text:
# Automorphisms of Finite Order on Gorenstein del Pezzo Surfaces

## Introduction

We work over the complex numbers field $``$. In this note we study the pair $`(X,G)`$ of a normal rational surface $`X`$ and a finite group $`G`$ of automorphisms on $`X`$.

When $`X`$ is smooth, this subject had been studied by S. Kantor more than one hundred years ago \[K\]. It was continued by Segre, Manin, Iskovskih, Gizatullin and many others \[S\], \[M1, 2\], \[I\], \[G\]. See also \[H1\], \[H2\]. In \[DO\], the group of automorphisms of any general del Pezzo surface is described and it turns out that its discrete part is equal to the kernel of the Cremona representation on the moduli space of $`n`$ points in $`^2`$. Very recently, de Fernex \[dF\] constructed all the Cremona transformations of $`^2`$ of prime order, where he employed the methods different from those used by Dolgachev and the author of this note in \[ZD\].

In \[ZD\], minimal pairs $`(X,G)`$ with prime order $`p=|G|`$ was considered. In particular, using the recent Mori theory, it was shown there that if the $`G`$-invariant sublattice of $`\text{Pic}X`$ has rank 1 then $`p5`$ unless $`X=^1`$; the short and precise classification of these pairs, modulo equivariant isomorphism, was also given there. In \[MM\] and \[MZ3\], more general situation was considered where $`X`$ may be singular or even open.

In this note we will consider the case where $`Y`$ is a Gorenstein del Pezzo singular surface of Picard number 1. So the pair $`(Y,G)`$ is automatically minimal in the generalized sense of \[ZD\]. In contrast to the smooth case in \[ZD\], we shall show that every prime number $`p5`$ is realizable as the order of some element in $`\text{Aut}(Y)`$ for some $`Y`$. This actually confirms the common belief that for a family of algebraic surfaces the automorphism group of a special member should be bigger than that of a generic member; see Remark D below. See also \[O\] for the case of family of K3 surfaces.

The other contrasting result is that in smooth case there are minimal pairs $`(X,/(5))`$ with $`X^2`$ so the action of $`/(5)`$ on $`X`$ is not lifted from a regular action on $`^2`$ \[ZD, Table 1\], while in singular case, every element of prime order $`p5`$ in $`\text{Aut}(Y)`$ ($`=\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$) is lifted from a projective transformation of $`^2`$ (Theorem A).

Moreover, we show that for a given $`Y`$, the inclusion $`/(p_0)\text{Aut}(Y)`$ for one single prime $`p_05`$ will guarantee the inclusion $`/(p)\text{Aut}(Y)`$ for every prime $`p5`$ (Theorem C).

We begin with a definition. A normal projective surface $`Y`$ is a Gorenstein del Pezzo surface if $`Y`$ has only rational double singularities and if the anti-canonical divisor $`K_Y`$ is ample.

As we see from the classification of higher dimensional algebraic varieties (see \[KM\]), a minimal (resp. canonical) model will have some terminal (resp. canonical) singularities. In surface case, canonical singularities are just rational double singularities (or Du Val singularities, or Dynkin type ADE singularities, or rational Gorenstein singularities in other notation). Also Gorenstein del Pezzo surfaces $`Y`$ appear naturally as degenerate fibres in a family of (smooth) del Pezzo surfaces (= Fano varieties of dimension 2); the minimal model conjecture (still unsolved for dimension 4 or greater) claims that every algebraic variety is birational to either a minimal model or a variety with a Fano fibration (whose singular fibres are varieties with some mild singularities and ample anti-canonical divisor). This is also the motivation why we study singular del Pezzo surfaces.

Gorenstein del Pezzo singular surface $`Y`$ of Picard number 1 satisfies $`1K_Y^29`$ and $`K_Y^27`$ (see e.g. \[MZ1\]). The case $`K_Y^2=8`$ (resp. $`K_Y^2=9`$) occurs if and only if $`Y`$ is the quadric cone $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_2`$ in $`^3`$ (resp. $`Y=^2`$). We now state our main results.

Theorem A. Let $`p5`$ be a prime number. Let $`Y`$ ($`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_2`$) be a Gorenstein del Pezzo (singular) surface of Picard number $`1`$. Then we have:

(1) Modulo equivariant isomorphism, there is either none or only one or exactly $`p+1`$ of non-trivial $`/(p)`$-action(s) on $`Y`$.

(2) Each non-trivial $`/(p)`$-action on $`Y`$ equals, modulo equivariant isomorphism, one of those in Examples $`1.11.9`$.

(3) Every order-$`p`$ element $`g`$ in $`\text{Aut}(Y)`$ ($`=\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$, $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ being the minimal resolution of $`Y`$) is lifted from a projective transformation $`\overline{g}`$ of $`^2`$, i.e., there is a birational morphism $`\mu :\stackrel{~}{Y}^2`$ such that $`\mu (gy)=\overline{g}\mu (y)`$ for all $`y`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$.

Theorem B. Let $`p5`$ be a prime number. Let $`Y`$ be a Gorenstein del Pezzo (singular) surface of Picard number $`1`$.

(1) If $`K_Y^2=6`$, then there are exactly $`p+1`$ of non-trivial $`/(p)`$-actions on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism.

(2) If $`K_Y^2=5`$, then there is a unique non-trivial $`/(p)`$-action on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism.

(3) If $`K_Y^2`$ is in $`\{3,4\}`$, then there is either only one or exactly $`p+1`$ of non-trivial $`/(p)`$-action(s) on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism.

(4) Suppose $`K_Y^2=2`$. Then there is a unique (resp. there is no any) non-trivial $`/(p)`$-action on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism, if $`\text{Sing}YA_7`$ (resp. $`\text{Sing}Y=A_7`$).

(5) Suppose $`K_Y^2=1`$. Then there is a unique (resp. there is no any) non-trivial $`/(p)`$-action on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism, if $`|K_Y|`$ has exactly two (resp. more than two) singular members (see 2.5).

Theorem C. Let $`Y`$ be a Gorenstein del Pezzo (singular) surface of Picard number $`1`$.

(1) The following are equivalent:

(1a) $`\text{Aut}(Y)`$ has finite order.

(1b) $`|\text{Aut}(Y)|=2^a3^b`$ with $`1a+b7`$.

(1c) Either $`\text{Sing}Y=A_7`$ (and hence $`K_Y^2=2`$), or $`K_Y^2=1`$ and $`|K_Y|`$ contains at least three singular members (i.e., $`K_Y^2=1`$ and $`Y`$ is different from those four in Examples $`1.11.4`$).

(2) The following are equivalent:

(2a) $`\text{Aut}(Y)`$ has infinite order.

(2b) $`\text{Aut}(Y)`$ contains an element of prime order $`p_0`$ with $`p_05`$.

(2c) For each prime number $`p5`$, there is at least one element $`g_p`$ of order $`p`$ in $`\text{Aut}(Y)`$.

Remark D. We like to compare Theorems B and C with known results for smooth $`Y`$.

(1) It is known that the order of $`\text{Aut}(Y)`$ of a generic rational surface (the blow up of $`^2`$ at very generic points) with $`K_Y^25`$ is a factor of $`5!`$ (see \[DO\] or \[Ko, Main Theorem\]).

(2) Let $`Y`$ be a (smooth) del Pezzo surface with $`K_Y^2=3`$ or $`4`$. It is known that there is at most one (resp. no any) $`/(p)`$-action on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism, if $`p=5`$ (resp. $`p7`$ is prime); see \[S, pp. 147-152\], \[H1, Theorem 1.1\] and \[H2, Theorem 5.3\].

An interesting observation made by I. Dolgachev is that the quotient surface of the degree 6 Del Pezzo surface modulo an involution, is a 4-nodal Segre cubic surface.

(3) The following can be deduced from \[DO\] or the main Theorem in \[Ko\]. Let $`Y`$ be a generic rational surface. If $`K_Y^24`$, then there is no prime order $`p`$ ($`p3`$) automorphism of $`Y`$. Suppose $`K_Y^2=5`$; then there is a unique (resp. no any) non-trivial $`/(p)`$-action on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism, if $`p=5`$ (resp. if $`p7`$ is prime). If $`K_Y^2=6,7`$, then for each prime $`p5`$, there are exactly $`p+1`$ of $`/(p)`$-actions on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism.

(4) Let $`Y`$ be a Gorenstein del Pezzo singular surface of Picard number 1. \[Y1\] or \[Y2\] implies: If $`K_Y^22`$, the $`\text{Sing}Y`$ determines uniquely the isomorphism class of $`Y`$. For $`K_Y^2=1`$, see \[Y1, 2\] or Proposition 2.5.

(5) We believe that a similar classification is achievable for $`p=2,3`$ though the list will be much longer and less elegant.

(6) The case $`K_Y^2=1`$ has been considered in \[Z2\].

## Acknowledgement

The author would like to thank Professor I. Dolgachev for the discussion on generic del Pezzo surfaces and Professor M. Reid on maps between singular del Pezzo surfaces. This work was partially supported by an Academic Research Fund of National University of Singapore.

## Section 1. Examples

We begin with a definition. A rational elliptic (smooth) surface $`f:X^1`$ is called extremal if $`f`$ is relatively minimal (i.e., $`K_X^2=0`$) and if the Mordell Weil group $`\text{MW}(f)`$ of all sections is torsion (cf. \[MP\], \[OS\]); the latter is equivalent to saying that the Picard lattice over Q of $`X`$ is generated by a single section and fibre components.

We will first give Examples 1.1 - 1.5, where $`p5`$ is a prime number and $`\zeta _p=exp(2\pi \sqrt{1}/p)`$. We will define an action of $`g/(p)`$ on certain extremal rational elliptic (smooth) surface $`X`$. In the Weierstrass equations for $`X`$ below (cf. \[MP, Tables 5.1-5.3\]), we use $`v`$ to denote the parameter of the base curve. In Examples 1.1-1.4, a different choice of section to be blown down by the map $`XY`$ will result in isomorphic $`Y`$ because $`\text{MW}(f)`$ acts (on $`X`$ and) transitively on the set of all sections. Also except Example 1.5, the action of $`g`$ on $`X`$ stabilizes all negative curves (i.e., $`(2)`$-curves in fibres and $`(1)`$-curves as sections); see Theorems 2.1 and 2.2.

Example 1.1. Let $`f:XB^1`$ be the unique rational elliptic (smooth) surface with singular fibres of type $`II`$ and $`II^{}`$. Its Weierstrass equation is given here:

$$y^2z=x^3+v^5z^3.$$

We define an order-$`p`$ automorphism $`g`$ on $`X`$ as follows:

$$g^{}:(x,y,z;v)(\zeta _p^5x,y,\zeta _p^{15}z;\zeta _p^6v).$$

Then $`g`$ preserves the fibration $`f`$ and stabilizes exactly two fibres of type $`II^{}`$ at $`v=0`$ and of type $`II`$ at $`v=\mathrm{}`$. The restriction $`g|B`$ has order $`p`$.

Clearly, $`g`$ stabilizes the unique section $`E`$ of $`f`$, which is given by $`[x,y,z;v]=[0,1,0;v]`$. We label the type $`II^{}`$ fibre as $`_{i=1}^6iC_i+4C_7+2C_8+3C_9`$ so that $`E+_{i=1}^8C_i`$ is a linear chain and $`C_9.C_6=1`$. Let $`XY_k`$ ($`0k4`$) be the composite of the smooth blow-down of $`E+_{i=1}^kC_i`$ and the contraction of the $`(2)`$-curves $`_{i=k+2}^9C_i`$. Then $`Y=Y_k`$ satisfies :

(\*) $`Y`$ is Gorenstein del Pezzo, Picard number $`\rho (Y)=1`$, $`K_Y^2=k+1`$ and Sing $`Y`$ is one of $`E_8,E_7,E_6,D_5,A_4`$ (depending on $`k`$).

The $`g`$ on $`X`$ induces a regular action of order-$`p`$ on $`Y_k`$, which we denote by the same letter $`g`$.

Example 1.2. Let $`f:XB^1`$ be the unique rational elliptic (smooth) surface with singular fibres of type $`III`$ and $`III^{}`$. Its Weierstrass equation is given here:

$$y^2z=x^3+v^3xz^2.$$

We define an order-$`p`$ automorphism $`g`$ on $`X`$ as follows:

$$g^{}:(x,y,z;v)(\zeta _p^3x,y,\zeta _p^9z;\zeta _p^4v).$$

Then $`g`$ preserves the fibration $`f`$ and stabilizes exactly two fibres of type $`III^{}`$ at $`v=0`$ and of type $`III`$ at $`v=\mathrm{}`$. The restriction $`g|B`$ has order $`p`$.

