text:
# Study 𝜔 and ϕ photoproduction in the nucleon isotopic channels

## 1 Introduction

The availabilities of high intensity electron and photon beams at JLab (CLAS), ELSA (SAPHIR), MAMI, ESRF (GRAAL), and SPring-8 give accesses to excite nucleons with the clean electromagnetic probes, thus revive the interest in the search of “missing resonances”  in meson photo- and electroproduction. Vector meson photoproduction near threshold attracts attentions  since those “missing resonances” could have stronger couplings to this channel such that their existing signals might be derived.

Taking into account large degrees of freedom in the resonance excitations, experimental efforts for such a purpose is by no means trivial. Historically, experimental data for photoproduction of vector meson in isotopic channels are very sparse. In contrast with the reaction $`\gamma +p\omega (\rho ^0)+p`$, there are only few dottes available for $`\gamma +n\rho ^{}+p`$ and $`\gamma +p\rho ^++n`$, while experiment on $`\gamma +n\omega (\varphi )+n`$ is not available. The main feature in the latter reactions is that the electric transition vanishes in the nucleon pole terms. Nevertheless, due to the change of the isospin degrees of freedom, interferences between different resonances and processes will change significantly. Nevertheless, in the neutron target reaction, resonances of quark model representation $`[\mathrm{𝟕𝟎},^\mathrm{𝟒}\mathrm{𝟖}]`$ are no longer suppressed by the Moorhouse selection rule , thus will add more ingredients into the reaction. Briefly, apart from various polarization observables which could provide rich information about the reaction mechanism, coherent study of isotopic reactions could also highlight signals which cannot be seen easily in a single channel.

Our motivation of studying the isotopic production of the $`\varphi `$ meson is rather different from the $`\omega `$. Our attention here is paid to the effects from the non-diffractive s\- and u-channel $`\varphi `$ production in polarization observables. The study of isotopic reaction provides us with insights into the non-diffractive processes at large angles (large momentum transfer with $`W24`$ GeV). Since the $`\varphi `$ meson has higher threshold ($`E_\gamma 1.57`$ GeV), where a large number of resonances can be excited, the non-diffractive resonance effects could exhibit more collectively rather than exclusively from individual resonances. Another relevant interest in $`\varphi `$ production is to detect strangeness component in nucleons, which could be another important non-diffractive source in the reaction . Although our study does not take into account such a mechanism, we shall see that our results provide some supplementary information for such an effort.

In this proceeding, a quark model approach to vector meson photoproduction  is applied to the photoproduction of $`\omega `$ and $`\varphi `$ meson off the proton and neutron. Our purpose is to provide a framework on which a systematic study of resonance excitations becomes possible.

## 2 The model

Our model consists of three processes: (i) vector meson production through an effective Lagrangian; (ii) t-channel pomeron exchange ($`𝒫`$) for $`\omega `$, $`\rho ^0`$ and $`\varphi `$ production ; (iii) t-channel light meson exchange. Namely, in the $`\omega `$ and $`\varphi `$ meson photoproduction, the $`\pi ^0`$ exchange ($`\pi `$) is taken into account. 111In the $`\rho ^0`$ production, the $`\sigma `$ meson exchange is included.

The effective Lagrangian for the $`V`$-$`qq`$ coupling is:

$$L_{eff}=\overline{\psi }(a\gamma _\mu +\frac{ib\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\nu }{2m_q})V^\mu \psi ,$$
(1)
where $`\psi `$ ($`\overline{\psi }`$) denotes the light quark (anti-quark) field in a baryon system; $`V^\mu `$ represents vector meson field ($`\omega `$, $`\rho `$, $`K^{}`$ and $`\varphi `$). In this model, the 3-quark baryon system is described by the NRCQM in the $`SU(6)O(3)`$ symmetry limit, while the vector meson is treated as an elementary point-like particle which couples to the constituent quark through the effective interaction. Parameter $`a`$ and $`b`$ denote the coupling strengths and are determined by experimental data.

The tree level transitions from the effective Lagrangian can be labelled by the Mandelstam variable, s, u, and t:

$$M_{fi}=M_{fi}^s+M_{fi}^u+M_{fi}^t.$$
(2)
Given the electromagnetic coupling $`H_e=\overline{\psi }\gamma _\mu e_qA^\mu \psi `$, and the effective strong coupling $`H_m=\overline{\psi }(a\gamma _\mu +\frac{ib\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\nu }{2m_q})V^\mu \psi `$, the s\- and u-channel with resonance excitations can be expressed as,

$`M_{fi}^{s+u}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}N_f|H_m|N_jN_j|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{E_i+\omega _\gamma E_j}}H_e|N_i`$ (3)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}N_f|H_e{\displaystyle \frac{1}{E_i\omega _mE_j}}|N_jN_j|H_m|N_i,`$
where $`\omega _\gamma `$ and $`\omega _m`$ represent the photon and meson energy, respectively. In this expression, all the intermediate states $`|N_j`$ are included. A simple transformation for the electromagnetic interaction leads to,

$`M_{fi}^{s+u}`$ $`=`$ $`iN_f|[g_e,H_m]|N_i`$ (4)
$`+i\omega _\gamma {\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}N_f|H_m|N_jN_j|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{E_i+\omega _\gamma E_j}}h_e|N_i`$
$`+i\omega _\gamma {\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}N_f|h_e{\displaystyle \frac{1}{E_i\omega _mE_j}}|N_jN_j|H_m|N_i,`$
with $`h_e=_le_l𝐫_l\mathit{ϵ}\text{ }_\gamma (1𝜶\text{ }\widehat{𝐤})e^{i𝐤𝐫_l}`$, and $`g_e=_le_l𝐫_l\mathit{ϵ}\text{ }_\gamma e^{i𝐤𝐫_l}`$, where $`\widehat{𝐤}𝐤/\omega _\gamma `$ is the unit vector along the photon three-momentum $`𝐤`$. We identify the term $`iN_f|[g_e,H_m]|N_i`$ as a seagull term $`M_{fi}^{sg}`$, and re-define the second and third term as the s\- and u-channel, respectively. The tree level diagrams are illustrated in Fig. 1, where a bracket on the seagull term gives a caution about its origin.

In the NRCQM, those low-lying states ($`n2`$) have been successfully related to the resonances which can be taken into account explicitly in the formula. For those higher excited states, they can be treated degenerate in the main quantum number $`n`$ in the harmonic oscillator basis. Detailed description of this approach can be found in Ref. . The $`\omega `$ and $`\varphi `$ production are significantly simplified because of isospin conservation. Namely, only isospin 1/2 intermediate resonances will contribute in the reaction. Another advantage for these two reactions is that both particles are charge-neutral. This feature leads to the vanishing of the t-channel vector meson exchange and the seagull term. In the end, only the s\- and u-channel (S+U) from Eq. 4 will be the contribution source from the effective Lagrangian. In addition, the Moorhouse selection rule  further simplifies the calculations for the proton target reaction. Due to this selection rule, resonances belonging to representation $`[\mathrm{𝟕𝟎},^\mathrm{𝟒}\mathrm{𝟖}]`$ would vanish in the $`\gamma pN^{}`$ transitions.

Apart from the S+U from the effective Lagrangian, our model includes the pomeron exchange ($`𝒫`$) to account for the diffractive phenomenon in vector meson photoproduction. In this model , the pomeron mediates the long range interaction between two confined quarks, and behaves rather like a $`C=+1`$ isoscalar photon. We summarize the vertices as follows:

(i) pomeron-nucleon coupling:

$$F_\mu (t)=3\beta _0\gamma _\mu f(t),f(t)=\frac{(4M_N^22.8t)}{(4M_N^2t)(1t/0.7)^2},$$
(5)
where $`\beta _0=1.27`$ GeV-1 is the coupling of the pomeron to one light constituent quark; $`f(t)`$ is the isoscalar nucleon electromagnetic form factor with four-momentum transfer $`t`$; the factor 3 comes from the “quark-counting rule”.

(ii) Quark-$`\varphi `$-meson coupling:

$$V_\nu (p\frac{1}{2}q,p+\frac{1}{2}q)=f_VM_\varphi \gamma _\nu ,$$
(6)
where $`f_V`$ is the radiative decay constant of the vector meson, and determined by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{Ve^+e^{}}=8\pi \alpha _e^2e_Q^2f_V^2/3M_V`$. A form factor $`\mu _0^2/(\mu _0^2+p^2)`$ is adopted for the pomeron-off-shell-quark vertex, where $`\mu _0=1.2`$ GeV is the cut-off energy, and $`p`$ is the four-momentum of the quark. The pomeron trajectory is $`\alpha (t)=1+ϵ+\alpha ^{}t`$, with $`\alpha ^{}=0.25`$ GeV-2.

The $`\pi ^0`$ exchange is introduced with the following Lagrangians for the $`\pi NN`$ and $`\varphi \pi \gamma `$ coupling:

$`L_{\pi NN}=ig_{\pi NN}\overline{\psi }\gamma _5(𝝉\text{ }𝝅\text{ })\psi .`$ (7)
and

$`L_{V\pi ^0\gamma }=e_N{\displaystyle \frac{g_{V\pi \gamma }}{M_V}}ϵ_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^\alpha A^\beta ^\gamma V^\delta \pi ^0.`$ (8)
where the commonly used couplings, $`g_{\pi NN}^2/4\pi =`$ 14, $`g_{\omega \pi \gamma }^2=3.315`$ and $`g_{\varphi \pi \gamma }^2=0.143`$, are adopted.

An exponential factor $`e^{(𝐪𝐤)^2/6\alpha _\pi ^2}`$ from the nucleon wavefunctions plays a role as a form factor for the $`\pi NN`$ and $`\varphi \pi \gamma `$ vertices, where $`\alpha _\pi =300`$ MeV is adopted. This factor comes out naturally in the harmonic oscillator basis where the nucleon is treated as a 3-quark system.

## 3 Results and discussions

Application of this approach to the $`\omega `$ meson photoproduction shows a great promise. A coherent study of the $`\rho `$ meson photoproduction  also highlights the approximately satisfied isospin symmetry between the $`\omega `$ and $`\rho `$ meson.

In $`\gamma p\omega p`$, the old measurements  of the parity asymmetries at $`E_\gamma =`$ 2.8, 4.7 and 9.3 GeV provides very strong constraints on the natural ($`𝒫`$) and unnatural-parity exchange ($`\pi `$). It was shown that at $`E_\gamma =2.8`$ GeV, the parity asymmetry has a negative value which suggests the still dominant contribution from the pion exchange. At 4.7 GeV, the natural-parity starts to dominate over the cross section, and at 9.3 GeV, the parity asymmetry is completely dominated by the pomeron exchanges. Such an energy evolution of the parity asymmetry above the resonance region constrains the “background” terms, which then can be extrapolated down to the resonance region. In Ref., we show that such a scheme is consistent with the experimental data for the parity asymmetries , and indeed leads to a reasonable estimation of these “background” terms.

### 3.1 $`\omega `$ meson photoproduction

Parameters at resonance region for the $`\omega `$ photoproduction are constrained approximately by the SAPHIR data . It shows that $`a=2.72`$ and $`b^{}ba=3.42`$ give an overall fit of available data.

