text:
# Two-colour photometric selection of high-redshift galaxies

## 1 Introduction

In recent years, two-colour selection techniques have proved themselves to be an invaluable method for identifying galaxies at high redshifts, paricularly by means of chosing a filter set spanning the wavelengths between $`\mathrm{Ly}\alpha `$ and the Lyman limit. Most notable has been the work of Steidel and collaborators (e.g. ??).

As part of a project to identify radio-quiet companions to known radio galaxies in the redshift range $`3\stackrel{<}{_{}}z\stackrel{<}{_{}}4.5`$, we required theoretical models to determine the optimal selection criteria given our choice of filters. This paper discusses modelling of the expected colours for galaxies and the potential for efficiently distinguishing them from foreground stars and galaxies through broad-band photometric techniques. The results of our observations are described in a companion paper (?).

In our searches for Lyman-break galaxies (hereafter LBGs), we initially worked to the assumptions that their spectra will be approximately flat above the rest-frame $`\mathrm{Ly}\alpha `$ wavelength, somewhat diminished between $`\mathrm{Ly}\alpha `$ and the Lyman limit, and have little or no flux below 912Å. Such assumptions were used for our pilot study of a region of approximately one square arcminute around the $`z=3.80`$ radio galaxy 4C 41.17, described in ?.

Unfortunately such naïve selection methods lend themselves to significant contamination from other red objects such as galaxies at moderate redshift (for instance where the 4000Å break is redshifted to the position of the Lyman break at the targetted redshift) or low-mass main-sequence stars. With the benefit of the models described in this paper and of Hubble Space Telescope images of the region studied in our pilot study, which have subsequently been made available through the HST Archive, we conclude that the majority of the high–redshift candidates previously identified are in fact foreground contaminants.

For more efficient selection, a much more detailed analysis will be required and the following points must be considered within the models:

1. Intrinsic spectra of starbursts
2. Attenuation due to intergalactic Hi absorption systems
3. Effects of dust extinction
4. Broad-band colours and potential for confusion with other objects through photometric selection techniques
5. Apparent magnitudes of high-redshift star-forming galaxies for particular cosmologies, likely star-formation rates and consequences for their observability

Throughout this paper, we follow the convention established by Steidel et al. (?) of using the AB magnitude system of (?), conversions for which are given in Table 1. This has the great advantage of being a magnitude system in which the colours of an unreddened star-forming galaxy between bandpasses sampling the rest-frame ultraviolet continuum will be close to zero.

### 1.1 Previous work

Guhathakurta and co-workers (?) searched for LBGs in relatively deep $`UB_JRI`$ images, but were unable to provide followup spectroscopic evidence. They estimated the strength of the break at the Lyman limit from consideration of the UV spectra of O and B stars, with synthetic spectra showing breaks of a factor in the range $`25`$ for a wide variety of input initial mass functions (IMFs), even without considering interstellar or intergalactic absorption by neutral hydrogen. Candidate LBGs are selected from their $`UB_J`$ and $`B_JI`$ colours. Their resulting selection region is somewhat conservative compared to later work, as it does not take into account the possibility of a substantial drop in flux below $`\mathrm{Ly}\alpha `$.

Most of the work of Steidel and collaborators makes use of a non-standard filter system, originally chosen for its suitability to a field containing a QSO and damped Lyman $`\alpha `$ system at known redshifts (?). Initially, selection is done taking into account intergalactic absorption measurements from QSO spectra (?), while later selection criteria are revised to take into account the detailed analysis of intergalactic attenuation by ?, which we use ourselves in § 3. Subsequent spectroscopic observations show that the selection process is highly effective with less conservative selection criteria. The lower bound in $`U_nG`$ has been relaxed from $`1.5`$ to $`1.0`$, with a resulting increase in surface density (to the magnitude limit of $`<25.0`$) from around 0.5 candidate objects per arcmin2 to around 1.25 per arcmin2 (??).

? use a similar approach to that described here in order to determine appropriate regions in two-colour space for the selection of $`U_{300}`$ and $`B_{450}`$ dropouts in the northern HDF. We develop this approach to a wider range of filters, including those typical of those found on ground-based optical CCD and NIR cameras, and to span as wide a range of potential galaxy scenarios as possible.

## 2 Simulated broad-band colours of galaxies

In order to devise efficient selection criteria for high–redshift galaxies, it is necessary to model the expected colours of a wide variety of different types of galaxies for all redshifts at which one might possibly expect to be able to see objects.

We base our models on the pégase code of ? (hereafter FRV); our thanks go to them for making the code publicly available. 222A more recent version of the code has recently been announced (?), but at present our models are built around the version one code. The FRV code produces synthetic galaxy spectra to a resolution of 10Å from 220–8780Å in the rest-frame333This resolution was higher than that of the Bruzual-Charlot models available at the time (?), an important factor when one wishes to shift the spectra to high redshifts., and to 200Å in the NIR. Like most current techniques for modelling the integrated spectrum of a population of stars, the FRV code uses the isochrone technique (?). A library of higher-resolution spectra is available, but this only covers the rest frame optical and is thus of little use when the objects are redshifted; besides which the higher resolution data is not overly crucial when dealing with broad bandpasses.

A substantial library of synthetic galaxy spectra using a wide variety of different input parameters to the FRV code was built up.

### 2.1 Variations of input parameters

#### 2.1.1 Evolutionary tracks

Two sets of stellar evolutionary tracks are made available with the FRV code, namely “Padova” (?) and “Geneva” (??). Post main sequence evolution, in particular that along the asymptotic giant branch for the most massive stars (?), proves the most difficult phase to trace in such tracks. Primarily this affects the NIR luminosity, with only a slight effect in the UV.

Another limitation is that the evolutionary tracks used are for solar metallicity, and will therefore not be an accurate representation of those in metal-poor regions such as may be found in the early universe. The version 2.0 FRV code attempts to redress this problem (?), and will be incorporated into our models at a future date. Early indications are that metallicity significantly affects the slope of the UV continuum, with bluer spectra at low metallicities. Evidently this will have a considerable effect upon the derived star formation rates. Further work with the new models is required to investigate this more thoroughly.

#### 2.1.2 Initial Mass Function

The FRV code by default incorporates the IMFs of ?, ?, ? and of Kroupa (?). The Salpeter is the simplest and still in widespread usage, but somewhat in error at the extremes. Later IMF models are an improvement in this respect, being somewhat more realistic and with less abrupt cut-offs at both ends, but are still limited by the the ability to observe the full range of stellar masses only in the solar neighbourhood.

The Kroupa IMF results from work on stars in the galactic disk which resolves the apparent differences between observations made in the solar neighbourhood and those derived from surveys to much greater distances. It is probably to date the most realistic representation of the IMF in our own galaxy and it is used as the default in our models.

Applying such empirically-derived IMFs to star-formation in the early universe is a big assumption, given our limited understanding of the physical processes involved. For example, low metallicity, different cloud dynamics and the possible influence of AGN activity upon star-formation may all affect the high–redshift IMF.

The high-mass slope of the IMF is of particular interest to us since it determines the numbers of O and B stars which dominate the UV luminosity in star-forming galaxies. Any estimate of star-formation rate based on the UV luminosity is thus strongly dependent on the choice of IMF. For simplicity and ease of comparison, star formation rates are generally derived for a Salpeter IMF, but one must bear in mind that with, for example, a Kroupa IMF as opposed to a Salpeter distribution, the overall star-formation rate may be a factor of $`2`$ higher if derived from the UV luminosity. The effects of extinction due to dust will boost the SFR higher still.

#### 2.1.3 Nebular emission

FRV use a default value for the fractional Lyman continuum absorption $`f=0.7`$, in agreement with LMC Hii values (?), but for completeness values from 0 to 1 were considered. This would have considerable effect on the strength of the Lyman break save for the fact that intergalactic attenuation becomes the dominant effect at redshifts sufficiently high for us to observe below the Lyman limit (§ 3). However it does govern the strength of emission lines, which, particularly in the case of $`\mathrm{Ly}\alpha `$, can in principle have considerable effect on the observed colours, though it is often strongly suppressed. Continuum emission is increased in the rest-frame optical, but this will only have an effect on the infrared colours of galaxies at high redshift.

### 2.2 Star-formation model

A variety of star-formation models are included in the FRV code, ranging from instantaneous bursts to constant SFR scenarios. Primarily the choice affects how quickly the galaxy spectrum evolves from that of young starbursting regions to that of aged ellipticals. We include in the final models galaxy spectra covering a very wide range of star-formation models and ages, subject to a conservative cut-off to eliminate galaxies at ages unphysical for any reasonable cosmology given their redshift. Thus the models include more or less any conceivable galaxy type.

### 2.3 Other parameters

The models also incorporate variations of initial star formation rate, governing the timescale over which stars are formed, and the fraction of stellar ejecta available for further star formation. This latter only affects galaxies sufficiently aged for a substantial proportion of the stars originally formed to go through the late stages of stellar evolution; significant star formation resulting from stellar ejecta results in the overall galaxy spectrum being a combination of the UV spectrum of a young star-forming galaxy together with the optical and NIR spectrum expected of an aged galaxy.

Dust extinction is also considered, but rather than than use the FRV extinction routine, we chose to use our own as described in § 4.

The spectra were then convolved with selected broad-band filter profiles (those of the WHT optical and NIR filter sets, and the HST WFPC2 filters as used in the HDF observations), scaled to the luminosity of a galaxy of stellar mass $`10^{10}`$$`M_{}`$, and the AB magnitudes output.

## 3 Intergalactic attenuation by the Lyman-$`\alpha `$ forest and by Lyman limit systems

To approximate intergalactic attenuation, the method of ? was followed. Equations 12 and 13 of his paper were used to correct for the Lyman-$`\alpha `$ forest. To correct for absorption of the Lyman continuum we made use of the approximate numerical integration of his Equation 16, which he states is good to 5%. For our purposes this is perfectly adequate and computationally inexpensive.

Given the random distribution of the absorbers, significant deviations from the mean attenuation are to be expected at any particular wavelength. In the Lyman-$`\alpha `$ forest region, this does not present any problem, since the use of broad bandpasses means that one will be averaging over a large number of absorbers.

Madau’s figure 2 shows the measured flux decrements for quasar spectra within bandpasses of $``$100Å in the rest-frame. Few decrements differ from the estimated mean by more than about 0.1 mag. In our case we can expect an even greater averaging effect to act in our favour owing to the wider bandpass of our filters.

Below the Lyman limit, a substantial contribution to the attenuation will come from the much rarer Lyman limit systems (LLS), for which the mean number along any line of sight will be of order unity. There is, however, a significant probability that there will not be a single LLS along a particular line of sight, about 10% at the redshifts of interest. While in the case of the $`\mathrm{Ly}\alpha `$ forest, the distribution of the number densities of absorbers about the mean can be approximated by a Gaussian at the redshift of interest, such an approximation cannot be made for the LLS.

The chances of an object missing our selection cuts owing to the absence of a LLS along the line of sight are greater for $`U`$ dropouts than for $`B`$ dropouts for two reasons. Firstly, the relative contribution of the LLS to the attenuation at $`z3`$ is greater than at $`z4`$ (see Figure 3). Secondly, the expected number of LLS along a line of sight increases significantly between $`z3`$ and $`z4`$.

