text:
# Extending the limits of globule detectionBased on observations with ISO, an ESA project with instruments funded by ESA Member States (especially the PI countries: France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom) and with the participation of ISAS and NASA.

## 1 Introduction

Bok globules were originally detected in absorption against HII regions by Bok and Reilly (1947), and are known as small, dense interstellar clouds in the solar neighbourhod ($`d400`$pc). They were identified optically, and mostly the nearby ones have been catalogued so far. It is expected that they are similarily common elsewhere in the Galactic disk and in fact a few distant ones are already investigated eg. by Launhardt & Henning (1997). Their FIR properties were determined by Clemens & Barvainis (1988) based on IRAS data. They emphasized the importance of finding FIR faint cold globules since these are representatives of the inactive (i.e. non-starforming) interstellar medium. Starless globules with small apparent size and low temperature (thus also very low 100 $`\mu `$m brightness) can be seen only by good sensitivity at wavelengths over 100 $`\mu `$m. An ISOPHOT study of pre-stellar cores in dark clouds with low 100 $`\mu `$m brightness were recently reported by Ward-Thompson et al. (2002). The ISOPHOT 170 $`\mu `$m Serendipity Survey (ISOSS) can be used to locate cold galactic objects even without any preliminary identification. This raises the possibility of detection of the ”missing” globules via ISOSS. We present our results on ISOSS J 20246+6541 proving that it is, indeed, a small and cold isolated molecular cloud - one of the so far missed population.

## 2 Observation and data analysis

We searched ISOSS at medium galactic latitudes for 170 $`\mu `$m point sources without IRAS counterparts. The ISOSS measurements, calibration, and data analysis for interstellar clouds are described by Bogun et al. (1996), Stickel et al. (2000) and Tóth et al. (2000) respectively. ISOSS J 20246+6541 was detected as an $`I_{170}(\mathrm{peak})=4`$ MJysr-1 ($`>4\sigma `$) pointlike (FWHM $`2.5`$′) source at RA(2000)=20h24m36s Dec(2000)=+65$`\mathrm{°}`$40$`\mathrm{}`$ (l=99.80$`\mathrm{°}`$, b=15.70$`\mathrm{°}`$). It is without an IRAS point source counterpart.

The optical appearance of CISS1 and its neighourhood was studied using 40′ $`\times `$ 40′ Digital Sky Survey (DSS) blue and red images. Photometry on DSS plates of all USNO (Monet et al. 1998) sources have been done where R and B $`<`$ 18mag. Integrated photographic density was derived for all these USNO sources. Photographic density values DN of the background were measured at each plate at 25 positions where neither star, nor significant background emission enhancement was seen. The background value is $`DN(BG)_R=4590\pm 190`$ and $`DN(BG)_B=4610\pm 230`$ in photographic density units for R and B bands respectively. Photometric calibration of the plates was made following Cutri’s (1993) method. The photographic density to magnitude calibration formulae were derived as $`log_{10}(DN)`$ vs. magnitude relations. The scatter is large for faint stars, and the extrapolation to low photographical density (i.e. high magnitude) values results in a large error bar. In order to make surface brightness maps of ISOSS J 20246+6541, stars were removed from the optical images by substituting the average surrounding DN value.

The $`J=`$(1–0) and (2–1) rotational lines of CO, 13CO and C18O were measured in Aug. 1998 with the IRAM-30 telescope. A $`4.5\mathrm{}\times 4.5\mathrm{}`$ region centered on ISOSS 20246+6541 was mappen in on-the-fly mode in 12CO(1–0), 12CO(2–1) and 13CO(1–0) with angular resolutions of 20″, 10″, 20″ respectively. Pointed measurements were performed in all the above mentioned transitions at the 13CO(1–0) peak position (22h24m46s, 65°40′01″). Spectral resolutions of 0.1, 0.05 and 0.03kms-1 were used. These spectra are shown in Fig. 1.

The lines are narrow with a FWHM of $`0.5`$kms-1. The result of the 1998 C18O pointed measurements were confirmed in Sept. 2000 when also the CS(2–1) and (3–2) as well as the HCO+(1–0) and (2–1) transitions were observed with the IRAM-30 telescope. The C18O, CS(2–1) and HCO+(1–0) lines were detected with $`S/N>5`$ and well resolved with the 0.03kms-1 spectral channels. The data were calibrated to the scale of corrected antenna temperature, $`T_\mathrm{A}^{}`$, by observing loads at ambient and cold temperature, as in the conventional “chopper-wheel” calibration for millimetre wavelength observations. The data were converted to the main-beam scale by applying the relation $`T_{\mathrm{MB}}=T_\mathrm{A}^{}\times (B_{\mathrm{eff}}/F_{\mathrm{eff}})`$. The values for the main-beam efficiency, $`B_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, are 0.70 and 0.42 (July 1998), and 0.75 and 0.53 (September 2000), and the values for the forward efficiency, $`F_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, are 0.92 and 0.85 for CO(1–0) and CO(2–1), respectively. We checked the calibration by observing the standard sources DR 21 and W3OH and found it always to be better than 20 %.

## 3 Results

### 3.1 FIR results and derived parameters

ISOSS J 20246+6541 is a faint FIR source with an upper limit on the $`I_{100}`$ brightness of about 0.5 MJysr-1 derived from the “raw” (IRDS format) IRAS data. Comparison of ISOSS and ISSA data (Wheelock et al. 1994) was made as described by Tóth et al. (2000). An upper limit of the colour temperature of 14.5 K was estimated from the bisector slope of the $`I_{170}`$ vs. $`I_{100}`$ scatter plot. Assuming a dust temperature of 14.5 K, an average dust column density of $`1.3\times 10^5`$gcm-2 was derived following Hildebrand (1983). This corresponds to an average hydrogen column density of $`N(`$HI+2H$`{}_{2}{}^{})=8.6\times 10^{20}`$cm-2 where a hydrogen-to-dust mass ratio of 110 (Launhardt & Henning 1997) was assumed.

### 3.2 Optical images

ISOSS J 20246+6541 appears as a faint, isolated reflection cloud west of the L1155/L1157 cloud complex. When smoothed to 15″ the excess diffuse surface brightness distribution of ISOSS 20246+6541 shows a “bright” lobe at the NE and a fainter fragmented one at SE. The POSS B band diffuse surface brightness is shown in Fig. 2 a, where the contours are drawn from 22.7 mag/$`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}`$ by $`0.05`$mag/$`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}`$ . The lowest contour corresponds to three times the standard deviation of photographical density outside the globule on the star-removed, smoothed image.

The average background surface brightness is 22.8/$`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}`$. Linear interpolation of the Leinert et al. (1998) table of the B band sky brightness distribution gives at the the cloud position 102 $`S_{10}`$, which agrees well with our result. The average excess surface brightness of ISOSS J 20246+6541 is $`26`$ mag/$`\mathrm{}`$″in the DSS B band. The same morphology is shown by the B and R surface brightness distributions, except that the SE lobe is slightly more red than the NW lobe. The lack of a dark core indicates an average visual extinction below $`1.5`$ mag.

### 3.3 Molecular line results, and derived parameters

All observed lines show a LSR velocity of -2.7kms-1. The FWHM widths of the 12CO lines are around 0.4kms-1, and around 0.3kms-1 for all the other detected lines. The 12CO and 13CO integrated intensity distributions are shown in Figs. 2 b and c. The bipolar shape is well seen and the CO line intensities are in accordance with the excess surface brightness distribution, the NE lobe being much brighter. The two lobes show the same radial velocity.

The physical parameters were at first approximated from the $`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{CO}(10)`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{CO}(10)`$ spectra of the peak intensity positions, assuming an isothermal spherical cloud in LTE which uniformly fills the beam. The LTE CO(1-0) excitation temperature is $`T_{\mathrm{ex}}(`$CO$`)=9.2`$ K, characteristic of non-starforming molecular clouds. We derived an optical depth of $`\tau (^{13}\mathrm{CO})=0.87`$ from the observed CO(1-0) and 13CO(1-0) line ratio assuming the terrestrial isotopic density ratio of 89. The CO column density was calculated using the standard LTE formula:
$`N(^{13}\mathrm{CO})=2.57\times 10^{14}T_{\mathrm{kin}}\frac{\tau (^{13}\mathrm{CO})\mathrm{\Delta }v}{1\mathrm{exp}(\frac{h\nu }{kT_{\mathrm{kin}}})}`$, resulting in $`N(^{13}\mathrm{CO})=8.9\times 10^{14}`$cm-2, which corresponds to $`N(\mathrm{H}_2)10^{21}`$cm-2 assuming $`N(\mathrm{H}_2)10^6N^{13}(\mathrm{CO})`$. This result is in agreement with the column density derived from the FIR data. The 12CO and 13CO lines trace the ISM well over most of the cloud. A comparison of C18O to 13CO lines (both 1-0 and 2-1) at the centre of the NE lobe indicates an underabundance of C18O by a factor of 4. This effect is expected in cold clouds with moderate density, exposed to UV radiation (Glassgold et al. 1985). A more careful modelling may account for it as we show in the Discussion session.

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 Distance of ISOSS J 20246+6541

The distance of ISOSS 20246+6541 can be estimated, relating it to its neighbours. Its nearest neighbours are L1122 and (Lynds 1998), and the YDM97~CO1 (Yonekura 1997). The 13CO survey of Cepheus by Yonekura (1997) covers the position of ISOSS J 20246+6541 and their Fig. 6 a indicates few small clouds around ISOSS J 20246+6541 (i.e. YDM97~CO1, YDM97~CO2, YDM97~CO3) and one even smaller unnumbered peak very close to ISOSS J 20246+6541 at l$`=100\stackrel{}{.}1`$ b$`=15\stackrel{}{.}7`$. All the listed Yonekura clouds have $`v_{\mathrm{LSR}}>+2.5`$kms-1, and they are counted into the “close group” of clouds, which on the other hand is associated with extended FIR features around ISOSS J 20246+6541. The nearest molecular clouds with negative $`v_{\mathrm{LSR}}`$ are YDM97~CO7, CO9, CO10 at $`l103`$$`\stackrel{}{.}`$0 $`b16`$$`\stackrel{}{.}`$7. ISOSS 20246+6541 itself has $`v_{\mathrm{LSR}}=2.7`$kms-1. It probably belongs to the ISM layer of the nearby Cepheus Flare GMC, and is located at about 400pc (Kun 1998). We note that applying the size-linewidth relation of Larson (1981) the globule may be between 100 and 400pc.

### 4.2 Radiative transfer models

We have modelled the NE lobe of the bipolar globule with spherically symmetric cloud models, although the NE clump shows some deviations from spherical symmetry in both 12CO and 13CO (see Fig. 2 b and c. With RA=20h24m44s Dec=+65$`\mathrm{°}`$40$`\mathrm{}`$04$`\mathrm{}`$ as the centre position, we have averaged spectra in concentric rings with radii increasing by 10$`\mathrm{}`$ intervals up to a radii of 90$`\mathrm{}`$. The effective resolution of the averaged spectra is 40$`\mathrm{}`$ for the $`J=`$1–0 lines and 20$`\mathrm{}`$ for the $`J=`$2–1 lines.