Clearly, $`g`$ stabilizes the only two sections $`E,E^{}`$ of $`f`$, which are given by $`[x,y,z;v]=[0,1,0;v]`$ and $`[x,y,z;v]=[0,0,1;v]`$. We label the type $`III^{}`$ fibre as $`_{i=1}^4iC_i+_{j=5}^8a_jC_j`$ so that $`E+_{i=1}^7C_i`$ is a linear chain. Let $`XY_k`$ ($`k=0,1,2`$) be the composite of the smooth blow-down of $`E+_{i=1}^kC_i`$ and the contraction of the $`(2)`$-curves $`_{i=k+2}^8C_i`$ and the $`(2)`$-curve in the type $`III`$ fibre not meeting $`E`$. Then $`Y=Y_k`$ satisfies :

(\*) $`Y`$ is Gorenstein del Pezzo, Picard number $`\rho (Y)=1`$, $`K_Y^2=k+1`$ and Sing $`Y`$ is one of $`E_7+A_1,D_6+A_1`$ and $`A_5+A_1`$ (depending on $`k`$).

The $`g`$ on $`X`$ induces a regular action of order-$`p`$ on $`Y_k`$, which we denote by the same letter $`g`$.

Example 1.3. Let $`f:XB^1`$ be the unique rational elliptic (smooth) surface with singular fibres of type $`IV`$ and $`IV^{}`$. Its Weierstrass equation is given here:

$$y^2z=x^3+v^4z^3.$$

We define an order-$`p`$ automorphism $`g`$ on $`X`$ as follows:

$$g^{}:(x,y,z;v)(\zeta _p^2x,y,\zeta _p^6z;\zeta _p^3v).$$

Then $`g`$ preserves the fibration $`f`$ and stabilizes exactly two fibres of type $`IV^{}`$ at $`v=0`$ and of type $`IV`$ at $`v=\mathrm{}`$. The restriction $`g|B`$ has order $`p`$.

Clearly, $`g`$ stabilizes the only three sections $`E,E^{},E^{\prime \prime }`$ of $`f`$, which are given by $`[x,y,z;v]=[0,1,0;v]`$ and $`[x,y,z;v]=[0,\pm v^2,1;v]`$. We label the type $`IV^{}`$ fibre as $`_{i=1}^3iC_i+_{j=4}^7a_jC_j`$ so that $`E+_{i=1}^5C_i`$ is a linear chain. Let $`XY_k`$ ($`k=0,1`$) be the composite of the smooth blow-down of $`E+_{i=1}^kC_i`$ and the contraction of the $`(2)`$-curves $`_{i=k+2}^7C_i`$ and the two $`(2)`$-curves in the type $`IV`$ fibre not meeting $`E`$. Then $`Y=Y_k`$ satisfies :

(\*) $`Y`$ is Gorenstein del Pezzo, Picard number $`\rho (Y)=1`$, $`K_Y^2=k+1`$ and Sing $`Y`$ is one of $`E_6+A_2`$ and $`A_5+A_2`$ (depending on $`k`$).

The $`g`$ on $`X`$ induces a regular action of order-$`p`$ on $`Y_k`$, which we denote by the same letter $`g`$.

Example 1.4. Let $`f:X_JB^1`$ be the rational elliptic (smooth) surface with two singular fibres of type $`I_0^{}`$ and $`J`$-invariant of a general fibre equal to the constant $`J=4r^3/(4r^3+27s^2)`$. Here $`r,s`$ are in $``$ so that $`4r^3+27s^20`$. Its Weierstrass equation is given as follows, where $`v`$ is the parameter of the base curve

$$y^2z=x^3+rv^2xz^2+sv^3z^3.$$

We define an order-$`p`$ automorphism $`g`$ on $`X`$ as follows:

$$g^{}:(x,y,z;v)(\zeta _p^1x,y,\zeta _p^3z;\zeta _p^2v).$$

Then $`g`$ preserves the fibration $`f`$ and stabilizes exactly the two fibres of type $`I_0^{}`$ at $`v=0`$ and $`v=\mathrm{}`$. The restriction $`g|B`$ has order $`p`$.

Clearly, $`g`$ stabilizes the only four sections $`E,E^{},E^{\prime \prime },E^{\prime \prime \prime }`$ of $`f`$, which are given by $`[x,y,z;v]=[0,1,0;v]`$ and $`[x,y,z;v]=[x_iv,0,1;v]`$, where $`x_i`$ are the roots of $`x^3+rx+s=0`$. We label a type $`I_0^{}`$ fibre as $`_{i=1}^2iC_i+_{j=3}^5a_jC_j`$ so that $`E+_{i=1}^3C_i`$ is a linear chain. Let $`X_JY_{J,k}`$ ($`k=0,1`$) be the composite of the smooth blow-down of $`E+_{i=1}^kC_i`$ and the contraction of the $`(2)`$-curves $`_{i=k+2}^5C_i`$ and the four $`(2)`$-curve in the another type $`I_0^{}`$ fibre not meeting $`E`$. Then $`Y=Y_{J,k}`$ satisfies :

(\*) $`Y`$ is Gorenstein del Pezzo, Picard number $`\rho (Y)=1`$, $`K_Y^2=k+1`$ and Sing $`Y`$ is one of $`2D_4`$ and $`D_4+3A_1`$ (depending on $`k`$).

The $`g`$ on $`X_J`$ induces a regular action of order-$`p`$ on $`Y_{J,k}`$, which we denote by the same letter $`g`$.

In general, if $`f:XB`$ ($`^1`$) has singular fibre type $`I_0^{},I_0^{}`$, then $`X=X_J`$ for some $`J`$ \[MP, Theorem 5.4\]. We remark also that the isomorphism class of $`Y_{J,k}`$ depends (resp. does not depend) on $`J`$ when $`k=0`$ (resp. $`k=1`$); see Proposition 2.5.

Example 1.5. Let $`f:XB^1`$ be the unique rational elliptic (smooth) surface with singular fibres of type $`I_1,I_1,I_5,I_5`$. Its Weierstrass equation is given here:

$$y^2z=x^3+Axz^2+Bz^3,$$

where $`A=3(112v+14v^2+12v^3+v^4)`$, $`B=2(118v+75v^2+75v^4+18v^5+v^6)`$. The Mordell Weil group $`G=\text{MW}(f)/(5)`$ acts on $`X`$ naturally as translations (of general fibres). In particular, it acts transitively on the set of all 5 sections. The $`G`$ stabilizes every fibre. So the restriction $`G|B`$ is trivial.

In Examples 1.6 - 1.10 below, we let $`Y`$ be a Gorenstein del Pezzo singular surface of Picard number 1. Let $`\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$ be the minimal resolution and $`D`$ the exceptional divisor. Denote by $`\mathrm{\#}D`$ the number of irreducible components of $`D`$. Then the Picard number $`\rho (\stackrel{~}{Y})=1+\mathrm{\#}D`$. Hence $`K_Y^2=K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}^2=9\mathrm{\#}D`$. For $`K_Y^22`$, the $`\text{Sing}Y`$ determines uniquely the isomorphism class of $`Y`$ (see Proposition 2.5); we will also use Figure 5 in \[Y1\] or \[Y2, Ch 4\] containing all negative curves on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$, which are either $`(1)`$-curves or $`(2)`$-curves.

Example 1.6. Let $`Y`$ be the unique Gorenstein del Pezzo surface of Picard number 1 and with $`\text{Sing}Y=A_2+A_1`$. Then $`K_Y^2=6`$.

We first construct such unique surface $`Y`$. Let $`P_1=[0,0,1]`$ and $`P_2=[0,1,0]`$. Let $`\mu :\stackrel{~}{Y}^2`$ be the blow up of $`P_1`$ and its 2 infinitely near points lying on the proper transform of the line $`L_{P_1P_2}`$, such that $`\mu ^1(L_{P_1P_2})=D_1+E+D_3+D_2`$ has the following dual graph

$$(2)(1)(2)(2).$$

Here $`D_1`$ is the proper transform of $`L_{P_1P_2}`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$ be the contraction of $`D=_{i=1}^3D_i`$. Then this $`Y`$ is the unique Gorenstein del Pezzo surface of Picard number 1 and with $`\text{Sing}Y=A_2+A_1`$. Note that $`E,D_i`$ are the only negative curves on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ \[Y1, 2\]. Clearly, $`G:=\text{Aut}(Y)=\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$. Since $`G`$ clearly stabilizes all negative curves, there is an induced $`G`$-action on $`^2`$ such that the map $`\mu `$ is $`G`$-equivariant. Thus $`G=\{gPGL_2()|g(P_1)=P_1,g(L_{P_1P_2})=L_{P_1P_2}\}`$. So $`G=\{(a_{ij})PGL_2()|a_{ij}=0(i<j)\}`$. Since $`D_1^1`$, each element of $`G`$ of finite order fixes either two or all points of $`D_1`$.

Claim 1.6.1. Let $`p2`$ be a prime number. Given any point $`QD_1\{D_1E\}`$, there are exactly $`p+1`$ different $`/(p)`$-actions on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism, each of which fixes at least two points of $`D_1`$: $`Q`$, $`D_1E`$; exactly one of these $`p+1`$ actions fixes three and hence all points of $`D_1`$.

We use the same $`Q`$ to denote its image on $`^2`$ and we may assume that $`Q=P_2`$ after change of coordinates. Now $`g=(a_{ij})`$ in $`G`$ fixes $`P_2`$ if and only if $`a_{32}=a_{ij}=0`$ ($`i<j`$). We may assume that $`a_{11}=1`$ and write $`g=g_1+h`$ where $`g_1=\text{diag}[1,a_{22},a_{33}]`$ and $`h=(h_{ij})`$ with $`h_{i1}=a_{i1}`$ for for $`i=2,3`$ and all other $`h_{ij}=0`$. Then $`h^2=0`$. So if $`g`$ is of prime order $`p`$, then $`I_3=g^p=(g_1+h)^p=g_1^p+pg_1^{p1}h`$. This equality implies that $`g_1^p=I_3`$ and $`h=0`$. So $`\text{ord}(g)=p`$ if and only if $`g=g_i`$ for some $`0ip`$, where $`g_p=\text{diag}[1,1,\zeta _p]`$ and $`g_b=\text{diag}[1,\zeta _p,\zeta _p^b]`$ ($`0bp1`$) with $`\zeta _p=exp(2\pi \sqrt{1}/p)`$. Now the image $`\mu (D_1)=L_{P_1P_2}=\{X=0\}`$ is $`g`$-fixed if and only if $`g=[1,\zeta _p,\zeta _p]`$. The claim follows.

For an arbitray element $`g`$ of prime order $`p`$ in $`G`$, we know that $`g`$ fixes at least two distinct points $`D_1E`$ and $`Q`$ on $`D_1`$. Clearly, there is a projective tranformation $`\tau `$ mapping $`P_1,P_2`$ to $`P_1`$, (the image of) $`Q`$. This $`\tau `$ lifts to an automorphism $`\tau `$ on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ mapping (the pre-image of) $`P_2`$ to $`Q`$. Now $`\tau ^1g\tau `$ fixes $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ and hence equals one of the $`g_i`$ above for some $`i`$. So modulo equivariant isomorphism, $`g_i`$ ($`0ip`$) are the only non-trivial actions of $`/(p)`$ on $`Y`$.

Example 1.7. Let $`Y`$ be the unique Gorenstein del Pezzo surface of Picard number 1 and with $`\text{Sing}Y=A_3+2A_1`$. Then $`K_Y^2=4`$.

We first construct such unique surface $`Y`$. Let $`P_1=[0,0,1]`$, $`P_2=[0,1,0]`$ and $`P_3=[1,0,0]`$. Let $`\mu :\stackrel{~}{Y}^2`$ be the blow up of $`P_1,P_2`$ and 3 infinitely near points of them such that $`\mu ^1(L_{P_1P_2}+L_{P_1P_3})=D_1+E_1+D_4+D_3+D_2+E_2+D_5`$ has the following dual graph

$$(2)(1)(2)(2)(2)(1)(2).$$

Here $`D_1,D_2`$ are the proper transforms of $`L_{P_1P_3}`$, $`L_{P_1P_2}`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$ be the contraction of $`D=_{i=1}^5D_i`$. Then this $`Y`$ is the unique Gorenstein del Pezzo surface of Picard number 1 and with $`\text{Sing}Y=A_3+2A_1`$. Note that $`E_i,D_j`$ are the only negative curves on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ \[Y1, 2\]. Clearly, $`G:=\text{Aut}(Y)=\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$. Let $`H=\{hG|h(D_1)=D_1\}`$. Then $`H`$ stabilizes every negative curve. As in Example 1.6, $`\mu `$ is $`H`$-equivariant and $`H=\{hPGL_2()|h(P_i)=P_i(i=1,2),h(L_{P_1P_3})=L_{P_1P_3}\}`$. So $`H=\{(a_{ij})PGL_2()|a_{ij}=0`$ if $`ij`$ and $`(i,j)(3,1)\}`$.

