text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The subject of gauge theory on non-commutative spaces has received much attention recently for a variety of reasons. In string theory, interest in the subject was kindled by  where it arose in the context of toroidal compactification of M(atrix) theory corresponding to eleven dimensional supergravity backgrounds with a constant three-form field. In , it was shown that non-commutative gauge theories arise naturally in IIA/B string theory as a certain decoupling limit of D-branes in NS-NS two-form backgrounds. In this paper we shall be interested in the behavior of gauge theories on non-commutative tori. In particular we shall study the question of how smoothly the non-commutative theory depends on the non-commutativity parameter $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ on a spacelike $`T^2`$. Our motivation for addressing this question is that continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ has strong consequences for the behavior of commutative gauge theories, due to the Morita equivalence  between commutative and non-commutative spaces for rational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

The question of smoothness in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ was addressed in part in , following the work of . These authors noticed different high energy behavior for rational and irrational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. As one increases the energy, there is a sequence of T-dual (or Morita equivalent) descriptions such that the theory has a quasi-local description. In the rational case, this sequence terminates above some finite energy, whereas in the irrational case the sequence never terminates. Since any irrational number is arbitrarily close to a rational one, the theory does not depend smoothly on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ from this point of view. On the other hand, if one varies $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ at a fixed energy, then the behavior is essentially smooth. Only at certain isolated values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ does the quasi-local T-dual description change. Note that these are not really phase transition points, and so do not represent any non-smooth behavior of the physics.

In fact, whether or not things depend smoothly on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ seems to depend on the question one asks. For instance, the moduli space of flat connections is independent of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$  (and therefore depends smoothly on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$). However the periodicity of non-commutative gauge fields for instance does not depend smoothly on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. A natural question is whether correlation functions open Wilson lines with fixed transverse momenta depend continuously on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

One way to address the question of continuity is to consider arbitarily close rational values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. For rational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ there is a Morita equivalent description in terms of a $`U(N)`$ Yang-Mills theory with magnetic flux $`m`$ on a commutative torus . The rank $`N`$ and flux $`m`$ of the commutative description differ drastically for arbitarily close rational values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. If for instance one considers the $`U(1)`$ gauge theory on a non-commutative $`T^2`$ with $`\mathrm{\Theta }=c/N`$ for integer $`c`$ and $`N`$, then the dual commutative theory has rank $`N`$ and flux $`m`$ which are solutions of $`aNcm=1`$, where $`a`$ is integer. Thus the commutative dual for $`\mathrm{\Theta }=1/2`$ is a $`U(2)`$ gauge theory, whereas the commutative dual for $`\mathrm{\Theta }=1000/2001`$ is an $`U(2001)`$ gauge theory. It follows that for open Wilson line correlators to depend smoothly on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ – up to some possible isolated phase transition points in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ –, there must be relations between commutative gauge theories of very different rank. For this reason, smooth dependence of correlators on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is a very non-trivial phenomenon. Yet continuity seems likely, at least in cases in which the non-commutative Yang-Mills theory is obtained from string theory, where the NS-NS two form is a continuous background. Comparing the small and large $`N`$ gauge theories is beyond the scope of this paper. However we will be able to check some of the properties implied by smooth $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ dependence in the large $`N`$ expansion of commutative gauge theories.

The T-duality which relates the non-commutative theory to the commutative one maps open Wilson lines of the non-commutative theory to closed Wilson lines wrapping the torus of the commutative theory . Thus the condition that the open Wilson line correlators depend smoothly on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ can be translated into a condition satisfied by correlators of wrapped Wilson loops in the commutative theory. The latter can only depend on certain combinations of $`m`$, $`N`$, the radius $`R`$, the coupling $`g^2`$, and the winding number and transverse momenta of the wrapped Wilson loops. (In asymptotically free theories, $`g^2`$ is replaced by the QCD scale.) We find that the Wilson loop correlators have the required dependence on these variables at leading order in the $`1/N`$ expansion of the strongly coupled four dimensional $`𝒩=4`$ super Yang-Mills theory. In pure two-dimensional Yang-Mills, we shall also find the correct behavior at leading order in the $`1/N`$ expansion. In both cases, the smooth behavior depends crucially on the fact that the magnetic flux behaves as a $`B`$ field modulus in a string description of the Yang-Mills theory.

The organization of this paper is as follows. In section 2 we review the definition of gauge theory on a non-commutative torus. In section 3, we give a simple construction of the Morita equivalence between a $`U(1)`$ gauge theory compactified on a non-commutative $`T^2`$ with rational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ and a $`U(N)`$ Yang-Mills theory on a commutative torus with magnetic flux. Morita equivalence was explicitly shown in generality in . The non-smooth dependence of the gauge field periodicity on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ follows simply from this map. In section 4 we construct the map between open Wilson lines  (including possible local operator insertions) in the non-commutative theory and wrapped Wilson lines in the commutative dual. In section 5 we discuss the correlation functions of wrapped Wilson loops in large N strongly coupled large $`𝒩=4`$ super Yang-Mills theory using the AdS-CFT correspondence, and show that at least to leading order in $`1/N`$ these have the behavior predicted by continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. We also discuss confining Yang-Mills theory in the $`1/N`$ expansion, and find behavior consistent with continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. In section 6 we discuss other possible tests of smooth behavior, and give our conclusions.

## 2 Review of Non-commutative Gauge Theories

Gauge theory on a non-commutative space can be constructed essentially by replacing regular products of functions with Moyal star products. The star product is defined as follows:

$$f(x)g(x)=e^{i\frac{\theta ^{\mu \nu }}{2}\frac{}{x^\mu }\frac{}{y^\nu }}f(x)g(y)|_{yx}.$$
(2.1)
The action of the non-commutative pure $`U(p)`$ Yang-Mills theory is

$$S=\frac{1}{g^2}d^DxTr(_{\mu \nu }(x)+\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mu \nu })(_{\mu \nu }(x)+\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mu \nu })$$
(2.2)
where

$$_{\mu \nu }(x)=_\mu 𝒜_\nu _\nu 𝒜_\mu i(𝒜_\mu 𝒜_\nu 𝒜_\nu 𝒜_\mu )$$
(2.3)
and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a background U(1) term whose significance will become apparent shortly. We shall be interested in the case in which two of the spatial directions $`x^1`$ and $`x^2`$ are non-commutative and compactified on a torus, i.e.

$$x^1x^2x^2x^1=i\theta $$
(2.4)
with $`x^1x^1+2\pi R`$ and $`x^2x^2+2\pi R`$.

The existence and renormalizability of these theories is still an open question, which has been addressed partially . Certain non-commutative $`U(N)`$ gauge theories arise in a decoupling limit  of D-branes in type IIA/B string theory. At least in these cases the theory should exist microscopically rather than just as an effective field theory. An alternative way to try to define the quantum theory uses a lattice regularization .

When compactified on a non-commutative $`T^2`$, these theories exhibit an $`SO(2,2,Z)`$ Morita equivalence which is inherited from string theory T-duality (see ). Morita equivalence has also been demonstrated explicitly without recourse to either string theory or supersymmetry . This equivalence exists at the classical level. The duality group has an $`SL(2,Z)`$ subgroup which acts as follows:

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}m\\ N\end{array}\right)`$ $``$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}m\\ N\end{array}\right)`$ (2.5)
$`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c+d\mathrm{\Theta }}{a+b\mathrm{\Theta }}}`$ (2.6)
$`R^2`$ $``$ $`R^2(a+b\mathrm{\Theta })^2`$ (2.7)
$`g^2`$ $``$ $`g^2(a+b\mathrm{\Theta })`$ (2.8)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ $``$ $`(a+b\mathrm{\Theta })^2\mathrm{\Phi }b(a+b\mathrm{\Theta })`$ (2.9)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }\theta /(2\pi R^2)`$ and $`2\pi R`$ is the circumference of the torus, which for simplicity we take to be square. The magnetic flux is denoted by $`m`$ and $`N`$ is the rank of the gauge group. The background field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is equal to the NS-NS $`B`$-field in the $`\alpha ^{}0`$ limit when $`\mathrm{\Theta }=0`$. If one starts with a non-commutative $`U(1)`$ gauge theory with rational $`\mathrm{\Theta }=c/d`$ (with $`gcd(c,d)=1`$) and vanishing first Chern class, then there is an $`SL(2,Z)`$ transformation of the form

$$T=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)$$
(2.10)
which gives rise to a standard gauge theory with $`\mathrm{\Theta }=0`$. Thus one could take the view that the non-commutative theory exists at least for rational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, and then try to define the theory at irrational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ by approaching it with an infinite sequence of rational numbers. This can only make sense if observables of the theory are arbitrarily close for arbitrarily close rational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. However as pointed out in , the continuity of observables in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ should not be taken for granted.

## 3 Morita equivalence of NC Yang-Mills theory

In this section we explicitly demonstrate Morita equivalence for $`U(1)`$ theories on a torus with rational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. The explicit map has been constructed in  111This map was already hinted at in , although the context of that paper was different.. We review this map and illustrate some of the issues related to continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

We will consider the non-commutative $`U(1)`$ Yang-Mills theory on $`T^2\times R^n`$, with $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{12}=c/N`$. We take the first Chern class and background term to vanish. For simplicity we consider a square torus, with sides of length $`2\pi R^{}`$. There is then an $`SL(2,Z)`$ T-duality

$$T=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& m\\ c& N\end{array}\right)$$
(3.1)
which gives a commutative $`U(N)`$ gauge theory. The gauge coupling and radius of the torus are mapped as follows:

$`g_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=g^2N`$ (3.2)
$`R^{}=NR,`$ (3.3)
where the unprimed quantities are in the commutative theory.

### 3.1 Explicit Form of Morita equivalence

We chose the first Chern class and background term to vanish in the non-commutative $`U(1)`$ gauge theory. In this case, the dual $`U(N)`$ commutative theory has first Chern class $`_{T^2}TrF=2\pi m`$ and a background field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ such that $`_{T^2}Tr(F+\mathrm{\Phi })=0`$. The action is

$$S=\frac{1}{g^2}tr(F\frac{m}{2\pi NR^2})^2.$$
(3.1.1)
To demonstrate Morita equivalence explicitly we start with the pure $`U(N)`$ gauge theory on a commutative $`T^2`$. For a $`U(N)`$ bundle the first Chern class is equal to the ’t Hooft magnetic flux  in the $`SU(N)`$ component of the gauge group, modulo $`N`$ (see e.g. ). We can redefine the $`U(1)`$ part of the gauge field to remove the background term, giving a $`U(1)\times SU(N)/Z_N`$ bundle with ’t Hooft flux $`m`$ and vanishing first Chern class. This redefinition is a matter of convenience in writing down the explicit form of the Morita equivalence, as it will allow us to do a Fourier transform of the gauge potential on a multiple cover of the torus.

