text:
# 𝑆𝑈(3)_𝑐⊗𝑆𝑈(3)_𝐿⊗𝑈(1)_𝑋 as an 𝐸₆ Subgroup

## 1 Introduction

The Standard Model (SM) local gauge group $`G_{SM}SU(3)_cSU(2)_LU(1)_Y`$ with the $`SU(2)_LU(1)_Y`$ sector hidden and $`SU(3)_c`$ confined, is in excellent agreement with all present experiments. However, the SM can not explain some issues like hierarchical masses and mixing angles, charge quantization, CP violation, etc., and many physicists believe that it does not represent the final theory, but serves as an effective theory, originating from a more fundamental one. So, extensions of the SM are always worthy to be considered.

So far there are not yet theoretical neither experimental facts which point toward what lies beyond the SM, and the best approach maybe to depart from it as little as possible. In this regard, $`SU(3)_LU(1)_X`$ as a flavor group has been introduced at several times in the literature; first as a family independent theory as in the SM, and next as a family structure which points to a natural explanation of the total number of families in nature. Several of the models studied in the literature are inconsistent in the sense that they are anomalous, vectorlike, or include more than three families with light neutral particles. Others include spin 1/2 particles with exotic electric charges, etc.. In this paper we studied $`SU(3)_LU(1)_X`$ as an $`E_6`$ subgroup and do some phenomenological calculations in order to set the different mass scales in the model and calculate the masses for all the spin 1/2 particles in one family. In our analysis several see-saw mechanisms are implemented.

The paper is organized in the following way. In Sec. 2 we introduce the model as an anomaly free theory, based on the local gauge group $`SU(3)_cSU(3)_LU(1)_X`$, and show that it is a subgroup of the electroweak-strong unification group $`E_6`$. In Sec. 3 we describe the scalar sector needed to break the symmetry and to produce masses to all the fermion fields in the model. In Sec. 4 we analyze the gauge boson sector paying special attention to the two neutral currents present in the model and their mixing. In Sec. 5 we analyze the fermion mass spectrum. In Sec. 6 we use experimental results in order to constraint the mixing angle between the two neutral currents and the mass scale of the new neutral gauge boson, and in Sec. 7 we present our conclusions. A technical appendix with details of the diagonalization of the $`5\times 5`$ mass matrix for the spin 1/2 neutral leptons in the model is presented at the end.

## 2 The fermion content of the model

First let us see what is the fermion content of the model.

### 2.1 $`SU(3)_cSU(3)_LU(1)_X`$ as an anomaly free model

In what follows we assume that the electroweak gauge group is $`SU(3)_LU(1)_XSU(2)_LU(1)_Y`$, that the left handed quarks (color triplets) and left-handed leptons (color singlets) transform as the $`3`$ and $`\overline{3}`$ representations of $`SU(3)_L`$ respectively, that $`SU(3)_c`$ is vectorlike as in the SM and, contrary to the models in Ref., that the several anomalies are cancelled individually in each family. So, we start with

$$Q_L=\left(\begin{array}{c}u\\ d\\ D\end{array}\right)_L,\psi _L=\left(\begin{array}{c}e^{}\\ \nu _e\\ N_1^0\end{array}\right)_L,$$

where $`D_L`$ is an $`SU(2)_L`$ singlet exotic quark of electric charge $`1/3`$, and $`N_{1L}^0`$ is also an $`SU(2)_L`$ singlet exotic lepton of zero electric charge.

If the {$`SU(3)_c,SU(3)_L,U(1)_X`$} quantum numbers are {$`3,3,X_Q`$} for $`Q_L`$, and {$`1,\overline{3},X_L`$} for $`\psi _L`$, two more lepton multiplets with quantum numbers {1,$`\overline{3},X_i\},i=1,2`$ must be introduced in order to cancel the $`[SU(3)_L]^3`$ anomaly; each one of those multiplets must include one $`SU(2)_L`$ doublet and one singlet of exotic leptons. The quarks fields $`u_L^c,d_L^c`$ and $`D_L^c`$ color anti-triplets and $`SU(3)_L`$ singlets must also be introduced in order to cancel the $`[SU(3)_c]^3`$ anomaly. Then the hypercharges ($`X_Q,X_L,X_1,X_2,`$ etc.) must be chosen in order to cancel the anomalies $`[SU(3)_c]^2U(1)_X,[SU(3)_L]^2U(1)_X,[grav]^2U(1)_X`$ and $`[U(1)_X]^3`$, where $`[grav]^2U(1)_X`$ stands for the gravitational anomaly .

We use for the symmetry-breaking chain $`SU(3)_LSU(2)_LU(1)_Z`$ the branching rule $`32(1/6)+1(1/3)`$, where the numbers in parenthesis are the $`Z`$ hypercharge value (which in turn implies $`\overline{3}2(1/6)+1(1/3)`$). Then, by using for the electric charge generator $`Q=T_{3L}+Z+X`$ where $`T_{3L}=\pm 1/2`$ is the $`SU(2)_L`$ third isospin component, we have that $`X_Q=0`$, $`X_u=2/3`$ and $`X_D=X_d=1/3`$. For those values the anomaly $`[SU(3)_c]^2U(1)_X`$ is automatically cancelled.

By the same token $`X_L=1/3`$. Then the $`[SU(3)_L]^2U(1)_X`$ anomaly cancellation condition reads $`X_1+X_2=1/3`$ and the $`[U(1)_X]^3`$ anomaly cancellation condition reads $`X_1^3+X_2^3=7/27`$. The solution to this pair of equations is $`X_1=1/3`$ and $`X_2=2/3`$ (or vice versa because the two equations are 1,2 symmetric).

We end up with the following anomaly free multiplet structure for this model:

$$\begin{array}{cccc}& & & \\ & & & \\ Q_L=\left(\begin{array}{c}u\\ d\\ D\end{array}\right)_L& u_L^c& d_L^c& D_L^c\\ & & & \\ (3,3,0)& (\overline{3},1,\frac{2}{3})& (\overline{3},1,\frac{1}{3})& (\overline{3},1,\frac{1}{3})\\ & & & \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \\ & & \\ \psi _L=\left(\begin{array}{c}e^{}\\ \nu _e\\ N_1^0\end{array}\right)_L& \varphi _L=\left(\begin{array}{c}E^{}\\ N_2^0\\ N_3^0\end{array}\right)_L& \chi _L=\left(\begin{array}{c}N_4^0\\ E^+\\ e^+\end{array}\right)_L\\ & & \\ (1,\overline{3},\frac{1}{3})& (1,\overline{3},\frac{1}{3})& (1,\overline{3},\frac{2}{3})\\ & & \end{array}$$

### 2.2 $`SU(3)_LSU(3)_cU(1)_X`$ as an $`E_6`$ subgroup

Models constructed with $`E_6`$ as the grand unified theory (GUT) group utilize the complex 27 dimensional representation for the left-handed fermions in one family. The models can be divided into two classes, depending on whether they emphasize the $`SO(10)`$ or the $`SU(3)_LSU(3)_cSU(3)_R`$ subgroups. For models in the second category the fundamental representation of $`E_6`$ has the following branching rule under $`[SU(3)]^3SU(3)_LSU(3)_cSU(3)_R`$:

$$27(3,3,1)(\overline{3},1,3)(1,\overline{3},\overline{3})$$

where the particle content of each term is:

$$(3,3,1)=(u,d,D)_L;(\overline{3},1,3)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}N^0& E^{}& e^{}\\ E^+& N^{0c}& \nu _e\\ e^+& \nu _e^c& M^0\end{array}\right)_L;(1,\overline{3},\overline{3})=(u^c,d^c,D^c)_L.$$

When $`SU(3)_R`$ breaks into $`U(1)_aU(1)_b`$ we have the branching rule $`3(a)(b)+(a)(b)+(0)(2b)`$ which shows that taking $`b=1/3`$ we can identify $`U(1)_b=U(1)_X`$ and it implies that $`(\overline{3},1,3)=\psi _L\varphi _L\chi _L`$. This allows us to identify $`N_{3L}^0=\nu _{eL}^c`$ as the right handed neutrino field (in the weak basis) and $`N_{4L}^0=N_{2L}^{0c}`$, as far as we stay in the breaking chain

$$[SU(3)]^3SU(3)_LSU(3)_cSU(2)_RU(1)^{}SU(3)_LSU(3)_cU(1)_X$$

Let us mention that the lower dimensional $`E_6`$ irreducible representations (irreps) are 1, 27, and 78, where irreps 1 and 78 are real representations and irrep 27 is complex and chiral. In the electroweak-strong unification theory based on $`E_6`$ the fermion fields are placed in irrep 27 and the gauge fields in irrep 78.

## 3 The scalar sector

Our aim is to break the symmetry in the way:

$$SU(3)_cSU(3)_LU(1)_XSU(3)_cSU(2)_LU(1)_YSU(3)_cU(1)_Q$$

and at the same time give masses to the fermion fields in our model. With this in mind let us introduce the following set of Higgs scalars:
$`\varphi _1=(1,\overline{3},1/3)`$ with Vacuum Expectation Value (VEV) $`\varphi _1^T=(0,0,V)`$; $`\varphi _2(1,\overline{3},1/3)`$ with VEV $`\varphi _2^T=(0,v/\sqrt{2},0)`$, and $`\varphi _3(1,\overline{3},2/3)`$ with VEV $`\varphi _3^T=(v^{}/\sqrt{2},0,0)`$, with the hierarchy $`V>vv^{}250`$ GeV, the electroweak breaking scale. The scale of $`V`$ could be fixed phenomenologically.

At first glance it looks like only two Higgs triplets are necessary for the symmetry breaking but, as can be seen, they are not enough to reproduce a realistic fermion mass spectrum in the model.

## 4 The gauge boson sector

There are a total of 17 gauge bosons in our model. One gauge field $`B^\mu `$ associated with $`U(1)_X`$, the 8 gluon fields associated with $`SU(3)_c`$ which remain massless, and another 8 associated with $`SU(3)_L`$ and that we write for convenience in the following way:

$$\frac{1}{2}\lambda _\alpha A_\alpha ^\mu =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}D_1^\mu & W^{+\mu }& K^{+\mu }\\ W^\mu & D_2^\mu & K^{0\mu }\\ K^\mu & \overline{K}^{0\mu }& D_3^\mu \end{array}\right)$$

where $`D_1^\mu =A_3^\mu /\sqrt{2}+A_8^\mu /\sqrt{6},D_2^\mu =A_3^\mu /\sqrt{2}+A_8^\mu /\sqrt{6}`$, and $`D_3^\mu =2A_8^\mu /\sqrt{6}`$. $`\lambda _i,i=1,2,\mathrm{},8`$ are the eight Gell-Mann matrices normalized as $`Tr(\lambda _i\lambda _j)=2\delta _{ij}`$, which allows us to write the charge operator as

$$Q=\frac{\lambda _3}{2}+\frac{\lambda _8}{2\sqrt{3}}+XI_3$$

where $`I_3`$ is the $`3\times 3`$ unit matrix.