? give values ranging from 0.25 at $`z_e=2.5`$ to about 0.05 at $`z_e=4.5`$ for the probability of encountering no LLS leading to an absorption depth $`\tau >\tau _{crit}=1.5`$ at the Heii line $`\lambda _e=304`$Å. As the photoionisation cross-section of H decreases approximately as $`\nu ^3`$ below the Lyman limit, this optical depth corresponds to a very optically-thick Lyman limit system, but these probabilities are a useful indicator of how the likelihood of encountering a Lyman limit system changes with redshift.

## 4 Dust extinction

While in the optical a measure of the dust extinction is obtainable from the emission line Balmer optical depth $`\tau _B^l`$, dust extinction in the UV is typically parametrized in terms of the continuum slope. The UV continuum of a star-forming galaxy may be approximated by a power law $`F(\lambda )\lambda ^\beta `$, with a “colour excess” defined by $`E(\beta )=\beta \beta _0`$. Spectral synthesis models give a value $`2.5\stackrel{<}{_{}}\beta _0\stackrel{<}{_{}}2.0`$, in broad agreement with measured values. For a young stellar population (age $`\stackrel{<}{_{}}2\times 10^7`$ yr), the differences, other than of normalisation, between the spectra of the extreme scenarios of instantaneous burst and constant star formation rate are small and within measurement uncertainties.

We calculate dust extinction according to the method of ? (1994, hereafter C94), taking the extinction parameter $`A(\lambda )`$ to be empirically fitted by a third-order polynomial $`Q_e(x)`$ (where $`x=1/\lambda `$ such that $`A(\lambda )=\tau {}_{}{}^{l}{}_{B}{}^{}Q_{e}^{}(x)`$.

$`Q_e`$ is purely the selective extinction as opposed to the total extinction, since for any spectral slope $`\beta `$ one does not in general know at what wavelength there is no extinction. To obtain the total extinction, we use the method described by ?, using consideration of energy conservation (relating the far IR excess to $`\beta `$). The ratio of total to selective extinction is parametrized as $`X_\lambda ^{}=A_\lambda /E(\beta )`$. For the HST F220W filter (central wavelength 2280Å, thus $`Q_e(\mathrm{F220W})=1.582`$) and the C94 starbursts, this value is constant at $`X_{F220W}^{}=1.6`$.

Using the starburst values of C94 to give $`\tau {}_{}{}^{l}{}_{B}{}^{}=0.494E(\beta )`$ and choosing $`\beta _0=2.5`$, we obtain

$$f^{}(\lambda )=\frac{10^{0.4\times 1.6(\beta +2.5)}f(\lambda )}{\mathrm{exp}\left[0.494(\beta +2.5)\left(Q_e(\lambda )1.582\right)\right]}$$
(1)
The dust extinction corrections are applied to our synthetic spectra prior to correcting for intergalactic extinction, using values for $`\beta `$ of $`2.5`$ (zero extinction), $`1.5`$ and $`0.5`$ (equivalent to $`E(BV)`$ of 0.00, 0.23 and 0.46).

## 5 Luminosity-SFR calibration

For the calibration between observed magnitude and star-formation rate, we choose for ease of comparison to use the same model as ?, namely a Salpeter IMF with upper mass cutoff at 80$`M_{}`$— this low cutoff has a significant effect on the magnitude (Figure 4).

For an $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ cosmology with $`\mathrm{H}_0=50`$ km s-1 Mpc-1, we find that a constant star formation rate of 10.0$`M_{}`$ yr-1 with solar metallicity at $`z=3.25`$ corresponds to a magnitude in $`R`$ of 24.88 at age 100Myr, tending asymptotically to $`R=24.79`$ as the galaxy ages444By an age of 60Myr, the luminosity is within 10% of this figure, and within 1% by an age of 400Myr.. This is slightly fainter than the value quoted by ?, but probably insignificant in view of the use of different spectral synthesis codes and stellar libraries.

Figure 4 shows the effect of changes in IMF, cosmology and evolutionary tracks. It is evident that accurate determination of the shape of the Madau curve is dependent on the cosmology, initial mass function and more accurate representations of stellar evolution at low metallicities.

## 6 Model colour-colour plots

Colour-colour plots for some of the three-filter photometric systems used in our observations are presented in Figures 5 to 10. A wider range of plots is available via the WWW at our website (?), together with an interface for the generation of plots for arbitrary colour pairs within a substantial database of optical, NIR and HST filters.

Galaxy colours are plotted at redshift increments of 0.05, together with colours typical of galactic stars, and our chosen selection criteria are shown. Young galaxies within the targetted redshift ranges have been highlighted for clarity.

In producing these plots, no assumptions have been made as to whether objects are likely to be observable. Galaxies are shown at all redshift intervals for which the ages of the oldest stars are less than the age of the Universe in any reasonable cosmology. In some cases evolved high–redshift objects will therefore be shown which are unphysically old or at least exceedingly unlikely to be observable within the foreseeable future.

Such plots can be used to determine the most effective use of broad-band filters to detect Lyman-break objects in future surveys. For efficient selection one must try to separate the locus of Lyman-break objects as much as possible from that of stars and low-redshift galaxies, an important factor is thus to ensure a reasonable span in wavelength between the filters used for selection. Figure 7 clearly shows the problem in using $`V`$ and $`R`$ as the two longer-wavelength bandpasses, since the two are too close in effective wavelength to give a significant colour term on intrinsically red objects. Using $`G`$ as the central filter is better (Figure 6) but Figure 5 shows that $`B`$ is optimum.

Obviously the choice of filters will be influenced somewhat by the targetted redshift, three-filter selection working most effectively where the central filter spans the wavelength of redshifted $`\mathrm{Ly}\alpha `$. UBR will be ineffective at selection of objects much beyond $`z3.1`$, whereas Steidel and co-workers have already shown the effectiveness of a system similar to our UGR out to around $`z3.5`$. Again, UGR is inappropriate beyond this: for instance we note that the radio galaxy 4C 41.17 at $`z=3.80`$ is too red in $`GR`$ to be selected in UGR, but is a clear dropout in UVR.

When searching for objects beyond $`z3.5`$, it becomes preferable to use $`B`$ rather than $`U`$ as the shortest wavelength bandpass. While UVI selection would in principle work well, the increased observing time required to make sufficiently deep observations in $`I`$ rather than $`R`$ owing to the increased sky background makes it advantageous to use $`B`$ in place of $`U`$ to decrease the necessary observing time in the bluest filter. As a central wavelength, $`V`$ is preferable to $`R`$ owing to the greater separation between high-redshift galaxies and low redshift objects, as can be seen from Figures 8 and 9.

## 7 Extensions to $`z>4.5`$

Selection of candidates at redshifts beyond $`z4.5`$ is perfectly feasible given sufficiently deep observations, although spectroscopic confirmation of such objects becomes much more difficult due to absorption and emission lines becoming redshifted to among the OH bands of the near-IR.

Steidel’s group have added an $`I`$ filter to their $`U_n`$$`G`$$``$ system in order to look for $`G`$ dropouts at $`z4.5`$, and have had considerable success (?). At higher redshifts still, $`V`$ dropouts can be searched for. A VRZ filter system is in theory very effective at selecting galaxies at $`z5`$, but observational considerations will in general make this impractical owing to the very high sky background, poor sensitivity of CCDs and severe problems with fringing if thinned CCDs are used.

In practice VRI is likely to be more suitable, indeed we use the data obtained in one of our fields to conduct a pilot study, but conclude that our data are insufficiently deep to probe a population of $`V`$ dropouts at $`z5`$. $`Z`$ imaging could be more effective with the use of large-format infra-red arrays, which are a factor of $`2`$ more sensitive than CCDs at such wavelengths, but the much greater area of CCDs, particularly in the form of large mosaic cameras, will give them the edge for some time to come.

Deep multicolour imaging surveys using large-format detectors will reveal many candidates. One such survey is being undertaken by researchers at Oxford using the Wide Field Camera on the Isaac Newton Telescope, imaging ten square degrees in $`BVRI`$ to depths comparable with this work, with subareas also imaged in $`U`$ and $`Z`$. Among the many possibilities of these data is that of searching for bright Lyman-break galaxies spanning the range $`2.8\stackrel{<}{_{}}z\stackrel{<}{_{}}5`$. Given the detection limits of the survey, we expect to find $`15000`$ $`U`$ dropouts at $`z3`$, 2000 or more $`R`$ dropouts at $`z4`$ and $`100`$ $`V`$ dropouts at $`z5`$ (?).

Shallower surveys can still make use of similar techniques for finding high–redshift objects. Though insufficiently deep to find galaxies at such redshifts, the Sloan Digital Sky Survey will probe quasars and other bright active galactic nuclei. Very similar colour selection techniques to ours have been applied to commissioning data to identify candidate quasars at redshifts above $`z\stackrel{>}{_{}}3.6`$ (??).

Beyond $`z6`$, intergalactic attenuation will affect even $`Z`$ band and objects at $`z>6`$ with star-formation rates typical of objects at $`z3`$ will have NIR magnitudes of 26 or beyond, difficult to observe even with long observations on 8–10m class telescopes. Ultimately observations of the earliest star-formation in the Universe at $`10\stackrel{<}{_{}}z\stackrel{<}{_{}}30`$ must be the preserve of NGST and similar instruments.

## 8 Acknowledgements

We thank Steve Rawlings, Lance Miller, Max Pettini, Gavin Dalton and Tony Lynas-Gray for helpful discussions. REJS acknowledges the support of a PPARC studentship. This research has made use of NASA’s Astrophysics Data System Abstract Service.


format: text

text:
# 𝜈-𝐾⁰ Analogy, Dirac-Majorana Neutrino Duality and the Neutrino Oscillations

## 1 Introduction

In view of the neutrino oscillation data, a simple $`(2+2)`$-form of the four-neutrino mixing phenomenology  is considered in  which is restricted to CP-conservation and based on an, initiated by Pontecorvo , extended neutrino analogy with the duality behavior of the hadronic system of the neutral kaons . Unlike the kaons, the neutrinos are elementary particles, leptons, and this lepton-hadron oscillation analogy prompted the suggestion of a new physical notion, the Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality. As it is known, a carrying lepton charge four-component Dirac field can be represented as a maximal mixing superposition of two two-component Majorana fields with equal masses and opposite CP-parities, e.g. . “Duality” means that massive neutrinos behave either as Dirac particles, or antiparticles, or as pairs of Majorana ones depending on the specific physical phenomena in which they are observed, and therefore the Majorana neutrinos come only in pairs with opposite CP-parities.

Beyond the formal differences, the suggested Dirac-Majorana duality properties of the neutrinos and the known duality properties of the neutral kaons have certain similar roots in particle physics. A massive charged field, ($`K^0`$-meson with strangeness, or Dirac neutrino fields with lepton charge) is a maximal mixing superposition of two “neutral” fields with equal masses, the unification is protected by symmetry. The “long-baseline” particle oscillations (oscillations of strangeness, or lepton charge) afford a universal mechanism for the transformation of very small perturbation effects of a real short-range charge symmetry violating interaction into certain large observable physical effects. It is because the charge symmetry violation renders the mentioned above charged field superposition phase-unlocked what leads via the long-baseline oscillations to large observable effects at large distances $`L`$ from the particle production vertex with a relativistic dimensional relation $`LE/\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ is the mass-squared difference of the emerging pair of real neutral fields ($`K_1^0`$, $`K_2^0`$-mesons, or a pair of Majorana neutrino fields) and $`E`$ is their energy. Hence the origin of the suggested Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality can be analogous to the known origin of the neutral kaon duality.