The ’t Hooft magnetic flux corresponds to twisted boundary conditions on the torus, characterized by a pair of transition functions. For a ’t Hooft flux $`m`$, we may choose the boundary conditions:

$`A(x^1+2\pi R,x^2)=P^mA(x^1,x^2)P^m`$ (3.1.2)
$`A(x^1,x^2+2\pi R)=QA(x^1,x^2)Q^1`$ (3.1.3)
where

$$Q=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& & & \\ & e^{\frac{2\pi i}{N}}& & \\ & & \mathrm{}& \\ & & & e^{\frac{2\pi i(N1)}{N}}\end{array}\right)$$
(3.1.4)
and

$$P=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 1& & \\ & 0& 1& \\ & & & \mathrm{}\\ 1& & & \end{array}\right)$$
(3.1.5)
$`Q`$ and $`P`$ satisfy

$$PQ=QPe^{\frac{2\pi i}{N}}.$$
(3.1.6)
We restricted ourselves to the case in which $`N`$ and $`m`$ are relatively prime:

$$aNcm=1$$
(3.1.7)
for some integers $`a`$ and $`c`$. Since $`(P^m)^N=Q^N=1`$, the gauge field is strictly periodic on an $`N^2`$ cover of the torus, with periods $`2\pi NR`$. Because the greatest common divisor of $`N`$ and $`m`$ is $`1`$, there is no smaller multiple cover on which the gauge fields are periodic.

A general form for a gauge field satisfying the above boundary conditions is given by

$$A^\mu =\underset{\stackrel{}{r}}{}a_\stackrel{}{r}^\mu Q^{cr_1}P^{r_2}\mathrm{exp}\left(i\pi \frac{c}{N}r_1r_2\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{x}}{NR}\right).$$
(3.1.8)
The phase factor $`\mathrm{exp}i\pi \frac{c}{N}r_1r_2`$ can be absorbed in the definition of $`a_r^\mu `$, but is included for convenience as it will lead to an easily recognizable form for the dual action. The field strength $`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu i[A_\mu ,A_\nu ]`$, may be written as

$$F^{\mu \nu }=\underset{\stackrel{}{r}}{}f_\stackrel{}{r}^{\mu \nu }Q^{cr_1}P^{r_2}\mathrm{exp}\left(i\pi \frac{c}{N}r_1r_2\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{x}}{NR}\right),$$
(3.1.9)
where

$`f_r^{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{i}{NR}}(r^\mu a_r^\nu r^\nu a_r^\mu )`$
$`i{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}}{}}a_{rr^{}}^\mu a_r^{}^\nu \left[\mathrm{exp}\left(i\pi {\displaystyle \frac{c}{N}}(r_2r_1^{}r_1r_2^{})\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(i\pi {\displaystyle \frac{c}{N}}(r_2r_1^{}r_1r_2^{})\right)\right]`$ (3.1.10)
In terms of the modes $`a_r^\mu `$ and $`f_r^{\mu \nu }`$, one can define a dual $`U(1)`$ gauge field which is periodic on a torus with radius $`R^{}=NR`$;

$$𝒜=\underset{r}{}a_r\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{x}}{R^{}}\right)$$
(3.1.11)
and a field strength,

$$=\underset{r}{}f_r\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{x}}{R^{}}\right).$$
(3.1.12)
It is then straightforward to show that

$$_{\mu \nu }=_\mu 𝒜_\nu _\nu 𝒜_\mu i(𝒜_\mu 𝒜_\nu 𝒜_\nu 𝒜_\mu )$$
(3.1.13)
provided that

$$\theta =\frac{c}{N}2\pi R_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}.$$
(3.1.14)
In terms of the dual variables, the action is

$$S=\frac{1}{g_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}_{T_{}^{2}{}_{}{}^{}\times R^n}.$$
(3.1.15)
where the torus has sides of length $`2\pi R^{}`$ and

$$g_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=g^2N.$$
(3.1.16)
Note that the flux of the dual non-commutative $`U(1)`$ field strength vanishes, and that there is no background field in the action.

One consequence of this map is that the non-commutative gauge field $`𝒜`$ is a periodic variable, with period

$$𝒜𝒜+\frac{N}{R^{}}.$$
(3.1.17)
This follows from the periodicity of the commutative gauge field $`AA+1/R`$ and the Morita map. At fixed $`R^{}`$, this period does not vary continuously with $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ since $`N`$ fluctuates wildly between arbitarily close rational values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }=c/N`$.

## 4 Mapping observables

We wish to identify quantities in the non-commutative theory which vary smoothly as a function of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, keeping $`g_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$ and $`R^{}`$ fixed. Via Morita equivalence, the existence of such quantities requires relations between small and large $`N`$ gauge theories.

### 4.1 Wilson loop observables

Among the quantities one might guess vary smoothly with $`\theta `$ are correlation functions of open Wilson lines (see ) at fixed transverse momenta. In the non-commutative theory, open Wilson lines are gauge invariant provided they have a certain transverse momentum. For simplicity we will consider the gauge invariant operators built from straight open Wilson lines, given by

$$\widehat{O}_p=d^2xW(x^ix^i+p_j\theta ^{ij})\mathrm{exp}(i\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{x})$$
(4.1.1)
where $`W(xy)`$ is an open Wilson line, path ordered with respect to the non-commutative star product, and stretching between the points $`x`$ and $`y`$ in the non-commutative plane. Because of the non-commutativity, the term $`\mathrm{exp}(i\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{x})`$ is a translation operator in the direction transverse to $`\stackrel{}{p}`$, which for gauge invariance must relate the two endpoints of the open Wilson line (see  for a more detailed discussion). If one writes the path between the endpoints as $`x(s)=x+\mathrm{\Delta }s`$, where $`s`$ is a parameter on the interval $`[0,1]`$, then

$`W`$ $`=`$ $`P_{}\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle 𝒜}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`1+i\mathrm{\Delta }{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑s𝒜(x+s\mathrm{\Delta })\mathrm{\Delta }^2{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑s{\displaystyle _0^s}𝑑\stackrel{~}{s}𝒜(x+s\mathrm{\Delta })𝒜(x+\stackrel{~}{s}\mathrm{\Delta })+\mathrm{},`$
where we have path ordered from right to left. For concreteness we consider Wilson lines stretching in the $`2`$ direction. Upon compactifying on a torus with a non-commutative parameter $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\frac{c}{N}2\pi R_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$, the gauge invariant open Wilson lines are

$$\widehat{O}_{n_{}^{}{}_{1}{}^{},e_{}^{}{}_{2}{}^{}}=d^2xTrW(x^2,x^2n_{}^{}{}_{1}{}^{}\frac{c}{N}2\pi R^{}+2\pi R^{}e_2^{})\mathrm{exp}(i\frac{n_1^{}x^1}{R^{}})$$
(4.1.3)
where $`n_1^{}`$ and $`e_2^{}`$ are integers. The operator (4.1.3) can be regarded as a creation operator for a state with momentum $`n_1^{}`$ and electric flux $`e_2^{}`$. Note that these operators are invariant under $`𝒜𝒜+N/R^{}`$.

The creation operator for states with ’t Hooft electric flux in the commutative Yang-Mills theory theory are Wilson lines wrapping the torus. In the presence of magnetic flux, these involve the transition functions $`U_i`$  associated to the twisted boundary conditions on the torus. For instance, a Wilson line beginning at the point $`(x^1,x^2)`$ and wrapping the torus $`e_2`$ times in the $`2`$ direction is given by

$$\widehat{O}_{e_2}(x^1)=TrP\mathrm{exp}\left(i_{x^2}^{x^2+2\pi Re_2}A_2𝑑x^2\right)U_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{e_2}.$$
(4.1.4)
We consider the Wilson loop in the fundamental representation, so that $`e_2`$ is the amount of electric flux created by $`W`$. Roughly speaking, the term $`U_2^{e_2}`$ is dual to the factor $`\mathrm{exp}(i\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{x})`$ corresponding to the fractional momentum in the expression for the open Wilson line of the non-commutative theory. The transition functions in this expression are necessary to ensure invariance of the Wilson loop under “small” gauge transformations i.e. those which are generated by the Gauss law operator $`D_iF_{0i}`$. The small gauge transformations $`V_s`$ are those which satisfy the same twisted boundary conditions as the field strength:

$$V_s(x^1,x^2+L^2)=U_2(x^1,x^2)V_s(x^1,x^2)U_2^{}(x^1,x^2).$$
(4.1.5)
One can check that (4.1.4) is independent of $`x^2`$, and that for a U(N) bundle, the Wilson loop (4.1.4) is periodic in $`x^1`$ in spite of the twisted boundary conditions on the gauge field.

### 4.2 Mapping Wilson loops

One can guess how non-commutative open Wilson lines map under Morita equivalence, since, at least in the maximally supersymmetric case, this equivalence is a manifestation of T-duality in string theory. Nevertheless one can explicitly construct this map in the Yang-Mills theory , making no use of supersymmetry. We discuss this map below.

Before writing the explicit transformation, let us consider general properties which give physical intuition into the nature of the Morita map. Consider the $`Z_N\times Z_N`$ set of large gauge transformations in the $`SU(N)`$ component of the commutative theory. These satisfy the following boundary conditions;

$$U(x^1+2\pi R,x^2)=z_1P^mU(x^1,x^2)P^m$$
(4.2.1)
and

$$U(x^1,x^2+2\pi R)=z_2QU(x^1,x^2)Q^1$$
(4.2.2)
where $`z_1`$ and $`z_2`$ are $`Z_N`$ phases $`\mathrm{exp}2\pi ik_1/N`$ and $`\mathrm{exp}2\pi ik_2/N`$ . The eigenvalues of these operators are $`\mathrm{exp}2\pi i\stackrel{}{e}\stackrel{}{k}/N`$ where $`\stackrel{}{e}`$ are the ’t Hooft electric fluxes. An example of a large gauge transformation is

$$U(x)=P$$
(4.2.3)
for which $`k_1=0`$ and $`k_2=1`$. Under $`APAP^1`$, the Fourier modes transform

$$a_\stackrel{}{r}a_\stackrel{}{r}e^{2\pi i\frac{c}{N}r_1}$$
(4.2.4)
In the dual non-commutative theory this corresponds to the translation

$$x_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}x_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}+2\pi R^{}\frac{c}{N}.$$
(4.2.5)
Since translations in the non-commutative theory are generated by the momentum operator $`n_1^{}`$, and the large gauge transformation (4.2.4) in the commutative theory by the electric flux operator $`\stackrel{~}{e}_2`$, we find

$$e^{2\pi i\frac{\stackrel{~}{e}_2}{N}}=e^{2\pi ic\frac{n_1^{}}{N}},$$
(4.2.6)
where $`n^{}`$ is the integer quantized momentum on the non-commutative torus, and $`\stackrel{~}{e}`$ is the $`SU(N)`$ ’t Hooft electric flux. The ’t Hooft flux is only defined modulo $`N`$. Note that in the $`U(N)`$ theory, the Wilson loop in the fundamental representation which wraps a cycle of the torus $`e_2`$ times creates a $`U(1)`$ electric flux $`e_2`$ and an $`SU(N)`$ electric flux $`\stackrel{~}{e}_2`$ which satisfies $`\stackrel{~}{e}_2=e_2modN`$.

As an aside, one consequence of the relation (4.2.6) is that translation invariance in the non-commutative theory may be spontaneously broken upon shrinking a cycle of the torus. In the dual commutative theory, this corresponds to spontaneous breaking of a $`Z_N`$ symmetry upon shrinking a cycle of the dual torus. This phenomenon corresponds to a finite temperature deconfinement transition, which is known to occur in the pure Yang-Mills theory .