We set the cloud parameters as follows.
(1) We assume a density distribution $`nr^{1.5}`$ with a density ratio 100 between the centre and the cloud surface.
(2) The kinetic temperature is assumed to rise linearly from the cloud centre. This is a crude approximation of the actual temperature structure of for a small, spherically symmetric globule without internal heating sources (e.g. Leung 1985; Nelson & Langer 1999) but will suffice for the present purposes. The temperature gradient, i.e. the difference between the outermost and innermost shells $`\mathrm{\Delta }T=0`$ K, 6 K or 10K. Higher contrast means too high a temperature for the outer cloud, in contradiction with the observed small linewidth.
(3) Extinction-dependent relative molecular abundances $`X(\mathrm{molecule})=\frac{n(\mathrm{molecule})}{n(H)}`$ were estimated according to Warin et al. (1996). The cloud is cold, exposed to UV radiation and it has a peak visual extinction between 1 and 2 mag. In these conditions isotope selective processes result in a relative overabundance of 13CO and relative underabundance of C18O according to Bally and Langer (1982). When applying the Warin et al. (1996) relative abundances, we introduced an intrinsic extinction at the cloud boundary since the 12CO lines are not vanishing at the boundary of the NE lobe. This assumption is supported by the presence of surrounding extended cirrus-like emission seen in 100 $`\mu `$m on the ISSA image.
(4). Distance: 100, 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, and 2000pc were tested.

When the density, temperature, relative abundance distributions and the distance is set to a value allowed by the above constrains, the free model parameters are the central density ($`n_\mathrm{c}`$), the intrinsic linewidth ($`\mathrm{\Delta }v`$) and the angular diameter ($`D`$) of the model cloud. The radiative transfer problem is solved with Monte Carlo simulation (Juvela 1997). The computed spectra are convolved to the resolution of the observed spectra and the quality of the fit between the two is estimated with a weighted $`\chi ^2`$ value. The model cloud is divided into 31 shells of equal thickness and the free parameters are optimized separately for 12CO and 13CO. We then select the set of parameters which provides the best fits for both. Since the 12CO observations only probe the outer layers of the cloud, the 12CO based estimate of the column density is uncertain. Modelling based on the 13CO line, however, gives surprisingly similar results when the appropriate average relative abundance value $`X(^{13}`$CO$`)1.1\times 10^6`$ is selected. The models are not sensitive to 20% changes in the average molecular abundances or density, although similar changes of the kinetic temperature or size are, critical (see Fig. 3).

Synthetic spectra for C18O CS and HCO+ were generated with the NLTE model using the best parameter sets (lowest $`\chi ^2`$) from the 12CO 13CO analysis. The relative abundances were varied up to 100% and the other parameters up to 30%. The C18O lines were best reproduced assuming an average relative abundance of $`X(^{13}\mathrm{CO})/X(\mathrm{C}^{18}\mathrm{O})150`$, an extreme but possible underabundance by factor of 28 (Glassgold et al. 1985). The pointed measurements supported the density and temperature results shown in Fig. 3. The derived NLTE kinetic temperature is around 11K and assuming a distance of 400 pc the peak hydrogen density and the size of the NE lobe is $`n_\mathrm{c}`$=6.7$``$104 cm-3 and 0.12 pc respectively. The column density estimate is $`N(\mathrm{H}_2)210^{21}`$ cm-2. The total gas mass would be $`3\mathrm{M}_{}`$.

With $`N(\mathrm{H}_2)`$1021 cm-2, the visual extinction towards the cloud centre is $`A_V`$1 (Bohlin et al. 1978) and for UV photons the cloud is optically thick unless it is very clumpy. External heating, however, is reduced by the surrounding ISM, which is represented by the nonvanishing 12CO lines. This may be the reason that a moderate 6K temperature contrast was found to be more likely than a 10K contrast or isothermal.

Although the SW clump is clearly elongated similar modelling was carried out for that part of the cloud. Observed spectra were averaged over annuli at radii up to 50$`\mathrm{}`$ from the clump centre. Assuming a model where the kinetic temperature increases linearly from the centre, we obtain a peak column density of $`N(\mathrm{H}_2)`$=2.9$``$1020 cm-2 based on the CO spectra.

## 5 Concluding remarks

1. ISOSS 20246+6541 is a small isolated molecular cloud discovered by its 170 $`\mu `$m emission.
2. The globule appears as bipolar in both optical surface brightness and mm-line maps.
3. A distance of 400 pc is likely, setting the diameter of the northern lobe to approximately 0.1 pc.
4. The average physical parameters are: $`T_{\mathrm{kin}}=11`$K, $`n(`$H$`{}_{2}{}^{})=7000`$cm-3.
5. In the $`5\mathrm{°}`$ environment of ISOSS 20246+6541 we found further 15 ISOSS sources with similar FIR parameters. One of those is another previously unknown globule as seen on DSS2 images.
6. The population of small and faint starless globules can only be explored by high sensitivity FIR measurements such as those carried out by PHT-C2 on board ISO.
7. We note that there are no other ISO measurements but the ISOSS within 40′distance from ISOSS J 20246+6541. Our finding thus also demonstrates the importance of such ubiased surveys by future missions like Planck.

###### Acknowledgements.

We acknowledge the numerous valuable comments by Prof. Kalevi Mattila, and important notes by Dr. Mark Rawlings. The ISOPHOT project and Postoperation Phase was funded by the Deutsche Agentur für Raumfahrtangelegenheiten (DARA, now DLR), the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, the Danish, British and Spanish Space Agencies and several European and American institutes.
Members of the Consortium on the ISOPHOT Serendipity Survey (CISS) are MPIA Heidelberg, ESA ISO SOC Villafranca, AIP Potsdam, IPAC Pasadena, Imperial College, London.
L. V. Tóth acknowledges an MPI research fellow grant. This research was partly supported by the OTKA F-022566 grant and by the Academy of Finland through grants No. 158300 and 173727.
This research has made use of the Digitized Sky Survey, produced at the Space Telescope Science Institute, NASA’s Astrophysics Data System Abstract Service, the Simbad Database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France.


format: text

text:
# Synthesis and tomographic characterization of the displaced Fock state of light

## a Introduction

Displaced Fock states (DFS) are highly non-classical states of harmonic oscillators generated by acting upon Fock (number) states with displacement operators. First theoretically described in 1985 , these states have received widespread attention in the last decade. Apart from a number of interesting and unusual physical properties DFS possess , it was shown that a random quantum state’s quasiprobability distribution can be represented in terms of series of displaced number states . This feature has then been used experimentally for measuring the Wigner functions of some states of propagating electromagnetic field  as well as for characterization of motional quantum states of trapped atoms . Recently, this technique was extended to measuring the quantum state of electromagnetic field in a high-finesse cavity . The DFS representation of the Wigner function has also lead to a surprising theoretical prediction  and an experimental demonstration  of quantum nonlocality of the original Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen state.

Although DFS have proven appealing to theoreticians and useful for various applications, their experimental characterization has not been reported yet, the main reason being the lack of technology of their synthesis. Recent progress in quantum reconstruction of the single-photon Fock state  has removed this obstacle, opening up the path to generation and characterization of more complex quantum states of light. In the present work we have produced displaced single-photon Fock states of the light field and investigated them by means of quantum optical homodyne tomography . As in our previous experiment , we have observed classically impossible negative values of the Wigner functions. In addition, we have seen photon number oscillations that are viewed as signatures of highly non-classical behavior typical for displaced Fock states .

An important difference between the undisplaced and displaced Fock states is that the latter do carry phase information and complete, phase-sensitive quantum tomography is therefore required for their reconstruction. This work presents the first application of this method to a highly non-classical state of light.

The action of the displacement operator $`\widehat{D}(\alpha )\mathrm{exp}(\alpha \widehat{a}^{}\alpha ^{}\widehat{a})`$ upon a random quantum state $`|\psi _0`$ is best visualized in terms of phase-space quaziprobability distributions. By acting on the state $`|\psi _0`$, the displacement operator simply shifts its Wigner function $`W_{|\psi _0}(X,P)`$ by the amount of displacement:

$$W_{\widehat{D}(\alpha )|\psi _0}(X,P)=W_{|\psi _0}(XX_0,PP_0),$$
(1)
where $`X_0`$ and $`P_0`$ are the real and imaginary components of the displacement amount, $`\alpha =X_0+iP_0`$. For example a coherent state is a displaced vacuum state: $`|\alpha =\widehat{D}(\alpha )|0`$.

It was shown  that displacing a state of light can be implemented experimentally by overlapping it with a strong coherent state $`|\alpha `$ upon a highly reflecting beamsplitter (Fig. 1). The quantum state emerging in the reflection (with respect to $`|\psi _0`$) beamsplitter output port is to a good approximation given by

$$|\psi \widehat{D}(\sqrt{T}\alpha )|\psi _0,$$
(2)
where $`T0`$ is the beamsplitter transmission.

In our work, the displacement operator was applied to the single-photon Fock state $`|1`$. The optical pulses containing single photons were prepared using conditional measurements on the entangled photon pair generated by means of parametric down-conversion. The two generated photons were separated into two emission channels according to their propagation direction (Fig. 2). A single-photon counter was placed into one of the channels to detect photon pair creation events. Registration of this (trigger) photon causes the biphoton to collapse, projecting itself onto the single-photon state in the other down-conversion channel.

The setup for preparing the single-photon states was similar to that described in our earlier papers . A 82-MHz repetition rate train of 1.6-ps pulses generated by a Spectra-Physics Ti:Sapphire laser at 790 nm was frequency doubled and subsequently down-converted in a beta-barium borate crystal. The down-conversion occurred in a type-one frequency-degenerate, but spatially non-degenerate configuration. Pair production events were detected via a Perkin-Elmer SPCM-AQR-14 single-photon counting module as a rate of 300–400 pairs per second.

The prepared pulsed Fock states were then subjected to optical displacement by means of a dielectric mirror with the reflectivity of at least 99.99% and a relatively strong coherent beam entering the mirror from the rear. The electric field quadratures of the displaced Fock states were then measured by means of balanced homodyne detection .

These measurements required a local oscillator which had to be phase stable with respect to the displacement field. This was achieved by having both fields originate from a single master laser beam split just before the displacement mirror. Since the two beams were recombined shortly thereafter on the 50-% beamsplitter of the homodyne detector, the optical arrangement resembled a Mach-Zehnder interferometer (Fig. 2) with a $`20`$ cm arm length. Such compact design ensured mutual interferometric stability of the local oscillator and the displacement field. The interference observed between the transmitted portion of the displacement pulse and the local oscillator allowed us to optimize spatial and temporal mode matching between the two. Since the optical mode of the local oscillator was also matched to the Fock states , all three modes were matched to each other as required for this measurement.

The local oscillator phase was swept by applying a linear voltage ramp to a piezoelectric transducer upon which the local oscillator mirror was mounted. In an experimental run that lasted a few minutes several tens of thousands quadrature noise samples were acquired. These data were scaled according to the vacuum state quadrature noise measured at the same local oscillator intensity.

The scaled experimental data, along with the reconstructed Wigner functions, are shown in Fig. 3. Fig. 3(a) represents the vacuum state $`|0`$ acquired with both the single-photon and the displacement beam blocked. Invoking the displacement operator $`\widehat{D}(\alpha )`$ with $`\alpha =0.60`$ converts the vacuum state into a coherent state $`|\alpha `$ \[Fig. 3(b)\]. Fig. 3(c) corresponds to the ensemble $`\widehat{\rho }_{\mathrm{mix}}=\eta |11|+(1\eta )|00|`$ acquired with the single-photon channel unblocked. The admixture of the vacuum occurs due to a number of setup imperfections ; the quantum efficiency of this measurement was equal to $`\eta =0.62`$. The displacement operator transformed this ensemble into a mixture of the DFS and a coherent state of the same amplitude \[Fig. 3(d)\],

$$\widehat{\rho }_{\mathrm{disp}}=\eta \widehat{D}(\alpha )|11|\widehat{D}^{}(\alpha )+(1\eta )|\alpha \alpha |.$$
(3)
The Wigner function of this ensemble is negative around the point $`X+iP=\alpha `$ as long as $`\eta >0.5`$.