Just because particle-antiparticle oscillation phenomena are well known in physics, they cannot be easily dismissed in the neutrino oscillation phenomenology. With such oscillations, the necessary condition that the charge of a particle maintains its explicit physical meaning reads $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2m^2`$, i.e. the charge violating interaction must be a small perturbation effect (particle oscillations with $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2m^2`$, if possible, should be charge conserving “short-baseline” oscillations, what is a different kind of particle oscillations). The long-baseline oscillations generate maximal charge violating effects no matter how weak are the new charge violating interactions. If the latter vanish, the long-baseline oscillation length would just grow infinitely, with the relevant particles being definitely Dirac fermions. Otherwise, they have dual properties. The neutrinos can be described as Dirac neutrino or antineutrino states in the semiweak interactions while being described as pairs of Majorana neutrino states in the long-baseline neutrino oscillations. No consistent theory of such a fundamental Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality is known as yet, also . But the neutrino oscillation data seem to point out new physics, and this notion is not excluded as yet. The notion of Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality at the approximation level of CP-invariance leads below to a physically motivated minimal neutrino mixing ansatz (the simplest symmetric form of the so-called $`(2+2)`$-scheme) with not more than two mixing angles, it conforms naturally to a number of well known neutrino oscillation data. Indications that may be in apparent disagreement with the minimal model of Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality, Sec. 2, come from the recent Super-Kamiokande solar neutrino oscillation data, Sec. 3.

## 2 Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality ansatz

The three weak interaction neutrino eigenstates $`\nu _e`$, $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ in the known charged and neutral weak interaction lepton currents of the SM, plus one sterile neutrino $`\nu _s`$, and also the weak interaction eigenstates of the corresponding antineutrinos $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_e(\nu _e)^c`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu (\nu _\mu )^c`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau (\nu _\tau )^c`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_s(\nu _s)^c`$, are represented by the following superposition ansatz :

$`\nu _e`$ $`=\left[\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{cos}\vartheta +\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta \right]_\mathrm{L},`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_e`$ $`=\left[(\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D})^c\mathrm{cos}\vartheta +(\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D})^c\mathrm{sin}\vartheta \right]_\mathrm{R},`$ (1)
$`\nu _\mu `$ $`=\left[\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta +\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{cos}\vartheta \right]_\mathrm{L},`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu `$ $`=\left[(\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D})^c\mathrm{sin}\vartheta +(\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D})^c\mathrm{cos}\vartheta \right]_\mathrm{R},`$ (2)
$`\nu _\tau `$ $`=\left[(\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D})^c\mathrm{sin}\phi +(\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D})^c\mathrm{cos}\phi \right]_\mathrm{L},`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau `$ $`=\left[\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{sin}\phi +\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{cos}\phi \right]_\mathrm{R},`$ (3)
$`\nu _s`$ $`=\left[(\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D})^c\mathrm{cos}\phi (\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D})^c\mathrm{sin}\phi \right]_\mathrm{L},`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_s`$ $`=\left[\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{cos}\phi \nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{sin}\phi \right]_\mathrm{R},`$ (4)
Here, $`\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}`$ are two carrying lepton charge four-component Dirac neutrino fields with masses $`m_\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}`$ and $`m_{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}`$ and with the mass Lagrangian term

$$\mathrm{\Delta }L^\mathrm{D}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i}{}m_i^\mathrm{D}\left[\overline{\nu _i^\mathrm{D}}\nu _i^\mathrm{D}+\overline{(\nu _i^\mathrm{D})^c}(\nu _i^\mathrm{D})^c\right],i=\mathrm{I},\mathrm{II}.$$
(5)
The symbols $`(\nu _i^\mathrm{D})^c`$ denote the Dirac antineutrino fields and the superscript $`c`$ means charge conjugation. The L and R subscripts denote left and right chirality states of the neutrinos in the weak interaction currents, which are defined by the projection operators $`(1\gamma _5)/2`$ and $`(1+\gamma _5)/2`$, respectively.

With the ansatz in Eqs. (1)–(4), the lepton charge is conserved in the semiweak interactions of the SM with the definition of the seven “leptons” ($`l_k=+1`$, $`k=1÷7`$):

$$\nu _e,\nu _\mu ,\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau ,\stackrel{~}{\nu }_s,e^{},\mu ^{},\tau ^+,$$
(6)
and the seven “antileptons” ($`l_k=1`$, $`k=1÷7`$):

$$\stackrel{~}{\nu }_e,\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu ,\nu _\tau ,\nu _s,e^+,\mu ^+,\tau ^{}.$$
(6)
The selection rule of lepton charge conservation in the semiweak interactions with the lepton charge definition in Eq. (6) leads to the important no-mixing of the Dirac neutrino mass eigenstates $`\nu _i^\mathrm{D}`$ with the Dirac antineutrino mass eigenstates $`(\nu _i^\mathrm{D})^c`$ in the ansatz (1)–(4) and therefore to the physically motivated restriction to only two mixing angles $`\vartheta `$ and $`\phi `$.

In contrast to the conservation of the separate electron, muon and tauon numbers, the lepton charge conservation with the definition (6) is not violated by the Dirac neutrino masses, Eq. (5), in the electroweak perturbation theory.

The definition of the lepton charge in Eq. (6) is rather uncommon. Usually all three lepton flavor pairs ($`\nu _e`$, $`e`$), ($`\nu _\mu `$, $`\mu `$) and ($`\nu _\tau `$, $`\tau `$) are implied to have the same lepton charge, e.g. $`l=+1`$. The suggestion that the three neutrinos are represented (beyond the SM) by three independent four-component Dirac fields would lead then to three sterile neutrinos as the right components of the Dirac neutrino fields with zero weak isospin and hypercharge. With the definition of the lepton charge (6) and the ansatz (1)–(4) and (5), we introduced not three but only two four-component Dirac neutrinos and so there is here only one sterile neutrino. The new $`SU_L(2)\times U(1)`$ electroweak symmetry representation and lepton charge content of the neutrinos in the ansatz (1)–(4) get more transparent in the limit of equal mixing angles $`\phi =\vartheta `$. In this case we can define two four-component Dirac neutrinos $`\nu ^e`$ and $`\nu ^\mu `$ in a one-parameter economical version of the ansatz (1)–(4),

$`\nu _e=\nu _\mathrm{L}^e(\stackrel{~}{\nu }_e=\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mathrm{R}^e),\stackrel{~}{\nu }_s=\nu _\mathrm{R}^e(\nu _s=\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mathrm{L}^e),`$
$`\nu _\mu =\nu _\mathrm{L}^\mu (\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu =\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mathrm{R}^\mu ),\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau =\nu _\mathrm{R}^\mu (\nu _\tau =\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mathrm{L}^\mu ),`$ (7)
$`\nu ^e\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{cos}\vartheta +\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta ,\nu ^\mu \nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta +\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}\mathrm{cos}\vartheta .`$
Both the left and right components of the four-component Dirac “muon” neutrino $`\nu ^\mu `$ are active in the weak interactions and represent the up- and down-components of the $`SU_L(2)`$-doublets $`(\nu ^\mu ,\mu ^{})_\mathrm{L}`$ and $`(\tau ^+,\nu ^\mu )_\mathrm{R}`$, respectively. On the other hand, only the left component of the four-component Dirac “electron” neutrino $`\nu ^e`$ in the electroweak doublet $`(\nu ^e,e^{})_\mathrm{L}`$ is active in the weak interactions, whereas its right component $`\nu _\mathrm{R}^e`$ remains a sterile neutrino in the SM. In contrast to the case of massless neutrinos in the SM, the Dirac mass Lagrangian term (5) generates transitions $`\nu _\mathrm{L}^\mu \nu _\mathrm{R}^\mu `$ and $`\nu _\mathrm{L}^e\nu _\mathrm{R}^e`$, i.e. it makes possible the transitions of the muon neutrino into the tau antineutrino, $`\nu _\mu \stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau `$, and also transitions of the electron neutrino into sterile antineutrino, which will be realized by the involvement of the Dirac masses in the weak interactions. In the more general mixing with $`\vartheta \phi `$, as in Eqs. (1)–(4), the Dirac neutrino masses generate all four possible types of the lepton charge conserving transitions in the weak interactions $`(\nu _e,\nu _\mu )(\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau ,\stackrel{~}{\nu }_s)`$. With the definition in Eq. (6), interesting though extremely suppressed (factor $`m_\nu ^2/E_\nu ^2`$) lepton charge conserving reactions, e.g.

$$\nu _\mu +(A,Z)(A,Z1)+\tau ^+,$$

are possible through the involvement of the Dirac neutrino masses in the lepton weak interactions. It is appropriate to note here that massive neutrinos are produced in the weak interactions with not complete longitudinal polarization. In our neutrino mixing pattern (1)–(4), it means that the incoming $`\nu _\mu `$ in the reaction above is an effective state including the muon neutrino plus a very small admixture of the tau and sterile antineutrinos. Because of the suppression by the very small neutrino masses, the violation of the $`(e\mu )\tau `$ universality in the definition of the lepton charge in Eq. (6) does not disagree with any known data.

The data of the atmospheric, solar and the LSND experiments can be explained with the following values of the neutrino mass-squared differences

$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_1^2`$ $`=`$ $`m_1^{}_{}{}^{}2m_1^2=\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{solar}}^210^{10}(\text{Vac}),\text{or}10^5(\text{MSW})\text{eV}^2,`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_2^2`$ $`=`$ $`m_2^{}_{}{}^{}2m_2^2=\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{atm}}^210^3÷10^2\text{eV}^2,`$ (8)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ $``$ $`m_2^2m_1^21\text{eV}^2`$
with a possible scheme of the neutrino mass spectrum

$$\stackrel{solar}{\stackrel{}{\mathrm{m}_1<\mathrm{m}_{}^{}{}_{1}{}^{}}}\stackrel{atm}{\stackrel{}{\mathrm{m}_2<\mathrm{m}_{}^{}{}_{2}{}^{}}}.$$
(9A)
and another possible scheme (9B) where the positions of the “solar” and the “atm” doublet splittings of Eq. (9A) are interchanged.

To describe the neutrino mass data of Eq. (8) in accordance with the single phenomenological approach of the $`\nu K^0`$ analogy, we should introduce an effective mass Lagrangian term $`\mathrm{\Delta }L^\mathrm{M}`$, called Majorana term, with maximal lepton charge violation $`\mathrm{\Delta }l=\pm 2`$,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }L^\mathrm{M}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i}{}m_i^\mathrm{M}\left[\overline{\nu _i^\mathrm{D}}(\nu _i^\mathrm{D})^c+\overline{(\nu _i^\mathrm{D})^c}\nu _i^\mathrm{D}\right],0<m_i^\mathrm{M}m_i^\mathrm{D},i=\mathrm{I},\mathrm{II}.$$
(10)
It has the physical meaning of a very small perturbation of the twofold mass-degenerate Dirac neutrino-antineutrino zero order approximation system, Eq. (5). This type of exact neutrino mass-degeneracy is certainly a natural zero-order approximation because it is protected by the CPT-invariance. To consider the lepton charge violating interaction as a small perturbation effect is necessary for modelling the Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality, see Sec. 1.