The explicit map between commutative Wilson loops and non-commutative open Wilson lines lines with winding number and transverse momentum is described in detail in the appendix. We can summarize the map as follows. Let us define the operator $`\widehat{O}_{n_1,e_2}`$ to be the closed Wilson line in the fundamental representation in the commutative $`U(N)`$ theory, with a transverse momentum $`n_1`$ and winding number $`e_2`$:

$$\widehat{O}_{n_1,e_2}=𝑑x^1\mathrm{exp}(i\frac{n_1x^1}{R})TrW(x^1,x^2x^2+2\pi Re_2)Q^{e_2}\mathrm{exp}(i\frac{me_2x^1}{NR}).$$
(4.2.7)
Here $`W`$ is the path ordered exponential between the indicated points, where the path is taken to be a straight line. The term $`U_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{e_2}=Q^{e_2}\mathrm{exp}(i\frac{me_2x^1}{NR})`$ is the transition function required for gauge invariance. Let us also define the operator $`\widehat{O}_{n_1^{},e_2^{}}^{}`$ to be an open Wilson line of the dual non-commutative theory;

$$\widehat{O}_{n_1^{},e_2^{}}^{}=𝑑x^1𝑑x^2W(x^1,x^2x^2+2\pi R^{}e_2^{}+2\pi R\frac{c}{N}n_1^{})\mathrm{exp}(i\frac{n_1^{}x^1}{R^{}})$$
(4.2.8)
The map is then

$$O_{n_1^{},e_2^{}}^{}=2\pi RN\widehat{O}_{n_1,e_2}$$
(4.2.9)
where the electric charges and momenta are related by an $`SL(2,Z)`$ matrix;

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}e_2\\ n_1\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}N& c\\ m& a\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}e_2^{}\\ n_1^{}\end{array}\right)$$
(4.2.10)
Note that for the maximally supersymmetric case, the relation (4.2.10) could have been arrived at from T-duality considerations in string theory. However we wish to emphasize that the Morita equivalence and the mapping of Wilson lines discussed above holds even for pure Yang-Mills theory.

### 4.3 Other Operators

One can extend this map to include the insertion of local gauge covariant operators. Consider for instance the operator of the non-commutative theory given by

$$d^2x_{\mu \nu }(x^1,x^2)W(x^1,x^2x^2+2\pi R^{}\frac{c}{N}n_1^{}+2\pi R^{}e_2^{})\mathrm{exp}(i\frac{n_1x^1}{R^{}})$$
(4.3.1)
Here the end point of the open Wilson line begins at the location of the local operator insertion. However for the straight Wilson line (see ) the operator is unchanged if the local operator is inserted anywhere within the $`P^{}`$ ordered Wilson line. The commutative dual of this operator is

$$𝑑x^1𝑑x^2TrF_{\mu \nu }(x^1,x^2)W(x^1,x^2x^2+2\pi Re_2)\mathrm{exp}(i\frac{n_1x^1}{R}).$$
(4.3.2)
Note that on the commutative side, we could have integrated over $`x^2`$ with a factor $`\mathrm{exp}(in_2x^2/R)`$. The non-commutative dual would then be an open Wilson lines with a non-zero longitudinal momentum. On a torus with rational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, it is possible to give a longitudinal momentum to the open Wilson line because gauge invariance only requires the momentum factor to be equivalent to a translation operator relating the endpoints of the open Wilson line (see figure 1). In addition to the longitudinal translation generated by the transverse momentum factor, one can translate all the way around the torus in the transverse direction. This corresponds to the inclusion of a longitudinal momentum $`n_2^{}=Nn_2`$.

Similarly, we can construct the non-commutative duals of the $`TrF^2(x)`$ operators in the commutative theory using the explicit map between the gauge fields in the two theories 222We thank Wati Taylor for pointing out this possibility to us.. A straightforward calculation gives the following operator in terms of the Fourier modes of the field strength:

$`TrF^2(x)=N{\displaystyle \underset{k,n}{}}f_{Nkn}^{\mu \nu }f_n^{\mu \nu }e^{\pi icNk_1k_2}e^{\pi ic(n_1k_2k_1n_2)}e^{\frac{i\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{x}}{R}}.`$ (4.3.3)
In the non-commutative theory this yields a family of gauge invariant operators that depend explicitly on $`N`$. There is an obvious generalization to operators $`TrF^n(x)`$, which yield new gauge invariant operators in non-commutative gauge theories with rational non-commutativity parameter.

## 5 Continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$

Continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ depends on the existence of very non-trivial relations between large and small $`N`$ gauge theories. For instance, if $`\mathrm{\Theta }=1/2`$, the commutative dual has $`N=2`$ and $`m=1`$, however if $`\mathrm{\Theta }=1000/2001`$ the commutative dual has $`N=2001`$ and $`m=2`$. Furthermore even at the classical level, the non-commutative theory on a torus does not have a manifestly smooth dependence on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, since the gauge potential is periodic, with periodicity given by (3.1.17). Nevertheless, when considering gauge invariant observables we will find smooth dependence on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, at least in the instances which we have thus far considered.

### 5.1 Energies

A first fairly trivial observation is that the BPS mass formulae in Yang-Mills theory  with $`16`$ supercharges is consistent with continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. One can ask whether the same holds true for the energy of an electric flux line in a confining Yang-Mills theory. Consider the pure four-dimensional commutative Yang-Mills theory on the space $`T^2\times S^1`$ where the $`S^1`$ has size $`L_3`$ and the $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ parameter lives on the $`T^2`$ which has radii equal to $`R`$. For sufficiently large $`R`$, the principle contribution to the energy of an electric flux on $`T^2`$ comes from the confined flux lines in the $`SU(N)/Z_N`$ component of the theory. The energy of an electric flux $`e_i`$ is given by

$$E(e_i)=\mathrm{\Lambda }^2Re_i+\mathrm{}.$$
(5.1.1)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the QCD scale and the omitted terms are subleading in $`1/\mathrm{\Lambda }R`$. In the dual $`U(1)`$ non-commutative theory, this is the energy of a state created by an open Wilson line. For concreteness, consider an electric flux $`e_2`$. Continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ in the non-commutative theory implies that the energy of the electric flux can be written in terms of variables in the dual $`U(1)`$ non-commutative theory which vary smoothly or are fixed as one varies $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. Using formula (4.2.10) the energy of the commutative electric flux can be written as

$$E(e_2)=\mathrm{\Lambda }^2R^{}(\frac{c}{N}n_1^{}+e_2^{})+\mathrm{}.$$
(5.1.2)
Thus the energy is consistent with continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }=c/N`$ (at least to leading order in $`1/\mathrm{\Lambda }R`$) provided the QCD scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ can be written in terms of variables in the non-commutative dual which do not differ for arbitarily close values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }=c/N`$. In two-dimensional QCD, the string tension is $`g^2N`$ or $`g_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$, which can indeed be held fixed as one varies $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. In four dimensions, we can address this question in the context of a confining vacuum of the $`𝒩=1^{}`$ SYM theory. This theory is obtained by deforming the $`𝒩=4`$ theory with a mass term, which in $`𝒩=1`$ language adds $`\mathrm{\Delta }W=\frac{1}{g^2}MTrX^2`$ to the superpotential. Morita equivalence treats the adjoint scalars in the same way as the gauge fields, so that the superpotential of the non-commutative dual is deformed by a term $`\frac{1}{g_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}M^{}𝒳^2`$ with $`M^{}=M`$. At very high energies, the $`𝒩=1^{}`$ theory is conformal, with gauge coupling $`g^2`$ (in the commutative description), while below the scale $`M`$ the coupling runs according to the QCD beta-function. For small ’t Hooft coupling, the QCD scale is given by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=Me^{\frac{1}{g^2N}}$$
(5.1.3)
This can be written in terms of non-commutative variables as

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=M^{}e^{\frac{1}{g_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}},$$
(5.1.4)
which is fixed as one varies $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

At this stage we have only checked the continuity of energies in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ to leading order in an $`1/\mathrm{\Lambda }R`$ expansion. It may be that these results do not persist beyond leading order. For a very small torus, one could investigate the question of continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ perturbatively, but we shall not do so here.

### 5.2 Wilson loop correlators in $`𝒩=4`$ SYM.

Other quantities in the non-commutative theory which one might expect to depend smoothly on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ are the correlation functions of open Wilson lines. We consider the correlation functions

$`G_{n_1,e_2}`$ $``$ $`<\widehat{O}_{n_1,e_2}\widehat{O}_{n_1,e_2}>`$
$`G_{n_1^{},e_2^{}}^{}`$ $``$ $`<\widehat{O}_{n_1^{},e_2^{}}^{}\widehat{O}_{n_1^{},e_2^{}}^{}>`$ (5.2.1)
of wrapped Wilson lines in the commutative theory and open Wilson lines in the non-commutative theory respectively. Via the duality map (4.2.9), continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ requires that the correlator of closed Wilson loops wrapping the torus in the commutative description has the following functional form

$`G_{n_1,e_2}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi RN)^2}}G_{n_1^{},e_2^{}}^{}=f(\mathrm{\Theta },g_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2},R^{},n_1^{},e_2^{})=`$
$`f({\displaystyle \frac{c}{N}},g^2N,RN,Nn_1me_2,cn_1+ae_2)`$ (5.2.2)
Using $`aNcm=1`$ and dimensional analysis, this can be rewritten as

$$G_{n_1,e_2}=(e_2R)^2\stackrel{~}{f}(\frac{c}{N},g^2N,Nn_1me_2,\frac{e_2}{N})$$
(5.2.3)
for some function $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$. Any other functional form would lead, via Morita equivalence, to a non-commutative theory in which the Wilson loop correlator differs between arbitarily close rational values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

One could try to verify continuity perturbatively, since Morita equivalence is a classical duality. At leading order, the result for the correlator in the non-commutative theory is independent of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ (see  ). Therefore, via Morita equivalence, the commutative theory has the right functional behavior at leading order (5.2.3). It would be interesting to check whether (5.2.3) is satisfied in a loop computation, although we will not do this here. In what follows, we shall verify the behavior predicted by continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ to leading order in the $`1/N`$ expansion of strongly coupled $`𝒩=4`$ $`U(N)`$ Yang-Mills theory.

