text:
# Hydrodynamic stability in accretion disks under the combined influence of shear and density stratification

## 1 Introduction: The Solberg-Høiland criterion

Keplerian disks are, according to the Rayleigh criterion

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dj^2}{dR}}>0`$ (1)
with $`j=R^2\Omega `$ being the angular momentum per unit mass and the distance $`R`$ from the rotation axis, hydrodynamically stable configurations. They are unstable configurations, however, under the influence of a (weak) magnetic field if the disk plasma has a sufficiently high conductivity (Balbus & Hawley 1991; Balbus 1995; Brandenburg et al. 1995; Ziegler & Rüdiger 2000). The question has now been formulated whether also other, nonmagnetic influences exist which in combination with the basic (negative) shear $`d\Omega /dR`$ allow instabilities in the linear regime. We remember three recent discussions. Urpin & Brandenburg (1998) consider the destabilizing action of any vertical dependence of $`\Omega `$ on $`z`$ which may more than compensate the stabilization of the positive radial gradient of $`j`$.

There is also the suggestion of Klahr & Bodenheimer (2001) that the negative radial entropy stratification in thin Keplerian disks may act in the sense of a destabilization. Note that with the standard-alpha description of accretion disks one finds the positive value

$`{\displaystyle \frac{S}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{C_v}{R}},`$ (2)
indicating, however, stability. Finally Richard et al. (2001) and Brandenburg & Dintrans (2001) comment on the idea that the vertical gradient of the density which always dominates accretion disk stratifications in combination with positive $`j/R`$ may destabilize the disk in the hydrodynamic regime. The extensive numerical simulations in the local shearing box system have shown that Keplerian disks (without vertical gradient of the angular velocity) are completely stable to linear and nonlinear instabilities (Balbus et al. 1996).

Most of the mentioned discussions are covered by the Solberg-Høiland conditions for dynamic stability which, for the rotation studied here, take the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{j^2}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{C_p\rho }}pS>0,`$ (3)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{p}{z}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{j^2}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{S}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{j^2}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{S}{R}}\right)<0`$ (4)
(Tassoul 2000). If $`p/z<0`$ (as is usual for accretion disks), the latter relation turns into

$`{\displaystyle \frac{j^2}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{S}{z}}>{\displaystyle \frac{j^2}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{S}{R}},`$ (5)
which for Keplerian disks with $`\Omega =\Omega (R)R^{1.5}`$ simply leads to the usual Schwarzschild criterion

$`{\displaystyle \frac{S}{z}}>0`$ (6)
for stability. However, if the angular velocity $`\Omega `$ depends on the vertical coordinate $`z`$ then Eq. (5) allows instability in the standard case of positive $`j/R`$ and $`S/z`$ in case they are large enough.

Equation (3) becomes

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{j^2}{R}}+{\displaystyle \frac{g}{C_p}}{\displaystyle \frac{S}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho C_p}}{\displaystyle \frac{p}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{S}{R}}>0`$ (7)
which with (6) and for $`dS/dR>0`$ ensures stability. It was adopted that $`g_z=g=\Omega ^2z>0`$.

In the opposite case of a negative entropy gradient one at least needs

$`\left|{\displaystyle \frac{S}{R}}\right|>{\displaystyle \frac{\rho C_p\Omega ^2}{|p/R|}}`$ (8)
in order to violate Eq. (7) in the most optimistic case of vertical isentropy.

If, on the other hand, the standard stratifications of accretion disks are $`j=j(R)`$ and $`S=S(z)`$, with $`dj^2/dR>0`$ then the Solberg-Høiland criterion reduces to

$`1+{\displaystyle \frac{z}{C_p}}{\displaystyle \frac{dS}{dz}}>0,{\displaystyle \frac{dS}{dz}}>0.`$ (9)
(in the upper hemisphere). Obviously $`dS/dz>0`$ is a sufficient condition for stability of Kepler disks after the Solberg-Høiland criterion also for the combined action of vertical density stratification and differential Kepler rotation. The same result have been derived in earlier papers by Livio & Shaviv (1977), Abramowicz et al. (1984) and Elstner et al. (1989). The local analysis for ring-like disturbances by Elstner et al. demonstrates in all details that in the framework of an ideal hydrodynamics, i.e. for vanishing Shakura-Sunyaev alpha, the traditional Schwarzschild criterion $`dS/dz>0`$ ensures stability for the Kepler disk. If the disk can be considered as isothermal in the vertical direction then it follows

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dS}{dz}}={\displaystyle \frac{}{\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{log}\rho }{dz}}`$ (10)
which is always positive for the typical density stratification, i.e. the disk should always be stable.

## 2 Combined stability conditions

In this Section a local stability analysis of the equations of ideal hydrodynamics in cylindrical coordinates ($`R,\varphi ,z`$) is presented. Sound waves and nonaxisymmetric disturbances are in particular allowed to exist.

The three components of the momentum equation are

$`{\displaystyle \frac{u_R}{t}}+u_R{\displaystyle \frac{u_R}{R}}+{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{u_R}{\varphi }}+u_z{\displaystyle \frac{u_R}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi ^2}{R}}=`$ (11)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{p}{R}}+g_R,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{t}}+u_R{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{R}}+{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{\varphi }}+u_z{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{z}}+{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi u_R}{R}}=`$ (12)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho R}}{\displaystyle \frac{p}{\varphi }}+g_\varphi ,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{u_z}{t}}+u_R{\displaystyle \frac{u_z}{R}}+{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{u_z}{\varphi }}+u_z{\displaystyle \frac{u_z}{z}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{p}{z}}+g_z.`$ (13)
The mass conservation reads

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{}{R}}(\rho u_R)+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho u_R}{R}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\varphi }}(\rho u_\varphi )+{\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}(\rho u_z)=0`$ (14)
and the energy equation is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{S}{t}}+u_R{\displaystyle \frac{S}{R}}+{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{S}{\varphi }}+u_z{\displaystyle \frac{S}{z}}=0.`$ (15)
As usual $`\rho `$ is the density, $`p`$ is the pressure, $`S`$ is the specific entropy, $`𝒈`$ is the vector of any acceleration. The unperturbed state is assumed to be $`u_{R,0}=u_{z,0}=0`$, $`u_{\varphi ,0}=R\Omega (R,z)`$, $`\rho _0=\rho _0(R,z)`$, $`p_0=p_0(R,z)`$, $`S_0=S_0(R,z)`$, $`g_R=g_R(R,z)`$, $`g_\varphi =0`$, $`g_z=g_z(R,z)`$. The only non-zero equations of the system (11)-(15) are equations (11) and (13) which take the form

$`g_R={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{R}}R\Omega ^2,g_z={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}.`$ (16)
Finally, the ideal gas equation of state is used $`p=/\mu \rho T`$, $`dS=C_vd\mathrm{log}(p\rho ^\gamma )`$ with $`C_v`$ as the specific heat at constant volume, and $`\gamma =C_p/C_v=5/3`$.

### 2.1 Linearized equations

The perturbations in the force are neglected. The perturbations $`u_R,u_\varphi ,u_z,\rho _1,p_1`$ to the basic state are assumed small and the linearized system (11)-(15) is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{u_R}{t}}+\Omega {\displaystyle \frac{u_R}{\varphi }}2\Omega u_\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_1}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1}{\rho _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{R}}=0,`$ (17)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{R}}(R^2\Omega )u_R+\Omega {\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{\varphi }}+R{\displaystyle \frac{\Omega }{z}}u_z+`$ (18)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0R}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_1}{\varphi }}=0,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{u_z}{t}}+\Omega {\displaystyle \frac{u_z}{\varphi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_1}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1}{\rho _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}=0,`$ (19)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1}{t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{u_R}{R}}+{\displaystyle \frac{u_R}{R}}+{\displaystyle \frac{u_z}{z}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{\varphi }}+`$ (20)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\Omega }{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1}{\varphi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}\rho _0}{R}}u_R+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}\rho _0}{z}}u_z=0,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{S_1}{t}}+\Omega {\displaystyle \frac{S_1}{\varphi }}+u_R{\displaystyle \frac{S_0}{R}}+u_z{\displaystyle \frac{S_0}{z}}=0.`$ (21)
In the frame of our local approximation the equations are considered only in small volume near some reference point ($`R_0,\varphi _0,z_0`$). The coefficients in the equations are thus constant taken at ($`R_0,\varphi _0,z_0`$). As usual both the short-wave approximation and the small-$`m`$ approximation, i.e.

$`|k_RR|m,|k_zz|m`$ (22)
are applied (cf. Meinel 1983). In this approximation all perturbations can be expressed by the modal representation $`\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{i}(k_RR+m\varphi +k_zz\omega t)]`$ and the equations take the final form

$`\mathrm{i}(\omega m\Omega )u_R2\Omega u_\varphi +\mathrm{i}k_R{\displaystyle \frac{p_1}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1}{\rho _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{R}}=0,`$ (23)
$`\mathrm{i}(\omega m\Omega )u_\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{R}}(R^2\Omega )u_R+R{\displaystyle \frac{\Omega }{z}}u_z=0,`$ (24)
$`\mathrm{i}(\omega m\Omega )u_z+\mathrm{i}k_z{\displaystyle \frac{p_1}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1}{\rho _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}=0,`$ (25)
$`\mathrm{i}(\omega m\Omega ){\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1}{\rho _0}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}\rho _0}{R}}u_R+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}\rho _0}{z}}u_z+`$ (26)
$`+\mathrm{i}k_Ru_R+\mathrm{i}k_zu_z=0,`$
$`\mathrm{i}(\omega m\Omega )\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_1}{p_0}}\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1}{\rho _0}}\right)+`$ (27)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{C_v}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{S_0}{R}}u_R+{\displaystyle \frac{S_0}{z}}u_z\right)=0.`$
Generally, it is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{C_v}}{\displaystyle \frac{S_0}{R}}={\displaystyle \frac{}{R}}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{\rho _0^\gamma }}\right),{\displaystyle \frac{1}{C_v}}{\displaystyle \frac{S_0}{z}}={\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{\rho _0^\gamma }}\right).`$ (28)
The epicyclic frequency $`\kappa `$ and the adiabatic sound speed $`c_{\mathrm{ac}}`$ are

$`\kappa ^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{R^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{j^2}{R}},c_{\mathrm{ac}}^2=\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{\rho _0}}.`$ (29)
The determinant of the above homogeneous fifth order system must vanish and the resulting dispersion relation is

$`(\omega m\Omega )D=0`$ (30)
with

$`D=(\omega m\Omega )^42E(\omega m\Omega )^2+F.`$ (31)
Here we have introduced the expressions

$`E={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[(k_R^2+k_z^2)c_{\mathrm{ac}}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{R}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{z}}+\kappa ^2\right]`$
(32)
and

$`F=({\displaystyle \frac{k_R}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{k_z}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{R}})`$
$`({\displaystyle \frac{k_Rc_{\mathrm{ac}}^2}{\gamma }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{\rho _0^\gamma }}\right){\displaystyle \frac{k_zc_{\mathrm{ac}}^2}{\gamma }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{R}}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{\rho _0^\gamma }}\right)+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{i}}{\rho _0^2}}({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{z}}))+\kappa ^2(k_z^2c_{\mathrm{ac}}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{z}})`$
$`R{\displaystyle \frac{\Omega ^2}{z}}\left(k_Rk_zc_{\mathrm{ac}}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{R}}+\mathrm{i}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k_R}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{k_z}{\rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{R}}\right)\right).`$
(33)
For axisymmetric modes we simply have to replace $`\omega m\Omega `$ by $`\omega `$. This procedure influences the frequencies rather than the stability.

