text:
# 1 The deceleration parameter 𝑞 vs time 𝑡 in units of 10 Gyrs

## Abstract

We have investigated the cosmological scenarios with a four dimensional effective action which is connected with multidimensional, supergravity and string theories. The solution for the scale factor is such that initially universe undergoes a decelerated expansion but in late times it enters into the accelerated expansion phase. Infact, it asymptotically becomes a de-Sitter universe. The dilaton field in our model is a decreasing function of time and it becomes a constant in late time resulting the exit from the scalar tensor theory to the standard Einstein’s gravity. Also the dilaton field results the existence of a positive cosmological constant in late times.

gr-qc/0103098

MRI-P-010303

Cosmology in scalar tensor theory and asymptotically de-Sitter Universe

A.A.Sen***anjan@mri.ernet.in and S.Sensomasri@mri.ernet.in

Harish-Chandra Research Institute, Chhatnag Road, Jhusi. Allahabad 211 019 India

The observed location of the first acoustic peak of CMB temperature fluctuation corroborated by the latest BOOMERANG and MAXIMA data  favours a spatially flat matter dominated universe whose energy density is dominated by some missing energy component. On the other hand, recent measurements of the luminosity-redshift relations observed for a number of newly discovered type Ia supernovae indicate that at present the universe is expanding in an accelerated manner suggesting that this missing energy has a negative pressure. The first and obvious choice for this missing component is the vacuum energy or cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. However this possibility of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ being the dominant component of the total energy density of the universe, has problem that the energy scale involved is lower than normal energy scale of most particle physics model by factor of $`10^{123}`$. The next choice for this missing energy is a dynamical $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the form of a scalar field slowly rolling down a considerably flat potential so that its slowly varying energy density mimics an effective cosmological constant. This form of missing energy density is called Quintessence and this is similar to the inflation field with the difference that it evolves in a much low energy scale.

There are a number of quintessence models which have been put forward in recent years and most of them involve a minimally coupled scalar field with different type of potentials dominating over the kinetic energy of the scalar field giving rise to an effective negative pressure . Although all these models have their own merits in explaining the missing energy and the accelerated expansion of the universe, they also have some drawbacks. First of all the minimally coupled self interacting scalar field models will be ruled out if the observations predicts that the missing component of the energy density obeys an equation of state $`p=\gamma \rho `$ with $`\gamma <1(\rho 0)`$, and this sort of equation of state is in reasonable agreement with different observations . Also the inequality $`dH^2(z)/dz3\mathrm{\Omega }_{m0}H_0(1+z)^2`$ should have to be satisfied for minimally coupled scalar field and its violation will certainly point towards a theory of non Einstein gravity such as scalar tensor theories where the scalar field is nonminimally coupled to gravity.

Also if one considers a supergravity theory in higher dimensions, then gravity is in general coupled to gauge fields composing the bosonic sectors. The reduction to four dimensions leads to a nontrivial coupling between the gravity and scalar fields, called dilaton, some of which come from the compactifications of the internal dimension. The cosmological scenarios of these effective models in four dimensions has been extensively studied . In recent years there are also attempts in modelling the missing energy of the universe and to explain its late time accelerated expansion in perview of these scalar tensor theories where the scalar field is nonminimally coupled to gravity sector . Attempts have also been done to study the late time accelerated expansion of the universe in context of original Brans-Dicke (BD)theory where the BD scalar field is massless . One of the problems in these models is that it is difficult to incorporate the decelerating expansion phase of the universe in these models. Hence these models are always accelerating which seriously contradicts with the big bang nucleosynthesis and structure formation scenario of the universe. It was shown by Banerjee and Pavon  that one can avoid such problem by assuming the BD parameter to be a function of the BD scalar field $`\varphi `$. Also all these scalar tensor theories are labelled by a parameter $`\omega `$ and another serious problem is that in most of these models, in order to have the accelerated expansion of the universe in late time together with the right estimates for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi `$, the range of this parameter $`\omega `$ is too small to match with the solar system experimental bound $`\omega >500`$. Bertolami and Martins have obtained the solution for the accelerated expansion of the universe in BD cosmology with a $`\varphi ^2`$ potential with large $`|\omega |`$. But in their work they have not considered the positive energy conditions for the matter and the scalar field. The reasons for these problems may be that in most of these models the simple power law expansion of the universe is assumed. Hence it may be worthwhile to study some different expansion behaviour of the universe which can give rise to late time accelerated expansion of the universe and also can solve the problems described above.

In the present work, we have used the low energy four dimensional effective action for the higher dimension theory, together with a matter fluid having a dissipative pressure over and above its positive equilibrium pressure. The CDM is in general considered to be a perfect fluid having a zero positive equilibrium pressure. However it has been proposed recently that the CDM must self interact in order to explain the detailed structure of the galactic halos . This self interaction may create a pressure for the CDM which can also be negative. Also, as demonstrated in a recent paper by Zimdahl et.al , one can have a pressure in the CDM if there exists an interaction which does not conserve particle numbers, and negative pressure can exist due to particle production out of gravitational field. In this case, the CDM is not a conventional dissipative fluid, but a perfect fluid with varying particle number. Zimdahl et.al have shown that even extremely small particle production rate can cause the sufficiently negative pressure to violate the strong energy condition. In our calculations, we have not assumed any particular model for the negative pressure of the CDM rather we have studied its effect in the late time expansion of the universe. Unlike the previous works on nonminimally coupled scalar tensor theories, we have not assumed any particular form for the potential for the BD scalar field. Instead we have assumed the temporal dependence of the BD scalar field in such way that one can recover the Einstein’s gravity in present day. This will ensure that there is no conflict with the present day Solar system experimental results which are very much consistent with the Einstein’s gravity. The solution for the scale factor of the universe is such that initially the universe undergoes decelerated expansion which is necessary for the structure formation scenario in the matter dominated universe, but in late time it enters the accelerated expanding phase suggested by the recent Supernova observations. In fact it has been shown that one can get a de-Sitter expanding universe asymptotically. The potential we obtain for such solution is a combination of terms like $`\varphi ^p(ln(\varphi ))^q`$ with $`p`$ and $`q`$ taking different values. This kind of potential has earlier been studied for inflationary model with minimally coupled scalar field by Barrow and Parson. Terms such as this also appears in the Coleman-Weinberg potential for new inflation. The behaviours of energy densities of the matter and the dilaton field are shown to be quite satisfactory in our model.

The field equations derived from the low energy effective action of the string theory is given by

$$G_{\mu \nu }=\frac{T_{\mu \nu }}{\varphi }+\frac{\omega }{\varphi ^2}(\varphi _{,\mu }\varphi _{,\nu }\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu }\varphi _{,\alpha }\varphi ^{,\alpha })+\frac{1}{\varphi }[\varphi _{,\mu ;\nu }g_{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}\varphi ]g_{\mu \nu }\frac{V(\varphi )}{2\varphi },$$
(1)
where $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ represents the energy momentum tensor of the matter field, $`\varphi `$ is the dilaton field and $`\omega `$ is a dimensionless parameter. We have assumed the matter content of the universe to be composed of a fluid represented by the energy momentum tensor

$$T_{\mu \nu }=(\rho +P)v_\mu v_\nu +Pg_{\mu \nu },$$
(2)
where $`\rho `$ and $`P`$ are the energy density and effective pressure of the fluid respectively and $`v_\mu `$is the four velocity of the fluid i.e, $`v_\mu v^\mu =1`$. The effective pressure of the fluid includes the thermodynamic pressure $`p`$ and a negative pressure $`\pi `$, which could arise either because of the viscous effect or due to particle production, i.e,

