text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

QCD at non-zero baryon density has recently been the subject of many studies. Our present knowledge of nucleon rich matter is limited to low densities and very high densities. In the first regime, we can rely on our good phenomenological understanding of nuclear interactions in the vacuum. In the second regime, the phenomenon of color superconductivity and its consequences are becoming better understood both qualitatively and quantitatively . However we have only a poor grasp of a sample of nuclear matter that is neither too dilute nor too dense. Unfortunately this kind of matter is found in many interesting physical systems, from supernova explosions and neutron stars to heavy ion collisions. In other words, our knowledge of the QCD phase diagram at non-zero chemical potential is limited to extreme cases, and it is clear that we need a better understanding of its characteristics.

This situation is very different from what we know about QCD at non-zero temperature and zero chemical potential, where numerous analytic and numerical studies have enabled us to achieve a qualitative and a quantitative understanding . Unfortunately, the current numerical techniques are useless in the case of QCD with three colors and fermions in the fundamental representation at non-zero baryon density. The complexity of the measure in the partition function is the origin of the problem. Special techniques have been developed to tackle this problem, but their reach is presently far from QCD . There are however QCD-like theories at non-zero baryon density that do not have this complexity problem. Therefore they can be studied numerically with the usual techniques: QCD with two colors and fundamental fermions, and QCD with any number of colors and adjoint fermions. We now have a good understanding of these QCD-like theories from analytic and numerical studies . QCD with three colors and two flavors of fundamental fermions at non-zero isospin density also has a real measure, and can therefore also be studied with standard numerical algorithms .

In this article we will study the QCD phase diagram for small chemical potentials associated to each quark flavor. At low enough energies, the single most important property of QCD is that chiral symmetry is spontaneously broken in the vacuum. It implies the existence of light bosonic degrees of freedom, and stringent constraints on the physical observables. This property has been extensively and successfully used to study QCD at low energy within an effective theory solely based on the symmetries of the QCD partition function, Chiral Perturbation Theory . Since the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry is still the most relevant property of QCD at low enough quark chemical potentials, Chiral Perturbation Theory should also enable us to explore the QCD phase diagram in this domain. This approach has been successfully used for QCD-like theories at non-zero baryon chemical potential and for QCD at non-zero isospin chemical potential .

We will restrict ourselves to the three light quark flavors, for which this effective theory approach can be used. There is however an intrinsic limitation to this approach. Since only the octet of Goldstone bosons are kept as the relevant degrees of freedom, high chemical potentials where other excitations become relevant cannot be reached. A rapid glance at the hadron spectrum, and in particular the proton, the rho and the omega, shows that we will be able to explore the domain restricted by $`\left|\mu _u\right|<300\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$, $`\left|\mu _d\right|<300\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$, and $`\left|\mu _s\right|<550\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$.

Our study extends the analysis of QCD at low isospin chemical potential that included the up and down quark flavors only . In this analysis, it was found that the pions form a condensate at high enough isospin chemical potential. Similarly, we will find that for high enough strange chemical potential, it is energetically favorable for the kaons to form a condensate. A non-trivial phase diagram emerges; there are three distinct phases: a normal phase, a pion condensation phase and a kaon condensation phase. The superfluid phases are separated from each other by a first order phase transition, whereas either of them is separated from the normal phase by a second order phase transition.

The pion and kaon condensates we will find in our study are very different from the pion and kaon condensates that emerge in a nucleon rich environment . In this latter case, the condensation is driven by the attractive meson-nucleon interactions. In our case the baryon density is zero, and the pion and kaon condensates emerge out of the vacuum as soon as it becomes energetically favorable for the system to form such condensates in the ground state, just because of the charge carried by these modes.

We proceed as follow. First we shortly derive the effective Lagrangian in Section 2, and then determine the ground state of the effective theory in Section 3. Section 4 is devoted to the computation of the various condensates relevant to the three different phases as well as the isospin and strangeness densities. The mass spectrum is computed in Section 5. Concluding remarks and discussion are presented in the Section 6.

## 2 Low-energy Effective Lagrangian

In order to construct the low-energy effective Lagrangian, we need to study the symmetries of QCD. We work in Minkowski space. The fermionic part of the QCD Lagrangian at non-zero quark chemical potentials is given by

$$_{\mathrm{QCD}}=\overline{\psi }\text{ /}D\psi +\overline{\psi }B_\nu \gamma _\nu \psi \overline{\psi }\psi ,$$
(1)
where

$`\psi =\left(\begin{array}{c}u\\ d\\ s\end{array}\right),=\mathrm{diag}(m_u,m_d,m_s),`$ (5)
$`\mathrm{and}B_\nu =(B,\stackrel{}{0}),B=\mathrm{diag}(\mu _u,\mu _d,\mu _s)=\mathrm{diag}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mu _B+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mu _I,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mu _B{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mu _I,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mu _B\mu _S).`$ (6)
One can either use chemical potentials associated with the quark flavors, or chemical potentials associated with baryon number, $`\mu _B`$, isospin, $`\mu _I`$, and strangeness, $`\mu _S`$. In this study, we will take $`m_u=m_dm`$. When all quark masses and chemical potentials vanish, the QCD Lagrangian is invariant under $`SU_L\left(3\right)\times SU_R\left(3\right)\times U_V\left(1\right)`$. At zero chemical potential, this symmetry is spontaneously broken to $`SU_V\left(3\right)\times U_V\left(1\right)`$. There are therefore eight Goldstone bosons in the spectrum: $`\pi ^0`$, $`\pi ^+`$, $`\pi ^{}`$, $`\eta ^0`$, $`K^+`$, $`K^{}`$, $`K^0`$, and $`\overline{K}^0`$. They are the relevant degrees of freedom at low energy.

The effective Lagrangian of QCD at low energies and finite quark chemical potentials in Minkowski space is given by

$`_{\mathrm{eff}}={\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{4}}\mathrm{Tr}_\nu \mathrm{\Sigma }_\nu \mathrm{\Sigma }^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}G\mathrm{Tr}\left(\mathrm{\Sigma }+\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}\right),`$ (7)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }SU\left(3\right)`$, and $`_\nu \mathrm{\Sigma }=_\nu \mathrm{\Sigma }i[B_\nu ,\mathrm{\Sigma }]`$. This is the usual Chiral Perturbation Theory Lagrangian at lowest order . It contains only the octet of Goldstone bosons due to spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking. The chemical potential has been introduced in the same way as a regular vector source using the usual flavor gauge symmetry . Under a chiral rotation, the quark fields transform as $`(\psi _L,\psi _R)(V_L\psi _L,V_R\psi _R)`$, with $`V_{L,R}SU\left(3\right)_{L,R}`$, whereas $`\mathrm{\Sigma }V_R\mathrm{\Sigma }V_L^{}`$. For zero chemical potentials $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is invariant under vector transformations and contains the octet of Goldstone bosons due to spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking:

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }=U\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}U,\mathrm{with}U=\mathrm{exp}\left(i\mathrm{\Phi }/\sqrt{2}F\right),`$ (8)
and

$`\mathrm{\Phi }=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{\pi ^0}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{\eta ^0}{\sqrt{6}}& \pi ^+& K^+\\ \pi ^{}& \frac{\pi ^0}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{\eta ^0}{\sqrt{6}}& K^0\\ K^{}& \overline{K}^0& \frac{2\eta ^0}{\sqrt{6}}\end{array}\right),`$ (12)
with $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1)`$ for $`\mu _B=\mu _I=\mu _S=0`$. The effective Lagrangian is invariant under local chiral transformations. At zero chemical potentials, the masses of the Goldstone bosons are given by the Gell-Mann–Oakes–Renner relation:

$`\begin{array}{ccc}m_\pi ^2\hfill & =\hfill & 2Gm/F^2\hfill \\ m_K^2\hfill & =\hfill & G\left(m+m_s\right)/F^2\hfill \\ m_{\eta ^0}^2\hfill & =\hfill & 2G\left(m+2m_s\right)/3F^2=\left(4m_K^2m_\pi ^2\right)/3.\hfill \end{array}`$ (16)
The first remarkable property of the effective Lagrangian (7) is that in the $`(\mu _B,\mu _I,\mu _S)`$-basis, $`\mu _B`$ completely drops out of $`_{\mathrm{eff}}`$. This is just due to the fact that the effective Lagrangian contains only the octet of Goldstone bosons due to spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking. The use of the effective Lagrangian is therefore limited to $`\left|\mu _B\right|<940\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$, $`\left|\mu _I\right|<770\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$, and $`\left|\mu _S\right|<550\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$. These estimated bounds come from the masses of the proton, the rho and the omega, respectively. This means that the effective Lagrangian is only valid in the domain $`\left|\mu _u\right|<300\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$, $`\left|\mu _d\right|<300\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$, and $`\left|\mu _s\right|<550\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$. Therefore in this work, the baryon chemical potential will never appear explicitly, and we will work with $`\mu _I`$ and $`\mu _S`$. Recall however that all our results are valid for $`\left|\mu _B\right|<940\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$, and that Chiral Perturbation Theory, in its domain of validity, allows us to determine the phase diagram in the three quark chemical potentials. For definiteness, we will restrict ourselves to $`\mu _I,\mu _S>0`$, the other quadrants in the $`(\mu _I,\mu _S)`$-plane are easily derived from our results.

## 3 Ground state

The ground state of the effective theory is determined by the maximum of the static part of the effective Lagrangian. Therefore $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$, the maximum of

$`_{\mathrm{stat}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{4}}\mathrm{Tr}[B,\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}][B,\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^{}]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}G\mathrm{Tr}\left(\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}+\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^{}\right),`$ (17)
determines the ground state of QCD at non-zero quark chemical potentials.

We will use the following Ansatz for the saddle point:

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{cos}\beta & \mathrm{sin}\beta \\ 0& \mathrm{sin}\beta & \mathrm{cos}\beta \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{cos}\alpha & \mathrm{sin}\alpha & 0\\ \mathrm{sin}\alpha & \mathrm{cos}\alpha & 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{cos}\beta & \mathrm{sin}\beta \\ 0& \mathrm{sin}\beta & \mathrm{cos}\beta \end{array}\right),`$ (27)
with $`\alpha ,\beta (0,\pi /2)`$. Notice that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}|_{\alpha =0}=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1)`$ corresponds to the ground state at $`\mu _I=\mu _S=0`$. Furthermore in the massless case,

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}|_{\left(\alpha =\frac{\pi }{2},\beta =0\right)}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 1& 0\\ 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)`$ (31)
is found to be the maximum when $`\mu _I>2\mu _S`$, and

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}|_{\left(\alpha =\frac{\pi }{2},\beta =\frac{\pi }{2}\right)}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 1\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 1& 0& 0\end{array}\right)`$ (35)
is found to be the maximum when $`\mu _I<2\mu _S`$. By noticing that the condensate is basically given by $`\overline{\psi }_R\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}\psi _L`$, it is easy to see that (31) corresponds to a pion condensation phase, and that (35) corresponds to a kaon condensation phase. Our Ansatz corresponds to an axial rotation to go from the normal phase to either of the superfluid phases, and a vector rotation to go directly from one superfluid phase to the other. We will show that this Ansatz indeed corresponds to a local maximum of $`_{\mathrm{stat}}`$. We will assume that it is the global maximum.