The stability of axisymmetric and nonaxisymmetric perturbations is thus defined by the same stability criterion in the approximation used. The first factor in (30) describes the waves with $`\omega =m\Omega `$ and will not be considered below. The stability is defined by the factor $`D`$. The roots of $`D`$ are

$`(\omega m\Omega )^2=E\pm \sqrt{E^2F}.`$ (34)
According to (32) the coefficient $`E`$ is real. The flow is thus always unstable for negative $`E`$ and complex $`F`$. Positive $`E`$ and real $`F`$ are, therefore, the necessary conditions for stability. According to (33), $`F`$ is real if and only if

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{z}}\right)R{\displaystyle \frac{\Omega ^2}{z}}=0.`$ (35)
Inserting (35) in (16), we find

$`{\displaystyle \frac{g_R}{z}}={\displaystyle \frac{g_z}{R}}`$ (36)
as the immediate consequence. Without forces this relation is always fulfilled. Any conservative force is a particular solution of (36). If – as it is in accretion disks – the gravity balances the pressure and the centrifugal force, then Eq. (35) is automatically fulfilled. Note that after the Poincare theorem for rotating media with potential force and $`\Omega =\Omega (R)`$ both the density and the pressure can be written as functions of the generalized potential so that (35) is always fulfilled.

Generally, the magnetic field is not conservative and can never fulfill the condition (36). This is the basic explanation for the existence of the magnetorotational instability which is driven by (weak) magnetic fields.

### 2.2 Sufficient conditions for stability

Now we can suppose that the necessary condition (35) is fulfilled.

The flow is stable if both roots in (34) are real and positive. The sufficient conditions for stability are therefore

$`E>0,0<F<E^2.`$ (37)
Inserting (35) into (33) we find $`F`$ to be positive if

$`{\displaystyle \frac{k_R^2}{k_z^2}}N_z^2+{\displaystyle \frac{k_R}{k_z}}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\gamma \rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{R}}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{\rho _0^\gamma }}\right)+N_R^2+\kappa ^2+`$ (38)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k_z^2c_{\mathrm{ac}}^2\rho _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}\left(\kappa ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{z}}R{\displaystyle \frac{\Omega ^2}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{R}}\right)>0,`$
where

$`N_z^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\gamma \rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{\rho _0^\gamma }}\right)`$ (39)
and

$`N_R^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\gamma \rho _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{R}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{R}}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{\rho _0^\gamma }}\right)`$ (40)
are components of the Brunt-Väisälä frequency. In our short-wave approximation (see (22)) we can neglect the last term in the left-hand side of (38). The expression (38) is thus a simple quadratic expression in $`k_R/k_z`$. Two conditions will ensure its positivity: i) the expression is positive for some value $`k_R/k_z`$ and ii) the expression has no real roots i.e. the discriminant is negative. The first condition is fulfilled if

$`N_R^2+N_z^2+\kappa ^2>0.`$ (41)
This is the Schwarzschild criterion for stability under the presence of rotation. The second condition leads to

$`{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}\left(\kappa ^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{\rho _0^\gamma }}\right)R{\displaystyle \frac{\Omega ^2}{z}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{R}}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{\rho _0^\gamma }}\right)\right)<0.`$ (42)
Equations (41) and (42) are exactly equivalent to the Solberg-Høiland conditions (3) and (4).

The Schwarzschild criterion (41) ensures that $`E>0`$ and the short-wave approximation ensures that $`F<E^2`$ and these relations do not yield any additional conditions.

The Solberg-Høiland conditions (3) and (4) can also be obtained in the Boussinesq approximation. Goldreich & Schubert (1967) have already formulated the dispersion relation within the frame of the Boussinesq approximation. Nevertheless, our more general consideration allows to find the new necessary condition for stability (35).

### 2.3 Limiting cases

Let us consider two interesting limiting cases. Without rotation the Schwarzschild criterion (3) takes the form

$`N_R^2+N_z^2>0,`$ (43)
where $`N_R`$ and $`N_z`$ are given by (39) and (40). The stratification is thus always stable if $`p_0`$ and $`S_0`$ have opposite stratifications – which indeed is the standard case. Nevertheless, Eq. (43) allows the stability also for the case when $`p_0`$ and $`S_0`$ have the same stratifications in one direction and opposite stratifications in another. Note, that according to (43) the situation with pressure stratification without any density stratification is always unstable.

Without density stratification the sufficient stability condition (3) for a rotating flow is

$`\kappa ^2>{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0^2c_{\mathrm{ac}}^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{R}}\right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _0^2c_{\mathrm{ac}}^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{z}}\right)^2.`$ (44)
This is the classical Rayleigh criterion (1) for stability generalized to the compressible case. Obviously, the right-hand side is positive and the criterion (44) is more restrictive than the standard one.

## 3 Numerical simulations

The main shortcoming in our presentation is the short-wave assumption (22) under which all the above considerations are only valid. Without this assumption, Fourier modes are no longer solutions of the linearized equations and we have to switch to much more complicated mathematics involving integral equations (see Rüdiger & Kitchatinov 2000). We prefer to present numerical simulations for the stability of (isothermal) density-stratified Keplerian disks under the influence of finite disturbances. Along this way also finite-amplitude disturbances can be considered within the frame of a nonideal hydrodynamics.

The above analytical study has shown that stratified disks are stable; under the assumption of a small scale in perturbations compared with the disk dimensions. We present a few numerical integrations of the hydrodynamic equations for the unrestricted case. The computations are based on the work of Arlt & Rüdiger (2001) which required a stable, stratified Keplerian disk as a prerequisite. We adapt these simulations with adiabatic evolution and relatively strong nonaxisymmetric perturbations.

The setup for our three-dimensional simulations applies a global, cylindrical computational domain with full azimuthal range, dimensionless radii from 4 to 6, and a vertical extent of 2 density scale heights on average, which is $`1`$ to $`+1`$ in dimensionless units. The ZEUS-3D code (developed by Stone & Norman 1992a,b; Stone et al. 1992) was used for the integration of the hydrodynamics. The modifications to the code are very close to those given in Arlt & Rüdiger (2001); the induction equation is naturally not integrated here.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{t}}+\mathrm{div}(\rho 𝒖)=0,`$ (45)
$`\rho {\displaystyle \frac{𝒖}{t}}+\rho (𝒖)𝒖=p+\rho 𝒈,`$ (46)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{t}}+\mathrm{div}(e𝒖)=p\mathrm{div}𝒖,`$ (47)
where $`𝒖`$, $`\rho `$, $`e`$, and $`p`$ have the usual meanings of velocity, density, energy density, and pressure. The source of gravitation is that of a point mass $`M=10^5`$ at $`R=0`$. The simulation does not include self-gravity in the disk. The polytrophic exponent is $`\gamma =5/3`$. The original ZEUS code provides artificial viscosities for improved shock evolution; we have put these terms to zero here. The advection interpolation is the second order van-Leer scheme.

The conditions for the vertical boundaries are stress-free; no matter can exit the computational domain in vertical direction and the vertical derivatives of $`u_R`$ and $`u_\varphi `$ vanish. The radial boundaries are also closed for the flow, and the radial derivative of $`u_z`$ vanishes. For the azimuthal flow, we have to adopt a modified boundary condition though. A Keplerian rotation profile is maintained into the boundary zones, based on the last zone of the integration domain. If the first azimuthal velocity of the computational domain is denoted by $`u_\varphi ^{(1)}`$, we use

$`u_\varphi ^{(0)}`$ $`=`$ $`u_\varphi ^{(1)}\sqrt{R^{(1)}/R^{(0)}}`$ (48)
$`u_\varphi ^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`u_\varphi ^{(1)}\sqrt{R^{(1)}/R^{(1)}.}`$ (49)
The outer radial boundary is treated accordingly for $`u_\varphi ^{(n+1)}`$ and $`u_\varphi ^{(n+2)}`$. The azimuthal boundary conditions are periodic.

A rough representation of a stratified disk with radius-independent density scale-height, was used for the initial conditions. We leave this configuration for free development under the influence of the gravitational potential. The initial conditions also involve a non-axisymmetric velocity perturbation of the form

$`u_z`$ $`=`$ $`A\mathrm{sin}m\varphi ,`$ (50)
$`u_R`$ $`=`$ $`A\mathrm{cos}(m+1)\varphi .`$ (51)
The amplitude $`A`$ is – in terms of the Keplerian velocity in the middle of the annulus, $`U_\mathrm{K}`$ – about $`710^4U_\mathrm{K}`$. We have run two models with $`m=1`$ and different resolutions and an additional integration with $`m=10`$ in order to test short-wave perturbations. The models are summarized in Table 1. The initial configuration is isothermal with an energy density of

$$e=\frac{1}{\gamma (\gamma 1)}\rho c_{\mathrm{ac}}^2,$$
(52)
where the sound speed $`c_{\mathrm{ac}}`$ is 7% of the Keplerian velocity $`U_\mathrm{K}`$, and the polytrope exponent is $`\gamma =5/3`$.

Figure 1 shows the evolution of the directional kinetic energies for the $`z`$\- and $`r`$-components. A gradual decay of fluid motion is observed. Velocity fluctuations can also be measured in terms of the correlation tensor element $`Q_{R\varphi }`$ which is non-dimensionalized with the average pressure giving the Shakura-Sunyaev parameter $`\alpha _{\mathrm{SS}}`$ (cf. Arlt & Rüdiger 2001). Figure 2 shows the evolution of $`\alpha _{\mathrm{SS}}`$ during 30 rotation periods at the inner disk radius. A clear relaxation of the flow is seen. The initially strong velocity fluctuations settle the correct density stratification for the gravitational potential of the point mass (central star). The fluctuations in vertical direction reach $`\pm 14`$% of the Keplerian velocity $`U_\mathrm{K}`$. Those in the radial direction even reach $`27`$%. They are thus not small at all, and even a nonlinear instability might be noticed if existing.

We can read an approximate decay time $`\tau _\mathrm{D}`$ from Fig. 1. On average, it amounts to about 20 orbital periods or $`\tau _\mathrm{D}=3.18`$ in non-dimensional units. As the main relaxation motions are vertical, we use the density scale-height for the length scale and obtain a viscosity of 0.03 caused by the finite resolution of the numerical grid. In terms if Reynolds numbers, we achieve

$$\mathrm{Re}=\frac{U_{\mathrm{in}}\tau _\mathrm{D}}{H_\rho }=1520$$
(53)
near the inner edge of the annulus where the Keplerian velocity is $`U_{\mathrm{in}}=158`$. The density-scale height at the inner edge is $`H_\rho =0.33`$ in the initial configuration.

