text:
# L-S categories of simply-connected compact simple Lie groups of low rank

## 1. Introduction

In this paper, each space is assumed to have the homotopy type of a CW complex. The (normalised) L-S category of $`X`$ is the least number $`m`$ such that there is a covering of $`X`$ by $`(m+1)`$ open subsets each of which is contractible in $`X`$. Hence $`\mathrm{cat}\{\}=0`$. By Lusternik and Schnirelmann , the number of critical points of a smooth function on a manifold $`M`$ is bounded below by $`\mathrm{cat}M+1`$.

G. Whitehead showed that $`\mathrm{cat}(X)`$ coincides with the least number $`m`$ such that the diagonal map $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{m+1}:X^{m+1}X`$ can be compressed into the ‘fat wedge’ $`\mathrm{T}^{m+1}(X)`$ (see Chapter X of ). Since $`^{m+1}X/\mathrm{T}^{m+1}(X)`$ is the $`(m+1)`$-fold smash product $`^{m+1}X`$, we have a weaker invariant $`w\mathrm{cat}X`$, the weak L-S category of $`X`$, given by the least number $`m`$ such that the reduced diagonal map $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{m+1}:X^{m+1}X`$ is trivial. Hence $`w\mathrm{cat}X\mathrm{cat}X`$.

T. Ganea has also introduced a stronger invariant $`\mathrm{Cat}X`$, the strong L-S category of $`X`$, by the least number $`m`$ such that there is a covering of $`X`$ by $`(m+1)`$ open subsets each of which is contractible in itself. Thus $`w\mathrm{cat}X\mathrm{cat}X\mathrm{Cat}X`$.

The weak and strong L-S categories usually give nice estimates of L-S category especially for manifolds. Actually, we do not know any example of a closed manifold whose strong L-S, L-S and weak L-S categories are not the same. The following problems are posed by Ganea :

* (Problem 1) Determine the L-S category of a manifold.
* (Problem 4) Describe the L-S category of a sphere-bundle over a sphere in terms of homotopy invariants of the characteristic map of the bundle.

Problem 1 has been studied by many authors, such as Singhof , Montejano , Schweizer , Gomez-Larrañaga and Gonzalez-Acuña , James and Singhof  and Rudyak . In particular for compact simply-connected simple Lie groups, $`\mathrm{cat}(SU(n+1))=n`$ for $`n1`$ by , $`\mathrm{cat}(Sp(2))=3`$ by  and $`\mathrm{cat}(Sp(n))n+1`$ for $`n2`$ by . It was also announced recently that Problem 4 was solved by the first author .

The method in the present paper also provides a result for $`G_2`$, and thus we have the following result.

###### Theorem 1.1.

The following is the complete list of L-S categories of a simply-connected compact simple Lie group of rank $`2`$:

| Lie groups | $`Sp\left(1\right)=SU\left(2\right)=Spin\left(3\right)`$ | $`SU\left(3\right)`$ | $`Sp\left(2\right)=Spin\left(5\right)`$ | $`G_2`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`w\mathrm{cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ | $`4`$ |
| $`\mathrm{cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ | $`4`$ |
| $`\mathrm{Cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ | $`4`$ |

Although the above result is known for experts, we give a short proof for $`G_2`$. In fact, the result for $`G_2`$ has never been published and is obtained in a similar but easier manner than the following result for $`Sp(3)`$:

###### Theorem 1.2.

$`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3))=\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3))=\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(3))=5`$.

###### Remark 1.3.

The argument given to prove Theorem 1.2 provides an alternative proof of Schweizer’s result

$$w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(2))=\mathrm{cat}(Sp(2))=\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(2))=3.$$

The authors know that a similar result to Theorem 1.2 is obtained by Lucía Fernández-Suárez, Antonio Gómez-Tato, Jeffrey Strom and Daniel Tanré . Our method is, however, much simpler and providing the following general result:

###### Theorem 1.4.

$`n+2w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(n))\mathrm{cat}(Sp(n))\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(n))`$ for $`n3`$.

This improves Singhof’s result: $`\mathrm{cat}(Sp(n))n+1`$ for $`n2`$. We propose the following conjecture.

###### Conjecture 1.5.

Let $`G`$ be a simply-connected compact Lie group with $`G`$ = $`_{i=1}^nH_i`$ where $`H_i`$ is a simple Lie group. Then $`w\mathrm{cat}(G)`$ = $`\mathrm{cat}(G)`$ = $`\mathrm{Cat}(G)`$ and $`\mathrm{cat}(G)`$ = $`_{i=1}^n\mathrm{cat}(H_i)`$.

It might be difficult to say something about $`\mathrm{cat}Sp(n)`$, but an old conjecture says the following.

###### Conjecture 1.6.

$`\mathrm{cat}Sp(n)=2n1`$ for all $`n1`$.

The authors thank John Harper for many helpful conversations.

## 2. Proof of Theorem 1.1

Let us recall a CW decomposition of $`G_2`$ from :

$$G_2=e^0e^3e^5e^6e^8e^9e^{11}e^{14}.$$

On the other hand, we have the following cone-decomposition.

###### Theorem 2.1.

There is a cone-decomposition of $`G_2`$ as follows:

$`G_2^{(5)}=\mathrm{\Sigma }P^2,S^5e^7G_2^{(5)}G_2^{(8)},`$
$`S^8e^{10}G_2^{(8)}G_2^{(11)},S^{13}G_2^{(11)}G_2.`$
Proof. The first and the last formulae are obvious. So we show the 2nd and 3rd formulae: By taking the homotopy fibre $`F_1`$ of $`G_2^{(5)}G_2`$, we can easily observe using the Serre spectral sequence that the fibre has a CW structure given by $`S^5e^7\text{(cells in dimensions }7\text{)}`$, where the cohomology generators corresponding to $`S^5`$ and $`e^7`$ are transgressive. Thus the mapping cone of $`S^5e^7F_1G_2^{(5)}`$ has the homotopy type of $`G_2^{(8)}`$. Similarly, the homotopy fibre $`F_2`$ of $`G_2^{(8)}G_2`$ has a CW structure given by $`S^8e^{10}\text{(cells in dimensions }10\text{)}`$, where the cohomology generators corresponding to $`S^8`$ and $`e^{10}`$ are transgressive. Thus the mapping cone of $`S^8e^{10}F_2G_2^{(8)}`$ has the homotopy type of $`G_2^{(11)}`$.  QED.

###### Corollary 2.1.1.

$`1`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(G_2^{(5)})`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(G_2^{(3)})`$, $`2`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(G_2^{(8)})`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(G_2^{(6)})`$, $`3`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(G_2^{(11)})`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(G_2^{(9)})`$ and $`4`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(G_2)`$.

Let us recall the following well-known fact due to Borel.

###### Fact 2.2.

$`H^{}(G_2;/2)/2[x_3,x_5]/(x_3^4,x_5^2)`$.

###### Corollary 2.2.1.

$`w\mathrm{cat}(G_2^{(5)})`$ $``$ $`w\mathrm{cat}(G_2^{(3)})`$ $``$ $`1`$, $`w\mathrm{cat}(G_2^{(8)})`$ $``$ $`w\mathrm{cat}(G_2^{(6)})`$ $``$ $`2`$, $`w\mathrm{cat}(G_2^{(11)})`$ $``$ $`w\mathrm{cat}(G_2^{(9)})`$ $``$ $`3`$ and $`w\mathrm{cat}(G_2)`$ $``$ $`4`$.

Corollaries 2.1.1 and 2.2.1 yield the following.

###### Theorem 2.3.

| Skeleta | $`G_2^{\left(3\right)}`$ | $`G_2^{\left(5\right)}`$ | $`G_2^{\left(6\right)}`$ | $`G_2^{\left(8\right)}`$ | $`G_2^{\left(9\right)}`$ | $`G_2^{\left(11\right)}`$ | $`G_2`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`w\mathrm{cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ | $`3`$ | $`4`$ |
| $`\mathrm{cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ | $`3`$ | $`4`$ |
| $`\mathrm{Cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ | $`3`$ | $`4`$ |

This completes the proof of Theorem 1.1.

## 3. The ring structure of $`h^{}(Sp(3))`$

To show Theorem 1.2, we introduce a cohomology theory $`h^{}()`$ such that $`h^{}(X,A)`$ $`=`$ $`\{X/A,𝕊[0,2]\}`$, where $`𝕊[0,2]`$ is the spectrum obtained from $`𝕊`$ by killing all homotopy groups of dimensions bigger than $`2`$. Then $`𝕊[0,2]`$ is a ring spectrum with $`\pi _{}^S(𝕊[0,2])[\eta ]/(\eta ^3,2\eta )`$, where $`\eta `$ is the Hopf element in $`\pi _1^S(𝕊)=\pi _1^S(𝕊[0,2])`$. Thus $`h^{}`$ is an additive and multiplicative cohomology theory with $`h^{}=h^{}(pt)[\epsilon ]/(\epsilon ^3,2\epsilon )`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\epsilon =1`$, where $`\epsilon h^1=\pi _0^S(\mathrm{\Sigma }^1𝕊)\pi _1^S(𝕊)`$ corresponds to $`\eta `$.

The characteristic map of the principal $`Sp(1)`$-bundle

$$Sp(1)Sp(2)S^7$$

is given by $`\omega =\iota _3,\iota _3:S^6Sp(1)S^3`$ the Samelson product of two copies of the identity $`\iota _3:S^3S^3`$, which is a generator of $`\pi _6(S^3)/12`$. We state the following well-known fact (see Whitehead ).

###### Fact 3.1.

Let $`\mu :S^3\times S^3S^3`$ be the multiplication of $`Sp(1)S^3`$. Then we have

$`Sp(2)S^3_{\mu (1\times \omega )}S^3\times C(S^6)=S^3_\omega C(S^6)_{\widehat{\mu }[\iota _3,\omega ]^r}C(S^9),`$
where $`\widehat{\mu }:S^3\times S^3_{\times \omega }\{\}\times C(S^6)S^3_\omega C(S^6)`$ is given by $`\widehat{\mu }|_{S^3\times S^3}=\mu `$ and $`\widehat{\mu }|_{S^3_\omega C(S^6)}=1`$ the identity and $`[\iota _3,\chi _\omega ]^r:S^9S^3\times S^3_{\times \omega }\{\}\times C(S^6)`$ is the relative Whitehead product of the identity $`\iota _3:S^3S^3`$ and the characteristic map $`\chi _\omega :(C(S^6),S^6)(S^3e^7,S^3)`$ of the $`7`$-cell. Thus we have $`1\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(2)^{(3)})`$, $`2\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(2)^{(7)})`$ and $`3\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(2))`$.

Let $`\nu :S^7S^4`$ be the Hopf element whose suspension $`\nu _n=\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n4}\nu `$ ($`n4`$) gives a generator of $`\pi _{n+3}(S^n)/24`$ for $`n5`$. Then we remark that $`\omega _n=\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n3}\omega `$ ($`n3`$) satisfies the formula $`\omega _n=2\nu _n\pi _{n+3}(S^n)`$ for $`n5`$. By Zabrodsky , there is a natural splitting

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(S^3\times S^3\{\}\times (S^3_\omega e^7))\mathrm{\Sigma }S^3\mathrm{\Sigma }(S^3_\omega e^7)\mathrm{\Sigma }S^3S^3.$$

Then by the definition of a relative Whitehead product, the composition of $`[\iota _3,\omega ]^r`$ with the projections to $`S^3`$ and $`S^3_\omega e^7`$ are trivial and the composition with the projection to $`S^3S^3`$ is given by $`\iota _3\omega `$. Thus we have

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(\widehat{\mu }[\iota _3,\omega ]^r)=H(\mu )\mathrm{\Sigma }(\iota _3\omega )=\pm \nu \omega _7=2\nu \nu _70$$

in $`\pi _{10}(S^4)/24\nu \nu _7/2\omega _4\nu _7`$, and hence we have

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }^2(\widehat{\mu }[\iota _3,\omega ]^r)=\nu _5\omega _8=2\nu _5^2=0\pi _{11}(S^5)/2$$

by Proposition 5.11 of Toda . The following two facts are also well-known.

###### Fact 3.2.

We have the following homotopy equivalences:

$`Sp(2)/S^3(S^3\times C(S^6))/(S^3\times S^6)=S_+^3\mathrm{\Sigma }(S^6)=S^7S^{10},`$
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }^2Sp(2)\mathrm{\Sigma }^2(S^3_\omega C(S^6))\mathrm{\Sigma }^2S^{10}=S^5_{\omega _5}C(S^8)S^{12}.`$
###### Fact 3.3.

The $`11`$-skeleton $`X_{3,2}^{(11)}`$ of $`X_{3,2}=Sp(3)/Sp(1)`$ has the homotopy type of $`S^7_{\nu _7}e^{11}`$.

Restricting the principal $`Sp(1)`$-bundle $`Sp(1)Sp(3)\stackrel{𝑞}{}X_{3,2}`$ to the subspace $`X_{3,2}^{(11)}=S^7_{\nu _7}e^{11}`$ of $`X_{3,2}`$, we obtain the subspace $`q^1(X_{3,2}^{(11)})=Sp(3)^{(14)}`$ of $`Sp(3)`$ as the total space of the principal $`Sp(1)`$-bundle $`Sp(1)Sp(3)^{(14)}\stackrel{𝑞}{}\mathrm{\Sigma }(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10})`$ with a characteristic map $`\varphi :S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10}Sp(1)S^3`$, which is an extension of $`\omega :S^6S^3`$.