The simplest admissible texture of the neutrino interactions, used here, reads: the sole location of lepton charge violation in the lepton interactions is in the left-right symmetric effective Majorana mass term (10) with physical meaning of a small perturbation, whereas the sole location of the left-right asymmetry is in the lepton charge conserving weak interactions. The left-right symmetry of the Majorana term (10) leads below to the maximal mixing of the Majorana neutrinos. The perturbative status of the Majorana term (10) leads to the fine doublet structure of the neutrino mass spectrum.

It should be noted that the Dirac and Majorana neutrino mass Lagrangian terms (5) and (10) are not compatible with the minimal Higgs mechanism of the SM electroweak theory. They are introduced here as a continuation of the neutrino mixing ansatz (1)–(4) in an attempt to scheme the new physics beyond the SM, which could be the source of the suggested dual Dirac-Majorana neutrino properties; the Majorana mass term (10) being analogous to the ($`K_1^0`$, $`K_2^0`$) mass Lagrangian term which schemes the relevant perturbative $`K_0\overline{K}_0`$ effect of the weak interactions. As follows, the neutrino mixing ansatz in (1)–(4), (5) and (10) leads uniquely to the symmetric form  of the widely discussed, e.g. , four-neutrino $`(2+2)`$-mixing scheme.

The total neutrino mass Lagrangian term can be rewritten in another form

$`\mathrm{\Delta }L^\nu `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }L^\mathrm{D}+\mathrm{\Delta }L^\mathrm{M}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}(m_k\overline{\nu }_k\nu _k+m_k^{}\overline{\nu }_k^{}\nu _k^{}),k=1,2,`$ (11)
$`m_k`$ $`=`$ $`(m_k^\mathrm{D}m_k^\mathrm{M}),m_k^{}=(m_k^\mathrm{D}+m_k^\mathrm{M}),m_k^{}m_km_k.`$
Here, ($`\nu _k`$, $`\nu _k^{}`$), $`k=1,2`$, are two pairs of truly neutral Majorana neutrino mass eigenstates (with CP-invariance they are stationary states). The Majorana neutrino states are related to the primary neutrino and antineutrino Dirac mass eigenstates $`\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}`$, $`\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}`$ and $`(\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D})^c`$, $`(\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D})^c`$:

$$\nu _k=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\nu _k^\mathrm{D}+(\nu _k^\mathrm{D})^c\right],\nu _k^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\nu _k^\mathrm{D}(\nu _k^\mathrm{D})^c\right].$$
(12)
The CP-parities of these Majorana neutrinos are opposite in each of the two doublets, see also .

After the small perturbation by the Majorana mass term (10) is switched on, the Majorana neutrino states $`\nu _k`$ and $`\nu _k^{}`$ are the new stationary states, while $`\nu _k^\mathrm{D}`$ and $`(\nu _k^\mathrm{D})^c`$ in Eq. (12) are the new nonstationary neutrino states, which are not Dirac states with lepton charge any more, comp. Sec. 1. It is because of phase-unlocking effect due to the different masses of the Majorana neutrinos $`\nu _k`$ and $`\nu _k^{}`$ in the superpositions

$$\nu _k^s=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\nu _k+\nu _k^{}),\nu _k^a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\nu _k\nu _k^{}),k=1,2.$$
(12)
The superscripts $`s`$ and $`a`$ here denote symmetric and antisymmetric states under the interchange of the Majorana neutrinos $`\nu _k`$ and $`\nu _k^{}`$ . At distances $`L`$ from the neutrino production vertex in the semiweak interactions, which are much shorter than the long-baseline oscillation length, $`\nu _k^s`$ and $`\nu _k^a`$ remain nearly Dirac neutrino and antineutrino states. It is mainly because of two factors: one is the maximal mixing of the Majorana neutrinos $`\nu _k`$ and $`\nu _k^{}`$ in (12) as a vestige of their primary Dirac neutrino origin in the semiweak interactions, and the other is negligible physical effects of lepton charge violation owing to the small differences of the Majorana neutrino phases in the neutrino mass doublets at the stated distances $`L`$. The Majorana neutrino states in Eq. (12) correspond to the truly neutral meson states $`K_1^0`$ and $`K_2^0`$ in the used here analogy, while the Dirac neutrinos $`\nu _i^\mathrm{D}`$ and antineutrinos $`\left(\nu _i^\mathrm{D}\right)^c`$ correspond to the primary neutral kaons which are produced in the strong interactions with definite strangeness as $`K^0`$ or $`\overline{K}^0`$ mesons and become the symmetric and antisymmetric superpositions, i.e. $`K^0=(K_1^0+K_2^0)/\sqrt{2}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0=(K_1^0K_2^0)/\sqrt{2}`$, at finite distances $`L`$ from the production vertex, comp. Eq. (12).

Unlike the formal description in the review , where the charge parities of the Majorana neutrinos are always chosen to be $`C=+1`$, the choice here of opposite charge parities $`C=+1`$ and $`C=1`$ for the Majorana neutrinos $`\nu _k`$ and $`\nu _k^{}`$ respectively proved to be more convenient for the purpose of modelling the Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality.

Lepton charge violating reactions, e.g. neutrinoless double $`\beta `$-decay, are possible because of the Majorana neutrino mass doublet splittings, they are naturally suppressed by factors much smaller than in the mentioned above possible lepton charge conserving $`\nu _\mu \stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau `$ transformations because of the relation $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_1^2m_1^2`$.

As a rule, the doublet structure of a quantum system reveals an underlying broken symmetry. There is no exception here: the doublet structure of the physical Majorana neutrino mass spectrum reveals the broken, by the perturbative effective Majorana term $`\mathrm{\Delta }L^\mathrm{M}`$, lepton charge symmetry of the semiweak interactions. The stabilizing condition for the fine two-doublet structure of the Majorana neutrino mass spectrum here is the protected by CPT-invariance mass-degeneracy of the zero-order approximation Dirac neutrino-antineutrino system. This fine structure of the Majorana neutrino mass spectrum is natural: if $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_1^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_2^2`$ were zero, the lepton charge symmetry would be restored.

The formal definition of the nearly Dirac neutrino $`\nu _k^s`$ and antineutrino $`\nu _k^a`$ fields is close to the definition of the “pseudo-Dirac neutrinos” in Ref. . The pseudo-Dirac neutrino field approximation is analogous to the well known effective approximation of carrying strangeness $`K^0`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ meson states of the strong interactions so far as we count the weak interactions as very small perturbations, $`m(K_2^0)m(K_1^0)m(K^0)`$. Just as the $`K^0`$ and the $`\overline{K}^0`$ meson states are produced in the strong interactions with definite strangeness (charge) whereas the dual truly neutral meson states $`K_1^0`$ and $`K_2^0`$ show up in the $`K^0`$-oscillations, the $`\nu _i^\mathrm{D}`$ and $`(\nu _i^\mathrm{D})^c`$ neutrino states are produced in the standard weak interactions with definite lepton charge as Dirac neutrinos whereas the dual truly neutral Majorana neutrino states $`\nu _k`$ and $`\nu _k^{}`$ show up in the long-baseline neutrino oscillations. The significant difference is that with three lepton flavors we need two massive Dirac neutrino fields $`\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}`$ (and Dirac antineutrino fields $`(\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D})^c`$ and $`(\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D})^c`$) and unlike the $`K^0`$-case there is a possibility of their mixing. Neutrino mixing in Eqs. (1)–(4), with different mixing angles $`\vartheta `$ and $`\phi `$ for the two chiral neutrino states $`\nu _{i\mathrm{L}}^\mathrm{D}`$ \[$`(\nu _i^\mathrm{D})_\mathrm{R}^c`$\], $`i=\mathrm{I},\mathrm{II}`$, and the two chiral antineutrino states $`(\nu _i^\mathrm{D})_\mathrm{L}^c`$ \[$`\nu _{i\mathrm{R}}^\mathrm{D}]`$, $`i=\mathrm{I},\mathrm{II}`$, respectively, is considered below. The condition of different mixings for the left and right components of the two four-component neutrinos $`\nu _\mathrm{I}^\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\nu _{\mathrm{II}}^\mathrm{D}`$ is here a part of the left-right asymmetry of the lepton weak interactions. In the one-parameter version (7) of the present model with the relation $`\phi =\vartheta `$ this additional left-right asymmetry disappears.

The sterile neutrino occurrence is here a necessary result of two conditions: 1) there is the lepton charge conservation in the semiweak interactions with three lepton flavors and 2) the neutrinos represented by the minimum of primary two massive four-component Dirac fields. Because of these conditions and the maximal parity nonconservation in the neutrino weak interactions, there must be one two-component nonactive neutrino degree of freedom, which must be imparted as a sterile neutrino in both the short-baseline and the long-baseline neutrino oscillations, see equations below.

The long-baseline neutrino oscillations, including the atmospheric and solar ones, are effective four-component Dirac neutrino-antineutrino lepton charge oscillations (i.e. left Dirac neutrino $``$ left Dirac antineutrino, or right Dirac neutrino $``$ right Dirac antineutrino, e.g. (7)), as a result of neutrino duality; beyond the formal differences, these lepton charge oscillations have the same physical meaning as the oscillations of strangeness in the $`K^0`$-meson oscillations: $`K^0(K_1^0+K_2^0)/\sqrt{2},\mathrm{\Delta }m0<\mathrm{oscillations},\mathrm{\Delta }t0>(K_1^0K_2^0)/\sqrt{2}\overline{K}^0`$, as a result of neutral kaon duality. On the other hand, the short-baseline neutrino oscillations are mainly lepton charge conserving effective two-Dirac-neutrino oscillations resulting in the transformations $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ with the oscillation amplitude $`\mathrm{sin}^22\vartheta `$, and $`\nu _\tau \nu _s`$ with the oscillation amplitude $`\mathrm{sin}^22\phi `$. These short-baseline oscillations have no $`K^0`$-analogy because of the absence of a relevant second $`K`$-generation, they would remain mainly unchanged even if the neutrino mass matrix were of the regular Dirac type with no neutrino mass doublet splittings. The main inference here is that only the two mentioned types of the short-baseline neutrino oscillations are possible: because of lepton charge conservation in the oscillations of this type, there are no short-baseline $`\nu _\mu ,\nu _e\nu _\tau ,\nu _s`$, oscillation transformations. This inference is supported by the positive LSND indications  and also by the negative data of the CHORUS and NOMAD experiments .

## 3 Fitting to the neutrino oscillation data

The equations for the neutrino oscillation probabilities below resulted from Eqs. (1), (2), (3) and (4) after revealing there (and also in Eq. (7)) the Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality condition:

$$\nu _i^\mathrm{D}\nu _i^s=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\nu _i+\nu _i^{}\right),(\nu _i^\mathrm{D})^c\nu _i^a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\nu _i\nu _i^{}\right),$$
(13)
in accordance with Eq. (12). The probabilities are written in terms of the neutrino mass scheme (9A), but the conclusions do not depend on this choice.