Claim 1.7.1. $`GH/(2)`$.

Indeed, if $`\sigma `$ is in $`G`$ but not in $`H`$, then $`\sigma `$ switchs $`D_1`$ and $`D_5`$ and $`\sigma ^2`$ is in $`H`$. On the other hand, the blow down $`\stackrel{~}{Y}^1\times ^1`$ of $`E_1+D_4`$ and $`E_2+D_2`$ to points $`(0,0),(\mathrm{},0)`$ is $`G`$-equivariant and the automorphism $`(x,y)(1/x,y)`$ downstairs lifts to an involution $`\sigma `$ in $`G`$ switching $`D_1`$ and $`D_5`$.

By the claim above, every prime order $`p`$ ($`p3`$) element $`g`$ of $`G`$ is contained in $`H`$. As in Example 1.6, $`g=\text{diag}[1,1,\zeta _p]`$ or $`g=\text{diag}[1,\zeta _p,\zeta _p^b]`$ ($`0bp1`$).

Example 1.8. Let $`Y`$ be the unique Gorenstein del Pezzo surface of Picard number 1 and with $`\text{Sing}Y=3A_2`$. Then $`K_Y^2=3`$.

We first construct such unique surface $`Y`$. Let $`P_1=[0,0,1]`$, $`P_2=[0,1,0]`$ and $`P_3=[1,0,0]`$. Let $`\mu :\stackrel{~}{Y}^2`$ be the blow up of $`P_1,P_2,P_3`$ and 3 infinitely near points of them such that $`\mu ^1(_{i<j}L_{P_iP_j})=E_1+D_1+D_2+E_2+D_3+D_4+E_3+D_5+D_6`$ is a simple loop (with $`E_1.D_6=1`$ and) with $`E_i^2=1`$ and $`D_j^2=2`$. Here $`D_1,D_3,D_5`$ are the proper transforms of $`L_{P_iP_j}`$ with $`(i,j)=(1,2)`$, $`(1,3)`$, $`(2,3)`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$ be the contraction of $`D=_{i=1}^6D_i`$. Then this $`Y`$ is the unique Gorenstein del Pezzo surface of Picard number 1 and with $`\text{Sing}Y=3A_2`$. Note that $`E_i,D_j`$ are the only negative curves on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ \[Y1, 2\]. Clearly, $`G:=\text{Aut}(Y)=\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$. Let $`H=\{hG|h(E_i)=E_i(i=1,2,3)\}`$. Then $`H`$ stabilizes every negative curve. As in Example 1.6, the $`\mu `$ is $`H`$-equivariant and $`H=\{hPGL_2()|h(P_i)=P_i(i=1,2,3)\}`$. So $`H=\{\text{diag}[a,b,c]PGL_2()\}`$.

Claim 1.8.1. $`GHS_3`$.

Indeed, if $`\sigma `$ is in $`G`$ but not in $`H`$, then $`\sigma `$ permutes $`E_i`$’s and hence $`G/HS_3`$. On the other hand, consider the blow down $`\stackrel{~}{Y}^1\times ^1`$ of $`E_1+D_6`$, $`E_3`$ and $`E_2+D_3`$ to points $`(0,0)`$, $`(\mathrm{},0)`$ and $`(\mathrm{},\mathrm{})`$. Then the involution $`\sigma :(x,y)(1/y,1/x)`$ downstairs lifts to an involution $`\sigma `$ in $`G`$ switching $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$. Similarly, we can find an involution $`\sigma _{ij}`$ in $`G`$ switching $`E_i`$ and $`E_j`$. This proves the claim.

By the claim above, every prime order $`p`$ ($`p5`$) element $`g`$ of $`G`$ is contained in $`H`$. As in Example 1.6, $`g=\text{diag}[1,1,\zeta _p]`$ or $`g=\text{diag}[1,\zeta _p,\zeta _p^b]`$ ($`0bp1`$).

Example 1.9. Let $`Y`$ be the unique Gorenstein del Pezzo surface of Picard number 1 and with $`\text{Sing}Y=2A_3+A_1`$. Then $`K_Y^2=2`$.

We first construct such unique surface $`Y`$. Let $`P_1=[0,0,1]`$, $`P_2=[0,1,0]`$, $`P_3=[1,0,0]`$ and $`P_4=[1,1,0]`$. Let $`\mu :\stackrel{~}{Y}^2`$ be the blow up of $`P_1,P_2,P_3`$ and 4 infinitely near points of them such that $`\mu ^1(_{i<j}L_{P_iP_j})=L+C`$ with $`L=E_1+D_1+D_2+D_3+E_4+D_6+D_5+D_4`$ and $`C=E_2+D_7+E_3`$. Here $`E_i^2=1`$ and $`D_j^2=2`$. This $`L`$ is a simple loop (with $`E_1.D_4=1`$) and $`C`$ is a linear chain such that $`L.C=2`$ and $`L`$ meets $`C`$ at the two points $`E_2D_2`$ and $`E_3D_5`$. Also $`D_1,D_5,D_6,E_2`$ are the proper transforms of $`L_{P_iP_j}`$ with $`(i,j)=(1,2)`$, $`(2,3)`$, $`(1,4)`$, $`(1,3)`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$ be the contraction of $`D=_{i=1}^7D_i`$. Then this $`Y`$ is the unique Gorenstein del Pezzo surface of Picard number 1 and with $`\text{Sing}Y=2A_3+A_1`$. Note that $`E_i,D_j`$ are the only negative curves on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ \[Y1, 2\]. Clearly, $`G:=\text{Aut}(Y)=\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$. Let $`H=\{hG|h(E_i)=E_i(1i4)\}`$. Then $`H`$ stabilizes every negative curve. As in Example 1.6, $`\mu `$ is $`H`$-equivariant and $`H=\{hPGL_2()|h(P_i)=P_i(1i4)\}`$. So $`H=\{\text{diag}[1,1,c]PGL_2()\}`$.

Claim 1.9.1. $`GH(/(2))^2`$.

Indeed, if $`\sigma `$ is in $`G`$ but not in $`H`$, then $`\sigma `$ stabilizes both sets $`\{E_1,E_4\}`$ and $`\{E_2,E_3\}`$. Note that the blow down $`\stackrel{~}{Y}^1\times ^1`$ of $`E_1`$, $`E_4`$, $`E_2+D_2`$ and $`E_3+D_5`$ to points $`(0,\mathrm{}),(\mathrm{},0),(0,0),(\mathrm{},\mathrm{})`$ is $`G`$-equivariant. The involutions $`\sigma _1:(x,y)(1/y,1/x)`$, $`\sigma _2:(x,y)(y,x)`$ lift to involutions $`\sigma _1`$, $`\sigma _2`$ in $`G`$ switching respectively $`E_2`$ and $`E_3`$, $`E_1`$ and $`E_4`$. This proves the claim.

By the claim above, every prime order $`p`$ ($`p3`$) element $`g`$ of $`G`$ is contained in $`H`$. Arguing as in Example 1.6, $`g=\text{diag}[1,1,\zeta _p]`$.

Example 1.10. Let $`Y`$ be the unique Gorenstein del Pezzo surface of Picard number 1 and with $`\text{Sing}Y=A_7`$. Then $`K_Y^2=2`$. We shall show that $`\text{Aut}(Y)=/(4)\times /(2)`$.

We first construct such unique surface $`Y`$. Let $`P_1=(0,0)`$ and $`P_2=(\mathrm{},0)`$. Let $`\mu :\stackrel{~}{Y}^1\times ^1`$ be the blow up of $`P_1,P_2`$ and 4 infinitely near points of them such that $`\mu ^1(L_{P_1}+M+L_{P_2})=E_1+D+E_2`$ with $`D=D_1+\mathrm{}+D_7`$; here $`L_{P_i}`$ ($`i=1,2`$) are the fibres $`x=0`$ and $`x=\mathrm{}`$, and $`M`$ is the section $`y=0`$. Also $`E_i^2=1`$ and $`D_j^2=2`$. This $`D`$ is a linear chain such that $`E_i.D=E_i.D_j=1`$ with $`(i,j)=(1,2)`$, $`(2,6)`$. Also $`D_1`$, $`D_4`$, $`D_7`$ are the proper transforms of $`L_{P_1}`$, $`M`$, $`L_{P_2}`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$ be the contraction of $`D`$. Then this $`Y`$ is the unique Gorenstein del Pezzo surface of Picard number 1 and with $`\text{Sing}Y=A_7`$. Note that $`E_i,D_j`$ are the only negative curves on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ \[Y1, 2\].

Clearly, $`G:=\text{Aut}(Y)=\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$. Let $`H=\{hG|h(E_i)=E_i(i=1,2)\}`$. Then $`H`$ stabilizes every negative curve. Note that the restriction $`H|D_i`$ with $`i=2`$ (resp. $`i=6`$) is trivial for $`H`$ fixes three intersection points of $`D_i`$ ($`^1`$) with $`D_{i1}`$, $`D_{i+1}`$ and $`E_1`$ (resp. $`E_2`$). As in Example 1.6, $`\mu `$ is $`G`$-equivariant. So $`H=\{h\text{Aut}(^1\times ^1)|h(P_i)=P_i(i=1,2);h|D_j=\text{id}(j=2,6)\}`$.

Since an element $`h`$ in $`H`$ stabilizes the curves $`L_{P_1}=\{x=0\}`$ and $`M=\{y=0\}`$, we have $`h:(x,y)(ax,by)`$. Following the blow up process, we see that $`h|D_j=\text{id}`$ ($`j=2,6`$) if and only if $`a=b^2`$ and $`a^1=b^2`$. Thus $`H=h_1/(4)`$, where $`h_1=(1,\sqrt{1})`$. Let $`\sigma _c:(x,y)(c/x,y)`$ be an involution. Then for a unique choice of $`c`$, the $`\sigma _c`$ lifts to an involution on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ switching $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$. Clearly, $`h_1\sigma _c=\sigma _ch_1`$. Therefore, $`G=h_1\times \sigma _c/(4)\times /(2)`$.

## Section 2. Proofs of Theorems

We will first prove Theorems 2.1-2.3. Theorems A, B and C will follow from Theorem 2.3, the observation that $`K_Y^2=9\mathrm{\#}D`$ in Proposition 2.5, Proposition 2.5 (3) and Lemma 2.6 (4).

Theorem 2.1. Let $`p5`$ be a prime number. Let $`f:X^1`$ be an extremal rational elliptic (smooth) surface such that $`/(p)`$ acts non-trivially on $`X`$. Then modulo equivariant isomorphism, the $`/(p)`$-action equals one of those in Examples $`1.11.5`$ ($`4`$ isolated ones and a family parametrized by a parameter $`J`$ in $``$). In particular, $`/(q)\text{Aut}(X)`$ for every prime $`q5`$, unless $`p=5`$ and $`X`$ is given in Example $`1.5`$.

Theorem 2.2. Let $`p5`$ be a prime number. Let $`f:X^1`$ be an extremal rational elliptic (smooth) surface. Then a non-trivial action (if exists) of $`/(p)`$ on $`X`$ is unique modulo equivariant isomorphism. Also the action stabilizes all negative curves on $`X`$, unless $`p=5`$ and $`X`$ is given in Example $`1.5`$.

Theorem 2.3. Let $`p5`$ be a prime number. Let $`Y`$ be a Gorenstein del Pezzo (singular) surface of Picard number $`1`$.

(1) $`Y`$ admits a non-trivial $`/(p)`$-action if and only if either $`K_Y^22`$ and $`\text{Sing}YA_7`$, or $`K_Y^2=1`$ and $`|K_Y|`$ has exactly two singular members (i.e., $`K_Y^2=1`$ and $`Y`$ equals one of those four in Examples $`1.11.4`$) whence $`\text{Sing}Y`$ is one of the following (see (2.5).)

$$E_8,E_7+A_1,E_6+A_2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}D_4.$$

(2) If $`K_Y^2=1`$, then there is at most one non-trivial $`/(p)`$-action on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism.

