text:
# Weak Reprocessed Features in the Broad Line Radio Galaxy 3C 382

## 1 Introduction

Recent observations with BeppoSAX  (Grandi 2001, Zdziarski & Grandi 2001) and RXTE  (Eracleous, Sambruna & Mushotzky 2000) have shown that the circumnuclear environments in Broad-Line Radio Galaxies (BLRGs) are different from those of their radio-quiet counterparts, Seyfert 1 galaxies. In particular, in radio-loud AGNs the reprocessed features can be absent or weak, while in radio-quiet AGNs the iron lines and the reflection components are generally intense and always detected (Matt 2001). These results have important implications for understanding the physical distinction between radio-quiet and radio-loud AGNs, that is why strong radio sources (lobes, jets, etc.) arise somehow only in a small fraction of AGNs.

Broad Line Radio Galaxies share some of the properties of radio quiet Seyfert galaxies, i.e. broad optical emission lines and an optical UV bump suggesting the presence of a similar optically thick accretion disk in both cases. Yet the accretion disks may differ in the physical conditions in their inner regions: hence the diagnostic importance of X-ray spectra which originate much closer to the central black hole.

The inner accretion disk in radio galaxies may be hot, optically thin and dominated by Advection (ADAF) as proposed early by Rees et al. (1982) and studied in detail more recently (Narayan 1997; Narayan, Mahadevan & Quataert 1988). The double-peaked broad lines observed in some BLRGs can be explained if the lines are produced in a cold outer disk surrounding a hot ion torus (Eracleous & Halpern 1984).

X-ray observations of a narrow (although intense) iron line and a weak UV bump in 3C 390.3, the prototype of double-peaked radio galaxies, support the idea that cold accreting material is not present in the vicinity of the black hole (Eracleous, Halpern & Livio 1997; Grandi et al. 1999). A hot accretion flow might also explain the BeppoSAX  spectrum of 3C 120, which shows a weak iron line and reflection component (Zdziarski & Grandi 2001).

However the weakness of discrete features in the X-ray spectra of radio galaxies could also be due to dilution of a ”normal” Seyfert continuum by a pure power-law X-ray component possibly due to non thermal emission from the jets known to be present in these systems.

This hypothesis was not favored however in the cases of 3C 390.3 and 3C 120 (Grandi et al. 1999, Grandi 2001, Zdziarski & Grandi 2001). In 3C390.3 the iron line, although narrow is rather intense. In 3C120 the high energy cutoff observed by BeppoSAX  excludes a significant power law jet component.

Here we discuss in detail the BeppoSAX observation of the Broad Line Radio Galaxy 3C 382 (z=0.0579). Preliminary results, together with an overall review of BeppoSAX  spectra of BLRGs were presented in Grandi (2000). 3C382 is a radio galaxy with lobe-dominated FRII morphology. The inclination angle of its radio jet is estimated by Eracleous and Halpern (1988) to be $`i>15^{}`$, assuming the radio structure is not bigger than the largest double-lobed radio galaxies. A relatively large inclination is supported by the low ratio of core to extended radio flux, $`RF_{core}/(F_{total}F_{core})=0.07`$ at 6 cm (Rudnick, Jones & Fiedler 1986), as compared for instance to $`R=2.69`$ for the well known OVV quasar 3C 279 (Morganti, Killeen & Tadhunter 1993). At optical-UV wavelengths, 3C 382 has broad (FWZI$`>25,000`$ km sec-1) emission lines which are variable on time scales of months to years. Its nuclear continuum is also strong and variable (Yee & Oke 1981, Tadhunter, Perez & Fosbury 1986). A recent HST WFPC2 image shows that 3C 382 is an elliptical galaxy strongly dominated by an unresolved nucleus (Martel et al. 1999).

The X-ray spectral properties of 3C 382 are not yet well established.

Previous satellites produced contradictory results on the soft emission. Some authors found signature of warm absorber ( Nandra & Pounds 1994, Reynolds 1997), others an excess of emission that was fitted with both a broken power law and a thermal model (Urry et al. 1989, Kaastra et al. 1991, Barr $`\&`$ Giommi 1992, Woźniak et al. 1998, Sambruna et al. 2000). Recently Prieto (2000) claimed that the soft excess could be entirely related to an extended thermal emission seen around the nucleus of 3C 382 in a ROSAT/HRI  image.

At higher energies, the situation is also more confused. Both Ginga  and ASCA  and RXTE have detected an iron line, although with different profiles and intensities (Nandra & Pounds 1994, Lawson & Turner 1997, Reynolds 1998, Woźniak et al. 1998, Eracleous et al. 2000). The ASCA  iron line was extremely broad ($`\sigma 1.8`$ keV) and more intense by about a factor 3 than that measured by Ginga .

The following sections describe the BeppoSAX observations, data analysis, and interpretation.

## 2 Observations and Data Reduction

3C 382 was observed on 1998 September 20-22 with the BeppoSAX Narrow Field Instruments (NFS): LECS (0.1-10 keV), MECS (1.5-10 keV), and PDS (15-300 keV). The LECS (Low Energy Concentrator Spectrometer) and MECS (medium Energy Concentrator Spectrometer) are imaging instruments and the PDS is a phoswich detector system with collimators pointing on and off the source. At the time of the 3C 382 observations, only two units (MECS2 and MECS3) of the MECS were working. Table 1 shows the net exposure times and count rates of LECS MECS and PDS, respectively.

To test whether fast flux variations occurred, we applied a $`\chi ^2`$ test to the light curve for each instrument separately. We set the threshold for significant variation at a probability of $`10^3`$ that the count rate was constant, independent of the temporal bins used (we used bins of 1000, 5000 and 10000 seconds). According to this criterion, no significant variations occurred during the BeppoSAX observation of 3C 382, even though this source is known to be active on the time scale of a day (Barr & Giommi 1982, Kaastra et al. 1991). Note that flux variations of about $`20\%`$ as observed by EXOSAT could have been easily detected by the MECS instrument (see Figure 1). Given the stationary state of the source, we summed the 0.1-120 keV spectrum over the entire observation.

Data from each instrument were reduced following standard procedures (Fiore, Guainazzi & Grandi 1999). The LECS and MECS spectra were accumulated from circular regions of 4’. A recent analysis by Prieto (2000) of the ROSAT/HRI images has demonstrated the presence of extended thermal emission around 3C 382. As the FWHM is about 100 arcseconds, it is not resolved in the BeppoSAX images and therefore contributes to the LECS spectrum. The Einstein/IPC  data revealed several serendipitous point-like sources at distances of about 3’ from the radio galaxy. Their contribution to the BeppoSAX spectra should be negligible since their Einstein/IPC count rates are about 30 times lower than those of 3C 382. Even assuming a very flat power law $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.5`$ and Galactic NH for the serendipitous sources, their contribute to the PDS flux is less than 10%. The LECS data were restricted to the 0.1-4 keV band because of well know calibration problems at higher energies (Grandi et al. 1997).

The PDS spectra were obtained combining the data from the 4 phoswich units. Each pair of detectors is associated to one collimator. The two collimators alternately point at the source and at the background. We extracted PDS spectra using both fixed (FRT) and variable Rise Time (VRT) thresholds to reject background (for details see Fiore, Guainazzi & Grandi 1999). We checked that the second method did not alter the quality of the data or introduce a spurious deficit of high energy photons. No substantial spectral difference between the FRT and VRT spectra was found, so we used the Variable Rise Time spectrum because of its better signal to noise ratio. At the high energy end of the PDS band we excluded channels for which the signal-to-noise ratio was less than 3$`\sigma `$, limiting the upper PDS energy to 120 keV.

Spectral data were then binned using the template files distributed by the BeppoSAX  Scientific Data Center, in order to ensure the applicability of the $`\chi ^2`$ statistic and an adequate sampling of the spectral resolution of each instrument. LECS, MECS and PDS spectra were simultaneously fitted with XSPEC11, with different relative normalization constants. The MECS constant was fixed to the value 1 and the PDS one was allowed to vary between 0.77-0.83. Since LECS and MECS data partially overlap, the LECS constant was not constrained, allowing the fit routine to find the best value. As discussed by Fiore, Guainazzi and Grandi (1999), this procedure allows to correct the flux miscalibrations among the instruments.

In this paper, the reported uncertainties are at 90$`\%`$ confidence level for one parameter of interest ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=2.71`$), the fluxes are corrected for absorption and the corresponding luminosities calculated assuming H$`{}_{0}{}^{}=50`$ km sec-1 Mpc-1 and q$`{}_{0}{}^{}=0`$.

## 3 Results

### 3.1 Spectral Analysis

The 3C 382 spectrum is complex and rich in features. As shown in Figure 2, with respect to a power law absorbed by the Galactic column density, NH$`=7.8\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2 (Stark et al. 1992), clear excesses are evident in the soft part of the spectrum ($`<2`$ keV), in the iron line region, and in the hard PDS band. In order to better disentangle the different spectral components, we first analyzed the medium-hard X-ray spectrum (2-120 keV), and then included the soft energy band.

A cutoff power law reprocessed by cold material (Magdziarz & Zdziarski 1995; PEXRAV model in XSPEC) provides a good fit to the 2-120 keV spectrum. We fixed the smaller inclination angle allowed by the pexrav model ( $`cosi=0.95`$) in agreement with the lower limit of the jet inclination $`i>15^{}`$ inferred by Eracleous and Halpern (1998). We also tested larger inclination angle. The fit is quite insensitive to this parameter for inclination angles $`i<30^{}`$.

Note that a simple cutoff power law does not give a good fit to the data ($`\chi ^2=109.2`$ for 81 degrees of freedom); $`\chi ^2`$ is improved significantly by adding a reflection component $`R=0.5`$ ($`\chi ^2=76.5`$ for 80 d.o.f.). An iron line, even if weak (EW=50 eV), is also required by the data; parameterizing the line with a narrow gaussian profile ($`\sigma _{Fe}=0`$), the fit improves significantly ($`\chi ^2=67.0`$ for 78 d.o.f., $`>99`$% significant according to the F-test). Even if the intrinsic width of the iron line is let free to vary, the $`\sigma `$ value is small and consistent with zero ( $`\sigma =0.09_{0.09}^{+071}`$ keV).

With the limited statistics it is not possible to accurately describe the high energy steepening of the power law. In fact, a broken power law (BEXRAV Model in XSPEC) with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{soft}}=1.86`$, $`E_{\mathrm{break}}=23`$keV and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{hard}}=2.1`$ gives an acceptable fit as well ($`\chi ^2`$=65.5 for 77 d.o.f.). Also in this case, the reprocessed features were both weak ($`R=0.5`$, EW=50 eV) and the intrinsic width of the line, when free to vary, still consistent with zero.

Finally we included the soft part of the spectrum. The ROSAT/HRI data show that 3C 382 is surrounded by an extended hot gas (kT=0.6 (+0.4,-0.1) keV; Prieto 2000). A re-analysis shows that the ROSAT/PSPC spectrum (0.1-2.4 keV) is well fitted by a nuclear power law ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.7`$ and $`F_{PSPC}2\times 10^{11}`$ erg cm-2 sec-1) plus a bremsstrahlung component which could account for all the soft excess reported by previous satellites. However, given the uncertainties in the HRI calibration the flux in the extended component is not well known and the determination made using the ROSAT PSPC is ambiguous since it could include a unsolved soft nuclear component. ($`F_{HRI}1.0\pm 0.7\times 10^{11}`$ erg cm-2 sec-1 and $`F_{PSPC}=2_{0.7}^{1.8}\times 10^{11}`$ erg cm-2 sec-1).

