text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Knots and links are of interest in mathematics and because of their connection to Yang-Baxter relations and solvable models -. Here a link is defined as an embedding of $`n_c`$ circles $`S^1`$ (each forming a component of the link) in $`^3`$, and a knot is the special case $`n_c=1`$ of a link involving one such circle. We shall generally use the notation $`L`$ and $`K`$ for links and knots and $`L`$ when referring to both. A longstanding problem in mathematics has been to reduce the classification of knots and links to an algebraic formulation. Various polynomials have been constructed in an effort to achieve an algebraic classification of knots. Here we shall focus on the Jones polynomial $`V_L(t)`$ . Technically, this is not, in general, a polynomial, since it can involve non-integral powers of its variable $`t`$ and, even in cases where it only involves integral powers, these may be negative. However, $`V_L(t)`$ can always be written as a polynomial in $`t`$ multiplied by a monomial prefactor. With this qualification, we shall follow common usage in referring to $`V_L(t)`$ as a polynomial. Lists of knots and links are given with standard ordering and labelling in, e.g., , and we follow the labelling conventions in this reference. The usual presentation of knots and links involves a projection from the embedding space $`^3`$ to $`^2`$ with resultant apparent crossings of the curves on the one or more embedded $`S^1`$’s. According to standard labelling, $`5_25_2^1`$ denotes the second knot with five crossings in the list, $`6_2^3`$ denotes the second link containing three intertwined components with six crossings, etc. We recall that an alternating link is defined as one in which, as one travels along each of the $`n_c`$ embedded circles $`S^1`$, one traverses a crossing in an overlying manner, then underlying, then overlying, and so forth.

Here we shall calculate Jones polynomials for certain families of knots and, more generally, links with arbitrarily many crossings and analyze certain properties in the limit of infinitely many crossings. An interesting pioneering study of this type has been carried out recently by Wu and Wang . We shall concentrate on alternating links but shall also briefly discuss the non-alternating case. Let us denote the member of a generic family as $`L_r`$, meaning that this has $`r`$ crossings. Other information about the links will be indicated as necessary below but is suppressed here. We introduce the notation for the formal limit $`lim_r\mathrm{}L_r=\{L\}`$. It is also useful to investigate the zeros of the Jones polynomial for classes of links or knots in the complex $`t`$ plane and their accumulation set $``$ in the limit where the number $`r`$ of crossings goes to infinity.

There are several motivations for this study. It is worthwhile to have new exact calculations of Jones polynomials for various families of links; furthermore, the fact that these apply for arbitrarily many crossings enables one to investigate the limit where the number of crossings goes to infinity. As noted above, knots and links are also relevant to physics because of their relation to Yang-Baxter equations. These equations are conditions for (i) transfer matrices of exactly soluble models in statistical mechanics, and (ii) equivalently, $`S`$-matrix elements of relativistic particle scattering in one space and one time dimension, so that these $`S`$ matrix elements factorize, i.e., the $`S`$ matrix an $`nn`$ scattering process factorizes into a product of $`S`$ matrix elements for simple $`22`$ scatterings, without particle production. Indeed, there are well-known connections between Yang-Baxter relations, the braid group, and Temperley-Lieb algebras (e.g., -). As we shall discuss next, there are also useful relations between the Jones polynomial and the Tutte polynomial, or equivalently, the partition function of the Potts model, a valuable model of phase transitions and critical phenomena.

## 2 Some General Results

### 2.1 Connection between Jones and Tutte Polynomials

Our method for calculating the Jones polynomials $`V_L(t)`$ for a given family of alternating links is to compute the Tutte polynomial $`T(G,x,y)`$ for a certain associated graph $`G`$ and then use the fact that $`V_L(t)`$ can be obtained as a special case of the Tutte polynomial for $`x=t`$ and $`y=1/t`$ . To explain this method, we first discuss some background. For a given knot, draw the associated shaded-region diagram. There are two such diagrams. To see this, consider a given crossing, say in the form of an $`\times `$; in one shading, the regions to the left and right of the $`\times `$ are light and those above and below the $`\times `$ are dark. In the other shading, the regions to the left and right are dark while those above and below are light. These two possible shadings are labelled as plus and minus with the following convention: as one exits a given crossing on the curve that is overlying, if the region on the left (right) is shaded, assign $`+`$ ($``$) to this crossing. For a given knot or link $`L`$, the numbers of the $`\pm `$ crossings are denoted $`r_\pm (L)`$. It is easily seen that for an alternating knot, if one crossing on the shaded-region diagram is $`+`$, then all are, and similarly if one crossing is $``$, then all are. We denote the corresponding shaded region diagrams as $`D_+(L)`$ and $`D_{}(L)`$. We denote the numbers of dark ($`d`$) and light ($`\mathrm{}`$) regions in the shaded region diagram $`n_d(D_\pm )`$ and $`n_{\mathrm{}}(D_\pm )`$. Clearly, $`n_d(D_+)=n_{\mathrm{}}(D_{})`$ and $`n_{\mathrm{}}(D_+)=n_d(D_{})`$. From these shaded-region diagrams $`D_\pm (L)`$, one then constructs the associated graphs $`G_+(L)`$ and $`G_{}(L)`$ by assigning vertices to the shaded regions and edges (bonds) connecting these vertices. We recall that a graph $`G=(V,E)`$ is defined by its vertex and edge sets $`V`$ and $`E`$. Strictly speaking, the objects that we are dealing with here are pseudographs, since they can have multiple edges and loops, but we shall continue to call them simply graphs. Let the number of vertices and edges of the graph $`G`$ be denoted $`n(G)=|V|`$ and $`e(G)=|E|`$. Clearly, the total number of crossings is equal to the number of edges of the associated graph:

$$r(L)=e(G_+(L))=e(G_{}(L))$$
(2.1.1)
and the respective numbers of dark (light) regions in the $`D_+`$ ($`D_{}`$) region diagrams is equal to the number of vertices in the associated graphs:

$$n_d(D_+)=n(G_+(L)),n_d(D_{})=n(G_{}(L)).$$
(2.1.2)
Furthermore,

$$G_+(L)=[G_{}(L)]^{}$$
(2.1.3)
i.e., $`G_{}(L)`$ is the (planar) dual of $`G_+(L)`$. (Here, from a planar graph $`G`$, the (planar) dual $`G^{}`$ is constructed by assigning to each face of $`G`$ a vertex and connecting these vertices by edges traversing the edges of $`G`$.) Another standard definition that we will need is the writhe of the knot or link $`L`$, denoted $`w(L)`$. For this we first define another type of sign $`s=\pm `$ for each crossing in a link. For each circle on the link, we consider an orientation, which can be regarded as a direction of motion along the circle. Next, we represent a given crossing as two arrows, one pointing to the upper left and one to the upper right. If the lower-right to upper-left arrow is over (under) the lower-left to upper-right arrow, the sign $`s`$ is $``$ ($`+`$). Denote the total number of crossings with $`s=+`$ ($`s=`$) as $`N_{s_+}`$ ( $`N_s_{}`$), respectively. Then the writhe is

$$w(L)=(+1)N_{s_+}+(1)N_s_{}$$
(2.1.4)
To each knot or link $`K`$ or $`L`$, there corresponds another, which we label as $`R(K)`$ and $`R(L)`$ obtained by reversing all crossings, i.e. replacing an over-under crossing by an under-over crossing, and vice versa. A basic property of the Jones polynomial is that

$$V_L(t)=V_{R(L)}(t^1).$$
(2.1.5)
We next proceed to the relation between the Jones polynomial $`V_L(t)`$ and the Tutte polynomial of the associated graph $`G_+(L)`$ which applies for the case in which $`L`$ is an alternating link or knot. The Tutte polynomial $`T(G,x,y)`$ of a graph $`G`$ (which may include multiple edges and loops) is -

$$T(G,x,y)=\underset{G^{}G}{}(x1)^{k(G^{})k(G)}(y1)^{c(G^{})}$$
(2.1.6)
where $`G^{}`$ is a spanning subgraph of $`G`$, i.e., $`G^{}`$ has the same vertex set and a subset of the edge set, of $`G`$: $`G^{}=(V,E^{})`$ with $`E^{}E`$. In eq. (2.1.6), $`k(G^{})`$, $`e(G^{})=|E^{}|`$, and $`c(G^{})`$ denote the number of components, edges, and (linearly independent) circuits of $`G^{}`$, with the usual relation

$$c(G^{})=e(G^{})+k(G^{})n(G^{})$$
(2.1.7)
where, as above, $`n(G^{})`$ is the number of vertices of $`G^{}`$. The Tutte polynomials of a planar graph $`G`$ and its (planar) dual $`G^{}`$ are related according to

$$T(G,x,y)=T(G^{},y,x).$$
(2.1.8)
The relation between the Jones polynomial $`V_L(t)`$ and the Tutte polynomial of the associated graph $`G_+(L)`$ for an alternating link or knot is then

$$V_L(t)=(1)^wt^{(n_{\mathrm{}}(G_+)n_d(G_+)+3w)/4}T(G_+(L),t,1/t).$$
(2.1.9)
Note that for a link involving an odd number $`n_c`$ of components (circles) and hence, in particular, for a knot, $`n_{\mathrm{}}(G_+)n_d(G_+)+3w`$ is always a multiple of 4, so that $`V_L(t)`$ is a multinomial, i.e., Laurent polynomial, in $`t`$. For a link consisting of an even number $`n_c2`$ of components $`n_{\mathrm{}}(G_+)n_d(G_+)+3w=2`$ mod 4, so that $`V_L(t)`$ is of the form $`V_L(t)=t^qPoly_L(t)`$, where $`q`$ is a positive or negative half-odd-integer.

### 2.2 Some Further Properties

A basic property of the Jones polynomial $`V_L(t)`$ for a link $`L`$ is that

$$V_L(e^{2\pi i/3})=(1)^{n_c}$$
(2.2.1)
where, as before, $`n_c`$ denotes the number of $`S^1`$’s in the link. Since in general, $`V_L(t)`$ (aside from its prefactor) may be a high-order polynomial in $`t`$, this suggests that $`V_L(t)`$ may have a complex-conjugate pair of zeros near to $`t=e^{\pm 2\pi i/3}`$. Indeed, for the special case $`n_c=1`$, i.e., a knot, one has

$$V_K(t)=1(1t)(1t^3)W_K(t)$$
(2.2.2)
where $`W_K(t)`$ is a Laurent polynomial in $`t`$. As shown in , it follows that $`V_K(t)`$ has a complex-conjugate pair of zeros that approach the points

$$t=e^{\pm 2\pi i/3}$$
(2.2.3)
as $`r(K)\mathrm{}`$.

Two other basic properties concern the highest and lowest powers of $`t`$ in $`V_L(t)`$ for an alternating knot or link. To determine these, we first derive the values of the respective maximal degrees of the Tutte polynomial in its variables $`x`$ and $`y`$:

$$\mathrm{max}(\mathrm{deg}_x[T(G,x,y)])=n(G)1$$
(2.2.4)
and

$$\mathrm{max}(\mathrm{deg}_y[T(G,x,y)])=c(G).$$
(2.2.5)
To prove (2.2.4) we maximize the power $`k(G^{})k(G)`$ in the definition (2.1.6). This maximum power is realized for $`G^{}=(V,\mathrm{})`$, i.e., the case where the spanning subgraph has no edges. For the case of interest here, where $`G`$ itself is connected, this power then takes on the maximal value $`n(G)1`$. To prove (2.2.5), we want to maximize the number of circuits in $`G^{}`$. Clearly, $`c(G^{})c(G)`$, so we achieve this maximum number of circuits by taking $`G^{}=G`$.

Then, combining (2.2.4) and (2.2.5) with (2.1.9), we have, for an alternating link (indicating also the sign of $`t`$)

$$\mathrm{max}(\mathrm{deg}[V_L(t)])=(1)^{w(L)+n(G_+(L))1}t^{n(G_+(L))1+(n_{\mathrm{}}(G_+(L))n_d(G_+(L))+3w(L))/4}$$
(2.2.6)
$$\mathrm{min}(\mathrm{deg}[V_L(t)]=(1)^{w(L)c(G_+(L))}t^{c(G_+(L))+(n_{\mathrm{}}(G_+(L))n_d(G_+(L))+3w(L))/4}$$
(2.2.7)
From these results together with the relation (2.1.7), it follows that

$`\mathrm{max}(\mathrm{deg}[V_L(t)])\mathrm{min}(\mathrm{deg}[V_L(t)])`$ $`=`$ $`e(G_+(L))`$ (2.2.8)
$`=`$ $`r(L).`$ (2.2.10)
We can simplify the sign in Eq. (2.2.6). Since $`(1)^{w(L)}=(1)^{r(L)}=(1)^{e(G_+(L))}`$, we have

$$(1)^{w(L)+n(G_+(L))1}=(1)^{n_d(D_{}(L))1}$$
(2.2.11)
which makes use of the Euler relation for a planar graph $`n(G)e(G)+f(G)=2`$, where $`f(G)=v(G^{})`$ is the number of faces of $`G`$, which is also equal to the number of vertices of the planar dual, $`G^{}`$.