(3) If $`\text{Sing}Y`$ is either $`A_2+A_1`$, or $`A_3+2A_1`$ or $`3A_2`$, then there are exactly $`p+1`$ different non-trivial $`/(p)`$-actions on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism (see Examples $`1.6`$, $`1.7`$ and $`1.8`$).

(4) If $`\text{Sing}Y=A_7`$, then $`\text{Aut}(Y)/(4)/(2)`$ (see Example $`1.10`$).

(5) If $`K_Y^22`$, $`Y\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_2`$ and $`\text{Sing}Y`$ is neither one of those four in $`(3)`$ and $`(4)`$, then there is a unique non-trivial $`/(p)`$-action on $`Y`$, modulo equivariant isomorphism.

We need some preparations.

Lemma 2.4. Let $`f:XB(^1)`$ be an extremal rational elliptic (smooth) surface such that there are at least three singular fibres. Then either $`|\text{Aut}(X)|=2^a5`$ with $`1a3`$ or $`|\text{Aut}(X)|=2^a3^b`$ with $`1a+b7`$. In the first case every element of order $`5`$ acts transitively on the set of the $`5`$ sections of $`f`$.

Proof. Let $`F`$ be the generic fibre of $`f`$ over the function field $`(B)`$. We have an exact sequence (see \[G, p.128\]):

$$(1)\text{Aut}(F)\text{Aut}(X)\text{Aut}(B).$$

Let $`F_1=f^1(t_1),\mathrm{},F_r=f^1(t_r)`$ be all singular fibres of $`f`$. Then $`H=\text{Im}(\text{Aut}(X)\text{Aut}(B))`$ acts on the set $`\{t_1,\mathrm{},t_r\}`$. The natural map $`HS_r`$ is injective for $`r3`$ and $`B^1`$. If we divide $`\{t_1,\mathrm{},t_r\}`$ into a disjoint union of subsets of cardinality $`n_k`$ with $`_kn_k=r`$, such that fibres over points in the same subset are of the same type, then $`H`$ stabilizes each subset and hence $`|H|`$ divides $`\mathrm{\Pi }_k(n_k)!`$.

On the other hand, if we let $`\text{MW}(f)`$ be the Mordell-Weil group of all sections of $`f`$ and $`\text{Aut}(F)_0`$ be the subgroup of $`\text{Aut}(F)`$ fixing the zero element (coming from a pre-designated zero section of $`f`$), then $`\text{Aut}(F)=\text{MW}(f)\text{Aut}(F)_0`$. So we conclude that $`|\text{Aut}(X)|=|\text{Aut}(F)_0||\text{MW}(f)||H|`$. All such $`f`$ are given in \[MP, Theorem 4.1\] (see also \[ibid, Theorem 5.4\]). By \[ibid. Table 5.1-5.3\], the $`J`$-function $`J(F)`$ is not a constant. So $`|\text{Aut}(F)_0|=2`$. Now the lemma follows from the classification of singular fibre types and $`\text{MW}(f)`$ in \[ibid. Theorem 4.1\] and the above observation that $`|H|`$ divides $`\mathrm{\Pi }_k(n_k)!`$.

Proposition 2.5. Let $`Y`$ ($`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_2`$) be a Gorenstein del Pezzo (singular) surface of Picard number $`1`$.

(1) $`\text{Sing}Y`$ is one of the following ($`26`$ of them):

$$\begin{array}{c}E_8,E_7+A_1,E_6+A_2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}D_4,D_8,D_5+A_3,D_6+2A_1,A_8,A_7+A_1,\\ 2A_4,A_5+A_2+A_1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}A_3+2A_1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}A_2,E_7,D_6+A_1,A_7,A_5+A_2,D_4+3A_1,\\ 2A_3+A_1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}A_2,A_5+A_1,E_6,A_3+2A_1,D_5,A_4,A_2+A_1.\end{array}$$

(2) $`\text{Sing}Y`$ determines uniquely the isomorphism class of $`Y`$ and $`|K_Y|`$ has at least three singular members, if $`\text{Sing}Y`$ is not $`E_8,E_7+A_1,E_6+A_2`$ or $`2D_4`$. If $`D`$ is one of $`E_8,E_7+A_1`$ and $`E_6+A_2`$, then there are exactly two isomorphism classes of $`Y=Y_D(i)`$ with $`\text{Sing}Y=D`$; $`Y=Y_D(1)`$ is given in Examples $`1.11.3`$; the $`|K_Y|`$ with $`Y=Y_D(1)`$ (resp. $`Y=Y_D(2)`$) has exactly two (resp. at least three) singular members. If $`\text{Sing}Y=2D_4`$ then $`Y`$ is isomorphic to one of those $`Y_{J,0}`$ in Example $`1.4`$ parametrized by $`J`$ in $``$ and $`|K_Y|`$ has exactly two singular members.

(3) Suppose that $`K_Y^2=1`$ and $`|K_Y|`$ contains at least three singular members. Then $`|\text{Aut}(Y)|=2^a3^b`$ with $`1a+b7`$.

For the $`Y`$ in the Proposition above, we let Let $`\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$ be the minimal resolution and $`D`$ the exceptional divisor. Clearly, $`\text{Aut}(Y)=\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$. Also the Picard number $`\rho (\stackrel{~}{Y})=1+\mathrm{\#}D`$ and $`K_Y^2=K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}^2=9\mathrm{\#}D`$, where $`\mathrm{\#}D`$ is the number of irreducible components of $`D`$.

Proof of Propositon $`2.5`$. (1) is well known (see e.g. \[MZ1\]). (2) is proved in \[Y1,2\]. We state the idea of the proof of (2) for the case $`K_Y^2=1`$. Let $`X\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ be the blow up of the unique point $`\text{Bs}|K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}|`$ with $`E`$ the exceptional curve (see the proof of Theorem 2.3 below). Then $`f=\mathrm{\Phi }_{|K_X|}:XB(^1)`$ is an extremal rational elliptic surface. These $`X`$, $`\text{MW}(f)`$ and isomorphism classes are classified in \[MP, Theorems 4.1 and 5.4\]. The composition map $`XY`$ defines a one-to-one correspondence between the set of isomorphism classes of extremal rational elliptic (smooth) surfaces and the set of Gorenstein del Pezzo surfaces of Picard number 1 and degree 1; the singular members of $`|K_Y|`$ are exactly the images of singular fibres of $`f`$.

The assertion(3) follows from Lemma 2.4 and the observation that $`\text{Aut}(Y)=\{g\text{Aut}(X)|g(E)=E)\}\sigma `$; here $`E`$ is a section of $`f`$ and $`\sigma `$ acts as $`\text{id}`$ on the generic fibre (fixing the zero section which is chosen to be $`E`$).

Lemma 2.6. Let $`Y`$ be as in the Proposition above. Let $`g`$ be an element in $`\text{Aut}(Y)=\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$ of prime order $`p`$ ($`p5`$).

(1) Every negative curve on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ is either a $`(1)`$-curve or a $`(2)`$-curve, and all negative curves are $`g`$-stable. If $`K_Y^22`$, then there are at most four of $`(1)`$-curves on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$.

(2) If $`E`$ is a $`(1)`$-curve on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$, then $`K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}=dE+\mathrm{\Delta }`$ numerically, where $`d=K_Y^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is an effective $``$-divisor with support in $`D`$.

(3) There is a $`(1)`$-curve $`E`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ such that $`E.D=1`$ if $`\text{Sing}Y`$ equals one of the following:

$$E_7,D_6+A_1,A_7,A_5+A_2,A_5+A_1,E_6,D_5,A_4.$$

(4) Theorem A $`(3)`$ in the Introduction is true.

Proof. The nef and bigness of $`K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}`$ implies that every negative curve is either a $`(1)`$-curve or a $`(2)`$-curve. When $`K_Y^2=1`$, (1) is reduced to Theorem 2.2 (see the proof of Theorem 2.3). (3) and the second part of (1) follows from Figure 5 in \[Y1\] or \[Y2, Ch 4\]. In particular, when $`K_Y^22`$ all $`(1)`$-curve are $`g`$-stable. Also every component of $`D`$ of type as shown in Proposition 2.5 is clearly $`g`$-stable. So (1) follows.

For (2), we note that the Picard number $`\rho (Y)=1`$, whence we have numerically $`K_Y=b\overline{E}`$ for some rational number $`b`$, where $`\overline{E}`$ is the image on $`Y`$ of $`E`$. Pulling back this relation, we get $`K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}=b(E+\mathrm{\Delta }^{})`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is an effective $``$-divisor and supported by $`D`$. Intersecting this with $`K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}`$, we get $`b=K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}^2=K_Y^2`$.

To prove (4), we need:

Claim 2.6.1. There is a birational morphism $`\mu :\stackrel{~}{Y}^2`$.

By (1), we have a birational morphism $`\stackrel{~}{Y}\mathrm{\Sigma }_d`$ where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_d`$ is the Hirzebruch surface of degree $`d2`$. We let $`M`$ be the section on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_d`$ with $`M^2=d`$. Since $`K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}^2<8`$, the map $`\stackrel{~}{Y}\mathrm{\Sigma }_d`$ factors through the blow up $`Z\mathrm{\Sigma }_d`$ of a point on a fibre $`F`$. The inverse on $`Z`$ of $`F`$ is a pair $`E+F^{}`$ of intersecting $`(1)`$-curves with $`F^{}`$ the proper transform of $`F`$. If $`d=1`$, then the claim is clear. If $`d=0,2`$, we have a composition $`\stackrel{~}{Y}Z\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ where the latter map is the blow down of $`F^{}`$. The claim follows.

We continue the proof of Lemma 2.6 (4). By (1), the $`\mu `$-exceptional divisor is $`g`$-stable. So there is an induced action of $`g`$ on $`^2`$ so that $`\mu `$ is $`g`$-equivariant. Now Theorem A (3) follows. This proves the lemma.

Let $`X`$ be a smooth projective surface with an order-$`n`$ automorphism $`g`$. Let $`C_0+C_1+\mathrm{}+C_r`$ be a linear chain of $`(2)`$-curves each of which is $`g`$-stable. Denote by $`P_{i+1}=C_iC_{i+1}`$. Note that the fixed set $`C_i^g`$ contains two distinct points $`P_i`$, $`P_{i+1}`$, where $`P_0C_0`$ and $`P_{r+1}C_r`$. Let $`\zeta `$ be a primitive $`n`$-th root of 1.

Lemma 2.7. Let $`g|P_i=(\zeta ^{a_i},\zeta ^{b_i})`$ be the diagonalization. Then we have $`b_i+a_{i+1}=0`$ (mod $`n`$) and $`a_i+b_i=a_j+b_j`$ (mod $`n`$) For all $`i`$ and $`j`$.

Proof. The first equality follows from the fact if $`g`$ acts as a multiple $`\zeta ^e`$ at the origin of $`C_i^1`$ then it acts as a multiple $`\zeta ^e`$ at the infinity. For the second equality, we note that the restricted line bundle $`𝒪(K_X)|C_i`$ is trivial for $`C_i`$ is a $`(2)`$-curve, and $`g`$ acts on it by a constant multiple $`g:(dx_idy_i)|C_i\zeta ^{a_i+b_i}(dx_idy_i)|C_i`$, where $`x_i,y_i`$ are defining equations of $`C_i,C_{i+1}`$ at $`P_i`$. So $`\zeta ^{a_i+b_i}=\zeta ^{a_{i+1}+b_{i+1}}`$ for $`P_i`$ and $`P_{i+1}`$ are on the same curve $`C_i`$. This proves the lemma.

In Lemmas 2.8 and 2.9 below, we let $`f:XB^1`$ be an extremal rational elliptic (smooth) surface and $`g`$ an element in $`\text{Aut}(X)`$ of prime order $`p`$ ($`p5`$). Note that each fibre is a member of $`|K_X|`$. So the fibration is $`g`$-stable. We denote by $`g|B`$ the induced action of $`g`$ on the base curve $`B`$.

Lemma 2.8. Suppose that $`g|B=\text{id}`$. Then $`f`$ has singular fibres of types $`I_5,I_5,I_1,I_1`$ (such $`X`$ is unique; see $`[MP]`$), $`p=5`$ and $`\text{MW}(f)/(5)`$. Moreover, the action of $`g/(5)`$ on $`X`$ is identical to that of $`\text{MW}(f)`$ on $`X`$ as translations (on general fibre).