###### Proposition 3.4.

We have the following homotopy equivalences:

$`Sp(3)^{(14)}S^3_{\mu (1\times \varphi )}S^3\times C(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10})`$
$`=S^3_\varphi C(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10})C(S^9_{\nu _9}e^{13}),`$
$`Sp(3)^{(14)}/S^3(S^3\times C(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10}))/(S^3\times (S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10}))`$
$`=S_+^3\mathrm{\Sigma }(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10})=(S^7_{\nu _7}e^{11})(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14}),`$
$`Sp(n)Sp(n1)Sp(n1)\times C(S^{4n2}),`$
where $`Sp(n1)Sp(n)^{((2n+1)n11)}`$ for $`n3`$, and hence
$`Sp(n)/Sp(n)^{((2n+1)n11)}`$
$`(Sp(n1)\times C(S^{4n2}))/(Sp(n1)\times S^{4n2}`$
$`Sp(n1)^{((2n1)(n1)11)}\times C(S^{4n2}))`$
$`=(Sp(n1)/Sp(n1)^{((2n1)(n1)11)})\mathrm{\Sigma }S^{4n2}`$
$`=\mathrm{}=(Sp(2)/\mathrm{})\mathrm{\Sigma }S^{10}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }S^{4n2}=(Sp(2)_+)S^{(2n+1)n10}`$
$`=S^{(2n+1)n10}S^{(2n+1)n10}Sp(2)`$
$`=S^{(2n+1)n10}(S^{(2n+1)n7}_{\omega _{(2n+1)n7}}e^{(2n+1)n3})S^{(2n+1)n},\text{for }n3\text{.}`$
This yields the following result.

###### Proposition 3.5.

Let $`\widehat{\mu }:S^3\times S^3_{\times \varphi }\{\}\times (S^3_\varphi C(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10}))S^3_\varphi C(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10})`$ be the map given by $`\widehat{\mu }|_{S^3\times S^3}=\mu `$ and $`\widehat{\mu }|_{S^3_\varphi C(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10})}=1`$ the identity. Then we have the following cone decomposition of $`Sp(3)`$:

$$Sp(3)S^3_\varphi C(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10})_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\varphi }}C(S^9_{\nu _9}e^{13})C(S^{17})C(S^{20}).$$

###### Corollary 3.5.1.

$`1`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(3)^{(3)})`$, $`2`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(3)^{(7)})`$, $`3`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(3)^{(14)})`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(3)^{(11)})`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(3)^{(10)})`$, $`4`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(3)^{(18)})`$ and $`5`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(3))`$.

To determine the ring structures of $`h^{}(Sp(2))`$ and $`h^{}(Sp(3))`$, we show the following lemma.

###### Lemma 3.6.

Let $`h^{}`$ be any multiplicative generalised cohomology theory and let $`Q=S^r_fe^q`$ for a given map $`f:S^{q1}S^r`$ with $`h^{}(Q)h^{}1,x,y`$, where $`x`$ and $`y`$ correspond to the generators of $`h^{}(S^r)h^{}x_0`$ and $`h^{}(S^q)h^{}y_0`$. Then

$$x^2=\pm H^h(\lambda _2(f))y\text{in}h^{}(Q),$$

where $`\lambda _2(f)\pi _q(S^{2r})`$ is the Boardman-Steer Hopf invariant equal to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }h_2(f)`$ the suspension of the James-Hopf invariant $`h_2(f)`$ (see ) and $`H^h:\pi _q(S^{2r})h^{2r}(S^q)h^{2rq}`$ is the Hurewicz homomorphism given by $`H^h(g)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^qg^{}(x_0x_0)`$.

Proof. By Boardman and Steer , $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Q_2=S^r_fe^qQ_2Q_2`$ equals the composition $`(i_2i_2)\lambda _2(f)q_2`$, where $`q_2:Q_2Q_2/S^r=S^q`$ is the collapsing map and $`i_2:S^rQ_2`$ is the bottom-cell inclusion. Thus we have

$`x^2`$ $`=\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{}(xx)=((i_2i_2)\lambda _2(f)q_2)^{}(xx)`$
$`=q_2^{}(\lambda _2(f)^{}(i_2^{}(x)i_2^{}(x)))=q_2^{}(\lambda _2(f)^{}(x_0x_0))=q_2^{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^qH^h(\lambda _2(f))).`$
Since $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^qH^h(\lambda _2(f))`$ is $`H^h(\lambda _2(f))y_0h^{2r}(S^q)`$ up to sign, we proceed as
$`x^2`$ $`=q_2^{}(\pm H^h(\lambda _2(f))y_0)=\pm H^h(\lambda _2(f))q_2^{}(y_0)=\pm H^h(\lambda _2(f))y.`$
This completes the proof of the lemma.  QED.

Using cohomology long exact sequences derived from the cell structure of $`Sp(3)`$ and a direct calculation using Proposition 3.4 and Lemma 3.6, we deduce the following result for the cohomology theory $`h^{}`$ considered at the beginning of this section.

###### Theorem 3.7.

The ring structures of $`h^{}(Sp(2))`$ and $`h^{}(Sp(3))`$ are as follows:

$`h^{}(Sp(2))h^{}\{1,x_3,x_7,y_{10}\},`$
$`h^{}(Sp(3))h^{}\{1,x_3,x_7,x_{11},y_{10},y_{14},y_{18},z_{21}\}`$
with ring structures given by $`x_3^2`$ = $`\epsilon x_7`$, $`x_7^2`$ = $`0`$, $`x_{11}^2`$ = $`0`$, $`x_3x_7`$ = $`y_{10}`$, $`x_3x_{11}`$ = $`y_{14}`$, $`x_7x_{11}`$ = $`y_{18}`$ and $`x_3x_7x_{11}`$ = $`z_{21}`$, where $`\epsilon `$ is the non-zero element in $`h^1`$.

###### Remark 3.8.

The two possible attaching maps $`:S^{10}S^3_\omega e^7`$ of $`e^{11}`$ discovered by Lucía Fernández-Suárez, Antonio Gómez-Tato and Daniel Tanré  are homotopic in $`Sp(2)`$. So, we can not find any effective difference in the ring structure of $`h^{}(Sp(3))`$ by altering, as is performed in , the attaching map of $`e^{11}`$.

###### Corollary 3.8.1.

$`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3)^{(3)})`$ $``$ $`1`$, $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3)^{(7)})`$ $``$ $`2`$, $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3)^{(18)})`$ $``$ $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3)^{(14)})`$ $``$ $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3)^{(11)})`$ $``$ $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3)^{(10)})`$ $``$ $`3`$ and $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3))`$ $``$ $`4`$, together with $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(2)^{(3)})`$ $``$ $`1`$, $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(2)^{(7)})`$ $``$ $`2`$ and $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(2))`$ $``$ $`3`$.

###### Corollary 3.8.2.

| Skeleta | $`Sp\left(2\right)^{\left(3\right)}`$ | $`Sp\left(2\right)^{\left(7\right)}`$ | $`Sp\left(2\right)`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`w\mathrm{cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ |
| $`\mathrm{cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ |
| $`\mathrm{Cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ |

## 4. Proof of Theorem 1.2

By Facts 3.1 and 3.2, the smash products $`^4Sp(3)`$ and $`^5Sp(3)`$ satisfy

$`(^4Sp(3))^{(19)}S^{12}_{\omega _{12}}e^{16}(S^{16}S^{16}S^{16})(S^{19}S^{19}S^{19}S^{19}),`$
$`(^5Sp(3))^{(22)}S^{15}_{\omega _{15}}e^{19}(S^{19}S^{19}S^{19})(S^{22}S^{22}S^{22}S^{22}).`$
Then we have the following two propositions.

###### Proposition 4.1.

The bottom-cell inclusions $`i:S^{12}^4Sp(3)`$ and $`i^{}:S^{15}^5Sp(3)`$ induce injective homomorphisms

$`i_{}:\pi _{18}(S^{12})\pi _{18}(^4Sp(3)^{(18)})\text{and}i_{}^{}:\pi _{21}(S^{15})\pi _{21}(^5Sp(3)),`$
respectively.

Proof. We have the following two exact sequences

$`\pi _{18}(S^{15})\stackrel{𝜓}{}\pi _{18}(S^{12})\stackrel{i_{}}{}\pi _{18}(^4Sp(3)^{(18)})\pi _{18}(S^{16}S^{16}S^{16}S^{16}),`$
$`\pi _{21}(S^{18})\stackrel{\psi ^{}}{}\pi _{21}(S^{15})\stackrel{i_{}^{}}{}\pi _{21}(^5Sp(3))\pi _{21}(S^{19}S^{19}S^{19}S^{19}S^{19}),`$
where $`\pi _{18}(S^{12})\pi _{21}(S^{15})/2\nu _{15}^2`$ and $`\psi `$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ are induced from $`\omega _{12}=2\nu _{12}`$ and $`\omega _{15}=2\nu _{15}`$. Thus $`\psi `$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ are trivial, and hence $`i_{}`$ and $`i_{}^{}`$ are injective.  QED.

###### Proposition 4.2.

The collapsing maps $`q:Sp(3)^{(18)}Sp(3)^{(18)}/Sp(3)^{(14)}`$ = $`S^{18}`$ and $`q^{}:Sp(3)Sp(3)/Sp(3)^{(18)}`$ = $`S^{21}`$ induce injective homomorphisms

1. $`q^{}:\pi _{18}(^4Sp(3)^{(18)})[Sp(3)^{(18)},^4Sp(3)^{(18)}]`$ and
2. $`q_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}:\pi _{21}(^5Sp(3))[Sp(3),^5Sp(3)]`$,

respectively.

Proof. Firstly, we show that $`q_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ is injective: Since we have $`[Sp(3),^5Sp(3)]`$ = $`[(S^{14}_{\omega _{14}}e^{18})S^{21},^5Sp(3)]`$ = $`[S^{14}_{\omega _{14}}e^{18},^5Sp(3)]\pi _{21}(^5Sp(3))`$ by Proposition 3.4, $`q_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ is clearly injective.

Secondly, we show that $`q^{}`$ is injective: Similarly we have $`[Sp(3)^{(18)},^4Sp(3)^{(18)}]`$ = $`[S^{14}_{\omega _{14}}e^{18},^4Sp(3)^{(18)}]`$ by Proposition 3.4. Thus it is sufficient to show that $`\overline{q}^{}:\pi _{18}(^4Sp(3)^{(18)})[S^{14}_{\omega _{14}}e^{18},^4Sp(3)^{(18)}]`$ is injective, where $`\overline{q}:S^{14}_{\omega _{14}}e^{18}S^{18}`$ is the collapsing map. In the exact sequence

$$\pi _{15}(^4Sp(3)^{(18)})\stackrel{\omega _{15}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}{}\pi _{18}(^4Sp(3)^{(18)})\stackrel{\overline{q}^{}}{}[S^{14}_{\omega _{14}}e^{18},^4Sp(3)^{(18)}],$$

we know that $`\pi _{15}(^4Sp(3)^{(18)})\pi _{15}(S^{12}_{\omega _{12}}e^{16})=/2`$ is generated by the composition of $`\nu _{12}`$ and the bottom-cell inclusion. Since $`\nu _{12}\omega _{15}=0\pi _{18}(S^{12})`$, the homomorphism $`\omega _{15}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ is trivial, and hence $`\overline{q}^{}`$ is injective.  QED.

Then the following lemma implies that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5`$ are non-trivial by Propositions 4.1 and 4.2.

###### Lemma 4.3.

We obtain that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4`$ = $`i\nu _{12}^2q:Sp(3)^{(18)}^4Sp(3)^{(18)}`$ and that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5`$ = $`i^{}\nu _{15}^2q^{}:Sp(3)^5Sp(3)`$.

Proof. Firstly, we show that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4=i\nu _{12}^2q`$ implies $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5=i^{}\nu _{15}^2q^{}`$. For dimensional reasons, the image of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(3)Sp(3)Sp(3)`$ is in $`Sp(3)^{(18)}Sp(3)^{(14)}S^3Sp(3)^{(18)}`$. Since $`Sp(3)^{(14)}`$ is of cone-length $`3`$ by Corollary 3.5.1, the restriction of the map $`(1\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}=\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5`$ to $`Sp(3)^{(18)}Sp(3)^{(14)}`$ is trivial. Thus $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5`$ equals the composition

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5:Sp(3)S^3Sp(3)^{(18)}\stackrel{1\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4}{}^5Sp(3)^{(18)}^5Sp(3).$$

Then by $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4=i\nu _{12}^2q`$, we observe that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5=i^{}(\iota _3\nu _{12}^2)q^{}=i^{}\nu _{15}^2q^{}`$.