In the light of this, we added a thermal model to the PEXRAV model plus a narrow ($`\sigma =0`$) iron line. This gives a good fit to the entire 0.1-120 keV spectrum but residuals are still present below 2 keV, indicating the presence of another (or more complex) soft component. Note also that the fitted soft temperature is much lower than required for the extended thermal gas (see Table 2).

The addition of a soft power law ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }3`$) significantly improves the $`\chi ^2`$ (see Table 2; better than 99.8$`\%`$ significance according to the F test). Note that the thermal component is not required by the data any longer. Its flux is consistent with zero and the temperature cannot be constrained very well (see Table 2). Even if the gas temperature is fixed to the ROSAT value (i.e. kT=0.6 keV), the flux of the extended component is still consistent with zero. During the ROSAT/PSPC observation the nuclear component (modeled with a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.7`$ power law) was about a factor 2 lower that during our observation, so it is possible that the extended component is washed out by the strong continuum and therefore only marginally detected by BeppoSAX . (The extended component would not have varied on the time scale of years.) Other thermal models, such as a black body, can also be used to fit the LECS excess instead of a simple power law. However the poor spectral resolution of BeppoSAX below 1 keV makes this a useless exercise because the different models are not statistically distinguishable.

We conclude that a hot extended plasma emission alone can not explain all the soft luminosity observed by BeppoSAX . Another softer and stronger nuclear component is necessary.

Once defined the best model for the entire BeppoSAX spectrum (thermal emission plus and power law component plus cutoffed power law and reflection), we came back to the iron line study. We allowed the intrinsic width ($`\sigma `$) of the line to vary. Also in this case we found $`\sigma `$ consistent with zero, being estimated from the fits as 0.04 (-0.04,+0.48) keV.

### 3.2 Iron Line Historical Study

One of the most striking results of the previous section is the weakness of the iron line and the reflection component, independent of what model was used to fit the continuum.

Since both the iron line and the reflection are weak, it makes sense to imagine the line arising in the same material that reflects the primary X-ray radiation. In order to understand the location of this reprocessing material, we investigated the iron line variability using data from the literature.

If the iron-emitting material is a standard cold disk with a hot corona above it, a strong correlation between continuum and reprocessed features is expected. Conversely, if either a non-thermal jet contaminates the X-ray continuum or the reprocessing gas is not near to the primary X-ray source, the continnum and line should not change together.

In Figure 3 the 2-10 keV continuum flux and the iron line flux are plotted vs. the the date of observation. The data are from Ginga (Woźniak et al. 1998), RXTE (Eracleous, Sambruna and Mushotzky 2000) and BeppoSAX (this paper). We did not use the ASCA data, in which the iron line was broad and intense (Reynolds 1997). As discussed by Zdziarski and Grandi (2001) for the 3C 120 case, the discrepancies between BeppoSAX /RXTE and ASCA are likely due to the ASCA continuum being not well parameterized, either because of (i) the limited energy band covered by ASCA , and consequently the inability to resolve all the spectral components, or (2) calibration problems among the different instruments, as reported by ASCA team. It is known that the SIS CCDs suffer from serious degradation at energies below 1 keV and that the SIS and GIS results also diverge. These problems were already present, although not understood, since 1994 111ASCA Calibration problems are reported on the web page heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/asca/wachout.html and discussed in the ASCA -BeppoSAX intercalibration report available on the BeppoSAX webpage: www.sdc.asi.it/software..

Figure 3 shows clearly that, while the continuum flux changed by about a factor 5 over a 9-year period, the number of photons emitted in the fluorescence line varied little (by less than a factor of 2). This result has a very important implication: it shows that the cold matter does not respond promptly to variations of the primary continuum.

In principle, the increase in continuum flux could be due to beamed jet radiation which dilutes the Fe emission of a stationary underlying (Seyfert-like) accretion disk. As discussed in the next section, there are other (radio-optical-UV) results which argue against the jet hypothesis in this source. Therefore we interpret Fig. 2 as implying a spatial separation between X-ray source and reprocessing matter.

Note that similar results, based on repeated BeppoSAX observations, have been obtained for another radio galaxy, Centaurus A (Grandi et al. 1998). In this source, the iron line appeared more intense when the nuclear source was at the lower intensity level, supporting the idea that the reprocessed features are produced far away from the primary X-ray source.

Given the scarce sampling of the continuum and the iron line flux, it is difficult to estimate the effective temporal lag (and therefore the distance between reprocessing gas and X-ray source). However the historical data support the idea that the reprocessing site is located at light years (parsecs) away from the X-ray primary source and coincides with a dense molecular torus.

Ghisellini, Haardt and Matt (1994) studied the contribution of an obscuring torus seen on axis to the X-ray spectrum and showed that, for column density NH$`10^{24}`$ cm-2, an important fraction of the hard X-ray radiation is reprocessed. The produced iron line is narrow and weak (80-100 eV) and the reflection component is 29-50$`\%`$ of the total flux at 30 keV. Our data agree with these predictions within the uncertainties.

In addition the BeppoSAX data indicate that line is narrow. For any tested model of the continuum, the best fit parameter of the intrinsic width is always less than 90 eV and consistent with zero. A narrow line is expected if the emitting gas is slowly rotating matter at parsec distances.

## 4 Discussion

The BeppoSAX X-ray spectrum of 3C 382 has provided a wealth of interesting results. We find:

* (1) a soft component not associated with the extended thermal emission detected by ROSAT ;
* (2) a medium-hard continnum well modeled with a cutoff power law ($`E120`$ keV) or a broken power law (Ebreak $`30`$ keV);
* (3) a weak narrow iron line; and
* (4) a weak reflection component.

Both the iron line and reflection component are significantly weaker that those observed in Seyfert 1 galaxies. In addition, X-ray spectra of 3C 382 taken from the literature show that the continuum and the iron line do not change together.

### 4.1 The Continuum Emission

In order to interpret these results, the first question is, how is the X-ray continuum emission produced? In the most popular scenarios for radio-loud AGNs, there are two possible origins for the X-ray emission:

* (i) Comptonization of seed photons by hot rarefied gas. The reprocessed region can be a patchy corona above a thin optically thick disk (Haardt & Maraschi 1991, 1993; Poutanen & Svensson 1996) or a hot inner accretion flow and a cold outer thin disk (Shapiro, Lightman & Eardley 1976; Narayan, Mahadevan & Quataert 1998).
* (ii) Synchrotron and inverse-Compton radiation from relativistic electrons in a collimated outflowing plasma. The seed photons responsible for the inverse Compton component can be the synchrotron photons originating within the jet (SSC; Maraschi, Ghisellini & Celotti 1992, Bloom & Marscher 1993) or photons external to the jet, produced by the accretion disk and/or the Broad Line Regions (EC; Sikora, Begelman & Rees 1994).

It is likely that the former process is at work in radio-quiet AGNs, the latter in blazars.

Broad-Line Radio Galaxies are believed to be intermediate objects because they show broad optical-UV lines but also contain well collimated radio jets. The question is then whether the observer sees X-ray photons from the jet or the accretion flow radiation or both. In 3C 382, there are hints that there is no strong jet contamination at optical-UV and X-ray wavelengths. Yee and Oke (1981) found an optical nuclear continuum which followed a power law ($`\nu ^\alpha `$) with alpha=+1.2 and -0.7 shortward and longward Hβ, respectively. They suggested that the upturn at the blue end could be the UV bump from the accretion disk, a feature commonly observed in Seyfert galaxies. Moreover the blue continuum in 3C 382 is only weakly polarized, whereas strong polarization would be expected if the contribution of beamed synchrotron radiation were significant (Antonucci 1984, Cohen et al. 1999). HST observations of broad-line FRII galaxies also support the idea of relatively weak optical jet emission: while optical cores are found in a number of these galaxies, including 3C 382, their luminosities are poorly correlated with the radio luminosities (Chiaberge, Capetti & Celotti 2000). Compared to FRIs with similar radio luminosities, BLRGs appear much brighter in the optical, consistent with emission from an accretion disk contributing significantly in these sources.

Canosa et al. (1999) found a strong linear correlation between core radio luminosity (at 5 GHz) and unresolved ROSAT/HRI luminosity for a sample of B2 radio galaxies (mostly FRIs). (Similar results in Einstein data for a smaller and heterogeneous sample were found by Fabbiano et al. 1984) Interestingly, 3C 382 is the only source in the B2 sample with an X-ray luminosity about 100 times larger than the correlation would predict. Canosa et al. (1999) argued that X-rays from 3C 382 must include strong X-ray emission from an unbeamed nuclear component, likely related to the accretion disk.

Our BeppoSAX data, together with simultaneous EXOSAT and IUE data (collected on 1983 September 12; Barr & Giommi 1992; Tadhunter et al. 1986), also support the idea of a strong disk contribution in 3C 382, as can be seen from the UV to X-ray spectral distribution in Figure 4. The UV flux can change by more than a factor 7 on a time scale of years (Tadhunter et al. 1986). Therefore, to represent the full range of UV variability, Figure 4 also shows the lowest and highest fluxes measured by IUE . The obvious UV/X-ray excess can be interpreted as accretion disk emission plus a hard Comptonized tail extending into the soft X-ray band.

Finally, we note that the spectral break at high energies observed in the BeppoSAX spectrum also argues against the blazar picture. According to unified schemes for radio-loud AGN (Urry & Padovani 1995), BLRGs and intrinsically powerful blazars are the same objects seen at different viewing angles, in which case the jet output in the BeppoSAX energy range should be inverse Compton (Fossati et al. 1998, Ghisellini 1998). However, it is unlikely that the high energy cutoff in 3C 382 is a Compton peak, which in powerful blazars appears at MeV-GeV energies.

On the contrary, a power law which cuts off at high energies is expected in Comptonization models, being related to the temperature of thermal electrons which scatter soft photons (Haardt & Maraschi 1991, 1993; Poutanen & Svensson 1997). The e-folding energy for 3C 382 is at a value typical of those for Seyfert 1s (Matt 2001). We therefore conclude that the X-ray continuum in 3C 382 is produced mainly by processes related to an accretion flow rather than non-thermal relativistic plasma in a jet.

### 4.2 Weak Reprocessing Features

The presence of a UV bump and soft X-ray excess indicates that the accretion material has to be cold and optically thick. When a cold slab is illuminated by a X-ray source, it produces an iron line and a reflected component (Matt, Perola & Piro 1991; George & Fabian 1991), which we should therefore expect to see in 3C 382. If instead the bulk of the reprocessed radiation comes from much larger regions, as suggested by the lag between continuum and iron line (Fig. 3), this means the cold accretion flow has somehow been inhibited from producing these characteristic spectral features.

One possible explanation is that the surface of the thin, optically thick disk (Shakura & Sunyaev 1970) is highly ionized. Nayakshin and Kallman (2000) have recently investigated how the ionization of deeper and deeper layers of the accretion disk can affect the reprocessed features. They showed that, if the X-rays are produced in magnetic flares at few disk scale heights, iron can be almost completely ionized providing the X-ray luminosity is a good fraction of the Eddington luminosity ($`L_{Edd}`$). In that case, the skin of the disk acts as a perfect mirror and the reflected continuum is featureless. Following their prescription, we calculated a lower limit for the accretion rate for 3C 382, $`\dot{m}=L_{tot}/L_{Edd}>6\times 10^3`$. The total luminosity, $`L_{tot}=L_{UV}+L_X5\times 10^{45}`$, was deduced from the simultaneous IUE and EXOSAT data reported in Fig. 4 assuming a high energy cutoff and a reflection strength as measured by BeppoSAX . The Eddington luminosity was calculated assuming an upper limit for the black hole mass ($`M<7\times 10^9`$ $`M`$; Tadhunter, Perez & Fosbury 1986). In agreement with the magnetic flare geometry investigated by Nayakshin and Kallman (2000), the lower limit for the 3C 382 accretion rate is sufficient to obtain a completely ionized mirror-like disk. Then the bulk of observed emission line can entirely come from a molecular torus.