The phase-averaged Wigner functions shown in Fig. 3(a,c) were calculated by means of Abel transformation. Reconstruction of the phase-sensitive Wigner functions \[Fig. 3(b,d)\] was performed via the inverse Radon transformation. To this end, each individual quadrature noise sample $`X_m`$ was associated with a particular local oscillator phase value $`\theta _m`$, determined by analyzing the periodic behavior of the raw data pattern; due to a large number of acquired data the dependence of $`\theta _m`$ on $`m`$ could be assumed linear. We have then applied the standard filtered back-projection algorithm  $`directly`$ to the set of normalized quadrature noise samples in terms of an empirical average:

$$W(X,P)=\frac{1}{\pi }\mathrm{K}(X\mathrm{cos}\theta _m+P\mathrm{sin}\theta X_m),$$
(4)
where $`\mathrm{K}(x)=\mathrm{cos}(k_cx)+k_cx\mathrm{sin}(k_cx)1)/x^2`$ is the transformation kernel, $`k_c=6.4`$ is the cutoff frequency and $`\theta _m`$ ranges between 0 and $`2\pi `$. This approach is simpler and more precise than the traditional one involving an intermediate step of binning up the data and calculating individual marginal distributions associated with each phase.

We have also evaluated the diagonal elements of the DFS density matrices in the Fock representation by applying the standard quantum state sampling method . As displayed in Fig. 4, the distributions associated with high amplitudes exhibit two peaks. This is a well-known characteristic feature of displaced Fock states, with the number of peaks for the state $`\widehat{D}(\alpha )|n`$ being equal to $`n+1`$ . The theoretical fits shown were obtained by substituting the photon statistics of the displaced Fock and coherent states into the ensemble (3), with the values of $`\alpha `$ and $`\eta `$ determined by analyzing the raw data. Note that the classical noise generated by the homodyne detector at large displacements has lowered the effective quantum efficiency from the values observed in undisplaced Fock states in the same experimental run. The amount of reduction was equal to 0.02 and 0.10 for $`\alpha =1.3`$ and $`\alpha =2.4`$, respectively,

In conclusion, we have synthesized a new quantum state of light, the displaced Fock state, and reconstructed its Wigner function and density matrix by means of optical homodyne tomography. This state exhibits highly nonclassical features such as negativity of its Wigner function and photon number oscillations. A novel approach to the inverse Radon transformation was employed.

In the present work we investigated the quantum state in only one of the beamsplitter output channels, discarding the other one. In a future publication  we subject both channels to quantum measurements and study their nonclassical correlations demonstrating the entangled nature of the two-mode state emerging from the beamsplitter.

A. L. was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. Support for this work was provided by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and Optik-Zentrum Konstanz.


text:
# hep-th/0202133 Marginal and Scalar Solutions in Cubic Open String Field Theory

## 1 Introduction

Cubic open string field theory (CSFT)  has several classical solutions corresponding to the tachyon condensation , tachyon lump  and marginal deformations . Since these solutions have been investigated numerically , it is necessary to obtain analytic solutions in order to study exact properties on classical solutions in CSFT. If an analytic solution of the tachyon vacuum exists, it is possible to prove Sen’s conjectures on the tachyon condensation , or to construct new polynomial string field theory of closed strings, or to formulate vacuum string field theory completely .

There are some attempts to obtain analytic solutions in CSFT . In Ref. , a Wilson lines solution and marginal tachyon lump solution are constructed without using a level truncation scheme with the Siegel gauge. As a result, it turns out that a branch cut singularity previously found in a marginal solution  should be gauge artifact because the analytic solution outside the Siegel gauge has no singularity. To construct the solutions, it is helpful to use the identity string field and left-right splitting properties of a delta function.

In this paper, we extend the Wilson lines solution to the ones representing general marginal deformations generated by a $`U(1)`$ current. The splitting properties of a delta function, which is proved as a generalization of the ones in Ref. , have an important role in the construction of marginal solutions. Due to the splitting properties of a delta function, some operators described by the left and right halves of a string become mutually commutable, and then the algebras of the operators are splitting into the left and right parts. Since CSFT is described by a half string formulation , the splitting algebras are powerful tools in order to find classical solutions in CSFT.

We also construct a scalar solution in terms of the splitting properties of a delta function, by which we find splitting algebras associated with the BRS current. The scalar solution has interesting features. It has a universal Fock space expression , namely it is written by the matter Virasoro generators and ghost fields, since it is made of the BRS current, the ghost and the identity string field. In addition, the expanded theory around it can not be connected with the original theory by the string field redefinition. These properties are required for the tachyon vacuum solution.

Recently, it was proposed that classical solutions are constructed, which correspond to deformations of D-brane positions . However, their solutions have singularity originated in a delta function, and so their Fock space expressions are ill-defined. On the other hand, our marginal and scalar solutions have well-defined Fock space expressions, and the marginal solutions contain the solution corresponding to deformations of D-brane positions.

This paper is organized as follows. In sec. 2, we prove the splitting properties of a delta function. In sec. 3, we construct general marginal solutions generated by a $`U(1)`$ current. We construct a scalar solution which represents a non-trivial background in sec. 4. We give summary and discussions in sec. 5. We present some detail calculations in the appendix.

## 2 Splitting Properties of Delta Function

We define a delta function as follows,

$`\delta (w,w^{})={\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}w^nw^{n1}={\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}w^nw^{n1},`$ (2.1)
where $`w`$ and $`w^{}`$ are complex coordinates within a unit circle. If $`f(w)`$ has no pole except the origin, the delta function satisfies

$`f(w)={\displaystyle _{C_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}}\delta (w,w^{})f(w^{}),`$ (2.2)
where $`C_0`$ denotes the contour which encircles the origin along the unit circle.

Let us consider integrations along left and right half unit circles as depicted in Fig. 1. We find that

$`{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}}w^n\delta (w,w^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}w^n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{kn}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{nk}}w^k\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(nk)\pi }{2}}\right).`$ (2.3)
This implies that the delta function of Eq. (2.1) is not a delta function if the integration path is the left half only. We perform the left integration of Eq. (2.3) once more. We find that, if $`m+n0`$,

$`{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}w^{m1}{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}}w^n\delta (w,w^{})`$ (2.4)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m+n}}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(m+n)\pi }{2}}\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k0,m+n}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k(kmn)}}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k\pi }{2}}\right)\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(kmn)\pi }{2}}\right),`$
if $`m+n=0`$,

$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2}}\mathrm{sin}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{k\pi }{2}}\right).`$ (2.5)
Using the formula

$`{\displaystyle \underset{k0,m}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k(km)}}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k\pi }{2}}\right)\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(km)\pi }{2}}\right)={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{4}}\delta _{m,0},`$ (2.6)
we can calculate the infinite series and find the following equation,

$`{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}w^{m1}{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}}w^n\delta (w,w^{})={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}w^{m+n1}.`$ (2.7)
Therefore, if $`f(w)`$ and $`g(w)`$ have no pole except the origin, we find

$`{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}}f(w)g(w^{})\delta (w,w^{})={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)g(w).`$ (2.8)
Thus, the delta function of Eq. (2.1) behaves as a delta function in the double left integrations. From Eqs. (2.2) and (2.8), other formulas are given by

$`{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}}f(w)g(w^{})\delta (w,w^{})={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)g(w),`$
$`{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}}f(w)g(w^{})\delta (w,w^{})=0.`$ (2.9)
These formulas of Eqs. (2.8) and (2) are generalizations of the ones for the delta function with the Neumann boundary condition .

## 3 Marginal Solutions

We consider the ghost field $`c(w)`$, and a $`U(1)`$ current $`J(w)`$, which is a dimension one primary field. These fields are expanded by

$`c(w)={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}c_nw^{n+1},J(w)={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}j_nw^{n1}.`$ (3.1)
The commutation relations of $`j_n`$ are given by

$`[j_m,j_n]=m\delta _{m+n}.`$ (3.2)
From Eq. (3.2), we find the commutation relation of $`J(w)`$ as

$`[J(w),J(w^{})]=_w\delta (w,w^{}).`$ (3.3)
Here, we introduce the following operators,

$`V_\mathrm{L}(f)={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)cJ(w),V_\mathrm{R}(f)={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)cJ(w),`$
$`C_\mathrm{L}(f)={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)c(w),C_\mathrm{R}(f)={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)c(w),`$ (3.4)
where $`f(w)`$ is a holomorphic function within the unit circle except the origin, and satisfies $`f(\pm i)=0`$. From the splitting formulas of the delta function, it follows that

$`\{V_\mathrm{L}(f),V_\mathrm{L}(g)\}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}}f(w)g(w^{})c(w)c(w^{})_w\delta (w,w^{})`$ (3.5)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)g(w)cc(w)`$
$`=`$ $`\{Q_\mathrm{B},C_\mathrm{L}(fg)\},`$
where we have used $`f(\pm i)=0`$ when we perform the partial integration. Similarly, we find that

$`\{V_\mathrm{R}(f),V_\mathrm{R}(g)\}=\{Q_\mathrm{B},C_\mathrm{R}(fg)\},`$ (3.6)
$`\{V_\mathrm{L}(f),V_\mathrm{R}(g)\}=0.`$ (3.7)
Thus, we can obtain left-right splitting algebras in terms of the splitting property of the delta function.