A second run with significantly higher resolution – in vertical direction in particular – is shown in Fig. 3. No change in the decaying nature of the perturbation is found.

An increase in azimuthal wave number of the perturbation does not provide instability either. Figure 4 is the result of a simulation with a perturbation of very high wave number, $`u_r=A\mathrm{sin}200\varphi `$, $`u_z=A\mathrm{cos}201\varphi `$, and doubled azimuthal resolution. The gas again settles towards an equilibrium state and very low kinetic energies in the radial and vertical components.

## 4 Conclusions

We have shown in Section 1 that the Solberg-Høiland conditions (3) and (4) answer the question whether the combined action of stable (radial) shear and stable (vertical) density stratification can produce a new instability. The clear answer is No, but uncertainties remain about validity of the Solberg-Høiland criterion for the case of nonaxisymmetric disturbances of the compressible accretion disk material. Indeed, in Section 2 we were able to reproduce the Solberg-Høiland criterion in the well-known formulation but only with a short-wave approximation and a small-$`m`$ approximation applied formulated in (22).

Sound waves have been included into the consideration. Our dispersion relation (31) is of fourth order contrary to the dispersion relation of second order resulting in the Boussinesq approximation (Goldreich & Schubert 1967) and contrary to the dispersion relation of fifth order resulting in nonideal hydrodynamics (Abramowicz et al. 1984, 1990). Along this way a new necessary condition for stability results which requires the external force which balances pressure and centrifugal force to be a conservative one, i.e. to possess a potential (cf. (35)).

It is interesting to note that in the Boussinesq approximation for nonideal fluids the Solberg-Høiland criterion changes to the Goldreich-Schubert-Fricke criterion (Goldreich & Schubert 1967; Smith & Fricke 1975; Urpin & Brandenburg 1998) which no longer allows the existence of a vertical shear for stability, i.e. $`\Omega /z=0`$. And, indeed, even in thin accretion disks there is always such a (weak) vertical shear $`\Omega /z`$ the meaning of which remains open. We have thus numerically simulated the stability of such accretion disks using the ZEUS-3D code. The numerical integration of the nonlinear adiabatic equations of the fully compressible hydrodynamics with initially nonaxisymmetric velocity perturbations does not lead to the onset of instability although the disk, of course, does possess a small vertical shear. An overview about the simulated configurations can be found in Table 1 which shows that we indeed have also considered very high values of the azimuthal “quantum” number $`m`$ which do not fulfill the short-wave condition (22).

Based on our numerical simulations, we thus cannot support findings about a fast, hydrodynamic instability in stratified disk flows. Similar simulations including magnetic fields showed the magneto-rotational instability with growth rates near $`0.5P_{\mathrm{orb}}^1`$. Our hydrodynamic runs cover 30–50 orbits of the inner disk and show only decay in velocity fluctuations. Angular momentum transport hovers at $`\alpha _{\mathrm{SS}}\stackrel{<}{}\pm 10^6`$; the temporal average in Fig. 2 is $`510^8`$.


format: text

text:
# On the Strong Coupling Dynamics of heterotic string theory on 𝐶³/𝑍₃

## 1 Introduction

Recently, models of 5D space-time bounded by two end-of the world branes attracted attention both as a laboratory for the phenomenology of elementary particle physics as well as of novel cosmological scenarios. A class of such models is inspired by compactifications of the Horava Witten (HW) M-theory . The understanding of the underlying 5D bulk physics is thus a key ingredient for the study of such models.

It turns out, however, that these 5D bulk theories associated with orbifold compactifications, are generally not well understood. This situation is demonstrated by the following puzzle. Consider the HW duals of the 6d $`T^4/Z_N`$ heterotic orbifolds. In this case there is a localized gauge symmetry $`G_1E_8`$ on one of the 6D end-of-the-world branes, and $`G_2E_8`$ on the other one. Generically the heterotic spectrum includes massless twisted particles that seem to be charged under both $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$. The puzzle is how to account for these states in the HW picture. The resolution of the puzzle follows the realization that in fact there is also a non-perturbative 7D bulk gauge theory $`G_{bulk}`$ associated with the $`A_{N1}`$ singularity of the corresponding ALE space. The twisted states are in fact charged under say $`G_2`$ and $`G_{bulk}`$  and not under $`G_2`$ and $`G_1`$. Proving the consistency of this scenario, namely, that there is a full anomaly cancellation of local symmetries, requires assigning particular boundary conditions to the 6d vector and hyper multiplets associated with the 7D vector multiplet. These boundary conditions, which seem to be quite ad hoc in the HW picture, turn out to be very natural when a duality with type I’ string is invoked . In the type I’ picture the twisted states can be traced back to strings associated with brane junctions that involve $`D6`$ branes, $`D8`$ branes $`O_8`$ orientifold planes and $`NS5`$ branes.

When analyzing the HW duals of 4D heterotic orbifold models, namely, compactifications on $`T^6/Z_N`$ one faces a similar puzzle. Again there are massless twisted states that are charged under both $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$. However, since the geometry at the vicinity of the fixed points is now $`R^6/Z_N`$, which is not associated with an $`A_{N1}`$ singularity but rather with a strongly coupled $`E_0`$ theory , there is no room for a non-abelian non-perturbative 5D gauge symmetry. Thus, the mechanism that resolves the puzzle has to be of a different origin.

The goal of this paper is to explore the duality between the heterotic theory on the $`T^6/Z_3`$ orbifold compactification and M-theory on $`(S_1/Z_2)\times (T^6/Z_3)`$. In particular we would like to account for the twisted mixed states.

The compactification of M-theory on $`C^3/Z_3`$ was intensively explored . The corresponding low energy field theory is the “mysterious” $`E_0`$  theory which is a strongly coupled 5D CFT with 8 supersymmetries and a one dimensional Coulomb branch. The $`E_0`$ theory has been explored using various different techniques including non-trivial fixed points of the renormalization flow of 5D supersymmetric theories , collapse of de Pezzo surfaces in Calabi-Yau compactifications  and type I’ string theories. In spite of these study efforts and due to its strongly coupled nature, the $`E_0`$ theory is still not well understood.

Even though the full description of the $`E_0`$ theory is lacking, partial results, based on educated guesses, about the low energy description of the compactified theory can be obtained. This is similar to the situation with the 6D $`(2,0)`$ theory where after compactification on $`T^2`$, the low-energy description of the theory is given by the $`N=4`$ Super-Yang-Mills field theory. This field theory is interacting and is believed to correctly describe all excitations as long as their energy is much lower than the compactification scale.

In this paper we study the compactification of the $`E_0`$ theory on the segment, $`S^1/Z_2`$, with certain boundary conditions that preserve $`N=1`$ supersymmetry in 4D. We will propose a Lagrangian that (presumably) describes the low energy excitations at a scale below the compactification scale.

The motivation for this Lagrangian comes from the study of the strong coupling dynamics of the heterotic string theory on the orbifolds $`T^6/Z_3`$ and $`C^3/Z_3`$. The notation $`C^3/Z_3`$ and $`T^6/Z_3`$ is somewhat ambivalent because there are several ways to specify the action of $`Z_3`$ on the $`E_8`$ gauge degrees of freedom. In this paper we concentrate mainly on the orbifolds that break the $`E_8\times E_8`$ gauge group down to $`SU(3)\times E_6\times SU(3)\times E_6`$. We assume that the volume of $`T^6/Z_3`$ is large so that worldsheet instantons can be neglected. We analyze the moduli space of these orbifolds from the heterotic string and the low energy supergravity pictures. We discuss the local anomaly cancellation in the various scenarios.

The paper is organized as follows. The moduli space of the $`T^6/Z_3`$ orbifold is discussed in section 2 from the heterotic theory point of view. We start with a brief description of the model, its spectrum, superpotential and D- term. We then analyze the F-term flatness condition for the $`R^6/Z_3`$ case, and this condition combined with the D-term flatness for the compact case. We show that the moduli space for the non-compact case is a blow-down at the zero section of a certain line bundle over $`P^2\times P^2`$. Section 3 is devoted to a brief reminder of the geometry of the blow-up of the fixed point of the $`C^3/Z_3`$ orbifold. In particular the metric, complex structure and the Euler number are written down. The moduli space is then reproduced from the supergravity description in the large blow-up limit. For completeness, we discuss gauge instantons for our model as well as the other $`T^6/Z_3`$ orbifolds. The strong coupling limit as inferred from the Horava Witten dual theory is the topic of section 6. We identify the two scales in the systems, namely, the compactification scale and the scale of the expectation value of the scalar field. We write down the $`N=1`$ supersymmetric 5d $`E_0`$ theory in terms of a 4D $`N=1`$ chiral and vector superfields. We then compactify this theory on $`S^1/Z_2`$ first in the limit of an expectation value which is much larger than the inverse of the compactification scale. In this regime we reduce the 11D HW supergravity to that of a 5D theory in the form of a non-linear sigma model. We then rewrite it in terms of a linear sigma model and determine the relations between the linear an non-linear descriptions. We then conjecture about the theory in the opposite regime where the compactification scale is larger than the inverse of the expectation value of the scalar field. Section 6 is devoted to a discussion of the anomaly cancellation in both the compact and non compact cases. In the former case the cancellation is between the contribution of the twisted states and that of the untwisted states after division by the number of fixed points. In the latter case the integration over the zero mode of the orbifold operation results in an identical division. In section 7 we summarize our results and state several open questions.

## 2 The moduli space from heterotic string theory

### 2.1 The model

The model is the heterotic string on a $`T^6/Z_3`$ orbifold. The $`T^6`$ is of the form $`T^2\times T^2\times T^2`$ where each $`T^2`$ is a quotient of the complex plane with the root lattice of $`SU(3)`$, namely, $`T^2=\frac{C}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{SU(3)}}`$. The tori are characterized by the identifications $`z_iz_i+1`$ and $`z_iz_i+e^{\pi i/3}`$ where $`i=1,2,3`$ and admit a $`Z_3`$ generated by the transformations

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_1:z_i\alpha (z_i)e^{2\pi r_i/3}z_i;r_i=(1,1,2)$$
(1)
There are 27 fixed points of the $`\alpha _i`$ at $`z_i=0,z_i=1/\sqrt{3}e^{\pi i/6},z_i=2/\sqrt{3}e^{\pi i/6}`$.

In addition to the vector $`r_i`$ the orbifolding operation is characterized also by its shift vector $`s_K`$, $`k=1,\mathrm{}16`$ defined by the transformation of the 16 complex left-moving fermions

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_2:\lambda ^{K\pm }e^{\pm \frac{2\pi is_K}{3}}\lambda ^{K\pm }$$
(2)
Then we define $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }_1\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ to be the generator of the $`Z_3`$ orbifold. The shift vector associated with the current model $`s_K=(1,12,0^5;1,1,2,0^5)`$, implies the breaking of each $`E_8`$ factor down to $`E_6\times SU(3)`$ (for more details see appendix A).

