text:
# Computational leakage: Grover’s algorithm with imperfections

## Abstract

We study the effects of dissipation or leakage on the time evolution of Grover’s algorithm for a quantum computer. We introduce an effective two-level model with dissipation and randomness (imperfections), which is based upon the idea that ideal Grover’s algorithm operates in a 2-dimensional Hilbert space. The simulation results of this model and Grover’s algorithm with imperfections are compared, and it is found that they are in good agreement for appropriately tuned parameters. It turns out that the main features of Grover’s algorithm with imperfections can be understood in terms of two basic mechanisms, namely, a diffusion of probability density into the full Hilbert space and a stochastic rotation within the original 2-dimensional Hilbert space.

Recently, quantum computing has emerged as one of the most challenging fields of physics both for theoreticians and experimentalists (see Ref. steane,  for a review). At the core of the theoretical side, a few quantum algorithms are now available, which can solve a certain class of problems faster than any available classical counterparts: for example, SHOR’s algorithm shor  factorizes a given large number $`N`$ at $`(\mathrm{log}N)^2`$ time steps with an exponential speed-up. Using GROVER’s algorithm (GA),grover  one can find a specific item on a long list of size $`N`$ at $`\sqrt{N}`$ time steps, which is a considerable gain in speed as compared with $`N`$ in classical algorithms.

These quantum algorithms operate perfectly only on ideal quantum computers. On the other hand, a certain amount of dissipation or uncontrolled coupling to the environment is clearly inevitable on real quantum computers. For example, any deviation from ideal operation in quantum gates, which may result from various origins, including fluctuation in the excitation energies of two-level systems (qubits), can be considered as “imperfections”. The imperfections will affect the efficiency of a quantum computer, and the operability of a given quantum algorithm may break down to the point of losing its advantage over a classical counterpart. Therefore, it is of vital importance to have a sound picture of how an error due to the presence of imperfections evolves in quantum algorithms. Obviously, a reasonable picture of the basic mechanisms given by the imperfections will be very crucial in constructing an appropriate quantum error correction method.cal ; steane2 ; preskil ; gottes

In general, the quantum state in a quantum computer is essentially a many-body (or network) state, the time evolution of which is delicately controlled by a given quantum algorithm. From such a point of view, the study of imperfection effects on quantum algorithms would belong to a more general research field which investigates disorder effects on the dynamics of a many-body state. Their exact treatment is actually a complicated subject, and only a few results have been obtained giving either general frameworks for understanding the effects or general methodologies for calculation.

There exist several theoretical, mainly numerical, investigations in this direction. The main stress has been given, from a practical point of view, on the stability of quantum algorithms with respect to the presence of imperfections. CIRAC and ZOLLERzoller  reported that the operability of quantum computing is rather safe against disorders available in the quantum FOURIER transform process. In Refs. paz,  and zurek, , the disorder effect in SHOR’s algorithm applied to the factorization of the number 15 was studied and by using the fidelity being defined as the square of the overlap of the actual quantum state with the ideal one, it was found that the operability of the SHOR’s algorithm can be destroyed due to a very small strength of the disorder in the modular exponentiation part.zurek  More systematic results have recently been obtained in Ref. song,  from the study of quantum computing of quantum chaos and imperfection effects: by considering the presence of imperfections in the quantum FOURIER transform, it was obtained that the imperfection strength scales polynomially with the number of qubits for the inverse participation ratio (IPR), which measures the strength of localization of quantum state and plays a role of the fidelity in Ref. zurek, . Nevertheless, it still remains at a primitive stage regarding an understanding of basic mechanisms carried by the imperfections in quantum algorithms. So far, the main policy has been simply to watch a deviation of the quantum state from the ideal one and to analyze its parameter dependence.

In this paper, we investigate the time evolution of a state governed by GROVER’s algorithm with imperfections, with a main emphasis on an understanding of interplay of the imperfections with the algorithm operator. Based on the idea that the ideal GA operates in an effective 2-dimensional HILBERT space, a stochastic two-level model with dissipation will be introduced, and then its simulation results will be compared to those of the GA with imperfections, which operates in a larger relevant HILBERT space resulting from the presence of the imperfections. They are in a good agreement via an appropriate fit of parameters. An analytic solution of the two-level model is given with some modification and provides a comprehensive picture of imperfection effects on the GA.

Let us begin with a brief sketch of the GA. The final goal is to identify $`|j`$ (target state) among $`N=2^{n_q}`$ quantum states, where $`n_q`$ is the number of qubits. Initially, the state of quantum register is prepared as a superposition of all states with the same amplitude. The GA may be broken up into two steps: (i) rotation of phase of $`|j`$ by $`\pi `$ and (ii) application of a diffusion operator $`D`$ which is defined, in matrix form, as $`D_{kl}=\delta _{kl}+2/N`$ with $`k,l=0,1,\mathrm{},N1`$, and $`\delta _{kl}`$ denoting the KRONECKER delta. The step (ii) is achieved by applying the HADAMARD operation to each single qubit and then performing a conditional phase shift on the computer with every computational basis state except $`|k=0`$ receiving a phase shift of $`1`$ followed by the second HADAMARD operation to each single qubit. Then, the quantum state during time evolution can be expressed as boyer

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }(\vartheta )=\mathrm{sin}\vartheta |j+\frac{\mathrm{cos}\vartheta }{\sqrt{N1}}\underset{kj}{}|k.$$
(1)
The initial state is characterized by $`\vartheta =\vartheta _0`$ with $`\mathrm{sin}\vartheta _0=1/\sqrt{N}`$. Each iteration transforms $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(\vartheta )`$ into $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(\vartheta +\omega )`$, where $`\mathrm{sin}\omega =2\sqrt{N1}/N`$. Then, after $`m(\pi /4)\sqrt{N}`$ iterations, $`\vartheta `$ becomes very close to $`\pi /2`$, and a measurement of the state yields $`|j`$ with an error $`O(1/N)`$. We note that the evolution of $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(\vartheta )`$ according to the GA is restricted to a 2-dimensional HILBERT space which is spanned by $`|x=(1/\sqrt{N1})_{kj}|k`$ and $`|y=|j`$. Each iteration represents a rotation of the quantum state by the angle $`\omega `$ in the $`x`$-$`y`$ plane and the GROVER’s operator for a single iteration can be written in a familiar form

$$\widehat{R}(\omega )=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{cos}\omega \hfill & & \hfill \mathrm{sin}\omega \\ \mathrm{sin}\omega \hfill & & \hfill \mathrm{cos}\omega \end{array}\right)$$
(2)
on the basis $`\{|x,|y\}`$.

Imperfections are introduced in the GA as follows: the ideal HADAMARD operator in the step (ii) is given by $`\stackrel{}{n}\stackrel{}{\widehat{\sigma }}`$, where $`\stackrel{}{n}=(1/\sqrt{2},0,1/\sqrt{2})`$, and $`\widehat{\sigma }_{x(y,z)}`$ denotes the PAULI spin matrix. We now replace $`\stackrel{}{n}`$ by

$$\stackrel{}{m}_q=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\mathrm{cos}\phi _q\mathrm{sin}\delta _q+\mathrm{cos}\delta _q,\sqrt{2}\mathrm{sin}\phi _q\mathrm{sin}\delta _q,\mathrm{cos}\phi _q\mathrm{sin}\delta _q+\mathrm{cos}\delta _q),$$
(3)
where $`q=1,2,\mathrm{},n_q`$ represent each single qubit. Here, $`\delta _q`$ and $`\phi _q`$ with $`|\delta _q|<ϵ/2`$ and $`0\phi _q<2\pi `$ are randomly chosen in an iteration of the GA and also vary randomly from iteration to iteration. Then, it turns out that $`\stackrel{}{m}_q`$ is a unit vector tilted from $`\stackrel{}{n}`$ by $`ϵ`$. It should be noted that, in spite of the imperfections, since the quantum state evolves without coupling to the additional environment, the qubit rotations remain unitary, keeping the normalization condition $`\mathrm{\Psi }|\mathrm{\Psi }=1`$ for any iteration number $`t`$. The presence of the imperfections will provide an additional coupling between the 2-dimensional HILBERT space spanned by $`\{|x,|y\}`$ (“computational space”) and the rest part of the total HILBERT space with $`2^{n_q}`$ dimensions, leading to the quantum leakageFAZ99  from the computational space as an intrinsic source of error in ideal gate operations.

Typical results of the GA with imperfections are shown in Fig. 1: $`p_j`$ and $`F`$ denote an ensemble-averaged probability of the target state $`|j`$ and an ensemble-averaged fidelity over 100 random runs, respectively, each of which is here given for $`n_q=13`$ and for imperfection strengths $`ϵ=0`$, 0.005, 0.01 and 0.02, respectively, as a function of iteration number $`t`$. Clearly, they are given by

$$p_j_ϵ(t)=|j|\mathrm{\Psi }(ϵ,t)|^2,F_ϵ(t)=|\mathrm{\Psi }(ϵ=0,t)|\mathrm{\Psi }(ϵ,t)|^2,$$
(4)
respectively, where the outer bracket represents the ensemble average. In the case of $`ϵ=0`$, $`p_j_0(t)`$ oscillates between 0 and 1 and reaches 1 at $`t(m+1/2)(\pi /2)\sqrt{N}71,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}213},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}355},\mathrm{}`$ with $`m=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$. When $`ϵ`$ is non-zero, one still finds oscillating features with the same period as in the ideal case, however, with an envelope decaying nearly exponentially with time $`t`$. As $`t`$ increases, the system approaches a saturated regime, where the noise completely dominates the ideal system dynamics, and accordingly $`p_j_ϵ(t)`$ fluctuates around $`1/N`$. A novel feature is that the decay affects not only the shape of the upper envelope but also that of the lower envelope such that the lower envelope is not simply given by $`p_j_ϵ(t)=0`$. This means that the probability for the system to remain at the target state is still available even at the time it originally vanishes in the ideal unperturbed system. Furthermore, $`F_ϵ(t)`$ is found to approximately equal the upper envelope of $`p_j_ϵ(t)`$.

As noted earlier, in the absence of imperfections, the wave-function of quantum register evolves within a very small part (of dimension 2) of the total HILBERT space (of dimension $`2^{n_q}`$). Furthermore, since the amplitudes of $`|x`$ and $`|y`$ remain real or at least keep the same phase over the time evolution, the actual relevant space is even smaller than the 2-dimensional entire HILBERT space. Let us denote the 2-dimensional HILBERT space spanned by $`|x`$ and $`|y`$ and the total HILBERT space by $`_2`$ and $`_t`$, respectively. The above results suggest that in general, the disordered GA operator yields states which are not restricted in $`_2`$ but spread over a larger space $`_t`$ (“computational leakage”). In other words, the presence of imperfections induces a probability density flow from $`_2`$ to $`_t`$ with diffusion-like nature. Then, let us define $`|w_2(t)|^2`$ as the probability that the state remains in $`_2`$ at time $`t`$ with an exponentially decaying function of $`t`$,

$$w_2(t)=e^{\gamma t},$$
(5)
where $`\gamma `$ represents the strength of the diffusion which depends on system parameters such as the strength of imperfections and the qubit numbers. Also, the imperfections affect the dynamics of the state within $`_2`$: in general, the phases of the two amplitudes of $`|x`$ and $`|y`$ are not equal to each other, and it is reasonable to assume that random phases are introduced during each iteration. Therefore, we would now like to adopt an effective two-level model which can encapsulate the effects of imperfections in the GA living in $`_t`$. Here, the time evolution of a quantum state $`|\psi (t)=c_m(t)|m+c_n(t)|n`$ on the bais $`\{|m,|n\}`$ is described by

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}c_m(t+1)\\ c_n(t+1)\end{array}\right)=e^\gamma \widehat{R}(\omega )\widehat{U}(\varphi _m,\varphi _n)\left(\begin{array}{c}c_m(t)\\ c_n(t)\end{array}\right),$$
(6)
where $`\widehat{U}(\varphi _m,\varphi _n)`$ is a diagonal matrix with $`U_{mm}=e^{i\varphi _m}`$ and $`U_{nn}=e^{i\varphi _n}`$, and $`\varphi _m(t)`$ and $`\varphi _n(t)`$ are assumed to be two independent random variables without any time correlation. Let each of these phase variables be chosen from a box distribution $`[W_\varphi /2,W_\varphi /2]`$ for a given $`W_\varphi `$. The frequency $`\omega =\mathrm{sin}^1(2\sqrt{N1}/N)`$ is the same as in the GA, and the initial conditions are given by $`c_m(0)=\mathrm{cos}\vartheta _0`$ and $`c_n(0)=\mathrm{sin}\vartheta _0`$ with $`\vartheta _0=\mathrm{sin}^1(1/\sqrt{N})`$. This is a stochastic two-level model with dissipation and we refer to it as STLM hereafter. Here, we obtain, after a minor calculation, an ensemble-averaged probability of the target state $`|j`$ and an ensemble-averaged fidelity, respectively:

$$p_j_{W_\varphi }^{(\gamma )}(t)=|c_n(t)|^2,F_{W_\varphi }^{(\gamma )}(t)=|c_m(t)\mathrm{cos}(\omega t+\vartheta _0)+c_n(t)\mathrm{sin}(\omega t+\vartheta _0)|^2.$$
(7)
It is noteworthy to consider the difference between the STLM and the original GA with imperfections. First, the finite fraction $`2^{n_q+1}`$ occupied by $`_2`$ in $`_t`$ is neglected in the STLM so that $`w_2(t)`$ decays to zero instead of $`\sqrt{2^{n_q+1}}`$. Since we are interested mainly in the regime before saturation, this is clearly not a significant difference. Secondly, the stochastic features of $`\gamma `$ are not considered. But, this is not critical, either, since those features will contribute a negligible correction to $`\gamma `$ after an ensemble-average in eq. (7).