Another possibility, which preserves the model of a cold disk, is that the hot corona has a mildly relativistic motion directed away from the disk (Beloborodov 1999a, 1999b). A soft photon of energy $`ϵ_s`$ passing through the hot corona acquires on average an energy A$`ϵ_s`$. Beloborodov has calculated A as a function of the plasma bulk motion $`\beta =v/c`$ (see Fig. 1 in Beloborodov 1999a). The spectral slope, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, depends on the amplification factor, roughly as $`\mathrm{\Gamma }2.33(A1)^{0.1}`$ (see also Fig. 2 in Beloborodov 1999b). The spectral index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.71.8`$, as for 3C 382, implies a Comptonization factor $`A14`$, which in turn implies $`\beta >0.4`$ for hemisphere and slab geometries of the corona, i.e., a mildly relativistic flow. The effect of the relativistic motion is to reduce the strength of the reflection. For $`\beta 0.4`$ and small angle of view the radiation reflected ($`R`$) from the cold slab becomes negligible ($`R<0.10.2`$). In a similar way, mildly relativistic motions of the corona can influence the iron line features. As shown by Reynolds and Fabian (1997), it is sufficient that a plasma flows with $`\beta 0.4`$ to reduce the equivalent width of the iron line by more than a factor 10. Also in this case, if the disk production of the line is strongly inhibited, the main reprocessing region can be a molecular torus.

Note that an outflowing corona model could also account for the weak features of 3C 120 (Zdziarski & Grandi 2001). This hypothesis is particularly attractive for radio-loud AGNs. A hot plasma with a mildly relativistic velocity is not unlikely in sources that produce strong jets in their nuclear regions.

## 5 Conclusions

The X-ray continuum of 3C 382 in a bright state derived from a long BeppoSAX observation is similar to that of Seyfert galaxies, i.e. a power law with index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.74`$, with an e-folding cutoff at about 120 keV. At soft energies, an excess of soft photons is detected that can not be accounted for by an extended thermal component alone. The additional soft component required by the BeppoSAX data could be due to thermal emission from the innermost regions of a Shakura-Sunyaev disk.

Although a cold disk may be present, it must for some reason be inhibited from producing features. The iron line and the reflection are both detected, but they are weak and the iron line is unsolved by BeppoSAX . This, plus the lack of correlation of the Fe line with the continuum flux, suggests the cold reprocessing material is far from the primary X-ray source. It could be a dense molecular torus thought to surround the central source in many AGN ($`N_H10^{24}`$ cm-2). We discussed two possibilities that can explain the suppression of features in the vicinity of the black hole: (i) the upper layers of the disk are completely ionized, or (ii) the patchy corona above the disk is not static but flowing away with mildly relativistic velocity.

We thank Ski Antonucci and Andrzej Zdziarski for valuable discussions. M. Guainazzi for analyzing the Einstein/IPC data. This work was supported in part by NASA grant NAG5-9327.


format: text

text:
# On Hyperbolic “Theories” of Relativistic Dissipative Fluids

Abstract. It is argued that, at least for the case of Navier-Stokes fluids, the so-called hyperbolic theories of dissipation are not viable.

Consider a Navier-Stokes fluid. By this, we mean a substance that, within a certain regime111That is, in the limit as one moves further and further into that regime. More on this later., may be described as follows. First, the local state of the substance must be completely characterized, within this regime, by the values of precisely five fields on space-time: two scalar fields, $`\rho `$ and $`n`$; two vector fields, $`u^a`$ and $`q^a`$, the former unit timelike and the latter orthogonal to $`u^a`$; and one tensor field, $`\tau ^{ab}`$, symmetric and also orthogonal to $`u^a`$. These fields are interpreted, respectively, as the fluid mass density, particle-number density, velocity, heat flow and stress. Second, the substance must be found to behave, within this regime, such that the following system of four equations  holds:

$$_b((\rho +p)u^au^b+pg^{ab}+2q^{(a}u^{b)}+\tau ^{ab})=0,$$
(1)
$$_m(nu^m)=0,$$
(2)
$$q_a+\sigma \rho (\delta _a{}_{}{}^{b}+u_au^b)[(_bT)/T+u^m_mu_b]=0,$$
(3)
$$\tau _{ab}+\eta \rho (\delta _{(a}{}_{}{}^{m}+u_{(a}u^m)_{|m|}u_{b)}+(\xi \eta /3)\rho (g_{ab}+u_au_b)_mu^m=0.$$
(4)
The five new variables, $`p,T,\sigma ,\eta `$, and $`\xi `$, appearing in these equations are fixed state functions, i.e., they are functions of $`\rho `$ and $`n`$, to be specified, once and for all, at the beginning. These five variables are interpreted, respectively, as the fluid pressure, temperature, thermal conductivity, viscosity and bulk viscosity. Eqn (1) is interpreted as conservation of stress-energy, and Eqn. (2) as conservation of particle number. Eqn. (3) is interpreted as describing heat-flow, and (4) as describing viscosity.

Examples of Navier-Stokes fluids include ordinary liquids, such as water, and ordinary gases, such as nitrogen at standard temperature and pressure.

We shall here be concerned with the issue of what happens outside the regime in which the Navier-Stokes description of such a fluid is applicable. In particular, we shall be concerned with whether or not there are available other physical theories that apply when the Navier-Stokes description breaks down.

Note that we are concerned solely with this single class of substances — Navier-Stokes fluids. There are, certainly, many other types of substances in the world — some characterized by more fields, and some simply by different fields222An example of a substance requiring more fields is Helium 2, the fluid that manifests “second sound”. See, e.g., . For other examples of non-Navier-Stokes substances, see  and references therein.. Undoubtedly, many of these substances manifest dissipative effects. It is certainly conceivable that some of these substances, in their dissipative regimes, may be described by viable hyperbolic theories. But the variety of possible “substances” in this world is enormous. We have to start somewhere, and the class of Navier-Stokes fluids seems as good a starting point as any: These fluids are rather common, are relatively well-understood, and are simple to describe mathematically. Furthermore, these fluids — or, rather, the breakdown of the Navier-Stokes descriptions of their dissipation — represent relatively pure examples of the descent into molecular effects. Perhaps, ultimately, it will be possible to extend some of these considerations to other types of substances.

Fix a Navier-Stokes fluid. The breakdown of the Navier-Stokes description of this fluid typically takes place at small distances, say, at all distances less than the order of some distance scale $`L`$. In general, this “breakdown” takes two distinct forms. One the one hand, the Navier-Stokes equations, (especially (3)-(4)), may fail. That is, the expressions on the left in these equations may be found to be nonzero, e.g., by an amount the order of the sizes of the terms in these equations. Indeed, relativity requires failure of the system (1)-(4) at least at distances of the order of $`d/c`$, where $`d`$ denotes the value of a typical Navier-Stokes dissipation coefficient ($`\sigma ,\eta `$, or $`\xi `$), and $`c`$ the speed of light. The second — and potentially more serious — type of breakdown involves ambiguity as to the physical meanings of the variables that appear in this description — i.e., of the quantities $`\rho ,n,u^a,q^a,\tau ^{ab},p,T`$, etc. To illustrate this, let the Navier-Stokes fluid be nitrogen gas, and consider a sample of this fluid, at approximately standard temperature and pressure, for which changes in fluid state take place only over distances of the order of centimeters. For this sample, we know, more or less, what fluid velocity and temperature mean, i.e., we could construct centimeter-sized probes to measure them. But now suppose that, instead, our sample manifested state-changes taking place on distance scales of the order of $`10^6`$ cm, the mean free path of the nitrogen molecules. In this case, things are not so simple: We must construct probes that work on these smaller scales. What typically happens is that different types of probes — although they all give the same result on centimeter-scales — will begin to give different results on the scale of $`10^6`$ cm. “Velocity” and “temperature”, on scales comparable with $`L`$, become ambiguous.

This $`L`$ is a state function, i.e., is a function of $`\rho `$ and $`n`$. We remark that inherent in this basic notion of a breakdown scale are at least two potential complexities. First, it is possible, at least in principle, that the two Navier-Stokes equations, (3) and (4), could fail on quite different scales; or that the various Navier-Stokes variables could lose their meanings on quite different scales. These circumstances would necessitate replacing the single scale $`L`$ by a variety of different scales. We shall return to this possibility later. A second type of complexity involves the possibility that the breakdown of an equation or a variable occurs in a more complicated manner — one that cannot be described simply by a length. For example, the requirement imposed by relativity on the system (1)-(4) is, in more detail, the following: This system of equations must fail on every combined distance-time scale, $`L,t`$, satisfying $`L^2\stackrel{<}{}dt`$ and $`L>ct`$, where $`d`$ denotes the value of a typical Navier-Stokes dissipation coefficient. These two inequalities describe some region of the $`L,t`$-plane333The complement of this region, incidentally, includes arbitrary small $`L`$-values and arbitrarily small $`t`$-values!. While these two types of complexities are certainly possible in principle, neither seems to arise in simple examples. For nitrogen gas at standard temperature and pressure, for instance, the Navier-Stokes equations and variables all break down on the same scale, $`L=10^6`$ cm, which is also the order of $`d/v`$, where $`d`$ is a typical Navier-Stokes dissipation coefficient, and $`v`$ is the speed of sound.

Fix a Navier-Stokes fluid, with breakdown scale $`L`$. There is a class of systems of partial differential equations, the so-called “hyperbolic theories”, that purport to be applicable to such a fluid on scales of the order of, and smaller than, $`L`$. These systems    have the following structure. Their fields consist of the same five fields that appear in the basic Navier-Stokes system, namely $`(\rho ,n,u^a,q^a,\tau ^{ab})`$. But their equations are different. The conservation equations, (1) and (2), are retained; while the dissipation equations, (3) and (4), are replaced by two new equations of the same tensor character (i.e., one a $`u`$-orthogonal vector and the other a $`u`$-orthogonal symmetric tensor). These two new equations can involve the values of all the variables, together with, linearly, the values of all their first derivatives. This entire quasilinear, first-order system of partial differential equations is so structured that it has two key properties: i) The system is symmetric-hyperbolic, and so in particular it has (unlike the original Navier-Stokes system (1)-(4)) an initial-value formulation; and ii) the system reproduces in the appropriate regime, i.e., on scales much larger than $`L`$, the original Navier-Stokes system. We remark that there is a vast number of possible candidates for this system of partial differential equations. For example, the general first-order, quasilinear, symmetric-hyperbolic system of partial differential equations in the variables $`(\rho ,n,u^a,q^a,\tau ^{ab})`$, manifesting the conservation laws (1)-(2), involves 219 free (scalar) functions of 8 (scalar) variables444Is it possible to reduce this plethora of possibilities by identifying some small, natural class of simple hyperbolic extensions of the system (1)-(4)? In this connection, we note that the obvious extension  — the result of adding multiples of $`(g_{as}+u_au_s)u^m_mq^s`$ and $`(g_{as}+u_au_s)(g_{bt}+u_bu_t)u^m_m\tau ^{st}`$ to the left sides of Eqns. (3) and (4), respectively — fails, for the resulting system of equations is not, apparently, symmetric-hyperbolic.!