$$P=p+\pi $$
(3)
The dynamics of the dilaton field is governed by the equation,

$$\mathrm{}\varphi =\frac{T}{2\omega +3}+\frac{1}{2\omega +3}\left(\varphi \frac{dV(\varphi )}{d\varphi }2V(\varphi )\right)$$
(4)
where $`T`$ is the trace of $`T_{\mu \nu }`$. The background metric is considered to be standard Friedman-Robertson- Walker one with the signature convention $`(,+,+,+)`$ and $`R`$ is the scale factor. We restrict ourselves for spatially flat metric only. We work in Jordan frame. One interesting thing about working in Jordan frame is that the conservation equation holds for matter and scalar field separately. Or in a slightly different way, the Bianchi Identity along with the wave equation (4) gives the matter conservation equation

$$\dot{\rho }+3\frac{\dot{R}}{R}(\rho +p+\pi )=0$$
(5)
Expressing explicitly in terms of the FRW metric the field equations and the wave equation respectively appear to be

$$3\frac{\dot{R}^2}{R^2}+3\frac{\dot{R}}{R}\frac{\dot{\varphi }}{\varphi }\frac{\omega }{2}\frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{\varphi ^2}\frac{V}{2\varphi }=\frac{\rho }{\varphi },$$
(6)
$$2\frac{\ddot{R}}{R}+\frac{\dot{R}^2}{R^2}+\frac{\ddot{\varphi }}{\varphi }+2\frac{\dot{R}}{R}\frac{\dot{\varphi }}{\varphi }+\frac{\omega }{2}\frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{\varphi ^2}\frac{V}{2\varphi }=\frac{p}{\varphi }$$
(7)
$$\ddot{\varphi }+3\frac{\dot{R}}{R}\dot{\varphi }=\frac{\rho 3p}{2\omega +3}\frac{1}{2\omega +3}\left[2V\varphi \frac{dV}{d\varphi }\right]$$
(8)
In this situation we are at liberty to make some assumptions as we have more unknowns $`(R,\varphi ,\rho ,p,\pi ,V)`$ with lesser numbers of equations to determine them. Unlike the previous investigations where people have assumed the power law expansion of the universe together with some suitable form of the potential, we will assume the form for the dilaton field in such a way so that it stabilises quickly with time resulting the transition to GR. Subsequently we calculate the form of the potential which can give rise to this kind of behaviour.

We assume the ansatz

$$\frac{\dot{\varphi }}{\varphi }=\beta Exp[\alpha (tt_0)]$$
(9)
and

$$H=\frac{\dot{R}}{R}=H_1Exp[\alpha (tt_0)]+H_2$$
(10)
where $`H_1,H_2,\alpha ,\beta `$ and $`t_0`$ are all positive constants. This essentially means that we are working in a scenario where the scale factor and the scalar field evolve as

$$R=R_0Exp[H_2t\frac{H_1}{\alpha }e^{\alpha (tt_0)}]$$
(11)
and

$$\varphi =\varphi _0Exp[\frac{\beta }{\alpha }e^{\alpha (tt_0)}]$$
(12)
As is evident from this expression, the dilaton field is an exponentially decreasing function of time and quickly stabilises at some constant $`\varphi _0`$ for large time. Hence in late time one could recover General Relativity by identifying $`1/\varphi _0`$ with $`G_0`$, the present Newtonian constant. Hence whatever be the choice of $`\omega `$ we have in our model. that really does not contradict the solar system bound on $`\omega `$ as for the present day the theory becomes GR.

The deceleration parameter seems to be an important parameter to specify the expansion of the universe. For last several decades the standard cosmological models favoured a presently matter dominated universe expanding in a decelerated fashion. The positive value of the deceleration parameter was more or less compatible with all cosmological tests. But the recent observation seem to favour negative value of this parameter to portray an accelerated expansion of the universe. With an ansatz of the form given by (10), the deceleration parameter $`q`$ is given by

$$q=\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}1=\frac{\alpha H_1e^{\alpha (tt_0)}}{[H_2+H_1e^{\alpha (tt_0)}]^2}1$$
(13)
The behaviour of the deceleration parameter $`q`$ is presented in figure 1. For this we have chosen the parameter $`t_0`$ to be $`10^{10}`$ yrs and also we have set our initial time to $`10^9`$ yrs, which is approximately the time for first bound structures to be formed. The graphical representation of $`q`$ shows that initially it has a positive value suggesting decelerated expansion, but with time it attains a negative value depicting accelerated expansion and finally saturates to $`1`$. This feature of $`q`$ quite satisfactorily explains the evolution of the universe where the matter dominated universe decelerates but starts accelerating at late time as suggested by present observation. It is interesting to notice that the universe starts accelerating very recently which is quite consistent with present estimated age of the universe. Also, the figure shows that it asymptotically the expansion becomes de-Sitter suggesting the existence of a positive cosmological constant.

Apart from the appropriate form of evolution of the universe, constraints are imposed on an acceptable model from the ratio of the energy densities of matter and scalar field. In the early times, such as at $`10^9`$ yrs, the matter energy density dominates the total energy density to justify the structure formation scenario, whereas at late time the scalar energy density plays the predominant role to explain the so called missing energy density of the universe.

To find whether the present ansatz accommodates these constraints we find the energy densities of the matter and the scalar field. With this specific kind of evolution of the universe \[(10),(12)\] the energy density of the matter and the scalar field turns out to be respectively

$$\rho =\left\{\frac{3H_2}{8}(16H_19\beta )e^{\alpha (tt_0)}3H_1[\beta (1+\omega )+H_1]e^{2\alpha (tt_0)}\right\}\varphi _0Exp[\frac{\beta }{\alpha }e^{\alpha (tt_0)}]+\rho _0$$
(14)
and

$$\rho _\varphi =\left\{3H_2^2+\frac{27}{8}\beta H_2e^{\alpha (tt_0)}+3H_1[\beta (1+\omega )+2H_1]e^{2\alpha (tt_0)}\right\}\varphi _0Exp[\frac{\beta }{\alpha }e^{\alpha (tt_0)}]\rho _0.$$
(15)
where $`\rho _0`$ is an integration constant with the choice

$$\omega +1=\frac{(16H_13\beta )^2}{8\beta (16H_1\beta )}\mathrm{and}\alpha =8H_2.$$
(16)
In order to ensure the positive energy condition for both matter and scalar field the constraints on the constants are $`(16H_13\beta )^2>8H_1(16H_1\beta )`$ and $`16H_19\beta >0`$. In figure 2 we plot the the energy densities of both the matter and the scalar field. The energy scale is plotted in units of $`10^{47}`$ GeV4. We find that the above constraints are accommodated i.e, the matter energy dominates the scalar energy in the early time but it evolves at such a rate that at late time the scalar energy density takes over the matter density and finally tracks to a constant ratio of the two densities. This is a very important behaviour so far as the late time acceleration and quintessence scenario are concerned. This tracking behaviour is a possible solution to the cosmic coincidence problem of the quintessence proposal. An interesting point to note here is that the energy density of matter $`\rho ^{1/4}`$ is $`10^3`$ eV at an epoch 1 Gyrs when the first bound structures were formed, which agrees quite well with the available data. On the other hand the density parameters also gives a clear picture about the ratio of energy densities of the universe at different epochs. A plot of the density parameter of matter $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_m=\frac{\rho }{3H^2\varphi })`$ and that of scalar field $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi =\frac{\rho _\varphi }{3H^2\varphi })`$ is shown in figure 3. $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ dominates the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{tot}`$ in the early time, but off late $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi `$ becomes the major contributor of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{tot}`$ and finally both $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi `$ saturates at values $`0.28`$ and $`0.72`$ respectively, which match the recent observations excellently.