Now, we perform a numerical simulation to obtain $`p_j_{W_\varphi }^{(\gamma )}(t)`$ and $`F_{W_\varphi }^{(\gamma )}(t)`$, which will be compared with $`p_j_ϵ(t)`$ and $`F_ϵ(t)`$ of the GA with imperfections, respectively. In Fig. 1, the results from the STLM are shown as solid lines: they are given by ensemble-averages over $`1000`$ realizations, respectively. We find that these results from the STLM provide an impressive agreement with the results of the GA after a proper adjustment of $`\gamma `$ and $`W_\varphi `$. This suggests that the main physical ingredients of the disordered GA are correctly incorporated in the STLM. Nevertheless, the origin of the novel feature in the lower envelopes is still unclear.

Without loss of generality, $`(c_m(t),c_n(t))`$ in the STLM during the time evolution can be written by $`(e^{\gamma t}\mathrm{cos}\vartheta (t),e^{\gamma t+i\varphi (t)}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta (t))`$ with $`\varphi (t):=\varphi _n\varphi _m`$ up to an overall phase. In case of $`\varphi (t)0`$ for arbitrary $`t`$, the angle $`\vartheta (t)`$ increases by $`\omega `$ after each iteration and is then given just by $`\omega t+\vartheta _0`$. However, if $`\varphi (t)`$ does not vanish, then from its stochastic nature, it follows that $`\vartheta (t)\vartheta (t1)`$ is not constant but would fluctuate around $`\omega `$.com  Now, under the assumption that $`\vartheta (t)`$ and $`\varphi (t)`$ are not correlated with each other, but simply two random variables, we can find analytic expressions of $`p_j_{W_\varphi }^{(\gamma )}(t)`$ and $`F_{W_\varphi }^{(\gamma )}(t)`$, respectively; let $`\vartheta (t)`$ increase by $`\omega +\eta _{t1}`$ between $`t1`$ and $`t`$ such that

$$\vartheta (t)=\vartheta _0+\omega t+\underset{k=0}{\overset{t1}{}}\eta _k,$$
(8)
where $`\eta _k`$ forms a GAUSSian distribution with mean 0 and width $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\vartheta `$, and then $`_{k=0}^{t1}\eta _k`$ also satisfies a GAUSSian distribution with mean $`0`$ and width $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\vartheta \sqrt{t}`$. From this and eq. (7), we get:

$`p_j^{(\gamma )}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`|w_2(t)|^2\mathrm{sin}^2\vartheta (t)={\displaystyle \frac{|w_2(t)|^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }_\vartheta \sqrt{\pi t}}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{sin}^2(\omega t+\vartheta _0+x)e^{x^2/(\mathrm{\Delta }_\vartheta ^2t)}𝑑x`$ (9)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^{2\gamma t}}{2}}\left[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{cos}(2\omega t+2\vartheta _0)e^{\mathrm{\Delta }_\vartheta ^2t}\right]`$
(note that no subindex $`W_\varphi `$ appears in $`p_j^{(\gamma )}(t)`$ ). If we further assume that $`\varphi (t)`$ also is of a GAUSSian distribution with mean 0 and width $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi `$, we then arrive at

$$F^{(\gamma )}(t)=\frac{e^{2\gamma t}}{2}\left[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}+e^{\mathrm{\Delta }_\vartheta ^2t}\left\{1\mathrm{sin}^2(2\omega t+2\vartheta _0)\left(1e^{\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi ^2/4}\right)\right\}\right].$$
(10)
Fig. 2 shows a comparison between the results of the GA with imperfections and those of eqs. (9) and (10). The good agreement in $`p_j(t)`$ would provide an explanation of why its lower envelope is not simply given by $`p_j=0`$ in the GA with imperfections; the uncertainty in the rotation angle during a single iteration accumulates as the iteration proceeds. Then, $`\vartheta (t)`$ does not represent a definite direction on a 2-dimensional plane but spreads over an interval range $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_\vartheta \sqrt{t},\mathrm{\Delta }_\vartheta \sqrt{t})`$. This offers an additional decay channel into the target state $`|j`$ after ensemble-averaging (see the term $`e^{\mathrm{\Delta }_\vartheta ^2t}`$ in eq. (9)). Also, in eq. (10) with $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi =0`$ we have $`F^{(\gamma )}(t)=(e^{2\gamma t}/2)\left(1+e^{\mathrm{\Delta }_\vartheta ^2t}\right)`$, which is given by the solid lines in Fig. 2 as the best fit of $`F_ϵ(t)`$ of the GA with imperfections. From eq. (10), it immediately follows that $`F(\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi 0)`$ is always less than $`F(\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi =0)`$.

In summary, we have investigated imperfection effects on the time evolution of the GROVER’s algorithm both numerically and analytically. An effective two-level model with dissipation and randomness has been introduced and the results show a good agreement with the simulation results of the disordered GROVER’s algorithm. It turns out that the main features in the results of the disordered GROVER’s algorithm can be understood through the diffusion-like behavior of quantum states from the original partial HILBERT space into the full HILBERT space. The two main decaying mechanisms found in this work are its direct manifestations. Our finding will provide a useful basis for study of more general imperfection effects in quantum algorithms.

We would like to thank Prof. G. J. Iafrate (NC State Univ.) and Prof. G. Mahler (Univ. of Stuttgart) for critical reading of the manuscript.


format: text

text:
# Quantum Field Treatment of DCC Dynamics

## I Introduction

The prospect of observing manifestations of chiral symmetry restoration in high-energy nuclear collisions has stimulated significant research activity over the past several years . In this endeavor, the most popular theoretical tool has been the linear $`\sigma `$ model, which in its simplest form describes an interacting O(4) field with isoscalar ($`\sigma `$) and isovector ($`𝝅`$) components. Within this framework, a number of instructive dynamical simulations have been carried out at the level of classical fields for the types of environment expected in high-energy collisions . Furthermore, quantum-field treatments have been developed and applied, albeit within the mean-field approximation and for uniform environments .

Relative to the classical studies, these latter treatments take account of the ever present quantum fluctuations and it appears that these may contribute significantly to the emerging signals . Therefore, it is of interest to further develop the quantal treatment so that more refined scenarios can be addressed dynamically. The present paper describes how the quantum-field treatment may be extended to non-uniform environments in a manner that allows numerical simulations for the types of scenario relevant to the study of disoriented chiral condensates. Moreover, the important role of quantum fluctuations is illustrated by means of a concrete application.

The highly excited systems formed in high-energy nuclear collisions expand very fast and the environments cool down correspondingly rapidly. As a consequence, the effective pion mass decreases quite quickly from its initially high thermal value towards its free value. Furthermore, the non-equilibrium relaxation dynamics of the chiral order parameter gives rise to a fairly regular oscillatory modulation of the mass with a frequency near half the value employed for the $`\sigma `$ meson . Since the expansion is predominantly longitudinal, it appears  that the cooling rate is insufficient to produce a quench , in which the square of the pion mass turns negative, causing the softest modes to become unstable and thus display an exponential population growth. While perhaps unfortunate from the physics perspective, this feature does simplify the physical analysis and improves the prospect for developing test-particle transport treatments . (A concrete impression of the typical time evolution of the effective pion mass in the bulk of the rapidly expanding system can be gained from Fig. 1.)

A further complication encountered in nuclear collision experiments is the non-uniformity of the environment resulting from the finite extension of the systems formed. In the mean-field framework, this causes the mass to be dependent on position as well, which then couples the elementary modes and thus complicates the treatment significantly. (A typical spatial profile of the mass function expected in nuclear collisions is shown in Fig. 2.)

## II Propagation

With such environments in mind, we now turn to the formal developments. In the mean-field approximation, the Hamiltonian density operator is given by

$$\widehat{}(𝐱)=\frac{1}{2}[\widehat{p}(𝐱)^2+(\widehat{q}(𝐱))^2+\mu ^2(𝐱,t)\widehat{q}(𝐱)^2],$$
(1)
where $`\widehat{q}(𝐱)`$ is the field operator and $`\widehat{p}(𝐱)`$ is its time derivative. Free pions provide a natural basis but, in order to bring the problem onto a canonical form, each pair of traveling waves $`|\pm 𝐤`$ is replaced by a corresponding pair of standing waves $`|\pm 𝜿`$ . With an arbitrary sign convention for the quantum numbers $`𝜿=\pm 𝐤`$, the associated canonical eigenfunctions are

$$𝐱|𝜿=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }}}\times \{\begin{array}{cccc}\sqrt{2}\mathrm{cos}(𝜿𝐱)& ,\hfill & 𝜿>\mathrm{𝟎}\hfill & ,\hfill \\ 1& ,\hfill & 𝜿=\mathrm{𝟎}\hfill & ,\hfill \\ \sqrt{2}\mathrm{sin}(𝜿𝐱)& ,\hfill & 𝜿<\mathrm{𝟎}\hfill & .\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
The canonical modes are orthonormal and complete, $`𝑑𝐱𝜿|𝐱𝐱|𝜿^{}=\delta _{𝜿𝜿^{}}`$, $`_𝜿𝐱|𝜿𝜿|𝐱^{}=\delta (𝐱𝐱^{})`$. The canonical annihilation operator is $`\widehat{\alpha }_𝜿`$, with $`[\widehat{\alpha }_𝜿,\widehat{\alpha }_𝜿^{}^{}]=\delta _{𝜿𝜿^{}}`$, and the dispersion relation is $`\omega _\kappa ^2=\kappa ^2+m^2`$.

The field operators can then be expanded as follows,

$`\widehat{q}(𝐱)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝜿}{}}𝐱|𝜿\widehat{q}_𝜿={\displaystyle \underset{𝝀}{}}\left[F^𝝀(𝐱)\widehat{\alpha }_𝝀+F^𝝀(𝐱)^{}\widehat{\alpha }_𝝀^{}\right],`$ (3)
$`\widehat{p}(𝐱)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝜿}{}}𝐱|𝜿\widehat{p}_𝜿={\displaystyle \underset{𝝀}{}}\left[G^𝝀(𝐱)\widehat{\alpha }_𝝀+G^𝝀(𝐱)^{}\widehat{\alpha }_𝝀^{}\right].`$ (4)
The mode functions are governed by the usual field equation of motion, which can readily be solved numerically,

$$\dot{F}^𝝀(𝐱)=G^𝝀(𝐱),\dot{G}^𝝀(𝐱)=[\mathrm{\Delta }\mu ^2(𝐱)]F^𝝀(𝐱).$$
(5)
The appropriate initial conditions are

$$F^𝝀(𝐱,t_\mathrm{i})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega _𝝀}}𝐱|𝝀,G^𝝀(𝐱,t_\mathrm{i})=i\sqrt{\frac{\omega _𝝀}{2}}𝐱|𝝀.$$
(6)
Using the canonial representation of the mode functions,

$$F^𝝀(𝐱)=\underset{𝜿}{}𝐱|𝜿F_𝜿^𝝀,G^𝝀(𝐱)=\underset{𝜿}{}𝐱|𝜿G_𝜿^𝝀,$$
(7)
we thus obtain the evolution of the canonical operators,

$`\widehat{q}_𝜿(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝝀}{}}\left[F_𝜿^𝝀(t)\widehat{\alpha }_𝝀+F_𝜿^𝝀(t)^{}\widehat{\alpha }_𝝀^{}\right],`$ (8)
$`\widehat{p}_𝜿(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝝀}{}}\left[G_𝜿^𝝀(t)\widehat{\alpha }_𝝀+G_𝜿^𝝀(t)^{}\widehat{\alpha }_𝝀^{}\right].`$ (9)
## III Analysis

It is instructive to express the Hamiltonian in terms of the canonical operators $`\widehat{p}_𝜿`$ and $`\widehat{q}_𝜿`$,

$$\widehat{H}(t)𝑑𝐱\widehat{}(𝐱)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{𝜿}{}\widehat{p}_𝜿^2+\frac{1}{2}\underset{𝜿𝜿^{}}{}\widehat{q}_𝜿M_{𝜿𝜿^{}}\widehat{q}_𝜿^{}.$$
(10)
Since the mass matrix is real and symmetric, $`M_{𝜿𝜿^{}}(t)=𝜿|\mu ^2(𝐱,t)\mathrm{\Delta }|𝜿^{}`$, it can be diagonalized at any given time $`t`$ by a real, unitary matrix $`𝑺(t)`$, leading to

$$\widehat{H}(t)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{𝐊}{}\left[\widehat{P}_𝐊^2+\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐊^2\widehat{Q}_𝐊^2\right].$$
(11)
Here the correlated canonical field operators are given by

$$\widehat{Q}_𝐊=\underset{𝜿}{}\widehat{q}_𝜿S_{𝜿𝐊}(t),\widehat{P}_𝐊=\underset{𝜿}{}\widehat{p}_𝜿S_{𝜿𝐊}(t),$$
(12)
and they satisfy $`[\widehat{Q}_𝐊,\widehat{P}_𝐊^{}]=i\delta _{\mathrm{𝐊𝐊}^{}}`$. At the given time $`t`$, the corresponding correlated eigenfunctions are

$$𝐱|𝐊=\underset{𝜿}{}𝐱|𝜿S_{𝜿𝐊}(t).$$
(13)
If the eigenvalues are positive, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐊^2>0`$, excitations relative to the adiabatic vacuum state can be defined by means of correlated quasiparticle annihilation operators,

$$\widehat{A}_𝐊=\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐊}{2}}\widehat{Q}_𝐊+\frac{i}{\sqrt{2\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐊}}\widehat{P}_𝐊,$$
(14)
which satisfy $`[\widehat{A}_𝐊,\widehat{A}_𝐊^{}^{}]=\delta _{\mathrm{𝐊𝐊}^{}}`$. The adiabatic vacuum state, $`|\overline{0}`$, is characterized by the absence of quasiparticles, $`\widehat{A}_𝐊|\overline{0}=0`$, and is generally a complicated many-body state when expressed in terms of the free quanta.