After our Ansatz (27) is introduced into (17), the static part of the effective Lagrangian becomes quite complicated

$`_{\mathrm{stat}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{32F^2}}\{(21\mu _I^2+12\mu _I\mu _S+20\mu _S^2+(19\mu _I^2+20\mu _I\mu _S+12\mu _S^2)\mathrm{cos}\alpha )\mathrm{sin}^2(\alpha /2)`$
$`2(\mu _I2\mu _S)^2\mathrm{sin}^4(\alpha /2)\mathrm{cos}\left(4\beta \right)+2(\mu _I2\mu _S)(3\mu _I+2\mu _S)\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha \}`$
$`+G\left\{m\mathrm{cos}\alpha \left(1+\mathrm{cos}^2\beta \right)+m_s\mathrm{cos}^2\beta +\left(m+m_s\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right)\mathrm{sin}^2\beta \right\}.`$
We first maximize $`_{\mathrm{stat}}`$ with respect to $`\beta `$. Remember that we limit ourselves to the first quadrant in the $`(\mu _I,\mu _S)`$-plane: $`\mu _I,\mu _S>0`$. We find that the maximum, for $`\alpha 0`$ and $`\beta (0,\pi /2)`$, is either at $`\beta =0`$ or at $`\beta =\pi /2`$. Therefore there are two different phases according to the value of $`\beta `$. We look for the maximum of $`_{\mathrm{stat}}`$ separately in each case.

1. $`\beta =0`$: The static part of the effective Lagrangian, its maximum, and the saddle point are given by

$`_{\mathrm{stat}}`$ $`=`$ $`2Gm\mathrm{cos}\alpha +Gm_s+{\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{2}}\mu _I^2\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha ,`$ (37)
$`\mathrm{with}`$ $`\{\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{cos}\alpha =1\hfill & \mathrm{for}\hfill & \mu _I<m_\pi \hfill \\ \mathrm{cos}\alpha =\left(m_\pi /\mu _I\right)^2\hfill & \mathrm{for}\hfill & \mu _I>m_\pi ,\hfill \end{array}`$ (40)
$`\mathrm{and}`$ $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{cos}\alpha & \mathrm{sin}\alpha & 0\\ \mathrm{sin}\alpha & \mathrm{cos}\alpha & 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right).`$ (44)
2. $`\beta =\pi /2`$: The static part of the effective Lagrangian, its maximum, and the saddle point are given by

$`_{\mathrm{stat}}`$ $`=`$ $`Gm+G\left(m+m_s\right)\mathrm{cos}\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)^2\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha ,`$ (45)
$`\mathrm{with}`$ $`\{\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{cos}\alpha =1\hfill & \mathrm{for}\hfill & \frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S<m_K\hfill \\ \mathrm{cos}\alpha =\left(m_K/\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\right)^2\hfill & \mathrm{for}\hfill & \frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S>m_K,\hfill \end{array}`$ (48)
$`\mathrm{and}`$ $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{cos}\alpha & 0& \mathrm{sin}\alpha \\ 0& 1& 0\\ \mathrm{sin}\alpha & 0& \mathrm{cos}\alpha \end{array}\right).`$ (52)

Finally, in order to find the maximum of the static part of the effective Lagrangian in the whole quadrant $`\mu _I,\mu _S>0`$, we have to compare the value of $`_{\mathrm{stat}}`$ for $`\alpha =0`$, for $`\beta =0`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha =\left(m_\pi /\mu _I\right)^2`$, and for $`\beta =\pi /2`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha =\left(m_K/\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\right)^2`$. The orientation of the condensate for a given pair $`(\mu _I,\mu _S)`$ is determined by the maximum of $`_{\mathrm{stat}}`$ at this point. We find three different phases:

1. Normal phase: $`\mu _I<m_\pi `$ and $`\mu _S<m_K\frac{1}{2}\mu _I`$

$`\mathrm{cos}\alpha =1,\mathrm{any}\beta (0,\pi /2)`$ (53)
2. Pion condensation phase: $`\mu _I>m_\pi `$ and $`\mu _S<\left(m_\pi ^2+\sqrt{\left(m_\pi ^2\mu _I^2\right)^2+4m_K^2\mu _I^2}\right)/2\mu _I`$

$`\mathrm{cos}\alpha =\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_\pi }{\mu _I}}\right)^2,\beta =0`$ (54)
3. Kaon condensation phase: $`\mu _S>m_K\frac{1}{2}\mu _I`$ and $`\mu _S>\left(m_\pi ^2+\sqrt{\left(m_\pi ^2\mu _I^2\right)^2+4m_K^2\mu _I^2}\right)/2\mu _I`$

$`\mathrm{cos}\alpha =\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_K}{\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S}}\right)^2,\beta =\pi /2.`$ (55)

The curve $`\mu _S=\left(m_\pi ^2+\sqrt{\left(m_\pi ^2\mu _I^2\right)^2+4m_K^2\mu _I^2}\right)/2\mu _I`$ is a first order phase transition curve, because the pion and kaon condensates compete on this curve. The phase diagram in the first quadrant and its obvious extension to the whole $`(\mu _I,\mu _S)`$-plane are given in Fig. 1 for $`m_\pi =140\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$, and $`m_K=500\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$. They are very similar to the phase diagram of QCD-like theories at finite baryon and isospin densities .

## 4 Condensates and charge densities

We will show in the next section that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ given by (27,53,54,55) is indeed a local maximum of the static part of the effective Lagrangian. We will assume that it is the global maximum. But first we investigate the properties of the ground state described by (27,53,54,55) in the three phases by looking at different observables. The quark-antiquark condensates, $`\overline{q}q`$ for $`q=u,d,s`$, the pion condensate, $`\overline{d}\gamma _5u+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.`$, the kaon condensate, $`\overline{s}\gamma _5u+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.`$ are obtained by inserting the appropriate sources into the effective Lagrangian , or more directly by noticing that the vacuum expectation value of an operator bilinear in the quark fields is basically given by $`\overline{\psi }_R\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}\psi _L`$ (31,35). The isospin density, $`n_I=_{\mathrm{eff}}/\mu _I`$, and the strangeness density, $`n_S=_{\mathrm{eff}}/\mu _S`$ are easily obtained from the static part of the effective Lagrangian.

1. Normal phase, $`\mu _I<m_\pi `$ and $`\mu _S<m_K\frac{1}{2}\mu _I`$:

$`\{\begin{array}{c}\overline{u}u=\overline{d}d=\overline{s}s=G\overline{q}q_0\hfill \\ \overline{d}\gamma _5u+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.=\overline{s}\gamma _5u+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.=0\hfill \\ n_I=n_S=0\hfill \end{array}`$ (59)
2. Pion condensation phase, $`\mu _I>m_\pi `$ and $`\mu _S<\left(m_\pi ^2+\sqrt{\left(m_\pi ^2\mu _I^2\right)^2+4m_K^2\mu _I^2}\right)/2\mu _I`$:

$`\{\begin{array}{c}\overline{u}u=\overline{d}d=G\mathrm{cos}\alpha =\overline{q}q_0m_\pi ^2/\mu _I^2\hfill \\ \overline{s}s=G=\overline{q}q_0\hfill \\ \overline{d}\gamma _5u+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.=G\mathrm{sin}\alpha =\overline{q}q_0\sqrt{1m_\pi ^4/\mu _I^4}\hfill \\ \overline{s}\gamma _5u+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.=0\hfill \\ n_I=F^2\mu _I\left(1m_\pi ^4/\mu _I^4\right)\hfill \\ n_S=0\hfill \end{array}`$ (66)
3. Kaon condensation phase, $`\mu _S>m_K\mu _I/2`$ and $`\mu _S>\left(m_\pi ^2+\sqrt{\left(m_\pi ^2\mu _I^2\right)^2+4m_K^2\mu _I^2}\right)/2\mu _I`$:

$`\{\begin{array}{c}\overline{u}u=\overline{s}s=G\mathrm{cos}\alpha =\overline{q}q_0m_K^2/\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I^2+\mu _S\right)^2\hfill \\ \overline{d}d=G=\overline{q}q_0\hfill \\ \overline{d}\gamma _5u+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.=0\hfill \\ \overline{s}\gamma _5u+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.=G\mathrm{sin}\alpha =\overline{q}q_0\sqrt{1m_K^4/\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)^4}\hfill \\ n_I=\frac{1}{2}F^2\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\left(1m_K^4/\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)^4\right)\hfill \\ n_S=F^2\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\left(1m_K^4/\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)^4\right).\hfill \end{array}`$ (73)

The isospin and strangeness densities in the superfluid phases just above the second order phase transition curves can be reproduced within a semi-classical analysis of a dilute Bose gas in the Bose-Einstein condensation phase . In the kaon superfluid phase, the strangeness density is naturally found to be twice bigger than the isospin density, since a kaon carries twice more strangeness than isospin.

The different condensates and charge densities as a function of $`\mu _I`$ and for a constant $`\mu _S`$ are depicted in Fig. 2, for $`\mu _S=200`$MeV, and in Fig. 3, for $`\mu _S=460`$MeV. In the first case we encounter only two phases as $`\mu _I`$ changes, whereas in the second case we encounter the three different phases found above as $`\mu _I`$ changes. As expected, the condensates and charge densities are continuous across the second order phase transition and discontinuous across the first order one. The different phases and the nature of the different phase transitions are clearly distinguished by the observables we study.

## 5 Curvatures and mass spectrum

In this section we will prove that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ given by (27,53,54,55) is indeed a local maximum of the static part of the effective Lagrangian. We compute the masses of the different excitations in the three phases. In order to obtain these masses, we have to expand the whole effective Lagrangian up to second order in the Goldstone fields. The general form of the effective Lagrangian reads

$`_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{4}}\mathrm{Tr}[B,\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}][B,\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^{}]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}G\mathrm{Tr}\left(\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}+\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^{}\right)`$ (74)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{4}}\mathrm{Tr}_\nu \mathrm{\Sigma }_\nu \mathrm{\Sigma }^{}+i{\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}B[\mathrm{\Sigma }^{},_0\mathrm{\Sigma }].`$
The fourth term in (74) may involve a term quadratic in the Goldstone fields (12). In the superfluid phases, the original Goldstone fields are mixed . Since the usual Goldstone manifold changes as the normal phase is left, the original octet of Goldstone bosons is not an appropriate set of coordinates for the new Goldstone manifold. We will denote these new appropriate fields by a “tilde”. We choose them so that the kinetic term in the Lagrangian is canonical. Furthermore, the linear derivative term in (74) mixes these new fields. Therefore the mass spectrum is not directly given by the curvatures of the static part of the Lagrangian at the maximum. When $`n`$-fields are mixed, the inverse propagator that appears in the effective Lagrangian is a $`n\times n`$ matrix, and the masses are given by the zeros of its determinant in the $`p_0^2`$-plane. A secular equation has therefore to be solved. It is a $`n`$-th order equation in $`p_0^2`$ when $`n`$ fields are mixed by the linear derivative term in (74). These equations can be explicitly solved, but the explicit solutions are cumbersome and rather useless expressions. Therefore we will only give which fields are mixed by the linear derivative term in (74), and solve the secular equation explicitly in the simple cases only. The labels of the different mixed states will be given according to the usual Goldstone mode they correspond to at the second order phase transition with the normal phase. We study each phase separately, and summarize our results for the mass spectrum in a few figures.