To what extent does such a system of partial differential equations represent a viable “theory” for a Navier-Stokes fluid, applicable at scales approaching and less than the breakdown scale $`L`$? There arises an immediate difficulty: The variables $`(\rho ,n,u^a,q^a,\tau ^{ab})`$, in terms of which this new system of equations is written, become physically ambiguous on the very distance scale, $`L`$, at which this system purports to be applicable. That is, as matters stand there are no meaningful “quantities” about which this new theory could make assertions. There is, of course, a simple cure for this malady: Include, as part of the statement of the new theory, a detailed description of what experimental procedures are to be used, on scales comparable with and smaller than $`L`$, to observe its variables555In the case of a gas, for example, such a description might entail writing down formulae, in terms of the distribution function, for these variables, leaving to the experimentalist the task of designing the appropriate tiny instruments to reflect these formulae.. But even supposing for a moment that such a description has been provided, there arises a second difficulty. Inherent in the breakdown of the physical meanings of the five variables $`(\rho ,n,u^a,q^a,\tau ^{ab})`$ is the inability of these variables — even as reinterpreted within the new theory — to provide a complete local description of the fluid state. That is, this variety of new potential observables arising on scales of the order of $`L`$ implies that there is more happening within the fluid at these scales than can be described by any five variables. As a consequence, we could hardly expect any viable system of fluid equations involving just the original variables $`(\rho ,n,u^a,q^a,\tau ^{ab})`$.

It could be argued that this new system of equations should be regarded as merely the “second-order” description of an actual physical fluid666It may be that not all of the possible hyperbolic systems of equations — involving all 219 functions of 8 variables — would be admitted as viable “second-order” systems. Unfortunately, it is not clear which systems would and which would not be admitted, because it is not clear exactly how this expansion in “orders” is to be carried out. For example, would there be admitted in the second-order system a term quartic in the heat-flow $`q^a`$, provided it is preceded by a sufficiently large coefficient?. The “zeroth-order” description is as a classical perfect fluid, with equations (1)-(2) (conservation); and the “first-order” description is as a Navier-Stokes fluid, with equations (1)-(4). Presumably there will ultimately be written down third- and then still higher-order descriptions — systems involving additional equations, and, very likely, also additional fields. This view is in fact supported by certain calculations in statistical mechanics   . Consider, specifically, a gas described by a distribution function, subject to Boltzmann’s equation with some appropriate collision function. Introduce the various moments of the distribution function, and interpret these moments as fields (infinite in number), which, taken together, describe the local properties of the fluid. Next, using the Boltzmann equation, obtain the system of equations (also infinite in number) connecting these moments. What is found, of course, is that the resulting system never “closes”, i.e., higher-order moments continue to exert their effects on the space-time behavior of lower-order moments. But we may, nevertheless, truncate this system: Assign to these various moments orders, and then write down, for each order, a system of equations involving only the moments up to and including those at that order. We remark that the second-order system of equations obtained in this way may or may not turn out to be symmetric-hyperbolic, depending on the truncation scheme employed. Indeed, there is no reason either to expect or to demand that a resulting second-order system — or any of the systems obtained at higher order — will have any solutions at all777Of course, we do expect that the entire coupled system, including the terms of all orders, will have an appropriate class of solutions, since we know that this is the case for the Boltzmann equation itself..

Consider, then, such a hierarchy of systems of equations — of successive orders zero, one, two, etc — that come into play on scales comparable with $`L`$. To what extent should the second-order system in this hierarchy be regarded as a viable physical theory? Clearly, there is a potential problem here, for it is difficult to isolate, and thus construct a theory of, the pure “second-order effects”: Just as these effects come into play, so do interfering effects from higher orders. To illustrate this point, let us consider again the original Navier-Stokes system, (1)-(4), i.e., the “first-order” system. We observe — and this is a key point — that this system differs in an essential way from those of all higher orders. Navier-Stokes effects can survive to large distance scales, in a way that higher-order effects cannot. Take, for example, Navier-Stokes Eqn. (3). Consider the following experimental arrangement, in the indicated limit. Let the temperature gradient be very much smaller than $`T/L`$, let this gradient be maintained over a distance very much larger than $`L`$, and, finally, wait a very long time (to allow the resulting heat-flow to produce a significant effect on the fluid states at the two ends of this temperature-gradient). In this limit, the observed effects of thermal conductivity, as described by (3), remain finite, while the effects of any ambiguities as to the meanings of the variables, together with any higher-order effects, approach zero. The Navier-Stokes system, in other words, has a “regime of applicability” — a limiting circumstance in which the effects included within that system remain prominent while the effects not included become vanishingly small. The Navier-Stokes system, in short, is essentially a part of continuum mechanics888This feature may be related to the following observation. What is actually observed about a fluid, on macroscopic scales, is typically only its state functions. Heat-flow and stress are then inferred from these, e.g., in the case of heat-flow, by observing changes in the state of the fluid residing at either end of a temperature gradient. In other words, we infer heat-flow and stress through failure of conservation of the naive stress-energy, $`(\rho +p)u^au^b+pg^{ab}`$. But there is only so much information that can be extracted from the failure of this one conservation law, i.e., there are only so many variables that can be inferred in this way. This window seems to be exhausted already by $`q^a`$ and $`\tau ^{ab}`$. Is there some precise result along these lines? — it was (or at least, could have been) discovered before we even knew about atoms; it is the system one uses, e.g., to decide which coat to wear in the morning — while the higher-order systems are essentially microscopic in character. Indeed, it is a reflection of this feature that there is any sensible notion at all of a “Navier-Stokes fluid”, as described earlier.

There is no similar regime of applicability for the second-order systems of equations: Just as the effects described by a second-order system begin to become significant, those effects are confounded by ambiguities as to the meanings of variables and by higher-order effects. In connection with this point, we remark that there has not been given, as far as I am aware, any example of a hypothetical experimental result such that an actual observation of that result would be interpreted as ruling out the second-order “theories” for Navier-Stokes fluids. The second-order systems of equations, in short, cannot stand alone as physical theories. The second- and higher-order systems of equations for a Navier-Stokes fluid might thus be compared with attempts to find equations of motion for extended bodies in general relativity  (an area plagued by problems of the meanings of variables), or with the ppn parameterization  for gravitational theories (in which there is an ample supply of parameters to fit observations). In neither of these two cases would the system of equations, truncated at the second order, be regarded as a viable physical theory.

We remarked earlier that it is possible, at least in principle, that a Navier-Stokes fluid could have the feature that its equations, (3)-(4), break down on some distance scale much larger than that on which the meanings of its variables, $`(\rho ,n,u^a,q^a,\tau ^{ab})`$, break down999The reverse, of course, is impossible: The equations could hardly make sense when the variables in those equations do not.. This is an intriguing possibility, for it would represent a fertile ground  for a viable hyperbolic theory: Such a fluid would manifest an intermediate regime, in which the variables $`(\rho ,n,u^a,q^a,\tau ^{ab})`$ are meaningful, and are at the same time free to satisfy some system of equations other than Navier-Stokes101010We remark on a second possibility. There might exist a substance that is characterized by precisely the Navier-Stokes variables, $`(\rho ,n,u^a,q^a,\tau ^{ab})`$, but which fails to satisfy Eqns. (3)-(4) in any regime, even on large scales. Such a substance would not, of course, be a Navier-Stokes fluid as we have characterized it. Yet, if any such substance exists, it too would be a candidate for having a description by a viable hyperbolic theory.. Unfortunately, I am aware of no Navier-Stokes fluid — either an actual one or a gedanken fluid — having this character. Here, as an example, is one attempt to construct such a fluid. Consider a gas consisting of a mixture of approximately equal particle-numbers of helium atoms and neutrinos, at approximately standard temperature and pressure. \[Assume, for present purposes, that these particles interact only by elastic scattering.\] One would expect that the helium atoms (since they contribute the bulk of the mass of the fluid) will control the basic fluid behavior, while the neutrinos (since they have the much larger mean free path) will control dissipative effects. Unfortunately, this particular substance is not a Navier-Stokes fluid in our sense, for to characterize its local state requires, in addition to the five Navier-Stokes variables, a sixth variable: the relative particle numbers of the two species. But it is not difficult to extend the Navier-Stokes system so that it is applicable to this fluid: Include within the system this additional variable, together with an additional (diffusion) equation to describe its behavior111111It is apparently not known whether there exists any symmetric-hyperbolic system of equations appropriate to this extended Navier-Stokes system. Probably, there does.. In any case, here is an example of a fluid having two characteristic distance scales: one large (the neutrino mean free path) and one small (the helium-atom mean free path). One could imagine that the Navier-Stokes equations might fail on the larger scale while the meanings of the variables fail on the smaller. But, unfortunately, things do not work out this way: In this example, the meanings of the basic Navier-Stokes variables break down already on the larger distance scale. For instance, take a sample of this fluid whose state changes on distance scales smaller than the neutrino mean free path. Then the result of a temperature measurement on this distance scale will depend on how opaque one’s thermometer is to neutrinos; and a measurement of the “fluid velocity” will depend on how helium atoms and neutrinos are counted as to their contributions to this velocity. That is, there is a variety of notions of “temperature” and “velocity” on this scale, notions that, while they all agree with each other on scales much larger than the neutrino mean free path, do not on these smaller scales. This particular fluid, in short, does not present us with any intermediate regime that would be appropriate for a second-order system of equations. It would be interesting to find some example of a fluid manifesting such an intermediate regime — or to produce a good argument that no such fluid exists.

As we remarked earlier, the Navier-Stokes system of equations, (1)-(4), must, for any given fluid, fail on some sufficiently small distance scale $`L`$; and we could, of course, design a series of experiments, carried out on that fluid near that scale, to observe such discrepancies. We might then proceed to “interpret” these experiments in terms of the second-order systems of equations, in the following manner. First, we must set up some correspondence between the various quantities that have been observed in these experiments and the variables appearing in the second-order systems, for no such correspondence is currently provided by these systems. Having done this, we may use these experimental results to assign values to some of the free parameters or functions that appear in the second-order systems. The result of this will be a second-order system of equations that “fits the experiments better than does the Navier-Stokes system” (that is, does so for this particular series of experiments, under this particular choice of a correspondence between the observed quantities and the variables that appear in the equations). But it is difficult to argue that such a fit constitutes either experimental evidence in favor of these second-order systems or evidence that these systems of equations are viable physical theories. The second-order systems are sufficiently encompassing that one or another of these systems is available to accommodate virtually any “effect” arising at scale $`L`$, including, not surprisingly, whatever effects happen to arise, in this particular fluid, in connection with the failure of its Navier-Stokes description.

Then how, if at all, are we to understand Navier-Stokes fluids in relativity? On the face of it, we seem to have no theory at all in the usual sense121212Of course, there always remains the “theory” that carries the full local complexity of the fluid on small distance scales, i.e., the theory that, for the case of a gas, carries the entire distribution function. But this description requires an infinite number of local fields.: The Navier-Stokes description must (by relativity) fail on small distance scales; while the second-order systems of equations arguably do not qualify as physical theories. First note that we do indeed have a “theory” of a somewhat different sort. Fix a physical Navier-Stokes fluid, and consider the entire panoply of second-order systems of partial differential equations appropriate for that fluid, i.e., consider all those systems, in the variables $`(\rho ,n,u^a,q^a,\tau ^{ab})`$, that are symmetric-hyperbolic and have the correct Navier-Stokes limit. All of these systems predict  that, on large distance scales, the left sides of Eqns. (3)-(4) will remain small throughout time, i.e., they predict “Navier-Stokes behavior”. Furthermore, all of these systems have initial-value formulations. This guarantees that they can be used to solve physical problems, e.g., that they could be combined with Einstein’s equation to study stability of gravitating fluid systems. It is futile to debate which of these second-order systems is the “correct” one. In the regime in which they differ significantly from each other, the systems themselves break down : Their variables lose their meanings, and higher-order effects come into play. We may think of this situation in the following way. On small distance scales, we have no suitable theory at all. On larger distance scales, by contrast, there is one system of equations — the Navier-Stokes system — that is appropriate for the description of the physics of the fluid, and a second family of systems — the hyperbolic systems — that are appropriate for the mathematics. This splitting of the physics and the mathematics is a novel situation, and it takes some getting used to. But, with a little care, “theories” of this type can be applied as effectively as more traditional physical theories.