Proof. If $`p`$ does not divide $`|\text{MW}(f)|`$, then $`g`$ stabilizes each section; so $`g`$ fixes each section for $`g|B=\text{id}`$. Thus a general fibre $`F`$ is an elliptic curve on which $`g`$ acts with a fixed point (the intersection of $`F`$ and a section). So $`\text{ord}(g|F)`$ divides 12. On the other hand $`\text{ord}(g|F)`$ divides $`\text{ord}(g|X)=p5`$. So $`g|F=\text{id}`$. This and $`g|B=\text{id}`$ imply that $`g=\text{id}_X`$, a contradiction. Thus $`p`$ divides $`|\text{MW}(f)|`$. Now the first part of lemma follows from \[MP, Theorems 4.1 and 5.4\]. Also $`g`$ acts transitively on the set of all 5 sections by the argument above.

For the second part, choose an automorphism $`h`$ of $`X`$ coming from an element (denoted also by $`h`$) of $`\text{MW}(f)`$ such that $`g^1h`$ acts identically on the set of the 5 sections in $`\text{MW}(f)`$. Then $`k=g^1h`$ acts on a general fibre $`F`$ with at least 5 fixed points (the intersection of $`F`$ with the 5 sections). Note that $`\text{ord}(k|F)`$ divides $`12`$ and if $`k|F\pm \text{id}`$, then $`J(F)=0`$ or $`1728`$. On the other hand, $`J(F)`$ is not a constant by \[MP, Table 5.3\]. We reach a contradiction. So $`k|F=\pm \text{id}`$. If $`k|F=\text{id}`$, then $`k=\text{id}_X`$ for $`k|B=\text{id}`$, whence $`g=h`$. If $`k|F=\text{id}`$ then $`g|F=(\text{id}_F)h`$ has order $`10`$, a contradiction. This proves the lemma.

Lemma 2.9. Suppose that $`g|B\text{id}`$. Then $`f`$ has one of the following $`4`$ singular fibre types:

(i) $`II,II^{},`$ (ii) $`III,III^{},`$ (iii) $`IV,IV^{},`$ (iv) $`I_0^{},I_0^{}`$.

Moreover, for each $`k=1,2,3`$, there is a unique $`X`$ of singular fibre type $`(k)`$ above. The surfaces with singular fibre type $`(iv)`$ above are parametrized by the $`J`$-invariant of a general fibre $`F`$ ($`J(F)`$ is a constant).

Proof. If one singular fibre is not $`g`$-stable, then $`f`$ has $`p`$ ($`p5`$) copies of the same fibre, which contradicts the fact that $`f`$ has at most four singular fibres \[MP, Theorem 4.1\]. So every singular fibre is $`g`$-stable. If $`f`$ has more than two singular fibres, then $`g|B`$ fixes more than two points (over which lying the singular fibres), so $`g|B=\text{id}`$ for $`B^1`$. This is a contradiction. Thus $`f`$ has at most two singular fibres. Now the lemma follows from \[MP, Theorem 4.1\].

In view of Lemmas 2.8 and 2.9, to show Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 we have only to show that for each $`X`$ satisfying one of 4 cases in Lemma 2.9, there is a unique non-trivial $`G=/(p)`$-action ($`p5`$) on $`X`$ (one is given in Examples 1.1-1.4). Note that in all these 4 cases, $`|\text{MW}(f)|4`$ and hence $`G`$ acts trivially on the set of sections, i.e., $`G`$ stabilizes every section, because $`p5`$. This and $`p5`$ again imply that every component in the two singular fibres (each of which is $`G`$-stable) is $`G`$-stable and hence the central component $`C_0`$, meeting three other components $`C_1,C_2,C_3`$, of a singular fibre is $`G`$-fixed (point wise). Let $`P=C_0C_1`$ and let $`h`$ be a generator of $`G`$ such that $`h|P`$ can be diagonalized as $`h|P=(1,\zeta _p)`$, where $`h`$ acts identically along the direction of $`C_0`$ and as a multiple $`\zeta _p=exp(2\pi \sqrt{1}/p)`$ along the direction of $`C_1`$. Applying Lemma 2.7, we can show that the $`g`$ in Examples 1.1 - 1.4 satisfies $`g|P=(1,\zeta _p)`$ so that $`g^1h`$ acts identically along the directions of $`C_0`$ and $`C_1`$. Hence $`g^1h=\text{id}_X`$ and $`h=g`$. This shows that the non-trivial action of $`/(p)`$ on $`X`$ is the same as that of $`g/(p)`$ on $`X`$ in one of Examples 1.1 - 1.4. This proves Theorems 2.1 and 2.2.

We can avoid the use of Lemma 2.7 by choosing a suitable power $`g^e`$ so that $`g^e|P=(1,\zeta _p)`$, whence $`h=g^e`$; so Lemma 2.7 claims that $`e=1`$ indeed.

Next we prove Theorem 2.3 by reducing to Theorems 2.1 and 2.2. Let $`\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$ and $`D`$ be as in Proposition 2.5. The assertion(4) is proved in Example 1.10. If $`K_Y^27`$ then $`K_Y^2=8`$ and $`Y`$ equals the quadric cone $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_2`$ in $`^3`$ (see \[MZ1\], or Proposition 2.5); in this case Theorem 2.3 can be checked easily in the spirit of Example 1.6. So we may assume that $`\text{Sing}YA_7`$ and $`K_Y^26`$.

We first consider the case $`K_Y^2=1`$. By the Riemann-Roch theorem and Kawamata-Viehweg Vanishing \[Ka, V\], the linear system $`|K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}|`$ has dimension 1, and it has a unique base point $`Q`$ by \[D, Proposition 2, p.40\]. Let $`X\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ be the blow-up of $`Q`$ with $`E`$ the exceptional curve. Then the linear system $`|K_X|`$ has dimension 1 and is base point free, so it defines an elliptic fibration $`f:XB^1`$ with $`E`$ as a section. Clearly, the non-trivial action of $`/(p)`$ on $`Y`$ induces a non-trivial action of $`/(p)`$ on $`X`$ so that the birational morphism $`XY`$ is $`/(p)`$-equivariant. Since the Picard number $`\rho (Y)=1`$, we see easily that $`f`$ is extremal in the sense of \[MP\]. Now Theorem 2.3 : the case $`K_Y^2=1`$ follows from Theorems 2.1 and 2.2. Indeed, since $`/(p)`$ stabilizes the section $`E`$, this $`X`$ is not equal to the surface in Example 1.5.

Next we consider the case $`d:=K_Y^22`$. Suppose that $`\text{Sing}Y`$ is as in Lemma 2.6 (3), then there is a $`(1)`$-curve $`E_d`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ such that $`E_d.D=1`$. If there is an element $`g`$ in $`\text{Aut}(Y)=\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})`$ of prime order $`p`$ ($`p5`$), then $`g`$ fixes at least two points on $`E_d`$ ($`^1`$): $`E_dD`$, $`Q_d`$. Let $`\sigma :\stackrel{~}{Y}_{d1}\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ be the blow-up of $`Q_d`$ with $`E_{d1}`$ the exceptional curve. Then the anti-canonical divisor of $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{d1}`$ equals $`\sigma ^{}(K_{\stackrel{~}{Y}})E_{d1}=dE_d^{}+(d1)E_{d1}+\sigma ^{}(\mathrm{\Delta })0`$ in notation of Lemma 2.6 (where $`E_d^{}`$ is the proper transform of $`E_d`$), and hence it is nef and also big for its self-intersection equals $`d11`$. So the divisor $`D_{d1}=\sigma ^{}(D)+E_d^{}`$ of $`(2)`$-curves which has zero intersection with the nef and big anti-canonical divisor of $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{d1}`$, is contractible to rational double singularities by the map $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{d1}Y_{d1}`$. Also $`Y_{d1}`$ has Picard number 1 and ample $`K_{Y_{d1}}`$. Clearly, our $`g`$ in $`\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y})=\text{Aut}(Y)`$ induces an element $`g`$ in $`\text{Aut}(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{d1})=\text{Aut}(Y_{d1})`$ so that $`\sigma `$ is $`g`$-equivariant.

In particular, if $`d=2`$ then $`\text{Sing}Y_{d1}`$ is one of those four in Theorem 2.3 (1) and also such $`g/(p)`$ in $`\text{Aut}(Y_{d1})`$ is unique modulo equivariant isomorphism; hence such $`g`$ in $`\text{Aut}(Y)`$ is also unique for any given $`Y`$ (see Lemma 2.6 (1)), modulo equivariant isomorphism.

For general $`d2`$, we have blow-ups below to reduce to the case $`d=1`$: $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_1\stackrel{~}{Y}_2\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_d`$. Using the information on the location of the point $`E_dD`$ in $`D`$ given in Figure 5 in \[Y1\] or \[Y2, Ch 4\], all possible chains of singularity types : $`\text{Sing}Y_1\text{Sing}Y_2\mathrm{}\text{Sing}Y_d`$ are as follows:

$$\begin{array}{c}E_8E_7E_6D_5A_4,\\ E_7+A_1D_6+A_1A_5+A_1,\\ E_6+A_2A_5+A_2.\end{array}$$

So Theorem 2.3 is true if $`\text{Sing}Y`$ is one of those in Lemma 2.6 (3).

We are left with those $`Y`$ with $`\text{Sing}Y`$ equal to one of the following:

$$D_4+3A_1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}A_3+A_1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}A_2,A_3+2A_1,A_2+A_1.$$

For the last four cases, Theorem 2.3 follows from the arguments in Examples 1.6-1.9.

Now we consider the remaining case $`\text{Sing}Y=D_4+3A_1`$. Then $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ contains a $`(1)`$-curve $`E_2`$ meeting the three isolated $`(2)`$-curves in $`D`$ \[ibid. Figure 5\]. Since $`g`$ with $`\text{ord}(g)=p5`$ stabilizes every component of $`D`$, this $`g`$ fixes the three points $`DE_2`$ and hence $`E_2`$ ($`^1`$) is $`g`$-fixed. Blowing up a point on $`E_2D`$, as above we will reduce to $`Y_1`$ with $`\text{Sing}Y_1=2D_4`$. Now the uniqueness of such $`g/(p)`$ in $`\text{Aut}(Y)`$ modulo equivariant isomorphism, follows from Theorem 2.3: the case $`K_Y^2=1`$. This proves Theorem 2.3.

## References

\[dF\] Tommaso de Fernex, Birational trasformations of prime order of the projective plane, preprint 2001.

\[D\] M. Demazure, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 777 (1980), Springer.

\[DO\] I. Dolgachev and D. Ortland, Point sets in projective spaces and theta functions, Ast risque, Vol. 165 (1988).

\[G\] M. H. Gizatullin, Rational $`G`$-surfaces, Math. USSR Izv. 16 (1981), 103–134.

\[GPZ\] R. V. Gurjar, C. R. Pradeep, D. -Q. Zhang, On Gorenstein surfaces isomorphic to $`^2/G`$, Nagoya Math. J. to appear, math.AG/0112242.

\[H1\] T. Hosoh, Automorphism groups of cubic surfaces, J. Algebra 192 (1997), 651–677.

\[H2\] T. Hosoh, Automorphism groups of quartic del Pezzo surfaces, J. Algebra 185 (1996), 374–389.

\[I\] V. A. Iskovskih, Minimal models of rational surfaces over arbitrary fields, Math. USSR Izv. 14 (1981), 17–39.

\[K\] S. Kantor, Theorie der endlichen Gruppen von eindeutigen Transformationen in der Ebene, Berlin: Mayer $`\&`$ Muller, 1895.

\[Ka\] Y. Kawamata, A generalization of Kodaira-Ramanujam’s vanishing theorem, Math. Ann. 261 (1982), 43–46.

\[Ko\] M. Koitabashi, Automorphism groups of generic rational surfaces, J. Algebra 116 (1988), 130 –142.

\[KM\] J. Kollar and S. Mori, Birational geometry of algebraic varieties, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, 134 (1998).

\[M1\] Yu. I. Manin, Rational surfaces over perfect fields, II, Math. USSR Sb. 1 (1967), 141–168.

\[M2\] Yu. I. Manin, Cubic forms : Algebra, geometry, arithmetic, 2nd ed, North-Holland Math. Library, 4 (1986), North-Holland Publ. Co., Amsterdam-New York.

\[MM\] M. Miyanishi and K. Masuda, Open algebraic surfaces with finite group actions, Transform. Group, to appear.

\[MP\] R. Miranda and U. Persson, On extremal rational elliptic surfaces, Math. Z. 193 (1986), 537–558.

\[MZ1,2\] M. Miyanishi and D. -Q. Zhang, Gorenstein log del Pezzo surfaces of rank one, I; II, J. Algebra 118 (1988), 63–84; 156 (1993), 183–193.