So, we are left to show $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4=i\nu _{12}^2q`$. For dimensional reasons, the image of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(3)^{(18)}Sp(3)^{(18)}Sp(3)^{(18)}`$ is in $`Sp(3)^{(14)}S^3Sp(3)^{(11)}Sp(3)^{(7)}Sp(3)^{(7)}Sp(3)^{(11)}S^3Sp(3)^{(14)}`$. Since $`S^3_\varphi C(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10})`$ is of cone-length $`2`$ by Corollary 3.5.1, the restriction of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3:Sp(3)^{(18)}^3Sp(3)^{(18)}`$ to $`S^3_\varphi C(S^6_{\nu _6}e^{10})`$ is trivial. Hence $`1\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3:Sp(3)^{(14)}S^3Sp(3)^{(11)}Sp(3)^{(7)}Sp(3)^{(7)}Sp(3)^{(11)}S^3Sp(3)^{(14)}^4Sp(3)^{(18)}`$ equals the composition

$`1\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3:(Sp(3)Sp(3))^{(18)}`$ $`\stackrel{𝛼}{}(S^3_\omega e^7)S^{10}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14})\stackrel{1\beta }{}^4(S^3_\omega e^7).`$
The map $`\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(3)^{(18)}(S^3_\omega e^7)S^{10}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14})`$ equals the composition

$$\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(3)^{(18)}S^{14}_{\omega _{14}}e^{18}(S^3_\omega e^7)S^{10}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14}).$$

Collapsing the subspace $`S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14})`$ of $`(S^3_\omega e^7)S^{10}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14})`$, we obtain a map

$$q^{}\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(3)^{(18)}S^7S^{10},$$

where $`q^{}:(S^3_\omega e^7)S^{10}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14})S^3S^{10}`$ is the collapsing map. For dimensional reasons, $`q^{}\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ equals the composition:

$$q^{}\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(3)^{(18)}Sp(3)^{(18)}/Sp(3)^{(14)}=S^{18}\stackrel{𝛾}{}S^7S^{10}.$$

If $`\gamma `$ were non-trivial, then $`\gamma `$ would be $`\eta _{17}:S^{18}S^{17}`$, and hence we should have $`x_7y_{10}=\epsilon y_{18}0`$. However, from the ring structure of $`h^{}(Sp(3))`$ given in Theorem 3.7, we know $`x_7y_{10}=0`$, and hence we obtain $`\gamma =0`$. Then the image of $`\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ is in the subspace $`S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14})`$ of $`(S^3_\omega e^7)S^{10}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14})`$, since they are $`12`$-connected. Hence $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4=(1\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ equals the composition

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4:Sp(3)^{(18)}\stackrel{\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14})\stackrel{1\beta }{}S^3(^3(S^3_\omega e^7))^{(15)}^4Sp(3)^{(18)},`$
where $`(^3(S^3_\omega e^7))^{(15)}`$ is given by $`(S^3_\omega e^7)S^3S^3S^3(S^3_\omega e^7)S^3S^3S^3(S^3_\omega e^7).`$ Collapsing the subspace $`^3S^3`$ of $`(^3(S^3_\omega e^7))^{(15)}`$, we obtain a map

$$q^{\prime \prime }\beta :S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14}S^7S^3S^3S^3S^7S^3S^3S^3S^7,$$

where $`q^{\prime \prime }:(^3(S^3_\omega e^7))^{(15)}S^7S^3S^3S^3S^7S^3S^3S^3S^7`$ is the collapsing map. For dimensional reasons, $`q^{\prime \prime }\beta `$ equals the composition

$$q^{\prime \prime }\beta :S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14}S^{14}\stackrel{\gamma ^{}}{}S^7S^3S^3S^3S^7S^3S^3S^3S^7.$$

If $`\gamma ^{}`$ were non-trivial, then its projection to $`S^{13}`$ would be $`\eta _{13}:S^{14}S^{13}`$, and hence we should have $`x_3^2x_7=\epsilon y_{14}0`$. However, from the ring structure of $`h^{}(Sp(3))`$ given in Theorem 3.7, we know $`x_3^2x_7=\epsilon x_7^2=0`$, and hence we obtain $`\gamma ^{}=0`$. Hence the image of $`\beta `$ lies in the subspace $`^3S^3`$ of $`^3Sp(3)^{(18)}`$.

On the other hand, for dimensional reasons, $`\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ equals the composition

$$\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(3)^{(18)}S^{14}_{\omega _{14}}e^{18}\stackrel{\alpha ^{}}{}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14}),$$

where the restriction $`\alpha ^{}|_{S^{14}}`$ equals the composition

$$\alpha ^{}|_{S^{14}}:S^{14}\stackrel{\gamma ^{\prime \prime }}{}S^{13}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14}).$$

If it were non-trivial, then $`\gamma ^{\prime \prime }`$ would be $`\eta _{13}:S^{14}S^{13}`$, and hence we should have $`x_3y_{10}=\epsilon y_{14}0`$. However, from the ring structure of $`h^{}(Sp(3))`$ given in Theorem 3.7, we know $`x_3y_{10}=x_3^2x_7=\epsilon x_7^2=0`$, and hence we obtain $`\gamma ^{\prime \prime }=0`$. Hence $`\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ equals the composition

$$\alpha \overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(3)^{(18)}\stackrel{𝑞}{}S^{18}\stackrel{\alpha ^{\prime \prime }}{}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14}),$$

and hence $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4`$ equals the composition

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4:Sp(3)^{(18)}\stackrel{𝑞}{}S^{18}`$ $`\stackrel{\alpha ^{\prime \prime }}{}S^3(S^{10}_{\nu _{10}}e^{14})\stackrel{1\beta }{}S^3(^3S^3)\stackrel{𝑖}{}^4Sp(3)^{(18)}.`$
Now, we are ready to determine $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4`$: By Theorem 3.7, we know $`x_3^2x_{11}=\epsilon z_{18}`$ and $`x_3^2=\epsilon x_7`$, hence $`\alpha ^{\prime \prime }:S^{18}S^{13}_{\nu _{13}}e^{17}`$ is a co-extension of $`\eta _{16}:S^{17}S^{16}`$ on $`S^{13}_{\nu _{13}}e^{17}`$ and $`1\beta :S^{13}_{\nu _{13}}e^{17}S^{12}`$ is an extension of $`\eta _{12}:S^{13}S^{12}`$.Thus the composition $`(1\beta )\alpha ^{\prime \prime }`$ is an element of the Toda bracket $`\{\eta _{12},\nu _{13},\eta _{16}\}`$ which contains a single element $`\nu _{12}^2`$ by Lemma 5.12 of , and hence $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4=i\nu _{12}^2q`$.  QED.

###### Corollary 4.3.1.

$`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3)^{(18)})`$ $``$ $`4`$ and $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3))`$ $``$ $`5`$.

This yields the following result.

###### Theorem 4.4.

| Skeleta | $`Sp\left(3\right)^{\left(3\right)}`$ | $`Sp\left(3\right)^{\left(7\right)}`$ | $`Sp\left(3\right)^{\left(10\right)}`$ | $`Sp\left(3\right)^{\left(11\right)}`$ | $`Sp\left(3\right)^{\left(14\right)}`$ | $`Sp\left(3\right)^{\left(18\right)}`$ | $`Sp\left(3\right)`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`w\mathrm{cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ | $`3`$ | $`3`$ | $`4`$ | $`5`$ |
| $`\mathrm{cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ | $`3`$ | $`3`$ | $`4`$ | $`5`$ |
| $`\mathrm{Cat}`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ | $`3`$ | $`3`$ | $`4`$ | $`5`$ |

This completes the proof of Theorem 1.2.

## 5. Proof of Theorem 1.4

We know that for $`n4`$,

$`Sp(n)^{(16)}=Sp(4)^{(15)}=Sp(3)^{(14)}e^{15},`$
$`Sp(n)^{(19)}=\{\begin{array}{cc}Sp(4)^{(15)}(e^{18}e^{18})\hfill & n=4,\hfill \\ Sp(4)^{(15)}(e^{18}e^{18})e^{19}\hfill & n5,\hfill \end{array}`$
$`Sp(n)^{(21)}=Sp(n)^{(19)}e^{21}`$
and that $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3)^{(14)})=\mathrm{cat}(Sp(3)^{(14)})=\mathrm{Cat}(Sp(3)^{(14)})=3`$. Firstly, we show the following.

###### Proposition 5.1.

$`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(4)^{(15)})=3`$.

Proof. Since $`\mathrm{cat}(Sp(2))=3`$, it follows that $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(4)^{(15)})3`$ by Theorem 5.1 of . Hence we are left to show $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(4)^{(15)})3`$: For dimensional reasons, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4=(\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }})\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(4)^{(15)}^4Sp(4)^{(15)}`$ equals the composition

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4:Sp(4)^{(15)}\stackrel{\alpha _0}{}Sp(4)^{(11)}Sp(4)^{(11)}\stackrel{\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{}^4Sp(4)^{(11)}^4Sp(4)^{(15)},$$

for some $`\alpha _0`$. By Fact 3.2, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(4)^{(11)}^2Sp(4)^{(11)}`$ equals the composition

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(4)^{(11)}\stackrel{\beta _0}{}(S^7S^{10})e^{11}\stackrel{\gamma _0}{}^2(S^3_\omega e^7)^2Sp(4)^{(11)},$$

for some $`\beta _0`$ and $`\gamma _0`$. Then for dimensional reasons, $`(\beta _0\beta _0)\alpha _0:Sp(4)^{(15)}((S^7S^{10})e^{11})((S^7S^{10})e^{11})`$ and $`(\gamma _0\gamma _0)|_{S^7S^7}:S^7S^7^4(S^3_\omega e^7)`$ are respectively equal to the compositions

$`(\beta _0\beta _0)\alpha _0:Sp(4)^{(15)}\stackrel{\alpha _0^{}}{}S^7S^7((S^7S^{10})e^{11})((S^7S^{10})e^{11}),`$
$`(\gamma _0\gamma _0)|_{S^7S^7}:S^7S^7\stackrel{\gamma _0^{}}{}^4S^3^4(S^3_\omega e^7),`$
for some $`\alpha _0^{}`$ and $`\gamma _0^{}`$. Hence $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4:Sp(4)^{(15)}^4Sp(4)^{(15)}`$ equals the composition

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4:Sp(4)^{(15)}\stackrel{\alpha _0^{}}{}S^7S^7\stackrel{\gamma _0^{}}{}^4S^3^4Sp(4)^{(15)},$$

where $`Sp(4)^{(15)}=Sp(3)^{(14)}e^{15}`$. By Theorem 3.7, $`x_7^2=0`$ in $`h^{}(Sp(3))`$, and hence $`\alpha _0^{}`$ annihilates $`Sp(3)^{(14)}`$. Thus $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4:Sp(4)^{(15)}^4Sp(4)^{(15)}`$ equals the composition

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4:Sp(4)^{(15)}\stackrel{q^{\prime \prime }}{}S^{15}\stackrel{\beta _0^{}}{}S^{14}\stackrel{\gamma _0^{}}{}S^{12}\stackrel{i^{\prime \prime }}{}^4Sp(4)^{(15)}$$

for some $`\beta _0^{}`$, where $`q^{\prime \prime }:Sp(4)^{(15)}Sp(4)^{(15)}/Sp(4)^{(14)}=S^{15}`$ is the projection and $`i^{\prime \prime }:S^{12}=S^3S^3S^3S^3^4Sp(4)^{(15)}`$ is the inclusion. Hence the non-triviality of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4`$ implies the non-triviality of $`\beta _0^{}`$ and $`\gamma _0^{}`$. Therefore $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4`$ should be $`i^{\prime \prime }\eta _{12}^3q^{\prime \prime }`$, if it were non-trivial. However, we also know from (5.5) of  that $`\eta _{12}^3`$ is $`12\nu _{12}=6\omega _{12}`$ and that $`i^{\prime \prime }\omega _{12}`$ is trivial by Fact 3.1. Therefore, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4:Sp(4)^{(15)}^4Sp(4)^{(15)}`$ is trivial, and hence $`w\mathrm{cat}Sp(4)^{(15)}3`$. This implies that $`w\mathrm{cat}Sp(4)^{(15)}=3`$.  QED.

Secondly, we show the following.

###### Proposition 5.2.

$`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(n)^{(19)})=4`$ for $`n4`$.

Proof. Since $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5=((1_{Sp(n)})\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:Sp(n)^{(19)}^5Sp(n)^{(19)}`$, it equals the composition

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5:Sp(n)^{(19)}\stackrel{\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{}Sp(n)^{(16)}Sp(n)^{(16)}=Sp(4)^{(15)}Sp(4)^{(15)}`$
$`\stackrel{(1_{Sp(4)^{(15)}})\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4}{}^5Sp(4)^{(15)}^5Sp(n)^{(19)},`$
which is trivial, since $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_4:Sp(4)^{(15)}^4Sp(4)^{(15)}`$ is trivial by Proposition 5.1. Thus $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(n)^{(19)})4`$, and hence $`w\mathrm{cat}(Sp(n)^{(19)})=4`$.  QED.

Let $`p_j:Sp(n)X_{n,j}=Sp(n)/Sp(nj)`$ be the projection for $`j1`$. Then we have the following.

