text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The Stark effect — the splitting of degenerate spectral lines in an electric field — was an important early success for quantum theory, and has remained a classroom staple, providing the introduction to perturbation theory for degenerate states. Paired with the Zeeman effect, in which an external magnetic field couples to the diagonal (but otherwise degenerate) angular momentum operator, the Stark effect demonstrates that this same degeneracy rescues the first order perturbation from the coupling of the external electric field to the off-diagonal position operator. Although the non-compact position operator cannot be considered a small perturbation in any rigorous sense, and in non-perturbative solutions, the discrete energy spectrum goes over to a continuous resonance spectrum, , the first order nonrelativistic splitting is the basis for the treatment of Stark broadening in spectroscopy. Stark broadening is been an important consideration in plasma physics  and has become a practical diagnostic tool in surface science  and astronomy . The strong electric fields required to observe the effect (Johannes Stark’s 1913 observation was made with field strengths of $`10^5`$ V/cm while typical fields may be two orders of magnitude higher ), suggest that a relativistically covariant formulation of the problem may be required, especially as the phenomenon is applied to high precision measurement.

In this paper, we discuss the Stark effect as a first order perturbation to a solution of the two body bound state problem in relativistically covariant quantum mechanics. This formulation of the problem is based on Stueckelberg’s off-shell kinematics with invariant evolution parameter , generalized to the many particle case by Horwitz and Piron  (see also ). The relaxation of the mass-shell constraint for particle kinematics is required to achieve an action-at-a-distance framework with scalar potential. In this framework, Arshansky and Horwitz  obtained exact solutions for relativistic generalizations of the classical central force problems. These wavefunctions form an induced representation of the Lorentz group , and are degenerate in the new quantum numbers associated with the enlarged symmetry. Moreover, dipole radiation, emitted in transitions among these bound states, obeys selection rules which are formally identical to those of the nonrelativistic problem but with covariant interpretation . The bound state solutions for the Coulomb problem represent mass eigenstates whose eigenvalues correspond to the well-known energy spectrum of the nonrelativistic theory .

The covariant Zeeman effect has been previously obtained  and the covariance of the approach permits the application of machinery developed there to the Stark effect. The construction of the action for the induced representation requires care, especially the coupling to the vector field in a manner which preserves both Lorentz and local gauge invariance. In the case of constant external electromagnetic field, the first order interaction term becomes a scalar contraction of the field strength tensor with the Lorentz generators. The Zeeman effect is then recovered as a magnetic-like field coupled to the rotation generators, and the Stark effect is obtained as an electric-like field coupled to the boost generators. Since the non-compact boost generators have complex eigenvalues, the relativistic bound states decay even at first order. To recover the usual Stark splitting, we must include an external scalar potential involving a coupling to the spacetime position four-vector. This ‘fifth potential’ has a natural interpretation in the pre-Maxwell electromagnetic theory , where it plays the role of a gauge field compensating for transformations which depend on the invariant evolution parameter. In the pre-Maxwell theory, the photon kinematics are also off-shell, however the measurement process picks out the zero-mass eigenstate as an equilibrium state . Under this interpretation of the Stark effect, the off-shell photon becomes a necessary corollary to the parameterized quantum mechanics formalism.

The Stueckelberg equation for the two body problem,

$$i_\tau \psi (x_1,x_2,\tau )=K\psi (x_1,x_2,\tau )=\left[\frac{p_{1\mu }p_1^\mu }{2M_1}+\frac{p_{2\mu }p_2^\mu }{2M_2}+V(x_1,x_2)\right]\psi (x_1,x_2,\tau )$$
(1)
is Poincaré invariant and quadratic in the four momenta. The nonrelativistic central force problems may be generalized to covariant form  through the replacement

$$r=\sqrt{(𝐫_1𝐫_2)^2}\rho =\sqrt{(𝐫_1𝐫_2)^2(t_1t_2)^2}$$
(2)
in the argument of the usual potentials. Since $`t_1t_2`$ in the Galilean limit, the original nonrelativistic problem is recovered in this limit.

One may separate variables of the center of mass motion and relative motion in the same way as in the nonrelativistic theory,

$$K=\frac{P^\mu P_\mu }{2M}+\frac{p^\mu p_\mu }{2m}+V(\rho ),$$
(3)
where

$$P^\mu =p_1^\mu +p_2^\mu M=M_1+M_2$$
(4)
$$p^\mu =(M_2p_1^\mu M_1p_2^\mu )/Mm=M_1M_2/M.$$

The reduced motion is then described by the relative Hamiltonian

$$K_{rel}=\frac{p^\mu p_\mu }{2m}+V(\rho ).$$
(5)
In order to obtain the correct nonrelativistic limit for the spectrum in the Coulomb problem, one must choose an arbitrary spacelike unit vector $`n_\mu `$ ($`g_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,1)n^2=+1`$) and restrict the spacetime support of the eigenfunctions to a Restricted Minkowski Space (RMS) corresponding to the condition

$$(x_{})^2=[x(xn)n]^20,$$
(6)
where $`xx^\mu `$ is the relative coordinate $`x_1^\mu x_2^\mu `$, and $`x^2=x^\mu x_\mu `$. The RMS is transitive and invariant under the O(2,1) subgroup of O(3,1) leaving $`n_\mu `$ invariant and translations along $`n_\mu `$. The choice of $`n_\mu `$ along the $`z`$-axis leads to the parameterization

$$y^0=\rho \mathrm{sinh}\beta \mathrm{sin}\theta y^1=\rho \mathrm{cosh}\beta \mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi $$

$$y^2=\rho \mathrm{cosh}\beta \mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi y^3=\rho \mathrm{cos}\theta $$
(7)
for which

$$(y^1)^2+(y^2)^2(y^0)^20.$$
(8)
The eigenfunctions of $`K_{rel}`$ form irreducible representations of SU(1,1) — in the double covering of O(2,1) — parameterized by the spacelike vector $`n_\mu `$ stabilized by the particular O(2,1) .

An induced representation of SL(2,C) was constructed , by applying the Lorentz group to the RMS coordinates $`x^\mu `$ and the frame orientation $`n_\mu `$, and studying the action on these wavefunctions. A set of wavefunctions with support on $`(n,x)`$ where

$$x\mathrm{RMS}(n_\mu )=\left\{x\right|[x(xn)n]^20\}$$
(9)
may be regarded as functions of the chosen $`n_\mu `$ and the coordinates of a standard frame $`y\mathrm{RMS}(\stackrel{˚}{n}_\mu )`$, since the Lorentz transformation $``$ which performs the mapping $`\stackrel{˚}{n}=(n)n`$ has the property that

$$x\mathrm{RMS}(n_\mu )\mathrm{and}y=(n)xy\mathrm{RMS}(\stackrel{˚}{n}_\mu ).$$
(10)
For the choice $`\stackrel{˚}{n}=(0,0,0,1)`$, the parameterization (7) may be used for $`y^\mu `$, and the effect on the wavefunctions of a Lorentz transformation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, may be seen from the composition

$$\begin{array}{ccc}x\mathrm{RMS}\left(n_\mu \right)& \stackrel{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}& x^{}\mathrm{RMS}\left(n_\mu ^{}\right)\\ & & \\ (n)^T& & (\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\\ & & \\ y\mathrm{RMS}\left(\underset{\mu }{\overset{}{n}}\right)& & y^{}\mathrm{RMS}\left(\stackrel{}{n_\mu }\right)\end{array}$$
(11)
to be

$$\psi _n(y)\psi _n^\mathrm{\Lambda }(y)=\psi _{\mathrm{\Lambda }^1n}(D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda }^1,n)y)$$
(12)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ acts directly on $`n_\mu `$. The representations are moved on an orbit generated by this spacelike vector, and the Lorentz transformations act on $`y^\mu `$ through the O(2,1) little group, represented by $`D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)`$, with the property

$$D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)\stackrel{˚}{n}=(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\mathrm{\Lambda }^T(n)\stackrel{˚}{n}\stackrel{˚}{n}.$$
(13)
Expressing the matrix Lorentz generators as

$$(^{\sigma \lambda })^{\mu \nu }=g^{\sigma \mu }g^{\lambda \nu }g^{\sigma \nu }g^{\lambda \mu },$$
(14)
the matrix $`^T(n)`$ was chosen in  to be

$`^T(n)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\gamma ^{23}}e^{\omega ^{31}}e^{\alpha ^{03}}`$ (15)
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mathrm{cosh}\alpha & 0& 0& \mathrm{sinh}\alpha \\ \mathrm{sin}\omega \mathrm{sinh}\alpha & \mathrm{cos}\omega & 0& \mathrm{sin}\omega \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \\ \mathrm{sin}\gamma \mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{sinh}\alpha & \mathrm{sin}\gamma \mathrm{sin}\omega & \mathrm{cos}\gamma & \mathrm{sin}\gamma \mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \\ \mathrm{cos}\gamma \mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{sinh}\alpha & \mathrm{cos}\gamma \mathrm{sin}\omega & \mathrm{sin}\gamma & \mathrm{cos}\gamma \mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \end{array}\right),`$ (16)
which provides the parameterization of $`n_\mu `$ as

$$n_\mu =\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{sinh}\alpha \\ \mathrm{sin}\omega \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \\ \mathrm{sin}\gamma \mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \\ \mathrm{cos}\gamma \mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \end{array}\right).$$
(17)
The generators $`h_{\alpha \beta }(n)`$ of (12) form a representation of the O(3,1) Lie algebra (through their action on $`y`$ and $`n`$), and the Casimir operators

$$\widehat{c}_1=\frac{1}{2}h_{\alpha \beta }(n)h^{\alpha \beta }(n)\widehat{c}_2=\frac{1}{2}ϵ^{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }h_{\alpha \beta }(n)h_{\gamma \delta }(n)$$
(18)
and the operators of the SU(2) subgroup

$$𝐋^2(n)=\frac{1}{2}h_{ij}(n)h^{ij}(n)L_1(n)=h^{23}(n)=i\frac{}{\gamma }$$
(19)
can be constructed as a commuting set. Moreover, the operator

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{1}{2}M^{\mu \nu }M_{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)\frac{3}{4},$$
(20)
where $`M^{\mu \nu }=y^\mu p^\nu y^\nu p^\mu `$, and the O(2,1) Casimir $`N^2=(M^{01})^2+(M^{02})^2+(M^{12})^2`$ commute with this set. The wavefunctions which are eigenfunctions of the set

$$\{\mathrm{\Lambda },N^2,\widehat{c}_1,\widehat{c}_2,𝐋^2(n),L_1(n)\}$$
(21)
with eigenvalues $`Q=\{\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)\frac{3}{4},n^2\frac{1}{4},c_1,c_2,L(L+1),q\}`$ form a representation of SL(2,C). The requirement that the resulting representation be unitary and irreducible (the wavefunctions lie in the principal series), imposes the condition $`c_1=\widehat{n}^21c_2^2/\widehat{n}^2`$, where $`\widehat{n}=n+1/2`$.

