text:
# Conserved currents for general teleparallel models

## I Introduction

The concept of an energy-momentum tensor for the gravitational field is, undoubtedly, the most puzzling issue in general relativity (GR). This quantity is well defined for other classical fields acting in a fixed geometrical background and has the following properties. It is

* local \- i.e., constructed only from the fields taken at some point on a manifold and the derivatives of the fields taken at the same point,
* covariant \- i.e., transforms as a tensor under diffeomorphisms of the manifold,
* conserved \- i.e., it satisfies the covariant divergence equation $`T_{}^{\mu }{}_{\nu ;\mu }{}^{}=0`$,
* “the first integral of the field equation” \- it is derivable from the field equations by integration and includes the field derivatives with an order of one less than the order of the field equation.

It is well known that in Einstein’s theory of gravity a quantity satisfying the conditions listed above does not exist. This fact is usually related to the existence of the equivalence principle. It implies that the gravitational field can not be detected at a point as a covariant object. This conclusion can also be viewed as a purely differential-geometric fact. Indeed, the components of the metric tensor are managed by a system of second order partial differential equations. Thus the energy-momentum quantity has to be a local tensor constructed from the metric components and their first order derivatives. The corresponding theorem of (pseudo) Riemannian geometry (due to Weyl ) states that every expression of such a type is trivial. Thus the objection for the existence of a gravitational energy-momentum tensor is directly related to the geometric property of the (pseudo) Riemannian manifold.
It is natural to expect that this objection can be lifted in an alternative geometric model of gravity.
In resent time teleparallel structures in the geometry of spacetime has evoked a considerable interest for various reasons. They was considered as a possible physical relevant geometry by itself as well as an essential part of generalized non-Riemannian theories such as the Poincaré gauge theory or metric - affine gravity. Another important subject are the various applications of the frame technique in physical theories based on classical (pseudo) Riemannian geometry.
The construction of a manifold endowed with a smooth field of frames (repére, vierbein) originated in the “Repére Mobile” method of Darboux-E. Cartan  in differential geometry. Weitzenböck  was the first who recognized that this construction can be also viewed as a self-sufficient geometrical structure. The geometrical structure of the teleparallel manifold was studied intensively in the first third of the last century - see  and the references therein.
The teleparallel description of gravity has been also studied for a long time. The pioneering works of Cartan  and Einstein  dealt meaningfully with various models of unified (gravitational-electromagnetic) field theory.
Investigations in gauge field theory of gravity and in Einstein-Cartan gravity (see ,  and the references therein), renewed the interest in teleparallel geometry. In the framework of the general geometrical metric-affine theory of gravity (MAG) , the teleparallel structure appears as one of the basic substructures. Accordingly, the general Lagrangian of MAG includes the pure teleparallel terms as a separate part. For investigations in this area see Refs.  to .
The dynamics of classical fields is completely determined by an appropriate integral functional of action. One derives the field equation by applying the least action principle. Conserved field currents are the first integrals of the field equation. Hence they can be derived, in principle, from the field equations by algebraic manipulations. However, one cannot describe in this way the origin and the meaning of the conservation law. The Noether theorem (see e.g. , ) provides a natural description of conservation laws. The conserved currents are associated with the invariant properties of the action under certain groups of transformations. The Noether theorem also provides an algorithmic procedure for the actual construction of a conserved current.
Recently the classical Noether technique was extended and reformulated in the language of modern differential geometric. The investigation into the Noether technique by Wald and his collaborators  motivated mostly by the problem of the black hole entropy. Important progress in the variational technique was provided by the free variation bicomplex of Anderson . Results similar to those of Wald were obtained in the framework of this general theory. In both approaches the general diffeomorphic Lagrangians was studied.
In this article we will make use of the covariant Noether procedure for specific Lagrangians with additional (gauge) symmetry. The outline of the paper is as follows:
We start in the first section with Maxwell-scalar system in flat Minkowski space. The field equations, the conserved currents, and the energy-momentum tensor are exhibited by explicitly covariant expressions of differential forms. This is used for the comparison with the teleparallel models. The second section serves as a brief survey of the teleparallel description of gravity.
Our main results are presented in the third section. We consider a coframe-scalar system with the most general odd quadratic coframe Lagrangian. The field equation is derived in a form almost literally similar to the Maxwell equation. By applying the Noether procedure, the conserved current associated with the diffeomorphism invariance of the Lagrangian is derived. It is interpreted as the total energy-momentum current of the system. This is a conserved current. It serves as the source of the coframe field. Consequently, a redistribution of energy between material and gravitational (coframe) fields is possible in principle.
The notion of the Noether current and the Noether charge for the coframe field are introduced. The energy-momentum tensor is defined as a map of the module of current 3-forms into the module of vector fields. Thus an energy-momentum tensor for the coframe field is defined in a diffeomorphism invariant and a translational covariant way.
In the fourth section the energy-momentum tensor is calculated for various teleparallel models: the pure Yang-Mills type model, the anti-Yang-Mills type model, and the generalized teleparallel equivalent of gravity. The latter case can serve as a very close alternative to the GR description of gravity.

## II Electromagnetic-scalar system

Before diving into the consideration of the teleparallel models, let us start with a rather simple example of a system that includes a gauge vector field and a scalar field. We consider this example mostly in order to give a brief account of the Noether procedure and to fix the notations employed in this paper. It should be noted, however, that the teleparallel description of gravity will be formulated in the next section in a form very similar to the familiar description of the electromagnetic field. A coframe field (i.e. a set of four 1-forms) is a basic dynamical variable in teleparallel gravity, while electromagnetic potential 1-form serves as the basic variable in Maxwell theory. As a consequence of that, the field equations, the conserved currents and the energy-momentum tensor in both theories will turn out to be of similar form.

### A Lagrangian

Let the Minkowski space of special relativity be given, i.e., a flat $`4D`$-manifold $`M`$ with a metric $`\eta _{ab}=(1,+1,+1,+1)`$ and with vanishing torsion. Consider a real even 1-form field $`A`$ which couples minimally to a complex even scalar field $`\phi `$. The total Lagrangian density for the system is given by an odd differential 4-form

$$L={}_{}{}^{(e)}L+{}_{}{}^{(s)}L=\frac{1}{2}FF\frac{1}{2}D\phi \overline{D\phi },$$
(1)
where

$$F=dA,\text{and}D\phi =(d+ieA)\phi $$
(2)
are the even forms of the corresponding field strengths. $`\overline{D\phi }`$ means the complex conjugate, and $``$ denotes the Hodge dual map defined by the flat metric $`\eta _{ab}`$. Our conventions for the operations on forms are listed in the Appendix.
The Lagrangian density (1) is invariant under the actions of two continuous groups: the Poincaré group of transformations of M, and the internal $`U(1)`$-gauge group of transformations of the field $`A`$. Hence two conserved currents of a different nature is expected for the system (1).
The infinitesimal variation of the Lagrangian is given by the variational relation

$$\delta L=\delta FF\mathrm{Re}(\delta (D\phi )\overline{D\phi }).$$
(3)
Applying the Leibniz rule to extract the total derivatives and using (2) we obtain an equivalent form of the variation relation (3)

$`\delta L`$ $`=`$ $`\delta A\left(dF+e\mathrm{Im}(\phi \overline{D\phi })\right)+\mathrm{Re}(\delta \phi \overline{DD\phi })`$ (5)
$`+d(\delta AF\mathrm{Re}(\delta \phi \overline{D\phi })).`$
### B Field equations

The variation (5) of the Lagrangian has to vanish for a class of arbitrary infinitesimal variations of the dynamical variables $`A`$ and $`\phi `$, hence it should be zero also for a subclass of independent variations vanishing at infinity. The total derivative term in (5) vanishes for such variations, while the first two terms result in two field equations. The field equation for the scalar field is

$$DD\phi =0,$$
(6)
while the field equation for the electromagnetic field is

$$dF={}_{}{}^{(s)}I,\mathrm{or}ddA={}_{}{}^{(s)}I.$$
(7)
The odd 3-form in the right hand side of (7) is the electromagnetic current produced by the complex scalar field

$${}_{}{}^{(s)}I=e\mathrm{Im}(\phi \overline{D\phi }),$$
(8)
which serves as a source for the field strength $`F`$.
Observe the structure of the field equations (7). The left hand side is the exterior derivative of the Hodge dual of the odd strength (2-form) while the right hand side is the odd form of a current (3-form). We will see later that this is a generic structure.
An immediate consequence of the field equation (7) is the conservation law for the electromagnetic current

$$d{}_{}{}^{(s)}I=0$$
(9)
This current is known to be associated with the $`U(1)`$-gauge symmetry of the Lagrangian (1). Let us turn, however, to another conserved current associated with the invariance of the total Lagrangian (1) under the action of Poincaré group of the space-time transformations.