It might be of interest to carry out a careful analysis of various other substances , to see whether, in any of these cases, there can be recovered some remnant of a viable “hyperbolic theory of dissipation”. It would be of particular interest to find an example of a substance for which it is possible i) to spell out the (limiting) regime in which the effects of the theory will be predominant, ii) to provide a complete list of the variables describing that substance, i.e., of those variables that characterize the local behavior of the substance in that regime, iii) to indicate how those variables are to be measured in that regime, iv) to write out, in full, the system of equations imposed by the theory on those variables, indicating any remaining free functions or parameters, and v) to give some credible evidence, experimental or theoretical, that those variables, in that regime, actually satisfy those equations.

I wish to thank Oscar Reula, Gabriel Nagy, and Rafael Sorkin for a number of helpful comments and suggestions.


text:
# Supersymmetric Model with Grassmann-odd Lagrangian

## 1 Introduction

There are two ways for the formulation of Hamiltonian dynamics in phase superspace: either by means of an even Poisson bracket with the help of a Grassmann-even Hamiltonian or in an odd Poisson bracket  with a Grassmann-odd Hamiltonian111We shall only consider non-degenerate brackets.. The dynamical systems with equal numbers of pairs of even and odd phase coordinates admit equivalent descriptions in the both brackets at once  with the help of the corresponding equivalent Hamiltonians of opposite Grassmann parities. However, there are such Hamiltonian systems which permit for their description only the bracket of a definite parity. For example, the Hamilton systems with odd equal numbers of the even and odd canonical variables can be described only by means of the odd Poisson bracket (see, for example, ). On the other hand, the systems having an even number of the even canonical variables which differs from a number of the odd variables allow their Hamiltonian description only in terms of the even Poisson bracket. In this connection, by assuming that a Hamilton system has the corresponding to it Lagrangian formulation and taking into account that in this case the Grassmann parity of the Lagrangian coincides with the parities of the bracket and Hamiltonian in terms of which this Hamiltonian system is described, we see that there are also two ways for the formulation of Lagrangian dynamics in configuration superspace: either by means of an even Lagrangian or in terms of an odd one . As in the case of the Hamiltonian dynamics, there are such systems which can be described only with the help of the Grassmann-odd Lagrangian and have no description in terms of the even one and vice versa.

In this report we just give such examples for $`D=1,N=1`$ supersymmetric models. By using the formalism with the even Lagrangian, we can construct from a real bosonic scalar superfield only kinetic terms, but a term for interaction turns out to be a total time derivative. While, using the formalism with the odd Lagrangian, we are able to construct from this superfield a model which contains both the kinetic and interaction terms.

The report is organized as follows. In Section 2 we show that in the case $`D=1,N=1`$ supersymmetry the even Lagrangian, which reduced from Lagrangian density constructed from one real scalar bosonic superfield, does not contain an interaction term. Then we propose a $`D=1,N=1`$ supersymmetric model having the odd Lagrangian, which also constructed on the basis of this superfield but has an interaction term. Consideration in this Section is carried out in the Lagrangian component formulation. The Hamiltonian component formulation for this model is given in Section 3. In Section 4 we present a superfield approach for the model both in the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formalisms. In Section 5 we show once again that even in a particular case of the supersymmetric one-dimensional oscillator the even Lagrangians, which are dynamically equivalent to the model proposed, can not be reduced from any superfield Lagrangian densities constructed from one real bosonic $`D=1,N=1`$ superfield.

## 2 Lagrangian component formulation

With respect to $`D=1,N=1`$ supersymmetry for the proper time $`t`$ and its real Grassmann superpartner $`\eta `$

$`t^{}=t+iϵ\eta ,\eta ^{}=\eta +ϵ`$
the components of the real Grassmann-even (bosonic) ($`g(\mathrm{\Phi })=0`$)222$`g(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ is a Grassmann parity of the quantity $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. scalar superfield

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(t,\eta )=q(t)+i\eta \theta (t)=\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(t^{},\eta ^{})$$
(1)
are transformed as

$`\delta q(t)q^{}(t)q(t)=i\theta ϵ,`$
$$\delta \theta (t)\theta ^{}(t)\theta (t)=\dot{q}ϵ,$$
(2)
where a dot means a time derivative and $`\delta `$ is a variation of the form.

With the help of a covariant derivative

$$D=_\eta i\eta _t,$$
(3)
where $`_x\frac{}{x}`$, we can construct from $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ an invariant action $`S_0`$ with a Grassmann-even Lagrangian $`\stackrel{0}{l},(g(\stackrel{0}{l})=0)`$

$`S_0={\displaystyle 𝑑t𝑑\eta \left[\frac{i}{2}D\mathrm{\Phi }\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}+iDV(\mathrm{\Phi })\right]}={\displaystyle 𝑑t}\stackrel{0}{l},`$
which contains only kinetic terms for the bosonic $`q`$ and fermionic $`\theta `$ coordinates

$`\stackrel{0}{l}={\displaystyle \frac{\dot{q}^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta \dot{\theta }+\dot{V}(q),`$
while their interaction term with an arbitrary real function $`V(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a total time derivative.

By using a Grassmann-odd Lagrangian $`\stackrel{1}{L}`$ ($`g(\stackrel{1}{L})=1`$) which in the case of $`D=1,N=1`$ supersymmetry corresponds to an even Lagrangian density $``$ ($`g()=0`$), we are able to construct a supersymmetric action

$`S_1=i{\displaystyle 𝑑t𝑑\eta \left[\frac{\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2}{2}V(\mathrm{\Phi })\right]}=i{\displaystyle 𝑑t𝑑\eta }`$
$`={\displaystyle 𝑑t}\stackrel{1}{L},`$ (4)
including both a kinetic term for coordinates $`q`$, $`\theta `$ and a term describing their interaction with the help of an arbitrary real function $`V(\mathrm{\Phi })`$. The Lagrangian density superfield has the form

$$=\stackrel{0}{L}+i\eta \stackrel{1}{L}=\frac{\dot{q}^2}{2}V(q)+i\eta [\dot{q}\dot{\theta }\theta V^{}(q)],$$
(5)
where a prime denotes a derivative with respect to the coordinate $`q`$. Note that the even and odd Lagrangians $`\stackrel{0}{L}`$ and $`\stackrel{1}{L}`$ are connected with each other with the aid of the exterior differential333We adopt the Grassmann parity of the exterior differential to be equal to unit $`g(dx)=g(x)+1`$. $`d`$ that accompanied by the following map $`\lambda :dq\theta `$ (see, for example, )

$`\lambda :d\stackrel{0}{L}\stackrel{1}{L}`$
and are transformed under supersymmetry (2) as

$`\delta \stackrel{0}{L}=i\stackrel{1}{L}ϵ,\delta \stackrel{1}{L}=\dot{\stackrel{0}{L}}ϵ.`$
In accordance with the scheme given in , the Euler-Lagrange equation for the even Lagrangian $`\stackrel{0}{L}`$ coincides with that one for the odd Lagrangian $`\stackrel{1}{L}`$, which corresponds to the variable $`\theta `$,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(_{\dot{\theta }}\stackrel{1}{L}\right)_\theta \stackrel{1}{L}={\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(_{\dot{q}}\stackrel{0}{L}\right)_q\stackrel{0}{L}`$
$`=\ddot{q}+V^{}(q)=0,`$ (6)
while the Euler-Lagrange equation for $`\stackrel{1}{L}`$, corresponding to the variable $`q`$, can be obtained by taking the exterior differential from two last equations in (2) and performing the map $`\lambda `$

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(_{\dot{q}}d\stackrel{0}{L}\right)_qd\stackrel{0}{L}=d\ddot{q}+dqV^{\prime \prime }=0`$
$`\stackrel{\lambda }{}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(_{\dot{q}}\stackrel{1}{L}\right)_q\stackrel{1}{L}=\ddot{\theta }+\theta V^{\prime \prime }=0.`$ (7)
## 3 Hamiltonian component formulation

The Lagrangians $`\stackrel{0}{L}`$ and $`\stackrel{1}{L}`$ in (5) have the same even momentum

$`p=_{\dot{q}}\stackrel{0}{L}=_{\dot{\theta }}\stackrel{1}{L}=\dot{q},`$
whereas an odd momentum $`\pi `$ for $`\stackrel{1}{L}`$ is connected with it by means of the exterior differential $`d`$ and the map $`\lambda `$

$`\lambda :dp\pi =_{\dot{q}}\stackrel{1}{L}=\dot{\theta }.`$
Corresponding to the even Lagrangian $`\stackrel{0}{L}`$ an even Hamiltonian

$$\stackrel{0}{H}=\dot{q}p\stackrel{0}{L}=\frac{p^2}{2}+V(q)$$
(8)
is also related with an odd Hamiltonian $`\stackrel{1}{H}`$, responding to the odd Lagrangian $`\stackrel{1}{L}`$,

$$\stackrel{1}{H}=\dot{q}\pi +\dot{\theta }p\stackrel{1}{L}=p\pi +\theta V^{}(q)$$
(9)
in a similar way

$`\lambda :d\stackrel{0}{H}\stackrel{1}{H}.`$
In the case of Hamiltonian formulation, the scheme given in Refs.  prescribe that the Hamilton equations

$$\dot{q}=p,\dot{p}=V^{}(q)$$
(10)
formulated for the even phase coordinates $`x^i=(q,p)`$ with the help of the even Hamiltonian (8) in the even Poisson bracket

$$\dot{x}^i=(x^i,\stackrel{0}{H})_0x^i(\underset{q}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{q}{\overset{}{}})\stackrel{0}{H}$$
(11)
coincide with those ones obtained for $`x^i`$ by using the odd Hamiltonian (9) in the odd bracket

$`\dot{x}^i=(x^i,\stackrel{0}{H})_0=\{x^i,\stackrel{1}{H}\}_1x^i(\underset{q}{\overset{}{}}\underset{\pi }{\overset{}{}}`$
$`\underset{\pi }{\overset{}{}}\underset{q}{\overset{}{}}+\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}})\stackrel{1}{H},`$ (12)
while the equations

$$\dot{\theta }=\pi ,\dot{\pi }=\theta V^{\prime \prime },$$
(13)
which are Hamiltonian equations for the odd phase coordinates $`\theta ^i=(\theta ,\pi )`$ described in the odd bracket (3)

$`\dot{\theta }^i=\{\theta ^i,\stackrel{1}{H}\}_1`$
can be obtained from (10) with the use of the exterior differential and the map $`\lambda `$

$`dx^i\stackrel{\lambda }{}\theta ^i.`$
In relations (11) and (3) $`\stackrel{}{}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{}`$ are right and left derivatives, respectively.