The wavefunctions in the induced representation have the explicit form

$$\psi _n^Q(y)=R_{n_a\mathrm{}}(\rho )\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mathrm{}}^n(\theta )\xi ^Q(n_\mu ,\beta ,\varphi )$$
(22)
where

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mathrm{}}^n(\theta )=(1\xi ^2)^{\frac{1}{4}}\sqrt{\frac{2\mathrm{}+1}{2}\frac{(\mathrm{}n)!}{(\mathrm{}+n)!}}P_{\mathrm{}}^n(\xi )$$
(23)
$$\xi ^Q(n_\mu ,\beta ,\varphi )=\underset{k=0}{\overset{L\widehat{n}}{}}𝒟_k^Q(\alpha ,\omega ,\gamma )\chi _{n+k}^n(\beta ,\varphi )$$
(24)
$$\chi _{n+k}^n(\beta ,\varphi )=B_{n+k,n}(\beta )\mathrm{\Phi }_{n+k}(\varphi )$$
(25)
$$B_{n+k,n}(\beta )=(1\zeta ^2)^{\frac{1}{4}}\sqrt{n\frac{(2n+k)!}{k!}}P_{n+k}^n(\zeta )$$
(26)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{n+k}(\varphi )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}e^{i(n+k+\frac{1}{2})\varphi }$$
(27)
$$𝒟_k^Q(\alpha ,\omega ,\gamma )=\mathrm{\Xi }_{Lk}^{nc_2}(u)P_{q,M_k}^L(z)e^{iq\gamma }$$
(28)
$$\mathrm{\Xi }_{Lk}^{nc_2}(u)=(1)^k\sqrt{\frac{(2\widehat{n}+k1)!}{(2\widehat{n}1)!k!}}N_L^Q(1u^2)^{\frac{\widehat{n}1}{2}}P_{\frac{ic_2}{\widehat{n}},\widehat{n}+k}^L(u)$$
(29)
with $`u=\mathrm{tanh}\alpha `$, $`z=\mathrm{sin}\omega `$, $`\xi =\mathrm{cos}\theta `$, $`\zeta =\mathrm{tanh}\beta `$, $`M_k=\widehat{n}+k`$ and $`N_L^Q`$ a normalization constant. The functions $`P_{\mathrm{}}^n(\xi )`$ are standard Legendre polynomials, and $`P_{ab}^L`$ is related to the Jacobi polynomials $`P_k^{\alpha \beta }`$ through

$$P_{ab}^L(z)=\frac{i^{ab}}{2^a}\sqrt{\frac{(La)!(L+a)!}{(Lb)!(L+b)!}}(1z)^{\frac{ab}{2}}(1+z)^{\frac{a+b}{2}}P_{La}^{(ab,a+b)}(z)$$
(30)
These wavefunctions are orthogonal with respect to the measure $`d^4yd^4n\delta (1n^2)`$, where

$`{\displaystyle d^4y}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\rho \rho ^3{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\beta \mathrm{cosh}\beta {\displaystyle _0^\pi }𝑑\theta \mathrm{sin}^2\theta {\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\varphi `$ (31)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\rho \rho ^3{\displaystyle _1^1}𝑑\xi \sqrt{1\xi ^2}{\displaystyle _1^1}𝑑\zeta (1\zeta ^2)^{\frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\varphi `$
$`{\displaystyle d^4n\delta (1n^2)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\alpha \mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha {\displaystyle _{\frac{\pi }{2}}^{\frac{\pi }{2}}}𝑑\omega \mathrm{cos}\omega {\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\gamma `$ (32)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _1^1}{\displaystyle \frac{du}{(1u^2)^2}}{\displaystyle _1^1}𝑑z{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\gamma `$
The remaining “radial” function, after the transformation $`\widehat{R}(\rho )=\sqrt{\rho }R(\rho )`$ must satisfy an equation which is precisely of the form of the nonrelativistic Schrödinger radial equation in three dimensions (and has the same normalization). The states $`\psi _n(y)`$ are then eigenstates of the Lorentz invariant $`K_{rel}`$, whose support is on the RMS($`n`$), with the quantum numbers (21), and a principal quantum number $`n_a`$. In particular, the solutions for the problem corresponding to the Coulomb potential  yield bound states with a mass spectrum which coincides with the nonrelativistic Schrödinger energy spectrum.

## 2 Phase Space

The Coulomb interaction has support in the RMS of an arbitrary unit vector $`n_\mu `$. However, it was shown in  that under dipole emission, the shift in the eigenvalue of $`L_1(n)`$ corresponds to a recoil in the orientation of $`n_\mu `$ with respect to the polarization of the emitted or absorbed photon. The dependence of the magnetic quantum number $`q`$ on the frame orientation is not surprising, since the operator $`L_1(n)`$ belongs to the SU(2) subgroup of SL(2,C), and acts on $`n_\mu `$, but not on the RMS coordinates (it was shown in  that for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ a rotation about the 1-axis, $`D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)1`$).

In order to consider the coupling to an external electromagnetic field, we construct a classical Lagrangian, in which $`n_\mu `$ plays an explicit dynamical role along with the RMS coordinates $`x_\mu `$. We show that the Lorentz generators are conserved quantities for this action, and construct the Hamiltonian, which may be unambiguously quantized and made locally gauge invariant.

We first consider the classical phase space parameterized by $`(n,y)`$ and their $`\tau `$-derivatives. From the known transformation properties,

$$nn^{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }nxx^{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }x$$
(33)
we find that

$$x^{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }x=\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((n)^Ty\right)=\left((\mathrm{\Lambda }n)^T(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }(n)^Ty=(n^{})^Ty^{}.$$
(34)
so that $`y`$ transforms as

$$yy^{}=D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)y,$$
(35)
where $`D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)=(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\mathrm{\Lambda }(n)^T`$ belongs to the O(2,1) which leaves $`\stackrel{˚}{n}`$ invariant, i.e.,

$$D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)\stackrel{˚}{n}=(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\mathrm{\Lambda }(n)^T\stackrel{˚}{n}=\stackrel{˚}{n}.$$
(36)
The coordinates thus transform as

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }:(n,y)(n,y)^{}=(\mathrm{\Lambda }n,D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)y).$$
(37)
Since $`\tau `$ is a scalar invariant, the velocity $`\dot{n}=dn/d\tau `$ transforms as a vector,

$$n^{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }n\dot{n}^{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }\dot{n}.$$
(38)
However $`(n)`$ is now $`\tau `$-dependent through $`n_\mu `$, so that

$`y=(n(\tau ))x`$ $``$ $`\dot{y}=(n)\dot{x}+\dot{}(n)x`$ (39)
$`x=(n(\tau ))^Ty`$ $``$ $`\dot{x}=(n)^T\dot{y}+\dot{}(n)^Ty.`$ (40)
But since $`d\mathrm{\Lambda }/d\tau =0`$, (39) is nevertheless form invariant:

$`(\dot{y})^{}`$ $`=`$ $`(n^{})\dot{x}^{}+\dot{}(n^{})x^{}`$ (41)
$`=`$ $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)[\mathrm{\Lambda }\dot{x}]+\dot{}(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)[\mathrm{\Lambda }x]`$
$`=`$ $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\mathrm{\Lambda }[(n)^T\dot{y}+\dot{}(n)^Ty]+\dot{}(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)[\mathrm{\Lambda }(n))^Ty]`$
$`=`$ $`[(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\mathrm{\Lambda }(n)^T]\dot{y}+[(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\mathrm{\Lambda }\dot{}(n)^T+\dot{}(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\mathrm{\Lambda }(n))^T]y`$
$`=`$ $`D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)\dot{y}+\dot{D}^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)y`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\tau }}[D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)y].`$
In summary, the phase space transforms as:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }:\{(n,y);(\dot{n},\dot{y})\}\{(\mathrm{\Lambda }n,D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)y);(\mathrm{\Lambda }\dot{n},D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)\dot{y}+\dot{D}^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)y)\}.$$
(42)
To obtain the classical generators of the Lorentz transformation (37), we expand the matrix form of the Lorentz transformations as

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=1+\lambda +o(\lambda ^2)$$
(43)
and write $`\lambda `$ as

$$\lambda =\frac{1}{2}\omega _{\alpha \beta }^{\alpha \beta }$$
(44)
where $`\omega _{\alpha \beta },\alpha ,\beta =0,\mathrm{},3`$ is (infinitesimal) antisymmetric. The matrix generators

$$^{\alpha \beta }=\frac{\lambda }{\omega _{\alpha \beta }}|_{\omega =0}$$
(45)
are those given in (14). According to (43) and (44), (37) becomes

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }:(n,y)(n,y)^{}=(n+\lambda n,(n+\lambda n)(1+\lambda )(n)^Ty)+o(\omega ^2).$$
(46)
Representing the classical generators of $`\xi =(n,y)\xi ^{}=(n^{},y^{})`$ as

$$X_{\alpha \beta }=\underset{i=1}{\overset{8}{}}\frac{\xi ^i}{\omega ^{\alpha \beta }}|_{\omega =0}\frac{}{\xi ^i}$$
(47)
where

$$\xi ^i=\{\begin{array}{c}n^\mu \mathrm{for}i=1,\mathrm{},4,\mu =0,\mathrm{},3\\ \\ y^\mu \mathrm{for}i=5,\mathrm{},8,\mu =0,\mathrm{},3\end{array}$$
(48)
we obtain for $`i=1,\mathrm{},4`$,

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}\frac{\xi ^i}{\omega ^{\alpha \beta }}|_{\omega =0}=(_{\alpha \beta })_\nu ^\mu n^\nu \frac{}{n^\mu }=n_\beta \frac{}{n^\alpha }n_\alpha \frac{}{n^\beta }$$
(49)
which was called $`d(\lambda _{\alpha \beta })`$ in . Similarly, for $`i=5,\mathrm{},8`$,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\xi ^i}{\omega ^{\alpha \beta }}}|_{\omega =0}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{\omega ^{\alpha \beta }}}\left[(n+\lambda n)(1+\lambda )(n)^Ty\right]^i|_{\omega =0}`$ (50)
$`=`$ $`_{\sigma \beta }_\alpha ^\rho (y^\sigma {\displaystyle \frac{}{y^\rho }}y^\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{y^\sigma }})n_\beta _\zeta ^\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\alpha }}_\sigma ^\zeta (y^\sigma {\displaystyle \frac{}{y^\rho }}y^\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{y^\sigma }})`$
which was called $`g(\lambda _{\alpha \beta })`$ in . We have used the fact that

$$(n)(n)^T=1\left(\frac{}{n^\mu }(n)\right)(n)^T+(n)\frac{}{n^\mu }(n)^T=0.$$
(51)
Finally, we obtain for the classical generators

$$X_{\alpha \beta }=_{\sigma \beta }_\alpha ^\rho (y^\sigma \frac{}{y^\rho }y^\rho \frac{}{y^\sigma })n_\beta _\zeta ^\rho \frac{}{n^\alpha }_\sigma ^\zeta (y^\sigma \frac{}{y^\rho }y^\rho \frac{}{y^\sigma })+n_\beta \frac{}{n^\alpha }n_\alpha \frac{}{n^\beta }$$
(52)
which was called $`ih_n(\lambda _{\alpha \beta })`$ in , and shown to satisfy the Lie algebra of SL(2,C). It is useful to maintain the matrix notation for $`_{\alpha \beta }`$ so that (52) may be written as

$`X_{\alpha \beta }`$ $`=`$ $`[(n)_{\alpha \beta }^T]_\nu ^\mu y^\nu {\displaystyle \frac{}{y^\mu }}[(_{\alpha \beta })_\sigma ^\rho n^\sigma {\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\rho }}^T]_\nu ^\mu y^\nu {\displaystyle \frac{}{y^\mu }}(_{\alpha \beta })_\sigma ^\rho n^\sigma {\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\rho }}`$ (53)
$`=`$ $`y^T[(n)_{\alpha \beta }^T]_𝐲y^T(n)[n^T_{\alpha \beta }_𝐧]^T_𝐲n^T_{\alpha \beta }_𝐧`$
where $`(_𝐲)_\mu =\frac{}{y^\mu }`$. By defining the four matrices

$$S_\mu =\frac{}{n^\mu }^T\mu =0,\mathrm{},3$$
(54)
(which by (51) are antisymmetric) equation (53) becomes

$$X_{\alpha \beta }=\left\{y^T[(n)_{\alpha \beta }^T]_𝐲+n_\mu (_{\alpha \beta })^{\mu \nu }[y^TS_\nu _𝐲+(_n)_\nu ]\right\}$$
(55)
In the matrix notation of (55), the generators found in  have the form

$$d_n(\lambda )=n_\mu (_{\alpha \beta })^{\mu \nu }(_n)_\nu $$
(56)
$$g_n(\lambda )=\left\{y^T[(n)_{\alpha \beta }^T]_𝐲+n_\mu (_{\alpha \beta })^{\mu \nu }y^TS_\nu _𝐲\right\}$$
(57)
For the action in $`(n,y)`$ coordinates, we choose the simplest Lagrangian containing a kinetic term for $`n_\mu `$, which is

$$\mathrm{L}=\frac{1}{2}m\dot{x}^2+\frac{1}{2}mr_0^2\dot{n}^2V(n,x),$$
(58)
where the scale factor $`r_0`$ is required because $`n_\mu `$ is a unit vector. Using (40) to expand $`\dot{x}`$, we may write (58) in the form

$$\mathrm{L}=\frac{1}{2}m[\dot{y}+\dot{}^Ty]^2+\frac{1}{2}mr_0^2\dot{n}^2V(n,^Ty).$$
(59)
Notice that when $`\dot{n}=0`$, the dynamics depend only on $`\dot{y}`$ and so the relative coordinate remains within RMS($`n`$). By construction, (59) is Lorentz invariant, and so is invariant under the transformations induced by (55). Therefore, applying Noether’s theorem and the Euler-Lagrange equation,

$$0=\delta \mathrm{L}=\frac{\mathrm{L}}{\xi ^i}\delta \xi ^i+\frac{\mathrm{L}}{\dot{\xi }^i}\delta \dot{\xi }^i=\left[\frac{\mathrm{L}}{\xi ^i}\frac{d}{d\tau }\frac{\mathrm{L}}{\dot{\xi }^i}\right]\delta \xi ^i+\frac{d}{d\tau }\left[\frac{\mathrm{L}}{\dot{\xi }^i}\delta \xi ^i\right],$$
(60)
for the variation $`\delta \xi ^i=\frac{1}{2}\omega ^{\alpha \beta }X_{\alpha \beta }\xi ^i`$, one obtains the conservation law

$$\frac{d}{d\tau }[\mathrm{p}^\mu X_{\alpha \beta }y_\mu +\pi ^\mu X_{\alpha \beta }n_\mu ]=0$$
(61)
where

$$\mathrm{p}_\mu =\frac{\mathrm{L}}{\dot{y}^\mu }\mathrm{and}\pi _\mu =\frac{\mathrm{L}}{\dot{n}^\mu }.$$
(62)
Using (55) for $`X_{\alpha \beta }`$, (61) becomes,

$$\frac{d}{d\tau }\{y^T(n)_{\alpha \beta }^T\mathrm{p}+n_\mu (_{\alpha \beta })^{\mu \nu }[y^TS_\nu \mathrm{p}+\pi _\nu ]\}=0.$$
(63)
If we understand $`\pi _\nu `$, in the Poisson bracket sense, as a derivative with respect to $`n_\mu `$, then the quantum operators $`h_n(\lambda _{\alpha \beta })`$ of  now appear as classical constants of the motion for the Lagrangian (58).