### 5.1 Normal phase

For $`\mu _I<m_\pi `$ and $`\mu _S<m_K\frac{1}{2}\mu _I`$, with the Goldstone fields defined in (12), we find that there is no mixing induced by the linear derivative term in the quadratic part of the effective Lagrangian. The various masses read

$`\begin{array}{ccc}m_{\pi ^0}\hfill & =\hfill & m_\pi \hfill \\ m_{\eta ^0}\hfill & =\hfill & m_{\eta ^0}=\sqrt{\left(4m_K^2m_\pi ^2\right)/3}\hfill \\ m_{\pi ^+}\hfill & =\hfill & m_\pi \mu _I\hfill \\ m_\pi ^{}\hfill & =\hfill & m_\pi +\mu _I\hfill \\ m_{K^+}\hfill & =\hfill & m_K\frac{1}{2}\mu _I\mu _S\hfill \\ m_K^{}\hfill & =\hfill & m_K+\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\hfill \\ m_{K^0}\hfill & =\hfill & m_K+\frac{1}{2}\mu _I\mu _S\hfill \\ m_{\overline{K}^0}\hfill & =\hfill & m_K\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S.\hfill \end{array}`$ (83)
The effect of the chemical potentials is just to shift the mass of a state by its charges times the chemical potentials: $`EEI\mu _IS\mu _S`$, where $`I`$ and $`S`$ are the isospin and strangeness of that state.

### 5.2 Pion condensation phase

For $`\mu _I>m_\pi `$ and $`\mu _S<\left(m_\pi ^2+\sqrt{\left(m_\pi ^2\mu _I^2\right)^2+4m_K^2\mu _I^2}\right)/2\mu _I`$, we find that there is mixing between some of the fields defined in (12), namely $`(\pi ^0,\eta ^0,\pi ^+,\pi ^{})`$, and $`(K^+,K^{},K^0,\overline{K}^0)`$. We find that the different masses are given by

$`\begin{array}{ccc}m_{\stackrel{~}{\pi }^0}^2\hfill & =\hfill & \mu _I^2\hfill \\ m_{\stackrel{~}{\eta }^0}^2\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{6\mu _I^2}(4m_K^2\mu _I^22m_\pi ^2\mu _I^2+6m_\pi ^4+7\mu _I^4+[48m_\pi ^6(\mu _I^2m_\pi ^2)\hfill \\ & & +\mu _I^4(4m_K^2+\mu _I^2)^24m_\pi ^4\mu _I^2(24m_K^243\mu _I^2)4m_\pi ^2\mu _I^4(4m_K^2+\mu _I^2)]^{1/2})\hfill \\ m_{\stackrel{~}{\pi }^+}^2\hfill & =\hfill & 0\hfill \\ m_{\stackrel{~}{\pi }^{}}^2\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{6\mu _I^2}(4m_K^2\mu _I^22m_\pi ^2\mu _I^2+6m_\pi ^4+7\mu _I^4[48m_\pi ^6(\mu _I^2m_\pi ^2)\hfill \\ & & +\mu _I^4(4m_K^2+\mu _I^2)^24m_\pi ^4\mu _I^2(24m_K^243\mu _I^2)4m_\pi ^2\mu _I^4(4m_K^2+\mu _I^2)]^{1/2}),\hfill \end{array}`$ (90)
and the masses of $`\stackrel{~}{K}^+,\stackrel{~}{K}^{},\stackrel{~}{K}^0,\stackrel{~}{\overline{K}}^0`$ are given by the zeros on the $`E`$-plane of

$`\mathrm{det}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{1}{2}E^2+s_1& Es_2& Es_3& 0\\ Es_2^{}& \frac{1}{2}E^2+s_1& 0& Es_3\\ Es_3^{}& 0& \frac{1}{2}E^2+s_1& Es_4\\ 0& Es_3^{}& Es_4^{}& \frac{1}{2}E^2+s_1\end{array}\right),`$ (95)
where

$`\begin{array}{ccc}s_1\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{2}\left(m_K^2\frac{1}{4}\mu _I^2+\mu _S^2+\mu _I\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right)\hfill \\ s_2\hfill & =\hfill & i\left(\mu _S+\frac{1}{2}\mu _I\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right)\hfill \\ s_3\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{2}\mu _I\mathrm{sin}\alpha \hfill \\ s_4\hfill & =\hfill & i\left(\mu _S\frac{1}{2}\mu _I\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right),\hfill \end{array}`$ (100)
and $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha =\left(m_\pi /\mu _I\right)^2`$, as given in (54).

### 5.3 Kaon condensation phase

For $`\mu _S>m_K\mu _I/2`$ and $`\mu _S>\left(m_\pi ^2+\sqrt{\left(m_\pi ^2\mu _I^2\right)^2+4m_K^2\mu _I^2}\right)/2\mu _I`$,we find that there is mixing between some of the fields defined in (12), namely $`(\pi ^0,\eta ^0,K^+,K^{})`$, and $`(\pi ^+,\pi ^{},K^0,\overline{K}^0)`$. The masses of $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }^0,\stackrel{~}{\eta }^0,\stackrel{~}{K}^+,\stackrel{~}{K}^{}`$ are given by the zeros in the $`E`$-plane of

$`\mathrm{det}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{1}{2}E^2+t_{11}& t_{12}& 0& 0\\ t_{12}^{}& \frac{1}{2}E^2+t_{22}& Et_{23}& 0\\ 0& Et_{23}^{}& \frac{1}{2}E^2& Et_{34}\\ 0& 0& Et_{34}^{}& \frac{1}{2}E^2+t_{44}\end{array}\right),`$ (105)
where

$`\begin{array}{ccc}t_{11}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{2\mathrm{cos}\alpha }m_K^2\hfill \\ t_{12}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}\left(m_K^2m_\pi ^2\right)\hfill \\ t_{22}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{6}\left(2m_\pi ^2+m_K^2\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right)\hfill \\ t_{23}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\mathrm{sin}\alpha \hfill \\ t_{34}\hfill & =\hfill & i\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\mathrm{cos}\alpha \hfill \\ t_{44}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{2}\left(m_K^2\mathrm{cos}\alpha +\left(\frac{1}{2}mu_I+\mu _S\right)^2\mathrm{cos}2\alpha \right),\hfill \end{array}`$ (112)
and $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha =\left(m_K/\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\right)^2`$, as given in (55). One of the modes, the $`\stackrel{~}{K}^+`$, is massless. The masses of $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }^+,\stackrel{~}{\pi }^{},\stackrel{~}{K}^0,\stackrel{~}{\overline{K}}^0`$ are given by the zeros on the $`E`$-plane of

$`\mathrm{det}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{1}{2}E^2+u_1& Eu_2& Eu_3& 0\\ Eu_2^{}& \frac{1}{2}E^2+u_1& 0& Eu_3\\ Eu_3^{}& 0& \frac{1}{2}E^2+u_4& Eu_5\\ 0& Eu_3^{}& Eu_5^{}& \frac{1}{2}E^2+u_4\end{array}\right),`$ (117)
where

$`\begin{array}{ccc}u_1\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{4}\left(2m_\pi ^2+\mu _I^22\mu _I\mu _S+2\mu _I\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right)\hfill \\ u_2\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{i}{4}\left(3\mu _I2\mu _S+2\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right)\hfill \\ u_3\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\mathrm{sin}\alpha \hfill \\ u_4\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{8}\left(4m_K^2+2\mu _I^24\mu _I\mu _S\mu _I^2\mathrm{cos}\alpha +4\mu _S^2\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right)\hfill \\ u_5\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{i}{4}\left(3\mu _I+2\mu _S+2\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right),\hfill \end{array}`$ (123)
and $`\mathrm{cos}\alpha =\left(m_K/\left(\frac{1}{2}\mu _I+\mu _S\right)\right)^2`$, as given in (55).

The spectrum is depicted as a function of $`\mu _I`$ for $`\mu _S=200`$MeV in Fig. 4, and for $`\mu _S=460`$MeV in Fig. 5, the corresponding condensates and densities are given in Fig. 2, and in Fig. 3, respectively. The masses are continuous across the second order phase transition lines, as they should, and they are in general discontinuous across the first order phase transition curves, as they might. In each superfluid phase there is one single massless Goldstone mode. The $`SU_V\left(3\right)\times U_V\left(1\right)`$ symmetry that leaves the quark-antiquark condensate invariant is further broken by the new condensates in the superfluid phases: $`U_I\left(1\right)`$ symmetry is broken by the pion condensate, and $`U_S\left(1\right)`$ is broken by the kaon condensate.

## 6 Conclusions

In this article we have explored part of the phase diagram of QCD at non-zero quark chemical potentials and zero temperature. We have used a low-energy effective theory based on the symmetries of the QCD partition function, Chiral Perturbation Theory. The quark chemical potentials have been introduced into the effective Lagrangian as a usual vector external source via a flavor gauge symmetry. Because we only kept the octet of the Goldstone bosons as relevant degrees of freedom, which is only justified for small enough chemical potentials, our analysis is intrinsicly limited to the domain $`\left|\mu _u\right|<300\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$, $`\left|\mu _d\right|<300\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$, and $`\left|\mu _s\right|<550\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$. But this whole domain can be reached within Chiral Perturbation Theory.

We have found a non-trivial phase diagram. There are three distinct phases: a normal phase, a pion superfluid phase, and a kaon superfluid phase. The two superfluid phases are separated by a first order phase transition curve, whereas each of them is separated from the normal phase by a second order phase transition curve. The observables that we have analyzed show a typical behavior for such a phase diagram. The behavior of the different condensates at the second order phase transitions is very similar to what has been found in QCD-like theories . The number densities just above the second order phase transition curves can be understood from a dilute gas approximation . The excitation spectrum in the normal phase is trivial, and there is one massless mode in each superfluid phase that is due to further spontaneous symmetry breaking by the unusual condensates, similar to what as been observed in QCD-like theories .

Our study extends the analysis of QCD at non-zero isospin chemical potential done by Son and Stephanov . We recover all their results on the pion condensate, the isospin number density and the mass spectrum for $`\left|\mu _S\right|<m_Km_\pi /2=430`$MeV, where kaon condensation can become energetically more favorable, depending on $`\mu _I`$ (cf. Fig.1, 2, 4).

Finally, at low energy and within the effective theory approach we have used, it would be interesting to study matter that is not only made out of quarks and gluons, but also electrons and neutrinos. The inclusion of the electro-magnetic interaction and of the weak interaction into Chiral Perturbation Theory has already been achieved in the vacuum , and its generalization to non-zero quark chemical potential seems to be rather straightforward. The effective theory technique we have used in this article is therefore very well suited to study more general problems of this kind.

Acknowledgments

G. Baym, M. Stephanov and J. Verbaarschot are acknowledged for useful discussions. J.B.K. is supported in part by the National Science Foundation, NSF-PHY96-05199. D.T. is supported in part by “Holderbank”-Stiftung.


format: text

text:
# PRODUCTION OF LIGHT GOLDSTONE PARTICLES ON PHOTON COLLIDERS

## 1 Introduction

The existence of Light Goldstone Particles (LGP), usually pseudoscalar (axion, arion, majoron, familon), is very attractive in many theoretical schemes (for recent review see e.g. ). Such particles are still elusive. So, the new method of their possible discovery looks attractive. In this respect, the program of construction of Photon Colliders based on future Linear Colliders provides new opportunity.