Note that the even bracket (11) for arbitrary functions $`A`$, $`B`$ of canonical variables rewritten in terms of the proper time

$`t[\stackrel{0}{H}(q,p),q]={\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{dq^{}}{\sqrt{2[\stackrel{0}{H}(q,p)V(q^{})]}}}|_{q^{}=q}`$
$`+t_0[\stackrel{0}{H}(q,p)]`$
(an arbitrary function $`t_0`$ corresponds to the choice of the proper time origin) and its canonically conjugate $`\stackrel{0}{H}`$ (8) takes the form

$$(A,B)_0=A(\underset{t}{\overset{}{}}\underset{\stackrel{0}{H}}{\overset{}{}}\underset{\stackrel{0}{H}}{\overset{}{}}\underset{t}{\overset{}{}})B$$
(14)
and given in the canonical variables $`t,\stackrel{0}{H},\stackrel{1}{H}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, where

$$dt\stackrel{\lambda }{}\mathrm{\Theta }=\frac{\theta }{p}+\stackrel{1}{H}_{\stackrel{0}{H}}t(\stackrel{0}{H},q),$$
(15)
the odd bracket (3) for any functions $`A`$, $`B`$ is

$`\{A,B\}_1=A(\underset{t}{\overset{}{}}\underset{\stackrel{1}{H}}{\overset{}{}}\underset{\stackrel{1}{H}}{\overset{}{}}\underset{t}{\overset{}{}}+\underset{\mathrm{\Theta }}{\overset{}{}}\underset{\stackrel{0}{H}}{\overset{}{}}`$
$`\underset{\stackrel{0}{H}}{\overset{}{}}\underset{\mathrm{\Theta }}{\overset{}{}})B.`$ (16)
By using the time derivative and Hamiltonian equations (10), (13), we obtain from the transformations (2) of the configuration superspace variables $`q`$ and $`\theta `$ the supersymmetry transformation rules for the phase superspace coordinates $`z^M=(x^i,\theta ^i)`$

$`\delta q=i\theta ϵ,\delta p=i\pi ϵ,`$
$`\delta \theta =ϵp,\delta \pi =ϵV^{},`$
which can be uniformly represented by means of the odd bracket (3)

$`\delta z^M=\{z^M,\stackrel{1}{Q}\}_1ϵ`$
with the help of an even supercharge

$$\stackrel{1}{Q}=\stackrel{0}{H}+i\pi \theta =\stackrel{0}{H}+i\stackrel{1}{H}\mathrm{\Theta },$$
(17)
where the last expression follows from (9) and (15).

The even supercharge (17) together with the odd Hamiltonian (9) satisfies in the odd bracket (3) $`N=1`$ superalgebra relations

$`\{\stackrel{1}{Q},\stackrel{1}{Q}\}_1=2i\stackrel{1}{H},\{\stackrel{1}{Q},\stackrel{1}{H}\}_1=0.`$
Note that an even covariant derivative has the form

$$\stackrel{1}{D}=\stackrel{0}{H}i\pi \theta =\stackrel{0}{H}i\stackrel{1}{H}\mathrm{\Theta }$$
(18)
and obeys in the odd bracket (3) the following permutation relations:

$`\{\stackrel{1}{D},\stackrel{1}{D}\}_1=2i\stackrel{1}{H},\{\stackrel{1}{D},\stackrel{1}{H}\}_1=0,`$
$`\{\stackrel{1}{D},\stackrel{1}{Q}\}_1=0.`$
## 4 Superfield approach

The Euler-Lagrange equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(_{\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}}\right)_\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$
for the even Lagrangian density superfield

$$=\frac{\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2}{2}V(\mathrm{\Phi }),$$
(19)
which follows from (2), takes the form

$$\ddot{\mathrm{\Phi }}+V^{}(\mathrm{\Phi })=0.$$
(20)
The components of (20) coincide with equations (2) and (2). From (19) we can define a superfield of the momentum density

$`𝒫=p+i\eta \pi =_{\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}}=\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}=\dot{q}+i\eta \dot{\theta }`$
and a superfield for the Hamiltonian density

$$=\stackrel{0}{H}+i\eta \stackrel{1}{H}=\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}𝒫=\frac{𝒫^2}{2}+V(\mathrm{\Phi }).$$
(21)
It is remarkable enough that on functions $`A`$ and $`B`$, depending on the real bosonic superfield $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and the momentum density superfield $`𝒫`$, we are able to introduce an even Poisson bracket of the following form

$`\{A,B\}_0=A(\underset{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\overset{}{}}\underset{𝒫}{\overset{}{}}\underset{𝒫}{\overset{}{}}\underset{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\overset{}{}})B.`$
By means of this bracket with the help of the Hamiltonian density (21), we can determine the following superfield Hamiltonian equations

$`\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}=\{\mathrm{\Phi },\}_0=𝒫,`$
$`\dot{𝒫}=\{𝒫,\}_0=V^{}(\mathrm{\Phi }),`$
which components give Hamiltonian equations (10), (13) for the phase variables $`z^M=(q,p;\theta ,\pi )`$.

## 5 Conclusion

In the simplest case of the one-dimensional supersymmetric oscillator

$$\stackrel{1}{H}_{\mathrm{osc}}=p\pi +a^2\theta q,(V_{\mathrm{osc}}=\frac{a^2q^2}{2}),$$
(22)
where $`a`$ is a constant of the inverse length dimension, the Hamilton equations for the canonical coordinates $`z^M=(q,p;\theta ,\pi )`$

$`\dot{q}=p,\dot{p}=a^2q,\dot{\theta }=\pi ,\dot{\pi }=a^2\theta `$
can be reproduced both with the odd Hamiltonian (22) in the canonical odd bracket (3) and in the following even Dirac brackets $`\{\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\}_{0k}^{}`$, $`(k=\pm 1)`$

$`\dot{z}^M=\{z^M,\stackrel{1}{H}_{\mathrm{osc}}\}_1=\{z^M,\stackrel{0}{H}_k\}_{0k}^{}`$
$`z^M[\underset{q}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{q}{\overset{}{}}ik(\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}`$
$`+\underset{\pi }{\overset{}{}}a^2\underset{\pi }{\overset{}{}})]\stackrel{0}{H}_k`$ (23)
with the aid of the corresponding even Hamiltonians

$$\stackrel{0}{H}_k=\frac{p^2+a^2q^2}{2}ik\pi \theta ,$$
(24)
which coincide in the case with the expressions for the even supercharge $`\stackrel{1}{Q}_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ (17) and even covariant derivative $`\stackrel{1}{D}_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ (18)

$`\stackrel{0}{H}_1=\stackrel{1}{Q}_{\mathrm{osc}},\stackrel{0}{H}_1=\stackrel{1}{D}_{\mathrm{osc}}.`$
The even Dirac brackets (5) and the even Hamiltonians (24) follow from the even Lagrangians

$$\stackrel{0}{L}_k=\frac{1}{2}[\dot{q}^2a^2q^2+ik(\psi ^\alpha \dot{\psi }^\alpha +2a\psi ^1\psi ^2)],$$
(25)
where $`\psi ^\alpha (t)`$ $`(\alpha =1,2)`$ are two real fermionic coordinates. Indeed, the even Lagrangians (25) lead to the momenta

$$p=_{\dot{q}}\stackrel{0}{L}_k=\dot{q},\pi _k^\alpha =_{\dot{\psi }^\alpha }\stackrel{0}{L}_k=\frac{ik}{2}\psi ^\alpha ,$$
(26)
canonically conjugate to the coordinates $`q`$ and $`\psi ^\alpha `$ in the even brackets corresponding to $`\stackrel{0}{L}_k`$

$$\{q,p\}_{0k}=1,\{\psi ^\alpha ,\pi _k^\beta \}_{0k}=\delta ^{\alpha \beta }.$$
(27)
The remaining even-bracket relations between the canonical variables have zero right-hand sides. The last relations in (26) define the second-class constraints

$$\phi _k^\alpha =\pi _k^\alpha +\frac{ik}{2}\psi ^\alpha ,\{\phi _k^\alpha ,\phi _k^\beta \}_0=ik\delta ^{\alpha \beta },$$
(28)
which commute in the even brackets (27) with the variables

$`\chi _k^\alpha =\pi _k^\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{ik}{2}}\psi ^\alpha ,\{\chi _k^\alpha ,\chi _k^\beta \}_0=ik\delta ^{\alpha \beta },`$
$`\{\phi _k^\alpha ,\chi _k^\beta \}_0=0,`$
entering into the definitions for the even Dirac brackets (5)

$`\{z^M,\stackrel{0}{H}_k\}_{0k}^{}=\{z^M,\stackrel{0}{H}_k\}_{0k}`$
$`ik\{z^M,\phi _k^\alpha \}_{0k}\{\phi _k^\alpha ,\stackrel{0}{H}_k\}_{0k}`$
$`=z^M(\underset{q}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{q}{\overset{}{}}`$
$`+ik\underset{\chi _k^\alpha }{\overset{}{}}\underset{\chi _k^\alpha }{\overset{}{}})\stackrel{0}{H}_k`$ (29)
and the even Hamiltonians (24)

$$\stackrel{0}{H}_k=\frac{p^2+a^2q^2}{2}+ika\chi _k^1\chi _k^2.$$
(30)
There is no summation over $`k`$ in the foregoing formulae. The even Hamiltonians (30) follow from the total even Hamiltonians corresponding to the Lagrangians (25) with the use of the second-class constraints $`\phi _k^\alpha =0`$. A correspondence between different expressions (5), (5) for the even Dirac brackets and (24), (30) for the even Hamiltonians $`\stackrel{0}{H}_k`$ can be established by putting either

$`a\chi _k^1=\pm i\pi ,\chi _k^2=\pm i\theta `$
or

$`a\chi _k^2=\pm i\pi ,\chi _k^1=i\theta .`$
Note that even in the simplest case of the one-dimensional supersymmetric oscillator the even Lagrangians (25) do not follow from any Lagrangian densities, given in terms of one real scalar bosonic $`D=1,N=1`$ superfield $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ (1)444In the case $`k=1`$ the even Lagrangian $`\stackrel{0}{L}_1`$ (25) is reduced from the even Lagrangian density expressed in terms of one scalar bosonic $`D=1,N=2`$ superfield (see, for example, )., as it takes place for the odd Lagrangian

$`\stackrel{1}{L}_{\mathrm{osc}}=\dot{q}\dot{\theta }a^2q\theta ,`$
that leads to the odd Hamiltonian (22), which is dynamically equivalent (see equation (5)) to the even one (24) followed from the even Lagrangian (25).

Thus, we see that in the case of $`D=1,N=1`$ supersymmetry the description with the odd Lagrangian is more economical.

## 6 Acknowledgements

One of the authors (V.A.S.) would like to thank the administration of the Ludwig Maximilian University of München for hospitality during the period when the main part of this work has been done. V.A.S. is also sincerely grateful to J. Lukierski for kind hospitality at the University of Wroclaw where the part of the work has been performed and together with A. Frydryszak for useful discussions.

The research of V.A.S. was supported in part by the Ukrainian State Foundation of Fundamental Researches, Grant No 2.5.1/54 and by Grant INTAS No 93-127 (Extension).


text:
# A construction of some ideals in affine vertex algebras

## 1. Introduction

Let $`\widehat{g}`$ be the affine Lie algebra associated to the finite-dimensional simple Lie algebra $`g`$. Then on the generalized Verma module $`N_k(g)`$, $`k`$, exists a natural structure of a vertex operator algebra (VOA) (cf. \[FZ\], \[FFr\], \[MP\], \[Li\], \[K2\]). Moreover, every $`\widehat{g}`$–submodule $`I`$ of $`N_k(g)`$ becomes an ideal in the VOA $`N_k(g)`$, and on the quotient $`N_k(g)/I`$ exists a structure of a VOA. Let $`N_k^1(g)`$ be the maximal ideal in $`N_k(g)`$. Then the quotient $`L_k(g)=N_k(g)/N_k^1(g)`$ is a simple VOA. If $`k`$ is an integer, then $`N_k^1(g)`$ is generated by one singular vector (cf. \[K1\], \[FZ\]). The similar situation is in the case when $`k`$ is an admissible rational number (cf. \[A\], \[AM\], \[DLM\], \[FM\], \[KW\]).