To obtain the Hamiltonian, we first observe that $``$ depends on $`\tau `$ only through $`n`$, so

$$\dot{}^T=\left(\dot{n}^\nu \frac{}{n^\nu }^T\right)=\dot{n}^\nu S_\nu $$
(64)
Applying (62) to (59),

$$\mathrm{p}_\mu =\frac{\mathrm{L}}{\dot{y}^\mu }=m[\dot{y}_\mu +(\dot{}^Ty)_\mu ]\mathrm{p}=m[\dot{y}+\dot{n}^\nu S_\nu y]$$
(65)
and

$$\pi _\mu =\frac{\mathrm{L}}{\dot{n}^\mu }=mr_0^2\dot{n}_\mu +m[\dot{y}+\dot{n}^\nu S_\nu y]^T\frac{}{\dot{n}^\mu }[\dot{y}+\dot{n}^\nu S_\nu y]=mr_0^2\dot{n}_\mu y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p}$$
(66)
where we used (65) and the antisymmetry of $`S_\mu `$ to obtain (66). Equations (65) and (66) may be inverted to eliminate $`(\dot{n},\dot{y})`$:

$$\dot{n}_\mu =\frac{1}{mr_0^2}[\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p}]$$
(67)
and

$$\dot{y}=\frac{1}{m}\mathrm{p}\dot{n}^\mu S_\mu y=\frac{1}{m}\dot{y}=\frac{1}{m}\mathrm{p}\dot{n}^\mu S_\mu y=\frac{1}{m}\mathrm{p}\frac{1}{mr_0^2}[\pi ^\mu +y^TS^\mu \mathrm{p}]S_\mu y$$
(68)
which may be used to write the Hamiltonian as

$`\mathrm{K}`$ $`=`$ $`\dot{y}\mathrm{p}+\dot{n}\pi \mathrm{L}`$ (69)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{p}^2}{2m}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2mr_0^2}}(\pi ^\mu +y^TS^\mu \mathrm{p})(\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p})+V`$
Since $`S^\mu `$ is antisymmetric, we may regard (69) as a quantum Hamiltonian without ordering ambiguity in the operator $`y^TS^\mu \mathrm{p}`$. The Schrödinger equation is then

$$i_\tau \psi =\mathrm{K}\psi =\left[\frac{\mathrm{p}^2}{2m}+\frac{1}{2mr_0^2}(\pi ^\mu +y^TS^\mu \mathrm{p})(\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p})+V\right]\psi ,$$
(70)
where we take as quantum operators

$$\mathrm{p}_\mu =i\frac{}{y^\mu }\pi _\mu =i\frac{}{n^\mu }$$
(71)
We require that (70) be locally gauge invariant in the coordinate space $`(n,y)`$, that is, under transformations of the form

$$\psi e^{ie\mathrm{\Theta }(n,y)}\psi ;$$
(72)
this can be accomplished through the minimal coupling prescription

$$\mathrm{p}_\mu \mathrm{p}_\mu e\mathrm{A}_\mu ^{(n)}\pi _\mu \pi _\mu e\chi _\mu $$
(73)
together with the requirement that under gauge transformation

$$\mathrm{A}_\mu ^{(n)}\mathrm{A}_\mu ^{(n)}+\frac{}{y^\mu }\mathrm{\Theta }\chi _\mu \chi _\mu +(\frac{}{n^\mu }+y^TS_\mu _𝐲)\mathrm{\Theta }.$$
(74)
Note that $`\mathrm{A}_\mu ^{(n)}`$ transforms under O(3,1) as an induced (over O(2,1)) representation; it transforms as $`\mathrm{p}_\mu `$ under Lorentz transformations (i.e., under the O(2,1) little group) and so, since the Maxwell equations are Lorentz invariant, it satisfies the Maxwell equation in the $`y^\mu `$ variables. Under gauge transformation,

$$(\mathrm{p}e\mathrm{A}^{(n)})e^{ie\mathrm{\Theta }}\psi =e^{ie\mathrm{\Theta }}(\mathrm{p}+e_𝐲\mathrm{\Theta }e\mathrm{A}^{(n)})\psi =e^{ie\mathrm{\Theta }}(\mathrm{p}e\mathrm{A}^{(n)})\psi $$
(75)
and

$`(\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p}e\chi _\mu ^{})e^{ie\mathrm{\Theta }}\psi `$ $`=`$ $`e^{ie\mathrm{\Theta }}(\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p}+e{\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\mu }}\mathrm{\Theta }+ey^TS_\mu _𝐧\mathrm{\Theta }e\chi _\mu ^{})\psi `$ (76)
$`=`$ $`e^{ie\mathrm{\Theta }}(\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p}e\chi _\mu )\psi ,`$
so that the gauge invariant form of (70) is

$$i_\tau \psi =\mathrm{K}\psi =\left[\frac{1}{2m}(\mathrm{p}e\mathrm{A}^{(n)})^2+\frac{1}{2mr_0^2}(\pi ^\mu +y^TS^\mu \mathrm{p}e\chi ^\mu )(\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p}e\chi _\mu )+V\right]\psi .$$
(77)
Notice the operator

$$D_\mu =\frac{}{n^\mu }+y^TS_\mu _𝐲=(_n)_\mu +y^TS_\mu _𝐲$$
(78)
which appears in the second of (74) and in (55). For a function $`f(n,y)`$ defined such that its dependence on $`n`$ is only through $`(n)^Ty`$ (which is to say that $`f`$ is a function of $`x`$ alone, even as $`n`$ varies in $`\tau `$), we find that

$$\frac{}{y^\mu }f=\frac{df}{d\xi ^\alpha }|_{\xi =(n)^Ty}\frac{}{y^\mu }(_\beta ^\alpha y^\beta )=_\mu ^\alpha \frac{df}{d\xi ^\alpha }|_{\xi =(n)^Ty}$$
(79)
and

$$\frac{}{n^\mu }f=\frac{df}{d\xi ^\alpha }|_{\xi =(n)^Ty}\frac{}{n^\mu }(_\beta ^\alpha y^\beta )$$
(80)
so that

$`D_\mu f`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\mu }}+y^TS_\mu _𝐲\right)f`$ (81)
$`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\mu }}+y_\beta _\gamma ^\beta ({\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\mu }}^{\alpha \gamma }){\displaystyle \frac{}{y^\alpha }}\right]f`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{df}{d\xi ^\sigma }}|_{\xi =(n)^Ty}y^\beta \left[{\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\mu }}_\beta ^\sigma +_\beta ^\gamma ({\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\mu }}_\gamma ^\alpha )_\alpha ^\sigma \right]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{df}{d\xi ^\sigma }}|_{\xi =(n)^Ty}y^\beta \left[{\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\mu }}_\beta ^\sigma +_\beta ^\gamma (^T)_\alpha ^\sigma {\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\mu }}_\gamma ^\alpha \right]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{df}{d\xi ^\sigma }}|_{\xi =(n)^Ty}y^\beta \left[{\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\mu }}_\beta ^\sigma _\beta ^\gamma _\gamma ^\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{}{n^\mu }}_\alpha ^\sigma \right]`$
$``$ $`0`$
where we have used (51). In fact, it follows from (54) that

$$dx_𝐱+dn^\mu D_\mu =dy_𝐲+dn_𝐧$$
(82)
which shows that $`_𝐱`$ and $`D_\mu `$ generate the variations induced by $`dx`$ and $`dn`$, just as $`_𝐲`$ and $`_𝐧`$ generate the variations induced by $`dy`$ and $`dn`$. Thus, $`D_\mu `$ acts as a kind of covariant derivative which vanishes on functions of $`x`$. In particular, $`D_\mu `$ vanishes on the eigenstates discussed in  and , in which case the Hamiltonian (69) reduces to the RMS Hamiltonian discussed in .

The classical Lagrangian associated with the locally gauge invariant Hamiltonian (69) is

$$\mathrm{L}=\frac{1}{2}m\dot{x}^2+\frac{1}{2}mr_0^2\dot{n}^2+e[\dot{x}(^T\mathrm{A}^{(n)})+\dot{n}\chi ]V(n,x).$$
(83)
In order for L to be a Lorentz scalar, $`^T\mathrm{A}^{(n)}`$ must transform under the full Lorentz group O(3,1). Since $`\mathrm{A}^{(n)}`$ was introduced as a field which transforms under the O(2,1) little group, we have that

$$\mathrm{A}^{(n)}=D^1(\mathrm{\Lambda },n)\mathrm{A}^{(n)}=(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\mathrm{\Lambda }^T(n)\mathrm{A}^{(n)}.$$
(84)
Operating on (84) with $`^T(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)`$ leads to

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left[^T(n)\mathrm{A}^{(n)}\right]=^T(\mathrm{\Lambda }n)\mathrm{A}^{(n)}=\left[^T(n)\mathrm{A}^{(n)}\right]^{}$$
(85)
verifying that the combination $`^T\mathrm{A}^{(n)}`$ transforms as a four vector under $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

## 3 Interaction With an External Field

In (73), we introduced the gauge compensation fields, $`\mathrm{A}_\mu ^{(n)}`$ and $`\chi _\mu `$, required to make the Hamiltonian (69) locally gauge invariant. To avoid introducing extra degrees of freedom, we argue that just as $`n`$ and $`y`$ transform under inequivalent representations of the Lorentz group ($`y`$ transforms under the O(2,1) little group induced by the action of the full O(3,1)), so $`\mathrm{A}_\mu ^{(n)}`$ and $`\chi _\mu `$ should be seen as inequivalent representations of the usual U(1) gauge group of electromagnetism. In the full spacelike region, a constant electromagnetic field, $`F^{\mu \nu }`$, can be represented through the vector potential

$$A^\mu (x)=\frac{1}{2}F^{\mu \nu }x_\nu .$$
(86)
We now restrict the support of $`A^\mu `$ to $`x`$ RMS($`n`$) and express the vector potential as a vector oriented with RMS($`\stackrel{˚}{n}`$) by writing

$$\mathrm{A}_\mu ^{(n)}(y)=_{\mu \nu }A^\nu (^Ty)=\frac{1}{2}_{\mu \nu }F_\sigma ^\nu _\lambda ^\sigma y^\lambda =\frac{1}{2}(F^Ty)_\mu .$$
(87)
For the field $`\chi _\mu `$, we choose (note that $`n`$ undergoes Lorentz transform in the same way as $`x`$),

$$\chi _\mu (n)=b^2A_\mu (n)=\frac{b^2}{2}F_\sigma ^\nu n^\sigma $$
(88)
(here $`b`$ is another length scale, required since $`A_\mu (x)`$ has units of length<sup>-1</sup>, so $`F_\sigma ^\nu `$ must have units of length<sup>-2</sup>, but $`\chi _\mu `$ must be without units) and we use (87) and (88) in the Schrödinger equation (77).