After breaking the symmetry with $`\varphi _i,i=1,2,3`$, and using for the covariant derivative for triplets $`D^\mu =^\mu i\frac{g}{2}\lambda _\alpha A_\alpha ^\mu ig^{}XB^\mu `$, we get the following mass terms for the charged gauge bosons of the electroweak sector: $`M_{W^\pm }^2=\frac{g^2}{4}(v^2+v^2),M_{K^\pm }^2=\frac{g^2}{4}(2V^2+v^2),M_{K^0(\overline{K}^0)}^2=\frac{g^2}{4}(2V^2+v^2)`$. For the three neutral gauge bosons we get a mass term of the form:

$$M=V^2(\frac{g^{}B^\mu }{3}\frac{gA_8^\mu }{\sqrt{3}})^2+\frac{v^2}{8}(\frac{2g^{}B^\mu }{3}gA_3^\mu +\frac{gA_8^\mu }{\sqrt{3}})^2+\frac{v^2}{8}(gA_3^\mu \frac{4g^{}B^\mu }{3}+\frac{gA_8^\mu }{\sqrt{3}})^2$$

By diagonalizing $`M`$ we get the physical neutral gauge bosons which are defined through the mixing angle $`\theta `$ and $`Z_\mu ,Z_\mu ^{}`$ by:

$`Z_1^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`Z_\mu \mathrm{cos}\theta +Z_\mu ^{}\mathrm{sin}\theta ,`$
$`Z_2^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`Z_\mu \mathrm{sin}\theta +Z_\mu ^{}\mathrm{cos}\theta ,`$
$`\mathrm{tan}(2\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{12}C_W(1T_W^2/3)^{1/2}[v^2(1+T_W^2)v^2(1T_W^2)]}{3(1T_W^2/3)(v^2+v^2)C_W^2[8V^2+v^2(1T_W^2)^2+v^2(1+T_W^2)^2]}},`$
where the photon field $`A^\mu `$, and the fields $`Z_\mu `$ and $`Z_\mu ^{}`$ are given by

$`A^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`S_WA_3^\mu +C_W\left[{\displaystyle \frac{T_W}{\sqrt{3}}}A_8^\mu +(1T_W^2/3)^{1/2}B^\mu \right],`$ (1)
$`Z^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`C_WA_3^\mu S_W\left[{\displaystyle \frac{T_W}{\sqrt{3}}}A_8^\mu +(1T_W^2/3)^{1/2}B^\mu \right],`$ (2)
$`Z^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`(1T_W^2/3)^{1/2}A_8^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{T_W}{\sqrt{3}}}B^\mu ,`$ (3)
$`S_W=\sqrt{3}g^{}/\sqrt{3g^2+4g^2}`$ and $`C_W`$ are the sine and cosine of the electroweak mixing angle respectively and $`T_W=S_W/C_W`$. Also we can identify the $`Y`$ hypercharge associated with the SM gauge boson as:

$$Y^\mu =\left[\frac{T_W}{\sqrt{3}}A_8^\mu +(1T_W^2/3)^{1/2}B^\mu \right].$$
(4)
In the limit $`\mathrm{sin}\theta 0`$, $`M_Z=M_{W^\pm }/C_W`$, this limit is obtained either by demanding $`V\mathrm{}`$ or $`v^2=v^2(C_W^2S_W^2)v^2C_{2W}`$.

### 4.1 Charged currents

The interactions among the charged vector fields with leptons are

$`H^{CC}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}}[W_\mu ^+(\overline{u}_L\gamma ^\mu d_L\overline{\nu }_{eL}\gamma ^\mu e_L^{}\overline{N}_{2L}^0\gamma ^\mu E_L^{}\overline{E}_L^+\gamma ^\mu N_{4L}^0)`$ (5)
$`+K_\mu ^+(\overline{u}_L\gamma ^\mu D_L\overline{N}_{1L}^0\gamma ^\mu e_L^{}\overline{N}_{3L}^0\gamma ^\mu E_L^{}\overline{e}_L^+\gamma ^\mu N_{4L}^0)`$
$`+K_\mu ^0(\overline{d}_L\gamma ^\mu D_L\overline{N}_{1L}^0\gamma ^\mu \nu _{eL}\overline{N}_{3L}^0\gamma ^\mu N_{2L}^0\overline{e}_L^+\gamma ^\mu E_L^+)]+h.c.,`$
which implies that the interactions with the $`K^\pm `$ and $`K^0(\overline{K}^0)`$ bosons violate the lepton number and the weak isospin. Notice also that the first two terms in the previous expression constitute the charged weak current of the SM as far as we identify $`W^\pm `$ as the $`SU(2)_L`$ charged left-handed weak bosons.

### 4.2 Neutral currents

The neutral currents $`J_\mu (EM),J_\mu (Z)`$ and $`J_\mu (Z^{})`$ associated with the Hamiltonian $`H^0=eA^\mu J_\mu (EM)+\frac{g}{C_W}Z^\mu J_\mu (Z)+\frac{g^{}}{\sqrt{3}}Z^\mu J_\mu (Z^{})`$ are:

$`J_\mu (EM)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\overline{u}\gamma _\mu u{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\overline{d}\gamma _\mu d{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\overline{D}\gamma _\mu D\overline{e}^{}\gamma _\mu e^{}\overline{E}^{}\gamma _\mu E^{}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{f}{}}q_f\overline{f}\gamma _\mu f`$
$`J_\mu (Z)`$ $`=`$ $`J_{\mu ,L}(Z)S_W^2J_\mu (EM)`$
$`J_\mu (Z^{})`$ $`=`$ $`T_WJ_\mu (EM)J_{\mu ,L}(Z^{})`$ (6)
where $`e=gS_W=g^{}C_W\sqrt{1T_W^2/3}>0`$, is the electric charge, $`q_f`$ is the electric charge of the fermion $`f`$ in units of $`e`$, $`J_\mu (EM)`$ is the electromagnetic current (vectorlike as it should be), and the left-handed currents are

$`J_{\mu ,L}(Z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\overline{u}_L\gamma _\mu u_L\overline{d}_L\gamma _\mu d_L+\overline{\nu }_{eL}\gamma _\mu \nu _{eL}\overline{e}_L^{}\gamma _\mu e_L^{}+\overline{N}_2^0\gamma _\mu N_2^0\overline{E}^{}\gamma _\mu E^{})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{f}{}}T_{3f}\overline{f}_L\gamma _\mu f_L`$
$`J_{\mu ,L}(Z^{})`$ $`=`$ $`S_{2W}^1(\overline{u}_L\gamma _\mu u_L\overline{e}_L^{}\gamma _\mu e_L^{}\overline{E}_L^{}\gamma _\mu E_L^{}\overline{N}_{4L}^0\gamma _\mu N_{4L}^0)`$ (7)
$`+`$ $`T_{2W}^1(\overline{d}_L\gamma _\mu d_L\overline{E}_L^+\gamma _\mu E_L^+\overline{\nu }_{eL}\gamma _\mu \nu _{eL}\overline{N}_{2L}^0\gamma _\mu N_{2L}^0)`$
$``$ $`T_W^1(\overline{D}_L\gamma _\mu D_L\overline{e}_L^+\gamma _\mu e_L^+\overline{N}_{1L}^0\gamma _\mu N_{1L}^0\overline{N}_{3L}^0\gamma _\mu N_{3L}^0)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{f}{}}T_{9f}\overline{f}_L\gamma _\mu f_L`$
where $`S_{2W}=2S_WC_W,T_{2W}=S_{2W}/C_{2W},\overline{N}_2^0\gamma _\mu N_2^0=\overline{N}_{2L}^0\gamma _\mu N_{2L}^0+\overline{N}_{2R}^0\gamma _\mu N_{2R}^0=\overline{N}_{2L}^0\gamma _\mu N_{2L}^0\overline{N}_{2L}^{0c}\gamma _\mu N_{2L}^{0c}=\overline{N}_{2L}^0\gamma _\mu N_{2L}^0\overline{N}_{4L}^0\gamma _\mu N_{4L}^0`$, and similarly $`\overline{E}\gamma _\mu E=\overline{E}_L^{}\gamma _\mu E_L^{}\overline{E}_L^+\gamma _\mu E_L^+`$. In this way $`T_{3f}=Dg(1/2,1/2,0)`$ is the third component of the weak isospin acting on the representation 3 of $`SU(3)_L`$ (the negative when acting on $`\overline{3}`$), and $`T_{9f}=Dg(S_{2W}^1,T_{2W}^1,T_W^1)`$ is a convenient $`3\times 3`$ diagonal matrix acting on the representation 3 of $`SU(3)_L`$ (the negative when acting on $`\overline{3}`$). Notice that $`J_\mu (Z)`$ is just the generalization of the neutral current present in the SM, which allows us to identify $`Z_\mu `$ as the neutral gauge boson of the SM, which is consistent with Eqs.(1), (2) and (4).

The couplings of the physical states $`Z_1^\mu `$ and $`Z_2^\mu `$ are then given by:

$`H^{NC}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2C_W}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}}Z_i^\mu {\displaystyle \underset{f}{}}\{\overline{f}\gamma _\mu [a_{iL}(f)(1\gamma _5)+a_{iR}(f)(1+\gamma _5)]f\}`$ (8)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2C_W}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}}Z_i^\mu {\displaystyle \underset{f}{}}\{\overline{f}\gamma _\mu [g(f)_{iV}g(f)_{iA}\gamma _5]f\}`$
where

$`a_{1L}(f)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\theta (T_{3f}q_fS_W^2){\displaystyle \frac{g^{}\mathrm{sin}\theta C_W}{g\sqrt{3}}}(T_{9f}q_fT_W),`$ (9)
$`a_{1R}(f)`$ $`=`$ $`q_fS_W(\mathrm{cos}\theta S_W{\displaystyle \frac{g^{}\mathrm{sin}\theta }{g\sqrt{3}}}),`$
$`a_{2L}(f)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\theta (T_{3f}q_fS_W^2){\displaystyle \frac{g^{}\mathrm{cos}\theta C_W}{g\sqrt{3}}}(T_{9f}q_fT_W),`$
$`a_{2R}(f)`$ $`=`$ $`q_fS_W(\mathrm{sin}\theta S_W+{\displaystyle \frac{g^{}\mathrm{cos}\theta }{g\sqrt{3}}})`$
and

$`g(f)_{iV}`$ $`=`$ $`a(f)_{iL}+a(f)_{iR},`$ (10)
$`g(f)_{iA}`$ $`=`$ $`a(f)_{iL}a(f)_{iR},`$
so, when the algebra gets done we get:

$`g(f)_{1V}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\theta (T_{3f}2S_W^2q_f){\displaystyle \frac{g^{}\mathrm{sin}\theta }{g\sqrt{3}}}(T_{9f}C_W2q_fS_W),`$
$`g(f)_{2V}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\theta (T_{3f}2S_W^2q_f){\displaystyle \frac{g^{}\mathrm{cos}\theta }{g\sqrt{3}}}(T_{9f}C_W2q_fS_W),`$
$`g(f)_{1A}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\theta T_{3f}{\displaystyle \frac{g^{}\mathrm{sin}\theta }{g\sqrt{3}}}T_{9f}C_W,`$
$`g(f)_{2A}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\theta T_{3f}{\displaystyle \frac{g^{}\mathrm{cos}\theta }{g\sqrt{3}}}T_{9f}C_W,`$
to be compared with the SM values $`g(f)_{1V}^{SM}=T_{3f}2S_Wq_f`$ and $`g(f)_{1A}^{SM}=T_{3f}`$. The values of $`g_{iV},g_{iA}`$ with $`i=1,2`$ are listed in Tables I and II. As we can see, in the limit $`\theta =0`$ the couplings of $`Z_1^\mu `$ to the ordinary leptons and quarks are the same as in the SM, and due to this we can test the new physics beyond the SM.