The probability of the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillations reads

$$W(\nu _\mu \nu _e)=\mathrm{sin}^22\vartheta [<\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_{12}^2)>\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_1^2)\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_2^2)],$$
(14)
where the symbol $`<>`$ in the first term denotes the arithmetic mean value of the appropriate four terms related to the four “large” mass-squared differences among the two different neutrino mass doublets. The notations in Eq. (14) and below are

$$(\delta m_{ij}^2)\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{ij}^2L}{4E},\mathrm{\Delta }m_{ij}^2m_j^2m_i^2,(\delta m_1^2)(\delta m_{11^{}}^2),(\delta m_2^2)(\delta m_{22^{}}^2),$$
(15)
with $`i,j=1,1^{},2,2^{}`$. $`E`$ is the neutrino energy and $`L`$ is the distance from the neutrino source to the detector. The probabilities of the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ transformations are determined by one factor $`\mathrm{sin}^22\vartheta `$, which is the effective LSND “two-neutrino” oscillation amplitude with an estimation

$$\mathrm{sin}^22\vartheta 2\times 10^3÷4\times 10^2.$$
(16)
The second and third terms in Eq. (14) give small contributions to the total $`\nu _\mu `$\- and $`\nu _e`$-disappearance atmospheric and solar oscillation probabilities (comp. Eqs. (20) and (23)) from the channels $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ and $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$, respectively. These negative sign terms in the probability $`W(\nu _\mu \nu _e)`$ indicate subtraction of the long-baseline lepton charge disappearance probabilities, what is a necessary result of the lepton charge conservation in the short-baseline oscillations in the present model.

The probability of the short-baseline $`\nu _\tau \nu _s`$ oscillation transformations follows from Eq. (14) after the substitution $`\vartheta \phi `$,

$$W(\nu _\tau \nu _s)=\frac{\mathrm{sin}^22\phi }{\mathrm{sin}^22\theta }W(\nu _\mu \nu _e).$$
(17)
A direct estimation of the mixing angle $`\phi `$ in Eq. (17) could be by the measurement of the $`\nu _\tau `$-survival probability in the short-baseline tau-neutrino oscillation experiment. It is not available at present, but the recent detection of the tau-neutrino at Fermilab  should eventually make possible such an experiment.

The probability of the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillations reads

$`W(\nu _\mu \nu _\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}^2\vartheta \mathrm{cos}^2\phi \mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_2^2)+\mathrm{sin}^2\vartheta \mathrm{sin}^2\phi \mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_1^2)`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{sin}2\vartheta \mathrm{sin}2\phi \left[\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_{1^{}2^{}}^2)+\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_{12}^2)\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_{12^{}}^2)\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_{1^{}2}^2)\right].`$
The probability of the $`\nu _\mu \nu _s`$ oscillations can be obtained from Eq. (3) by the substitution $`\phi \phi +\pi /2`$, and so the probability of the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau +\nu _s`$ transformations,

$$W(\nu _\mu \nu _\tau +\nu _s)=\mathrm{cos}^2\vartheta \mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_2^2)+\mathrm{sin}^2\vartheta \mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_1^2),$$
(19)
is independent of the second mixing angle $`\phi `$ and of the neutrino mass doublet separation $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}`$. Eq. (19) describes the probability of the long-baseline $`\nu _\mu `$ oscillation transformations. With the contribution from Eq. (14), the total probability of the $`\nu _\mu `$ oscillation transformations reads

$$W(\nu _\mu \nu _\tau +\nu _s+\nu _e)=\mathrm{cos}^4\vartheta \mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_2^2)+\mathrm{sin}^4\vartheta \mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_1^2)+\mathrm{sin}^22\vartheta <\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_{12}^2)>.$$
(20)
The first term in Eq. (20) is the dominant one, it gives the main part of the muon neutrino disappearance probability in the atmospheric long-baseline $`\nu _\mu `$-neutrino oscillations with the large amplitude

$$A_{\mathrm{atm}}\mathrm{cos}^4\vartheta 1.$$
(21)
It comes mainly from the transformations $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ and $`\nu _\mu \nu _s`$, their partial contributions carry the factors $`\mathrm{cos}^2\phi `$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\phi `$, respectively. At $`\phi =45^{}`$ the ratio of these contributions $`\mathrm{cot}^2\phi `$ is near to one. The contribution from the transformations $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ in Eq. (20) is a small short-baseline effect. The recent data indications in favor of the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ transitions in the atmospheric $`\nu _\mu `$-oscillations  seem to exclude a dominant contribution from the $`\nu _\mu \nu _s`$ mode in these oscillations.

The probability of the $`\nu _\mu `$-survival oscillations and the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ appearance transformations in the coming long-baseline accelerator $`\nu _\mu `$-oscillation experiments should be

$$W(\nu _\mu \nu _\mu )\mathrm{cos}^2\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_2^2L}{4E},W(\nu _\mu \nu _\tau )\mathrm{cos}^2\phi \mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_2^2L}{4E},$$
(22)
where $`L`$ is the distance from the neutrino source to the detector. The results of these experiments should lead to a clear estimation of the mixing angle $`\phi `$ through the term $`\mathrm{cos}^2\phi `$ in Eq. (22).

The probability of the $`\nu _\tau `$ oscillation transformations $`\nu _\tau \nu _\mu +\nu _e+\nu _s`$ follows from Eq. (20) after the substitution $`\vartheta \phi `$.

The probability of the $`\nu _e\nu _s`$ and $`\nu _e\nu _s+\nu _\tau `$ long-baseline oscillation transformations can be obtained from Eqs. (3) and (19), respectively, after the substitution $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_2^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_1^2`$. The total probability of the $`\nu _e`$ oscillation transformations reads

$$W(\nu _e\nu _s+\nu _\tau +\nu _\mu )=\mathrm{cos}^4\vartheta \mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_1^2)+\mathrm{sin}^4\vartheta \mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_2^2)+\mathrm{sin}^22\vartheta <\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta m_{12}^2)>.$$
(23)
The first term in this equation is the dominant one with nearly maximal amplitude. It comes from the transformations $`\nu _e\nu _s`$ and $`\nu _e\nu _\tau `$, their partial contributions are with factors $`\mathrm{cos}^2\phi `$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\phi `$, respectively. Again, the contribution from the transformations $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ is a small short-baseline effect.

The phenomenology above leads to a complementary relation between the possible dominant modes in the atmospheric and the solar oscillations: if the tau neutrino dominates the atmospheric $`\nu _\mu `$-oscillations, then the sterile neutrino should dominate the solar $`\nu _e`$-oscillations, and conversely.

If the second mixing angle in the ansatz (1)–(4) is very small, $`\phi 45^{}`$, as in the economical one-parameter version (7), the tau neutrino will strongly dominate the atmospheric $`\nu _\mu `$-oscillations, and the sterile neutrino will strongly dominate the solar $`\nu _e`$-oscillations. This inference is in good agreement with the recent atmospheric Super-Kamiokande muon neutrino oscillation data , but it does not agree with the solar neutrino data , which seem to exclude the $`\nu _e\nu _s`$ oscillation mode as the dominant one in the solar neutrino oscillations.

In the other extreme case with a large mixing angle $`\phi =45^{}`$, the dominant disappearance neutrino transformations in both the atmospheric and solar neutrino oscillations should be the same, $`\nu _\mu (\nu _\tau +\nu _s)`$ and $`\nu _e(\nu _\tau +\nu _s)`$, respectively, with equal $`\nu _\tau `$ and $`\nu _s`$ modes in each case, while the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ modes are strongly suppressed in these long-baseline neutrino oscillations in accordance at least with the most confident atmospheric Super-Kamiokande data .

Note, that none of the solar neutrino oscillation data are comparable with the Super-Kamiokande atmospheric neutrino oscillation data  by their confidence as yet . With the new atmospheric neutrino indication , the mixing angle region $`\phi 45^{}`$ is certainly the least disfavored by the recent neutrino oscillation data.

## 4 Conclusion

To conclude, an attempt is made to explain relations between well known different neutrino data by the suggestion of a new unifying physical notion, the Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality. The nearly maximal neutrino transformation $`\nu _\mu (\nu _\tau +\nu _x)`$, $`xe`$, oscillation amplitude in the atmospheric Super-Kamiokande neutrino experiment , together with lepton charge conservation in all the known weak interaction reactions, and the data dictated doublet character of the neutrino mass spectrum, Eq. (8), with the LSND indications accepted, e.g. , prompts an extended analogy between the neutrino properties and the duality properties of the neutral kaons. Duality means an indication of new physics: the neutrinos are carrying lepton charge Dirac fields in the semiweak interactions, and they are pairs of dual truly neutral Majorana fields in the long-baseline neutrino oscillations. The massive neutrinos are produced in the semiweak interactions as Dirac particles with not complete longitudinal polarization, and they remain nearly Dirac neutrinos (see the discussion of Eq. (12)) at finite distances from the production vertex until these distances remain much shorter than the long-baseline oscillation lengths.

The necessary restriction to three active in the weak interactions lepton flavors determines a minimum of two four-component massive Dirac neutrinos, two associated pairs of Majorana neutrinos, and it leads to the involvement of one sterile neutrino which has to be imparted in the neutrino oscillations.

The suggested dual Dirac-Majorana properties of the neutrinos are modelled in a minimal four-neutrino mixing ansatz for the three flavor and one sterile neutrinos (1)–(4) and the Dirac neutrino mass term (5) which describe lepton charge conservation in the semiweak interactions with a special lepton charge pattern (6), plus a Majorana neutrino mass term (10) which is regarded by definition as a small perturbation effect. As a result, we get a simple unifying neutrino oscillation phenomenology with two nearly mass-degenerate Majorana neutrino doublets in Eq. (11), the maximal neutrino mixing condition in Eq. (13) and the physically motivated important restriction to not more than two mixing angles $`\vartheta `$ and $`\phi `$ in the CP-invariant lepton semiweak interactions with a symmetric $`(2+2)`$ neutrino mixing pattern (1)–(4) plus (13). The fine neutrino mass doublet structure is natural here because it is produced by a lepton charge symmetry violating perturbation on a zero-approximation system of two exactly twofold mass-degenerate Dirac neutrino-antineutrino pairs.

The model implies violation of the $`(e,\mu )\tau `$ universality and allows a group of suppressed by the small Dirac neutrino masses reactions, which involve basically the helicity-flip lepton charge conserving Dirac neutrino transformations $`\nu _\mu (\nu _e)\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau `$ (in contrast to the lepton charge violating, $`\mathrm{\Delta }l=\pm 2`$, helicity conserving Majorana neutrino transformations $`\nu _\mu (\nu _e)\nu _\tau `$ in the long-baseline neutrino oscillations), which will be testable in the next generations of neutrino reaction experiments. If the effective Dirac mass of the muon neutrino is not in the eV, but in the 100 keV region indeed , the production of the antitauons $`\tau ^+`$ by the high energy muon neutrinos $`\nu _\mu `$ on nuclei is more interesting, it is singled out in Sec. 2.

The necessary involvements of the sterile neutrino in the solar and atmospheric neutrino oscillations will be tested in many coming neutrino oscillation experiments as SNO, Super-Kamiokande, MiniBooNE, KARMEN, the accelerator long-baseline K2K and MINOS experiments and other neutrino oscillation experiments .