$`i_\tau \psi `$ $`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m}}(\mathrm{p}e\mathrm{A}^{(n)})^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2mr_0^2}}(\pi ^\mu +y^TS^\mu \mathrm{p}e\chi ^\mu )(\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p}e\chi _\mu )+V\right]\psi `$ (89)
$`=`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m}}\mathrm{p}^2{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2m}}(\mathrm{p}\mathrm{A}^{(n)}+\mathrm{A}^{(n)}\mathrm{p})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2mr_0^2}}(\pi ^\mu +y^TS^\mu \mathrm{p})^2`$
$`\text{ }{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2mr_0^2}}[(\pi ^\mu +y^TS^\mu \mathrm{p})\chi _\mu +\chi ^\mu (\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p})]+V+o(e^2)]\psi `$
$`=`$ $`\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m}}\mathrm{p}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2mr_0^2}}(\pi ^\mu +y^TS^\mu \mathrm{p})^2+V`$
$`\text{ }e[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\mathrm{A}^{(n)}\mathrm{p}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{mr_0^2}}\chi ^\mu (\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p})]+o(e^2)\}\psi `$
where the first three terms of (89) are the unperturbed Hamiltonian $`\mathrm{K}_0`$.

The perturbation term to order $`o(e)`$, is

$`e[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\mathrm{A}^{(n)}\mathrm{p}`$ $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{mr_0^2}}\chi ^\mu (\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p})]`$ (90)
$`=`$ $`e\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\mathrm{A}^{(n)T}\mathrm{p}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{mr_0^2}}\left(\chi ^T\pi +y^T(S\chi )\mathrm{p}\right)\right]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}(F^Ty)^T\mathrm{p}+{\displaystyle \frac{b^2}{mr_0^2}}F_\nu ^\mu n^\nu (\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p})]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2m}}[y^TF^T\mathrm{p}+{\displaystyle \frac{mb^2}{mr_0^2}}n_\nu F^{\nu \mu }(\pi _\mu +y^TS_\mu \mathrm{p})].`$
Expanding the electromagnetic field tensor on the basis of four by four antisymmetric tensors given by the Lorentz generators $`^{\mu \nu }`$,

$$F=\frac{1}{2}F_{\mu \nu }^{\mu \nu }(F)^{\alpha \beta }=\frac{1}{2}F_{\mu \nu }(^{\mu \nu })^{\alpha \beta }=\frac{1}{2}F_{\mu \nu }(g^{\mu \alpha }g^{\nu \beta }g^{\mu \beta }g^{\nu \alpha })=F^{\alpha \beta }.$$
(91)
Using (91) in (90) we find that the perturbation term to order $`o(e)`$ becomes

$$\frac{e}{4m}F_{\alpha \beta }[y^T^{\alpha \beta }^T\mathrm{p}+\frac{b^2}{r_0^2}n_\mu (^{\alpha \beta })^{\mu \nu }(\pi _\nu +y^TS_\nu \mathrm{p})]$$
(92)
Taking $`b=r_0`$, then we may write the first order perturbation (using (55)) as

$$\frac{e}{4m}F_{\alpha \beta }[y^T^{\alpha \beta }^T\mathrm{p}+n_\mu (^{\alpha \beta })^{\mu \nu }(\pi _\nu +y^TS_\nu \mathrm{p})]=\frac{e}{4m}F_{\alpha \beta }X^{\alpha \beta }.$$
(93)
The interaction term in (93) was used in  to obtain the Zeeman effect. For the magnetic-like field with $`F^{\mu \nu }F_{\mu \nu }=2(𝐁^2𝐄^2)>0`$, there exists a frame for which the interaction is purely magnetic. In such a frame, the perturbation becomes

$$\frac{e}{4m}F_{\alpha \beta }X^{\alpha \beta }=\frac{e}{4m}F_{ij}X^{ij}=\frac{e}{4m}ϵ_{ijk}B^kX^{ij}=\frac{e}{2m}B^k\left[\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{ijk}X^{ij}\right]=\frac{e}{2m}B^kh(\lambda _k)$$
(94)
where $`h(\lambda _k)`$ are the three conserved generators of the SU(2) rotation subgroup of SL(2,C) for the phase space $`\{(n,y);(\pi ,\mathrm{p})\}`$, that is, the angular momentum operator for the eigenstates of the induced representation. Notice that in the matrix element for unperturbed eigenstates, the second terms of (90) vanishes, so the relativistic Zeeman effect does not depend upon the values of $`r_0`$ or $`b`$.

In , the diagonal angular momentum operator is $`L_1(n)=h(\lambda _1)=i/\gamma `$, and so if we take $`𝐁=B(1,0,0)`$ then we find that

$$\mathrm{K}_0\mathrm{K}=\mathrm{K}_0\frac{eB}{2m}h(\lambda _1)$$
(95)
splits the mass levels of the bound states according to

$$K_\mathrm{}nK_{\mathrm{}nq}^{}=K_\mathrm{}n\frac{eB}{2m}q$$
(96)
In going from (95) to (96), we have used the fact that the unperturbed Hamiltonian of (89) reduces to the the unperturbed Hamiltonian of . Equation (96) further justifies the conclusion reached in  that $`q`$ is the magnetic quantum number. As pointed out in , the quantum number $`q`$ belongs to a representation in the double covering of the Lorentz group, which takes on, in fact, half-integer value, and indicates even multiplicity for the normal Zeeman splittings. Moreover, the manifest covariance of the formalism guarantees that the splitting of the spectrum will be independent of the observer.

## 4 The Stark Effect

For the electric-like field with $`F^{\mu \nu }F_{\mu \nu }<0`$, we may find a frame in which the interaction is purely electric, leading to the covariant formulation of the Stark effect. In this case, we find from (93) that the first order perturbation is

$$\frac{e}{4m}F_{\alpha \beta }X^{\alpha \beta }=\frac{e}{2m}E^jih_n\left(\lambda _{0j}\right)$$
(97)
and the electric field couples to the boost generators, which are off-diagonal, non-compact, and anti-Hermitian . In order to recover the usual Stark level splitting, we propose a second contribution to the perturbation, given by the scalar potential

$$V^{}(x,n)=e\left[\epsilon ^\mu \left(x_\mu +r_0n_\mu \right)\right],$$
(98)
where $`\epsilon ^\mu `$ is a constant four-vector. Together, the perturbation is

$$\mathrm{K}^{}=\frac{e}{2m}E^1ih_n\left(\lambda _{01}\right)+e\epsilon ^1\left(x_1+r_0n_1\right),$$
(99)
where we have taken the fields along the $`1`$-axis.

We first consider separately the contribution from the usual electric field; that is, we take $`\epsilon ^1=0`$ in (99). The matrix elements for the boost generators follow from directly their algebraic properties , and so

$`<n_a^{}\mathrm{}^{}n^{}L^{}q^{}c_2^{}|`$ $`ih_n\left(\lambda _{01}\right)|n_a\mathrm{}nLqc_2>=\delta _{qq^{}}\delta _{nn^{}}\delta _\mathrm{}^{},\mathrm{}\delta _{n_{a^{},}n_a}\delta (c_2c_2^{})`$
$`\times `$ $`\left[iC_L\sqrt{L^2q^2}\delta _{L^{},L1}iA_Lq\delta _{L^{},L}iC_{L+1}\sqrt{(L+1)^2q^2}\delta _{L^{},L+1}\right]`$ (100)
where

$`iC_L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{L}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\left(L^2\widehat{n}^2\right)\left(L^2+c_2^2/\widehat{n}^2\right)}{4L^21}}}`$ (101)
$`iA_L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ic_2}{L(L+1)}}`$ (102)
$`iC_{L+1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{L+1}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\left((L+1)^2\widehat{n}^2\right)\left((L+1)^2+c_2^2/\widehat{n}^2\right)}{4(L+1)^21}}}.`$ (103)
The contribution to the spectrum becomes

$`<n_a^{}\mathrm{}^{}n^{}L^{}q^{}c_2^{}|`$ $`K^{}|n_a\mathrm{}nLqc_2>={\displaystyle \frac{e}{2m}}E\delta _{n_a^{},n_a}\delta _{qq^{}}\delta _{nn^{}}\delta _\mathrm{}^{},\mathrm{}\delta (c_2c_2^{})`$ (104)
$`\times [{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{L^2q^2}}{L}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\left(L^2\widehat{n}^2\right)\left(L^2+c_2^2/\widehat{n}^2\right)}{4L^21}}}\delta _{L^{},L1}{\displaystyle \frac{ic_2}{L(L+1)}}q\delta _{L^{},L}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{(L+1)^2q^2}}{L+1}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\left((L+1)^2\widehat{n}^2\right)\left((L+1)^2+c_2^2/\widehat{n}^2\right)}{4(L+1)^21}}}\delta _{L^{},L+1}].`$
We consider the contribution of this term to the ground state, with the quantum numbers

$$n=0\mathrm{}=0n_a=0\mathrm{}+n_a=0L=1/2,3/2q=\pm 1/2$$
(105)
where we recall the even multiplicity for the relativistic ground state. Combining (104) and (105),

$`<n_a^{}\mathrm{}^{}n^{}L^{}q^{}c_2^{}|K^{}|n_a\mathrm{}nLqc_2>`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{eE}{2m}}\delta _{n_a^{},n_a}\delta _{qq^{}}\delta _{nn^{}}\delta _\mathrm{}^{},\mathrm{}\delta (c_2c_2^{})`$ (106)
$`\times [(q)({\displaystyle \frac{4ic_2}{3}}\delta _{L,\frac{1}{2}}\delta _{L^{},\frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4ic_2}{15}}\delta _{L,\frac{3}{2}}\delta _{L^{},\frac{3}{2}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4}}+4c_2^2}(\delta _{L,\frac{3}{2}}\delta _{L^{},\frac{1}{2}}\delta _{L,\frac{1}{2}}\delta _{L^{},\frac{3}{2}})]`$
which after diagonalization, provides the following contribution to the spectrum

$$\mathrm{\Delta }K=\pm i\frac{eE}{2m}\left(\frac{6}{15}c_2\pm \sqrt{(\frac{4}{15}c_2)^2+\left(\frac{1}{4}+\frac{4}{9}c_2^2\right)}\right)\underset{c_20}{}\pm i\frac{eE}{4m}$$
(107)
Since the contribution in (107) is pure imaginary, we see that the usual electric field leads to the decay of the ground state.

We now consider the scalar contribution to (99); that is we consider the case in which $`E^1=0`$. The matrix elements for the operators $`x^\mu `$ and $`n^\mu `$ were computed in , and the relevant results are

$`<n_a^{}\mathrm{}^{}n^{}L^{}q^{}c_2^{}|x^1|n_a\mathrm{}nLqc_2>`$ $`=`$ $`<n_a^{}\mathrm{}^{}|\rho |n_a\mathrm{}>{\displaystyle \frac{q}{L(L+1)}}\delta _{qq^{}}\delta _{nn^{}}\delta _{L^{}L}`$ (108)
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{i=\pm 1}{}}E_\mathrm{}n^{(i)}\delta _{\mathrm{}^{}\mathrm{}+i}\delta (c_2c_2^{})`$
where

$$E_\mathrm{}n^{(i)}=\{\begin{array}{c}\left(\mathrm{}n+1\right)\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\mathrm{}+1}\frac{1}{2\mathrm{}^{}+1}\frac{\left(\mathrm{}n\right)!}{\left(\mathrm{}+n\right)!}\frac{\left(\mathrm{}^{}+n\right)!}{\left(\mathrm{}^{}n\right)!}},i=+1\\ \\ \left(\mathrm{}+n\right)\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\mathrm{}+1}\frac{1}{2\mathrm{}^{}+1}\frac{\left(\mathrm{}n\right)!}{\left(\mathrm{}+n\right)!}\frac{\left(\mathrm{}^{}+n\right)!}{\left(\mathrm{}^{}n\right)!}},i=1\end{array}$$
(109)
and

$$<n_a^{}\mathrm{}^{}n^{}L^{}q^{}c_2^{}|n^1|n_a\mathrm{}nLqc_2>=\frac{q}{L(L+1)}\delta _{qq^{}}\delta _{nn^{}}\delta _{LL^{}}\delta _{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}\delta _{n_an_a^{}}\delta (c_2c_2^{}).$$
(110)
Collecting (98), (109), and (110), the perturbative contribution of the scalar term to the spectrum will be,

$`<n_a^{}\mathrm{}^{}n^{}L^{}q^{}c_2^{}|V^{}|n_a\mathrm{}nLqc_2>`$ $`=`$ $`eϵ{\displaystyle \frac{q}{L(L+1)}}\delta _{qq^{}}\delta _{nn^{}}\delta _{L^{}L}\delta (c_2c_2^{})`$ (111)
$`\times `$ $`\left[<n_a^{}\mathrm{}^{}|\rho |n_a\mathrm{}>{\displaystyle \underset{i=\pm 1}{}}E_\mathrm{}n^{(i)}\delta _{\mathrm{}^{}\mathrm{}+i}+r_0\delta _{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}\delta _{n_an_a^{}}\right]`$
Considering specifically the level splitting in the $`2s2p`$ system, with the quantum numbers

$$n=0L=1/2q=\pm 1/2\mathrm{}=0,1n_a=0,1\mathrm{}+n_a=1$$
(112)
we combine (111) and (112) to find

$`<n_a^{}\mathrm{}^{}n^{}L^{}q^{}c_2^{}|V^{}|n_a\mathrm{}nLqc_2>`$ $`=`$ $`eϵ\mathrm{sgn}(q)\delta _{qq^{}}\delta _{nn^{}}\delta _{L^{}L}\delta (c_2c_2^{})`$ (113)
$`\times \left[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}r_0\delta _{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}+2a_0\left(\delta _{\mathrm{}^{},\mathrm{}1}+\delta _{\mathrm{}^{},\mathrm{}+1}\right)\right].`$
where $`a_0=\mathrm{}^2/(me^2)`$ is the Bohr radius, which enters through the expectation value of $`\rho `$ with respect to the radial wavefunctions. After diagonalization, the contribution to the spectrum is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }K=\pm eϵ\left(\frac{2}{3}r_0\pm 2a_0\right),$$
(114)
which may be compared with the standard nonrelativistic result

$$\mathrm{\Delta }K_{\mathrm{nonrelativistic}}=\pm eE\left(3a_0\right).$$
(115)
The free parameter $`r_0`$ appears to be remain for comparison with experiment.