\[MZ3\] M. Miyanishi and D. -Q. Zhang, Equivariant classification of Gorenstein open log del Pezzo surfaces with finite group actions, Preprint 2001.

\[O\] K. Oguiso, Automorphism groups in a family of K3 surfaces, math.AG/0104049.

\[OS\] K. Oguiso and T. Shioda, The Mordell-Weil lattice of a rational elliptic surface, Comment. Math. Univ. St. Paul. 40 (1991), 83–99.

\[S\] B. Segre, The Non-singular cubic surfaces, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1942.

\[V\] E. Viehweg, Vanishing theorems, J. Reine Angew. Math. 335 (1982), 1–8.

\[Y1\] Q. Ye, On Gorenstein log del Pezzo surfaces, Japanese J. Math. to appear, math.AG / 0109223.

\[Y2\] Q. Ye, On algebraic surfaces with non-positive Kodaira dimension, PhD thesis, National Univ. of Singapore, 2001.

\[ZD\] D. -Q. Zhang, Automorphisms of finite order on rational surfaces, with an appendix by I. Dolgachev, J. Algebra 238 (2001), 560–589.

\[Z2\] D. -Q. Zhang, Automorphisms of finite order on extremal rational elliptic surfaces and Gorenstein del Pezzo surfaces of degree one, Contemporary Math. to appear.


format: text

text:
# Dynamics of electromagnetic waves in Kerr geometry

## I. INTRODUCTION

We know that Maxwell’s equations describe the dynamics of electro-magnetic wave. Four equations indicate how electric and magnetic field are dependent each other and how they propagate in space. Also electro-magnetic wave means particle of spin-1, like photon. To study the dynamics of the spin-1 particles in curved space-time one needs to look up the Maxwell’s equation in Kerr geometry (if the central gravitating object is chosen rotating and uncharged). In this context it is easier to consider the electromagnetic waves as an external perturbation in the space-time. This external perturbation can be represented as incident waves of different sorts in the space-time of the black hole. We are considering the back ground space-time as of Kerr black hole which is stationary and axisymmetric. So the perturbation can be expressed as a superposition of waves with different modes with the ‘$`t`$’ and ‘$`\varphi `$’ dependence given as $`exp[i(\sigma t+m\varphi )]`$, where $`\sigma `$ is the frequency of the waves and $`m`$ is an integer which may be positive, negative or zero. Far away from the black hole the space-time is flat where the Maxwell’s equation and its solution are well known. As the electromagnetic wave i.e., corresponding perturbation comes closer to the black hole the space-time becomes curved where usual quantum theory may not be applicable. In that region, set of Maxwell equations will be modified and corresponding global behaviour of the spin-1 particles will be deviated with respect to that of flat space.

Photon is an electro-magnetic radiation. From the study of Maxwell equations we can investigate the behaviour of the photon close to the black hole or other gravitating object which result can be applicable further for other related works and in the context of astrophysical problem where the relativistic information is important. The solutions of Maxwell equations in a curved space-time have a considerable importance in black hole physics as well as in the context of mathematical physics. If the spatially complete solution is possible to construct, it is very useful to study the absorption rate of the black hole, to find the corresponding Feynman Green function, for checking the stability of the black hole (say, in case of the Kerr geometry, one can study the stability of Kerr black hole), to study the black hole perturbation, to study the quasi-normal modes of the black hole, to do the second quantization of the metric (in this case Kerr metric) etc. In case of matter flows towards the compact object, out of the matter which falls towards the central body photon is there. That photon also may take part in the cooling process of the accreting matter, though the Compton wavelength of the incoming photon is very small compared to size of the black hole horizon if the black hole is chosen as formed by the supernova explosion only. On the other hard, we know all the primordial black holes of mass greater than $`10^{15}`$gm are still exist in nature. For this kind of black holes the interaction between the incoming photon and the black hole may be significant. Thus, naturally the dynamical behaviour of the photon, how it is coupled with space-time (how the spin of the photon couples with the rotation of compact object) is very important to study. Also, in the case of Hawking radiation, boson, fermion, graviton are emitted from the black hole and scattered in the space-time. In that context the behaviour of the electromagnetic wave is essential to look into.

In 1972, Teukolsky initiated the electromagnetic perturbation in Kerr geometry and separated corresponding master equation. It was shown that, separation into radial ($`r`$) and angular ($`\theta `$) parts is possible if the particular choice of temporal ($`t`$) and azimuthal ($`\varphi `$) dependency is chosen in case of stationary and axisymmetric system as given above. In next year Teukolsky himself studied corresponding reflection and transmission problem of the electromagnetic waves in Kerr geometry. Then, Teukolsky & Press studied the interaction of electromagnetic waves with black hole and found numerical solutions asymptotically. In 1976, Chandrasekhar again looked into the separated Maxwell equations in curved space-time particularly in Kerr geometry and indicated about some features like super-radiance. Later he discussed extensively about the electromagnetic, Dirac, gravitational wave equation in curved space-time and showed some asymptotic results. In 1984, Chakrabarti solved the separated angular Dirac equation analytically and also listed the values of the separation constant $`\lambda `$ for the particle of spin 1/2, 1 and 2. Then, various scattering phenomena from black holes have been studied by Futterman et al.. After that, recently, Mukhopadhyay & Chakrabarti, Mukhopadhyay have started to study different behaviour of spin-1/2 particles in curved space-time in case of non-rotating (Schwarzschild), rotating (Kerr) and charged (Reissner-Nordström) black hole geometry. Following (almost) same approach here we would like to re-initiate the study of spin-1 particles in Kerr geometry. Most of the earlier studies have given asymptotic solutions of Maxwell equations, here we are going to present spatially complete, global solution in Kerr geometry. Here one of the main difference of our approach is that after separating the equation into radial and angular part, with a further certain choice of basis, imaginary number $`i`$ ($`=\sqrt{1}`$) is completely taken off from potential of the system. Physically, as if we consider such a frame there the potential is real which is felt by the incoming electromagnetic wave. So the final equations to be studied are explicitly real which makes easier to attack the problem (in case of , potential contains real and imaginary both the parts, so the potential behaviour had to be studied separately).

We will use Newman-Penrose spinor formalism to write the Maxwell equations in curved space-time and then separate into the radial and angular part to solve separately. In the next section we will introduce the basic equations of the problem. In §3, we will show analytical solutions where the behaviour of potentials for the different sets of input parameter are shown. Finally, in §4, we will make conclusions.

## II. Basic Equations of the Problem

We know that $`F_{ij}=_iA_j_jA_i`$ is the electromagnetic covariant antisymmetric tensor where, $`A_i=(A_0,\stackrel{}{A})`$ ($`A_0`$ and $`\stackrel{}{A}`$ are the scalar and vector potential respectively) and corresponding Maxwell equations in curved space-time is

$$F_{[ij;k]}=0,g^{ik}F_{ij;k}=0.$$
(1)
Following Chandrasekhar, using Newman-Penrose formalism, $`F_{ij}`$ can be written in terms of three complex scalars as

$`\varphi _0=F_{13}`$ $`=`$ $`F_{ij}l^im^j,`$ (2)
$`\varphi _1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(F_{12}+F_{43})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F_{ij}(l^in^j+\overline{m}^im^j),`$ (3)
$`\varphi _2=F_{42}`$ $`=`$ $`F_{ij}\overline{m}^im^j.`$ (4)
Here, $`l^i`$, $`n^i`$, $`m^i`$ and $`\overline{m}^i`$ are four null basis for Newman-Penrose formalism. In terms of the tetrad components and intrinsic derivatives Maxwell equations become

$`F_{[ab|c]}=0,\eta ^{nm}F_{an|m}=0.`$ (5)
Thus, by using eqns. (2) and (5), Maxwell equations are replaced by

$`\varphi _{1|1}\varphi _{0|4}=0,\varphi _{2|1}\varphi _{1|4}=0,`$ (6)
$`\varphi _{1|3}\varphi _{0|2}=0,\varphi _{2|3}\varphi _{1|2}=0.`$ (7)
In terms of different spin coefficients, tetrads which are expressed in terms of directional derivatives, eqn. (6) i.e., the reduced Maxwell equations become

$`D\varphi _1\delta ^{}\varphi _0`$ $`=`$ $`(\pi 2\alpha )\varphi _0+2\rho \varphi _1\kappa \varphi _2,`$ (8)
$`D\varphi _2\delta ^{}\varphi _1`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda \varphi _0+2\pi \varphi _1+(\rho 2ϵ)\varphi _2,`$ (9)
$`\delta \varphi _1\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\varphi _0`$ $`=`$ $`(\mu 2\gamma )\varphi _0+2\tau \varphi _1\sigma \varphi _2,`$ (10)
$`\delta \varphi _2\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\varphi _1`$ $`=`$ $`\nu \varphi _0+2\mu \varphi _1+(\tau 2\beta )\varphi _2.`$ (11)
Here, $`D`$, $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$, $`\delta `$, $`\delta ^{}`$ are the directional derivatives which are basically the basis vectors of the system. Different spin coefficients namely $`\pi `$, $`\alpha `$, $`\rho `$, $`\kappa `$, $`\lambda `$, $`ϵ`$, $`\mu `$, $`\gamma `$, $`\tau `$, $`\sigma `$, $`\nu `$, $`\beta `$ are given by Chandrasekhar and which are expressed in terms of the Kerr metric coefficients. If we substitute all these in eqn. (8) we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^{}\sqrt{2}}}\left(_1{\displaystyle \frac{iasin\theta }{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\varphi _0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(𝒟_1+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\varphi _1,`$ (12)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^{}\sqrt{2}}}\left(_0+{\displaystyle \frac{2iasin\theta }{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\varphi _1`$ $`=`$ $`\left(𝒟_0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\varphi _2,`$ (13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\rho }\sqrt{2}}}\left(_1^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{iasin\theta }{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\varphi _2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2\rho ^2}}\left(𝒟_0^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\varphi _1,`$ (14)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\rho }\sqrt{2}}}\left(_0^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{2iasin\theta }{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\varphi _1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2\rho ^2}}\left(𝒟_1^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\varphi _0,`$ (15)
where, $`\overline{\rho }=r+iacos\theta `$, $`\overline{\rho }^{}=riacos\theta `$ and $`_n`$, $`_n^{}`$, $`𝒟_n`$ and $`𝒟_n^{}`$ are defined as

$$𝒟_n=_r+\frac{iK}{\mathrm{\Delta }}+2n\frac{rM}{\mathrm{\Delta }};𝒟_n^{}=_r\frac{iK}{\mathrm{\Delta }}+2n\frac{rM}{\mathrm{\Delta }},$$
$`(7a)`$
$$_n=_\theta +Q+ncot\theta ;_n^{}=_\theta Q+ncot\theta ,$$
$`(7b)`$
$$K=(r^2+a^2)\sigma +am;\mathrm{\Delta }=r^2+a^22Mr;Q=a\sigma sin\theta +mcosec\theta .$$
$`(7c)`$
Now choosing $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=\varphi _0`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1=\varphi _1\overline{\rho }^{}\sqrt{2}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2=2\varphi _2(\overline{\rho }^{})^2`$ eqn. (12) reduces to

$`\left(_1{\displaystyle \frac{iasin\theta }{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(𝒟_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_1,`$ (8)
$`\left(_0+{\displaystyle \frac{iasin\theta }{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ $`=`$ $`\left(𝒟_0{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_2,`$ (9)
$`\left(_1^{}{\displaystyle \frac{iasin\theta }{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(𝒟_0^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_1,`$ (10)
$`\left(_0^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{iasin\theta }{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(𝒟_1^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^{}}}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_0.`$ (11)
Now using first and last equation of (8) we get

$`\left[\mathrm{\Delta }𝒟_1𝒟_1^{}+_0^{}_12i\sigma (r+iacos\theta )\right]\mathrm{\Phi }_0=0`$ (12)
and using second and third of (8) we get

$`\left[\mathrm{\Delta }𝒟_0^{}𝒟_0+_0_1^{}+2i\sigma (r+iacos\theta )\right]\mathrm{\Phi }_2=0.`$ (13)
Equations (12) and (13) are clearly separable. Now we choose, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=R_{+1}(r)S_{+1}(\theta )`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2=R_1(r)S_1(\theta )`$ and separating the eqns. (12) and (13) into radial and angular parts we get the Teukolsky’s equation as

