text:
# Modular transformation and twist between trigonometric limits of 𝑠𝑙(𝑛) elliptic R-matrix

## 1 Introduction

Universal twists connecting quantum (super) algebras to elliptic (super) algebras have been constructed in . Recently, universal twists connecting double Yangian $`DY(sl(2))_c`$ to deformed double Yangian $`DY_\xi (sl(2))_c`$ (or $`A_{\mathrm{},\eta }(\widehat{sl_2})`$ ), has been given in . They show the quasi-Hopf structure of elliptic (super) algebras and deformed Yangian.

If $`(𝒜,\mathrm{\Delta },)`$ defines a quasi-triangular Hopf (super) algebra and the universal twist $`𝒜𝒜`$ satisfies the cocycle-like relations ( For the details we will refer the reader to ), $`(𝒜,\mathrm{\Delta }^{},^{})`$ with

$`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}()=\mathrm{\Delta }()^1,^{}=F_{21}_{12}^1,`$ (1.1)
defines a quasi-triangular quasi-Hopf (super) algebra. As for the R-matrices interpreted as evaluation representation of universal ones, it becomes

$`R^{}=F_{21}RF_{12}^1,`$ (1.2)
where the particular matrix $`F`$ is the evaluation representation of $``$.

It is well-known that there exist two kind trigonometric degeneracy limits of elliptic R-matrix: scaling limit which is the R-matrix of deformed double Yangian $`DY_\xi (sl(n))_c`$ and ordinary limit which is also related to another type deformed Yangian (e.g $`DY_\xi ^{V6}`$). In this letter, we will construct the twist between these two trigonometric R-matrices. In special case $`n=2`$, our result coincides with the result of Arnaudon’s.

## 2 Trigonometric limits of elliptic R-matrix

### 2.1 The $`sl(n)`$ elliptic R-matrix

Let $`n`$ be an integers and $`n2`$, $`w𝒞`$ and $`Imw>0`$, $`\xi `$ take real value and $`\xi >0`$, $`\tau 𝒞`$ and $`Im\tau >0`$. Set $`𝐕`$ be a n-dimensional vector space with standard basis $`\{e_j\}_{j𝐙_n}`$. Introduce $`n\times n`$ matrices $`h`$, $`g`$ and $`I_\alpha `$ with $`\alpha 𝐙_n𝐙_n`$ by

$`he_j=e_{j+1},ge_j=\omega ^je_j,j𝐙_n,`$
$`I_\alpha I_{\alpha _1,\alpha _2}=h^{\alpha _1}g^{\alpha _2},`$
where $`\omega =exp\{\frac{2i\pi }{n}\}`$. Define the elliptic functions

$`\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}a\hfill \\ b\hfill \end{array}\right](z,\tau )={\displaystyle \underset{mZ}{}}exp\{i\pi [(m+a)^2\tau +2(m+a)(z+b)]\},`$ (2.3)
$`\sigma _\alpha (z,\tau )=\sigma _{(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)}(z,\tau )=\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+\frac{\alpha _1}{n}\hfill \\ \frac{1}{2}+\frac{\alpha _2}{n}\hfill \end{array}\right](z,\tau ).`$ (2.6)
The $`𝐙_n`$-symmetric R-matrix can be defined as

$`\overline{S}(z,w,\tau )={\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _0(w,\tau )}{\sigma _0(z+w,\tau )}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}W_\alpha (z,\tau )I_\alpha I_\alpha ^1,`$ (2.7)
where

$`W_\alpha (z,\tau )={\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _\alpha (z+\frac{w}{n},\tau )}{n\sigma _\alpha (\frac{w}{n},\tau )}}.`$
The elements of $`𝐙_n`$-symmetric R-matrix can be expressed explicitly

$`\{\overline{S}(z,w,\tau )\}_{ij}^{kl}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _0(w,\tau )}{\sigma _0(z+w,\tau )}}{\displaystyle \frac{{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+\frac{j}{n}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](z,n\tau )}{{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+\frac{j}{n}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](0,n\tau )}}`$ (2.19)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+\frac{lk}{n}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](z+w,n\tau )}{\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+\frac{ik}{n}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](w,n\tau )\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+\frac{li}{n}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](z,n\tau )}}.`$
Introduce $`sl(n)`$ elliptic R-matrix

$`S(z)S(z,w,\tau )=x^{2\frac{z}{w}(\frac{1}{n}1)}{\displaystyle \frac{g_1(\frac{z}{w})}{g_1(\frac{z}{w})}}\overline{S}(z,w,\tau ),`$ (2.20)
with $`x=e^{i\pi w}`$ and

$`g_1(v)={\displaystyle \frac{\{x^{2v}x^2\}\{x^{2v}x^{2n+2\xi 2}\}}{\{x^{2v}x^{2n}\}\{x^{2v}x^{2\xi }\}}},`$ (2.21)
where $`\{z\}=(z;e^{2i\pi \tau },x^{2n})`$ and $`(z;p_1,\mathrm{},p_m)_{\{n_i\}=0}^{\mathrm{}}(1zp_1^{n_1}\mathrm{}p_m^{n_m})`$.

The $`sl(n)`$ elliptic R-matrix $`S(v)`$ satisfies the following properties

$`\mathrm{Yang}\mathrm{Baxter}\mathrm{equation}`$ $`:`$ $`S_{12}(v_1v_2)S_{13}(v_1v_3)S_{23}(v_2v_3)`$
$`=S_{23}(v_2v_3)S_{13}(v_1v_3)S_{12}(v_1v_2),`$
$`\mathrm{Unitarity}`$ $`:`$ $`S_{12}(v)S_{21}(v)=1,`$
$`\mathrm{Crossing}\mathrm{Unitarity}`$ $`:`$ $`S_{12}(v)^{t_2}S_{21}(vn)^{t_2}=1,`$
### 2.2 Scaling limit of the $`sl(n)`$ elliptic R-matrix

The scaling limit of the R-matrix (2.20) is taken by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\tau }}={\displaystyle \frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }},{\displaystyle \frac{w}{\tau }}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi }},w0+,\mathrm{with}\beta ,\xi \mathrm{and}\mathrm{}\mathrm{fixed}.`$ (2.22)
The above limit should be understood as $`w`$ go to $`0`$ with the $`Imw`$ from $`0+`$. Noting the properties of elliptic functions under the scaling limit (2.22)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+a\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](\frac{i\beta w}{\mathrm{}},n\xi w)}{\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+b\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](\frac{i\beta w}{\mathrm{}},n\xi w)}}\stackrel{w0+}{}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{i\pi (ab)}sin\pi (\frac{i\beta w}{n\mathrm{}\xi }+a)}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta w}{n\mathrm{}\xi }+b)}},`$ (2.27)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+a\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](\frac{i\beta w}{\mathrm{}},\xi w)}{\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+b\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](\frac{i\beta w}{\mathrm{}},\xi w)}}\stackrel{w0+}{}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{i\pi (ab)}sin\pi (\frac{i\beta w}{\mathrm{}\xi }+a)}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta w}{\mathrm{}\xi }+b)}},`$ (2.32)
we can obtain that in the scaling limit the matrix elements of (2.20) become

$`\{R_\xi ^{DY}\}_{ij}^{kl}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})`$ $`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`\underset{w0+}{lim}S_{ij}^{kl}({\displaystyle \frac{i\beta w}{\mathrm{}}},w,\xi w)`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{w0+}{lim}x^{\frac{2i\beta (1n)}{n\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_1(\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}})}{g_1(\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}})}}\times \underset{w0+}{lim}\overline{S}_{ij}^{kl}({\displaystyle \frac{i\beta w}{\mathrm{}}},w,\xi w)`$
$`=`$ $`\kappa (\beta )\{{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{n\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{\alpha }{n})}{sin\pi (\frac{\alpha }{n})}}\}{\displaystyle \frac{sin\pi (\frac{1}{\xi })sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{n\mathrm{}\xi })sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{n\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{n\xi }+\frac{lk}{n})}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi })sin\pi (\frac{1}{n\xi }+\frac{ik}{n})sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{n\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{li}{n})}},`$
$`=`$ $`\kappa (\beta ){\displaystyle \frac{sin\pi (\frac{1}{\xi })sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi })sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{n\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{n\xi }+\frac{lk}{n})}{nsin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi })sin\pi (\frac{1}{n\xi }+\frac{ik}{n})sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{n\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{li}{n})}},`$
where the scalar factor $`\kappa (\beta )`$ is given

$`\kappa (\beta )=exp\{2{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{sh(n1)\mathrm{}tsh(\xi 1)\mathrm{}tsh2i\beta t}{sh\mathrm{}\xi tshn\mathrm{}t}}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{t}}\},`$
and $`\kappa (\beta )`$ can be re-expressed in terms of double sine function. In the deriving, we have used the identity

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{sin(x+\frac{j\pi }{n})}{sin(\frac{j\pi }{n})}}={\displaystyle \frac{sinnx}{nsinx}}.`$
In the particular case n=2, one recovers explicitly

$`R_\xi ^{DY}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})=\kappa (\beta )\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{cos\frac{\pi }{2\xi }cos\frac{i\pi \beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }}{cos\pi (\frac{i\beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{2\xi })}& 0& 0& \frac{sin\frac{\pi }{2\xi }sin\frac{i\pi \beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }}{cos\pi (\frac{i\beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{2\xi })}\\ 0& \frac{cos\frac{\pi }{2\xi }sin\frac{i\pi \beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{2\xi })}& \frac{sin\frac{\pi }{2\xi }cos\frac{i\pi \beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{2\xi })}& 0\\ 0& \frac{sin\frac{\pi }{2\xi }cos\frac{i\pi \beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{2\xi })}& \frac{cos\frac{\pi }{2\xi }sin\frac{i\pi \beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{2\xi })}& 0\\ \frac{sin\frac{\pi }{2\xi }sin\frac{i\pi \beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }}{cos\pi (\frac{i\beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{2\xi })}& 0& 0& \frac{cos\frac{\pi }{2\xi }cos\frac{i\pi \beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }}{cos\pi (\frac{i\beta }{2\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{2\xi })}\end{array}\right).`$ (2.38)
### 2.3 The ordinary trigonometric limit of $`sl(n)`$ elliptic R-matrix

The ordinary trigonometric limit of the R-matrix (2.20) is taken by: $`\tau +i\mathrm{}`$ with $`z`$ and $`w`$ fixed . Noting the properties

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+\frac{a}{n}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](z,\tau )}{\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+\frac{a}{n}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](w,\tau )}}`$ $`\stackrel{\tau +i\mathrm{}}{}`$ $`\{\begin{array}{ccc}exp\{2i\pi (\frac{a}{n}\frac{1}{2})(zw)\},\hfill & & 0<a<n\hfill \\ exp\{2i\pi (\frac{a}{n}+\frac{1}{2})(zw)\},\hfill & & n<a<0\hfill \end{array},`$ (2.45)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](z,\tau )}{\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](w,\tau )}}`$ $`\stackrel{\tau +i\mathrm{}}{}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{sin\pi z}{sin\pi w}},`$ (2.50)
we have that in ordinary trigonometric limit the matrix elements of (2.20) become

$`\{R^Q\}_{ij}^{kl}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})`$ $`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`\kappa (\beta )\times \underset{\tau +i\mathrm{}}{lim}\overline{S}_{ij}^{kl}({\displaystyle \frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi }},\tau )`$ (2.51)
$`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}\{R^Q\}_{ii}^{ii}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})=\kappa (\beta )\hfill & \\ \{R^Q\}_{ij}^{ij}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})=\kappa (\beta )\frac{sini\pi \beta }{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi })}exp\{2i\pi (\frac{ji}{n}\frac{1}{2})\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }\},\hfill & i<j\hfill \\ \{R^Q\}_{ij}^{ij}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})=\kappa (\beta )\frac{sini\pi \beta }{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi })}exp\{2i\pi (\frac{ji}{n}+\frac{1}{2})\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }\},\hfill & j<i\hfill \\ \{R^Q\}_{ji}^{ij}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})=\kappa (\beta )\frac{sini\pi \beta }{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi })}exp\{2i\pi (\frac{1}{2}+\frac{ji}{n})\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }\},\hfill & i<j\hfill \\ \{R^Q\}_{ji}^{ij}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})=\kappa (\beta )\frac{sini\pi \beta }{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi })}exp\{2i\pi (\frac{1}{2}+\frac{ji}{n})\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }\},\hfill & j<i\hfill \\ \{R^Q\}_{ij}^{kl}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})=0,\hfill & otherwise\hfill \end{array}.`$ (2.58)
In the particular case n=2, one recovers

$`R^Q(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})=\kappa (\beta )\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& \frac{sin\frac{i\pi \beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi })}& \frac{sin\frac{i\pi }{\xi }}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi })}& 0\\ 0& \frac{sin\frac{i\pi }{\xi }}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi })}& \frac{sin\frac{i\pi \beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }}{sin\pi (\frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }+\frac{1}{\xi })}& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right).`$ (2.63)
In the case $`\mathrm{}=\pi `$, the above R-matrix coincides with the S-matrix of sine-Gordon model.

