format: text

text:
# Anomalies in Quantum Mechanics: the 1/𝑟² Potential

## 1 Introduction

The use of symmetry to enhance our understanding of physical systems is well-known. An important manifestation of this simplification is Nöther’s theorem, which guarantees the correspondence between symmetries and conservation laws.$`^{\text{References}}`$ Examples of the consequences of this theorem include

* translation invariance $``$ momentum conservation;
* time translation invariance $``$ energy conservation;
* rotational invariance $``$ angular momentum conservation.

These particular symmetries and conservation laws are exact. Far more common are cases for which the invariance is only approximate and is broken in some fashion. Nevertheless, the symmetry still represents a useful way of analyzing the system, and it is important to understand the mechanisms by which this symmetry breaking can take place. Despite the many physical situations involving symmetry violation, there exist just three mechanisms by which this violation can take place:

* Explicit symmetry breaking, wherein the breaking occurs explicitly in the Lagrangian. Familiar examples include particle physics, where the heavier mass of the strange quark compared to its up, down counterparts violates the underlying SU(3) invariance;$`^{\text{References}}`$ nuclear physics, where the up-down quark mass difference together with electromagnetic effects are responsible for small deviations from isotopic spin invariance;$`^{\text{References}}`$ gravitational physics, where general relativity together with small perturbations from the outer planets lead to deviations from the underlying O(4) invariance associated with a pure $`1/r`$ interaction and hence to the precession of Mercury’s perihelion.$`^{\text{References}}`$
* Spontaneous (or hidden) symmetry breaking, wherein the Lagrangian remains invariant, but the symmetry is not present in the ground state. Familiar examples include condensed matter physics, where the spontaneous violation of rotational invariance by the creation of spin-correlated domains in materials such as iron leads to the phenomenon of ferromagnetism,$`^{\text{References}}`$ and the spontaneous violation of local gauge invariance by the condensation of spin- and momentum-correlated electron pairs in low temperature systems leads to superconductivity;$`^{\text{References}}`$ classical physics, where (as first studied by Jacobi) the rapid rotation of a gravitationally bound sphere leads to a lowest energy state not possessing the expected axial invariance.$`^{\text{References}}`$
* Anomalous (or quantum mechanical) symmetry breaking, wherein the symmetry is present at the classical level, but is broken by quantization.$`^{\text{References}}`$ Examples include elementary particle physics, where the two photon decay of the neutral pion verifies the anomalous breaking of axial SU(2) invariance,$`^{\text{References}}`$ and in elementary particle physics, where the so-called trace anomaly leads to a substantial component of the nucleon mass being due to its gluon substructure.$`^{\text{References}}`$

Although these manifestations of explicit and spontaneous symmetry breaking are textbook examples and are well known and available to most physicists, the realization of anomalous symmetry breaking is generally presented only within the context of quantum field theory and is subsequently somewhat inaccessible to all but the experts. Yet this inaccessibility need not be the case. Indeed in previous contributions to this journal, it has been shown that the anomaly is manifested in ordinary quantum mechanics in two spatial dimensions with a delta function interaction.$`^{\text{References}}`$ However, this example is not realized in nature. In this note we point out that an additional example of anomalous symmetry breaking occurs in the real world of three spatial dimensions in the presence of a $`1/r^2`$ potential and that the resultant predictions have been experimentally verified in atomic physics. The discussion is at the level appropriate for a graduate quantum mechanics course.

After a brief review of the previously mentioned two-dimensional delta function potential, we show in Sec. 2 how the $`1/r^2`$ interaction can be analyzed using either cutoff regularization in both the bound state and scattering regimes. In Sec. 3 we demonstrate how this situation can be realized experimentally and discuss the confrontation of theory with recent experiments. Our results are summarized in Sec. 4.

## 2 Anomalies in Quantum Mechanics

To understand how an anomaly is realized in quantum mechanics, we first review the partial wave formalism, in which the solution to the time-independent Schrödinger equation is expanded in Legendre polynomials

$$\psi (\stackrel{}{r})=\underset{\mathrm{}}{}a_{\mathrm{}}P_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )\frac{1}{r}R_{\mathrm{}}(r).$$
(1)
The radial functions $`R_{\mathrm{}}(r)`$ obey the differential equation (henceforth we employ $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$)

$$\left[\frac{1}{2m}\frac{d^2}{dr^2}+\frac{\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)}{2mr^2}+V(r)\right]R_{\mathrm{}}(r)=ER_{\mathrm{}}(r).$$
(2)
### 2.1 Free Particle

For a free particle, $`V(r)=0`$ and $`E\stackrel{}{k}^2/2m`$, and we have the plane wave solution

$$\psi (\stackrel{}{r})=\mathrm{exp}(ikz)=\underset{\mathrm{}}{}(2\mathrm{}+1)i^{\mathrm{}}j_{\mathrm{}}(kr)P_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{cos}\theta ),$$
(3)
that is, $`a_{\mathrm{}}=i^{\mathrm{}}(2\mathrm{}+1)/k,R_{\mathrm{}}(r)=krj_{\mathrm{}}(kr)`$ in the notation of Eq. (1). By using the asymptotic behavior

$$j_{\mathrm{}}(kr)\stackrel{r\mathrm{}}{}\frac{1}{kr}\mathrm{sin}(kr\mathrm{}\frac{\pi }{2}),$$
(4)
we can write Eq. (3) in the form

$$\mathrm{exp}(ikz)\stackrel{r\mathrm{}}{}\frac{1}{2ikr}\underset{\mathrm{}}{}(2\mathrm{}+1)P_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )(e^{ikr}e^{i(kr\mathrm{}\pi )}).$$
(5)
Equation (5) is a linear combination of incoming, $`e^{ikr}`$, and outgoing, $`e^{ikr}`$, spherical waves with a phase shift $`\mathrm{}\pi `$ between them in the channel having angular momentum $`\mathrm{}`$, due to the centrifugal potential term, $`\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)/2mr^2`$ in Eq. (2). The existence of this energy-independent phase between incoming and outgoing spherical wave components can be understood from the invariance of Eq. (2) under the scale transformation $`r\mu r,kk/\mu `$, which requires that the solution be a function of the product $`kr`$, which is scale invariant.$`^{\text{References}}`$ This condition is obviously satisfied by the spherical Bessel functions $`j_{\mathrm{}}(kr)`$, and would be violated by the existence of an energy-dependent phase.

In the presence of a potential, the asymptotic form of the scattering solutions to the Schrödinger equation becomes

$`\psi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{r})`$ $`\stackrel{r\mathrm{}}{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2ikr}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{}}(2\mathrm{}+1)P_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )[e^{i(kr+2\delta _{\mathrm{}}(k))}e^{i(kr\mathrm{}\pi )}]`$ (6)
$`=e^{ikz}+{\displaystyle \frac{e^{ikr}}{r}}f(\theta ),`$
where

$$f(\theta )=\underset{\mathrm{}}{}(2\mathrm{}+1)\frac{e^{i2\delta _{\mathrm{}}(k)}1}{2ik}P_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )$$
(7)
is the scattering amplitude, and $`\delta _{\mathrm{}}(k)`$ is the scattering phase shift introduced by the potential. Because the presence of the potential breaks the scale invariance, the appearance of an energy-dependent phase is permitted.

### 2.2 $`\delta ^2(\stackrel{}{r})`$ Potential

Now consider what happens in two spatial dimensions, for which the asymptotic form of the scattering solution is$`^{\text{References}}`$

$$\psi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{r})\stackrel{r\mathrm{}}{}e^{ikx}+\frac{e^{i(kr+\frac{\pi }{4})}}{\sqrt{r}}f(\theta ),$$
(8)
with

$$f(\theta )=i\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{e^{i2\delta _n(k)}1}{\sqrt{2\pi k}}e^{in\theta }.$$
(9)
In this case if we include the potential energy

$$V(\stackrel{}{r})=\lambda \delta ^2(\stackrel{}{r}),$$
(10)
the scale invariance is maintained — indeed, at the classical level, there is no scattering because no particles are deflected. However, the absence of scattering no longer holds once the theory is quantized. Actually this anomalous behavior should be expected because of the wave-like nature of the particles — an incident beam even with zero impact parameter can sense the presence of the potential spike at $`\stackrel{}{r}=0`$. Of course, this scattering will occur only in the $`n=0`$ channel, because wavefunctions with $`n0`$ must vanish at the origin.