### 2.2 The spectrum, superpotential and D-term

The spectrum of the model contains the untwisted states

$$3(3,27,1,1)3(1,1,3,27)9moduli$$
(3)
and the twisted states

$$27(\overline{3},1,\overline{3},1)$$
(4)
where the decomposition is under $`SU(3)\times E_6\times SU(3)\times E_6`$. (In Appendix A the spectra of the other $`T^6/Z_3`$ models is presented).

Let $`A=1\mathrm{}27`$ be a label of the fixed-point of $`Z_3`$ inside $`T_6/Z_3`$. Near such a fixed point the space looks like $`R^6/Z_3`$. We have one chiral field, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_A`$, in the $`(\overline{3},1,\overline{3},1)`$ localized around each fixed point. The moduli space is determined by the F-term and D-term conditions. The F-term comes from the superpotential:

$$W(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Phi }_{27})=\underset{A}{}det\mathrm{\Phi }_A,$$

where we think of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_A`$ as a $`3\times 3`$ matrix. The D-term conditions are:

$$g_{YM}^2\text{tr}\underset{A}{}\mathrm{\Phi }_A^{}\tau ^a\mathrm{\Phi }_A=0,g_{YM}^2\text{tr}\underset{A}{}\mathrm{\Phi }_A\tau ^a\mathrm{\Phi }_A^{}=0,a=1\mathrm{}8,$$

where $`\tau ^a`$ is a generator of $`SU(3)`$ (taken as a $`3\times 3`$ matrix) and $`g_{YM}^2`$ is the 4D $`E_8`$ coupling constant. It is given by the 10D coupling constant divided by the volume of $`T^6/Z_3`$.

### 2.3 The F-term for the orbifold $`R^6/Z_3`$

Most of the nontrivial dynamics is localized at the fixed points. So we analyze $`R^6/Z_3`$ first. Since the volume of $`R^6`$ is infinite we can set $`g_{YM}=0`$ and forget about the D-terms. There is only one $`3\times 3`$ field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ with superpotential $`Wdet\mathrm{\Phi }`$. The F-term constraints are $`W^{}=0`$ where $`W^{}`$ is the matrix of $`2\times 2`$ minors of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. Thus, the F-term constraints imply that the rank of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is at most $`1`$. We can therefore write $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ as:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=uv^T,$$
(5)
where $`u`$ is a vector in the $`(\overline{3},1)`$ of $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ and $`v`$ is a vector in the $`(1,\overline{3})`$. $`u`$ breaks the left $`SU(3)`$ down to $`SU(2)`$ and $`v`$ does the same to the right $`SU(3)`$ so altogether we are left with $`SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$ where $`U(1)`$ acts as:

$$ue^{i\theta }u,ve^{i\theta }v.$$
(6)
### 2.4 The F-term and D-term for the orbifold $`T^6/Z_3`$

Moving back to $`T^6/Z_3`$, we solve the individual F-term constraints and find that each $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can be written as $`\mathrm{\Phi }_A=u_Av_A^T`$ ($`A=1\mathrm{}27`$). The D-term constraints imply

$$0=\underset{A}{}(u_A^{}u_A)(v_A^{}\tau ^av_A)=\underset{A}{}(v_A^{}v_A)(u_A^{}\tau ^au_A),a=1\mathrm{}8$$

This can only be satisfied if

$$\underset{A}{}(v_A^{}v_A)u_Au_A^{}=\underset{A}{}(u_A^{}u_A)v_Av_A^{}=cI.$$

In particular, unless all of the $`u_A`$’s and $`v_A`$’s are zero, we need at least 3 different $`A`$’s with nonzero $`u_A`$ and $`v_A`$. This is because the matrix $`u_Au_A^{}`$ is of rank $`1`$ and the sum of 2 matrices of rank $`1`$ can never be $`cI`$ (i.e. of rank $`0`$) for $`c0`$.

Note that $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }_1,\mathrm{\Lambda }_2)SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ act as

$$u_A\mathrm{\Lambda }_1^{}u_A,v_A\mathrm{\Lambda }_2v_A.$$

If exactly 3 $`A`$’s have nonzero $`\mathrm{\Phi }_A`$’s (say $`A=1,2,3`$) then we can use the $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ gauge freedom to turn the $`u_A`$’s and $`v_A`$ into the following form:

$$u_1=v_1=\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\\ 0\end{array}\right),u_2=v_2=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\\ 0\end{array}\right),u_3=v_3=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 0\\ 1\end{array}\right).$$

In this case $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2,\mathrm{\Phi }_3`$ are all diagonal and the unbroken symmetry is $`U(1)^2`$. If $`l>3`$ in general, all of the $`SU(3)^2`$ will be broken.

### 2.5 The moduli space for $`R^6/Z_3`$

We have seen that the moduli space for the case of $`R^6/Z_3`$ is the moduli space of all $`3\times 3`$ matrices of rank $`1`$. we can parameterize it as follows. Take $`\mathrm{\Phi }=uv^T`$ as before. $`u`$ and $`v`$ are not uniquely defined because we can change $`u\lambda u`$ and at the same time $`v\lambda ^1v`$. If $`\mathrm{\Phi }0`$ then neither $`u`$ nor $`v`$ are zero. The equivalence relation $`u\lambda u`$ (for $`\lambda C`$) defines a point on $`P^2`$ that we will denote by $`[u]`$. Similarly $`v`$ defines a point $`[v]`$ in $`P^2`$. For fixed $`[u]`$ and $`[v]`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ has one more complex degree of freedom which is the overall scale and we denote it by $`e^\sigma `$ (for $`\sigma C`$). As $`\sigma `$ varies, $`e^\sigma `$ spans a plane (complex line) which is fibered over $`P^2\times P^2`$. Let $`_1`$ ($`_2`$) be the universal line bundle over the first (second) $`P^2`$. Then,

The moduli space is the blow-down of

$`_1_2`$ over $`P^2\times P^2`$ at the zero section.

We wish to understand how this moduli space can be interpreted in the limit of small curvature and small gauge field strengths. In this case the moduli space is understood as the moduli space of the deformation of the geometry into a nonsingular space and a nonsingular instanton configuration. The space $`R^6/Z_3`$ can be deformed into a smooth space with the singularity at the origin replaced by $`P^2`$. Our goal is to argue that $`e^\sigma `$ parameterizes the size of the $`P^2`$ (and the $`B`$-field on it) and $`[u]`$ and $`[v]`$ parameterize the $`E_8\times E_8`$ instanton configuration.

## 3 Some facts from geometry

We need some facts about the blow-up of $`C^3/Z_3`$ and the normalizable harmonic 2-form on it. In general $`C^n/Z_n`$ (where the generator of $`Z_n`$ acts as multiplication by $`e^{\frac{2\pi i}{n}}`$ on all the coordinates of $`C^n`$) can be deformed to a smooth (noncompact) Calabi-Yau manifold that approaches $`C^n/Z_n`$ at infinity. In this CY the singular point at the origin on $`C^n/Z_n`$ is replaced with a compact projective space $`P^{n1}`$.

### 3.1 Metric and complex structure

We can take the metric on $`P^{n1}`$ to be the Fubini-Study metric

$$g_{i\overline{j}}=\frac{\delta _{i\overline{j}}(1+|z_k|^2)z_i\overline{z}_{\overline{j}}}{\left(1+|z_k|^2\right)^2},$$

which is derived from the Kähler function

$$K=\mathrm{log}\left(1+|z_1|^2+\mathrm{}+|z_{n1}|^2\right).$$

The normalized $`(1,1)`$ form is $`\omega =ig_{i\overline{j}}dz_id\overline{z}_{\overline{j}}`$. It can be written as $`\omega =dA`$ with

$$A=\frac{i}{2}e^K\underset{k}{}(z_kd\overline{z}_{\overline{k}}\overline{z}_{\overline{k}}dz_k).$$

The blowup of $`C^n/Z_n`$ can be written as a line bundle over $`P^{n1}`$ with first Chern class $`c_1=n\omega `$. Choose a constant $`a>0`$. Let $`z_1,\mathrm{},z_{n1}`$ parameterize the point on the base and let $`0\theta <2\pi `$ be a periodic variable and $`ar<\mathrm{}`$ be a real coordinate. The metric on the blown-up space can be written as

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}r^2{\displaystyle \underset{i,\overline{j}=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}g_{i\overline{j}}dz_id\overline{z}_{\overline{j}}`$
$`+`$ $`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{a^{2n}}{r^{2n}}}\right)^1dr^2+{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{n^2}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{a^{2n}}{r^{2n}}}\right)(d\theta nA)^2`$
The holomorphic coordinates are $`z_1,\mathrm{},z_{n1}`$ and

$$w=\sqrt{r^{2n}a^{2n}}e^{\frac{K}{2}+i\theta }.$$

This space has a normalizable 2-form:

$$\stackrel{~}{F}=\frac{2(n1)a^{2(n1)}}{nr^{2n3}}dr(d\theta nA)+\frac{a^{2(n1)}}{r^{2(n1)}}\omega .$$
(7)
It satisfies

$$_{P^1P^{n1}}\stackrel{~}{F}=2\pi ,_{\text{Fiber}}\stackrel{~}{F}=\frac{2\pi }{n}.$$
(8)
Also

$$\stackrel{~}{F}\stackrel{~}{F}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{F}=\frac{2\pi }{n^2}\omega ^{n1}=\frac{(2\pi )^n}{n^2}$$
(9)
Here $`P^{n1}`$ denotes the divisor given by $`r=a`$ and $`P^1P^{n1}`$ is any (complex) line inside this divisor. The fibers are given by fixed $`z_k`$’s. For $`n=3`$ we can calculate

$$\frac{1}{2}_{P^2}\text{tr}_6RR=12(2\pi )^2.$$

The trace is in the representation $`6`$ of $`SO(6)`$.

Another property of interest is the Euler number of the $`\frac{T^6}{Z_n}`$ orbifolds. Consider in particular the $`n=3`$ case. At each fixed point one deletes the singular point and glues instead, as was explained above, a non-compact manifold composed of a $`P^2`$ and a line bundle over it with a resulting $`c_1=0`$. The Euler number of each of these glued manifolds is $`\chi =3`$. Since $`T^2`$ has a vanishing $`\chi `$, the torus with the 27 deleted points has $`\chi =27`$. Thus, the Euler number of $`\frac{T^6}{Z_3}`$ is $`\chi =27/3=9`$. We add now the Euler number of the glued manifolds and we end with $`\chi =9+27\times 3=72`$.