## 5 Interpretations

The calculations in the previous section indicate that in first order perturbation theory, the usual electric field has the effect of causing the covariant bound state to decay, a phenomenon known from the exact, non-perturbative treatment of the Stark effect. However, the observed shifting of the spectral lines, understood semi-classically as the alignment of the bound state’s effective dipole moment in the external electric field, is not reproduced from this contribution. In order to recover the usual Stark splitting, it was necessary to introduce a scalar potential which depends linearly on the position four-vector. This scalar potential has a natural interpretation in the pre-Maxwell electromagnetic theory, which we now present.

Consider the one particle Stueckelberg equation,

$$i_\tau \psi (x,\tau )=\left[\frac{p_\mu p^\mu }{2M}+V(x)\right]\psi (x,\tau ).$$
(116)
Saad, Horwitz, and Arshansky have argued  that the local gauge covariance of equation (116) should include transformations which depend on $`\tau `$, as well as on the spacetime coordinates. This requirement of full gauge covariance leads to a theory of five gauge compensation fields, since gauge transformations are functions on the five dimensional space $`(x,\tau )`$. Under local gauge transformations of the form

$$\psi (x,\tau )e^{ie_0\mathrm{\Lambda }(x,\tau )}\psi (x,\tau )$$
(117)
the equation

$$(i_\tau e_0a_5)\psi (x,\tau )=\frac{1}{2M}(p^\mu e_0a^\mu )(p_\mu e_0a_\mu )\psi (x,\tau )$$
(118)
is covariant, when the compensation fields transform as

$$a_\mu (x,\tau )a_\mu (x,\tau )+_\mu \mathrm{\Lambda }(x,\tau )a_5(x,\tau )a_5(x,\tau )+_\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }(x,\tau ).$$
(119)
The Schrödinger-like equation (118) leads to the five dimensional conserved current

$$_\mu j^\mu +_\tau j^5=0$$
(120)
where

$$j^5=|\psi (x,\tau )|^2j^\mu =\frac{i}{2M}(\psi ^{}(^\mu ie_0a^\mu )\psi \psi (^\mu ie_0a^\mu )\psi ^{}).$$
(121)
In analogy to nonrelativistic quantum mechanics the squared amplitude of the wave function may be interpreted as the probability of finding an event at $`(\tau ,x)`$. Equation (120) may be written as $`_\alpha j^\alpha =0`$, with $`\alpha =0,1,2,3,5`$.

According to (118), we can write the classical Hamiltonian as

$$K=\frac{1}{2M}(p^\mu e_0a^\mu )(p_\mu e_0a_\mu )e_0a_5$$
(122)
and using the Hamilton equations

$$\frac{dx^\mu }{d\tau }=\frac{K}{p_\mu }\frac{dp^\mu }{d\tau }=\frac{K}{x_\mu }$$
(123)
we find

$$M\dot{x}^\mu =(p^\mu e_0a^\mu )$$
(124)
which enables us to write the classical Lagrangian,

$`L`$ $`=`$ $`\dot{x}^\mu p_\mu K`$ (125)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}M\dot{x}^\mu \dot{x}_\mu +e_0\dot{x}^\mu a_\mu +e_0a_5.`$
We may find the Lorentz force  by applying the Euler-Lagrange equations to (125), which in the notation $`\alpha ,\beta =0,1,2,3,5`$, is

$$M\ddot{x}^\mu =f_\nu ^\mu \dot{x}^\nu +f_{\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}5}}^\mu =f_\alpha ^\mu (x,\tau )\dot{x}^\alpha .$$
(126)
where

$$f^{\mu \nu }=^\mu a^\nu ^\nu a^\mu f_{\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}5}}^\mu =^\mu a_5_\tau a^\mu .$$
(127)
The four equations (126) imply

$$\frac{d}{d\tau }(\frac{1}{2}M\dot{x}^2)=M\dot{x}^\mu \ddot{x}_\mu =\dot{x}^\mu (f_{\mu 5}+f_{\mu \nu }\dot{x}^\nu )=\dot{x}^\mu f_{\mu 5}$$
(128)
So, the conditions for the dynamical conservation of $`\dot{x}^2=\mathrm{constant}`$, are

$$f_{5\mu }=0\mathrm{and}_\tau f^{\mu \nu }=0$$
(129)
Thus, the mass-shell relation has the status, classically, of a conservation law (a constant of motion conserved by Noether’s theorem for the $`\tau `$-translation symmetry) rather than a constraint.

When we add as the dynamical term for the gauge field, $`(\lambda /4)f_{\alpha \beta }f^{\alpha \beta }`$ where $`\lambda `$ is a dimensional constant, the equations for the field are found to be

$$_\beta f^{\alpha \beta }=\frac{e_0}{\lambda }j^\alpha =ej^\alpha $$
(130)
$$ϵ^{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta ϵ}_\alpha f_{\beta \gamma }=0$$
(131)
where $`f_{\alpha \beta }=_\alpha a_\beta _\beta a_\alpha `$, and

$`j^\mu (\tau ,y)`$ $`=`$ $`\dot{x}^\mu (\tau )\delta ^4\left(yx(\tau )\right)`$ (132)
$`j^5(\tau ,y)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho (\tau ,y)=\delta ^4\left(yx(\tau )\right).`$ (133)
We identify $`e_0/\lambda `$ as the dimensionless Maxwell charge (it follows from (138) below that $`e_0`$ has dimension of length). The three vector form of the pre-Maxwell equations are

$`𝐞=ej^0+_\tau \epsilon ^0`$ $`\times 𝐞+_0𝐡=0`$
$`\times 𝐡_0𝐞_\tau \epsilon =e𝐣`$ $`𝐡=0`$
$`\epsilon =ej^4_0\epsilon ^0`$ $`\times \epsilon \sigma _\tau 𝐡=0`$
$`\epsilon ^0`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma _\tau 𝐞_0\epsilon `$ (134)
where

$`e_i=f^{0i}`$ $`h_i={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}ϵ_{ijk}f^{jk}`$
$`\epsilon ^i=f^{5i}`$ $`\epsilon ^0=f^{50}`$ (135)
Since the 4-vector part of the current in (121) is not conserved by itself, it may not be the source for the Maxwell field. However, integration of (121) over $`\tau `$, with appropriate boundary conditions, leads to $`_\mu J^\mu =0`$, where

$$J^\mu (x)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\tau j^\mu (x,\tau )$$
(136)
so that we may identify $`J^\mu `$ as the source of the Maxwell field. Under appropriate boundary conditions, integration of (130) over $`\tau `$ implies

$$_\nu F^{\mu \nu }=eJ^\mu ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \lambda }_\mu F_{\nu \rho }=0$$
(137)
where

$$F^{\mu \nu }(x)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\tau f^{\mu \nu }(x,\tau )A^\mu (x)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\tau a^\mu (x,\tau )$$
(138)
so that $`a^\alpha (x,\tau )`$ has been called the pre-Maxwell field.

In the pre-Maxwell theory, interactions take place between events in spacetime rather than between worldlines. Each event, occurring at $`\tau `$, induces a current density in spacetime which disperses for large $`\tau `$, and the continuity equation (120) states that these current densities evolve as the event density $`j^5`$ progresses through spacetime as a function of $`\tau `$. As noted above, if $`j^50`$ as $`|\tau |\mathrm{}`$ (pointwise in spacetime), then the integral of $`j^\mu `$ over $`\tau `$ may be identified with the Maxwell current. This integration has been called concatenation  and provides the link between the event along a worldline and the notion of a particle, whose support is the entire worldline. Concatenation places the electromagnetic field on the zero mass-shell. The Maxwell theory has the character of an equilibrium limit of the microscopic pre-Maxwell theory.

In consideration of the pre-Maxwell theory, the scalar action-at-a-distance potential in the Horwitz-Piron quantum theory, may be seen as an effective interaction resulting from the scalar gauge potential $`a_5`$. This effective interaction follows from the concatenation process, by which microscopic $`\tau `$-dependent evolution is averaged, according to

$$e_0a_5(x,\tau )\underset{average}{}e_0\left[\frac{1}{\lambda }𝑑\tau a_5(x,\tau )\right]=eA_5(x)=V(x)$$
(139)
so that the scalar potential plays the role of the Coulomb potential in nonrelativistic mechanics.

If we consider a scalar potential of the form

$$V^{}(x)=eA^5(x)=e\epsilon ^\mu x_\mu $$
(140)
with constant $`\epsilon ^\mu `$, then — since $`A^\mu (x)`$ is independent of $`\tau `$ — the corresponding the field strength tensor will be

$$F^{5\mu }=^5A^\mu ^\mu A^5=\epsilon ^\mu .$$
(141)
We see from (141) that the choice of scalar potential required to recover the Stark splitting from the covariant bound state theory corresponds precisely to a constant external four-vector electric field $`F^{5\mu }=\epsilon ^\mu `$, analogous to the constant external three-vector electric field $`F^{0j}=E^j`$ which causes the bound state to decay. This interpretation of the Stark effect calculation suggests that the parameterized evolution theories of the Stueckelberg type require the pre-Maxwell electromagnetic theory as a corollary, in order to provide a complete description of known phenomenology.


format: text

text:
# The endomorphism rings of jacobians of cyclic covers of the projective line

## 1. Introduction

We write $`𝐙,𝐐,𝐂`$ for the ring of integers, the field of rational numbers and the field of complex numbers respectively. Recall that a number field is called a CM-field if it is a purely imaginary quadratic extension of a totally real field. Let $`p`$ be an odd prime, $`\zeta _p𝐂`$ a primitive $`p`$th root of unity, $`𝐐(\zeta _p)𝐂`$ the $`p`$th cyclotomic field and $`𝐙[\zeta _p]`$ the ring of integers in $`𝐐(\zeta _p)`$. It is well-known that $`𝐐(\zeta _p)`$ is a CM-field of degree $`p1`$. We write $`𝐅_p`$ for the finite field consisting of $`p`$ elements.

Let $`f(x)𝐂[x]`$ be a polynomial of degree $`n4`$ without multiple roots. Let $`C_{f,p}`$ be a smooth projective model of the smooth affine curve

$$y^p=f(x).$$

It is well-known that the genus $`g(C_{f,p})`$ of $`C_{f,p}`$ is $`(p1)(n1)/2`$ if $`p`$ does not divide $`n`$ and $`(p1)(n2)/2`$ if it does. The map

$$(x,y)(x,\zeta _py)$$

gives rise to a non-trivial birational automorphism

$$\delta _p:C_{f,p}C_{f,p}$$

of period $`p`$.