To see how the scattering arises, we examine a scattering solution. In momentum space the Schrödinger equation becomes

$$\frac{1}{2m}(\stackrel{}{p}^2\stackrel{}{k}^2)\varphi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{p})=\lambda \psi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{r}=0),$$
(11)
where

$$\varphi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{p})=d^2re^{i\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{p}}\psi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{r})$$
(12)
is the Fourier transform of the scattering wavefunction. The solution to Eq. (11) is

$$\varphi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{p})=(2\pi )^2\delta ^2(\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{k})\frac{2m\lambda \psi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{r}=0)}{\stackrel{}{p}^2\stackrel{}{k}^2iϵ}.$$
(13)
For consistency, we require,

$$\psi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{r}=0)=\frac{d^2p}{(2\pi )^2}\varphi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{p})=12m\lambda \psi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{r}=0)\frac{1}{4\pi }\mathrm{log}\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{k^2},$$
(14)
where we have regulated the otherwise divergent momentum space integration by introducing a cutoff parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Then

$$\psi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{r}=0)=\frac{1}{1+(\lambda m/2\pi )\left(\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2/k^2+i\pi \right)}.$$
(15)
We can obtain the scattering amplitude by taking the inverse Fourier transform and find

$$\psi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{r})=e^{ikx}2m\lambda \psi ^{(+)}(\stackrel{}{r}=0)\frac{i}{4}H_0^{(1)}(kr),$$
(16)
where

$$\frac{i}{4}H_0^{(1)}(kr)=\frac{d^2p}{(2\pi )^2}e^{i\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{r}}\frac{1}{\stackrel{}{p}^2\stackrel{}{k}^2+iϵ}\stackrel{r\mathrm{}}{}\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2\pi kr}}e^{i(kr+\frac{\pi }{4})}$$
(17)
is the two-dimensional Green’s function. If we compare Eq. (16) with the asymptotic form Eq. (8), we identify the scattering amplitude as

$$f(\theta )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi k}}\frac{1}{\frac{1}{m\lambda }+\frac{1}{2\pi }\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2/k^2)+i/2}.$$
(18)
To eliminate the dependence on the cutoff, we note that the scattering amplitude has a pole at

$$E_{\mathrm{bs}}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{2m}e^{2\pi /\lambda m},$$
(19)
indicating the presence of a (single) bound state. Using this binding energy as a parameter, we can rewrite Eq. (18) as

$$f(\theta )=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi k}}\frac{\pi }{\mathrm{log}(\frac{k^2}{2mE_{\mathrm{bs}}})i\pi },$$
(20)
which is now expressed only in terms of experimental quantities. Equivalently, we can characterize the scattering amplitude in terms of a phase shift

$$\delta _n(k)=\delta _{n,0}\mathrm{cot}^1\left(\frac{1}{\pi }\right)\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{k^2}{2mE_{\mathrm{bs}}}\right),$$
(21)
or in terms of the differential scattering cross section

$$\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }}=\frac{2}{\pi k}\frac{1}{1+\pi ^2\mathrm{log}^2\left(\frac{k^2}{2mE_{\mathrm{bs}}}\right)}.$$
(22)
The existence of this energy dependent phase in the $`n=0`$ channel or of the fixed energy bound state is clear evidence of anomalous symmetry breaking.

The manifestation of anomalous symmetry breaking in quantum mechanics for the two-dimensional delta function interaction has been explored previously$`^{\text{References}}`$ and was reviewed to set the context for our primary topic — the $`1/r^2`$ potential. As we shall see, there is an anomaly in this case also, and although there are similarities to the $`\delta ^2(\stackrel{}{r})`$ case, there are also important differences, one of which is the fact that there are experimental consequences.

### 2.3 $`1/r^2`$ Potential

Consider the potential

$$V(r)=\frac{\lambda }{r^2}$$
(23)
in three spatial dimensions. We define the partial wave amplitude $`R_{\mathrm{}}(r)u_{\mathrm{}}(r)/r`$ and find

$$\left[\frac{d^2}{dr^2}+\frac{\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)+2m\lambda }{r^2}k^2\right]R_{\mathrm{}}(r)=0,$$
(24)
so that invariance under the scale transformation $`r\mu r,kk/\mu `$ again holds. It is clear that the solutions to Eq. (24) can be written in terms of Bessel functions

$$u_{\mathrm{}}(r)\sqrt{kr}J_{\rho +\frac{1}{2}}(kr)\mathrm{and}\sqrt{kr}N_{\rho +\frac{1}{2}}(kr),$$
(25)
where we have defined

$$\rho (\rho +1)\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)+2m\lambda .$$
(26)
Because $`\rho `$ is defined via a quadratic equation, it is apparent that the character of the solutions must change when the discriminant

$$D_{\mathrm{}}=(\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{2})^2+2m\lambda $$
(27)
becomes negative. For repulsive interactions, $`\lambda >0`$, there is nothing unusual. In general, the orders of the Bessel functions become irrational, but the problem can be solved as usual. Because the wavefunction must be regular at the origin, we must have

$$u_{\mathrm{}}(r)/r\frac{1}{\sqrt{kr}}J_{\rho +\frac{1}{2}}(kr)\stackrel{r\mathrm{}}{}\frac{1}{kr}\mathrm{sin}(kr\rho \frac{\pi }{2}),$$
(28)
and the scattering phase shift can be read off as

$$\delta _{\mathrm{}}=\left(\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{(\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{2})^2+2m\lambda }\right)\frac{\pi }{2}.$$
(29)
Because $`\delta _{\mathrm{}}`$ is independent of $`k`$, this result is consistent with the expected scale invariance.

Now consider the case of an attractive potential, $`\lambda <0.`$ As long as the discriminant is positive, things go through as before. However, once $`D_{\mathrm{}}<0`$, the potential has overcome the centrifugal barrier, and the order $`\rho `$ of the Bessel function becomes imaginary.$`^{\text{References}}`$ First consider the case of a bound state, in which case the boundary condition as $`r\mathrm{}`$ demands that the solution be constructed in terms of the Bessel function $`K_{i\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}}(\mu r)`$, where we have defined $`\sqrt{D_{\mathrm{}}}i\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}`$ and the binding energy as

$$E_{\mathrm{bs}}\frac{\mu ^2}{2m}.$$
(30)
The asymptotic behavior is then

$$u_{\mathrm{}}(r)\sqrt{\mu r}K_{i\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}}(\mu r)\stackrel{r\mathrm{}}{}\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{2}}e^{\mu r}.$$
(31)
The allowed values of $`\mu `$ (and thereby of the binding energy) are determined by the boundary condition that the wavefunction vanish at the origin. From the behavior

$$K_{i\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}}(\mu r)\stackrel{r0}{}\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{sinh}(\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}})}}\mathrm{sin}\left[\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mu r}{2}\right)\mathrm{arg}[\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}})]\right],$$
(32)
where arg indicates the phase of the following complex number, we see that the wavefunction goes through infinitely many zeroes as $`r0`$. As a consequence, the spectrum becomes continuous and unbounded from below, implying that, despite its appearance, the Hamiltonian is not self-adjoint. Similarly, the phase shift of the scattering wavefunction as $`r0`$ is undetermined.

One mathematically attractive solution to these problems is to define a so-called self-adjoint extension of the Hamiltonian by specifying a particular boundary condition at $`r=0`$.$`^{\text{References}}`$ For example, each member of the continuum of self-adjoint extensions of this Hamiltonian can be characterized by the (energy-independent) scattering phase shift as $`r0`$.$`^{\text{References}}`$ We briefly discuss self-adjoint extensions in the applications of the $`1/r^2`$ potential, but this regularization method does not directly illustrate anomalous symmetry breaking.