In Fig. 2, differential cross sections for the isotopic channels are presented at four energy bins, $`E_\gamma =`$1.225, 1.450, 1.675 and 1.915 GeV, and compared with the SAPHIR data . It shows that near threshold the $`\pi ^0`$ exchange ($`\pi `$) dominates over the other two processes at small angles, while $`𝒫`$ will compete with $`\pi `$ with the increasing energies. The exclusive $`𝒫`$ and $`\pi `$ in the proton and neutron reaction are changed slightly due to the small difference between the proton and neutron mass. The S+U contributions generally dominate at large angles. Compare these two isotopic reactions, we see that the main impact of the change of the isospin space comes from S+U.

Interesting interfering effects among these processes could be seen in polarization observables. In Fig. 3, we present predictions for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(2\rho _{11}^1+\rho _{00}^1)/(2\rho _{11}^0+\rho _{00}^0)`$, which has been measured by GRAAL . Here, $`\rho ^1`$ and $`\rho ^0`$ are density matrix elements in the helicity space . One important feature of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is that large asymmetries (deviation from 0) cannot be produced by the exclusive $`𝒫`$, $`\pi `$ or $`𝒫+\pi `$. As shown by the solid curves, large asymmetries are produced by the interferences between the $`𝒫+\pi `$ and S+U processes. Interest arises from the comparison of the isotopic reactions. It shows that the S+U produces flattened positive asymmetries in $`\gamma n\omega n`$ near threshold. Specifically, we show the effects of $`P_{13}(1720)`$ in the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, which suggest that isotopic reactions could have outlined more information.

Another interesting observable with polarized photon beam is, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_A(\rho _{11}^1+\rho _{11}^1)/(\rho _{11}^0+\rho _{11}^0)`$. As found in Ref. , this observable is more sensitive to small contributions from individual resonances. Due to lack of space, we shall only show the calculation of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_A`$ for the $`\varphi `$ production in the next Subsection.

### 3.2 $`\varphi `$ meson photoproduction

In the $`\varphi `$ meson production, the parameter $`a=0.241\pm 0.105`$ and $`b^{}ba=0.458\pm 0.091`$ for the effective $`\varphi `$-$`qq`$ coupling are determined by the fit of old data from Ref.  at $`E_\gamma =2.0`$ GeV and the recent data from CLAS  at 3.6 GeV. These values are much smaller than parameters derived for the $`\omega `$ and $`\rho `$ production. Qualitatively, the $`\varphi `$-$`qq`$ couplings could be suppressed by the OZI rule. Meanwhile, in the SU(3) symmetry limit, $`a_\varphi /a_\omega =g_{\varphi NN}/g_{\omega NN}`$ can be derived, which is consistent with the ratio for an ideal $`\omega `$-$`\varphi `$ mixing , $`g_{\varphi NN}/g_{\omega NN}=\mathrm{tan}3.7^{}`$.

Using the same parameters derived in $`\gamma p\varphi p`$, the cross sections for both $`\gamma p\varphi p`$ and $`\gamma n\varphi n`$ are calculated at $`E_\gamma =2.0`$ GeV (Fig. 5). Significant cross section difference occurs at large angles, where $`d\sigma /d\mathrm{\Omega }`$ for $`\gamma n\varphi n`$ is much smaller than for $`\gamma p\varphi p`$. A common feature arising from these two reactions is a relatively stronger backward peak from the “background” u-channel nucleon pole term. Similar feature is also found by Laget .

In Fig. 5, the isotopic effects of these two reactions are shown for the polarized beam asymmetry $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_A(\rho _{11}^1+\rho _{11}^1)/(\rho _{11}^0+\rho _{11}^0)=(\sigma _{}\sigma _{})/(\sigma _{}+\sigma _{})`$ at $`E_\gamma =2.0`$ GeV, where $`\sigma _{}`$ and $`\sigma _{}`$ denote the cross sections for $`\varphi K^+K^{}`$ when the decay plane is parallel or perpendicular to the photon polarization vector.

The dashed curves represent results for $`𝒫+\pi `$, which deviate from $`+1`$ (for pure natural-parity exchange) due to the presence of the unnatural parity pion exchange. With the S+U, the full model calculation suggests that the large angle asymmetry is strongly influenced by the S+U processes, while the forward angles are not sensitive to them. Interferences between the $`𝒫`$ and S+U can be seen by excluding the $`\pi `$ (see the dot-dashed curves). It shows that asymmetries produced by the S+U at forward angles are negligible. Since the pion exchange becomes very small at large angles, we conclude that the large angle asymmetry is determined by the S+U and reflects the isotopic effects. The role played by the s-channel resonances in the two reactions are presented by excluding the u-channel contributions. As shown by the dotted curves, the interferences from the s-channel resonances are much weaker than that from the u-channel, although they are still an important non-diffractive source at large angles.

This feature, which might make it difficult to filter out signals for individual s-channel resonances in the $`\varphi `$ photoproductions might suggest that the forward angle could be an ideal region for the study of other non-diffractive sources. 222 For example, it was suggested by Ref. , the strangeness component in nucleons could produce large asymmetries in beam-target double polarization observable at forward angles, while we find that S+U process only make sense at large angles.

It should be noted that no isotopic effects can be seen in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_A`$ if only $`𝒫+\pi `$ contribute to the cross section. This is because the transition amplitude of $`𝒫`$ is purely imaginary, while that of pion exchange is purely real. In $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_A`$, the sign arising from the $`g_{\pi NN}`$ will disappear, which is why the dashed curves in Fig. 5 are (almost) the same. It is worth noting that our results for the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_A`$ are quite similar to findings of Ref.  at small angles, but very different at large angles. In Ref.  only the nucleon pole terms for the s\- and u-channel processes were included.

## 4 Conclusions and perspectives

We show that the effective Lagrangian approach in the quark model basis provides an ideal framework for the study of resonance excitations in vector meson photoproduction. The great advantage is that only a limited number of parameters will be introduced. Meanwhile, it permits a systematic and coherent study of different isospin channels, which could be helpful in highlighting model-independent features in the reaction mechanisms. In the SU(6)$``$O(3) framework, photoproduction of isospin 1 ($`\rho ^{0,\pm 1}`$) and isospin 1/2 ($`K^\pm `$, $`K^0`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$) can be also studied .

Conerning the search of signals for $`s\overline{s}`$ component in the nucleon, the forward angle kinematics might be selective if the findings of Refs.  are taken into account, since effects from the S+U are negligible. Certainly, since a possible strangeness content has not been explicitly included in this model, the effective $`\varphi `$-$`qq`$ coupling cannot distinguish between an OZI evading $`\varphi NN`$ coupling and a strangeness component in the nucleon. In future study, a more complex approach including the possible strangeness component in the nucleon should be explored.

Concerning the efforts of searching for “missing resonances” (in $`\omega `$ photoproduction)  and probing strangeness components (in $`\varphi `$, it shows that the isotopic channels might be useful for disentangling various processes involved in the reaction mechanism. Experiments using the neutron target could provide more evidence to pin down model-independent aspects for any modelling .

## Acknowledgments

I thank J.-P. Didelez, M. Guidal, B. Saghai, and J.S. Al-Khalili for collaborations on part of the work. Fruitful discussions with E. Hourany concerning the GRAAL experiment, T. Nakano concerning the SPring-8, and P.L. Cole and D.J. Tedeschi concerning the CLAS experiments, are acknowledged.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recently, an alternative formulation of Kaluza-Klein theory  has been presented which is based on a differential geometry that is adapted to the decomposition of the five-dimensional (5d) Kaluza-Klein space-time into 4d space-time and the internal $`S^1`$ manifold . Physically, this approach leads to the same results as conventional Kaluza-Klein theory except that it allows for the Einstein-Cartan theory of 4d space-time.

In this article, the alternative formulation of Kaluza-Klein theory is investigated further. In particular, the translational connection on the 5d manifold is considered and it is shown that the part of it belonging to the fifth dimension is related to the electromagnetic vector potential and a Stueckelberg scalar. As a consequence, it will be seen that the $`U(1)`$ gauge symmetry of Maxwell theory can be interpreted as a translational symmetry of the internal space.

The use of the translational connection leads to a generalization of the alternative Kaluza-Klein theory in that a mass term for the electromagnetic field can be considered. The introduction of a 5d cosmological term that has the same symmetries as the geometry used leads, after dimensional reduction, to the Einstein-Cartan theory with cosmological constant coupled to massive Maxwell theory in the Stueckelberg formulation thus unifying the cosmological constant and the photon mass.

This article is organized as follows. In section 2, the alternative formulation of Kaluza-Klein theory is described in the language of fibre bundles. In section 3, the translational connection is introduced and its relationship with the electromagnetic vector potential is revealed. The 5d cosmological term and its dimensional reduction are considered in section 4. Section 5 contains some conclusions.

In this article, the following conventions are employed. Uppercase indices with values $`0,1,2,3,5`$ refer to 5d space-time where $`A,B,\mathrm{}`$ are used for internal indices and $`M,N,\mathrm{}`$ for coordinate indices. Lowercase indices with values $`0,1,2,3`$ are used for 4d space-time with $`a,b,\mathrm{}`$ denoting internal indices and $`\mu ,\nu ,\mathrm{}`$ being coordinate indices. Explicit indices in parentheses will always be internal indices. The metric signature is $`(+++(+))`$. Throughout this article, geometrized units are used where $`16\pi G=1=c`$.

## 2 Five-Dimensional Unification of Einstein-Cartan Theory and Maxwell Theory

Kinematically, Kaluza-Klein theory is based on two assumptions: First, the 5d space-time manifold $`M^5`$ is decomposed into the 4d space-time manifold $`M^4`$ and a 1-sphere $`S^1`$ representing the internal space, that is, $`M^5=M^4\times S^1`$. Secondly, all geometrical fields defined on $`M^5`$ have a dependence only on the points of $`M^4`$. (We disregard massive excitations of the geometry.) Assuming a 5d local Lorentz gauge symmetry on $`M^5`$, these two restrictions can be expressed as symmetry breakings: The 4+1 decomposition of $`M^5`$ is described by the symmetry breaking $`SO(4,1)SO(3,1)`$ on $`M^5`$ where $`SO(3,1)`$ represents the local Lorentz symmetry on $`M^4`$. The fact that the geometrical fields only depend on 4d spacetime corresponds to the symmetry breaking $`SO(3,1)1`$ on each single internal manifold $`S^1`$.

Starting from a general Riemann-Cartan geometry on $`M^5`$, the consequent application of standard theorems for the reduction of linear connections  on the symmetry breakings leads to a unique geometry on $`M^5`$. This will be explained in this section. The reduction is described in some detail in order to be able to generalize it to affine connections in the following section.