The form of potential admissible in this ansatz is given by

$$V(\varphi )=\left(\frac{8H_2}{\beta }\right)^2[3H_1(\beta \omega +2H_1)\frac{\omega }{2}\beta ^2]\varphi \left[\mathrm{ln}\frac{\varphi }{\varphi _0}\right]^2+6H_2^2\varphi \mathrm{ln}\frac{\varphi }{\varphi _0}+6H_2^2\varphi 2\rho _0$$
(17)
This kind of potential can arise due to higher order loop corrections of the Coleman-Weinberg potential. This type of potential had been used earlier in quite a few references, specially in context of inflationary scenario. We have plotted the potential in figure 4. An interesting point to note here is that the minimum of the potential has a nonzero value at which the dilaton stabilises. This asymptotically generates a positive cosmological constant which provides a good enough explanation for the missing energy component. We have also plotted in figure 5, the equation of state for the dilaton field, where one finds that the equations of state stabilises at -1 in late times suggesting that the dilaton field gives rise to a positive cosmological constant in late time.

The effective pressure of the CDM fluid is given by

$$P=\left\{e^{\alpha (tt_0)}\left[\frac{5}{8}H_2(16H_19\beta )\right]e^{2\alpha (tt_0)}(\beta 3H_1)[\beta (1+\omega )+H_1]\right\}\varphi _0Exp[\frac{\beta }{\alpha }e^{\alpha (tt_0)}]\rho _0$$
(18)
In figure 6 we have plotted the effective pressure $`P`$ of the CDM. It has shown that the CDM has very small effective negative pressure in late time. This is similar to what Chimento et.al and also Zimdahl et.al assumed in their investigations.

In conclusion, we have studied the cosmological evolution with the low energy effective string action. We have assumed the form of the dilaton field in such a way so that it stabilises quickly with time resulting the transition to the GR theory. Hence the problem of having a higher value of the parameter $`\omega `$ consistent with Solar system observation is no more in our theory which is present in most of the quintessence models in scalar tensor theories studied in recent times. Moreover the scale factor of the universe in our model is such that one can have a decelerating universe in early time but in late time the universe becomes accelerating which is consistent with the recent supernovae observations. In fact the universe asymptotically becomes a de-Sitter universe. We have also calculated the form of potential that can give rise to such kind behaviour. It has been shown that the potential has a non zero minima where the dilaton will stabilise and this will give give rise to a positive cosmological constant asymptotically. The behaviours of the energy densities of the matter and scalar field show that although in early time, the energy density of the matter field is greater than that of the scalar field but in late times the scalar field will dominate explaining the missing energy component. We have fixed our initial time at 1 Gyr. But initially the universe is decelerating as well as the matter energy density dominates over that of the scalar field, hence one can extend our model back in earlier time to meet the constraints from the big-bang nucleosynthesis.

It seems that this model can be a viable model, at least theoretically, to explain the late time acceleration of the universe and the missing energy component. It will be interesting to see whether this model actually matches with Type Ia supernovae observations and also with CMBR experiments like BOOMERANG and MAXIMA.

We gratefully acknowledge Dileep P.Jatkar and Debajyoti Choudhury for useful discussions.


format: text

text:
# Entropy and Information

## Entropy and Information

In spite of several justified objections raised to the second law of thermodynamics in specific cases , its validity for the Universe and the importance of entropy conception is generally accepted. Along with its probability meaning expressed by relation

$$S=k.\mathrm{ln}p=k.\mathrm{ln}P$$
(1)
where $`S`$ is the entropy, $`k`$ is the Boltzmann constant, $`p`$ is the probability of the existence of a microstate, $`P`$ is the number of microstates associated with a macroscopic state, entropy is also a measure of information needed to describe system properties. In accordance with a common usage, entropy will be expressed as dimensionless quantity, number of information is given in bit. Since a number of information transferred $`I`$ by binary characters is

$$I=\mathrm{log}_2p$$
(2)
the entropy of a state fully describle by a number of information $`I`$ is then

$$S=I(k\mathrm{ln}2)9\times 10^{24}I$$
(3)
Thus, a number of information needed to fully describe a system can be expressed either via its entropy or by a number of bits.

Applying the above ideas to the Universe with a permanent increase of its entropy content, it is obvious that to describe such a universe, a number of information must growth as well.

## Information, ENU and the Universe Dimensionality

One of the corner-stones of the holographic model of the Universe, elaborated by Bohm , declares that every point of the Universe (every elemental particle) is in mutual contact with the other points (particles) and holds the information about the whole Universe. The higher dimensionality of the Universe, the higher number of information is needed to its description. A postulate relating a maximum information $`I_{\mathrm{max}}`$ and a certain space dimensionality $`n`$ of the Universe may be generally expressed as

$$\mathrm{log}_2I_{\mathrm{max}}=2^{(n1)}$$
(4)
As a starting point (rationalized latter) let us suppose that

$$n=10$$
(5)
Then it follows from (4) and (5)

$$I_{\mathrm{max}}10^{154}$$
(6)
Corresponding maximum entropy based on (3) and (6) is

$$S_{\mathrm{max}}10^{131}$$
(7)
In the ENU model  it holds

$$a=c.t_c=\frac{2G.m_U}{c^2}1.3\times 10^{26}\mathrm{m}$$
(8)
where $`a`$ is the gauge factor, $`t_c`$ is the cosmological time, and $`m_U`$ is the mass of the Universe. The elementary particles did not exist at the very beginning of the Universe, the gravitational field quanta, however, existed. This is why the entropy of the Universe can be expressed by means of a number of gravitational field quanta at a given cosmological time. If the mean energy of a gravitational field quantum is denoted as $`E_g`$, then

$$S=\frac{m_U.c^2}{\left|E_g\right|}=\frac{t_c.c^5}{2G.\left|E_g\right|}$$
(9)
As shown in our previous paper , it holds in the ENU

$$i.\mathrm{}\frac{d\mathrm{\Psi }_g}{dt}=E_g.\mathrm{\Psi }_g$$
(10)
where $`\mathrm{\Psi }_g`$ is the wave function of the Universe defined as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_g=e^{i(t_{Pc}.t_c)^{1/2}.t}$$
(11)
It follows from (10) and (11) that

$$\left|E_g\right|=\mathrm{}(t_{Pc}.t_c)^{1/2}$$
(12)
where $`t_{Pc}`$ is the Planck time

$$t_{Pc}=\left(\frac{G.\mathrm{}}{c^5}\right)^{1/2}=5.39056\times 10^{44}\mathrm{s}$$
(13)
The entropy content at a time $`t`$ is then, based on (9), (10), and (11), given by

$$S=\left(\frac{t}{t_{Pc}}\right)^{3/2}$$
(14)
i.e. at the time being

$$S10^{92}$$
(15)
A crucial conclusion stems from (7) and (14). It determines a cosmological time in which the maximum entropy should be reached

$$t_{c(\mathrm{max})}10^{35}10^{36}\mathrm{years}$$
(16)
A significance of this result lies in the fact that $`t_{c(\mathrm{max})}`$ represents the time for which a decay of of baryonic matter is anticipated.

## Concluding Remarks

Standard cosmological theories deals with the 3-dimensional space. Within the Kaluza-Klein theoretical approaches  more-dimensional spaces ($`n`$ = 4 to 6) are elaborated . A classic superstring theory used space with $`n`$ = 9, in the M-theory $`n`$ = 10. There are other conceptions within the superstring theories  in which a number of dimensions is even higher.