## 3 Modular transformation and the twist from $`R^Q`$ to $`R_\xi ^{DY}`$

### 3.1 Modular transformation of elliptic functions

The elliptic $`\sigma _0`$-function has the following modular transformation property

$`\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right]({\displaystyle \frac{z}{\tau }},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau }})=exp\{i\pi {\displaystyle \frac{z^2}{\tau }}\}\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}\\ \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right](z,\tau )\times const.`$ (3.5)
where the $`const.`$ only depends on $`\tau `$. Noting that

$`\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+a\hfill \\ \frac{1}{2}+b\hfill \end{array}\right](z,\tau )=exp\{2i\pi [z+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+b+{\displaystyle \frac{a\tau }{2}}]\}\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}\hfill \\ \frac{1}{2}\hfill \end{array}\right](z+b+a\tau ,\tau ),`$ (3.10)
we have the following properties under modular transformation

$`\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+a\\ \frac{1}{2}+b\end{array}\right]({\displaystyle \frac{z}{\tau }},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau }})=exp\{i\pi [{\displaystyle \frac{z^2}{\tau }}+ab+2ab]\}\theta \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}+b\\ \frac{1}{2}a\end{array}\right](z,\tau )\times const..`$ (3.15)
From (3.15) and the definition of $`𝐙_n`$-symmetric R-matrix, we can derive the following relations

$`(MM)\overline{S}({\displaystyle \frac{z}{\tau }},{\displaystyle \frac{w}{\tau }},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau }})(M^1M^1)=x^{\frac{2zw(1n)}{n\tau }}P\overline{S}(z,w,\tau )P.`$ (3.16)
where $`P`$ is the permutation operator acting on tensor space $`𝐕𝐕`$ as: $`P(e_ie_j)=e_je_i`$, and the $`n\times n`$ matrix $`M`$ with the elements defined as $`(M)_{jk}=\omega ^{jk}`$. The matrix $`M`$ enjoys in the following properties

$`MgM^1=h^1,MhM^1=g.`$ (3.17)
### 3.2 Twist from $`R^Q`$ to $`R_\xi ^{DY}`$

In this subsection, we shall calculate the twist from $`R_\xi ^{DY}`$ defined in (2.2) to $`R^Q`$ given in (2.51). From (2.2), we have

$`R_\xi ^{DY}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa (\beta )\underset{w0+}{lim}\overline{S}({\displaystyle \frac{i\beta w}{\mathrm{}}},w,\xi w)`$
$`=`$ $`\kappa (\beta )(MM)P\underset{w0+}{lim}\{\overline{S}({\displaystyle \frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi }},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi w}})\}P(M^1M^1)`$
$`=`$ $`\kappa (\beta )(MM)P\underset{\tau +i\mathrm{}}{lim}\{\overline{S}({\displaystyle \frac{i\beta }{\mathrm{}\xi }},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi }},\tau )\}P(M^1M^1)`$
$`=`$ $`(MM)PR^Q(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})P(M^1M^1).`$
In the second line we have used (3.16). Therefore, the trigonometric degeneracy limits R-matrices $`R_\xi ^{DY}`$ and $`R^Q`$ are related by

$`R_\xi ^{DY}(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})=F_{21}R^Q(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})F_{12}^1,`$ (3.18)
where the twist $`F_{12}`$ is

$`F_{12}=MMP_{12}.`$ (3.19)
In the following, let us consider the special case $`n=2`$. In this case,

$`M=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right)=\sqrt{2}V\sigma _z,`$ (3.22)
where

$`\sigma _z=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \\ & 1\end{array}\right),V={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right).`$ (3.27)
Thanks to that $`R^Q`$ (2.63) satisfies the following properties

$`PR^Q(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})P=R^Q(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})=(\sigma _z\sigma _z)R^Q(\beta ,\xi ;\mathrm{})(\sigma _z\sigma _z),`$
our twist is equivalent to that given by Arnaudon et al.

### Acknowledgments.

We would like to thank Bo-yu Hou for his encouragement. W.-L. Yang would like to thank Prof. von Gehlen and the theoretical group of the Physikalishes Institut der Universität Bonn for their kind hospitality. This work has been partly supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China. W.-L. Yang is supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.


format: text

text:
# Correlated atomic motion and spin-ordering in bcc 3He

## I Introduction

The spin-ordered phase of bcc 3He presents a difficult challenge to accurate theoretical description . The main problem is to explain why the transition temperature  of 10-3K is two orders of magnitude larger than the nuclear dipolar interaction $``$10-8K. The prevalent description is in terms of atomic exchange cycles involving several atoms (Multiple Spin Exchange model). Successively higher order cycles produce competing ferro and antiferromagnetic interactions For qualitative description within this Multiple Spin Exchange model (MSE), one needs up to six or more atoms exchanging places, which becomes difficult to calculate and seems a priori less probable . In fact, it is not sure that this description converges  for larger exchange cycles, i.e. may not be the spin-ordering mechanism. This conceptual problem, despite the relative successes of the MSE picture , therefore raises the interest in another approach .

We propose that magnetic ordering of 3He is a result of correlations in the zero point atomic motion, which however does not require exchange of atoms . These correlations lower the energy of the ground state  and result in a coherent state of oscillating electric dipoles, which also modify the phonon spectrum. We show here that the zero-point motion of the atoms produces an oscillating magnetic polarization of the electronic cloud which interacts with the nuclear spin in each atom. The nuclear spins interact with each other indirectly, through the electric dipolar interaction between the atoms. In effect, this interaction is hyper-fine like, and has the right order of magnitude to be related to the spin-ordering transition. In addition, we show that the volume dependence of the on-site magnetic interaction is in agreement with experimental data, and that the space symmetry of the proposed interaction leads naturally to the distinct u2d2 antiferromagnetic phase. Our scenario is somewhat similar to the mechanism of hyperfine enhanced nuclear magnetism that occurs in certain insulators .

The plan of the paper is as follows: In section II we establish the applicability of our model of zero-point electric dipoles in bcc 3He. In section III we describe the hyperfine magnetic interactions and their volume dependence. In section IV we show how the indirect dipolar interactions induced by the on-site hyperfine interactions lead to the u2d2 symmetry of the ordered phase. In section V we calculate some properties of the u2d2 phase and compare them to the experimental data. In section VI we give a description of the nature of the high-field phase (HFP) and calculate its properties.

## II Coherent dipoles in the bcc ground-state and transverse phonons

At temperatures which are high compared to the magnetic interactions (T$``$1mK), the atomic motion in bcc 3He can be treated in the same way as in 4He .

We begin by observing  that in contrast to the situation prevailing in gaseous He, the interatomic potential is highly anisotropic in the bcc crystal. The potential well is both very wide and anharmonic (double-well) along the major axes (100,010,001). This means that the atomic wavefunctions will be particularly extended in these directions. In order to reduce the repulsive overlap energy, the many-body wavefunction has to include ”dynamic-correlations” . The current treatment using variational wavefunction  incorporates these correlations using a Jastrow-type wavefunction that has a two-body or higher order terms to represent the short-range hard-core repulsion. Using this variational wavefunction, the phonon spectrum is calculated through a Self-Consistent Harmonic (SCH) calculation . This gives a satisfactory description of most phonon branches, except for the transverse T1(110) phonon, which experimentally is found to be much softer than calculated. Introducing cubic terms into the calculation to represent the anharmonicity, softens the calculated phonon spectra overall, which ruins the good agreement with the phonon branches other than T1(110). This SCH+C method also breaks the delf-consistency of the Harmonic procedure and predicts an anomalous upward slope of the lowest transverse T110 mode, which is not observed.

We would like to describe the anharmonicity in a different way; we treat the local motion of the atom in its potential well as a ”local mode”. The harmonic description of the crystal potential misses the low-lying vibration of the atoms due to the shallow (double-well) potential along the major axes, which is the mode responsible for the strong dynamic correlations in the many-body wavefunction. We therefore treat the low-energy local excitation along the major axes, and the harmonic modes as two independent degrees of freedom. The collective motion of the atoms is assumed to be well described by the Self Consistent Harmonic calculation. In this procedure, we take the SCH spectrum from previous works , as the approximate harmonic description. The ”local modes” can be shown to couple only to the T1(110) transverse phonon. The coupling is described in terms of an electric dipolar matrix element, where this zero-point dipole moment arises from a correlated atomic motion along the major axes.

The origin of a zero point electric dipole moment is the highly directional zero point oscillation of the nucleus, which breaks the rotational symmetry of the nuclear position relative to the electronic cloud. Going beyond the Born-Oppenheimer approximation, the electronic wave function aquires a p-component in addition to the s-orbital. The first order correction to the electronic energy due to relative nuclear-electronic fluctuations is : $`\mathrm{\Delta }E(m/M_n)(a/D)E_{sp}5`$K, where $`m`$ is the electron mass, $`M_n`$ the nuclear mass, $`a0.25`$Å is the Bohr radius, $`D0.8`$Å is the spread of the excited nuclear wavefunction, and $`E_{sp}`$ the excitation energy of the He atom from the $`s`$ to the $`p`$ shell. Since the crystalline potential is anisotropic, we can take this zero point motion to be highly directional (i.e. a completely off-diagonal matrix element). We assume that $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ is the energy associated with the mixing of the $`s`$ and $`p`$ electronic levels: $`|\psi |s+\lambda |p`$, i.e. $`\lambda \sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }E/E_{sp}}10^2`$. This local polarization results in zero-point dipolar interactions between the atoms . Taking these interactions into account, the ground state of the crystal can be lowered by having the nuclear motions correlated with respect to the relative phase of this zero-point oscillatory motion. The dipolar interaction energy $`E_0`$, of the order of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$, is the energy we associate with the correlated zero-point oscillations of the atoms along the major axes.

In our scenario, the ground-state of the crystal in which the zero-point motion of the atoms is correlated may be described as a global state of quantum resonance between the two degenerate configurations shown in Fig.1, each of which minimizes the instantaneous dipolar interaction energy  for dipoles along the major axes (i.e. $`\widehat{\mu }=\widehat{𝐱},\widehat{𝐲},\widehat{𝐳}`$)

$$E_{dip}=\underset{i0}{}\mu _\mathrm{𝟎}\mu _𝐢\left[\frac{3\mathrm{cos}^2\left(\widehat{\mu }\left(𝐫_0𝐫_i\right)\right)1}{\left|𝐫_0𝐫_i\right|^3}\right]$$
(1)
where $`𝐫_0`$ is the position of an atom and the summation $`𝐫_i`$ runs over the entire lattice. The atomic electric dipole moment $`\left|\mu \right|`$ induced by the coherent zero-point motion is proportional to $`\lambda `$ through

$$\left|\mu \right|=e\psi \left|x\right|\psi 2e\lambda s\left|x\right|p$$
(2)
Due to the lower symmetry of the dipolar array (Fig.1) compared to the crystal symmetry, a coupling between the harmonic phonons and the dipolar modulation exists only along the (110) direction . The excitations of these dipoles are periodic modulations of the relative phases of the dipoles, with respect to the ground state array (Fig.1). We found that the dipolar interactions vanish at the edge of the Brillouin zone, so this transverse phonon has the energy $`E_0`$ at this point. The hybridization of the dipolar excitations with the phonons results in a factor 2 softening of the transverse T1(110) phonon compared to the harmonic calculation. The experimental data give a softening by a factor of $``$1.7, in close agreement. In addition, in our model there appears a localized (i.e. dispersionless) excitation branch of energy $`2E_0`$, which is involved in mass diffusion and contributes to the specific-heat . This excitation is a quantum analogue of a point defect (”vacancy”) and has similar features . The specific heat of the localized mode is consistent with the experimental contribution attributed to point defects to the total heat capacity, and in fact resolves previous inconsistencies related to the properties of the point defects in this solid (vacancies). Let us emphasize that the additional modes are a consequence of introducing an additional degree of freedom to the solid , which is the relative phase of the internal mixing of the $`|s`$ and $`|p`$ states.