It is important to recognize that (14) refers to the Schrödinger representation. The corresponding Heisenberg operator, $`\widehat{𝒜}_𝐊(t)`$, can be obtained by replacing the Schrödinger operators $`\widehat{q}_𝜿`$ and $`\widehat{p}_𝜿`$ entering in (12) by the corresponding Heisenberg operators given in (8-9),

$$\widehat{𝒜}_𝐊(t)=\underset{𝐋}{}\left[𝒰_𝐊^𝐋(t)\widehat{A}_𝐋+𝒱_𝐊^𝐋(t)^{}\widehat{A}_𝐋^{}\right],$$
(15)
where $`\widehat{A}_𝐋`$ is the quasiparticle annihilation operator associated with the initial form of the mass function $`\mu ^2(𝐱,t_\mathrm{i})`$. The Bogoliubov coefficients $`𝒰_𝐊^𝐋(t)`$ and $`𝒱_𝐊^𝐋(t)`$ can be obtained from the basic mode coefficients $`F_𝜿^𝝀(t)`$ and $`G_𝜿^𝝀(t)`$ by a sequence of elementary transformations.

Since the operators $`\widehat{𝒜}_𝐊(t)`$ refer to the evolving eigenrepresentation, they are less suitable for the analysis which is better performed in the $`𝐱`$ and $`𝐤`$ representations,

$`\widehat{𝒜}(𝐱,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐋}{}}\left[𝒰^𝐋(𝐱,t)\widehat{A}_𝐋+𝒱^𝐋(𝐱,t)^{}\widehat{A}_𝐋^{}\right],`$ (16)
$`\widehat{𝒜}_𝐤(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐋}{}}\left[𝒰_𝐤^𝐋(𝐱,t)\widehat{A}_𝐋+𝒱_𝐤^𝐋(𝐱,t)^{}\widehat{A}_𝐋^{}\right].`$ (17)
The corresponding Bogoliubov coefficients are obtained by the appropriate additional transformations,

$`𝒰^𝐋(𝐱;t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝜿𝐊}{}}𝐱|𝜿S_{𝜿𝐊}(t)𝒰_𝐊^𝐋(t),`$ (18)
$`𝒰_𝐤^𝐋(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝜿𝐊}{}}𝐤|𝜿S_{𝜿𝐊}(t)𝒰_𝐊^𝐋(t).`$ (19)
With the above preparations, we are now able to derive expressions for any quasiparticle observable. Of particular interest is the spatial correlation function,

$`\overline{\rho }(𝐱,𝐱^{};t)`$ $``$ $`t|\widehat{A}^{}(𝐱)\widehat{A}(𝐱^{})|t=t_\mathrm{i}|\widehat{𝒜}^{}(𝐱,t)\widehat{𝒜}(𝐱^{},t)|t_\mathrm{i}`$ (20)
$`=`$ $`\overline{\rho }^{\mathrm{qu}}(𝐱,𝐱^{};t)+\overline{\rho }^{\mathrm{cl}}(𝐱,𝐱^{};t).`$ (21)
Here the first term arises from the quantum fluctuations in the initial state and is given by

$$\overline{\rho }^{\mathrm{qu}}(𝐱,𝐱^{};t)=\underset{𝐋}{}𝒱^𝐋(𝐱,t)𝒱^𝐋(𝐱^{},t)^{}.$$
(22)
The second term is caused by the real agitations in the initial state (which are often referred to as the “classical” or “thermal” field fluctuations).

Analogously, we may consider the one-body density matrix in the $`𝐤`$ representation,

$`\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}(t)`$ $``$ $`t|\widehat{A}_𝐤^{}\widehat{A}_𝐤^{}|t=t_\mathrm{i}|\widehat{𝒜}_𝐤^{}(t)\widehat{A}_𝐤^{}(t)|t_\mathrm{i}`$ (23)
$`=`$ $`\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}^{\mathrm{qu}}(t)+\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}^{\mathrm{cl}}(t),`$ (24)
where the quantal contribution is

$$\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}^{\mathrm{qu}}(t)=\underset{𝐋}{}𝒱_𝐤^𝐋(t)𝒱_𝐤^{}^𝐋(t)^{}.$$
(25)
Expressions for observables reflecting two- or many-body correlations can also be derived but they become progressively more complicated. Moreover, the results of course depend on what is being assumed regarding the corresponding correlations in the initial state.

## IV Illustrative application

In order to demonstrate the practical applicability of the described treatment, and at the same time illustrate the importance of the quantum fluctuations, we consider a one-dimensional system having the most important features expected in actual scenarios. In order to emulate the finite transverse extension of systems generated in high-energy heavy-ion collisions, we assume that the initial mass function exceeds the free value $`m`$ within only a limited region, $`|x|5\mathrm{fm}`$. We furthermore assume that $`\mu ^2(x)m^2`$ maintains this spatial profile in the course of time, while the overall magnitude scales in proportion to its bulk value, $`\mu _0(t)`$. Fig. 1 shows the time dependence of this latter quantity, while Fig. 2 depicts the initial spatial profile of the mass function, $`\mu (x,0)`$.

Given the particular mass function $`\mu (x,t)`$, the mode functions $`F^\lambda (x,t)`$ and $`G^\lambda (x,t)`$ are then determined numerically by solving the equation of motion (5) for each canonical mode $`\lambda `$. Since the mass function remains positive throughout (in fact it is never below the free mass $`m`$), it is possible to analyze the system in terms of the adiabatic quasiparticle modes at any time.

The contribution from the quantum fluctuations to the spatial quasiparticle density at various times during the evolution, is shown in Fig. 3 and the associated spectral distribution is shown in Fig. 4,

$`\overline{\rho }^{\mathrm{qu}}(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\rho }^{\mathrm{qu}}(x,x;t)={\displaystyle \underset{L}{}}|𝒱^L(x,t)|^2,`$ (26)
$`\overline{\rho }_k^{\mathrm{qu}}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\rho }_{kk}^{\mathrm{qu}}(t)={\displaystyle \underset{L}{}}|𝒱_k^L(t)|^2.`$ (27)
These quantities show what would result if there were no excitation at all in the initial state (corresponding to zero temperature). Any actual agitations in the initial state would then lead to additional contributions.

At the initial time, $`t=t_i`$, the quantities $`\overline{\rho }^{\mathrm{qu}}(x)`$ and $`\overline{\rho }_k^{\mathrm{qu}}`$ vanish by design. But soon, as the effective mass experiences its first rapid decrease, energy stored in the high initial mass is liberated and a rapidly rising quasiparticle density appears with a spatial profile resembling that of the mass excess $`\delta \mu (x)=\mu (x)m`$. Part of these quasiparticles are reabsorbed when the mass again increases and this cycle is repeated in a less noticable manner, as the mass oscillations proceed with an ever decreasing amplitude. The quasiparticles produced by this mechanism have a rather structureless spectrum of approximately gaussian form.

Meanwhile, the regularity of the temporal oscillations in the mass function begins to manifest itself and, at somewhat later times, the spectral profile exhibits a visible enhancement of the modes near the resonance frequency, $`\omega _{\mathrm{res}}\frac{1}{2}\omega _\sigma =300\mathrm{MeV}`$, corresponding to a momentum of $`k_{\mathrm{res}}266\mathrm{MeV}/c`$. As a consequence, the quasiparticle gas begins to resemble two countermoving beams with the corresponding flow velocities centered around $`v_{\mathrm{flow}}\pm k_{\mathrm{res}}/m`$. The two corresponding outwards bursts are clearly visible in Fig. 3 at late times when the mass function has largely relaxed to its free form and the production processes have subsided.

Traces of these characteristic effects might be observable in actual collision experiments, such as those underway at RHIC. More extensive calculations would clearly be needed for a quantitative assessment of this prospect.

## V Discussion

In the present paper we have sketched how the non-uniform and rapidly evolving scenarios of interest in connection with disoriented chiral condensates may be addressed with real-time non-equilibrium quantum-field theory within the mean-field approximation, in which the interactions are encoded into an effective mass function. For an arbitrary form of the mass function, the strategy is to first obtain the time evolution operator, which depends only on $`\mu ^2(𝐱,t)`$, and then evaluate the observables resulting from any particular initial quantum state $`|t_\mathrm{i}`$. This makes it economical to perform averages over ensembles of initial states having similar mass functions.

When the eigenvalues of the mass matrix are positive, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐊^2>0`$, it is particularly instructive to consider quasiparticle excitations defined relative to the adiabatic eigenbasis. But it should be noted that even if the system enters the classically forbidden region where the quasiparticles cannot be defined, the dynamical propagation of the system works without modification.

A first application of the developed treatment has been made to a system with a non-trivial mass function depending on both time and space. In addition to demonstrating the practicality of the approach, the example serves to illustrate the quantitative importance of including the quantum fluctuations in the dynamical treatment.

The approach assumes that the effective mass function is given. For the time being, an approximate form of the mass function for a given scenario can be obtained on the basis of semiclassical simulations . Though not fully satisfactory, this approach may actually be reasonably accurate, since the quantum treatment, while having a large effect on specific signals, is expected to have a relatively small overall effect on the effective mass. Nevertheless, an interesting and more formal task, beyond scope of present study, is posed by the question of how to best determine the effective mass function selfconsistently with the evolution of the quantum many-body state.

As noted above, the computational challenge posed by the treatment is not prohibitively larger than that met at the classical level, since it merely requires (repeated) solution of the same field equation (5). The treatment may thus be applied to scenarios similar to those addressed at the classical level. This presents an obvious practical task which should yield more quantitative information on the observable signals of the expected chiral dynamics.

## Acknowledgements

The author is pleased to acknowledge helpful discussions with D. Boyanovsky, S.J. Jeon, and E. Mottola. This work was supported by the Director, Office of Energy Research, Office of High Energy and Nuclear Physics, Nuclear Physics Division of the U.S. Department of Energy, under Contract DE-AC03-76SF00098.

LBNL-46265 Physical Review C62


text:
# Chandra Observation of M84, Radio Lobe Elliptical in Virgo cluster.

## 1.  Introduction

M84 (NGC4374) is an E1 galaxy within the core of the Virgo cluster. Radio observations at 1.4 and 4.9 GHz show two lobes and a jet (Laing & Bridle 1987). In X-rays, the galaxy has a compact gas halo, rather low metallicity and an overabundance of alpha-process elements (e.g. Finoguenov & Jones 2000).

In this Letter we discuss primarily the comparison of the X-ray and radio morphologies. We also determine the temperature and abundance structures in the galaxy center, which allows a direct comparison with optical abundance measurements. Finally, we resolve the nature of the hard X-ray component, found by ASCA in many ellipticals (Matsumoto et al. 1997).

## 2. Observation and data reduction

A Chandra ACIS-S observation of M84 was made on 2000, May 19. After removing time intervals with high X-ray background, the useful exposure was 28.7 ksec. Gain corrections were made using CIAO v1.1.1 software. Response matrices were generated for the focal plane temperature of -120C and position averaged, according to the source location. Since the galaxy is embedded in diffuse X-ray emission from the Virgo cluster, we calculated the background from a region on the detector far from M84. We take the distance to M84 as 17 Mpc, so 1′′ corresponds to 82 pc.

## 3. Diffuse X-ray emission in M84

Instead of appearing round, the bright extended X-ray emission from M84, shown in Fig.1, has an $``$-shape, characterized by a bar extending east from the center and several almost parallel filaments extending approximately perpendicular to this bar.