###### Proposition 5.3.

Let $`q^{\prime \prime \prime }:Sp(n)Sp(n)/Sp(n)^{((2n+1)n3)}=S^{(2n+1)n}`$ be the collapsing map and $`i^{\prime \prime \prime }:S^{(2n+1)n6}(^5Sp(n))X_{n,n3}\mathrm{}X_{n,1}`$ the inclusion. Then

$$q_{}^{\prime \prime \prime }{}_{}{}^{}i_{}^{\prime \prime \prime }{}_{}{}^{}:\pi _{(2n+1)n}(S^{(2n+1)n6})[Sp(n),(^5Sp(n))X_{n,n3}\mathrm{}X_{n,1}]$$

is injective.

Proof. Firstly, we have the following exact sequence

$`\pi _{(2n+1)n}(S^{(2n+1)n3})\stackrel{\psi ^{\prime \prime \prime }}{}\pi _{(2n+1)n}(S^{(2n+1)n6})`$
$`\stackrel{i_{}^{\prime \prime \prime }{}_{}{}^{}}{}\pi _{(2n+1)n}((^5Sp(n))X_{n,n3}\mathrm{}X_{n,1})\pi _{(2n+1)n}(_5S^{(2n+1)n2}),`$
where $`\pi _{(2n+1)n}(S^{(2n+1)n6})/2\nu _{(2n+1)n6}^2`$ and $`\psi ^{\prime \prime \prime }`$ is induced from $`\omega _{(2n+1)n6}`$ $`=`$ $`2\nu _{(2n+1)n6}`$. Thus $`\psi ^{\prime \prime \prime }`$ is trivial, and hence $`i_{}^{\prime \prime \prime }{}_{}{}^{}`$ is injective.

Secondly, since $`(^5Sp(n))X_{n,n3}\mathrm{}X_{n,1})`$ is $`(n(2n+1)11)`$-connected, we have

$`[Sp(n),(^5Sp(n))X_{n,n3}\mathrm{}X_{n,1}]`$
$`=[(S^{(2n+1)n7}_{\omega _{(2n+1)n7}}e^{(2n+1)n3})S^{(2n+1)n},(^5Sp(n))X_{n,n3}\mathrm{}X_{n,1}]`$
$`=[S^{(2n+1)n7}_{\omega _{(2n+1)n7}}e^{(2n+1)n3},(^5Sp(n))X_{n,n3}\mathrm{}X_{n,1}]`$
$`\pi _{(2n+1)n}((^5Sp(n))X_{n,n3}\mathrm{}X_{n,1})`$
by Proposition 3.4, and hence $`q_{}^{\prime \prime \prime }{}_{}{}^{}`$ is injective. Thus $`q_{}^{\prime \prime \prime }{}_{}{}^{}i_{}^{\prime \prime \prime }{}_{}{}^{}`$ is injective.  QED.

Then the following lemma implies that $`((1_{^5Sp(n)})p_{n3}\mathrm{}p_1)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{n+2}`$ is non-trivial by Proposition 5.3, and hence we obtain Theorem 1.4.

###### Lemma 5.4.

$`((1_{^5Sp(n)})p_{n3}p_{n4}\mathrm{}p_1)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{n+2}=i^{\prime \prime \prime }\nu _{(2n+1)n6}^2q^{\prime \prime \prime }`$.

Proof. We have

$`((1_{^5Sp(n)})p_{n3}\mathrm{}p_1)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{n+2}=(\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5p_{n3}\mathrm{}p_1)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{n2}`$
$`=(\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5(1_{^{n3}Sp(n)}))((1_{Sp(n)})p_{n3}\mathrm{}p_1)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{n2}.`$
For dimensional reasons, the image of $`((1_{Sp(n)})p_{n3}\mathrm{}p_1)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{n2}`$ lies in

$$Sp(n)^{(21)}S^{15}\mathrm{}S^{4n1}Sp(n)^{(19)}X_{n,n3}\mathrm{}X_{n,1}.$$

From Proposition 5.2, it follows that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5`$ annihilates $`Sp(n)^{(19)}`$, and hence it equals the composition

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5:Sp(n)^{(21)}S^{21}\stackrel{𝛿}{}^5Sp(n)^{(21)}$$

for some $`\delta \pi _{21}(^5Sp(3))`$. Then we obtain the following diagram except for the dotted arrow using Lemma 4.3, which is commutative up to homotopy:

Since the pair ($`^5Sp(n)`$,$`^5Sp(3)`$) is $`26`$-connected for $`n4`$, we can compress $`\delta `$ into $`^5Sp(3)`$ as $`\delta j\delta _0`$. Thus we have

$$j\delta _0q^{}ji^{}\nu _{15}^2q^{}.$$

Now we know that $`dimSp(3)=21<261`$, and hence we can drop $`j`$ from the above homotopy relation and obtain

$$\delta _0q^{}i^{}\nu _{15}^2q^{}.$$

By Proposition 4.2, $`q_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}:\pi _{21}(^5Sp(3))[Sp(3),^5Sp(3)]`$ is injective, and hence we obtain

$$\delta _0i^{}\nu _{15}^2.$$

Thus $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5`$ equals the composition

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_5:Sp(n)^{(21)}S^{21}\stackrel{\nu _{15}^2}{}S^{15}^5Sp(n)^{(21)}.$$

Thus $`((1_{^5Sp(n)})p_{n3}\mathrm{}p_1)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{n+2}`$ equals the composition

$`((1_{^5Sp(n)})p_{n3}\mathrm{}p_1)\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{n+2}:Sp(n)S^{21}S^{(2n+7)(n3)}`$
$`\stackrel{\nu _{(2n+1)n6}^2}{}S^{15}S^{(2n+7)(n3)}(^5Sp(n))X_{n,n3}\mathrm{}X_{n,1}.`$
This completes the proof of the lemma.  QED.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

BCCUNY-HEP/02-02 hep-th/0202158

Strings, Fivebranes and an Expanding Universe

Ramzi R. Khuri1,2,3a e-mail: khuri@gursey.baruch.cuny.edu. and Andriy Pokotilov1,2b e-mail: APokotilov@gc.cuny.edu.

1Department of Natural Sciences, Baruch College, CUNY

17 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10010

2Graduate School and University Center, CUNY

365 5th Avenue, New York, NY 10036

3Center for Advanced Mathematical Sciences

American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon ∗∗ Associate member.

Abstract

It was recently shown that velocity-dependent forces between parallel fundamental strings moving apart in a $`D`$dimensional spacetime implied an accelerating expanding universe in $`D1`$-dimensional space-time. Exact solutions were obtained for the early time expansion in $`D=5,6`$. Here we show that this result also holds for fundamental strings in the background of a fivebrane, and argue that the feature of an accelerating universe would hold for more general $`p`$-brane-seeded models.

February 2002

In recent work \[1,,2\], it was shown that velocity-dependent forces between parallel fundamental strings moving apart in a $`D`$-dimensional spacetime implied an accelerating expanding universe in $`D1`$-dimensional spacetime. Exact solutions were obtained for the expansion rate for simple models in $`D=5,6`$ . It was also noted in  that an accelerating universe can equally well arise for parallel $`p`$-branes, for arbitrary $`p`$, preserving half the spacetime supersymmetries and moving apart in the transverse space.

In this letter we investigate whether the feature of an accelerating universe holds for different types of $`p`$-branes. We first verify that the string result holds for parallel fivebranes moving apart and then consider strings moving in a fivebrane background. We find an explicit solution in the mean-field approximation for an expanding, accelerating universe consisting of strings moving in the fivebrane background.

For the fundamental string solution , we start with the combined action $`S_{string}=I_D+S_2`$, where

$$I_D=\frac{1}{2\kappa _D^2}d^Dx\sqrt{g}\left(R\frac{1}{2}(\varphi )^2\frac{1}{23!}e^\varphi H_3^2\right)$$

is the $`D`$-dimensional string low-energy effective spacetime action and

$$S_2=\frac{T_2}{2}d^2\zeta \left(\sqrt{\gamma }\gamma ^{\mu \nu }_\mu X^M_\nu X^Ng_{MN}e^{\varphi /2}+ϵ^{\mu \nu }_\mu X^M_\nu X^NB_{MN}\right)$$

is the two-dimesional worldsheet sigma-model source action. Upper case latin leters denote indices of target space-time, lower case greek leters are worldvolume indices. $`g_{MN}`$, $`B_{MN}`$ and $`\varphi `$ are the spacetime canonical metric, antisymmetric tensor and dilaton, respectively, while $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ is the worldsheet metric. $`H_3=dB_2`$ and $`T_2`$ is the string tension equal to its mass/length. The string sigma-model action is related to the canonical metric via $`g_{MN}^s=e^{\varphi /2}g_{MN}`$.

The fundamental string solution represents stationary macroscopic string parallel to the $`x^1`$ direction and is given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ds^2& =e^{3\varphi /2}\left(dt^2+(dx^1)^2\right)+e^{\varphi /2}\delta _{ij}dx^idx^j,\hfill \\ \hfill e^{2\varphi }& h=1+\frac{k_n}{r^n},B_{01}=h^1\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`n=D4`$ (we assume $`D>4`$), $`r^2=x^ix_i`$ and the lower case latin indices run through the $`D2`$-dimensional space transverse to the worldvolume ($`i,j=2,3,\mathrm{},D1`$). The constant $`k_n=\frac{2\kappa _D^2T_2}{n\mathrm{\Omega }_{n+1}}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{n+1}`$ is the volume of the $`n+1`$-dimensional unit sphere.

The Lagrangian for a test fundamental string moving in the background of a parallel source string is then given by \[1,,4\]

$$_2=mh^1\left(\sqrt{1h\dot{x}^2}1\right),$$

where $`m`$ is the mass of the string, $`\dot{x}^2=\dot{x}^i\dot{x}_i`$ and the “$``$” represents a time derivative. This Lagrangian does not depend explicitly on time, so that the total energy of the system is conserved. For $`D=5,6`$, the equation for conservation of energy can be integrated exactly .

For $`D=5`$ a straightforward integration yields

$$\left(\frac{\rho +3}{\rho +1}\right)\mathrm{ln}\left(\sqrt{\frac{r}{a}}+\sqrt{\frac{r}{a}+1}\right)+\sqrt{\frac{r}{a}}\sqrt{\frac{r}{a}+1}=\sqrt{\frac{\left(\rho +2\right)^3}{\rho \left(\rho +1\right)^2}}\left(\frac{tt_0}{k_1}\right),$$

where $`\rho =\frac{E}{m}`$, $`a=\frac{\rho k_1}{\rho +2}`$ and $`t_0`$ is a constant. For small $`r`$ (or early time $`t`$) ,

$$r\left(\frac{\rho +2}{\rho +1}\right)^2\frac{t^2}{k_1},$$

while for large $`r`$ (or late time), $`rt`$.

For $`D=6`$, we obtain

$$\sqrt{r^2+a}+\sqrt{a}\left(\frac{\rho +2}{\rho +1}\right)\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{r+\sqrt{r^2+a}\sqrt{a}}{r+\sqrt{r^2+a}+\sqrt{a}}\right)=\sqrt{\frac{\rho (\rho +2)}{(\rho +1)^2}}(tt_0),$$

where again $`a=\frac{\rho k_2}{\rho +2}`$ and $`t_0`$ is a constant. For small $`r`$,

$$rr_0\mathrm{exp}\frac{t}{\sqrt{k_2}},$$

while for large $`r`$ we again find $`rt`$. This late time behaviour is a general property of this kind of model and is valid for any $`D`$ .

In  it was shown that some simple models of a string-seeded universe in $`D=5,6`$ have the same early time behaviour (1),(1) as corresponding source/test string systems. This suggests that the mean-field approximation of  provides a valid description of the early time expansion rate for these systems. Late time expansion rates for these models can also be obtained from conservation of energy and may represent a testable prediction (see  for further discussions).

The fundamental string in $`D=10`$ is a solution of $`3`$form version of $`D=10,N=1`$ supergravity. The dual $`7`$form version of this theory  corresponds to supergravity coupled to the fivebrane $`\sigma `$model \[6,,7\]. The action for the supergravity fields $`(g_{MN},A_{MNPQRS},\varphi )`$ is now

$$I_{10}=\frac{1}{2\kappa _{10}^2}d^{10}x\sqrt{g}\left(R\frac{1}{2}(\varphi )^2\frac{1}{27!}e^\varphi K_7^2\right)$$

where $`K_7=dA_6`$. $`I_{10}`$ is the same action as $`I_D`$ in (1) for $`D=10`$ provided $`H_3`$ and $`K_7`$ are related via the duality transformation

$$K_7={}_{}{}^{}H_{3}^{}e^\varphi .$$

The fivebrane sigma-model action is given by \[6,,8\]

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill S_6=T_6d^6\zeta (\sqrt{\gamma }\gamma ^{\mu \nu }_\mu X^M_\nu X^Ng_{MN}e^{\varphi /6}2\sqrt{\gamma }+& \\ \hfill \frac{1}{6!}ϵ^{\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _6}_{\mu _1}X^{M_1}_{\mu _2}X^{M_2}_{\mu _3}X^{M_3}_{\mu _4}X^{M_4}_{\mu _5}X^{M_5}_{\mu _6}X^{M_6}A_{M_1M_2\mathrm{}M_6})& \end{array}$$

where $`T_6`$ is the fivebrane tension. The fivebrane sigma model metric is related to the canonical metric via $`g_{MN}^f=e^{\varphi /6}g_{MN}`$.