In the commutative $`𝒩=4`$ $`U(N)`$ Yang-Mills theory, the correlator of Wilson loops on $`T^2`$ can be computed at large $`N`$ and strong ’t Hooft coupling using the AdS-CFT correspondence  and the method of  . In this case one would at least expect that when a supergravity dual of the non-commutative theory exists (see ), and the geometry depends smoothly on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, the formula (5.2.3) ought to be satisfied. Note that the supergravity description is generically not valid in all T-dual descriptions of the theory (although there may be overlapping regions of validity). We shall look for the smooth behavior (5.2.3) directly in the supergravity description of the commutative theory. Consider the supergravity background which is dual to the commutative Yang-Mills theory with ’t Hooft flux $`m`$. The supergravity description is valid in the large $`N`$ limit at fixed but large ’t Hooft coupling. The background is given by

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha ^{}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{U^2}{\sqrt{\lambda }}}(dt^2+dx_1^2+dx_2^2+dx_3^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\lambda }dU^2}{U^2}}+\sqrt{\lambda }d\mathrm{\Omega }_5^2\right]`$
$`e^\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{4\pi N}}`$
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi R^2}}dx^1dx^2`$ (5.2.4)
where $`\lambda =4\pi g^2N`$ and $`x^1`$ and $`x^2`$ are compactified on a square torus of radius $`R`$. Note that the $`B`$ field takes precisely the value we imposed in section 3 to cancel the $`U(1)`$ flux. The correlator of Wilson loops can be obtained by summing over minimal area surfaces in $`AdS_5\times S_5`$ with boundaries given by the Wilson loops at the boundary of AdS space. 333 As in , we consider Wilson loop operators involving the scalar fields of the $`𝒩=4`$ SYM theory: $`W=Tr\mathrm{exp}\left(iA+ϵ_IX^I\right)`$ for fixed $`ϵ`$. This amounts to fixing the boundary of the minimal surface at a point in the $`S^5`$. The Morita map applies as before. Note that there is no $`1/N`$ in front of the Wilson loop operator we consider. With this normalization the correlator of wrapped Wilson loops is of order $`1`$ at large $`N`$. Consider oppositely oriented Wilson loops wrapping the $`2`$-direction $`e_2`$ times at the points $`x^1=x_+^1`$ and $`x_{}^1`$ as in figure 2.

The minimal area surfaces have the form

$`x^2(\sigma ,\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi Re_2\sigma `$
$`x^1(\sigma ,\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`(x_+^1x_{}^1+2\pi Rn)\tau `$
$`U(\sigma ,\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`U(\tau ),`$ (5.2.5)
where $`\sigma `$ and $`\tau `$ are defined on the interval $`[0,1]`$ and $`n`$ is an integer characterizing the winding number of the minimal surface in the $`x^1`$ direction. $`U(\tau )`$ is determined by extremizing the world sheet action

$$S_n=\sqrt{detG}=2\pi Re_2𝑑\tau \sqrt{\left(\frac{U}{\tau }\right)^2+\frac{U^4}{\lambda }\left|x_+^1x_{}^1+2\pi Rn\right|^2}.$$
(5.2.6)
Although the context is somewhat different, this is precisely the same minimization problem as the one solved in . In the limit in which the boundaries are at $`U\mathrm{}`$, the world sheet action is divergent until making an appropriate subtraction. The result obtained after this subtraction can be extracted from  and is given by

$$S_n(x_+^1x_{}^1)=\frac{2\pi Re_2(4\pi )^2(2\lambda )^{1/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{4})^4|x_+^1x_{}^1+2\pi Rn|}$$
(5.2.7)
In position space, the correlator of Wilson loops at strong ’t Hooft coupling and leading order in the $`1/N`$ expansion is given formally by

$$G_{e_2}(x_+^1,x_{}^1)=e_2\underset{n}{}\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{me_2(x_+^1x_{}^1+2\pi Rn)}{NR}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(S_n(x_+^1x_{}^1)\right)$$
(5.2.8)
Several comments are in order. First, the phase factor proportional to the magnetic flux arises because of the relation between the flux and the NS-NS B field modulus. Note that for $`m=0modN`$, the sum on the index $`n`$ is divergent, due to the long range correlations of the $`𝒩=4`$ theory. We shall just consider the formal sum for the moment.

Second, the overall factor of $`e_2`$ in (5.2.8) requires some explanation. The Wilson loops forming the boundary of the minimal surface correspond to an element of the permutation group $`𝒮_{e_2}`$ which is a cycle of length $`e_2`$. The easiest way to understand the overall factor of $`e_2`$ in (5.2.8) is to infinitesimally deform both Wilson loops, so that the $`e_2`$ cycles of each do not lie on top of each other. For each Wilson loop, let us label the points at $`x^2=0`$ by an index $`i\{1,\mathrm{},e_2\}`$, and choose a point $`i=1`$ on one of the Wilson loops $`\gamma ^{}`$. As one follows the $`x^2=0`$ path on the world sheet from $`\gamma ^{}`$ to the other Wilson loop $`\gamma ^+`$, there are $`e_2`$ possible end points on $`\gamma ^+`$. These are topologically distinct when the boundaries are held fixed. One can also understand the factor of $`e_2`$ in terms of topologically distinct planar diagrams, as illustrated in figure 3. This factor of $`e_2`$ will prove essential for smooth dependence of the non-commutative dual on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

Note that due to the sum on $`n`$ in (5.2.8), the correlator is periodic in $`x_+^1`$ and $`x_{}^1`$. Recall that the $`SU(N)`$ Wilson loop defined by (4.1.4) is not periodic in the presence of ’t Hooft flux , whereas the $`U(N)`$ Wilson loop is periodic. In the commutative case, the AdS-CFT relation is said to describe an $`SU(N)/Z_N`$ rather than $`U(N)`$ theory (e.g. ). We therefore interpret the result (5.2.8) as the correlator of $`U(N)`$ Wilson loops with a non-dynamical background $`U(1)`$, with first Chern class equal to the $`SU(N)`$ ’t Hooft flux. We now Fourier transform (5.2.8), giving the correlator of Wilson loops with momentum $`n_1`$:

$`G_{n_1,e_2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R}}𝑑x_+^1{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R}}𝑑x_{}^1e^{i\frac{n_1(x_+^1x_{}^1)y}{R}}G_{e_2}(x_+^1,x_{}^1)`$
$`=`$ $`2\pi Re_2{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R}}𝑑y\mathrm{exp}(i{\displaystyle \frac{n_1y}{R}})`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{me_2(y+2\pi Rn)}{NR}}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi Re_2(4\pi )^2(2\lambda )^{1/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{4})^4|y+2\pi Rn|}}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`2\pi Re_2{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑y\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{(n_1Nme_2)y}{NR}}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi Re_2(4\pi )^2(2\lambda )^{1/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{4})^4|y|}}\right)`$
Note that this converges as long as the momentum $`n_1Nme_2`$ is non-zero. The zero momentum divergence arises because the $`𝒩=4`$ theory is conformal. The correlator (5.2) has the functional form

$$G_{n_1,e_2}=(e_2R)^2f(g^2N,(n_1Nme_2)\frac{e_2}{N})$$
(5.2.10)
which is consistent with continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. It would be very interesting to explicitly see if the $`\frac{1}{N}`$ corrections are also consistent with continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. Very little is known about the $`1/N`$ corrections in the strongly coupled $`𝒩=4`$ super Yang-Mills theory. Still, the behavior of the leading term in the large $`N`$ result is by itself non-trivial.

Note that one expects the Wilson loop correlator in the commutative theory to depend smoothly on $`m/N`$ in ’t Hooft large $`N`$ limit at fixed $`e_2`$, $`n_1`$ and $`R`$. This excludes explicit dependence on $`c/N`$ in the $`1/N`$ expansion. Assuming this and continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ implies a $`1/N`$ expansion of the form

$$G_{n_1,e_2}=(Re_2)^2\underset{l}{}\left(\frac{e_2}{N}\right)^lg_l(g^2N,\frac{e_2}{N}(Nn_1me_2))$$
(5.2.11)
In writing this expression we have also made use of the fact that $`Nn_1me_2`$ grows like $`N`$ for a generic choice of $`n_1`$ and $`e_2`$, while the argument of $`g_l`$ is by definition of order one.

The above discussion has some interesting consequences for gauge theory on a non-commutative $`R^2`$ in the $`\theta \mathrm{}`$ limit. It has been pointed out that the $`\theta \mathrm{}`$ limit of a field theory on a non-commutative $`R^2`$ behaves like a string theory, due to the vanishing of all but the planar graphs . In the $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit of the commutative theory with $`R,e_2,n_1`$ and $`m/N`$ fixed, the correlator (5.2) can be interpreted as that of an open Wilson line with fixed length and transverse momentum in the strong coupling limit of the $`\theta \mathrm{}`$ theory, where $`\theta =\mathrm{\Theta }2\pi R_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$ and $`R^{}=RN\mathrm{}`$. The length of the open Wilson line is

$$L^{}=\mathrm{\Theta }n_1^{}+2\pi R^{}e_2^{}=e_2R$$
(5.2.12)
while the momentum is

$$p^{}=\frac{n_1^{}}{R^{}}=\frac{(Nn_1me_2)}{NR},$$
(5.2.13)
both of which are fixed in the large $`N`$ limit. It may seem odd that open Wilson lines of arbitrary momentum $`p`$ and length $`L`$ exist in the infinite $`\theta `$ and infinite $`R^{}`$ limit of the non-commutative theory, where one would naively write $`L^{}=\theta p^{}`$. However the non-commutative electric flux $`e_2^{}`$ can conspire to give a finite length in this limit, since the length is actually given by (5.2.12).

### 5.3 Wilson loop correlators in confining Yang-Mills

The Morita equivalence (4.2.9) applies classically even in the pure $`U(N)`$ Yang-Mills theory. This raises the question of whether confining Yang-Mills theories exhibit behavior consistent with continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. These theories differ greatly from the $`𝒩=4`$ theory, and in the non-commutative case exhibit $`UV/IR`$ mixing . Furthermore, it is difficult to embed asymptotically free confining theories in string theory. It may be that the $`𝒩=4`$ case exhibits continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ while the confining theories do not. We shall address this question of continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ in the $`1/N`$ expansion of confining Yang-Mills and find evidence for continuity at leading order.