The ENU model is compatible with superstring theory having $`n`$ = 10. Calculations based on relations present in this work lead to a result showing that if $`n<10`$, the maximum cosmological time would be less than the present time.

New results might be obtained when some features of the ENU model (such as the matter creation and gravitational energy localization) are incorporated into superstring theory.

## References

1. V. Čápek, J. Bok, Physica A 290 (2001) 379
2. W. Yourgrau, A. van der Merwe, Entropy, Information and Statistical Thermodynamics, in Cosmology, Fusion and Other Matters (F. Reines, ed.), Adam Hilger, London, 1972, p.241
3. B.H. Mahan, University Chemistry (2nd ed.), Addison-Wesley Publ. Comp., London, 1972, p. 340
4. D. Bohm, B.J. Hiley, The Undivided Universe, Routledge, London, 1993
5. V. Skalský, M. Súkeník, Astrophys. Space Sci., 178 (1991) 169
6. M. Súkeník, J. Šima, Preprint gr-qc/0010061
7. T. Appelquist, A. Chodos, P.G. Freund (Eds.) Modern Kaluza-Klein Theories, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA., 1987
8. T. Gherghetta, M. Shaposhnikov, Phys. Rev. Lett., 85 (2000) 240
9. M.B. Green, J.H. Schwarz, E. Witten, Superstring Theory, Vol. 1, 2. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989
10. M. Kaku, Introduction to Superstrings, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1988


text:
# New Coherent String States and Minimal Uncertainty in WZWN Models

## 1 Introduction

Coherent states play an important role in quantum mechanics, where they represent the ”quasi-classical” states of minimal uncertainty (see for instance ). Coherent states have also been widely used in string theory for the computation of scattering amplitudes (see for instance ). Both in ordinary quantum mechanics and in the standard formulation of string theory, coherent states can be defined in (at least) two alternative but equivalent ways: Either as eigenstates of the annihilation operator, or as the exponential of the creation operator acting on the ground state. However, when considering string theory on a group manifold using a WZWN or gauged WZWN construction, the situation is quite different. In that case, the fundamental Abelian harmonic oscillator commutator $`[a,a^{}]=1`$ is substituted by a non-Abelian Kac-Moody current algebra. As a consequence, a state defined as the exponential of a creation operator acting on the ground state, will no longer in general be an eigenstate of the annihilation operator. For the same reason, it will generally not be a state of minimal uncertainty.

The purpose of the present paper is to discuss the alternative, but in-equivalent, definitions of coherent states in WZWN models. More precisely, we shall consider the $`SL(2,R)`$ WZWN model corresponding to bosonic string theory in 3-dimensional Anti de Sitter space, $`AdS_3SL(2,R)SU(1,1)`$. It represents the simplest example of string theory on a manifold with curved space and curved time \[3-16\], and it has attracted renewed interest recently in the context of the conjecture  connecting supergravity and superstring theory in $`AdS`$ space with a conformal field theory on the boundary. For a recent discussion about coherent states on group manifolds, see also .

In a previous publication , we considered coherent states in $`AdS_3`$ using the definition corresponding to the exponential of a creation operator. Such states were shown to describe, among other things, the very massive string states in $`AdS_3`$. In particular, it was shown that there is a discrete spectrum of very massive string states, with asymptotic behaviour $`m^2\alpha ^{}N^2`$ ($`N`$ positive integer). This was in precise agreement with the previous results obtained using semi-classical quantization , and the same asymptotic behaviour was also obtained in ref., although the construction there was completely different from ours.

The coherent states, defined in terms of the exponential of a creation operator, however, are not eigenstates of the annihilation operator, and they are not minimal uncertainty states. Moreover, they are somewhat complicated to work with. In this paper we consider the alternative definition of coherent states in $`AdS_3`$, taking the property of being an eigenstate of the annihilation operator as the fundamental one. Such states will also be automatically states of minimal uncertainty, and they are generally much easier to work with.

There is an extensive literature on coherent states of various kinds; canonical coherent states, spin coherent states, group-realated coherent states etc. (for a review see ). The coherent states constructed in this paper generalize the $`SU(1,1)`$ group-related coherent states originally constructed in . The coherent states in  were constructed using the ladder-operators. The ladder-operators correspond to the zero-modes of the Kac-Moody algebra: $`L^\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}J_0^\pm `$, $`L_{12}=J_0^3`$. In string theory, the zero-modes are not really creation and annihilation operators. Therefore, we use the $`n=1`$ modes instead. So our coherent states are completely different from theirs. However, it is interesting that our results reduce to theirs if we take $`k=0`$, where $`k`$ is the level of the WZWN model. The reason is that the $`n=1`$ algebra, for $`k=0`$, is formally identical to the zero-mode algebra. Thus, all our results for $`k=0`$ reduce to theirs.

This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we first review the standard formulation of string theory on a group manifold . We then derive the explicit expression for the coherent states defined as eigenstates of the annihilation operator. Normalization, Virasoro and mass-shell conditions are also considered. In Section 3, we show that the coherent states constructed in Section 2 are states of minimal uncertainty, in the usual sense of ordinary quantum mechanics. In Section 4, we consider the relation between these ”new” coherent states and the ”old” coherent states discussed in . Finally in Section 5, we have some concluding remarks.

## 2 Coherent States

The $`SL(2,R)`$ Kac-Moody algebra for (say) the left-moving currents is given by

$$[J_m^a,J_n^b]=iϵ_c^{ab}J_{m+n}^c+\frac{k}{2}m\eta ^{ab}\delta _{n+m}$$
(2.1)
where

$$k=\frac{1}{H^2\alpha ^{}},$$

is the level of the $`SL(2,R)`$ WZWN model, and $`H^1`$ stands for the length scale. (Our conventions are: $`\eta ^{ab}=\text{diag}(1,1,1)`$ and $`ϵ^{123}=+1`$).

In terms of the currents, $`J^\pm =J^1\pm iJ^2`$, the algebra becomes

$`[J_m^+,J_n^{}]`$ $`=2J_{m+n}^3+km\delta _{m+n}`$
$`[J_m^3,J_n^\pm ]`$ $`=\pm J_{m+n}^\pm `$
$`[J_m^3,J_n^3]`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{k}{2}}m\delta _{m+n}`$
The world-sheet energy-momentum tensor takes the Sugawara form

$$T=\frac{1}{k2}\eta _{ab}:J^aJ^b:=\frac{1}{k2}:(J^+J^{}J^3J^3):$$
(2.3)
Its Fourier modes

$$T=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}L_ne^{in\sigma }$$
(2.4)
are given by

$$L_n=\frac{1}{k2}\underset{l=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}:\left(\frac{1}{2}(J_{nl}^+J_l^{}+J_{nl}^{}J_l^+)J_{nl}^3J_l^3\right):$$
(2.5)
They fulfill the Virasoro algebra

$$[L_m,L_n]=(mn)L_{m+n}+\frac{c}{12}m(m^21)\delta _{m+n}$$
(2.6)
where the central charge is given by

$$c=\frac{3k}{k2}$$
(2.7)
Demanding $`c=26`$, corresponding to conformal invariance, gives $`k=52/23`$. Notice also the commutators

$$[L_n,J_m^\pm ]=mJ_{n+m}^\pm ,[L_n,J_m^3]=mJ_{n+m}^3$$
(2.8)
which will be usefull in the following.