## 4 The moduli space from supergravity

We would like to reproduce the moduli space found in section (2.5) in the limit that the blow-up parameter, $`a`$, is large compared to $`l_s`$. The moduli space is then the moduli space of $`E_8\times E_8`$ instantons on the blown-up $`C^3/Z_3`$. The requirement on the instanton is that the holonomy of the gauge field at infinity is known. Namely, define the contour

$$\gamma (t)=(z_1=\xi _1,\mathrm{},z_{n1}=\xi _{n1},\theta =t,r=r_0),0t<2\pi .$$

where $`\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{n1},r_0`$ are constants. We require that as $`r_0\mathrm{}`$ the holonomy of the $`E_8\times E_8`$ gauge field along $`\gamma (t)`$ is conjugate to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ that was defined in (2). The second requirement is that

$$\frac{1}{30}_{P^2}\text{tr}_{248}FF=_{P^2}\text{tr}RR=24(2\pi )^2.$$

Here $`P^2`$ is the exceptional divisor of the blow-up. The instanton solutions that we will consider are abelian. They are given by picking a generator $`\tau `$ of the Lie algebra of $`E_8\times E_8`$, normalized such that $`e^{2\pi i\tau }`$ is the unity in the group, and setting the $`E_8\times E_8`$ field-strength to be $`F=i\stackrel{~}{F}\tau `$, where $`\stackrel{~}{F}`$ is the 2-form found in (7). (Note that $`F`$ is defined to be anti-hermitian.) According to (8), the holonomy around $`\gamma (t)`$ is $`e^{\frac{2\pi i}{3}\tau }`$. Thus $`\tau `$ should be chosen so that $`e^{\frac{2\pi i}{3}\tau }`$ will be $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ – the generator of $`Z_3`$ in the gauge group. The instanton condition implies that

$$24=\frac{1}{30}\text{tr}_{248}\tau ^2.$$

For the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ that breaks $`E_8\times E_8`$ to $`(E_6\times SU(3))^2`$ we can pick $`\tau `$ as follows. Let $`\varphi _1:SU(3)E_8`$ be the embedding of $`SU(3)`$ in the first $`E_8`$ factor and let $`\varphi _2`$ be the embedding in the second factor. We pick $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }SU(3)`$ to be $`\text{diag}(1,1,2)`$ and take $`\tau =\varphi _1(\stackrel{~}{\tau })\varphi _2(\stackrel{~}{\tau })`$. Note that for elements of $`E_8`$ that are embedded in $`SU(3)`$ we have

$$\frac{1}{30}\text{tr}_{248}\varphi _i(\stackrel{~}{\tau })^2=2\text{tr}_3\stackrel{~}{\tau }^2=12.$$

Summing the contributions of the two $`E_8`$ factors gives $`24`$. The moduli space is the moduli space of embeddings of $`\tau `$ inside $`E_8\times E_8`$ keeping the holonomy at infinity, $`e^{\frac{2\pi i}{3}\tau }`$ fixed. The moduli space of different $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$’s in $`SU(3)`$ that are conjugate to $`\text{diag}(1,1,2)`$ is $`P^2`$. Thus the moduli space of instantons is $`P^2\times P^2`$. The coordinate $`\sigma `$ from (2.5) is interpreted as $`\sigma =\frac{1}{2}\alpha ^{}\pi a^2+iB`$ where $`\pi a^2`$ is the area of a $`P^1`$ divisor inside the exceptional $`P^2`$ and $`B`$ is the integral of the NSNS 2-form on $`P^1`$.

It is interesting to check other embeddings of $`Z_3`$ inside $`E_8\times E_8`$. In one embedding we take the generator of $`Z_3`$ to be in the center of $`SU(9)/Z_3E_8`$. The element is $`e^{\frac{2\pi i}{9}}`$. We then take $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }su(9)`$ to be

$$\stackrel{~}{\tau }=\text{diag}\left(\underset{8}{\underset{}{\frac{1}{3},\mathrm{},\frac{1}{3},}}\frac{8}{3}\right).$$

We let $`\varphi :su(9)E_8`$ be the embedding and we calculate

$$\frac{1}{30}\text{tr}_{248}\varphi (\stackrel{~}{\tau })^2=2\text{tr}_9\stackrel{~}{\tau }^2=16.$$

Therefore, in the second $`E_8`$ factor we should find an embedding with instanton number $`8`$. For this we break $`E_8`$ to $`SU(14)\times U(1)`$ and embed $`\tau `$ as $`e^{\frac{2\pi i}{3}}`$ inside $`U(1)`$.

## 5 Strong coupling limit

At strong coupling, the $`E_8\times E_8`$ heterotic string theory on $`C^3/Z_3`$ is described by weakly coupled 11D gravity on the bulk of $`(S^1/Z_2)\times (C^3/Z_3)\times R^{4,1}`$ and $`GE_8`$ gauge fields on the two boundaries. The only strongly coupled part of this background comes from the fixed point of the $`Z_3`$ action. It is described by the $`E_0`$ theory compactified on $`S^1/Z_2`$.

The $`E_0`$ theory is a strongly coupled 5D CFT that describes the localized degrees of freedom of M-theory on $`C^3/Z_3`$ at the fixed point. We will recall some known facts about the $`E_0`$-theory in subsection (5.2). We will then use the heterotic string analysis of the orbifold to make conjectures about the 4D low-energy description of the $`E_0`$ theory compactified on $`S^1/Z_2`$.

### 5.1 The setting

The $`E_0`$-theory is compactified on an interval $`S^1/Z_2`$ and, as we shall see, there are extra degrees of freedom on the boundaries. Let the length of the interval be $`\pi R`$. The 5D $`E_0`$-theory has a moduli space $`R/Z_2`$  that is parameterized by an order parameter $`\chi _0`$ with dimensions of mass (see subsection (5.2) below).

Our problem has two scales:

* The compactification scale, $`\frac{1}{R}`$,
* The $`E_0`$-scale, $`\chi _0\chi `$.

If $`\chi _0\frac{1}{R}`$ the 5D compactification (energy) scale is low and we can first reduce the $`E_0`$-theory to its 5D low-energy description and then compactify the latter on $`S^1/Z_2`$ with appropriate boundary conditions.

If, on the other hand, the condition $`\chi _0\frac{1}{R}`$ is not met, quantum corrections are strong and we do not know the metric on the moduli space of the effective 4D low-energy theory. Since we do not know any microscopic definition for $`\chi _0`$ it does not make sense to use $`\chi _0`$ as a coordinate on the 4D moduli space. We can still look for an effective 4D low-energy description but it requires a better understanding of the $`E_0`$ theory. We will propose a conjecture about that description in section (5.8).

### 5.2 The $`E_0`$-theory

The $`E_0`$-theory is a five-dimensional interacting CFT. It has $`N=1`$ supersymmetry (8 generators) in 5D. It has a one-dimensional Coulomb branch parameterized by a real coordinate $`\chi _0>0`$. For a generic $`\chi _0`$ the low-energy description is a 5D vector multiplet with (five dimensional) $`N=1`$ supersymmetry. This multiplet comprises of a scalar $`\chi `$ (whose VEV is $`\chi _0`$), a vector field $`A`$ and fermions. The low-energy effective action is

$$L=\frac{1}{4\pi ^2}\left[\frac{1}{2}\chi _\mu \chi ^\mu \chi +\frac{1}{4}\chi F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{24}ϵ^{\mu _1\mu _2\mu _3\mu _4\mu _5}A_{\mu _1}F_{\mu _1\mu _2}F_{\mu _3\mu _4}\right]d^5x+\text{(fermions).}$$
(10)
Here $`\chi `$ is a scalar field of dimension $`1`$, $`A`$ is a low-energy $`U(1)`$ gauge field and $`F=dA`$. The Coulomb branch is parameterized by the VEV $`\chi _0=\chi `$. The $`E_0`$-theory has a rich structure of electric BPS particles with masses that are integer multiples of $`\chi _0`$ and magnetic BPS strings with tensions that are integer multiples of $`\chi _0^2`$ .

We can rewrite (10) using 4D $`N=1`$ superspace. We separate one direction out of the five, call it $`x_4`$, and we define the chiral superfield $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x_4)`$ and the vector superfield $`\stackrel{~}{V}(x_4)`$ (which depend explicitly on the parameter $`x_4`$) so that

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x_4)|_{\theta =\overline{\theta }=0}=\chi (x_4)+iA_4(x_4)$$
(11)
and, in the WZ gauge,

$$\stackrel{~}{V}=\theta \sigma ^\mu \overline{\theta }A_\mu +i\theta ^2\overline{\theta }\lambda i\overline{\theta }^2\theta \overline{\lambda }+\frac{1}{2}\theta ^2\overline{\theta }^2D.$$
(12)
The gauge freedom is

$$\stackrel{~}{V}\stackrel{~}{V}+\mathrm{\Lambda }+\mathrm{\Lambda }^{},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}+2_4\mathrm{\Lambda }.$$

where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a superfield. Without any boundary conditions the Lagrangian is

$`L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{1}{8}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^{}2_4\stackrel{~}{V})^3+\stackrel{~}{V}_4\stackrel{~}{V}D_\alpha W^\alpha +_4\stackrel{~}{V}\overline{D}^{\dot{\alpha }}\stackrel{~}{V}\overline{W}_{\dot{\alpha }}+_4\stackrel{~}{V}D_\alpha \stackrel{~}{V}W^\alpha \right]d^4\theta }`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}W_\alpha W^\alpha d^2\theta }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^{}\overline{W}^{\dot{\alpha }}\overline{W}_{\dot{\alpha }}d^2\overline{\theta }}`$
where, as usual, $`W_\alpha =\frac{1}{4}\overline{D}^2D_\alpha \stackrel{~}{V}`$ and it satisfies $`D^\alpha W_\alpha =\overline{D}_{\dot{\alpha }}\overline{W}^{\dot{\alpha }}`$.

It is not hard to check that this Lagrangian is gauge invariant up to a total derivative

$`\delta {\displaystyle Ld^4x}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24\pi ^2}}_4{\displaystyle \mathrm{\Lambda }W_\alpha W^\alpha d^2\theta d^4x}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24\pi ^2}}_4{\displaystyle \mathrm{\Lambda }^{}\overline{W}^{\dot{\alpha }}\overline{W}_{\dot{\alpha }}d^2\overline{\theta }d^4x}`$
Expanded in components we find

$`L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{1}{2}\chi (_\mu \chi )^2+\frac{1}{2}\chi F_{4\mu }F^{4\mu }+\frac{1}{2}\chi ^2_4D\frac{1}{2}\chi F^{}F\right]d^5x}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{1}{2}\chi D^2+\frac{1}{4}\chi F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{8}A_4ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \tau }F_{\mu \nu }F_{\rho \tau }\frac{1}{6}A_\mu ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \tau }_4A_\nu F_{\rho \tau }\right]d^5x}`$
Here $`\mu =0\mathrm{}3`$. Although this action does not look manifestly Lorentz invariant, if we eliminate the auxiliary fields we find $`D=_4\chi `$ and $`F=0`$ and the whole action can be rewritten as (10) and the action is manifestly Lorentz invariant (although supersymmetry is not manifest).