Let us consider the functions $`F_+^{(h)}(w)`$ and $`F_{}^{(h)}(w)`$ which, if we change the coordinate as $`w^{}=1/w`$, transform into

$`F_+^{(h)}(w^{})`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dw^{}}}\right)^hF_+^{(h)}(w),`$
$`F_{}^{(h)}(w^{})`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dw^{}}}\right)^hF_{}^{(h)}(w).`$ (3.8)
$`F_+^{(h)}(w)`$ transforms as a dimension $`h`$ field and $`F_{}^{(h)}(w)`$ has a opposite sign compared with a dimension $`h`$ field. Generally, the functions $`F_\pm ^{(h)}(w)`$ are given by

$`F_+^{(h)}(w)={\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}a_nv_n^{(h)}(w),`$
$`F_{}^{(h)}(w)={\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}b_nu_n^{(h)}(w),`$ (3.9)
where $`v_n^{(h)}`$ and $`u_n^{(h)}`$ are defined by

$`u_n^{(h)}(w)=w^{nh}(1)^{nh}w^{nh},v_n^{(h)}(w)=w^{nh}+(1)^{nh}w^{nh}.`$ (3.10)
The $`N`$-strings vertex of a midpoint interaction is defined by gluing the boundaries $`\left|w_i\right|=1(i=1,2,\mathrm{},N)`$ of $`N`$ unit disks with the identifications ,

$`w_iw_{i+1}=1,\mathrm{for}\left|w_i\right|=1,\mathrm{Re}w_i1,`$ (3.11)
where $`w_{N+1}`$ denotes $`w_1`$. If $`\varphi (w)`$ is a dimension $`h`$ primary field, one forms of $`dwF_+^{(h+1)}\varphi `$ and $`dwF_{}^{(h+1)}\varphi `$ are transformed as

$`dw_{i+1}F_+^{(h+1)}(w_{i+1})\varphi (w_{i+1})=dw_iF_+^{(h+1)}(w_i)\varphi (w_i),`$
$`dw_{i+1}F_{}^{(h+1)}(w_{i+1})\varphi (w_{i+1})=dw_iF_{}^{(h+1)}(w_i)\varphi (w_i).`$ (3.12)
Then, considering $`cJ(w)`$ and $`c(w)`$ as the primary fields, we obtain the following equations related to star product:

$`(V_\mathrm{R}(F_{}^{(1)})A)B=()^{\left|A\right|}A(V_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})B),`$ (3.14)
$`(C_\mathrm{R}(F_+^{(2)})A)B=()^{\left|A\right|}A(C_\mathrm{L}(F_+^{(2)})B),`$
where $`A`$ and $`B`$ are arbitrary string fields, and $`\left|A\right|`$ is $`0`$ if $`A`$ is Grassmann even and 1 if it is odd. Similarly, we find that

$`V_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})I=V_\mathrm{R}(F_{}^{(1)})I,C_\mathrm{L}(F_+^{(2)})I=C_\mathrm{R}(F_+^{(2)})I,`$ (3.15)
where $`I`$ denotes the identity string field. The function $`F_+^{(2)}(w)`$ must satisfy $`F_+^{(2)}(\pm i)=0`$, because the ghost $`c(w)`$ has the midpoint singularity on the identity string field, which is evaluated by the oscillator expression as

$`c(w)|I=\left[c_0{\displaystyle \frac{ww^3}{1+w^2}}+c_1{\displaystyle \frac{w^2}{1+w^2}}+c_1{\displaystyle \frac{1+w^2+w^4}{1+w^2}}+{\displaystyle \underset{n2}{}}c_nv_n^{(1)}(w)\right]|I.`$ (3.16)
Now, we obtain a classical solution associated with the $`U(1)`$ current,

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}=\mathrm{diag}\left(a_iV_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_i^2C_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{2})\right)I,`$ (3.17)
where $`a_i`$ are parameters and $`i`$ corresponds to the Chan-Paton index. From Eqs. (3.5), (3.14), (3.14) and (3.15), it follows that

$`Q_\mathrm{B}\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_i^2\{Q_\mathrm{B},C_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{2})\}I,`$
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}`$ $`=`$ $`a_i^2V_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})IV_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})I+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_i^2V_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})IC_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{2})I`$ (3.18)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_i^2C_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{2})IV_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})I+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}a_i^4C_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{2})IC_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{2})I`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_i^2\{V_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)}),V_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})\}I`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_i^2\{Q_\mathrm{B},C_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{2})\}I.`$
Then, the classical solution satisfies the equation of motion, $`Q_\mathrm{B}\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}+\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}=0`$. The solution for $`F_{}^{(1)}(w)=u_0^{(1)}(w)+u_2^{(1)}(w)`$ are give by Ref. . Since the classical solution of Eq. (3.17) dose not refer to any boundary condition, it is a generalization of the solution given by Ref. .

If we expand the string field around the classical solution, the BRS charge becomes

$`Q_\mathrm{B}^{}=Q_\mathrm{B}+a_iV_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})a_jV_\mathrm{R}(F_{}^{(1)})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_i^2C_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{2})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_j^2C_\mathrm{R}(F_{}^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{2}),`$ (3.19)
which operates to each $`(i,j)`$-component of the string field $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{ij}`$. Supposed that there is the dimension ‘zero’ field $`\phi (w)`$ which satisfies

$`[\phi (w),J(w^{})]=i\delta (w,w^{}),[Q_\mathrm{B},\phi (w)]=icJ(w).`$ (3.20)
For the operator $`\phi `$, we introduce the left and right integrated operators,

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{L}(f)={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)\phi (w),\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{R}(f)={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)\phi (w).`$ (3.21)
From Eq. (3.20), it follows that

$`[\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{L}(f),Q_\mathrm{B}]=iV_\mathrm{L}(f),[\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{L}(f),V_\mathrm{L}(g)]=iC_\mathrm{L}(fg).`$ (3.22)
By these commutation relations, the shifted BRS charge can be written as

$`Q_\mathrm{B}^{}=e^{B_{ij}(F_{}^{(1)})}Q_\mathrm{B}e^{B_{ij}(F_{}^{(1)})},`$ (3.23)
where $`B`$ is defined by

$`B_{ij}(F_{}^{(1)})=ia_i\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})ia_j\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{R}(F_{}^{(1)}).`$ (3.24)
Therefore, it seems that the shifted theory is transformed into the original theory by the redefinition of the string field and the classical solution is trivial. However, it is true only if the field $`\phi (w)`$ exists and the redefinition is well-defined for the zero-mode part of $`\phi `$. For example, we consider $`JiX`$ and $`\phi X`$. In this case, if the direction $`X`$ is compactified, the redefinition is ill-defined for the zero-mode of $`X`$. Indeed, the shifted theory describes strings in the Wilson lines background, and the classical solution corresponds to the condensation of the gauge fields .

Using the operator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{L}`$, the classical solution can be rewritten as

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}=\mathrm{exp}(ia_i\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})I)Q_\mathrm{B}\mathrm{exp}(ia_i\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{L}(F_{}^{(1)})I).`$ (3.25)
It implies that the classical solution is a gauge transform of zero string field, namely it is pure gauge. However, as well as the string field redefinition, there are cases in which the gauge transformation is ill-defined because of the zero-mode of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_L`$. For the Wilson lines solution, the classical solution is locally pure gauge, but it is globally non-trivial configuration, analogously to field theoretical situations.

Let us consider the potential height $`S[\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}]`$ at the classical solution. Since the classical solution has parameters $`a_i`$, it follows that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{da_i}}S[\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}]={\displaystyle \frac{2}{g}}{\displaystyle (Q_\mathrm{B}\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}+\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m})\frac{d\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}}{da_i}}=0.`$ (3.26)
Then, we find that $`S[\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}(a_i)]=S[\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{m}(a_i=0)]=0`$ . Thus, the potential height is always zero and $`a_i`$ correspond to marginal parameters.

We can construct classical solutions by using $`F_+^{(1)}`$ instead of $`F_{}^{(1)}`$. However, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{L}(F_+^{(1)})`$ can not involve the zero mode of $`\phi `$ because of $`v_0^{(1)}(w)=0`$. Therefore, the solutions correspond to pure gauge and physically trivial solutions.

## 4 Scalar Solutions

The BRS current is defined by

$`J_\mathrm{B}(w)=c\left(T_X+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}T_{\mathrm{gh}}\right)(w)+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}^2c(w),`$ (4.1)
where $`T_X(w)`$ and $`T_{\mathrm{gh}}(w)`$ denote the energy momentum tensors of string coordinates and reparametrization ghosts, respectively . The operator product expansions (OPEs) of the BRS current and the ghost field are given by

$`J_\mathrm{B}(w)J_\mathrm{B}(w^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(d18)/2}{(ww^{})^3}}cc(w^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{(d18)/4}{(ww^{})^2}}c^2c(w^{}){\displaystyle \frac{(d26)/12}{ww^{}}}c^3c(w^{})+\mathrm{}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{(ww^{})^3}}cc(w^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{(ww^{})^2}}c^2c(w^{})+\mathrm{},`$
$`J_\mathrm{B}(w)c(w^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ww^{}}}cc(w^{})+\mathrm{},`$ (4.2)
where $`d=26`$ is the matter central charge of the conformal field theory. We can expand the BRS current and the ghost field using oscillation modes,

$`J_\mathrm{B}(w)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}Q_nw^{n1},`$
$`c(w)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}c_nw^{n+1}.`$ (4.3)
Since $`\{Q_\mathrm{B},c(w)\}=cc(w)`$, the OPEs of Eq. (4) can be rewritten in the form of anti-commutation relations of these oscillators,

$`\{Q_m,Q_n\}=2mn\{Q_\mathrm{B},c_{m+n}\},\{Q_m,c_n\}=\{Q_\mathrm{B},c_{m+n}\}.`$ (4.4)
From Eq. (4.4), we find the anti-commutation relation of the BRS current and the ghost,

$`\{J_\mathrm{B}(w),J_\mathrm{B}(w^{})\}`$ $`=`$ $`\{Q_\mathrm{B},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}_w_w^{}\left(c(w)\delta (w,w^{})\right)\},`$
$`\{J_\mathrm{B}(w),c(w^{})\}`$ $`=`$ $`\{Q_\mathrm{B},c(w)\delta (w,w^{})\}.`$ (4.5)
We now define the following operators,

$`Q_\mathrm{L}(f)={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)J_\mathrm{B}(w),Q_\mathrm{R}(f)={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)J_\mathrm{B}(w),`$ (4.6)
where $`f(w)`$ is a holomorphic function within the unit circle except the origin, and, in addition, its values at the midpoint is zero, $`f(\pm i)=0`$. From Eq. (4), we can calculate the anti-commutation relation of the operators as follows,

$`\{Q_\mathrm{L}(f),Q_\mathrm{L}(g)\}`$ (4.7)
$`=`$ $`\{Q_\mathrm{B},{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}}f(w)g(w^{})2_w_w^{}\left(c(w)\delta (w,w^{})\right)\}`$
$`=`$ $`2\{Q_\mathrm{B},{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}}f(w)g(w^{})c(w)\delta (w,w^{})\},`$
where surface terms are vanished due to $`f(\pm i)=g(\pm i)=0`$. Using the delta function formula, we find that

$`\{Q_\mathrm{L}(f),Q_\mathrm{L}(g)\}=2\{Q_\mathrm{B},C_\mathrm{L}(fg)\}.`$ (4.8)
Similarly, other anti-commutation relations are given by

$`\{Q_\mathrm{R}(f),Q_\mathrm{R}(g)\}=2\{Q_\mathrm{B},C_\mathrm{R}(fg)\},`$
$`\{Q_\mathrm{L}(f),C_\mathrm{L}(g)\}=\{Q_\mathrm{B},C_\mathrm{L}(fg)\},`$
$`\{Q_\mathrm{R}(f),C_\mathrm{R}(g)\}=\{Q_\mathrm{B},C_\mathrm{R}(fg)\},`$
$`\{Q_\mathrm{L}(f),Q_\mathrm{R}(g)\}=\{Q_\mathrm{L}(f),C_\mathrm{R}(g)\}=\{Q_\mathrm{R}(f),C_\mathrm{L}(g)\}=0.`$ (4.9)
Thus, we can obtain the splitting algebras associated with the BRS current by using the splitting properties of the delta function.