To describe this opportunity we remind necessary features of obtaining Photon Colliders. The intense photon beams for Photon Collider should be obtained by backscattering of electrons prepared for the Linear Collider on the intense laser light . It is expected to obtain here the conversion coefficient $`k`$ ( the ratio of obtained high energy photons to the number of initial electrons $`N_e`$) close to 1. The main features of conversion are described by quantity $`x`$ which determined via initial electron beam energy $`E`$ and laser photon energy $`\omega _0`$ as

$$x=\frac{4E\omega _0}{m_e^2}.$$
(1)
The best quality of photon spectra is obtained at highest values of $`x`$, which are limited from above by a value about $`x_0=2(1+\sqrt{2})4,8`$. The conversion coefficient $`k=N_\gamma \sigma _C/S`$, where $`N_\gamma `$ is the number of photons in the laser bunch, $`S`$ – its cross section in the conversion point and $`\sigma _C`$ is the standard cross section of Compton scattering at c.m. energy $`W_0=m_e\sqrt{x+1}`$.

From this it follows that the conversion region can be considered as $`e\gamma _0`$ collider ($`\gamma _0`$ is the laser photon) with huge luminosity $``$ but small c.m.s. energy $`W_0`$:

$$=f\frac{N_eN_\gamma }{S}=f\frac{kN_e}{\sigma _C}10^{45}÷10^{46}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{year}^1,\mathrm{W}_0=\mathrm{m}_\mathrm{e}\sqrt{\mathrm{x}+1}1.2\mathrm{MeV}.$$
(2)
Here $`N_e`$ is the number of electrons in bunch and $`f`$ is the repetition rate.

Therefore, this conversion region presents unique place for the study of LGP production if its mass is less than $`W_0m_e`$. This opportunity was studied in Refs. . In this paper we discuss new potential given by effects of high laser photon density in the conversion region. This high density makes strongly probable the processes

$$e+n\gamma _0=e+X.$$
(3)
with simultaneous absorption of $`n>1`$ laser photon111 In the second mechanism of production $`n\gamma _0+\gamma X`$ (where $`\gamma `$ is the high energy photon) the number of produced LGP’s is essentially less than that discussed in the text the corresponding cross section contains additional factor $`m_X^2/m_e^2`$. Evidently, in such a process the permissible region of LGP mass is expanded to values $`m_e(\sqrt{nx+1}1)`$.

To this goal we discuss briefly modern status of different LGP (section 2). Next we describe the method to calculate probabilities of processes under interest in the field of intense laser light (section 3). Last we discuss the proposed registration method (section 4).

## 2  Various LGP’s. Modern status.

The Effective Lagrangian describing an interaction of any LGP $`X_i`$ with electrons and photons has the form

$$=g_{iee}\overline{e}\gamma _5eX_i+C_{i\gamma \gamma }\frac{\alpha }{m_e}X_iF\stackrel{~}{F}$$
(4)
### 2.1 The ”invisible” axion

The axion is a light pseudogoldstone boson, proposed for the solution of the CP-violation problem in strong interactions . The existence of this standard axion is practically forbidden by modern data (see e.g ). However, the idea of natural explanation of CP symmetry is attractive, and the theory of the standard axion was modified to make its interaction with matter weaker and to make it lighter.

The axion model with two Higgs doublets is characterized by the scale of breaking of the $`U(1)`$-symmetry $`f_{pq}246`$ GeV and the mass $`m_a150`$ KeV, connected by one parameter: the ratio of the vacuum expectation value (VEV) of Higgs doublets.

The addition of new Higgs multiplets breaks relation between $`m_a`$ and standard $`f_{pq}`$ value. It happens that $`250`$ GeV $`f_{pq}10^{19}`$ GeV, the mass $`m_a`$, just as the coupling with matter can become sufficiently smaller than in the basic theory . For example, one can introduce the additional scalar field ($`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ singlet) with arbitrary large VEV. The obtained ”invisible” axion $`X_a`$ is known as Dine-Fischler-Srednicki-Zhitnitsky axion (DFSZ) .

The couplings $`g_{aee}`$ and $`C_{a\gamma \gamma }`$ in eq. (4) are given by:

$$g_{aee}=\frac{m_am_e}{f_\pi m_\pi }\frac{1+z}{N\sqrt{z}}\mathrm{cos}^2\beta 2.1\frac{m_am_e}{f_\pi m_\pi }\mathrm{cos}^2\beta ,$$
(5)
$$C_{a\gamma \gamma }=\frac{m_am_e}{8\pi f_\pi m_\pi }2\sqrt{z}0.06\frac{m_am_e}{f_\pi m_\pi },$$
(6)
where $`f_\pi =94`$ MeV is the pion decay constant, $`z=m_u/m_d=0.568`$ is the ratio of the quark masses, $`N`$ is the number of generations, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ is the ratio of the VEV’s of two Higgs fields. Respectively, the mass of axion is given by

$$m_a=m_\pi \frac{f_\pi }{f_a\mathrm{sin}2\beta }\frac{2N\sqrt{z}}{1+z}0.96m_\pi \frac{Nf_\pi }{f_a\mathrm{sin}2\beta }.$$
(7)
Another form of ”invisible” axion was proposed in Refs. , now it is known as hadronic or Kim-Shifman-Vainstein-Zakharov axion (KSVZ). This axion does not interact with leptons at the tree level. Therefore, its couplings to leptons and photons are two orders less compared to DFSZ axion.

The archion model  contains the global symmetry $`U(1)`$, its spontaneous breaking results in Goldstone boson, which has both diagonal and nondiagonal flavor interaction with fermions. But unlike the axion the archion has no interaction with photons and it is like a hadronic axion with strongly suppressed lepton interaction.

Modern experimental limitation for electron-axion coupling gives $`g_{aee}<310^8`$  (In this review limitation for pseudovector coupling $`G_{aee}=g_{aee}/(2m_e)`$ is presented.)

The astrophysical constraints on the VEV, mass and coupling of ”invisible” axion  are very restrictive:

$$10^9\mathrm{GeV}<\mathrm{f}_\mathrm{a}<10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}0.510^{12}<\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{aee}}<0.510^9,$$

$$0.610^5eV<m_a<0.610^2eV.$$

### 2.2 The Arion $`X_\alpha `$

The arion is a neutral, strictly massless, stable pseudoscalar boson with even charge parity, interacting with fermions . The interaction of arion with lepton is described by an Effective Lagrangian (4) with:

$$g_{\alpha ee}=\mathrm{tan}\beta \frac{m_e}{v},v=(G_F\sqrt{2})^{1/2}=246GeV.$$
(8)
Here $`X_\alpha `$ is the arion field, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ is the ratio of different VEVs, modern estimations in Higgs boson physics are in favor of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =1÷40`$. However, the astrophysical data are in favor of very small $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ (which are not forbidden yet in the standard two doublet Higgs models). Weakly interacting with a matter the arions can be emitted from stars. The arion emission leads to fast loss of energy from the stars. The demand of the condition by which the arion luminosity of the Sun should not exceed the photon luminosity leads to $`\mathrm{tan}\beta <10^3`$. A more strong constraint appears from the evolution of red giants is $`\mathrm{tan}\beta <10^6`$.

It gives weak coupling with leptons $`g_{aee}<210^9210^6`$.

### 2.3  The Majoron $`X_M`$

A spontaneously broken global symmetry of lepton number will lead to massive Majorana neutrinos and a Nambu-Goldstone boson, named the majoron. This can be accomplished by extending the Standard Model with an additional gauge-single Higgs field , or $`SU(2)`$triplet Higgs multiplet . The respective Goldstone bosons are the Chikashige-Mohapatra- Peccei (CMP) Majoron and the Gelmini-Roncadelli (GR) Majoron.

CMP model requires the addition of a gauge-singlet Higgs field and a right-handed heavy neutrino. The effective Majoron -electron interaction induced at one-loop level is given by

$$=\frac{G_F}{16\pi ^2}m_em_\nu \overline{e}\gamma _5eX_M$$
(9)
From the current upper bound $`m_{\nu _e}<10eV`$ it is easily seen that the coupling of the CMP Majoron to matter is extremely small ($`g_{Mee}<10^{17}`$).

An $`SU(2)`$triplet Higgs multiplet is introduced in GR Majoron model. The wave function of the GR Majoron is primarily the phase field of the neutral component and has a small admixture of the Higgs doublet with the mixing angle $`2v_T/v_D`$ ($`v_T`$ and $`v_D`$ being the VEV’s of the Higgs triplet and doublet, respectively). As a consequence, the GR Majoron has a tree-level coupling to electrons

$$=2\sqrt{2}G_Fv_Tm_e\overline{e}\gamma _5eX_M$$
(10)
The astrophysical constraint from the consideration of majoron emission rates of the neutron-star core is $`v_T<2KeV`$.

Thus, we have the following constraint on the coupling with an electron: $`g_{Mee}<3.410^{14}`$.

### 2.4 The Familon $`X_F`$

The familon is the Goldstone boson associated with the spontaneous breaking of a global family symmetry (horizontal symmetry) between the generation of the quarks and leptons . Since the breaking of the horizontal group can takes place at small distance $`1/F`$ only, the familon, similar to the invisible axion, interacts weakly with the matter and its mass should be small.

The Effective Lagrangian for the interaction of a familon with a lepton at low energy has form (4) with $`g_{Fee}=2m_e/F`$.

The absence of decay $`K^+\pi ^+X_F`$ results in limitation $`g_{Fee}<0.810^{14}`$ ($`F>1.310^{11}`$GeV) . The astrophysical constraint here is less restrictive, it gives $`g_{Fee}=2m_e/F<1.410^{13}`$ ($`F>710^9`$ GeV).

## 3  The calculations of probability and the number of events.

We consider the laser wave with circular polarization (which is the best for conversion ). Its vector potential has form $`A_\mu =a_{1\mu }\mathrm{cos}\phi +a_{2\mu }\mathrm{sin}\phi ,\phi =kx`$, where $`k_\mu `$ is the momentum of laser photon, ($`ka_1=ka_2=a_1a_2=0,a_1^2=a_2^2=a^2`$).

The matrix element of the LGP production by an electron in external field can be written in the form

$$M_{fi}=ig_{Xee}d^4x\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_e(x)\gamma _5\mathrm{\Psi }_e\mathrm{\Phi }(x),$$
(11)
where $`\mathrm{\Psi }_e(x)`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_e(x)`$ are the exact solution of the Dirac equation for an electron in the field of a circularly polarized wave:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_e(x)=\left(1+\frac{ek\widehat{A}}{2kp}\right)u_p\mathrm{exp}\left(ie\frac{a_1p}{kp}\mathrm{sin}\phi ie\frac{a_2p}{kp}\mathrm{cos}\phi +iqx\right),\varphi _X=\frac{e^{ip_Xx}}{\sqrt{2ϵ_X}}.$$
(12)
Here $`ϵ_X,p_X`$ is the energy and the momentum of LGP, $`p`$ and $`q`$ are the momentum and ”quasimomentum” of an electron

$$q_\mu =p_\mu +\xi ^2\frac{m_e^2}{2kp}k_\mu ,\xi ^2=\frac{e^2a^2}{m_e^2}.$$

Note that

$$m_{}^2=q_\mu q_\mu =m_e^2(1+\xi ^2).$$

This difference from $`m_e^2`$ is essential to find the production threshold.