So far we have discussed the low-energy effective action in 5D. Later on we will discuss a compactification on $`S^1/Z_2`$ that breaks half the supersymmetry. For completeness, we note that the simplest compactification of the $`E_0`$ down to 4D is on $`S^1`$ in such a way that preserves $`N=2`$ supersymmetry. We will take the coordinate along $`S^1`$ to be $`0x_42\pi R`$. The low-energy description of the $`E_0`$-theory compactified on $`S^1`$ is given by a single $`N=2`$ $`U(1)`$ vector multiplet with the effective action that is derived from the Seiberg-Witten curve:

$$y^2=(x^2u)(xu^2).$$

Here $`u`$ is a holomorphic parameter on the moduli space. For $`|u|\mathrm{}`$ we can write

$$\frac{1}{2\pi R}\mathrm{log}u\chi +iA_4.$$

### 5.3 Adding a boundary

We take the effective action (10) and compactify it on the interval $`S^1/Z_2`$. Let $`0x_4\pi R`$ be the coordinate along the interval (the other coordinates are $`x_0,\mathrm{},x_3`$). Now we add the boundaries at $`x_4=0`$ and $`x_4=\pi R`$. Our goal is to propose a Lagrangian that describes the theory at energies

$$E\frac{1}{R}\chi _0\chi .$$

In the context of M-theory, as we explained above, the compactification arises from M-theory on a blown up $`C^3/Z_3`$ where the singularity was blown up to a $`P^2`$ with volume $`M_p^6\chi _0^2`$. We are interested in the regime $`\chi _0M_p`$ where the scale of our low-energy $`E_0`$-theory is lower than $`M_p`$.

The $`U(1)`$ gauge group of the low-energy effective action (10) has an anomaly when we add a boundary. This anomaly comes from the Chern-Simons term

$$\frac{1}{32\pi ^2}AFF\frac{1}{32\pi ^2}ϵ^{\alpha \beta \gamma \mu \nu }A_\alpha F_{\beta \gamma }F_{\mu \nu }d^5x.$$
(14)
This term comes from the Chern-Simons term of 11D supergravity reduced on the blown-up $`C^3/Z_3`$ with the substitution $`C=3A(x_0,\mathrm{}x_4)\stackrel{~}{F}(x_5\mathrm{}x_{10})`$. Here $`\stackrel{~}{F}`$ is the harmonic 2-form defined in (7). The factor of 3 is needed because it is $`3\stackrel{~}{F}`$ that has integral periods according to (9). In 5D, the Chern-Simons term must be an integer product of $`\frac{1}{96\pi ^2}AFF`$ (see ). Our model has 3 times the fundamental unit of anomaly.

There are two possible ways to eliminate the anomaly. We can either add degrees of freedom on the boundary with the opposite anomaly or we can set the boundary conditions on the gauge field so that its parallel components vanish on the boundary. In that case, the gauge group contains only transformations that vanish on the boundary and there is no anomaly.

In the next subsections we will discuss two descriptions of the theory with a boundary. We will start with an analysis of the regime $`\frac{1}{R}M_p\chi _0`$ where the Horava-Witten supergravity approximation to M-theory is valid. We will see that the dimensional reduction of the Horava-Witten low-energy effective action leads to a description where the gauge transformation vanish on the boundary. Extra degrees of freedom on the boundary are then described by a nonlinear $`\sigma `$-model.

We will then discuss an alternative description in terms of a linear $`\sigma `$-model where the gauge transformations are allowed not to vanish on the boundary. Instead extra charged chiral superfields cancel the anomaly on the boundary.

### 5.4 Description in terms of the nonlinear $`\sigma `$-model

When $`M_p\chi _0`$ the volume of the $`P^2`$ blow-up is large and we can reduce the Horava-Witten supergravity Lagrangian – the 11D supergravity in the bulk and $`E_8`$ gauge fields on the 10D boundary – down to the noncompact 5D. The reduction of the $`E_8`$ gauge fields was discussed in detail in section (4) and the result was that the low-energy degrees of freedom describe the moduli space of a certain instanton. The moduli space was described as the embedding of $`U(1)SU(3)`$ where $`SU(3)`$ was a fixed subgroup of $`E_8`$. The $`E_8`$ instanton moduli space in this problem is therefore a copy of $`P^2`$ (not to be confused with the blow up divisor which is also a $`P^2`$ but in space-time and not in field space). Thus, at low-energies, the degrees of freedom on the boundary are described by a nonlinear $`\sigma `$-model with $`P^2`$ as the target space. The appropriate boundary conditions for the superfields $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$, defined in (11-12), can be obtained from the Horava-Witten boundary conditions on the 3-form field $`C`$ of 11D supergravity. Recall that Horava and Witten described the segment $`[0,\pi R]`$ as $`S^1/Z_2`$ with the $`Z_2`$ acting as

$`Z_2:C_{10\mu \nu }(x_{10})`$ $``$ $`C_{10\mu \nu }(x_{10}),`$
$`Z_2:C_{\sigma \mu \nu }(x_{10})`$ $``$ $`C_{\sigma \mu \nu }(x_{10}),`$
Here $`\mu ,\nu =0\mathrm{}9`$. In our problem $`x_{10}`$ should be replaced with $`x_4`$. The connection between $`C`$ and the components $`A_\mu `$ and $`A_4`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is

$$C_{\mu IJ}=A_\mu \stackrel{~}{F}_{IJ},C_{4IJ}=A_4\stackrel{~}{F}_{IJ}.$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{F}`$ is the 2-form on the blown up $`C^3/Z_3`$ that was defined in (7). It follows that $`Z_2`$ acts on $`A_\mu `$ and $`A_4`$ as

$$A_\mu (x_4)A_\mu (x_4),A_4(x_4)A_4(x_4).$$

These rules can be extended to the superfields and we can now derive the boundary conditions

$$\stackrel{~}{V}|_{x_4=0}=\stackrel{~}{V}|_{x_4=\pi R}=0,_4\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}|_{x_4=0}=_4\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}|_{x_4=\pi R}=0.$$

### 5.5 The linear $`\sigma `$-model

We will now discuss an alternative description of the boundary. The Chern-Simons term (14) produces an anomaly for the $`U(1)`$ gauge transformations on the boundary. This anomaly can be canceled by 3 4D chiral fermions with $`U(1)`$ charge $`1`$ on the boundary. Thus, we assume that on the boundary there is a chiral superfield $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ that is in the fundamental representation $`3`$ of a global $`SU(3)`$ and is also charged under the 5D $`U(1)`$ gauge field. The total action now has an extra term

$$\stackrel{~}{X}^{}e^{\stackrel{~}{V}}\stackrel{~}{X}d^4\theta d^4x$$
(15)
On the other hand we do not impose Dirichlet boundary conditions on the gauge fields. When we integrate out the auxiliary field $`D`$ from (LABEL:fivedl) we need to integrate by parts over $`dx_4`$. When there is a boundary we find a boundary contribution of

$$\frac{1}{2}\chi ^2D.$$

The field $`D`$ also appears linearly in (15). Integrating $`D`$ out we find the boundary condition

$$\frac{1}{2}\chi ^2|_{x_4=0}=|X|^2,X\stackrel{~}{X}|_{\theta =\overline{\theta }=0}$$
(16)
where $`X`$ is the scalar ($`\theta =\overline{\theta }=0`$) component of $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$. Note also that the a single $`U(1)`$ charged chiral superfield is anomalous in 4D but the anomaly is canceled by the inflow from the term $`AFF`$ in (LABEL:fivedl) in 5D. This consideration also shows that we need exactly 3 chiral fields to cancel the anomaly from the 5D WZ term.

In the regime $`\chi _0\frac{1}{R}`$ the other boundary is far and the effective action near the boundary cannot have any dimensionful parameter in it. The superfields $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ both have mass dimensions of $`1`$. This implies that there is a possibility to add

$`I_2`$ $`=`$ $`C_0{\displaystyle _{x_4=0}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^{}2_4\stackrel{~}{V})^2d^4\theta d^4x`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{C_1}{4}}{\displaystyle _{x_4=0}}\left[{\displaystyle W_\alpha W^\alpha d^2\theta }+{\displaystyle \overline{W}^{\dot{\alpha }}\overline{W}_{\dot{\alpha }}d^2\overline{\theta }}\right].`$
to the action. Here $`C_0`$ and $`C_1`$ are unknown coefficient. Such a term will not affect the boundary conditions (16).

Similarly, we add a chiral superfield $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ at the other end, $`x_4=\pi R`$. The $`U(1)`$ anomaly cancellation can be satisfied if we require that $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ is also a triplet and has charge $`1`$ under the 5D $`U(1)`$ gauge group. We assume that it is in the representation $`3`$ of another global $`SU(3)`$. $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ satisfies the boundary condition

$$\frac{1}{2}\chi ^2|_{x_4=\pi R}=|Y|^2,Y\stackrel{~}{Y}|_{\theta =\overline{\theta }=0}$$

### 5.6 Relation between the linear and nonlinear $`\sigma `$-models

We can now solve the equations of motion of the nonlinear $`\sigma `$-model at energies $`E\frac{1}{R}`$. If we vary the action with respect to $`A_4`$ and integrate by parts, keeping boundary terms, so as to extract the coefficient of $`\delta A_4(0)`$ we find the equation

$$0=\chi ^2A_\mu +\text{Im}(X_i^{}D_\mu X_i)+\chi F_{4\mu }+C_0^4F_{\mu 4}+C_1^\nu F_{\mu \nu }.$$

The first term comes from $`|D_\mu X|^2`$ and the boundary condition (16). To look for the zero modes we assume that $`X_i`$, $`A_4`$ and $`A_\mu `$ are independent of $`x_0,\mathrm{},x_3`$. We find the boundary condition at $`x_4=0`$:

$$0=\chi _0^2A_\mu +\chi _0_4A_\mu C_0^4_4A_\mu .$$

There is a similar equation at $`x_4=\pi R`$. The equation of motion in the bulk is $`_4^4A_\mu =0`$ and for $`\chi _00`$ there is no zero mode because any nonzero solution that is independent of $`x_0,\mathrm{},x_3`$ cannot satisfy both boundary conditions.

Now we allow the fields to vary as a function of $`x_0\mathrm{},x_3`$. For low-energy modes, we can neglect $`^\nu F_{\nu \mu }`$ and $`^4_4A_\mu `$ and $`\chi _0^4A_\mu `$ compared to $`\chi _0^2A_\mu `$. We therefore get

$$A_\mu |_{x_4=0}\frac{1}{\chi _0^2}\text{Im}(X_i^{}D_\mu X_i)+\frac{1}{\chi _0}_\mu A_4$$

and a similar equation at the other end. Together we find the solution:

$$A_\mu (x_4)\frac{\pi Rx_4}{\pi R\chi _0^2}\text{Im}(X_i^{}D_\mu X_i)\frac{x_4}{\pi R\chi _0^2}\text{Im}(Y_i^{}D_\mu Y_i)+\frac{1}{\chi _0}_\mu A_4$$

Assuming that $`R\chi _01`$ our assumptions about neglecting $`\chi _0_4A_\mu `$ are correct. We also assume that $`A_4`$ is independent of $`x_4`$.