TABLE I. The $`Z_1^\mu \overline{f}f`$ couplings.    f $`g(f)_{1V}`$ $`g(f)_{1A}`$    u $`(\frac{1}{2}\frac{4S_W^2}{3})[\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}]`$ $`\frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{2}\mathrm{sin}\theta /[2(4C_w^21)^{1/2}]`$  d $`\mathrm{cos}\theta (\frac{1}{2}+\frac{2S_W^2}{3})\frac{\mathrm{sin}\theta }{(4C_W^21)^{1/2}}(\frac{1}{2}\frac{S_W^2}{3})`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\{\mathrm{cos}\theta +\mathrm{sin}\theta C_{2W}/[2(4C_W^21)^{1/2}]\}`$  D $`\frac{2S_W^2\mathrm{cos}\theta }{3}+\mathrm{sin}\theta (1\frac{5}{3}S_W^2)/(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$ $`C_W^2\mathrm{sin}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$  $`e^{}`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\theta (\frac{1}{2}+2S_W^2)+\frac{3\mathrm{sin}\theta }{(4C_W^21)^{1/2}}(\frac{1}{2}S_W^2)`$ $`\frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{2}+\frac{\mathrm{sin}\theta }{(4C_W^21)^{1/2}}(\frac{1}{2}C_W^2)`$  $`E^{}`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\theta (1+2S_W^2)\frac{S_W^2\mathrm{sin}\theta }{(4C_W^21)^{1/2}}`$ $`C_W^2\mathrm{sin}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$  $`\nu _e,N_2^0`$ $`\frac{1}{2}[\mathrm{cos}\theta +\mathrm{sin}\theta (12S_W^2)/(4C_W^21)^{1/2}]`$ $`\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{cos}\theta +\mathrm{sin}\theta (12S_W^2)/(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$  $`N_1^0,N_3^0`$ $`C_W^2\mathrm{sin}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$ $`C_W^2\mathrm{sin}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$  $`N_4^0`$ $`\frac{1}{2}[\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}]`$ $`\frac{1}{2}[\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}]`$

TABLE II. The $`Z_2^\mu \overline{f}f`$ couplings.    f $`g(f)_{2V}`$ $`g(f)_{2A}`$    u $`(\frac{1}{2}\frac{4S_W^2}{3})[\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}]`$ $`\frac{\mathrm{sin}\theta }{2}\mathrm{cos}\theta /[2(4C_w^21)^{1/2}]`$  d $`\mathrm{sin}\theta (\frac{1}{2}+\frac{2S_W^2}{3})\frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{(4C_W^21)^{1/2}}(\frac{1}{2}\frac{S_W^2}{3})`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\{\mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\theta C_{2W}/[2(4C_W^21)^{1/2}]\}`$  D $`\frac{2S_W^2\mathrm{sin}\theta }{3}+\mathrm{cos}\theta (1\frac{5}{3}S_W^2)/(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$ $`C_W^2\mathrm{cos}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$  $`e^{}`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\theta (\frac{1}{2}+2S_W^2)+\frac{3\mathrm{cos}\theta }{(4C_W^21)^{1/2}}(\frac{1}{2}S_W^2)`$ $`\frac{\mathrm{sin}\theta }{2}+\frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{(4C_W^21)^{1/2}}(\frac{1}{2}C_W^2)`$  $`E^{}`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\theta (1+2S_W^2)\frac{S_W^2\mathrm{cos}\theta }{(4C_W^21)^{1/2}}`$ $`C_W^2\mathrm{cos}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$  $`\nu _e,N_2^0`$ $`\frac{1}{2}[\mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\theta (12S_W^2)/(4C_W^21)^{1/2}]`$ $`\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\theta (12S_W^2)/(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$  $`N_1^0,N_3^0`$ $`C_W^2\mathrm{cos}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$ $`C_W^2\mathrm{cos}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}`$  $`N_4^0`$ $`\frac{1}{2}[\mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}]`$ $`\frac{1}{2}[\mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\theta /(4C_W^21)^{1/2}]`$

## 5 Fermion masses

The Higgs scalars introduced in section 3 not only break the symmetry in an appropriate way, but produce the folowing mass terms for the fermions of the model:

### 5.1 Quark masses

For the quark sector we can write the following Yukawa terms:

$$_Y^Q=Q_L^TC(h_u\varphi _3u_L^c+h_D\varphi _1D_L^c+h_d\varphi _2d_L^c+h_{dD}\varphi _2D_L^c+h_{Dd}\varphi _1d_L^c)+h.c.$$
(11)
where $`h_\eta ,\eta =u,D,d,dD,Dd`$, are Yukawa couplings of order one and $`C`$ is the charge conjugate operator. ¿From Eq.(11) we get for the up quark sector a mass term $`m_u=h_uv^{}/\sqrt{2}`$, and for the down quark sector a mass matrix in the basis $`(d,D)_L`$ of the form:

$$M_{dD}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}h_dv/\sqrt{2}& h_{dD}v/\sqrt{2}\\ h_{Dd}V& h_DV\end{array}\right).$$
(12)
For the particular case $`h_d=h_{dD}=h_{Dd}=h_Dh`$, the mass eigenvalues of the previous matrix are $`m_d=0`$ and $`m_D=h(V+v/\sqrt{2})`$. Since there is not a physical reason for the Yukawas to be equal, let us calculate the mass eigenvalues as a function of $`|M_{dD}|(h_dh_Dh_{dD}h_{Dd})`$ the determinant of the Yukawas, and in the expansion $`v/V`$. Then the algebra shows that $`m_Dh_DV+h_dv/\sqrt{2}|M_{dD}|v^2/\sqrt{2}Vh_D+\mathrm{}`$ and $`m_dv|M_{dD}|(1+h_{dD}h_{Dd}v/\sqrt{2}Vh_D^3+\mathrm{})/\sqrt{2}h_D`$. This expansion can be used to explain the experimental values for the quark masses in any one of the three families (for the third family for example we may choose the particular values $`h_b=h_B=0.8,h_{bB}=0.9`$ and $`h_{Bb}=0.7`$ in order to get $`m_b10^2m_t`$, etc.). Since the model does not allow us to calculate the Yukawa couplings, the fermion masses can not be predicted in this model. But, contrary to what happen in the SM, in the context of this model we can implement, in a reasonable way, the weak isospin breaking in the quark sector for the three families (what we have here is a particular realization of the general analysis presented in Ref.).

### 5.2 Lepton masses

For the lepton sector we can write the following Yukawa terms:

$$_Y^l=ϵ_{abc}[\psi _L^aC(h_1\varphi _L^b\varphi _3^c+h_2\chi _L^b\varphi _1^c+h_3\chi _L^b\varphi _2^c)+\varphi _L^aC(h_4\chi _L^b\varphi _1^c+h_5\chi _L^b\varphi _2^c)]+h.c..$$
(13)
where $`a,b,c`$ are $`SU(3)_L`$ tensor indices and the Yukawas are again of order one. These new terms produce in the basis (e,E) the mass matrix

$$M_{eE}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}h_3v/\sqrt{2}& h_5v/\sqrt{2}\\ h_2V& h_4V\end{array}\right)$$
(14)
with eigenvalues $`m_E=h_4Vh_3v/\sqrt{2}|M_{eE}|v^2/\sqrt{2}Vh_4+\mathrm{}`$ and $`m_ev|M_{eE}|(1h_2h_5v/\sqrt{2}Vh_4^3+\mathrm{})/\sqrt{2}h_4`$, where $`|M_{eE}|=h_2h_5h_3h_4`$, with similar consequences as in the down quark sector.

For the neutral leptons in the basis $`(\nu _e,N_1,N_2.N_3,N_4)`$ we get the mass matrix

$$M_N=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 0& 0& h_1v^{}/\sqrt{2}& h_2V\\ 0& 0& h_1v^{}/\sqrt{2}& 0& h_3v/\sqrt{2}\\ 0& h_1v^{}/\sqrt{2}& 0& 0& h_4V\\ h_1v^{}/\sqrt{2}& 0& 0& 0& h_5v/\sqrt{2}\\ h_2V& h_3v/\sqrt{2}& h_4V& h_5v/\sqrt{2}& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(15)
For the particular case $`h_2=h_4=h`$ and $`h_3=h_5=h^{}`$ the mass eigenvalues are $`0`$, $`\pm h_1v^{}/\sqrt{2}`$, $`\pm \sqrt{h_1^2v^2/2+h^2v_2^2+2h^2V^2}`$ which means that we have a Majorana neutrino of zero mass and two Dirac neutral particles with masses $`h_1v^{}/\sqrt{2}`$ and $`(h_1^2v^2/2+h^2v_2^2+2h^2V^2)^{1/2}`$. The eigenvector associated with the zero mass Majorana neutrino is $`\alpha (vh^{},\sqrt{2}Vh,vh^{},\sqrt{2}Vh,v^{}h_1)`$ where $`\alpha =(2v^2/h^2+4V^2h^2+v^2h_1^2)^{1/2}`$ is a normalization factor. This amazing result implies, in the context of this model, that not only the known tiny mass neutral fermion must be a Majorana particle, but that it is not the electron neutrino but a mixture of five neutral particles with only one of them associated with the vertex $`\overline{\nu }_eeW`$.

But $`h_2h_5h_3h_4`$, otherwise we will have a zero mass electron. To diagonalize $`M_N`$ for the most general case ($`h_i1,i=1,2,\mathrm{}.,5`$ but not equal) is not a simple task. A tedious algebra shows that, for the most general case, the five mass eigenvalues are $`\pm h_1v^{}/\sqrt{2}`$ (exact values), one small see-saw value of order $`vv^{}/V`$ and two very large values of order $`(\pm V+\eta )`$ where $`\eta `$ is a small see-saw quotient, which means that, in the context of this model, the five neutral leptons in each family split as: a Dirac neutrino with a mass of the order of the electroweak breaking mass scale, a pseudo-Dirac neutrino with a very large mass, and a see-saw majorana neutrino. In the appendix we carry out the detailed calculation for the particular case $`h_2=h_4h_1h_3h_5`$, in the expansion $`vv^{}/V`$. The five mass eigenvalues for that particular case are: $`\pm h_1v^{}/\sqrt{2}`$, $`\pm [(\sqrt{2}h_4V+[(h_3+h_5)^2v^2+2(h_1v^{}(h_3h_5)v/\sqrt{2})^2]/(8\sqrt{2}h_4V)]`$ and $`m_\nu =(h_5h_3)vv^{}/2h_4V`$. Notice that $`m_\nu `$ is suppressed not only for the see-saw quotient $`vv^{}/V`$ but also for the small difference of the Yukawas $`(h_5h_3)/2h_4`$, which implies that $`V`$ can be lower than $`10^{11}`$ GeV, the standard seesaw mechanism value.