Based in large part on observations of ’t Hooft , the large $`N`$ limit of QCD is expected to be described by a string theory. In two dimensions, where an exact solution exists , the string description has been constructed . Let us consider this situation first. We will again consider the correlation function of Wilson loops $`\widehat{O}_{n_1,e_2}`$ wrapping the torus. The correlator can be computed using methods described in . The basic idea is that one sums over maps without folds from the world sheet to the target space, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }T`$, such that the boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a cyclic $`e_2`$-fold cover of the $`S^1`$ associated to each Wilson loop. At leading order in the $`1/N`$ expansion, one sums over covers without branch points. The ’t Hooft magnetic flux plays the role of a $`B`$ field modulus of the 2-d QCD string. This means that in the sum over maps of the worldsheet to the target space $`\mathrm{\Sigma }T`$, string worldsheets are weighted by a phase factor

$$e^{i\frac{m}{N}\frac{1}{2\pi R^2}_\mathrm{\Sigma }𝑑x^1dx^2}$$
(5.3.1)
just as in the AdS-CFT case. In 2-d QCD this can be seen for instance by computing with the heat kernel action with twisted boundary conditions. The correlation function at leading order in $`1/N`$ is given by

$`G_{n_1,e_2}`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi Re_2{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R}}𝑑y\mathrm{exp}(i{\displaystyle \frac{n_1y}{R}})`$ (5.3.2)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{me_2(y+2\pi Rn)}{NR}}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\lambda 2\pi Re_2|y+2\pi Rn|\right)`$
where $`\lambda `$ is the ’t Hooft coupling $`g^2N`$ and $`n`$ indicates a winding number of the world sheet in the direction transverse to the Wilson loops. The overall factor of $`e_2`$ arises for the same reasons as in the AdS-CFT case. The above expression can be rewritten as

$`G_{n_1,e_2}=2\pi Re_2{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑y\mathrm{exp}(i{\displaystyle \frac{(n_1Nme_2)y}{NR}})\mathrm{exp}\left(\lambda 2\pi Re_2|y|\right)`$ (5.3.3)
This is manifestly consistent with smooth dependence on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, as it depends only on the variables $`e_2R,g^2N,NR`$ and $`n_1Nme_2`$444While the Wilson loop correlation function is smooth, the partition function (or vacuum energy) is not, since it it depends on the variable $`m/N+i\lambda R^2`$ , which can not be written in terms of non-commutative variables which vary continuously with $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.. At this point we have been somewhat cavalier about the distinction between $`U(N)`$ and $`SU(N)`$. The above correlator is that of an $`SU(N)`$ Wilson loop, with an extra $`U(1)`$ phase factor in the transition function such that the Wilson loop is periodic in the transverse direction. This can be interpreted as a $`U(N)`$ correlator with a frozen $`U(1)`$, much like the correlator in the AdS-CFT case. At higher orders in the $`1/N`$ expansion, the distinction between $`U(N)`$ and $`SU(N)`$ will certainly be important. The role of the $`U(1)`$ is at this stage somewhat mysterious. It would be interesting to compute the $`1/N`$ corrections, and see if they are consistent with continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. The $`1/N`$ corrections arise by considering branched covers, as well as collapsed handles and tubes in the $`SU(N)`$ case.

One can also make similar statements about continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ in four dimensional confining Yang-Mills theories. The argument depends crucially on the relation of the ’t Hooft magnetic flux to a B field modulus of the 4-d QCD string. This relation can be shown  in the context of MQCD  and its IIA limit where it arises as a consequence of a freezing of the $`U(1)`$ degree of freedom. In the MQCD context, the correlator can be computed by summing over M2-branes with boundaries on the Wilson loop times an interval (see  ). At leading order the result is identical to (5.3.3) with the replacement $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$ is the MQCD string tension.

## 6 Conclusions and discussion

The existence of renormalizable gauge theories on non-commutative spaces is still an open question. For rational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, the theory may be defined on the torus via Morita equivalence with gauge theory on a commutative torus. However it is not manifest that observable quantities are arbitrarily close for arbitrarily close values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, as one would require to define the theory for irrational $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. For this to be the case, there must be strong constraints on observables in commutative Yang-Mills theories. In other words, if the non-commutative gauge theory on the torus could be defined for all values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, consistent with Morita equivalence, we would have strong predictions for commutative gauge theories on tori.

The strong constraints on commutative gauge theories are easily seen to be satisfied for such quantities as the energies of BPS states in Yang-Mills theories with $`16`$ supercharges. In this paper we have verified that these constraints are also obeyed by the correlator of wrapped Wilson loops, to leading order in the $`1/N`$ expansion of four dimensional $`𝒩=4`$ Yang-Mills theory, and pure two dimensional QCD. We also presented rough arguments concerning the behavior of this correlator in confining four dimensional QCD, where it again seems to be consistent with continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

While the leading $`1/N`$ behavior of the correlator is consistent with continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, there exist other quantities which do not vary continuously with $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. Amongst these is the periodicity of the non-commutative gauge potential, and certain observables which can only be defined for rational values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. Moreover, in the two-dimensional case, continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is only exhibited by the correlator, but not by the partition function.

To check further whether commutative gauge theories satisfy the constraints implied by smooth non-commutative duals, it would be enlightening to study the subleading terms in the $`1/N`$ expansion in cases in which this is possible, such as two-dimensional QCD. Perhaps a next to leading order term can shed light on whether the pattern observed in this paper persists. If it persists, it yields strong predictions on commutative gauge theories. If it does not, there is a puzzle as to the definition of non-commutative gauge theories on the torus for irrational values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. It would also be interesting to check continuity in $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ perturbatively. In the confining case, this can be done on a sufficiently small torus.

A further point of investigation could be the following. Using the AdS/CFT correspondence, we computed the correlator of closed Wilson loops in the large $`N`$ limit. We made good use of the fact that the correlator of spatially separated Wilson loops is equivalent to a computation of the quark-anti-quark potential with a compactified time direction (where the compactification is assumed to preserve supersymmetry). That allowed us to recuperate the results in . We expect this correlator to be equivalent to a correlator of open Wilson lines in a non-commutative $`U(p)`$ theory that we should be able to compute at large $`p`$ using the non-commutative version of the AdS/CFT correspondence . Since these correlators are dual, they should yield the same result, after dualising momentum and winding number of the loops. It should be instructive to try and follow the AdS/CFT correspondence (for theories compactified on tori) under the Morita equivalence map, to learn more about the correspondence for non-commutative field theories.

## Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Allan Adams, Ori Ganor, Ami Hanany, Aki Hashimoto, Roman Jackiw, Anatoly Konechny, Sanjaye Ramgoolam, Wati Taylor, Pierre van Baal and Frank Wilcek for helpful conversations. This work is supported in part by funds provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (D.O.E.) under cooperative research agreement DE-FC02-94ER40818.

## 7 Appendix: mapping Wilson lines

In this appendix we prove the relation (4.2.9) discussed in , taking into account Wilson lines with both winding and transverse momentum. We will do so by expanding the path ordered exponentials in $`\widehat{O}_{n_1^{},e_2^{}}^{}`$ and $`2\pi RN\widehat{O}_{n_1,e_2}`$ as follows:

$`P(e^{i{\scriptscriptstyle A}})=`$
$`1+i{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑sA_\mu (x(s)){\displaystyle \frac{dx^\mu (s)}{ds}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑s{\displaystyle _0^s}𝑑\stackrel{~}{s}A_\mu (x(s))A_\nu (x(\stackrel{~}{s})){\displaystyle \frac{dx^\mu (s)}{ds}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx^\nu (\stackrel{~}{s})}{d\stackrel{~}{s}}}+\mathrm{}`$
(7.1)
and showing equivalence at all orders. Inserting this expansion into the expression (4.2.7) for the operator $`2\pi RN\widehat{O}`$, and using expression (3.1.8) for $`A`$, gives

$`{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R}}𝑑x^1{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑s_a{\displaystyle _0^{s_a}}𝑑s_b\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}\left(2\pi i(r_{2a}s_a+r_{2b}s_b+\mathrm{}){\displaystyle \frac{e_2}{N}}\right)`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i\pi {\displaystyle \frac{c}{N}}(r_{1a}r_{2a}+r_{1b}r_{2b}+\mathrm{})\right)Tr\left(Q^{cr_{1a}}P^{r_{2a}}Q^{cr_{1b}}P^{r_{2b}}\mathrm{}Q^{e_2}\right)`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i(\stackrel{}{r}_a\stackrel{}{x}+\stackrel{}{r}_b\stackrel{}{x}\mathrm{}+me_2x^1)/NR\right)\mathrm{exp}(in_1x^1/R)a_{\stackrel{}{r}_a}^2a_{\stackrel{}{r}_b}^2\mathrm{}`$
$`2\pi RN(2\pi Re_2)^k`$ (7.2)
where we have used

$$x^2(s)=x^2+2\pi Re_2s$$
(7.3)
for $`s`$ defined on the interval $`[0,1]`$ and $`k`$ denotes the order in the expansion of the exponential. We wish to show that (7.2) is equivalent order by order to the analogous expansion for $`\widehat{O}`$, given by

$`{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R^{}}}𝑑x^1{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R^{}}}𝑑x^2{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑s_a{\displaystyle _0^{s_a}}𝑑s_b\mathrm{}`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(2\pi i(r_{2a}s_a+r_{2b}s_b+\mathrm{})(e_2^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{c}{N}}n_1^{})\right)`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{}{r}_a\stackrel{}{x})}{R^{}}}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{}{r}_b\stackrel{}{x})}{R^{}}}\right)\mathrm{}`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{n_1^{}x^1}{R^{}}}\right)a_{\stackrel{}{r}_a}^2a_{\stackrel{}{r}_b}^2\mathrm{}\left(2\pi R^{}(e_2^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{c}{N}}n_1^{})\right)^k`$
(7.4)
We will begin with (7.2) and reorder the quantities within the trace, giving

$`Tr\left(Q^{cr_{1a}}P^{r_{2a}}Q^{cr_{1b}}P^{r_{2b}}\mathrm{}Q^{e_2}\right)`$ $`=`$
$`Tr\left(Q^{cr_{1a}cr_{1b}+\mathrm{}e_2}P^{r_{2a}+r_{2b}+\mathrm{}}\right)\varphi (\stackrel{}{r}_a,\stackrel{}{r}_b\mathrm{},me_2)`$ (7.5)
where $`\varphi `$ is a $`Z_N`$ phase. It will not be necessary to write it explicitly. Now one can readily verify that the quantity

$$Tr\left(Q^{cr_{1a}cr_{1b}+\mathrm{}e_2}P^{r_{2a}+r_{2b}+\mathrm{}}\right)$$
(7.6)
vanishes unless

$$c(r_{1a}+r_{1b}+\mathrm{}me_2)=kN$$
(7.7)
and

$$c(r_{2a}+r_{2b}+\mathrm{})=jN$$
(7.8)
for integers $`k`$ and $`j`$. If these conditions are satisfied then, since $`P^N=Q^N=1`$,

$$Tr\left(Q^{cr_{1a}cr_{1b}+\mathrm{}e_2}P^{r_{2a}+r_{2b}+\mathrm{}}\right)=N$$
(7.9)
The Wilson loop is independent of the base point $`x^2`$, so all contributions from non-zero $`j`$ vanish.