A crucial test of the ansatz (1)–(4) will be the coincidence of the two seemingly independent experimental values of the mixing angle $`\phi `$ from the long-baseline accelerator neutrino oscillation transformations $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$, Eq. (22), and the short-baseline $`\nu _\tau `$-survival oscillations, Eq. (17). With Dirac-Majorana neutrino duality, the restriction to not more than two mixing angles is feasible in the phenomenology of neutrino oscillations at the approximation of CP-invariance.

Beyond the formal differences, the suggested duality properties of the neutrinos are analogous to the well known duality properties of the neutral kaons. This physical idea was initiated by Pontecorvo and has gained new support  from the leading neutrino oscillation data since the main Super-Kamiokande atmospheric neutrino oscillation results in 1998 , and also the LSND indications . The new versatile developments in experimental neutrino physics will eventually prove or disprove this physical idea finally, e.g. .

## Acknowledgements

I would like to thank N.V. Mikheev for very useful discussions and valuable critical comments and L.A. Vassilevskaya and A.Ya. Parkhomenko for interest in this work and preparation of the LaTeX file.


text:
# 1 Pole clusters for resonances obtained in solution 1.

EXISTENCE AND PROPERTIES OF THE $`f_0(665)`$ STATE AND CHIRAL SYMMETRY 111 This work was supported by the Grant Program of Plenipotentiary of Slovak Republic at JINR. Yu.S. and M.N. were supported in part by the Slovak Scientific Grant Agency, Grant VEGA No. 2/7175/20; and D.K., by Grant VEGA No. 2/5085/99.

Yu.S. Surovtseva, D. Krupab, M. Nagyb

$`^a`$ Bogoliubov Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, JINR, Dubna 141 980, Russia
$`^b`$ Institute of Physics, SAS, Dúbravská cesta 9, 842 28 Bratislava, Slovakia

## Abstract

On the basis of a simultaneous description of the isoscalar $`s`$-wave of $`\pi \pi `$ scattering (from the threshold up to 1.9 GeV) and of $`\pi \pi K\overline{K}`$ process (from the threshold to $``$ 1.4 GeV) in the model-independent approach, it is shown that there exists the $`f_0(665)`$ state with properies of the $`\sigma `$-meson, the glueball nature of $`f_0(1500)`$ is indicated, and the $`f_0(1370)`$ is assigned mainly to $`s\overline{s}`$ state. The coupling constants of the observed states with $`\pi \pi `$ and $`K\overline{K}`$ systems and scattering lengths $`a_0^0(\pi \pi )`$ and $`a_0^0(K\overline{K})`$ are calculated. The existence of the $`f_0(665)`$ state and the obtained $`\pi \pi `$-scattering length ($`a_0^00.27m_{\pi ^+}^1`$) seem to suggest the linear realization of chiral symmetry.

Key-words: analyticity, unitarity, uniformization, multichannel resonance, scalar meson, QCD nature

1. The scalar-meson sector causes a lot of questions up to now. A strong model dependence of information on these objects (as wide multichannel states) obtained from experimental data makes sometimes the drawn conclusions doubtful. E.g., we have shown  that an inadequate description of multichannel states gives not only their distorted parameters when analyzing data but also can cause the fictitious states when one neglects important channels. In this report, we show that a large background earlier obtained in various analyses of the $`s`$-wave $`\pi \pi `$ scattering  hides, in reality, the $`\sigma `$-meson and the influence of the left-hand branch-point. The state with $`\sigma `$-meson properties is required by most models (like the linear $`\sigma `$-models and the Nambu – Jona-Lasinio models ) for spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry.

A model-independent information on multichannel states can be obtained only on the basis of the first principles (analyticity and unitarity) immediately applied to analyzing experimental data and using the mathematical fact that the local behaviour of analytic functions determined on the Riemann surface is governed by the nearest singularities on all sheets. Earlier, we have proposed that method for 2- and 3-channel resonances and developed the concept of standard clusters (poles on the Riemann surface) as a qualitative characteristic of a state and a sufficient condition of its existence . We outline this below for the 2-channel case. Then we analyze simultaneously experimental data on the processes $`\pi \pi \pi \pi ,K\overline{K}`$ in the channel with $`I^GJ^{PC}=0^+0^{++}`$. On the basis of obtained pole clusters for resonances, their coupling constants with the considered channels and scattering lengths compared with the results of various models, we conclude on the nature of the observed states and on the mechanism of chiral-symmetry breaking.

2. Two-Coupled-Channel Formalism. We consider the coupled processes of $`\pi \pi `$ and $`K\overline{K}`$ scattering and $`\pi \pi K\overline{K}`$. Therefore, we have the 2-channel $`S`$-matrix determined on the 4-sheeted Riemann surface. The matrix elements $`S_{\alpha \beta }`$, where $`\alpha ,\beta =1(\pi \pi ),2(K\overline{K})`$, have the right-hand (unitary) cuts along the real axis of the $`s`$-variable complex plane ($`s`$ is the invariant total energy squared), starting at $`4m_\pi ^2`$ and $`4m_K^2`$, and the left-hand cuts, beginning at $`s=0`$ for $`S_{11}`$ and at $`4(m_K^2m_\pi ^2)`$ for $`S_{22}`$ and $`S_{12}`$. The Riemann-surface sheets are numbered according to the signs of analytic continuations of the channel momenta $`k_1=(s/4m_\pi ^2)^{1/2}`$, $`k_2=(s/4m_K^2)^{1/2}`$ as follows: signs $`(\text{Im}k_1,\text{Im}k_2)=++,+,,+`$ correspond to the sheets I, II, III, IV.

The resonance representations on the Riemann surface are obtained with the help of the formulae, expressing analytic continuations of the matrix elements to unphysical sheets $`S_{\alpha \beta }^L`$ ($`L=II,III,IV`$) in terms of those on the physical sheet $`S_{\alpha \beta }^I`$ which have only zeros (beyond the real axis), corresponding to resonances:

$`S_{11}^{II}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_{11}^I}},S_{11}^{III}={\displaystyle \frac{S_{22}^I}{detS^I}},S_{11}^{IV}={\displaystyle \frac{detS^I}{S_{22}^I}},`$
$`S_{22}^{II}={\displaystyle \frac{detS^I}{S_{11}^I}},S_{22}^{III}={\displaystyle \frac{S_{11}^I}{detS^I}},S_{22}^{IV}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_{22}^I}},`$ (1)
$`S_{12}^{II}={\displaystyle \frac{iS_{12}^I}{S_{11}^I}},S_{12}^{III}={\displaystyle \frac{S_{12}^I}{detS^I}},S_{12}^{IV}={\displaystyle \frac{iS_{12}^I}{S_{22}^I}},`$
Here $`detS^I=S_{11}^IS_{22}^I(S_{12}^I)^2`$. These formulae immediately give the resonance representation by poles and zeros on the 4-sheeted Riemann surface. One must discriminate between three types of 2-channel resonances described by a pair of conjugate zeros on sheet I: (a) in $`S_{11}`$, (b) in $`S_{22}`$, (c) in each of $`S_{11}`$ and $`S_{22}`$. As seen from (S0.Ex1), to the resonances of types (a) and (b) one has to make correspond a pair of complex conjugate poles on sheet III, shifted relative to a pair of poles on sheet II and IV, respectively. To the states of type (c) one must consider corresponding two pairs of conjugate poles on sheet III. A resonance of every type is represented by a pair of complex-conjugate clusters (of poles and zeros on the Riemann surface) of size typical of strong interactions. The cluster kind is related to the state nature. The resonance, coupled relatively more strongly to the $`\pi \pi `$ channel than to the $`K\overline{K}`$ one, is described by the cluster of type (a); in the opposite case it is represented by the cluster of type (b) (say, the state with the dominant $`s\overline{s}`$ component); the flavour singlet (e.g. glueball) must be represented by the cluster of type (c) as a necessary condition.

For the simultaneous analysis of experimental data on the coupled processes it is convenient to use the Le Couteur-Newton relations  expressing the $`S`$-matrix elements of all coupled processes in terms of the Jost matrix determinant $`d(k_1,k_2)`$, the real analytic function with the only square-root branch-points at $`k_i=0`$. To take into account these right-hand branch-points at $`4m_\pi ^2`$ and $`4m_K^2`$ and also the left-hand one at $`s=0`$, we use the uniformizing variable

$$v=\frac{m_K\sqrt{s4m_\pi ^2}+m_\pi \sqrt{s4m_K^2}}{\sqrt{s(m_K^2m_\pi ^2)}}$$
(2)
which maps the 4-sheeted Riemann surface onto the $`v`$-plane, divided into two parts by a unit circle centered at the origin. Sheets I (II), III (IV) are mapped onto the exterior (interior) of the unit disk on the upper and lower $`v`$-half-plane, respectively. The physical region extends from point $`i`$ on the imaginary axis ($`\pi \pi `$ threshold) along the unit circle clockwise in the 1st quadrant to point 1 on the real axis ($`K\overline{K}`$ threshold) and then along the real axis to point $`b=\sqrt{(m_K+m_\pi )/(m_Km_\pi )}`$ into which $`s=\mathrm{}`$ is mapped on the $`v`$-plane. The intervals $`(\mathrm{},b],[b^1,b^1],[b,\mathrm{})`$ on the real axis are the images of the corresponding edges of the left-hand cut of the $`\pi \pi `$-scattering amplitude. The type (a) resonance is represented in $`S_{11}`$ by two pairs of the poles on the images of sheets II and III, symmetric to each other with respect to the imaginary axis, and by zeros, symmetric to these poles with respect to the unit circle. On $`v`$-plane, the Le Couteur-Newton relations are

$$S_{11}=\frac{d(v^1)}{d(v)},S_{22}=\frac{d(v^1)}{d(v)},S_{11}S_{22}S_{12}^2=\frac{d(v)}{d(v)}.$$
(3)
The condition of the real analyticity implies $`d(v^{})=d^{}(v)`$ for all $`v`$, and the unitarity needs the following relations to hold true for the physical $`v`$-values: $`|d(v^1)||d(v)|`$, $`|d(v^1)||d(v)|,`$ $`|d(v)|=|d(v)|`$.

The $`d(v)`$-function that already does not possess branch-points is taken as $`d=d_Bd_{res}`$ where $`d_B`$ is the part of the $`K\overline{K}`$ background that does not contribute to the $`\pi \pi `$-scattering amplitude. On the $`v`$-plane, $`S_{11}`$ has no cuts, however, the amplitudes of $`K\overline{K}\pi \pi ,K\overline{K}`$ processes do have the cuts on the $`v`$-plane, which arise from the left-hand cut on the $`s`$-plane, starting at the point $`s=4(m_K^2m_\pi ^2)`$. This left-hand cut will be neglected in the Riemann-surface structure, and the contribution on the cut will be taken into account in the $`K\overline{K}`$ background as a pole on the real $`s`$-axis on sheet I in the sub-$`K\overline{K}`$-threshold region; on the $`v`$-plane, this pole gives two poles on the unit circle in the upper half-plane, symmetric to each other with respect to the imaginary axis, and two zeros, symmetric to the poles with respect to the real axis. Therefore,

$$d_B=v^4(1pv)^4(1+p^{}v)^4,$$
(4)
where $`p`$ is the position of zero on the unit circle. The fourth power in (4) follows from eqs.(S0.Ex1) and from that, for the $`s`$-channel process $`\pi \pi K\overline{K}`$, the crossing $`u`$\- and $`t`$-channels are the $`\pi K`$ and $`\overline{\pi }K`$ scattering (exchanges in these channels contribute on the left-hand cut). The function $`d_{res}(v)`$ represents the contribution of resonances and, except for the point $`v=0`$, consists of the zeros of clusters:

$$d_{res}=v^M\underset{n=1}{\overset{M}{}}(1v_n^{}v)(1+v_nv),$$
(5)
where $`M`$ is the number of pairs of the conjugate zeros.