### 2.3 Limit of Links with Infinitely Many Crossings

We next define a function

$$U(\{L\},t)=\underset{n(G_+(L))\mathrm{}}{lim}[(1)^{n_d(D_{}(L))1}V_L(t)]^{1/n(G_+(L))}.$$
(2.3.1)
With the multiplicative factor incorporated as indicated, the coefficient of the maximal power of $`t`$ is positive and hence the resultant function is real and positive for large real positive $`t`$. Consequently, among the $`n`$ different $`1/n`$’th roots, one can, with no ambiguity, pick the real positive one, and this is understood in eq. (2.3.1). The largest region in the complex $`t`$ plane to which one can analytically continue the function $`U(\{L\},t)`$ we shall call region $`R_1`$.

We remark that there is a subtlety in the definition (2.3.1) due to the fact that at certain special points $`t=t_s`$ one can encounter the noncommutativity

$$\underset{tt_s}{lim}\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}[V_L(t)]^{1/n}\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\underset{tt_s}{lim}[V_L(t)]^{1/n}$$
(2.3.2)
where $`nn(G_+(L))`$. Denote $`U_{tn}`$ and $`U_{nt}`$ as the functions defined by the different order of limits on the left and right-hand sides of (2.3.2). Here we make the choice

$$U(\{L\},t)U_{tn}(\{L\},t)$$
(2.3.3)
since this has the advantage of removing certain isolated discontinuities that are present in $`U_{nt}`$.

The definition (2.3.1) is analogous to the definition of the exponent of the reduced free energy $`f`$ in statistical mechanics according to

$$e^f=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}Z^{1/n}$$
(2.3.4)
where $`Z`$ is the partition function. Again, in this definition one implicitly takes the real positive $`1/n`$’th root, and there is no ambiguity since for physical values of temperature and external magnetic field, $`Z`$ is real and positive. Another analogy is the ground state degeneracy $`W`$ per site for the Potts antiferromagnet on a graph $`G`$, which can be obtained from the chromatic polynomial $`P(G,q)`$, counting the number of ways of coloring the vertices of a graph $`G`$ subject to the constraint that no two adjacent vertices have the same color. Denoting the formal limit as $`n\mathrm{}`$ of a family of graphs $`G`$ as $`\{G\}`$, we define

$$W(\{G\},q)=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}P(G,q)^{1/n}.$$
(2.3.5)
In  it was noted that at certain special points $`q_s`$ (typically $`q_s=0,1,..,\chi (G)`$, where $`\chi (G)`$ is the chromatic number of the graph $`G`$, i.e. the minimum number of colors necessary for a proper vertex coloring of $`G`$), one has the noncommutativity of limits

$$\underset{qq_s}{lim}\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}P(G,q)^{1/n}\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\underset{qq_s}{lim}P(G,q)^{1/n}$$
(2.3.6)
and hence it is necessary to specify the order of the limits in the definition of $`W(\{G\},q_s)`$ . Denoting $`W_{qn}`$ and $`W_{nq}`$ as the functions defined by the different order of limits on the left and right-hand sides of (2.3.6), the choice $`WW_{qn}`$ was made in  and subsequent our works since this has the advantage of removing certain isolated discontinuities that are present in $`W_{nq}`$. For a given family of graphs $`G`$, and for sufficiently large real positive $`q`$, $`P(G,q)`$ is real and positive, so again one can choose, without any ambiguity, the real positive $`1/n`$’th root in (2.3.5). In  the largest region in the complex $`q`$ plane to which one can analytically continue the function $`W(\{G\},q)`$ from the real positive axis for large $`q`$ was denoted as $`R_1`$. Just as $`W(\{G\},q)`$ is analytic in certain regions of the complex $`q`$ plane, $`U(\{L\},t)`$ is analytic in certain regions of the complex $`t`$ plane. And just as was true for $`W`$, in regions other than $`R_1`$, $`V_L(t)`$ can be negative or complex, hence there is no canonical choice of the phase to take in evaluating the $`1/n`$’th root in (2.3.1), and only the magnitude $`|U(\{L\},t)|`$ can be determined unambiguously.

The continuous locus where $`U(\{L\},t)`$ is nonanalytic, called $``$, arises as the continuous accumulation set of the zeros of $`V_L(t)`$. A pioneering discussion of this type of accumulation of zeros to form non-analytic boundaries for a model in statistical physics was given by Yang and Lee  for the zeros of the Ising model partition function as a function of the complex variable $`\mu =e^{2\beta H}`$, where $`\beta =(k_BT)^1`$, $`T`$ is the temperature, and $`H`$ is the external magnetic field. A second example is the zeros of a spin model partition function in the complex variable $`a^K`$, where $`K=\beta J`$ and $`J`$ is a spin-spin exchange coupling . A more complicated example is provided by the study of the zeros and their accumulation set in the $`^2`$ space defined by $`(a,\mu )`$ .

### 2.4 Connection with Potts Model Partition Function

It is useful to observe that the Tutte polynomial of a graph is essentially equivalent to the partition function of the Potts model on this graph (for a review of the Potts model, see ). We recall that on $`G`$ (often taken to be a regular lattice in physics) at temperature $`T`$ the Potts model is defined by the partition function

$$Z(G,q,v)=\underset{\{\sigma _n\}}{}e^\beta $$
(2.4.1)
with the (zero-field) Hamiltonian

$$=J\underset{ij}{}\delta _{\sigma _i\sigma _j}$$
(2.4.2)
where $`\sigma _i=1,\mathrm{},q`$ are the spin variables on each vertex $`iG`$; $`\beta =(k_BT)^1`$; and $`ij`$ denotes pairs of adjacent vertices, and again with $`K=\beta J`$,

$$v=e^K1.$$
(2.4.3)
This function $`Z(G,q,v)`$ can be written as the sum

$`Z(G,q,v)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{G^{}G}{}}q^{k(G^{})}v^{e(G^{})}`$ (2.4.4)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{r=k(G)}{\overset{n(G)}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s=0}{\overset{e(G)}{}}}z_{rs}q^rv^s.`$ (2.4.7)
This formula allows one to generalize the definition of the Potts model from $`q_+`$ to $`q`$ and from the real physical range $`1v<\mathrm{}`$ to $`v`$. Now let

$$x=1+\frac{q}{v}$$
(2.4.8)
and

$$y=v+1$$
(2.4.9)
so that

$$q=(x1)(y1).$$
(2.4.10)
Then the Tutte polynomial and Potts model are related according to

$$Z(G,q,v)=(x1)^{k(G)}(y1)^{n(G)}T(G,x,y).$$
(2.4.11)
Another relation concerns the chromatic polynomial $`P(G,q)`$, which counts the number of ways of coloring the vertices of $`G`$ subject to the condition that no two adjacent vertices have the same color . This is identical to the partition function of the Potts antiferromagnet at $`T=0`$, i.e., $`v=1`$:

$$P(G,q)=Z(G,q,1)$$
(2.4.12)
or, equivalently,

$$P(G,q)=(q)^{k(G)}(1)^{n(G)}T(G,1q,0).$$
(2.4.13)
Thus, via the connection to the Tutte polynomial or Potts model partition function, one sees that the study of the zeros of the Jones polynomial is related to studies of complex-temperature zeros of Ising and Potts models , -, to studies of zeros in complex $`q`$ of chromatic polynomials (e.g., -,), and the studies of zeros of Potts model partition functions in the $`𝒞^2`$ space spanned by $`(q,v)`$ -, .

It will be convenient to recall some definitions from graph theory. The circuit graph $`C_n`$ is the graph of $`n`$ vertices connected with edges to form a circle. The (planar) dual of this graph is called the fat link, $`FL_n`$, and consists of two vertices with $`n`$ edges connecting them. The join $`G+H`$ of two graphs $`G`$ and $`H`$ is the graph formed by connecting each vertex of $`G`$ to all of the vertices of $`H`$. The wheel graph $`(Wh)_n`$ is the join of a single vertex with the circuit graph $`C_{n1}`$. Note that the wheel graph is self-dual: $`(Wh)_n^{}=(Wh)_n`$. The degree of a vertex is the number of edges that connect to it. A homeomorphic expansion (= inflation) of a graph $`G`$ is obtained by inserting one or more degree-2 vertices to edges of $`G`$. Given a graph, the homeomorphic expansion of this graph is another graph. The inverse operation, homeomorphic reduction, consists in removing one or more degree-2 vertices from a graph. This can take one out of the class of proper graphs by resulting in a multigraph; for example, the homeomorphic reduction of $`C_3`$ is the multigraph $`C_2`$.

## 3 A Structural Theorem for $`V_L(t)`$

We next derive a basic theorem which will be important for our further analysis. It was proved in  that the Tutte polynomial for a recursive graph consisting of $`m`$ repetitions of some basic subgraph can be written in the form

$$T(G,x,y)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N_{T,G,\lambda }}{}}c_{G,j}(\lambda _{G,j})^m$$
(3.1)
where the coefficients $`c_{G,j}`$ and the terms $`\lambda _{G,j}`$ depend on the type of graph but not on $`m`$. It follows from this and the relation (2.1.9) for alternating links that the Jones polynomial for links $`L`$ whose associated graphs $`G_\pm (L)`$ are recursive has the same type of form,

$$V_L(t)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N_{L,\lambda }}{}}c_{L,j}(\lambda _{L,j})^m$$
(3.2)
where

$$N_{L,\lambda }N_{T,G_+(L),\lambda }.$$
(3.3)
The inequality is used here because when one sets $`x=t`$ and $`y=1/t`$, some $`\lambda _{G,j}(x,y)`$’s may become identically equal or may vanish. There is one case that we have considered where $`N_{T,\lambda }=10`$ but when one sets $`x=1/y=t`$, two of the $`\lambda _{T,j}`$’s become equal, so that $`N_{L,\lambda }=9`$. However, for all of the families discussed here, (3.3) is realized as an equality. A term $`\lambda _{L,j}`$ is dominant if its magnitude $`|\lambda _{L,j}|`$ is greater than the magnitudes of other terms $`\lambda _{L,j^{}}`$ occurring in (3.2). This definition is motivated by the fact that in a given region of the complex $`t`$ plane, as $`m`$ gets large, the $`\lambda _{L,j}`$ with largest magnitude dominates the sum to a greater and greater extent. Thus, the continuous locus $``$ where $`U_L(t)`$ is nonanalytic occurs where there is a switching between dominant terms $`\lambda _{L,j}`$ as one moves throughout the complex $`t`$ plane. This locus, i.e. the set of curves and possible line segments, arises as the continuous accumulation set of the zeros of $`V_L(t)`$. This is evident also in the work of . There are also discrete points on the accumulation set, at $`t=e^{\pm 2\pi i/3}`$ .

## 4 The Family of Knots $`A_n`$ with $`G_+(A_n)=D1C_{n1}`$

Let us define the (multi)graph $`D1C_n`$ as the result of doubling one edge (denoted as $`D1`$) of the circuit graph $`C_n`$. Note that $`D1C_2=FL_3`$. These multigraphs are associated with a certain family of knots. We have found this association by observing a number of special cases and then generalizing this correspondence. Specifically, we observe that

$$G_+(3_1)=D1C_2$$
(4.1)
$$G_+(4_1)=D1C_3$$
(4.2)
$$G_+(5_2)=D1C_4$$
(4.3)
and

$$G_+(6_1)=D1C_5.$$
(4.4)
We generalize this to a family of knots with $`r`$ crossings, denoted $`A_n`$ with the property that

$$G_+(A_n)=D1C_{n1}$$
(4.5)
Thus, $`A_3=3_1`$, $`A_4=4_1`$, $`A_5=5_2`$, $`A_6=6_1`$, etc. As an example, we show in Fig. 1 a picture of the knot $`A_9`$, which is $`9_2`$ in the standard list. Higher members of this family are obtained by adding more twists to the bottom part of the knot, keeping the entwinement in the upper central part the same.