We consider the properties of the $`Q_{\mathrm{L}(\mathrm{R})}`$ related to star product and the identity string field. Since $`dw_iF_+^{(0)}(w_i)J_\mathrm{B}(w_i)`$ is a globally defined one form in the gluing N-strings surface, we obtain a similar equation to Eqs. (3.14) and (3.14),

$`\left(Q_\mathrm{R}(F_+^{(0)})A\right)B=()^{\left|A\right|}A\left(Q_\mathrm{L}(F_+^{(0)})B\right).`$ (4.10)
Similarly, we find that

$`Q_\mathrm{L}(F_+^{(0)})I=Q_\mathrm{R}(F_+^{(0)})I.`$ (4.11)
Now, we can show that a classical solution is given by

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_0=Q_\mathrm{L}(F_+^{(0)})I+C_\mathrm{L}(G_+^{(2)})I,`$ (4.12)
where $`G_+^{(2)}(w)`$ is

$`G_+^{(2)}(w)={\displaystyle \frac{\left(F_+^{(0)}(w)\right)^2}{1+F_+^{(0)}(w)}}.`$ (4.13)
$`G_+^{(2)}(\pm i)`$ must be zero in order to cancel the midpoint singularity of the ghost on the identity, as in the case of the marginal solutions. Indeed, from Eqs. (3.14), (4.8), (4), (4.10) and (4.11), we find that the classical equation satisfies the equation of motion:

$`Q_\mathrm{B}\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\{Q_\mathrm{B},C_\mathrm{L}(G_+^{(2)})\}I,`$
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_0\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\{Q_\mathrm{B},C_\mathrm{L}((F_+^{(0)})^2+F_+^{(0)}G_+^{(2)})\}I.`$ (4.14)
Then, it follows that $`Q_\mathrm{B}\mathrm{\Psi }_0+\mathrm{\Psi }_0\mathrm{\Psi }_0=0`$.

If we expand the string field around the classical solution, the shifted theory has the following BRS charge,

$`Q_\mathrm{B}^{}=Q_\mathrm{B}+Q(F_+^{(0)})+C(G_+^{(2)}),`$ (4.15)
where we define

$`Q(f)=Q_\mathrm{L}(f)+Q_\mathrm{R}(f),C(f)=C_\mathrm{L}(f)+C_\mathrm{R}(f).`$ (4.16)
If we take $`F_+^{(0)}(w)=\mathrm{exp}(h(w))1`$, the classical solution and the shifted BRS charge are rewritten as

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_0=Q_\mathrm{L}(e^h1)IC_\mathrm{L}\left((h)^2e^h\right)I,`$ (4.17)
$`Q_\mathrm{B}^{}=Q(e^h)C\left((h)^2e^h\right).`$ (4.18)
Let us consider the redefinition of the string field. The ghost number currents are given by

$`J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w)=cb(w),`$ (4.19)
where $`c(w)`$ and $`b(w)`$ are ghost and anti-ghost fields, respectively. The OPEs of the ghost current with the BRS current and with the ghost field are given by

$`J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w)J_\mathrm{B}(w^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{(ww^{})^3}}c(w^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{(ww^{})^2}}c(w^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(ww^{})^2}}J_\mathrm{B}(w^{})+\mathrm{},`$ (4.20)
$`J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w)c(w^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ww^{}}}c(w^{})+\mathrm{}.`$ (4.21)
We introduce an operator for the function $`f(w)`$ which is holomorphic except the origin,

$`q(f)={\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}f(w)J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w)}.`$ (4.22)
The OPEs of Eqs. (4.20) and (4.21) give the following commutation relations,

$`[q(f),Q(g)]=Q(fg)2C(fg),`$ (4.23)
$`[q(f),C(g)]=C(fg).`$ (4.24)
From the commutation relations of Eqs. (4.23) and (4.24), we find that, through the transformation generated by $`q(f)`$, the BRS charge becomes

$`e^{q(f)}Q_\mathrm{B}e^{q(f)}`$ $`=`$ $`Q_\mathrm{B}+[q(f),Q_\mathrm{B}]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2!}}[q(f),[q(f),Q_\mathrm{B}]]+\mathrm{}`$ (4.25)
$`=`$ $`Q_\mathrm{B}+Q(f)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2!}}\left\{Q(f^2)2C((f)^2)\right\}+\mathrm{}`$
$`=`$ $`Q(e^f)C\left((f)^2e^f\right).`$
Therefore, if the string field $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is redefined as $`\mathrm{\Psi }=e^{q(h)}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$, the shifted BRS charge is transformed into the original BRS charge.

In order to interpret the background of the redefined theory, let us consider the conservation law of $`q(h)`$ on the $`N`$-strings vertex. The gluing $`N`$-strings surface can be transformed into the whole complex $`z`$-plane by the mapping

$`z=e^{\frac{2\pi (1k)i}{N}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+iw_k}{1iw_k}}\right)^{\frac{2}{N}},(k=1,\mathrm{},N).`$ (4.26)
Here, $`\mathrm{exp}(2\pi (1k)i/N)(k=1,\mathrm{},N)`$ correspond to the $`N`$ punctures in the $`z`$-plane, which represent $`N`$ strings insertions, and the origin and the infinity in the $`z`$ plane correspond to the midpoints of the $`N`$ strings. Since $`h(w)`$ is an analytic scalar and $`F_+^{(0)}(\pm i)=0`$, we find that $`h(z=0)=h(z=\mathrm{})=0`$. Therefore, the conservation law in the $`z`$ plane is given by

$`V_N|{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle _{C_k}}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}}h(z)J_{\mathrm{gh}}(z)=0,`$ (4.27)
where the contour $`C_k`$ encircles the puncture at the $`k`$-string in the $`z`$ plane. The anomalous term at the infinity vanishes due to $`h(\mathrm{})=0`$. We can express the contour integral around the $`k`$-string’s puncture in terms of the local coordinates $`w_k`$. Since the transformation low of the ghost number current $`J_{\mathrm{gh}}`$ is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{dw}}J_{\mathrm{gh}}(z)=J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w)+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2z}{dw^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dz}{dw}}\right)^1,`$ (4.28)
we obtain the following identity ,

$`V_N|{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}q^{(k)}(h)=V_N|{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle _{C_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw_k}{2\pi i}}h(w_k)J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w_k)=\kappa _N(h)V_N|,`$
$`\kappa _N(h)={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle _{C_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw_k}{2\pi i}}h(w_k){\displaystyle \frac{d^2z}{dw_{k}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dz}{dw_k}}\right)^1,`$ (4.29)
where $`C_0`$ denotes the contour around the origin. From Eq. (4.26), we find that

$`\kappa _N(h)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle _{C_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw_k}{2\pi i}}h(w_k)\left({\displaystyle \frac{4i}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+w_k^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{2w_k}{1+w_k^2}}\right)`$ (4.30)
$`=`$ $`6i{\displaystyle _{C_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}h(w){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+w^2}}+3N{\displaystyle _{C_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}h(w){\displaystyle \frac{w}{1+w^2}}.`$
The shifted action around the classical solution is given by

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{1}{g}}{\displaystyle \left(\mathrm{\Psi }Q_\mathrm{B}^{}\mathrm{\Psi }+\frac{2}{3}\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }\right)}.`$ (4.31)
The action is made of a reflector and a three strings vertex, which are $`2`$-strings and $`3`$-strings vertices, respectively. If we redefine the string field as $`\mathrm{\Psi }=e^{q(h)}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$, the action becomes<sup>*</sup><sup>*</sup>*In Ref. , the classical solution was constructed for a particular function $`h(w)`$. However, $`\kappa _2`$ was missed when it was physically interpreted. So, the conclusion has changed in this paper.

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{1}{g}}{\displaystyle \left(e^{\kappa _2(h)}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}Q_\mathrm{B}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}+\frac{2}{3}e^{\kappa _3(h)}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\right)}.`$ (4.32)
Supposed that the first term of Eq. (4.30) has non-zero value. Since $`\kappa _2/2\kappa _3/3`$, we can not absorb these factors by rescaling the string field, and the shifted theory becomes the theory with the original BRS charge and the different coupling constant. So, the classical solution may represent the dilaton condensation. If the first term vanishes, the shifted theory become the original one by rescaling the string field, and so the classical solution may correspond to a pure gauge solution. However, each cases should be investigated more carefully, because there is a possibility that the redefinition itself is ill-defined.

Expanding the ghost current as $`J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w)=_nq_nw^{n1}`$, we can write the operator $`q(h)`$ as

$`q(h)`$ $`=`$ $`q_0{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}w^1h(w)}+q^{(+)}(h)+q^{()}(h),`$ (4.33)
where $`q^{(+)}(h)`$ and $`q^{()}(h)`$ which correspond to positive and negative mode parts of $`q(h)`$ are given by

$`q^{(+)}(h)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}q_n{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}w^{n1}h(w)},`$
$`q^{()}(h)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}q_n{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}w^{n1}h(w)}.`$ (4.34)
The operator $`e^{q(h)}`$ is rewritten by the ‘normal ordered’ form as follows,

$`e^{q(h)}=\mathrm{exp}\left(q_0{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}w^1h(w)}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[q^{(+)}(h),q^{()}(h)]\right)e^{q^{()}(h)}e^{q^{(+)}(h)}.`$ (4.35)
If the commutator of $`q^{(\pm )}(h)`$ has singularity, the operator $`e^{q(h)}`$ is ill-defined and we can not redefine the string field by $`\mathrm{\Psi }=e^{q(h)}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$. Then, using such a singular function $`h(w)`$, we can obtain a non-trivial classical solution. From the OPE of the ghost number currents

$`J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w)J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(ww^{})^2}}+\mathrm{},`$ (4.36)
the oscillators $`q_n`$ satisfy $`[q_m,q_n]=m\delta _{m+n}`$. Then, we can write generally the commutator of $`q^{(\pm )}(h)`$ as

$`[q^{(+)}(h),q^{()}(h)]={\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}\frac{dw^{}}{2\pi i}\frac{1}{(ww^{})^2}h(w)h(w^{})}.`$ (4.37)
For example, let us consider the classical solution for

$`h_a(w)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{a}{2}}\left(w+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w}}\right)^2\right),`$ (4.38)
where $`a`$ is a real parameter which is larger than or equal to $`1/2`$. For this $`h_a(w)`$, $`F_+^{(0)}(w)`$ and $`G_+^{(2)}(w)`$ are given by

$`F_+^{(0)}(w)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{h(w)}1={\displaystyle \frac{a}{2}}\left(w+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w}}\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{a}{2}}\left(v_0^{(0)}(w)+v_2^{(0)}(w)\right),`$
$`G_+^{(2)}(w)`$ $`=`$ $`(h(w))^2e^{h(w)}=a^2w^2{\displaystyle \frac{\left(w^2\frac{1}{w^2}\right)^2}{1+\frac{a}{2}\left(w+\frac{1}{w}\right)^2}}.`$ (4.39)
Indeed, we find that $`F_+^{(0)}(\pm i)=0`$ and $`G_+^{(2)}(\pm i)=0`$, and this $`h_a(w)`$ gives the classical solution by Eq. (4.17). The function $`h_a(w)`$ has the Laurent expansion as follows (see in Appendix A),

$`h_a(w)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}(1Z(a))^2{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{n}}Z(a)^n(w^{2n}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w^{2n}}}),`$
$`Z(a)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1+a\sqrt{1+2a}}{a}}.`$ (4.40)
Using this expansion and Eq. (4.30), we can evaluate $`\kappa _N(h_a)`$ as

$`\kappa _N(h_a)`$ $`=`$ $`3N\mathrm{log}(1Z(a)).`$ (4.41)
Here, the first term of Eq. (4.30) vanishes. Therefore, we may naively expect that the shifted action reduces the original one and the classical solution might be pure gauge.