### C Conserved currents

On shell, i.e., for the fields satisfying the field equations (6) and (7), the variation relation (5) reduces to

$$d\left({}_{}{}^{(e)}\mathrm{\Theta }+{}_{}{}^{(s)}\mathrm{\Theta }\right)\delta L=0,$$
(10)
where the 3-forms for the electromagnetic and for the scalar fields are

$${}_{}{}^{(e)}\mathrm{\Theta }=\delta AF,\text{and}{}_{}{}^{(s)}\mathrm{\Theta }=\mathrm{Re}(\delta \phi \overline{D\phi }).$$
(11)
Consider a vector field $`X`$ which represents an infinitesimal action of the Poincaré group on $`M`$. Let the variations of the fields $`\delta A`$ and $`\delta \phi `$ be produced by the Lie derivative operator $`_X`$ taken with respect to $`X`$. Since the Lagrangian (1) is Poincaré invariant, its variation, being generated by the variations of the fields, will also be produced by the Lie derivative $`_X`$. Thus the equations $`\delta \phi =_X\phi ,\delta A=_XA`$ result in $`\delta L=_XL.`$ We will make use of a known formula for the Lie derivative of an arbitrary $`p`$-form $`\alpha `$

$$_X\alpha =d(X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\alpha )+X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\alpha .$$
(12)
Note that the first term in the right hand side of (12) vanishes for scalars. The second term is zero for $`4`$-forms. Hence, the Lie derivative and consequently the variation of an arbitrary Lagrangian 4-form is a total derivative. After substituting the corresponding expressions for the variations into (10) it takes a form of a conservation law for a certain odd 3-form $`J(X)`$

$$dJ(X)=0.$$
(13)
This 3-form is expressed as the sum of the electromagnetic and the scalar parts

$$J(X)={}_{}{}^{(e)}J(X)+{}_{}{}^{(s)}J(X).$$
(14)
This fact is in agreement with the minimal coupling form of the Lagrangian (1). The explicit expressions for the currents are

$`{}_{}{}^{(e)}J(X)`$ $`=`$ $`(d(X\text{ }\text{ }A)+(X\text{ }\text{ }F))FX\text{ }\text{ }{}_{}{}^{(e)}L,`$ (15)
$`{}_{}{}^{(s)}J(X)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Re}\left((X\text{ }\text{ }d\phi )\overline{D\phi }\right)X\text{ }\text{ }{}_{}{}^{(s)}L.`$ (16)
The conserved 3-form $`J(X)`$ can be considered as a preliminary candidate for the total energy-momentum current for the scalar-electromagnetic system. It is odd, covariant, local, and associated with the transformations of the manifold. Unfortunately, the electromagnetic 3-form (15) includes a term (the first one) with a non-algebraic dependence on the vector field $`X`$. Consequence will be shown that only a current which depends linearly (algebraic) on an arbitrary vector field admits a reformulation in terms of the energy-momentum tensor. Observe also another problem with the reduction (14). The electromagnetic part (15) and the scalar part (16) are not separately gauge invariant.
The 3-form $`J(X)`$ can be amended in order to avoid the non-algebraic dependence on an arbitrary vector $`X`$ and also to recover the separate gauge invariance of its pieces. For that, we use the Leibniz rule for extracting the total derivative in the first term of (15). Apply the field equation (7) to obtain a new reduction

$$J(X)={}_{}{}^{(e)}𝒯(X)+{}_{}{}^{(s)}𝒯(X)+d\left({}_{}{}^{(e)}Q(X)\right),$$
(17)
where the 3-forms are

$`{}_{}{}^{(e)}𝒯(X)`$ $`=`$ $`(X\text{ }\text{ }F)F{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}X\text{ }\text{ }(FF),`$ (18)
$`{}_{}{}^{(s)}𝒯(X)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Re}((X\text{ }\text{ }D\phi )\overline{D\phi })+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}X\text{ }\text{ }(D\phi \overline{D\phi }).`$ (19)
As for the 2-form $`{}_{}{}^{(e)}Q(X)`$, it is exhibited as

$${}_{}{}^{(e)}Q(X)=(X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }A)F.$$
(20)
The 3-forms $`{}_{}{}^{(s)}𝒯(X)`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{(e)}𝒯(X)`$ are odd, covariant, local and their sum

$$𝒯(X)={}_{}{}^{(e)}𝒯(X)+{}_{}{}^{(s)}𝒯(X)$$
(21)
is conserved:

$$d𝒯(X)=0.$$
(22)
Thus $`𝒯(X)`$ can be interpreted as the total conserved current of the system. Accordingly, by  the 3-forms (18), (19) will be refereed to as the electromagnetic and the scalar Noether currents correspondingly. As for the odd 2-form $`Q(X)`$ it can be identified with the Noether charge . Note that this object is not gauge invariant and depends only on the electromagnetic field variables.
As for the gauge invariance of the reduction (14), it is recovered: the electromagnetic part (18) and the scalar part (19) are both gauge invariant.
Although, the 3-forms $`{}_{}{}^{(s)}𝒯(X)`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{(m)}𝒯(X)`$ depend on an arbitrary vector field $`X`$, this dependence is algebraically linear. Thus every one of these currents can be treated as a linear map of the module of vector fields on $`M`$ into the module of 3-forms on $`M`$, i.e., as a tensor field. A natural representation of a linear map on vector spaces (on modules) is obtained by its action on the basis vectors. In this case the currents are refereed to as the canonical currents of the corresponding fields. Take $`e_a=/x^a`$ to obtain the canonical energy-momentum current of the electromagnetic field

$${}_{}{}^{(e)}𝒯_{a}^{}:={}_{}{}^{(e)}𝒯(e_a)=(e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }F)F\frac{1}{2}e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(FF),$$
(23)
and the canonical energy-momentum current of the scalar field

$${}_{}{}^{(s)}𝒯_{a}^{}:={}_{}{}^{(s)}𝒯(e_a)=\mathrm{Re}((e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }D\phi )\overline{D\phi })+\frac{1}{2}e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(D\phi \overline{D\phi }).$$
(24)
The canonical Noether charge 2-form for the electromagnetic field can also be defined:

$${}_{}{}^{(e)}Q_{a}^{}:={}_{}{}^{(e)}Q(e_a)=(e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }A)F.$$
(25)
Recall that this quantity is not gauge invariant.

### D The energy-momentum tensor

Let us introduce now the notion of the energy-momentum tensor by this differential-form formalism. We are looking for a second rank tensor field of a type $`(0,2)`$. Such a tensor can always be treated as a bilinear map

$$T:𝒳(M)\times 𝒳(M)(M),$$

where $`(M)`$ is the algebra of $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-functions on $`M`$ while $`𝒳(M)`$ is the $`(M)`$-module of vector fields on $`M`$. The unique way to construct a scalar from a 3-form and a vector is is to take the Hodge dual of the 3-form and to contract the result by the vector. Consequently, we define the energy-momentum tensor as

$$T(X,Y):=Y\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒯(X).$$
(26)
Observe that this quantity is a tensor if and only if the 3-form current $`𝒯`$ depends linearly (algebraic) on the vector field $`X`$. Certainly, $`T(X,Y)`$ is not symmetric in general. The canonical form of the energy-momentum tensor is defined as

$$T_{ab}:=T(e_a,e_b)=e_b\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒯_a.$$
(27)
Another useful form of this tensor can be obtained from (27) by applying the rule (A15)

$$T_{ab}=(\vartheta _b𝒯_a).$$
(28)
The familiar relation $`T_{a}^{}{}_{}{}^{b}=\eta ^{bc}T_{ac}`$ defines tensors of a type $`(1,1)`$

$$T_{a}^{}{}_{}{}^{b}=(\vartheta ^b𝒯_a),$$
(29)
and

$$T_{}^{a}{}_{b}{}^{}=(\vartheta _b𝒯^a),$$
(30)
which are different for non-symmetric $`T_{ab}`$. By applying the rule (A9) the relation (27) can be converted into

$$𝒯_a=T_{a}^{}{}_{}{}^{b}\vartheta _b.$$
(31)
Thus the components of the energy-momentum tensor are the coefficients of the current $`𝒯_a`$ in the dual basis $`\vartheta ^a`$ of the vector space $`\mathrm{\Omega }^3`$ of odd 3-forms.
In order to justify our definition of the energy-momentum tensor let us first show that the current satisfies the ordinary conservation law. The coframe $`\vartheta ^a=0`$ is close, thus $`d\vartheta _b=0`$. From (31) we derive

$$d𝒯_a=dT_{a}^{}{}_{}{}^{b}\vartheta _b=T_{a}^{}{}_{}{}^{b}{}_{,b}{}^{}1.$$

Hence the differential-form conservation law $`d𝒯_a=0`$ is equivalent to the tensorial conservation law $`T_{a}^{}{}_{}{}^{b}{}_{,b}{}^{}=0`$ and conversely.
Let us write down the explicit forms of the energy-momentum tensor.
For the electromagnetic field we obtain by substituting (18) in (25) and using (A15,A17)

$${}_{}{}^{(e)}T(X,Y)=((X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }F)(Y\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }F))<X,Y>L.$$
(32)
By this formula the energy-momentum tensor in an explicitly symmetric form:

$${}_{}{}^{(e)}T(X,Y)={}_{}{}^{(e)}T(Y,X).$$
(33)
The canonical form of the electromagnetic energy-momentum tensor is

$$T_{ab}={}_{}{}^{(e)}T(e_a,e_b)=((e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }F)(e_b\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }F))\eta _{ab}L.$$
(34)
In a specific coordinate chart $`\{x^\mu \}`$ we take the coordinate basis vectors $`X=_\alpha `$ and $`Y=_\beta `$ to obtain the familiar expression for the energy-momentum tensor of the electromagnetic field

$${}_{}{}^{(e)}T_{\alpha \beta }^{}:={}_{}{}^{(e)}T(_\alpha ,_\beta )=F_{\alpha \mu }F_{\beta }^{}{}_{}{}^{\mu }+\frac{1}{4}\eta _{\alpha \beta }F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }.$$
(35)
This tensor is obviously traceless: $`\eta ^{\alpha \beta }T_{\alpha \beta }=0`$.
For the scalar field we obtain using (19) an explicitly symmetric form of the energy-momentum tensor

$${}_{}{}^{(s)}T(X,Y)=\mathrm{Re}((X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }D\phi )(Y\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\overline{D\phi }))<X,Y>L.$$
(36)
In a specific coordinate chart $`\{x^\mu \}`$ we use the covariant derivative notations $`D\phi =D_\alpha \phi dx^\alpha `$ to derive the familiar expression for the energy-momentum tensor of a complex scalar field.

$${}_{}{}^{(s)}T_{\alpha \beta }^{}=\mathrm{Re}(D_\alpha \phi D_\beta \overline{\phi })+\frac{1}{2}\eta _{\alpha \beta }(D_\mu \phi \overline{D^\mu \phi }).$$
(37)
## III Teleparallel gravity