The fundamental fivebrane solution to the equations of motion of the combined action $`S_{fivebrane}=I_{10}+S_6`$ is given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ds^2& =e^{\varphi /2}\left(dt^2+(dx^1)^2\right)+e^{3\varphi /2}\delta _{mn}dx^mdx^n,\hfill \\ \hfill e^{2\varphi }& =1+\frac{\stackrel{~}{k}_2}{r^2},A_{012345}=e^{2\varphi }\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{k}_2=\frac{\kappa _{10}^2T_6}{\mathrm{\Omega }_3}`$, $`m,n=6,7,8,9`$ and $`r`$ is the radial coordinate in the four-dimensional space transverse to the six-dimensional worldvolume of the fivebrane.

The Lagrangian for a test fivebrane moving in the background of a parallel source-fivebrane  can be easily obtained from (1), (1) and in term of the proper time of the test fivebrane takes the form

$$_6=me^{2\varphi }\left(\sqrt{1e^{2\varphi }\dot{r}^2}1\right),$$

where $`m`$ is the mass of the test fivebrane. Thus the Lagrangian (1) for this two-fivebrane system in $`D=10`$ has exactly the same form as the Lagrangian for the test string moving in the source string background in $`D=6`$. This fact is a consequence of string/fivebrane duality in $`D=10`$ or even string/string duality in $`D=6`$, once the fivebrane is reduced to a dual string in $`D=6`$ . Note that we could have obtained the identical result as above starting directly with the dual string in $`D=6`$. So the early time dependence $`r=r(t)`$ (where r is the radial coordinate for the four-dimensional space transverse to the six-dimensional worldvolume) has the form $`rr_0\mathrm{exp}\frac{t}{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{k}_2}}`$ where $`r_0`$ is the initial distance between the fivebranes in this four-dimensional space. In the mean-field approximation, the position of the test-fivebrane represents the average fivebrane-fivebrane distance and hence the scale size of the universe (see \[1,,2\]).

We now wish to investigate whether the above scenario holds for velocity-dependent forces between different branes. The most natural case to consider is that of a brane propagating in the background of a dual brane. In particular, we consider a test string moving in the background of a fivebrane. Suppose the fivebrane is oriented along $`x^\alpha =\zeta ^\alpha `$ ($`\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},5`$). We assume that the test string lies either parallel or antiparallel to one of the fivebrane directions, say $`x^1`$. Viewed as a background for string propagation, the fivebrane is a nonsingular solution of the spacetime action $`I_{10}`$ alone, without the need for a source term (since no singularity is present in the string frame). The metric and dilaton are then given by (1), with the three-form given by the duality transformation (1). Since, from (1), the only nonvanishing components of $`K`$ are of the form $`K_{012345m}`$ where the directions $`m=6,7,8,9`$ are transverse to the fivebrane, by dualizing we obtain that the only nonzero components of $`H_3=dB_2`$ are $`H_{pqs}(r)`$ where again $`p,q,s=6,7,8,9`$. Thus the only nonvanishing components of $`B_{MN}`$ occur when $`M,N=6,7,8,9`$. It then follows that the Wess-Zumino-Witten term in the action (1) for the test string in the fivebrane background $`ϵ^{\mu \nu }_\mu X^M_\nu X^NB_{MN}`$ vanishes. Replacing the fields of the fivebrane from (1) into (1) we obtain the Lagrangian

$$=m\sqrt{1e^{2\varphi }\dot{r}^2}$$

where $`m`$ is the mass of the test string and $`e^{2\varphi }`$ is given by (1). The Hamiltonian of this test string/source fivebrane system also does not depend on time and thus represents the conserved energy

$$EH=\frac{m}{\sqrt{1e^{2\varphi }\dot{r}^2}}.$$

Integrating (1) over time we obtain

$$\sqrt{r^2+\stackrel{~}{k}_2}\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{k}_2}\mathrm{ln}\frac{\sqrt{r^2+\stackrel{~}{k}_2}+\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{k}_2}}{r}=\sqrt{\alpha }t+const,$$

where $`\alpha =1\frac{m^2}{E^2}`$.

For early times $`(r<<\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{k}_2})`$ we obtain from (1)

$$rr_0\mathrm{exp}\left(\sqrt{\frac{\alpha }{\stackrel{~}{k}_2}}t\right)$$

i.e. the same type of early time dependence as for parallel strings in $`D=6`$. Once again, for late times we obtain $`rt`$ as a general feature of this type of model \[1,,2\]. We would expect this feature to persist for any dual pair of $`p`$-brane, in particular for fivebranes propagating in the background of a string.

Since similar results seem to hold for branes propagating in either identical or dual brane backgrounds, this strongly suggests that the type of velocity-dependent forces present in the above cases are generic to branes and would lead to an accelerating expanding universe for various different types of branes simultaneously propagating in the same background. This is also supported by the compositeness feature of brane solutions, which allows for the construction of arbitrary brane solution from fundamental brane building blocks (of which the fundamental string and fivebrane are examples) \[10,,11\]. Another interesting question is whether these scenarios hold in the context of general relativity, independent of string theory. A possible extension of these results is to consider different orientations of the various branes, in which case the zero-force condition no longer holds in the static limit. Finally, it is worthwhile to go beyond the mean-field approximation and investigate the many-body problem directly (see  for some simplified models), also taking into account quantum interactions.

Acknowledgements: Research supported by PSC-CUNY Grant # 63497 00 32 and a Eugene Lang Junior Faculty Research Fellowship.

References

relax R. R. Khuri, Phys. Lett. B353 (2001) 520, hep-th/0109041. relax R. R. Khuri and A. Pokotilov, hep-th/0201194 relax A. Dabholkar, G. W. Gibbons, J. A. Harvey and F. Ruiz Ruiz, Nucl. Phys. B340 (1990) 33. relax C. G. Callan and R. R. Khuri, Phys. Lett. B261 (1991) 263. relax A. H. Chamseddine, Phys. Rev. D24 (1981) 3065. relax M. J. Duff and J. X. Lu, Nucl. Phys. B354 (1991) 141. relax M. J. Duff, R. R. Khuri and J. X. Lu, Phys. Rep. B259 (1995) 213, hep-th/9412184. relax M. J. Duff and J. X. Lu, Nucl. Phys. B354 (1991) 129. relax M. J. Duff, R. R. Khuri and J. X. Lu, Nucl. Phys. B377 (1992) 281. relax R. R. Khuri, hep-th/9609094. relax M. Cvetic and D. Youm, Phys. Rev. D53  (1996) 584 ; M. Cvetic and A. A. Tseytlin, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 5619.


text:
# NEW REPRESENTATION FOR LAGRANGIANS OF SELF-DUAL NONLINEAR ELECTRODYNAMICS

## 1 Introduction

It is well known that the on-shell $`SO(2)`$ ($`U(1)`$) duality invariance of Maxwell equations can be generalized to the whole class of the nonlinear electrodynamics models, including the famous Born-Infeld theory. The condition of $`SO(2)`$ duality can be formulated as a nonlinear differential equation for the Lagrangian of these theories . Up to now, the general solution of this equation was analysed only in the framework of proper power expansions. Here, based on our recent paper , we present details of new representation for the Lagrangians of these theories. Alongside with the electromagnetic field strength $`F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$, it involves an auxiliary tensor (bispinor) field $`V_{\alpha \beta },\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$. It will be shown that the $`SO(2)`$ duality condition can be explicitly solved in this formalism, without resorting to any perturbative expansion. The general Lagrangian solving this constraint is a sum of an interaction term $`E(V^2,\overline{V}^2)`$ depending only on the $`U(1)`$-invariant combination of the auxiliary fields, $`E=\stackrel{~}{E}(V^2\overline{V}^2)`$, and non-invariant terms which are bilinear in $`V`$ and $`F`$. The Lagrangian involving only the Maxwell field strengths emerges as a result of eliminating the tensor auxiliary fields by their algebraic equations of motion. More general nonlinear electrodynamics Lagrangians respecting the so-called discrete self-duality (or duality under Legendre transformation) also admit a simple characterization in terms of the function $`E`$. In this case it should be even, $`E(V^2,\overline{V}^2)=E(V^2,\overline{V}^2)`$, and otherwise arbitrary.

In Sect. 2 we give a brief account of the continuous and “discrete” dualities in nonlinear electrodynamics in the conventional approach. A novel representation of the appropriate Lagrangians via bispinor auxiliary fields $`V_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ is discussed in Sect. 3. Two examples of duality-invariant models in the new setting, including the Born-Infeld theory, are presented in Sect. 4. An extension to $`U(n)`$ duality-invariant systems of $`n`$ Abelian gauge fields is given in Sect. 5. The corresponding Lagrangian in the $`V,F`$ representation is fully specified by the interaction term which is an $`U(n)`$ invariant function of $`n`$ auxiliary fields $`V_{\alpha \beta }^k`$. The discrete self-duality also amounts to a simple restriction on the interaction function.

## 2  Self-dualities in nonlinear
electrodynamics

We shall discuss nonlinear 4D electrodynamics models which reveal duality properties and include the free Maxwell theory and Born-Infeld theory as particular cases. Detailed motivations why such models are of interest to study can be found, e.g., in .

2.1 Continuous on-shell $`SO(2)`$ duality. In the spinor notation, the Maxwell field strengths are defined by

$`F_{\alpha \beta }(A){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(_\alpha ^{\dot{\beta }}A_{\beta \dot{\beta }}+_\beta ^{\dot{\beta }}A_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}),`$
$`\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}(A){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(_{\dot{\alpha }}^\beta A_{\beta \dot{\beta }}+_{\dot{\beta }}^\beta A_{\beta \dot{\alpha }}),`$ (1)
where $`_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}=\frac{1}{2}(\sigma ^m)_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}_m`$ and $`A_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}`$ is the corresponding vector gauge potential. Below we shall sometimes treat $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ as independent variables, without assuming Eqs. (1).

Let us introduce the Lorentz-invariant complex variables

$`\phi =F^{\alpha \beta }F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{\phi }=\overline{F}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}.`$ (2)
In this representation, two independent invariants which one can construct out of the Maxwell field strength in the standard vector notation take the following form:

$`F^{mn}F_{mn}=2(\phi +\overline{\phi }),`$
$`F_{mn}\stackrel{~}{F}^{mn}=2i(\phi \overline{\phi }).`$ (3)
Here

$$F_{mn}=_mA_n_nA_m,\stackrel{~}{F}^{mn}=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon ^{mnpq}F_{pq}.$$

It will be convenient to deal with dimensionless $`F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ and $`\phi ,\overline{\phi }`$, introducing a coupling constant $`f`$, $`[f]=2`$. Then the generic nonlinear Lagrangian $`(F,\overline{F})=f^2L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$, where

$$L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })=\frac{1}{2}(\phi +\overline{\phi })+L_{int}(\phi ,\overline{\phi })$$
(4)
and $`L_{int}(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ collects all possible self-interaction terms of higher-order in $`\phi ,\overline{\phi }`$.

We shall use the following notation for the derivatives of the Lagrangian $`L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ 111In these and some subsequent relations it is assumed that the functional argument $`F`$ stands for both $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$; we hope that this short-hand notation will not give rise to any confusion.

$`P_{\alpha \beta }(F)iL/F^{\alpha \beta }=2iF_{\alpha \beta }L_\phi ,`$ (5)
$`L_\phi =L/\phi ,L_{\overline{\phi }}=L/\overline{\phi },`$
$`L_{\phi \overline{\phi }}=^2L/\phi \overline{\phi }\mathrm{},`$
and for the bilinear combinations of them

$`\pi P^{\alpha \beta }P_{\alpha \beta }=4\phi (L_\phi )^2,`$
$`\overline{\pi }\overline{P}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}\overline{P}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}=4\overline{\phi }(L_{\overline{\phi }})^2.`$ (6)
In the vector notation, the same quantities read

$`\stackrel{~}{P}^{mn}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\epsilon ^{mnpq}P_{pq}=2L/F_{mn}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}P_{mn}\stackrel{~}{P}^{mn}=\pi \overline{\pi }.`$
The nonlinear equations of motion have the following form in this representation:

$`_{\alpha \dot{\alpha }}(F)_\alpha ^{\dot{\beta }}\overline{P}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}(F)_{\dot{\alpha }}^\beta P_{\alpha \beta }(F)=0.`$ (7)
These equations, together with the Bianchi identities

$`_{\alpha \dot{\alpha }}(F)_\alpha ^{\dot{\beta }}\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}_{\dot{\alpha }}^\beta F_{\alpha \beta }=0,`$ (8)
constitute a set of first-order equations in which one can treat $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ as unconstrained conjugated variables.