3. Analysis of experimental data. We analyze simultaneously the available experimental data on the $`\pi \pi `$-scattering  and process $`\pi \pi K\overline{K}`$  in the channel with $`I^GJ^{PC}=0^+0^{++}`$. As the data, we use the results of phase analyses which are given for phase shifts of the amplitudes ($`\delta _1`$ and $`\delta _{12}`$) and for moduli of the $`S`$-matrix elements $`\eta _a=|S_{aa}|`$ (a=1$`\pi \pi `$,2$`K\overline{K}`$) and $`\xi =|S_{12}|`$. The 2-channel unitarity condition gives $`\eta _1=\eta _2=\eta ,\xi =(1\eta ^2)^{1/2},\delta _{12}=\delta _1+\delta _2`$.

For a satisfactory description of the $`s`$-wave $`\pi \pi `$ scattering from the threshold to 1.89 GeV and process $`\pi \pi K\overline{K}`$ from the threshold to $``$ 1.4 GeV, three resonances turned out to be sufficient (solution 1): the two ones of type (a) ($`f_0(665)`$ and $`f_0(980)`$) and $`f_0(1500)`$ of type (c). I.e., a minimum scenario of the simultaneous description of these two processes does not require the $`f_0(1370)`$ resonance, therefore, if this meson exists, it must be relatively more weakly coupled to the $`\pi \pi `$ channel than to the $`K\overline{K}`$ one, i.e., be described by the cluster of type (b) (this would testify to the dominant $`s\overline{s}`$ component in this state). To confirm quantitatively this qualitative conclusion , we consider also the 2nd solution including the $`f_0(1370)`$ of type (b).

Solution 1: For $`\delta _1`$ and $`\eta `$, 113 and 50 experimental points , respectively, are used; when rejecting the points at 0.61, 0.65, and 0.73 GeV for $`\delta _1`$ and at 0.99, 1.65, and 1.85 GeV for $`\eta `$ which give an anomalously large contribution to $`\chi ^2`$, we obtain for $`\chi ^2/\text{ndf}`$ the values 2.7 and 0.72, respectively; the total $`\chi ^2/\text{ndf}`$ in the case of $`\pi \pi `$ scattering is 1.96.

The satisfactory description for $`|S_{12}|`$ is given from the threshold to $``$ 1.4 GeV. Here 35 experimental points  are used; $`\chi ^2/\text{ndf}1.11`$ when eliminating the points at 1.002, 1.265, and 1.287 GeV (with an especially large contribution to $`\chi ^2`$).

For $`\delta _{12}(\sqrt{s})`$, a satisfactory description is obtained to $``$ 1.52 GeV with $`p=0.948201+0.31767i`$ (this corresponds to the pole on the $`s`$-plane at $`s=0.434\mathrm{GeV}^2`$). Here 59 experimental points  are considered; $`\chi ^2/\text{ndf}3.05`$ when eliminating the points at 1.117, 1.247, and 1.27 GeV (with an especially large contribution to $`\chi ^2`$). The total $`\chi ^2/\text{ndf}`$ for four analyzed quantities to describe the processes $`\pi \pi \pi \pi ,K\overline{K}`$ is 2.12; the number of adjusted parameters is 17. In Table 1, the obtained pole clusters for resonances are shown on the complex energy plane ($`\sqrt{s_r}=\mathrm{E}_ri\mathrm{\Gamma }_r`$).

Now we calculate the coupling constants of these states with $`\pi \pi `$ and $`K\overline{K}`$ systems ($`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$, respectively) through the residues of amplitudes at the pole on sheet II, expressing the $`T`$-matrix via the $`S`$-matrix as $`S_{ii}=1+2i\rho _iT_{ii}`$, $`S_{12}=2i\sqrt{\rho _1\rho _2}T_{12}`$, where $`\rho _i=\sqrt{(s4m_i^2)/s}`$, and taking the resonance part of amplitude in the form $`T_{ij}^{res}=_rg_{ir}g_{rj}D_r^1(s),`$ where $`D_r(s)`$ is the inverse propagator ($`D_r(s)ss_r`$). We obtain (in GeV units): for $`f_0(665)`$: $`g_1=0.7477\pm 0.095`$ and $`g_2=0.834\pm 0.1`$, for $`f_0(980)`$: $`g_1=0.1615\pm 0.03`$ and $`g_2=0.438\pm 0.028`$, for $`f_0(1500)`$: $`g_1=0.899\pm 0.093`$.

Solution 2 (analysis with $`f_0(1370)`$): The description of the $`\pi \pi `$ scattering from the threshold to 1.89 GeV is practically the same as without the $`f_0(1370)`$: $`\chi ^2/\text{ndf}`$ for $`\delta _1`$ and $`\eta `$ is 2.01. The description of data is slightly improved for $`|S_{12}|`$ which is reached now up to $``$ 1.46 GeV. For this quantity, we now consider 41 experimental points ; $`\chi ^2/\text{ndf}0.92`$. However, on the whole, the description is even worse than with the 1st solution: the total $`\chi ^2/\text{ndf}2.93`$ for four analyzed quantities to describe the processes $`\pi \pi \pi \pi ,K\overline{K}`$ (cf. 2.12 for the 1st case). The number of adjusted parameters is 21 where they all are positions of the poles describing resonances except a single one related to the $`K\overline{K}`$ background which is $`p=0.976745+0.214405i`$ (this corresponds to the pole on the $`s`$-plane at $`s=0.622\mathrm{GeV}^2`$).

In Table 2, the obtained clusters for considered resonances are shown (the cluster for the $`f_0(665)`$ remains the same as in solution 1, therefore, it is not shown in Table 2).

When calculating the coupling constants in solution 2, we should take, for the $`f_0(1370)`$, the residues of amplitudes at the pole on sheet IV. We obtain (in GeV units): for $`f_0(665)`$: $`g_1=0.724\pm 0.095`$ and $`g_2=0.582\pm 0.1`$, for $`f_0(980)`$: $`g_1=0.153\pm 0.03`$ and $`g_2=0.521\pm 0.028`$, for $`f_0(1370)`$: $`g_1=0.11\pm 0.03`$ and $`g_2=0.91\pm 0.04`$, for $`f_0(1500)`$: $`g_1=0.866\pm 0.09`$.

So, the $`f_0(980)`$ and especially the $`f_0(1370)`$ are coupled essentially more strongly to the $`K\overline{K}`$ system than to the $`\pi \pi `$ one. This tells about the dominant $`s\overline{s}`$ component in the $`f_0(980)`$ state and especially in the $`f_0(1370)`$ one.

Let us also indicate the scattering lengths calculated for both the solutions. For the $`K\overline{K}`$ scattering: $`a_0^0(K\overline{K})=1.188\pm 0.13+(0.648\pm 0.09)i,[m_{\pi ^+}^1];(\mathrm{solution1}),`$
$`a_0^0(K\overline{K})=1.497\pm 0.12+(0.639\pm 0.08)i,[m_{\pi ^+}^1];(\mathrm{solution2}).`$
The imaginary part in $`a_0^0(K\overline{K})`$ means that, already at the threshold of the $`K\overline{K}`$ scattering, other channels ($`2\pi ,4\pi `$ etc.) are opened. We see that the real part of the $`K\overline{K}`$ scattering length is very sensitive to the existence of the $`f_0(1370)`$ state.

In Table 3, we compare our results for the $`\pi \pi `$ scattering length $`a_0^0`$, obtained for both solutions, with results of some other works both theoretical and experimental.

We see that our results correspond to the linear realization of chiral symmetry.

Here, we presented model-independent results. Masses and widths of these states that should be calculated from the obtained pole positions and coupling constants are highly model-dependent. Let us demonstrate this.

If $`f_0(665)`$ is the $`\sigma `$-meson, then from the known relation $`g_{\sigma \pi \pi }=(m_\sigma ^2m_\pi ^2)/\sqrt{2}f_{\pi ^0}`$ ($`f_{\pi ^0}=93.1`$ MeV), we obtain $`m_\sigma 342`$ MeV. If we take the resonance part of amplitude as $`T^{res}=\sqrt{s}\mathrm{\Gamma }/(m_\sigma ^2si\sqrt{s}\mathrm{\Gamma })`$, we obtain $`m_\sigma 850`$ MeV and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1240`$ MeV.

4. Summary. It is shown that the large $`\pi \pi `$-background usually obtained in various analyses combines, in reality, the influence of the left-hand branch-point and the contribution of a wide resonance at $``$ 665 MeV. Thus, a model-independent confirmation of the state, denoted in the PDG issues by $`f_0(4001200)`$  is obtained.

A parameterless description of the $`\pi \pi `$ background is given by allowance for the left-hand branch-point in the proper uniformizing variable. Therefore, all the adjusted parameters in describing the $`\pi \pi `$ scattering are the positions of poles corresponding to resonances, and we conclude that our model-independent approach is a valuable tool for studying the realization schemes of chiral symmetry. The existence of $`f_0(665)`$ and the obtained $`\pi \pi `$-scattering length ($`a_0^0(\pi \pi )0.27`$) suggest the linear realization of chiral symmetry.

The analysis of the used experimental data evidences that, if the $`f_0(1370)`$ resonance exists (soluiton 2), it has the dominant $`s\overline{s}`$ component, because the ratio of its coupling constant with the $`\pi \pi `$ channel to the one with the $`K\overline{K}`$ channel is 0.12. A minimum scenario of the simultaneous description of processes $`\pi \pi \pi \pi ,K\overline{K}`$ does without the $`f_0(1370)`$ resonance. The $`K\overline{K}`$ scattering length is very sensitive to whether this state exists or not.

The $`f_0(1500)`$ state is represented by the pole cluster which corresponds to a flavour singlet, e.g. the glueball.

We think that multichannel states are most adequately represented by clusters, i.e., by the pole positions on all the corresponding sheets. The pole positions are rather stable characteristics for various models, whereas masses and widths are very model-dependent for wide resonances.


text:
# References

Non-abelian self-duality from self-interaction
A. Khoudeir
Instituto de Física, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Apdo. Postal 20-364, 01000 México D. F. México

and

Centro de Astrofísica Teórica, Departamento de Física, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de los Andes,
Mérida, 5101,Venezuela.

## Abstract

The non-abelian self-dual action in three dimensions is derived using the self-interaction mechanism.