However, we must consider the string field redefinition in detail as general discussion. From Eq. (4), the operator $`q(h_a)`$ can be expressed by

$`q(h_a)`$ $`=`$ $`q_0\mathrm{log}(1Z(a))^2+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{n1}}{n}}(q_{2n}+q_{2n})Z(a)^n`$ (4.42)
$`=`$ $`q_0\mathrm{log}(1Z(a))^2+q^{(+)}(h_a)+q^{()}(h_a),`$
where $`q^{(+)}`$ and $`q^{()}`$ denote the positive and negative modes part of $`q(h_a)`$;

$`q^{(+)}(h_a)={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{n1}}{n}}q_{2n}Z(a)^n,q^{()}(h_a)={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{n1}}{n}}q_{2n}Z(a)^n.`$ (4.43)
Using $`[q_m,q_n]=m\delta _{m+n}`$, we can evaluate the commutation relation of $`q^{(\pm )}`$ as follows,

$`[q^{(+)}(h_a),q^{()}(h_a)]=2{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}Z(a)^{2n}=2\mathrm{log}(1Z(a)^2).`$ (4.44)
Then, we can rewrite the operator $`e^{q(h_a)}`$ by the ‘normal ordered’ form

$`e^{q(h_a)}`$ $`=`$ $`(1Z(a)^2)^1\mathrm{exp}(q_0\mathrm{log}(1Z(a))^2)e^{q^{()}(h_a)}e^{q^{(+)}(h_a)}.`$ (4.45)
For $`a>1/2`$, this operator is well-defined since $`\left|Z(a)\right|<1`$. Therefore, the classical solution for $`a>1/2`$ should be pure gauge solution. However, in the case of $`Z(a=1/2)=1`$, this operator $`e^{q(h_a)}`$ has singularity and the string field redefinition is ill-defined. Thus, we can obtain a non-trivial classical solution for $`a=1/2`$.

In the case of $`a=1/2`$, the classical solution is given by

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ $`=`$ $`Q_\mathrm{L}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\left(w+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w}}\right)^2\right)I+C_\mathrm{L}\left(w^2\left(w+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w}}\right)^2\right)I.`$ (4.46)
Each term of Eq. (4.46) has a well-defined Fock space expression as follows,

$`Q_\mathrm{L}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\left(w+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w}}\right)^2\right)|I={\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{2\pi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{2n+1}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n+3}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n1}}\right)Q_{2n1}|I,`$
$`C_\mathrm{L}\left(w^2\left(w+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w}}\right)^2\right)|I`$
$`=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}c_1+{\displaystyle \frac{10}{3\pi }}c_1+2{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{\pi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{2n+1}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n+3}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n1}}\right)c_{2n1}\right]|I,`$ (4.47)
where use has been made of Eq. (3.16) and

$`J_\mathrm{B}(w)|I={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}Q_nv_n^{(1)}(w)|I.`$ (4.48)
If we expand the string field around the classical solution, the shifted BRS charge is given by

$`Q_\mathrm{B}^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Q_\mathrm{B}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\left(Q_2+Q_2\right)+2c_0+c_2+c_2.`$ (4.49)
The BRS current is written by the matter Virasoro generators and the ghost fields, and the identity string field is given by the Virasoro generators . Therefore, the scalar solution has a universal expression for arbitrary backgrounds.

Finally, we show that the classical solution for $`a=1/2`$ is generated by a singular gauge transformation. From the OPE of Eqs. (4.20) and (4.21), we can calculate the commutation relations of $`J_{\mathrm{gh}}`$ with $`J_\mathrm{B}`$ and c,

$`[J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w),J_\mathrm{B}(w^{})]=J_\mathrm{B}(w)\delta (w,w^{})2_w_w^{}\left(c(w)\delta (w,w^{})\right),`$
$`[J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w),c(w^{})]=c(w)\delta (w,w^{}).`$ (4.50)
We introduce the operators corresponding to the left and right pieces of $`q(h)`$,

$`q_\mathrm{L}(f)={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w),q_\mathrm{R}(f)={\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{R}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}f(w)J_{\mathrm{gh}}(w),`$ (4.51)
where we impose $`f(\pm i)=0`$. From Eq. (4), these operators satisfy

$`[q_\mathrm{L}(f),Q_\mathrm{L}(g)]=Q_\mathrm{L}(fg)2C_\mathrm{L}(fg),`$
$`[q_\mathrm{L}(f),C_\mathrm{L}(g)]=C_\mathrm{L}(fg),`$ (4.52)
and the left and right operators are commutable each other. From Eq. (4), we find as the case of $`N=1`$

$`I|\left(q_\mathrm{L}(h_a)+q_\mathrm{R}(h_a)\right)=\kappa _1(h_a)I|,\kappa _1(h_a)=3\mathrm{log}(1Z(a)).`$ (4.53)
From the anomalous transformation law of Eq. (4.28), we find that

$`V_N|\left(q_\mathrm{L}^{(r+1)}(h_a)+q_\mathrm{R}^{(r)}(h_a)\right)=3{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}w^1h_a(w)V_N|,`$ (4.54)
where $`r`$ represents the Hilbert space of the $`r`$-th string. Using Eq. (4), we can evaluate the coefficient in the right hand side as

$`3{\displaystyle _{C_\mathrm{L}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{2\pi i}}w^1h_a(w)=3\mathrm{log}(1Z(a))=\kappa _1(h_a).`$ (4.55)
From Eqs. (4), (4.53) and (4.54), the classical solution of Eq. (4.17) for $`h_a(w)`$ is expressed as the gauge transform of zero string field,

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\mathrm{exp}\left(q_\mathrm{L}(h_a)I\right)Q_\mathrm{B}\mathrm{exp}\left(q_\mathrm{L}(h_a)I\right).`$ (4.56)
Let us consider the case of $`a=1/2`$. Using Eq. (4), we can write the operator $`q_\mathrm{L}(h_{1/2})`$ by the mode expression,

$`q_\mathrm{L}(h_{1/2})=q_0\mathrm{log}2+q_\mathrm{L}^{(+)}(h_{1/2})+q_\mathrm{L}^{()}(h_{1/2}),`$ (4.57)
where we define

$`q_\mathrm{L}^{(+)}(h_{1/2})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{n}}q_{2n}`$ (4.58)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{2n1}}\left(\beta (n{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})+\beta (n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})\right)q_{2n1}`$
$`q_\mathrm{L}^{()}(h_{1/2})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{n}}q_{2n}`$ (4.59)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{2n1}}\left(\beta (n{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})+\beta (n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})\right)q_{2n+1}.`$
Here, $`\beta (z)`$ is defined by

$`\beta (z)={\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{z+n}},`$ (4.60)
and it is written by digamma function $`\psi (z)=d\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)/dz`$,

$`\beta (z)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\psi \left({\displaystyle \frac{z+1}{2}}\right)\psi \left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}}\right)\right).`$ (4.61)
Using Eqs. (4.58) and (4.59), we can calculate the commutator of $`q_\mathrm{L}^{(\pm )}`$ as follows,

$`[q_\mathrm{L}^{(+)}(h_{1/2}),q_\mathrm{L}^{()}(h_{1/2})]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}`$ (4.62)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n1}}\left(\beta (n{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})+\beta (n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})\right)^2.`$
Thus, the commutator of $`q_\mathrm{L}^{(\pm )}`$ has divergence as well as the one of $`q^{(\pm )}`$. Rewriting $`\mathrm{exp}(\pm q_\mathrm{L}I)`$ as

$`\mathrm{exp}\left(\pm q_\mathrm{L}(h_{1/2})I\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left(\pm q_\mathrm{L}(h_{1/2})\right)I`$ (4.63)
$`=2^{q_0}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[q_\mathrm{L}^{(+)}(h_{1/2}),q_\mathrm{L}^{()}(h_{1/2})]\right)e^{\pm q_\mathrm{L}^{()}(h_{1/2})}e^{\pm q_\mathrm{L}^{(+)}(h_{1/2})},`$
we find that the expression of Eq. (4.56) has singularity for $`a=1/2`$, and it implies that the classical solution for $`a=1/2`$ can be expressed as a singular gauge transform of the trivial vacuum.

## 5 Summary and Discussion

In this paper, we proved the splitting properties of the delta function. Using the splitting properties of the delta function, we found the marginal solutions with well-defined Fock space expressions related to a $`U(1)`$ current in CSFT. Then, we constructed the scalar solution with a well-defined universal Fock space expression in CSFT, the theory expanded around which can not be transformed into the original one by the string field redefinition. In addition, the scalar solution can be expressed as a singular gauge transform of the trivial vacuum. Though the non-trivial scalar solution was constructed based on the particular function $`h_{1/2}(w)`$, we can find other solutions by looking for the function which make the string field redefinition ill-defined. We have not yet understood whether other solutions connect to each other by gauge transformations, or each solution corresponds to a different vacuum.

We expect that the scalar solution represents the condensation of the tachyon, if various scalar solutions represent a single vacuum. The reasons are the following: First, it is impossible to connect the shifted theory to the original one by the string field redefinition, and so, the classical solution represents the non-trivial background which is not merely pure gauge. Secondly, the classical solution is scalar and has a universal expression. Thirdly, the physical states of the original theory are no longer physical in the expanded theory around the classical solution. Indeed, we can find that $`Q_\mathrm{B}^{}|\mathrm{phys}0`$ for all states $`|\mathrm{phys}`$ such that $`Q_\mathrm{B}|\mathrm{phys}=0`$.

Of course, in order to clarify this conjecture, we must prove at least two propositions. First, there exists no BRS singlet state for the shifted BRS charge in the Hilbert space , or equivalently, the new BRS charge has vanishing cohomology. Secondly, the potential height $`S[\mathrm{\Psi }_0]`$ is equal to the D-brane tension. At present, we can not deny the possibilities to prove these propositions. It should be noted about the latter proposition. As in the case of the marginal solutions, we find that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{da}}S[\mathrm{\Psi }_0]={\displaystyle \left(Q_\mathrm{B}\mathrm{\Psi }_0+\mathrm{\Psi }_0\mathrm{\Psi }_0\right)\frac{d\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{da}}=0.`$ (5.1)
So, the potential height $`S[\mathrm{\Psi }_0]`$ is equal to zero for $`a>1/2`$. However, it may become non-zero value at $`a=1/2`$, because the classical solution is ill-defined for $`a<1/2`$ and so $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ is not differentiable at $`a=1/2`$.

We should comment on the relation between our scalar solution and a purely cubic theoretical approach to the tachyon vacuum . Their argument was based on purely cubic string field theory (PCSFT) . However, the operator of $`Q_\mathrm{L}^2`$ appeared in the equation of motion in PCSFT has a midpoint singularity, which originates in $`\delta (\pm i,\pm i)`$ of the surface term in Eq. (4.7). Our scalar solution dose not suffer from the midpoint singularity because such a singular surface term disappears due to the condition $`f(\pm i)=g(\pm i)=0`$. If we find any classical solution in PCSFT, we should formulate it by other language without midpoint singularity instead of oscillator expansions, which is required also for light-cone type string field theories .

## Acknowledgements

We would like to thank H. Hata, H. Itoyama, I. Kishimoto, T. Kugo, K. Murakami and K. Ohmori for valuable discussions and comments.

Appendix

## Appendix A Laurent Expansion of $`h_a(w)`$

First, we find the following equation,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}x}{\mathrm{cosh}A\mathrm{cos}x}}=2{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}e^{nA}\mathrm{sin}(nx)(A>0).`$ (A.1)
Integrating this equation, we obtain

$`\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{cosh}A\mathrm{cos}x)=A\mathrm{log}22{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{nA}}{n}}\mathrm{cos}(nx)(A>0),`$ (A.2)
where the integral constant is given by comparing the values at $`x=0`$ or $`\pi /2`$. This equation is valid also for the case of $`A=0`$.