## 6 Constrains on the $`(Z^\mu Z^\mu )`$ mixing angle and the $`Z_2^\mu `$ mass

To bound $`\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ and $`M_{Z_2}`$ we use parameters measured at the $`Z`$ pole from CERN $`e^+e^{}`$ collier (LEP), SLAC Linear Collider (SLC) and atomic parity violation constraints which are given in the table III . The expression for the partial width for $`Z_1^\mu f\overline{f}`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(Z_1^\mu f\overline{f})=\frac{N_CG_FM_{Z_1}^3}{6\pi \sqrt{2}}\rho \left[\frac{3\beta \beta ^3}{2}(g(f)_{1V})^2+\beta ^3(g(f)_{1A})^2\right](1+\delta _f)R_{QCD+QED},$$
(16)
where $`f`$ is an ordinary SM fermion, $`Z_1^\mu `$ is the physical gauge boson observed at LEP, $`N_C=3`$ is the number of colors, $`R_{QCD+QED}`$ are the QCD and QED corrections and $`\beta =\sqrt{14m_b^2/M_{Z_1}^2}`$ is a kinematic factor which is $`1`$ for all the SM fermions except for the bottom quark for which $`m_b=5.0`$ GeV . The factor $`\delta _f`$ is zero for all fermions except for the bottom quark for which the contribution coming from the top quark in the one loop vertex radiative correction is parametrized as $`\delta _b10^2(m_t^2/(2M_{Z_1}^2)+1/5)`$ . The $`\rho `$ parameter has two contributions, one is the oblique correction given by $`\delta \rho 3G_Fm_t^2/(8\pi ^2\sqrt{2})`$ and the other is the tree level contribution to the $`(Z_\mu Z_\mu ^{})`$ mixing, which can be written as $`\delta \rho _V(M_{Z_2}^2/M_{Z_1}^21)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta `$. Finally, $`g(f)_{1V}`$ and $`g(f)_{1A}`$ are listed in table I. Using Eq. (16), $`g(f)_{iV}`$ and $`g(f)_{iA}`$ we can write expressions for LEP and SLC parameters, where we are using the following values: $`m_t=174.3`$ GeV, $`\alpha _s(m_Z)=0.1192`$, $`\alpha (m_Z)^1=127.938`$, and $`S_W^2=0.2333`$.

The efective weak charge $`Q_W`$ in atomic parity violation is given by

$$Q_W=2\left[(2Z+N)c_{1u}+(Z+2N)c_{1d}\right],$$
(17)
where $`c_{1q}=2g(e)_{1A}g(q)_{1V}`$, $`Z`$ is the number of protons and $`N`$ is the number of neutrons in the atomic nucleus. The $`Q_W`$ determination for $`{}_{55}{}^{133}C_{s}^{}`$ has been improved recently  to the value

$$Q_W(_{55}^{133}C_s)=72.06\pm 0.28\pm 0.34,$$
(18)
result to be compared with the theoretical value for $`Q_W`$ which can be written as

$$Q_W(_{55}^{133}C_s)=73.09\pm 0.04+\mathrm{\Delta }Q_W,$$
(19)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_W`$ includes the contributions of new physics. The discrepancy between the SM and the experimental data is given by

$`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_W`$ $`=`$ $`Q_W^{exp}Q_W^{SM}`$ (20)
$`=`$ $`1.03\pm 0.44.`$
Regarding to the $`(Z_\mu Z_\mu ^{})`$ mixing between two neutral currents, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_W`$ can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }Q_W=\left[\left(1+4\frac{S_W^2}{12S_W^2}\right)Z\right]\delta \rho _V+\mathrm{\Delta }Q_W^{},$$
(21)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_W^{}`$ is model dependent and it can be obtained for our model by using $`g(e)_{1A}`$ and $`g(q)_{1V}`$ from Table I. The analysis for our model gives

$$\mathrm{\Delta }Q_W^{}=(3.94Z6.40N)\mathrm{sin}\theta +(1.49Z+1.81N)\frac{M_{Z_1}^2}{M_{Z_2}^2}.$$
(22)
With the expressions for Z pole observables and $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_W`$ in terms of new physics and using experimental data from LEP and SLC  and atomic parity violation as in table III, we do a $`\chi ^2`$ fit and we find the best allowed region for $`\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ vs. $`M_{Z_2}`$ at 95$`\%`$ CL.

TABLE III. Experimental data and SM values for the parameters     Experimental results SM    $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z`$ (GeV) $`2.4952\pm 0.0023`$ $`2.4963\pm 0.0016`$  $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(had)`$ (GeV) $`1.7444\pm 0.0020`$ $`1.7427\pm 0.0015`$  $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(l^+l^{})`$ (MeV) $`83.984\pm 0.086`$ $`84.018\pm 0.028`$  $`R_e`$ $`20.804\pm 0.050`$ $`20.743\pm 0.018`$  $`A_{FB}(e)`$ $`0.0145\pm 0.0025`$ $`0.0165\pm 0.0003`$  $`R_b`$ $`0.21653\pm 0.00069`$ $`0.21572\pm 0.00015`$  $`R_c`$ $`0.1709\pm 0.0034`$ $`0.1723\pm 0.0001`$  $`A_{FB}(b)`$ $`0.0990\pm 0.0020`$ $`0.1039\pm 0.0009`$  $`A_{FB}(c)`$ $`0.0689\pm 0.0035`$ $`0.0743\pm 0.0007`$  $`A_{FB}(s)`$ $`0.0976\pm 0.0114`$ $`0.1040\pm 0.0009`$  $`A_b`$ $`0.922\pm 0.023`$ $`0.9348\pm 0.0001`$  $`A_c`$ $`0.631\pm 0.026`$ $`0.6683\pm 0.0005`$  $`A_s`$ $`0.82\pm 0.13`$ $`0.9357\pm 0.0001`$  $`A_e(𝒫_\tau )`$ $`0.1498\pm 0.0048`$ $`0.1483\pm 0.0012`$  $`Q_W(Cs)`$ $`72.06\pm 0.28\pm 0.34`$ $`73.09\pm 0.04`$

In Fig.1 we display the allowed region for $`\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ vs. $`M_{Z_2}`$ at 95$`\%`$ confidence level. When $`\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ goes to zero, the contribution of $`\delta \rho _V`$ to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(ff)`$ decouples, which allow us to get a lower bound for $`M_{Z_2}`$ (the bounds come from $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_W`$). At 95$`\%`$ CL the allowed region gives

$`0.0015`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ $`0.0048,`$
$`600GeV`$ $`M_{Z_2},`$ (23)
which implies that the mass of the new neutral gauge boson is compatible with the bound got in $`p\overline{p}`$ collisions at Tevatron . A model independent analysis, similar to the one presented here has been reported by J. Erler and P. Langacker in Ref..

## 7 Conclusions

We have presented an anomaly-free model based on the local gauge group $`SU(3)_cSU(3)_LU(1)_X`$ which is a subgroup of the electroweak-strong unification group $`E_6`$. We break the gauge symmetry down to $`SU(3)_cU(1)_Q`$ and at the same time give masses to all the fermion fields in the model in a consistent way by using three different Higgs scalars $`\varphi _i,i=1,2,3`$ which set two different mass scales; $`vv^{}250`$ GeV $`<<V`$. By using experimental results from LEP, SLC and atomic parity violation we bound the mixing angle and the mass of the additional neutral current to be $`0.0015\mathrm{sin}\theta <0.0048`$ and $`600GeVM_{Z_2}`$ at 95$`\%`$ CL.

The most outstanding result of our analysis is the mass spectrum of the fermion fields in the model which arises as a consequence of the mixing between ordinary fermions and their exotic counterparts without the need of different scale Yukawa couplings. Conspicuously, the five neutral leptons in the model split as a Dirac neutrino with a mass of the order of the electroweak breaking mass scale $`v`$, a pseudo-Dirac neutrino with a large mass of order $`V`$ and a tiny see-saw Majorana neutrino which is not the partner of the lightest charged lepton at the $`W^\pm `$ vertex, but a mixture of the five neutral states in the weak bases.

Notice that all the new states are vector-like with respect to the SM quantum numbers. They consist of an isosinglet quark $`D`$ of electric charge $`1/3`$, a lepton isodoublet $`(E^{},N_2^0)_L^T`$ with $`N_{2L}^{0c}=N_{4L}^0`$ in the weak basis, and two neutral lepton isosinglets $`N_{1L}^0`$ and $`N_{3L}^0`$. Since $`V`$ can be of the order of a few TeV, these exotic fermions could be accessible in forth coming searches at the Fermilab TeVatron collider or at the LHC under construction at CERN.

But two neat predictions of this model are: first, the existence of a Dirac neutrino for each family with a mass of the order of the electroweak mass scale; second, the existence of a new neutral gauge boson with a mass just below the TeV scale. The experimental signature for this particle may be present already at the LEP II $`e^+e^{}`$ collider data , or just around the corner of the Fermilab TeVatron output.

## 8 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was partially supported by BID and Colciencias in Colombia.

APPENDIX

In this appendix we diagonalize perturbatively the mass matrix for the neutral leptons which appears in section 5.2. First let us simplify the notation with the following definitions: $`a=h_1v^{}/\sqrt{2},B=h_2V,c=h_3v/\sqrt{2},b=h_4V`$ and $`C=h_5v/\sqrt{2}`$. Then the mass terms for the neutral fermions now reads: $`M_N=B\nu _eN_4+a\nu _eN_3aN_1N_2+cN_1N_4+bN_2N_4+CN_3N_4+h.c.`$; which in the basis $`(\nu _e,N_1,N_2,N_3,N_4)`$ becomes:

$$M_N=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 0& 0& a& B\\ 0& 0& a& 0& c\\ 0& a& 0& 0& b\\ a& 0& 0& 0& C\\ B& c& b& C& 0\end{array}\right)$$

Making a unitary transformation of $`M_N`$ to the new basis:

$`E_1`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha [(b+c),(BC),(BC),(b+c),0]`$ (24)
$`E_2`$ $`=`$ $`\beta [(bc),(B+C),(B+C),(bc),0]`$
$`E_3`$ $`=`$ $`\beta [(B+C),(bc),(bc),(B+C),0]`$
$`E_4`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha [(B+C),(b+c),(b+c),(BC),0]`$
$`E_5`$ $`=`$ $`e_5=[0,0,0,0,1]`$
where $`\alpha =1/[2(b+c)^2+2(BC)^2]^{1/2}`$ and $`\beta =1/[2(bc)^2+2(B+C)^2]^{1/2}`$, we get the mass matrix in the following block diagonal form:

$$M_N=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}a& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& a& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& a& 0& 1/2\beta \\ 0& 0& 0& a& 1/2\alpha \\ 0& 0& 1/2\beta & 1/2\alpha & 0\end{array}\right)$$

.