Using standard techniques (see ), we calculated the probability of LGP production by a nonpolarized electron

$$dW=\frac{g_{Xee}^2m_e}{64\pi }W_n\frac{du}{(1+u)^2}$$
(13)
$$W_n=\frac{1}{\sqrt{nx+1+\xi ^2}}\left(2\eta ^2J_n^2(z)+\xi ^2\frac{u^2}{1+u}[J_{n+1}^2(z)+J_{n1}^2(z)2J_n^2(z)]\right),$$

where $`J_n(z)`$ is the Bessel function of $`n`$-th order, $`u=(kp_a)/(kp^{^{}})`$, $`p^{^{}}`$ is the momentum of a scattering electron,

$$\eta =\frac{m_X}{m_e},z=\frac{2\xi }{x}\sqrt{nx+1+\xi ^2}\sqrt{\frac{(u_+u)(uu_{})}{(1+u_+)(1+u_{})}},u_{}<u<u_+,$$

$$u_\pm =\frac{nx+\eta ^2\pm \sqrt{(\eta ^2nx)^24\eta ^2(1+\xi ^2)}}{2+nx+2\xi ^2\eta ^2\sqrt{(\eta ^2nx)^24\eta ^2(1+\xi ^2)}}.$$

In formula (13) the term with given $`n`$ describes the LGP production by an electron via absorption from electromagnetic wave $`n`$ of laser photons simultaneously (3), $`n_{th}`$ is the minimal number of photons for the Goldstone production with the mass $`m_X`$

$$n_{th}=\frac{1}{x}(\eta ^2+2\eta \sqrt{1+\xi ^2})$$
(14)
Integrating the expression (13) we get the total probability of the LGP production (in this case the term “cross section” cannot be used):

$$\frac{g_{Xee}^2m_e}{64\pi }f(x,\xi ,\eta ).$$

In Figure 1 the dependence of function $`f(x,\xi ,\eta )`$ shown at some values $`\xi `$.

At $`\xi ^21`$, expanding the Bessel function in series, we get from (13)

$$dW_n=\frac{g_{Xee}^2m_e(\xi /x)^{2n}}{64\pi n!\sqrt{nx+1+\xi ^2}}D\frac{du}{(1+u)^2}$$
(15)
$$D=2\eta ^2((1+\xi ^2)(u_+u)(uu_{}))^n+\frac{x^2n^2u^2}{1+u}((1+\xi ^2)(u_+u)(uu_{}))^{n1}$$

For $`n=1`$, integrating (15) by $`u`$, we get the production cross-section calculated in Ref. :

$$\sigma =\frac{1}{2}\frac{\alpha g_{Xee}^2}{m_e^2}\frac{1}{x}\{(12\frac{\eta ^2}{x}+\frac{2\eta ^2(\eta ^22)}{x^2})\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{4(x+1)}{2+x\eta ^2+\sqrt{(x\eta ^2)^24\eta ^2}}\right).$$

$$.+\sqrt{(x\eta ^2)^24\eta ^2}(1\frac{7}{2}\eta ^2+\frac{3}{2}x8\frac{\eta ^2}{x}7\frac{\eta ^2}{x^2})\}$$

At $`x=5`$ this cross-section is:

$$\sigma g_{Xee}^25.410^{24}cm^2$$

Numerical estimations. Here we use the physical parameters of the laser conversion region which are chosen in accordance with the projects of Photon Colliders . In the conversion scheme, it has been proposed to use a laser with photon energy $`\omega _0=1.17`$ eV. The length of conversion region characterized by a high density of laser photons is $`l1.5`$ nm, which value is close to the length of the electron bunch. The invariant mass of the $`\gamma _0e`$–system for the energy of electron $`E_e=250`$ GeV is comparable to the electron mass $`W_01.21`$ eV ($`x=4.5`$). It is convenient to express $`\xi ^2`$ in terms of the energy $`A`$, the duration $`\tau `$ and radius $`a_\gamma `$ of the laser flash in the interaction point

$$\xi ^2=\frac{A}{A_{}},\mathrm{where}A_{}=\frac{\tau c}{4}\left(\frac{m_e\omega _0a_\gamma c}{e\mathrm{}}\right)^2.$$

For the values $`\pi a_\gamma ^210^5cm^2`$ we have $`A_{}=100`$ J and at the energy of laser flash $`A=25`$ J $`\xi ^2=0.25`$. The value $`\xi ^2`$ can reach 0.6. The number of produced LGP’s is

$$N_X=\frac{N_e\tau }{2}\underset{n>n_{th}}{}_u_{}^{u_+}𝑑W_n$$
(16)
The LGP energies are distributed in the interval

$$\frac{\eta ^2}{(x+\eta ^2)R}E_e<ϵ_X<E_e\frac{x+\eta ^2}{x+1}R,\mathrm{where}\mathrm{R}=\frac{1}{2}\left(1+\sqrt{1\frac{4\eta ^2(\mathrm{x}+1)}{(\mathrm{x}+\eta ^2)^2}}\right)$$
(17)
For $`E_e=250`$ GeV at $`m_X=10`$ KeV this corresponds to the interval

$$20MeV<ϵ_X<208GeV$$

. Since the effective mass of the $`\gamma _0e`$–system is not large the characteristic emission angles of Goldstones relative to the direction of the electron bunch are $`m_e/E_e10^5`$. Therefore the angular spread of Goldstones is defined by the angular spread of electrons in the beam ($`10^4`$).

The numerical calculation of the number of LGP’s and the used couplings are shown in the table. It is seen that a large number of axions or arions will generate from the discussed conversion.

Table

|  | $`g_{Xee}`$ | Cross-section $`\sigma (cm^2)`$ | The number of LGP per year |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Standard axion | $`210^6`$ | $`2.210^{35}`$ | $`710^{10}`$ |
| ”Invisible” axion | $`310^8`$ | $`4.910^{39}`$ | $`1.510^7`$ |
| Arion | $`210^6`$ | $`210^{35}`$ | $`710^{10}`$ |
| Familon | $`1.410^{13}`$ | $`110^{49}`$ | $`310^4`$ |
| Majoron | $`3.410^{14}`$ | $`510^{51}`$ | $`1.510^5`$ |

## 4 The registration

To see the obtained LGP the special simple detector is proposed. It should be some pin–type lead rod with radius about 2 cm and length about 100 m, placed in vacuum behind a shield to get rid of the background (Fig.2). The round scinillator with diameter in 1-3 m in the end of this device should detect particles produced in lead.

The LGP should interact with lead nuclei and production of hadrons:

$$X+Pbh(\mathrm{hadrons})$$
(18)
This reaction will be observed as the production of hadron jets with total energy $`ϵ_X`$ and characteristic transverse momentum $`p_{}300`$ MeV/c. Let us evaluate the number of events for the case of standard axion. The cross-section of reaction (18) is $`A`$ times as large as the cross-section of the axion–nucleon interaction, $`\sigma _{an}`$, where $`A`$ is the number of nucleons in a nucleus. The cross-section $`\sigma _{an}f_{a\pi }\sigma _{\pi n}(v/f_{pq})^2`$, where $`f_{a\pi }`$ is the amplitude of the axion–pion transition for the standard axion, $`f_{a\pi }=210^4`$. Therefore222The cross-section of lepton pairs production in Bete-Haitler reaction $`X+Pbe^+e^{}+\mathrm{},X+Pb\mu ^+\mu ^{}+\mathrm{}`$ is approximately an order less then cross-section discussed.

$$\sigma (X_a+Pbh)Af_{a\pi }^2(v/f_{pq})^2\sigma _{\pi n}510^{34}cm^2.$$
(19)
With this cross section on the path of lead of 100 m one event (3), (18) per hour will be observed. The increase of additional $`U(1)`$ symmetry scale to one order gives the decrease of the events number in lead of four orders, because we really think it is possible to reach $`f_{pq}10`$ TeV in this experiment.

The background for the reaction (3), (18) will be produced via the high energy photon interaction with the matter of detector. With good wall behind vacuum camera our lead detector can destinate only neutrinos produced in this wall. Their angular spread ($`>300\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}/\mathrm{E}`$) is much higher that of LGP’s calculated above. Besides, energies of these neutrino should be less than the energies of LGP’s.

## 5 Acknowledgments

I would like to thank I.F.Ginzburg for improving English in the manuscript and valuable remarks. The author thanks R.N.Mohapatra for the criticism of majoron problem.


text: # Demonstration Example


text:
# Singular Band Behavior of the Extended Emery Model for High-Tc Superconductors

## I Introduction

ARPES measurements of YBa2Cu3O6.95 (Y123) , YBa2Cu4O8 (Y124) , Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+δ (Bi2212)  and La2-xSrxCuO4 (LSCO)  Fermi surfaces provide interesting information about the qualitative properties of the electron system in the high Tc materials. At least roughly, the electrons behave as fermions with large Fermi surfaces which pass through the vicinity of the hyperbolic van Hove points of the Brioullin zone (BZ), in agreement with some early theoretical conjectures . Additionally, the Fermi surface is unusually flat along one of the high symmetry directions passing through the hyperbolic van Hove point. This corresponds to the increase of the strenght of the logarithmic van Hove singularity in the electron density of states. Related to it is the early theoretical proposal of the extended (one-dimensional) van Hove singularities , which are stronger than logarithmic.

The experimentally obtained k-dependance of the conducting band is usually fitted throughout the BZ with the Fourier series involving only the first and second harmonics in the symmetry allowed combinations . Such fits use six independant parameters and they suggest in particular that the direct oxygen-oxygen hopping is small, but not negligible with respect to the direct copper-oxygen hopping of the electrons. The former procedure is unjustly called ”tight-binding” fits.

Actually, the proper tight-binding calculation with one copper state and two oxygen states per unit cell leads to the three band structure which involves the first and higher harmonics in non-linear way. Only when the site energy splitting between copper and oxygen is by far the largest energy in the problem, the tight-binding structure of the conduction band becomes an additive combination of low order Fourier harmonics. Here, we will point out that the topology of the measured Fermi surfaces, expecially those of the weakly dopped LSCO, suggests that the site energy splitting between copper and oxygen is not large. The analysis of the electric field gradients in the high-Tc superconductors  led to the same conclusion. Therefore we carefully examined the tight-binding band structure characterized with the Cu-O site energy splitting, the Cu-O hopping and the O-O hopping, for all the ratios of these three parameters. The agreement with the experiments turns out to be remarkably good, although our fits use small number of parameters, presumably because the non-linear dependence of the band structure on the first harmonics is properly taken into account.

The observation of the shadow bands in Bi2212  opens the possibility that two of three tight-binding bands are present at the Fermi level. The range of parameters for which this can occur is determined here. In the three band model this is accompanied by the appearance of the extended van Hove singularities. It will turn out, however, that the topologies of these two tight-binding Fermi surfaces and the observed Fermi surfaces cannot be reconciled, suggesting that the shadow band in Bi2212 is the result of spin or of structure induced doubling of the BZ. This also means that in the three band model the extended van Hove singularities cannot occur close to the Fermi level, but the usual logarithmic singularities are expected to be strongly enhanced.