We instead opt for an alternative route and introduce a short distance cutoff $`a`$ and demand that the wavefunction vanish at this point, $`u_{\mathrm{}}(r=a)=0`$, and that the physics be independent of the choice of cutoff parameter.$`^{\text{References}}`$ This prescription yields the points

$$\mu _na=2\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\mathrm{arg}[\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}})]n\pi }{\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}}\right).$$
(33)
In order that $`\mu _na0`$, we require $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}<<1`$ and, because $`\mathrm{arg}[\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}})]=\gamma \mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}+𝒪(\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}})^2`$, the energy becomes

$$E_{n,\mathrm{}}=\frac{1}{2m}\left(\frac{2e^\gamma }{a}\right)^2e^{2\pi n/\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}}.$$
(34)
In order that the ground state ($`n=1,\mathrm{}=0`$) energy remains finite and well-defined as $`a0`$, we require $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{gs}}=\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{gs}}(a)0^+`$, which demands the scaling behavior

$$\frac{2\pi }{\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{gs}}(a)}=2\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mu a}{2}\right)2\gamma .$$
(35)
This relation does not predict the value of $`\mu `$, but rather defines the scaling of $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{gs}}(a)`$ as $`a0`$ in terms of the experimental value of $`\mu =\sqrt{2mE_{\mathrm{gs}}}`$. The corresponding ground state wavefunction is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{gs}}(r)=\frac{\mu }{\sqrt{2\pi r}}K_0(\mu r).$$
(36)
The very existence of a bound state implies the presence of an energy scale and the breaking of scale invariance as a result of quantization, just as in the case of the two-dimensional delta function — a quantum mechanical example of an anomaly!

Another similarity with the two-dimensional delta function potential is that there is but a single bound state. This similarity can be seen from the fact that because $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{gs}}0^+`$ and $`D_{\mathrm{}}>D_0`$, the discriminant in any but the $`s`$-wave channel must be positive so that no anomaly (and no bound state) can occur. Similarly in the $`\mathrm{}=0`$ case but with $`n>1`$, we see from Eq. (34) that such states cannot have nonzero binding energies, because

$$\frac{E_{n,0}}{E_{1,0}}=e^{2\pi (n1)/\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{gs}}}\stackrel{\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{gs}}0^+}{}0.$$
(37)
We summarize this discussion with the observation that from Eq. (27) and the following, there exists a critical value of the coupling constant, $`2m\lambda =\frac{1}{4}`$, below which there exists a single bound state and above which there are no bound states.

We can also consider scattering in the presence of an anomaly. In this case the solutions of the partial wave equation must be linear combinations of $`H_\rho ^{(1)}(kr)`$ and $`H_\rho ^{(2)}(kr)`$:

$$u_{\mathrm{}}(r)/\sqrt{r}=A_1H_\rho ^{(1)}(kr)+A_2H_\rho ^{(2)}(kr).$$
(38)
From the asymptotic dependence

$$u_{\mathrm{}}(r)/\sqrt{r}\stackrel{r\mathrm{}}{}\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi kr}}\left(A_1e^{i(kr\frac{1}{2}\rho \pi \frac{\pi }{4})}+A_2e^{i(kr\frac{1}{2}\rho \pi \frac{\pi }{4})}\right),$$
(39)
then for the $`s`$-wave channel in which $`\mathrm{\Xi }_00^+`$, we identify the scattering phase shift via

$$\frac{A_1}{A_2}=e^{i(2\delta _0\frac{\pi }{2})}.$$
(40)
On the other hand, for small values of $`r`$, we find

$`u_0(r)/\sqrt{r}`$ $`=`$ $`A_1(J_{i\mathrm{\Xi }_0}(kr)+iN_{i\mathrm{\Xi }_0}(kr))+A_2(J_{i\mathrm{\Xi }_0}(kr)iN_{i\mathrm{\Xi }_0}(kr))`$ (41)
$`\stackrel{r0}{}A_1\left({\displaystyle \frac{(\frac{1}{2}kr)^{i\mathrm{\Xi }_0}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\mathrm{\Xi }_0)}}(1+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cosh}\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0}{\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0}}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\frac{1}{2}kr)^{i\mathrm{\Xi }_0}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1i\mathrm{\Xi }_0)}}\right)`$
$`+`$ $`A_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{(\frac{1}{2}kr)^{i\mathrm{\Xi }_0}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\mathrm{\Xi }_0)}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cosh}\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0}{\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0}})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\frac{1}{2}kr)^{i\mathrm{\Xi }_0}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1i\mathrm{\Xi }_0)}}\right).`$
The requirement that $`u_0(r=a)=0`$ yields

$`{\displaystyle \frac{A_1}{A_2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^{i\sigma }(1+i\xi )e^{\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0}e^{i\sigma }(1i\xi )}{e^{i\sigma }(1+i\xi )e^{\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0}e^{i\sigma }(1i\xi )}}`$ (42)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\xi +\mathrm{tan}\sigma +i\mathrm{tanh}\frac{1}{2}\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0(1\xi \mathrm{tan}\sigma )}{\xi +\mathrm{tan}\sigma i\mathrm{tanh}\frac{1}{2}\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0(1\xi \mathrm{tan}\sigma )}},`$
where we have defined

$$i\xi =\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1i\mathrm{\Xi }_0)\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\mathrm{\Xi }_0)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1i\mathrm{\Xi }_0)+\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\mathrm{\Xi }_0)}\mathrm{and}e^{i\sigma }=(\frac{1}{2}ka)^{i\mathrm{\Xi }_0}=\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{\Xi }_0\mathrm{log}\frac{1}{2}ka).$$
(43)
If we compare Eq. (43) with Eq. (40), we can identify

$$\delta _0(k)\frac{\pi }{4}=\mathrm{tan}^1\frac{\mathrm{tanh}\frac{1}{2}\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0(1\xi \mathrm{tan}\sigma )}{\xi +\mathrm{tan}\sigma }.$$
(44)
In the limit that $`\mathrm{\Xi }_00^+`$, we have then

$$\mathrm{tan}(\delta _0(k)\frac{\pi }{4})\frac{1}{2}\pi \mathrm{\Xi }_0\frac{1\gamma \mathrm{\Xi }_0\mathrm{log}\frac{1}{2}ka}{\gamma \mathrm{\Xi }_0+\mathrm{tan}\mathrm{\Xi }_0\mathrm{log}\frac{1}{2}ka}.$$
(45)
Using the scaling behavior

$$\mathrm{\Xi }_0(a)=\frac{\pi }{\mathrm{log}\frac{1}{2}\mu a}+\gamma ,$$
(46)
we find that

$$\mathrm{tan}(\delta _0(k)\frac{\pi }{4})=\frac{1\mathrm{cot}\delta _0(k)}{1+\mathrm{cot}\delta _0(k)}\frac{\pi }{\mathrm{log}\frac{k^2}{\mu ^2}},$$
(47)
which yields the partial wave amplitude

$$ka_0(k)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{cot}\delta _0(k)i}=\frac{1}{\left(\frac{\mathrm{log}\frac{k^2}{\mu ^2}\pi }{\mathrm{log}\frac{k^2}{\mu ^2}+\pi }\right)i}.$$
(48)
As a check we verify that that Eq. (48) has a pole at the bound state energy $`k^2=2mE_{\mathrm{bs}}=2m\mu ^2`$.

Because

$$\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{}}=\sqrt{(\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{2})^22m|\lambda |}>\mathrm{\Xi }_0=\sqrt{\frac{1}{4}2m|\lambda |}0,$$
(49)
we see that there is no anomaly in the non-$`s`$ wave states so that the scattering phase shift is given by its non-anomalous value given in Eq. (29). The form of the scattering amplitude is

$`f(\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(2\mathrm{}+1)i^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{exp}(i\delta _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{sin}\delta _{\mathrm{}})P_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$ (50)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(\frac{\mathrm{log}\frac{k^2}{\mu ^2}\pi }{\mathrm{log}\frac{k^2}{\mu ^2}+\pi }\right)i}},`$
where $`\delta _{\mathrm{}}`$ is given by Eq. (29).