The Kac-Moody algebra contains the subalgebra of zero modes $`J_0^a`$, for which the quadratic Casimir is

$$Q=\eta _{ab}J_0^aJ_0^b=\frac{1}{2}\left(J_0^+J_0^{}+J_0^{}J_0^+\right)J_0^3J_0^3$$
(2.9)
The primary states, which are quantum states $`|jm>`$ at grade zero (”base-states” or ”ground-states”), are characterised by

$$Q|jm>=j(j+1)|jm>,J_0^3|jm>=m|jm>$$
(2.10)
Moreover, they fulfill

$$J_0^\pm |jm>=\sqrt{m(m\pm 1)j(j+1)}|jm\pm 1>$$
(2.11)
as well as

$$J_l^a|jm>=0;l>0$$
(2.12)
The primary states must belong to one of the unitary representations of $`SL(2,R)`$ (or its covering group) .

For simplicity and clarity of the construction, we concentrate in the following on the subalgebra generated by $`(J_{+1}^{},J_1^+,J_0^3)`$

$`[J_{+1}^{},J_1^+]`$ $`=2J_0^3+k`$
$`[J_0^3,J_1^+]`$ $`=J_1^+`$
$`[J_0^3,J_{+1}^{}]`$ $`=J_{+1}^{}`$
An example of string configurations described by this subalgebra is provided by circular strings (which contain only modes corresponding to $`n=0`$ and $`n=\pm 1`$); it should be stressed that we consider this subalgebra only for simplicity and clarity and that our construction can be easily used for other string configurations as well.

Moreover, our coherent states will be constructed using the base-state $`|jj>`$, which belongs to the highest weight discrete series $`D_j^{}`$ , with states $`|jm>`$

$$j1/2,m=j,j1,\mathrm{}$$
(2.14)
Since we shall consider the covering group of $`SL(2,R)`$, there are no further restrictions on $`j`$, i.e., it does not need to be an integer or half-integer . In particular, from eq.(2.11) it follows that

$$J_0^+|jj>=0,J_0^{}|jj>=\sqrt{2j}|jj1>$$
(2.15)
The idea is now to construct coherent states as eigenstates of the annihilation operator $`J_{+1}^{}`$

$$J_{+1}^{}|\mu >=\mu |\mu >$$
(2.16)
where $`\mu `$ is a complex number. For the state $`|\mu >`$ we use the ansatz

$$|\mu >=𝒩\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}C_n\left(J_1^+\right)^n|jj>$$
(2.17)
where $`𝒩`$ is a normalization constant, and the coefficients $`C_n`$ are to be determined. Using the commutator

$$[J_{+1}^{},\left(J_1^+\right)^n]=n\left(J_1^+\right)^{n1}(n1+k+2J_0^3)$$
(2.18)
eq.(2.16) immediately leads to the recursion relation

$$(n+1)(n+2j+k)C_{n+1}=\mu C_n$$
(2.19)
which is solved by

$$C_n=\mu ^n\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k+n)}$$
(2.20)
with the normalization $`C_0=1`$.

Using the identity

$$<jj|\left(J_{+1}^{}\right)^n\left(J_1^+\right)^m|jj>=\delta _{nm}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k+n)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k)}$$
(2.21)
the normalization condition for the state $`|\mu >`$ leads to

$$1=<\mu |\mu >=|𝒩|^2\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(\mu ^{}\mu )^n}{n!}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k+n)}$$
(2.22)
That is to say

$$|𝒩|^2=\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k)|\mu |^{(2j+k1)}I_{2j+k1}(2|\mu |)$$
(2.23)
where $`I_\nu (x)`$ is the modified Bessel function  and $`|\mu |^2=\mu ^{}\mu `$. To ensure that the right hand side of eq.(2.23) is positive for arbitrary complex $`\mu `$, we take $`2j+k`$ positive. Thus we get the spin-level restriction \[4-6,8-14\]

$$j>\frac{k}{2}$$
(2.24)
Therefore, altogether, for $`2j+k`$ positive, we have

$`|\mu >`$ $`=`$ $`𝒩{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\mu ^n{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k+n)}}\left(J_1^+\right)^n|jj>`$ (2.25)
$`=`$ $`𝒩\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k)\left(\mu J_1^+\right)^{(2j+k1)/2}I_{2j+k1}\left(2\sqrt{\mu J_1^+}\right)|jj>`$
where $`𝒩`$ is given by eq.(2.23). As in quantum mechanics, the coherent states (2.25) do not form an orthogonal set. The scalar product of two coherent states is given by

$$|<\nu |\mu >|^2=\frac{I_{2j+k1}(2\sqrt{\nu ^{}\mu })I_{2j+k1}(2\sqrt{\mu ^{}\nu })}{I_{2j+k1}(2\sqrt{\nu ^{}\nu })I_{2j+k1}(2\sqrt{\mu ^{}\mu })}$$
(2.26)
In string theory, a physical state must fulfill the mass-shell condition and the Virasoro primary conditions

$$(L_01)|\psi >=0,L_l|\psi >=0;l>0$$
(2.27)
For the coherent states (2.25) it is easy to see that the Virasoro primary conditions are fulfilled. However, being coherent states, they obviously are not eigenstates of neither the number operator nor of the $`L_0`$ operator. We shall therefore impose a ”weak” mass-shell condition

$$<\mu |(L_01)|\mu >=0$$
(2.28)
Using the identity

$$L_0\left(J_1^+\right)^n|jj>=\left(n\frac{j(j+1)}{k2}\right)\left(J_1^+\right)^n|jj>$$
(2.29)
the condition (2.28) leads to

$$\frac{I_{2j+k}(2|\mu |)}{I_{2j+k1}(2|\mu |)}=|\mu |^1\left(1+\frac{j(j+1)}{k2}\right)$$
(2.30)
which is to be solved for (say) $`j`$ as a function of $`\mu `$.

We close this section with some comments on the case where $`2j+k=\{0,1,2,\mathrm{}\}=N`$, where $`N`$ is a non-negative integer. In that case the solution (2.20) for $`C_n`$ is actually not well-defined. Instead the recursion relation (2.19) is solved by

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}C_n=0;n=0,1,\mathrm{}N\hfill & \\ C_{N+1+l}=\frac{\mu ^l}{l!}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2+l)};l0\hfill & \end{array}$$
(2.31)
and the coherent state is given by

$`|\mu >`$ $`=`$ $`𝒩{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\mu ^n{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2+n)}}\left(J_1^+\right)^{N+1+n}|(N+k)/2,(N+k)/2>`$
$`=`$ $`𝒩{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2)}{\mu ^{N+1}}}\left(\mu J_1^+\right)^{(N+1)/2}I_{N+1}\left(2\sqrt{\mu J_1^+}\right)|(N+k)/2,(N+k)/2>`$
where $`𝒩`$ is a normalization constant. However, using the identity

$`<(N+k)/2,(N+k)/2|\left(J_{+1}^{}\right)^n\left(J_1^+\right)^m|(N+k)/2,(N+k)/2>`$
$`=(1)^n\delta _{nm}n!\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{N!}{(Nn)!};nN& \\ 0;n>N& \end{array}`$ (2.35)
one finds that $`<\mu |\mu >=0`$. That is to say, the coherent states for $`2j+k=N`$ are zero norm states, so we shall not consider them further.

We are thus left with a continous spectrum of the positive norm coherent states (2.25). The discrete spectrum of states (2.32) are all zero norm states, and are expected to decouple in scattering amplitudes.