Let us give a brief account of gravity on teleparallel manifolds. Consider a coframe field $`\{\vartheta ^a,a=0,1,2,3\}`$ defined on a $`4D`$ differential manifold $`M`$. The 1-forms $`\vartheta ^a`$ declared to be pseudo-orthonormal. This determines completely a metric on the manifold $`M`$ via the relation

$$g=\eta _{ab}\vartheta ^a\vartheta ^b.$$
(38)
Thus it is possible to consider the coframe field $`\vartheta ^a`$ as a basic dynamical variable and to treat the metric $`g`$ as only a secondary structure.
In order to have an isotropic structure on $`M`$ (without peculiar directions) the coframe variable have to be defined only up to global pseudo-rotations of the group $`SO(1,3)`$. Thus, the truly dynamical variable is the equivalence class of coframes $`[\vartheta ^a]`$ is , while the global pseudo-rotations produce the equivalence relation on this class. Hence, in addition to the invariance under the diffeomorphic transformations of the manifold $`M`$, the basic geometric structure has to be global $`SO(1,3)`$ invariant.
Recall the well known property of the teleparallel geometry: it is possible to define the parallelism of two vectors at different points by comparing the components of the vectors in local frames. Namely, two vectors (1-forms) are parallel if the corresponding components are proportional when referred to a local frame (coframe). This absolute parallelism can be treated as a global path independent parallel transport. In the affine-connections formalism such a transport is described by existence of a special teleparallel connections of vanishing curvature . The Riemannian curvature of the manifold which is constructed from the metric (38) is non-zero, in general.
Gravity is described by the teleparallel geometry in a way similar to Einstein theory, i.e., by differential-geometric invariants of the structure.
Looking for such invariants, an important distinction between the metric and the teleparallel structures emerges.
The metric structure admits diffeomorphic invariants of the second order or greater. The metric invariants of the first order are trivial. The unique invariant of the second order is the scalar curvature. This expression plays the role of an integrand in the Einstein-Hilbert action.
The teleparallel structure admits diffeomorphic and $`SO(1,3)`$ global invariants of the first order. The simplest example of such invariants is the expression $`e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\vartheta ^a`$. The class of quadratic diffeomorphic invariant and global covariant operators is exhibited in . These operators serve to construct a general class of field equations . Restrict the consideration to field equations derivable from an action integral. The corresponding Lagrangian has to be odd, quadratic (in the first order derivatives of the coframe field $`\vartheta ^a`$), diffeomorphic, and global $`SO(1,3)`$ invariant. It can be constructed as a linear combination of three Weitzenböck quadratic teleparallel invariants . The symmetric form of this Lagrangian is

$$L=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\rho _i{}_{}{}^{(i)}L$$
(39)
with

$`{}_{}{}^{(1)}L`$ $`=`$ $`d\vartheta ^ad\vartheta _a,`$ (40)
$`{}_{}{}^{(2)}L`$ $`=`$ $`(d\vartheta _a\vartheta ^a)(d\vartheta _b\vartheta ^b),`$ (41)
$`{}_{}{}^{(3)}L`$ $`=`$ $`(d\vartheta _a\vartheta ^b)(d\vartheta _b\vartheta ^a).`$ (42)
The coefficients $`\rho _i`$ are dimensionless free parameters of the theory.
Every term of the Lagrangian (39) is independent of a specific choice of a coordinate system and invariant under the global (rigid) $`SO(1,3)`$ transformations of the coframe. Thus different choices of the free parameters $`\rho _i`$ yield different translation invariant classical field models. Some of them are known to be applicable for description of the gravitational field.
The field equation is derived from the Lagrangian (39) in the form ,

$`\rho _1(2dd\vartheta _a+e_a\text{ }\text{ }(d\vartheta ^bd\vartheta _b)2(e_a\text{ }\text{ }d\vartheta ^b)d\vartheta _b)+`$ (43)
$`\rho _2(2\vartheta _ad(d\vartheta ^b\vartheta _b)+2d\vartheta _a(d\vartheta ^b\vartheta _b)+`$ (44)
$`e_a\text{ }\text{ }(d\vartheta ^c\vartheta _c(d\vartheta ^b\vartheta _b))2(e_a\text{ }\text{ }d\vartheta ^b)\vartheta _b(d\vartheta ^c\vartheta _c))+`$ (45)
$`\rho _3(2\vartheta _bd(\vartheta _ad\vartheta ^b)+2d\vartheta _b(\vartheta _ad\vartheta ^b)+`$ (46)
$`e_a\text{ }\text{ }(\vartheta _cd\vartheta ^b(d\vartheta ^c\vartheta _b))2(e_a\text{ }\text{ }d\vartheta ^b)\vartheta _c(d\vartheta ^c\vartheta _b))=0.`$ (47)
In  the class of “diagonal” spherical-symmetric static solution to the field equation (43) is described. It was also shown there that a solution with Newtonian behavior at infinity appears only in the case $`\rho _1=0.`$ This is the Schwarzschild coframe

$`\vartheta ^0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1m/2r}{1+m/2r}}dt,\vartheta ^i=\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{m}{2r}}\right)^2dx^i,i=1,2,3,`$ (48)
which yields via (38) the Schwarzschild metric in isotropic coordinates.
Few remarks on the structure of the field equation (43) are now in order.
On one hand, the coframe field is a complex of $`16`$ independent variables at every point of $`M`$ while the symmetric metric tensor field has only $`10`$ independent components. An additional requirement of local $`SO(1,3)`$ invariance, which satisfied in the case

$$\rho _1=0,\rho _2+2\rho _3=0$$
(49)
restricts the set of 16 independent variables to a subset of $`10`$ variables. This subset is certainly related to 10 independent components of the metric.
On the second hand for an arbitrary choice of the parameters $`\rho _i`$ the field equation (43) is a system of 16 independent equations. This system can be reduced to two covariant systems - a symmetric tensorial system of 10 independent equations and an antisymmetric tensorial system of 6 independent equations. In  it was shown that, if (49) holds, the antisymmetric equation vanishes identically. Thus in the case of local $`SO(1,3)`$ invariance the system (43) is restricted to a system of 10 independent equations for 10 independent variables. Therefore the coframe (teleparallel) structure coincides with the metric structure. The local $`SO(1,3)`$ invariant teleparallel model is referred to as the teleparallel equivalent of gravity -.

## IV Coframe-scalar system

### A The total Lagrangian

Let a differential $`4D`$-manifold $`M`$ be given. Consider a system containing two smooth fields defined on $`M`$: an even coframe field $`\vartheta ^a`$ and an even (real) scalar field $`\phi `$. Our goal is to derive a conserved current expression for the coframe field for a set of models parameterized by the constants $`\rho _i`$. As in the case of the electromagnetic field, the scalar field $`\phi `$ will play a role of an indicator of a true current.
The minimal coupling total Lagrangian density of the system is an odd 4-form, which can be written as a sum of the coframe Lagrangians with the scalar Lagrangian

$$L={}_{}{}^{(c)}L+{}_{}{}^{(s)}L=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\rho _i{}_{}{}^{(i)}L\frac{1}{2}d\phi d\phi ,$$
(50)
where the coframe Lagrangians $`{}_{}{}^{(i)}L`$ are as defined in (40-42).
The standard computations of the variation of a Lagrangian defined on a teleparallel manifold are rather complicated. It is because one needs to vary not only the coframe $`\vartheta ^a`$ itself, but also the the dual frame $`e_a`$ and even the Hodge dual operator, that depends on the coframe implicitly .
In order to avoid these technical problems we will rewrite the total Lagrangian (50) in a compact form which will be useful for the variation procedure.
Consider the exterior differentials of the basis 1-forms $`d\vartheta ^a`$ and introduce the $`C`$-coefficients of their expansion in the basis of even 2-forms $`\vartheta ^{ab}`$ (we use here and later the abbreviation $`\vartheta ^{ab\mathrm{}}=\vartheta ^a\vartheta ^b\mathrm{}`$)

$$d\vartheta ^a=\vartheta _{\beta ,\alpha }^adx^\alpha dx^\beta :=\frac{1}{2}C_{}^{a}{}_{bc}{}^{}\vartheta ^{bc}.$$
(51)
By definition, the coefficients $`C_{}^{a}{}_{bc}{}^{}`$ are antisymmetric: $`C_{}^{a}{}_{bc}{}^{}=C_{}^{a}{}_{cb}{}^{}.`$ The explicit expression can be derived from the definition (51)

$$C_{}^{a}{}_{bc}{}^{}:=e_c\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(e_b\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\vartheta ^a).$$
(52)
In terms of the $`C`$-coefficients the teleparallel parts of the Lagrangian (50) are

$`{}_{}{}^{(1)}L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_{abc}C^{abc}1,`$ (53)
$`{}_{}{}^{(2)}L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_{abc}\left(C^{abc}+C^{bca}+C^{cab}\right)1,`$ (54)
$`{}_{}{}^{(3)}L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(C_{abc}C^{abc}2C_{}^{a}{}_{ac}{}^{}C_{b}^{}{}_{}{}^{bc}\right)1.`$ (55)
The form (53) is useful for a proof of the completeness of the set of quadratic invariants . It is enough to consider all the possible combinations of the indices. Thus a linear combination of the Lagrangians (53) is the most general quadratic coframe Lagrangian.
Using (53) we rewrite the coframe Lagrangian in a compact form

$${}_{}{}^{(c)}L=\frac{1}{4}C_{abc}C_{ijk}\lambda ^{abcijk}1,$$
(56)
where the constant symbols

$`\lambda ^{abcijk}`$ $`:=`$ $`(\rho _1+\rho _2+\rho _3)\eta ^{ai}\eta ^{bj}\eta ^{ck}+\rho _2(\eta ^{aj}\eta ^{bk}\eta ^{ci}+\eta ^{ak}\eta ^{bi}\eta ^{cj})`$ (58)
$`2\rho _3\eta ^{ac}\eta ^{ik}\eta ^{bj}`$
are introduced. It can be checked, by straightforward calculation, that these $`\lambda `$-symbols are invariant under a transposition of the triplets of indices

$$\lambda ^{abcijk}=\lambda ^{ijkabc}.$$
(59)
We also introduce an abbreviated notation

$$F^{abc}:=\lambda ^{abcijk}C_{ijk}.$$
(60)
As for the scalar Lagrangian, it can also be rewritten in a product form similar to (56) by introducing the scalar notations for the derivatives

$$d\phi =\phi _a\vartheta ^a,\text{or}\phi _a=e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\phi .$$
(61)
The total Lagrangian (50) reads now as

$$L=\frac{1}{4}\left(C_{abc}F^{abc}2\phi _a\phi ^a\right)1.$$
(62)
### B Variation of the Lagrangian