A clue towards understanding this peculiar X-ray morphology comes from a comparison with the radio structure. Two radio lobes extend North and South from the source’s center. X-ray emitting gas surrounds the radio lobes. As discussed in Sec.4, the temperature of the X-ray filaments is 0.6–0.7 keV, similar to that at the galaxy center and slightly colder than the more extended X-ray emission, seen on scales up to 25 kpc. Apparently, expansion of the radio lobes has caused the hot gas to have the $``$-shaped structure. However, as will be shown in Sec.4, the temperature of the filaments surrounding the radio lobes is not very different from the temperature found for the central and outer region of the source. Thus, we conclude that the lobes are not overpressured and therefore are not capable of driving a strong shock into the ambient material. This interpretation is similar to that for Hydra-A (McNamara et al. 2000).

We can use the density ($`n_e`$) of the hot gas surrounding the radio lobes, determined from X-ray observations combined with radio measurements of the Faraday rotation ($`R_m`$) to directly determine the strength of the magnetic field ($`B_{}`$) (e.g. Laing & Bridle 1987).

$$R_mn_eB_{}𝑑l$$

To determine the magnetic field strength we extracted radial profile of the X-ray surface brightness around the geometrical center of the southern radio lobe to model the 3-d density profile (see Fig.3). We model this with a $`\beta `$-model, modified by setting the density to zero inside some radius, so the emission detected inside this radius is only due to the projection effects. Using the results of this modeling, we estimate the integrated electron density to be $`0.04`$ cm-3 kpc, which, for a Faraday rotation of 25 rad m-2, requires the line-of-sight magnetic field strength to be 0.8 $`\mu G`$, well below the equipartition value of 20 $`\mu G`$ (Laing & Bridle 1987). Thus, the magnetic field associated with the X-ray plasma appears much weaker then the field in the radio lobe. This method, however, has certain limitations, since on one hand, it sets an upper limit on the magnetic field, due to the possible presence of plasma between the source and the observer, and on the other hand, there is an open question of which scale size of the magnetic field reversals is most responsible for the observed RM and whether this scale is characteristic of the strength of the magnetic field.

The radio and X-ray morphologies suggest that M84 is moving in the core of the Virgo cluster. In particular the northern edge of the north radio lobe appears compressed and, as shown on the right of Fig.1, although the faint X-ray emission has a more regular shape, it is extended towards the south. Both the X-ray extension and radio structure suggest motion through the Virgo cluster towards the north-north-west in the observed plane. We also note that the radio jet, seen in the southern lobe, points to a cloudlet of X-ray emission 3.3 kpc (40′′) from the center, which could be compressed plasma swept up by the jet.

## 4. Temperature and Heavy Element Abundances

Spectra for different regions of M84 are presented in Fig.4. In our spectral modeling of thermal emission from M84, we use the MEKAL model (Mewe et al. 1985, Mewe and Kaastra 1995, Liedahl et al. 1995). Unless noted otherwise, we found the Galactic absorption column of $`2\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2 (Stark et al. 1992). Errors are given on the 68% confidence level. We determined abundances for O, Mg, Si and Fe. In deriving the abundances, we use the solar abundance table from Anders & Grevesse (1989), where elemental number abundances for O, Mg, Si, Fe relative to hydrogen are (85.1, 3.8, 3.55, 4.68)$`\times 10^5`$. We chose the energy interval 0.6–7 keV for spectral analysis. We masked out the point sources when extracting the spectra of the extended emission and in spectral fitting allowed for the presence of the hard X-ray emission. We detect little variation in the temperature ($`0.60\pm 0.05`$ keV) for the different parts of the $``$-shaped emission with the east part slightly hotter and the south-east filament hotter by 0.1 keV. In the diffuse emission, if we fit both hard and soft components, the temperature of the soft component rises from 0.6 keV at the center to 0.8 keV at 5 radii.

We specify four zones, where we determine the abundances of heavy elements: the inner 6′′ (0.5 kpc), the eastern and western parts of $``$-shaped diffuse emission and the faint X-ray halo, extending from 2 to 5. In Fig.4 we plot the results for the $``$-shaped emission from 6′′ to 1 (east) and from 1 to 2 (west). The abundance determination is sensitive to the background subtraction and is less reliable for the faint X-ray halo. Among elements, Si abundance is most strongly affected, while the Mg abundance is the most robust.

The $``$-shaped region contributes most of the diffuse X-ray emission and thus provides the tightest constraints on measurements of the elemental abundance. The Fe abundance is highest in the $``$-shaped diffuse emission and highest in the eastern part. The Fe abundance in $``$-shaped region is well in excess of -0.35 dex., found in optical studies (Kobayashi & Arimoto 1999), allowing for additional gas enrichment from SN Ia. The Mg/Fe ratio shows a trend toward an overabundance of alpha-process elements at low metallicities. In the faint X-ray halo, low-metallicity inhibition of the SN Ia rate is needed to explain the low Fe abundance. Low Fe abundance in the center could be an artifact, due to the possible presence of additional emission components, e.g. X-ray scattering of AGN emission on the galactic dust. Our findings demonstrate that the previously reported disagreement between X-ray and optical abundance estimates was due to their different spatial scales of measurements.

## 5. Origin of the Hard Component

A hard X-ray component in elliptical galaxies has been found in many ASCA observations (e.g. Matsumoto et al. 1997) with spectral characteristics corresponding to a 6.5 keV bremsstrahlung temperature. Three origins have been proposed to explain the hard component. First – LMXB (Matsumoto et al. 1997), second – AGN (e.g. Finoguenov & Jones 2000) and third – the presence of relativistic particles, contained by a magnetic field, introduced by Fukazawa et al. (2000) to explain the hard component seen in groups of galaxies. Chandra’s subarcsecond resolution allows us to distinguish among these three possibilities, since the first is an ensemble of discrete sources, the second is a point source in the galaxy center and the third is a diffuse source.

Fig.5 shows the 2.5–7 keV emission. In this hard band, in 28.7 ksec, the diffuse emission provides 240 counts, the central point source 100 counts, with 167 counts from detected point sources.

The central X-ray point source is coincident with the position of the radio nucleus. Its spectrum is an absorbed ($`N_H=2.7(2.43.0)\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2) power law ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2.3(2.22.4)`$) and its luminosity is $`4\times 10^{39}`$ ergs/sec in the 0.5–10 keV band. The integrated spectrum of the combined emission from point sources is characterized by a bremsstrahlung temperature of 13 (9–22) keV or a power law index 1.41 (1.34–1.48). Their total luminosity in the 0.5–10. keV band is $`8\times 10^{39}`$ ergs/s, yielding an $`L_X/L_B`$ ratio similar to M31 (Makishima et al. 1989).

To estimate the contribution of point sources below our detection limit, we study the point source $`log(N)log(S)`$ distribution in the 0.4–5.0 keV band, using the central $`20\times 20`$ kpc2 region. A fit to the source counts distribution, excluding the first and the last bin of the histogram shown in Fig.5, gives $`N=36\times S^{0.43}`$. Assuming no break at lower source fluxes, we estimate an additional 1/3 of the point source flux in undetected sources. Thus, point sources cannot explain the hard diffuse emission in M84. We note that at our point source sensitivity limit (10 cnts detected in the 0.4–10. keV band correspond to $`8\times 10^{16}`$ erg cm-2 s-1 in the 0.5–2 keV band for the average slope found for bright background sources of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.7`$), using the log N–log S determination by Giacconi et al. (2000), 3 of the 50 sources we detect should be background; one identified quasar is omitted from the source list.

The diffuse hard component extends to $`10`$ kpc from the galaxy center. For spectral estimates, however, we take the central bright 3.1 kpc radius, where the uncertainty in the background subtraction is less important. In the spectral analysis, we also fit the soft diffuse component. The hard X-ray component can be satisfactory described by a thermal plasma of 3.9 (2–11) keV giving a luminosity of $`1.2\times 10^{40}`$ ergs/sec in the 0.5–10 keV band. A power law fit to the hard diffuse component gives $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $`2.0(1.62.2)`$.

Fukazawa et al. (2000) suggested that hard diffuse emission is due to the Inverse Compton Scattering of CMB photons on relativistic electrons. Alternatively, they suggested a non-thermal bremsstrahlung between thermal gas and high energy particles. Both these scenarios have difficulties explaining the observed shape of the diffuse emission in M84, since the hard X-ray emission should correlate well with the radio emission in the first scenario (e.g. Sarazin 1988), and with the soft X-ray emission in the second. Both radio and soft X-ray morphologies are well defined and do not correlate with the hard X-ray component. However, as we noted earlier, the magnetic field strength outside the radio lobes is 25 times lower, which implies a reduction in the synchrotron emission by almost three orders of magnitude. Therefore, to explain a mismatch between the radio and hard X-ray diffuse emission, energetic electrons with estimated $`\gamma =10^{34}`$ must be distributed similar to the X-ray emission. Thus, differences in X-ray and radio morphology could be due to the change in the magnetic field strength. The electrons, required for this scenario would have life-times of $`10^9`$ yr, so their supply is not a problem (Fukazawa et al. 2000).

As an alternative to an Inverse Compton origin, we suggest that the hard diffuse X-ray emission is due to AGN-inflated gas in the center of the galaxy. In order for this suggestion to hold, several requirements must be met. First, in order for the hot gas to be convectively stable (e.g. Sarazin 1988), the entropy of the hot gas should not exceed the entropy of the faint diffuse halo. The latter has an entropy of $`90\pm 20`$ keV cm2 (ignoring constants and logarithms). For the measured density of the hard component, this requires that the temperature be less then 4.6 keV, consistent with that measured 3.9 (2–11) keV. Hotter temperatures are allowed closer than 0.8 kpc from the center, where the gas density is higher. The second requirement is that the gas be in pressure equilibrium in the gravitational field of M84. In fact, we would expect there to be a hole at the center of the soft emission, which in M84 is masked by the complex structure in the central region. The spatial distribution of the hard component is characterized by a $`\beta `$-model with $`\beta =0.43\pm 0.04`$, $`r_c=0.97\pm 0.12`$ kpc. Assuming an isothermal temperature of 3 keV, the total gravitational mass within 3.1 kpc is $`4.0\times 10^{11}`$$`M_{}`$. Using the cooler gas component ($`\beta =1.40\pm 0.03`$, $`r_c=5.28\pm 0.08`$ kpc) at larger radii, we find $`9.2\times 10^{11}`$$`M_{}`$ within 10 kpc. For a total blue luminosity of $`5\times 10^{10}`$$`L_{}`$ and effective radius of 5 kpc (Kobayashi & Arimoto 1999), both mass estimates correspond to a $`M/L_B`$ ratio of 20. This is similar to Brighenti & Mathews (1998) result of constant $`M/L_B`$ in ellipticals over a large range of radii. This is consistent with the assumption that the gas is in pressure equilibrium. Finally, the total energy of the hot component is $`10^{56}`$ ergs, which requires a heat input of $`10^{41}`$ ergs/s for 0.1 Gyr. Future X-ray observations can test this suggestion through a more precise temperature determination and the detection of Fe K-shell lines.

In the proposed scenario, the cooler X-ray emitting filaments surrounding the radio-lobes will tend to fall toward the center, due to their lower entropy, but are repelled by the pressure in the radio-lobes, which apparently has little impact on the diffuse hot X-ray gas. Thus, for the cool component of the X-ray emission, the radio source works as a fountain, lifting up the infalling gas.

## 6. Conclusions

The high resolution Chandra image shows the remarkable interaction of the radio lobes and the diffuse soft X-ray emission. The expansion of the radio lobes appears to have created cavities in the soft emission that are surrounded by higher density shells. Based on the similarities in the temperature and abundance of the filaments around the radio lobes and the gas in the central region, we suggest that this gas has a common origin and circulates throughout the central region of the galaxy. Chandra’s high resolution also has led to the detection of a population of luminous ($`>10^{38}`$ ergs/sec) galactic X-ray sources and the discovery of a hard, diffuse source in the central 10 kpc. We suggest that the AGN at the center of M84 heats the gas in this region. Future observations of M84 and other galaxies can test this prediction. Finally, Chandra’s resolution allowed abundance measurements to be made on a spatial scale similar to those done optically, resolving the issue of low reported abundances for the X-ray gas, compared to optical studies.

The authors are thankful to Alexey Vikhlinin and Maxim Markevitch for their help in Chandra data reduction, and to Dan Harris, Yasushi Fukazawa, Brian McNamara and the referee for useful comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by NASA grants GO0-1045X and AG5-3064 and the Smithsonian Institution.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Exclusive hadron production in two-photon collisions provides a tool to study a variety of fundamental aspects of QCD and has long been a subject of great interest (cf.  and references therein). Recently a new aspect of this has been pointed out, namely the physics of the process $`\gamma ^{}\gamma \pi \pi `$ in the region where $`Q^2`$ is large but $`W^2`$ small . This process factorizes  into a perturbatively calculable, short-distance dominated scattering $`\gamma ^{}\gamma q\overline{q}`$ or $`\gamma ^{}\gamma gg`$, and non-perturbative matrix elements measuring the transitions $`q\overline{q}\pi \pi `$ and $`gg\pi \pi `$. We call these matrix elements generalized distribution amplitudes (GDAs) to emphasize their close connection to the distribution amplitudes introduced long ago in the QCD description of exclusive hard processes .