The knot $`A_n`$ has writhe

$$w(A_n)=\{\begin{array}{cc}n\hfill & \text{if }n\text{ is odd}\hfill \\ 4n\hfill & \text{if }n\text{ is even}\hfill \end{array}.$$
(4.6)
The shaded diagram $`D_+`$ corresponding to this knot has

$$n_d(D_+(A_n))=n1$$
(4.7)
dark regions and

$$n_{\mathrm{}}(D_+(A_n))=3$$
(4.8)
light regions.

We calculate the Jones polynomial for this family of knots by first calculating the Tutte polynomial for the graph $`D1C_n`$. We find

$`T(D1C_n,x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`(1+y)\left[y+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n2}{}}}x^j\right]+x^{n1}`$ (4.9)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(x1)}}\left[(1+y)(xyxy)+(x+y)x^{n1}\right].`$ (4.11)
Using the relation (2.1.9), we then have

$$V_{A_n}(t)=\frac{t^k}{(1+t)}\left[(1+t^2)+(1t^1)(1+t+t^1)(t)^{1n}\right]$$
(4.12)
where

$$k=\{\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & \text{if }n\text{ is odd}\hfill \\ 3\hfill & \text{if }n\text{ is even}\hfill \end{array}.$$
(4.13)
This is of the form (3.2) with $`N_{L,\lambda }=2`$, the terms

$$\lambda _{A_n,1}=1$$
(4.14)
$$\lambda _{A_n,2}=t^1$$
(4.15)
and the corresponding coefficients

$$c_{A_n,1}=\frac{t^k(1+t^2)}{1+t}$$
(4.16)
$$c_{A_n,2}=\frac{t^k(1t)(1+t+t^1)}{1+t}.$$
(4.17)
Our formula (4.12) contains as special cases the known results for

$$V_{A_3}(t)=t^4(1+t+t^3)$$
(4.18)
$$V_{A_4}(t)=t^2(1t+t^2t^3+t^4)$$
(4.19)
and so forth for higher $`A_n`$.

In the limit $`n\mathrm{}`$, the continuous accumulation set $``$ of the zeros of $`V_{A_n}(t)`$ is the solution of the degeneracy equation $`|t|=1`$, i.e., the unit circle in the complex $`t`$ plane. We find that the density of the zeros on this circle is uniform. Evidently, this locus separates the $`t`$ plane into two regions. Note that for this family, the discrete points given in eq. (2.2.3) lie on the continuous accumulation set. We denote the region exterior to this circle, i.e., $`|t|>1`$ as $`R_1`$ and the interior of the circle, $`|t|<1`$ as region $`R_2`$. In region $`R_1`$, $`\lambda _{A_n,1}`$ is dominant and

$$U(\{A\},t)=1\mathrm{for}tR_1.$$
(4.20)
Thus, as $`t\mathrm{}`$, $`U`$ is a constant. For other families of links, we find that $`U`$ can increase in magnitude without bound as $`t\mathrm{}`$. In region $`R_2`$, $`\lambda _{A_n,2}`$ is dominant and

$$|U(\{A\},t)|=\frac{1}{|t|}\mathrm{for}tR_2.$$
(4.21)
$`|U(\{A\},t)|`$ diverges like $`1/|t|`$ as $`t0`$. Indeed, we find that for each of the families of links that we have considered, $`U`$ diverges as $`t0`$ (with the power depending on the family).

## 5 Families of Knots and Links $`B_n`$ with $`G_+(B_n)=(Wh)_n`$

We observe that a number of knots and links yield wheel graphs as their associated graphs. Specifically, we find that

$$G_+(4_1)=(Wh)_3=D1C_3$$
(5.1)
$$G_+(6_2^3)=(Wh)_4$$
(5.2)
and

$$G_+(8_{18})=(Wh)_5$$
(5.3)
A picture of the knot $`8_{18}`$ is shown in Fig. 3. We generalize this to the family $`B_n`$ of links with $`G_+(B_n)=(Wh)_n`$. The links in this family always have an even number of crossings, $`r(B_n)`$. This family has

$$n(G_+(B_n))n=\frac{r(B_n)}{2}+1$$
(5.4)
$$n_d(D_+(B_n))=n_{\mathrm{}}(D_+(B_n))$$
(5.5)
and

$$w(B_n)=0.$$
(5.6)
For the Tutte polynomial of the wheel graph $`(Wh)_n`$ we find, in the notation of (3.1), $`N_\lambda =3`$ and, with $`m=n1`$,

$$\lambda _{Wht,1}=1$$
(5.7)
$$\lambda _{Wht,(2,3)}=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+x+y\pm \left[(1+x+y)^24xy\right]^{1/2}\right]$$
(5.8)
$$c_{Wht,1}=q2=xyxy1$$
(5.9)
and

$$c_{Wht,j}=1\mathrm{for}j=2,3$$
(5.10)
so that

$$T((Wh)_n,x,y)=xyxy1+(\lambda _{Wht,2})^{n1}+(\lambda _{Wht,3})^{n1}.$$
(5.11)
Using the relation (2.1.9), we have

$$V_{B_n}(t)=t+t^1+(\lambda _{Wh,2})^{n1}+(\lambda _{Wh,3})^{n1}$$
(5.12)
where

$$\lambda _{Wh,(2,3)}=\frac{1}{2}\left[1tt^1\pm \left[12(t+t^1)+t^2+t^2\right]^{1/2}\right].$$
(5.13)
Note the symmetry

$$V_{B_n}(t)=V_{B_n}(t^1)$$
(5.14)
which follows from the self-dual property of the wheel graphs and the symmetry (2.1.8) of the Tutte polynomial. Our general formula subsumes the following special cases for $`B_3=4_1`$, $`B_5=8_{18}`$:

$$V_{B_3}=t^2(1t+t^2t^3+t^4)$$
(5.15)
$$V_{B_5}=t^4(14t+6t^27t^3+9t^47t^5+6t^64t^7+t^8).$$
(5.16)
The locus $``$ is determined by the degeneracy of leading $`\lambda `$’s, in this case simply by $`|\lambda _{Wh,2}|=|\lambda _{Wh,3}|`$ and consists of the union of an arc of the unit circle with a line segment on the positive real axis as shown in Fig. 4:

$$:\{t=e^{i\theta },\frac{2\pi }{3}\theta \frac{2\pi }{3}\}\{\frac{3\sqrt{5}}{2}t\frac{3+\sqrt{5}}{2}\}.$$
(5.17)
Numerically, $`(3\sqrt{5})/2=0.381966\mathrm{}`$ and $`(3+\sqrt{5})/2=2.61803\mathrm{}`$ The four endpoints of $``$ occur where the numerator of the function in the square root, $`12tt^22t^3+t^4=(t^2+t+1)(t^23t+1)`$ vanishes. Note that the endpoints of the circular arc occur precisely at the special points in eq. (2.2.3). Evidently, the locus $``$ does not separate the $`t`$ plane into different regions. On the positive real axis for $`t>(3+\sqrt{5})/2`$, the dominant term is $`\lambda _{Wh,3}`$ and hence

$$U(\{B\},t)=\lambda _{Wh,3}.$$
(5.18)
This expression applies throughout the complex $`t`$ plane, taking account of the fact that the sign of the square root reverses when one passes across the branch cut associated with this square root, which is the same here as the locus $``$. Thus, in the vicinity of the origin, the dominant term is $`\lambda _{Wh,3}`$ and $`U(\{B\},t)`$ diverges like $`t^1`$ as $`t0`$. As $`t\mathrm{}`$, $`U`$ again diverges, like $`t`$.

## 6 Family of Links $`E_n`$ with $`G_+(E_n)=H_{3,n}`$

In earlier work on continuous accumulation sets $``$ of zeros of chromatic polynomials as the number of vertices of a graph in some family goes to infinity, a certain family of graphs called “hammock” graphs were studied  and it was shown that the locus $``$ for these graphs was noncompact in the $`q`$ plane, i.e. passed through the origin of the $`1/q`$ plane. Thus, the zeros of the chromatic polynomials for these graphs have magnitudes that are unbounded as one takes the number of vertices to infinity . The hammock graph $`H_{k,\mathrm{}}`$ is defined as follows: start with two end vertices and connect these together by $`\mathrm{}`$ “ropes”, each consisting of $`k`$ vertices, counting the end vertices. The dual of the graph $`H_{3,\mathrm{}}`$ is a multigraph which we denote $`DC_{\mathrm{}}`$:

$$(H_{3,\mathrm{}})^{}=DC_{\mathrm{}}.$$
(6.1)
Here, $`DC_{\mathrm{}}`$ is the multigraph obtained by starting with a circuit graph and doubling each edge. Note that $`DC_2=FL_4`$ and $`FL_4^{}=C_4=H_{3,2}`$. We calculate the correspondences

$$G_+(4_1^2)=DC_2,i.e.,G_{}(4_1^2)=H_{3,2}$$
(6.2)
$$G_+(6_1^3)=H_{3,3},i.e.,G_{}(6_1^3)=DC_3$$
(6.3)
$$G_+(8_1^4)=H_{3,4},i.e.,G_{}(8_1^4)=DC_4.$$
(6.4)
We denote $`E_2=R(4_1^2)`$, $`E_3=6_1^3`$, and $`E_4=8_1^4`$ and generalize this to the family of links $`E_n`$ with the property

$$G_+(E_n)=H_{3,n},i.e.,G_{}(E_n)=DC_n.$$
(6.5)
The links in this family always have an even number $`r(E_n)`$ of crossings. We note that the number of vertices in the associated graph, $`|V(G_+(E_n))|`$, is given by

$$|V(G_+(E_n))|=\frac{r(E_n)}{2}+2=n+2.$$
(6.6)
In Fig. 5 we show a picture of the knot $`8_1^4`$ as an example of this family.

The family $`E_n`$ has

$$n_d(D_+(E_n))=n+2$$
(6.7)
$$n_{\mathrm{}}(D_+(E_n))=n.$$
(6.8)
For a link containing $`n_c2`$ intertwined components (in contrast to a knot), the writhe depends on the orientations chosen for these components (circles) and we follow the convention that for a given link $`L`$, $`[L]_1`$ refers to the choice of orientations with the smallest value of the writhe, $`[L]_2`$ to the next smallest, and so forth. With an appropriate convention, we have

$$w([E_n]_1)=2n.$$
(6.9)
For the Tutte polynomial for the hammock graph $`H_{3,n}`$ we find $`N_{T,\lambda }=2`$ and

$$T(H_{3,n},x,y)=\frac{1}{(y1)}\left[(xyxy)(1+x)^n+(x+y)^n\right].$$
(6.10)
Using the relation (2.1.9), we find

$$V_{E_n}(t)=\frac{t^{1/2}}{1+t}\left[(1+t+t^1)\left(\frac{1t}{t^{3/2}}\right)^n+(1)^n\left(\frac{t+t^1}{t^{3/2}}\right)^n\right].$$
(6.11)
This is of the form (3.2) with the terms

$$\lambda _{E_n,1}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}(1+t^1)$$
(6.12)
$$\lambda _{E_n,2}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}(1+t^2)$$
(6.13)
and corresponding coefficients

$$c_{E_n,1}=\frac{t^{1/2}(1+t+t^1)}{(1+t)}$$
(6.14)
$$c_{E_n,2}=\frac{t^{1/2}}{1+t}.$$
(6.15)
This yields the special cases

$$V_{[R(4_1^2)]_1}(t)=t^{9/2}(1t^2+t^3t^4)$$
(6.16)
$$V_{[6_1^3]_1}(t)=t^7(1t+3t^2t^3+3t^42t^5+t^6).$$
(6.17)
The continuous locus $``$ is determined by the degeneracy of magnitudes $`|1+t^1|=|1+t^2|`$. Let us introduce polar coordinates

$$t=re^{i\theta }$$
(6.18)
The locus $``$ is described by the equation

$$1+\frac{1}{r^2}+2r\mathrm{cos}\theta +2\mathrm{cos}(2\theta )=0$$
(6.19)
i.e.,

$$\mathrm{cos}\theta =\frac{1}{4}\left[r+\left(r^2+12\frac{4}{r^2}\right)^{1/2}\right].$$
(6.20)
This curve passes through $`t=1`$, crosses the imaginary axis at $`t=\pm \frac{i}{\sqrt{3}}`$, passes into the $`Re(t)>0`$ half-plane, then bends back toward the imaginary axis and extends upward and downward to $`\pm i\mathrm{}`$. Asymptotically,

$$\mathrm{cos}\theta =\frac{3}{2r}+O(\frac{1}{r^3})\mathrm{as}r\mathrm{}.$$
(6.21)
A portion of this curve is shown in Fig. 6. Thus, the locus $``$ is noncompact in the $`t`$ plane, and this family of knots shows that the zeros of Jones polynomials have magnitudes that are not necessarily bounded. In Fig. 6 we show $``$ in the $`t`$ plane together with zeros calculated for a link with $`n=42`$ crossings. These zeros lie close to the asymptotic locus $``$ but, as expected for finite $`n`$, do not continue to track near it as it extends arbitrary far from the origin. This is similar to the behavior that was found for the comparison of the location of chromatic zeros and their asymptotic accumulation set for families of graphs where this set was unbounded . Another noteworthy feature of the locus $``$ for this family is that it does not cross the positive real $`t`$ axis, thereby showing that this is not a necessary property of such a locus. Evidently, the locus $``$ divides the $`t`$ plane into two different regions. For this family the special discrete points on the accumulation set at the values given in eq. (2.2.3) are separate from the continuous accumulation set $``$.