Using the symmetry property of the $`\lambda `$-symbols (59) the variation of the total Lagrangian (62) takes the form

$$\delta L=\frac{1}{2}(\delta C_{abc}F^{abc}2\delta \phi _a\phi ^a)1L\delta (1).$$
(63)
The variation of the volume element is

$`\delta (1)`$ $`=`$ $`\delta (\vartheta ^{0123})=\delta \vartheta ^0\vartheta ^{123}\mathrm{}=\delta \vartheta ^0\vartheta ^0\mathrm{}`$
$`=`$ $`\delta \vartheta ^m\vartheta _m.`$
Thus

$$L\delta (1)=(\delta \vartheta ^m\vartheta _m)L=\delta \vartheta ^m(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }L)$$
(64)
As for the variation of the $`C`$-coefficients, we calculate them by equating the variations of the two sides of the equation (51)

$$\delta d\vartheta _a=\frac{1}{2}\delta C_{amn}\vartheta ^{mn}+C_{amn}\delta \vartheta ^m\vartheta ^n.$$

Using the formulas (A12) and (A15) we derive

$`\delta d\vartheta _a\vartheta _{bc}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta C_{amn}\vartheta ^{mn}\vartheta _{bc}+C_{amn}\delta \vartheta ^m\vartheta ^n\vartheta _{bc}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta C_{amn}\vartheta ^m(e^n\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta _{bc})C_{amn}\delta \vartheta ^m(e^n\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta _{bc})`$
$`=`$ $`\delta C_{abc}1\delta \vartheta ^m\left(C_{amb}\vartheta _cC_{amc}\vartheta _b\right).`$
Therefore

$$\delta C_{abc}1=\delta (d\vartheta _a)\vartheta _{bc}+\delta \vartheta ^m(C_{amb}\vartheta _cC_{amc}\vartheta _b).$$
(65)
The variation of the scalar field coefficients $`\phi _a`$ can also be calculated using their definition (61). We write

$$\delta (d\phi )=\delta \phi _a\vartheta ^a+\phi _a\delta \vartheta ^a,$$

consequently,

$$\delta \phi ^a1=\delta (d\phi )\vartheta _a\phi _m\delta \vartheta ^m\vartheta _a.$$
(66)
After substituting (6466) into (63) the variation of the Lagrangian takes the form

$`\delta L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F^{abc}(\delta (d\vartheta _a)\vartheta _{bc}+\delta \vartheta ^m(C_{amb}\vartheta _cC_{amc}\vartheta _b))`$
$`(\delta (d\phi )\phi _m\delta \vartheta ^m)d\phi +\delta \vartheta ^m(e_m\text{ }\text{ }L).`$
Extract the total derivatives in the corresponding terms to obtain

$`\delta L`$ $`=`$ $`\delta \vartheta _m(d({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F^{mbc}\vartheta _{bc})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F^{abc}(C_{amb}\vartheta _cC_{amc}\vartheta _b)+\phi _md\phi +e_m\text{ }\text{ }L)`$ (68)
$`+\delta \phi dd\phi +d({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta \vartheta _aF^{abc}\vartheta _{bc}\delta \phi d\phi ).`$
The variation relation (68) will play a basic role in the sequel. Let us rewrite it in a compact form by introducing the following abbreviated notations.
Define one-indexed 2-forms

$$𝒞^a:=\frac{1}{2}C^{abc}\vartheta _{bc}=d\vartheta ^a.$$
(69)
and a conjugate strength 2-form

$$^a:=\frac{1}{2}F^{abc}\vartheta _{bc}=(\rho _1+\rho _3)𝒞^a+\rho _2e^a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(\vartheta ^m𝒞_m)\rho _3\vartheta ^a(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒞^m)$$
(70)
The 2-form $`^a`$ can be also represented via the irreducible (under the Lorentz group) decomposition of the 2-form $`𝒞^a`$ (see ). Write

$$𝒞^a={}_{}{}^{(1)}𝒞_{}^{a}+{}_{}{}^{(2)}𝒞_{}^{a}+{}_{}{}^{(3)}𝒞_{}^{a},$$
(71)
where

$`{}_{}{}^{(1)}𝒞_{}^{a}`$ $`=`$ $`𝒞^a{}_{}{}^{(2)}𝒞_{}^{a}{}_{}{}^{(3)}𝒞_{}^{a},`$ (72)
$`{}_{}{}^{(2)}𝒞_{}^{a}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\vartheta ^a(e_m\text{ }\text{ }𝒞^m),`$ (73)
$`{}_{}{}^{(3)}𝒞_{}^{a}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}e^a\text{ }\text{ }(\vartheta _m𝒞^m).`$ (74)
Substitute (72) into (70) to obtain

$$^a=(\rho _1+\rho _3){}_{}{}^{(1)}𝒞_{}^{a}+(\rho _12\rho _3){}_{}{}^{(2)}𝒞_{}^{a}+(\rho _1+3\rho _2+\rho _3){}_{}{}^{(3)}𝒞_{}^{a}.$$
(75)
The coefficients in (75) coincide with those calculated in .
The 2-forms $`𝒞^a`$ and $`^a`$ do not depend on a choice of a coordinate system. They change as vectors by $`SO(1,3)`$ transformations of the coframe.
Using (69) the coframe Lagrangian can be rewritten as

$${}_{}{}^{(c)}L=\frac{1}{4}C_{abc}F^{abc}1=\frac{1}{2}𝒞_a^a$$
(76)
Let us turn now to the variation relation (68). The terms of the form $`FC`$ can be rewritten as

$`F^{abc}(C_{amb}\vartheta _cC_{amc}\vartheta _b)=(F^{abc}F^{acb})C_{amb}\vartheta _c`$
$`=2C_{amb}(e^b\text{ }\text{ }^a)=2(e_m\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)^a.`$
Consequently (68) takes the form

$`\delta L`$ $`=`$ $`\delta \vartheta _m(d(^m)(e_m\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)^a+(e_m\text{ }\text{ }d\phi )d\phi +e_m\text{ }\text{ }L)`$ (78)
$`+\delta \phi dd\phi +d(\delta \vartheta _m^m\delta \phi d\phi )`$
Collect now the quadratic terms in the brackets in two different 3-forms. The scalar field 3-form is defined as

$${}_{}{}^{(s)}𝒯_{m}^{}=(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\phi )d\phi +\frac{1}{2}e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(d\phi \phi ),$$
(79)
while the coframe field 3-form is defined as

$${}_{}{}^{(c)}𝒯_{m}^{}=(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)^a\frac{1}{2}e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(𝒞_a^a).$$
(80)
In (79) and (80) the explicit expressions for the scalar and the coframe Lagrangians are inserted. We will use also the notation

$$𝒯_m={}_{}{}^{(s)}𝒯_{m}^{}+{}_{}{}^{(c)}𝒯_{m}^{}$$
(81)
for the total 3-form of the system.
Using the definitions above the variational relation (68) results in the final form

$$\delta L=\delta \vartheta _m\left(d^m𝒯^m\right)+\delta \phi dd\phi +d(\delta \vartheta _m^m\delta \phi d\phi ).$$
(82)
### C The field equations

We are ready now to write down the field equations. For the scalar field it takes the familiar form

$$dd\phi =0$$
(83)
As for the coframe, the field equation is

$$d^m=𝒯^m.$$
(84)
Note that this is the same equation as (43). The equivalence of the forms can be established by straightforward but tedious algebraic manipulations. The form of the coframe field equation (84) is exactly the same as discussed above: exterior derivative of the dual strength in the left hand side and a 3-form in the right hand side. Thus the 3-forms $`𝒯^m`$ serves as a source for the strength $`^m`$. The field equation (84) yields the conservation law

$$d𝒯_m=0.$$
(85)
Thus we obtain a conserved total 3-form for the system which is constructed from the first order derivatives of the field variables (coframe). It is local and covariant. Moreover, it is naturally reduced to the sum of a scalar field 3-form and a coframe field 3-form. The 3-form $`𝒯_m`$ is our candidate for the coframe energy-momentum current. We obtained this expression directly from the field equation and it is similar to the electromagnetic current 3-form (8). Note however an important distinction. The source term for electromagnetic field depends only on material field (scalar in our case). The electromagnetic field itself is uncharged. As for the the coframe field its source is the sum of a material (scalar) field current and a coframe field current $`{}_{}{}^{(c)}𝒯_{m}^{}`$.
In order to identify the conserved 3-form $`𝒯_m`$ with the energy-momentum current we have to answer the question: What symmetry this conserved current can be associated with?