## 2 Factorization

We are interested in $`e+\gamma e+\pi \pi `$. To lowest order in QED the interaction between the lepton and the hadron side is mediated by one-photon exchange. The contribution we focus on is the one where the $`\gamma ^{}\gamma \pi \pi `$ subprocess appears, as depicted in Fig. 1. The two diagrams where both photons attach to the lepton line are referred to as the bremsstrahlung contribution. We notice that in this case the pions are in a C-odd state, in contrast to the former one where they emerge in a C-even state. The phenomenological interest of this observation will be discussed in Sect. 4.

The kinematical regime in which we study the reaction is that of large $`Q^2=q^2`$, where $`q=kk^{}`$ is the momentum tranferred from the electron (see Fig. 1), and small $`W^2=(p+p^{})^2`$. To be specific we shall explore the domain $`Q^24`$ GeV2 and $`W^21`$ GeV2. The $`Q^2`$ at which the leading contribution to be discussed starts to drive the cross section is, however, a matter of experimental determination because present theory can at best estimate the size of power corrections .

Let us now discuss the factorization of the process at large $`Q^2`$. To do this it is useful to visualize the process in the Breit frame, where the incoming real photon of momentum $`\frac{1}{2}(Q+W^2/Q)\widehat{z}`$ collides with a static virtual photon of momentum $`Q\widehat{z}`$ and the pion pair emerges with momentum $`\frac{1}{2}(QW^2/Q)\widehat{z}`$. Neglecting $`W^2`$ compared with $`Q^2`$, a simple spacetime cartoon can be drawn (see Fig. 2), which in addition shows the momentum sharing between the two pions on one hand, and between the two partons on the other hand.

Although a complete proof of factorization relies on a very detailed study of loop corrections, we may motivate it by emphasizing the similarities between the one-pion and the two-pion channels. The result of factorization is that the amplitude of the $`\gamma ^{}\gamma \pi \pi `$ reaction is a combination of a short distance transition from $`\gamma ^{}\gamma `$ to two partons (two quarks or two gluons) and a long distance process of hadronization of two partons into two hadrons.

At leading order in $`\alpha _S`$, the two photons couple to a $`q\overline{q}`$ pair. The relevant diagrams are displayed in Fig. 3. The matrix element of the time ordered product of the two electromagnetic current reads

$$T^{\mu \nu }=g_T^{\mu \nu }\underset{q}{}\frac{e_q^2}{2}_0^1𝑑z\frac{2z1}{z(1z)}\mathrm{\Phi }_q^+(z,\zeta ,W^2),$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_q^+`$ is the quark component of the two-pion distribution amplitude. The index $`+`$ indicates that the process selects the C-even component of the quark GDA. We notice that the amplitude (1) is independent of $`Q^2`$. This is understood to be true up to logarithmic scaling violation. We also remark that both photons have the same helicity. This property is specific to the $`q\overline{q}`$ channel. In the gluon channel, i.e., for the $`\gamma ^{}\gamma gg`$ subprocess, the photons can have opposite helicities , but still the virtual photon has to be transversely polarized. The phenomenological consequences of all these facts will be discussed in Sect. 4.

## 3 The generalized distribution amplitude

The operator definition of the two-pion distribution amplitude is, in $`A^+=0`$ gauge,

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_q(z,\zeta ,W^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dx^{}}{2\pi }e^{iz(P^+x^{})}\pi (p)\pi (p^{})|\overline{q}(x^{})\gamma ^+q(0)|0},`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_g(z,\zeta ,W^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{P^+}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx^{}}{2\pi }e^{iz(P^+x^{})}\pi (p)\pi (p^{})|F^{+\mu }(x^{})F_{\mu }^{}{}_{}{}^{+}(0)|0}.`$
The standard analysis of QCD radiative corrections shows that the amplitude (1) is modified by logarithms of $`Q^2`$. The leading logarithmic corrections may be factorized into the distribution amplitude, which thus depends on a factorization scale $`\mu ^2`$ through a linear combination of terms $`(\mathrm{log}\mu ^2)^{d_n}`$ with anomalous dimensions $`d_n`$. We refer the reader to Ref.  for a review in the present context. We only mention here that in the considered channel quarks and gluons mix under evolution and that all $`d_n`$’s are positive, except for one which is zero. This implies that the GDA tends to a non vanishing asymptotic form when $`\mu ^2\mathrm{}`$. This asymptotic form reads:

$`{\displaystyle \underset{q=1}{\overset{n_f}{}}}\mathrm{\Phi }_q^+(z,\zeta ,W^2)`$ $`=`$ $`18n_fz(1z)(2z1)`$
$`\times \left[B_{10}(W^2)+B_{12}(W^2)P_2(2\zeta 1)\right],`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_g(z,\zeta ,W^2)`$ $`=`$ $`48z^2(1z)^2`$
$`\times \left[B_{10}(W^2)+B_{12}(W^2)P_2(2\zeta 1)\right].`$
One finds that the first subasymptotic term has the same polynomials dependence in $`z`$ and $`\zeta `$, whereas solutions with yet higher $`d_n`$ involve polynomials of higher degree in both $`z`$ and $`\zeta `$.

One interesting phenomenological consequence of the interrelation of $`z`$ and $`\zeta `$ is that, since the $`\zeta `$ dependence may be rewritten as a partial wave expansion, the $`\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ dependence of the cross section provides information on the $`z`$ behavior of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. The latter would be otherwise difficult to extract since the amplitude is given as an integral over this variable (see Eq. (1)).

Let us now construct a simple model for the GDA. To perform this task, we take advantage of the energy-momentum sum-rules:

$`{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑z(2z1)\mathrm{\Phi }_q(z,\zeta ,W^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{(P^+)^2}}\pi ^+(p)\pi ^{}(p^{})|T_q^{++}(0)|0,`$
$`{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑z\mathrm{\Phi }_g(z,\zeta ,W^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(P^+)^2}}\pi ^+(p)\pi ^{}(p^{})|T_g^{++}(0)|0,`$
and of the form factor decomposition of $`T^{\mu \nu }`$:

$`\pi (p)\pi (p^{})|T_{q,g}^{\mu \nu }(0)|0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}T_{q,g}^{(1)}(W^2)[(p+p^{})^\mu (p+p^{})^\nu W^2g^{\mu \nu }]`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}T_{q,g}^{(2)}(W^2)(pp^{})^\mu (pp^{})^\nu .`$
We have to perform an analytic continuation from $`W^2`$ to $`0`$, which leads to

$$\frac{9n_f}{10}B_{12}(0)=\underset{q}{}T_q^{(2)}(0)=R_\pi $$

where $`R_\pi 50\%`$ is the total momentum fraction carried by quarks and antiquarks in a pion.

We simplify the discussion on energy dependence by using first that below the inelastic threshold the partial wave phases are related to the phase shifts $`\delta _0(W^2)`$ and $`\delta _2(W^2)`$ of $`\pi \pi `$ elastic scattering as a consequence of Watson’s theorem. We then assume $`|B_{12}(W^2)|`$ to be constant and thus equal to $`B_{12}(0)`$. Finally, we estimate $`B_{10}`$ through a soft pion theorem that gives $`B_{10}(0)=B_{12}(0)`$ .

Our model two-pion distribution amplitude thus reads

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{u/d}=10z(1z)(2z1)R_\pi \left[\frac{\beta ^23}{2}e^{i\delta _0(W^2)}+\beta ^2e^{i\delta _2(W^2)}P_2(\mathrm{cos}\theta )\right]$$

## 4 Phenomenology

Let us now briefly outline some useful phenomenological features of the $`e\gamma e\pi \pi `$ process (see Ref.  for more details).

There are three independent helicity amplitudes $`A_{++}`$, $`A_{0+}`$ and $`A_+`$, but the first one dominates at large $`Q^2`$ and may be written as

$$A_{++}=\underset{q}{}\frac{e_q^2}{2}_0^1𝑑z\frac{2z1}{z(1z)}\mathrm{\Phi }_q^{\pi \pi }(z,\zeta ,W^2),$$

at leading order in $`\alpha _S`$. The two other amplitudes are non-leading:

$$A_{0+}/A_{++}1/Q,A_+/A_{++}\alpha _S(Q^2).$$

In the case of $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ production, the cross section gets a contribution from the Bremsstrahlung process and can be decomposed as

$$d\sigma =d\sigma _B+d\sigma _I+d\sigma _G.$$

The interference with the bremsstrahlung process allows us to access the $`\gamma ^{}\gamma `$ process at the amplitude level, thanks to the different C-conjugation properties of the two processes. This contribution is selected by charge asymmetries such as

$$d\sigma (\pi ^+(p)\pi ^{}(p^{}))d\sigma (\pi ^{}(p)\pi ^+(p^{}))$$

and by angular distributions derived from this. This interference part may be written as

$$d\sigma _I(Q^2,W^2,\mathrm{cos}\theta ,\phi )e_l\left(C_0+C_1\mathrm{cos}\phi +C_2\mathrm{cos}2\phi +C_3\mathrm{cos}3\phi \right)$$

with the dominant term at large $`Q^2`$ given by

$`C_1`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Re}\left\{F_\pi ^{}A_{++}\right\}[1(1x)(1+ϵ)]\mathrm{sin}\theta `$
$``$ $`\mathrm{Re}\left\{F_\pi ^{}A_{0+}\right\}\sqrt{2x(1x)}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}ϵ\mathrm{cos}\theta `$
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{Re}\left\{F_\pi ^{}A_+\right\}(1x)\mathrm{sin}\theta `$
With our model distribution presented above we estimate counting rates around $`10^4`$ events for an integrated luminosity of 20–30 fb-1 at an $`e^+e^{}`$ c.m. energy of 10 GeV. This would allow one to measure the interference term with some $`O(10\%)`$ statistical errors.

## 5 Summary

The study of $`\gamma ^{}\gamma \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$, $`\pi ^0\pi ^0`$ at large photon virtuality and small c.m. energy is a powerful new tool for investigating the confining mechanism which takes place in the transformation of quarks or gluons into two mesons. The simplest model for the two-pion distribution amplitude uses the asymptotic solution to the evolution equations, $`\pi \pi `$ elastic phase shifts, and $`R_\pi `$.

Encouraging rates are predicted for the kinematics and luminosity of existing $`B`$ factories, and one may expect data to come soon from the BABAR, BELLE, and CLEO experiments.

The same GDA appears in deep electroproduction processes too, where it opens the possibility of extracting skewed parton distributions from $`2\pi `$ electroproduction without careful separation of resonant $`\rho `$ vs. non-resonant $`2\pi `$ production.

## Acknowledgments

We acknowledge useful discussions with O.V. Teryaev.


text:
# Effective Field Theory Power Counting at Finite Density

## Abstract

Effective field theory is applied to finite-density systems with two-particle interactions exhibiting an unnaturally large scattering length, such as neutron matter. A new organizational scheme, identified for a large number of space-time dimensions, allows for convergent analytic calculations in many-body systems and is similar to the hole-line expansion of traditional nuclear physics.

preprint: MIT-CTP-3033

Effective field theory (EFT) provides a way to systematically improve low-energy observables and make predictions for related processes. It has recently been applied to systems with an unnaturally large scattering length by adopting an organizational scheme that forces an infinite set of diagrams to be summed at leading order .

Extending the systematic language of an EFT to many-body systems would be beneficial for describing various systems of interest including nuclei, neutron stars, and atomic Fermi-Dirac condensates. Although sophisticated approximation techniques already exist for describing finite-density systems , error estimates are difficult to quantify and have been considered the “holy grail” of many-body physics by Brueckner.

At finite density, EFTs have given an accurate understanding of dilute systems  and of Fermi surface effects  such as the superconductor pairing gap . Also, the Skyrme model and EFTs constructed at saturation density  can parameterize finite-density effects with only a few parameters. However, connecting bulk properties at finite density, such as the equation of state of nuclear matter (an idealized infinite system of protons and neutrons interacting only through the strong force), to known free-space interactions between the constituent particles requires a consistent organizational scheme (or power counting) at finite density. This will also allow many other interesting questions to be investigated, including whether nuclear matter binds in the chiral limit  and why nuclear matter saturates.

An EFT treatment of many-body systems automatically dictates the relevance of higher-particle contact interactions. For example, three-particle scattering composed of only two-body interactions has divergent loop corrections and the addition of an actual three-body contact interaction is required to regularize the result . For nucleons in the triton, such a contact interaction has been shown to be as important as two-body interactions . Therefore, it is natural to first focus on an EFT description of finite density systems with two states, such as neutron matter, since then Pauli’s exclusion principle requires three- and higher-body contact interactions to be multiplied by powers of momentum and the EFT implies these contributions are suppressed.