## 3 Minimal Uncertainty

One of the most important properties of coherent states in quantum mechanics is the one of minimal uncertainty

$$\mathrm{\Delta }X\mathrm{\Delta }P=\frac{1}{2}$$
(3.1)
We shall now show that the states (2.25) lead to the same property in the case of a Kac-Moody algebra. First we define Hermitean operators $`(X,P,)`$

$`X`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}}}(J_{+1}^{}+J_1^+)`$
$`P`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2k}}}(J_{+1}^{}J_1^+)`$ (3.2)
$``$ $``$ $`J_0^3`$
Then, the algebra (2.13) becomes

$`[X,P]`$ $`=i(1+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{k}})`$
$`[X,]`$ $`=iP`$
$`[,P]`$ $`=iX`$
The algebra (3.3) can be interpreted as a modified Harmonic oscillator algebra; the modification being represented by the second term $`\frac{2}{k}`$ in the $`X,P`$ commutator. That is, in the semi-classical limit $`(k\mathrm{})`$, we get the standard Harmonic oscillator algebra . It is quite natural to interprete $`X`$ and $`P`$ as coordinate and momentum, respectively, since, in the context of Kac-Moody algebras, the roles of coordinates and momenta are played by the currents $`J`$. However, the interpretation of $``$ as some kind of Hamiltonian needs a few comments: First, notice that, contrary to the case of the standard harmonic oscillator, $``$ is here an independent operator; in particular, $`\frac{1}{2}(P^2+X^2)`$. On the other hand, there is a simple relation between $`J_0^3`$ and the energy $`E`$ and angular momentum $`l`$ of a string in $`AdS_3`$

$`J_0^3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}J^3𝑑\sigma ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(E+l)`$
$`\overline{J}_0^3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\overline{J}^3𝑑\sigma ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(El)`$ (3.4)
where a bar denotes right-movers. Thus, the total energy is $`E=J_0^3+\overline{J}_0^3`$ and it is natural to identify $`J_0^3`$.

From eqs.(3.3), the uncertainty relation here is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }X\mathrm{\Delta }P\frac{1}{2}|<(1+\frac{2}{k})>|$$
(3.5)
with minimal uncertainty in the case of equality sign. For $`k\mathrm{}`$, it is the usual Heisenberg relation.

Now, consider the coherent states (2.25). It is straightforward to compute

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }X)^2=(\mathrm{\Delta }P)^2=\frac{1}{2k}\left(k+2(j+1)(1+\frac{j}{k2})\right)$$
(3.6)
as well as

$$<>=(j+1)(1+\frac{j}{k2})$$
(3.7)
That is to say

$$\mathrm{\Delta }X\mathrm{\Delta }P=\frac{1}{2}|<(1+\frac{2}{k})>|$$
(3.8)
i.e., minimal uncertainty. That is to say, states (2.25) are quasiclassical states.

## 4 ”Exponential” Coherent States

In a previous paper , we considered a different type of coherent states defined in terms of the exponential of the creation operator

$$e^{\stackrel{~}{\mu }J_1^+}|jj>$$
(4.1)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }`$ is an arbitrary complex number. Such coherent states (4.1) are however not eigenstates of the annihilation operator $`J_{+1}^{}`$

$$J_{+1}^{}e^{\mu J_1^+}|jj>=\mu \left(2j+k+\mu J_1^+\right)e^{\mu J_1^+}|jj>$$
(4.2)
As for the normalization of states (4.1), we use the identity

$$<jj|e^{\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}J_{+1}^{}}e^{\stackrel{~}{\mu }J_1^+}|jj>=1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu })^n}{n!}\underset{l=1}{\overset{n}{}}(2j+k1+l)$$
(4.3)
The product on the right hand side goes as $`n!`$. Thus the infinite sum is convergent only if $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu }<1`$, or if the infinite sum terminates after a finite number of terms (this happens if $`2j+k1+l=0`$, for some $`l`$). More precisely, the right hand side of eq.(4.3) is a finite positive number in the following two cases
(I): $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu }<1`$ and $`j`$ arbitrary ($`j1/2`$).
In this case the normalized state is

$$|\stackrel{~}{\mu }_I>=(1\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu })^{j+k/2}e^{\stackrel{~}{\mu }J_1^+}|jj>$$
(4.4)
(II): $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu }>1`$ and $`2j+k=N(N=0,1,2,\mathrm{}).`$
In this case the normalized state is

$$|\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{II}>=(\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu }1)^Ne^{\stackrel{~}{\mu }J_1^+}|Nk/2,Nk/2>$$
(4.5)
The Virasoro primary conditions are obviously fulfilled for the states (4.4)-(4.5), while the mass-shell condition in the form of eq.(2.28) gives rise to some additional constraints on $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }`$ and $`j`$. In the two cases one finds, respectively
(I):

$$\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu }=\frac{1+\frac{j(j+1)}{k2}}{2j+k+1+\frac{j(j+1)}{k2}}<1;\frac{k}{2}<j\frac{1}{2}$$
(4.6)
(II):

$$\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu }=\frac{1+\frac{j(j+1)}{k2}}{2j+k+1+\frac{j(j+1)}{k2}}>1;j=N\frac{k}{2}(N=1,2,\mathrm{})$$
(4.7)
It follows that the spectrum consists of two parts : (I) A continuous spectrum where $`j`$ fulfills the standard spin-level condition \[4-6,8-14\] $`k/2<j1/2`$, and (II) a discrete spectrum where $`j`$ fulfills $`j=Nk/2`$ ($`N`$ positive integer). The discrete spectrum describes very massive string states, with asymptotic behaviour $`m^2\alpha ^{}N^2`$ ($`N`$ positive integer) . This is in precise agreement with previous results obtained using semi-classical quantization , and the same asymptotic behaviour was also obtained in the recent paper .

Unfortunately, the states (4.4)-(4.5) are somewhat complicated to work with since they are not eigenstates of the annihilation operator. Therefore it would be useful to express them in terms of the states (2.25). More generally, let us consider the off-shell relationship between states (2.25) and states (4.4). Clearly, the two types of coherent states are not orthogonal

$$<\mu |\stackrel{~}{\mu }_I>=\frac{(1\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu })^{j+k/2}|\mu |^{(2j+k1)/2}e^{\mu ^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu }}}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k)I_{2j+k1}(2|\mu |)}}$$
(4.8)
but it is possible to express (say) the states $`|\stackrel{~}{\mu }_I>`$ in terms of the states $`|\mu >`$. However, since the states $`|\mu >`$ form an over-complete set, the expression will of course not be unique. So, we just give an example:

For fixed $`2j+k`$, we first introduce normalized basis states $`|n>`$

$$|n>=\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k+n)}}\left(J_1^+\right)^n|jj>;<n|m>=\delta _{nm}$$
(4.9)
It follows that

$$<n|\mu >=\frac{|\mu |^{(2j+k1)/2}\mu ^n}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k+n)I_{2j+k1}(2|\mu |)}}$$
(4.10)
as well as

$$|n>=d^2\mu f_n(\mu )|\mu >$$
(4.11)
where

$$f_n(\mu )=\frac{\mu _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}e^{\frac{1}{2}\mu ^{}\mu }}{2^{n+1}\pi |\mu |^{(2j+k1)/2}}\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k+n)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)}I_{2j+k1}(2|\mu |)}$$
(4.12)
Using eq.(4.4), we eventually get the formal expression

$$|\stackrel{~}{\mu }_I>=(1\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu })^{j+k/2}\underset{n=0}{}\stackrel{~}{\mu }^n\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k+n)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2j+k)}}d^2\mu f_n(\mu )|\mu >$$
(4.13)
which is the desired result.

## 5 Conclusion

We studied the properties of exact (all level $`k`$) quantum coherent states in the context of Kac -Moody algebras (WZWN models).