### D Conserved currents

Return to the variational relation (82). On shell, for fields satisfying the field equations (83) and (84), it takes the form

$$\delta L=d\mathrm{\Theta }(X),$$
(86)
where

$$\mathrm{\Theta }=\delta \vartheta ^a_a\delta \phi d\phi .$$
(87)
Consider the variations of the fields produced by the Lie derivative taken relative to a smooth vector field $`X`$ on the manifold $`M`$. The total Lagrangian (62) is a diffeomorphic invariant, hence it’s variation is produced by the Lie derivative taken relative to the same vector field $`X`$. The Lie derivative of an arbitrary 4-form is a total derivative thus the the relation (86) takes a form of a conservation law for a certain 3-form

$$dJ(X)=0,J(X)=\mathrm{\Theta }(X)X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }L.$$
(88)
The explicit form of this conserved current is

$$J(X)=(d(X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta ^a)+X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒞^a)_a(X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\phi )d\phi X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }L.$$
(89)
As in the case of electromagnetic field, this quantity includes a term (the first one) which is non-linear (non-algebraic) relative to an arbitrary vector field $`X`$. Such a form of the conserved current can not be used for definition of an energy-momentum tensor. Unlike the electromagnetic case this problem can be solved merely by using the canonical form of the current.
Let us take $`X=e_a`$. The first term of (89) vanishes identically. Thus

$$J(e_m)=(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒞^a)_a(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\phi )d\phi e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }L.$$
(90)
Observe that this expression coincides with the source of the field equation (84): $`J(e_m)=𝒯_m`$. Thus the conserved current $`𝒯_m`$ is associated with the diffeomorphic invariance of the Lagrangian and consequently represents the energy-momentum current.
Another way to avoid the first term in (89) is to extract the total derivative.

$`J(X)`$ $`=`$ $`d((X\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta ^a)_a)(X\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta ^a)d_a+(X\text{ }\text{ }𝒞^a)_a`$
$`(X\text{ }\text{ }d\phi )d\phi X\text{ }\text{ }L.`$
$`=`$ $`d\left((X\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta ^a)_a\right)(X\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta ^a)(d_a𝒯_a)`$
Thus, up to the field equation (84), the current $`J(X)`$ represents a total derivative of a certain 2-form

$$J(X)=d\left((X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta ^a)_a\right).$$
(91)
This result is a special case of a general proposition due to Wald  for a diffeomorphic Lagrangians. The 2-form

$${}_{}{}^{(c)}Q(X)=(X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta ^a)_a.$$
(92)
can be referred to as the Noether charge for the coframe field. The canonical form of the Noether charge for the coframe field coincides with the dual of the conjugate strength $`^a`$.

$${}_{}{}^{(c)}Q_{a}^{}={}_{}{}^{(c)}Q(e_a)=_a.$$
(93)
Note, that such 2-form plays an important role in Wald’s treatment of the black hole entropy .

### E Energy-momentum tensor

In this section we present the expressions for the energy-momentum tensor for the scalar and coframe fields. Apply the definition (27) to the conserved current (79). Thus, the energy-momentum tensor for the scalar field is

$${}_{}{}^{(s)}T_{mn}^{}=((e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\phi )(e_n\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\phi ))+\frac{1}{2}\eta _{mn}(d\phi d\phi ).$$
(94)
Observe that this expression is symmetric $`{}_{}{}^{(s)}T_{mn}^{}={}_{}{}^{(s)}T_{nm}^{}`$ and coincides with the familiar coordinate-wise expression.
As for the coframe field, its energy-momentum tensor is derived from the current (80)

$${}_{}{}^{(c)}T_{mn}^{}=e_n\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }{}_{}{}^{(}c)𝒯_m=e_n\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }((e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)^a\frac{1}{2}e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(𝒞_a^a)).$$
(95)
Using (A15) we rewrite the first term in (95) as

$`e_n\text{ }\text{ }((e_m\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)^a)=(\vartheta _n^2[(e_m\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)^a])`$
$`=((e_m\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)^2(\vartheta _n^a))=((e_m\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)(e_n\text{ }\text{ }^a)).`$
As for the second term in (95) it takes the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}e_n\text{ }\text{ }\left(e_m\text{ }\text{ }(𝒞_a^a)\right)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\vartheta _n^2(e_m\text{ }\text{ }(𝒞_a^a))`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\vartheta _n\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta _m)(𝒞_a^a)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\eta _{mn}(𝒞_a^a).`$
Consequently the energy-momentum tensor for the coframe field is

$${}_{}{}^{(c)}T_{mn}^{}=((e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)(e_n\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }^a))+\frac{1}{2}\eta _{mn}(𝒞_a^a).$$
(96)
Observe that this expression is exactly of the same form as the familiar expression for the energy momentum tensor of the Maxwell electromagnetic field (34). It also satisfies the following
Proposition For all teleparallel models described by the Lagrangian (50) the energy-momentum tensor defined by (96) is traceless $`{}_{}{}^{(c)}T_{}^{m}{}_{m}{}^{}=0.`$
Proof Compute the trace of (96):

$`{}_{}{}^{(c)}T_{}^{m}{}_{m}{}^{}={}_{}{}^{(c)}T_{mn}^{}\eta ^{mn}=((e_m\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)(e^m\text{ }\text{ }^a))+2(𝒞_a^a)`$
$`=((e_m\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)^2(\vartheta ^m^a))+2(𝒞_a^a)`$
$`=(\vartheta ^m(e_m\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_a)^a)+2(𝒞_a^a)=0`$
In the latter equality the relation (A9) was used.

### F The field equation for a general system

The coframe field equation have been derived for a coframe-scalar system. Consider a general minimally coupled system which includes a coframe field $`\vartheta ^a`$ and a material field $`\psi `$. The material field can be a differential form of an arbitrary degree and can carry exterior and interior indices. Take the total Lagrangian of the system to be in the form

$$L={}_{}{}^{(c)}L(\vartheta ^a,d\vartheta ^a)+{}_{}{}^{(m)}L(\vartheta ^a,\psi ,d\psi ),$$
(97)
where the coframe Lagrangian is defined by (50). Take the variation of (97) relative to the coframe field $`\vartheta ^a`$

$$\delta L=\delta \vartheta _a\left(d^a{}_{}{}^{(c)}𝒯_{}^{a}{}_{}{}^{(m)}𝒯_{}^{a}\right),$$
(98)
where the material form current 3-form is defined via the variation derivative of the material Lagrangian relative to the coframe field $`\vartheta ^a`$

$${}_{}{}^{(m)}𝒯_{}^{a}:=\frac{\delta }{\delta \vartheta _a}{}_{}{}^{(m)}L.$$
(99)
Consequently, the field equation for the general system (97) takes the form

$$d^a=𝒯^a,$$
(100)
where the notion of the total current of the system $`𝒯={}_{}{}^{(c)}𝒯_{}^{a}+{}_{}{}^{(m)}𝒯_{}^{a}`$ is introduced. In the tensorial form the equation can be rewritten as

$$e_b\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d^a=T_{}^{a}{}_{b}{}^{},$$
(101)
or equivalently

$$\vartheta _bd^a=T_{}^{a}{}_{b}{}^{}1.$$
(102)
The conservation law for the total current $`d𝒯^a=0`$ is a consequence of the field equation (100).
The field equation is similar to the Maxwell field equation for the electromagnetic field. Observe, however, an important difference. The source term in the right hand side of the electromagnetic field equation depends only on external fields. The electromagnetic field itself is not charged and does not produces additional fields.
On the other hand the tensorial form (101) of the field equation is similar to the Einstein field equation for the metric tensor

$$R_{}^{a}{}_{b}{}^{}\frac{1}{2}\delta _b^aR={}_{}{}^{(m)}T_{}^{a}{}_{b}{}^{}.$$
(103)
Again, the source terms in the field equations (101) and (103) are different. The source of the Einstein gravity is the energy-momentum tensor only of the materials fields. The conservation of this tensor is a consequence of the field equation. Thus even if some meaningful conserved energy-momentum current for the metric field existed it would have been conserved regardless of the material field current. Consequently, any transmission of the energy-momentum current between the material and gravitational fields is forbidden in the framework of the traditional Einstein gravity.
As for the coframe field equation, the total energy-momentum current plays a role of the source of the field. Consequently the coframe field is completely “self-interacted” - the energy-momentum current of the coframe field produces an additional field. The conserved current of the coframe field equation is the total energy-momentum current, not only the material current. Thus the transmission of the current between the material field and the coframe field is, in principle, possible.

## V Non-gravity teleparallel models

Let us turn now to concrete teleparallel models, which can be constructed by choosing a fixed set of parameters $`\rho _i`$ in the Lagrangian (50). We start with two models, which have unique static, spherical symmetric solutions. These solutions, however, have not Newtonian limit at infinity. So these models are not viable models of gravity. We continue with the so-called teleparallel equivalent of gravity. This model has a unique static, spherical symmetric solution, which leads to the Schwarzschild metric. The consideration is restricted to the vacuum case.

### A Yang-Mills-type model

We start with a teleparallel model described by a Lagrangian 4-form of a pure Yang-Mills type

$$L=\frac{1}{2}\rho d\vartheta ^ad\vartheta _a.$$
(104)
Here the choice of the free parameters in the Lagrangian (50) is

$$\rho _1=\rho ,\rho _2=\rho _3=0.$$
(105)
The conjugate strength (70) takes the form

$$^a=\rho 𝒞^a.$$
(106)
Consequently the field equation (100) is

$$d(𝒞^a)=\frac{1}{\rho }𝒯^a,$$
(107)
where the source term is the energy-momentum current of the coframe field

$$𝒯^a=\rho ((e^a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒞_m)𝒞^m\frac{1}{2}e^a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(𝒞_m𝒞^m)).$$
(108)
It was proved in  that the field equation (107) has a unique static solution of a ”diagonal” form, which is spherical symmetric ($`r=\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}`$)

$$\vartheta ^0=\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{4/3}dt,\vartheta ^\alpha =\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{2/3}dx^\alpha \alpha =1,2,3.$$
(109)
The corresponding metric is

$$ds^2=\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{8/3}dt^2\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{4/3}(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2).$$
(110)
Substituting the solution (109) in (108) we obtain

$$𝒯_0=\frac{4}{9}\frac{\rho }{r_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{2/3}\vartheta _0,$$
(111)
$$𝒯_\alpha =\frac{4}{9}\frac{\rho }{r_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{2/3}\left(2\delta _{\alpha \beta }+5\frac{x_\alpha x_\beta }{r^2}\right)\vartheta ^\beta ,$$
(112)
where $`\alpha ,\beta =1,2,3`$ and $`\delta _{\alpha \beta }=diag\{1,1,1\}`$.
The energy-momentum tensor for the coframe field takes the form