Surprisingly enough, the simple three band tight-binding model  has not been examined in sufficient detail before. The previous attempts were focused on the correlation effects in the high-Tc oxides , examining the restricted range of the tight-binding parameters. It was concluded in particular that two lower bands can touch each other in the nighborhood of the Fermi level when the Cu-O site energy splitting and the oxygen-oxygen hopping are both positive . Here we point out that such touching can occur for any relative sign of these parameters and even when the splitting vanishes. Small, doping dependant values of the renormalized Cu-O splitting are suggested by our comparison of the three band model with the ARPES data in the full range of the tight-binding parameters. This emphasizes the need for the correlation theory which leads to small, doping dependant values of the Cu-O splitting. It is interesting to note in this respect that the standard ( the O-O hopping neglected) slave-boson mean field theory does lead to the effective Cu-O splittings which are small and even change sign for resonable values of the bare tight-binding parameters . The extensions of those results to the finite O-O hopping is therefore being carried out and will be presented in separate paper.

## II General

Here we examine the usual, nonmagnetic, undistorted CuO2 square unit cell with $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ ionic wave function associated to the Cu site, whereas the oxygen sites on the x and y axes are associated to the $`p_x`$ and $`p_y`$ states respectively. The phases of the wave functions are chosen as in Fig.1. $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the splitting between oxygen and copper site energies, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\epsilon _p\epsilon _d`$.

The hole picture is used here so that $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$ corresponds to the usually quoted values of $`\epsilon _p\epsilon _d`$ . The hybridisations between Cu and O and between two neighbouring oxygens are introduced through the hopping integrals $`t`$ and $`t^{}`$ respectively. This simple picture covers the noninteracting holes (electrons) in the CuO2 plane, but also the case of the very large interaction Ud on the copper site, if the latter is treated by the mean-field slave boson approximation  or by the appropriate Hartree-Fock . Both approximations lead to the renormalisation of the bare values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`t`$, whereas $`t^{}`$ is not affected by correlations. The Bloch states are built in the usual tight-binding way from $`d_{x^2y^2}`$, $`p_x`$ and $`p_y`$ states in each unit cell and the band energies $`\epsilon _i(𝐤)`$ are found by diagonalisation of 3x3 hermitean matrix. This leads to the secular equation of the third order

$$\epsilon ^3+3p\epsilon +2q=0$$
(1)
where

$$p=[\alpha +\beta (\eta ^2+\xi ^2)+\gamma \eta ^2\xi ^2],$$
(2)
$$q=a+b(\eta ^2+\xi ^2)+c\eta ^2\xi ^2,$$
(3)
with

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{27}}\mathrm{\Delta }^3,b={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}t^2\mathrm{\Delta },c={\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}t^{}[t^{}\mathrm{\Delta }+3t^2],`$ (4)
$`\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{9}}\mathrm{\Delta }^2,\beta ={\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}t^2,\gamma ={\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}t^2,`$ (5)
and

$$\eta =\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_x}{2},\xi =\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_y}{2}.$$
(6)
$`\epsilon `$ is the energy measured with respect to $`\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }=(\epsilon _d+2\epsilon _p)/3`$. The hermiticity of 3x3 tight-binding matrix ensures that three roots $`\epsilon _i`$ of Eq.(1) are real. It should be noted that Eq.(1) is invariant on the simultaneus replacement $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta },t^{}t^{}`$ and $`\epsilon \epsilon `$, irrespectively of the sign of $`t`$. This means that the band structure $`\epsilon _i(𝐤)`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0,t^{}<0`$ or for $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0,t^{}<0`$ can be obtained from the $`\epsilon _i(𝐤)`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0,t^{}>0`$ or for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0,t^{}>0`$ respectively by the reflection on the k plane. We shall therefore, without the loss of generality, carry out the theoretical discussion for $`t,t^{}>0`$ and for both signs of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, although $`t^{}<0`$ will also suit the experimental situation, as discussed in Section V. It can be finally noted that the band structure in the electron language, appropriate for the ARPES analysis is obtained from the band structure in the hole language used here by the reflection on the k plane.

## III Small $`t^{}`$

It is instructive to start the discussion of the features of the energy bands by introducing t’ as a small quantity. The well known results for $`t^{}=0`$ are shown in Fig.2. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$ lower band $`\epsilon _L`$ is splitted from the intermediate and the upper band $`\epsilon _I,\epsilon _U`$ by $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and the latter two bands, $`\epsilon _I`$ being dispersionless, are degenerate at the $`𝚪`$ point. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$, the dispersionless band joins the lower band coinciding with it at the $`𝚪`$ point. The lowest band $`\epsilon _L`$ is half filled in the stoechiometric crystal, and the Fermi energy $`\epsilon _F^0`$ coincides with the van Hove singularities at $`\epsilon _x^L`$, for any value of t and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

The small parameter $`t^{}`$ can be introduced either by the usual perturbation theory applied to 3x3 tight-binding matrix or by iteration of the solutions of Eq.(1). Retaining only the leading term, linear in $`t^{}`$, (i.e. the first order perturbation theory) gives the structure of $`\epsilon _L`$

$$\epsilon _L(𝐤)=\epsilon {}_{L}{}^{0}(𝐤)+\frac{32t^{}t^2\eta ^2\xi ^2}{A(2A+\epsilon _p+\epsilon _d)},$$
(7)
where

$$2A=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }^2+16t^2(\eta ^2+\xi ^2)}.$$
(8)
The main qualitative effect of $`t^{}`$ is the change in the number of the states below the van Hove singularity at $`\epsilon _x^L`$, the value of which remains itself unaffected by $`t^{}`$. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$ the number of the states below $`\epsilon _x^L`$ is increased or decreased respectively. In both cases the Fermi level $`\epsilon _F^0`$ of the half-filled band is removed from the van Hove singularity at $`\epsilon _x^L`$. The quantitative discussion is based on Fig.3.

For$`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$ the $`\epsilon _x^L`$ equienergetic straight line is bent towards the $`𝚪`$ point and all the states between this line and the finite $`t^{}`$ curve are transferred from below $`\epsilon _x^L`$ to the energies above it. The number of the transferred states can be determined for small $`t^{}`$ by expanding in terms of the small departure of the $`\epsilon _x^L`$ equienergetic curve for $`t^{}0`$ from the straight line and by calculating the surface between the straight line and this curve. Thus obtained number of the transferred states $`\delta _c`$ is

$$\delta _c=\frac{4t^{}}{\pi ^2t}\mathrm{sign}\mathrm{\Delta },t^{}<|\mathrm{\Delta }|<t,$$
(10)
and

$$\delta _c=\frac{8t^{}}{\pi ^2\mathrm{\Delta }},t^{}|\mathrm{\Delta }|<t^2<\mathrm{\Delta }^2.$$
(11)
The energy $`\epsilon ^0`$ which divides the number of the states in the band in two halves can be calculated in the same spirit by finding the equienergetic curve which encompasses the same number of states below and above the straight line, as shown in Fig.3. For the two regimes considered above

$$(\epsilon ^0\epsilon {}_{x}{}^{L})\mathrm{ln}\frac{|\epsilon ^0\epsilon {}_{x}{}^{L}|}{4t}=2t^{}\mathrm{sign}\mathrm{\Delta },$$
(13)
and

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(\epsilon ^0\epsilon {}_{x}{}^{L})}{t^2}\mathrm{ln}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(\epsilon ^0\epsilon {}_{x}{}^{L})}{t^2}=\frac{16t^{}}{\mathrm{\Delta }}.$$
(14)
Note that $`\epsilon ^0`$ coincides with the Fermi level when the band $`\epsilon _L`$ is half filled, and then $`\delta _c`$ is the critical hole doping which brings the Fermi level to $`\epsilon _x^L`$.

The number of the states $`\delta `$ between the two close energies $`\epsilon `$ and $`\epsilon ^0`$ can be determined by similar reasoning as

$$\epsilon \epsilon ^0=\frac{\pi ^2t\delta }{2\mathrm{ln}\frac{|\epsilon ^0\epsilon {}_{x}{}^{L}|}{4t}}\mathrm{sign}\mathrm{\Delta },$$
(16)
and

$$\epsilon \epsilon ^0=\frac{\pi ^2t^2\delta }{8\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{ln}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(\epsilon ^0\epsilon {}_{x}{}^{L})}{t^2}}.$$
(17)
Obviously, Eq.(3) also defines the position of the Fermi level at $`\epsilon =\epsilon _F`$, if $`\delta `$ is taken to be the doping of the CuO2 plane.

In two considered limis Eqs.(3) can be used to determine the density of states $`d\delta /dE`$ for $`\epsilon `$ between $`\epsilon _x^L`$ and $`\epsilon ^0`$

$$n_L(\epsilon )=\frac{2}{\pi ^2t}(1+\frac{2t^{}}{t})\mathrm{ln}\frac{|\epsilon \epsilon {}_{x}{}^{L}|}{4t},$$
(19)
and

$$n_L(\epsilon )=\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }|}{2\pi ^2t^2}(1+\frac{4t^{}}{|\mathrm{\Delta }|})\mathrm{ln}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(\epsilon \epsilon {}_{x}{}^{L})}{t^2},$$
(20)
or vice versa, Eqs.(3) and (11) can be used to derive Eq.(3). The density of states between $`\epsilon ^0`$ and $`\epsilon _x^L`$ is increased by $`t^{}`$.

It should be noted that the results (11) to (3) concern only the energetic neighbourhood of the van Hove energy $`\epsilon _x^L`$. The behavior of the band structure far from $`\epsilon _x^L`$ is irrelevant in this respect, in spite of the fact that t’ leads to the level crossing for all the energies down to $`\epsilon _M^L`$.

Let us close this discussion by noting that the density of states can be obtained from Eq.(7) in the closed form for all energies when $`\mathrm{\Delta }>t^{},t`$. In this case, the spectrum of the lowest band can be obtained explicitly,

$$\epsilon _L(𝐤)=\frac{2}{3}\mathrm{\Delta }+\frac{4t^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\eta ^2+\xi ^2\frac{8t^{}}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta ^2\xi ^2)$$
(22)
in agreement with the usual additive form of the ”tight-binding” fits. This leads to the density of states

$$n_L(\epsilon )=\frac{2|\mathrm{\Delta }|}{\pi ^2t}\frac{1}{\sqrt{t^232t^{}\epsilon }}𝐊[\frac{8\epsilon (t^2|\mathrm{\Delta }|4t^{}t^22\epsilon \mathrm{\Delta }^2)}{t^3\sqrt{t^232t^{}\epsilon }}]$$
(23)
where the first term in Eq. (22) is omitted and $`K(x)`$ is the complete elliptic integral of the first kind. For $`t^{}|\mathrm{\Delta }|<t^2<\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$, Eq.(23) reproduces the result (20).

## IV Band degeneracy

The main aim of the discussion which follows is to consider the degeneracies or the near degeneracies of the three bands $`\epsilon _i`$, at a given k, which are caused by including the oxygen-oxygen hopping $`t^{}`$ into the dispersions in non-perturbative way. It is clear from Fig.3 that such effects can occur only when the dispersions related to $`t`$ and $`t^{}`$ are at least of the same order of magnitude, i.e. for the sufficiently large $`t^{}`$.

The large $`t^{}`$ is also related to the qualitative modification of the dispersion within each band itself, e.g. the bending of the $`\epsilon _x^L`$ equienergetic line, instead of being small, as in Fig.3, becomes large, obviously changing the symmetry properties of the equienergetic surfaces all over the BZ. This is related to the fact that the O-O overlap induces the hopping along the diagonal of the Cu-O unit cell, unlike the Cu-O overlap, associated with the propagation along the cell’s main axes, i.e. the additional propagation axes are rotated by $`\pi /4`$ with respect to the original ones.