The jacobian $`J^{(f,p)}:=J(C_{f,p})`$ of $`C_{f,p}`$ is an abelian variety of dimension $`g(C_{f,p})`$. We write $`\mathrm{End}(J^{(f,p)})`$ for the ring of endomorphisms of $`J^{(f,p)}`$ over $`𝐂`$. By Albanese functoriality, $`\delta _p`$ induces an automorphism of $`J^{(f,p)}`$ which we still denote by $`\delta _p`$; it is known (\[10, p. 149\], \[11, p. 458\]) that

$$\delta _p^{p1}+\mathrm{}+\delta _p+1=0$$

in $`\mathrm{End}(J^{(f,p)})`$. This gives us an embedding

$$𝐙[\zeta _p]𝐙[\delta _p]\mathrm{End}(J^{(f,p)})$$

(\[10, p. 149\], \[11, p. 458\]).

Our main result is the following statement.

###### Theorem 1.1.

Let $`K`$ be a subfield of $`𝐂`$ such that all the coefficients of $`f(x)`$ lie in $`K`$. Assume also that $`f(x)`$ is an irreducible polynomial in $`K[x]`$ of degree $`n5`$ and its Galois group over $`K`$ is either the symmetric group $`𝐒_n`$ or the alternating group $`𝐀_n`$. Then

$$\mathrm{End}(J^{(f,p)})=𝐙[\delta _p]𝐙[\zeta _p].$$

In particular, $`J^{(f,p)}`$ is a simple complex abelian variety.

###### Remark 1.2.

In the case when $`p`$ is a Fermat prime the assertion of Theorem 1.1 is proven in . (Also in  the author proved that if the conditions of Theorem 1.1 hold true then $`𝐙[\delta _p]`$ is a maximal commutative subring in $`\mathrm{End}(J^{(f,p)})`$ for all odd primes $`p`$. See  for a similar result in positive characteristic when $`pn`$ and $`n9`$.) The “opposite” case when $`J^{(f,p)}`$ is an abelian variety of CM-type was studied in . An analogue of Theorem 1.1 for hyperelliptic jacobians (i.e., the case of $`p=2`$) was proven in  (see also , ).

###### Examples 1.3.

1. the polynomial $`x^nx1𝐐[x]`$ has Galois group $`𝐒_n`$ over $`𝐐`$ (\[13, p. 42\]). Therefore the endomorphism ring (over $`𝐂`$) of the jacobian $`J(C)`$ of the curve $`C:y^p=x^nx1`$ is $`𝐙[\zeta _p]`$ if $`n5`$.
2. the Galois group of the “truncated exponential”

$$\mathrm{exp}_n(x):=1+x+\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{x^3}{6}+\mathrm{}+\frac{x^n}{n!}𝐐[x]$$

is either $`𝐒_n`$ or $`𝐀_n`$ . Therefore the endomorphism ring (over $`𝐂`$) of the jacobian $`J(C)`$ of the curve $`C:y^p=\mathrm{exp}_n(x)`$ is $`𝐙[\zeta _p]`$ if $`n5`$.

###### Remark 1.4.

If $`f(x)K[x]`$ then the curve $`C_{f,p}`$ and its jacobian $`J^{(f,p)}`$ are defined over $`K`$. Let $`K_a𝐂`$ be the algebraic closure of $`K`$. Clearly, all endomorphisms of $`J^{(f,p)}`$ are defined over $`K_a`$. This implies that in order to prove Theorem 1.1, it suffices to check that $`𝐙[\delta _p]`$ coincides with the ring of all $`K_a`$-endomorphisms of $`J^{(f,p)}`$ or equivalently, that $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$ coincides with the $`𝐐`$-algebra of $`K_a`$-endomorphisms of $`J^{(f,p)}`$.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 contains auxiliary results about endomorphism algebras of complex abelian varieties. We use them in Section 3 in order to study endomorphisms of $`J^{(f,p)}`$. In Section 4 we prove the main result. The short last Section contains corrigendum to .

The author would like to thank the referee for useful comments.

## 2. Complex abelian varieties

Throughout this section we assume that $`Z`$ is a complex abelian variety of positive dimension. As usual, we write $`\mathrm{End}^0(Z)`$ for the semisimple finite-dimensional $`𝐐`$-algebra $`\mathrm{End}(Z)𝐐`$. We write $`_Z`$ for the center of $`\mathrm{End}^0(Z)`$. It is well-known that $`_Z`$ is a direct product of finitely many number fields. All the fields involved are either totally real number fields or CM-fields. Let $`H_1(Z,𝐐)`$ be the first rational homology group of $`Z`$; it is a $`2\mathrm{d}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{m}(Z)`$-dimensional $`𝐐`$-vector space. By functoriality $`\mathrm{End}^0(Z)`$ acts on $`H_1(Z,𝐐)`$; hence we have an embedding

$$\mathrm{End}^0(Z)\mathrm{End}_𝐐(H_1(Z,𝐐))$$

(which sends $`1`$ to $`1`$).

Suppose $`E`$ is a subfield of $`\mathrm{End}^0(Z)`$ that contains the identity map. Then $`H_1(Z,𝐐)`$ becomes an $`E`$-vector space of dimension

$$d=\frac{2\mathrm{d}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{m}(Z)}{[E:𝐐]}.$$

We write

$$\mathrm{Tr}_E:\mathrm{End}_E(H_1(Z,𝐐))E$$

for the corresponding trace map on the $`E`$-algebra of $`E`$-linear operators in $`H_1(Z,𝐐)`$.

Extending by $`𝐂`$-linearity the action of $`\mathrm{End}^0(Z)`$ and of $`E`$ on the complex cohomology group

$$H_1(Z,𝐐)_𝐐𝐂=H_1(Z,𝐂)$$

of $`Z`$ we get the embeddings

$$E_𝐐𝐂\mathrm{End}^0(Z)_𝐐𝐂\mathrm{End}_𝐂(H_1(Z,𝐂))$$

which provide $`H_1(Z,𝐂)`$ with a natural structure of free $`E_𝐂:=E_𝐐𝐂`$-module of rank $`d`$. If $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_E`$ is the set of embeddings of $`\sigma :E𝐂`$ then it is well-known that

$$E_𝐂=E_𝐐𝐂=\underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}{}E_{E,\sigma }𝐂=\underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}{}𝐂_\sigma $$

where

$$𝐂_\sigma =E_{E,\sigma }𝐂=𝐂.$$

Since $`H_1(Z,𝐂)`$ is a free $`E_𝐂`$-module of rank $`d`$, there is the corresponding trace map

$$\mathrm{Tr}_{E_𝐂}:\mathrm{End}_{E_𝐂}(H_1(Z,𝐂))E_𝐂$$

which coincides on $`E_𝐂`$ with multiplication by $`d`$ and with $`\mathrm{Tr}_E`$ on $`\mathrm{End}_E(H_1(Z,𝐐))`$.

We write $`\mathrm{Lie}(Z)`$ for the tangent space of $`Z`$; it is a $`\mathrm{dim}(Z)`$-dimensional $`𝐂`$-vector space. By functoriality, $`\mathrm{End}^0(Z)`$ and therefore $`E`$ acts on $`\mathrm{Lie}(Z)`$. This provides $`\mathrm{Lie}(Z)`$ with a natural structure of $`E_𝐐𝐂`$-module. We have

$$\mathrm{Lie}(Z)=\underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}{}𝐂_\sigma \mathrm{Lie}(Z)=_{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}\mathrm{Lie}(Z)_\sigma $$

where

$$\mathrm{Lie}(Z)_\sigma =𝐂_\sigma \mathrm{Lie}(Z)=\{x\mathrm{Lie}(Z)ex=\sigma (e)xeE\}.$$

Let us put

$$n_\sigma =n_\sigma (Z,E)=\mathrm{dim}_{𝐂_\sigma }\mathrm{Lie}(Z)_\sigma =\mathrm{dim}_𝐂\mathrm{Lie}(Z)_\sigma .$$

We write $`\sigma ^{}:E𝐂`$ for the composition of $`\sigma :E𝐂`$ and the complex conjugation $`𝐂𝐂`$. The embedding $`\sigma ^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_E`$ is (called) the complex-conjugate of $`\sigma `$.

###### Remark 2.1.

It is well-known (\[1, p. 53\], \[5, p. 84\]) that

$$n_\sigma +n_\sigma ^{}=d\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E.$$

###### Remark 2.2.

Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1(Z)`$ be the space of the differentials of the first kind on $`Z`$. It is well-known that the natural map

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^1(Z)\mathrm{Hom}_𝐂(\mathrm{Lie}(Z),𝐂)$$

is an isomorphism. This isomorphism allows us to define via duality the natural homomorphism

$$E\mathrm{End}_𝐂(\mathrm{Hom}_𝐂(\mathrm{Lie}(Z),𝐂))=\mathrm{End}_𝐂(\mathrm{\Omega }^1(Z)).$$

This provides $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1(Z)`$ with a natural structure of $`E_𝐐𝐂`$-module in such a way that

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^1(Z)_\sigma :=𝐂_\sigma \mathrm{\Omega }^1(Z)\mathrm{Hom}_𝐂(\mathrm{Lie}(Z)_\sigma ,𝐂).$$

In particular,

$$n_\sigma =\mathrm{dim}_𝐂(\mathrm{Lie}(Z)_\sigma )=\mathrm{dim}_𝐂(\mathrm{\Omega }^1(Z)_\sigma ).$$

###### Theorem 2.3.

Suppose $`E`$ contains $`_Z`$. Then the tuple

$$(n_\sigma )_{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}\underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}{}𝐂_\sigma =E_𝐐𝐂$$

lies in $`_Z_𝐐𝐂`$. In particular, if $`E/𝐐`$ is Galois and $`_ZE`$ then there exists a nontrivial automorphism $`\kappa :EE`$ such that $`n_\sigma =n_{\sigma \kappa }`$ for all $`\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E`$.

Proof. The inclusion $`_ZE`$ implies that $`_Z`$ is a field.

There is a canonical Hodge decomposition (\[7, chapter 1\], \[1, pp. 52–53\])

$$H_1(Z,𝐂)=H^{1,0}H^{0,1}$$

where $`H^{1,0}`$ and $`H^{0,1}`$ are mutually “complex conjugate” $`\mathrm{dim}(Z)`$-dimensional complex vector spaces. This splitting is $`\mathrm{End}^0(Z)`$-invariant and the $`\mathrm{End}^0(Z)`$-module $`H^{1,0}`$ is canonically isomorphic to $`\mathrm{Lie}(Z)`$. Let

$$𝔣_H:H_1(Z,𝐂)H_1(Z,𝐂)$$

be the $`𝐂`$-linear operator in $`H_1(Z,𝐂)`$ defined as follows.

$$𝔣_H(x)=xxH^{1,0};𝔣_H(x)=0xH^{0,1}.$$

Clearly, $`𝔣_H`$ commutes with $`\mathrm{End}^0(Z)`$ and therefore with $`E`$. Hence $`𝔣_H`$ may be viewed as an endomorphism of the free $`E_𝐂`$-module $`H_1(Z,𝐂)`$; clearly, its trace is the tuple

$$(n_\sigma )_{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}\underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}{}𝐂_\sigma =E_𝐂.$$

Suppose $`MT=MT_Z\mathrm{GL}_𝐐(H_1(Z,𝐐)))`$ is the Mumford-Tate group of (the rational Hodge structure $`H_1(Z,𝐐)`$ and of) $`Z`$ (). It is a connected reductive algebraic $`𝐐`$-group that contains scalars and could be described as follows (\[16, section 6.3\]). Let $`mt\mathrm{End}_𝐐(H_1(Z,𝐐)))`$ be the $`𝐐`$-Lie algebra of $`MT`$; it is a reductive algebraic linear $`𝐐`$-Lie algebra which contains scalars and its natural faithful representation in $`H_1(Z,𝐐)`$ is completely reducible. In addition, $`mt`$ is the smallest $`𝐐`$-Lie subalgebra in $`\mathrm{End}_𝐐(H_1(Z,𝐐)))`$ enjoying the following property: its complexification

$$mt_𝐂=mt_𝐐𝐂\mathrm{End}_𝐂(H_1(Z,𝐂))$$

contains scalars and $`𝔣_H`$. It is well-known that the centralizer of $`MT`$ (and therefore of $`mt`$) in $`\mathrm{End}_𝐐(H_1(Z,𝐐))`$ coincides with $`\mathrm{End}^0(Z)`$. This implies that the center $`𝔠`$ of $`mt`$ lies in $`_Z`$. Since $`mt`$ is reductive, it splits into a direct sum

$$mt=mt^{ss}𝔠$$

of $`𝔠`$ and a semisimple $`𝐐`$-Lie algebra $`mt^{ss}`$. Clearly, $`mt`$ lies in $`\mathrm{End}_E(H_1(Z,𝐐))`$.