In order to study annihilating ideals of highest weight representations, it is very important to understand the ideal lattice of the VOA $`N_k(g)`$. This problem was initiated \[FM\]. It is known fact that in the case $`g=sl_2`$ and $`k2`$ , $`N_k^1(sl_2())`$ is the unique ideal in the VOA $`N_k(sl_2())`$. Different situation is in the case of critical level ($`k=h^{}`$, here $`h^{}`$ denotes the dual Coxeter number). In this case there exists a very rich structure of ideals of $`N_h^{}(g)`$, which implies the existence of infinitely many non-isomorphic VOAs (cf. \[FFr\]).

In the present paper we will introduce a family of VOAs which are quotients of the VOA $`N_k(g)`$ in the cases of affine Lie algebras $`A_\mathrm{}1^{(1)}`$ and $`C_{\mathrm{}}^{(1)}`$ at integer and half-integer levels. This family includes VOAs associated to the admissible representations studied in \[A\]. The basic step in our construction is the construction of one infinite family of singular vectors in $`N_k(g)`$. As a consequence we get some new non-trivial ideals in VOAs $`N_k(g)`$. We also begin the study of the representation theory of these VOAs by identifying the corresponding Zhu’s algebras explicitly. We demonstrate that the VOA $`N_k(g)`$ for $`k`$ can have a nontrivial quotient which has infinitely many irreducible modules from the category $`𝒪`$. These representations are parameterized with certain algebraic curves.

## 2.  Vertex operator algebra $`N_k(g)`$

Let $`g`$ be a finite-dimensional simple Lie algebra over $`C`$ and let $`(,)`$ be a nondegenerate symmetric bilinear form on $`g`$. Let $`g=n_{}+h+n_+`$ be a triangular decomposition for $`g`$. Let $`\theta `$ be the highest root for $`g`$, end $`e_\theta `$ the corresponding root vector. Define $`\rho `$ as usual. The affine Lie algebra $`\widehat{g}`$ associated with $`g`$ is defined as $`g[t,t^1]cd,`$ where $`c`$ is the canonical central element \[K1\] and the Lie algebra structure is given by

$$[xt^n,yt^m]=[x,y]t^{n+m}+n(x,y)\delta _{n+m,0}c,$$

$$[d,xt^n]=nxt^n$$

for $`x,yg`$. We will write $`x(n)`$ for $`xt^n`$.

The Cartan subalgebra $`\widehat{h}`$ and subalgebras $`\widehat{g}_+`$, $`\widehat{n}_{}`$ of $`\widehat{g}`$ are defined by

$$\widehat{h}=hcd,\widehat{g}_\pm =gt^{\pm 1}[t^{\pm 1}].$$

Let $`P=g[t]cd`$ be upper parabolic subalgebra. For every $`k`$, $`kh^{}`$, let $`v_k`$ be $`1`$–dimensional $`P`$–module such that the subalgebra $`g[t]+d`$ acts trivially, and the central element $`c`$ acts as multiplication with $`k`$. Define the generalized Verma module $`N_k(g)`$ as

$$N_k(g)=U(\widehat{g})_{U(P)}v_k.$$

Then $`N_k(g)`$ has a natural structure of a vertex operator algebra (VOA). Vacuum vector is $`\mathrm{𝟏}=1v_k`$.

Recall that there is one-to-one correspondence between irreducible modules of the VOA $`V`$ and the irreducible modules for the corresponding Zhu’s algebra $`A(V)`$ (cf. \[Z\], \[FZ\]). The Zhu’s algebra of the VOA $`N_k(g)`$ is isomorphic to $`U(g)`$ (cf. \[FZ\]). Let $`F:U(\widehat{g}_{})U(g)`$ be the projection map defined with

$$F(a_1(i_11)\mathrm{}a_n(i_n1))=(1)^{i_1+\mathrm{}i_n}a_na_{n1}\mathrm{}a_1,$$

for every $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_ng`$, $`i_1,\mathrm{},i_n_+`$, $`n`$. Assume that $`J`$ is an ideal in the VOA $`N_k(g)`$. Let $`F(J)`$ be a two-sided ideal of $`U(g)`$ generated by the set $`\{F(w)|wU(\widehat{g}_{}),w\mathrm{𝟏}J\}.`$ Then the Zhu’s algebra of the quotient VOA $`\frac{N_k(g)}{J}`$ is isomorphic to the quotient algebra

$$\frac{U(g)}{F(J)}$$

(for more details see \[FZ\]).

## 3.  Lie algebras $`sp_2\mathrm{}()`$ and $`sl_{\mathrm{}}()`$

Consider now two $`\mathrm{}`$-dimensional vector spaces $`A_1=_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}a_i`$, $`A_2=_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}a_i^{}`$. Let $`A=A_1+A_2`$. The Weyl algebra $`W(A)`$ is the associative algebra over $``$ generated by $`A`$ and relations

$$[a_i,a_j]=[a_i^{},a_j^{}]=0,[a_i,a_i^{}]=\delta _{i,j},i,j\{1,2,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\}.$$

Define the normal ordering on $`A`$ by

$$:xy:=\frac{1}{2}(xy+yx)x,yA.$$

Then (cf. \[B\] and \[FF\]) all such elements $`:xy:`$ span a Lie algebra isomorphic to $`g=sp_2\mathrm{}()`$ with a Cartan subalgebra $`h`$ spanned by

$$h_i=:a_ia_i^{}:i=1,2,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}.$$

Let $`\{ϵ_i|1i\mathrm{}\}h^{}`$ be the dual basis such that $`ϵ_i(h_j)=\delta _{i,j}`$. The root system of $`g`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\{\pm (ϵ_i\pm ϵ_j),\pm 2ϵ_i|1i,j\mathrm{},i<j\}$$

with $`\alpha _1=ϵ_1ϵ_2,\mathrm{},\alpha _\mathrm{}1=ϵ_\mathrm{}1ϵ_{\mathrm{}},\alpha _{\mathrm{}}=2ϵ_{\mathrm{}}`$ being a set of simple roots. The highest root is $`\theta =2ϵ_1`$. We fix the root vectors :

$$X_{ϵ_iϵ_j}=:a_ia_j^{}:,X_{ϵ_i+ϵ_j}=:a_ia_j:,X_{(ϵ_i+ϵ_j)}=:a_i^{}a_j^{}:.$$

Assume that $`\mathrm{}2`$. Then the simple Lie algebra $`sl_{\mathrm{}}()`$ is a Lie subalgebra $`g_1`$ of $`g`$ generated by the set

$$\{X_{ϵ_iϵ_j}|i,j=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{};ij\}.$$

The Cartan subalgebra $`h_1`$ is spanned by

$$\{h_ih_j|i,j=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{};ij\}.$$

From the above construction we conclude that there are non-zero homomorphisms

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:U(g)W(A),\mathrm{\Phi }_1=\mathrm{\Phi }|_{U(g_1)}:U(g_1)W(A).$$

## 4. Ideals in the VOA $`N_k(sp_2\mathrm{}())`$

In this section let $`g=sp_2\mathrm{}()`$. We will present one construction of singular vectors in $`N_k(g)`$ for integer and half-integer values of $`k`$. We will use the notation as in the Section 3. This construction generalizes the construction of singular vectors at half-integer levels from \[A\]. For $`m`$, $`m\mathrm{}`$ we define matrices $`C_m`$ and $`C_m(1)`$ by

(4.5) $`C_m=`$ $`\left[\begin{array}{cccc}X_{2ϵ_1}& X_{ϵ_1+ϵ_2}& \mathrm{}& X_{ϵ_1+ϵ_m}\\ X_{ϵ_1+ϵ_2}& X_{2ϵ_2}& \mathrm{}& X_{ϵ_2+ϵ_m}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ X_{ϵ_1+ϵ_m}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& X_{2ϵ_m}\end{array}\right],`$
(4.10) $`C_m(1)=`$ $`\left[\begin{array}{cccc}X_{2ϵ_1}(1)& X_{ϵ_1+ϵ_2}(1)& \mathrm{}& X_{ϵ_1+ϵ_m}(1)\\ X_{ϵ_1+ϵ_2}(1)& X_{2ϵ_2}(1)& \mathrm{}& X_{ϵ_2+ϵ_m}(1)\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ X_{ϵ_1+ϵ_m}(1)& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& X_{2ϵ_m}(1)\end{array}\right].`$
As usual let $`C_m^{i,j}`$ (resp. $`C_m^{i,j}(1)`$) be $`(m1)\times (m1)`$ matrix obtained by deleting $`i^{th}`$ row and $`j^{th}`$ column of matrix $`C_m`$ (resp. $`C_m(1)`$). Define next

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1)=`$ $`det(C_m(1))={\displaystyle \underset{\sigma Sym_m}{}}(1)^{\text{sign}(\sigma )}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}X_{ϵ_i+ϵ_{\sigma (i)}}(1),`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_m=`$ $`det(C_m)={\displaystyle \underset{\sigma Sym_m}{}}(1)^{\text{sign}(\sigma )}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}X_{ϵ_i+ϵ_{\sigma (i)}}.`$
Set $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m^{i,j}(1)=det(C_m^{i,j}(1))`$.

By using the definition and the properties of determinants, one sees the following lemma.

###### Lemma 4.1.

$`[X_{\alpha _i},\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1)]=0`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$.

$`[X_{ϵ_iϵ_j}(0),\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1)]=0`$ for $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},m`$, $`ij`$.

$$[X_{2ϵ_1}(1),\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1)]=\left(2(m1)+4(ch_1)\right)(\mathrm{\Delta }_m^{1,1}(1))+f$$

where

$$f\underset{ij}{}U(\widehat{g}_{})X_{ϵ_iϵ_j}(0).$$

###### Theorem 4.1.

For every $`m,n`$, $`m\mathrm{}`$, set $`k_{m,n}=n\frac{m+1}{2}`$. Then $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^n\mathrm{𝟏}`$ is a singular vector in $`N_{k_{m,n}}(g)`$.

Proof. From Lemma 4.1 directly follows that

$$X_{\alpha _i}(0)(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^n\mathrm{𝟏}=0,\text{for}i=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}.$$

Again using Lemma 4.1 we get

$`X_\theta (1)(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^n\mathrm{𝟏}=X_{2ϵ_1}(1)(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^n\mathrm{𝟏}=`$
$`=4n(ck_{m,n})(\mathrm{\Delta }_m^{1,1}(1))(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^{n1}\mathrm{𝟏}=0,`$
which proves the theorem. ∎

Define the ideal $`J_{m,n}(g)`$ in the VOA $`N_{k_{m,n}}(g)`$ with

$$J_{m,n}(g)=U(\widehat{g})(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^n\mathrm{𝟏}.$$

Let

$$V_{m,n}(g)=\frac{N_{k_{m,n}}(g)}{J_{m,n}(g)}$$

be the quotient VOA.

###### Remark 4.1.

For $`m=1`$ Theorem 4.1 gives the known fact that
$`X_{2ϵ_1}(1)^s\mathrm{𝟏}`$ is a singular vector in $`N_{s1}(g)`$. Moreover, this vector generates the submodule $`J_{1,s}(g)`$ which coincides with the maximal submodule of $`N_{s1}(g)`$.