### 2.4 An Aside

Before proceeding to applications of this formalism, it is interesting (but unrelated to considerations of the anomaly) that there is another curious feature of the $`1/r^2`$ interaction, as previously pointed out by Kayser.$`^{\text{References}}`$ If one solves for the classical scattering angle for motion in the presence of such a potential, the result is

$$\theta _{\mathrm{cl}}=\pi \left(1\frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2+2m\lambda }}\right),$$
(51)
where $`L`$ is the angular momentum. Taking the interaction to be repulsive ($`\lambda >0`$) and solving for the cross section, we find

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma _{\mathrm{cl}}}{d\mathrm{\Omega }}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{L}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{dL}{d\theta }}\right|`$ (52)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2\pi E}}{\displaystyle \frac{1x}{x^2(2x)^2\mathrm{sin}\pi x}},`$
where $`p=\sqrt{2mE}`$ is the incoming momentum, and we have defined $`x=\theta /\pi `$. Thus the cross section is linear in the coupling constant, in apparent violation of the simple Born approximation result when the potential becomes weak. In Ref. it is shown that the same cross section results from a quantum mechanical evaluation. The resolution of the apparent paradox lies in the fact that the classical scattering condition in Eq. (51) can be satisfied only when $`2m\lambda >>1`$. This condition can be seen from the result $`L\theta >>1`$ which implies that

$$2m\lambda >>\frac{1}{\pi ^2}\frac{2x}{x(1x)^2}.$$
(53)
Thus the classical result corresponds to the strong coupling regime, where the Born approximation is not appropriate.

## 3 Applications

A remarkable feature of the above analysis of the $`1/r^2`$ potential is that this interaction is realized in nature. As has recently been emphasized, one such application is to that of a charge interacting with a point dipole.$`^{\text{References}}`$ Because the potential outside an electric dipole $`\stackrel{}{p}`$ is given by

$$\varphi (\stackrel{}{r})=\frac{\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{r}}{4\pi r^3},$$
(54)
the potential energy for a charge $`e`$ in the vicinity is given by

$$V(\stackrel{}{r})=\frac{e\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{r}}{4\pi r^3}=\frac{\sigma \mathrm{cos}\theta }{r^2},$$
(55)
which has the desired $`1/r^2`$-dependence. Point dipoles are not physical, but a good approximation is provided by a polar molecule such as water and the point charge can be taken to be a nearby electron. To analyze this system by means of the formalism developed in Sec. 2, we write the bound state solution as in Ref.:

$$\psi (\stackrel{}{r})=\frac{1}{r}u(r)\mathrm{\Theta }(\theta ).$$
(56)
Then the equations determining the radial and angular dependence are given by

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dr^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{2mr^2}}\right)u(r)`$ $`=`$ $`Eu(r)`$
$`(\widehat{L}^2+2m\sigma \mathrm{cos}\theta )\mathrm{\Theta }(\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma \mathrm{\Theta }(\theta ),`$ (57)
and the separation constant $`\gamma `$ is related to the actual coupling $`\sigma `$ of the point-dipole potential by Eq. (57). If we use the normalized Legendre polynomials

$$\sqrt{\frac{(2\mathrm{}+1)}{2}}P_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{cos}\theta ),$$
(58)
as a basis, Eq. (57b) can be written as a matrix equation

$$M_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mathrm{}^{}}=0,$$
(59)
with

$`M_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}(\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)\gamma )`$ (60)
$`+\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}m\sigma \left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\sqrt{(2\mathrm{}1)(2\mathrm{}+1)}}}\delta _{\mathrm{}1,\mathrm{}^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}+1}{\sqrt{(2\mathrm{}+1)(2\mathrm{}+3)}}}\delta _{\mathrm{}+1,\mathrm{}^{}}\right].`$
Equation (60) is an eigenvalue equation, for which the existence of a solution requires that

$$\mathrm{det}M_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=\mathrm{det}\left|\begin{array}{cccc}\gamma & \frac{2m\sigma }{\sqrt{3}}& 0& \mathrm{}\\ \frac{2m\sigma }{\sqrt{3}}& 2\gamma & \frac{4m\sigma }{\sqrt{15}}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& \frac{4m\sigma }{\sqrt{15}}& \mathrm{}& \\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\end{array}\right|=0.$$
(61)
Equation (61) can be easily solved numerically by successively evaluating the $`n\times n`$ determinant, which converges extremely rapidly:

$`n`$ $`=`$ $`2:(2m\sigma )^2=3\gamma (2\gamma )`$
$`n`$ $`=`$ $`3:(2m\sigma )^2=3\gamma (2\gamma )\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\frac{4\gamma }{5(6\gamma )}}}\right).`$ (62)
From our study of the $`1/r^2`$ potential in Sec. 2.3, we know that there exists a critical value of the coupling constant, $`2m\lambda =\frac{1}{4}`$, below which there exists a bound state and above which there does not. Hence from Eq. (61), we observe that there must exist a critical value of the dipole moment $`\sigma ^{}`$, defined via

$$\mathrm{det}M_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}(\gamma =\frac{1}{4},2m\sigma ^{})=0,$$
(63)
such that a bound electron-polar molecule state, an anion, can (cannot) exist for values of the dipole moment larger (smaller) than this critical value. From Eq. (62), we find $`2m\sigma ^{}=1.279\mathrm{}`$, that is,

$$p^{}=\frac{4\pi }{e}\sigma ^{}=0.640ea_0,$$
(64)
where $`a_0=1/m\alpha `$ is the Bohr radius.

This prediction can be checked experimentally, and studies have been conducted attempting to measure the binding energies of anion systems.$`^{\text{References}}`$ It has indeed been found that a minimum dipole moment exists, as shown in Fig. 1; there does seem to exist a minimum dipole moment $`p_{\mathrm{exp}}^{}0.86ea_0`$, as would be expected from the above considerations. Note that there is a bit of a subtlety here in that a real molecule is not a point dipole. Rather the potential for a finite dipole can be written as

$$V(\stackrel{}{r})=\frac{qe}{4\pi }\left(\frac{1}{R_+}\frac{1}{R_{}}\right)=\frac{ep\mathrm{cos}\theta }{4\pi r^2}+U_{\mathrm{br}}(\stackrel{}{r}),$$
(65)
which is the superposition of a pure point dipole interaction with a scale symmetry-breaking interaction $`U_{\mathrm{br}}(\stackrel{}{r})`$. Because experimentally such an explicitly symmetry breaking term cannot be eliminated, the observed critical moment is due to a combination of the anomalous and explicit symmetry breaking effects. It is clear that the presence of explicit breaking does not affect the existence of a critical moment, as expected from the quantum mechanical anomaly. However, the size of $`p^{}`$ is affected, as can be seen from the comparison of experimental and theoretical sizes of the critical moment. This difference is perhaps not surprising, because in QCD, the combination of explicit and anomalous symmetry breaking results in a value for the $`\pi ^0\gamma \gamma `$ decay rate very near that predicted by the anomaly.$`^{\text{References}}`$

It is interesting that a second application of the $`1/r^2`$ potential has recently been discussed. In this case it involves the interpretation of an experiment involving the interaction of a neutral but polarizable atom with a charged wire.$`^{\text{References}}`$ Because the electric field generated by the wire falls off linearly with distance, the induced electric dipole moment has the form

$$\stackrel{}{p}=4\pi \alpha _E\stackrel{}{E}\frac{\alpha _E}{r},$$
(66)
where $`\alpha _E`$ is the electric polarizability. The corresponding interaction potential is

$$U(r)=\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{E}\frac{\alpha _E}{r^2},$$
(67)
and falls off as $`1/r^2`$. The issue here is not the experimental appearance of a critical value of the coupling constant because the attractive $`1/r^2`$ potential is always critical in this cylindrical two-dimensional problem,$`^{\text{References}}`$ no matter what the strength of the electric field produced by the charged wire. The intriguing aspect of this experiment is that the atoms are observed to disappear from the system with an absorption cross section which can be fitted by a classical argument.$`^{\text{References}}`$ An analogous treatment of the two-dimensional $`1/r^2`$ potential, regularized and renormalized as done here, would have only bound state and elastic scattering solutions, and no absorption. Bawin and Coon utilized a method suggested by Radin$`^{\text{References}}`$ to sum over the infinite number of elastic scattering solutions of the self-adjoint extensions of the $`1/r^2`$ interaction to obtain a quantum mechanical expression that displayed absorption.$`^{\text{References}}`$ As the parameters of this initial experiment corresponded to the classical limit established by Kayser,$`^{\text{References}}`$ the classical limit of their quantum mechanical treatment recovered the experimental situation. However, further discussion is beyond the scope of this paper.