For the non-diagonal $`3\times 3`$ block we use the approximation $`B=b>>cC`$ and the perturbative expansion $`v^mv^{nm}/V^{n1}`$ for $`n=1,2,3\mathrm{}`$ and $`m=0,1,2,\mathrm{}n`$. Then we get:

$$M_{3N}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& b\\ 0& 0& b\\ b& b& 0\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& 0& \frac{(Cc)}{2}+\frac{(C+c)^2}{8b}\\ 0& a& \frac{(Cc)}{2}+\frac{(C+c)^2}{8b}\\ \frac{(Cc)}{2}+\frac{(C+c)^2}{8b}& \frac{(Cc)}{2}+\frac{(C+c)^2}{8b}& 0\end{array}\right).$$

Rotating now $`M_{3N}`$ with

$$R=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1/\sqrt{2}& 1/\sqrt{2}& 0\\ 1/2& 1/2& 1/\sqrt{2}\\ 1/2& 1/2& 1/\sqrt{2}\end{array}\right),$$

we finally get

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& \frac{a}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{(Cc)}{2}& \frac{a}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{(Cc)}{2}\\ \frac{a}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{(Cc)}{2}& \sqrt{2}[b+\frac{(C+c)^2}{8b}]& 0\\ \frac{a}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{(Cc)}{2}& 0& \sqrt{2}[b+\frac{(C+c)^2}{8b}]\end{array}\right),$$

which we diagonalize using matrix perturbation theory up to second order in the perturbation \[landau\]. After the algebra is done we get the following three eigenvalues: $`m_1\frac{a(cC)}{b},m_2\sqrt{2}b+\frac{(c+C)^2}{4\sqrt{2}b}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}b}(\frac{a}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{(Cc)}{2})^2`$ and $`m_3\sqrt{2}b\frac{(c+C)^2}{4\sqrt{2}b}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}b}(\frac{a}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{(Cc)}{2})^2`$. Notice that for $`h_3=h_5(c=C)`$ we get a zero mass Majorana neutrino.

Fig.1 Contour plot displaying the allowed region for $`\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ vs. $`M_{Z_2}`$ at 95$`\%`$ CL.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction and results

## 1 Introduction and results

Solitonic solutions of field equations of motion play an essential role in our understanding of field and string theories beyond perturbation theory. This persists for the noncommutative extension of scalar and gauge field theories which have lately come under intense scrutiny because they appear naturally in string theory . Indeed, many quantum field theories on a noncommutative space-time are obtained in a certain zero-slope limit from effective field theories of open-string modes in a particular NS-NS two-form (‘$`B`$-field’) background . In modern parlance, open-string dynamics takes place inside the world volume of $`D`$-branes where a constant $`B`$-field gets traded for effective noncommutativity and a deformed metric. Hence, string theories provide a higher-level (commutative) arena for the study of noncommutative field theories.

A case in point is the open $`N=2`$ fermionic string  which at tree-level111 For a one-loop analysis see . proved to be identical to self-dual Yang-Mills theory in $`2+2`$ dimensions, possibly in the background of a self-dual metric and a Kähler $`B`$-field . Turning on the latter in the world volume of $`n`$ coincident (Kleinian) $`D3`$-branes was recently shown to yield noncommutative self-dual $`U(n)`$ gauge theory .

Starting from $`D3`$-branes whose world volumes fill the flat (Kleinian) target space $`^{2,2}`$, it is interesting to consider lower-dimensional $`D`$-branes and describe the effective field theories appearing on their world volumes in a zero-slope limit. In this paper we show that open $`N=2`$ strings in a $`B`$-field background induce on the world volume of $`n`$ coincident $`D2`$-branes a noncommutative generalization of a modified $`U(n)`$ sigma model (with a Wess-Zumino-type term) . The latter is equivalent to non-relativistic Chern-Simons theory coupled to Higgs fields . For $`n`$ coincident $`D1`$-branes we obtain the standard $`U(n)`$ sigma model in $`1+1`$ dimensions and its Euclidean version.

By now a lot of solitonic solutions for noncommutative Yang-Mills and Yang-Mills-Higgs theories have been constructed \[15–37\], many of them with the help of the solution-generating technique proposed in . In the present paper we demonstrate that one can do better for ‘integrable’ noncommutative field theories. Whenever equations of motion can be written as compatibility conditions of some linear equations, then there exists a more general technique to construct a new solution from an old one, known as the ‘dressing’ approach .

We adapt this dressing method to the noncommutative case and apply it to the noncommutative modified sigma model in $`2+1`$ dimensions (mentioned above). It is outlined how to construct multi-soliton configurations with arbitrary relative motion of the individual lumps. To be explicit we illustrate the general scheme by giving examples of one-soliton solutions for the gauge groups $`U(1)`$ and $`U(2)`$, including their energies. Since the model has neither relativistic nor rotational invariance, the energy of a noncommutative soliton depends on the direction of its motion. For some directions it even falls below the rest energy. If all velocities are put to zero one simply obtains static configurations which are the instantons of the noncommutative two-dimensional sigma model. In general, though, our solitons correspond on the string level to $`D0`$-branes moving inside $`D2`$-branes.

## 2 Open N=2 strings in a B-field background

We begin by recapitulating some basic facts about the open $`N=2`$ string and how to properly couple it to a $`B`$-field background. The critical $`N=2`$ string lives in 2+2 (real) dimensions, i.e. the string world sheet $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is embedded into a four-dimensional target space with (Kleinian) signature (2,2). Its propagating world-sheet degrees of freedom consist of the embedding coordinates $`X^\mu `$ (with center-of-mass $`x^\mu `$) plus a set of NSR Majorana spinors $`\psi ^\mu `$, with $`\mu =1,2,3,4`$. The $`N=2`$ string admits couplings to a self-dual metric $`g=g_{\mu \nu }(x)\text{d}x^\mu \text{d}x^\nu `$ and a Kähler NS-NS two-form $`B=B_{\mu \nu }(x)\text{d}x^\mu \text{d}x^\nu `$. We specialize to flat Kleinian space $`^{2,2}`$ with a metric

$$(g_{\mu \nu })=\text{diag}(\xi _1,\xi _1,\xi _2,\xi _2)\text{where}\xi _1,\xi _2_+$$
(1)
are scaling parameters. In addition, we shall consider $`n`$ coincident $`Dp`$-branes for $`p=1,2,3`$ and gauge to zero all $`B`$-field components orthogonal to the $`D`$-brane world volumes. Concrete expressions for the remaining $`B`$-field components shall be given in the next section.

It has been shown  that the standard superfield action in superconformal gauge has to be improved by two $`B`$-dependent boundary terms, in order to achieve consistency of the open-string boundary conditions with the two residual rigid supersymmetries  222 We use $`\rho ^0=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),\rho ^1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),\{\rho ^\alpha ,\rho ^\beta \}=2\eta ^{\alpha \beta },(\eta ^{\alpha \beta })=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right),\sigma ^0=\tau ,\sigma ^1=\sigma .`$
XX Recall that a Majorana spinor $`\phi `$ (in 1+1 dimensions) has two components, and $`\overline{\phi }=\phi ^{}\rho ^0.`$

$`\delta X^\mu `$ $`=\overline{\epsilon }_1\psi ^\mu +J_\nu ^\mu \overline{\epsilon }_2\psi ^\nu ,`$
$`\delta \psi ^\mu `$ $`=i\rho ^\alpha _\alpha X^\mu \epsilon _1+iJ_\nu ^\mu \rho ^\alpha _\alpha X^\nu \epsilon _2.`$ (2)
Here $`(J_\nu ^\mu )`$ is a constant complex structure compatible with our metric and $`B`$-field, i.e.

$`g_{\mu \nu }J_\lambda ^\nu +J_\mu ^\nu g_{\lambda \nu }=0\text{and}B_{\mu \nu }J_\lambda ^\nu J_\mu ^\nu B_{\lambda \nu }=0.`$ (3)
Its nonzero components are the following: $`J_2^1=J_1^2=J_4^3=J_3^4=1.`$ The consistent gauge-fixed $`N=2`$ string action reads

$$S=\frac{1}{4\pi \alpha ^{}}_\mathrm{\Sigma }\text{d}^2\sigma \left[(\eta ^{\alpha \beta }g_{\mu \nu }+\epsilon ^{\alpha \beta }2\pi \alpha ^{}B_{\mu \nu })_\alpha X^\mu _\beta X^\nu +(g_{\mu \nu }+2\pi \alpha ^{}B_{\mu \nu })i\overline{\psi }^\mu \rho ^\alpha _\alpha \psi ^\nu \right].$$
(4)
It is important to note that the action functional (4) cannot be written in terms of superfields.

## 3 Branes and Seiberg-Witten limits

General formulae. We now investigate how open $`N=2`$ strings are affected by a background $`B`$-field on $`D`$-brane world volumes. Without loss of generality, we only turn on $`B`$-field components parallel to the $`D`$-brane world volumes. Furthermore, we switch on only their ‘magnetic’ components, in order to allow for the Seiberg-Witten limit to yield noncommutative gauge theory.

The starting point is the form of the open-string correlators ,

$`X^\mu (\tau )X^\nu (\tau ^{})`$ $`=\alpha ^{}G^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{ln}(\tau \tau ^{})^2+\frac{i}{2}\theta ^{\mu \nu }\epsilon (\tau \tau ^{}),`$ (5)
$`\psi ^\mu (\tau )\psi ^\nu (\tau ^{})`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{G^{\mu \nu }}{\tau \tau ^{}}},`$ (6)
for $`\tau ,\tau ^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }.`$ Here,

$$[(g+2\pi \alpha ^{}B)^1]^{\mu \nu }=G^{\mu \nu }+\frac{\theta ^{\mu \nu }}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}$$
(7)
yields the effective metric $`G=(G_{\mu \nu })`$ seen by the open string and gives rise to the noncommutativity matrix $`\theta =(\theta ^{\mu \nu })`$ appearing in $`[X^\mu (\tau ),X^\nu (\tau )]=i\theta ^{\mu \nu }`$ . The most general nontrivial ‘magnetic’ field $`B=(B_{\mu \nu })`$ has components

$$B_{12}=B_{21}=:B_1,B_{34}=B_{43}=:B_2,$$
(8)
but depending on the dimension and orientation of the $`D`$-branes one or both parameters may be equal to zero. The inverse open-string metric and the noncommutativity parameters read

$`(G^{\mu \nu })`$ $`=\text{diag}({\displaystyle \frac{\xi _1}{\xi _1^2+(2\pi \alpha ^{}B_1)^2}},{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _1}{\xi _1^2+(2\pi \alpha ^{}B_1)^2}},{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _2}{\xi _2^2+(2\pi \alpha ^{}B_2)^2}},{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _2}{\xi _2^2+(2\pi \alpha ^{}B_2)^2}}),`$
$`\theta ^{12}`$ $`=\theta ^{21}={\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2B_1}{\xi _1^2+(2\pi \alpha ^{}B_1)^2}},\theta ^{34}=\theta ^{43}={\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2B_2}{\xi _2^2+(2\pi \alpha ^{}B_2)^2}}.`$ (9)
Notice that for $`B_2=B_1`$ the background will be self-dual, and the action (4) will have $`N=4`$ supersymmetry .