A basis of tangent vectors $`e_A=e_A^M_M`$ at a point of $`M^5`$ forms a linear frame. The set of all linear frames at all points of $`M^5`$ forms the bundle of linear frames $`L(M^5)`$. The restriction to orthonormal frames, which here means frames transforming under $`SO(4,1)`$, amounts to the choice of a 5d metric tensor $`\gamma _{MN}`$ with respect to which the frames are orthonormal. The corresponding fibre bundle is the bundle of orthonormal frames $`O(M^5)`$. The generators of the Lie algebra $`so(4,1)`$ of $`SO(4,1)`$ will be denoted by $`J^{AB}`$ and satisfy the Lie algebra

$$[J^{AB},J^{CD}]=2\eta ^{C[A}J^{B]D}2\eta ^{D[A}J^{B]C}$$
(1)
where $`\eta ^{AB}`$ is the 5d Minkowski metric and square brackets denote antisymmetrization. Each element $`A=\frac{1}{2}A_{AB}J^{AB}`$ of $`so(4,1)`$ induces a so called fundamental vector field $`A^{}`$ on $`O(M^5)`$ which is given by

$$A^{}=A_{AB}e^{AM}\frac{}{e_B^M}$$
(2)
with $`e^{AM}\eta ^{AB}e_B^M`$. The integral curves of $`A^{}`$ are 1-parameter groups of $`SO(4,1)`$ transformations on the fibres of $`O(M^5)`$ generated by $`A`$. A connection form $`\omega `$ on $`O(M^5)`$ is an $`so(4,1)`$ valued 1-form on $`O(M^5)`$ that satisfies $`\omega (A^{})=A`$ and transforms under global $`SO(4,1)`$ transformations of the frames according to the adjoint representation. From equation (2) then follows that $`\omega `$ is of the form

$$\omega =\frac{1}{2}\left(e_{MA}\mathrm{d}e_B^M+e_{MA}e_B^N\mathrm{\Gamma }_{NP}^M\mathrm{d}x^P\right)J^{AB}$$
(3)
where the functions $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{NP}^M`$ are the connection coefficients and $`e_{AM}\eta _{AB}e_M^B`$ with the coframe $`e^A`$ which is determined by the duality relation $`e^A(e_B)=\delta _B^A`$. Under a local $`SO(4,1)`$ transformtion $`e_A^{}=e_B\mathrm{\Omega }^B_A`$ of the frames, the connection form $`\omega `$ (or, more precisely, its pullback to $`M^5`$) transforms as

$$\omega ^A{}_{B}{}^{}\mathrm{\Omega }^1{}_{}{}^{A}{}_{C}{}^{}\omega _{}^{C}{}_{D}{}^{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{D}{}_{B}{}^{}+\mathrm{\Omega }^1{}_{}{}^{A}{}_{C}{}^{}\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Omega }^C{}_{B}{}^{}.$$
(4)
The 4+1 decomposition of $`M^5`$ allows the use of special frames $`e_A`$ whose basis vectors $`e_{(5)}`$ point in the fifth dimension, that is, $`e_{(5)}`$ is a multiple of $`_5`$. These frames form a subbundle $`Q(M^5)`$ of $`O(M^5)`$ with structure group $`SO(3,1)`$. It is defined by the tensor

$$q_N^M=e_a^Me_N^a$$
(5)
which projects 5d vectors onto the 4d spacetime manifold $`M^4`$ and induces a metric on $`M^4`$. With respect to $`O(M^5)`$, this tensor can be regarded as a section of the associated fibre bundle with standard fibre $`SO(4,1)/SO(3,1)`$. The connection (3) is reducible to a connection $`\omega ^{}`$ on $`Q(M^5)`$ if and only if $`q_N^M`$ is parallel with respect to $`\omega `$, from which follows

$$\omega _{a(5)M}=e_a^Ne_{(5)}^PD_Mq_{NP}=0$$
(6)
where $`D_M`$ denotes the covariant derivative corresponding to $`\omega `$ and $`q_{MN}\gamma _{MP}q_N^P`$.

The requirement to be able to perform a dimensional reduction means that geometrical quantities do not depend on the coordinate $`x^5`$ of $`S^1`$. This implies that a preferred basis $`e_a`$ can be chosen where $`e_a`$ is fixed along each internal space belonging to a point of $`M^4`$. Since each internal space $`S^1`$ at a point $`x^\mu `$ defines a subbundle $`Q(S^1,x^\mu )`$ of $`Q(M^5)`$ by restricting $`Q(M^5)`$ to the fibres over the $`S^1`$ manifold at the point $`x^\mu `$ of $`M^4`$, the preferred frames form a subbundle $`S(S^1,x^\mu )`$ of $`Q(S^1,x^\mu )`$ with structure group $`1`$. The preferred frames $`e_a(x^5,x^\mu )`$ can be considered as a section of the associated fibre bundle over $`S^1`$ with standard fibre $`SO(3,1)`$. The $`SO(3,1)`$ connection $`\omega ^{}`$ induces a connection on each subbundle $`Q(S^1,x^\mu )`$ of $`Q(M^4)`$. These connections are reducible to connections on $`S(S^1,x^\mu )`$ if and only if $`e_a(x^5,x^\mu )`$ is parallel with respect to the induced connection, which means

$$\omega _{ab5}=e_a^MD_5e_{bM}=0$$
(7)
The conditions (6) and (7) define a connection on $`M^5`$ that is adapted to the symmetries of the Kaluza-Klein reduction. It was previously called a semi-teleparallel connection  since it parallelizes the internal space while leaving the Riemann-Cartan connection on $`M^4`$ unrestricted.

We will base a five dimensional unification on this connection instead as on the Riemannian connection of conventional Kaluza-Klein theory. However, formally we will follow the same procedure in chosing an action functional as in Kaluza-Klein theory. To start with, we observe that similar to the unique decomposition

$$\omega ^A{}_{BM}{}^{}=\stackrel{A}{\stackrel{}{\omega }}{}_{BM}{}^{}K^A_{BM}$$
(8)
of a Lorentz connection $`\omega ^A_{BM}`$ into the Levi-Civita connection $`\stackrel{A}{\stackrel{}{\omega }}_{BM}`$ and the contortion tensor $`K^A_{BM}`$, we have a unique decomposition

$$\omega ^A{}_{BM}{}^{}=\stackrel{~}{\omega }^A{}_{BM}{}^{}+S^A_{BM}$$
(9)
of a Lorentz connection $`\omega ^A_{BM}`$ into a semi-teleparallel connection $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }^A_{BM}`$ and a tensor field $`S^A_{BM}`$ that is restricted by the condition that its projection onto $`M^4`$ vanishes,

$$q_Q^Mq_R^Nq_S^PS_{MNP}=0$$
(10)
where $`S_{MNP}e_M^Ae_N^BS_{ABP}`$.

In order to obtain a unique action for the semi-teleparallel connection, we start with the Einstein-Cartan action on $`M^5`$,

$$S[e^A,\omega _{AB}]=_{M^5}\mathrm{d}^5x\sqrt{\gamma }R(e^A,\omega _{AB}).$$
(11)
Here, $`\gamma `$ is the determinant of the 5d metric $`\gamma _{MN}`$ and $`R`$ is the 5d scalar curvature. We then insert the decomposition (9) for the Lorentz connection and determine the stationary point with respect to the tensor field $`S^A_{BM}`$. As a result, we obtain a functional of the semi-teleparallel connection $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$. In the case of the decomposition (8), this procedure leads to the Einstein-Hilbert action which is chosen as the action functional in conventional Kaluza-Klein theory. Thus, we expect by using the decomposition (9) to arrive at a sensible action functional for a 5d unification.

The determination of the stationary point of the action functional is best done using the preferred frames $`e_A`$ that are adapted to the Kaluza-Klein geometry since in this basis we have $`\omega _{a(5)M}=0=\omega _{ab5}`$ and the condition (10) means $`S_{abc}=0`$. Inserting the decomposition (9) into the Einstein-Cartan action and varying with respect to $`S_{ab(5)}`$ and $`S_{(5)ab}`$, we obtain

$`S_{ab(5)}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{K}_{ab(5)}`$ (12)
$`S_{(5)ab}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{K}_{(5)ab}`$ (13)
where $`\stackrel{~}{K}_{ABC}`$ is the contortion tensor of the semi-teleparallel connection $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_{ABC}`$. The Einstein-Cartan action contains the components $`S_{(5)a(5)}`$ only within the linear term $`S_{(5)a(5)}\stackrel{~}{K}^{ab}_b`$. Hence, the action possesses a stationary point only if the 4d torsion is tracefree, $`\stackrel{~}{K}^{ab}{}_{b}{}^{}=0`$, which is the case in the absence of spinning matter. Reinserting (12) and (13) into the Einstein-Cartan action, we obtain the action

$$S[e^A,\stackrel{~}{\omega }_{AB}]=_{M^5}\mathrm{d}^5x\sqrt{\gamma }\left({}_{}{}^{4}R\frac{1}{4}T^{(5)ab}T_{(5)ab}\right).$$
(14)
Here, $`{}_{}{}^{4}R`$ is the 4d scalar curvature and $`T^A_{BC}`$ is the 5d torsion tensor of $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$. We choose the action functional (14) as the action for the alternative five dimensional unification.

In order to make contact with electromagnetism, we parameterize the 5d coframe $`e^A`$. The fifth component of $`e_A`$ is chosen to be

$$e_{(5)}=\mathrm{e}^{\varphi (x^\mu )}_\theta $$
(15)
where $`\theta x^5`$ is the coordinate along the internal $`S^1`$ and $`\varphi (x^\mu )`$ is a scalar field as usual in the Kaluza-Klein theory. From the duality relation, the fifth component of the coframe then has the form

$$e^{(5)}=\mathrm{e}^\varphi \mathrm{d}\theta +C_\mu \mathrm{d}x^\mu $$
(16)
where $`C_\mu `$ is a 4d vector field. The remaining components of the basis and cobasis follow from equations (15) and (16) using the duality relation:

$`e_a`$ $`=`$ $`e_a^\mu _\mu e_a^\mu C_\mu \mathrm{e}^\varphi _\theta `$ (17)
$`e^a`$ $`=`$ $`e_\mu ^a\mathrm{d}x^\mu .`$ (18)
As in conventional Kaluza-Klein theory, the vector field $`C_\mu `$ shall be related to the electromagnetic vector potential $`A_\mu `$. To find this relationship, we note that in Kaluza-Klein theory gauge transformations of $`A_\mu `$ are attributed to coordinate transformations along the internal space, that is, $`\theta \theta +\lambda (x^\mu )`$. Inserting this transformation into equation (16) leads to

$$e^{(5)}=\mathrm{e}^\varphi \mathrm{d}\theta +\left(\mathrm{e}^\varphi _\mu \lambda +C_\mu \right)\mathrm{d}x^\mu .$$
(19)
From this follows that we have to choose

$$C_\mu =\mathrm{e}^\varphi A_\mu $$
(20)
in order to obtain the correct gauge transformation $`A_\mu A_\mu +_\mu \lambda `$.

Using the chosen parameterization of the basis as the preferred frames for the semi-teleparallel connection, the fifth component of the torsion tensor is given by

$$T^{(5)}{}_{ab}{}^{}=\mathrm{e}^\varphi e_a^\mu e_b^\nu F_{\mu \nu }$$
(21)
where $`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu `$ represents the electromagnetic field strength. Then, the action functional (14) reads after dimensional reduction

$$S[e^a,\omega _{ab},A_\mu ,\varphi ]=_{M_4}\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{g}\mathrm{e}^\varphi \left({}_{}{}^{4}R\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{e}^{2\varphi }F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }\right)$$
(22)
where $`g`$ is the determinant of the 4d metric $`g_{\mu \nu }=e_\mu ^ae_\nu ^b\eta _{ab}`$. Equation (22) coincides with the action of the Einstein-Cartan-Maxwell theory coupled to a scalar field.