$$T_{mn}=\frac{4}{9}\frac{\rho }{r_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{2/3}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 2+5\frac{x^2}{r^2}& 5\frac{xy}{r^2}& 5\frac{xz}{r^2}\\ 0& 5\frac{xy}{r^2}& 2+5\frac{y^2}{r^2}& 5\frac{yz}{r^2}\\ 0& 5\frac{xz}{r^2}& 5\frac{yz}{r^2}& 2+5\frac{y^2}{r^2}\end{array}\right).$$
(113)
Observe that this matrix is traceless and symmetric. The leading coefficient in (109) can be interpreted as follows. Compute the scalar curvature of the metric (110). It is negative at every point of $`M`$ and coincides with the leading coefficient of (113)

$$R=\frac{4}{9}\frac{1}{r_0^2}\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{2/3}.$$
(114)
Identify the energy of the field (109) with the $`\{00\}`$ component of the energy-momentum tensor to obtain

$$E=\frac{4}{9}\frac{\rho }{r_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{2/3}.$$
(115)
Thus, in order to have positive energy of the field, we have to require that the parameter $`\rho `$ should be negative. The choice $`\rho =1`$ is in accordance with .
Observe a remarkable relation between the energy of the coframe field and the scalar curvature

$$E=\rho R.$$
(116)
It should be noted, however, that the right hand side of (116) is invariant under local $`SO(1,3)`$ transformations of the coframe as well as under arbitrary diffeomorphisms of the manifold. The left hand side of (116), however, depends on a specific coframe and on a choice of the coordinates.
It was proved in  that the solution of the type (112) is a generic solution in a wide class of teleparallel models. For almost arbitrary choice of the parameters $`\rho _i`$ the unique spherical symmetric static solution has a form

$$\vartheta ^0=\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^adt,\vartheta ^i=\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^bdx^i,$$
(117)
where the exponents $`a`$ and $`b`$ are functions of $`\rho _i`$ ’s

$$a=\frac{2\rho _1}{2\rho _33\rho _1},b=\frac{\rho _12\rho _3}{2\rho _33\rho _1}.$$
(118)
The corresponding metrics is

$$ds^2=\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{2a}dt^2\left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^{2b}(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2).$$
(119)
The metric (119) is singular at the origin of the coordinates as well as at infinity and regular for $`0<r<\mathrm{}`$. Thus it does not have the Minkowskian limit and can not be used to describe the gravitational field.

### B Anti Yang-Mills-type model.

Consider a teleparallel model with a Lagrangian of the form

$$L=\rho d^{}\vartheta ^ad^{}\vartheta _a.$$
(120)
This is obtained from the Yang-Mills Lagrangian (104) by replacing the familiar exterior derivative operator with the coderivative operator $`d^{}=d`$. The coderivative of the basis 1-forms can be expressed by its exterior derivative

$$d^{}\vartheta ^a=(\vartheta ^{am}d\vartheta _m)=e^a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\delta \vartheta ^m).$$
(121)
Consequently, by using the rule (A9), the Lagrangian can be rewritten as

$$L=\rho \left(e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\vartheta ^m)\right)(\vartheta ^{an}d\vartheta _n)=\rho (e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }d\vartheta ^m)\vartheta ^nd\vartheta _n.$$
(122)
In order to embed the Lagrangian (122) into the general form of the teleparallel Lagrangian (50) we use again the rule (A9) to obtain

$`L=\rho (e_m\text{ }\text{ }(d\vartheta ^m\vartheta ^n)d\vartheta ^n)d\vartheta _n`$
$`=\rho d\vartheta _n\vartheta _m(d\vartheta ^m\vartheta ^n)\rho d\vartheta ^nd\vartheta _n`$
Thus the Lagrangian (120) is

$$L=\rho {}_{}{}^{(1)}L+\rho {}_{}{}^{(3)}L,$$
(123)
and the corresponding set of parameters is

$$\rho _1=\rho ,\rho _2=0,\rho _3=\rho .$$
(124)
The conjugate strength is

$$^a:=\rho \vartheta ^a(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒞^m)$$
(125)
The field equation (84) takes the form

$$d\left(\vartheta ^a(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }𝒞^m)\right)=\frac{1}{\rho }𝒯^a,$$
(126)
where the energy-momentum current $`𝒯^a`$ is obtained from (80) by inserting the conjugate strength (125).
A unique spherical symmetric, static, “diagonal” solution for the equation (126) is

$$\vartheta ^0=dt,\vartheta ^i=\left(1+\frac{r_0}{r}\right)dx^i.$$
(127)
This coframe generates an asymptotically-flat metric

$$ds^2=dt^2\left(1+\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^2(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2).$$
(128)
The metric (128) represents a point-like solution if the corresponding ADM-mass is positive. Rewrite the metric (128) in the spherical Schwarzschild-type coordinates. In the spherical coordinates the metric is

$$ds^2=dt^2\left(1+\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^2(dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2).$$

Using now the translation

$$\stackrel{~}{r}=r+r_0$$

we obtain the asymptotic-flat metric in the Schwarzschild coordinates

$$ds^2=dt^2\frac{d\stackrel{~}{r}^2}{(1\frac{r_0}{\stackrel{~}{r}})^2}\stackrel{~}{r}^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2.$$
(129)
The ADM mass for the metric (129) takes the form

$$m:=\underset{\stackrel{~}{r}\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\stackrel{~}{r}}{2}\left(1(1\frac{r_0}{\stackrel{~}{r}})^2\right)=r_0.$$
(130)
Thus by taking the parameter $`r_0`$ to be positive we obtain a particle-type solution with a finite positive ADM-mass.
The metric (128) is singular at the origin $`r=0`$ and consequently the metric (129) is singular at $`\stackrel{~}{r}=r_0`$. In order to clarify the nature of this singularity compute the scalar curvature of the metric (128) via the formula (136). The result is

$$R=\frac{r_0^2}{(r_0+r)^4}=\frac{r_0^2}{\stackrel{~}{r}^4}.$$
(131)
This function is non-zero and regular for all values of $`r`$ including the origin ($`r=0`$).
The proper distance for a radial null geodesic in the metric (129) is equal to the proper time and attach the infinity

$$l=t=_{r_0}^{\stackrel{~}{r}_1}\frac{d\stackrel{~}{r}}{1\frac{r_0}{\stackrel{~}{r}}}\mathrm{}$$

Thus the point $`r=0`$ ($`\stackrel{~}{r}=r_0`$) does not belong to any final part of the space-time.
Computing the conjugate strength with the coframe (122) we obtain

$$^a=\frac{2m\rho }{r(m+r)^2}\delta _{\mu \nu }x^\mu \vartheta ^{a\nu },$$
(132)
where $`a=0,1,2,3`$, while $`\mu ,\nu =1,2,3`$.
Calculating the energy-momentum current for the coframe field (122) we obtain

$$𝒯^0=\frac{2m^2\rho }{(m+r)^4}\vartheta ^0,$$
(133)
$$𝒯^\alpha =\frac{2m^2\rho }{(m+r)^4}\frac{x^\alpha x^\mu }{r^2}\delta _{\mu \nu }\vartheta ^\nu ,$$
(134)
Consequently the energy-momentum tensor obtains the form

$$T_{mn}=\frac{2m^2\rho }{(m+r)^4}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& \frac{x^2}{r^2}& \frac{xy}{2r^2}& \frac{xz}{2r^2}\\ 0& \frac{xy}{2r^2}& \frac{y^2}{r^2}& \frac{yz}{2r^2}\\ 0& \frac{xz}{2r^2}& \frac{yz}{2r^2}& \frac{z^2}{r^2}\end{array}\right).$$
(135)
Observe that this matrix is traceless and symmetric. The leading coefficient in (109) is proportional again to the scalar curvature. The free coefficient $`\rho `$ have to be chosen to be positive. Taking $`\rho =\frac{1}{2}`$ we obtain also in this model the relation $`E=R`$.

## VI Teleparallel models for gravity

Let us delete the first (Yang-Mills-type) term in the general Lagrangian (39) by requiring

$$\rho _1=0.$$

Thus the Lagrangian under consideration is

$$L=\rho _2(d\vartheta _a\vartheta ^a)(d\vartheta _b\vartheta ^b)+\rho _3(d\vartheta _a\vartheta ^b)(d\vartheta _b\vartheta ^a).$$
(136)
The conjugate strength (70) takes the form

$$^a=\rho _2e^a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(\vartheta ^m𝒞_m)+\rho _3e^m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(\vartheta ^a𝒞_m)$$
(137)
The field equation (84) takes the form

$$\rho _2d((\vartheta ^m𝒞_m)\vartheta ^a)+\rho _3d((\vartheta ^a𝒞_m)\vartheta ^m)=𝒯^a,$$
(138)
where the energy-momentum current $`𝒯^a`$ is obtained from (80) by inserting the conjugate strength (125).
A unique spherical symmetric, static, “diagonal” solution for the equation (138) is