## 4 Conclusions

The phenomenon of symmetry breaking is universal in physics, but although explicit and spontaneous violations are well-known and are generally treated in introductory courses, the same cannot be said of quantum mechanical or anomalous symmetry breaking, where a symmetry is valid at the classical level but is violated due to quantization of the theory. This omission is presumably due to the fact that most familiar manifestations of the anomaly, for example, the two-photon decay of the neutral pion, occur in the context of quantum field theory and belong in the realm of elementary particle physics. However, this need not be the case. We have argued here that one can present this subject within the realm of ordinary quantum mechanics by studying the violation of scale symmetry, $`r\mu r`$, $`kk/\mu `$. In earlier papers in this journal, the case of a two-dimensional delta function was examined.$`^{\text{References}}`$ However, this case is purely an intellectual exercise and has no experimental consequences. In this paper, we have examined the $`1/r^2`$ potential, which is anomalous and which does have experimental ramifications in the existence of a critical dipole moment allowing the binding of anions in atomic physics$`^{\text{References}}`$ and in the recent study of the interaction of a polarizable atom with a charged wire.$`^{\text{References}}`$

Finally, it has long been known that the main features of the quantum mechanical three-body bound state and some striking aspects of nuclear three-body scattering are due to an effective $`1/r^2`$ potential, built from the relative distances between the particles, including mass factors where appropriate.$`^{\text{References}}`$ This effective potential is displayed most clearly in recent effective field theory discussions of three-body systems, where it also exhibits scale invariance violation,$`^{\text{References}}`$ but this discussion is clearly beyond the level of our paper. In any case we believe that the above discussion is at a level that is appropriate in an advanced quantum mechanics course, and it is hoped that paper note will encourage the introduction of this fascinating topic into such a venue.

## Acknowledgement

It is a pleasure to acknowledge very interesting discussions with Boris Kayser and with Michel Bawin about this material. This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under award NSF-PHY-98-01875 and NSF-PHY-00-70938.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

A *quiver* $`Q`$ is a directed graph specified by a set of vertices $`Q_0`$, a set of arrows $`Q_1`$ and head and tail maps

$$h,t:Q_1Q_0.$$

Throughout the paper we shall assume that $`Q`$ is finite, i.e. the sets $`Q_0`$ and $`Q_1`$ are finite.

Let $`𝒜`$ be a category. A *representation* of a quiver $`Q`$ in $`𝒜`$ is a correspondence which associates an object $`V_i`$ of $`𝒜`$ to each vertex $`iQ_0`$ and a morphism

$$\varphi _a:V_{ta}V_{ha}$$

to each arrow $`aQ_1`$. There is an obvious notion of a morphism $`f:(V,\varphi )(W,\psi )`$ between representations of $`Q`$: it consists of a family of morphisms $`f_i:V_iW_i`$ such that the diagrams

commute for every $`aQ_1`$. In this way the representations of $`Q`$ form a category; note that this is an abelian category whenever $`𝒜`$ is.

A fundamental case is when $`𝒜`$ is the category of vector spaces over a field $`𝐤`$. We shall refer to a representation of $`Q`$ in this category as a $`Q`$-vector space or simply as a representation of $`Q`$. There is a related algebraic notion: given a quiver $`Q`$ one can construct its so-called path algebra (see Section 2) and the category of left modules over the path algebra is equivalent to the category of representations of $`Q`$. This has been a very fruitful idea in the theory of representations of algebras (see, e.g., Benson ).

Another case of great interest is when $`𝒜`$ is the category of algebraic vector bundles over an an algebraic variety $`X`$, or the category of holomorphic vector bundles over a complex manifold $`X`$. A representation of a quiver $`Q`$ in this category is called a *quiver bundle* or, for short, a *$`Q`$-bundle*. This notion unifies many of the vector bundles with extra structure which have been studied previously; we mention some examples. If $`Q`$ is the quiver

$$\text{},$$

then a $`Q`$-bundle is a holomorphic triple as studied by García-Prada  and Bradlow and García-Prada . In the special case $`V_1=𝒪_X`$ this becomes equivalent to the notion of Bradlow pair . More generally, consider the quiver

$$\text{}.$$

In this case a $`Q`$-bundle is called a holomorphic chain, these where studied by Álvarez-Cónsul and García-Prada . There is a generalization of the notion of $`Q`$-bundle to that of *twisted $`Q`$-bundle*, where the morphisms $`\varphi _a`$ are twisted by a vector bundle $`M_a`$ (see Section 3 for precise definitions). An important example of this is that of Higgs bundles on a curve $`X`$, introduced by Hitchin : these are pairs $`(E,\varphi )`$, where $`E`$ is a vector bundle and $`\varphi `$ is a morphism $`\varphi :EEK_X`$, where $`K_X`$ is the canonical bundle of $`X`$. Thus a Higgs bundle is a twisted $`Q`$-bundle where $`Q`$ is given by

$$\text{}.$$
(1.1)
In various applications it has been important to study infinitesimal deformations and extensions of $`Q`$-bundles and this has been done on a case by case basis. For Bradlow pairs, see Thaddeus  and for Higgs bundles see Nitsure , Markman , Bottacin  and Hausel and Thaddeus . The study of extensions of triples is important for the study of representations of the fundamental group of a surface in the group $`\mathrm{U}(p,q)`$ .

The goal of this paper is to give a unified treatment of the homological algebra of twisted quiver bundles, in order to study their extensions and deformations. The natural setting is to work in an abelian category with enough injectives, but the category of $`Q`$-bundles is not abelian, because the category of vector bundles over $`X`$ is itself not abelian. We therefore work with representations of $`Q`$ in the category of sheaves of $`𝒪_X`$-modules on a ringed space $`(X,𝒪_X)`$, which is an abelian category and has enough injectives. In this general setting, our results apply, for example, both when $`X`$ is an algebraic variety with the Zariski topology and $`𝒪_X`$ is the sheaf of algebraic functions, and also when $`X`$ is a complex manifold with the Hausdorff topology and $`𝒪_X`$ is the sheaf of holomorphic functions. We shall call a representation of a quiver $`Q`$ in this category a *$`Q`$-sheaf of $`𝒪_X`$-modules* (or simply a *$`Q`$-sheaf*, for short). One sees easily that the category of $`Q`$-sheaves is abelian. In analogy to the case of $`Q`$-vector spaces, the category of $`Q`$-sheaves of $`𝒪_X`$-modules is equivalent to the category of sheaves of modules for a certain sheaf of algebras on $`X`$ (see Section 3). This more algebraic point of view is important to our approach.

As in the vector bundle situation, the notion of $`Q`$-sheaf generalizes to the notion of *twisted $`Q`$-sheaf*; the twisting data consists of a locally free sheaf $`M_a`$ of $`𝒪_X`$-modules for each arrow $`aQ_1`$ (again we refer to Section 3 for precise definitions).