Self-duality in three dimensions was proposed initially by Townsend et. al.  as an alternative to the topologically massive theory. In principle, they seem different descriptions of a locally massive spin 1 physical excitation: the self-dual theory is described by a non-gauge invariant first order action while the topologically massive action is written down in a gauge invariant second order formulation. Both actions have an abelian Chern-Simons term ($`ϵ^{mnp}A_m_nA_p`$). Despite these differences, Deser and Jackiw stablished that both theories are locally equivalent through the existence of a master action, even in the presence of external sources. Moreover, both theories are dual equivalent and the self-dual theory can be seen as a gauged fixed version of the topologically massive theory. The self-dual theory for gravity and for higher spin in three dimensions was achieved in  and , respectively. If glogal properties are considered, the equivalence is modified, for instance, the partition functions of the self dual and topologically massive theories are not the same but they are related in the following way: $`Z_{SD}=Z_{CS}Z_{TM}`$ (where $`Z_{CS}`$ is the partition function of the abelian Chern-Simons action).

The non-abelian generalization of the topologically massive theory was given in  while the non-abelian self-dual theory was formulated independently by McKeon  and Arias, et. al., which has a structure of a Freedman-Townsend action.

In this letter, starting from an appropiate master action, we will derive the non-abelian self-dual action using the self-interaction mechanism.

We will start by considering the following master action

$$I=d^3x[\mu ϵ^{mnp}A_m_na_p\frac{1}{2}\mu ^2a_ma^m\mu ϵ^{mnp}A_m_nv_p+\frac{1}{2}\mu ϵ^{mnp}v_m_nv_p]$$
(1)
This action can be seen as the coupling between a Maxwell field ($`A_m`$) and a vector field ($`v_m`$) described by an abelian Chern-Simons action through a three dimensional BF topological term. Independent variations in the $`a_m`$, $`v_m`$ and $`A_m`$ fields, yield the following equations of motion

$$a^m=\frac{1}{2}\mu ϵ^{mnp}f_{np(A)},$$
(2)
$$ϵ^{mnp}_n[A_pv_p]=0$$
(3)
and

$$ϵ^{mnp}_n[a_p+v_p]=0,$$
(4)
where $`f_{mn(A)}=_mA_n_nA_m`$. The last two equations can be solved locally. We have

$$v_m=A_m+_m\varphi $$
(5)
and

$$a_m=v_m+_m\sigma .$$
(6)
The master action has abelian gauge invariance

$$\delta A_m=_m\lambda _1\delta v_m=_m\lambda _2$$
(7)
Substituting the equations (2) and (5), into the master action lead to the action for the abelian topologically massive theory

$$I=d^3x[\frac{1}{4}f_{(A)}^{mn}f_{mn(A)}\frac{1}{4}\mu ϵ^{mnp}A_mf_{np(A)}].$$
(8)
On the other hand, we can eliminate the $`a_m`$ and $`A_m`$ fields, through the use of equations (5) and (6) in order to obtain

$$I=d^3x[\frac{1}{2}\mu ^2(v_m_m\varphi )(v^m^m\varphi )+\frac{1}{2}\mu ϵ^{mnp}v_m_nv_p],$$
(9)
which is invariant under the following abelian gauge transformations

$$\delta v_m=_m\lambda _1,\delta \varphi =\lambda _1.$$
(10)
Fixing the gauge $`\varphi =0`$, we obtain the non-gauge invariant self-dual action. Then, the proposed master action show the equivalence (at classical level) between the topologically and self-dual theories. The master action that we are considering is locally equivalent to the master action of Deser and Jackiw, as can be seen after eliminating only the $`v_m`$ field and is written down as

$$I=d^3x[\mu ϵ^{mnp}A_m_na_p\frac{1}{2}\mu ^2a_ma^m\frac{1}{2}\mu ϵ^{mnp}A_m_nA_p]$$
(11)
Introducing the Lie-algebra valued vectors $`A_m=A_m^iT^i`$, $`a_m=a_m^iT^i`$ and the Lie-algebra valued field strength $`F_{mn}=F_{mn}^iT^i`$, where the generators $`T^i`$ of the gauge group are normalized by $`T^iT^j=\delta ^{ij}`$, the non-abelian generalization of the master action of Deser and Jackiw obtained by replacing ordinary derivative by covariant derivative, $`f_{mn}=_mA_n_nA_m`$ $``$ $`F_{mn}=_mA_n_nA_m+[A_m,A_n]`$ and considering the non-abelian Chern-Simons term is

$$I=\mu trd^3x[ϵ^{mnp}a_mF_{np}\frac{1}{2}\mu a_ma^m\frac{1}{2}ϵ^{mnp}A_m(_nA_p+\frac{2}{3}A_nA_p)]$$
(12)
and only can reproduce the non-abelian version of the topologically massive theory after eliminating the $`a_m`$ field by using its equation of motion ($`a^m=ϵ^{mnp}F_{np}`$). On the other hand, the equation of motion obtained by independent variations in $`A_m`$ has no known solutions and in consecuence the non-abelian master action of Deser and Jackiw can not reproduce the non-abelian self-dual action. The non-abelian topologically massive theory can be deduced from the self-interaction mechanism.

Now, we will consider for simplicity a triplet of $`SU(2)`$ free vector fields $`A_m^i`$ coupled with a triplet of $`SU(2)`$ free vector fields $`v_m^i`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$). The action is

$$I_o=d^3x[\mu ϵ^{mnp}A_m^i_na_p^i\frac{1}{2}\mu ^2a_m^ia^{mi}\mu ϵ^{mnp}A_m^i_nv_p^i+\frac{1}{2}\mu ϵ^{mnp}v_m^i_nv_p^i].$$
(13)
This action has two global simmetries. One is the global $`SU(2)`$ symmetry

$$\delta _\omega X=gϵ^{ijk}X^j\omega ^k$$
(14)
where X = (A, a, v) and the other global symmetry is given by

$$\delta _\rho A_m^i=gϵ^{ijk}[a_m^j+v_m^j]\rho ^k;\delta _\rho a_m^i=0=\delta _\rho v_m^i.$$
(15)
Under these transformations, the action changes by a total derivative.

The Noether currents associated with the global symmetries are

$$j^{mi}=\mu gϵ^{mnp}ϵ^{ijk}A_n^j[a_p^k+v_p^k]+\frac{1}{2}\mu gϵ^{mnp}ϵ^{ijk}v_n^jv_p^k$$
(16)
and

$$K^{mi}=\frac{1}{2}\mu gϵ^{mnp}ϵ^{ijk}[a_n^j+v_n^j][a_p^k+v_p^k].$$
(17)
These currents are conserved on-shell. Now, we will couple these Noether currents to the action $`I_0`$ through the corresponding self-interaction term defined by

$$j^{mi}\frac{\delta I_{SI}}{\delta v_m^i},K^{mi}\frac{\delta I_{SI}}{\delta A_m^i}.$$
(18)
We find

$`I_{SI}`$ $`=`$ $`g\mu {\displaystyle }d^3x[ϵ^{mnp}ϵ^{ijk}v_m^iA_n^ja_p^k{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}ϵ^{mnp}ϵ^{ijk}v_m^iv_n^jA_p^k`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}ϵ^{mnp}ϵ^{ijk}A_m^ia_n^ja_p^k+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}ϵ^{mnp}ϵ^{ijk}v_m^iv_n^jv_p^k].`$
The self-interaction mechanism stops here since no other derivative terms appear in $`I_{SI}`$. Now, we add $`I_{SI}`$ to $`I_o`$. The last term in eq. (13) combines with the last term in eq. (19) to give a Chern-Simons term for the $`v_m`$ field. The non-abelian action is

$`I`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mu {\displaystyle }d^3x[ϵ^{mnp}A_m^i(F_{np(a)}^i+F_{np(v)}^i+2gϵ^{ijk}a_nv_p^k)\mu a_m^ia^{mi}`$
$`+`$ $`ϵ^{mnp}v_m^i(_nv_p^i+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}ϵ^{ijk}v_n^jv_p^k)],`$
or

$$I=\frac{1}{2}\mu d^3x[ϵ^{mnp}A_m^iF_{np(a+v)}^i\mu a_m^ia^{mi}+ϵ^{mnp}v_m^i(_nv_p^i+\frac{1}{3}ϵ^{ijk}v_n^jv_p^k)],$$
(21)
where

$$F_{mn(a)}^i=_ma_n^i_na_m^i+gϵ^{ijk}a_m^ja_n^k$$
(22)
and

$$F_{mn(v)}^i=_mv_n^i_nv_m^i+gϵ^{ijk}v_m^jv_n^k$$
(23)
are the field strengths for the $`a_m^i`$ and $`v_m^i`$ fields. The self-interaction process combines the abelian gauge transformations with the global ones giving rise to the following non-abelian local gauge transformations

$`\delta A_m^i`$ $`=`$ $`gϵ^{ijk}A_m^j\alpha ^k;\delta a_m^i=gϵ^{ijk}a_m^j\alpha ^k`$ (24)
$`\delta v_m^i`$ $`=`$ $`_m\alpha ^i+gϵ^{ijk}v_m^j\alpha ^k`$
and

$`\delta A_m^i`$ $`=`$ $`_m\kappa ^i+gϵ^{ijk}[a_m^j+v_m^j]\kappa ^k`$ (25)
$`\delta a_m^i`$ $`=`$ $`0=\delta v_m^i`$
Defining $`\omega _ma_m+v_m`$, the action is rewritten down as

$`I`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{g^2}}tr{\displaystyle }d^3x[ϵ^{mnp}A_mF_{np(\omega )}\mu (v_m\omega _m)(v^m\omega ^m)`$
$`+`$ $`ϵ^{mnp}v_m[_nv_p+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}v_nv_p].`$
This action was interpreted as the interaction between a Chern-Simons and a BF($`ϵAF`$) topological terms propagating a massive spin 1 physical mode. Like as in the non-abelian topologically massive theory, invariance in the functional integral implies the quantization condition: $`4\pi \frac{\mu }{g^2}=integer`$.

We observe that $`A_m`$ play the role of a Lagrange multiplier. Its equation of motion is

$$F_{mn(\omega )}=0$$
(27)
which tell us that $`\omega `$ is a pure gauge.

$$\omega _m=U^1_mU.$$
(28)
Then, the action becomes

$$I=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mu }{g^2}trd^3x[\mu (v_mU^1_mU)(v^mU^1^mU)+ϵ^{mnp}v_m(_nv_p+\frac{2}{3}v_nv_p)],$$
(29)
where the $`v_m`$ field appear coupled with a Stuckelberg field. Now, we have invariance under the following (finite) gauge transformations

$$v_mg^1_m_mg+g^1v_mg,UUg.$$
(30)
This gauge invariance allow us to fix the gauge $`U=1`$, in order to obtain the standard action for the non-abelian self-dual field $`v_m`$

$$I=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mu }{g^2}trd^3[\mu v_mv^m+ϵ^{mnp}v_m(_nv_p+\frac{2}{3}v_nv_p)].$$
(31)
To conclude, we have derived the non-abelian self-dual action in three dimensions using the self-interaction mechanism. Recently, a dual version of a pure non-abelian Chern-Simons action was formulated . It would be interesting to analyse the duality properties of the self-dual and topologically masive theories at non-abelian level.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author would like to thank to Marti Ruiz Altaba for his hospitality at Instituto de Física de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Also, the author thanks Conicit-Venezuela for financial support.