In the case of bcc 4He the bare local mode energy $`E_0`$ was measured directly by NMR of a 3He impurity, and the phonon spectrum was measured using neutron scattering. Our calculation is consistent with both sets of data . There are no neutron scattering measurements of the phonon spectrum of bcc 3He, but sound velocity data indicates that the slope of the T1(110) phonon is about half of the SCH calculation . We predict that this ratio should indeed be 1/2, and we therefore take half the energy of the calculated  SCH T1(110) phonon at the edge of the Brillouin zone to be the bare dipole-flip energy $`E_0(5`$K at V=21.5cm3/mole) in solid 3He. According to our model, the energy of the localized mode involved in thermally activated self-diffusion should be $`2E_010`$K. This value is in excellent agreement with the activation energy measured by x-ray diffraction, ultrasonics and NMR experiments  at V=21.5cm3/mole. A similar activation energy is also obtained from the excess specific heat , and pressure measurements .

We therefore establish the likely occurance of coherent zero-point dipoles in the ground-state of bcc 3He. The volume dependence of the dipolar energy (i.e. the ’vacancy’ activation energy $`2E_0`$) is shown in Fig.2a from various experimental sources . Since the excitation energy of the atom inside the crystal potential increases with decreasing volume, we indeed expect the energy $`2E_0`$ to behave as in Fig.2a. The mixing parameter $`\lambda `$ depends on pressure through $`\sqrt{VE_0}`$, where $`V`$ is the molar volume. This behavior arises from the definition of $`E_{dip}`$ (1),(2) and the factor $`\left|𝐫_0𝐫_i\right|^3`$ in this equation is proportional to the molar volume $`V`$. We plot the result in Fig.2b, where we see that $`\lambda `$ increases slowly with decreasing molar volume $`V`$. Future x-ray studies  in bcc 3He may be able to check our prediction for the relation between the activation energy ($`2E_0`$, Fig.2a) and the T1(110) phonon as a function of the molar volume.

## III Magnetic interactions

We now describe the magnetic interaction arising within our model. The lowest $`|p`$ level of the He atom has the electrons in a spin $`S=1`$ state due to strong exchange interaction , of the order of 0.25eV. The zero-point electric dipole interactions, arising from the relaxation of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation, are also accompanied by electronic spin interactions due to magnetic-dipole transitions. The size of the electric dipole matrix is given by the electric dipolar interaction energy $`E_0=2|E_{dip}|`$ (1). The size of the magnetic-dipole matrix is related to the electric dipole matrix by

$$E_{magtrans}E_0(\mathrm{}/M_ac_s)/x$$
(3)
where $`M_a`$ is the atomic mass, $`c_s`$ is the velocity of sound of the T110 phonon. We find that $`\mathrm{}/mc_sx0.8`$Å so that both transition matrices are of the same order. We therefore have oscillating zero-point electric and magnetic dipoles, with an electric dipole moment of size $`2e\lambda x`$ and a magnetic dipole moment of size $`2\lambda n_e`$, where $`n_e`$ is the electron’s magnetic moment.

In addition, the atomic $`p`$-state, $`S=1`$ level is split into 3 sublevels with quantum numbers: $`J=L+S=0,1,2`$, due to spin-orbit coupling , which is of the order of $`1.5`$K. In our particular $`sp`$-hybridized states, which are not pure states of the quantum number $`J`$, there is no spin-orbit coupling, as the orbital current is zero. Rather, these states are split as a consequence of the magnetic dipolar interaction between the two electrons. The magnetic interaction will tend to align the total electronic spin with the symmetry axis of the excited $`|p`$ state, i.e. along the normal axes (Fig.3). This follows from a simple calculation of the magnetic dipolar interaction of the two electrons, in which the $`|s`$ electron is centered on average in the nucleus, while the $`|p`$ electron is spread over the two lobes (Fig.3). We thus estimate the aligning dipolar interaction energy at $`E_{es}1.4`$K, of the order of the spin-orbit coupling.

In the ground state, the zero-point $`|p`$ electrons will therefore have an oscillating magnetic moment $`𝐍_e2\lambda n_e`$, where $`n_e`$ is the magnetic moment of an electron. Because part of the electronic magnetic moment is now associated with the $`|p`$ state, there appears a net uncanceled moment of equal size in the $`|s`$ component of the electronic wavefunction. In 4He the nuclear spin is zero, and the zero-point magnetic polarization of the electrons has no effect. In contrast, in 3He the nuclear magnetic spin $`I=1/2`$ will interact with the oscillating electronic magnetic moment, mainly due to the contact term of the $`|s`$ electron at the nucleus. The magnetic interaction is of the hyper-fine type , and the energy associated with it, $`E_{mag}`$, is given by

$$E_{mag}=\frac{8\pi }{3}𝐍_e𝐍_n\delta (r)$$
(4)
where $`𝐍_n`$ is the effective nuclear magnetic moment, reduced empirically  by a factor of $`0.83`$ due to zero-point fluctuations of the nuclear spins . Using experimental hyper-fine data , we find the maximum value of $`E_{mag}/k_B4.5`$mK (for V=24 cm3/mole). This energy is much larger than the direct nuclear dipole-dipole interaction ($`0.1\mu `$K), and is of the right magnitude to explain the high transition temperature of nuclear ordering in bcc 3He. A diagram of the energy scales involved in the magnetic interactions is shown in Fig.4, where we show the cascade of the different interactions that ultimately align the electronic and nuclear spins, with the zero-point excitations of the $`p`$-state.

Before proceeding to describe the nuclear spin ordering phenomenon, and the effect of the magnetic interactions on the zero-point electric dipoles, we present a quantitative calculation of the volume dependence of the magnetic interaction at T=0. It is known empirically that these interactions have a strong volume dependence , usually described as: $`E_{mag}V^{18}`$. In our model, the magnetic energy (4) will change with pressure due to changes of the electronic magnetic polarization $`𝐍_e`$. First, the pressure changes the admixture of the $`|p`$ orbital in the ground state wavefunction $`|\psi `$, through changes of the mixing parameter $`\lambda `$. Second, as the solid is compressed, the 3 sub-levels ($`J=0,1,2`$) broaden into partially overlapping bands. This overlap leads to further reduction of the net alignment of the electronic magnetic moment $`𝐍_e`$ with the orbital polarization (Fig.3).

The reduction in $`𝐍_e`$ due to the broadening of the sub-levels with pressure can be approximated as linearly proportional to the overlap integral of the three spin-orbit sub-levels

$$𝐍_e(V)\left(1F(V)\right)\lambda (V)𝐍_e$$
(5)
where the overlap integral $`F(V)=\varphi _1^{}(E)\varphi _1(E)𝑑E`$, and $`\varphi _1^{}(E)`$,$`\varphi _1(E)`$ are taken as normalized Gaussians centered at the energies of the spin-orbit levels, which are $`1.5`$K apart . The effective energy width $`\gamma `$ of these Gaussians ($`\varphi _1^{}(E)`$ and $`\varphi _1(E)`$) is estimated using a simple band calculation, as the change of the Coulomb energy of the $`|p`$ electrons due to overlapping $`|p`$ wavefunctions on neighboring He nuclei

$$\gamma (V)=\lambda ^2\underset{i}{}\frac{e^2}{\left|𝐫_0𝐫_i\right|}\psi _0^{}(r)\psi _i(r)d^3r$$
(6)
where $`\psi _0^{}(r),\psi _i(r)`$ are the $`p`$-state wavefunctions of the electrons around the central atom and its $`i`$ neighbors. In this calculation we also take into account the large spatial spread of the atomic position inside the wide potential well , of approximately $`\pm 0.8`$Å. We find that $`\gamma `$ ranges from $``$0K for V=24 cm3/mole to 5.5K for V=19 cm3/mole. The overlap factor $`1F(V)`$ is therefore very sensitive to volume, changing from 1 at V$`24.3`$ cm3/mole to $`0.01`$ at V=19 cm3/mole. One can see that as the volume decreases the broadening of the bands increases, thereby decreasing the net magnetic polarization of the electronic cloud.

The strength of the magnetic interaction should be proportional to the measured Curie-Weiss temperature $`\theta `$. In Fig.5 we compare the normalized magnetic interaction energy $`E_{mag}`$ (4) with the normalized measured  $`\theta `$. We find that the volume dependence of $`E_{mag}`$ agrees very well with that of $`\theta `$. Since in our model there is only one magnetic interaction, there is a single energy scale that determines the volume dependence of the transition temperature and the $`e_2`$ coefficient of the specific-heat . All these quantities have the same volume dependence, a simpler situation than that involving a competition among many exchange processes .

## IV Composite Quantum Resonance of the electronic and magnetic subsystems

We now consider the effects of the magnetic interactions on the coherent-state of the oscillating electronic dipoles. We begin with the high-temperature paramagnetic phase (PP), where the nuclear spins are randomly oriented. The existence of the hyper-fine splitting $`E_{mag}`$ (4) means that the quantum resonance state of the atoms, oscillating between the two configurations of Fig.1 is broken. The resonance frequency of each site will be slightly different from each other, randomly shifted by $`0E_{mag}/\mathrm{}`$, along each of the 3 major axes. The result will be that the zero-point electric dipoles will slowly drift out of resonance, breaking the long-range order of Fig.1.

It is possible to restore the degeneracy of the overall ground state, and hence the quantum resonance condition of the zero-point dipolar oscillations. This can be done if the nuclear spins become ordered as well, in a spatial configuration which has the same overall magnetic interaction energy with each of the two states of Fig. 1. We first note that the total on-site magnetic interaction is isotropic with respect to the direction of the nuclear spin. This is due to the simultaneous interaction of the nuclear spin with the zero-point electronic spin which has equal components oscillating along all 3 major axes.

The electric dipolar interactions in the ground-state of Fig.1 are such that each simple cubic sublattice of the bcc has no net interaction with the other sublattice. We therefore look for the possible static arrangements of the nuclear spins that fulfill the resonance requirement on each sublattice independently. Such arrangements are shown in Fig.6. In these arrangements there is an equal number of atoms with electronic and nuclear spins aligned (and anti-aligned) in both degenerate configurations of the electric dipoles (Fig.1). This arrangement also preserves the overall time-reversal symmetry of the system at zero field, i.e. no net magnetic polarization. Since these configurations exist on both sublattices, we end up with the u2d2 arrangements which is the symmetry of the ordered nuclear phase . The only constraint so far due to the quantum resonance is the u2d2-type symmetry (i.e. also u3d3 etc.). We would like now to describe in more detail the nature of the coherent state combining the zero-point electronic dipoles with the ordered nuclear spins.

The random on-site magnetic interaction can be thought of as a fliping of the dipoles with respect to the ground-state configuration of Fig.1. The average density, or probability, of a dipole-flip is given by the ratio of the magnetic energy $`E_{mag}`$ to the electric dipole-flip excitation energy $`E_0`$. The ground-state occupation of these flipped dipoles due to the magnetic interactions, means that there is a change in the zero-point occupation of the $`p`$ electrons $`\lambda `$. The $`p`$-state mixing which is associated with these magnetically-induced flipped dipoles, is given by: $`\lambda _m\lambda \sqrt{E_{mag}/E_0}10^2\lambda `$. This small polarization corresponds to an electric dipole moment: $`\mu _m10^2\mu `$, where $`\mu `$ is the full zero-point electric dipole moment (2). Since the magnetically-induced electric dipole-moments $`\mu _m`$ are interacting with each other, we are looking for configurations (of the type shown in Fig.6) that minimize this dipolar interaction energy (1) along the major axes (i.e. $`\widehat{\mu }=\widehat{𝐱},\widehat{𝐲},\widehat{𝐳}`$)

$$E_{magdipole}=\underset{i0}{}\mu _{𝐦,\mathrm{𝟎}}\mu _{𝐦,𝐢}\left[\frac{3\mathrm{cos}^2\left(\widehat{\mu }_𝐦\left(𝐫_0𝐫_i\right)\right)1}{\left|𝐫_0𝐫_i\right|^3}\right]$$
(7)
The configuration of Fig.6a has the lowest dipolar energy given by (7), and will therefore be chosen as the ground-state of the ordered phase. In this configuration, the nuclear spins are aligned along a vector $`𝐝`$ which is orthogonal to the u2d2 modulation axis $`𝐥`$ (here along the (100) axis). One can see that the total dipolar interaction energy will be invariant under any rotation of the vector $`𝐝`$ around $`𝐥`$. We therefore naturally obtain the state where the vector $`𝐥`$ is along one of the major axes, as is found experimentally from the domain structure . We point-out that the u2d2 symmetry of the ordered phase results from symmetry and energy considerations which are independent of any quantitative parameters. This is in contrast to the MSE theory where the symmetry is determined by competition between many parameters .