Our main results are as follows. We construct an explicit injective resolution of a twisted $`Q`$-sheaf (Proposition 3.5); in particular it follows that the abelian category of twisted $`Q`$-sheaves has enough injectives. This is done by combining the standard injective resolution in the category of twisted $`Q`$-vector spaces with injective resolutions in the category of sheaves. From the explicit form of the injective resolution of a twisted $`Q`$-sheaf we then deduce a long exact sequence (Theorem 4.1) which relates the $`\mathrm{Ext}`$ groups in the category of twisted $`Q`$-sheaves to the $`\mathrm{Ext}`$ groups of the sheaves which make up the twisted $`Q`$-sheaves. This should be a very useful tool in practical calculations and generalizes earlier results for special quivers; it was probably first observed by Nitsure , in the case of Higgs bundles. Next we prove that if $`V`$ and $`W`$ are twisted $`Q`$-sheaves such that $`V`$ is locally free, then the group $`\mathrm{Ext}^i(V,W)`$ is isomorphic to a certain $`i`$th hypercohomology group (Theorem 5.1). This should be useful for representing extension classes using $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{C}}`$ech or Dolbeault cohomology, and also connects our results to the special cases mentioned above, which are generally stated using hypercohomology.

To finish this introduction, we mention some related work. On the subject of twisted $`Q`$-bundles, Álvarez-Cónsul and García-Prada  have recently proved a Hitchin-Kobayashi correspondence between stable twisted $`Q`$-bundles and solutions to certain gauge theory equations for special metrics on the underlying smooth bundles. (In fact they consider the even more general notion of quivers with relations). This generalizes earlier results in the special cases mentioned earlier.

We also should mention the paper  by Biswas and Ramanan. They study the infinitesimal deformation space of principal Higgs bundles on a curve using hypercohomology. Even though this is a somewhat different situation from ours, there are certain similarities: for example they show that there is a long exact sequence relating the infinitesimal deformation space to certain sheaf cohomology groups of vector bundles associated to the underlying principal bundle.

### Acknowledgements.

The first author thanks The Institute for Mathematical Sciences, University of Aarhus for hospitality while part of this work was carried out.

## 2 The path algebra

In this section we recall a few relevant facts about representations of quivers and the corresponding notion of modules over the path algebra. For more details see, e.g., , ,  or , but note that we use a slight modification of the standard definition of path algebra.

Let $`Q`$ be a quiver. A *non-trivial path* in $`Q`$ is a sequence $`p=a_m\mathrm{}a_0`$ of arrows $`a_i`$, such that $`ha_{i1}=ta_i`$, for each $`i`$.

We write $`tp=ta_0`$ and $`hp=ha_m`$. In addition, for each vertex $`iQ_0`$, there is a *trivial path* $`i`$, which begins and ends at $`i`$. The *length* of a non-trivial path is the number of arrows in the sequence; a trivial path has length zero.

Now, for a commutative ring $`R`$, suppose that we have an $`R`$-module $`M_a`$ for each $`aQ_1`$. For each non-trivial path $`p=a_m\mathrm{}a_0`$, we set

$$M_p=M_{a_m}_R\mathrm{}_RM_{a_0}.$$

For each trivial path $`i`$, we set $`M_i=R`$ and write $`e_iM_i`$ for the element thereby identified with $`1R`$.

###### Definition 2.1.

Let $`Q`$ be a quiver and let $`M=\{M_a\}_{aQ_1}`$ be a collection of $`R`$-modules. The *$`M`$-twisted path algebra over $`R`$* is

$$A=\underset{p}{}M_p,$$

where the sum is over all paths in $`Q`$ and the $`R`$-linear multiplication is defined by

$$x_px_q=x_px_q\text{if }tp=hq\text{, and }0\text{ otherwise,}$$

for $`x_pM_p`$ and $`x_qM_q`$, while

$`x_pe_i`$ $`=x_p\text{if }i=tp\text{, and }0\text{ otherwise,}`$
$`e_ix_p`$ $`=x_p\text{if }i=hp\text{, and }0\text{ otherwise,}`$
$`e_ie_j`$ $`=e_i\text{if }i=j\text{, and }0\text{ otherwise.}`$
###### Remark 2.2.

(1) The $`R`$-algebra $`A`$ is graded, by the subspaces corresponding to paths of length $`n`$, that is

$$A_n=\underset{|p|=n}{}M_p.$$

Indeed, $`A`$ may also be defined as the tensor algebra, over the ring $`A_0=_{iQ_0}R`$, of the $`A_0`$-bimodule $`A_1=_{aQ_1}M_a`$.

(2) When each $`M_a=R`$ (or is free with one generator), then we get the usual path algebra of the quiver.

(3) Suppose that $`a`$ and $`b`$ are arrows with the same head and tail. If we replace them by one arrow $`c`$ and let $`M_c=M_aM_b`$, then we clearly get the same algebra.

The notion of a representation of $`Q`$ in the category of $`R`$-modules defined in the Introduction can be generalized to take into account twisting by the modules $`M_a`$ as follows: an *$`M`$-twisted representation of $`Q`$* consists of $`R`$-modules $`V_i`$ for $`iQ_0`$ and $`R`$-module maps

$$\varphi _a:M_a_RV_{ta}V_{ha}$$

for $`aQ_1`$. A *morphism* between twisted representations $`(V,\varphi )`$ and $`(W,\psi )`$ is a collection of $`R`$-module maps $`f_i:V_iW_i`$ such that the diagrams

commute for all $`aQ_1`$. It follows immediately that the forgetful functors $`(V,\varphi )V_i`$ are exact, for each $`iQ_0`$.

It is a straightforward exercise to show directly that the category of $`M`$-twisted representations of $`Q`$ is an abelian category, using the fact that the category of $`R`$-modules is abelian and the functor $`M_a_R`$ is right exact. However, this is also evident from the following.

###### Proposition 2.3.

The category of twisted representations of $`Q`$ is equivalent to the category of left $`A`$-modules. ∎

###### Proof.

Let $`(V,\varphi )`$ be a twisted representation of $`Q`$. We can then define a left $`A`$-module $`V`$ as follows: as an $`R`$-module it is

$$V=\underset{iQ_0}{}V_i,$$

and the $`A`$-module structure is extended linearly from

$`e_iv`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{cc}v,\hfill & vV_i,\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & vV_j\text{for }ji\text{,}\hfill \end{array}`$
for $`iQ_0`$ and
$`x_av`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{cc}\varphi _a(x_av),\hfill & vV_{ta},\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & vV_j\text{for }jta\text{,}\hfill \end{array}`$
for $`x_aM_a`$ and $`aQ_1`$. This construction can be inverted as follows: given a left $`A`$-module $`V`$ we set $`V_i=e_iV`$ for $`iQ_0`$ and define the map $`\varphi _a:M_a_RV_{ta}V_{ha}`$ by $`x_avx_av`$. One quickly checks that morphisms of representations of $`Q`$ correspond to $`A`$-module homomorphisms (see  or  for details). ∎

We will exploit this result and henceforth describe a twisted representation $`(V,\varphi )`$ of $`Q`$ as just an $`A`$-module $`V`$. Note in particular that we have a canonical identification $`V_i=e_iV`$.

The following $`A`$-module resolution is of fundamental importance to us.

###### Proposition 2.4.

Let $`V`$ be a module over the twisted path algebra $`A`$. There is an exact sequence

$$\begin{array}{c}0V\stackrel{\mathit{ϵ}}{}\underset{iQ_0}{}\mathrm{Hom}_R(e_iA,V_i)\hfill \\ \hfill \stackrel{𝑑}{}\underset{aQ_1}{}\mathrm{Hom}_R(M_a_Re_{ta}A,V_{ha})0,\end{array}$$
(2.1)
where

$$ϵ(v)(x)=xv$$

and the map $`d`$ is given by

$$d:(\alpha _i)_{iQ_0}\left(\alpha _{ha}\mu _a\varphi _a(1\alpha _{ta})\right)_{aQ_1}$$

where $`\mu _a:M_ae_{ta}Ae_{ha}A`$ is the multiplication map.