Let us now consider the integral over the $`x^1`$ dependent parts of (7.2),

$$𝑑x^1\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{(r_{1a}+r_{1b}+\mathrm{}+me_2n_1N)x^1}{NR}\right).$$
(7.10)
Since $`gcd(N,c)=1`$ via (3.1.7), we can rewrite (7.7) as

$$r_{1a}+r_{1b}+\mathrm{}me_2=qN$$
(7.11)
where $`q`$ is an integer. Therefore (7.10) is an integral over a periodic function, giving

$$2\pi R\delta _{0,r_{1a}+r_{1b}+\mathrm{}+me_2n_1N}$$
(7.12)
We can therefore write (7.2) as

$`{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R}}𝑑x^1{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R}}𝑑x^2{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑s_a{\displaystyle _0^{s_a}}𝑑s_b\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}\left(2\pi i(r_{2a}s_a+r_{2b}s_b+\mathrm{}){\displaystyle \frac{e_2}{N}}\right)`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i\pi {\displaystyle \frac{c}{N}}(r_{1a}r_{2a}+r_{1b}r_{2b}+\mathrm{})\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{(r_{1a}+r_{1b}+\mathrm{}+me_2n_1N)x^1}{R}}\right)`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{(r_{2a}+r_{2b}+\mathrm{})x^2}{R}}\right)\varphi (\stackrel{}{r}_a,\stackrel{}{r}_b\mathrm{},me_2)a_{\stackrel{}{r}_a}^2a_{\stackrel{}{r}_b}^2\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{N}{2\pi R}}2\pi RN(2\pi Re_2)^k`$
(7.13)
This expression is equivalent to the following integral over the non-commutative torus;

$`{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R^{}}}𝑑x^1{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R^{}}}𝑑x^2{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑s_a{\displaystyle _0^{s_a}}𝑑s_b\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}\left(2\pi i(r_{2a}s_a+r_{2b}s_b+\mathrm{}){\displaystyle \frac{e_2}{N}}\right)`$
$`\mathrm{exp}(i\pi {\displaystyle \frac{c}{N}}(r_{1a}r_{2a}+r_{1b}r_{2b}+\mathrm{}))\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{(r_{1a}+r_{1b}+\mathrm{}+me_2n_1N)x^1}{R^{}}}\right)`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{(r_{2a}+r_{2b}+\mathrm{})x^2}{R^{}}}\right)`$
$`\varphi (\stackrel{}{r}_a,\stackrel{}{r}_b\mathrm{},me_2)a_{\stackrel{}{r}_a}^2a_{\stackrel{}{r}_b}^2\mathrm{}(2\pi Re_2)^k`$
(7.14)
where we have used $`R^{}=RN`$ and the fact that $`d^2xAB=d^2xA.B`$. We can now make use of a relation between the $``$-algebra and the matrix algebra generated by $`Q`$ and $`P`$. Note that

$$Q^{cr_1}P^{r_2}=P^{r_2}Q^{cr_1}\mathrm{exp}(2\pi i\frac{c}{N}r_1r_2)$$
(7.15)
and

$`\mathrm{exp}(i{\displaystyle \frac{r_1x^1}{R^{}}})\mathrm{exp}(i{\displaystyle \frac{r_2x^2}{R^{}}})=`$
$`\mathrm{exp}(i{\displaystyle \frac{r_2x^2}{R^{}}})\mathrm{exp}(i{\displaystyle \frac{r_1x^1}{R^{}}})\mathrm{exp}(2\pi i{\displaystyle \frac{c}{N}}r_1r_2)`$ (7.16)
Thus

$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{r_{1a}x^1}{R^{}}}\right)exp\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{r_{2a}x^2}{R^{}}}\right)exp\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{r_{1b}x^1}{R^{}}}\right)exp\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{r_{2b}x^2}{R^{}}}\right)\mathrm{}`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{me_2x^1}{R^{}}}\right)=`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{(r_{1a}+r_{1b}+\mathrm{}+me_2n_1N)x^1}{R^{}}}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{(r_{1a}+r_{1b}+\mathrm{})x^2}{R^{}}}\right)`$
$`\varphi (\stackrel{}{r}_a,\stackrel{}{r}_b,\mathrm{},me_2)`$
(7.17)
where, since $`Q^{e_2}=Q^{cme_2}`$, the phase $`\varphi `$ in (7.17) is the same as that which appears in (7.5). Furthermore we have

$$\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{r_1x^1}{R^{}}\right)exp\left(i\frac{r_2x^2}{R^{}}\right)=\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{x}}{R^{}}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{c}{N}\pi r_1r_2\right).$$
(7.18)
Therefore (7.14) may be written as

$`{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R^{}}}𝑑x^1{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi R^{}}}𝑑x^2{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑s_a{\displaystyle _0^{s_a}}𝑑s_b\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}\left(2\pi i(r_{2a}s_a+r_{2b}s_b+\mathrm{}){\displaystyle \frac{e_2}{N}}\right)`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{r}_a\stackrel{}{x}}{R^{}}}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{r}_b\stackrel{}{x}}{R^{}}}\right)\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{(me_2n_1N)x^1}{R^{}}}\right)`$
$`a_{\stackrel{}{r}_a}^2a_{\stackrel{}{r}_b}^2\mathrm{}(2\pi Re_2)^k`$
(7.19)
Formula (7.19) is now identical to (7.4) with the identification

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}e_2^{}\\ n_1^{}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& c\\ m& N\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}e_2\\ n_1\end{array}\right)$$
(7.20)
This completes the proof.


format: text

text:
# Bose–Einstein condensates in traps of time–dependent topology

## Abstract

Superfluid phenomena can be explained in terms of the topologies of the order parameter and of the confining vessel. For example, currents in a toroidal vessel can be characterized by a discrete and conserved quantity, the winding number. In trapped Bose–Einstein condensates, the topology of the trap can be characterized by the topology of the Thomas–Fermi surface of its N–particle ground state. This can be altered during an experiment, so that a toroidal trap may deform into a more spherical shape, allowing an initially persistent current to decay into singly–quantized vortices. We investigate such a procedure numerically, and confirm that the Thomas–Fermi prescription for the trap topology gives an accurate picture of vortex formation.

The intriguing beauty of the concept of topological quantum numbers has ever since its introduction into physics drawn great attention to states that are topologically nontrivial Thouless . In a system that has undergone a second order phase transition these numbers characterize the order parameter field. For a Bose–condensed system the order parameter is the phase of the macroscopic wave–function, and vortex line defects, as well as persistent currents in multiply–connected vessels, are examples of topologically nontrivial states that have been well investigated in superfluid 4He and 3He Donelly . Indeed, these classic superfluids are sufficiently strongly interacting systems that the topology of the order parameter field becomes especially important, because it is insensitive to the microphysical details for which we lack simple and reliable theories. Dilute samples of Bose–condensed alkali atoms BECs , however, are weakly interacting, and the numerically tractable Gross–Pitaevskii (GP) mean field theory describes them with high quantitative accuracy. They are also amenable to a wide range of experimental controls, including the time–dependent manipulation of the inhomogeneous external trapping fields. In this paper we propose an experimental approach which takes advantage of this capability to probe the continuous range of physics between vortices and persistent currents, by adiabatically deforming a trapping potential so that the topology it imposes on the condensate effectively changes. This causes an initially uniform current to break up, at some point, into a number of vortices. The technique thus offers an adiabatic complement to the stirring experiments on critical velocity in condensates Onofrio .

The topological quantum number of a vortex defect or a persistent current can be found by writing the wave–function of the superfluid as the product of a modulus and a phase, $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\sqrt{\rho }e^{i\theta }`$. The condition of superfluidity means that the density field $`\rho `$ is strongly fixed energetically, so that the remaining low–energy degrees of freedom are those of the current velocity field, given by the gradient of the phase, $`\stackrel{}{v}=(\mathrm{}/m)\stackrel{}{}\theta `$, with $`m`$ being the particle mass. Because $`\theta `$ must be single–valued modulo $`2\pi `$, the circulation calculated by integrating $`\stackrel{}{v}`$ along an arbitrary closed contour $`C`$,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_C=\frac{\mathrm{}}{m}\underset{C}{}d\stackrel{}{l}\stackrel{}{}\theta =\frac{\mathrm{}}{m}\mathrm{\Delta }\theta |_C,$$
(1)
must be $`2\pi (\mathrm{}/m)\kappa `$. The integer $`\kappa `$ will be unchanged by any continuous deformation of the field $`\theta `$: it is a topological invariant known as the winding number. If the entire superfluid sample has no ‘holes’, however, then the contour $`C`$ can be shrunk to zero size, so that $`\kappa `$ is changed to zero by a continuous process, after all. The paradox is resolved by the fact that the winding number can change if $`\rho `$ vanishes at any point on the contour, because there $`\theta `$ becomes undefined. Hence a simply connected sample with $`\kappa 0`$ must contain such topological defects – vortex cores. A multiply connected sample can have a winding number without defects, in which case the current cannot decay – unless vortices nucleate at the sample surface, and then drift across the current. Thus the interplay between topological defects in the order parameter, and the topology of the confining vessel, gives a qualitative explanation of superfluidity, which is a necessary preliminary to any microscopic considerations (of how vortices nucleate, etc.).

For liquid helium there is a sharp distinction between topological defects, which are microscopically small, and the topology of the sample’s macroscopic container. For dilute Bose–Einstein condensates, in contrast, a vortex core may be only a couple of orders of magnitude smaller than the entire sample. So if we are to use trap topology to get a simple understanding of how cold atomic currents can be stable, and how they can decay, then we must be precise about how to distinguish the ‘intrinsic topology’ of a condensate, due to vortices, from the topology which is imposed by the trap. Since topology characterizes closed surfaces, trap topology must be the topology of an equipotential surface $`V(\stackrel{}{r})=V_0`$ . For traps of finite strength, this topology will in general depend on the choice of $`V_0`$. For a given number of trapped atoms $`N`$, however, the natural candidate is the ground state Thomas–Fermi (TF) surface $`V(\stackrel{}{r})=\mu `$, where $`\mu (N)`$ is the condensate chemical potential. It is a main result of this paper to show that this prescription does indeed provide a very useful measure of the effect of the trap on vortex nucleation in circulating condensates. The distinction between a condensate with a vortex, and a condensate circulating in a toroidal trap, remains from one point of view only a matter of degree (see Fig. 1); but this definition of trap topology captures the fact that there is a physically important difference of scale.

We simulate the evolution of a dilute Bose–Einstein condensate held initially in a toroidal trap Bloch73 ; Yoo98 ; Geller98 , obtained by focusing a blue–detuned laser beam into the center of a rotationally symmetric harmonic trap Onofrio ; Ketterle98 ; Sanpera00 . For numerical tractability we consider the limit of a quasi–two–dimensional trap, and neglect the third dimension entirely. Assuming the profile of the laser to be Gaussian, the resulting potential $`V_t(r)`$ can be written as

$$V_t(r)=\frac{1}{2}r^2+h_te^{\frac{r^2}{\sigma ^2}},$$
(2)
where $`h_t`$ and $`\sigma `$ determine the height and width of the central peak. The subscript $`t`$ indicates that the height is to be modified adiabatically during the evolution Jila2C . Using natural units we scale the length in units of the harmonic oscillator ground state size $`a_0=\sqrt{\mathrm{}/m\omega }`$ and the energy in units of the trap frequency $`\mathrm{}\omega `$. Because the potential is changed adiabatically, the state of the system at time $`t`$ is assumed to be determined by the instantaneous time–independent GP equation

$$\mu _t\psi _t=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }_2\psi _t+V_t\psi _t+g|\psi _t|^2\psi _t,$$
(3)
where the non–linear coupling constant in the quasi–2D trap is given by $`g=4\pi a/a_0`$, with $`a`$ representing the atomic $`s`$–wave scattering length. We calculate the sequence of instantaneously stationary states of the adiabatically evolving system by propagating the time–dependent GP equation in imaginary time SpStFFT , and changing the potential slightly in every time step. We begin with an initial $`\psi _0`$ with $`\kappa >1`$, with $`h_0,\sigma _0`$ such that this state is (locally) stable. As we slowly lower $`h_t`$, we find in all cases that at some critical height $`h_c`$ instability occurs. In Fig. 2 we show a generic example of this effect, in which a current with $`\kappa =2`$ breaks up into two vortices. (The rotational symmetry is broken through numerical noise, with vortices forming at angles unrelated to the spatial grid.)