### 5.7 The moduli space

The low energy effective action in 4D is a nonlinear $`\sigma `$-model with a 5 (complex) dimensional target space. The target space can be described as a line bundle over $`P^2\times P^2`$, the same as the one discussed in subsection (2.5). The homogeneous coordinates on the first $`P^2`$ are given by the fields $`X_i/X`$ ($`i=1\mathrm{}3`$) on the boundary at $`x_4=0`$ and the homogeneous coordinates on the second $`P^2`$ are given by $`Y_i/Y`$. The coordinates on the fiber of the line bundle is the $`\theta =\overline{\theta }=0`$ component of the superfield $`e^{_0^{\pi R}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x_4)𝑑x_4}`$. We will denote it by $`z`$. The symmetry group $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ acts non-trivially on the moduli space and the orbit of any point is an $`S^1`$ bundle over $`P^2\times P^2`$.

Finally, let us discuss the metric on the moduli space. For $`R\chi _01`$, the size of each $`P^2`$ is given by

$$X=Y=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\chi _0=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\pi R}\mathrm{log}|z|.$$

The metric on the fiber is

$$\frac{\chi _0}{\pi R}\frac{|dz|^2}{|z|^2}=\frac{\mathrm{log}|z|}{\pi ^2R^2|z|^2}|dz|^2.$$

### 5.8 The regime opposite to $`\chi _0\frac{1}{R}`$

If the condition $`\chi _0\frac{1}{R}`$ is not met then $`\chi _0`$, being defined as the 5D VEV, is not well defined. We cannot use the low-energy effective action (10) but we will propose below an alternative Lagrangian that describes the compactified theory at energies $`E\frac{1}{R}`$. There are several examples of 5D and 6D strongly interacting theories that after compactification to 4D are described at low energies by ordinary field theories. The $`(2,0)`$ theory, for example, is described by $`N=4`$ Super-Yang-Mills theory after compactification on $`T^2`$ and at energies below the compactification scale. We can hope that the $`E_0`$ theory compactified on the segment $`S^1/Z_2`$ (with the boundary conditions implied by the M-theory construction above) is also described by a regular field theory at energies below the compactification scale. The heterotic string analysis that was discussed in section (2.2) provides a clue.

Before tackling the entire spectrum up to scales $`E\frac{1}{R}`$ let us consider the lowest end of the spectrum, namely the moduli space. The starting point is the classical result of section (5.7). $`N=1`$ supersymmetry allows for quantum corrections to both the Kähler metric as well as the superpotential. However, we assume that the global $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ remains a good symmetry (as the embedding into string theory suggests). Since the $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ orbit of a point in the classical 5(complex) dimensional moduli space found in section (5.7) is of real codimension $`1`$ there cannot be any generated superpotential (since there is no nonzero holomorphic function that is constant on a real codimension $`1`$ subspace and zero at infinity). The Kähler potential, on the other hand, can receive quantum corrections. The $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ symmetry imposes restrictions on the possible Kähler metrics. To see what the restrictions are it is convenient to parameterize the moduli space by a complex $`3\times 3`$ matrix, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$, of rank $`1`$. When the variables $`\stackrel{~}{X},\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ discussed in section (5.5) are valid, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ can be taken as the $`\theta =\overline{\theta }=0`$ component of the superfield

$$R\stackrel{~}{X}e^{_0^{\pi R}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x_4)𝑑x_4}\stackrel{~}{Y}^T.$$
(17)
The only $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ invariant that can be constructed from a rank $`1`$ matrix is $`\xi \text{tr}\mathrm{\Phi }_1^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$. Note that in the regime $`\chi _0\frac{1}{R}`$ we have

$$\xi \text{tr}\mathrm{\Phi }_1^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1=R^4\chi _0^4e^{2\pi R\chi _0}.$$

The $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ invariant Kähler metric can only be a function of the real variable $`\xi `$. In the regime ($`\xi 1`$) the Kähler function is proportional to $`\chi _0^3`$ as can be seen from (10) (and is a complicated function of $`\xi `$). $`K(\xi )`$ receives quantum corrections and we wish to extrapolate to the region of small $`\xi `$. We will assume that there is a point $`\xi =0`$ in the moduli space where the $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ symmetry is restored. In principle, the point $`\xi =0`$ might be infinitely far away on the moduli space but this seems unlikely.

If such a point where $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ is restored exists we might hope that it is described at low energies by an ordinary field theory. We conjecture that this is indeed the case and that for $`\xi 1`$ the dynamics at energies $`E\frac{\xi ^{\frac{1}{2}}}{R}\frac{1}{R}`$ is reproduced by the following Lagrangian. First, we should elevate the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ defined in (17) to a generic $`3\times 3`$ matrix, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, without any restriction on the rank. The Lagrangian is then

$$\text{tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }d^4\theta +\lambda det\mathrm{\Phi }d^2\theta +\lambda det\mathrm{\Phi }^{}d^2\overline{\theta }$$
(18)
Here $`\lambda `$ is an unknown real constant.

We have seen in section (2.3) that the potential of the scalar component of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ in (18) has a minimum when the $`3\times 3`$ matrix has rank $`1`$ (or $`0`$). The moduli space of $`3\times 3`$ matrices of rank $`1`$ can be parameterized as in (5) and using (17) we see that the massless spectrum is reproduced correctly. In other words, at energies $`E\sqrt{\text{tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ the dynamics that is described by (18) and the dynamics that is described in (5.5) coincide.

The global symmetry $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ acts on $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ as $`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Lambda }_1\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Lambda }_2`$ with $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }_1,\mathrm{\Lambda }_2)SU(3)\times SU(3)`$. Up to an $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ transformation we can choose the VEV $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ to be of the form

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\varphi _0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right).$$

It breaks $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ down to $`SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$, as discussed in (2.3). The 9 complex fields that comprise $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ decompose under $`SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$ as

$$(1,1)_0+(2,2)_0+(1,2)_3+(2,1)_3.$$

Here the subindex denotes the $`U(1)`$ charge. The 4 fields in the representations $`(2,2)_0`$ are massive with masses of order $`\varphi _0`$. Note that if a particle with the quantum numbers $`(2,2)_0`$ existed it could decay into the massless particles with quantum numbers $`(1,2)_3`$ and $`(2,1)_3`$. Moreover, we expect $`\lambda `$ to be a parameter of order $`1`$ and therefore (18) is strongly coupled.

The conjecture (18) is motivated by the string theory effective action. The string theory derivation assumes, of course, that $`\lambda _s^{\frac{1}{3}}=M_pR1`$ but we conjecture that the form above remains valid even when $`M_pR1`$. The reason is that we expect the 4D low energy effective action to be scale invariant at energies well below $`\frac{1}{R}`$. The F-term in the expression (18) receives no quantum corrections and therefore the dimension of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can receive no quantum corrections. The Kähler term can receive quantum correction. By dimensional analysis it should be of the form $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }f(R\mathrm{\Phi },R\mathrm{\Phi }^{})`$ where $`f`$ is some function of the dimensionless quantities $`R\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`R\mathrm{\Phi }^{}`$. Assuming that $`f(0,0)0`$ we can normalize $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ such that $`f(0,0)=1`$ and for small $`R\mathrm{\Phi }`$ we can approximate $`f`$ to be a constant.

Note that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ has 9 components but when $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ gets a nonzero VEV that is a matrix of rank $`1`$ only 5 components of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ remain massless (since a rank $`1`$ matrix can be put in the form (5) with the equivalence relations (6)). Therefore, 4 components of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ are massive at a generic point of the moduli space. The masses of these components are of the order of $`\chi _0`$ and when $`\chi _0\frac{1}{R}`$ the masses are of the order of the compactification scale. Since we are neglecting any modes with masses of the order of $`\frac{1}{R}`$, the form (18) does not contain any information in addition to the moduli space for $`\chi _0\frac{1}{R}`$.

## 6  Anomalies

In this section we discuss the cancellation of anomalies of local symmetries in the 4D field theories associated with the $`Z_3`$ orbifold models. We consider here the case of $`[E_6\times SU(3)]\times [E_6\times SU(3)]`$ gauge symmetry, and the rest of the $`Z_3`$ models in the appendix. We analyze the anomalies of the low energy effective action of the heterotic string theory compactified on compact $`\frac{T^6}{Z_3}`$, on non-compact $`\frac{C^3}{Z_3}`$, for the HW dual model and for the case where the singularity is blown up.

### 6.1 The $`\frac{T^6}{Z_3}`$ orbifold model

At each fixed point anomalies can potentially occur only in the $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ subgroup of the local symmetry group. Recall that the twisted states are in the representation $`(\overline{3},\overline{3})`$ so the contribution to the anomaly of each $`SU(3)`$ is that of 3 anti-fundamental representations. The charged untwisted massless matter transform in the $`3(3,27,1,1)3(1,1,3,27)`$ representation of the full symmetry group. Thus, the contribution to the anomaly of each $`SU(3)`$ symmetry group is that of 81 fundamentals divided evenly between all the fixed points, namely divided by 27- the number of fixed points. So altogether the contribution of the untwisted matter is that of three fundamentals. Hence there is an exact cancellation between the twisted and untwisted states and both $`SU(3)`$ gauge symmetries are anomaly free.

### 6.2 The $`\frac{C^3}{Z_3}`$ orbifold model

Consider now the heterotic compactification on non-compact $`\frac{R^6}{Z_N}`$ Calabi Yau orbifolds. In such a case, it may seem that one faces a problem with the cancellation of local anomalies. Again we consider the $`Z_3`$ model with the unbroken gauge group $`[E_6\times SU(3)]\times [E_6\times SU(3)]`$.

The content of the massless spectrum is the same as that of the compact case. The main difference is that unlike the 27 fixed points of the compact case here there is only one single singular point, namely, the origin. Thus it seems that there is not reason to divide the contribution of the untwisted sector by 27 and hence it looks as if the anomaly associated with the twisted matter cannot balance that of the untwisted sector.

It turns out that the division that one invokes in the compact case due to the multiplicity of fixed points, should be implemented also in the non-compact case. As was shown by Gimon and Johnson, when performing the corresponding one loop stringy computation in the non-compact case, there is a zero mode of the $`Z_3`$ projection that one has to take into account. The trace of the twist operator $`\alpha =e^{\frac{2\pi ik}{N}}`$ that operates on the complex coordinates $`ze^{\frac{2\pi ik}{N}}z`$ for each $`T^2`$ takes the form

$$Tr[e^{\frac{2\pi ik}{N}}]=𝑑z𝑑\overline{z}z,\overline{z}|\alpha |z,\overline{z}=\frac{1}{4\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\pi k}{N}}$$

where one uses the basis with $`z|z^{}=\frac{1}{V_{T^2}}\delta (zz^{})`$. For the $`T^6`$ and for a $`Z_3`$ orbifold we thus get the factor of

$`\frac{1}{(4\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\pi k}{3})^3}=\frac{1}{27}`$ which we have to multiply the contribution of the untwisted sector. Therefore, like for the compact case, there is an exact cancellation between the contributions of the twisted and untwisted sectors to the anomaly.