In our picture, the interaction between the nuclear spins is indirect, being mediated by the electronic subsystem. This picture is somewhat similar to the hyperfine enhanced nuclear magnetism observed in certain insulators . There, the nuclear polarization is effectively enhanced by an electronic spin that is partially aligned by a strong hyperfine interaction of a charged rare-earth ion. In our case, it is a quantum resonance of the electronic system that results in a coherent phase of oscillating electric and magnetic moments.

Experimentally, there is a marked difference between the hcp and bcc phases, in the sense that there is spin-ordering in the bcc phase, as opposed to the lack of such a transition in the hcp phase . This result is a natural consequence of our model, since we expect the triangular symmetry to frustrate any long-range dipolar ordering  of the type shown in Fig.1. Indeed there is no evidence for long-range zero-point electric dipole correlations in the hcp phase , in the form of large discrepancies between the SCH calculations of the phonon spectrum and the measured phonons. We therefore do not expect a priori any long-range ordering of the nuclear spins in the hcp phase . In contrast, within the conventional MSE model, the absence of ordering of the spin system well below its Curie-Weiss temperature is not easily explained.

## V Magnetic excitations and energy of the U2D2 phase

Due to the large ratio between $`E_0`$ and $`E_{mag}`$, the slow zero-point oscillations of the magnetically-excited electric dipoles $`\mu _m`$ can be decoupled from the much faster zero-point oscillation of the electric dipoles with natural frequency $`E_0/\mathrm{}`$. The new coherent state can therefore be described as a tensor product of the coherent states of the two decoupled components of the oscillating electric dipoles. A fast component with natural frequency $`E_0/\mathrm{}`$ described by the Bose creation/annihilation operators $`a_{}^{}{}_{k}{}^{}`$,$`a_k`$ representing approximately the full electric dipole moment (2), and a slow component described by the Bose creation/annihilation operators $`b_{}^{}{}_{k}{}^{}`$,$`b_k`$ representing the electric dipole moment $`\mu _m`$ induced by the on-site hyperfine magnetic interaction. This decoupling of the magnetic and phononic quasi-particles is quite natural , due to the difference of 3 orders of magnitude in the energy.

If we treat the magnetically-induced interactions as decoupled from the fast oscillating component, the total effective Hamiltonian for the new coherent state is

$$H=H_{phon}+H_{mag}$$
(8)
where $`H_{phon}`$ is given in Eq.5 of Ref.\[\], and similarly

$`H_{mag}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\left(2E_{magdipole}+X_{mag}(𝐤)\right)b_k^{}b_k`$ (10)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}X_{mag}(𝐤)\left(b_k^{}b_k^{}+b_kb_k\right)`$
where $`b_k^{},b_k`$ are Bose creation/annihilation operators that represent a local flip of $`\mu _m`$ out of the ground-state (u2d2) arrangement, which behaves as a local-mode with bare energy (7) $`E_{magdip}2E_{magdipole}E_{mag}`$, i.e. $`X_{mag}(0)=E_{magdip}/2`$. The dipolar interaction $`X_{mag}(𝐤)`$ is given by (7)

$`X_{mag}\left(𝐤\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i0}{}}\mu _{𝐦,\mathrm{𝟎}}\mu _{𝐦,𝐢}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{3\mathrm{cos}^2\left(\widehat{\mu }_m\left(𝐫_0𝐫_i\right)\right)1}{\left|𝐫_0𝐫_i\right|^3}}\right]`$ (12)
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\left[2\pi i𝐤\left(𝐫_0𝐫_i\right)\right]`$
with $`𝐤`$ being the wavevector characterizing the modulation of the array of the dipoles $`\mu _m`$ and nuclear spins, arranged in u2d2 configuration Fig.6a. Since the relative phase between the magnetically-induced electric dipole moments $`\mu _m`$ is determined by the relative alignment of the nuclear spins, there is a one-to-one correspondence between the modulation of the nuclear spins relative to the u2d2 arrangement, and modulation of the relative phase of the electric dipoles $`\mu _m`$. The local-mode of energy $`E_{magdip}`$ therefore corresponds also to a nuclear spin-flip out of the u2d2 ground-state arrangement.

The Hamiltonian $`H_{mag}`$ (10) which describes the effective interaction between the magnetically induced dipoles $`\mu _m`$ can be diagonalized using the Bogoliubov transformation  $`\beta _k=u(k)b_k+v(k)b_{k}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$. The two functions $`u(k)`$ and $`v(k)`$ are given by: $`u{}_{}{}^{2}(k)=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{E_{magdip}+X_{mag}(k)}{E_{sw}(k)}+1),v{}_{}{}^{2}(k)=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{E_{magdip}+X_{mag}(k)}{E_{sw}(k)}1)`$, where the modulations of the magnetic Hamiltonian $`H_{mag}`$ describe the energy spectrum of the spin-waves.

$$E_{sw}(k)=\sqrt{E_{magdip}\left(E_{magdip}+2X_{mag}(k)\right)}$$
(13)
The result of solving the effective Hamiltonian (10) is a coherent ground-state

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\left(\underset{k}{}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{v_k}{u_k}b_k^{}b_k^{}\right)\right)|vac$$
(14)
A modulation of the relative phases of the magnetically-induced electric dipoles $`\mu _m`$ with a wavevector $`𝐤`$, represents a spin-wave since the nuclear spins have the same relative phase. We see that the electric dipolar interaction introduces an effective restoring force between the nuclear spins, that results in the above dispersion relation.

In Fig.7 we plot the dispersion relations of the spin waves obtained from Eq. (13), along various directions of the crystal. We find that the velocities of these waves at long wavelengths are in the range $`6.010.0`$cm/sec (for V$`24`$cm3/mole). These values are similar to those extracted from melting pressure measurements , where a value of $`8.4\pm 0.4`$cm/sec was found. There is a soft excitation in the (100) direction ($`c_{sw}3`$cm/sec), and also an unstable excitation with an imaginary dispersion relation in the (010) direction, along which we therefore do not expect a propagating spin-wave. Along this direction the modulation in the nuclear spins breaks the quantum-resonance condition, which states that the total magnetic interaction energy is the same for both configurations of the dipoles of Fig.1. This modulation is therefore prohibited within the quantum resonance restriction. We note that this calculation was for the nuclear spins fully aligned with the $`z`$-axis.

Mean-field calculations of the MSE model  have also resulted in anisotropic spin-waves, though there is at present no experimental data on the directional anisotropy of the spin-waves to compare with theory.

In addition to Bosonic spin-waves there can also be local dipole-flips of the magnetically-induced electric dipoles $`\mu _m`$. These $`\pi `$-shifted, i.e antisymmetric, dipole excitations are treated as Fermions, just as described previously for the full electric dipole moment . The energy spectrum of these excitations is given by

$$E_{fm}(k)=\sqrt{E_{magdip}^2+E_{sw}(k)^2}$$
(15)
The dispersion relation of these optic-like excitations is also plotted in Fig.7.

We can now calculate the contribution of all these excitations to the specific-heat. In the calculation, we included the individual contributions of each mode (in a spherical phase-space volume), and then simply averaged. Each type of excitation was treated with using the appropriate (Bose or Fermi) statistics, and the details are described in the Appendix (23). The agreement with the (limited) experimental data for the volume V=24.13 cm3/mole is fairly good (Fig.8). At this molar volume, we have $`E_{magdip}2.6`$mK. We note that the contribution of the optic-like modes is important at higher temperatures, and that the agreement between the data and the simple $`T^3`$ law is somewhat fortuitous. Similar conclusions were reached using the MSE model . In particular, our calculation has the right slope as the experimental data.

For the specific volume $`V24`$cm3/mole, experimental data on the ground-state energy  gives $`E_{mag}/21.1\pm 0.1`$mK, while our calculation (4,5) gives $`E_{mag}/21.3`$mK. Plotting the free energies for the two phases (23),(18) in Fig.9, we find that they give a transition temperature: $`T_N1.25`$mK, close to the measured result  of $`1.05`$mK. In this calculation, we took the empirical value of $`E_{mag}/2=1.1`$mK, for the constant aligning energy appearing in (23),(18). In addition, the experimental data in Fig.9 was shifted up by $`0.1`$mK, which is within the experimental uncertainty. We find that the flat free energy below the transition temperature fits the free energy of the ordered phase (23). It should be pointed out that this calculation, which is based on independent spin-waves, is valid only at low temperatures, compared to $`E_{mag}`$. We see that the energy difference between different spin arrangements which fit the symmetry constraint (such as u3d3 etc. ), is only through the relatively small term $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{dip}`$ in the free-energy (20).

In Fig.10 we show the entropies of the two phases as a function of temperature, and indicate the jump at the approximate transition temperature. We obtain a latent heat of $`\mathrm{\Delta }ST_c100\mu `$K per atom, while experimentally it is found to be  $`250\mu `$K per atom. This degree of agreement is quite reasonable considering the crudeness of the spin-wave approximation at temperatures where the entropy is already $`0.35\mathrm{ln}(2)`$, and the independent spin-wave picture is questionable.

Finally we describe the magnetic response of the u2d2 phase. The zero-temperature susceptibility of an antiferromagnet with the field orthogonal to the magnetic moments , is given by: $`\chi (0)=\mu _n^2/E_{mag}`$, where $`E_{mag}/2`$ is the aligning energy, and we use the effective nuclear moment, reduced by a factor of $`0.83`$, due to the quantum fluctuations . The calculated susceptibility is smaller by $`15\%`$ than the measured value , and is therefore in reasonable agreement.

The zero-field antiferromagnetic resonance frequency , measured by NMR , is given by: $`\mathrm{}^2\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2=4E_dE_{mag}`$, where $`E_d`$ is the direct nuclear magnetic dipolar interaction. To calculate the temperature dependence of this quantity, we calculate (Appendix) the reduction in the ordered magnetic moment due to thermal occupation of excited states . Since $`E_d`$ depends on the ordered nuclear magnetic moment $`N_n`$ squared, we have that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0N_n`$. In Fig.11 we plot the normalized temperature dependence of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ compared to the thermally reduced magnetic moment: $`(1\mathrm{\Delta }M)`$ (Eq.(25)). We find that the reduction in the frequency is well described by our calculation, up to $`0.7`$mK, above which the experimental data have a steeper decline. We further note that NMR experiments measure the resonance of the stationary nuclear spin, and do not reflect the fast-oscillating ($`\omega =E_0/\mathrm{}`$) zero-point electronic magnetic moments $`𝐍_e`$.

Our final comment about the u2d2 phase is concerning its domain structure. It was found  that a crystal grown in a narrow channel will have one large magnetic domain which will be oriented such that the magnetic planes are parallel with the channel axis and surface. This observation can be explained by our model in the following way. On the channel surface the coherent motion of the atoms is inhibited in the direction normal to the wall. The only remaining coherent motion is parallel to the wall surface, and so will therefore be the magnetic ordering. At the nucleation site, when the crystal grows into the free liquid, it will have the three domains along the three orthogonal major axes. The relative sizes of the domains will be determined by random roughness at the nucleation site .