$`\vartheta ^0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1m/2r}{1+m/2r}}dt,\vartheta ^i=\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{m}{2r}}\right)^2dx^i,i=1,2,3,`$ (139)
This coframe corresponds to the Schwarzschild metric in isotropic coordinates

$$ds^2=\left(\frac{1m/2r}{1+m/2r}\right)^2dt^2\left(1+\frac{m}{2r}\right)^4(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2).$$
(140)
Observe that the first term of the strength (137) as well as the first term of the field equation (138) vanish identically for an arbitrary choice of the “diagonal” form $`\vartheta ^a=Fdx^a`$.
Computing the conjugate strength for the coframe (122) we obtain

$$^0=\frac{2m\rho _3}{r^3(1+m/2r)^3}\delta _{\mu \nu }x^\mu \vartheta ^{0\nu },$$
(141)
$$^\alpha =\frac{2m\rho _3(1m/4r)}{r^3(1m/2r)(1+m/2r)^3}\delta _{\mu \nu }x^\mu \vartheta ^{\alpha \nu },$$
(142)
where $`a=0,1,2,3`$, while $`\alpha ,\mu ,\nu =1,2,3`$.
Calculating the energy-momentum current for the coframe field (122) we obtain

$$𝒯^0=\frac{3\rho _3(m^2/r^4)(1m/6r)}{(1m/2r)(1+m/2r)^6}\vartheta ^0,$$
(143)
$$𝒯^\alpha =\frac{\rho _3(m^2/r^4)}{(1m/2r)(1+m/2r)^6}\left(\vartheta ^\alpha \frac{m}{r}\frac{x^\alpha x^\mu }{r^2}\delta _{\mu \nu }\vartheta ^\nu \right),$$
(144)
Consequently the energy-momentum tensor is

$$T_{mn}=\frac{\rho _3(m^2/r^4)}{(1m/2r)(1+m/2r)^6}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}3\frac{m}{2r}& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 1\frac{m}{2r}\frac{x^2}{r^2}& \frac{m}{2r}\frac{xy}{r^2}& \frac{m}{2r}\frac{xz}{r^2}\\ 0& \frac{m}{2r}\frac{xy}{r^2}& 1\frac{m}{2r}\frac{y^2}{r^2}& \frac{m}{2r}\frac{yz}{r^2}\\ 0& \frac{m}{2r}\frac{xz}{r^2}& \frac{m}{2r}\frac{yz}{r^2}& 1\frac{m}{2r}\frac{z^2}{r^2}\end{array}\right).$$
(145)
Observe that this matrix is traceless and symmetric. The leading coefficient in (109) is proportional again to the scalar curvature. The free coefficient $`\rho `$ has to be positive. Taking $`\rho =\frac{1}{2}`$ we obtain also in this model the relation $`E=R`$.

## Acknowledgments

I am deeply grateful to F.W. Hehl and to S. Kaniel for constant support, interesting discussions and valuable comments.

## A Basic notations and definitions

Let us list our basic conventions. We consider an $`n`$-dimensional differential manifold $`M`$ of signature

$$\eta _{ab}=diag(1,+1,\mathrm{},+1).$$
(A1)
Let the manifold $`M`$ will be endowed with a smooth coframe field (1-forms)

$$\{\vartheta ^a(x),a=0,\mathrm{},n1\}.$$
(A2)
Note that a smooth non-degenerate frame (coframe) field can be defined on a manifold of a zero second Stiefel-Whitney class. However this topological restriction is not exactly relevant in physics because the solutions of physical field equations can degenerate at a point or on a curve. Moreover, these solutions produce the most important physical models (particles, strings, etc.).
The coframe $`\vartheta ^a(x)`$ represents, at a given point $`xM`$, a basis of the linear space of 1-forms $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1`$. The set of all non-zero exterior products of basis 1-forms

$$\vartheta ^{a_1,\mathrm{},a_p}:=\vartheta ^{a_1}\mathrm{}\vartheta ^{a_p}$$
(A3)
represents a basis of the linear space of $`p`$-forms $`\mathrm{\Omega }^p`$. Note the (anti)commutative rule for arbitrary forms $`\alpha \mathrm{\Omega }^p`$ and $`\beta \mathrm{\Omega }^q`$

$$\alpha \beta =(1)^{pq}\beta \alpha .$$
(A4)
The dual set of vector fields

$$\{e_a(x),a=0,\mathrm{},n1\}$$
(A5)
forms a basis of the linear space of vector fields at a given point.
The duality of vectors and 1-forms can be expressed by inter product operation for which we use the symbol    . Namely,

$$e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta ^b=\delta _a^b.$$
(A6)
The action $`X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }w`$ of a vector $`X`$ on a form $`w`$ of arbitrary degree $`p`$ is defined by requiring: (i) linearity in $`X`$ and in $`w`$, (ii) modified Leibniz rule for the wedge product of $`\alpha \mathrm{\Omega }^p`$ and $`\beta \mathrm{\Omega }^q`$

$$X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }(\alpha \beta )=(X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\alpha )\beta +(1)^p\alpha (X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\beta ).$$
(A7)
These properties together with (A6) guarantee the uniqueness of the map $`\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }:\mathrm{\Omega }^p\mathrm{\Omega }^{p1}`$.
The following relations involving the inner product operation ($`p=deg(w)`$) are useful for actual calculations.

$`X\text{ }\text{ }(Y\text{ }\text{ }w)`$ $`=`$ $`Y\text{ }\text{ }(X\text{ }\text{ }w),`$ (A8)
$`\vartheta ^a(e_a\text{ }\text{ }w)`$ $`=`$ $`pw,`$ (A9)
$`e_a\text{ }\text{ }(\vartheta ^aw)`$ $`=`$ $`(np)w.`$ (A10)
We use also the forms $`\vartheta _a:=\eta _{ab}\vartheta ^b`$ with subscript and the corresponding vector fields $`e^a:=\eta ^{ab}e_b`$ with superscript. Thus

$$e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta _b=\eta _{ab}.$$
(A11)
The linear spaces $`\mathrm{\Omega }^p`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{np}`$ have the same dimensions $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{k}\right)=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{np}\right)`$. Thus they are isomorphic. This isomorphism Hodge dual map is linear. Thus it is enough to define its action on basis forms:

$$(\vartheta ^{a_1\mathrm{}a_p})=\frac{1}{(np)!}ϵ^{a_1\mathrm{}a_pa_{p+1}\mathrm{}a_n}\vartheta _{a_{p+1}\mathrm{}a_n}.$$
(A12)
We use here the complete antisymmetric pseudo-tensor $`ϵ^{a_1\mathrm{}a_{n1}}`$ normalized as $`ϵ^{01\mathrm{}(n1)}=1`$. The set of indices $`\{a_1,\mathrm{},a_n\}`$ is an even permutation of the standard set $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},(n1)\}`$.
Thus $`\vartheta ^{0\mathrm{}(n1)}=1`$ and $`1=\vartheta ^{0\mathrm{}(n1)}`$.
The consequence of the definition (A12) is ($`deg(\alpha )=deg(\beta )`$)

$$\alpha \beta =\beta \alpha .$$
(A13)
For the choice of the signature (A1) we obtain

$$^2w=(1)^{p(np)+1}w.$$
(A14)
In the case $`n=4`$ the operator $`^2`$ preserves the forms of odd degree and changes the sign of the forms of even degree.
The following equation is useful for actual calculations

$$e_a\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }w=(\vartheta _aw).$$
(A15)
To prove this linear relation it is enough to check it for the basis forms.
The pseudo-orthonormality for the basis forms $`\vartheta ^a`$ yields the metric tensor $`g`$ on the manifold $`M`$

$$g=\eta _{ab}\vartheta ^a\vartheta ^b.$$
(A16)
The formulas (A11) and (A15) can be applied to derive a useful form of a scalar product of two vectors $`X`$ and $`Y`$. We write these vectors in the basis $`e_a`$ as $`X=X^me_m`$ and $`Y=Y^me_m`$. Thus the scalar product is

$$<X,Y>=X^mY^n<e_m,e_n>=X^mY^n\eta _{mn}.$$

Using (A11) we obtain

$$<X,Y>=X^mY^n(e_m\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\vartheta _n)$$

Thus

$$<X,Y>=X\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}Y=Y\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}X,$$
(A17)
where $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}X`$ is the 1-form dual to the vector $`X`$ which obtained by a canonical map from vectors to 1-forms

$$\mathrm{}:X^me_mX^m\vartheta _m.$$


format: text

text:
# Sigma/Glueball Decay of D+ and D{_𝑠}⁺

## Abstract

Recently the D+ charm meson was observed to have a clear branching ratio into the low energy $`\pi \pi `$ sigma resonance, while this channel was not detected in the D$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{s}{}^{}`$ decay. It is shown that this is consistent with the standard treatment of exclusive charm meson decays and a proposed glueball/sigma picture.

PACS Indices:13.25.Ft,14.40.Cs,12.38.Lg,14.40.-n,14.70.Dj,13.75.Lb

The Fermilab E791 Collaboration has recently reported seeing a clear signal of the decay of the D+ into a $`\pi ^+`$ plus a low-energy scalar-isoscalar $`\pi \pi `$ resonance, with a (mass,width) of about (480,325) MeV. This is presumably the elastic resonance found in the analysis of $`\pi \pi `$ scattering with (mass,width) of about (400,400) MeV. We refer to this as the sigma, $`\sigma `$. In the D$`{}_{s}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$ decays, however, the sigma was not found. It is the purpose of the present work to show that these experimental results are consistent with the glueball/sigma model which we have recently proposed. With this model there is a unique skeletal diagram which allows us to calculate the ratio of the $`\sigma \pi ^+`$ to the $`\varphi \pi ^+`$ decay widths of the D+ with no new parameters. The QCD corrections to the skeletal diagrams for these decay channels are then discussed. For the D$`{}_{s}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$ decay into the $`\sigma \pi +`$ channel it is shown that there are two skeletal diagrams then tend to cancel, which can explain why this channel has not been observed in experiments.

The sigma glueball idea is based in part on the QCD sum rule analysis of the scalar gluon correlator and in part from the large $`\sigma `$ decay rates of scalar glueball candidates. Although the QCD sum rule method is not used in the present work, we briefly review the method for finding glueball masses. Using the composite field operator for the scalar glueball, $`J^G(x)=\alpha _sG^2`$, where $`G_{\mu \nu }^a`$ is the gluon field tensor and $`J^G(x)`$ is proportional to the pure-glue term in the QCD Lagrangian, the scalar gluon correlator is defined as

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(p)`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle d^4xe^{iqx}<0T[J(x)J(0)]0>},`$ (1)
where the link operator has been omitted. The correlator is evaluated numerically in lattice gauge calculations. In the QCD sum rule method the dispersion relation for the correlator is equated to a QCD operator product expansion, with the mass of the Glueball determined by estimating the value of the pole in the dispersion relation. Using a subtracted dispersion relation and carrying out the standard QCD sum rule analysis a number of theorists find a glueball solution in the region of 300-600 MeV, depending on the values used for the nonperturbative condensate parameters. In a recent study of the coupled scalar mesons and glueballs in which instanton as well as other gluonic effects have been included we find a mainly meson solution corresponding to the fo(1370), a mainly glueball solution corresponding to the fo(1500), and a light glueball in the region of 400-500 MeV, consistent with our earlier studies. The main two sources of error in the method are the determination of the values of the condensates and the treatment of the continuum part of the dispersion relation. A light glueball has not been found in quenched lattice gauge calculations.