For neutrons, restricting the momenta to be below $`m_\pi `$ and neglecting spin dependence will clarify the discussion since pions and other extended structure can be integrated out leaving only simple point-like interactions. In addition, the two proposed free-space EFT power countings, known as $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-counting and $`Q`$-counting , yield equivalent results in this regime. Therefore, $`𝒪(k_F/m_\pi )`$ corrections will be implicit in the following. To make the relevant scales transparent, dimensional regularization with power divergence subtraction (PDS)  will be used below to regulate infinite integrals.

Non-relativistic particles with (spin-averaged) contact interactions are governed by the most general lagrangian

$`_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ $`=`$ $`N^{}\left(i_t+{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{2M}}\right)NC_0(N^{}N)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_2\left[(N^{}N)^2+((N^{})N)^2\right]`$ (2)
$`+C_2^p(N^{}N)\left((N^{})N\right)+\mathrm{},`$
with particle mass $`M`$, $`S`$-wave interactions $`C_0`$ and $`C_2`$, $`P`$-wave interaction $`C_2^p`$, and higher derivatives and partial waves represented by the dots. Calculating observables using this non-renormalizable lagrangian leads to divergences which need to be regulated. One-loop scattering (Fig. 1a) with external relative momentum $`𝐤=\frac{1}{2}(𝐤_1𝐤_2)`$ in the PDS subtraction scheme is

$$\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{M}{k^2q^2+iϵ}=\frac{M}{4\pi }(\mu +ik).$$
(3)
This introduces the renormalization scale $`\mu `$ into amplitudes, and so the low-energy constants in Eq. (2) must also depend on $`\mu `$ to ensure observables are $`\mu `$-independent.

Note that $`\mu `$ should be of the same order as the characteristic momentum of the process, $`k`$, so that the relative size of the loop Eq. (3) is not altered. Both scales should be small compared to the scale of underlying physics ($`m_\pi `$ for neutrons) to ensure the EFT description does not break down. Furthermore, two-particle interactions exhibiting a large scattering length introduce a small momentum scale into the system (the neutron scattering length $`a_s`$ gives $`|1/a_s|10`$ MeV). All this can be summarized by defining a generic small scale $`Q(k,\mu ,1/a_s)`$, and all observables are well approximated by an expansion in $`Q`$.

Matching the on-shell T-matrix to phase-shift data gives expressions for the low-energy constants of Eq. (2) in terms of scattering observables  such as the scattering length $`a_s`$ and effective range $`r_e`$,

$`C_0={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi /M}{\mu 1/a_s}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Q}},C_2k^2={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi /M}{(\mu 1/a_s)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_e}{2}}k^2Q^0.`$
Since the particle-particle loop Eq. (3) scales like $`Q`$, all insertions of $`C_0`$ contribute at leading order $`1/Q`$ to the T-matrix, whereas insertions of $`C_2`$ and other contact interactions are higher order. This justifies the Lippmann-Schwinger equation for $`C_0`$ only, which forms a summable geometric series, giving

$$T(k)=\frac{C_0}{1\frac{MC_0}{4\pi }(\mu +ik)}=\frac{4\pi /M}{1/a_s+ik}.$$
(4)
Note that the result is $`\mu `$-independent and produces the first term in the effective range expansion by construction.

A many-body system of fermions with spin-isospin degeneracy $`g=(2S+1)(2I+1)`$ forms a Fermi sea with Fermi momentum $`k_F`$ and density $`\rho =gk_F^3/6\pi ^3`$. The kinetic energy per particle of a free fermion gas is given by the familiar expression

$$\frac{E_{\mathrm{kin}}}{A}=\frac{g}{\rho }\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{k^2}{2M}=\frac{3}{5}\frac{k_F^2}{2M}.$$
(5)
Quantum fluctuations allow particle-hole pairs to form, with interactions still given by the lagrangian Eq. (2). These contributions to the ground-state energy can be represented by closed, connected Feynman diagrams and calculated using finite-density Feynman rules .

Two basic building blocks of finite-density diagrams are depicted in Fig. 1a and b. Since the neutron propagator accounts for both particle and hole propagation

$$G_0(k)_{\alpha \beta }=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\left(\frac{\theta (kk_F)}{k_0𝐤^2/2M+iϵ}+\frac{\theta (k_Fk)}{k_0𝐤^2/2Miϵ}\right),$$
(6)
contour integration of the loop momentum shows Fig. 1a and b actually represent three processes: two-particle or two-hole scattering in Fig. 1a and one-particle, one-hole scattering in Fig. 1b. Pauli blocking is enforced by the following theta functions, which depend on the center of mass momentum $`𝐏=𝐤_1+𝐤_2`$ and arbitrary relative momentum $`𝐪`$ (with $`𝐪_{\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟐}}=\frac{1}{2}𝐏\pm 𝐪`$),

$`\theta _q^+`$ $``$ $`\theta \left(q_1k_F\right)\theta \left(q_2k_F\right),`$
$`\theta _q^\pm `$ $``$ $`\theta \left(q_1k_F\right)\theta \left(k_Fq_2\right),`$
$`\theta _q^{}`$ $``$ $`\theta \left(k_Fq_1\right)\theta \left(k_Fq_2\right),`$
for particle-particle, particle-hole, and hole-hole scattering respectively. These three processes can be integrated analytically:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\theta _q^+}{k^2q^2+iϵ}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{4\pi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{k_F}{(2\pi )^2}}f(\kappa ,s),`$ (7)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\theta _q^\pm }{𝐏(𝐤𝐪)+iϵ}}={\displaystyle \frac{k_F}{(2\pi )^2}}\stackrel{~}{f}(𝜿𝐬,s),`$ (8)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\theta _q^{}}{q^2k^2+iϵ}}={\displaystyle \frac{k_F}{(2\pi )^2}}f(\kappa ,s)\theta (1s).`$ (9)
having defined the dimensionless momenta $`𝐬=\frac{1}{2}𝐏/k_F`$ and $`𝜿=𝐤/k_F`$. Particle-particle scattering has contributions from momenta up to infinity and so can be written as a regularized integration over all momenta, Eq. (3), which brings the $`\mu `$-dependence in Eq. (7), minus a term constraining at least one propagator to be inside the Fermi surface, which replaces the remnant of asymptotic scattering, $`ik`$, by the nontrivial function $`f(\kappa ,s)`$. This same functional form appears in hole-hole scattering, but in this case both $`𝐤_1`$ and $`𝐤_2`$ must be inside the Fermi surface, and so $`P<2k_F`$ (i.e. $`s<1`$). In fact, the functions in Eqs. (7-9) have different analytical forms depending on whether $`s>1`$ or $`s<1`$, and the combinations which enter ground-state energy calculations are

$`\theta (1s)f(\kappa ,s)`$ $`=`$ $`1+s+\kappa \mathrm{ln}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1+s\kappa }{1+s+\kappa }}\right|+{\displaystyle \frac{1\kappa ^2s^2}{2s}}\mathrm{ln}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{(1+s)^2\kappa ^2}{1\kappa ^2s^2}}\right|,`$ (10)
$`\theta (1s)\stackrel{~}{f}(\alpha s,s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1\alpha }{2}}+\alpha \mathrm{ln}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1s\alpha }{\alpha }}\right|+{\displaystyle \frac{1(\alpha s)^2}{4s}}\mathrm{ln}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1+s\alpha }{1s\alpha }}\right|,`$ (11)
$`\theta (s1)\stackrel{~}{f}(\alpha s,s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{s\alpha }{2s}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1(\alpha s)^2}{4s}}\mathrm{ln}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{s+1\alpha }{s1\alpha }}\right|.`$ (12)
Interpreting one contribution to the ground-state energy, Fig. 1d, in three different ways gives the identities:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3kd^3P}{(2\pi )^6}\theta _k^{}\left(f(\kappa ,s)\frac{\pi \mu }{k_F}\right)}={\displaystyle \frac{d^3kd^3P}{(2\pi )^6}\theta _k^{}\stackrel{~}{f}(𝜿𝐬,s)}`$ (13)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{d^3kd^3P}{(2\pi )^6}\theta _k^+f(\kappa ,s)\theta (1s)}={\displaystyle \frac{k_F^6}{6\pi ^4}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{112\mathrm{ln}2}{35}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mu }{6k_F}}\right),`$ (14)
which all integrate to the same result, serving as an excellent check of Eqs. (10-12).

Extending $`Q`$-counting to finite density shows the small parameter is $`Q(k_F,\mu ,1/a_s)`$, so all powers of $`k_Fa_s`$ must be summed at leading order . Also, this choice $`\mu k_F`$ ensures the regularization does not destroy the relative importance of Eq. (7), since $`f(\kappa ,s)/\pi 𝒪(1)`$. With this scaling, the kinetic energy per particle Eq. (5) is $`𝒪(Q^2)`$, and the contribution with one $`C_0`$ insertion, Fig. 1c, is

$$\left(\frac{E}{A}\right)_{(\text{1}c)}=\frac{g(g1)}{2\rho }\frac{d^3kd^3P}{(2\pi )^6}\theta _k^{}C_0=\frac{(g1)k_F^3}{12\pi ^2}C_0Q^2.$$
(15)
The free-space counting $`C_01/Q`$ makes Eq. (15) of the same order as the kinetic energy and hence nontrivial properties such as nuclear binding can possibly occur at leading order. In fact, each additional $`C_0`$ vertex added to Fig. 1c requires two more propagators and one more loop integral, bringing an extra factor of order***The identification $`k_0k^2/2M`$ is made for power counting purposes .

$$C_0\left(\frac{M}{k_F^2}\right)^2\left(\frac{k_F^5}{M}\right)Q^0$$
(16)
and so all possible insertions of $`C_0`$, including non-planar graphs, are leading order, making calculations intractable.

However, evaluation of some representative diagrams will show there is still an additional organizational scheme which can be exploited. Take, for example, the Feynman diagrams in Fig. 2a-d, which are all of the same order in $`Q`$-counting. They are rings of bubbles with particle scattering in either the same direction or opposite directions. A loop momentum is assigned to each bubble and a propagator Eq. (6) to each line. The final loop momentum can be chosen to be the center-of-mass momentum $`P`$, which traverses the entire ring and is shared equally by the legs of each bubble. A contour integration over the propagators enforces energy conservation, so not all propagators of a diagram can be particles (or holes).

The contributions to each diagram are: two particle-particle bubbles, one hole-hole bubble (2pp-1hh) and one particle-particle bubble, two hole-hole bubbles (1pp-2hh) for Fig. 2a; 3pp-1hh, 2pp-2hh, and 1pp-3hh for Fig. 2b; 2ph-1hp and 1ph-2hp for Fig. 2c; 3ph-1hp, 2ph-2hp, and 1ph-3hp for Fig. 2d. After working through the Feynman rules, simplifying the expressions, and dividing by the density $`\rho `$, the energy per particle for each diagram, organized according to the aforementioned particle and hole content, is:

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{E}{A}}\right)_{(\text{2}a)}=(g1){\displaystyle \frac{k_F^2}{2M}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{Mk_FC_0}{4\pi }}\right)^3{\displaystyle \frac{48}{\pi ^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3sd^3\kappa }{(4\pi )^2}\left[\theta _\kappa ^{}\left(f(\kappa ,s)\frac{\pi \mu }{k_F}\right)^2+\theta _\kappa ^+f(\kappa ,s)^2\right]},`$
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{E}{A}}\right)_{(\text{2}b)}=(g1){\displaystyle \frac{k_F^2}{2M}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{Mk_FC_0}{4\pi }}\right)^4{\displaystyle \frac{48}{\pi ^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3sd^3\kappa }{(4\pi )^2}}`$
$`\times \left[\theta _\kappa ^{}\left(f(\kappa ,s){\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mu }{k_F}}\right)^3+3\left(f(\kappa ,s){\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mu }{k_F}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{2\pi }\frac{\theta _\kappa ^{}\theta _q^+}{\kappa ^2q^2}f(q,s)}+\theta _\kappa ^+f(\kappa ,s)^3\right],`$
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{E}{A}}\right)_{(\text{2}c)}=(g1)(g3){\displaystyle \frac{k_F^2}{2M}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{Mk_FC_0}{4\pi }}\right)^3{\displaystyle \frac{96}{2!\pi ^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3sd^3\kappa }{(4\pi )^2}\left[\theta _\kappa ^{}\stackrel{~}{f}(𝜿𝐬,s)^2+\theta _\kappa ^\pm \stackrel{~}{f}(𝜿𝐬,s)^2\right]},`$
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{E}{A}}\right)_{(\text{2}d)}=(g1)^2(g3){\displaystyle \frac{k_F^2}{2M}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{Mk_FC_0}{4\pi }}\right)^4{\displaystyle \frac{96}{3!\pi ^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3sd^3\kappa }{(4\pi )^2}}`$
$`\times \left[\theta _\kappa ^{}\stackrel{~}{f}(𝜿𝐬,s)^33\stackrel{~}{f}(𝜿𝐬,s){\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{4\pi }\frac{\theta _\kappa ^{}\theta _q^\pm }{𝐬(𝜿𝐪)}\stackrel{~}{f}(𝐪𝐬,s)}+\theta _\kappa ^\pm \stackrel{~}{f}(𝜿𝐬,s)^3\right],`$
where a factor of $`\theta (1s)`$ has been absorbed into $`f(\kappa ,s)`$. The factor of “3” in contributions to Fig. 2b and d comes from the combinatorics of choosing the second pp or ph pair respectively and the symmetry factor of Fig. 2d gives an additional $`1/3`$ suppression compared to the other diagrams.