## 3 Translational Connection

We next generalize the linear connection considered in the previous section to an affine connection, that is, we additionally introduce a translational connection on $`M^5`$ . Applying symmetry breakings analogous to the ones used to define the semi-teleparallel connection, we will see that the translational connection has a natural relation with the electromagnetic vector potential.

The bundle of linear frames $`L(M^5)`$ can be extended to the bundle of affine frames $`A(M^5)`$ by generalizing linear frames $`e_A^M`$ to affine frames $`(e_A^M,q^M)`$ which include affine vectors $`q^M=e_A^Mq^A`$ at each point of $`M^5`$. In the case of the bundle of orthonormal frames $`O(M^5)`$, the corresponding bundle of affine frames $`P(M^5)`$ consists of frames that transform under the 5d Poincaré group $`P(5)=SO(4,1)T^5`$. $`P(5)`$ is generated by the generators $`(J^{AB},P_A)`$ which have, besides equation (1), the Lie brackets

$`[J^{AB},P_C]`$ $`=`$ $`2\delta _C^{[B}\eta ^{A]D}P_D`$ (23)
$`[P_A,P_B]`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (24)
Under a Poincaré transformation, an affine frame transforms according to

$$(e_A^M,q^A)(\mathrm{\Omega }^B{}_{A}{}^{}e_{B}^{M},\mathrm{\Omega }^1{}_{}{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}(q^Bt^B))$$
(25)
where $`t^A`$ is a translation. The fundamental vector field $`A^{}`$ on $`P(M^5)`$ corresponding to the Lie algebra element $`A=\frac{1}{2}A_{AB}J^{AB}+A^AP_A`$ is

$$A^{}=A_{AB}e^{AM}\frac{}{e_B^M}A^Ae_A^M\frac{}{q^M}.$$
(26)
From this follows the connection form

$$\widehat{\omega }=\omega +\phi $$
(27)
with the translational connection form

$$\phi =e_M^A\left(\mathrm{d}q^M\mathrm{\Gamma }_{NP}^Mq^N\mathrm{d}x^P+\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_N^M\mathrm{d}x^N\right)P_A$$
(28)
where $`\omega `$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{NP}^M`$ are the $`SO(4,1)`$ connection form and connection coefficients, respectively, defined in equation (3), and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_N^M`$ are the connection coefficients of the translational connection. Under a local Poincaré transformation, $`\phi ^A`$ transforms as

$$\phi ^A\mathrm{\Omega }^1{}_{}{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}(\phi ^B+\mathrm{D}t^B)$$
(29)
where $`\mathrm{D}t^A\mathrm{d}t^A+\omega ^A{}_{B}{}^{}t_{}^{B}`$. Since $`\phi ^A`$ transforms under local Lorentz transformations as a tensor, we will set $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_N^M=\delta _N^M`$ in the following thus relating $`\phi ^A`$ to the cobasis $`e^A`$. The translational connection form can then be written as

$$\phi ^A=\mathrm{D}q^A+e^A.$$
(30)
Equation (30) was first introduced in reference . We will follow reference  and refer to the bundle coordinates $`q^A`$ as Poincaré coordinates.

We next apply the symmetry reductions described in the previous section to the translational connection. The first symmetry breaking $`SO(4,1)SO(3,1)`$ generalizes to

$$P(5)SO(3,1)T^5.$$
(31)
The 5d translational symmetry is not broken since the 4+1 decomposition of space-time can be realized by splitting the translations into 4d space-time translations and internal ones. The reduced subbundle of $`P(M^5)`$ that corresponds to (31) will be denoted by $`R(M^5)`$. The translational part of $`R(M^5)`$ is not changed with respect to $`P(M^5)`$. Accordingly, the translational connection is not affected by the symmetry breaking (31). However, the second symmetry breaking, which is restricted to the fibres $`R(S^1,x^\mu )`$ of the bundle $`R(M^5)`$, generalizes to

$$SO(3,1)T^51\times T^1$$
(32)
where $`T^1`$ corresponds to the internal $`S^1`$ translations which are $`U(1)`$ transformations. The reason for (32) is that 4d space-time translations — like 4d space-time Lorentz transformations — must be independent of the coordinates of the internal space in order to be able to perform the dimensional reduction.

The induced connection form on $`R(S^1,x^\mu )`$ is

$$\widehat{\omega }=\frac{1}{2}\omega _{ab5}\mathrm{d}\theta J^{ab}+\phi _5^A\mathrm{d}\theta P_A.$$
(33)
The symmetry breaking (32) means that the connection (33) is reducible to the $`T^1`$ connection $`\widehat{\omega }=\phi _5^{(5)}\mathrm{d}\theta P_5`$ on each fibre. Consequently, besides $`\omega _{ab5}=0`$, the components $`\phi _5^a`$ of the translational connection vanish.

Next we seek a physical interpretation of the semi-teleparallel translational connection. In accordance with the Kaluza-Klein theory, we require that the fields $`e_M^A`$ and $`q^A`$ only depend on the 4d space-time. (A dependence of $`q^{(5)}`$ on $`\theta `$ can be removed by a $`T^1`$ gauge transformation.) According to equation (30), the 4d space-time part of the coframe is given by

$$e_\mu ^a=_\mu q^a+\omega ^a{}_{b\mu }{}^{}q_{}^{b}+\phi _\mu ^a.$$
(34)
This follows from the fact that $`\omega ^a_{(5)\mu }`$ vanishes in a semi-teleparallel geometry. Equation (34) is the known relation between the 4d cobasis $`e_\mu ^a`$, the Riemann-Cartan connection $`\omega ^a_{b\mu }`$, the 4d Poincaré coordinates $`q^a`$ and the 4d translational connection $`\phi _\mu ^a`$. Thus, equation (34) can be understood within a 4d Poincaré gauge theory .

For the components $`e_5^a`$ of the coframe, we have from equation (30)

$$e_5^a=_5q^a+\omega ^a{}_{B5}{}^{}q_{}^{B}+\phi _5^a=0$$
(35)
because $`\omega ^a{}_{B5}{}^{}=0`$ and $`\phi _5^a=0`$ for a semi-teleparallel geometry and because $`q^a`$ is independent of the coordinate $`\theta `$ of the internal space. Equation (35) is in accordance with our choice of the adapted frame (18).

The component $`e_5^{(5)}`$ is given by

$$e_5^{(5)}=_5q^{(5)}+\omega ^{(5)}{}_{a5}{}^{}q_{}^{a}+\phi _5^{(5)}=\phi _5^{(5)}$$
(36)
since $`q^{(5)}`$ does not depend on $`\theta `$ and $`\omega ^{(5)}{}_{a5}{}^{}=0`$. Comparing equation (36) with equation (16), we find

$$\phi _5^{(5)}=\mathrm{e}^\varphi .$$
(37)
Finally, for the components $`e_\mu ^{(5)}`$ follows

$$e_\mu ^{(5)}=_\mu q^{(5)}+\omega ^{(5)}{}_{a\mu }{}^{}q_{}^{a}+\phi _\mu ^{(5)}=_\mu q^{(5)}+\phi _\mu ^{(5)}.$$
(38)
Comparison with equation (16) yields

$$\phi _\mu ^{(5)}=C_\mu _\mu \sigma $$
(39)
where we have set $`\sigma q^{(5)}`$. In order to find the physical meaning of this equation, we consider a $`T^1`$ gauge transformation $`\sigma \sigma \lambda (x^\mu )`$. From equations (29) and (39) follows

$$\phi _\mu ^{(5)}\phi _\mu ^{(5)}+_\mu \lambda $$
(40)
which is a $`U(1)`$ gauge transformation. Hence, we can identify the translational connection $`\phi _\mu ^{(5)}`$ with the electromagnetic vector potential $`A_\mu `$. Then, $`\sigma `$ has the meaning of a Stueckelberg scalar . Note that the identification

$$C_\mu =A_\mu +_\mu \sigma $$
(41)
differs from (20) in that coordinate transformations of the internal space no longer induce $`U(1)`$ transformations — provided $`\varphi `$ is not zero. Instead, the $`U(1)`$ gauge transformations are translational gauge transformations.

The construction of the action functional given in the previous section remains unchanged by the introduction of the translational connection. This follows from the fact that the coframe $`e^A`$ is not affected by the symmetry reductions and there is no explicit dependence of the action functional on the translational connection.

To summarize this section, it has been shown that the electromagnetic vector potential $`A_\mu `$ can be interpreted as the fifth component $`\phi _\mu ^{(5)}`$ of a translational connection where $`U(1)`$ gauge transformations correspond to internal $`S^1`$ translations. Furthermore, the fifth component $`q^{(5)}`$ of the Poincaré coordinates can be interpreted as a Stueckelberg scalar $`\sigma `$.

It should be remarked that these identifications cannot be performed by generalizing a 5d Riemann-Cartan geometry or a 5d Riemannian geometry to include translations.

## 4 Cosmological Term

In this section, we consider the addition of a cosmological term to the action (22). In Kaluza-Klein theory, the cosmological term is

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{M^5}\mathrm{d}^5x\sqrt{\gamma }$$
(42)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the cosmological constant. Using differential forms, (42) may be rewritten as

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{AB}_{M^5}e^Ae^B.$$
(43)
Here, $`e^A`$ is a 5d orthonormal coframe, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{AB}`$ is a constant tensor, and $``$ is the duality operator defined by

$$\alpha \beta =(\alpha ,\beta )e$$
(44)
where $`\alpha `$,$`\beta `$ are p-forms, $`(,)`$ denotes the scalar product defined by the 5d metric induced by the coframe $`e^A`$, and $`e`$ is the corresponding volume form. 5d Lorentz invariance requires the tensor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{AB}`$ to be of the form

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{AB}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{5}\eta _{AB}.$$
(45)
Indeed, using equation (44) in (43) yields (42) where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{AB}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are related by equation (45).

The main difference between the approach to 5d unification presented in this work and traditional Kaluza-Klein theory is the breaking of the 5d Lorentz invariance to a 4d Lorentz invariance. Therefore, we have also to break down the 5d Lorentz invariance of the cosmological term. This can be done by using a different duality operator in (43). We can define a new duality operator $`\mathrm{}`$ by

$$e^A\mathrm{}e^B=e_M^Ae_N^B{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}\gamma _{}^{MN}\sqrt{{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}\gamma }\mathrm{d}^5x$$
(46)
where $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}\gamma _{}^{MN}`$ is a 5d metric different from $`\gamma ^{MN}`$. Since we want to retain 4d Lorentz invariance, equation (46) has to be invariant under 4d Lorentz transformations which means that the 4d part of $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}\gamma _{}^{MN}`$ is the one of $`\gamma ^{MN}`$, that is, $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}\gamma _{}^{\mu \nu }=g^{\mu \nu }`$. For $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}\gamma _{}^{MN}`$ we use the parameterization

$${}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}\gamma _{}^{MN}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}g^{\mu \nu }& B^\nu \\ B^\mu & \mathrm{e}^{2\psi }+B^\mu B_\mu \end{array}\right)$$
(47)
where $`B^\mu `$ is a 4d vector field and $`\psi `$ is a scalar field.