$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }𝒟_0𝒟_0^{}2i\sigma r\right)\mathrm{\Delta }R_{+1}`$ $`=`$ $`\text{}\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }R_{+1},`$ (14)
$`\left(_0^{}_1+2a\sigma cos\theta \right)S_{+1}`$ $`=`$ $`\text{}\lambda S_{+1},`$ (15)
$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }𝒟_0^{}𝒟_0+2i\sigma r\right)R_1`$ $`=`$ $`\text{}\lambda R_1,`$ (16)
$`\left(_0_1^{}2a\sigma cos\theta \right)S_1`$ $`=`$ $`\text{}\lambda S_1.`$ (17)
Here, we use the identity $`\mathrm{\Delta }𝒟_1𝒟_1^{}R_{+1}=𝒟_0𝒟_0^{}\mathrm{\Delta }R_{+1}`$ and $`\lambda `$ is chosen as the separation constant. Now choosing $`P_{+1}=\mathrm{\Delta }R_{+1}`$ and $`P_1=R_1`$ and by a suitable choice of the relative normalisation of the functions $`P_{+1}`$ and $`P_1`$ we get

$`\mathrm{\Delta }𝒟_0𝒟_0P_1=\xi P_{+1};\mathrm{\Delta }𝒟_0^{}𝒟_0^{}P_{+1}=\xi ^{}P_1,`$ (18)
where, $`|\xi |^2=\text{}\lambda ^24\alpha ^2\sigma ^2`$ and $`\alpha ^2=a^2+\frac{am}{\sigma }`$. Thus, from the first of eqn. (18), (7a,b) and third of (14) we get

$`\xi P_{+1}=(\text{}\lambda 2i\sigma r)P_1+2iK𝒟_0P_1.`$ (19)
Similarly, using second of eqn. (18), (7a,b) and first of (14) we get

$`\xi ^{}P_1=(\text{}\lambda +2i\sigma r)P_{+1}2iK𝒟_0^{}P_{+1}.`$ (20)
Then from eqns. (19) and (20) we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}P_{+1}={\displaystyle \frac{iK}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}P_{+1}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2K}}\left[(\text{}\lambda +2i\sigma r)P_{+1}\xi ^{}P_1\right],`$ (21)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}P_1={\displaystyle \frac{iK}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}P_1+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2K}}\left[(\text{}\lambda 2i\sigma r)P_1\xi P_{+1}\right].`$ (22)
Now, eqns. (21) and (22) are the set of radial equations which we will solve for the radial behaviour of spin-1 particles.

### II.A. Reduction of Angular equations

Now, in angular set of equation of (14), if we choose the integrating factor $`sin\theta `$ and consider the independent variable $`\theta `$ transforms as $`\frac{d}{dU}=sin\theta \frac{d}{d\theta }`$ such that

$`U=log\left|tan{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}\right|,`$ (23)
we get the transformed set of angular Maxwell equations as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2S_{\pm 1}}{dU^2}}+𝒥_{\pm 1}^2S_{\pm 1}=0,`$ (24)
where, $`𝒥_{\pm 1}^2=sin^2\theta (\text{}\lambda \pm Q^{}cosec^2\theta Qcot\theta Q^2\pm 2a\sigma cos\theta )`$, prime denotes the derivative with respect to $`\theta `$.

According to the transformation of variable $`\theta `$ (which runs from $`0`$ to $`\pi `$) to $`U`$ (which runs from $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`+\mathrm{}`$) the reduced eqn. (24) is now wave equation in cartesian like coordinate system with wave vector $`𝒥_{\pm 1}`$ which contains the information of angular potential felt by the spin-up and spin-down incoming particles.

### II.B. Reduction of Radial equations

We define the new set of basis for spin-1 particles as $`P_\pm =P_{+1}\pm iP_1`$. So from eqns. (21) and (22) we get

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sigma r}{K}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\xi }{2K}}\right)\right]P_+=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{K}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{}\lambda }{2K}}\right]P_{}e^{i\pi /2},`$ (25)
where $`\xi `$ is real and given as $`\xi =\xi ^{}=\sqrt{\text{}\lambda ^24\alpha ^2\sigma ^2}`$. Further, defining $`\psi _\pm =P_\pm e^{i\pi /4}`$ eqn. (25) reduces to

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}P_1(r)\right]\psi _+=W\psi _{}.`$ (26)
Similarly, we can get another one as,

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}P_2(r)\right]\psi _{}=W\psi _+.`$ (27)
Here, $`P_1(r)=\frac{\sigma r}{K}+\frac{\xi }{2K}`$, $`P_2(r)=\frac{\sigma r}{K}\frac{\xi }{2K}`$ and $`W=\frac{\text{}\lambda }{2K}\frac{K}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. Now, eqns. (26) and (27) are the coupled radial equations for spin-1 particles in the particular choice of basis system as given above. To get appropriate solution we will decouple those and change the independent variable $`r`$ to $`V`$ as is given below.

Decoupling eqns. (26) and (27) for $`\psi _+`$ we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\psi _+}{dr^2}}\left(P_1(r)+P_2(r)+{\displaystyle \frac{W^{}}{W}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{d\psi _+}{dr}}+\left(W^2P_1^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{W^{}}{W}}P_1+P_1P_2\right)\psi _+=0,`$ (28)
where, prime denotes the derivative with respect to $`r`$. Now, we consider the integrating factor $`[W(r^2+\alpha ^2)]^1`$ and variable transformation as $`\frac{d}{dV}=[W(r^2+\alpha ^2)]^1\frac{d}{dr}`$ such that

$`V=\left({\displaystyle \frac{\text{}\lambda }{2\sigma }}\right)r\sigma \left[{\displaystyle \frac{r^3}{3}}+Mr^2+r(2\alpha ^2+2(2M^2a^2)+a^2){\displaystyle \frac{(\alpha ^2+r_{}^2)^2}{2\sqrt{M^2a^2}}}log(rr_{})+{\displaystyle \frac{(\alpha ^2+r_+^2)^2}{2\sqrt{M^2a^2}}}log(rr_+)\right],`$ (29)
where, $`r_\pm =M\pm \sqrt{M^2a^2}`$ and $`\alpha ^2=a^2+am/\sigma `$. Thus from eqn. (28) we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\psi _+}{dV^2}}+𝒦_+^2\psi _+=0,`$ (30)
where, $`𝒦_+^2=\frac{\left(W^2P_1^{}+\frac{W^{}}{W}P_1+P_1P_2\right)}{W^2(r^2+\alpha ^2)^2}`$. Similarly, decoupling eqns. (26) and (27) for $`\psi _{}`$ we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\psi _{}}{dV^2}}+𝒦_{}^2\psi _{}=0,`$ (31)
where, $`𝒦_{}^2=\frac{\left(W^2P_2^{}+\frac{W^{}}{W}P_2+P_1P_2\right)}{W^2(r^2+\alpha ^2)^2}`$. Finally, we have set of second order differential wave equations (30) and (31) which are easier to attack to study the radial behaviour of spin-1 particles. Usually new transformed variable $`V`$ varies from $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`+\mathrm{}`$. But, if the frequency $`\sigma `$ of the incident wave is such that

$`W^2(r^2+\alpha ^2)^2=0`$ (32)
at $`r=r_c>r_+`$, $`Vr`$ relation becomes multivalued. For that frequency range wave vector $`𝒦_\pm `$ diverges at $`r=r_c`$ outside the horizon and the energy extraction from the space-time may be possible in the range $`r_+`$ to $`r_c`$. Here $`r_c`$ may play the same role as the radius of ergosphere. We know that, in case of a rotating black hole energy extraction may be possible from the ergo-region. Chandrasekhar conjectured from the asymptotic solution of the electromagnetic wave that the super-radiance is exist. He showed that, if the frequency of the incident wave is less than of certain cut-off value (i.e., $`\stackrel{<}{}\frac{am}{2Mr_+}`$), potential barrier of the system diverges and it varies as $`\frac{1}{(r|\alpha |)^4}`$ close to the singular point. Here, our calculations tally well with that conjecture. Equations (30) and (31) are the wave equations in cartesian like coordinate system where $`𝒦_\pm `$ contains the information of the radial potential felt by the particles in the new basis system.

Now, from eqn. (32) we see the singular points are, where potential diverges for

$$\sigma =\sigma _c=\frac{\pm \mathrm{\Delta }^{1/2}\sqrt{2\text{}\lambda }2am}{2(a^2+r^2)},$$
$`(27a)`$
$$\sigma =\sigma _c=\frac{am}{r^2+a^2}.$$
$`(27b)`$
Thus, there are three possible frequencies where the potential may diverge and the super-radiance occurs. But not necessarily for all three $`\sigma _c`$s potential will diverge at $`rr_+`$ for particular $`a`$, $`m`$, $`M`$. If the frequencies of the incident electromagnetic wave are such that, at a radius $`rr_+`$ at least one of the eqns. (27a,b) satisfy then for that frequency range super-radiance is expected. For the other values of $`\sigma `$ the potential as well as $`𝒦_\pm ^2`$ behaviour does not have any singular point as is shown in Figs. 1 and 2a,b below. Here, the frequencies for which super-radiance is expected to occur are looking different from that given by Chandrasekhar. Actually, as we change the dependent variable ($`R_{\pm 1}`$ to $`\psi _\pm `$) and independent variable ($`r`$ to $`V`$) here in a different manner with respect to that of Chandrasekhar, frequency expressions are looking different apparently but the physical meanings are same for both the cases. It is interesting to note that for super-radiance to occur either eqn. (27a) or (27b) or both have to be satisfied at a radius $`rr_c`$ whatever be the $`\sigma `$. Thus, it is very obvious that for all $`\sigma `$ eqns. (27a.b) do not satisfy, which is again in agreement with Chandrasekhar’s calculation.

## III. Solution

Here we will discuss about the solution of the reduced Maxwell equations described in previous section. We mainly will concentrate on the solution of eqns. (24), (30), (31) and will understand about the dynamical behaviour of the spin-1 particles in Kerr geometry.

### III.A. Angular Solution

From eqn. (14), we see that for Schwarzschild black hole, solution of angular set of equations is nothing but the standard spherical harmonics $`{}_{s}{}^{}Y_{lm}^{}(\theta ,\varphi )`$ with integral azimuthal quantum number $`m`$. In that occasion $`^{}`$ and $``$ simply act as raising and lowering operator respectively of spin-s for $`{}_{s}{}^{}Y_{lm}^{}(\theta ,\varphi )`$. Corresponding eigenvalue which is the separation constant $`\lambda `$ for spin-1 particles is appeared as $`\text{}\lambda ^2=l(l+1)`$, which is well known as the total angular momentum of the system where $`l`$ is the angular momentum quantum number. For the case of spin-1/2 particles, Chakrabarti found the angular solution in Kerr geometry in terms of the combination of different spherical harmonics and Clebsch-Gordan coefficients in perturbative method with $`a\sigma `$ as the perturbative parameter. He also found the separation constant which was modified from that of Schwarzschild case in terms of Clebsch-Gordan coefficients. Here, our approach to find the angular solution is different from that of Chakrabarti. Actually our method is easily possible to apply here even for angular equation as particles are massless. Thus to get angular solution we will solve eqn. (24) by IWKB method which was applied earlier for the solution of radial Dirac equation only. By this IWKB (instantaneous WKB) method we can get the analytical solution of the second order wave equation which is described in detail in earlier papers. By this method the transmission and reflection coefficients are calculated at the each location. Here, the particle under consideration is moving in a potential field varying with the location. As the potential barrier felt by the particle is changing with space (see figures for potential plot), the transmission and reflection amplitudes should be space-dependent. Thus from the IWKB solution we can get the local values of the reflection and transmission coefficient and the spatially complete solution is possible to construct. One can have more clear feeling about the local transmission and reflection coefficients if the potential barrier of the system is thought to compose of a large number of square steps. The size and number of the different steps are chosen in such a way that the overall combination of all the steps follows the pattern of the actual potential barrier. Now, one can solve this as a barrier problem where the barrier under consideration contains a large number of square steps. The transmission and reflection coefficients are calculated at each junction out of the transmission in the previous junction, from what the meaning of local values of the transmission and reflection coefficient is well-understood. In the earlier papers, in the context of the solution of Dirac equation it was seen that in both the ways (by IWKB method and the way when barrier is considered to compose by a large number of square steps) the solutions are matching perfectly. Here, throughout the study we will concentrate on IWKB solution (not the barrier method as) to obtain an analytical result. The solution of IWKB method is valid if the wave number $`k`$ of the incoming photon at a location $`x`$ satisfies the condition $`\frac{1}{k}\frac{dk}{dx}<<k`$. Thus, the applicability of IWKB method depends on the validity of the WKB approximation method.