As well known, the quantity proper to the study of the degeneracy of the spectrum $`\epsilon _i`$ at a given k is

$$D=q^2+p^3,$$
(24)
known as the discriminant of the third order Eq.(1). The hermiticity of the problem, i.e. of 3x3 tight-binding matrix, which makes the roots $`\epsilon _i`$ real, ensures that

$$D0$$
(25)
For $`D<0`$, all the roots $`\epsilon _i`$ are real and different, whereas $`D=0`$, with $`p^3=q^20`$ implies that two roots are degenerate. For $`p=q=0`$, all three roots coincide. Together with the inequality (25), this means that the zero of $`D`$ at a given point k of the BZ is also the maximum of $`D`$. Therefore, instead of the direct calculation of the zeroes of $`D`$, which is the third order polinomial in $`\eta ^2`$ and $`\xi ^2`$, it is possible to find the optima of $`D`$ with respect to $`\eta `$ and $`\xi `$, and to determine which of those, if any, are the zeros of $`D`$. In carrying out this procedure, it is convenient to use the polar coordinates instead of $`\eta `$ and $`\xi `$ of Eq.(6)

$$\eta =\rho \mathrm{sin}\phi ,\xi =\rho \mathrm{cos}\phi .$$
(26)
The zero of the derivative of D with respect to $`\phi `$ is easily found to be

$`{\displaystyle \frac{D}{\phi }}`$ $`=`$ $`\rho ^4\mathrm{sin}4\phi [c(a+b\rho ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{c\rho ^4\mathrm{sin}^22\phi }{4}})`$ (27)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3\gamma }{2}}(\alpha +\beta \rho ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma \rho ^4\mathrm{sin}^22\phi }{4}})^2]=0.`$ (28)
The advantage of this representation is that, besides separating out immediately the trivial solution at $`\rho =0`$, which corresponds to the degeneracy at the $`𝚪`$ point, it also exibits other possible band degeneracies at $`\phi _{1,2}=0,\pi /4`$, i.e. on the $`𝚪𝐗`$ and $`𝚪𝐌`$ axes of the BZ.

The nature of the third maximum, associated with the zero of the square braces in Eq.(27) is best understood for $`t=0`$, when this zero occurs for

$$\rho ^2\mathrm{sin}2\phi =\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }|}{2t^{}}.$$
(29)
This is easily recognized as the condition that the pure oxygen band crosses the dispersionless copper level, as shown in Fig.4. Consequently, $`D_0=D(t=0)=0`$ on the line (29).

In the next step the change $`\mathrm{\Delta }D`$ is calculated to the leading order in $`t`$. On the line (29)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }D=\frac{32}{27}\mathrm{\Delta }^4t^2(\rho ^2\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2t^{}}).$$
(30)
It follows that $`\mathrm{\Delta }D<0`$ in all the points on the crossing line (29) except for $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$ in the single point on the $`𝚪𝐌`$ diagonal

$$\phi _3=\frac{\pi }{4},\rho {}_{3}{}^{2}=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2t^{}},$$
(31)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }D=0`$, i.e. $`D=D_0+\mathrm{\Delta }D=0`$. The band degeneracy associated with the third maximum of D occurs on the $`𝚪𝐌`$ diagonal and it is possible only for the same sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`t^{}`$. The variation of $`\mathrm{\Delta }D`$ in the vicinity of the line (29) is weak with respect to the variation of $`D_0<0`$, i.e. $`D=D_0+\mathrm{\Delta }D<0`$ in the vicinity of the line (29). Therefore, small $`t`$ removes the degeneracy of two bands, except at the point (31), rather than displacing slightly the crossing line (29) to the new position. In other words, small $`t`$ introduces the anticrossing of the oxygen band and the former copper level, excepting the single point (31) for $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$, as exemplified in Fig.5a and 5b.

Turning back to the first, $`\phi _1=0`$ maximum of $`D`$, on the $`𝚪𝐗`$ line, we note that for $`t=0`$ it corresponds to the degeneracy of two oxygen bands, symmetric by reflection on the k plane, while the dispersionless copper level is decoupled from the oxygen bands. When the copper is removed, the natural BZ corresponds to one oxygen per unit cell, i.e. it is rotated for $`\phi /4`$ with respect to the original one and increased by $`\sqrt{2}`$. In this zone two bands unfold into one continuous oxygen band and the dispersionless $`𝚪𝐗`$ line becomes analoguous to the dispersionless straight line in Fig.3 for $`t=0`$. The corresponding singularity in the density of states is therefore logarithmic . For $`t0`$, the degeneracy on the $`𝚪𝐗`$ line is removed, except in the $`𝚪`$ point, as shown e.g. in Fig.5b, with the consequences further discussed in Sec.V

### A Lower critical value of t’

The previous discussion shows that for finite $`t`$,$`t^{}`$ the degeneracies of the bands at a given k point can occur only on the $`𝚪𝐌`$ line. Setting $`\eta =\xi `$ in the equation $`D(\eta ,\xi )=0`$ simplifies considerably further discussion. To this effect, it is convenient to distinguish between $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$, as already suggested by Eq.(30) and start with the limit of small $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|`$. The solution of the equation $`D=0`$ is particulary simple around $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ at the M point of the BZ. By increasing $`t^{}`$ from zero, the dispersionless oxygen level $`\epsilon _I`$ of Fig.2 bends towards the lower band $`\epsilon _L`$ and these two bands touch at the M point. It can be shown analitically that, for $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|`$ small, the degeneracy at the M point occurs for

$$\frac{t_{cr}^{}}{t}=0.5+0.167\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{t},$$
(32)
i.e. for $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$ the oxygen level must bend more to cross the gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ than for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$, when there is no gap to cross. Eq.(32) shows that the band touching occurs not only for $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$, as already known , but also for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$. This is allowed by the solution $`\phi _2=\pi /4`$ of the Eq.(27), although the solutions $`\phi _3=\pi /4,\rho _3`$, given by Eq.(31), is not a zero of $`D`$ when $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$. The full curve $`t_{cr}^{}/t`$ versus $`\mathrm{\Delta }/t`$ is obtained numericaly in Fig.6. The limit of the large $`\mathrm{\Delta }/t`$ in Fig.7 is transparent: it corresponds to the situation when the pure oxygen band touches the flat copper level at the M point of the BZ. According to the Eq.(29), this occurs for $`4t_{cr}^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$. In Fig.7a and 8a, the full three band structures, obtained by solving Eq.(1) numerically, are displayed for $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2t=\pm 0.5`$ when $`t^{}/t=t_{cr}^{}/2t=0.64`$ and 0.39 respectively.

### B Upper critical value of t’

It is further interesting to investigate what happens for $`t^{}>t_{cr}^{}`$ for the fixed value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }/t>0`$ in Fig.6. Some representative band structures are shown in Fig.7 for $`\mathrm{\Delta }/t=1`$. It appears that the bands $`\epsilon _I`$ and $`\epsilon _L`$ touch at a point which moves from the M point towards the $`𝚪`$ point as t’ increases from $`t_{cr}^{}`$. For $`t^{}/t1`$, the regime of the Eq.(29),(30) and (31) is reached, i.e. the touching of the bands occurs at $`\rho ^2=\mathrm{\Delta }/2t^{}<1`$.

The situation is more complicated for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$. It is illustrated in Fig.8 for $`\mathrm{\Delta }/t=1`$. As $`t^{}/t`$ increases beyond $`t_{cr}^{}/t`$, the point of the coincidence moves towards the $`𝚪`$ point, reaching and leaving it for

$$\frac{\stackrel{~}{t_{cr}^{}}}{t}=\frac{2t}{\mathrm{\Delta }}.$$
(33)
For this value of parameters $`\epsilon _I`$ is again dispersionless as it was before for $`t=0`$ in Fig.4. The corresponding dispersions of the bands $`\epsilon _L`$ and $`\epsilon _U`$ are given by

$$\epsilon _{L,U}=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2}[1\pm \sqrt{1+\frac{16t^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2}(\eta ^2+\xi ^2+16\eta ^2\xi ^2)}].$$
(34)
For $`t^{}>\stackrel{~}{t_{cr}^{}}`$, $`\epsilon _I`$ starts to bend towards $`\epsilon _U`$ and, according to the Eq.(31), reaches the anticrossing with this band at $`\rho ^2`$ given approximately by Eq.(29). This anticrossing is more pronounced for $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2t=5`$ of Fig.5b than for $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2t=1`$ of Fig.8d.

The discussion is completed by showing in Fig.9a, the band touching of Fig.8b with better resolution, the equienergetic surfaces of the bands $`\epsilon _L`$ and $`\epsilon _I`$ when they touch in the Fig.9b and the full dispersion of the bands $`\epsilon _L`$ and $`\epsilon _I`$ in Figs.9c and d. The topology of the bands on Fig.9b for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$ shows striking similarity to the one found before for the bands that touch at $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$, i.e. the observation of such topology cannot be used to select the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

### C $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ bands

The features described above for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$ can be studied explicitely on the borderline $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ between those two (cf. Fig.6) because then the electron spectrum can be obtained in the closed form

$$\epsilon _L=4t^{}\sqrt{\eta ^2\xi ^2+\frac{t^2}{4t^2}(\eta ^2+\xi ^2)}+\frac{t^2}{t^{}}\frac{\eta ^2\xi ^2}{\eta ^2\xi ^2+\frac{t^2}{4t^2}(\eta ^2+\xi ^2)},$$
(36)
$$\epsilon _I=\frac{2t^2}{t^{}}\frac{\eta ^2\xi ^2}{\eta ^2\xi ^2+\frac{t^2}{4t^2}(\eta ^2+\xi ^2)},$$
(37)
$$\epsilon _U=4t^{}\sqrt{\eta ^2\xi ^2+\frac{t^2}{4t^2}(\eta ^2+\xi ^2)}+\frac{t^2}{t^{}}\frac{\eta ^2\xi ^2}{\eta ^2\xi ^2+\frac{t^2}{4t^2}(\eta ^2+\xi ^2)}.$$
(38)
for $`t^{}>>t`$ and similarly for $`t^{}<<t`$.

Eqs.(7),(34) and (IV C) illustrate the fact that in the tight-binding approximation the spectrum is built from low order harmonics $`\eta ^2,`$ $`\xi ^2`$ of the Eq.(6) in nonlinear way. Eq.(IV C) and (39) are useful also because it will turn out in Sec.VI that the experimental specra are close to the $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ limit.

## V Extended van Hove singularities

Inspection of Figs.7 and 8 shows that the degeneracy of the bands $`\epsilon _L`$ and $`\epsilon _I`$ at the point M, for $`t^{}=t_{cr}^{}`$ is acompanied in the band $`\epsilon _L`$ with the absence of the dispersion on the line between $`𝚪`$ and M points. It appears that the dispersion depends only on the component of the wavevector perpendicular to the $`𝚪𝐌`$ line, in a quadratic way, i.e. the dispersion is one-dimensional on whole $`𝚪𝐌`$ line. As a result, an ”extended” van Hove singularity is found in the density of states of the lowest band

$$n_L(\epsilon )\frac{B}{\sqrt{\epsilon \epsilon _L^M}}.$$
(39)
When the degeneracy between the $`𝚪`$ and M points is lifted by changing slightly $`t^{}`$ from $`t_{cr}^{}`$, the usual step singularity at $`\epsilon _M^L`$ and the logarithmic singularity at $`\epsilon _x^L`$ are recovered in $`n_L(\epsilon )`$, lying close to each other in energy, i.e. enhancing each other. The described coalescence of these two singularities can be explicitly found in Eq.(3), but it occurs there for $`8t^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$, when, unfortunately, the expansion in terms of $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|t,t^{}`$ is only qualitatively correct.