In the respective regions $`R_1`$ and $`R_2`$ to the right and left of $``$, $`\lambda _{E_n,2}`$ and $`\lambda _{E_n,1}`$ are dominant, so that

$$U(\{E\},t)=\lambda _{E_n,2}\mathrm{for}tR_1$$
(6.22)
$$|U(\{E\},t)|=|\lambda _{E_n,1}|\mathrm{for}tR_2$$
(6.23)
$`U(\{E\},t)`$ diverges like $`t^{5/2}`$ as $`t0`$ and vanishes like $`t^{1/2}`$ as $`t\mathrm{}`$.

In the $`s=1/t`$ plane, the image of $``$ is compact, forming a closed curve passing through $`s=1`$ and $`s=0`$. Using the relation (2.1.5), it follows that the image of $``$ in the $`s`$ plane is identical to the locus $``$ for the family $`R(\{E\})`$ in the $`t`$ plane. We show this in Fig. 7.

## 7 Families of Knots $`F_n`$ with $`G(F_n)=HW_n`$

We define the graph $`HW_n`$ as the graph obtained by starting with the wheel graph $`(Wh)_m`$ and performing a single homeomorphic expansion on each edge forming a spoke of the wheel, where, as a result,

$$n=2m+1$$
(7.1)
is necessarily odd. We observe the correspondences $`G_+(6_1)=HW_5`$ and generalize this to a family of knots $`F_n`$ with

$$G(F_n)=HW_n.$$
(7.2)
Thus, the next member of the family beyond $`F_5=6_1`$ is $`F_7=9_{41}`$, and so forth for higher members. An example of this family is shown in Fig. 8.

The knot $`F_n`$ has writhe

$$w(F_n)=\frac{(n1)}{2}.$$
(7.3)
The shaded diagram $`D_+`$ corresponding to this knot has

$$n_d(D_+(F_n))=n$$
(7.4)
dark regions and

$$n_{\mathrm{}}(D_+(F_n))=\frac{n+1}{2}$$
(7.5)
light regions.

We calculate the Jones polynomial for this family of knots by first calculating the Tutte polynomial for the graph $`HW_n`$. We find

$$T(HW_n,x,y)=(xyxy1)(x+1)^m+\lambda _{HW,1}^m+\lambda _{HW,2}^m$$
(7.6)
where $`m=(n1)/2`$ as given by eq. (7.1) and

$$\lambda _{HW,(1,2)}=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+2x+x^2+y\pm \left[(1+2x+x^2+y)^24x(x+1)(x+y)\right]^{1/2}\right]$$
(7.7)
Using the relation (2.1.9), we then have

$$V_{F_n}(t)=1+(t+t^1)(1t^1)^m+(t^2t^1+1t)^m$$
(7.8)
This is of the form (3.2) with $`N_{L,\lambda }=3`$, with the terms

$$\lambda _{F_n,1}=1$$
(7.9)
$$\lambda _{F_n,2}=1t^1$$
(7.10)
$$\lambda _{F_n,3}=t^2t^1+1t$$
(7.11)
and the corresponding coefficients

$$c_{F_n,1}=1$$
(7.12)
$$c_{F_n,2}=t+t^1$$
(7.13)
and

$$c_{F_n,3}=1.$$
(7.14)
Our formula (7.8) contains as special cases the known results for

$$V_{F_5}(t)=t^4(1t+t^22t^3+2t^4t^5+t^6)$$
(7.15)
$$V_{F_7}(t)=t^6(13t+5t^27t^3+8t^48t^5+8t^65t^7+3t^8t^9)$$
(7.16)
and so forth for higher $`F_n`$.

From these results, we have then calculated the zeros of $`V_{F_n}(t)`$ and the singular locus $``$, which is shown in Fig. 9. This locus divides the $`t`$ plane into six regions, of which two are self-conjugate and the other four comprise two complex-conjugate pairs. The two special points (2.2.3) lie on two of the ovals comprising the locus $``$. The right-hand oval is the solution to the degeneracy equation $`|\lambda _{F_n,1}|=|\lambda _{F_n,3}|`$; in the region $`R_1`$ outside of this oval, $`\lambda _{F_n,3}`$ is dominant, while inside the oval, in a region that we denote as $`R_2`$, $`\lambda _{F_n,1}`$ is dominant. The large upper and lower ovals are, apart from the small bubble regions, the solution to the equation $`|\lambda _{F_n,2}|=|\lambda _{F_n,3}|`$ and in the interior of these large ovals, which we call regions $`R_3`$ and $`R_3^{}`$, $`\lambda _{F_n,2}`$ is dominant. Finally, in the small bubble phases on the lower (upper) right part of the upper (lower) oval, which we denote $`R_4`$ and $`R_4^{}`$, $`\lambda _{F_n,1}`$ is dominant. We thus have

$$U(\{F\},t)=(\lambda _{F_n,3})^{1/2}\mathrm{for}tR_1$$
(7.17)
$$|U(\{F\},t)|=|\lambda _{F_n,1}|^{1/2}=1\mathrm{for}tR_2,R_4,R_4^{}$$
(7.18)
$$|U(\{F\},t)|=|\lambda _{F_n,2}|^{1/2}\mathrm{for}tR_3,R_3^{}$$
(7.19)
$`|U(\{F\},t)|`$ diverges like $`|t|^1`$ as $`t0`$. The locus $``$ intersects the real axis at the two points $`0.6823278\mathrm{}`$ and $`1.754877\mathrm{}`$ (solutions of the cubic degeneracy equations given above). As $`t\mathrm{}`$, $`U`$ diverges like $`t^{1/2}`$. Thus, the behavior of $`U`$ for large positive real $`t`$ varies widely among the families of links that we have studied, ranging from vanishing, to being a constant, to diverging.

## 8 $`V_L(t)`$ for non-alternating links

For a non-alternating knot or link, one does not have a simple relation between the Jones polynomial $`V_L(t)`$ and the Tutte polynomial as given in eq. (2.1.9). In this case, there are two types of edges, $`e_\pm (G)`$, in the associated graph instead of just one type of edge as in the case of an alternating link. In general, the Jones polynomial for any link can be expressed in term of Potts model partition function  as

$$V_L(t)=q^{1/2}(t^{3/4})^wZ(W_+,W_{})$$
(8.1)
where

$$W_\pm (a,b)=A_\pm (1+v_\pm \delta _{ab})$$
(8.2)
and

$$v_\pm =e^{K_\pm }1.$$
(8.3)
The definition of $`Z(W_+,W_{})`$ related to the usual $`Z(G,q,v_\pm )`$ by

$$Z(W_+,W_{})=A_+^{e_+(G)}A_{}^{e_{}(G)}q^{n(G)/2}Z(G,q,v_\pm )$$
(8.4)
where $`n(G)`$ is the total vertex umber of the associated graph. To satisfy all three Reidemeister moves, we have to set $`A_\pm =t^{\pm 1/4}`$, $`v_\pm =(1+t^{})`$, and $`q=t+2+1/t`$. For alternating links, all the edges are either $`+`$ type or $``$ type. Here we have $`K_+=K_{}`$, which means that we have both positive and negative spin-spin interaction with the same magnitude. The relation between $`v_+`$ and $`v_{}`$ is that

$$v_\pm =\frac{v_{}}{1+v_{}}$$
(8.5)
Therefore, we have to modify eq. (2.4.4) to be

$$Z(G,q,v_{})=\underset{G^{}G}{}q^{k(G^{})}v_{}^{e(G^{})}(\frac{1}{1+v_{}})^{e_+(G^{})}$$
(8.6)
or

$$Z(G,q,v_+)=\underset{G^{}G}{}q^{k(G^{})}v_+^{e(G^{})}(\frac{1}{1+v_+})^{e_{}(G^{})}$$
(8.7)
where $`e_\pm (G^{})`$ is the number of plus (minus) type edges in $`G^{}`$. Equivalently, we have

$$T(G_{na},x,y)=\underset{G^{}G}{}(x1)^{k(G^{})k(G)}(y1)^{c(G^{})}(\frac{1}{y})^{e^{}(G^{})}$$
(8.8)
where $`e^{}(G^{})`$ is the number of plus type edges in $`G^{}`$ if $`y=t`$, and the number of minus type edges in $`G^{}`$ if $`y=1/t`$. Without loss of generality, consider the associated graph $`G`$ such that the majority of its edges are plus type. If all vertices of $`G`$ are connected by at least one of the plus edges, which can be achieved most of the time by performing the type III Reidemeister move, one can rewrite eq. (8.8) as

$$T(G_{na},x,y)=\underset{\{e_{}\}}{}\mathrm{\Delta }T(G_{\{e_{}\}},x,y)(\frac{1}{y})^e_{}$$
(8.9)
where we sum all possible minus type edge set $`\{e_{}\}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }T(G_{\{e_{}\}},x,y)`$ is the difference of Tutte polynomials for the graph with and without a particular edge set $`\{e_{}\}`$. Combining eqs. (2.4.11), (8.1), and (8.4), we have

$`V(t)_{na}`$ $`=`$ $`(t^{3/4})^wt^{(22n(G)+e_+(G)e_{}(G))/4}T(G_{na},t,1/t)`$ (8.10)
$`=`$ $`(t^{3/4})^wt^{(2+2n(G)+e_+(G)e_{}(G))/4}T(G_{na},1/t,t).`$ (8.12)
Another way to deal with non-alternating knots or links is even simpler and makes use of the skein relation for the Jones polynomial,

$$\frac{1}{t}V_{L_+}(t)tV_L_{}(t)=[\sqrt{(}t)\frac{1}{\sqrt{(}t)}]V_{L_0}(t)$$
(8.13)
where the associated graph for $`L_0`$ corresponds to (i) the graph with a contraction of the edge considered if the definition of $`\pm `$ crossings is the same for the oriented links and that for the shading, and (ii) the graph with a deletion operation performed on this edge if these two definitions are different. The Jones polynomial can be obtained by using this relation to flip the sign of the crossings until all the graphs become alternating, after which one can apply eq. (2.1.9).

## 9 A Remark on Computational Complexity

The question of the computational complexity associated with determining basic properties of knots and links, i.e., roughly speaking, the number of steps needed to obtain this information, is a subject of considerable interest in pure and applied mathematics and computer science (e.g., ). Recently, for example, an upper bound has been given for the number of Reidemeister moves (RM) needed to transform the unknot to a circle with no crossings, where the unknot is defined as the trivial knot . This bound is of the form $`N_{RM}2^{c_1r}`$, where, as before, $`r`$ is the number of crossings and $`c_1`$ is a certain (large) constant. We would like to point out here that for the families of knots and links for which we have calculated the Jones polynomial $`V_L(t)`$, our method, using the intermediate step of computing the Tutte polynomial of the associated graph $`G_+(L)`$, requires a polynomial, rather than exponential number of steps. Specifically, we use the standard iterative use of the deletion-contraction theorem for the Tutte polynomial. This difference in computational complexity is quite similar to the situation for the Potts model partition function: a formal evaluation of the sum over states for this model on an arbitrary graph involves exponentially many steps since there are exponentially many spin configurations. However, by means of the transfer matrix method or the related iterated deletion-contraction theorem for the equivalent Tutte polynomial, one can, for specific families of graphs, carry out the evaluation in a polynomial number of steps, since the partition function is just the trace of a power of the transfer matrix.

Acknowledgment: We would like to thank Prof. F. Y. Wu for suggesting this line of investigation and for giving us a copy of  prior to publication. This research was supported in part by the NSF grant PHY-9722101.


format: text

text:
# References

The effect of vacuum polarisation on muon-proton scattering at small energies and angles

A. Gashia, G. Raschea, W.S. Woolcockb

aInstitut für Theoretische Physik der Universität,
Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Zürich, Switzerland
b Department of Theoretical Physics, IAS,
The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia

We give a compact expression for the unpolarised differential cross section for muon-proton scattering in the one photon exchange approximation. The effect of adding the vacuum polarisation amplitude to the no-spin-flip amplitude for one photon exchange is calculated at small energies and scattering angles and is found to be negligible for present experiments.