Since $`mt^{ss}`$ is semisimple and the trace map $`\mathrm{Tr}_E`$ is a Lie algebra homomorphism, $`\mathrm{Tr}_E(mt^{ss})=\{0\}`$. Since $`𝔠_ZE`$, we have $`\mathrm{Tr}_E(𝔠)_Z`$ and therefore

$$\mathrm{Tr}_E(mt)_Z.$$

This implies easily that

$$\mathrm{Tr}_{E_𝐂}(mt_𝐂)_Z_𝐐𝐂.$$

In particular, since $`𝔣_Hmt_𝐂`$, we have $`\mathrm{Tr}_{E_𝐂}(𝔣_H)_Z_𝐐𝐂`$. But $`\mathrm{Tr}_{E_𝐂}(𝔣_H)=(n_\sigma )_{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }}`$. This implies easily that

$$(n_\sigma )_{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}=\mathrm{Tr}_{E_𝐂}(𝔣_H)_Z_𝐐𝐂.$$

In order to prove the second assertion of the theorem, notice that its assumptions imply that $`E/_Z`$ is a nontrivial Galois extension. If $`\kappa :EE`$ is a non-identity element of the Galois group $`\mathrm{Gal}(E/_Z)`$ then one may easily check that

$$_Z_𝐐𝐂\{(u)_{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}\underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }_E}{}𝐂=E_𝐂u_\sigma =u_{\sigma \kappa }\sigma \}.$$

## 3. Cyclic covers and jacobians

Throughout this paper we fix an odd prime $`p`$ and assume that $`K`$ is a field of characteristic zero. We fix an algebraic closure $`K_a`$ and write $`\mathrm{Gal}(K)`$ for the absolute Galois group $`\mathrm{Aut}(K_a/K)`$. We also fix in $`K_a`$ a primitive $`p`$th root of unity $`\zeta `$.

Let $`f(x)K[x]`$ be a separable polynomial of degree $`n4`$. We write $`_f`$ for the set of its roots and denote by $`L=L_f=K(_f)K_a`$ the corresponding splitting field. As usual, the Galois group $`\mathrm{Gal}(L/K)`$ is called the Galois group of $`f`$ and denoted by $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)`$. Clearly, $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)`$ permutes elements of $`_f`$ and the natural map of $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)`$ into the group $`\mathrm{Perm}(_f)`$ of all permutations of $`_f`$ is an embedding. We will identify $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)`$ with its image and consider it as a permutation group of $`_f`$. Clearly, $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)`$ is transitive if and only if $`f`$ is irreducible in $`K[x]`$.

We refer the reader to  for the definition and properties of the heart $`(𝐅_p^_f)^{00}`$ over the field $`𝐅_p`$ of the group $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)`$ acting on the set $`_f`$. Here we just recall that $`(𝐅_p^_f)^{00}`$ is a finite-dimensional $`𝐅_p`$-vector space provided with a natural structure of $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)`$-module.

Let $`C=C_{f,p}`$ be the smooth projective model of the smooth affine $`K`$-curve

$$y^p=f(x).$$

So $`C`$ is a smooth projective curve defined over $`K`$. The rational function $`xK(C)`$ defines a finite cover $`\pi :C𝐏^1`$ of degree $`p`$. Let $`B^{}C(K_a)`$ be the set of ramification points. Clearly, the restriction of $`\pi `$ to $`B^{}`$ is an injective map $`B^{}𝐏^1(K_a)`$, whose image is the disjoint union of $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`_f`$ if $`p`$ does not divide $`\mathrm{deg}(f)`$ and just $`_f`$ if it does. We write

$$B=\pi ^1(_f)=\{(\alpha ,0)\alpha _f\}B^{}C(K_a).$$

Clearly, $`\pi `$ is ramified at each point of $`B`$ with ramification index $`p`$. We have $`B^{}=B`$ if and only if $`n`$ is divisible by $`p`$. If $`n`$ is not divisible by $`p`$ then $`B^{}`$ is the disjoint union of $`B`$ and a single point $`\mathrm{}^{}:=\pi ^1(\mathrm{})`$. In addition, the ramification index of $`\pi `$ at $`\pi ^1(\mathrm{})`$ is also $`p`$. Using Hurwitz’s formula, one may easily compute the genus $`g=g(C)=g(C_{p,f})`$ of $`C`$ (\[4, pp. 401–402\], \[14, proposition 1 on p. 3359\], \[10, p. 148\]). Namely, $`g`$ is $`(p1)(n1)/2`$ if $`p`$ does not divide $`n`$ and $`(p1)(n2)/2`$ if it does.

###### Remark 3.1.

Assume that $`p`$ does not divide $`n`$ and consider the plane triangle (Newton polygon)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{n,p}:=\{(j,i)0j,0i,pj+ninp\}$$

with the vertices $`(0,0)`$, $`(0,p)`$ and $`(n,0)`$. Let $`L_{n,p}`$ be the set of integer points in the interior of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{n,p}`$. One may easily check that $`g`$ coincides with the number of elements of $`L_{n,p}`$. It is also clear that for each $`(j,i)L_{n,p}`$

$$1jn1;1ip1;p(j1)+(j+1)n(pi).$$

Elementary calculations (\[4, theorem 3 on p. 403\]) show that

$$\omega _{j,i}:=x^{j1}dx/y^{pi}=x^{j1}y^idx/y^p=x^{j1}y^{i1}dx/y^{p1}$$

is a differential of the first kind on $`C`$ for each $`(j,i)L_{n,p}`$. This implies easily that the collection $`\{\omega _{j,i}\}_{(j,i)L_{n,p}}`$ is a basis in the space of differentials of the first kind on $`C`$.

There is a non-trivial birational $`K_a`$-automorphism of $`C`$

$$\delta _p:(x,y)(x,\zeta y).$$

Clearly, $`\delta _p^p`$ is the identity map and the set of fixed points of $`\delta _p`$ coincides with $`B^{}`$.

Let $`J^{(f,p)}=J(C)=J(C_{f,p})`$ be the jacobian of $`C`$. It is a $`g`$-dimensional abelian variety defined over $`K`$ and one may view (via Albanese functoriality) $`\delta _p`$ as an element of

$$\mathrm{Aut}(C)\mathrm{Aut}(J(C))\mathrm{End}(J(C))$$

such that $`\delta _p\mathrm{Id}`$ but $`\delta _p^p=\mathrm{Id}`$ where $`\mathrm{Id}`$ is the identity endomorphism of $`J(C)`$. Here $`\mathrm{Aut}(C)`$ stands for the group of $`K_a`$-automorphisms of $`C`$, $`\mathrm{Aut}(J(C))`$ stands for the group of $`K_a`$-automorphisms of $`J(C)`$ and $`\mathrm{End}(J(C))`$ stands for the ring of all $`K_a`$-endomorphisms of $`J(C)`$. As usual, we write $`\mathrm{End}^0(J(C))=\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})`$ for the corresponding $`𝐐`$-algebra $`\mathrm{End}(J(C))𝐐`$.

###### Lemma 3.2.

$`\mathrm{Id}+\delta _p+\mathrm{}+\delta _p^{p1}=0`$ in $`\mathrm{End}(J(C))`$. Therefore the subring $`𝐙[\delta _p]\mathrm{End}(J(C))`$ is isomorphic to the ring $`𝐙[\zeta _p]`$ of integers in the $`p`$th cyclotomic field $`𝐐(\zeta _p)`$. The $`𝐐`$-subalgebra $`𝐐[\delta _p]\mathrm{End}^0(J(C))=\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})`$ is isomorphic to $`𝐐(\zeta _p)`$.

Proof. See \[10, p. 149\], \[11, p. 458\].

###### Remark 3.3.

If $`K`$ contains $`\zeta `$ then the Galois modules $`(𝐅_p^_f)^{00}`$ and $`\mathrm{ker}(\mathrm{Id}\delta _p)`$ are canonically isomorphic (\[10, proposition 6.2\], \[11, proposition 3.2\]).

###### Remark 3.4.

Recall that $`p`$ is odd and assume that $`n=\mathrm{deg}(f)`$ is divisible by $`p`$ say, $`n=pm`$ for some positive integer $`m`$. Since $`n4`$, we conclude that $`n5`$.

Let $`\alpha K_a`$ be a root of $`f`$ and $`K_1=K(\alpha )`$ be the corresponding subfield of $`K_a`$. We have $`f(x)=(x\alpha )f_1(x)`$ with $`f_1(x)K_1[x]`$. Clearly, $`f_1(x)`$ is a separable polynomial over $`K_1`$ of degree $`pm1=n14`$. It is also clear that the polynomials

$$h(x)=f_1(x+\alpha ),h_1(x)=x^{n1}h(1/x)K_1[x]$$

are separable of the same degree $`pm1=n14`$. The standard substitution

$$x_1=1/(x\alpha ),y_1=y/(x\alpha )^m$$

establishes a birational isomorphism between $`C_{f,p}`$ and a curve

$$C_{h_1}:y_1^p=h_1(x_1)$$

(see \[14, p. 3359\]). But $`\mathrm{deg}(h_1)=pm1`$ is not divisible by $`p`$. Clearly, this isomorphism commutes with the actions of $`\delta _p`$.

###### Theorem 3.5.

Suppose $`n4`$. Assume that $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$ is a maximal commutative subalgebra in $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})`$. Then the center $``$ of $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})`$ is a CM-subfield of $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$.

Proof. This is theorem 3.8 of .

###### Theorem 3.6.

Suppose $`n4`$. Assume that $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$ is a maximal commutative subalgebra in $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})`$. Then $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})=𝐐[\delta _p]𝐐(\zeta _p)`$ and therefore $`\mathrm{End}(J^{(f,p)})=𝐙[\delta _p]𝐙[\zeta _p]`$.

Proof. Let $`=_{J^{(f,p)}}`$ be the center of $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})`$. We know that $``$ is a CM-subfield of $`E:=𝐐[\delta _p]`$.

Replacing, if necessary, $`K`$ by its subfield (finitely) generated over $`𝐐`$ by all the coefficients of $`f`$, we may assume that $`K`$ (and therefore $`K_a`$) is isomorphic to a subfield of the field $`𝐂`$ of complex numbers. So, $`KK_a𝐂`$. We may also assume that $`\zeta =\zeta _p`$ and consider $`C_{(f,p)}`$ as complex projective curve and its jacobian $`J^{(f,p)}`$ as complex abelian variety.

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{\Sigma }_E`$ be the set of all field embeddings $`\sigma :E=𝐐[\delta _p]𝐂`$. We are going to apply Theorem 2.3 to $`Z=J^{(f,p)}`$ and $`E=𝐐[\delta _p]`$. In order to do that we need to get some information about the multiplicities

$$n_\sigma =n_\sigma (Z,E)=n_\sigma (J^{(f,p)},𝐐[\delta _p]).$$

Remark 2.2 allows us to do it, using the action of $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$ on the space $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1(J^{(f,p)})`$ of differentials of the first kind on $`J^{(f,p)}`$.

Recall that if $`\sigma ^{}:𝐐[\delta _p]𝐂`$ is the embedding complex conjugate to $`\sigma `$ then, by Remark 2.1,

$$n_\sigma +n_\sigma ^{}=\frac{2\mathrm{d}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{m}(J^{(f,p)})}{p1},$$

since $`[𝐐[\delta _p]:𝐐]=p1`$. Notice also that for each $`\sigma :𝐐[\delta _p]𝐂`$

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^1(J^{(f,p)})_\sigma =\{\omega \mathrm{\Omega }^1(J^{(f,p)})\delta _p(\omega )=\sigma (\delta _p)\omega \}.$$

In other words, $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1(J^{(f,p)})_\sigma `$ is the eigenspace corresponding to the eigenvalue $`\sigma (\delta _p)`$ of $`\delta _p`$ and $`n_\sigma `$ is the multiplicity of the eigenvalue $`\sigma (\delta _p)`$.

Let $`i<p`$ be a positive integer and $`\sigma _i:𝐐[\delta _p]𝐂`$ be the embedding which sends $`\delta _p`$ to $`\zeta ^i`$. Obviously, the complex conjugate of $`\sigma _i`$ coincides with $`\sigma _{pi}`$. In addition, for each $`\sigma `$ there exists precisely one $`i`$ such that $`\sigma =\sigma _i`$. Clearly, $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1(J^{(f,p)})_{\sigma _i}`$ is the eigenspace of $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1(J^{(f,p)})`$ attached to the eigenvalue $`\zeta ^i`$ of $`\delta _p`$. Therefore $`n_{\sigma _i}`$ coincides with the multiplicity of the eigenvalue $`\zeta ^i`$.