Finally, for the effective open-string coupling $`G_s`$, which is related to the closed-string coupling $`g_s`$ via $`G_s=g_s[\mathrm{det}G/\mathrm{det}(g+2\pi \alpha ^{}B)]^{1/2}`$, we obtain

$$G_s=g_s\left[\left(1+(2\pi \frac{\alpha ^{}}{\xi _1}B_1)^2\right)\left(1+(2\pi \frac{\alpha ^{}}{\xi _2}B_2)^2\right)\right]^{1/2}=(2\pi )^{2p}(\alpha ^{})^{\frac{3p}{2}}g_{\text{YM}}^2,$$
(10)
including the relation to the Yang-Mills coupling $`g_{\text{YM}}`$ on the $`Dp`$-brane .

D3-branes. Consider $`n`$ coincident (Kleinian) $`D3`$-branes with world-volume signature $`(++)`$. Then the Seiberg-Witten limit consists of taking $`\alpha ^{}0`$ while sending $`\xi _1=\xi _2=(\alpha ^{})^20`$ (and therefore $`g_{\mu \nu }0`$) so that $`G,G^1`$, and $`\theta `$ remain finite. Let us now rescale coordinates,

$$x^12\pi B_1x^1,x^22\pi B_1x^2,x^32\pi B_2x^3,x^42\pi B_2x^4,$$
(11)
and denote them by the same letter $`x^\mu `$. Then, the components of $`G`$ and $`\theta `$ must be transformed as befits rank-two tensors. Explicitly, we have

$`(G^{\mu \nu })`$ $`(\eta ^{\mu \nu })=\text{diag}(+1,+1,1,1),`$
$`\theta ^{12}=\theta ^{21}`$ $`4\pi ^2B_1,\theta ^{34}=\theta ^{43}4\pi ^2B_2.`$ (12)
Thus, in these coordinates the commutative limit $`\theta 0`$ corresponds to $`B0.`$

D2-branes. Next we have a look at $`n`$ coincident (Minkowskian) $`D2`$-branes with world volumes extending along $`x^1,x^2,x^4.`$ In this case we take $`\xi _1=(\alpha ^{})^2`$ but $`\xi _2=1`$ and in the Seiberg-Witten limit send $`\alpha ^{}0.`$ Our subsequent rescaling for this case,

$$x^12\pi B_1x^1,x^22\pi B_1x^2,x^3x^3,x^4x^4,$$
(13)
sends the inverse open-string metric and the noncommutativity parameter to

$$(G^{\mu \nu })(\eta ^{\mu \nu })=\text{diag}(+1,+1,1,1),\theta ^{12}=\theta ^{21}4\pi ^2B_1=:\theta $$
(14)
(remembering that $`\theta ^{34}=0`$ in this case). It is obvious that the $`D2`$-brane results can be obtained from the $`D3`$-brane equations by simply setting $`B_2=0`$. Note that by considering Euclidean $`D1`$-branes we arrive at the same formulae (14).

## 4 Effective field theories on D-brane world volumes

Eleven years ago it was discovered  that the open $`N=2`$ fermionic string at tree level is identical to self-dual Yang-Mills field theory in $`2+2`$ dimensions. The complete absence of a massive physical spectrum ties in with the vanishing of all string amplitudes beyond three-point. In  it was shown that turning on a non-vanishing constant $`B`$-field background yields noncommutative self-dual Yang-Mills as the effective field theory in the target. We shall now extend our analysis to the case where the $`B`$-field is restricted to the world volume of lower-dimensional $`D`$-branes.

Apart from replacing $`gG`$ in the propagators (5) and (6), turning on a $`B`$-field merely multiplies each primitive open-string amplitude, obtained at $`\theta =0`$ from a disk diagram with a fixed leg ordering $`(1,2,\mathrm{},M)`$, by a factor of

$$\underset{1j<\mathrm{}M}{}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{i}{2}k_{j\mu }\theta ^{\mu \nu }k_\mathrm{}\nu \right\},$$
(15)
where $`k_j`$ denotes the momentum of the $`j`$th external leg. As delineated in  the effect of the phase (15) is subsumed in the effective world-volume field theory by replacing the ordinary product of fields with the Moyal (star) product.

The $`N=2`$ string is no exception to this rule : Its tree-level amplitudes on the space-time filling brane are reproduced by the noncommutative extension of the scalar field theory for a prepotential of self-dual $`U(n)`$ gauge theory. The choice of prepotential is a matter of gauge. In fact, by choosing a suitable Lorentz frame we can always arrive at Leznov’s gauge  or at Yang’s gauge  and even scale the Yang-Mills coupling $`g_{\text{YM}}`$ to unity . Since the Leznov as well as the Yang gauge break $`SO(2,2)`$ invariance, the resulting scalar field theories and equations have a reduced global symmetry. In the following we shall employ both gauges and restrict to lower-dimensional $`D`$-branes by setting appropriate $`B`$-field components and coordinate dependencies to zero.

D3-branes. This is the maximal case already discussed in . The cubic Lagrangian for the $`u(n)`$-valued Leznov prepotential $`\varphi `$ reads

$$L=\frac{1}{2}\eta ^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{tr}_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi +\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{tr}\varphi \left[(_2+_4)\varphi (_1_3)\varphi (_1_3)\varphi (_2+_4)\varphi \right],$$
(16)
where ‘$`\mathrm{tr}`$’ traces over the $`u(n)`$ algebra and fields are multiplied by means of the noncommutative star product

$$(fg)(x)=f(x)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{i}{2}\stackrel{_{{}_{}{}^{}}}{}_\mu \theta ^{\mu \nu }\stackrel{_{{}_{}{}^{}}}{}_\nu \right\}g(x).$$
(17)
D2-branes. For the case of coincident $`D2`$-branes our reasoning leads to the Lagrangian

$$L=\frac{1}{2}\eta ^{ab}\mathrm{tr}_a\varphi _b\varphi +\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{tr}\varphi \left[(_2+_4)\varphi _1\varphi _1\varphi (_2+_4)\varphi \right],$$
(18)
where $`a,b,\mathrm{}=1,2,4`$. We see that in accordance with the discussion above the Lagrangian (18) can be obtained from (16) upon reducing from the $`D3`$-brane world volume to a $`D2`$-brane world volume by imposing $`_3\varphi =0`$. Our choice of $`B`$-field then implies (see (14)) that the time coordinate $`x^4`$ becomes commutative. From now on, we shall relabel our coordinates as follows,

$$x=x^1,y=x^2,t=x^4.$$
(19)
The Lagrangian (18) produces a Leznov-type equation of motion,

$$_x^2\varphi _u_v\varphi +_v\varphi _x\varphi _x\varphi _v\varphi =0,$$
(20)
where we defined

$$u:=\frac{1}{2}(t+y),v:=\frac{1}{2}(ty),_u=_t+_y,_v=_t_y.$$
(21)
D1-branes. By considering open $`N=2`$ strings interacting with $`n`$ coincident $`D1`$-branes extending in the $`x`$-direction we obtain in the Seiberg-Witten limit (see section 3) an effective field theory on the $`D1`$-brane world volume $`^{1,1}`$, with the following equation of motion:

$$_x^2\varphi _t^2\varphi +_t\varphi _x\varphi _x\varphi _t\varphi =0.$$
(22)
Alternatively, for Euclidean $`D1`$-branes the effective scalar field on $`^{2,0}`$ obeys

$$_x^2\varphi +_y^2\varphi +_x\varphi _y\varphi _y\varphi _x\varphi =0.$$
(23)
It is easy to see that equations (22) and (23) can be obtained from equation (20) by imposing the conditions $`_y\varphi =0`$ and $`_t\varphi =0`$, respectively.

Operator formalism. In the remainder of this paper we concentrate on the noncommutative field theory (18) in $`2+1`$ dimensions, which can be obtained in a Seiberg-Witten limit of the open $`N=2`$ string with $`n`$ coincident $`D2`$-branes and a constant $`B`$-field background. It is well known that the star product, e.g. in (18), can be dropped by passing to noncommutative coordinates, $`x^\mu \widehat{x}^\mu `$, satisfying $`[\widehat{x}^\mu ,\widehat{x}^\nu ]=i\theta ^{\mu \nu }`$. In our $`D2`$-brane context we have $`(t,x,y)(t,\widehat{x},\widehat{y})`$ where

$$[t,\widehat{x}]=[t,\widehat{y}]=0,[\widehat{x},\widehat{y}]=i\theta \text{with}\theta =4\pi ^2B_1>0.$$
(24)
The metric $`(\eta _{ab})=\text{diag}(+1,+1,1)`$ and the parameter $`\theta `$ are extracted from equation (14).

Using complex noncommutative coordinates $`\widehat{z}=\widehat{x}+i\widehat{y}`$ and $`\widehat{\overline{z}}=\widehat{x}i\widehat{y}`$ we introduce creation and annihilation operators

$$a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\theta }}\widehat{z}\text{and}a^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\theta }}\widehat{\overline{z}}\text{so that}[a,a^{}]=1.$$
(25)
They act on the Fock space $``$ with an orthonormal basis $`\{|n,n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}\}`$ such that

$$a|0=0,a|n=\sqrt{n}|n1,a^{}|n=\sqrt{n+1}|n+1.$$
(26)
Then, any function $`f(t,z,\overline{z})`$ can be related to an operator-valued function $`\widehat{f}(t)`$ acting in $``$, with the help of the Moyal-Weyl map (see e.g. )

$$f(t,z,\overline{z})\widehat{f}(t)=\frac{2i\text{d}p\text{d}\overline{p}}{(2\pi )^2}\stackrel{~}{f}(t,p,\overline{p})e^{i\sqrt{2\theta }(\overline{p}a+pa^{})},$$
(27)
where $`\stackrel{~}{f}(t,p,\overline{p})`$ is the Fourier transform of $`f(t,z,\overline{z})`$ with respect to $`(z,\overline{z})`$. Under this map, we have $`fg\widehat{f}\widehat{g}`$ and

$$\text{d}x\text{d}yf2\pi \theta \text{Tr}\widehat{f}=2\pi \theta \underset{n0}{}n|\widehat{f}|n,$$
(28)
where ‘Tr’ signifies the trace over the Fock space $``$. The operator formulation turns spatial derivatives into commutators,

$$_xf\frac{i}{\theta }[\widehat{y},\widehat{f}]=:\widehat{}_x\widehat{f}\text{and}_yf\frac{i}{\theta }[\widehat{x},\widehat{f}]=:\widehat{}_y\widehat{f}.$$
(29)
For notational simplicity we will from now on omit the hats over the operators.

In the operator language, the Leznov-type equation (20) may be rewritten as follows,

$$_x^2\varphi _u_v\varphi +[_v\varphi ,_x\varphi ]=0,$$
(30)
where the elements of the $`u(n)`$ matrices $`\varphi `$ are $`t`$-dependent operators in the Fock space $``$, and derivatives $`_x`$, $`_u=_t+_y`$ and $`_v=_t_y`$ are understood as in (29).