If $`a>0`$, we can rewrite $`h_a(w)`$ as

$`h_a(w)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{a}{2}}\left(w+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w}}\right)^2\right)`$ (A.3)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}(1+2a\mathrm{cos}^2\sigma )`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}a+\mathrm{log}\left[\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}\right)\mathrm{cos}(\pi 2\sigma )\right],`$
where we take $`w=\mathrm{exp}(i\sigma )`$. Applying Eq. (A.2) to the second term of Eq. (A.3) by taking $`A=\mathrm{log}[(1+a+\sqrt{1+2a})/a]`$, we find that

$`h_a(w)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{1+a+\sqrt{1+2a}}{2}}`$ (A.4)
$`2{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{n}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+a\sqrt{1+2a}}{a}}\right)^n\mathrm{cos}(2n\sigma ).`$
If $`0>a1/2`$, $`h_a(w)`$ can be rewritten by

$`h_a(w)=\mathrm{log}(a)+\mathrm{log}\left[\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}\right)\mathrm{cos}(2\sigma )\right].`$ (A.5)
Applying Eq. (A.2) by taking $`A=\mathrm{log}[(1+a+\sqrt{1+2a})/(a)]`$, we have the same expansion form of Eq. (A.4) as the case of $`a>0`$.

Taking the limit $`a0`$ in the right hand-side of Eq. (A.4), the result becomes zero and we find that Eq. (A.4) holds in the case of $`a=0`$. Thus, we derive the formula of Eq. (4).


text:
# Lieb Mode in a Quasi One-Dimensional Bose-Einstein Condensate of Atoms

\[

## Abstract

We calculate the dispersion relation associated with a solitary wave in a quasi-one-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensate of atoms confined in a harmonic, cylindrical trap in the limit of weak and strong interactions. In both cases, the dispersion relation is linear for long wavelength excitations and terminates at the point where the group velocity vanishes. We also calculate the dispersion relation of sound waves in both limits of weak and strong coupling.

PACS numbers: 05.45.Y, 03.75.Fi, 05.30.Jp, 67.40.Db

\]

Bose-Einstein condensates of trapped alkali-metal atoms  offer a rich source of interesting non-linear phenomena. At mean-field level, the effects of atom-atom interactions can be described as a one-body potential proportional to the local density of atoms. The order parameter, i.e., the condensate wavefunction, then satisfies a non-linear Schrödinger equation which also includes the effect of the confining (harmonic) potential.

Many authors have discussed the properties of solitary waves in a Bose-Einstein condensate of trapped alkali-metal atoms . Solitary waves were created and studied experimentally by Burger et al and by Denschlag et al. Solitary waves result as a balance between the energy cost associated with the Heisenberg principle, $`\mathrm{}^2/2m\xi ^2`$, where $`m`$ is the atom mass and $`\xi `$ is the characteristic length of the solitary wave, and the energy gain due to the local density variation of the system, which is of order $`nU_0`$. Here $`n`$ is the atomic density, and $`U_0=4\pi \mathrm{}^2a/m`$ is the effective two-body interaction matrix element, with $`a`$ being the scattering length for atom-atom collisions. In the present study, we consider repulsive interactions with $`a>0`$. Equating these two terms, one sees that the characteristic size of a solitary wave is set by the coherence length $`\xi `$ which satisfies the equation $`\mathrm{}^2/2m\xi ^2=nU_0`$. In the experiments of Refs., the effective interaction between the atoms was repulsive, and the solitary waves were thus density depressions. For an attractive effective interaction, the solitary waves are expected to be elevations in the density.

Since the atoms are confined, momentum is not a good quantum number. However, it is possible to use cigar-shaped traps which are very long along the $`z`$ axis. These systems are quasi one-dimensional , and the momentum along this axis is approximately a good quantum number.

An interesting question arises in this context. Some 40 years ago, Lieb considered a purely one-dimensional Bose gas of atoms interacting via a contact potential and predicted two distinct modes of excitation . One was identified as the usual Bogoliubov mode. The other class of excitations was later shown by Kulish et al.  to be associated with solitary waves (see also Ref. .) These authors demonstrated that the dispersion relation resulting from solitary wave excitation is associated to that predicted by Lieb. It is thus reasonable to ask (at least in the case of quasi one-dimensional atomic condensates) whether this “Lieb mode” exists. Actually, in the recent study of Ref.  the Lieb mode was examined in one dimension. Although the theoretical prediction for this mode seems firm, it has never been observed experimentally. In this regard, it is interesting that Stamper-Kurn et al. and Ozeri et al. have recently managed to probe the long wavelength phonon spectrum associated with the Bogoliubov mode in a cigar-shaped condensate of atoms using Bragg spectroscopy. As we argue below, the Lieb mode should be present in such a system and may be observable. Since for long-wavelength excitations the Lieb mode coincides with the usual Bogoliubov mode of sound waves, it is crucial that the momentum imparted to the cloud be appropriately large for the two modes to have distinct energies. One, for example, could excite the cloud using the method of phase imprinting, in order to create a solitary wave, and then measure the excitation energy and the corresponding momentum.

In the present study we derive the dispersion relation associated with the Lieb mode. Reference  (and, recently, Ref. ) has dealt with the same problem for a different range of parameters using a full three-dimensional numerical calculation based on the nonlinear Gross-Pitaevskii equation. In this calculation, the solitary wave is found to be a hybrid between a one-dimensional soliton and a three-dimensional vortex ring, but the method is applicable in our limit, as well. Since the present results deal with weaker interactions, we have chosen to adopt a description which neglects the contribution of vortex rings. We distinguish between two limits. In the limit of weak interactions, $`n_0U_0\mathrm{}\omega _{}`$, where $`n_0`$ is the maximum density of atoms far away from the wave, and $`\omega _{}`$ is the frequency of the trapping potential transversely to the long axis of the trap, the resulting equation is the ordinary nonlinear Gross-Pitaevskii equation. In the opposite limit of strong interactions $`n_0U_0\mathrm{}\omega _{}`$, the resulting equation is a modified Gross-Pitaevskii equation, in which the nonlinear term is proportional to the magnitude of the order parameter. Finally, we calculate the usual Bogoliubov mode in both regimes of weak and strong interactions and comment on the limits of validity of our study.

Model. We start with a $`T=0`$ Bose-Einstein condensate of atoms confined in a cylindrical harmonic potential, $`V=m\omega _{}^2(x^2+y^2)/2`$ and assume wave motion along the $`z`$ axis. There is no confinement along the $`z`$ axis, and away from the wave, there is a uniform density of atoms, $`n(x,y)`$, which is independent of $`z`$. For a short-ranged atom-atom interaction, $`V_{\mathrm{int}}(𝐫𝐫^{})=U_0\delta (𝐫𝐫^{})`$, the Gross-Pitaevskii equation for the order parameter $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ has the form

$`i\mathrm{}_t\mathrm{\Psi }=(\mathrm{}^2^2/2m+U_0|\mathrm{\Psi }|^2+V)\mathrm{\Psi }.`$ (1)
Following Ref., we assume that the transverse dimension of the cloud is sufficiently small and the corresponding time scale sufficiently rapid that the transverse profile of the particle density can adjust to the equilibrium form appropriate for the instantaneous number of particles per unit length. The problem becomes one-dimensional, and the solitary pulse can be described by a local velocity, $`v(z)`$, and a local density of particles per unit length, $`\sigma (z)`$ , $`\sigma (z)=𝑑x𝑑y|\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y,z)|^2`$. With this assumption, the wavefunction may be written in the form $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐫,t)=f(z,t)g(x,y,\sigma )`$ , where $`g`$ is the equilibrium wavefunction for the transverse motion which depends on time implicitly through the time dependence of $`\sigma `$. We choose $`g`$ to be normalized so that $`|g|^2𝑑x𝑑y=1`$ and thus, from the equations above, $`|f|^2=\sigma `$.

To proceed, we consider two opposite limits, namely the weak-coupling limit and the Thomas-Fermi regime. The transition between the two limits occurs for $`\sigma _0a1/4`$ , where $`\sigma _0`$ is the value of $`\sigma `$ far away from the wave.

Weak-coupling limit. We first consider the weak coupling regime. Although this has traditionally been an academic limit, it is now possible to create Bose-Einstein condensates in cigar-shaped traps  which realize the weak-interaction limit. In this case $`|g|^2`$ has a Gaussian form, $`|g|^2=(\pi a_{}^2)^1e^{(\rho /a_{})^2}`$. As shown in Ref., $`f`$ satisfies the equation

$`i\mathrm{}_tf=(\mathrm{}^2/2m)_z^2f+\mathrm{}\omega _{}(1+2a|f|^2)f.`$ (2)
We see from this equation that $`fe^{i\omega _{}(1+2a\sigma _0)t}`$ as $`|z|\mathrm{}`$. Thus, we rewrite Eq. (2) using the variable $`w=fe^{i\omega _{}(1+2a\sigma _0)t}`$ to obtain

$`i\mathrm{}_tw=(\mathrm{}^2/2m)_z^2w+\mathrm{}\omega _{}2a(|w|^2\sigma _0)w.`$ (3)
Equation (3) has the standard (quadratic) nonlinear term and leads to a speed of sound, $`c_w`$, which satisfies the equation $`mc_w^2=2\mathrm{}\omega _{}\sigma _0a`$  \[see also Eq. (17).\] Since $`\sigma _0=n_0\pi a_{}^2`$, we see that $`mc_w^2=n_0U_0/2`$.

Writing $`w=\sqrt{\sigma }e^{i\varphi }`$ and separating the real and imaginary parts of Eq. (3), we obtain the two hydrodynamic equations

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\sigma }}{z}}\right)^2=\left(2\mathrm{}\omega _{}\sigma amu^2\right){\displaystyle \frac{(\sigma \sigma _0)^2}{2\sigma }},`$ (4)
$`v=u(1\sigma _0/\sigma ).`$ (5)
Here, we have imposed the boundary condition $`v0`$ for $`\sigma \sigma _0`$. The solution of Eq. (4) is

$`\sigma (z)/\sigma _01={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}^2\theta }{\mathrm{cosh}^2(z\mathrm{cos}\theta /\zeta )}},`$ (6)
where $`\theta =\mathrm{arcsin}(u/c_w)`$ and $`\zeta =2\xi (n_0)`$ with $`\xi (n_0)`$ equal to the coherence length for $`n_0=\sigma _0/(\pi a_{}^2)`$ (i.e., $`\zeta =a_{}/(2\sigma _0a)^{1/2}`$). The wavefunction $`w`$ can also be written as

$`w=\sqrt{\sigma _0}[i\mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{tanh}(z\mathrm{cos}\theta /\zeta )].`$ (7)
Energy and momentum of the solitary wave. In the limit of weak interactions, Eq. (3) implies that

$`={\displaystyle }({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}{\displaystyle \frac{w^{}}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}}+\mathrm{}\omega _{}a(ww^{})^22\mathrm{}\omega _{}a\sigma _0ww^{}`$ (8)
$`+\mathrm{}\omega _{}a\sigma _0^2)dz,`$ (9)
where the final term, which represents the energy of the background density of atoms, ensures convergence of the integral. Equation (9) can be written as

$`={\displaystyle }[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\sigma }}{z}}\right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2\sigma }{2m}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{z}}\right)^2`$ (10)
$`+\mathrm{}\omega _{}a(\sigma \sigma _0)^2]dz.`$ (11)
Since $`v=\mathrm{}_z\varphi /m`$, Eqs. (4) and (5) allow us to reduce Eq. (11) to the simpler form

$`=2\mathrm{}\omega _{}a{\displaystyle (\sigma \sigma _0)^2𝑑z}.`$ (12)
Given the solitary wave profile of Eq. (6), Eq. (12) yields

$`=(4\sqrt{2}/3)_0\mathrm{cos}^3\theta ,`$ (13)
where $`_0=\mathrm{}\omega _{}(\sigma _0a)^{1/2}\sigma _0a_{}`$.