Let $`P_0`$ be one of the $`\delta _p`$-invariant points (i.e., a ramification point for $`\pi `$) of $`C_{f,p}(K_a)C_{f,p}(𝐂)`$. Then

$$\tau :C_{f,p}J^{(f,p)},P\mathrm{cl}((P)(P_0))$$

is an embedding of complex algebraic varieties and it is well-known that the induced map

$$\tau ^{}:\mathrm{\Omega }^1(J^{(f,p)})\mathrm{\Omega }^1(C_{f,p})$$

is a $`𝐂`$-linear isomorphism obviously commuting with the actions of $`\delta _p`$. (Here $`\mathrm{cl}`$ stands for the linear equivalence class.) This implies that $`n_{\sigma _i}`$ coincides with the dimension of the eigenspace of $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1(C_{(f,p)})`$ attached to the eigenvalue $`\zeta ^i`$ of $`\delta _p`$.

###### Remark 3.7.

Clearly, if for some positive integer $`j`$ the differential $`x^{j1}dx/y^{pi}`$ lies in $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1(C_{(f,p)})`$ then it is an eigenvector of $`\delta _p`$ with eigenvalue $`\zeta ^i`$. Now assume that $`p`$ does not divide $`n`$. It follows from Remark 3.1 that each $`n_\sigma =n_{\sigma _i}`$ could be visualized as the number of interior integer points in $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{n,p}`$ along the corresponding (to $`pi`$) horizontal line. Elementary calculations show that this number is $`[\frac{ni}{p}]`$. This implies that $`n_{\sigma _i}=[\frac{ni}{p}]`$ for $`1ip1`$. Then $`n_{\sigma _i}=0`$ if and only if $`1i[\frac{p}{n}]`$.

Assume, in addition, that $`p<n`$. Clearly, in this case the function $`in_{\sigma _i}=[\frac{ni}{p}]`$ is strictly increasing.

###### Remark 3.8.

Assume that $`p`$ divides $`n`$. Then $`n5`$ and $`n14`$. Clearly, $`p`$ does not divide $`n1`$. Applying Remark 3.4, we get a curve $`C_{h_1,p}:y_1^p=h_1(x_1)`$ with separable polynomial $`h_1(x_1)`$ of degree $`n1`$ and a $`\delta _p`$-equivariant birational isomorphism between $`C_{f,p}`$ and $`C_{h_1,p}`$. This gives us a $`\delta _p`$-equivariant isomorphism

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^1(C_{f,p})\mathrm{\Omega }^1(C_{h_1,p}).$$

Applying Remark 3.7 to $`C_{h_1,p}`$ and $`n1`$ (instead of $`C_{f,p}`$ and $`n`$), we conclude that $`n_{\sigma _i}=[\frac{(n1)i}{p}]`$ for $`1ip1`$. Then $`n_{\sigma _i}=0`$ if and only if $`1i[\frac{p}{n1}]`$.

Assume, in addition, that $`np`$. Clearly, in this case $`n1>p`$ and the function $`in_{\sigma _i}=[\frac{(n1)i}{p}]`$ is strictly increasing.

###### Proposition 3.9.

1. let us assume that $`p>n`$. Then $`n_\sigma =0`$ if and only if $`\sigma =\sigma _i`$ with $`1i[\frac{(p1)}{n}]`$.
2. let us assume that $`p=n`$. Then $`n_\sigma =0`$ if and only if $`\sigma =\sigma _i`$ with $`i=1`$.

Proof of Proposition 3.9. First, assume that $`p>n`$. Clearly, $`p`$ does not divide $`n`$ and therefore $`[\frac{p}{n}]=[\frac{p1}{n}]`$. Now the assertion (i) follows from Remark 3.7.

Now assume that $`n=p`$. By Remark 3.8, $`n_{\sigma _i}=0`$ if and only if $`1i[\frac{p}{n1}]`$. But $`[\frac{p}{n1}]=[\frac{p}{p1}]=1`$.

###### Proposition 3.10.

Let us assume that $`p<n`$. If $`\sigma ,\iota `$ are two embeddings $`𝐐[\delta _p]𝐂`$ then $`n_\sigma =n_\iota `$ if and only if $`\sigma =\iota `$.

Proof of Proposition 3.10. First assume that $`p`$ does not divide $`n`$. Then the assertion follows from (the last sentence of) Remark 3.7.

Now assume that $`p`$ divides $`n`$. Then the assertion follows from (the last sentence of) Remark 3.8.

End of the proof of Theorem 3.6. If $`=𝐐[\delta _p]`$ then we are done, since $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$ is a maximal commutative subalgebra in $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})`$. Assume that $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$. Our goal is to get a contradiction.

Clearly, $`𝐐[\delta _p]/𝐐`$ is a Galois extension. It follows from Theorem 2.3 and Remark 2.2 (applied to $`Z=J^{(f,p)}`$ and $`E=𝐐[\delta _p]`$) that there exists a non-trivial field automorphism $`\kappa :𝐐[\delta _p]𝐐[\delta _p]`$ such that for all $`\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }`$

$$n_\sigma =n_{\sigma \kappa }.$$

Clearly, there exists an integer $`m`$ such that $`1<m<p`$ and $`\kappa (\delta _p)=\delta _p^m`$.

First, assume that $`n>p`$. It follows from Proposition 3.10 that $`\sigma \kappa =\sigma `$ which could not be the case, since $`\kappa `$ is not the identity map. This contradiction proves the Theorem in the case of $`n>p`$.

Second, assume that $`n=p`$. It follows from Proposition 3.9(ii) that $`\sigma _1\kappa =\sigma _1`$ which, by the same token, leads to a contradiction.

Third, assume that $`p>n`$. It follows from Proposition 3.9(i) that the map $`\sigma \sigma \kappa `$ permutes the set $`\{\sigma _i1i[\frac{(p1)}{n}]\}`$. Since $`\kappa (\delta _p)=\delta _p^m`$, $`\sigma _i\kappa (\delta _p)=\zeta ^{im}`$. This implies that multiplication by $`m`$ in $`𝐅_p^{}`$ leaves invariant the subset $`A:=\{imodp𝐅_p1i[\frac{(p1)}{n}]\}`$. This implies that

$$m=m1\left[\frac{(p1)}{n}\right]\frac{(p1)}{4}.$$

Let us consider the arithmetic progression consisting of the $`m`$ integers $`[\frac{(p1)}{n}]+1,\mathrm{},[\frac{(p1)}{n}]+m`$ with difference $`1`$. All its elements lie between $`[\frac{(p1)}{n}]+1`$ and

$$\left[\frac{(p1)}{n}\right]+m2\left[\frac{(p1)}{n}\right]2\frac{(p1)}{4}=\frac{(p1)}{2}<p1.$$

Clearly, there exists a positive integer $`rm`$ such that $`[\frac{(p1)}{n}]+r`$ is divisible by $`m`$, i.e., there is a positive integer $`d`$ such that $`md=[\frac{(p1)}{n}]+r`$. Since $`[\frac{(p1)}{n}]m2`$, we have $`d[\frac{(p1)}{n}]`$ but $`md=[\frac{(p1)}{n}]+r[\frac{(p1)}{n}]+m<p1`$. This implies that $`A`$ is not invariant under multiplication by $`m`$ which gives the desired contradiction.

## 4. Jacobians and their endomorphism rings

Recall that $`K`$ is a field of characteristic zero, $`K_a`$ is its algebraic closure. Suppose $`f(x)K[x]`$ is a polynomial of degree $`n5`$ without multiple roots, $`_fK_a`$ is the set of its roots, $`K(_f)`$ is its splitting field. Let us put

$$\mathrm{Gal}(f)=\mathrm{Gal}(K(_f)/K)\mathrm{Perm}(_f).$$

###### Theorem 4.1 (corollary 5.3 of ).

Let $`p`$ be an odd prime. If $`f(x)K[x]`$ is an irreducible polynomial of degree $`n5`$ and $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)=𝐒_n`$ or $`𝐀_n`$ then $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$ is a maximal commutative subalgebra in $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})`$ and the center of $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})`$ is a CM-subfield of $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$.

Combining Theorems 4.1 and 3.6, we obtain the following statement.

###### Theorem 4.2.

Let $`p`$ be an odd prime. If $`f(x)K[x]`$ is an irreducible polynomial of degree $`n5`$ and $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)=𝐒_n`$ or $`𝐀_n`$ then $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})=𝐐[\delta _p]`$ and therefore $`\mathrm{End}(J^{(f,p)})=𝐙[\delta _p]𝐙[\zeta _p]`$.

Clearly, Theorem 1.1 is a special case of Theorem 4.2.

###### Example 4.3.

Suppose $`L=𝐂(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n)`$ is the field of rational functions in $`n`$ independent variables $`z_1,\mathrm{},z_n`$ with constant field $`𝐂`$ and $`K=L^{𝐒_n}`$ is the subfield of symmetric functions. Then $`K_a=L_a`$ and

$$f(x)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}(xz_i)K[x]$$

is an irreducible polynomial over $`K`$ with Galois group $`𝐒_n`$. Let $`C`$ be a smooth projective model of the $`K`$-curve $`y^p=f(x)`$ and $`J(C)`$ its jacobian. It follows from Theorem 4.2 that if $`n5`$ then the ring of $`L_a`$-endomorphisms of $`J(C)`$ is $`𝐙[\zeta _p]`$. In particular, the abelian variety $`J(C)`$ is absolutely simple. When $`p=3`$ and $`3n`$ the absolute simplicity of $`J(C)`$ was proven in (\[15, p. 107\]).

###### Example 4.4.

Let $`h(x)𝐂[x]`$ be a Morse polynomial of degree $`n5`$. This means that the derivative $`h^{}(x)`$ of $`h(x)`$ has $`n1`$ distinct roots $`\beta _1,\mathrm{}\beta _{n1}`$ and $`h(\beta _i)h(\beta _j)`$ while $`ij`$. (For example, $`x^nx`$ is a Morse polynomial.) Let $`K=𝐂(z)`$ be the field of rational functions in variable $`z`$ with constant field $`𝐂`$ and $`K_a`$ its algebraic closure. Then a theorem of Hilbert (\[13, theorem 4.4.5, p. 41\]) asserts that the Galois group of $`h(x)z`$ over $`k(z)`$ is $`𝐒_n`$. Let $`C`$ be a smooth projective model of the $`K`$-curve $`y^p=h(x)z`$ and $`J(C)`$ its jacobian. It follows from Theorem 4.2 that the ring of $`K_a`$-endomorphisms of $`J(C)`$ is $`𝐙[\zeta _p]`$. In particular, the abelian variety $`J(C)`$ is absolutely simple.

We refer the reader to  for the definition and basic properties of very simple representations.

###### Theorem 4.5.

Suppose $`p`$ is an odd prime, $`n5`$ and $`K`$ contains a primitive $`p`$th root of unity. If the $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)`$-module $`(𝐅_p^_f)^{00}`$ is very simple then $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$ coincides with its own centralizer in $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})`$.

Proof. See theorem 5.2 of .

###### Theorem 4.6.

Suppose $`p`$ is an odd prime, $`n5`$ and $`K`$ contains a primitive $`p`$th root of unity. If the $`\mathrm{Gal}(f)`$-module $`(𝐅_p^_f)^{00}`$ is very simple then $`\mathrm{End}^0(J^{(f,p)})=𝐐[\delta _p]`$ and therefore $`\mathrm{End}(J^{(f,p)})=𝐙[\delta _p]𝐙[\zeta _p]`$.

Proof. It is an immediate corollary of Theorem 4.5 combined with Theorem 3.6.

## 5. Corrigendum to

Remark 2.1 on p. 94, the last assertion. In general, it is not necessarily true that $`G`$ is doubly transitive \[3, Beispiel 2c\], . However, it becomes true if one assumes additionally that either $`p`$ does not divide $`n`$ or $`G`$ is transitive and $`p`$ is an odd number dividing $`n`$ (\[3, Satz 4a and Satz 11\], \[20, lemma 2.4\]).

Lemma 2.4 on p. 95. Its assertion is essentially contained in Satz 4a of .

Remark 2.5 on p. 95. Its assertion is essentially Hilffsatz 3b of .

Sections 1, 3 and 5. Everywhere $`𝐐(\delta _p)`$ means $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$. (However, it does not make a difference, since $`𝐐[\delta _p]`$ is a field.)