## VI High-Field Phase

Above a critical external magnetic field $`H_{c1}`$ there is a first-order transition to a high-field phase (HFP). The NMR data for this phase  indicates a phase with cubic symmetry and large magnetization: $`N_z>0.6`$ (in units of the saturation magnetization ). The nuclear spin arrangement infered for this phase is shown in Fig.12. Since there is now global nuclear magnetization along the field direction ($`z`$-axis in Fig.13), there is no time reversal symmetry and no quantum resonancea, for the oscillating electric dipole moments $`\mu _m`$ along this axis. Along the orthogonal $`xy`$-directions there is still quantum resonance for the electronic dipoles $`\mu _m`$’s, and hyperfine interactions of energy $`E_{mag}`$. In a semi-classical picture, the nuclear spins are vectors with the magnetization in the $`z`$-direction given by their $`z`$-component, precessing around the $`z`$-axis with the Larmor frequency. In the paramagnetic-phase (PP) the $`xy`$-components of the spins are random, while in the HFP there is long-range order for these components (Fig.13), due to the aligning effect of the hyperfine interactions in the $`xy`$-plane. The order-parameter is therefore the global phase of the coherent $`xy`$-components $`\mu _m^{xy}`$, i.e. a complex order-parameter, and we expect a second-order phase transition of the type found for example in superfluid 4He, which is also in the 3D-XY universality class . Further, the specific-heat data  of the HFP has a distinct cusp at the transition temperature, typical of a $`\lambda `$-type transition.

Let us examine the field dependence of the hyperfine magnetic interactions in the $`xy`$-plane, by first looking at the electronic polarization. With increasing external magnetic field the electronic spins $`𝐍_e`$ in the $`xy`$-plane will become oriented with the external field along the $`z`$-direction, reducing the hyperfine interactions with the nuclear spins in the $`xy`$-directions (4). The electronic spins are oriented with the oscillating $`p`$-states of the atom in the $`xy`$ plane, with effective energy $`E_{es}1.4(1F)`$K, where the factor $`1F`$ takes into account the overlap of the different electronic spin orientations (5, Fig.3), reducing the effective energy gap. The single-atom magnetic Hamiltonian for the electronic spins in the $`xy`$-plane, in an external field $`H`$ is therefore

$$H_{elec}\frac{1}{2}E_{es}N_{e}^{x}{}_{}{}^{2}HN_e^z$$
(16)
with $`N_e^x,N_e^z`$ the classical components of $`𝐍_e`$. The first term represents the aligning dipolar interaction between the $`s`$ and $`p`$ electrons of the atom. Solving (16) by mean-field, we get a linear magnetization: $`N_e^z=H/E_{es}`$, and full magnetization of the electronic spins $`𝐍_e`$ at a field: $`H_{c2}26`$T (using $`(1F)0.6`$ for V$`24`$cm3, so that $`E_{es}/20.4`$K), in rough agreement with the estimated  experimental value of $`22`$T. At fields larger than $`H_{c2}`$ there are no $`xy`$ hyperfine interactions so the nuclear spins are free to fully align with the external field, and there is a zero-temperature transition to the PP.

The volume dependence of $`H_{c2}`$ is experimentally  found to have a volume dependence which is steeper than the critical Neel temperature $`T_N`$ of the u2d2 phase. This is in agreement with our formulation (16), as $`H_{c2}`$ is given by the steep dependence of the factor $`(1F)`$ (Fig.5). Since $`T_N`$ is roughly proportional to $`E_{mag}`$ (Fig.9), we get: $`\frac{H_{c2}(V_1)}{H_{c2}(V_2)}\frac{\lambda (V_1)}{\lambda (V_2)}\frac{T_N(V_1)}{T_N(V_2)}`$ (using Eqs.4,5 and $`\lambda (V)`$ from Fig.2a). Comparing the data  at V2=24 cm3/mole and V1=22.7 cm3/mole we find: $`\frac{H_{c2}(V_1)}{H_{c2}(V_2)}0.25`$, $`\frac{\lambda (V_1)}{\lambda (V_2)}1.2`$ and $`\frac{T_N(V_1)}{T_N(V_2)}0.3`$, in excellent agreement with the above relation.

If the electronic spins $`\mu _m`$ in the $`xy`$-plane would have an arrangement where the dipolar interaction energy is negative (such as the u2d2 phase (7)), they would have zero-point oscillations with the resulting dipolar interaction energy $`E_{magdip}`$ (10,12). These oscillations would get them out of phase with the nuclear spins, which are precessing with the Larmor frequency. We therfore can only have a cubic arrangement with zero ground-state dipolar interactions. In Fig.13 we plot the dipolar interaction energy $`X_{hfp}`$ (12) of the $`xy`$-components $`\mu _m^{xy}`$ as a function of modulation wavevector $`k`$ along the (001)-axis, with respect to the ground-state array of Fig.13. We find that the dipolar interaction energy is indeed zero in the ground-state, with a quadratic dispersion similar to excitations in a ferromagnet.

We shall now describe the nuclear spins in the HFP. In the HFP the nuclear spins will have a stiffness against small perturbation from the ordered configuration of Fig.13 (see Fig.13). Perturbations of the nuclear spins in the $`xy`$-plane will cost an energy $`X_{hfp}`$ (Fig.13), while the $`z`$-component perturbation costs the Zeeman energy $`E_{zeeman}=N_nH`$. A simple description of this state is therefore by the following model magnetic Hamiltonian of independent nuclei

$$H_{hfp}H\sigma _zN_n^zE_x\sigma _xN_n^x$$
(17)
where $`H`$ is the external field in units of energy, $`E_x=E_{mag}/2`$ is the effective aligning energy of the $`xy`$-components compared with the random arrangement of the nuclear spins (see Eq.18), $`N_n^z,N_n^x`$ are the components of the nuclear spin. The size of the hyperfine $`xy`$-interactions of the nuclear spins with the electronic spins will be reduced with increasing magnetic field: $`E_x𝐍_e^x\sqrt{1H/H_{c2}}`$ (4,16).

The energy of the nuclear spin is therefore given by $`E_{hfp}=\sqrt{H^2+E_x^2}`$. We plot in Fig.14 the energy $`E_{hfp}`$ compared with the energy of the u2d2 phase at zero temperature (23): $`E_{u2d2}=(E_{mag}/2)\mathrm{\Delta }E_{dip}\chi (0)H^2`$ (using at V=24cm3 $`E_{mag}/21.1`$mk, see Sec. V). We see that the HFP has lower energy than the u2d2 phase at fields $`H>0.7`$T, which is quite close to the measured value  of $`H_{c1}0.45`$T. In Fig.14 we also plot the magnetization of the u2d2 phase: $`N_{u2d2}=\chi (0)H`$, compared with the measured magnetization , and as calculated for the HFP (17): $`N_{hfp}=2H\left(H+E_{hfp}\right)/E_x^2`$. We find that the calculated magnetization is $`0.55`$ at the calculated critical field $`H_{c1}`$, which is close to the measured value  of $`0.6`$.

We further checked the dependence of this critical field on the magnetic energy $`E_{mag}`$, and we find that it has a weaker than linear dependence, in accordance with the experimental data . Taking $`E_{mag}T_N`$ and using the measured  values at $`V_1=24.21`$cm3 and $`V_2=22.45`$cm3, we calculate a ratio of critical fields of $`H_{c1}(V_1)/H_{c1}(V_2)3.4`$, compared to the measured ratio of $`3`$ (while the transition temperatures vary by a factor of $`4.2`$).

We note that our description of the HFP is at best qualitative, since at higher magnetic fields the calculated magnetization $`N_{hfp}`$ is much larger than the measured magnetization (Fig.15). Using the measured magnetization we shall now use (17) to describe the phase diagram of the HFP. The overall stiffness of the spins should be proportional to the transition temperature of HFP to PP, since the stiffness represents the energy cost to randomize the spins and create a PP. From (17) and Fig.13 this energy should be given by the geometric-mean of the energies appearing in (17): $`E_{mean}=\sqrt{(HN_z)(E_xN_x)}`$, where $`N_z`$ is the measured magnetization (Fig.15) and $`N_x=\sqrt{1N_z^2}`$. We find that a constant factor of $`1.3`$ relates this last expression ($`E_{mean}`$) with $`T_c`$, and is in excellent agreement with the measured $`T_c`$ (Fig.16).

## VII Conclusion

To conclude, our model enables us to describe both the phonon spectra and the nuclear magnetic ordering of bcc 3He using a single parameter, which is the thermal activation energy $`E_0`$. The model offers a consistent picture of the nature of the magnetic phases of bcc 3He, and their phase diagram. We give a quantitative description of the u2d2 phase, which compares well with the measured data. Despite the more qualitative nature of our description of the HFP, we obtain a good description of the phase diagram parameters: $`H_{c1},H_{c2},T_c`$ and their field and volume dependence.

We are currently exploring the consequences of this model regarding the description of the magnetic properties of solid 3He in confined geometries (nano-clusters, aerogel) and in lower dimensions such as adsorbed two-dimensional films.

Acknowledgements N.G. thanks Tony Leggett and Gordon Baym for many useful discussions and suggestions. This work was supported by the Israel Science Foundation, the Technion VPR fund for the Promotion of Research, the Fulbright Foreign Scholarship grant, NSF grant no. DMR-99-86199 and NSF grant no. PHY-98-00978.

## VIII Appendix

Here, we present details of the calculation of the free-energy and magnetization of the u2d2 phase.

The ground-state energy of the nuclear spins has two contributions. The first is the reduction of energy compared to the random case, where the electronic dipoles $`\mu _m`$ of everage nergy $`E_{mag}/2`$ are excited. This energy is equivalent to an effective magnetic field that tends to align the nuclear spins, and its effects already appear significant in the PP. The free energy of the PP, can be therefore written as

$$F_{para}k_BT\mathrm{ln}\left[2\mathrm{cosh}(E_{mag}/2k_BT)\right]$$
(18)
In the ordered, coherent u2d2 phase, there is an additional reduction in the ground-state energy of the coherent magnetically-induced electric dipoles $`\mu _m`$ due to their negative dipolar interaction

$`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{dip}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{E_{sw}(k)(E_{magdip}+X_{mag}(k))}{2}}`$ (20)
$`50\mu K/atom`$
where we again calculated the contribution from each Bosonic mode and then averaged. In the u2d2 phase there are therefore coherent zero-point electronic dipoles $`\mu _m`$, which reduce the ground-state energy (14), oscillating with a resonance energy $`E_{magdip}`$ (10,12). The free energy of the ordered phase can therefore be approximated as

$`F_{u2d2}`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{dip}(E_{mag}/2)`$ (23)
$`+k_BT[{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\mathrm{ln}(1\mathrm{exp}(E_{sw}(k)/k_BT))`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\mathrm{ln}(1+\mathrm{exp}(E_{fm}(k)/k_BT))]`$
The specific-heat $`C_v=T^2F/T^2`$ and entropy $`S=F/T`$ are then calculated from these free energies.

We now calculate the reduction in the ordered magnetic moment due to thermal occupation of excited states . For the Bosonic and Fermionic excitations (13,15) we have a reduction in magnetization which is proportional to the occupation of excited states

$`\mathrm{\Delta }M`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\left[u_k^2n_B+v_k^2(1n_B)\right]`$ (25)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\left[w_k^2n_F+y_k^2(1+n_F)\right]`$
where $`n_B,n_F`$ are the Bose/Fermi occupation factors respectively, and $`(u_k,v_k),(w_k,y_k)`$ are the Bose and Fermi Boguliubov factors . The factors $`(u_k,v_k)`$ where given before (section V), while the Fermi factors are given by

$$w_k^2=\frac{1}{2}\left(1+\frac{E_{magdip}}{E_{fm}(k)}\right),y_k^2=\frac{1}{2}\left(1\frac{E_{magdip}}{E_{fm}(k)}\right)$$
(26)


text:
# Initial data for a head on collision of two Kerr-like black holes with close limit

## 1 Introduction

Perturbation analysis has been used successfully in the study of black-hole collisions (see  and references therein and also  for a recent approach which combines full numerical calculations with perturbation theory). In the case of a head-on collision a pure linear analysis provide a remarkable accurate description of the late state of the collision. This calculation is based on the fact that the head-on initial data  can be written as a perturbation of the Schwarzschild initial data, the separation between the black-holes is the perturbation parameter. When the black holes have intrinsic angular momentum, the natural generalization of this idea is to consider perturbations around a Kerr background. The problem now is to construct proper initial data: a solution of the vacuum constraints equations that represents two black holes; such that, when the separation between them is zero we recover the initial data of the final Kerr black hole. This property is usually called the ‘close limit’ of the initial data. The standard Bowen-York data do not have a close limit to Kerr, since it does not include the Kerr initial data for any choice of the parameters. In  and  it has been computed numerically a class of axially symmetric initial data that has the desired close limit to the Kerr, and it has also been studied the linear evolution of them. However this initial data do not have the topology of two black holes, an extra undesirable singularity appear in the solution. The purpose of this article is to overcome this problem, generalize the construction for non-axially symmetric data and give a rigorous existence proof for this class of initial data.