PACS numbers: 13.60

Keywords: $`\mu p`$ elastic scattering, $`\mu p`$ vacuum polarisation, $`\pi N`$ scattering.

Corresponding author. Electronic mail: rasche@physik.unizh.ch; Tel: +41 1 635 5810; Fax: +41 1 635 5704

A group at TRIUMF is currently running an experiment to measure the differential cross sections for $`\pi ^+p`$ and $`\pi ^{}p`$ elastic scattering at small energies(pion laboratory kinetic energy in the range 20 MeV to 60 MeV) and at small angles (from $`2^{}`$ to $`30^{}`$) . To fix the absolute values of the desired cross sections accurately, simultaneous measurements are being made of the cross sections for muon-proton scattering. This cross section is given to a very good approximation by calculating it using the one photon exchange ($`1\gamma E`$) amplitude. Two photon exchange diagrams can certainly be ignored, but at the small energies and angles at which the experiments are being done it is necessary to check whether the inclusion of vacuum polarisation makes a change to the results obtained using the $`1\gamma E`$ approximation that needs to be taken into account in the present experiment. This note reports the results of our calculations of this effect.

It turns out that the correct formula for the unpolarised differential cross section (average over initial spins, sum over final spins) for muon-proton scattering in the $`1\gamma E`$ approximation is not readily accessible in the literature; an unnecessarily complicated form is in private circulation. The full calculation for the laboratory frame has been given in Ref., together with results for the polarisation parameters and references to earlier work. The unpolarised cross section is the quantity $`I_0`$ in Eq.(4.6) of Ref.. In the following we will put it in a neater form which involves the electromagnetic form factors $`F_1`$, $`F_2`$ of the proton. This form can be readily programmed and used to determine the average muon-proton cross section across the target in a typical experiment, where the muons lose a non-negligible amount of energy in the target and an average cross section is what is actually measured.

A muon, with mass $`\mu `$ and incident laboratory kinetic energy $`T`$, is scattered by a proton (mass $`m`$) at rest, through an angle $`\theta `$ in the laboratory. The total initial energy and laboratory momentum of the incident muon are given by

$$\omega =\mu +T,l^2=T(2\mu +T)$$
(1)
The Mandelstam variables $`s`$, $`t`$ are given by

$$s=(m+\mu )^2+2mT,$$
(2)
$$t=\frac{2ml^2\{\omega \mathrm{sin}^2\theta +m\mathrm{cos}\theta \sqrt{m^2\mu ^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }\}}{s+l^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }.$$
(3)
The muon emerges with a laboratory momentum $`l^{}`$, where

$$\frac{l^{}}{l}=\frac{(\omega +m)\sqrt{m^2\mu ^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }+(m\omega +\mu ^2)\mathrm{cos}\theta }{s+l^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }.$$
(4)
The unpolarised differential cross section in the centre-of-momentum (c.m.) frame is given in its most economical form in terms of the Dirac and Pauli form factors $`F_1`$ and $`F_2`$ of the proton, normalised so that

$$F_1(0)=F_2(0)=1.$$

The anomalous magnetic moment of the proton then appears explicitly and is taken from Ref.. The result is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_{cm}}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2s}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2}{t^2}}\{(F_1(t))^2[2(sm^2\mu ^2)^2+2st+t^2]`$
$`+2\kappa F_1(t)F_2(t)t(t+2\mu ^2)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{t\kappa ^2(F_2(t))^2}{2m^2}}[t(2m^2+\mu ^2s)\lambda (s,m^2,\mu ^2)]\},`$ (5)
where

$$\lambda (s,m^2,\mu ^2)=s^22s(m^2+\mu ^2)+(m^2\mu ^2)^2$$
(6)
and $`s`$, $`t`$ are defined in Eqs.(2) and (3). The conversion to the differential cross section in the laboratory frame is via a kinematical factor:

$$\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_{lab}}=(\frac{l^{}}{l})^2\frac{s}{m\sqrt{m^2\mu ^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_{cm}},$$
(7)
where $`\frac{l^{}}{l}`$ is given by Eq.(4).

The other aim of this paper, beside giving the results in Eqs.(5) and (7), is to report our calculations of the effect of adding the vacuum polarisation amplitude to the no-spin-flip $`1\gamma E`$ amplitude. This amplitude in the c.m frame we denote by $`f`$; $`f`$ is real and contributes $`f^2`$ to $`\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_{cm}}`$. The rest of $`\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_{cm}}`$ comes from the 5 spin-flip amplitudes, whose form is of no interest to us here. It is completely sufficient to use the lowest order approximation to the vacuum polarisation amplitude $`f_{vp}`$ in the c.m. frame; $`f_{vp}`$ is a no-spin-flip amplitude and is real. Moreover, the effect of the proton form factor on $`f_{vp}`$ is negligible. The effect of inclusion of $`f_{vp}`$ is to increase $`\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_{cm}}`$ by

$$(f+f_{vp})^2f^2=f_{vp}(2f+f_{vp});$$

$`f`$ and $`f_{vp}`$ have the same sign. The quantity of interest to us is the proportional increase $`r_{vp}`$:

$$r_{vp}=\frac{f_{vp}(2f+f_{vp})}{\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_{cm}}}.$$
(8)
Since the conversion to $`\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_{lab}}`$ is via the purely kinematical factor of Eq.(7), $`r_{vp}`$ in Eq.(8) is also the proportional increase in $`\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_{lab}}`$ due to vacuum polarisation.

The expression for $`f`$ comes from a rather tedious calculation starting from Eq.(2.17) of Ref., but with the matrix elements of the currents evaluated in the c.m. frame. The expression for $`f_{vp}`$ can be taken from Ref. or Ref.. For $`\mu ^+p`$ scattering $`f`$ and $`f_{vp}`$ are, in the present notation,

$`f={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{Wt}}\{F_1(t)[sm^2\mu ^2+t({\displaystyle \frac{W}{W+m+\mu }}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{s+(m\mu )^2}{s(m\mu )^2}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{st^2}{2(W+m+\mu )^2(s(m\mu )^2)}}]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa tF_2(t)}{2m}}[Wm+{\displaystyle \frac{st}{(W+m+\mu )(s(m\mu )^2)}}]\},`$ (9)
$$f_{vp}=\frac{\alpha ^2(sm^2\mu ^2)}{3\pi Wt}F(t),$$
(10)
where $`W=\sqrt{s}`$ and

$$F(t)=\frac{5}{3}+X+(1+X)^{\frac{1}{2}}(1\frac{1}{2}X)\mathrm{ln}\{\frac{(1+X)^{\frac{1}{2}}+1}{(1+X)^{\frac{1}{2}}1}\},$$
(11)
$$X=\frac{4m_e^2}{t},$$
(12)
$`m_e`$ being the electron mass. For $`\mu ^{}p`$ scattering both $`f`$ and $`f_{vp}`$ change sign, so that $`r_{vp}`$ remains unchanged.

For our calculations we used the form factors

$$F_1(t)=F_2(t)=(1t/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)^2,$$
(13)
with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=805`$ MeV, which corresponds to the measured charge radius of the proton . The values of $`r_{vp}`$ were calculated for $`\theta 30^{}`$ at values of $`T`$ between 20 MeV and 60 MeV. The value of $`r_{vp}`$ for a given angle $`\theta `$ increases very slowly as $`T`$ increases. We give the results at 20 MeV, 40 MeV and 60 MeV in Fig.1. Contrary to expectations, they show that $`r_{vp}`$ increases with the angle as well as with energy, though of course the unpolarised cross section itself falls with energy for a fixed angle $`\theta `$ and falls very rapidly as one moves away from the forward direction.

The important conclusion is that $`r_{vp}`$ is in fact much smaller than the best statistical error that could realistically be achieved in the counting rate for the relevant scattering experiments ($`\mu ^\pm p`$ and $`\pi ^\pm p`$). The effect of vacuum polarisation is a correction similar in size to what one would expect from two photon exchange, around $`1\%`$ or less. Both effects can be safely ignored when using the $`\mu ^\pm p`$ differential cross section to fix the absolute values of the differential cross sections for $`\pi ^\pm p`$ elastic scattering at small energies and angles.

Acknowledgements. We thank the group performing the TRIUMF experiment 778 for suggesting the problem and the Swiss National Foundation for financial support.


text:
# Space-time evolution of the 𝜆ϕ⁴ model: classical and quantum aspects

## 1  Introduction

In relativistic heavy ion collisions, such as those performed now at RHIC and CERN, very dense and nearly baryon free systems are formed in the central rapidity region. These excited systems decay and produce a large number of secondary particles. In view of the large densities and multiplicities, with or without quark gluon plasma formation, it is very likely that these intermediate systems will exhibit some collective behavior. It is therefore reasonable to treat their expansion with hydrodynamics  and it is interesting to investigate the connection between the hydro-dynamical and the field theoretical approaches, see for example . In fact, the fluid approach has been taken so seriously that irregularities in the hydrodynamic flow pattern have been proposed as possible signals of a deconfined phase .

Given the physical appeal of hydrodynamics, many of its aspects and underlying assumptions have been investigated during the last ten years. Some of the studied topics are thermalization, initial conditions for the fluid expansion, the equation of state (and possible phase transitions), the freeze out mechanism and final state interactions. The direct correspondence of the hydro-dynamical description with the field theoretical one is thus highly appropriate.

In this context, at least two questions arise which have not been addressed so far and are discussed in the present article. The first is: i) which is the role played by the quantum field nature of this dense matter in the expansion? In other words, which mistake are we doing when we use classical hydrodynamics and neglect quantum effects? The second question is: ii) if the expanding matter is merged in a condensate, which is the effect of this condensate on the expansion?

Whereas solving these equations is technically very complicated in full hydrodynamics, the interplay between classical background and quantum fluctuations can be studied in simpler scenarios. In this work we discuss the space-time evolution of the $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ model in $`1+1`$ dimensions at zero temperature. Solving nonperturbatively and self-consistently the equations of motion of the theory, we can follow the expansion of a highly energetic system composed by a self interacting scalar field. In particular, we can separately investigate the classical and quantum components of the system and estimate the role played by the condensate during the expansion.

In spite of the enormous differences between this simple model and the realistic descriptions of the “fireballs” formed at RHIC, we believe that our study can be of interest and give us some relevant insights into the real physical situation.

Due to the extreme complexity of realistic theories, such as QCD, one usually is obliged to consider effective models which respect the major properties of the fundamental theory. The $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ model shares with QCD the properties of asymptotic freedom and spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB) in the frame of the Gaussian approximation. Due to the SSB, the field is decomposed into a classical and a quantum part. At the same time it may also represent the mesonic sector of the linear sigma model, which is often used to describe the dynamics of a gas of pions. In the context of cosmology the scalar field of the model may be considered as the relevant degree of freedom for inflationary models .

Some progress has been achieved in the last decade in understanding the dynamics of the $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ model. In particular, lattice calculations of the time evolution of out of equilibrium configurations, both at zero and finite temperatures, in 1+1 and 3+1 dimensions in continuous and discretized space-times have been performed .

In this work the $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ will be investigated in the Gaussian approach with the formalism discussed in Refs. . It is suitable for non homogeneous configurations of the fluctuations (the quantum part of the field) as well as of the condensate (as the classical part of the field $`\overline{\varphi }(t)`$ will be called). They can be thought of as two interacting “liquids” with continuous energy transfer and this view is under investigation. The text is organized as follows. In section II the Gaussian formalism for out of equilibrium systems is briefly outlined and the equations of movement are derived. In section III we discuss the numerical method employed here and developed in . The numerical results are presented in section IV for several different out of equilibrium situations and values of the coupling constant. The results and some perspectives are summarized in the final section.

## 2  Time dependent Gaussian approximation to $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ model

The Hamiltonian density for a scalar field $`\varphi `$ with bare mass $`m_0^2`$ and coupling constant $`\lambda `$ is:

$`H={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\pi ^2(\stackrel{}{x})+(\varphi (\stackrel{}{x}))^2+m_0^2\varphi ^2(\stackrel{}{x})+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{12}}\varphi ^4(\stackrel{}{x})\right),`$ (1)
where the action of operators $`\varphi `$ and $`\pi `$ in functional Schroedinger representation over a wave functional $`\mathrm{\Psi }\left[\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\right]=<\varphi (𝐱)|\mathrm{\Psi }\left[\varphi \right]>`$ is given by:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\widehat{\varphi }|\mathrm{\Psi }\left[\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\right]>=\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})|\mathrm{\Psi }\left[\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\right]>,\hfill & \\ \widehat{\pi }|\mathrm{\Psi }\left[\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\right]>=i\delta /\delta \varphi (\stackrel{}{x})|\mathrm{\Psi }\left[\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\right]>.\hfill & \end{array}$$
(2)
For our variational calculations analyzed below, in the Schroedinger picture the wave functional evolves like the Schroedinger equation

$$i\frac{}{t}\mathrm{\Psi }\left[\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\right]=H\mathrm{\Psi }\left[\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\right].$$
(3)
This is, thus, a non covariant formalism suitable for time dependent problems.