The restricted invariance under 4d Lorentz transformations requires $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{AB}`$ to be of the form

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{AB}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{4}\eta _{ab}& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{\Sigma }\end{array}\right)$$
(48)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a constant. Using this equation and the modified duality operator $`\mathrm{}`$, (43) yields after dimensional reduction

$`{\displaystyle _{M^4}}\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{g}\mathrm{e}^\psi [\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ab}e_\mu ^ae_\nu ^bg^{\mu \nu }`$ (49)
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{\Sigma }e_\mu ^{(5)}e_\nu ^{(5)}g^{\mu \nu }2\mathrm{\Sigma }B^\mu e_\mu ^{(5)}e_5^{(5)}+\mathrm{\Sigma }e_5^{(5)}e_5^{(5)}(\mathrm{e}^{2\psi }+B^\mu B_\mu )].`$
If we insert the $`e^{(5)}`$ given by equations (16) and (41), and use that $`g^{\mu \nu }=e_a^\mu e_b^\nu \eta ^{ab}`$, we obtain

$`{\displaystyle _{M^4}}\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{g}\mathrm{e}^\psi [\mathrm{\Lambda }+\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{e}^{2\varphi 2\psi }`$ (50)
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(A_\mu +_\mu \sigma \mathrm{e}^\varphi B_\mu )(A_\nu +_\nu \sigma \mathrm{e}^\varphi B_\nu )g^{\mu \nu }].`$
The expression (50) contains a mass term for the vector potential $`A_\mu `$. This is particularly clear in the case $`\psi =\varphi `$ and $`B_\mu =0`$ for which (50) reads

$$_{M^4}\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{g}e^\varphi \left[\mathrm{\Lambda }+\mathrm{\Sigma }+\mathrm{\Sigma }\left(A_\mu +_\mu \sigma \right)\left(A_\nu +_\nu \sigma \right)g^{\mu \nu }\right].$$
(51)
The functional (51) consists of two parts, a 4d cosmological term with the cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }+\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and a mass term for the vector potential in the Stueckelberg formalism where the photon mass is given by

$$m=\mathrm{}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Sigma }}.$$
(52)
Other choices of the fields $`B_\mu `$ and $`\psi `$ are possible. $`B_\mu `$ may be interpreted as an external current.

In summary, we see that from the viewpoint of a 5d unification, the cosmological constant and the photon mass are of the same origin.

## 5 Conclusions

The main achievement of Kaluza-Klein theory is the unification of 4d gravitational concepts and notions from Maxwell theory into 5d gravitational concepts. This has so far been done, e.g., for the 4d metric and the vector potential which are unified in the 5d metric, and for the momentum of a point particle and its charge which are unified in a 5d momentum. In this article, this Kaluza-Klein programme has been extended in two ways. First, the 4d translational gauge symmetry of gravitation and the $`U(1)`$ gauge symmetry of Maxwell theory are unified in a 5d translational symmetry. Secondly, it has been shown that the cosmological constant and the photon mass can be unified in a 5d cosmological tensor.

Whether the latter unification is of a deeper significance, cannot be shown by the classical methods used in this paper. However, a further test of the usefulness of the approach would be the generalization to nonabelian gauge theories. Heuristically, if we consider the gauge theory of electroweak interactions, the minimal choice for the internal manifold in a higher dimensional unification is the homogeneous space $`U(1)\times SU(2)/U(1)`$. Since this space is three-dimensional, the incorporation of a cosmological term along the lines of section 4 of this article would lead to three mass terms for the four gauge bosons, which qualitatively agrees with the mass spectrum of the gauge bosons of electroweak interactions.


text:
# Connectivity via nongeneric pencils

## 1. Introduction

In this paper we extend the method of slicing by pencils to a larger class of “admissible” pencils. This aim is motivated by the fact that, in certain situations, the pencils one is able to use are not generic. As an important example, we mention the study of the topology of a polynomial function $`f:^n`$, which is itself a nongeneric pencil on $`^n`$ (see §4).

So let $`X=YV`$, where $`Y`$ is a compact complex analytic space and $`V`$ is a closed complex subspace. For instance, quasi-projective varieties are of this kind.

We call “pencil” the ratio of two sections $`f`$ and $`g`$ of a holomorphic line bundle $`LY`$. It defines a holomorphic function $`h:=f/g`$ over the complement $`YA`$ of the “axis” of the pencil (i.e. the indeterminacy locus) $`A:=\{f=g=0\}`$. A pencil is called generic with respect to $`X`$ when its axis $`A`$ is general (i.e. stratified transversal to some Whitney stratification of the pair $`(Y,V)`$) and when the holomorphic map $`h=f/g:YA^1`$ has only stratified double points as singularities. These singularities are finitely many, by the compactness of $`Y`$, but part of those might be outside $`X`$. Instead of only double points, one may consider pencils with any kind of stratified isolated singularities (see \[HL3\], \[GM\]).

We mean by nongeneric pencil a pencil where singularities may also occur inside the axis (e.g. when the axis $`A`$ is not transversal). In this paper we consider nongeneric pencils with isolated singularities in the axis, in the precise meaning of Definition 2.3. The main result we prove is the following:

###### Theorem 1.1.

Let $`X=YV`$, where $`Y`$ and $`VY`$ are compact complex analytic spaces. Let $`f,g`$ be sections of a holomorphic line bundle over $`Y`$, defining a pencil with at most isolated singularities in the axis (Definition 2.3) and let $`X_\alpha `$ denote a generic member of the pencil. Let $`\mathrm{rhd}Xn`$, where $`n2`$.

If one of the following two conditions is fulfilled:

1. $`AV`$ and the pair $`(X_\alpha ,AX_\alpha )`$ is $`(n2)`$-connected,
2. $`AV`$ and $`V\{g=0\}`$,

then the pair $`(X,X_\alpha )`$ is $`n1`$ connected.

###### Example 1.2.

Let $`\widehat{f}=x^2y+xz^2`$, $`\widehat{g}=z^3`$ define a pencil on $`^3`$ with homogeneous coordinates $`x,y,z,w`$. We restrict the pencil to the nonsingular surface $`Y^3`$ given by $`yw+x^2z^2=0`$. The axis $`\widehat{A}^3`$ consists of two lines, one of which, namely $`\{x=z=0\}`$ being the singular locus of each member of the pencil. The axis $`A=\widehat{A}Y`$ of the pencil on $`Y`$ is two points and one of them is singular. This is clearly a nongeneric pencil, since all of its members have singularities in the axis.

Nevertheless, Theorem 1.1 can be applied to this situation, since the pencil has isolated singularities in the axis (by Proposition 2.4), $`\mathrm{rhd}Y2`$ and $`(Y_\alpha ,AY_\alpha )`$ is $`0`$-connected.

Theorem 1.1 represents a far reaching extension of the Lefschetz Hyperplane Theorem, which asserts that, if $`X^N`$ is a projective variety and $`H^N`$ a hyperplane such that $`XH`$ is non singular of dimension $`n`$ (more generally: if $`XH`$ has rectified homotopy depth greater or equal to $`n`$), then $`\pi _k(X,XH)=0`$ for all $`k<n`$. Although not generic itself, the hyperplane $`H`$ can be viewed as a member of a generic pencil (by choosing a generic axis inside $`H`$, which is possible to do in the projective space). Then one may conclude by using our Remark 3.6, which deals with this particular situation.

Lefschetz’s original proof (\[Lef\], see also \[La\]) uses a generic pencil of hyperplanes to scan the space. Several generalizations to (non compact) spaces with singularities, such as by Goresky and MacPherson \[GM\], Hamm and Lê \[HL1-3\], use Morse theory (method first employed by Bott \[Bo\], Andreotti and Frankel \[AF\]). For the bibliography up to ’88, one can look up \[GM\]. It appears that in some of these generalizations, under the respective hypotheses, generic pencils do exist and their use yields alternative proofs (e.g. in \[GM, Thm. 1.2, pag.199\]).

The main condition we impose in our Theorem 1.1 is on the rectified homotopical depth of the space $`X`$ (abbreviated $`\mathrm{rhd}X`$). This was introduced by Hamm and Lê \[HL3\], who proved several Lefschetz type theorems and Grothendieck’s conjectures \[HL-1,2,3,4\]. We only say here that this amounts to a local condition $`\mathrm{rhd}_xXn`$ which is satisfied, for instance, at points $`x`$ where $`(X,x)`$ is a germ of a complete intersection of dimension $`n`$. The condition on $`\mathrm{rhd}`$ is recursive, namely $`\mathrm{rhd}X_\alpha n1`$, by \[HL3, Theorem 3.2.1\].

The condition on the connectivity of $`(X_\alpha ,AX_\alpha )`$ comes in naturally (see \[La\]) and can also be recursive. Indeed, $`AX_\alpha `$ may be a (singular) fibre of a second pencil $`h^{}=f/g^{}`$ on the space $`X_\alpha `$ (which replaces $`X`$ as total space), with new axis $`A_1:=\{f=g^{}=0\}`$. Let’s denote by $`(X_\alpha )_\beta `$ a generic member of it. We suppose by induction that the pair $`((X_\alpha )_\beta ,A_1(X_\alpha )_\beta )`$ is $`(n3)`$ connected and suppose that Theorem 1.1 can be applied. It follows that $`(X_\alpha ,(X_\alpha )_\beta )`$ is $`(n2)`$ connected. When $`X`$ is compact or when $`AX_\alpha `$ is generic, this implies in turn, see Remark 3.6, that $`(X_\alpha ,AX_\alpha )`$ is $`(n2)`$ connected.

By applying Switzer’s result \[Sw, Proposition 6.13\] to the above theorem, one derives the usual attaching result:

###### Corollary 1.3.

Under the hypotheses of Theorem 1.1, up to homotopy type, the space $`X`$ is built from $`X_\alpha `$ by attaching cells of dimension $`n`$.

If $`X`$ is in addition a Stein space of dimension $`n`$, then the attaching cells are of dimension precisely $`n`$. If moreover $`X`$ is $`n1`$ connected, then the general hyperplane section $`X_\alpha `$ has the homotopy type of a bouquet of spheres $`S^{n1}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

The proof of our theorem is based on the Nash blowing-up along the axis of the pencil, on homotopy excision and on local Lefschetz type results. We also remark (Proposition 3.5) that, if $`X_\alpha `$ is not generic, then, in the conclusion of Theorem 1.1 one may replace $`X_\alpha `$ by $`X_D`$, a small “tube” neighbourhood of $`X_\alpha `$.

As natural applications, we prove new connectivity estimations on fibres of polynomial functions and complements of affine hypersurfaces.

## 2. Singularities in the axis

Fix a Whitney stratification $`𝒲`$ of $`Y`$ such that $`V`$ is a union of strata. Let $`\tau =[s:t]`$ denote a point on the complex projective line $`^1`$. Let $`𝕐`$ denote the hypersurface $`\{(x,\tau )Y\times ^1sf(x)tg(x)=0\}`$ in $`Y\times ^1`$ obtained by blowing up the axis $`A`$ and let $`𝕏:=𝕐(X\times ^1)`$. Consider the projection $`p:𝕐^1`$ to $`^1`$ and its restriction $`p_{|𝕏}:𝕏^1`$. We also consider the projection to the first factor $`\pi :𝕐Y`$. We use the following notations throughout the paper: for any $`M^1`$, $`𝕐_M:=p^1(M)`$ and $`𝕏_M:=𝕏𝕐_M`$.