This set is said to be duality-invariant if the Lagrangian $`L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ satisfies certain nonlinear condition . The precise form of this self-duality condition in the spinor notation is

$`S[F,P(F)]F^{\alpha \beta }F_{\alpha \beta }+P^{\alpha \beta }P_{\alpha \beta }\text{c.c.}`$
$`=\phi +\pi \overline{\phi }\overline{\pi }`$
$`=\phi \overline{\phi }4[\phi (L_\phi )^2\overline{\phi }(L_{\overline{\phi }})^2]=0.`$ (9)
Let us define the nonlinear transformation

$`\delta _\omega F_{\alpha \beta }=\omega P_{\alpha \beta }(F)2i\omega F_{\alpha \beta }L_\phi ,`$ (10)
where $`\omega `$ is a real parameter. This transformation is a nonlinear realization of the $`SO(2)`$ group, provided the condition (9) is satisfied. Indeed, in this case $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`P_{\alpha \beta }(F)`$ form an $`SO(2)`$ vector

$`\delta _\omega P_{\alpha \beta }(F)=4\omega F_{\alpha \beta }{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}[\phi (L_\phi )^2\overline{\phi }(L_{\overline{\phi }})^2]`$
$`=\omega F_{\alpha \beta }.`$ (11)
The set of equations (7), (8) is clearly invariant under these transformations

$`\delta _\omega \left(\begin{array}{c}_{\alpha \dot{\alpha }}\\ _{\alpha \dot{\alpha }}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \omega \\ \omega & 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}_{\alpha \dot{\alpha }}\\ _{\alpha \dot{\alpha }}\end{array}\right).`$ (18)
Thus these transformations are an obvious generalization of the $`SO(2)`$ duality transformation in the Maxwell theory:

$`\delta _\omega F_{\alpha \beta }=i\omega F_{\alpha \beta },\delta _\omega \overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}=i\omega \overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }},`$ (19)
which is a symmetry of the vacuum Maxwell equation $`_{\dot{\alpha }}^\beta F_{\alpha \beta }=0`$.

The authors of  analyzed the self-duality condition (9) as an equation for the unknown $`L`$, using the power expansion in some variable. They have found that in each order of the perturbation theory the general solution for $`L`$ is specified by some arbitrary function of the single variable $`\phi \overline{\phi }`$. In Sect. 3 we propose the explicit solution to this problem beyond the power expansions, taking advantage of a new representation of self-dual Lagrangians via bispinor auxiliary fields.

It should be pointed out that the $`SO(2)`$ duality transformations in the standard setting described above cannot be realized on the vector potential $`A_m`$; they provide a symmetry between the equations of motion and Bianchi identity and as such define on-shell symmetry. The manifestly $`SO(2)`$ duality-invariant Lagrangians can be constructed in the formalism with additional vector and auxiliary fields . Here we shall not discuss connections with this extended formalism.

Although the Lagrangian $`L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ satisfying (9) is not invariant with respect to transformation (10), one can still construct, out of $`\phi `$ and $`\overline{\phi }`$, the $`SO(2)`$ invariant function

$`I[F,P(F)]L+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}(FP\overline{F}\overline{P})`$
$`=L\phi L_\phi \overline{\phi }L_{\overline{\phi }}I(\phi ,\overline{\phi }),`$ (20)
$`\delta _\omega I(\phi ,\overline{\phi })={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\omega (\phi +\pi \overline{\phi }\overline{\pi })=0,`$
where $`FP\overline{F}\overline{P}=P_{\alpha \beta }F^{\alpha \beta }\overline{P}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}\overline{F}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$. This function cannot be taken as a Lagrangian since it contains no free part.

2.2 Self-duality under Legendre transformation. For what follows we shall need a first-order representation of the action corresponding to the Lagrangian (4), such that the Bianchi identities (8) are implemented in the action with the appropriate Lagrange multipliers and so $`F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ are unconstrained complex variables. This form of the action is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f^2}}{\displaystyle }d^4x\stackrel{~}{L}[F,F^D(B)]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{f^2}}{\displaystyle }d^4x\{L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$
$`+i[FF^D(B)\overline{F}\overline{F}^D(B)]\},`$ (21)
where

$`F_{\alpha \beta }^D(B){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(_\alpha ^{\dot{\beta }}B_{\beta \dot{\beta }}+_\beta ^{\dot{\beta }}B_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}).`$ (22)
Varying with respect to the Lagrange multiplier $`B_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}`$, one obtains just the Bianchi identities for $`F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ (8). Solving them in terms of the gauge potential $`A_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}`$ and substituting the result into (21), we come back to (4). On the other hand, the multiplier $`B_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}`$ is defined up to the standard Abelian gauge transformation, which suggests interpreting $`B_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}`$ and $`F_{\alpha \beta }^D(B)`$ as the dual gauge potential and gauge field strength, respectively. Using the algebraic equations of motion for the variables $`F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$, one can express the action (21) in terms of $`F_{\alpha \beta }^D(B),\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^D(B)`$. If the resulting action has the same form as the original one in terms of $`F_{\alpha \beta }(A),\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}(A)`$, the corresponding electrodynamics model is said to enjoy the “discrete” self-duality. This sort of duality should not be confused with the on-shell continuous $`SO(2)`$ duality discussed earlier. The relevant $`SO(2)`$ symmetry is realized on the variables $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ according to (10) and it is not defined on the dual vector potential $`B_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}`$. However, as we shall see soon, any $`L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ solving the constraint (9) corresponds to a system revealing the discrete self-duality. The inverse statement is not generally true, so the class of nonlinear electrodynamics actions admitting $`SO(2)`$ duality of equations of motion forms a subclass in the variety of actions which are self-dual in the “discrete” sense.

Let us elaborate on this in some detail. The dual picture is achieved by varying (21) with respect to the independent variables $`F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$, which yields

$$F_{\alpha \beta }^D(B)=iL/F^{\alpha \beta }P_{\alpha \beta }(F)=2iF_{\alpha \beta }L_\phi ,$$
(23)
where $`P_{\alpha \beta }(F)`$ is the same as in (5). Substituting the solution of this algebraic equation, $`F_{\alpha \beta }=F_{\alpha \beta }(F^D)`$, into (21) gives us the dual Lagrangian $`\widehat{L}(F^D)`$

$`\widehat{L}(F^D)=\widehat{L}(\pi ^D,\overline{\pi }^D)\stackrel{~}{L}[F(F^D),F^D],`$ (24)
where $`\pi ^DF^{D\alpha \beta }F_{\alpha \beta }^D=\pi (F)`$ and $`\pi ,\overline{\pi }`$ were defined in (6).

Using (23) and its conjugate, as well as the definitions (21), (24), one can explicitly check the property

$`F_{\alpha \beta }=i\widehat{L}/F^{D\alpha \beta }\text{and c.c.}.`$ (25)
Due to this relation, and keeping in mind the inverse one (23), one can treat the equation

$`\widehat{L}(\pi ,\overline{\pi })=L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })+i(FP\overline{F}\overline{P})`$ (26)
as setting the direct and inverse Legendre transforms $`L\stackrel{~}{L}`$ between two functions of 6 complex variables

$`F_{\alpha \beta }P_{\alpha \beta }=iL/F^{\alpha \beta },`$
$`dL=iP_{\alpha \beta }dF^{\alpha \beta }+i\overline{P}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}d\overline{F}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }},`$ (27)
$`P_{\alpha \beta }F_{\alpha \beta }=i\widehat{L}/P^{\alpha \beta },`$
$`d\widehat{L}=iF^{\alpha \beta }dP_{\alpha \beta }i\overline{F}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}d\overline{P}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}.`$ (28)
Within this interpretation, the “discrete” self-duality defined above and amounting to the condition

$`\widehat{L}(\pi ,\overline{\pi })=L(\pi ,\overline{\pi }),`$ (29)
can be equivalently called “self-duality under Legendre transformation” .

Let us show that the $`SO(2)`$ duality condition (9) indeed guarantees the self-duality under Legendre transformation (29). The simplest proof of this statement (see, e.g., ) makes use of the finite discrete $`SO(2)`$ transformation

$`F_{\alpha \beta }P_{\alpha \beta },P_{\alpha \beta }F_{\alpha \beta }`$ (30)
and the invariance of function (20) under the global version of the $`SO(2)`$ transformations (10). Due to the latter property, (20) is invariant with respect to (30) too

$$L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })+\frac{i}{2}PF\frac{i}{2}\overline{P}\overline{F}=L(\pi ,\overline{\pi })\frac{i}{2}FP+\frac{i}{2}\overline{F}\overline{P}.$$

Comparing this relation with (26), we arrive at the condition (29).

For the dual Lagrangian $`\widehat{L}(\pi ,\overline{\pi })`$ one can construct the 1st order action similar to (21)

$`f^2{\displaystyle }d^4x\stackrel{~}{L}[P,F(A)]=f^2{\displaystyle }d^4x[\widehat{L}(\pi ,\overline{\pi })`$
$`iPF(A)+i\overline{P}\overline{F}(A)].`$ (31)
where $`F_{\alpha \beta }(A),\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}(A)`$ were defined in (1). The self-dual case (in the “discrete” sense) corresponds to identifying $`\widehat{L}(\pi ,\overline{\pi })=L(\pi ,\overline{\pi })`$. Varying (31) with respect to the gauge potential $`A_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}`$ produces Bianchi identities for the originally unconstrained variable $`P_{\alpha \beta },\overline{P}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ as the corresponding equations of motion and so implies

$$P_{\alpha \beta }=F_{\alpha \beta }^D(B),\overline{P}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}=\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^D(B).$$

On the other hand, the equation of motion for $`P^{\alpha \beta }`$ in this representation yields

$`F_{\alpha \beta }=iL/P^{\alpha \beta }=2iP_{\alpha \beta }L_\pi .`$ (32)
Solving this equation for the unknown $`P_{\alpha \beta }`$ as a function of $`F_{\alpha \beta }(A),\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}(A)`$, we come back to the action corresponding to the original Lagrangian (4).

The on-shell $`SO(2)`$ duality formulated earlier in terms of the variables $`F_{\alpha \beta },P_{\alpha \beta }(F)`$ admits an equivalent formulation in terms of the dual variables $`P_{\alpha \beta },F_{\alpha \beta }(P)`$:

$`\delta _\omega P_{\alpha \beta }=\omega F_{\alpha \beta }(P)=2i\omega P_{\alpha \beta }L_\pi .`$ (33)
The condition of $`SO(2)`$ self-duality has the following form in this representation:

$`S[F(P),P]=\pi [14(L_\pi )^2]\text{c.c.}=0.`$ (34)
The function $`S[F(P),P]`$ is obtained by substituting $`F_{\alpha \beta }(P)`$ from (32) into the universal bilinear form (9).

## 3 A new form of the actions of nonlinear electrodynamics and self-dualities

3.1 Nonlinear electrodynamics Lagrangians in a new setting. The recently constructed $`N=3`$ supersymmetric extension of the Born-Infeld theory  suggests a new representation for the actions of nonlinear electrodynamics discussed in the previous Section.

The infinite-dimensional off-shell $`N=3`$ vector multiplet contains gauge field strengths (1) and auxiliary fields $`H_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`\overline{H}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ . The gauge field part of the off-shell super $`N=3`$ Maxwell component Lagrangian is 222In the rest of the paper we put the overall coupling constant $`f`$ equal to 1.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16}}[h+\overline{h}6(\overline{H}\overline{F}+HF)+\phi +\overline{\phi }],`$ (35)
where $`h=H^{\alpha \beta }H_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`HF=H^{\alpha \beta }F_{\alpha \beta }(A)`$. Eliminating the auxiliary fields $`H_{\alpha \beta },\overline{H}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ by their algebraic equations of motion we arrive at the standard Maxwell action

$`L_2(F)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\phi +\overline{\phi }).`$ (36)
The $`N=3`$ off-shell superfield strengths contain the following combinations of fields :

$`V_{\alpha \beta }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(H_{\alpha \beta }+F_{\alpha \beta }),`$
$`\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(\overline{H}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}+\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}).`$ (37)
The free Maxwell Lagrangian (35), being rewritten through $`V_{\alpha \beta },\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$, reads

$$_2(V,F)=\nu +\overline{\nu }2(VF+\overline{V}\overline{F})+\frac{1}{2}(\phi +\overline{\phi }),$$
(38)
where

$`\nu V^{\alpha \beta }V_{\alpha \beta },\overline{\nu }\overline{V}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }},`$
$`VFV^{\alpha \beta }F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{V}\overline{F}\overline{V}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}.`$ (39)
Eliminating $`V^{\alpha \beta }`$ by its algebraic equation of motion,

$`V^{\alpha \beta }=F^{\alpha \beta },\overline{V}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}=\overline{F}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }},`$ (40)
we arrive at the free Lagrangian (36).

Our aim will be to find a nonlinear extension of the free Maxwell Lagrangian using the $`N=3`$ supersymmetry-inspired form $`_2(V,F)`$ of it, eq. (38), such that this extension becomes the generic nonlinear Lagrangian $`L(F^2,\overline{F}^2)`$, eq. (4), after eliminating the auxiliary fields $`V_{\alpha \beta },\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ by their algebraic (nonlinear) equations of motion.