A simple change of variables shows the $`i`$ph-$`j`$hp and $`j`$ph-$`i`$hp contributions are the same for any $`i`$ and $`j`$. Numerically integrating the above expressions and taking $`\mu =0`$ for clarity gives

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{E}{A}}\right)_{(\text{2}a)}`$ $`=`$ $`(g1){\displaystyle \frac{k_F^2}{2M}}(k_Fa_s)^3\left(0.0641+0.0115\right),`$ (17)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{E}{A}}\right)_{(\text{2}b)}`$ $`=`$ $`(g1){\displaystyle \frac{k_F^2}{2M}}(k_Fa_s)^4\left(0.0383+3\times 0.002470.000683\right),`$ (18)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{E}{A}}\right)_{(\text{2}c)}`$ $`=`$ $`(g1)(g3){\displaystyle \frac{k_F^2}{2M}}\left(k_Fa_s\right)^3(0.0287+0.0287),`$ (19)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{E}{A}}\right)_{(\text{2}d)}`$ $`=`$ $`(g1)^2(g3){\displaystyle \frac{k_F^2}{2M}}\left(k_Fa_s\right)^4(0.000603+3\times 0.000557+0.000603).`$ (20)
Adding the terms for each of the three-bubble diagrams, Fig. 2a and c, gives results in agreement with Ref. . Comparison of individual terms in Eqs. (17-20) shows each additional hole-line is suppressed by about a factor of three. This means every added hole-hole bubble is suppressed by almost an order of magnitude. The suppression is the same at nonzero $`\mu `$, where $`k_Fa_s`$ can be taken very large.

This suppression can be described by a new power counting at finite density which is kinematical in nature and will lead to the simplification of many-body calculations. Take the 1pp-1hh contribution of Eq. (14), which using Eq. (7) can be written in terms of one relative momentum below the Fermi surface and another above:

$$\frac{d^3Pd^3kd^3q}{(2\pi )^9}\frac{\theta _k^{}\theta _q^+}{k^2q^2+iϵ}=\frac{d^3Pd^3kd^3q}{(2\pi )^9}\frac{\theta _k^{}\theta _q^+}{q^2+iϵ}\left(1\frac{k^2}{q^2+iϵ}+𝒪(k^4/q^4)\right).$$
(21)
The integration region $`\theta _k^{}`$ can be pictured as the overlap of two Fermi spheres (of radius $`k_F`$) with centers separated by the center-of-mass momentum $`𝐏`$, whereas the region $`\theta _q^+`$ is given by all momenta excluding these same intersecting spheres . In principle, the momenta $`k`$ and $`q`$ can both be near $`k_F`$, but the integration measure $`d^3P`$ suppresses $`P0`$, which makes the approximation $`qk`$ appropriate.

In addition, for $`P\stackrel{<}{_{}}2k_F`$, the overlap region of the two spheres is small and suppresses additional powers of $`k^2`$ in the numerator, since

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3\kappa }{4\pi }\frac{\theta _\kappa ^+}{\kappa ^2+iϵ}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mu }{2k_F}}+1+𝒪(1s),`$ (22)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3\kappa }{4\pi }\theta _\kappa ^{}}={\displaystyle \frac{(1s)^2}{2}}+𝒪(1s)^3,`$ (23)
and more generally $`\theta _q^+/q^{2n}𝒪(1s)^0`$ for every $`n`$, and $`\theta _k^{}k^{2n}𝒪(1s)^{n+2}`$. Then, working in $`D`$ dimensions (with the understanding that $`D=4`$ will be taken at the end of the calculation) the integral over the center-of-mass momentum gives

$$_0^1𝑑ss^{D2}(1s)^n\frac{1}{D^n}_0^1𝑑ss^{D2}.$$
(24)
for large $`D`$. In fact, carrying out the entire calculation in $`D`$-dimensions shows the suppression is actually $`1/𝒟^n`$ with $`𝒟2^{D/2}`$, which is numerically equivalent to Eq. (24) for $`D=4`$ but even more convergent in larger number of dimensions.

From the above, the theta functions which enforce Pauli blocking can be associated with powers of $`1/𝒟`$: $`\theta _\kappa ^+1/𝒟^0`$, $`\theta _\kappa ^{}1/𝒟^2`$, and Eq. (14) implies $`\theta _\kappa ^\pm 1/𝒟`$. Therefore, the expansion in $`1/𝒟`$ is similar to the traditional hole-line expansion of nuclear physics . Furthermore, the complicated functions of Eq. (10-12) greatly simplify to

$$f(\kappa ,s)=2+𝒪(𝒟^1),f(\kappa ,s)=\frac{(1s)^2}{\kappa ^2}+𝒪(𝒟^3),$$
(25)
since they always appear with the respective theta functions $`\theta _\kappa ^{}`$ and $`\theta _\kappa ^+`$, and using Eq. (14),

$$\theta (s1)\stackrel{~}{f}(\alpha s,s)=\frac{1}{3s(s\alpha )}+𝒪(𝒟^2).$$
(26)
Using these simplified forms along with Eqs. (22-23), the above analytic expressions for the diagrams of Fig. 2 can be analytically integrated. The numerical values at each order in $`1/𝒟`$ are collected in Table I, and the $`1/𝒟`$-expansion quickly converges to the full result in most cases, although the contributions to Fig. 2c require further investigation.

The existence of a power counting in $`1/𝒟`$ allows for systematic calculation of finite-density observables such as the ground-state energy. First of all, it is interesting to note that at next-to-leading order in the $`Q`$-expansion, one insertion of $`C_2k^2`$ will appear, and the integration of $`k^2`$ over phase space ($`\theta _k^{}`$) brings a factor of $`1/𝒟`$. Therefore the hierarchy of the $`Q`$-expansion is already included in the $`1/𝒟`$-expansion. The leading order ground-state energy per particle can be written in closed form:

$$\frac{E}{A}=\frac{E_{\mathrm{kin}}}{A}+\frac{E_{\mathrm{int}}^{(0)}}{A}+𝒪(1/𝒟),$$
(27)
with the kinetic energy given by Eq. (5) and the interaction energy to this order given by all the particle-particle scattering terms (i.e., the $`n`$pp-1hh bubbles for all $`n`$). This is a summable geometric series, giving

$$\frac{E_{\mathrm{int}}^{(0)}}{A}=\frac{g(g1)}{2\rho }\frac{d^3Pd^3k}{(2\pi )^6}\theta _k^{}\frac{4\pi /M}{1/a_s\frac{k_F}{\pi }f(\kappa ,s)},$$
(28)
which is $`\mu `$-independent, as it should be for any consistent expansion. Actually, to the order quoted in $`1/𝒟`$, the substitution $`f(\kappa ,s)2`$ is valid, which gives the leading-order ground-state energy per particle for neutron matter (taking $`g=2`$)

$$\frac{E}{A}=\left(\frac{3}{5}+\frac{2k_Fa_s/3}{\pi 2k_Fa_s}\right)\frac{k_F^2}{2M}+𝒪(1/𝒟).$$
(29)
For $`a_s>0`$, $`E/A`$ has a pole at $`k_Fa_s=\pi /2`$ and it would be interesting to explore its consequence in atomic systems where the scattering length can be tuned. As for neutrons, the scattering length is negative and it is a good approximation to take $`1/a_s0`$, to arrive at the scale-invariant answer $`E/A=(4/15)k_F^2/2M`$. The next order in $`1/𝒟`$ will require a single insertion of $`C_2`$ or $`C_2^p`$ and diagrams with three hole-lines.

A new power counting at finite density has been found which includes the nonperturbative free-space power counting of two-nucleon EFTs. The many-body problem simplifies in a large number of space-time dimensions and leads to a convergent expansion even for $`D=4`$. Including explicit pions and three-body forces in the lagrangian will allow the above analysis to be extended to nuclear matter for an exploration of the behavior near saturation density.

I would like to thank R. J. Furnstahl, H. W. Hammer, D. B. Kaplan, J. W. Negele, and K. Rajagopal for useful discussions and I. W. Stewart for a critical reading of the manuscript. This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy under cooperative research agreement #DF-FC02-94ER40818.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to study the noncommutative nature of spacetime in the neighborhood of D-branes. It was conjectured  that the $`AdS\times S`$ spacetime, which is the near horizon geometry of certain brane configurations, is best described as a noncommutative space, based on hints from the AdS/CFT duality. With the help of giant gravitons , people have also studied the $`AdS\times S`$ geometry probed by a graviton, which can be a string or membrane depending on the context . Although it was first suggested that the spacetime consists of a q-deformed sphere , some evidence was also found for the fuzzy sphere . There is also a suggestion of certain equivalence between two types of noncommutative spheres .

Apart from information from the CFT side, since D-branes in background NS-NS B field is known to be noncommutative , by dualities this implies that fundamental strings in background R-R B field become noncommutative . This was indeed shown in the matrix theory . Thus we expect that due to the R-R gauge field background, the $`AdS\times S`$ spacetime is also noncommutative.

It was pointed out in  that the AdS/CFT duality can be understood as a change of basis at the tip of the Coulomb branch of the DLCQ theory. By studying the DLCQ theory of the $`(2,0)`$ field theory, the $`S^4`$ part in $`AdS_7\times S^4`$ was shown to be a fuzzy sphere in that paper. In this paper we aim to generalize the derivation of fuzzy spheres to branes of arbitrary dimensions. We study the matrix model  of a D-particle probing the spacetime surrounding $`N`$ coincident D$`p`$-branes. (By D-particle we actually mean a graviton with unit longitudinal momentum in DLCQ M theory.) We find that the transverse coordinates of the probe satisfy the algebra of Snyder  and Yang , with the angular part defined on a fuzzy sphere for any even $`p`$.

We shall focus on the geometry of the space transverse to $`N`$ flat D$`p`$-branes located at the origin. In the framework of BFSS matrix model , we consider $`p=4`$ in Sec.2, $`p=2,6,8`$ in Sec.3. The case $`p=0`$ is discussed in Sec.4. Finally we make some comments in Sec.5.

## 2 D4-branes

In this section we revisit the case of D4-branes, for which the fuzzy nature of spacetime was first discussed in .

The matrix model for a D-particle in the vicinity of $`N`$ D4-branes can be found in . 111 The action for $`N`$ D0-branes and one D4-brane is given in . It is straightforward to change it to the action we need for one D0-brane and $`N`$ D4-branes.  The Lagrangian is composed of three parts

$$=_0+_1+_2,$$
(1)
where $`_0`$ is the $`U(N)`$ SYM theory on 4+1 dimensions describing $`N`$ D4-branes, $`_1`$ is the SUSY $`U(1)`$ Lagrangian for the D0-brane, and the interaction term is

$`_2`$ $`=`$ $`|D_tv^\rho |^2+\chi ^{}D_t\chi v_\rho ^{}(X^ax^a)^2v^\rho `$ (2)
$`\chi ^{}(X^ax^a)\gamma _a\chi v_\rho ^{}(\mathrm{\Theta }\psi )^\rho \chi |v|^4.`$
We have $`v^\rho `$ as a Weyl spinor of $`SO(4)`$, and $`\chi `$ is an $`SO(5)`$ spinor. They correspond to the open string stretched between the D0-brane and $`N`$ D4-branes, so they are in the fundamental representation of $`U(N)`$. $`X`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ are the matrix coordinates for the $`N`$ D4-branes, and $`x`$ and $`\psi `$ are those for the D0-brane. The D4-branes are at the origin so we take $`X=0`$.

For large $`x`$, one can integrate out $`v`$ and $`\chi `$ and read off the metric of D4-brane in the effective Lagrangian for $`x`$ . For small $`x`$ we consider the low energy limit in which we can ignore the kinetic term of $`x`$. By varying $``$ with respect to $`x`$, we find

$$x^a=\frac{1}{2|v|^2}\chi ^{}\gamma ^a\chi .$$
(3)
As a change of coordinates, we can view

$$r=\frac{1}{2|v|^2}$$
(4)
as the radial coordinate and

$$Y^a=\chi ^{}\gamma ^a\chi $$
(5)
as Cartesian coordinates parametrizing $`S^4`$. Assuming canonical commutation relations for $`\chi `$

$$\{\chi _\rho ^{},\chi _\kappa \}=\delta _{\rho \kappa },$$
(6)
one finds that the angular coordinates $`Y`$ satisfy the algebra of Snyder  and Yang

$`[Y_a,Y_b]`$ $`=`$ $`iL_{ab},`$ (7)
$`[L_{ab},Y_c]`$ $`=`$ $`i\left(\delta _{ac}Y_b\delta _{bc}Y_a\right),`$ (8)
$`[L_{ab},L_{cd}]`$ $`=`$ $`i\left(\delta _{ac}L_{bd}+\delta _{bd}L_{ac}\delta _{ad}L_{bc}\delta _{bc}L_{ad}\right),`$ (9)
where $`L_{ab}`$ are the generators of $`SO(5)`$ rotations of the sphere. This result was first derived in , and then in  in different ways.