In the Gaussian approximation at zero temperature $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is parametrized by:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Psi }\left[\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\right]=Nexp\left\{\frac{1}{4}𝑑\stackrel{}{x}𝑑\stackrel{}{y}\delta \varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\left(G^1(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})+i\mathrm{\Sigma }(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})\right)\delta \varphi (\stackrel{}{y})+i𝑑\stackrel{}{x}\overline{\pi }(\stackrel{}{x})\delta \varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\right\},\hfill & \end{array}$$
(4)
Where $`\delta \varphi (\stackrel{}{x},t)=\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\overline{\varphi }(\stackrel{}{x},t)`$; the normalization is $`N`$, the variational parameters are the condensate $`\overline{\varphi }(\stackrel{}{x},t)=<\mathrm{\Psi }|\varphi |\mathrm{\Psi }>`$ and its conjugated variable $`\overline{\pi }(\stackrel{}{x},t)=<\mathrm{\Psi }|\pi |\mathrm{\Psi }>`$; quantum fluctuations are represented by the width of the Gaussian $`G(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y},t)=<\mathrm{\Psi }|\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})\varphi (\stackrel{}{y})|\mathrm{\Psi }>`$ and its conjugate variable $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y},t)`$.

In variational time dependent calculations we have to choose an action to be minimized in order to obtain the equations of motion. We take the well known Dirac action from :

$$I=𝑑t<\mathrm{\Psi }\left(i\frac{}{t}\widehat{H}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }>.$$
(5)
In order to calculate it, we take the mean value of an operator $`\widehat{O}`$ given by:

$$\begin{array}{cc}<\mathrm{\Psi }|\widehat{O}|\mathrm{\Psi }>=𝒟\left[\varphi \right]\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\widehat{O}\mathrm{\Psi }\hfill & \end{array}$$
(6)
By means of this average procedure the energy density $`\rho =<\mathrm{\Psi }|H|\mathrm{\Psi }>`$ can be calculated. Its temporal evolution will be investigated in section 4.

Variations with respect to the variational parameters and their conjugated yield the following equations of motion (any repeated spatial index means integration over that variable):

$$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\delta I}{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})}_tG(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})=2\left(G(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{z})\mathrm{\Sigma }(\stackrel{}{z},\stackrel{}{y})+\mathrm{\Sigma }(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{z})G(\stackrel{}{z},\stackrel{}{y})\right),\hfill & \\ \frac{\delta I}{\delta G(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})}_t\mathrm{\Sigma }(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})=\left(2\mathrm{\Sigma }(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{z})\mathrm{\Sigma }(\stackrel{}{z},\stackrel{}{y})\frac{1}{8}G^1(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{z})G^1(\stackrel{}{z},\stackrel{}{y})\right)+\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})}{2}+\frac{\lambda }{2}\overline{\varphi }(\stackrel{}{x})^2\right),\hfill & \\ \frac{\delta I}{\delta \overline{\pi }(\stackrel{}{x})}_t\overline{\varphi }(\stackrel{}{x})=\overline{\pi }(\stackrel{}{x}),\hfill & \\ \frac{\delta I}{\delta \overline{\varphi }(\stackrel{}{x})}_t\overline{\pi }(\stackrel{}{x})=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})\overline{\varphi }(\stackrel{}{y})+\frac{b}{6}\overline{\varphi }^2(\stackrel{}{x}),\hfill & \end{array}$$
(7)
Where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})=\mathrm{\Delta }+\left(m_0^2+\frac{\lambda }{2}G(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{x})\right)\delta (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y})`$. In this approximation the interaction term $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ becomes quadratic, i.e., it contributes to a self consistent mass. These equations were generalized for the out of thermo-dynamical equilibrium using different methods in .

Using the Gaussian ansatz (3) in the symmetric phase ($`\overline{\varphi }=0`$) we need only two initial conditions for the temporal evolution of these equations, $`G(t=0)`$ and $`\dot{G}(t=0)`$, which is proportional to its imaginary part $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. An inspection of the equations of motion shows that for $`\overline{\varphi }(t=0)=\dot{\overline{\varphi }}(t=0)=0`$ the variables $`\overline{\varphi }`$ and $`\overline{\pi }`$ will not change, i.e., the classical part of the field will remain constant (zero) during all times in the frame of this approach.

Several numerical works have been done for the above equations of movement. The choice of initial conditions is entirely subordinate to the Gaussian approximation. If it were not Gaussian, we would have to consider three conditions instead of two . The analysis of these equations by Boyanovsky et al and by  shows that initial conditions (for homogeneous $`G`$ and $`\overline{\varphi }`$ ) are crucial for the time interval in which the system evolves towards the minimum and for the speed of the field evolution.

## 3  Numerical method

The numerical method for the temporal evolution of the initial conditions corresponding to the system described above used in this paper was developed in . This section is a brief review. One defines a generalized density matrix in a lattice as:

$`R_{i,j}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\rho _{i,j}\hfill & \kappa _{i,j}\hfill \\ \kappa _{i,j}^{}\hfill & \rho _{i,j}^{}\hfill \end{array}\right),`$ (10)
where the density matrices (mean values) are given by: $`\rho _{i,j}=\frac{1}{2}<a_ia_j^{}+a_i^{}a_j>`$ which is hermitian and $`\kappa _{i,j}=<a_ia_j>`$ is symmetric, using the creation and annihilation operators. These operators can be written in a lattice with mesh size $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ in d spatial dimensions as:

$`a(j)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left\{\varphi (j)(\mathrm{\Delta }x)^{\frac{d1}{2}}+i\pi (j)(\mathrm{\Delta }x)^{\frac{1+d}{2}}\right\}`$ (11)
$`a^{}(j)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left\{\varphi (j)(\mathrm{\Delta }x)^{\frac{d1}{2}}i\pi (j)(\mathrm{\Delta }x)^{\frac{1+d}{2}}\right\}`$ (12)
Some of the calculated mean values in terms of the matrix elements of the above matrix are given by:

$$\begin{array}{cc}G(i,j)=<\varphi (i)\varphi (j)>=\frac{1}{(\mathrm{\Delta }x)^{d1}}\mathrm{}e(\rho (i,j)\kappa (i,j))\hfill & \\ F(i,j)=<\mathrm{\Pi }(i)\mathrm{\Pi }(j)>=\frac{1}{(\mathrm{\Delta }x)^{d+1}}\mathrm{}e(\rho (i,j)+\kappa (i,j))\hfill & \end{array}$$
(13)
where $`F(i,j)=G(i,j)^1/4+4\mathrm{\Sigma }(i,k)G(k,l)\mathrm{\Sigma }(l,i)`$.

The temporal evolution is governed by the Hartree (Fock) Bogoliubov energy, which can be parametrized in the following form:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{i,j}={\displaystyle \frac{\delta E}{\delta R_{j,i}}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}W_{i,j}& D_{i,j}\\ D_{i,j}& W_{i,j}\end{array}\right),`$ (16)
where the above matrices are given in terms of the parameters of the model :

$`W_{i,j}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\mathrm{\Delta }_{i,j}+(m_0^2+\lambda G_{i,i}/2+(\mathrm{\Delta }x)^2)\delta _{i,j}),`$ (17)
$`D_{i,j}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\mathrm{\Delta }_{i,j}+(m_0^2+\lambda G_{i,i}/2(\mathrm{\Delta }x)^2)\delta _{i,j}).`$ (18)
With these matrices, one can check that the Liouville-von Neumann condition is satisfied:

$$i\dot{R}_{ij}=[H_{ik},R_{kj}].$$
(19)
These equations are equivalent to those obtained from the Gaussian approximation of the previous section . The time-evolution of the generalized density matrix can be then performed for given initial conditions.

## 4  Numerical results

In this section we will report results of numerical calculations for the equations of motion studied above in a lattice of 100 points with spacing $`\mathrm{\Delta }x=0.1fm`$. By varying $`\mathrm{\Delta }x0`$ it was possible to assure the reliability of the results (dynamics does not change in this limit). The lattice spacing is always to be much smaller than the correlation length ($`\xi =1/m_{phys}`$) which is quite smaller than the lattice size (10 fm). The first initial condition for the classical part of the field is given by:

$$\overline{\varphi }(t=0)=\overline{\varphi }_0tanh^2\left(\frac{xx_0}{0.5}\right),\dot{\overline{\varphi }}=\overline{\pi }=0,$$
(20)
where $`x_0`$ is the center of the lattice and the coordinate $`x`$ is discretized. This configuration is not stable since in a small region of the lattice the field has values different from the vacuum.

The field configuration corresponding to (20) is shown in Figure 1 with a solid line for the model with a strong coupling constant $`\lambda =600fm^2`$ and physical mass $`\mu =100MeV`$. In terms of energy it corresponds to a bubble of high energy density in the vacuum which can be interpreted as an in medium effect. This initial condition is plugged into the system of equations (7) and numerically evolved with the method described in the last section. Knowing the field configuration at all times we can compute the energy density distribution at all time steps for different scenarios. Periodic boundary conditions are considered in this work.

In Figure 2a we show the energy density distribution of the classical part of the field alone (which we call $`\rho `$) along the $`x`$ direction for different times $`t=0`$ (thick solid), $`=0.1`$ (solid), $`=1`$ (thin solid), $`2`$ (thick dotted) and $`3.5`$ (dotted) fm. As it can be seen, the energy density excess with relation to the vacuum value is distributed among the lattice by means of “waves”. The expansion of the initially high energy density proceeds with two peaks for each side of the lattice. This feature may be expected for the massless Klein-Gordon equation which has a sinoidal solution due to the gradient terms. The energy density is proportional to the square of the field and consequently we obtain this “two bumps” structure.

In Figure 2b the same initial conditions for the condensate are evolved in time with the contribution from the quantum fluctuations, i.e., considering all the four equations (7). For the quantum part along this work, it was assumed that, at the initial time, they are at the vacuum value, i.e.:

$$G(r,t=0)=G_0\mathrm{\Sigma }\dot{G}(r,t=0)=0,$$
(21)
where $`G_0`$ is the value of the quantum fluctuations in the vacuum of the asymmetric phase ($`\overline{\varphi }0`$) obtained from a gap equation. In this case the gap equation is given by:

$$\mu ^2=m_0^2+\frac{\lambda }{2}G_0(\mu ^2)+\frac{\lambda }{2}\overline{\varphi }_0^2$$
(22)
The value of $`G_0`$ can be fixed by the physical mass $`\mu `$. There is, now, energy transfer from the classical part to the quantum fluctuations and back. Comparing figures 2a and 2b we can clearly see that the inclusion of quantum fluctuations accelerates the expansion. This is especially visible at $`t=3.5`$ fm and even more at higher times. The effect is small but unambiguous. We observe an inversion in the heights of the two bumps that characterize the energy distribution, the outer bump becoming more pronounced in the quantum case. This is an indication that, quantum fluctuations increase the pressure in spite of the isoentropic character of the approximation. Furthermore, the energy density configuration is clearly smoother than in the purely classical case. It is worth to remember once more that the present approach is not yet completely “self-consistent” in the sense that for given initial “non-equilibrium” conditions the model should reflect this fact including, for instance, the coupling constants and quantum fluctuations. This is under study .

In order to investigate the sensitivity of the conclusion found in the last paragraph to the shape of the initial conditions, we repeat the same calculations starting from the following field profile:

$$\overline{\varphi }(t=0)=\overline{\varphi }_0\left\{1+0.3sech^2\left(\frac{xx_0}{0.5}\right)\right\}.$$
(23)
The corresponding field configuration is shown in Figure 1 with a dashed line. In this case we use a different coupling constant $`\lambda =60fm^2`$. This choice changes the global normalization of the field and energy, but it does not change the dynamics considerably. As a matter of fact, in the classical level, there is a scale invariance in the dynamics with relation to changes in such variable. Taking into account quantum fluctuations this scale invariance is broken (slightly for the range of parameters considered in this work). Evolving only the classical part of the field in the same way as before we obtain Figure 3a, which is very similar to Fig. 2a. Switching on the quantum fluctuations leads to results of Fig. 3b. Comparing Figs. 3a and 3b we observe the same effect already seen in Fig. 2, i.e., the inclusion of quantum fluctuations accelerates the expansion.