By Lorentz covariance, such a nonlinear Lagrangian has the following general form:

$`[V,F(A)]=_2[V,F(A)]+E(\nu ,\overline{\nu }),`$ (41)
where $`E`$ is a real function encoding self-interaction. Varying the action with respect to $`V_{\alpha \beta }`$, we derive the algebraic relation between $`V`$ and $`F(A)`$ in this formalism

$`F_{\alpha \beta }(A)=V_{\alpha \beta }(1+E_\nu )\text{and c.c.},`$ (42)
where $`E_\nu E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })/\nu `$. This relation is a generalization of the free equation (40) and it can be used to eliminate the auxiliary variable $`V^{\alpha \beta }`$ in terms of $`F^{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`\overline{F}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$, $`V_{\alpha \beta }V_{\alpha \beta }[F(A)]`$ (see eq. (46) below). The natural restrictions on the interaction function $`E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$ are

$`E(0,0)=0,E_\nu (0,0)=E_{\overline{\nu }}(0,0)=0,`$ (43)
which mean that its $`(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$-expansion does not contain constant and linear terms. Clearly, given some non-singular interaction Lagrangian $`L_{int}(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ in (4), one can pick up the appropriate function $`E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$, such that the elimination of $`V^{\alpha \beta },\overline{V}^{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ by (42) yields just this self-interaction. Thus (41) with an arbitrary (non-singular) interaction function $`E`$ is another form of generic nonlinear electrodynamics Lagrangian (4). The second equation of motion in this representation, obtained by varying (41) with respect to $`A_{\alpha \dot{\alpha }}`$, has the form

$`_{\dot{\alpha }}^\beta [F_{\alpha \beta }(A)2V_{\alpha \beta }]+\text{c.c.}=0.`$ (44)
After substituting $`V_{\alpha \beta }=V_{\alpha \beta }[F(A)]`$ from (42), eq. (44) becomes the dynamical equation for $`F_{\alpha \beta }(A),\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}(A)`$ corresponding to the generic Lagrangian (4). Comparing (44) with (7) yields the relation

$`P_{\alpha \beta }(F)=i\left[F_{\alpha \beta }2V_{\alpha \beta }(F)\right],`$ (45)
where $`P_{\alpha \beta }(F)`$ was defined in (5).

Let us elaborate in more detail on the relation of the $`V,F`$ representation of the nonlinear electrodynamics Lagrangians to the original “minimal” one (4) which involves only $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$. The general solution of the algebraic equation (42) for $`V_{\alpha \beta }`$ can be written as

$`V_{\alpha \beta }(F)=F_{\alpha \beta }G(\phi ,\overline{\phi }).`$ (46)
The transition function $`G(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ can be found from the basic requirement that (41) coincides with the initial nonlinear action after eliminating $`V_{\alpha \beta },\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$

$`[V(F),F]=L(\phi ,\overline{\phi }).`$ (47)
Using eq.(46), one can obtain the relations

$`\nu =\phi G^2,\overline{\nu }=\overline{\phi }\overline{G}^2,`$ (48)
$`V(F)F=\phi G,\overline{V}(F)\overline{F}=\overline{\phi }\overline{G}.`$ (49)
After substituting these expressions in (47) with making use of the explicit expressions (38), (41), eq. (47) can be rewritten as

$`E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })=L(\phi ,\overline{\phi }){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\phi +\overline{\phi })`$
$`+\phi G(2G)+\overline{\phi }\overline{G}(2\overline{G}).`$ (50)
One should also add the relations:

$`G^1=1+E_\nu ,\overline{G}^1=1+E_{\overline{\nu }},`$ (51)
which follow from comparing (46) with (42).

Differentiating (50) with respect to $`\phi `$ and using the relations

$$\frac{\nu }{\phi }=G^2+2\phi G\frac{G}{\phi },\frac{\overline{\nu }}{\phi }=2\overline{\phi }\overline{G}\frac{\overline{G}}{\phi },$$

one obtains the simple expression for transition functions

$`G(\phi ,\overline{\phi })={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}L_\phi .`$ (52)
A useful corollary of this formula and eqs. (48), (51) is the relation

$`\nu E_\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\phi (14L_\phi ^2).`$ (53)
Given a fixed $`L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$, one can express $`\phi ,\overline{\phi }`$ in terms of $`\nu ,\overline{\nu }`$ using eqs. (48), (52) and then restore the explicit form of $`E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$ by (50). Conversely, given $`E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$, one can restore $`L(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$. In practice, finding out such explicit relations is a rather complicated task, as we shall see on two examples in Sect. 4.

3.2 Self-dualities revisited. Until now we did not touch any issues related to self-dualities. A link with the consideration in the previous Section is established by Eq. (45) which relates the functions $`P_{\alpha \beta }(F)`$ and $`V_{\alpha \beta }(F)`$.

Substituting this into the $`SO(2)`$ duality condition (9) and making use of eq. (53) we find

$`S[F,P(F)]=[F^{\alpha \beta }V^{\alpha \beta }(F)]V_{\alpha \beta }(F)\text{c.c}`$
$`=\nu E_\nu \overline{\nu }E_{\overline{\nu }}.`$ (54)
Thus passing to the $`V,F`$ representation allows one to reduce the nonlinear differential equation (9) to a linear differential equation for the function $`E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$:

$$\text{Eq.(}\text{9}\text{)}\nu E_\nu \overline{\nu }E_{\overline{\nu }}=0.$$
(55)
The corresponding realization of the $`SO(2)`$ (or $`U(1)`$) transformations (10), (11) in terms of $`F^{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`V^{\alpha \beta }(F)`$ is given by

$`\delta _\omega V_{\alpha \beta }(F)=i\omega V_{\alpha \beta }(F),`$ (56)
$`\delta _\omega F_{\alpha \beta }=i\omega [F_{\alpha \beta }2V_{\alpha \beta }(F)].`$ (57)
It is worth recalling that the on-shell $`SO(2)`$ duality transformation mixes the dynamical equations of motion for $`F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ with the Bianchi identities (8), and so in this extended set of equations one should treat $`F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ as unconstrained conjugated complex variables (without explicitly solving (8) in terms of gauge potential $`A_{\alpha \dot{\beta }}`$). Correspondingly, the algebraic relation (42) should be viewed to connect two independent sets of variables, $`(F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }})`$ and $`(V_{\alpha \beta },\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }})`$:

$`F_{\alpha \beta }=V_{\alpha \beta }(1+E_\nu ).`$ (58)
Due to this relation, one can equivalently formulate the dynamics and duality transformations in terms of either the set $`(F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }})`$ or the set $`(V_{\alpha \beta },\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }})`$. Respectively, one can choose as the basic one either the transformation (57) or (56). It is important to be sure that (58) is covariant under the transformations (56),(57). It is straightforward to check that both (58) and the constraint (55) itself are indeed covariant under these transformations on the surface of eq. (55).

It is important to emphasize that the new form (55) of the self-duality constraint (9) admits a transparent interpretation as the condition of invariance of $`E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$ with respect to the $`U(1)`$ transformations (56)

$`\delta _\omega E=2i\omega (\overline{\nu }E_{\overline{\nu }}\nu E_\nu )=0.`$ (59)
The general solution of (55) is a function $`\stackrel{~}{E}(a)`$ which depends on the single real $`U(1)`$ invariant variable $`a=\nu \overline{\nu }`$ quartic in the auxiliary fields $`V_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$

$`E_{sd}(\nu ,\overline{\nu })=\stackrel{~}{E}(a)=\stackrel{~}{E}(\nu \overline{\nu }),\stackrel{~}{E}(0)=0.`$ (60)
Thus we come to the notable result that the whole class of nonlinear extensions of the Maxwell action admitting the on-shell $`SO(2)`$ duality is parametrized by an arbitrary $`SO(2)`$ invariant real function of one argument $`E_{sd}=\stackrel{~}{E}(\nu \overline{\nu })`$ in the representation (41). The remarkable property of $`E_{sd}`$ is that only terms $`\nu ^n\overline{\nu }^n`$ can appear in its power expansion. Below we shall present this expansion for two examples, including the most interesting case of Born-Infeld theory.

In the $`V,F`$ representation it is very easy to construct invariants of the $`SO(2)`$ duality rotations. Besides the function $`E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$ itself, one more real invariant combination of $`V_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`F_{\alpha \beta }(V)`$ is as follows

$`I_0(V,F)=\nu +\overline{\nu }VF\overline{V}\overline{F}`$
$`=\nu E_\nu \overline{\nu }E_{\overline{\nu }}.`$ (61)
Finally, let us examine which restrictions on the interaction Lagrangian $`E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$ are imposed by the requirement of the “discrete” self-duality with respect to the exchange $`F(A)F^D(B)`$. For this we shall need a first-order representation of the Lagrangian (41) similar to (21).

Let us treat $`(V,F)`$ in eq.(41) as a function of two independent variables and implement the Bianchi identities for $`F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ (amounting to the expressions (1)) in the Lagrangian via the dual field-strength $`F_{\alpha \beta }^D(B)`$ (22):

$`\stackrel{~}{}[V,F,F^D(B)](V,F)`$
$`+i[F^D(B)F\overline{F}^D(B)\overline{F}].`$ (62)
The algebraic $`V^{\alpha \beta }`$ equation of motion $`\stackrel{~}{L}/V^{\alpha \beta }=0`$ is just the relation (58). On the other hand, varying (62) with respect to $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$, one obtains the linear relation

$`F_{\alpha \beta }2V_{\alpha \beta }=iF_{\alpha \beta }^D(B)\text{and c.c.}`$ (63)
as the corresponding equation of motion. The Bianchi identities for $`F_{\alpha \beta }^D(B)`$ following from the definition (22) imply for $`F_{\alpha \beta }=F_{\alpha \beta }(A)`$ just the dynamical equation (44) (with $`V_{\alpha \beta }`$ expressed in terms of $`F_{\alpha \beta },\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ from (58)). This proves the equivalence of the dynamics described by (62) with that associated with (41) or (4).

The function $`\stackrel{~}{}[V,F,F^D(B)]`$ in (62) contains only quadratic and linear terms in $`F`$ and $`\overline{F}`$, so one can explicitly find the dual form of (62) in terms of $`F_{\alpha \beta }^D(B),\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^D(B)`$ and $`V_{\alpha \beta },\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$, expressing $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}`$ from Eq. (63):

$`\stackrel{~}{}[V,F(V,F^D),F^D]\stackrel{~}{}(U,F^D)`$
$`=_2(U,F^D)+E(u,\overline{u}),`$ (64)
where

$$U_{\alpha \beta }iV_{\alpha \beta },u=U^{\alpha \beta }U_{\alpha \beta }.$$

Comparing the dual Lagrangian (64) with the original one (41), we observe that the necessary and sufficient condition of the discrete self-duality is the following simple restriction on the function $`E`$

$`E(\nu ,\overline{\nu })=E(\nu ,\overline{\nu }).`$ (65)
Obviously, an arbitrary $`SO(2)`$-invariant function $`E_{sd}=\stackrel{~}{E}(\nu \overline{\nu })`$ corresponding to a $`SO(2)`$ self-dual system automatically satisfies the discrete self-duality condition (65). This elementary consideration provides us with a simple proof of the fact (mentioned in Sect. 2) that the $`SO(2)`$ self-dual systems constitute a subclass in the set of those enjoying the discrete self-duality.

## 4 Examples of self-dual systems

4.1 Born-Infeld theory. The Lagrangian of the Born-Infeld theory has the following form in terms of complex invariants (2)

$`L_{BI}(\phi ,\overline{\phi })=\left[1Q(\phi ,\overline{\phi })\right],`$ (66)
where

$`Q(\phi ,\overline{\phi })=\sqrt{1+X},`$
$`X(\phi ,\overline{\phi })(\phi +\overline{\phi })+(1/4)(\phi \overline{\phi })^2.`$ (67)
The power expansion of the BI-lagrangian is

$`L_{BI}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\phi +\overline{\phi })+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\phi \overline{\phi }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2^2}}\phi \overline{\phi }(\phi +\overline{\phi })`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2^3}}\phi \overline{\phi }(3\phi \overline{\phi }+\phi ^2+\overline{\phi }^2)+O(\phi ^5).`$ (68)
In the BI theory the function (5) has the following explicit form

$`P_{\alpha \beta }(F)=i{\displaystyle \frac{L_{BI}}{F^{\alpha \beta }}}`$
$`=iF_{\alpha \beta }Q^1(\phi ,\overline{\phi })[1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\phi \overline{\phi })].`$ (69)
It is easy to check that this function satisfies the $`SO(2)`$ self-duality condition (9), so BI theory belongs to the class of self-dual models .

Let us study the Lagrangian $`V,F`$ function $`_{BI}(V,F)`$ (41) for this particular case. Our basic purpose will be to find the corresponding function $`E_{BI}(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$.

The function $`G(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ relating the variables $`V_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ and defined by eq. (52), is given by the expression

$`Gg={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left\{1+Q^1\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\phi \overline{\phi })\right]\right\}`$ (70)
$`=1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\phi }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\phi \overline{\phi }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(\overline{\phi })^2+\mathrm{}.`$
It is easy to find the inverse relation

$`\phi =2\overline{g}{\displaystyle \frac{1\overline{g}}{[1(g+\overline{g})]^2}}.`$ (71)
Our aim is to find $`E_{BI}`$ as a function of the variables $`\nu =V^2,\overline{\nu }=\overline{V}^2`$. As the first step, one expresses $`\nu ,\overline{\nu }`$ in terms of $`g`$ and $`\overline{g}`$, using (49) and (71)

$`\nu =\phi g^2=2\overline{g}g^2{\displaystyle \frac{1\overline{g}}{[1(g+\overline{g})]^2}}.`$ (72)
Introducing

$`t{\displaystyle \frac{g\overline{g}}{1(g+\overline{g})}},`$ (73)
one finds that $`t`$, as a consequence of (72) and the fact that $`g(\phi =0)=1`$, satisfies the following quartic equation:

$$t^4+t^3\frac{1}{4}\nu \overline{\nu }=0,t(\nu =\phi =0)=1.$$
(74)
It allows one to express $`t`$ in terms of $`a\nu \overline{\nu }`$

$$t(a)=1\frac{a}{4}+\frac{3a^2}{16}\frac{15a^3}{64}+\mathrm{}.$$
(75)
One can write a closed expression for $`t(a)`$ as the proper solution of (74), but we do not present it here in view of its complexity.