The other observations which lead to the glueball/sigma picture are first that the fo(1500), which has characteristics of a glueball with a scalar meson admixture, has the four-pion channel as its largest decay branching fraction; and second, that a BES analysis has shown that the four-$`\pi `$ channel is dominated by two-sigmas. This is also true for the fo(1710) and fo(2100) which have recently been shown to have glueball characteristics. This has led to our conjecture that the light glueball and sigma form a coupled-channel system, with the sigma resonance driven by the glueball pole. From the Breit-Wigner resonance fit to the resonance we obtain the matrix element $`<\sigma V^{int}GB>`$ for the coupling of the scalar glueball to the scalar $`\pi \pi `$ resonance. Note that the coupling interaction $`V^{int}`$ is not needed in this work, only the matrix element taken from the experimental analysis. We have used this for the study of hybrid baryon decay, and the pomeron-nucleon coupling and the production of sigmas in high energy p-p collisions via the pomeron. This is the glueball/sigma model. Since it is possible that the treatment of the gluonic continuum could give a false solution for the light glueball, we consider this picture to be a conjecture, however, the model would also follow from a very broad gluonic structure in the region of the $`\sigma `$ (i.e., the glueball pole is far from the real axis) which couples strongly to the sigma resonance. If the picture is valid there are many important consequences that can be observed in a variety of experiments. We believe that the charm meson decays are an excellent example, which is the subject of the present work.

It is convenient use the quark-diagram classification scheme, in which there are six skeltal diagrams, by which we mean processes without explicit gluonic effects. The need to consider processes in addition to what was once considered to be the dominant spectator decay process was made evident by the large difference between D+ and D0 lifetimes. See Ref  for a review of exclusive D+, Do and D$`{}_{s}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$ charm decays expressed in terms of this classification. Theoretical treatments have been mainly based on an effective weak Hamiltonian based on the standard model (see Refs. for reviews of the method). For example, for the decays of the D+ to a $`\varphi +\pi ^+`$ or $`\sigma +\pi ^+`$, which are of central interest for the present work, the effective Hamiltonian is

$`H^{eff}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}}V_{cs}^{}V_{q_eq_f}[(C_1(\overline{q}_eq_f)_L(\overline{s}c)_L+C_2(\overline{s}q_f)_L(\overline{q}_ec)_L],`$ (2)
where $`(\overline{q}_eq_f)_L=\overline{q}_e^aJ_\mu q_f^a\overline{q}_e^a\gamma ^\mu (1\gamma _5)q_f^a`$, $`V_{ij}`$ are the CKM matrix elements and the color is summed. The constants $`C_1,C_2`$ have been estimated by renormalization group calculations. Calculations with this framework proved to be quite successful for the study of most exclusive D decays. During the period when the method was being developed, and many exclusive charm decays were being measured, however, it was argued that additional flavor singlet gluonic processes, called hairpins, might be important. It was also shown that final state interactions must be considered on the same level as the hairpins, and that strong interaction effects at least for certain exclusive decays make it difficult if not impossible to identify the contributions of the varous skeletal quark diagrams. For inclusive processes one can carry out operator product expansions and treat the nonperturbative QCD effects using known condensates (see, e.g., Ref  for a recent review), however, for exclusive processes accurate inclusion of QCD is difficult.

For the decays D$`{}_{}{}^{+}\varphi \pi ^+`$ and D$`{}_{}{}^{+}\sigma \pi ^+`$ there is a unique skeletal diagram, the internal W+ mechanism illustrated in Fig. 1.

Using Eq.(3) with a Fierz transformation of the second term one has

$`<X\pi ^+H^{eff}D^+>`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}}cos\theta _csin\theta _cC_3<X\overline{s}s)_L0><\pi ^+(\overline{u}c)_LD^+>.`$ (3)
The constant $`C_3`$ will not be needed here. The matrix elements of the quarks currents for $`X=\varphi ,\sigma `$ are

$`<0\overline{s}J_\mu s\varphi _\nu >`$ $`=`$ $`f_\varphi m_\varphi ϵ_{\mu \nu }`$ (4)
$`<0\overline{s}J_\mu s\sigma >`$ $`=`$ $`f_\sigma m_\sigma \delta _{\mu 0},`$
with $`f_\varphi ,f_\sigma `$ the couplings given by the short-distance values of the wave functions of the $`\varphi ,\sigma `$, respectively. For the decay D$`{}_{}{}^{+}\sigma \pi ^+`$ there is additional contribution from the process with the $`\overline{s}`$ and $`s`$ from the two W$`+`$ vertices being replaced by $`\overline{d}`$ and $`d`$. The CKM matrix elements are about the same and $`<0\overline{d}J_\mu d\sigma >1.2<0\overline{s}J_\mu s\sigma >`$, since the s quark condensate is about 80% of the d quark condensate. Thus the effective value of $`f_\sigma `$ is increased by about a factor of two.

Here we use for the value of the $`\varphi `$ coupling $`f_\varphi `$ = 228 Mev. The glueball amplitude constant can be estimated from the low-energy theorem

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{7}{2}}<0G^20>,`$ (5)
with $`<0G^20>`$ the gluon condensate. The $`\sigma `$ coupling can be obtained from another low energy theorem

$`i{\displaystyle d^4x<0T[\overline{s}s(x)\alpha _sG^2(0)]0>}`$ $``$ $`24\pi <0\overline{s}s0>/b_0,`$ (6)
with $`b_0`$ = 9.667 for three colors and two flavors. and Eq.(5), with a similar form for the d-quark contribution to give

$`<0\overline{s}J_\mu s\sigma >+<0\overline{d}J_\mu d\sigma >`$ $`=`$ $`0.14\delta _{\mu 0}GeV^2.`$ (7)
Taking the sigma mass to be 500 Mev, the phase space ratio without spin $`\sigma /\varphi `$ = 1.23. Therefore from Eq.(3) we obtain for the ratio of the exclusive decay widths

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(D^+\sigma \pi ^+)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(D^+\varphi \pi ^+)}}`$ $``$ $`0.15.`$ (8)
The experimental value of this ratio from Ref. for the $`\sigma `$ and the PDG for the $`\varphi `$ is 0.22. In the light of both the uncertainties in the calculation and the possibilitiy of other contributions, discussed next, there is quite reasonable agreement between theory and experiment.

Although the diagram shown in Fig.1 is the only skeletal diagram that contributes to either the $`\varphi `$ or $`\sigma `$ decays of the D+, there are two other diagram with explicit QCD processes that also contribute:

the annihilation-hairpin processes (Fig.2a) and the spectator-final state interaction process (Fig. 2b). The later is analogous to the process treated in Ref. in which it was shown that such final state rearrangement processes might be comparable in magnitude to the nonspectator decays. We do not attempt to estimate these prosesses which are very difficult to calculate accurately.

For the D$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{s}{}^{}`$ decay into a $`\varphi \pi ^+`$ there is one skeletal diagram, the spectator shown in Fig.3a; while for the decay into a $`\sigma \pi ^+`$ there is a contribution from the spectator graph and also two annihilation graph processes, shown in Fig.3b.

For the $`D_s^+\sigma \pi ^+`$ the matrix element of the weak effective Hamiltonian, after a Fierz transformation, is

$`<\sigma \pi ^+H^{eff}D_s^+>`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}}cos\theta _c^2(C_1+3C_2)<\sigma \pi ^+(\overline{u}d)_L0><0(\overline{s}c)_LD_s^+>.`$ (9)
Using the results given in Ref. one sees that the ratio of the $`\sigma `$ to $`\varphi `$ rates for the D$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{s}{}^{}`$ decays, which contains a factor of $`(C_1+3C_2)^2/C_1^2`$, would be strongly reduced compared to the D+ decay. This gives a qualitative explanation for the fact that the $`\sigma \pi ^+`$ channel was not found in the E791 experiment.

It is interesting to note that the only skeletal diagram for the D$`{}_{}{}^{+}K^++\varphi (\sigma )`$ decays is the annihilation process; and that there are also two Do decays to the $`\sigma `$ or $`\varphi `$, D$`{}_{}{}^{o}\varphi (\sigma )\overline{K}^o`$ and D$`{}_{}{}^{o}\varphi (\sigma )K^o`$, that have the W-exchange as the only skeletal diagram. We expect that the ratio of the $`\sigma `$ to the $`\varphi `$ fraction should be similar to the corresponding D+ decays described above. Another interesting related experimental observation by the CLEO Collaboration is that in the $`\tau ^{}\nu _\tau \pi ^{}\pi ^o\pi ^o`$ decay the data cannot be fit without a sigma channel. The diagram with the W- coupling to the

$`\sigma \pi ^{}`$ through a $`d\overline{u}`$, illustrated in Fig.4, leads to this channel in a natural way in the glueball/sigma model. In this case a more detailed theoretical study of the $`(\overline{q}_aq_b)_L`$ matrix elements is needed to obtain the branching ratios, which we do not attempt here.

We conclude that the D+ and Ds decays are consistent with our glueball/sigma model and suggest that experimental searches for the sigma channels in other charm decays, as well as other heavy quark and lepton hadronic decays, would be rewarding.

On leave from Carnegie Mellon University

This work was supported in part by the NSF grant PHY-00070888. The author wishes to thank the TQHN group at the University of Maryland for hospitality during the period when this work was carried out, and acknowledge helpful discussions with Jen-chieh Peng, Roy Briere, Jeffrey Appel and Thomas Cohen.