Quantum coherent states in the context of string theory on a group manifold (WZWN models) are important since they may help solving the unitarity problem: Having positive norm (no ghost-states appear in the string spectrum), they consistently include the high massive strings (which otherwise are excluded by the spin-level condition).

Coherent states admit (at least) two alternative definitions: (i) as the exponential of the creation operator acting on the ground state, and (ii) as eigenstates of the annhilation operator. In the $`k\mathrm{}`$ limit, all the known properties of usual coherent states are recovered.

In ordinary quantum mechanics and string theory in flat space time (with the usual commutator algebra of harmonic oscillators), the two alternative definitions (i) and (ii) are equivalent. This is not the case in the context of Kac-Moody algebras as in the WZWN models.

In this paper we have constructed coherent states as defined by (ii), compared them to the states (i) we previously constructed, and computed the uncertainty relation in this context. Modification to the Heisenberg relation is given by $`2/k`$ where $``$ is connected to the string energy. Coherent states (ii) are generally much easier to work with and satisfy automatically and for any $`k`$ the minimal uncertainty condition. They are thus quassiclassical, in some sense more classical than states (i) which only satisfy it in the $`k\mathrm{}`$ limit.

The coherent states (ii) reduce, for $`k=0`$, to the group-related $`SU(1,1)`$ coherent states constructed in , as explained in the introduction. In the opposite limit, for $`k\mathrm{}`$, they reduce to the standard canonical coherent states .

Acknowledgements
A.L.L. would like to thank the Ambassade de France à Copenhague, Service Culturel et Scientifique for financial support in Paris, during the preparation of this paper.


text:
# Implications of modes of star formation for the overall dynamics of galactic disks

## 1. Massive star formation and disk stability

In an influential study Kennicutt (1989) has introduced the concept that massive star formation in spiral galaxies is related to a general gravitational instability of the gas disks of the galaxies. He demonstrated for a sample of Sc galaxies that the inner parts of the disks with massive star formation, which is observed in the form of numerous HII regions, have sharp outer radial boundaries, which coincide with the threshold of gravitational instability of the gas disks. Doubts about this concept were raised by Ferguson et al. (1996, 1998). They have shown that this transition is not as sharp as claimed by Kennicutt (1989), because they detected HII regions also in the outer parts of the disks of some of the galaxies in Kennicutt’s sample. Furthermore they have argued that the gas disk of the prototype galaxy of the sample, NGC 6946, might not have reached the threshold of instability at all.

It is the aim of the present paper to point out implications of the concept of gravitational instability of the gaseous components of galactic disks for the overall stability of galactic disks.

Since the pioneering works of Safronov (1963) and Toomre (1964) there is a rich literature on disk stability which cannot be reviewed here in its entirety, but I recall only the basic principles. The gravitational stability of rotating, self gravitating disks is regulated by two effects. First there is the well known Jeans instability, which implies that perturbations of the disks with scales larger than the Jeans length are dynamically unstable,

$$\lambda >\lambda _\mathrm{J}=\frac{\sigma ^2}{G\mathrm{\Sigma }},$$
(1)
where $`\sigma `$ denotes the turbulent velocity dispersion in the case of a gas disk, or the stellar velocity dispersion in case of a star disk. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ denotes the surface density of the disk and $`G`$ is the constant of gravity. In a rotating disk, however, there is an upper limit to the scales on which perturbations can grow. When a patch of a disk shrinks, its detailed angular momentum referred to the center of the patch is conserved. This leads to additional centrifugal forces tearing the patch apart, and perturbations on scales larger than

$$\lambda >\lambda _\mathrm{c}=\frac{G\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\mathrm{\Omega }^2},$$
(2)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ denotes the angular velocity of the disk, are suppressed. Obviously, if the upper limit is smaller than the lower limit,

$$\lambda _\mathrm{c}<\lambda _\mathrm{J},$$
(3)
the disk is stable on all scales. If the rhs of equation (3) is divided by the lhs, the stability criterion can be expressed by a single number, the famous Toomre $`Q`$ stability parameter. It is derived by searching for ring–like solutions of either the hydrodynamical, the Jeans equations or the Boltzmann equation in the case of a star disk combined with the Poisson equation in order to take account of the self–gravity of the perturbations. It can be shown that the stable solutions are separated from the unstable, growing solutions in a parameter space spanned by the radial wave lengths of the ring–like density perturbations expressed in terms of the critical wave length, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}=4\pi ^2G\mathrm{\Sigma }/\kappa ^2`$, and the stability parameter $`Q`$,

$$Q=\frac{\sigma _\mathrm{U}\kappa }{\alpha G\mathrm{\Sigma }},$$
(4)
where $`\sigma _\mathrm{U}`$ denotes the turbulent velocity dispersion of the gas or the radial stellar velocity dispersion and $`\kappa `$ is the epicyclic frequency, $`\kappa =\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Omega }\sqrt{2+\frac{r}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\frac{d\mathrm{\Omega }}{dr}}`$. $`\alpha `$ is a numerical coefficient, which is equal to $`\pi `$ for an isothermal gas disk and ranges between 3.6 and 3.9 for a star disk depending on the exact form of the velocity distribution (Toomre 1964, Fuchs & von Linden 1998). This is illustrated in Fig. 1 for the simplest case of an isothermal gas disk. The line separating the stable from the unstable solutions is given by (cf. Binney & Tremaine 1987)

$$1=\frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}}{|\lambda |}\frac{1}{1+\frac{Q^2}{4}\left(\frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}}{\lambda }\right)^2}.$$
(5)
As can be seen from from Fig. 1 the disk is stable on all scales, if

$$Q1.$$
(6)
The criterion for stability becomes more complicated, if the disk consists of more than one component (Biermann 1975, Jog & Solomom 1984, Romeo 1992, Elmegreen 1995, Fuchs & von Linden 1998). I shall not go here through a mathematical derivation, but illustrate the main effect by a ‘Gedanken’–experiment. Suppose one splits a disk into two equal halves, which means according to their definitions that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,2}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2}=\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}`$, and $`Q_{1,2}=2Q`$. The surface separating stable from unstable solutions is given by

$`1={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}}{|\lambda |}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+\frac{Q_1^2}{4}\left(\frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}}{\lambda }\right)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}{|\lambda |}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+\frac{Q_2^2}{4}\left(\frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}}{\lambda }\right)^2}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{2}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}}{|\lambda |}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+\frac{(2Q)^2}{4}\left(\frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}}{2\lambda }\right)^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}}{|\lambda |}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+\frac{Q^2}{4}\left(\frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}}{\lambda }\right)^2}}.`$ (7)
Thus, if for example $`Q=1`$, the two components with $`Q=2`$ would be deemed rather stable, whereas the compound disk is on the brink of instability. This means in particular for a galactic disk with a star and gas disk that only

$$Q_{}>1\mathrm{and}Q_\mathrm{g}>1$$
(8)
ensures dynamical stability. The reverse is also true: if one of the subsystems is unstable, the entire disk is dynamically unstable. This is in my view a worrying aspect of the concept of Kennicutt (1989) of dynamically unstable gas disks.