Now we are ready to find $`E_{BI}(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$. Taking into account the explicit expressions (71) and (72) and substituting all this into (50), one finally finds a simple expression for $`E_{BI}(\nu ,\overline{\nu })`$ through the real variable $`t(a)`$

$`E_{BI}(a)=2[2t^2(a)+3t(a)+1]`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{a}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{a^2}{8}}+{\displaystyle \frac{3a^3}{32}}+\mathrm{}.`$ (76)
4.2 One more example. Let us now consider the self-dual system corresponding to the simplest choice of the function $`E`$ in the action (41)

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{E}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\nu \overline{\nu }(\nu \stackrel{ˇ}{E}_\nu =\stackrel{ˇ}{E})`$ (77)
which is the lowest order self-dual approximation of $`E_{BI}`$. This model is distinguished in that the relation (58) and the corresponding representation of equations of motion via variables $`V`$ are polynomial.

Using Eq.(51) one can obtain the relation between variables $`\nu ,\overline{\nu }`$ and $`\phi ,\overline{\phi }`$ in this case

$`\phi =\nu (1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\nu })^2\text{and c.c.}.`$ (78)
Like in the previous example, we present here first terms in the power expansion of the solution

$`\nu =\phi \phi \overline{\phi }+\phi ^2\overline{\phi }+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}\phi \overline{\phi }^2+\mathrm{}.`$ (79)
The corresponding expansion of the transition function is

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{G}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{ˇ}{L}_\phi =(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\nu })^1`$
$`=1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\phi }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\phi \overline{\phi }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(\overline{\phi })^2+\mathrm{}`$ (80)
and one can directly find $`\stackrel{ˇ}{L}(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ for this case. The Lagrangian $`\stackrel{ˇ}{L}(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ turns out to be highly non-polynomial, despite the fact that the interaction in the $`V,F`$ representation is specified by the simple monomial (77).

Note that the first two orders of the solution (80) coincide with the corresponding terms in the Born-Infeld theory (70), while the terms starting from the 3-rd order are different. It can be also checked that the first three terms in the non-polynomial Lagrangian of this model $`\stackrel{ˇ}{L}(\phi ,\overline{\phi })`$ coincide with those in $`L_{BI}`$ (68).

## 5 $`U(n)`$ self-duality

Let us consider $`n`$ Abelian field-strengths

$`F_{\alpha \beta }^i,\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^i,`$ (81)
where $`i=1,2\mathrm{}n`$. As the first step, one can realize the group $`SO(n)`$ on these variables

$`\delta _\omega F_{\alpha \beta }^i=\xi ^{ik}F_{\alpha \beta }^k,\xi ^{ki}=\xi ^{ik}.`$ (82)
This group is assumed to define an off-shell symmetry of the corresponding nonlinear Lagrangian $`L(F^k,\overline{F}^k)=\frac{1}{2}(F^iF^i)\frac{1}{2}(\overline{F}^i\overline{F}^i)+L_{int}(F^k,\overline{F}^k)`$.

The $`U(n)`$ self-duality conditions for the Lagrangian $`L(F^k,\overline{F}^k)`$ generalizing the $`U(1)`$ condition (9) have been analyzed in Refs.. In the spinor notation, these conditions read

$`𝒜^{[kl]}=(F^kP^l)(F^lP^k)\text{c.c.}=0,`$ (83)
$`𝒮^{(kl)}=(F^kF^l)+(P^kP^l)\text{c.c.}=0,`$ (84)
where

$`P_{\alpha \beta }^k(F)i{\displaystyle \frac{L}{F^{k\alpha \beta }}}`$ (85)
$`(F^kP^l)F^{k\alpha \beta }P_{\alpha \beta }^l,\text{etc}.`$
The condition (83) amounts to the $`SO(n)`$ invariance of the Lagrangian and holds off shell. The second condition is the true analog of (9). It guarantees the covariance of the equations of motion for $`F_{\alpha \beta }^k,\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^k`$ together with Bianchi identities,

$`_{\alpha \dot{\alpha }}^k(F)_\alpha ^{\dot{\beta }}\overline{P}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^k(F)_{\dot{\alpha }}^\beta P_{\alpha \beta }^k(F)=0,`$ (86)
$`_{\alpha \dot{\alpha }}^k(F)_\alpha ^{\dot{\beta }}\overline{F}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^k_{\dot{\alpha }}^\beta F_{\alpha \beta }^k=0,`$
under the following nonlinear transformations:

$`\delta _\eta F_{\alpha \beta }^k=\eta ^{kl}P_{\alpha \beta }^l(F),`$ (87)
$`\delta _\eta P_{\alpha \beta }^k(F)=\eta ^{kl}F_{\alpha \beta }^l`$
where $`\eta ^{kl}=\eta ^{lk}`$ are real parameters. On the surface of the condition (84) these transformations, together with (82), form the group $`U(n)`$. The $`U(n)`$ group structure becomes manifest after passing to the new variables:

$`V_{\alpha \beta }^k(F){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[F_{\alpha \beta }^k+iP_{\alpha \beta }^k(F)],`$
$`\delta V_{\alpha \beta }^k(F)=\omega ^{kl}V_{\alpha \beta }^l(F),`$ (88)
$`\omega ^{kl}=\xi ^{kl}+i\eta ^{kl},\overline{\omega }^{lk}=\omega ^{kl}.`$
The particular solution of the $`U(n)`$ self-duality conditions (83), (84) constructed so far  is formulated in terms of the algebraic equation for auxiliary scalar variables $`\chi ^{kl}=\chi ^{lk}`$

$`L={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\chi ^{kk}+\overline{\chi }^{kk}),`$
$`\chi ^{kl}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\chi ^{kj}\overline{\chi }^{jl}=(F^kF^l).`$ (89)
It generalizes a similar representation for the BI Lagrangian (or its $`N=1`$ extension)

$`L_{BI}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\chi +\overline{\chi }),`$
$`\chi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\chi \overline{\chi }=\phi =(FF),`$ (90)
where $`\chi `$ is an auxiliary scalar. This $`n=1`$ version of Eq.(89) can be readily solved

$$\chi =\frac{1}{2}(\phi \overline{\phi })L_{BI}.$$

The solution for an arbitrary $`n`$ has been constructed in  within a perturbative expansion.

Passing to an analog of the $`V,F`$ representation in the $`U(n)`$ case will allow us to find the general solution to (83), (84).

Let us define a new representation for the $`SO(n)`$ invariant nonlinear electrodynamics Lagrangians in terms of the Abelian gauge field strengths $`F_{\alpha \beta }^k(A^k)`$ and auxiliary fields $`V_{\alpha \beta }^k`$

$`(V^k,F^k)=(V^kV^k)+(\overline{V}^k\overline{V}^k)`$
$`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}(V^kF^k)2(\overline{V}^k\overline{F}^k)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(F^kF^k)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\overline{F}^k\overline{F}^k)+E(V^k,\overline{V}^k).`$ (91)
The real Lagrangian of interaction $`E(V,\overline{V})`$ is $`SO(n)`$ invariant by definition. In the case without interaction ($`E=0`$), the bilinear part of (91) gives the standard free Lagrangian of $`n`$ Abelian fields,

$`L_2(F^k,\overline{F}^k)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(F^kF^k){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\overline{F}^k\overline{F}^k),`$ (92)
as the result of eliminating the auxiliary fields.

In the general case of $`E0`$ the algebraic equation for $`V_{\alpha \beta }`$ is

$`F_{\alpha \beta }^k=V_{\alpha \beta }^k+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{E}{V_k^{\alpha \beta }}}.`$ (93)
Using the relation

$`P_{\alpha \beta }^k=i[F_{\alpha \beta }^k2V_{\alpha \beta }^k],`$ (94)
one can rewrite the $`U(n)`$ self-duality conditions (83) and (84) in this representation as follows

$`i(F^lV^k)i(F^kV^l)\text{c.c.}=0,`$
$`(F^lV^k)+(F^kV^l)2(V^kV^l)\text{c.c.}=0.`$ (95)
One can readily show that, after making use of the relation (93), these conditions can be brought into the form quite similar to the $`U(1)`$ self-duality condition (55)

$`V_{\alpha \beta }^k{\displaystyle \frac{E}{V_{\alpha \beta }^l}}\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^k{\displaystyle \frac{E}{\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^l}}=0.`$ (96)
This constraint is none other than the condition of invariance of $`E(V,\overline{V})`$ with respect to the $`U(n)`$ transformations (88).

Using the $`U(n)`$-invariant function $`E`$ one can also construct the simple invariant

$`I_0=V_{\alpha \beta }^k{\displaystyle \frac{E}{V_{\alpha \beta }^k}}\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^k{\displaystyle \frac{E}{\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^k}}.`$ (97)
It is easy to see that the whole Lagrangian (91) is not invariant with respect to the nonlinear part of the $`U(n)`$ transformations, being invariant only under the off-shell $`SO(n)`$ ones (corresponding to $`\eta ^{kl}=0`$ in (88)). This matches with the fact that these $`U(n)/SO(n)`$ transformations define an on-shell symmetry of the joint set of equations of motion and Bianchi identities. Just these transformations are true analogs of the standard $`U(1)`$ ($`SO(2)`$) duality rotations discussed in previous Sections.

The conclusion is that the $`V,F`$ representation in the case of $`n`$ Abelian gauge field strengths allows one to reduce the nonlinear $`U(n)`$ self-duality conditions to the $`U(n)`$ invariance condition (96) for the interaction function $`E(V,\overline{V})`$ and so to obtain a general description of the $`U(n)`$ self-dual models of nonlinear electrodynamics in terms of an $`U(n)`$ invariant function of $`n`$ complex auxiliary variables $`V_{\alpha \beta }^i,\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^i`$.

The passing to the standard $`F,\overline{F}`$ representation of the corresponding Lagrangians requires solving the nonlinear algebraic equations (93) for $`V_{\alpha \beta }^i,\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^i`$. In general, this can be done only within power expansions. It would be interesting to find an example of self-dual system with a few gauge field strengths, where a solution to such equations can be found in a closed form, like in the BI example of Sect. 4, and to establish the precise connection with the Lagrangian (89).

Finally, let us notice that the condition of “discrete” self-duality in the general case is as follows

$`E(V_{\alpha \beta }^k,\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^k)=E(iV_{\alpha \beta }^k,i\overline{V}_{\dot{\alpha }\dot{\beta }}^k).`$ (98)
It is an obvious generalization of the $`n=1`$ condition (65).

## 6 Conclusion

This talk is an extended version of Sect. 3 of our work  devoted to the construction of $`N=3`$ supersymmetric Born-Infeld theory (see also ). We have introduced a new $`V,F`$ representation for the Lagrangians of nonlinear electrodynamics and shown that it allows for a simple description of systems exhibiting the properties of on-shell $`U(n)`$ self-duality or/and off-shell discrete self-duality in terms of real function of auxiliary bispinor complex fields. In the $`V,F`$ representation, the nonlinear self-duality conditions are reduced to the simple $`U(1)`$ or $`U(n)`$ invariance conditions (55), (96) for this function. The general condition of the discrete self-duality, or self-duality under Legendre transformation, is the invariance of this function under some discrete reflections of its arguments, Eqs. (65), (98).

It is an interesting and quite feasible task to extend this consideration to the case of $`N=1`$ and $`N=2`$ supersymmetric extensions of nonlinear electrodynamics  in order to obtain a general characterization of the corresponding self-dual systems. Also, finding out a similar $`V,F`$ representation for non-Abelian BI theory and its superextensions could shed more light on the structure of these theories.

Note added. Our general solution for the $`SO(2)`$ self-dual Lagrangian $`L(F^2,\overline{F}^2)`$ can be obtained from Eq.(50) by substituting the $`U(1)`$-invariant function $`E_{sd}(\nu ,\overline{\nu })=\stackrel{~}{E}(\nu \overline{\nu })`$ and solving the algebraic equations (42) for $`V_{\alpha \beta }`$. A similar form of the general solution to the $`SO(2)`$ self-duality condition has been found in Refs. by a different method. To the best of our knowledge, the general solution of the $`U(n)`$ self-duality equation via a $`U(n)`$ invariant function $`E`$, as well as the general parametrization of the Lagrangians with discrete self-dualities via the functions $`E`$ (65), (98) were not earlier considered in the literature.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to S.M. Kuzenko for bringing Refs. to our attention and for discussions. This work was partially supported by INTAS grant No 00-254, RFBR-DFG grant No 02-02-04002, grant DFG 436 RUS 113/669, RFBR-CNRS grant No 01-02-22005 and a grant of Bogoliubov-Infeld Programme.