The plan of the paper is the following. In section 2 we give a brief summary of the standard conformal technique for solving the constraints equations with many asymptotically flat ends. This class of initial data contain, in general, apparent horizons around the ends. The existence of apparent horizons lead us to interpret these data as representing initial data for black-holes collision. The evolution of them will presumably contain an event horizon, the final picture of the whole space time will be similar to the one shown in figure 60 of , which represents a collision and merging of two black holes. We describe in this section a set of existence theorems that are appropriate for our present purpose. In section 3 we summarize properties of the Kerr initial data that have been proved in . Together with the existence theorems of section 2 these are the essential tools for our construction. The new initial data is given in sections 4 and 5. The idea is very similar to the one given in , the important difference is the choice of the conformal metric and the conformal extrinsic curvature. In section 4 we construct remarkably simple initial data that represent a Schwarzschild and a Kerr black hole, with a close limit to a final Kerr black hole. In section 5 we generalize to two Kerr black holes at arbitrary location and with spin in arbitrary directions. The Kerr metric is characterized by the mass $`m`$ and the angular momentum per mass $`a`$. The initial data given in section 5 depend smoothly on the parameters $`m_1,J_1^a`$, $`m_2,J_2^a`$ and $`L`$, where $`m_1`$ and $`m_2`$ are the mass parameter of each of the black holes, $`J_1^a`$ and $`J_2^a`$ are the spin vectors of each of them and $`L`$ is the distance between the black holes. We define $`a_1^2=m_1^2|J_1|^2`$ and $`a_2^2=m_2^2|J_2|^2`$, we always chose $`m_1^2>a_1^2`$ and $`m_2^2>a_2^2`$. The data satisfies the following two properties:

* *Far limit:* When $`m_1`$ is zero, we obtain the Kerr initial data with mass $`m_2`$ and angular momentum $`J_2`$. If we fix the location of the hole $`1`$ and take the limit $`L=\mathrm{}`$, we obtain the Kerr initial data with mass $`m_1`$ and angular momentum $`J_1`$. The same is true if we exchange the holes $`1`$ and $`2`$, because the data is symmetric in the parameters $`1`$ and $`2`$.
* *Close limit:* When $`L=0`$ we obtain a Kerr initial data with mass $`m_1+m_2`$ and angular momentum $`J_K=J_1+J_2`$.

In section 6 possible generalizations are discussed. Finally, in appendix A, we state some known results about the momentum constraint in axial symmetry in a coordinate independent way.

## 2 Solutions of the vacuum constraint equations with many asymptotically flat ends

The conformal approach to find solutions of the constraint equations with many asymptotically flat end points $`i_k`$ is the following (cf. ,  and the reference given there. The setting outlined here, where we have to solve (1), (2) on the compact manifold has been studied in , , , see also ,  for an interesting application of this formalism). Let $`S`$ be a compact manifold, denote by $`i_k`$ a finite number of points in $`S`$, and define the manifold $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ by $`\stackrel{~}{S}=Si_k`$. We assume that $`h_{ab}`$ is a positive definite metric on $`S`$, with covariant derivative $`D_a`$, and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}`$ is a trace-free symmetric tensor, which satisfies

$$D_a\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}=0\text{on}\stackrel{~}{S}.$$
(1)
Let $`\theta `$ a solution of

$$L_h\theta =\frac{1}{8}\mathrm{\Psi }_{ab}\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}\theta ^7\text{on}\stackrel{~}{S},$$
(2)
where $`L_h=D^aD_aR/8`$ and $`R`$ is the Ricci scalar of the metric $`h_{ab}`$. Then the physical fields $`(\stackrel{~}{h},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }})`$ defined by $`\stackrel{~}{h}_{ab}=\theta ^4h_{ab}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{ab}=\theta ^{10}\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}`$ will satisfy the vacuum constraint equations on $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$. To ensure asymptotic flatness of the data at the points $`i_k`$ we require at each point $`i_k`$

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}=O(r^4)\text{as}r0,$$
(3)
$$\underset{r0}{lim}r\theta =c_k,$$
(4)
where the $`c_k`$ are positive constants, $`x^i`$ are normal coordinates centered at $`i_k`$ and $`r=(_{i=1}^3(x^j)^2)^{1/2}`$.

In order to get existence of solutions for equations (1) and (2) with the boundary conditions (3) and (4), we have to impose some restrictions on the conformal metric $`h_{ab}`$. We require that the Ricci scalar of $`h_{ab}`$ is positive

$$R>0.$$
(5)
It is physically reasonable to impose that $`h_{ab}`$ is smooth on $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$. However, the differentiability of $`h_{ab}`$ at the ends $`i_k`$ is a very delicate issue, since it characterizes the fall-off behavior of the initial data near space like infinity. Strong assumptions (for example smoothness) can rule out physical important initial data (for example the Kerr initial data). A suitable condition for $`h_{ab}`$, which in particular include the Kerr initial data as we will see, is the following

$$h_{ab}W^{4,p}(S),p3/2.$$
(6)
(see e.g.  for the definitions of the Sobolev, Lebesgue and Hölder spaces $`W^{s,p}`$, $`L^p`$ and $`C^{m,\alpha }`$, $`0<\alpha <1`$). In particular this condition implies that $`h_{ab}`$ is $`C^{2,\alpha }(S)`$. Existence of solutions for the constraint equations under the assumption (5) and (6) were proved in , in the following we briefly summarize these results. We will present simplified versions of the theorems, which are sufficient for our present purpose.

In order to find solutions of equation (2) with the boundary condition (4) we look first for functions $`\theta _{i_k}`$ which satisfies the linear equation

$$L_h\theta _{i_k}=0,\text{ in }S\{i_k\},$$
(7)
and at $`i`$

$$\underset{r0}{lim}r\theta _{i_k}=1,$$
(8)
where $`i_kS`$ is an arbitrary point. Denote by $`B_{i_k}(ϵ)`$ the open ball with center $`i_k`$ and radius $`ϵ>0`$, where $`ϵ`$ is chosen small enough such that $`B_{i_k}`$ is a convex normal neighborhood of $`i_k`$. Choose a function $`\chi _{i_k}C^{\mathrm{}}(S)`$ which is non-negative and such that $`\chi _{i_k}=1`$ in $`B_{i_k}(ϵ/2)`$ and $`\chi _{i_k}=0`$ in $`SB_{i_k}(ϵ)`$. We have the following lemma.

###### Lemma 2.1

Assume that $`h_{ab}`$ satisfies (5) and (6). Let $`i_kS`$ an arbitrary point. Then, there exists a unique solution $`\theta _{i_k}`$ of equation (7) which satisfies condition (8) at $`i_k`$. Moreover, $`\theta _{i_k}>0`$ in $`S\{i_k\}`$ and we can write $`\theta _{i_k}=\chi _{i_k}/r+g_{i_k}`$, with $`g_{i_k}C^{1,\alpha }(S)`$.

For each of the end points $`i_k`$ we have a corresponding function $`\theta _{i_k}`$, we define $`\theta _0`$ by

$$\theta _0=\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}c_k\theta _{i_k}.$$
(9)
The initial data will have $`n+1`$ asymptotic ends, the relevant cases for us are $`n=0,1,2`$. It is important to note that $`\theta _0^1`$ is in $`C^\alpha (S)`$, it is non-negative and vanishes only at the points $`i_k`$.

To obtain the solution $`\theta `$, we write $`\theta =\theta _0+u`$ and solve on $`S`$ the following equation for $`u`$

$$L_hu=\frac{1}{8}\theta _0^7\mathrm{\Psi }_{ab}\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}(1+\theta _0^1u)^7.$$
(10)
We have the following existence result.

###### Theorem 2.2

Assume the metric $`h_{ab}`$ satisfies (5) and (6), and that $`\theta _0^7\mathrm{\Psi }_{ab}\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}L^q(S)`$, $`q2`$. Then, there exists a unique non-negative solution $`uW^{2,q}(S)`$ of equation (10). We have $`u>0`$ unless $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{ab}\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}=0`$.

We note that our assumptions on $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}`$ impose rather mild restrictions, which are, in particular, compatible with the fall off requirement (3).

We turn now to the linear equation (1). A smooth solution on $`S`$ can easily be obtained by known techniques (cf. ) However, in that case the initial data will have vanishing momentum and angular momentum. To obtain data without this restriction, we have to consider fields $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}C^{\mathrm{}}(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ which are singular at $`i_k`$. The existence of initial data with non trivial momentum and angular momentum has been studied in , where the role of the conformal symmetries is also discussed. In  we have generalized some of the results proved in  for smooth metrics to metrics in the class (6). We will present here a simplified version of these results. Consider the following tensor in $`^3\{0\}`$

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_J^{ab}=\frac{3}{r^3}(n^aϵ^{bcd}J_cn_d+n^bϵ^{acd}J_cn_d),$$
(11)
where $`J^a`$ is a constant vector and $`n^a=x^a/r`$. This tensor is trace-free and divergence free with respect to the flat metric. The vector $`J^a`$ will give the angular momentum of the initial data. This tensor is one of the explicit solutions of the momentum constraint for conformally flat metric studied in . Consider the three sphere $`S^3`$. The tensor $`\mathrm{\Psi }_J^{ab}`$ can be extended to an smooth tensor on $`S^3\{i_1\}\{i_2\}`$, where $`i_1`$ and $`i_2`$ are two different points of $`S^3`$.

We define $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_J^{ab}`$ to be the trace free part with respect to $`h_{ab}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_J^{ab}`$; and $`(_hw)^{ab}`$ to be the conformal Killing operator $`_h`$, with respect to the metric $`h_{ab}`$, acting on a vector $`w^a`$. We have the following theorem.

###### Theorem 2.3

Assume that the metric $`h_{ab}`$ satisfies (6) and let $`S`$ be $`S^3`$. Let $`i_1`$ and $`i_2`$ two different points in $`S^3`$ and $`Q^{ab}W^{1,p}(S)`$ an arbitrary symmetric, trace-free, tensor field. Then, there exist a unique vector field $`w^aW^{2,q}(S)`$, $`1<q<3/2`$, such that the tensor

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}=\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_J^{ab}+Q^{ab}+(_hw)^{ab},$$
(12)
satisfies the equation $`D_a\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}=0`$ on $`S^3\{i_1\}\{i_2\}`$.

The tensor $`Q^{ab}`$ gives the regular part of the extrinsic curvature, which does not contribute to the angular momentum of the initial data. A more general version of this theorem, which in particular includes linear momentum, was proved in . By superposition we obtain solutions with no trivial angular momentum with three or more asymptotic ends. It is important to recall that the tensor $`\mathrm{\Psi }_J^{ab}`$ is singular in two points, that is, we need at least two asymptotic ends. If we insist in having only one asymptotic end, then, the possible existence of conformal symmetries of the metric $`h_{ab}`$ restricts the allowed value for the angular and linear momentum of the initial data. For example, if we chose $`h_{ab}`$ to be $`h_{ab}^0`$, the standard metric of $`S^3`$, then the linear and angular momentum of the data have to vanish. For a complete discussion of this issue see   and also .

The linear and angular momentum of the initial data at each end $`i_k`$ depend only on the tensor $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}`$ and not on the conformal factor $`\theta `$, they are given by

$$P^a=\frac{1}{8\pi }\underset{ϵ0}{lim}_{B_{i_k}(ϵ)}r^2\mathrm{\Psi }_{bc}(\delta ^{ba}2n^bn^a)n^c𝑑S_ϵ,$$
(13)
$$J^a=\frac{1}{8\pi }\underset{ϵ0}{lim}_{B_{i_k}(ϵ)}r\mathrm{\Psi }_{cd}ϵ^{abc}n^dn_b𝑑S_ϵ,$$
(14)
where $`dS_ϵ`$ is the area element on the two-sphere $`B_{i_k}(ϵ)`$. If we compute these integrals for the particular tensor given by (12) we obtain $`P^a=0`$ and the angular momentum is given by the constant vector $`J^a`$ of (11).