Observe that $`A\times ^1𝕐`$, that $`𝕐(A\times ^1)`$ can be identified (as the graph of $`h`$) with $`YA`$, and that the restriction $`p_{|𝕐(A\times ^1)}`$ can be identified with $`h`$. The stratification $`𝒲`$ restricted to the open set $`YA`$ induces a Whitney stratification on $`𝕐(A\times ^1)`$, via the above identification.

###### Definition 2.1.

(Stratification of $`𝕐`$)
Let $`𝒮`$ be the coarsest Whitney stratification on $`𝕐`$ which coincides over $`𝕐(A\times ^1)`$ with the one induced by $`𝒲`$ on $`YA`$. (This exists, by classical stratification arguments, see e.g. \[GLPW\].) We refer to it as the canonical stratification of $`𝕐`$ generated by the stratification $`𝒲`$ of $`Y`$. We also consider as canonical stratification of $`𝕏`$ the stratification induced by $`𝒮`$ on $`𝕏`$.

After endowing $`𝕐`$ and $`𝕏`$ with canonical stratifications, the next observation is that both $`p:𝕐^1`$ and $`p_{|𝕏}:𝕏^1`$ are stratified locally trivial fibrations above the complement in $`^1`$ of some finite set (”bad values”) and that this is true in general, regardless of the singularities or the position of the axis $`A`$. This type of result is classical (Isotopy Theorem), it goes back to Thom’s paper \[Th\] and it is based on the fact that $`p`$ is proper analytic and $`𝒮`$ has finitely many strata. The problem one has to deal with is what happens in the pencil when one encounters such a critical value. This comes from the singular locus of $`p`$. Let us first define it.

###### Definition 2.2.

The singular locus of $`p`$ with respect to $`𝒮`$ is the following closed analytic subset of $`𝕐`$:

$$\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p:=\underset{𝒮_\beta 𝒮}{}\mathrm{Sing}p_{|𝒮_\beta }.$$

The critical values of $`p`$ with respect to $`𝒮`$ are the points in the image $`p(\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p)`$.

###### Definition 2.3.

We say that the pencil defined by $`h`$ is a (nongeneric) pencil with isolated singularities in the axis if $`dim\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p0`$.

In case that $`Y`$ is projective, the condition $`dim\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p0`$ in the above definition is equivalent to the condition: the singularites of the function $`p`$ at the blown-up axis $`A\times ^1`$ are at most isolated. Indeed, in this case the singularities of $`p`$ outside the axis are also isolated, by the following reason. Suppose that $`p`$ has non-isolated singularities and consider one component $`𝒞`$ of the singular locus $`\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p`$. Since $`𝒞`$ is necessarily contained in a single fibre of $`p`$, call it $`p^1(b)`$, it has to intersects the axis $`A\times \{b\}`$, which is a hypersurface in $`p^1(b)`$. Then, at all points of $`𝒞(A\times \{b\})`$, we have $`dim𝒞1`$. This ends our argument.

We shall assume for the remainder of this paper that the singular locus of $`p`$ is of dimension $`0`$, hence it consists of a finite number of points. This assumption is satisfied for instance in the following particular but very significant case.

###### Proposition 2.4.

Let $`Y^N`$ be a projective variety endowed with some Whitney stratification and let $`\widehat{h}=\widehat{f}/\widehat{g}`$ define a pencil of hypersurfaces in $`^N`$. Let $`B`$ denote the set of points on $`\widehat{A}Y`$ where some member of the pencil is singular or where $`\widehat{A}`$ is not transversal to $`𝒲`$. If $`dimB0`$ and the singular points of $`h:YA^1`$ with respect to $`𝒲`$ are isolated then $`p`$ has isolated singularities.

###### Proof.

On $`𝕐(A\times ^1)`$, $`p`$ is just $`h`$ and its singularities are isolated. The notation $`A`$ stays for $`\widehat{A}Y`$, as usual.

Next, let us remark that $`𝕐=(Y\times ^1)`$, where $`=\{x^N,[s:t]^1s\widehat{f}(x)t\widehat{g}(x)=0\}`$. The singularities of $``$ are contained into $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\widehat{A}}=(\widehat{A}\times ^1)\{s\widehat{f}t\widehat{g}=0\}`$, which is at most a collection of lines, by hypothesis. We endow $``$ with the coarsest Whitney stratification. It follows that $``$ is transversal to the strata $`𝒲\times ^1`$ of $`Y\times ^1`$, except eventually along $`B\times ^1`$. By using that a transversal intersection of Whitney stratified sets is Whitney \[GLPW, p. 19\]), it follows that the canonical stratification $`𝒮`$ of $`𝕐`$ restricted to $`(AB)\times ^1`$ contains only strata which are products by $`^1`$. Hence the projection $`p`$ is transversal to these strata. Finally, the stratification $`𝒮`$ may distinguish at most a finite number of points, as point strata, out of each line from the collection of projective lines $`B\times ^1`$. Then $`p`$, being a projection, is still transversal to the complement of these points in $`B\times ^1`$. ∎

## 3. Proof of the main result and some consequences

Denote in the following $`A^{}:=AX`$. For any $`M^1`$, let us denote $`Y_M:=\pi (p^1(M))`$ and $`X_M:=XY_M`$.

We compute here the homotopy groups $`\pi _j(X,X_\alpha )`$ of the pair space-section, where in the sequel $`\alpha `$ is supposed to be a general value for $`p`$. Let $`\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p=\{b_1,\mathrm{},b_k\}^1`$ be the singular values of $`p`$.

###### Lemma 3.1.

For any $`W^1`$, the space $`Y_W`$ (resp. $`X_W`$) is homotopy equivalent to the space $`𝕐_W`$ (resp. $`𝕏_W`$), to which one attaches along the product of $`A`$ (resp. $`A^{}`$) by $`W`$ the product of $`A`$ (resp. $`A^{}`$) by $`\mathrm{Cone}(W)`$. In particular, if $`W`$ is contractible, then $`Y_W\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}𝕐_W`$ and $`X_W\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}𝕏_W`$.

###### Proof.

The first statement immediately follows from the definition of the spaces $`𝕐`$ and $`𝕏`$. As for the second statement, we have the homotopy equivalences:

$$Y_W\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}𝕐_W_{A\times W}A\times \mathrm{Cone}(W)\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}𝕐_W,$$

since $`A\times \mathrm{Cone}(W)\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}A\times W`$. The same argument applies to $`X_W`$ and we get $`X_W\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}𝕏_W`$. Notice that in case $`A^{}=\mathrm{}`$, we have $`𝕏_W=X_W`$, for any $`W`$. ∎

Take small disjoint closed discs $`D_i^1`$ centered at $`b_i`$, a point $`\alpha ^1`$ exterior to all discs, and simple paths (non self intersecting, mutually non intersecting except at $`\alpha `$) $`\gamma _i^1_{i=1}^k\stackrel{}{D_i}`$ from $`\alpha `$ to some fixed point $`c_iD_i`$, for all $`i\{1,\mathrm{},k\}`$. Denote by $`𝒟`$ the subset $`_{i=1}^kD_i\gamma _i`$. Choose a closed disc $`K^1\stackrel{}{𝒟}`$ such that $`K𝒟=\{\alpha \}`$ and consider the decomposition $`^1=K\overline{^1K}`$, where $`K\overline{^1K}`$ is a circle which we denote by $`S`$ (therefore $`\alpha S`$). Since $`𝒟`$ is a deformation retract of $`\overline{^1K}`$, and by the local triviality of the map $`p_{|𝕏}`$, the space $`𝕏_{\overline{^1K}}`$ retracts to $`𝕏_𝒟`$. By Lemma 3.1, the corresponding retraction follows in the space $`X`$, namely $`X_{\overline{^1K}}`$ retracts to $`X_𝒟`$. Indeed:

$$X_{\overline{^1K}}\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}𝕏_{\overline{^1K}}_{A\times \overline{^1K}}A\times \mathrm{Cone}(\overline{^1K})\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}𝕏_𝒟_{A\times 𝒟}A\times \mathrm{Cone}(𝒟)\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}X_𝒟.$$

The same lemma also shows that $`X_\alpha `$ is homotopy equivalent to $`X_K`$. Hence we have the homotopy equivalence of pairs $`(X,X_\alpha )\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}(X,X_K)`$ and $`(X_{\overline{^1K}},X_\alpha )\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}(X_𝒟,X_\alpha )`$.

We now want to apply homotopy excision (Blakers-Massey theorem \[BM\], see also \[Gr, Corollary 16.27\]) to the pair $`(X_KX_{\overline{^1K}},X_K)`$. We have clearly that the pair $`(X_{\overline{^1K}},X_S)`$ is $`0`$-connected and we need the connectivity level of $`(X_K,X_S)`$. By considering the triple $`(X_K,X_S,X_\alpha )`$ and remembering that $`X_K\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}X_\alpha `$, we get, for any $`i`$, the isomorphism:

(1)
$$\pi _{i+1}(X_K,X_S)\pi _i(X_S,X_\alpha ).$$

###### Proposition 3.2.

Assume that $`A^{}\mathrm{}`$.

1. If $`(X_\alpha ,A^{})`$ is $`m`$-connected, $`m0`$, then:

1. $`(X_S,X_\alpha )`$ is at least $`m+1`$ connected.
    2. The excision morphism $`\pi _j(X_{\overline{^1K}},X_S)\pi _j(X,X_K)`$ is an isomorphism for $`jm+1`$ and an epimorphism for $`j=m+2`$.
2. If, for any $`i\{1,\mathrm{},k\}`$, the pair $`(𝕏_{D_i},𝕏_{c_i})`$ is $`s`$-connected, then $`(X_𝒟,X_\alpha )`$ is $`s`$-connected too.

###### Proof.

(a)(i). Note first that $`X_S`$ is homotopy equivalent to the subset $`𝕏_SA^{}\times K`$ of $`𝕏_K`$. Let $`I`$ and $`J`$ be two arcs (of angle less than $`2\pi `$) which cover $`S`$. We have the homotopy equivalence $`(X_S,X_\alpha )\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}(𝕏_I(A^{}\times K)𝕏_J(A^{}\times K)),𝕏_J(A^{}\times K))`$.

Then, by homotopy excision (Blakers-Massey theorem), if the (identical!) pairs $`(𝕏_I(A^{}\times K),𝕏_I(A^{}\times K))`$ and $`(𝕏_J(A^{}\times K),𝕏_J(A^{}\times K))`$ are $`m+1`$ connected, then the following morphism:

$$\pi _j(𝕏_I(A^{}\times K),𝕏_I(A^{}\times K))\pi _j(𝕏_I(A^{}\times K)𝕏_J(A^{}\times K),𝕏_J(A^{}\times K))$$

is an isomorphism for $`j2m+1`$. This would imply that $`(X_S,X_\alpha )`$ is $`m+1`$ connected.