Our goal is to investigate quantitatively the behaviour of this critical height $`h_c`$ as a function of $`\kappa `$ and $`\sigma `$. Although the imaginary time solution of eq. (3) does give the correct evolution of the system, the vortex cores form at such low densities that our numerical resolution is insufficient to determine the precise barrier height at which they first form. We overcome this limitation by numerically solving the imaginary time Bogoliubov equations around the solutions of the GP equation, using the ansatz

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_t=\psi _t+\phi ,$$
(4)
so that the imaginary time Bogoliubov equation reads

$`(\mu +\epsilon )\phi =`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(_{rr}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}_r+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}_{\varphi \varphi }\right)\phi `$
$`+V(r)\phi +2U|\psi _t|^2\phi +U|\psi _t|^2\phi ^{}.`$ (5)
We solve Eq. (Bose–Einstein condensates in traps of time–dependent topology) for the lowest eigenvalue $`\epsilon `$ by relaxation in imaginary time, using a higher order Runge–Kutta method. The eigenfunctions $`\phi `$ found by this procedure have no direct physical significance; but the first appearance of a negative $`\epsilon `$ indicates precisely when instability occurs. The nature of the instability is then determined by the imaginary time GP evolution as outlined above. We repeat these calculations for a range of $`\kappa `$ and $`\sigma `$; the results are shown in Fig. 3.

The most salient feature of the results is a ‘floor’ effect: in many cases, with wider barriers and higher winding numbers, the critical barrier height is equal to the chemical potential. The critical barrier height may rise above this ‘floor’, if the barrier is narrow enough or the winding number small enough. These two basic results suggest one natural interpretation: the spawning of the vortices is governed by two factors, one of which is the topology of the ground state TF surface. We show below that these two factors are conceptually worth distinguishing, but are not actually physically independent.

The first factor in vortex formation is instability of surface excitations Smith99 . If the velocity of the atoms at the inner border exceeds the local critical velocity, $`v_c`$, vortices form while the sample is still multiply connected on the trap scale. Lowering the central barrier shrinks the inner radius of the toroidal TF surface, and with fixed circulation this raises the velocity at this inner radius. If $`\kappa `$ is high enough, stability may fail when the inner toroidal radius is so large that the curvature of the inner TF surface is irrelevant, and we are effectively seeing the critical velocity for flow past a straight TF surface. In this limit we can expect to recover the critical velocity for flow perpendicular to a linear ramp potential (because the vortices will nucleate within a narrow boundary layer, within which the potential is effectively linear). From dimensional analysis it then follows that $`v_c\left(\mathrm{}F/m^2\right)^{1/3}`$ where $`F`$ is the derivative of the trapping potential, at the TF surface, in the direction normal to that surface Smith99 . A comparison of this approximation with the results from the numerical solution of eq. (Bose–Einstein condensates in traps of time–dependent topology) is shown in Fig. 4. With appropriately chosen proportionality constants, which evidently reflect the role of curvature, the agreement is excellent. Since the scaling of the critical velocity with the surface force persists quite well in almost all of our cases, it is evident that the picture of vortices forming through surface instability is at least qualitatively valid even in cases where the concept of a surface may well be suspect (such as those in which the condensate density is very low where the vortices form).

We can supplement our understanding of vortex formation in this doubtful regime, and explain the floor effect in Fig. 3, by invoking trap topology as our second factor. Lowering $`h_t`$ below the chemical potential abruptly changes the trap topology, and turns a persistent current of winding number $`|\kappa |>1`$ into a multiply quantized vortex. As is well known, a multiply quantized vortex is unstable against breaking up into unit vortices, because the energy of a single vortex is $`\kappa ^2`$. Of course, this topological factor is not a separate mechanism, in addition to the microphysical mechanisms of instability at supercritical velocity. It should be obvious that as the inner TF surface disappears, the velocity at that surface becomes arbitrarily large. But trap topology is a concise summary of microphysical details, which can quickly identify a whole regime in which unit vortices will appear.

On the other hand, there can be qualitative features of vortex behaviour which depend on more specific details of the trapping potential than its topology. Our results corroborate previous observations that instability to vortex formation need not mean that the resulting vortices penetrate the current Feder99 . Fig. 2(b) is not an intermediate stage in a real–time process, but a local energy minimum for a particular potential height. It shows that vortices may be stably trapped near the inner TF surface. From the point of view of superfluidity, this indicates that a persistent current may be nonlinearly stabilized despite being linearly unstable. (That is, the linear instability can saturate nonlinearly without destruction of the current.) From the point of view of vortex dynamics, this trapping feature would allow study of interactions between vortices. Since the energy of a vortex scales with the density of the background fluid, vortices tend to ‘float’ towards the potential barrier VortexTrapping ; but the well–known Coulomb–like repulsion between vortices circulating in the same direction tends, in the circular geometry, to drive them radially outwards. A too gentle slope of the central potential, or too many vortices, allows this repulsion to dominate buoyancy, and the vortices are expelled through the outer TF surface. As a result the winding number of the current circulating in the trap is decreased by the number of exiting vortices. So one corollary application of our topology–changing procedure is stabilizing vortices against drifting out of the sample.

The tunable central barrier can also be useful for creating circulating currents in the first place. Simulations indicate that phase imprinting Ertmer99  methods should be particularly enhanced, because the problematic core region of the mask becomes irrelevant. Phase imprinting should also be effective in even less trivial topologies: with two Gaussian barriers, and a slightly more complicated mask, one can make vortex pairs, or vortex–anti–vortex pairs. And once quantized circulation has been established around the barriers, they may be moved independently. Finally, the non–equilibrium phenomenon of spontaneous creation of winding number in rapid quenches has been predicted to be more readily observable in toroidal traps RapidAnglin , and with a tunable barrier one could assess this dependence quantitatively.

In summary, therefore, we have proposed and examined a method of effectively changing the topology of a trap confining a condensate with a persistent current. We have computed critical parameters for vortex formation, and identified the effect of trap topology. The proposed technique would allow the precisely controlled production of vortices, and may help to shed new light on the general role of topology in superfluid phenomena.

###### Acknowledgements.

We gratefully acknowledge discussion with J. I. Cirac, P. Zoller, K. Mølmer, and R. Onofrio. This work has been supported by the European Union under the TMR network No. ERBFMRX–CT960002, by the Austrian FWF, by the Danish research council, and by the American NSF through its grant for ITAMP at the Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.


text:
# High Sensitivity, High Spectral Resolution, Mid-infrared Spectroscopy

## 1. Introduction

In Bob Tull’s design and construction of high resolution, optical spectrographs at McDonald Observatory, he has had the advantage of being able to crawl around inside his spectrograph to see how the instrument is behaving. That advantage, along with careful design and great experience, has allowed him to make spectrographs like 2dcoude: R$`\frac{\lambda }{\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda }`$ up to 250,000 or R=60,000 and complete optical coverage in two settings (Tull et al. 1995). We have built a spectrograph that does not quite equal Bob’s work in terms of maximum spectral resolution or fractional wavelength coverage, but operates at 20 times longer wavelength with 60 times fewer pixels. It can rightfully be called the first true high spectral resolution grating spectrograph for the mid-infrared (MIR).

The MIR, here defined as 5 $`\mu `$m$`<\lambda <`$25 $`\mu `$m, is somewhat exotic. Section 2 gives some background about observing near 10 $`\mu `$m. Section 3 describes MIR spectral features, past results, and present and future instruments. In Section 4 we discuss methods of obtaining R=100,000 at 10 $`\mu `$m. Finally, in Section 5, we describe our instrument, TEXES, in more detail and present some preliminary results.

## 2. Observing in the MIR

Ground-based MIR astronomy is predominantly limited by the atmosphere and background radiation. The Earth’s atmosphere limits observations to spectral regions, windows, where terrestrial molecules do not absorb light from space. More importantly, molecules that absorb photons also emit photons, contributing to the background photon rate. In most cases, photon noise from the background emission is the limiting factor in the sensitivity of MIR instruments.

Figure 1 shows the MIR atmospheric transmission from Mauna Kea on a dry night.

The dominant absorbers are H2O (5.5-7.5 $`\mu `$m, 17-30 $`\mu `$m), CO2 (13.5-16.5 $`\mu `$m), and O3 (9.5-10 $`\mu `$m). Water is particularly devastating because the lines form low in Earth’s atmosphere and are substantially pressure-broadened. Observing from high, dry sites substantially improves the transmission (Figure 2)

The background photon rate is given by

$$N_\gamma =2.36\times 10^{11}\frac{ϵB_\nu (T)}{h\nu }A[\mathrm{photons}/\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Hz}/\mathrm{arcsec}^2]$$

where $`ϵ`$ is the sky+telescope+instrument emissivity, $`B_\nu (T)`$ is the Planck function, $`A`$ is the telescope area, $`h\nu `$ is the energy of the photon, and the numerical factor converts the solid angle to $`arcsec^2`$. A typical number for a 3 meter telescope with $`ϵ=0.1`$ would be 5$`\times 10^9`$ photons s-1 $`\mu `$m-1 arcsec-2 or a background of approximately -2.7 mag arcsec-2. Note that a cooled, space telescope will have orders of magnitude improvement in sensitivity.

## 3. MIR Spectroscopy

MIR spectral features can be loosely divided into three categories: solid features, ionic lines, and molecular rotation-vibration transitions. Each of these classes probes a different environment and is best observed with different spectral resolution. Solid features include dust grains, ices, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The broad nature of these features suggest observations at low spectral resolution, R$``$100 to 1000. Ionic and atomic spectral lines, for example from HII regions, external galaxies, or shock excited regions, require higher resolving power: R$``$1000 to 10,000. Molecular transitions are often associated with cold interstellar gas or stellar photospheres. Observing molecular lines requires high spectral resolution: R$``$10,000 to 100,000.

Most molecular transitions in the MIR are rotation-vibration bands. Therefore, many lines, each arising from a different rotational energy level of the same molecule, are closely spaced in frequency. In addition, isotopic transitions and transitions involving higher vibrational states may also overlap in frequency. With sufficient spectral coverage one can simultaneously observe transitions with a range of sensitivity to temperature and density, providing a consistent data set with multiple constraints.

Table 1 lists commonly observed molecules in the MIR. Molecules without an electric dipole, H2, CH4, and C2H2, are unobservable with radio telescopes.

Table 2 provides a non-exhaustive list of some past, present, and future MIR spectrographs along with their resolving power. Clearly, very few instruments are designed to concentrate on MIR molecular spectroscopy. Unfortunately, infrared space telescopes, although extremely sensitive, are not equipped with high resolution spectrographs primarily because of weight and size limitations.

MIR spectroscopy definitely advanced in importance with the success of the Infrared Space Observatory (ISO). ISO’s Short Wavelength Spectrometer (SWS; de Graauw et al. 1996), provided many beautiful data sets throughout the MIR with a resolving power $``$2000. Figures 3 and 4 present examples of SWS data. Figure 3 shows solid features and some ionic lines from evolved stars (Molster et al. 1996).

Figure 4 shows Jupiter in the MIR along with a model spectrum and identification of molecular features (Encrenaz et al. 1996).