### 6.3  The HW dual with blown up fixed point

In the HW dual of both the compact and non compact orbifold models one has to cancel the 4D anomalies locally at each point along the $`\frac{S^1}{Z_2}`$ interval and in particular at the two ends of it.

We will discuss now the anomaly cancellation for the blown up $`R^6/Z_3`$ case and at the end of this subsection we comment on the case where the fixed points are not blown up.

Let us first see how the anomalies are canceled when we are at a generic point of the moduli space where the symmetry is broken down to $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R\times U(1)_V`$. Let us also denote the 5d $`U(1)`$ gauge group as $`U(1)_B`$.

The fields $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ have the following $`(SU(2)_L,SU(2)_R)_{(U(1)_V,U(1)_B)}`$ quantum numbers:

$$\stackrel{~}{X}:(2,1)_{(1,1)}+(1,1)_{(2,1)},\stackrel{~}{Y}:(1,2)_{(1,1)}+(1,1)_{(2,1)},$$

We can take the contribution of the untwisted fields to the anomaly to as that of 3 superfields each with quantum numbers

$$(2,1)_{(1,0)}+(1,1)_{(2,0)}+(1,2)_{(1,0)}+(1,1)_{(2,0)}.$$

When $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ is broken down to $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R\times U(1)_V`$ the VEVs of $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ are not invariant under $`U(1)_V`$. We can rectify this with a compensating $`U(1)_B`$ gauge transformation. In other words, we define a $`U(1)_C`$ such that the charges satisfy $`Q_CQ_V+2Q_B`$. The $`(SU(2)_L,SU(2)_R)_{U(1)_C}`$ quantum numbers are now:

$$\stackrel{~}{X}:(2,1)_3+(1,1)_0,\stackrel{~}{Y}:(1,2)_3+(1,1)_0.$$

We can now take the VEVs to be invariant under $`U(1)_C`$. We can now check the local cancellation of the anomaly. The fields $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ together with the untwisted fields on the $`x_4=0`$ end with quantum numbers $`(2,1)_1+(1,1)_2`$ cancel the $`U(1)_CSU(2)_L^2`$ anomaly. However the $`U(1)_C^3`$ anomaly is not canceled. We get a net $`54F^3`$ from $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ and $`18F^3`$ from the “untwisted sector” adding up to $`72F^3`$. Here $`F`$ stands for a $`U(1)_C`$ gauge field. The bulk 5D Chern-Simons term also contributes to the anomaly and the contribution is $`24F^3`$. Altogether we get $`48F^3`$. The fields at the other end, $`x_4=\pi R`$ contribute $`48F^3`$. Therefore, locally in 5D the $`U(1)_C^3`$ anomaly does not cancel.

But in fact the $`U(1)_C^3`$ anomaly is not required to cancel locally in 5D. Only the $`SU(2)^2\times U(1)_C`$ anomalies have to cancel locally. The $`U(1)_C`$ gauge transformation is the same with opposite signs on both ends. In other words, we are not allowed to make a different $`U(1)`$ transformation at $`x_4=0`$ and at $`x_4=\pi R`$ without changing the vacuum.

For the HW scenario without blowing up the fixed points, and with $`R1/M_p`$ we can consider the 4D world volume theory on each end of the world brane neglecting the influence of the physics at the other end. Consider the theory on the left end. This theory has a gauge symmetry with the gauge group $`[E_6\times SU(3)]_L`$. The untwisted sector still contributes $`\frac{1}{27}`$ of the massless $`[3(3,27)]`$ representation. Anomaly cancellation, thus, requires three multiplets of $`3`$ of $`SU(3)_L`$. Since we do not have a handle on the structure of the theory without a blow up, we can only conjecture on how such a cancellation may occur. One possibility is that the $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ field which transforms in $`(\overline{3},\overline{3})`$ of the global $`SU_L(3)\times SU_R(3)`$ symmetry group in the bulk couples at the 4D left theory to the $`SU_L(3)`$ gauge fields and the $`SU_R(3)`$ un-gauged degrees of freedom are flavor degrees of freedom. These field cancels the $`SU(3)_L`$ anomaly of the untwisted fields. A similar mechanism might take place on the right end of the world 4D theory. Of course, it might be that the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is only a low-energy effective description of more fundamental degrees of freedom and in the regime $`R\mathrm{}`$ the anomaly cancellation mechanism is different.

## 7 Summary and discussion

In this paper we have addressed the strong coupling dynamics of the $`T^6/Z_3`$ ( $`C^3/Z_3`$) heterotic orbifolds. The main tool used has been the duality with the strongly coupled heterotic string theory and the weakly coupled Horava Witten M-theory compactified on $`(S^1/Z_2)\times (T^6/Z_3)`$.

The motivation for this study has been three folded: to shed additional light on M-theory from the heterotic string, to explore the domain of large string coupling using the Horava-Witten picture and to better understand the effective action of the recently popular scenarios of 5D bulk space-time with two end-of-the-world branes. We concentrated mainly on the $`Z_3`$ orbifold that breaks the $`E_8\times E_8`$ gauge group down to $`SU(3)\times E_6\times SU(3)\times E_6`$.

We showed that the moduli space of the $`(C^3/Z_3)`$ heterotic orbifold is a blow-down at the zero section of a line bundle that is the product of the two universal line bundles, $`_1_2`$, over $`P^2\times P^2`$. The properties of the moduli space were reproduced from the supergravity description in the large blow-up limit. The gauge instantons of the symmetric model as well as of other $`T^6/Z_3`$ orbifolds were analyzed. In the context of the $`E_0`$ theory on a segment we identified two scales of the system, namely, the compactification scale and the scale of the expectation value of the scalar field. We wrote down the $`N=1`$ supersymmetric 5D $`E_0`$ theory in terms of a 4D $`N=1`$ chiral and vector superfields. We then compactified this theory on $`(S^1/Z_2)`$ first in the limit of an expectation value which is much larger than the inverse of the compactification scale. In this regime we reduced the 11D HW supergravity to that of a 5D theory in the form of a non-linear sigma model. We then rewrote it in terms of a linear sigma model and determined the relations between the linear an non-linear descriptions. Finally we were led to a conjecture about the low energy description of the five dimensional $`E_0`$-theory (the CFT that describes the the singularity region of M-theory on $`C^3/Z_3`$) compactified on $`S^1/Z_2`$.

The status of the heterotic compactifications on singular CY orbifolds stand in contrast to the situation with compactifications on singular $`K3`$ orbifolds. There the HW theory is weakly coupled even before the singularities are blown-up . Unfortunately, we still do not possess a fully coherent picture for the analogous models with compactification on singular CY orbifolds.

Another open direction is the search for possible viable phenomenological models on the 4D end-of-the-world branes. For instance one may introduce Wilson loops to get symmetry breaking patterns that are compatible with the standard model symmetries.

###### Acknowledgments.

We would like to thank Eric Gimon, S. Theisen and E. Witten for useful discussions and comments. Our discussion in section (4) in particular benefited from conversations with E. Witten. We would especially like to thank Vadim Kaplunovsky who took part in the first stages of this project. The research of JS was supported in part by the US-Israel Binational Science Foundation, by GIF – the German-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research, and by the Israel Science Foundation. The work of OJG was supported in part by the Director, Office of Science, Office of High Energy and Nuclear Physics, of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC03-76SF00098, and in part by the NSF under grant PHY-0098840.

## Appendix A The spectra and anomalies of the $`Z_3`$ heterotic models

We will now describe the spectra for the various orbifolds of the $`E_8\times E_8`$ heterotic string theory that were discussed in the paper. The details can be found in . (See also  for a new discussion on orbifolds.)

From the target space point of view the different orbifolds are characterized by the different embeddings of $`Z_3`$ into the gauge groups $`E_8\times E_8`$. From the worldsheet point of view, the different orbifoldings are characterized by two vectors $`\stackrel{}{r}=(r_1,r_2,r_3)`$ and the shift vector $`\stackrel{}{s}=(s_1,\mathrm{}s_{16})`$. The conditions that these two vectors have to satisfy are

$$\underset{i}{}r_i=\underset{i}{}s_i=0mod2\underset{i}{}r_i^2\underset{i}{}s_i^2=0mod6$$
(A-1)
In particular for $`r_i=(1,1,2)`$ the condition takes the form $`_is_i^2=0mod6`$ The nontrivial solutions of these conditions and the corresponding gauge groups are

$`(0^8;0^8)`$ $``$ $`[E_8]\times [E_8]`$ (A-2)
$`(1,12,0^5;0^8)`$ $``$ $`[E_8]\times [E_6\times SU(3)]`$ (A-3)
$`(1,12,0^5;1,1,20^5)`$ $``$ $`E_6\times SU(3)\times [E_6\times SU(3)]`$ (A-4)
$`(1,1,0^6;20^7)`$ $``$ $`[E_7\times U(1)]\times [SO(14)\times U(1)]`$ (A-5)
$`(1,1,1,1,2,0^3;20^7)`$ $``$ $`[SU(9)]\times [SO(14)\times U(1)]`$ (A-6)
The corresponding spectra of the models with broken $`E_8`$ symmetries are

$`U:3(1;27,3)+9moduli`$ $`T:27[(1;27,1)+3(1;1,\overline{3})]`$ (A-7)
$`U:3[(27,3;1,1)+(1,1;27,3)]+9moduli`$ $`T:27(1,\overline{3};1,\overline{3})`$ (A-8)
$`U:3[(56;1)+2(1;1)+(1;64)+(1;14)]+9moduli`$ $`T:27[(1;14)+2(1;1)]`$ (A-9)
$`U:3[(84;1)+(1;64)+(1;14)]+9moduli`$ $`T:27[(1;\overline{9})]`$ (A-10)
where $`U`$ adn $`T`$ stand for the untwisted and twisted sectors respectively.

Anomalies of the 4D field theory were discussed in section 5 for the $`E_6\times SU(3)\times [E_6\times SU(3)]`$. The same anomaly cancellation mechanism applies also for the right symmetry group $`[E_6\times SU(3)]`$ of the second model of the above list. Since $`E_7`$ and $`SO(14)`$ are anomaly free groups, we have to discuss only the anomalies of the $`SU(9)`$ of the last model and of the $`U(1)`$s of the fourth and fifth models. The contribution of the matter in the $`84`$ representation of $`SU(9)`$ is the same as that of 9 fundamentals. Since it is part of the untwisted sector it has to be divided by 27 so that the net contribution is that of a fundamental, since they come with a multiplicity of three. The contribution of the twisted sector is of one anti-fundamental thus one has a full anomaly cancellation.