The total mass of the initial data at each end $`i_k`$ is given by

$$M_{i_k}=\widehat{m}_{i_k}+2c_{i_k}\underset{k^{}=0,k^{}k}{\overset{n}{}}c_{i_k^{}}\theta _{i_k^{}}(i_k)+2u(i_k),$$
(15)
where

$$\widehat{m}_{i_k}=2c_{i_k}g_{i_k}(i_k).$$
(16)
The constant $`\widehat{m}_{i_k}`$ is the mass of the initial data with only one end point $`i_k`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}=0`$.

Let us mention how some well known initial data are obtained in this setting. Consider $`S^3`$ (in the rest of the paper we will always work in this manifold) with the standard metric $`h_{ab}^0`$ and standard spherical coordinates $`(\psi ,\vartheta ,\varphi )`$. The south pole $`i_0`$ is given by $`\psi =0`$ and the north pole $`i_\pi `$ by $`\psi =\pi `$. The metric $`h_{ab}^0`$ has the form

$$h^0d\psi ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\psi (d\vartheta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\vartheta d\varphi ^2).$$
(17)
Denote by $`(\psi _k,\vartheta _k,\varphi _k)`$ the coordinates of the point $`i_k`$. Using that $`h_{ab}^0`$ is conformally flat one easily obtains that the corresponding function $`\theta _{i_k}`$ is given by

$$\theta _{i_k}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}(1\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{cos}\psi _k\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\psi _k\mathrm{cos}\gamma )^{1/2}},$$
(18)
where

$$\mathrm{cos}\gamma =\mathrm{cos}\vartheta \mathrm{cos}\vartheta _k+\mathrm{sin}\vartheta \mathrm{sin}\vartheta _k\mathrm{cos}(\varphi \varphi _k).$$

Note that in this case $`\widehat{m}_{i_k}=0`$.

Assume that $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}=0`$, this implies $`u=0`$ by equation (10). If we chose only one end $`i_0`$, we have $`\theta _0=\theta _{i_0}`$ and we obtain the Minkowski initial data. If we chose two different ends $`i_0`$ and $`i_1`$ we obtain the Schwarzschild solution, the conformal factor is given by

$$\theta _s=\theta _{i_0}+m\theta _{i_1}\mathrm{sin}(\psi _1/2).$$
(19)
Where $`m`$ is an arbitrary, positive, constant. We have chosen the constants $`c_0=1`$, $`c_1=m\mathrm{sin}(\psi _1/2)`$, such that $`m`$ is the total mass at any of the ends $`i_0`$ or $`i_1`$, as we can easily verify from equations (15) and (18).

If we have three different points $`i_0`$, $`i_1`$ and $`i_2`$, we obtain the Brill-Lindquist initial data. The conformal factor is given by

$$\theta _{ss}=\theta _{i_0}+m_1\theta _{i_1}\mathrm{sin}(\psi _1/2)+m_2\theta _{i_2}\mathrm{sin}(\psi _2/2).$$
(20)
We have chosen the constants such that the mass at the at the end $`i_0`$ is $`M_{i_0}=m_1+m_2`$. We chose this end point as the place were the observer is ‘located’. The far limit of the data is when $`m_1`$ or $`m_2`$ is equal to zero, or when $`\psi _1`$ or $`\psi _2`$ is equal to zero (i.e.; when we put one of the holes at the ‘infinity’ $`i_0`$), in both cases this data reduce to Schwarzschild data (19) with mass $`m_1`$ and $`m_2`$ respectively. As a distance parameter $`L`$ we can chose the Euclidean distance in $`^3`$ between the points $`i_1`$ and $`i_2`$. The close limit is given by $`i_1=i_2`$ (and different from $`i_0`$), in this case we obtain Schwarzschild data with mass $`m_0+m_1`$.

Using again that $`h_{ab}^0`$ is conformally flat and the fact that (11) is divergence free with respect to the flat metric, we find that the following tensor

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_0^{ab}=\frac{3}{(\mathrm{sin}\psi )^3}(\widehat{n}^aϵ^{bcd}J_c\widehat{n}_d+\widehat{n}^bϵ^{acd}J_c\widehat{n}_d).$$
(21)
is trace-free and divergence free with respect to $`h_{ab}^0`$, where we have defined $`\widehat{n}_a=D_a\psi `$. $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0^{ab}`$ is smooth on $`S^3\{i_0\}\{i_\pi \}`$ and is singular at the poles. In an analogous way we can construct a tensor $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1^{ab}`$ which is singular at two arbitrary (but different) points $`i_0`$ and $`i_1`$. Let $`\theta _0`$ given by

$$\theta _0=\theta _{i_0}+m\theta _{i_1}\mathrm{sin}(\psi _1/2).$$
(22)
Let $`u_{by}`$ the unique solution of (10) for $`h_{ab}^0`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1^{ab}`$ and $`\theta _0`$ given by (22). The conformal factor is

$$\theta _{by}=\theta _0+u_{by}.$$
(23)
This is the Bowen-York initial data for one black hole with spin (the other data discussed there can be obtained a similar form). The positive constant $`m`$ is no longer the total mass of the data. The mass of the data at the end $`i_0`$ is given by $`m+u_{by}(i_0)`$. The generalization to more than two ends is straightforward: pick up another tensor $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2^{ab}`$ which is singular at the ends $`i_0`$ and $`i_2`$, define $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{12}^{ab}=\mathrm{\Psi }_1^{ab}+\mathrm{\Psi }_2^{ab}`$; and consider $`\theta _0`$ given by

$$\theta _0=\theta _{i_0}+m_1\theta _{i_1}\mathrm{sin}(\psi _1/2)+m_2\theta _{i_2}\mathrm{sin}(\psi _2/2).$$
(24)
Let $`\overline{u}_{by}`$ the unique solution of (10) for $`h_{ab}^0`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{12}^{ab}`$ and (24). The conformal factor is given by $`\theta _{by}=\theta _0+\overline{u}_{by}`$. The mass at $`i_0`$ is $`m_1+m_2+\overline{u}_{by}(i_0)`$. This data neither have a far nor a close limit to the Kerr initial data.

## 3 The Kerr initial data

In  it has been proved that the Kerr initial data satisfies the hypothesis of the existence theorems of section 2, namely, that the conformal metric satisfies (5) and (6), and the conformal extrinsic curvature has a the form (12). In this section we briefly summarize this calculation.

Consider the Kerr metric in the Boyer-Lindquist coordinates $`(t,\stackrel{~}{r},\vartheta ,\varphi )`$ , with mass $`m`$ and angular momentum per mass $`a`$, such that $`m^2>a^2`$. We define $`\delta =\sqrt{m^2a^2}`$.

Take any slice $`t=const`$. Denote by $`\stackrel{~}{h}_{ab}^k`$ the intrinsic three metric of the slice and by $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_k^{ab}`$ its extrinsic curvature. These slices are maximal, i. e. $`\stackrel{~}{h}_{ab}^k\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_k^{ab}=0`$. There exist a coordinate transformation which maps the region outside the exterior horizon in to the three sphere $`S^3`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{h}_{ab}^k`$ is smooth in $`S^3\{i_0\}\{i_\pi \}`$. Moreover, there exist a conformal factor $`\theta _k`$, which is singular at the poles $`\{i_0\}`$ and $`\{i_\pi \}`$

$$\underset{\psi \pi }{lim}(\psi \pi )\theta _k=\delta ,\underset{\psi 0}{lim}\psi \theta _k=1,$$
(25)
such that the rescaled metric $`h_{ab}^k=\theta _k^4\stackrel{~}{h}_{ab}^k`$ is in the Sobolev space $`W^{4,p}(S^3)`$, $`p<3`$. The conformal metric $`h_{ab}^k`$ has the form

$$h_{ab}^k=h_{ab}^0+a^2fv_av_b,$$
(26)
where the smooth vector field $`v_a`$ is given by $`v_a\mathrm{sin}^2\psi \mathrm{sin}^2\vartheta (d\varphi )_a`$, and the function $`f`$, which contains the non-trivial part of the metric, is given explicity in . The only property of this function that we will use is that it is analytic in the parameters $`m`$, $`a`$ and it satisfies $`fW^{4,p}(S)`$. Since $`f`$ is analytic in $`a`$, the Ricci scalar $`R`$ is also analytic in $`a`$. For $`a=0`$ we have that $`R=6`$, the scalar curvature of $`h_{ab}^0`$. Thus, if $`a`$ is sufficiently small, $`R`$ will be a positive function on $`S^3`$. In the following we will assume the latter condition to be satisfied.

The metric (26) is axially symmetric, the norm of the Killing vector $`\eta ^a=(/\varphi )^a`$ is given by

$$\eta ^k=\mathrm{sin}^2\psi \mathrm{sin}^2\vartheta (1+a^2f\mathrm{sin}^2\psi \mathrm{sin}^2\vartheta ).$$
(27)
The conformal extrinsic curvature is defined by

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_k^{ab}=\theta _k^{10}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_k^{ab}.$$
(28)
The tensor $`\mathrm{\Psi }_k^{ab}`$ is smooth in $`S^3\{i_0\}\{i_\pi \}`$ and at the poles it has the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_k^{ab}=\mathrm{\Psi }_J^{ab}+Q^{ab}$$
(29)
where $`\mathrm{\Psi }_J^{ab}`$ is given by (11) with $`|J|=am`$, $`Q^{ab}`$ is trace free and $`Q^{ab}W^{1,p}(S^3)`$. If $`a=0`$ then $`\mathrm{\Psi }_k^{ab}=0`$. Since the Kerr initial data satisfies the constraint, we have that

$$D_a\mathrm{\Psi }_k^{ab}=0,$$
(30)
where $`D_a`$ is the connection of the metric $`h_{ab}^k`$. Using theorems 2.1 and 2.2, we can decompose the Kerr conformal factor like

$$\theta _k=\theta _{i_0}+\delta \theta _{i_\pi }+u_k,$$
(31)
where the function $`u_kW^{2,q}(S^3)`$.

## 4 Close limit initial data with Schwarzschild-like and Kerr-like asymptotic ends

We want to construct initial data that represent two black-holes, one of them a Kerr-like black hole and the other a Schwarzschild-like black hole. This data will have both a far and a close limit. The main simplification between this data and the one in the following section is that the momentum constraint is solved explicitly, due to the axial symmetry of the conformal metric, i.e.; we do not make use of theorem 2.3 in this case.

Let $`i_1`$ an arbitrary point in $`S^3`$ with coordinates $`(\psi _1,\vartheta _1,\varphi _1)`$, this point will be the location of the Schwarzschild-like end. Let $`m_1`$ an arbitrary positive constant. Define the following metric

$$h_{ab}^{sk}=h_{ab}^0+a^2(\mu f+\nu f^K)v_av_b,$$
(32)
where $`f^K=f(a,m+m_1)`$ is the corresponding $`f`$ function defined by equation (26) for a Kerr initial data with angular momentum per mass $`a`$ and mass $`m+m_1`$. The functions $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ will depend smoothly on $`m_1`$, $`m`$ and the distance $`L`$ between the point $`i_1`$ and the point $`i_\pi `$. These functions have to be chosen in such a way that the metric (32) reduce to the conformal Kerr metric $`(m,a)`$ when $`m_1`$ is zero or when $`L`$ goes to infinity (far limit), and to the conformal Kerr metric $`(m+m_1,a)`$ when $`L=0`$ (close limit). It is clear that the metric (32) satisfies (6) and, for small $`a`$, (5). To ensure that the metric is non-degenerate we impose

$$\mu ,\nu 0.$$
(33)
Define the dimensionless parameter $`ϵ=L^2/(mm_1)`$. We impose the following conditions on $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$. In the far limit

$$ϵ=\mathrm{}\mu =1,\nu =0;$$
(34)
and in the close limit

$$ϵ=0\mu =0,\nu =1.$$
(35)
Of course, there is an enormous freedom in the choice of $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ which satisfies (33), (34) and (35). For example, we can take

$$\mu =\frac{ϵ}{1+ϵ},\nu =\frac{1}{1+ϵ}.$$
(36)
The metric (32) is axially symmetric. The norm of the Killing vector is given by

$$\eta ^{sk}=\mathrm{sin}^2\psi \mathrm{sin}^2\vartheta (1+a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\psi \mathrm{sin}^2\vartheta (\mu f+\nu f^K)).$$
(37)
In appendix A we prove that the following tensor satisfies the equation $`D_a\mathrm{\Psi }_{sk}^{ab}=0`$ with respect to the metric (32)

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{sk}^{ab}=\left(\frac{\eta ^{sk}}{\eta ^k}\right)^{3/2}\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_k^{ab}+\left(\frac{\eta ^{sk}}{\eta ^K}\right)^{3/2}\nu \mathrm{\Psi }_K^{ab},$$
(38)
where $`\eta ^K`$ is the corresponding norm of the Killing vector for the Kerr metric $`(m+m_1,a)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_K^{ab}`$ is the corresponding conformal extrinsic curvature. In the far limit this tensor is equal to $`\mathrm{\Psi }_k^{ab}`$ and in the close limit is equal to $`\mathrm{\Psi }_K^{ab}`$.