In the asymmetric phase the effective potential has a Mexican hat like form and in all cases presented in this work the total energy is smaller than the “barrier” (located at the origin of the $`\overline{\varphi }`$ space) which separates the two minima of the potential. In the cases shown in Figures 2b and 3b there is a tunneling of the condensate from one side of the potential to the other. For some kinds of initial condition this was already shown in . This effect disappears if the quantum fluctuations are switched off but remain when the lattice spacing is reduced as discussed below.

The presence of quantum fluctuations make the energy density to be amplified in the earlier times and to expand faster. This amplification is stronger in the case shown in figure 3b. As time goes the energy density “waves” tend to decrease. Moreover, we notice small regions with energy density lower than the true vacuum of the corresponding phase in the beginning of the expansion, just after the energy density amplification happens.

The total energy of the system is conserved during the evolution. We want to stress that the inclusion of quantum fluctuations changes the overall energy normalization of the system. Therefore, the initial energy profile is similar for all figures but the normalization is different as can be seen in the pictures.

The equations of movement (7) exhibit Ultra Violet (UV) divergences in a continuum space-time which are exactly the same as those present in the GAP equation for the vacuum of the model. They require mass renormalization (and also coupling constant renormalization depending on the space-time dimension) which is exactly the same for the static and time dependent cases. In  analytical solutions for these equations of movement were found for a particular kind of initial conditions. They exhibit the UV divergences only at the initial time (t=0). As this divergence is eliminated by the renormalization (of the mass and/or coupling) the temporal evolution remains unchanged. This is also true in the lattice: the deviation of the system with relation to the vacuum state determines the temporal evolution. For a variation of the lattice spacing, i.e., as $`\mathrm{\Delta }x0`$ (for low values as 0.02 fm were checked) the dynamics does not change considerably (with the corresponding mass rescaling). In fact, the continuum limit must be the same for the static and time-dependent cases. The deviations from this (renormalized) state are always finite and are not altered by vacuum redefinition (renormalization). Mass renormalization changes the normalization of the energy density being, therefore, not important for the dynamical evolution.

In fact, the difference between the classical system and the classical plus quantum system is, in part, related to a scale invariance. The classical level exhibits scale invariance but this is not present at the quantum level. These effects will be explicitly addressed in detail elsewhere .

Our results point out to the following simple picture: without quantum fluctuations a given localized spatial configuration of the field $`\overline{\varphi }`$ expands, simply converting “potential” into “kinetic” energy. The inclusion of these fluctuations accelerates the expansion. This effect may be caused by the interaction between the particles and the condensate, by the tunneling between the two vacua or by these both aspects. The questions addressed in this work are related to those discussed in Ref. . In that work, the expansion was driven by the effective potential, (which contains a $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ part) plus the contribution of a gas of pions. The former and latter contributions correspond respectively to our classical and quantum contributions. The total pressure is the sum of both the effective potential and the pion gas component and therefore also in that model the inclusion of quantum fluctuations increases the total pressure and the expansion rate. These conclusions also are in agreement with studies for the effects of quantum fluctuations in the Inflationary scenario where there is “acceleration” of the dynamics, see for example .

## 5 Summary

We have analyzed the temporal evolution of non-homogeneous configurations of the $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ model considering two different approaches: the classical equations of motion and the equations of motion in the framework of the Gaussian approach for the quantum fluctuations in a one-dimensional lattice. We have been able to study the influence of the quantum fluctuations on the classical field dynamics and vice versa. Quantum fluctuations make the energy distribution smoother. Besides that, we conclude that the quantum fluctuations accelerate the expansion of a non homogeneous configuration of the classical part of the field after having amplified the energy density. We noted a tunneling of the condensate from one side of the “Mexican-hat” potential to the other when quantum fluctuations are considered depending on the initial conditions.

We would like to emphasize that in the limit of vanishing lattice spacing the dynamics is not qualitatively modified: the renormalization acts as to change the field and therefore energy density normalization but not the dynamics. We have been concerned mainly with short interval evolution, but the evolution of thermal degrees of freedom will be analyzed elsewhere. Finally with the inclusion of temperature, we hope to establish a closer connection between our system and a hydro-dynamically expanding fireball.

Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by FAPESP- Brazil. F.L.B. wishes to thank D. Vautherin with whom part of this work was initiated. Most part of the numerical calculations was performed in the machines of the Laboratory for Computation of the University of São Paulo - LCCA-USP.

Figure Captions

* Initial field configuration. Solid line corresponds to (20) and the dashed line line to (23).
* a) Evolution of the energy distribution of the condensate at different times; b) the same as a) with the inclusion of quantum fluctuations. The initial field configuration is given by (20).
* The same as Fig.2 for the initial configuration (23).


text:
# The shear dynamics in Bianchi I cosmological model on the brane

## Acknowledgements

Author is greatful to Varun Sahhi and Tarun Deep Saini for stimulated discussions and to IUCAA, where this work was done, for hospitality.


text:
# Quark mean field model with density dependent couplings for finite nuclei

## I Introduction

One of the most interesting topics in nuclear physics is to study the variations of hadron properties in nuclear medium. Experimentally, the EMC effect reveals the medium modification of the internal structure of the nucleon . The EMC effect motivated many theoretical works on the study of hadrons in terms of quarks and gluons. At present, we are still far away to describe nucleons and nuclei in terms of quarks and gluons using quantum chromodynamics (QCD), which is believed to be the fundamental theory of strong interactions. Thus, it is desirable to build models which incorporate quark and gluon degrees of freedom and respect the established theories based on hadronic degrees of freedom. Such models are necessarily crude from various view points since the study of the nuclear many-body systems on the fundamental level is intractable.

The quark-meson coupling (QMC) model proposed by Guichon  provides a simple and attractive framework to incorporate quark degrees of freedom in the study of nuclear many-body systems. The model describes nuclear matter as nonoverlapping MIT bags in which the quarks interact self-consistently with structureless scalar and vector mesons in the mean field approximation. The QMC model has been subsequently extended with reasonable success to various problems of nuclear matter and finite nuclei . The quark mean field (QMF) model as named in Ref.  took the constituent quark model for the nucleon instead of the MIT bag model, so that it could overcome the shortcoming of the QMC model as explained in Ref. . The QMF model has been applied to study the properties of finite nuclei, where the coupling constants were determined by the saturation properties of nuclear matter .

In this paper, we introduce density dependent couplings for the QMF model, so that we can reproduce the relativistic Brueckner-Hartree-Fock (RBHF) results of nuclear matter . The RBHF approach as a microscopic many-body theory based on hadronic degrees of freedom, provided very closely the nuclear matter saturation properties, where the coupling constants and the form factors of the one-boson exchange potential (OBEP) were fixed from the nucleon-nucleon scattering and the deuteron properties. The RBHF approach can be considered as parameter-free many-body theory, since all parameters in RBHF approach were adjusted to the two-nucleon problem at first. Encouraged by the success of the RBHF approach in describing nuclear matter properties, there were many applications of the RBHF results on finite nuclei . The relativistic mean field (RMF) theory with density dependent couplings was developed for finite nuclei, as well as reproducing the RBHF results of nuclear matter. The RMF theory with density dependent couplings provided very good results on the nuclear properties as the binding energies and the nuclear radii with including the rearrangement contributions . Both the RBHF and RMF approaches are based on hadronic degrees of freedom, where the nucleons and mesons are treated as structureless particles. Therefore, they are not applicable to study the quark effect in nuclei.

Hence, it is very interesting to connect the QMF model to the RBHF results by density dependent couplings, so that we can investigate the medium modification of the nucleon structure and finite nuclei properties, as well as reproducing the quantitative results of RBHF theory for nuclear matter simultaneously. The consideration to introduce density dependent couplings of mesons with quarks is based on the medium modifications of the meson properties. There are many works discussing the variations of hadron properties . In the present model, the scalar mean field provides a strong attraction and as a consequence the constituent quark mass is reduced in nuclear medium. The mesons, which are actually composites of quarks, are influenced due to the presence of the scalar mean field. Therefore, the density dependent couplings modeled through direct coupling to the scalar field represents, in a way, self-interaction in the scalar field.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II we describe the QMF model with density dependent couplings. In Sec. III we present the parameters used in this paper, and compare the nuclear matter results with RBHF results. We then apply this model to finite nuclei and discuss the variations of the nucleon properties inside nuclei in Sec. IV. Section V is devoted to the summary.

## II QUARK MEAN FIELD MODEL WITH DENSITY DEPENDENT COUPLING

In this section, we give a brief description of the QMF model with density dependent couplings. We follow the basic concept of the QMF model , in which the couplings of the mesons with quarks are constants. In the present work, we introduce density dependent couplings for the scalar ($`\sigma `$) and vector ($`\omega `$) mesons with quarks, which are modeled as functions of the $`\sigma `$ mean field. We include also the isovector meson, $`\rho `$, whose coupling with a quark is assume to be a constant for simplicity. We note that the contribution from the $`\rho `$ meson is very weak for stable nuclei compared with those from the $`\sigma `$ and $`\omega `$ mesons. In addition, the photon field should be included for finite system.

In the QMF model, the nucleon in nuclear medium is described in terms of the constituent quark model, in which the quarks couple with the $`\sigma `$, $`\omega `$, and $`\rho `$ mesons. We take the relativistic mean field (RMF) approximation  for the meson fields. In the constituent quark model, the quarks in a nucleon satisfy the following Dirac equation:

$`\left[i\gamma _\mu ^\mu m_q+g_\sigma ^q(\sigma )\sigma g_\omega ^q(\sigma )\omega \gamma ^0g_\rho ^q\rho \tau _3\gamma ^0\chi _c\right]q(r)=0.`$ (1)
where $`m_q`$ is the constituent quark mass and $`\chi _c`$ the confinement. The $`g_\sigma ^q(\sigma )`$ and $`g_\omega ^q(\sigma )`$ as functions of the $`\sigma `$ mean field, are the couplings of the $`\sigma `$ and $`\omega `$ mesons with quarks, while the $`g_\rho ^q`$ denotes the coupling constant of the $`\rho `$ meson with a quarks. We follow Ref.  to take into account the spin correlations and remove the spurious center of mass motion, and then work out the effective nucleon mass $`M_n^{}`$.

For a static nuclear many-body system, the Lagrangian within the mean field approximation can be written as

$``$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }\left[i\gamma _\mu ^\mu M_n^{}(\sigma )g_\omega (\sigma )\omega \gamma ^0g_\rho \rho \tau _3\gamma ^0\right]\psi `$ (4)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[(\sigma )^2+m_\sigma ^2\sigma ^2\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[(\omega )^2+m_\omega ^2\omega ^2\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[(\rho )^2+m_\rho ^2\rho ^2\right]`$
$`\overline{\psi }\left[{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2}}\left(1+\tau _3\right)\gamma ^0A\right]\psi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(A)^2.`$
Here, $`\psi `$ denotes the nucleon fields; $`\sigma `$, $`\omega `$, and $`\rho `$ are the $`\sigma `$, $`\omega `$, and $`\rho `$ meson mean fields with masses $`m_\sigma `$, $`m_\omega `$, and $`m_\rho `$, respectively; $`A`$ denotes the photon field. The nuclear many-body system can be solved with the change of the nucleon properties under the influence of the scalar mean field, which is exclusively expressed in the effective nucleon mass, $`M_n^{}(\sigma )`$, as a function of the $`\sigma `$ mean field. The $`\omega `$ and $`\rho `$ mean fields do not cause any change of the nucleon properties , and they appear merely as the energy shift. The relations between nucleon-meson couplings and quark-meson couplings have been given in Ref.  as $`g_\omega (\sigma )=3g_\omega ^q(\sigma )`$ and $`g_\rho =g_\rho ^q`$. We will apply the present model to study the properties of nuclear matter and finite nuclei in the following two sections.

## III PARAMETERS AND NUCLEAR MATTER RESULTS

In this section we will show the numerical results of nuclear matter and discuss the density dependent couplings. The change of the nucleon properties under the influence of the $`\sigma `$ mean field has been studied in Ref. , where the effective nucleon mass, $`M_n^{}`$, has been shown as a function of the quark mass correction, $`\delta m_q`$. Here $`\delta m_q`$ is related to $`\sigma `$ mean field as $`\delta m_q=g_\sigma ^q(\sigma )\sigma `$. We take the same quark mass and two types of confinement ($`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2`$ and $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2(1+\gamma ^0)/2`$ with $`k=1000\mathrm{MeV}/\mathrm{fm}^2`$) as those used in Ref. .