Note that the quantization of the system (6) is carried out without imposing any additional constraint. This is in contrast with other derivation of noncommutative space by imposing BPS constraints , or other reduction of the Hilbert space .

## 3 D$`p`$-branes

To generalize the discussions above to $`p=2,6,8`$, we start with the BFSS matrix model description of a D0-brane and $`N`$ D$`p`$-branes realized as a bound state of infinitely many D0-branes. The matrix model has the SYM action

$$S=d^{p+1}x\text{Tr}\left(\frac{1}{4}[X_\mu ,X_\nu ]^2+\frac{1}{2}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu [X_\mu ,\mathrm{\Psi }]\right),$$
(10)
where $`X`$’s are the matrix coordinates, and $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a $`9+1`$ dimensional Majorana-Weyl spinor dimensionally reduced to $`p+1`$ dimensions. They are

$$X_\mu =\left(\begin{array}{cc}Z_\mu & y_\mu \\ y_\mu ^{}& x_\mu \end{array}\right),\mathrm{\Psi }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Theta }& þ\\ þ^{}& \psi \end{array}\right).$$
(11)
Here $`x`$ and $`\psi `$ are the probe coordinates. In the temporal gauge $`X_0=i_0`$. $`Z_i=iD_i`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{},p`$) are covariant derivatives on the dual torus, and they satisfy the D$`p`$-brane condition

$$[Z_{2i1},Z_{2i}]=if,i=1,\mathrm{},p/2,$$
(12)
where $`f`$ is a constant depending on $`N`$, the longitudinal momentum and the size of the torus. $`Z_a`$’s ($`a=p+1,\mathrm{},9`$) represent transverse coordinates of the $`N`$ D$`p`$-branes, so we let $`Z_a=0`$. We shall also take $`\mathrm{\Theta }=0`$. In other words, we set the $`N`$ D-branes in the ground state as a fixed background. The open string stretched between the probe and the $`N`$ D-branes is represented by $`y`$ and $`þ`$, which are in the fundamental representation of the gauge group $`U(N)`$.

Plugging (11) into the action (10), we obtain the potential

$`L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|(Z_\mu y_\nu Z_\nu y_\mu +y_\mu x_\nu y_\nu x_\mu )|^2`$ (13)
$`+y^\mu [Z_\mu ,Z_\nu ]y_\nu y_\mu ^{}y_\nu y_\mu ^{}y_\nu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}y_\mu ^{}y_\mu y_\nu ^{}y_\nu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}y_\mu ^{}y_\nu y_\nu ^{}y_\mu `$
$`+\overline{þ}\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu (Z_\mu þþx_\mu )+\overline{þ}\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu (y_\mu \psi \mathrm{\Theta }y_\mu )+(\overline{\psi }y_\mu ^{}y_\mu ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Theta }})\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu þ.`$
For large $`x`$, the open string modes are heavy, so one can integrate out the off-diagonal components $`y,þ`$. The low energy effective action describes the probe moving in a curved spacetime. Given enough supersymmetry, it is in agreement with supergravity .

However, for small $`x`$, some open string modes are light, and they should not be integrated out. To take into account the light modes, we first set $`x=0`$ and find the zero modes, and then one can adiabatically increase $`x`$ to a small value (compared with the string length scale $`l_s`$). Given these open string modes, we shall minimize the potential energy in order to derive the properties of spacetime probed by a D0-brane in the low energy limit.

Let us recall some facts about the zero modes . For any $`p`$ ($`p=0,2,4,6,8`$) there is always a fermionic zero mode. It is therefore important to keep the fermionic fields. We will see later that indeed they play a crucial role in making the spacetime noncommutative. For $`p=2,4,6,8`$, denote the fermionic zero mode as

$$þ_{A\alpha }=\varphi _A\chi _\alpha .$$
(14)
For $`p=4`$, $`\varphi _A`$ is an $`SO(4)`$ Weyl spinor on D4-branes. It is a section of the twisted bundle on the dual torus. The amplitude of the fermionic zero mode is given by $`\chi _m`$, which is an $`SO(5)`$ spinor. The bosonic zero mode is

$$y_i=\overline{v}\gamma _i\varphi ,$$
(15)
where $`v`$ is an $`SO(4)`$ Weyl spinor. This can be viewed as a SUSY transformation from the fermionic zero mode according to $`\delta y_\mu =\overline{ϵ}\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu þ`$. Plugging this solution of $`þ`$ and $`y`$ into (13), and integrating ove the dual torus, one reproduces (2) as the leading order terms. For $`p=2,6,8`$, $`\varphi _A`$ is an $`SO(p)`$ Weyl spinor on D$`p`$-branes, and $`\chi _m`$ is an $`SO(9p)`$ spinor. There is no bosonic zero mode in these cases.

We will ignore the kinetic terms of $`x`$ and $`\psi `$ in the action, assuming that they change very slowly with time. We will also replace $`þ`$ by its zero mode solutions at $`x=0`$. For $`p=2,6,8`$, the lowest energy mode of $`y`$ is given by

$$y_i=v_i^A\varphi _A,y_a=0.$$
(16)
Its mass squared at $`x=0`$ is of the order $`f`$ for $`p=6,8`$. For $`p=2`$ the mass squared is negative, as the D0-brane tends to dissolve into the D2-branes .

From (13) we derive the equations of motion for $`x`$

$$2|y|^2x_\mu y_\mu ^{}y_\nu x_\nu (y_\nu ^{}x_\nu )y_\mu \overline{þ}^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu þy_\nu ^{}D_\nu y_\mu +D_\nu y_\mu ^{}y_\nu =0,$$
(17)
where $`\mu ,\nu =1,2,\mathrm{},9`$. Plugging (14) and (16) into (17), and integrating over the dual torus, one finds

$$2|v|^2x_a=\overline{\chi }^{}\gamma _a\chi .$$
(18)
This again implies (3), as in the case $`p=4`$, and results in the algebra of an $`(8p)`$ dimensional fuzzy sphere.

Strictly speaking, the mass of higher exitations of $`y`$ are of the same order of magnitude as the lowest energy mode. Hence it is not a very good approximation to ignore them. For a generic $`y`$, we can still integrate (17) over the dual torus for $`x_i=0`$. We get

$$M_{ab}x_b=\overline{\chi }\gamma _a\chi +z_a,$$
(19)
where $`M_{ab}`$ is the integration of $`(2|y|^2\delta _{ab}y_a^{}y_by_b^{}y_a)`$. Since $`M_{ab}`$ is symmetric, it can be diagonalized by an $`SO(p)`$ transformation so that (19) is turned into

$$M_ax_a^{}=\overline{\chi }^{}\gamma _a\chi ^{}+z_a^{}.$$
(20)
Upon quantization, $`x_a^{}`$ becomes a coordinate on a fuzzy ellipsoid. Since all modes of $`y`$ are heavy for $`p=6,8`$, one can also integrate out $`y`$ (for a given cutoff) and find effective values for $`M_a`$ and $`z_a`$. Due to the $`SO(p)`$ symmetry of the system, we expect that $`M_a`$ is a constant independent of $`a`$ and $`z_a=0`$. It follows that $`x`$ is still of the form (3)

$$x_a=r\overline{\chi }\gamma _a\chi ,$$
(21)
and its angular part lives on a fuzzy sphere (7)-(9).

## 4 D0-branes

The discussion in the previous section also applies to the case $`p=0`$ with constant zero modes. However, since this case is simpler, we are able to provide a more explicit derivation.

In the low energy limit we ignore time derivatives of $`x`$ and $`\psi `$ in the action to derive equations of motion from the potential (13). Ignoring also higher order terms of $`y`$, we find the equation of motion for $`y`$

$$\ddot{y}_ax_b(y_bx_ay_ax_b)\overline{\psi }\mathrm{\Gamma }^aþ=0,$$
(22)
where $`a,b=1,\mathrm{},9`$. This equation of motion has the symmetry $`y_ay_a+\lambda x_a`$ for constant $`x`$, where $`\lambda `$ is any scalar in the fundamental representation of $`U(N)`$. This is in fact a gauge symmetry. For the background configuration

$$X_a=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 0& x_a\end{array}\right),$$
(23)
the gauge transformation by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \lambda \\ \lambda ^{}& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(24)
results in a change of the off-diagonal components

$$\delta X_a=[\mathrm{\Lambda },X_a]=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \lambda x_a\\ \lambda ^{}x_a& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(25)
We can fix the gauge by imposing

$$x_ay_a=0.$$
(26)
Note that $`D_a=0`$ ($`a=1,\mathrm{},9`$) for D0-branes. Using the equation of motion for $`x`$ (17) and the gauge fixing condition (26), we find

$$x_a=\frac{1}{2|y|^2}\overline{þ}\mathrm{\Gamma }_aþ.$$
(27)
This is of the same form as (3). The angular part

$$Y_a=\overline{þ}\mathrm{\Gamma }_aþ$$
(28)
lives on a fuzzy sphere (7)-(9). Finally we have shown that the fuzzy sphere appears for all $`p=0,2,4,6,8`$.

The equation of motion for $`þ`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }^a(þx_ay_a\psi )=0.$$
(29)
When $`x=0`$ and $`\psi =0`$, equations of motion for $`y`$ and $`þ`$ are trivially satisfied. The zero modes for $`y`$ and $`þ`$ are just arbitrary constants.

For a complete analysis, Gauss’ law should be imposed as a constraint of quantization in the temporal gauge ($`A_0=0`$). Time derivatives can not be ignored in the Gauss’ law because the conjugate momenta of $`x`$ also takes part in the commutation relations.

## 5 Remarks

The analysis above is valid when $`|x|`$ is much smaller than $`l_s`$, so that the open string zero mode is much lighter than the oscillations modes and dominates the open string effect. The string coupling constant $`g_s`$ should also be very small to justify our ignoring the closed string effects. Furthermore, in the low energy limit a D0-brane can be used to probe structures down to the scale of the Planck length $`g_s^{1/3}l_s`$ , thus the fuzzy sphere effect should be important for physics in the region $`g_s^{1/3}l_s<|x|<l_s`$.

The derivation above also suggests that as a perturbative expansion, it is more efficient to formulate the theory in terms of the perturbative fields $`\stackrel{~}{x}`$, etc. defined by

$$x_a=x_a^{(0)}+\stackrel{~}{x}_a,$$
(30)
where $`x^{(0)}`$ is given by (3). Since $`\stackrel{~}{x}`$ represents heavier modes of open strings, one can integrate out $`\stackrel{~}{x}`$ and other heavy modes to obtain a low energy effective theory for a D0-brane living on a fuzzy space with coordinates $`x_a^{(0)}`$.

Our result agrees completely with  for $`S^4`$. (D4-brane here actually means longitudinal M5-brane.) For the case of $`S^2`$ (D6-brane), it was proposed  that the $`AdS_2\times S^2`$ space as the near horizon region of a set of M2 and M5 branes is actually a fuzzy space. The $`S^2`$ part is a fuzzy sphere defined by

$$[Y_a,Y_b]=iϵ_{abc}Y_c.$$
(31)
This can be viewed as a realization of the algebra (7)-(9) on BPS states satisfying

$$L_{ab}=ϵ_{abc}Y_c.$$
(32)
These are exactly the states considered in  that lead to the suggestion of a fuzzy sphere (32).

The D$`p`$-branes in type II B string theory ($`p=`$ odd) are related to the even $`p`$ cases by T-duality, thus we also expect fuzzy spaces to appear there. Maybe one should use the IKKT matrix model  for an analogous discussion. However, for odd $`p`$ the angular coordinate $`Y`$ lives on an odd dimensional fuzzy sphere. For even dimensional fuzzy spheres, the radius squared $`R^2=Y^2`$ is central for the representations constructed out of symmetrized tensor products of Clifford algebras . Yet for odd dimensions, we do not know a general construction of representations for which $`R^2`$ is central.

In  it was also conjectured that the $`AdS`$ part of the spacetime for AdS/CFT dualities should also be noncommutative. In our derivation following (17), we may keep $`x_i`$ nonzero in the derivation. The problem is that we do not have the $`SO(9)`$ symmetry needed to reach (20). It is also unclear how the time coordinate can ever turn out to be noncommutative in this framework. Perhaps one should start with IKKT matrix model .

## Acknowledgment

The author thanks Chong-Sun Chu, Hsien-chung Kao and Miao Li for valuable discussions. This work is supported in part by the National Science Council, Taiwan, and the Center for Theoretical Physics at National Taiwan University.