Consider the functions $`\theta _{i_k}`$ corresponding to the metric $`h_{ab}^{sk}`$, these functions exist by lemma 2.1. Define $`\theta _0`$ by

$$\theta _0=\theta _{i_0}+(\mu \delta +\nu \delta _K)\theta _{i_\pi }+\mu m_1\mathrm{sin}(\psi _1/2)\theta _{i_1},$$
(39)
where $`\delta _K=\sqrt{(m+m_1)^2a^2}`$. Let $`u_{sk}`$ be the unique, non-negative, solution of equation (10), for the metric (32), extrinsic curvature (38) and $`\theta _0`$ given by (39). The solution exists by theorem 2.2. Then the conformal factor is given by

$$\theta _{sk}=\theta _0+u_{sk}.$$
(40)
Note that the conformal factor has also the proper close and far limit. This finish the construction. The data has a close limit to a Kerr initial data with mass $`m+m_1`$ and angular momentum $`(m+m_1)a`$. It also has far limit: when $`m_1=0`$ or $`L=\mathrm{}`$ (which implies $`\psi _1=0`$) we obtain exactly the Kerr initial data of mass $`m`$ and angular momentum $`ma`$. When $`m=a=0`$ we obtain the Schwarzschild initial data with mass $`m_1`$.

Summarizing, to construct the initial data define $`h_{ab}^{sk}`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{sk}^{ab}`$ and $`\theta _0`$ by equations (32), (38) and (39). Solve equation (10) for $`u_{sk}`$ with respect to these tensors. Define $`\theta _{sk}`$ by (40). Then the physical initial data is given by $`\stackrel{~}{h}_{ab}^{sk}=\theta _{sk}^4h_{ab}^{sk}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_{sk}^{ab}=\theta _{sk}^{10}\mathrm{\Psi }_{sk}^{ab}`$.

## 5 Close limit initial data with two Kerr-like asymptotic ends

Take the Kerr initial data and make a rigid rotation such that the spin points in to the direction of an arbitrary vector $`J_1^a`$, and make a shift of the origin to the coordinate position of an arbitrary point $`i_1`$. Let the mass and the modulus of the angular momentum of this data be $`m_1`$ and $`a_1m_1`$. We obtain a rescaled metric $`h_{ab}^{k_1}=h_{ab}^0+a_1^2f_1v_a^1v_b^1`$, where $`f_1`$ and $`v_a^1`$ are obtained from $`f`$ and $`v_a`$ by the rotation and the shift of the origin, they depend on the coordinates of the point $`i_1`$ and the vector $`J_1^a`$. In an analogous way we define the corresponding rescaled extrinsic curvature $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{k_1}^{ab}`$. Take another vector $`J_2^a`$ and another point $`i_2`$ and make the same construction. We define $`f_1^K`$ to be the corresponding $`f_1`$ function of a Kerr initial data of mass $`m_1+m_2`$, angular momentum $`J_1^a+J_2^a`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{K_1}^{ab}`$ be the corresponding conformal extrinsic curvature. The function $`f_2^K`$ and the tensor $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{K_2}^{ab}`$ is defined in analogous way, with respect to the origin $`i_2`$. Define the following metric

$$h_{ab}=h_{ab}^0+\left(a_1^2\mu f_1+a_K^2\nu _1f_1^K\right)v_a^1v_b^1+\left(a_2^2\mu f_2+a_K^2\nu _2f_2^K\right)v_a^2v_b^2.$$
(41)
The smooth function $`\mu ,\nu _1,\nu _2`$ will be chosen following similar arguments as in the previous section, namely

$$\mu ,\nu _1,\nu _20,$$
(42)
we impose the far limit

$$ϵ=\mathrm{}\mu =1,\nu _1=\nu _2=0;$$
(43)
and the close limit

$$ϵ=0\mu =0,\nu _1+\nu _2=1,$$
(44)
where $`ϵ=L^2/(m_1m_2)`$. In order that this data reduce to the one constructed in the previous section when one of the hole is Schwarzschild, we impose

$$a_1=0\nu _1=0,a_2=0\nu _2=0.$$
(45)
As in the previous section, it is clear that the metric (41) satisfies (6) and (5), for small $`a_1`$ and $`a_2`$. As an explicit example for the functions $`\mu ,\nu _1,\nu _2`$ we can take $`\mu `$ defined by (36) and

$$\nu _1=\frac{a_1^2}{(a_1^2+a_2^2)(1+ϵ)},\nu _2=\frac{a_2^2}{(a_1^2+a_2^2)(1+ϵ)}.$$
(46)
When the points $`i_1`$ and $`i_2`$ are chosen to be on the axis $`\vartheta =0`$, the metric (41) is axially symmetric, we can apply, as in the previous section, the result of appendix A to solve for the momentum constraint. But in general, the metric (41) is not axially symmetric. To solve the momentum constraint in this case we use theorem 2.3. Define $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{kk}^{ab}`$ by

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{kk}^{ab}=\mu _1\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_{k_1}^{ab}+\nu _1\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_{K_1}^{ab}+\mu _2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_{k_2}^{ab}+\nu _2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_{K_2}^{ab}+(w)^{ab},$$
(47)
where the bar indicate that we take the trace free part with respect the metric (41), and $`w^a`$ is the unique vector field such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{kk}^{ab}`$ is divergence free in $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ with respect to the metric (41). Note that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{kk}^{ab}`$ has a far limit to $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{k_1}^{ab}`$ or $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{k_2}^{ab}`$ and a close limit ($`i_1=i_2`$) to $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{K_1}^{ab}=\mathrm{\Psi }_{K_2}^{ab}`$.

The functions $`\theta _{i_k}`$ for the metric $`h_{ab}^{kk}`$ exist by lemma 2.1, we define $`\theta _0`$ by

$$\theta _0=\theta _{i_0}+(\mu \delta _1+\nu _1\delta _K)\theta _{i_1}\mathrm{sin}(\psi _1/2)+(\mu \delta _2+\nu _2\delta _K)\theta _{i_2}\mathrm{sin}(\psi _2/2).$$
(48)
Let $`u_{kk}`$ be the unique solution of (10) with respect to (41), (49) and (48), which exist by theorem 2.2. The conformal factor is given by

$$\theta _{kk}=\theta _0+u_{kk}.$$
(49)
We see that this initial data satisfies the far and close limit with respect to the Kerr initial data.

## 6 Conclusions

We have constructed a family of initial data that represent two black-holes and have the desired far and close limit with respect to the Kerr initial data. The main point in the construction is the choice of the conformal metric and the conformal extrinsic curvature, given by (41) and (47). The conformal metric and extrinsic curvature are the ‘free data’, they determine uniquely a solution of the constraints, provided they satisfy certain conditions. These conditions are discussed in the existence theorems of section 2. In our case the data (41) and (47) satisfy these conditions since the Kerr initial data satisfy them, as it was discussed in section 3. The tensors (41) and (47) are, essentially, a superposition of three different Kerr initial data: the two ‘initial’ Kerr black holes and the ‘final’ Kerr black hole. In contrast to the close limit data constructed in , where only one Kerr initial data is used. In that case, when one forces the data to have the topology of two black holes, the equations produce an unwanted extra singularity.

The functions $`\nu `$ and $`\mu `$, which determined the solution, are only required to satisfy the far and close limit conditions. In order to provide an explicit example, we have presented a particular choice of these functions, but other choices can be easily constructed. For example, in a previous work we have made the simpler choice $`\nu _1=\nu _2=0`$ and $`\mu =1`$, which do not have the close limit property. It would be very interesting to know the influence of different choices in the final form of the gravitational waves emitted by the data.

The natural question is whether this construction can be generalized to include linear momentum. It is possible to add an extra term in the extrinsic curvature (12) which contains the linear momentum of each black hole. The existence theorem for the momentum constraint is exactly the same (see ). However, we will not have either Kerr or Schwarzschild in the far limit, since the Boyer-Lindquist slices are not boosted. This is exactly the same situation as for the boosted data given in . That is, in order to produce initial data which have the far limit to Kerr and also linear momentum we have to study boosted maximal slices in Kerr. Even for Schwarzschild this is a non-trivial problem. On the other hand, we could impose only a close limit to Kerr. This can be, in principle, achieve with a proper choice of the functions $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$. We will study this generalization in a future work.

## Acknowledgements

It is a pleasure to thank J. Baker, S. Husa and C. Lousto for helpful discussions and suggestions.

## Appendix A Appendix: The momentum constraint in axially symmetric initial data

We collect here some results regarding the momentum constraints in an axially symmetric background which are useful for constructing explicit solutions. What follows is, essentially, a re-writing of the results founded in  and  in a coordinate independent way.

Assume that we have a metric $`h_{ab}`$ with a Killing vector $`\eta ^a`$, which is hypersurface orthogonal. Define the norm $`\eta `$ by $`\eta =\eta ^a\eta ^bh_{ab}`$.

Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}`$ the tensor defined by

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}=\frac{2}{\eta }S^{(a}\eta ^{b)},$$
(50)
where $`S^a`$ satisfies

$$\mathrm{\pounds }_\eta S^a=0,S^a\eta _a=0,D_aS^a=0,$$
(51)
$`\mathrm{\pounds }_\eta `$ is the Lie derivative with respect $`\eta `$.

We use the Killing equation $`D_{(a}\eta _{b)}=0`$, the fact that $`\eta ^a`$ is hypersurface orthogonal, (i.e.; it satisfies $`D_a\eta _b=\eta _{[a}D_{b]}\mathrm{ln}\eta `$) and equations (51) to conclude that $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab}`$ is trace free and divergence free.

The metric $`h_{ab}`$ has the following splitting

$$h_{ab}=e_{ab}+\frac{\eta _a\eta _b}{\eta },$$
(52)
where $`e_{ab}`$ is the intrinsic metric of the 2-surface orthogonal to $`\eta ^a`$. Let assume that we have another metric $`h_{ab}^{}`$ related to $`h_{ab}`$ by

$$h_{ab}^{}=e_{ab}+\gamma \frac{\eta _a\eta _b}{\eta },\mathrm{\pounds }_\eta \gamma =0,$$
(53)
where $`\gamma `$ is a positive function. The metric $`h_{ab}^{}`$ has a Killing vector $`\eta ^a`$, with $`\eta _a^{}=\gamma \eta _a`$, i.e.; $`\gamma =\eta ^{}/\eta `$. One easily check that the vector $`S_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{a}=S^a/\sqrt{\gamma }`$ satisfies equations (51) with respect to the metric $`h_{ab}^{}`$. Then, the tensor $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{ab}`$ defined by

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{{}_{}{}^{}ab}=\frac{1}{\gamma ^{3/2}}\mathrm{\Psi }^{ab},$$
(54)
is trace free and divergence free with respect to $`h_{ab}^{}`$.

The solution of equations (51) can be written in terms of a scalar potential $`\omega `$

$$S^a=\frac{1}{\eta }ϵ^{abc}\eta _bD_c\omega ,\mathrm{\pounds }_\eta \omega =0.$$
(55)
We have restricted ourselves to tensor of the form (50), since the Kerr extrinsic curvature has precisely this form. For a more general discussion, and also for an explicit computation of the potential $`\omega `$ for Kerr, see .