Calculation of the momentum $`𝒫`$,

$`𝒫=i\mathrm{}{\displaystyle w^{}\frac{w}{z}𝑑z}=m{\displaystyle \sigma (z)v(z)𝑑z},`$ (14)
requires a more careful description of the solitary-wave profile for large $`|z|`$. This is most easily accomplished by requiring that the solitonic wavefunction is periodic on a large interval $`[L/2,+L/2]`$. The solution to this problem for all $`L`$ can be expressed analytically in terms of Jacobi elliptic functions . For our purposes, it is sufficient to note the behaviour of $`\sigma `$ and $`\varphi `$ in the limit of large $`L`$. For $`z𝒪(L^0)`$, $`\sigma `$ is still given by Eqs. (6) and (7). For positive $`u`$, Eq. (5) indicates that $`_z\varphi `$ is negative and that a net phase will accumulate as we move from the center of the solitary wave at $`z=0`$ towards $`z=+L/2`$. For $`z𝒪(L)`$, however, the periodic $`\sigma `$ approaches a constant value larger than $`\sigma _0`$ by an amount proportional to $`1/L`$. In this region, $`_z\varphi `$ is positive, the total phase accumulated between $`z=0`$ and $`+L/2`$ is precisely $`0`$, and the periodic boundary conditions are fulfilled. Evidently, this large-$`z`$ behaviour makes a finite contribution to the momentum in the $`L\mathrm{}`$ limit which is readily evaluated from Eq. (14). To leading order, the momentum can be evaluated using Eqs. (6) and (7) to obtain

$`𝒫=m{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}(\sigma \sigma _0)v(z)𝑑z=mu{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\sigma \sigma _0)^2}{\sigma }}𝑑z.`$ (15)
Using the order parameter of Eq. (7), we find that

$`𝒫=𝒫_0(\pi u/|u|2\theta \mathrm{sin}2\theta ),`$ (16)
where $`𝒫_0=\sigma _0\mathrm{}`$. The momentum $`𝒫`$ was also determined in Ref. using the macroscopic relation $`𝒫=u^1(/u)𝑑u`$. This yields a result identical to Eq. (16). Equation (16) implies that a maximum momentum of $`𝒫_{\mathrm{max}}=\pi \sigma _0\mathrm{}`$ is obtained for $`u=0`$. Note that, to leading order in $`1/L`$, the energy of Eq. (13) is unaltered by the imposition of periodic boundary conditions.

Combining Eqs. (13) and (16), we arrive at the dispersion relation $`(𝒫)`$ for the Lieb mode in the limit of weak interactions. The solid line of Fig. 1(a) shows this result. For $`𝒫0`$, $`=c_w𝒫`$, in agreement with the usual Bogoliubov dispersion relation discussed below. The Lieb mode terminates at $`𝒫=𝒫_{\mathrm{max}}`$ where it has an energy of $`/_0=4\sqrt{2}/3`$.

Bogoliubov mode in the weak interaction limit. Equation (3) implies that the Bogoliubov mode obeys the dispersion relation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{_0}}=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \frac{|𝒫|}{𝒫_0}}\sqrt{1+\left({\displaystyle \frac{𝒫}{𝒫_0}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _0a}{8}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{a_{}}{a}}\right)^2}.`$ (17)
Choosing $`\sigma _0a=0.1`$, $`a_{}=1`$ $`\mu `$m, and $`a=100`$ Å, the coefficient inside the square root is 125. This number is relatively large because the characteristic wavevector corresponding to $`𝒫_0`$, i.e., $`\sigma _0`$, is much larger than the inverse coherence length, $`\xi ^1(n_0)`$. Specifically, $`\xi ^1(n_0)(8\sigma _0a)^{1/2}/a_{}`$. Thus, $`\sigma _0\xi (n_0)a_{}(\sigma _0/a)^{1/2}10`$. The dotted line in Fig. 1(a) shows the dispersion relation of Eq. (17) for the above numbers.

The strong coupling limit. In the limit of strong interactions, $`n_0U_0\mathrm{}\omega _{}`$, we use the Thomas-Fermi approximation for the transverse profile, $`|g|^2=2(\pi R_{}^2)^1(1\rho ^2/R_{}^2)`$, with $`R_{}/a_{}=2(\sigma a)^{1/4}`$ . From Ref. we again see that $`w=fe^{2i\omega _{}(\sigma _0a)t}`$ satisfies the equation

$`i\mathrm{}_tw=(\mathrm{}^2/2m)_z^2w+2\mathrm{}\omega _{}a^{1/2}(|w||w_0|)w.`$ (18)
The effective equation obeyed by $`w`$ now involves a modified non-linear term proportional to $`|w|`$. Equation (18) implies a sound speed of $`mc_s^2=\mathrm{}\omega _{}(\sigma _0a)^{1/2}`$ (see also Eq. (26).\] Since $`n_0U_0=2\mathrm{}\omega _{}(\sigma _0a)^{1/2}`$, this becomes $`mc_s^2=n_0U_0/2`$ .

Using Eq. (18), we again write $`w=\sqrt{\sigma }e^{i\varphi }`$ and separate real and imaginary parts. The velocity is still given by Eq. (5). In addition, Eq. (18) implies that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\sigma }}{z}}\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\mathrm{}\omega _{}a^{1/2}(2\sigma ^{3/2}`$ $``$ $`3\sigma _0^{1/2}\sigma +\sigma _0^{3/2})`$ (19)
$``$ $`mu^2{\displaystyle \frac{(\sigma \sigma _0)^2}{2\sigma }}.`$ (20)
This equation provides a relation between $`u`$ and the minimum value of $`\sigma `$, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{min}}`$. For a given $`u`$, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{min}}`$ is given by the non-trivial root ($`\sigma \sigma _0`$) of the right side of Eq. (20).

Energy and momentum in the strong interaction limit. Using Eq. (15) we find that the momentum is given by

$`𝒫/𝒫_0=u/c_s{\displaystyle (y1)^2/y𝑑x},`$ (21)
where $`x=z(\sigma _0a)^{1/4}/a_{}`$ and $`y=\sigma /\sigma _0`$. Here, $`\sigma `$ is the solution of Eq. (20). In addition, Eq. (18) gives an energy

$`={\displaystyle }[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\sigma }}{z}}\right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma \mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{z}}\right)^2+`$ (22)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\mathrm{}\omega _{}a^{1/2}(2\sigma ^{3/2}3\sigma \sigma _0^{1/2}+\sigma _0^{3/2})]dz.`$ (23)
The final term in the integral again guarantees its convergence and corresponds to the energy of the background density.

Since $`v=\mathrm{}_z\varphi /m`$, Eq. (20) and the formula $`v=u(1\sigma _0/\sigma )`$ allow us to write Eq. (23) as

$`=(4/3)\mathrm{}\omega _{}a^{1/2}{\displaystyle (2\sigma ^{3/2}3\sigma \sigma _0^{1/2}+\sigma _0^{3/2})𝑑z}.`$ (24)
Introducing the unit of energy $`_0^{^{}}=\mathrm{}\omega _{}(\sigma _0a)^{1/4}\sigma _0a_{}`$,

$`/_0^{^{}}={\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}{\displaystyle (2y^{3/2}3y+1)𝑑x}.`$ (25)
We have solved Eq. (20) numerically to obtain $`\sigma (z)`$ for various values of $`u`$. This numerical solution was used in Eqs. (21) and (25) to determine $`𝒫(u)`$ and $`(u)`$, respectively. The solid line in Fig. 1(b) shows the resulting dispersion relation for the Lieb mode in the limit of strong interactions. The $`x`$ axis is measured in units of $`𝒫_0`$, and the $`y`$ axis is measured in units of $`_0^{^{}}`$. As in the case of weak interactions, the slope of the curve for small values of $`𝒫`$ is equal to $`c_s`$, and also the curve terminates at $`\pi 𝒫_0`$ with $`1.5_0^{^{}}`$.

Bogoliubov mode in the limit of strong interactions. Equation (18) implies that the dispersion relation associated with the Bogoliubov mode is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{_0^{^{}}}}={\displaystyle \frac{|𝒫|}{𝒫_0}}\sqrt{1+\left({\displaystyle \frac{𝒫}{𝒫_0}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(\sigma _0a)^{3/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{a_{}}{a}}\right)^2}.`$ (26)
For $`\sigma _0a=1`$, $`a_{}=1`$ $`\mu m`$, and $`a=100`$ Å, the coefficient inside the square root is $`2500`$, which is $`1`$, since the characteristic wavevector corresponding to $`𝒫_0`$, i.e., $`\sigma _0`$, is $``$ than $`\xi ^1(n_0)`$: $`\sigma _0\xi (n_0)\sigma _0a_{}/(\sigma _0a)^{1/4}`$. The dotted line in Fig. 1(b) shows the dispersion relation of Eq. (26) for this choice of parameters. Once again, the Lieb and the Bogoliubov modes have identical dispersion relations in the limit of long wavelength excitations, as expected.

The methods adopted here are expected to be reliable for weak interactions  for which the width of the solitary wave is much larger than the transverse width of the cloud. In this regime the transverse degrees of freedom are frozen out, and the behavior of the system is essentially one-dimensional. As the strength of the interaction is increased, it has been demonstrated in Ref.  that the dark solitary waves become unstable. (See also Ref. .) As shown in this reference, dark solitary waves in a cylindrical trap become unstable for $`n_0U_0/\mathrm{}\omega _{}2.4`$. Assuming that the system is in the Thomas-Fermi regime, $`\sigma _0/(\pi R_{}^2)=n_0/2`$, with $`R_{}^2=4a_{}^2(\sigma _0a)^{1/2}`$ , and therefore the corresponding critical value of $`\sigma _0a`$ is $`1.2^2=1.44`$. Thus, our approach should also provide a reasonable variational description of the dispersion relation in the strong interaction regime provided only that dark solitary waves are stable. In addition, we note that the Bogoliubov dispersion relation obtained here is in analytic agreement with numerical solutions  in the large and small momentum limits for both weak and strong interactions. Differences of only a few percent for intermediate momenta are found for $`\sigma _0a`$ as large as 1.

In summary, we have calculated the dispersion relation $`=(𝒫)`$ of a sound wave and of a solitary wave in a quasi one-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensate of atoms confined in a harmonic, cylindrical trap in the limits of weak and strong interactions. For solitary waves, in both limits the spectrum has the same qualitative behaviour: it is linear for long wavelength excitations and coincides with the Bogoliubov mode. For shorter wavelength excitations, it lies below the Bogoliubov mode, and it terminates at a maximum momentum for which the group velocity vanishes. We would like to thank N. Papanicolaou for pointing out the existence of the Lieb mode to us and for useful discussions. We also acknowledge profitable discussions with C. J. Pethick. G.M.K. was supported by the Swedish Research Council (VR), and by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (SSF). G.M.K. would like to thank the Physics Dept. of the Univ. of Crete for its hospitality.