To perform the nuclear matter calculation, we take the Lagrangian given in Eq. (2), in which all the derivative terms of the meson fields vanish for infinite nuclear matter due to the translational invariance. Then, the nucleons and mesons obey the following Euler-Lagrange equations,

$`[i\gamma _\mu ^\mu `$ $``$ $`M_n^{}(\sigma )g_\omega (\sigma )\omega \gamma ^0g_\rho \rho \tau _3\gamma ^0]\psi =0,`$ (5)
$`m_\sigma ^2\sigma `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{M_n^{}(\sigma )}{\sigma }}\overline{\psi }\psi {\displaystyle \frac{g_\omega (\sigma )}{\sigma }}\omega \overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi `$ (7)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{M_n^{}(\delta m_q)}{\delta m_q}}g_\sigma ^q(\sigma )\overline{\psi }\psi {\displaystyle \frac{M_n^{}(\delta m_q)}{\delta m_q}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_\sigma ^q(\sigma )}{\sigma }}\sigma \overline{\psi }\psi 3{\displaystyle \frac{g_\omega ^q(\sigma )}{\sigma }}\omega \overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi ,`$ (8)
$`m_\omega ^2\omega `$ $`=`$ $`g_\omega (\sigma )\overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi =3g_\omega ^q(\sigma )\overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi ,`$ (10)
$`m_\rho ^2\rho `$ $`=`$ $`g_\rho \overline{\psi }\tau _3\gamma ^0\psi =g_\rho ^q\overline{\psi }\tau _3\gamma ^0\psi .`$ (12)
Here, the bracket $``$ $``$ means the expectation value of the operator between the nuclear ground state. We note that the appearance of the last two terms in Eq. (4) is due to the variable couplings, which is similar to the inclusion of the rearrangement terms in the density dependent RMF approach based on hadronic degrees of freedom . The effective nucleon mass $`M_n^{}`$ and its derivative with respect to the $`\delta m_q`$ has been studied in Ref. . We take the meson masses as $`m_\sigma =550\mathrm{MeV}`$, $`m_\omega =783\mathrm{MeV}`$, and $`m_\rho =770\mathrm{MeV}`$.

We introduce density dependent couplings, $`g_\sigma ^q(\sigma )`$ and $`g_\omega ^q(\sigma )`$, in the present model. This consideration is based on the variation of meson properities as the nuclear environment changes. The mesons, which are actually composites of quarks, are influenced by the $`\sigma `$ mean field . The quark-meson couplings in nuclear medium may be modified as density increases. It is therefore reasonable to attempt density dependent couplings, which contain the complicated medium modification effectively. This treatment is similar in spirit to the density dependent RMF approach based on hadronic degrees of freedom, which provided a realistic description of bulk properties of finite nuclei and nuclear matter . The nucleon-meson couplings in the density dependent RMF approach were found to decrease with increasing nuclear matter density. This suggests a decreasing quark-meson couplings due to the relations between the nucleon-meson couplings with the quark-meson couplings.

we model the density dependent couplings, $`g_\sigma ^q`$ and $`g_\omega ^q`$, through direct couplings to the $`\sigma `$ mean field. We parameterize these variable couplings as

$`g_\sigma ^q(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`a_\sigma b_\sigma \sigma ^{1/3},`$ (13)
$`g_\omega ^q(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`a_\omega b_\omega \sigma ^{1/3}.`$ (14)
With these formulas, it is possible to reproduce the scalar and vector potentials of the RBHF theory for symmetric nuclear matter within a good accuracy. We list the parameters of $`a_i`$ and $`b_i`$ in Table I, which are determined by the RBHF results with potential A . The parameter $`g_\rho ^q`$, which is still a constant for simplicity, is taken as $`g_\rho ^q=4`$, so that we can get the symmetry energy to be around $`35\mathrm{MeV}`$.

In Fig. 1, we plot the scalar and vector potentials, $`U_S`$ and $`U_V`$, as functions of the nuclear matter density $`\rho `$. The RBHF results  are marked by solid dots, as well as the results in the RMF model with TM1 parameter set  by dotted curve for comparison. We show in Fig. 2 the energy per nucleon, $`E/A`$, as a function of density $`\rho `$. The solid and dashed curves, which are the results of the present model with two types of confinement, are almost identical. We note that the saturation density, binding energy and incompressibility of the solid curve in Fig. 2 are $`0.16\mathrm{fm}^3`$, $`15.5\mathrm{MeV}`$ and $`159\mathrm{MeV}`$, respectively. We found there exist slight differences between the RBHF results and those in the present model in Fig. 2, which is partly due to the appearance of the rearrangement terms in Eq. (4). The importance of rearrangement terms in a relativistic density dependent field theory has been discussed extensively in Ref. .

## IV FINITE NUCLEI RESULTS

In this section we will present the calculated results of some spherical nuclei and discuss the variations of the nucleon properties inside nuclei. The meson mean fields in a spherically symmetric nucleus are functions of the radial coordinate $`r`$. Here, we follow the prescription of Ref.  and assume the nucleons obey the Dirac equation,

$`\left[i\gamma _\mu ^\mu M_n^{}(\sigma )g_\omega (\sigma )\omega (r)\gamma ^0g_\rho \rho (r)\tau _3\gamma ^0{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2}}(1+\tau _3)A(r)\gamma ^0\right]\psi =0,`$ (15)
where the effective nucleon mass $`M_n^{}`$ is a function of the scalar mean field $`\sigma `$. The meson mean fields ($`\sigma `$, $`\omega `$, $`\rho `$) and the photon field ($`A`$) satisfy the following Klein-Gordon equations,

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma (r)m_\sigma ^2\sigma (r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{M_n^{}(\sigma )}{\sigma }}\overline{\psi }\psi +{\displaystyle \frac{g_\omega (\sigma )}{\sigma }}\omega (r)\overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi `$ (16)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{M_n^{}(\delta m_q)}{\delta m_q}}g_\sigma ^q(\sigma )\overline{\psi }\psi +{\displaystyle \frac{M_n^{}(\delta m_q)}{\delta m_q}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_\sigma ^q(\sigma )}{\sigma }}\sigma (r)\overline{\psi }\psi +3{\displaystyle \frac{g_\omega ^q(\sigma )}{\sigma }}\omega (r)\overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi ,`$ (17)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega (r)m_\omega ^2\omega (r)`$ $`=`$ $`g_\omega (\sigma )\overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi =3g_\omega ^q(\sigma )\overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi ,`$ (19)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho (r)m_\rho ^2\rho (r)`$ $`=`$ $`g_\rho \overline{\psi }\tau _3\gamma ^0\psi =g_\rho ^q\overline{\psi }\tau _3\gamma ^0\psi ,`$ (21)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }A(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2}}\overline{\psi }(1+\tau _3)\gamma ^0\psi .`$ (23)
We solve the above equations self-consistently using the parameters determined by the RBHF results of nuclear matter with potential $`A`$. In Fig. 3 and 4, we plot the charge density distributions for $`{}_{}{}^{40}\mathrm{Ca}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}`$, respectively. The experimental values taken from Ref.  are shown by solid curves. The calculated results with scalar confining potential ($`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2`$) are shown by dashed curves, while those with scalar-vector confining potential ($`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2(1+\gamma ^0)/2`$) by dash-dotted curves. The curves with two types of confinement are very close, since the parameters used here are determined by the same RBHF results. The theoretical central densities are slightly higher than the experimental values, which is related to the RBHF results used in determining the parameters. The dependence of the finite nuclei properties on the RBHF results were discussed in more detail in Refs. . The calculated results in the present model for the binding energies per nucleon $`E/A`$, the rms charge radii $`R_c`$, and the spin-orbit spitting $`\mathrm{}E_{LS}`$ are compared with the experimental values in Table II. The experimental data taken from Refs.  are listed in the last column. The results with two types of confinement agree very well with the experiment, and no explicit difference between them. In Table III and IV, the single particle energies of $`{}_{}{}^{40}\mathrm{Ca}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}`$ are compared with the experimental data . We show in Fig. 5 and 6 the scalar and vector mean fields ($`\sigma `$ and $`\omega `$) as functions of $`r`$ for $`{}_{}{}^{40}\mathrm{Ca}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}`$. Here, the results with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2`$ are given by solid curves, while those with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2(1+\gamma ^0)/2`$ by dashed curves. Again, the corresponding results with two types of confinement are very similar due to the same reason as mentioned before.

It is very interesting to see the variations of the nucleon properties inside nuclei. We plot in Fig. 7 and 8 the ratios of the nucleon rms radius and effective mass in $`{}_{}{}^{40}\mathrm{Ca}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}`$ to those in free space, $`R/R_0`$ and $`M_n^{}/M_n`$, as functions of nuclear radial coordinate $`r`$. We find the model with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2(1+\gamma ^0)/2`$ (dashed curves) gives near $`10\%`$ increasing nucleon radius at the center of the nuclei, while that with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2`$ gives around $`5\%`$ increase. The nucleon radius decrease to its value in free space from center to outside, as the scalar mean field decreasing. As for the effective nucleon mass, both scalar and scalar-vector confinement cases give around $`40\%`$ reduction at the center of the nuclei. The curves with two types of confinement are almost identical. It is due to the reproduction of the RBHF scalar potential.

## V CONCLUSION

We have developed the QMF model with density dependent couplings, so that we can investigate the variations of the nucleon structure and finite nuclei properties, as well as reproducing the RBHF results of nuclear matter simultaneously. We introduced the density dependence of the couplings of mesons with quarks through direct couplings to the $`\sigma `$ field based on the capability of $`\sigma `$ field in influencing hadron properties. We have used the constituent quark model for the nucleon, which naturally allows the direct coupling of $`\sigma ,\omega `$, and $`\rho `$ mesons with quarks. With the parameters determined by the RBHF results of nuclear matter, we can perform the numerical calculations for finite nuclei.

We have found the QMF model with density dependent couplings gave very successful descriptions of spherical nuclei. By comparison with the density dependent RMF approach on hadronic level, we have reproduced the properties of finite nuclei with the same or even better agreement to the experimental data. The present model with scalar confinement has the capability to produced better results on the binding energies per nucleon compared with those in Ref. . Very weak dependence on the type of the confinement was found in the results of nuclear properties, which is due to the reproduction of the RBHF scalar and vector potentials for nuclear matter.

We have also investigated the variations of the nucleon properties in spherical nuclei. The QMF model with density dependent couplings can provide a significantly swollen nucleon radius in nuclear environment. We found the model with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2(1+\gamma ^0)/2`$ predicted near $`10\%`$ increasing nucleon radius at the center of nuclei, while that with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2`$ gave around $`5\%`$ increase. At the same time, around $`40\%`$ reduction of the nucleon mass at the center of nuclei were predicted.

## Acknowledgments

One of the authors (H.S.) would like to thank H. Toki for valuable discussions. This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China.

## Figure captions

The scalar and vector potentials of nuclear matter, $`U_S`$ and $`U_V`$, as functions of the nuclear matter density $`\rho `$. The results of the present model with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2`$ are shown by solid curves, while those with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2(1+\gamma ^0)/2`$ are shown by dashed curves. The RBHF results with potential $`A`$ in Ref.  are marked by solid dots, and the results in the RMF(TM1) model  are plotted by dotted curves for comparison.

The energy per nucleon, $`E/A`$, as functions of the nuclear matter density $`\rho `$. The curves are labeled as in Fig. 1.

The charge density distributions for $`{}_{}{}^{40}\mathrm{Ca}`$ compared with the experimental data (solid curve) . The dash-dotted and dashed curves are the results in the present model with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2`$ and $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2(1+\gamma ^0)/2`$, respectively.

Same as Fig. 3 but for $`{}_{}{}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}`$.

The scalar and vector mean fields, $`\sigma `$ and $`\omega `$, as functions of the radial coordinate $`r`$ for $`{}_{}{}^{40}\mathrm{Ca}`$. The results in the present model with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2`$ are shown by solid curves, while those with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2(1+\gamma ^0)/2`$ are shown by dashed curves.

Same as Fig. 5 but for $`{}_{}{}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}`$.

The ratios of the nucleon rms radius and effective mass in $`{}_{}{}^{40}\mathrm{Ca}`$ to those in free space, $`R/R_0`$ and $`M_n^{}/M_n`$, as functions of the radial coordinate $`r`$. The results in the present model with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2`$ are shown by solid curves, while those with $`\chi _c=\frac{1}{2}kr^2(1+\gamma ^0)/2`$ are shown by dashed curves.

Same as Fig. 7 but for $`{}_{}{}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}`$.