It remains to prove our hypothesis. This follows since the pair $`(𝕏_I(A^{}\times K),𝕏_I(A^{}\times K))`$ is homotopy equivalent to $`(𝕏_\alpha \times I,𝕏_\alpha \times IA^{}\times I)`$ and this, in turn, is just the product of pairs $`(𝕏_\alpha ,A^{})\times (I,I)`$. Here we use the assumption in the statement of our Proposition.
(ii). From (1) and from the point (i) it follows that the pair $`(X_K,X_S)`$ is $`m+2`$ connected. Hence we’ve got the needed connectivity level of $`(X_K,X_S)`$ which makes homotopy excision work. The proof is now complete.
(b). From Lemma 3.1 it follows that $`(X_𝒟,X_\alpha )\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}(𝕏_𝒟,𝕏_\alpha )`$, since $`𝒟`$ is contractible. By Switzer’s result \[Sw, 6.13\], the $`s`$-connectivity of the CW-relative complex $`(𝕏_{D_i},𝕏_{c_i})`$ implies that, up to homotopy equivalence, $`𝕏_{D_i}`$ is obtained from $`𝕏_{c_i}`$ by attaching cells of dimension $`s+1`$. Since $`𝕏_𝒟=_i𝕏_{D_i\gamma _i}`$ and $`𝕏_{c_i}\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}𝕏_\alpha `$, it follows that $`𝕏_𝒟`$ is obtained from $`𝕏_\alpha `$ by attaching cells of dimension $`s+1`$. ∎

###### Proposition 3.3.

(case $`V\{g=0\}`$)
Assume that $`V\{g=0\}`$. If the pair $`(𝕏_{D_i},𝕏_{c_i})`$ is $`s`$-connected, for any $`i\{1,\mathrm{},k\}`$, then $`(X,X_\alpha )`$ is $`s`$-connected.

###### Proof.

In this case $`h_{|X}=f/g:X`$ is a well defined holomorphic function. Since $``$ retracts to $`𝒟`$, the spaces $`K`$ and $`S`$ do not occur and we simply have $`(X,X_\alpha )\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}(X_𝒟,X_\alpha )`$. We have $`A^{}=\mathrm{}`$, therefore $`𝕏_{D_i}=X_{D_i}`$ and $`𝕏_{c_i}\stackrel{\mathrm{diff}}{}X_\alpha `$. The result follows by using Switzer’s argument \[Sw, 6.13\], like in the proof of Proposition 3.2(b). ∎

Since $`AV`$, the axis $`A`$ may be highly non transversal to the stratification $`𝒲`$ of $`(Y,V)`$. However, the singularities of $`p`$ might be still isolated; remember that Definition 2.2 says that $`x\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p`$ if and only if $`x(\mathrm{Sing}Y_t)A`$, where $`t=p(x)`$. This situation occurs when studying polynomial functions on $`^n`$. For instance, the polynomial function $`f:^2`$, $`f(x,y)=x+x^2y`$, as pencil of hypersurfaces, has isolated singularities at infinity. See §4 for applications.

We have shown that in the cases covered by Propositions 3.2 and 3.3, the connectivity of $`(X,X_\alpha )`$ depends on the one of $`(𝕏_{D_j},𝕏_{c_j})`$, for each $`j`$. So we further study $`(𝕏_{D_j},𝕏_{c_j})`$, for some fixed $`j`$. Let’s drop the index $`j`$ and write simply $`(𝕏_D,𝕏_c)`$. We have assumed that $`p`$ has no singularities over $`D^{}`$ and has only isolated singularities over the center $`b`$ of $`D`$, among the following three possible kinds: singularities on $`𝕏_bA\times ^1`$, singularities on $`𝕐_b(𝕏A\times ^1)`$ and singularities of $`p`$ in the axis $`A\times \{b\}`$.

Say $`𝕐_b\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p=\{a_1,\mathrm{},a_r\}`$. Let us consider (small) local Milnor-Lê balls at each isolated singularity of $`𝕐_b`$. The existence of such balls was shown by Milnor \[Mi\] in case of smooth ambient space and by Lê D.T. for singular stratified spaces \[Lê1\], \[Lê2\]. These closed balls have the property that, modulo the reducing of the radius of $`D`$ as much as necessary, their boundaries $`B_i`$ are transversal to the strata of our stratification $`𝒮`$ of the space $`𝕐`$. It is natural now to excise the complement $`C`$ of the disjoint union $`_{i\{1,\mathrm{},r\}}B_i𝕐_𝒟`$ from the pair $`(𝕐_D,𝕐_c)`$. This has to be related to the fact that $`p_|:CD`$ is a trivial fibration, and moreover, since it is a stratified fibration, the restriction $`p_{|𝕏}:C𝕏D`$ is also trivial.

If we perform excision, then we reduce the problem to a local one, around the isolated singularities. In homology, we get the direct sum decomposition $`H_{}(𝕏_D,𝕏_c)=_iH_{}(B_i𝕏_D,B_i𝕏_c)`$. In homotopy, the excision (Blakers-Massey theorem) implies that the level of connectivity of $`(𝕏_D,𝕏_c)`$ is at least equal to the minimum of the levels of connectivity of $`(B_i𝕏_D,B_i𝕏_c)`$.

We need a condition which implies a certain level of connectivity of each pair $`(B_i𝕏_D,B_i𝕏_c)`$. A condition that fits well is the rectified homotopical depth of the total space $`𝕏`$. This condition does not depend on the stratification of the space.

###### Proposition 3.4.

If $`\mathrm{rhd}(X)s+1`$, then, for any $`i\{1,\mathrm{},r\}`$, the pair $`(B_i𝕏_D,B_i𝕏_c)`$ is at least $`s`$-connected.

###### Proof.

Since we work on the space $`𝕏`$, we would need a condition on $`\mathrm{rhd}(𝕏)`$. So, we first prove that $`\mathrm{rhd}(𝕏)s+1`$. Since on the space $`X\times ^1`$ we have the product stratification $`𝒲\times ^1`$, the condition $`\mathrm{rhd}_𝒲(X)s+1`$ implies $`\mathrm{rhd}_{𝒲\times ^1}(X\times ^1)s+2`$. Our space $`𝕏`$ is a hypersurface in $`X\times ^1`$ and therefore its rectified homotopical depth is one less, i.e. $`\mathrm{rhd}𝕏s+1`$, by \[HL3, Theorem 3.2.1\].

The rectified homotopical depth of $`𝕏`$ gives a certain level of connectivity of the complex links of the strata of the stratification $`𝒮`$, according to \[GM\] and \[HL3\]. One may relate the connectivity of these complex links to the connectivity of the Milnor-Lê data $`(B_i𝕏_D,B_i𝕏_c)`$. This is more special data, especially when the singularity is not in $`𝕏_D`$ but on its “boundary” $`𝕐(V\times ^1)`$. Such relation among connectivities is the local Lefschetz theorem of Hamm and Lê \[HL3, Theorem 4.2.1 and Cor. 4.2.2\]. This result can be applied for the function $`p_|:𝕐_DD`$ with isolated singularities and for the space $`𝕏_D=𝕐_D(V\times ^1)`$ and it tells precisely that, since $`\mathrm{rhd}𝕏s+1`$, the pair $`(B_i𝕏_D,B_i𝕏_c)`$ is at least $`s`$-connected. This proves our statement. ∎

###### Proof.

of Theorem 1.1. From the long exact sequence of the triple $`(X_{\overline{^1K}},X_S,X_\alpha )`$ and since $`(X_S,X_\alpha )`$ is $`n1`$ connected (by Proposition 3.2(a)(i)), it follows that the morphism (induced by inclusion):

(2)
$$\pi _j(X_{\overline{^1K}},X_\alpha )\pi _j(X_{\overline{^1K}},X_S)$$

is an isomorphism for $`jn1`$ and an epimorphism for $`j=n`$.

Next, by Proposition 3.4 and the observations before it, the pairs $`(𝕏_{D_i},𝕏_{c_i})`$ are $`n1`$ connected. Then, applying Proposition 3.2(b) and (a)(i), via the morphism (2), we get the connectivity $`n1`$ of $`(X,X_\alpha )`$. So far for the proof of Theorem 1.1(a).

As for (b), it is now an imediate consequence of Proposition 3.3 together with Proposition 3.4. Note however something important, which we shall use in §4: the hypothesis $`dim\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p0`$ is too strong. Actually, in Theorem 1.1(b) it is sufficient to assume that $`dim\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p^{}0`$, where $`p^{}`$ is the restriction of $`p`$ on $`𝕐_{}`$. Our proof only uses this weaker hypothesis. ∎

We end this section by proving the usual observation that we can replace $`X_\alpha `$ in the conclusion of the theorem by a “very bad” member of the pencil and then take a good neighbourhood of this. Let $`D_\delta ^1`$ denote a small enough disc centered at $`\delta `$ such that $`D_\delta p(\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p)=\{\delta \}`$.

###### Proposition 3.5.

In Theorem 1.1, replace the hypothesis about the singularities of the pencil with the following: “Let $`f,g`$ define a pencil with at most isolated singularities except at one fiber $`X_\delta `$, that is $`dim(\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮pX_\beta )0`$, for all $`\beta \delta `$”.

Then $`(X,X_{D_\delta })`$ is $`(n1)`$ connected.

###### Proof.

We just consider $`D_\delta `$ as one of the small discs $`D_i`$ within $`𝒟`$. We of course still need a generic member $`X_\alpha `$ and the hypothesis on the connectivity of $`(X_\alpha ,A^{})`$ in case $`A^{}`$ is not empty.

It follows from Proposition 3.2(a)(i) and from (1) that $`(X_K,X_S)`$ is $`n`$-connected. By homotopy excision of $`X_𝒟`$ from $`(X,X_𝒟)`$, this implies that $`(X,X_𝒟)`$ is $`n`$-connected. In turn, via the homotopy exact sequence of the triple $`(X,X_𝒟,X_{D_\delta })`$, this implies that the morphism induced by inclusion $`\pi _i(X_𝒟,X_{D_\delta })\pi _i(X,X_{D_\delta })`$ is an isomorphism for $`in1`$. It remains to study $`(X_𝒟,X_{D_\delta })`$. Since $`𝒟`$ and $`D_\delta `$ are contractible, Lemma 3.1 says that $`(X_𝒟,X_{D_\delta })\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}(𝕏_𝒟,𝕏_{D_\delta })`$. By the argument in the proof of Proposition 3.2(b) and also by Proposition 3.4, $`𝕏_𝒟`$ is obtained from $`𝕏_{D_\delta }`$ by attaching cells of dimension $`n`$. Consequently, $`(𝕏_𝒟,𝕏_{D_\delta })`$ is also $`(n1)`$-connected, hence $`(X,X_{D_\delta })`$ too. ∎

Suppose now that $`X`$ is compact. Then, since in generic pencils on such $`X`$ the tube neighbourhood $`X_{D_\delta }`$ contracts to the fibre $`X_\delta `$, we have:

###### Remark 3.6.

In the conclusion of the above Proposition 3.5, the tube $`X_{D_\delta }`$ can be replaced by $`X_\delta `$ when the inclusion $`X_\delta X_{D_\delta }`$ is a homotopy equivalence. This happens for instance if $`X`$ is compact or if the pencil has no singularities in the axis (i.e. $`(A\times ^1)\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p=\mathrm{}`$).

As mentioned in the Introduction, this remark is useful in order to make Theorem 1.1 work inductively on dimension, namely to show that the condition on the connectivity of $`(X_\alpha ,AX_\alpha )`$ is recursive. It also clarifies why the “classical” Lefschetz hyperplane theorem (stated in the Introduction) can be proved by using a pencil having a generic axis into the “bad” hyperplane $`H`$.