Both figures show the tremendous signal-to-noise and wavelength coverage achieved by the SWS. However, it is important to note that with the SWS spectral resolution, narrow features such as the C2H2 Q-branch at 729 cm-1 are totally blended together.

Figure 5 is a figure taken from Evans et al. (1991) showing the observations of the C2H2 Q-branch in absorption toward IRc2 in Orion.

These observations, taken from the ground with Irshell (Lacy et al. 1989), demonstrate the information available with higher resolution and the difficulty of observing through the Earth’s atmosphere (note the top trace showing an observation of the atmospheric absorption).

## 4. High Spectral Resolution

There are three major benefits to using high spectral resolution: First, resolving the Earth’s atmospheric lines makes observing between the lines practical. Furthermore, correcting for the atmospheric lines becomes easier. Second, when the line width matches the resolution of an instrument, the instrument’s sensitivity to that line is at a maximum. Finally, if the line is fully resolved, line profile information becomes available for modeling and analysis.

Several types of instrument can achieve R=100,000 in the MIR, each with advantages. We will now discuss three methods to illustrate our decision in favor of a grating spectrograph. We will not include coherent systems, such as heterodyne spectrometers, which easily reach the resolution requirement, but have limited sensitivity, spatial coverage, and spectral coverage (e.g. Betz 1980).

Fourier transform spectrometers (FTS), such as the one used at KPNO (Hall et al. 1979), operate by sampling the Fourier transform of the spectrum over a range of phase delays. For a more detailed discussion of an FTS, see Hinkle (this volume). In the basic design, a Michelson interferometer, a beamsplitter divides the light between two separate arms, the reference and the scanning arm, and recombines before reaching the detector. To achieve R=100,000 at 10 $`\mu `$m, the scanning mirror must travel at least 0.5 m. The detector records the intensity as a function of the phase delay and the resulting spectrum is recovered in software. If used with an array detector, an FTS will simultaneously sample the spectrum of all points in the field-of-view (Maillard 1995). Because the FTS samples the entire bandpass at all times, the noise also comes from the entire bandpass and fluctuations in the sky background will affect the entire spectrum. An FTS is most efficient when seeking extended wavelength coverage over an extended object.

A Fabry-Perot (FP) is a scanning monochromator which measures spectral elements sequentially. With an array detector, it can also simultaneously record spectra of an extended object, albeit with spectral shifts across the field. To achieve R=100,000 requires multiple, cryogenic FP etalons. Assuming a high plate finesse of 50, the spacing must be 1 cm and the free spectral range will be 0.5 cm-1, requiring at least two additional elements, such as a cryogenic FP and a narrow-band filter, to isolate the orders. As with the FTS, an FP is subject to noise from sky fluctuations. An FP is most efficient if observing a single line over an extended object.

A diffraction grating disperses light in a single dimension. With a detector array, a grating spectrograph will sample a continuous spectrum along with one spatial dimension defined by the entrance slit. To achieve R=100,000 at 10 $`\mu `$m requires a grating $``$0.5 m long, as will be discussed below. A grating is most efficient when observing a point source over an extended spectral range.

## 5. TEXES

Because our science involves molecular rotation-vibration lines, mostly in point sources, we chose to design and build a grating spectrograph, the Texas Echelon-Cross-Echelle Spectrograph or TEXES. TEXES operates from 5 to 25 $`\mu `$m with multiple spectroscopic modes: R$``$100,000 in a cross-dispersed format; R$``$15,000 in single order; and R$``$3,000 in single order. It is available to the community on a collaborative basis. Recent observing runs at the McDonald 2.7 m telescope and NASA’s 3 m Infrared Telescope Facility (IRTF) have demonstrated the capabilities of the instrument. TEXES also serves as a test-bed for construction of our SOFIA instrument, EXES.

The heart of TEXES is an echelon grating, a steeply blazed, coarsely ruled, diffraction grating (Michelson 1898). For a reflection grating, the grating equation is

$$m\lambda =2d(sin\alpha +sin\beta )$$

where $`m`$ is the grating order, $`\lambda `$ is the wavelength of interest, $`d`$ is the groove spacing, and $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are the angles of incidence and diffraction, respectively. The theoretical resolving power in the diffraction limited case with $`\alpha \beta \theta `$ is

$$R=\frac{2Lsin\theta }{\lambda }$$

where $`L`$ is the length of the grating. For high resolution within a confined volume, both the angle of incidence and the length of the grating must be large.

Our echelon grating is a single piece of diamond-machined aluminum. It is 36 inches long with a 3.4 inch square cross-section. The angle of incidence is 84.3. The groove spacing is 0.3 inch or, in more familiar terms, 0.133 lines/mm. The grating was manufactured by Hyperfine, Inc of Boulder, Colorado (Bach, Bach, & Bach 2000). For images of the slightly longer EXES grating, see

$$http://nene.as.utexas.edu/exes/epo/figures/scifigs.html.$$

The echelon design is very appropriate for a MIR instrument. Since the groove spacing is so coarse, we operate in 1500th order at 10 $`\mu `$m with a limited free spectral range, 0.66214 cm-1. However, our MIR detector array, with only 256 $`\times `$ 256 pixels, is small enough that orders overfill the array longward of 11 $`\mu `$m. In theory, the diffraction limited resolving power of our instrument is R=180,000. Because working at the diffraction limit is difficult to achieve and inefficient due to light loss at the entrance slit, we typically operate at R$``$75,000.

We have conducted some laboratory tests to investigate the performance of the echelon. Using a room temperature gas cell, we create an emission line spectrum. Figure 6 shows gas cell spectra of CH4 and C2H2 at 7.7 $`\mu `$m and 13.7 $`\mu `$m.

The C2H2 spectra includes the region shown in Figure 5 observed with Irshell by Evans et al. (1991). With TEXES, it is easy to separate the individual Q-branch lines. From these spectra, we find deviations from Gaussian line profiles at 7.7 $`\mu `$m and Gaussian profiles at 13.7 $`\mu `$m (Figure 7).

Typical FWHM for each wavelength demonstrates R=75,000 in both cases.

TEXES’s initial observing run was on the McDonald Observatory 2.7 m telescope in February, 2000. We had 8 nights for a combination of engineering and science projects. Figure 8 shows a high resolution, cross-dispersed spectrum of Jupiter with numerous C2H6 lines in emission and the same data summed along the slit and reorganized in a 1D format.

We have subsequently had about 12 clear nights on NASA’s IRTF. With a larger, infrared-optimized telescope at about twice the altitude, we have had a significant improvement in our signal-to-noise of roughly a factor of 10. Projects that were awarded time include: searching for H2 pure rotational lines in Uranus, planetary nebulae, and young stellar objects; examining C2H2 and HCN absorption toward massive star formation regions, looking at Jupiter and Saturn in a variety of molecules, and investigating stellar Mg I emission and H2O absorption for a range of spectral types. Detailed results of these projects are awaiting complete data reduction and will be published elsewhere, but one preliminary observational result illustrates TEXES’s performance.

Two Mg I lines near 12 $`\mu `$m (811.578 and 818.058 cm-1) were found in the Sun to be Zeeman sensitive (Brault & Noyes 1983). These photospheric emission lines have been modeled by Carlsson, Rutten, & Shchukina (1992) and are still used for solar magnetic field studies (Moran et al. 2000). Because the Zeeman splitting increases with wavelength relative to Doppler broadening, these MIR lines hold great potential for measurement of stellar magnetic fields.

Jennings et al. (1986) observed two stars, $`\alpha `$ Ori and $`\alpha `$ Tau, with the KPNO 4 m telescope and FTS searching for the 811.578 cm-1 line. The resolving power selected was 50,000 with a wavelength coverage of 2 cm-1. Several hours of integration produced a firm detection in $`\alpha `$ Ori and a probable detection in $`\alpha `$ Tau, both in absorption. Later it was recognized that the absorption in $`\alpha `$ Ori was from H2O (Jennings & Sada 1998).

In Figure 9 we show a spectrum of $`\alpha `$ Tau obtained at the IRTF with TEXES. The spectral resolution is 75,000 (all lines resolved) with a coverage of almost 6 cm-1. This is a single nod pair with total integration time of 4 seconds.

The Mg I line (818.06 cm-1) is clearly seen in emission with numerous absorption features coincident with OH and H2O features identified in the sunspot spectrum. Unlike the 811 cm-1 line, this line does not suffer from blending with H2O features. From these data, if we assume a flux density for $`\alpha `$ Tau of 440 Jy (FD=416.7 Jy at 12.5 $`\mu `$m; Hammersley et al. 1998) our NEFD per spectral resolution element (1$`\sigma `$:1 second) is $``$10 Jy.

We have more time on the IRTF in June and will continue to make TEXES available for collaborative projects. Undoubtedly, some important projects will require a larger aperture. The foreoptics in TEXES make it adaptable to other telescopes and it is our hope to someday be on a 8-10 m class telescope where our sensitivity will improve by an order of magnitude.

### Acknowledgments.

Design, construction and observing with TEXES has been made possible with the support of NSF grants AST-9120546 and AST-9618723, USRA grant USRA 8500-98-008 and the Texas Advanced Research Project grant 003658-0473-1999.

## References

Bach, K. G., Bach, B. W., & Bach, B. W. 2000, Proc. SPIE, 4014, 118

Betz, A. 1980, NASA. Langley Res. Center Heterodyne Systems and Technol., Pt. 1 p 11-22 (SEE N80-29652 20-36), 11

Brault, J. & Noyes, R. 1983, ApJ, 269, L61

Carlsson, M., Rutten, R. J., & Shchukina, N. G. 1992, A&A, 253, 567

de Graauw, T. et al. 1996, A&A, 315, L49

Encrenaz, T. et al. 1996, A&A, 315, L397

Evans, N. J. II, Lacy, J. H., & Carr, J. S. 1991, ApJ, 264, 485

Hall, D. N. B., Ridgway, S., Bell, E. A., & Yarborough, J. M. 1979, Proc. SPIE, 172, 121

Hammersley, P. L., Jourdain de Muizon, M., Kessler, M. F., Bouchet, P., Joseph, R. D., Habing, H. J., Salama, A., & Metcalfe, L. 1998, A&AS, 128, 207

Hinkle, K. H. 2001, ASP Conf. Ser. ???, 000

Jennings, D. E., Deming, D., Wiedemann, G. R., & Keady, J. J. 1986, ApJ, 310, L39

Jennings, D. E. & Sada, P. V. 1998, Science, 279, 844

Lacy, J. H., Achtermann, J. M., Bruce, D. E., Lester, D. F., Arens, J. F., Peck, M. C., & Gaalema, S. D. 1989, PASP, 101, 1166

Maillard, J. P. 1995, ASP Conf. Ser. 71: IAU Colloq. 149: Tridimensional Optical Spectroscopic Methods in Astrophysics, 316

Michelson, A. A. 1898, ApJ, 8, 37

Molster, F. J. et al. 1996, A&A, 315, L373

Tull, R. G., MacQueen, P. J., Sneden, C., & Lambert, D. L. 1995, PASP, 107, 251

Wallace, L., Livingston, W., & Bernath, P. 1994, NSO Technical Report, Tucson: National Solar Observatory, National Optical Astronomy Observatory, —c1994,