## 5 Noncommutative solitons in 2+1 dimensions

In the previous sections we have laid the groundwork for the main part of this paper, which sets out to construct solitonic classical configurations for the integrable effective field theory of open $`N=2`$ strings on coincident noncommutative $`D2`$-branes. The crucial ingredient for solving the noncommutative field equations is the ‘dressing method’, which was invented to generate solutions for commutative integrable systems  and is easily extended to the noncommutative setup. The purpose of this section is, firstly, to present this important technique in its generality and adapt it to the noncommutative situation before, secondly, demonstrating its power by deriving one-soliton configurations for the $`U(1)`$ and $`U(2)`$ gauge groups and calculating their energies.

Linear system. Let us consider the two linear equations

$$(\zeta _x_u)\psi =A\psi \text{and}(\zeta _v_x)\psi =B\psi ,$$
(31)
which can be obtained from the Lax pair for the self-dual Yang-Mills equations in $`^{2,2}`$  by gauge-fixing and imposing the condition $`_3\psi =0`$. Here, $`\psi `$ depends on $`(t,x,y,\zeta )`$ or, equivalently, on $`(x,u,v,\zeta )`$ and is an $`n\times n`$ matrix whose elements act as operators in the Fock space $``$. The matrices $`A`$ and $`B`$ are of the same type as $`\psi `$ but do not depend on $`\zeta `$. The spectral parameter $`\zeta `$ lies in the extended complex plane. The matrix $`\psi `$ is subject to the following reality condition :

$$\psi (t,x,y,\zeta )[\psi (t,x,y,\overline{\zeta })]^{}=1,$$
(32)
where ‘$``$’ is hermitian conjugation. We also impose on $`\psi `$ the standard asymptotic conditions

$`\psi (t,x,y,\zeta \mathrm{})`$ $`=1+\zeta ^1\varphi (t,x,y)+O(\zeta ^2),`$ (33)
$`\psi (t,x,y,\zeta 0)`$ $`=\mathrm{\Phi }^1(t,x,y)+O(\zeta ).`$ (34)
As we shall see in a moment, it is no coincidence that the letter $`\varphi `$ in (33) is also used to denote the (operator-valued) Leznov field in (30).

Compatibility conditions. The compatibility conditions for the linear system of differential equations (31) are

$`_xB_vA=0,`$ (35)
$`_xA_uB[A,B]=0.`$ (36)
The solution of (35) is

$$A=_x\varphi \text{and}B=_v\varphi ,$$
(37)
where $`\varphi `$ is the same matrix as in (33). By substituting (37) into (36) we reproduce the second-order equation (30), which identifies $`\varphi `$ as the Leznov field.

Alternatively, one can first solve (36) via

$$A=\mathrm{\Phi }^1_u\mathrm{\Phi }\text{and}B=\mathrm{\Phi }^1_x\mathrm{\Phi },$$
(38)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }^1`$ is the matrix in (34). By inserting (38) into the remaining condition (35) we gain an equivalent (Yang-type) form of our field equation (30), namely

$$_x(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_x\mathrm{\Phi })_v(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_u\mathrm{\Phi })=0.$$
(39)
Returning to the original coordinates,

$$_x(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_x\mathrm{\Phi })+_y(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_y\mathrm{\Phi })_t(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_t\mathrm{\Phi })+_y(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_t\mathrm{\Phi })_t(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_y\mathrm{\Phi })=0,$$
(40)
one notices that this equation is not $`SO(2,1)`$ Lorentz invariant. However, it is the integrable equation of motion for a modified sigma model in $`2+1`$ dimensions . Finally we remark that (37) and (38) also follow directly from (31) and the asymptotic forms (33) and (34).

Solutions. In order to generate solutions of the equations (30) and (39) we employ the so-called ‘dressing method’ . More concretely, we look for solutions to the system (31) with (32) of the form

$$\psi (t,x,y,\zeta )=1+\underset{k=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{\mu _k\overline{\mu }_k}{\zeta \mu _k}P_k(t,x,y),$$
(41)
where the $`\mu _k`$ are complex constants (usually Im $`\mu _k<0`$ for all $`k`$) and the matrices $`P_k`$ are independent of $`\zeta .`$ In the commutative case such $`\psi `$ describe $`m`$ moving solitons which scatter trivially and whose velocities are determined by the constants $`\mu _k.`$ Subjecting the ansatz (41) to the reality condition (32) we find that the $`P_k`$ have to satisfy certain algebraic equations. An obvious solution to the latter is found by taking the $`P_k`$ to be mutually orthogonal hermitian projectors:

$$P_k^{}=P_k,P_k^2=P_k,P_{k_1}P_{k_2}=0\text{for}k_1k_2.$$
(42)
From (31) and (32) we learn that

$`A(t,x,y)=(\zeta _x\psi _u\psi )(t,x,y,\zeta )[\psi (t,x,y,\overline{\zeta })]^{},`$ (43)
$`B(t,x,y)=(\zeta _v\psi _x\psi )(t,x,y,\zeta )[\psi (t,x,y,\overline{\zeta })]^{}.`$ (44)
The matrices $`A`$ and $`B`$ do not depend on $`\zeta `$; therefore the poles at $`\zeta =\mu _k`$ on the r.h.s. of (43) and (44) have to be removable. This leads to the following differential equations for the projectors $`P_k`$:

$$(\mu _k_xP_k_uP_k)\left(1\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{\mu _{\mathrm{}}\overline{\mu }_{\mathrm{}}}{\mu _k\overline{\mu }_{\mathrm{}}}P_{\mathrm{}}\right)=0=(\mu _k_vP_k_xP_k)\left(1\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{\mu _{\mathrm{}}\overline{\mu }_{\mathrm{}}}{\mu _k\overline{\mu }_{\mathrm{}}}P_{\mathrm{}}\right).$$
(45)
If $`r_k`$ is the matrix rank of $`P_k`$ and $`n2`$ we can always take $`P_k`$ to be of the form

$$P_k=T_k(T_k^{}T_k)^1T_k^{}\text{for}k=1,\mathrm{},m,$$
(46)
where the $`T_k`$ are arbitrary $`n\times r_k`$ matrices subject to $`T_k^{}T_{\mathrm{}}=0`$ for $`k\mathrm{}`$. As before, the elements of $`T_k,T_k^{}`$ and $`P_k`$ are Fock-space operators. Substituting (46) into (45) we find that the equations (45) hold if the $`T_k^{}`$ satisfy

$`\mu _k_xT_k^{}_uT_k^{}=0\text{and}\mu _k_vT_k^{}_xT_k^{}=0.`$ (47)
The general solution of these equations is $`T_k^{}=T_k^{}(\overline{w}_k)`$, meaning the $`T_k`$ are arbitrary functions of

$$w_k:=x+\overline{\mu }_ku+\overline{\mu }_k^1v=x+\frac{1}{2}(\overline{\mu }_k\overline{\mu }_k^1)y+\frac{1}{2}(\overline{\mu }_k+\overline{\mu }_k^1)t.$$
(48)
Hence, if the matrix elements of $`T_k`$ are arbitrary holomorphic functions of the complex linear combination $`w_k`$ of the coordinates $`t,x,y`$, then the projectors (46) satisfy the differential equations (45).

The sub-ansatz (42) is rather restrictive for describing multi-soliton configurations. Those are captured better by putting (cf. )

$$P_k=\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{m}{}}T_{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mathrm{}k}{\mu _k\overline{\mu }_k}T_k^{}\text{for}k=1,\mathrm{},m,$$
(49)
where the $`T_k(t,x,y)`$ are $`n\times r`$ matrices, now unconstrained, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mathrm{}k(t,x,y)`$ are $`r\times r`$ matrices with $`r1`$, so that

$$\psi (t,x,y,\zeta )=1+\underset{k,\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{1}{\zeta \mu _k}T_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mathrm{}kT_k^{}.$$
(50)
Substituting (50) into (32) we learn that the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mathrm{}k`$ must invert the $`r\times r`$ matrices

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{kp}=\frac{1}{\mu _k\overline{\mu }_p}T_k^{}T_p,\text{i.e.}\underset{k=1}{\overset{m}{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mathrm{}k\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{kp}=\delta _p^{\mathrm{}}.$$
(51)
Demanding again vanishing residues for the poles at $`\zeta =\mu _k`$ on the r.h.s. of (43) and (44) we obtain the same differential equations as before, namely (47), but now for the $`T_k^{}`$ in the ansatz (50). Thus, again every collection of holomorphic matrix functions $`T_k(w_k)`$ provides a solution.

We observe that plugging the ansatz (41) into the formulae (33) and (34) reveals the solutions

$$\varphi =\underset{k=1}{\overset{m}{}}(\mu _k\overline{\mu }_k)P_k\text{and}\mathrm{\Phi }^1=\mathrm{\Phi }^{}=1\underset{k=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{\mu _k\overline{\mu }_k}{\mu _k}P_k$$
(52)
of equations (30) and (39) in terms of projectors. In the case of (49) the solutions take the form

$$\varphi =\underset{k,\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{m}{}}T_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mathrm{}kT_k^{}\text{and}\mathrm{\Phi }^1=\mathrm{\Phi }^{}=1\underset{k,\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{1}{\mu _k}T_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mathrm{}kT_k^{}.$$
(53)
Note that formally the noncommutativity never entered our considerations.

Solitons. Formulae (52) and (53) represent two rather general classes of explicit solutions to our Leznov- and Yang-type field equations (30) and (39). As solutions of the reduced noncommutative self-dual Yang-Mills equations they are of BPS character. If we want to specialize to solitons (i.e. moving lumps of energy), we should impose the condition that the energy of such field configurations is finite. For this consideration we find it convenient to switch from the Leznov- to the Yang-type description, which makes use of the $`U(n)`$-valued field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t,x,y)`$. The computation of the energy gets quite involved already in the commutative limit when the soliton configuration $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is time-dependent , and even more so for multi-soliton configurations. To keep the algebra manageable we concentrate on one-soliton solutions for the gauge groups $`U(1)`$ and $`U(2)`$.