## 2. The prototype Sc galaxy NGC 6946

NGC 6946 has been studied in great detail. The radial distributions of atomic and molecular hydrogen, the radial optical surface brightness profile and estimates of the radial variation of the star formation rate as deduced from Hα observations can be found in Tacconi & Young (1986). In the following I have converted densities of molecular hydrogen to the CO–to–H2 conversion factor of Dame (1993). The rotation curve of NGC 6946 has been observed by Carignan et al. (1990), who also provide a mass model comprising a disk and a dark halo component. All the data are summarized in Table 1. The gas densities have multiplied by a factor of 1.4 in order to take account of the heavy elements. In order to determine the $`Q`$ parameters estimates of the velocity dispersions are required. For the interstellar gas I assume following Kennicutt (1989) the ubiquitously found value of 6 km/s (Dickey et al. 1990). Kamphuis & Sancisi (1993) derive from their HI observations of NGC 6946 a velocity dispersion of the HI gas of about 13 km/s in the regions of the optical disk (R25 = 16 kpc), which drops to 6 km/s outside the optical disk. Ferguson et al. (1998) have pointed out that, if the higher value is used to determine the stability parameter, $`Q_\mathrm{g}`$ does not drop below the threshold of instability. However, within about half the optical radius the interstellar gas is dominated by molecular hydrogen and the velocity dispersion of molecular clouds is typically 5 km/s (Gammie, Ostriker, & Jog 1991). I have thus chosen the velocity dispersions given in Table 1. The radial stellar velocity dispersions are not known, but can be estimated from the vertical hydrostatic equilibrium condition of the disk and assumptions about the form of the velocity ellipsoid as explained in Fuchs & von Linden (1998). The resulting stability parameters including corrections for the finite thickness of the disk are shown in Table 1.

As can be seen from Table 1 there is a distinct drop of the stability parameter of the gas disk below 1 at R = 16 kpc, which coincides with the outer boundary of the HII region disk. I conclude from this discussion like Kennicutt (1989) that the massive star forming disk of NGC 6946 is indeed dynamically unstable.

## 3. Numerical Simulations

In order to follow the onset of instability into the non–linear regime I have run together with S. von Linden numerical simulations of the evolution of an unstable gas disk embedded in a star disk. The code, originally developed by F. Combes and collaborators, implements a two–dimensional star disk (N = 38 000) in which interstellar gas clouds are embedded (N$`{}_{\mathrm{c}}{}^{}`$ 38 000). The composite disk is surrounded by rigid bulge and dark halo potentials. The gravitational potential of the star disk is calculated by a standard particle–mesh scheme and the inelastic encounters of the gas clouds is simulated by an elaborate cloud–in–cell scheme, which maintains by coalescence and fragmentation a steady mass spectrum of the clouds. Details of the simulations are described in Fuchs & von Linden (1998). The composite disk was set up initially axisymmetrically, and the $`Q`$ parameters of the stars and the gas were initially $`Q_{}2`$ and $`Q_\mathrm{g}0.5`$, respectively. Thus the composite disk was set up dynamically unstable and resembles in this the inner parts of the Sc galaxies from Kennicutt’s sample.

The next steps of the evolution of the disk are shown in Fig. 2. As expected ring–like density perturbations appear immediately in the gas disk. The wave lengths of the perturbations are of the order of the critical wave length of the gas disk, about 2 kpc at R = 10 kpc. The rings fragment into lumps with masses in the range of 104 to 107 M. These agglomerates are so heavy that the star disk responds to them by induced, ‘swing amplified’ spiral structures (Toomre 1981). The potential troughs of the star disk, on the other hand, begin to trap much of the interstellar gas, and during their further evolution both the star and gas disks undergo rather synchronous, repetitive cycles of swing amplified spiral perturbations. After 5$``$108 yrs the star disk gets heated up dynamically by the spiral activity so much that hardly any non–axisymmetric structure is any longer possible in the disk. In the gas disk, however, there is still a lot of spiral activity. Since the star disk has become dynamically inactive, the critical wave lengths of the spiral structures are much smaller, which leads to a flocculent appearance of the disk.

## 4. Discussion

The numerical simulations show that the disks of Sc galaxies like NGC 6946 are in a highly peculiar dynamical state. The reaction of the star disks to dynamically unstable gas disks is so fierce that they become dynamically hot within less than a Gyr. On the other hand, Toomre (1990) has argued that Sc galaxies must have star disks, which are dynamically active, because otherwise their morphological appearance would be quite different from what is observed. This can be clearly seen in Fig. 2, when one compares the frames corresponding to, say, 1.4$``$108 yrs and 4.8$``$108 yrs with an optical image of the galaxy which is reproduced in Fig. 3.

Thus the star disks in Sc galaxies must be effectively cooled dynamically by star formation of stars on low velocity dispersion orbits. The star formation rate required to cool the star disks has been estimated by Fuchs & von Linden (1998). They conclude from their numerical simulations that about 40% of the mass of the star disk is required per Gyr in the form of newly born stars to keep the disk in a steady dynamical state. Interestingly the presently observed star formation rate in NGC 6946 as deduced from the extinction–corrected Hα surface emissivity (Devereux & Young 1993) is actually as high as the required gas consumption rate. This is in my view not a coincidence, but has to be explained by theories of the physics of star formation. On the other hand, this mode of star formation cannot be sustained over extended periods, because a galaxy like NGC 6946 is consuming at the present rate nearly its entire gas disk within a Gyr. It will switch presumably soon to a more quiescent mode of star formation like in M 33, NGC 2403, or NGC 7331, where the threshold of dynamical instability is not reached. This is quite different in young galactic disks, where the star disks are less massive and there is an ample reservoir of interstellar gas (Fuchs et al. 2001, in preparation).

### Acknowledgments.

I am grateful to J. Gallagher for helpful discussions.

## References

Biermann, P.L. 1975, in IAU Symp. No. 69, Dynamics of Stellar Systems, ed. M. Hayli (Dordrecht: Reidel), 321

Binney, J., Tremaine, S. 1987, Galactic Dynamics (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press)

Carignan, C., Charbonneau, P., Boulanger, F. et al. 1990 A&A, 234, 43

Dame, T.M. 1993, in AIP Conf. Proc. 278, Back to the Galaxy, ed. S.S. Holt & F. Verter (New York: AIP), 267

Devereux, N.A., Young, J.S. 1993, AJ, 106, 948

Dickey, J.M., Murray Hanson, M., Helou, G. 1990, ApJ, 352, 522

Elmegreen, B.G. 1995, MNRAS, 275, 944

Ferguson, A.M.N., Wyse, R.F.G., Gallagher, J.S. et al. 1996, in The Interplay Between Massive Star Formation, the ISM and Galaxy Evolution, ed. D. Kunth, B. Guideroni, M. Heydar-Malayeri, & Trinh Xu Thuan (Gif-sur-Yvette: Edition Frontieres), 557

Ferguson, A.M.N., Wyse, R.F.G., Gallagher, J.S. et al. 1998, ApJ, 506, L19

Fuchs, B., von Linden, S. 1998 MNRAS, 294, 513

Gammie, C.F., Ostriker, J.P., Jog, C. 1991, ApJ, 378, 565

Jog, C., Solomon, P.M. 1984 ApJ, 276, 114

Kamphuis, J., Sancisi, R. 1993, A&A, 273, L31

Kennicutt, R.C. 1989, ApJ, 344, 685

Romeo, A.B. 1992, MNRAS, 256, 307

Safronov, V.S. 1960, Ann. d’Astrophys., 23, 979

Tacconi, L.J., Young, J.S. 1986, ApJ, 308, 600

Toomre, A. 1964, ApJ, 139, 1217

Toomre, A. 1981, in The Structure and Evolution of Normal Galaxies, ed. S.M. Fall & D. Lynden-Bell (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press), 111

Toomre, A. 1990, in Dynamics and Interactions of Galaxies, ed. R. Wielen (Berlin: Springer), 292