###### Proof.

Note that there is a natural inclusion

$$\mathrm{Hom}_A(A,V)\underset{iQ_0}{}\mathrm{Hom}_R(e_iA,V_i)$$

and that, under this inclusion, $`ϵ`$ is just the standard isomorphism $`V\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Hom}_A(A,V)`$. In particular, $`ϵ`$ is injective.

Next we show that $`\mathrm{im}(ϵ)=\mathrm{ker}(d)`$. Let

$$\alpha =(\alpha _i)_{iQ_0}\underset{iQ_0}{}\mathrm{Hom}_R(e_iA,V_i)$$

be such that $`d\alpha =0`$. The map $`d`$ can be written as $`d=(d_a)_{aQ_1}`$ with

$$d_a(\alpha )(x_ax)=\alpha _{ha}(x_ax)x_a\alpha _{ta}(x),$$

and thus $`d\alpha =0`$ means that for any $`xV_{ta}`$ and $`x_aM_a`$ we have

$$\alpha _{ha}(x_ax)=x_a\alpha _{ta}(x).$$

Hence, we see that $`d\alpha =0`$ if and only if $`\alpha (yx)=y\alpha (x)`$ for any $`yA`$; in other words if and only if $`\alpha `$ is $`A`$-linear. Therefore $`\mathrm{ker}(d)=\mathrm{Hom}_A(A,V)`$, showing that $`\mathrm{im}(ϵ)=\mathrm{ker}(d)`$.

Finally, we must show that $`d`$ is surjective. Let

$$\beta =(\beta _a)_{aQ_1}\underset{aQ_1}{}\mathrm{Hom}_R(M_a_Re_{ta}A,V_{ha}),$$

then it suffices to find $`\alpha `$ such that $`d_a(\alpha )=\beta _a`$ for each $`aQ_1`$. Note that the grading of $`A`$ gives a natural grading $`e_iA=_{l0}e_iA_l`$, and that we have

$$e_iA_l=\underset{\{a:ha=i\}}{}M_a_Re_{ta}A_{l1}.$$

We define $`\alpha =(\alpha _i)_{iQ_0}`$ by induction on $`l`$ as follows:

* On $`e_iA_0`$, we set $`\alpha _i=0`$ for all $`iQ_0`$.
* Assume that $`\alpha `$ is defined on $`e_iA_{l1}`$ for all $`i`$, then we define $`\alpha _i`$ on $`e_iA_l`$ by setting

$$\alpha _i(x_ax)=x_a\alpha _{ta}(x)+\beta _a(x_ax)$$

for $`x_axM_a_Re_{ta}A_{l1}`$.

It is then easy to verify that $`d_a(\alpha )=\beta _a`$. ∎

Let $`A`$ be any $`R`$-algebra, let $`V`$ be a left $`A`$-module, let $`W`$ be a right $`A`$-module and let $`L`$ be an $`R`$-module. There is the standard adjunction

$$\mathrm{Hom}_A(V,\mathrm{Hom}_R(W,L))\mathrm{Hom}_R(W_AV,L).$$
(2.2)
The isomorphism relates $`f`$ on the left and $`g`$ on the right when

$$f(v)(w)=g(wv)$$

for all $`vV`$ and $`wW`$. This adjunction has several important consequences, and we will use similar results later in the paper. Firstly, since

$$V_ie_iA_AV,$$

it follows that for any left $`A`$-module $`V`$ and for any $`R`$-modules $`N`$ and $`L`$ we have the adjunction formula

$$\mathrm{Hom}_A(V,\mathrm{Hom}_R(N_Re_iA,L))\mathrm{Hom}_R(N_RV_i,L),$$
(2.3)
and from this we deduce the following Proposition.

###### Proposition 2.5.

Let $`N`$ be a free $`R`$ module and $`L`$ be an injective $`R`$ module. Then the left $`A`$-module

$$\mathrm{Hom}_R(N_Re_iA,L)$$

is injective for each $`iQ_0`$.

###### Proof.

We need to see that the functor

$$\mathrm{Hom}_A(\text{},\mathrm{Hom}_R(N_Re_iA,L))$$

is exact, which it is, because, by (2.3), it is the composite of three exact functors: the forgetful functor $`VV_i`$ is always exact, $`N_R\text{}`$ is exact when $`N`$ is free, and $`\mathrm{Hom}_R(\text{},L)`$ is exact when $`L`$ is injective. ∎

As a special case, suppose that $`R=𝐤`$ is a field. Then every vector space is both free and injective and the sequence (2.1) is the ‘standard’ injective resolution of $`V`$.

###### Example 2.6.

Consider the quiver (1.1). In this case the path algebra $`A`$ can be identified with the polynomial algebra $`𝐤[x]`$. Let $`V`$ be a module over $`𝐤[x]`$, then the injective resolution (2.1) takes the form

$$0V\stackrel{\mathit{ϵ}}{}\mathrm{Hom}_𝐤(𝐤[x],V)\stackrel{𝑑}{}\mathrm{Hom}_𝐤(𝐤[x],V)0,$$

where $`ϵ(v)(p)=pv`$ and $`d(\alpha )(p)=\alpha (xp)x\alpha (p)`$.

## 3 Quiver sheaves

Let $`Q`$ be a quiver and let $`(X,𝒪_X)`$ be a ringed space. In this section, we consider twisted representations of $`Q`$ in the category of sheaves of $`𝒪_X`$-modules on $`X`$. For basic definitions about ringed spaces and sheaves of $`𝒪_X`$-modules, refer to Hartshorne , Ch. II, Sec. 1,2,5. Note also that the category of sheaves of $`𝒪_X`$-modules on $`X`$ has enough injectives ( Prop. III.2.2).

Suppose we are given a collection $`\{M_a\}_{aQ_1}`$ of locally free sheaves of $`𝒪_X`$-modules. An *$`M`$-twisted $`Q`$-sheaf of $`𝒪_X`$-modules* (or a *twisted $`Q`$-sheaf on $`X`$*, for short) consists of $`𝒪_X`$-modules $`V_i`$ for $`iQ_0`$ and morphisms

$$\varphi _a:M_a_{𝒪_X}V_{ta}V_{ha}$$

for $`aQ_1`$. A *morphism* between twisted $`Q`$-sheaves $`(V,\varphi )`$ and $`(W,\psi )`$ on $`X`$ is a collection of $`𝒪_X`$-module maps $`f_i:V_iW_i`$ such that the diagrams

commute for all $`aQ_1`$. As in Section 2, the forgetful functors $`(V,\varphi )V_i`$ are exact, for each $`iQ_0`$, and the category of $`M`$-twisted $`Q`$-sheaf of $`𝒪_X`$-modules is abelian.

Next we describe the corresponding algebraic notion, analogous to the definition of the twisted path algebra in Section 2. For each non-trivial path $`p=a_m\mathrm{}a_0`$ in $`Q`$ we set

$$M_p=M_{a_m}_{𝒪_X}\mathrm{}_{𝒪_X}M_{a_0}$$

and we set $`M_i=𝒪_X`$. We define the *$`M`$-twisted path algebra on $`X`$* to be the sheaf of $`𝒪_X`$-algebras $`B=_pM_p`$ where the sum is over all paths in $`Q`$ and the multiplication is the obvious one (cf. Definition 2.1).

In a similar way to Proposition 2.3, the category of twisted $`Q`$-sheaves is equivalent to the category of sheaves of $`B`$-modules on $`X`$ (a detailed proof can be found in ). Thus we shall interchangeably use the expressions “twisted $`Q`$-sheaf” and “sheaf of $`B`$-modules”, or, for short, “$`B`$-module”.

Note that, for the elementary facts above, we do not use the assumption that the twisting sheaves $`M_a`$ are locally free, i.e. that the functor $`M_a_{𝒪_X}\text{}`$ is exact. However, this assumption is used in realising the main objective of this section, that is, to show that the category of twisted $`Q`$-sheaves has enough injectives.