For $`m=2`$ Theorem 4.1 reconstructs the result from \[A\], Theorem 3.1, that

$$\left(X_{2ϵ_1}(1)X_{2ϵ_2}(1)X_{ϵ_1+ϵ_2}(1)^2\right)^s\mathrm{𝟏}$$

is a singular vector in $`N_{s\frac{3}{2}}(g)`$. Again, the corresponding submodule $`J_{2,s}(g)`$ is the maximal submodule of $`N_{s\frac{3}{2}}(g)`$.

Assume that $`m_1m`$, $`n_1n`$ and $`k_{m_1,n_1}=k_{m,n}`$. This implies that $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_{m_1}(1))^{n_1}\mathrm{𝟏}`$ and $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^n\mathrm{𝟏}`$ are different singular vectors in $`N_{k_{m,n}}(g)`$. Then using Theorem 4.1 and Remark 4.1 we get the following corollary on the structure of the maximal submodule of $`N_k(g)`$.

###### Corollary 4.1.

Assume that $`\mathrm{},s`$ and $`\mathrm{}3`$. The maximal submodule $`J_{1,s}(g)`$ of $`N_{s1}(g)`$ is reducible. If $`\mathrm{}4`$ then the maximal submodule $`J_{2,s}(g)`$ of $`N_{s\frac{3}{2}}(g)`$ is reducible.

The following result will identify the Zhu’s algebra of the VOA $`V_{m,n}(g)`$.

###### Theorem 4.2.

The Zhu’s algebra $`A(V_{m,n}(g))`$ is isomorphic to $`\frac{U(g)}{(\mathrm{\Delta }_m)^n}`$, where $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_m)^n`$ is a two-sided ideal in $`U(g)`$ generated by the vector $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_m)^n`$.

For $`m2`$, there is a nontrivial homomorphism

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}:A(V_{m,n}(g))W(A).$$

In particular, if $`\pi :W(A)\text{End}(M)`$ is any nontrivial $`W(A)`$–module then $`\pi \overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is a module for the Zhu’s algebra $`A(V_{m,n}(g))`$.

Proof.  The proof of the statement (1) follows from the fact that the projection map $`F`$ maps $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^n`$ to $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_m)^n`$.

In order to prove (2), we consider the (non-trivial) homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }:U(g)W(A)`$ defined in Section 3. For $`m2`$ we have

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{\Delta }_m)=det\left[\begin{array}{cccc}a_1^2& a_1a_2& \mathrm{}& a_1a_m\\ a_1a_2& a_2^2& \mathrm{}& a_2a_m\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ a_1a_m& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& a_m^2\end{array}\right]=0,$$

and $`\mathrm{\Phi }((\mathrm{\Delta }_m)^n)=0`$, which implies that there is a nontrivial homomorphism $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}:A(V_{m,n}(g))W(A)`$. ∎

###### Remark 4.2.

Since the Weyl algebra $`W(A)`$ has a rich structure of irreducible representations, Theorem 4.2 implies that for $`m2`$, the Zhu’s algebra $`A(V_{m,n}(g))`$ has infinitely many irreducible representations, and therefore the VOA $`V_{m,n}(g)`$ has infinitely many irreducible representations.

One very interesting question is the classification of irreducible modules in the category $`𝒪`$. In the case $`m=2`$ irreducible representations in the category $`𝒪`$ of the VOA $`V_{2,n}(g)`$ were classified in \[A\]. It was proved that any $`V_{2,n}`$–module from the category $`𝒪`$ is completely reducible.

###### Remark 4.3.

An beutiful application of the theory of vertex operator algebras to integrable highest weight modules was made in \[MP\]. It was proved that any singular vector in the VOA $`N_k(g)`$ corresponds to a loop $`\widehat{g}`$–module acting on highest weight representations of level $`k`$. As a consequence of our construction in present paper, we get a new family of such loop-modules. Let $`R_{m,n}=U(g)(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^n\mathrm{𝟏}`$ be the top level of the ideal $`J_{m,n}(g)`$. It is clear that $`R_{m,n}`$ is an irreducible finite-dimensional $`g`$–module with the highest weight $`2n\omega _m`$ (here $`\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _{\mathrm{}}`$ denote the fundamental weights for $`g`$). Then $`\overline{R}_{m,n}=R_{m,n}[t,t^1]`$ is a loop module which acts on highest weight representations of level $`k=k_{m,n}`$ (for definitions see \[MP\]). Loop modules $`\overline{R}_{m,n}`$ for $`m=1`$ were constructed in \[MP\], and for $`m=2`$ in \[A\]. The results of the next section will also provide new examples of loop modules acting on integer level highest weight representations in the case of affine Lie algebra $`A_\mathrm{}1^{(1)}`$. We should also mention that these new loop modules are ”bigger” than the loop modules which characterize integrable highest weight modules.

###### Example 4.1.

Let $`g=sp_6()`$. Set $`R=R_{3,1}=U(g).\mathrm{\Delta }_{3,1}`$. Then $`R`$ is a finite-dimensional irreducible $`g`$–module with the highest weight $`2\omega _3`$. Using the similar arguments to those in \[A\], \[AM\] and \[MP\], one gets that an irreducible highest weight $`g`$–module $`V(\lambda )`$ with the highest weight $`\lambda `$ is a module for the Zhu’s algebra $`A(V_{3,1}(g))`$ if and only if

$$R_0v_\lambda =0,$$

where $`v_\lambda `$ is the highest weight vector, and $`R_0`$ is the zero-weight subspace of $`R`$. Moreover, for every $`uR_0`$, there is a unique polynomial $`p_uU(h)`$ such that $`uv_\lambda =p_u(h)v_\lambda `$. Since $`dimR_0=4`$, we get that the irreducible highest weight $`A(V_{3,1})`$–modules are parameterized with the zeros of four polynomials $`p_1(h)`$, $`p_2(h)`$, $`p_3(h)`$, $`p_4(h)`$. Using the similar considerations to those in \[A\], Section 5, we get that these polynomials are

$`p_1(h_1,h_2,h_3)=(h_1+1)(h_2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})h_3,`$
$`p_2(h_1,h_2,h_3)=(h_1+1)(4h_3+(h_2+h_3)(h_2+h_31)),`$
$`p_3(h_1,h_2,h_3)=h_3(4(h_2+1)+(h_1+h_2+2)(h_1+h_21)),`$
$`p_4(h_1,h_2,h_3)=4h_3(h_2+1)+(h_1+h_31)(h_2+h_3+h_2(h_1+h_3)).`$
Now, it is easy to find the zeros of these polynomials. The classification of irreducible modules follows from the Zhu’s algebra theory. Finally, we obtain the following complete list of irreducible modules from the category $`𝒪`$:

$`\{L((x1)\mathrm{\Lambda }_0+x\mathrm{\Lambda }_1)|x\}\{L((x1)\mathrm{\Lambda }_1+x\mathrm{\Lambda }_2)|x\}`$
$`\{L((x1)\mathrm{\Lambda }_2+x\mathrm{\Lambda }_3)|x\}`$
$`\{L(2\mathrm{\Lambda }_0+\mathrm{\Lambda }_2),L(\mathrm{\Lambda }_12\mathrm{\Lambda }_3),L({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_0{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_3),L({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_0+\mathrm{\Lambda }_2{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_3),`$
$`L({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_0+\mathrm{\Lambda }_1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_3),L({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_0+\mathrm{\Lambda }_1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_2{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_3)\}.`$
It is also important to see that the irreducible modules are parameterized with a union of one finite set and a union of three lines in $`^4`$.

We also notice that every module for the Zhu’s algebra $`A(V_{3,1}(g))`$ is also a module for the Zhu’s algebra $`A(V_{3,n}(g))`$ for every $`n`$. In this way the previous arguments give that for every $`n`$ the VOA $`A(V_{3,n})`$ has uncountably many irreducible modules from the category $`𝒪`$.

## 5.  Ideals in the VOA $`N_k(sl_{\mathrm{}}())`$

In this section let $`g=sl_{\mathrm{}}()`$. We will present one construction of singular vectors in $`N_k(g)`$ for integer values of $`k`$. The proofs will be omitted since they are completely analogous to the proofs from Section 4.

As before, we will use the notation from Section 3. For $`m`$, $`2m\mathrm{}`$ we define matrices $`A_m`$ and $`A_m(1)`$ by

(5.15) $`A_m=\left[\begin{array}{cccc}X_{ϵ_1ϵ_{\mathrm{}}}& X_{ϵ_1ϵ_\mathrm{}1}& \mathrm{}& X_{ϵ_1ϵ_{\mathrm{}m+1}}\\ X_{ϵ_2ϵ_{\mathrm{}}}& X_{ϵ_2ϵ_\mathrm{}1}& \mathrm{}& X_{ϵ_2ϵ_{\mathrm{}m+1}}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ X_{ϵ_mϵ_{\mathrm{}}}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& X_{ϵ_mϵ_{\mathrm{}m+1}}\end{array}\right],`$
and

(5.20) $`A_m(1)=`$ $`\left[\begin{array}{cccc}X_{ϵ_1ϵ_{\mathrm{}}}(1)& X_{ϵ_1ϵ_\mathrm{}1}(1)& \mathrm{}& X_{ϵ_1ϵ_{\mathrm{}m+1}}(1)\\ X_{ϵ_2ϵ_{\mathrm{}}}(1)& X_{ϵ_2ϵ_\mathrm{}1}(1)& \mathrm{}& X_{ϵ_2ϵ_{\mathrm{}m+1}}(1)\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ X_{ϵ_mϵ_{\mathrm{}}}(1)& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& X_{ϵ_mϵ_{\mathrm{}m+1}}(1)\end{array}\right].`$
Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m=det(A_m)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1)=det(A_m(1))`$.

###### Theorem 5.1.

For every $`m,n`$, $`2m\mathrm{}`$, set $`k_{m,n}=nm`$. Then $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^n\mathrm{𝟏}`$ is a singular vector in $`N_{k_{m,n}}(g)`$.

Define the ideal $`J_{m,n}(g)`$ in the VOA $`N_{k_{m,n}}(g)`$ with

$$J_{m,n}(g)=U(\widehat{g})(\mathrm{\Delta }_m(1))^n\mathrm{𝟏}.$$

Let $`V_{m,n}(g)=\frac{N_{k_{m,n}}(g)}{J_{m,n}(g)}`$ be the quotient VOA.

###### Remark 5.1.

For $`m=1`$ Theorem 5.1 gives the known fact that $`X_{ϵ_1ϵ_{\mathrm{}}}(1)^s\mathrm{𝟏}`$ is a singular vector in $`N_{s1}(g)`$. Moreover, this vector generates the submodule $`J_{1,s}(g)`$ which is the maximal submodule of $`N_{s1}(g)`$.

We have:

###### Corollary 5.1.

Assume that $`\mathrm{},s`$, $`\mathrm{}4`$. Then the maximal submodule $`J_{1,s}(g)`$ of $`N_{s1}(g)`$ is reducible.

Similarly as in Section 4 we can explicitly identify Zhu’s algebras $`A(V_{m,n}(g))`$ and find a connection with the Weyl algebra $`W(A)`$.

###### Theorem 5.2.

The Zhu’s algebra $`A(V_{m,n}(g))`$ is isomorphic to the quotient algebra

$$\frac{U(g)}{(\mathrm{\Delta }_m)^n},$$

where $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_m)^n`$ is a two-sided ideal in $`U(g)`$ generated by $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_m)^n`$.

For $`m2`$, there is a nontrivial homomorphism

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}:A(V_{m,n}(g))W(A).$$

In particular, every module for Weyl algebra $`W(A)`$ can be lifted to a module for the Zhu’s algebra $`A(V_{m,n}(g))`$.