Putting $`m=1`$ and dropping the index we get $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\frac{\mu \overline{\mu }}{T^{}T}`$, and the solutions (52) and (53) simplify to

$$\varphi =(\mu \overline{\mu })P\text{and}\mathrm{\Phi }=1+\frac{\mu \overline{\mu }}{\overline{\mu }}P.$$
(54)
It is assumed that $`\mu `$ is not real. Furthermore, we have $`_x=_w+_{\overline{w}}`$ and

$`_t=\frac{1}{2}(\overline{\mu }+\overline{\mu }^1)_w+\frac{1}{2}(\mu +\mu ^1)_{\overline{w}},`$
$`_y=\frac{1}{2}(\overline{\mu }\overline{\mu }^1)_w+\frac{1}{2}(\mu \mu ^1)_{\overline{w}},`$ (55)
so that (45) reduces to

$$(_wP)(1P)=0(1P)_{\overline{w}}P=0.$$
(56)
Recall that our solutions $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ depend on $`t,x,y`$ only through $`w`$ and $`\overline{w}`$. It is therefore convenient to switch from $`z,\overline{z}`$ (as used in section 4) to the ‘co-moving’ coordinates $`w,\overline{w}`$. For the latter we have (in the operator formalism)

$$[w,\overline{w}]=\frac{i}{2}\theta (\mu \overline{\mu }\mu ^1+\overline{\mu }^1)=:2\beta >0\text{for}\text{Im}\mu <0.$$
(57)
Notice that $`wz`$ and $`\beta =\theta `$ when $`\mu =i`$ (static case). We introduce creation and annihilation operators $`c^{}`$ and $`c`$ together with a Fock space $`_t`$ related to the ‘co-moving’ coordinates $`w,\overline{w}`$ via

$`c={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\beta }}}w,c^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\beta }}}\overline{w},|n_t:={\displaystyle \frac{(c^{})^n}{\sqrt{n!}}}|0_t,`$
$`c|0_t=0,c|n_t=\sqrt{n}|n1_t,c^{}|n_t=\sqrt{n+1}|n+1_t.`$ (58)
Coordinate derivatives are then represented in the standard fashion as

$$\sqrt{2\beta }_w[c^{},.],\sqrt{2\beta }_{\overline{w}}[c,.].$$
(59)
In the case of commutative space-time coordinates there are no smooth soliton solutions with fields taking values in the abelian $`U(1)`$ group or its Lie algebra since then equations (30) and (39) will be linear. For a noncommutative space, though, this is not the case, as has been widely observed in the literature. In order to solve (56) for the $`U(1)`$ case, one may take as $`P`$ simply the projector

$$P_0=|0_t0|_t$$
(60)
onto a one-dimensional subspace of the Fock space $`_t.`$ It is not difficult to see that $`P_0`$ satisfies the condition (56). Thus, configurations (54) with $`P=P_0`$ fulfil equations (30) and (39), respectively.

Let us advance to a one-soliton solution for the group $`U(2)`$. In this situation, we have $`n=2`$, and our $`r=1`$ projector $`P`$ is constructed from a $`2\times 1`$ matrix $`T`$. As a simple case we take

$$T=\left(\begin{array}{c}\lambda \\ c\end{array}\right)\text{with}\lambda \{0\}$$
(61)
and create the projector

$`P=T{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T^{}T}}T^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\lambda \overline{\lambda }}{N+\lambda \overline{\lambda }}& \frac{\lambda }{N+\lambda \overline{\lambda }}c^{}\\ c\frac{\overline{\lambda }}{N+\lambda \overline{\lambda }}& c\frac{1}{N+\lambda \overline{\lambda }}c^{}\end{array}\right)\text{where}N:=c^{}c,`$ (62)
which satisfies (56). Formulae (54) now provide solutions of the field equations (30) and (39).

Energies. As in the commutative case , the model (18) has a conserved energy-momentum density,

$$𝒫_a=(\delta _a^b\delta _0^c\frac{1}{2}\eta _{a0}\eta ^{bc})\mathrm{tr}_b\mathrm{\Phi }^{}_c\mathrm{\Phi },$$
(63)
which yields the energy functional

$`E`$ $`={\displaystyle \text{d}x\text{d}y𝒫_0}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \text{d}x\text{d}y\mathrm{tr}\left(_t\mathrm{\Phi }^{}_t\mathrm{\Phi }+_x\mathrm{\Phi }^{}_x\mathrm{\Phi }+_y\mathrm{\Phi }^{}_y\mathrm{\Phi }\right)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle }\text{d}x\text{d}y\mathrm{tr}[(\overline{\mu }+\overline{\mu }^1)^2_w\mathrm{\Phi }^{}_w\mathrm{\Phi }+(\mu +\mu ^1)^2_{\overline{w}}\mathrm{\Phi }^{}_{\overline{w}}\mathrm{\Phi }`$
$`+(2+\mu \overline{\mu }+\mu ^1\overline{\mu }^1)(_w\mathrm{\Phi }^{}_{\overline{w}}\mathrm{\Phi }+_{\overline{w}}\mathrm{\Phi }^{}_w\mathrm{\Phi })],`$ (64)
where the last expression is valid only for the one-soliton case. The integral is taken over the space-like plane $`t=const`$ and does not depend on $`t`$.

Using (5) and (59) and replacing $`\text{d}x\text{d}y\mathrm{tr}2\pi \theta \text{Tr}2\pi \theta \text{Tr}__t`$, we can calculate the energy (5) of the abelian soliton $`\mathrm{\Phi }=1+\frac{\mu \overline{\mu }}{\overline{\mu }}P_0`$:

$`E(\mu )|_{U\left(1\right)}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\mu \overline{\mu })(\overline{\mu }\mu )(1+\mu \overline{\mu })^2}{(\mu \overline{\mu })^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{4}{i(\mu \overline{\mu }\mu ^1+\overline{\mu }^1)}}2\pi \beta \text{Tr}(_wP_0_{\overline{w}}P_0+_{\overline{w}}P_0_wP_0)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi (\overline{\mu }\mu )(1+\mu \overline{\mu })}{i\mu \overline{\mu }}}\underset{=1}{\underset{}{\text{Tr}[c,P_0][P_0,c^{}]}}=8\pi \gamma \mathrm{sin}^2\phi .`$ (65)
To arrive at the last expression, we have performed the polar decomposition

$$\mu =\alpha e^{i\phi }\text{and defined}\gamma =\frac{1+\alpha ^2}{2\alpha \mathrm{sin}\phi }.$$
(66)
The velocity of the soliton in the $`xy`$ plane is (cf. )

$$(v_x,v_y)=(\frac{2\alpha \mathrm{cos}\phi }{\alpha ^2+1},\frac{\alpha ^21}{\alpha ^2+1}),\text{so that}\gamma ^1=\sqrt{1v_x^2v_y^2}.$$
(67)
We repeat the computation for the $`U(2)`$ soliton built with (62). To this end we differentiate $`\mathrm{\Phi }=1+\frac{\mu \overline{\mu }}{\overline{\mu }}P`$ with the help of (59) and make repeated use of the identities $`f(N)c=cf(N1)`$ and $`c^{}f(N)=f(N1)c^{}`$. Substituting into (5), we obtain

$`E(\mu )|_{U\left(2\right)}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi (\overline{\mu }\mu )(1+\mu \overline{\mu })}{i\mu \overline{\mu }}}\text{Tr}[c,P][P,c^{}]`$
$`=8\pi \gamma \mathrm{sin}^2\phi \text{Tr}\left|\left(\begin{array}{cc}c\frac{\lambda \overline{\lambda }}{(N1+\lambda \overline{\lambda })(N+\lambda \overline{\lambda })}& \frac{\lambda \lambda \overline{\lambda }}{(N+\lambda \overline{\lambda })(N+1+\lambda \overline{\lambda })}\\ cc\frac{\overline{\lambda }}{(N1+\lambda \overline{\lambda })(N+\lambda \overline{\lambda })}& c\frac{\lambda \overline{\lambda }}{(N+\lambda \overline{\lambda })(N+1+\lambda \overline{\lambda })}\end{array}\right)\right|^2`$
$`=8\pi \gamma \mathrm{sin}^2\phi \text{Tr}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{(\lambda \overline{\lambda })^2}{(N+\lambda \overline{\lambda })(N+1+\lambda \overline{\lambda })^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \overline{\lambda }N}{(N1+\lambda \overline{\lambda })(N+\lambda \overline{\lambda })^2}}\right\}`$
$`=8\pi \gamma \mathrm{sin}^2\phi {\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \overline{\lambda }}{(n+\lambda \overline{\lambda })(n+1+\lambda \overline{\lambda })}}=8\pi \gamma \mathrm{sin}^2\phi ,`$ (68)
where some care must be taken for $`|\lambda |=1`$. We see that the energies of the one-soliton solutions for the groups $`U(1)`$ and $`U(2)`$ are finite and depend on the velocity (67) of the solitons. Notice that the energies do not depend on $`\theta `$ and are identical to the commutative result for $`SU(2)`$ .

In order to obtain a solution describing $`m`$ solitons moving with the same velocity one should use in (61) two polynomials in $`c`$ of degree $`m`$. More general multi-soliton solutions featuring relative motion of the individual lumps can be constructed by using $`m`$ different matrices $`T_k`$ and applying formulae (50)-(53) with (48). All these moving solitons have a brane-world interpretation: Since $`m`$-soliton solutions of an effective $`U(n)`$ Yang-Mills-Higgs theory in $`2+1`$ dimensions correspond to $`m`$ $`D0`$-branes inside $`n`$ coincident $`D2`$-branes, we see that our solitons describe $`D0`$-branes moving inside the $`D2`$-branes.

## 6 Solitons in 1+1 and instantons in 2+0 dimensions

Consider the effective field theory on the $`D1`$-brane world volume briefly discussed in section 4. After changing field variables via $`_x\varphi =\mathrm{\Phi }^1_t\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`_t\varphi =\mathrm{\Phi }^1_x\mathrm{\Phi }`$ its equation of motion takes the form

$$_x(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_x\mathrm{\Phi })_t(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_t\mathrm{\Phi })=0.$$
(69)
This is the field equation of the standard sigma model in $`1+1`$ dimensions with the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ taking values in the group $`U(n)`$.

Obviously our choice (8) of the $`B`$-field leads to commutative $`^{1,1}`$, where $`fg=fg`$, and there appears no star product in (69) (nor in (22)). In principle one can turn on a more general $`B`$-field background with nonzero ‘electric’ components $`B_{14}=B_{41}`$. In  this type of field has been considered in much detail, and it was shown that it does not admit a zero-slope limit which produces a field theory on a noncommutative space-time. Thus, open $`N=2`$ strings only yield the sigma model on commutative $`^{1,1}`$. In order to derive solitonic solutions of its equations (22) and (69) one should simply drop the $`y`$ dependence from all formulae of section 5 (i.e. impose $`_y=0`$ on all fields). No additional work is necessary here.

Let us finally have a look at the effective field theory on the Euclidean $`D1`$-brane world volume. It is easy to see that after the field redefinition $`_x\varphi =\mathrm{\Phi }^1_y\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`_y\varphi =\mathrm{\Phi }^1_x\mathrm{\Phi }`$ its equation of motion becomes

$$_x(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_x\mathrm{\Phi })+_y(\mathrm{\Phi }^1_y\mathrm{\Phi })=0.$$
(70)
This equation describes the $`U(n)`$ sigma model on the noncommutative Euclidean space $`^{2,0}`$. It is interesting to note that these equations can be derived by reduction of the noncommutative self-dual Yang-Mills equations on $`^{2,2}`$ but not from their Euclidean variant on $`^{4,0}`$ (cf. ). Solutions of (70) are easily obtained from the solutions in $`2+1`$ dimensions formulated in section 5. One should simply put $`\mu _k=ik`$ in all formulae. Then $`w_k=x+iy=z`$ and $`\overline{w}_k=xiy=\overline{z}`$, i.e. instanton solutions of noncommutative two-dimensional sigma models arise as static solutions of the modified sigma model in $`2+1`$ dimensions. If in (54) we consider projectors of rank one, we get the $`P^n`$ chiral model on a noncommutative plane. Solutions of its field equation were studied in .

Acknowledgements

The work of O.L. and A.D.P. is partially supported by DFG under grant Le 838/7-1. B.S. is grateful to the ‘Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes’ for support.