Similar extended van Hove singularities are associated with the absence of the dispersion on the $`𝚪𝐗`$ line in the band $`\epsilon _I`$ for any finite values of $`t`$ and $`t^{}`$. For $`t=0`$ however, as already explained below Eq.(30), the copper level is decoupled from the oxygen band structure and two oxygen bands $`\epsilon _I`$ and $`\epsilon _U`$ coalesce into one band with the artificial degeneracy on the $`𝚪𝐗`$ line. When the artificial degeneracy is removed, by increasing the BZ so that it corresponds to one oxygen per unit cell, the spectrum of this band is continuously increasing through the $`𝚪𝐗`$ line, what is thus associated with the logarithmic, and not with the extended van Hove singularity in the density of states.

It is apparent here that in the three band model with $`1+\delta `$ holes, the Fermi level falls far from the extended van Hove singularity in the $`\epsilon _I`$ band. On the other hand, when the extended van Hove singularity (39) occurs for $`t^{}=t_{cr}^{}`$ in the $`\epsilon _L`$ band, the Fermi level crosses necessarily two bands, $`\epsilon _L`$ and $`\epsilon _I`$. This fact makes the discussion of the main band and the shadow bands, observed in some of the high-$`T_c`$ superconductors , quite relevant. The rest of this paper is devoted to the analysis of the empirical band structure. As already mentioned, it will turn out that the observed dispersions of the main band and the shadow band cannot be reconciliated with $`\epsilon _L(𝐤)`$ and $`\epsilon _I(𝐤)`$, i.e. the extended van Hove singularities of the three band model do not occur close to the Fermi level.

## VI Experiments

The previous discussion provided the complete description of the three band structure. Although it was carried out for $`t^{}>0`$ and arbitrary sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the symmetry properties (cf Sec.II) extend it to the entire range of the parameters. In this section, we shall compare these results with the experimental data obtained by the ARPES measurements.

The first step is to determine the position of the Fermi level $`\epsilon _F`$ for the doping $`\delta `$ in the calculated band structure, then to find the corresponding Fermi surface and finally to compare it with the empirical data. Since the discussion was carried out in the hole picture, $`1+\delta `$ holes are placed in the lowest band begining from it’s bottom at the ($`\pi ,\pi `$) point, (i.e. the M point of the square unit cell), to the Fermi level $`\epsilon _F`$, where $`\epsilon _I`$ is also possibly present for $`t^{}>0`$. As already mentioned in Sec.II, the band structure for $`t^{}<0`$ can be obtained from the one calculated for $`t^{}>0`$ by the reflection on the k plane. The result is that $`\epsilon _F`$ falls then in the $`\epsilon _U`$ band alone, i.e. the band touching cannot occur close to the $`\epsilon _F`$. In any case, all three bands can be brought to the Fermi level of $`1+\delta `$ holes by varying appropriately the tight-binding parameters.

Using in particular the regime separation summarized in Fig.7, all the regimes of the parameters are examined in this way, comparing the topology of the obtained Fermi surfaces with the corresponding experimental data. The bending of the Fermi surfaces towards the $`𝚪`$ point requires that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`t^{}`$ have the opposite signs for all the considered materials. This is already apparent in the small $`t^{}`$ limit of Sec.III and generalizes to arbitrary $`t^{}`$. The values of the parameters vary among different materials as will be discussed bellow. It is also appropriate to point out that all the experimentally obtained Fermi surfaces are fitted here with only two different parameters, e.g. with $`t/2t^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2t^{}`$. Two more parameters, e.g. t and $`\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }=(\epsilon _d+2\epsilon _p)/3`$ are needed to fit the conducting band(s) away from $`\epsilon _F`$.

### A La2-xSrxCuO4

The recent ARPES measurements in LSCO  give the evolution of the Fermi surface in the large range of dopings $`\delta `$. The two parameters fit of those data are shown in Fig.10a$``$e. Two sets of fitting parameters, given in Fig.11, one characterized by $`t^{}>0`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$ and the other by $`t^{}<0`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$, fit the data equally well. It follows that the rigid band model is completely inadequate to describe the evolution of the Fermi surface with $`\delta `$, because in both sets $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2t^{}`$ and $`t/2t^{}`$ undergo large variations with $`\delta `$.

It is further important to note in Fig.11 that for both sets of parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2t^{}`$ and $`t/2t^{}`$ are small for small $`\delta `$. This is best understood by noting that for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0,t=0`$ the Fermi surface of the half-filled ($`\delta =0`$) band coincides with kx, ky axes of the BZ, which in the qualitative terms corresponds to the Figs.10a$``$e. As already explained in Sections III and V, the energetic degeneracy of the $`𝚪𝐗`$ line in the pure ($`t=0`$) oxygen model is related to the logarithmic rather than to the extended van Hove singularity in the density of states.

The full band structure with $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`t`$ small, but finite is shown in the Fig.12 for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0,t^{}>0`$. In particular Figs.12e and d illustrate that weak dispersion is introduced by $`t`$ in the conducting band $`\epsilon _L`$ along the $`𝚪𝐗`$ line, i.e. the van Hove singularity at X, although enhanced, is logarithmic. Fig.12 also shows that for the values of parameters found in the case $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0,t^{}<0`$ the band $`\epsilon _I`$ is rather far from the Fermi level. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0,t^{}>0`$, this holds independently on the values of the parameters.

The usual $`t^{}=0`$ mean field slave boson theory with large U, other interactions absent, allows small and even negative values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ , but large variations of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`t`$ with the doping $`\delta `$ are not obtained this way. The slave boson calculations with finite $`t^{}`$ are under way for this reason and also because the previous results with finite $`t^{}`$ do not cover the range of parameters which appeared to be relevant here.

### B Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8

As interesting feature of the ARPES results in Bi2212 taken in the normal state is the appearance of two Fermi surfaces in the BZ . There are points in the 2d k space in which two Fermi lines cross or touch. In the three band model such points can occur only on the $`𝚪𝐌`$ line, as shown in Figs.7,8 and 9, whereas the experimantal crossing or touching points fall quite far from this line. It is therefore more appropriate to interpret two observed Fermi lines as belonging to the main band of the same topology as the one found in LSCO, and to the shadow band obtained by the $`(\pi ,\pi )`$ shift of the main band. It is likely that this shift is produced by AF or by structural $`(\pi ,\pi )`$ superlattice. The values of parameters which fit the main band are $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2t^{}=0.0625`$ and $`t/2t^{}=0.1`$, i.e. Bi2212 has even smaller values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`t`$ than LSCO with $`\delta 0.05`$. However, the number of holes $`1+\delta `$ below Fermi level corresponds to $`\delta 0.25`$. Similar conclusion holds also for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0,`$ $`t^{}>0`$.

In addition to the Fermi surfaces the ARPES measurements in Bi2212 provide the information about the states filled with electrons, i.e. about the empty hole states . When the fit is extended to the energies away from the $`\epsilon _F`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }`$ and $`t`$ are determined. The best fits to those measurements are shown in Fig.13b. The idea underlying these fits is that the Fermi liquid theory applies to the effects of magnetic, structural or superconducting fluctuations, beyond the mean field slave boson theory. The latter gives only the basic band structure, which was discussed here. The Fermi liquid renormalisation of this structure by fluctuations presumably vanish at $`\epsilon _F`$, i.e. the band theory is accurate at $`\epsilon _F`$ , as it is implicit from the fits of the Fermi surfaces, given in Figs.10 and 13. The departures of the experimental data from such fits are thus to be associated with the fluctuation effects away from $`\epsilon _F`$.

The most prominent fluctuation effect defined this way is the flattening of the measured dispersion along the $`\mathrm{𝐗𝐌}`$ line, compared to the band model prediction (Fig.25b). This flattening is understood here as the precursor of the gap opening around the X point, which is observed e.g. on doping Bi2212 with Dy . The precursor is not expected to be a simple pseudogap, which occurs only when the adiabatic approximation can be applied to the relevant fluctuations. Due to the small velocity of electrons, the adiabatic approximation fails in the van Hove singularity, and the band states are conserved at the Fermi level, although a part of them can be transferred to the pseudogap wings. This theoretical prediction, which justifies the description of the Fermi surface by the band theory, is borne out by the recent high resolution ARPES measurements along the $`𝚪𝐗`$ line . Those data show empirically that the states close to $`\epsilon _F`$ in the vicinity of the X point are shared between the peak at $`\epsilon _F`$ and the pseudogap wings. The calculations of the detailed k dependances and the comparison with the experiments is currently under way.

### C YBa2Cu3O$`{}_{6}{}^{}.95`$

There are two planes per unit cell of Y123 which result in dimerisation of the CuO2 bands along the axis perpendicular to the planes. In addition, the CuO chains of Y123 are conducting, which complicates further the analysis of the observed band structure. It is however resonable to assume that the lowest of the CuO2 bands undergoes only the dispersionless dimerisation shift towards lower energies.

The fit of the lowest band measured in Y123  with the three band model, shown in Fig.14, proceeds similarily to the cases of LSCO and Bi2212. The Fermi surface fit leads to $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2t^{}`$=-0.0625, $`t/2t^{}`$=-0.1 i.e. to the values characteristic for Bi2212. It is interesting to note that the band flattening observed in Bi2212 along the $`\mathrm{𝐗𝐌}`$ line does not occur in Y123. If not a problem of the experimental resolution, this suggests that the nature of fluctuations which affect the vicinity of the X point in the electron spectrum differs considerably between Bi2212 and Y123 and opens an interesting question which requires further investigation.

## VII Conclusion

In contrast to the most of the many body theories of the high-Tc superconductors, which are attempting to construct the electron band structure starting from a given set of bare band and interaction parameters, this paper assumes that the resulting average band structure can be described with a few effective near-neighbor tight-binding parameters. After the detailed analysis, which encompasses the rich structure of the three band model, it appears that the single band at the Fermi level describes the Fermi surfaces in LSCO, Bi2212 and Y123 remarkably well. Only two parameters are used in those fits, compared to the usual, at least four parameter fits of the Fermi surfaces. The improvement is obtained by the use of the effective tight-binding band structure which is non-linear in low order harmonics in contrast to the Fourier fits. This indicates that the average band structure arises from the (large) short range correlations. The departure of the predicted band behavior, measured in the vicinity the Fermi level, is used to determine the effects of the fluctuations on the small energy scales not included in the average band structure. This way the desired results of the many body theories are defined more clearly, they should end up with the effective tight-binding parameters in the energy range between 1eV and 0.1eV, and with the additional fluctuation effects on the energy scales of the order of 0.1eV to 0.01eV. The corresponding space scales of the correlations involved into the average band structure and into departures from it are related in analogous way. Large energy scales alone describe the Fermi surface, what implies that the Fermi liquid theory is the good starting point in the calculation of the fluctuation effects.

## VIII Acknowledgment

We would like to thank Prof. Jacques Friedel, Dr. Davor Pavuna, Dr. Eduard Tutiš, Dr. Denis Sunko and Dr. Ivan Kupčić for the stimulating discussions. This work was supported by Croatian Ministry of Science under the project 119-204.