In the eqn. (24), $`\lambda `$ is already known following the calculation of Chakrabarti. Thus all the parameters are known in (24). As $`𝒥_{\pm 1}`$ varies in entire region and we are interested about the dynamics of the waves in that region itself, from eqn. (24) we get the solution

$`S_{\pm 1}={\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_{a}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}}{\sqrt{𝒥_{\pm 1}}}}e^{+iu_{a\pm }}+{\displaystyle \frac{_{a}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}}{\sqrt{𝒥_{\pm 1}}}}e^{iu_{a\pm }}`$ (28)
by IWKB method, where the coefficients $`𝒜_{a}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}`$ and $`_{a}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}`$ are space-dependent related as $`𝒜_{a}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+_{a}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=𝒥_{\pm 1}`$ because sum of the transmission and reflection coefficients are always unity. The ikonals are defined as $`𝒥_{\pm 1}𝑑U=u_{a\pm }`$.

Now we will display the solutions for a few sets of physical parameter. The physical parameters are chosen in such a manner that the interaction of photon with black hole should be significant. Therefore, corresponding Compton wavelength should be of same order to the black hole radius, i.e., $`\frac{1}{\sigma }M+\sqrt{M^2a^2}`$ (as $`\text{}h=G=c=1`$), otherwise the result is insignificant. Also we choose $`M=1`$ for all the figures. Figure 1 shows the variation of $`𝒥_+^2`$ and $`𝒥_{}^2`$ with respect to $`U`$ for different rotation parameters ($`a=01`$) of the black hole for a particular frequency of the incident wave ($`\sigma =0.5`$). It is seen that in a certain range both $`𝒥_+^2`$ and $`𝒥_{}^2`$ attain negative values and corresponding ikonals become imaginary. Recalling Schrödinger wave equation, we can say for that range of $`U`$ total energy of the incoming particle is less than the potential energy of the system and particle is inside the barrier. In the other range, total energy of the spin-1 particle (in that coordinate system) is greater than or equal to the potential energy of the system as $`𝒥_\pm ^2`$ attains greater than or equal to zero respectively. In the case of $`𝒥_+^2`$, at around $`\theta =\frac{\pi }{2}`$ particle enters into the barrier and remains inside upto $`\theta =\pi `$. On the other hand, behaviour of $`𝒥_{}^2`$ is just opposite. In that case particle energy becomes greater than or equal to the potential energy of the system at around $`\theta =\pi /2`$ but for $`\theta \pi /2`$ the particle remains inside the barrier. In this way, with the increment of $`\theta `$ values, particle goes inside the barrier and then comes out from it alternatively and corresponding $`U`$ runs from $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$ alternatively. As the rotation of the black hole decreases curvature of the space-time reduces, which reflects in the behaviour of $`𝒥_\pm ^2`$ whose height is lowered down. The results with particular $`a`$ parameter but different $`\sigma `$s will be same as Fig. 1 as it depends only on $`a\sigma `$ not on the individual values of $`a`$ and $`\sigma `$.

Although the solution (28) is looking like a wave solution containing incident and reflected parts but there is nothing like that physically. This appears like that because of the method we choose and corresponding transformation of variable $`\theta `$ to cartesian like variable $`U`$. Following ,  and  we can find out the $`\theta `$-dependent expressions of $`𝒜_{a_\pm }`$ and $`_a_\pm `$ but there is no relation to transmission and reflection wave amplitudes. To calculate the $`\theta `$-dependent expressions of $`𝒜_{a_\pm }`$ and $`_a_\pm `$ we need to impose the boundary conditions properly. In case of $`𝒥_+^2`$, for $`U\mathrm{}`$ (actually for $`U\stackrel{<}{}5`$, see Fig. 1) both $`𝒜_{a_+}`$ and $`_{a_+}`$ should be constant which are same as for pure WKB solution. But in the region $`U0\mathrm{}`$, as because the wave is inside the potential barrier, $`_{a_+}`$ must be zero otherwise the solution will diverge at $`U\mathrm{}`$. In case of $`𝒥_{}^2`$, the boundary conditions for $`𝒜_a_{}`$ and $`_a_{}`$ should be appeared just in an opposite way as is depicted from the behaviour of $`𝒥_{}^2`$ too. But it can be reminded that this solution is only valid for $`\frac{1}{𝒥_\pm }\frac{d𝒥_\pm }{dU}<<𝒥_\pm `$.

### III.B. Radial Solution

To find the solution of eqns. (30) and (31) we again follow IWKB method where $`𝒦_\pm `$ a is function of $`r`$ and we are interested about the solution at the varying $`𝒦_\pm `$ region. The solution is

$`\psi _\pm ={\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_{r}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}}{\sqrt{𝒦_\pm }}}e^{+iu_{r\pm }}+{\displaystyle \frac{_{r}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}}{\sqrt{𝒦_\pm }}}e^{iu_{r\pm }},`$ (29)
where, the space dependent transmitted and reflected amplitudes are related as $`𝒜_{r}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+_{r}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=𝒦_\pm `$ and the ikonals are defined as $`𝒦_\pm 𝑑V=u_{r\pm }`$. In a similar way as the case for angular solution sum of the space-dependent transmission and reflection coefficients are unity always. Close to the black hole horizon $`_{r}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}\mathrm{shouldbe}0`$; because of high gravitative power there is virtually no outwards reflection. Also, far away from the black hole, both $`𝒜_{r}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}`$ and $`_{r}^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}`$ are constant as potential does not vary there (see Fig. 2a,b). These are the essential boundary conditions to obtain space-dependent solutions. Far away from the black hole, solutions will merge to that of WKB solution. As matter comes closer, spatial variance comes into the picture and IWKB method is needed to obtain an analytical space-dependent solution. This solution is valid for the entire range of $`r`$ and all values of $`a`$ (even for Schwarzschild $`a=0`$ case). As for different physical parameter set, variations of $`𝒦_\pm `$ are different, corresponding space-dependent behaviour of transmission and reflection coefficients will be different.

Here we display the solutions for a few physical parameter set for which the interaction between incoming photon and black hole is significant, as explained in §III.A. Figure 2a shows the behaviour of the square of wave numbers $`𝒦_+`$ and $`𝒦_{}`$ with respect to new variable $`V`$ for a particular frequency ($`\sigma `$) and different angular momentum of the black hole ($`a`$). It is seen that as $`a`$ value increases, curvature effect on the space-time increases as a result corresponding strength of the wave number increases. Similar features are seen in Fig. 2b where $`𝒦_+^2`$ and $`𝒦_{}^2`$ are shown for a particular Kerr parameter ($`a=0.5`$) and different $`\sigma `$s. As the frequency of the incident wave becomes higher, its energy becomes higher too, as a result it needs to overcome the less strength of barrier. On the other hand with the decrement of frequency its energy decreases as well as it feels higher potential barrier in the motion. For both the cases, in entire region of $`V`$, $`𝒦_\pm ^2`$ never be negative, which indicates total energy of the incoming wave is always greater than or equal to the potential energy of the system. It can be checked that for some parameter set, $`𝒦_\pm ^2`$ becomes negative, which indicates the existence of the potential barrier whose peak is higher than the energy of the incoming particle as was seen in the case of Dirac particles in Kerr geometry.

Figure 2c shows the space-dependent reflection and transmission coefficients for the frequency of particle $`\sigma =0.5`$ and angular momentum of the compact object $`a=0.4`$. Following  we get corresponding $`\text{}\lambda =1.190382`$. In Fig. 2a, the corresponding behavior of wave number is shown. Far away from the black hole ($`V\mathrm{}`$) small $`𝒦_+`$ indicates higher barrier hight and high rate of reflection. As the wave comes closer to the black hole ($`V\mathrm{}`$) potential barrier decreases as well as wave number $`𝒦_+`$ increases which results particle becomes free or almost free. So in that region transmission is 100% or almost 100%. At the other locations, these transmission and reflection coefficients are varying according to the behaviour of potential as well as $`𝒦_+`$. Again, this solution is only valid as the condition $`\frac{1}{𝒦_\pm }\frac{d𝒦_\pm }{dV}<<𝒦_\pm `$ satisfies.

It can be mentioned that this method of solution is also applicable to a range of parameters which demonstrates super-radiance where potential diverges at a certain location $`r>r_+`$. In early, this divergent nature of potential was depicted in case of fermions, though for the case of fermion super-radiance does not occur. In the present case, if we choose for example, $`a=0.5`$, $`\sigma =0.2`$ and corresponding $`\text{}\lambda =1.305519`$, $`m=1`$, it is found that potential as well as $`𝒦_\pm ^2`$ diverge at a certain location $`r>r_+`$ and $`Vr`$ relation becomes multivalued. For this parameter set super-radiance is expected to occur. Similarly, different other parameter set can be chosen where potentials as well as wave numbers diverge.

## VI. conclusions

Here we have studied the solution of Maxwell’s equation in curved space-time particularly in Kerr geometry analytically. By the solution we can get the dynamical behaviour of spin-1 particles around black holes. We started with Maxwell equations in curved space-time especially in Kerr geometry then separated it into radial and angular parts. Furthermore, the radial and angular variables are given transformation in such a way that the equations are reduced to one dimensional wave equations in cartesian like coordinate system which is easier to attack. Following the earlier works by the author radial and angular solutions of Maxwell equations are obtained which we had only asymptotic knowledge so far. Here we give the spatially complete analytical solution which is helpful for further studies those are already mentioned in the Introduction. Here the incident and reflected amplitudes are not constant, which vary according to the variation of the potential. Thus the reflection and transmission rate of the incident photon are space-dependent. On the occasion for the solution of Dirac equation in a black space-time author initiated a technique namely IWKB method to obtain the space-dependent behaviour of the transmission and reflection coefficient and corresponding spatially complete solution, then it was verified with the numerical results. Here we have used same IWKB method to obtain solutions of Maxwell equations. The detail technique, i.e., how to obtain the space-dependent analytical expressions for transmission and reflection amplitudes are not repeated here. Here, one of the main emphasis is to construct an analytical complete solution of the electromagnetic wave in a curved space-time, according to my knowledge which was unavailable so far in the literature although the asymptotic as well as numerical solutions were available. Once we have the analytical solution, we can apply it obtain the Feynman Green function, second quantization in a specific metric, here for Kerr metric. The technique applied here is quantum mechanical where $`S_{\pm 1}`$ and $`\psi _\pm `$ are wave functions and the corresponding amplitudes of the wave are number. Once we have this knowledge of solution we can make second quantization in curved space-time where $`S_{\pm 1}`$ and $`\psi _\pm `$ are no longer wavefunctions but fields and the corresponding amplitudes become operator. Also in the context of Hawking radiation, to check black hole’s stability and its perturbation, to find the quasi-normal modes of the black hole this solution is useful, as this is valid at close to the black hole as well as away from it.

Also we have studied here how the electromagnetic wave face different potential barrier for different physical parameter in a black hole space-time. As the radial functions $`R_{\pm 1}`$ are given a certain choice of transformation, the potential in the final second order wave equation becomes real (unlike the earlier works like  etc.) which is now easier to study. According to that we concentrated on to study the transmission and reflection coefficients of the incoming wave. It is seen that depending on the frequency of the incoming electromagnetic wave and the angular momentum of the central object potential as well as wave number of the system change. Thus, it is concluded that the black hole can distinguish the spin-1 particles with different physical parameters. Earlier it was shown by the author that black hole can distinguish Dirac particles of different frequency and mass and act as mass-spectrograph. Now globally we can say that black hole can act as mass-spectrograph irrespective of the spin, frequency and mass of the particle (although in case of electromagnetic wave there is no question of rest mass). Furthermore, the coupling between the spin of black hole and that of particle parts important role, as a result, particle of the particular physical parameter will face different potential barrier for different black holes. Also the same particle with spin-up and spin-down in case of a particular black hole will face totally different potential. Thus we can conclude that the gravitational field is very sensitive on the spin of the particle.

Another important issue is the super-radiance. It was seen that for Dirac particle there is no existence of super-radiance. In case of spin-1 particle super-radiance is very obvious feature as was conjectured by Chandrasekhar earlier. But the existence of super-radiance disappears as particle flips in its spin. For the same sign of spin of the black hole and particle (here $`a`$ and $`m`$ respectively) with positive energy of the particle super-radiance does not occur, but, if any one of them flips in spin super-radiance may appear for a particular range of frequency.

Acknowledgment
I would like to express my gratitude to Professor A. R. Prasanna for carefully reading the manuscript and continuous encouragement.

I also would like to dedicate this work to my late wife Aruna Mukhopadhyay, who was passed away on 15th March, 2001. Because of her continuous encouragement my research life was very easy earlier. I express my deep condolence for her.