## 4. Aplications

We give applications of Theorem 1.1(b) concerning the topology of fibres of polynomial functions $`f:^n`$ and complements of hypersurfaces in $`^n`$. The asymptotic behaviour of $`f`$ was studied by several authors in the last years (see e.g. \[ST\], \[Pa\], \[Ti2\]).

A polynomial function may be extended to a meromorphic function on a compact space; this embedding is however not unique. We consider here the embedding of $`^n`$ into a weighted projective space $`_w:=(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n,1)`$, as follows. Associate to each coordinate $`x_i`$ a positive weight $`w_i`$, for $`i\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ and write $`f=f_d+f_{dk}+\mathrm{}`$ where $`f_i`$ is the degree $`i`$ weighted-homogeneous part of $`f`$ and $`f_{dk}0`$. Then take a new variable $`z`$ of weight 1. We get a meromorphic function $`\stackrel{~}{f}/z^d`$ on $`_w`$ and the Nash blown up space $`𝕐:=\{s\stackrel{~}{f}tz^d=0\}_w\times ^1`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is the degree $`d`$ homogenized of $`f`$. We consider the coarsest Whitney stratification $`𝒮`$ on $`𝕐`$. Here $`V`$ is the hyperplane at infinity $`\{z=0\}`$ and $`g:=z^d`$.

We say that the pencil defined by $`f`$ has at most isolated singularities in $`𝕐^{}:=𝕐_{}`$ if the singularities of the restriction $`p^{}:=p_{|𝕐^{}}:𝕐^{}`$ with respect to the stratification $`𝒮`$ are isolated. Let us denote by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ the weighted projective variety $`\{gradf_d=0,f_{dk}=0\}_w\{z=0\}`$.

###### Proposition 4.1.

If $`dim\mathrm{Sing}f0`$ and $`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }0`$ then the pencil defined by $`f`$ has at most isolated singularities in $`𝕐^{}`$.

###### Proof.

We prove that $`dim\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p^{}0`$. Since the singularities of $`p^{}`$ on $`^n=𝕐^{}\{z=0\}`$ are isolated by hypothesis, we only have to look on $`𝕐^{}\{z=0\}`$, which is the product $`\{f_d=0\}\times (_w\{z=0\})\times `$.

We need to know the stratified structure of $`𝕐^{}`$ in the neighbourhood of $`𝕐^{}\{z=0\}`$. Consider first $`𝕐^{}\{z=0\}(\{gradf_d0\}\times )`$. This is a subspace of the quotient by the $`^{}`$ action of the nonsingular part of the hypersurface $`\{\stackrel{~}{f}tz^d=0\}`$ considered as subset of $`(^{n+1}\{0\})\times `$. We claim that the stratification by the orbit type of this nonsingular part is Whitney regular. Indeed, the $`^{}`$ action reduces, within Zariski-open subsets $`\{x_i0\}`$, to the action of a finite group. For quotients by finite groups, the natural orbit type stratification is Whitney regular (see e.g. \[GLPW, p. 21\], \[Fe\]).

Since the action on the factor $``$ is trivial, the strata within $`𝕐^{}\{z=0\}(\{gradf_d0\}\times )`$ are products by $``$. It follows that $`p^{}`$ (which is the projection to $``$) is transversal to these strata.

Next we look to points $`q\{gradf_d=0\}\{f_{dk}=0\}_w\{z=0\}`$. We have $`\stackrel{~}{f}(x,z)tz^d=f_d(x)+z^kg`$, where $`g(q,z,t)=f_{dk}(q)+zh(q,z,t)`$ and $`f_{dk}(q)0`$.

Locally at $`q`$, our hypersurface $`𝕐^{}=\{\stackrel{~}{f}(x,z)tz^d=0\}`$ is equivalent, via an analytic change of coordinates, modulo a choice of the $`k`$-root, to the product of $`\{f_d(x)+(z^{})^k=0\}`$ by the coordinate $`t`$, where $`z^{}`$ is the new coordinate $`z`$ and $`\{z^{}=0\}`$ is equal to $`\{z=0\}`$ at $`q`$. Since we have again a product by $``$, we may deduce that, locally, the line $`\{q\}\times `$ is included into a Whitney stratum of $`𝒮`$. Hence the map $`p^{}`$ has no singularities on $`\{q\}\times `$.

This proves that $`\mathrm{Sing}_𝒮p^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }\times `$. Since $`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }0`$, the set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\times `$ is a finite union of complex lines. The map $`p^{}`$ is transversal to such a line, so singularities of $`p^{}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\times `$ can occur only if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\times `$ contains point-strata of $`𝒮`$. But there can only be finitely many such point-strata. This ends our proof. ∎

###### Note 4.2.

The above proof shows that the condition $`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }0`$ implies that $`dim\mathrm{Sing}f1`$.

###### Corollary 4.3.

If the polynomial $`f:^n`$ has isolated singularities and $`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }0`$ then its general fibre $`X_\alpha `$ is homotopy equivalent to a bouquet of spheres of dimension $`n1`$. Moreover, any atypical fibre of $`f`$ is at least $`n3`$ connected.

###### Proof.

By applying Theorem 1.1(b) via Proposition 4.1, we get that $`(X,X_\alpha )=(^n,X_\alpha )`$ is $`n1`$ connected. Since $`X_\alpha `$ is Stein of dimension $`n1`$, our first statement follows by Corollary 1.3.

For the second statement, we use an argument similar to the one used to prove \[Ti1, Theorem 5.5\]. We give here an outline of it. First, we take a sufficiently large ball $`B`$ centered at the origin such that $`X_bB_M`$ is homotopy equivalent to $`X_b`$, for any ball $`B_M`$ larger or equal to $`B`$.

We next consider the polar locus of the map $`(p^{},z)`$ at some isolated singularity in $`𝕐_b\{z=0\}`$. This locus is a curve or it is void, see loc. cit. The polar curves corresponding to the singularities in $`𝕐_b\{z=0\}`$ intersect a nearby general fibre $`X_\alpha `$ at a finite number of points. It follows that $`X_\alpha `$ is homotopy equivalent to $`X_\alpha B`$ to which one attaches a finite number of cells of dimension $`n1`$, corresponding to the intersection multiplicities of the polar curves with $`X_\alpha `$. On the other hand, $`X_bB`$ is homotopy equivalent to $`X_\alpha B`$ to which one attaches $`n`$-cells, corresponding to the isolated singularities on $`X_b`$. It follows that $`(X_\alpha ,X_\alpha B)`$ is $`n2`$ connected and that $`(X_b,X_\alpha B)`$ is $`n1`$ connected. Therefore, since $`X_\alpha `$ is $`n2`$ connected, $`X_b`$ is $`n3`$ connected. ∎

This represents an extension of results on connectivity of fibres, in the vein of \[ST\] and \[Ti1\]. Dimca and Păunescu \[DP\] proved recently a related result, by different methods. We shall explain in a forthcoming paper \[LT\] that, with a recursive procedure, our result not only recovers \[DP\], but also improves the connectivity estimation for generic fibres.

###### Example 4.4.

$`f=x^2y^3+v^2+y`$ has $`\mathrm{Sing}f=\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\{[1:0:0],[0:1:0]\}^2`$. Here all the weights are $`1`$ and $`_w`$ is the usual projective space $`^3`$. One can verify that the general fibre is homotopy equivalent to $`S^2S^2S^2`$. It turns out that the only atypical fibre is $`f^1(0)`$.

We further give an application of our results to the topology of complements of hypersurfaces in $`^n`$. This is a topic which goes back to Zariski and van Kampen \[vK\], who described a general procedure to compute the fundamental group of the complement to an algebraic curve in $`^2`$ by slicing with linear pencils. Zariski showed that $`\pi _1`$ depends on the type and position of singularities of the curve. More recently, Libgober \[Li\] proved similar results on the higher homotopy group $`\pi _{nk1}(^nV)`$, where $`k`$ is the dimension of the singular locus of the hypersurface $`V`$, $`k<n2`$. This is the first possible nontrivial homotopy group of rank higher than $`1`$, since, by the classical Lefschetz theorem, $`\pi _i(^nV)=0`$, for $`2i<nk1`$. Since $`\pi _{nk1}(^nV)=\pi _{nk1}(H_k^nV)`$, for a general linear subspace $`H_k`$ of codimension $`k`$, the problem of finding $`\pi _{nk1}`$ reduces to the case of the complement of a hypersurface $`V`$ with isolated singularities (see \[Li, §1\]).

In \[Li, Theorem 2.4\], Libgober considers the case when $`V`$ has at most isolated singularities and $`\overline{V}`$ is transversal to the hyperplane at infinity in $`^n`$. We show here that, under certain circumstances (weaker transversality condition but imposing that $`V`$ is a generic fibre of $`f`$), we may conclude to the triviality of $`\pi _{nk1}(^nV)`$. For a more general statement and other results on complements of hypersurfaces we refer to the forthcoming paper \[LT\].

###### Proposition 4.5.

If $`V`$ is a general fibre of a polynomial $`f:^n`$ and the pencil defined by $`f`$ has at most isolated singularities in $`𝕐^{}`$ then $`^nV\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}S^1S^n`$. In particular, $`\pi _{n1}(^nV)=0`$ if $`n>2`$.

###### Proof.

We consider small enough discs $`D_i`$ centered at the “bad values” of the pencil, like in §3, and also a small enough closed disc $`D_0`$ centered at the general value $`\beta `$. Let $`\alpha D_0`$. Using the notations in §3, the configuration $`D_0^{}_i(D_i\gamma _i)`$ is a strong deformation retract of $`\{\beta \}`$. It follows that $`^nV\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}f^1(D_0^{}_i(D_i\gamma _i))`$.

Now, denoting by $`S^1`$ the boundary of $`D_0`$, the space $`f^1(D_0^{}_i(D_i\gamma _i))`$ is homotopy equivalent to the space obtained by attaching to $`f^1(D_0^{})\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}S^1\times f^1(\alpha )`$ the space $`f^1(_i(D_i\gamma _i))`$, over $`\{\alpha \}\times f^1(\alpha )`$. Notice that $`f^1(_i(D_i\gamma _i))`$ is homotopy equivalent to $`^n`$, thus attaching it to $`S^1\times f^1(\alpha )`$ over $`\{\alpha \}\times f^1(\alpha )`$ corresponds to shrinking $`\{\alpha \}\times f^1(\alpha )`$ to a point.

We therefore get that $`f^1(D_0^{}_i(D_i\gamma _i))`$ is homotopy equivalent to a bouquet of a circle $`S^1`$ and the suspension over $`f^1(\alpha )`$. Since by Corollary 1.3 and the remark following it, $`f^1(\alpha )`$ is homotopy equivalent to a bouquet of $`(n1)`$-spheres, the suspension over $`f^1(\alpha )`$ is a bouquet of $`n`$-spheres. This concludes the proof.

In the Example 4.4, the “singularities at infinity” of a general fibre $`V`$, in the sense of \[Li\] are non isolated (since $`\overline{V}⋔̸\{z=0\}`$ along $`\{x=0\}\{y=0\}^2`$). The results of \[Li\] do not give any information in this case; hoewever, our Proposition 4.5 can be applied, since the pencil defined by $`f`$ has at most isolated singularities in $`𝕐^{}`$. We get $`^3V\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}S^1S^3S^3S^3`$.