Specifically, we shall construct an injective resolution of a twisted $`Q`$-sheaf by combining the resolution (2.1) in the $`A`$-module direction with an injective resolution in the $`𝒪_X`$-module direction. The first step is to generalize Proposition 2.4 to $`B`$-modules.

###### Proposition 3.1.

Let $`V`$ be a $`B`$-module. There is an exact sequence of sheaves

$$\begin{array}{c}0V\stackrel{\mathit{ϵ}}{}\underset{iQ_0}{}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(e_iB,V_i)\hfill \\ \hfill \stackrel{𝑑}{}\underset{aQ_1}{}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(M_a_{𝒪_X}e_{ta}B,V_{ha})0,\end{array}$$
(3.1)
where the map $`ϵ`$ is defined by

$$ϵ(v)(x)=xv$$
(3.2)
for local sections $`v`$ and $`x`$ and the map $`d`$ is defined on a local section $`\alpha =(\alpha _i)_{iQ_0}`$ by

$$d:(\alpha _i)_{iQ_0}\left(\alpha _{ha}\mu _a\varphi _a(1\alpha _{ta})\right)_{aQ_1}$$
(3.3)
where $`\mu _a:M_ae_{ta}Be_{ha}B`$ is the multiplication map.

###### Proof.

It is sufficient to show exactness on stalks. Let $`𝒪_x`$ be the local ring at $`x`$, and let $`M_{a,x}`$, $`B_x`$ and $`V_x`$ be the stalks at $`x`$ of $`M_a`$, $`B`$ and $`V`$, respectively. Recall from Serre \[21, no 10\] that the stalk of the tensor product of sheaves is the tensor product of the stalks over the local ring. Thus we need to show that the sequence

$$\begin{array}{c}0V_x\stackrel{\mathit{ϵ}}{}\underset{iQ_0}{}\mathrm{Hom}_{𝒪_x}(e_iB_x,V_{i,x})\hfill \\ \hfill \stackrel{𝑑}{}\underset{aQ_1}{}\mathrm{Hom}_{𝒪_x}(M_{a,x}_{𝒪_x}e_{ta}B_x,V_{x,ha})0,\end{array}$$

is exact for every $`xX`$. But, again using the fact on tensor products mentioned above, we see that $`B_x`$ is the $`M_{a,x}`$-twisted path algebra over $`𝒪_x`$. Hence exactness is immediate from Proposition 2.4. ∎

Another important ingredient in our construction is the following analogue for sheaves of the adjunction formula (2.2).

###### Proposition 3.2.

Let $`B`$ be a sheaf of $`𝒪_X`$-algebras, let $`V`$ a sheaf of left $`B`$-modules, let $`W`$ be a sheaf of right $`B`$-modules and let $`L`$ be an $`𝒪_X`$-module. Then there is a natural isomorphism

$$\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_B(V,\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(W,L))\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(W_BV,L).$$

###### Proof.

This follows from (2.2) by an argument analogous to the one used in the proof of Proposition 3.1 above. ∎

###### Corollary 3.3.

Let $`V`$ be a $`B`$-module and $`N`$ and $`L`$ be a $`𝒪_X`$-modules. Then there is a natural isomorphism

$$\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(N_{𝒪_X}V_i,L)\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_B(V,\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(N_{𝒪_X}e_iB,L)).$$

###### Proof.

This follows from Proposition 3.2, because $`V_ie_iB_BV`$. ∎

The following is analogous to Proposition 2.5.

###### Proposition 3.4.

Let $`L`$ be an injective $`𝒪_X`$-module and let $`N`$ be a locally free $`𝒪_X`$-module. Then

$$\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(N_{𝒪_X}e_iB,L)$$

is an injective $`B`$-module.

###### Proof.

We have to show that

$$\mathrm{Hom}_B(\text{},\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(N_{𝒪_X}e_iB,L))$$

is an exact functor. By Corollary 3.3 this functor is the composite of the three functors, $`VV_i`$, $`N_{𝒪_X}\text{}`$ and $`\mathrm{Hom}_{𝒪_X}(\text{},L)`$. Just as in the proof of Proposition 2.5, the first one is always exact the second one is exact because $`N`$ is locally free and the third one is exact because $`L`$ is injective. ∎

Now, if $`V`$ is any $`B`$-module, then for each $`𝒪_X`$-module $`V_i`$, we can choose an injective resolution

$$V_i\stackrel{\mathit{ϵ}}{}V_i^0\stackrel{𝛿}{}V_i^1\stackrel{𝛿}{}\mathrm{}$$

Because $`M_a_{𝒪_X}\text{}`$ is an exact functor, the usual argument, using injectivity of the $`V_{ha}^n`$, shows that the maps

$$\varphi _a:M_a_{𝒪_X}V_{ta}V_{ha}$$

lift to chain maps

$$\varphi _a^{}:M_a_{𝒪_X}V_{ta}^{}V_{ha}^{}$$
(3.4)
for each $`aQ_1`$. Thus the $`V^n=_iV_i^n`$ become $`B`$-modules and the maps $`\delta :V^nV^{n+1}`$ become $`B`$-module homomorphisms.

We construct the desired injective resolution of $`V`$ from the following double complex, which we denote by $`C(V)^{}`$.

(3.5)
The horizontal differentials are $`(1)^qd`$, where $`d`$ is the map (3.3) for $`V^q`$, and the vertical differentials are induced by $`\delta :V_i^nV_i^{n+1}`$. Using the fact that the $`\delta `$ are $`B`$-module homomorphisms it is easy to check that the squares of the double complex anti-commute.

Denote the total complex of $`C(V)^{}`$ by $`I(V)^{}`$ and note that we have a canonical injection of $`B`$-modules

$$\overline{ϵ}:VI(V)^0=\underset{iQ_0}{}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(e_iB,V_i^0)$$

where $`\overline{ϵ}`$ is given by composing

$$ϵ:V^0\underset{iQ_0}{}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(e_iB,V_i^0)$$

defined in (3.2) with the inclusion $`VV^0`$.

###### Proposition 3.5.

For any $`B`$-module $`V`$, the complex $`I(V)^{}`$ is an injective resolution of $`V`$.

###### Proof.

It follows from Proposition 3.4 that each term in (3.5) is injective and so $`I(V)^n`$ is an injective $`B`$-module for each $`n`$. We have just seen that $`V`$ injects into $`I(V)^0`$, so all that remains to check is that $`VI(V)^{}`$ is an exact complex. We use the following notation:

$`F(V)`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{iQ_0}{}}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(e_iB,V_i),`$
$`G(V)`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{aQ_1}{}}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(M_a_{𝒪_X}e_{ta}B,V_{ha}).`$
Then we have the following commutative diagram:

Since, for any $`iQ_0`$ and $`aQ_1`$, the $`𝒪_X`$-modules $`e_iB`$ and $`M_a_{𝒪_X}e_{ta}B`$ are locally free, we see that $`\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(e_iB,\text{})`$ and $`\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(M_a_{𝒪_X}e_iB,\text{})`$ are exact functors. Hence the columns of the above diagram are exact. Furthermore, the bottom row of the diagram is exact from Proposition 3.1. From these two facts it is easy to see that $`VI(V)^{}`$ is an exact complex. ∎

## 4 A long exact sequence

Now that we can take injective resolutions of $`B`$-modules, we may define $`\mathrm{Ext}_B^i(V,W)`$ as the $`i`$th cohomology of the complex $`\mathrm{Hom}_B(V,I(W)^{})`$, where $`I(W)^{}`$ is an injective resolution of $`W`$. Our main theorem provides a tool for calculating $`\mathrm{Ext}_B^i(V,W)`$, in terms of the $`\mathrm{Ext}`$ groups of the $`𝒪_X`$-modules $`V_i`$ and $`W_j`$, via a long exact sequence. As explained in the Introduction, several earlier results are special cases of this.

Before stating the result, we need to explain how to interpret some of the notation. We are already familiar with the map

$$\mathrm{Hom}(E,F)\mathrm{Hom}(M_aE,M_aF):f1f$$

given by the functor $`EM_aE`$. Since $`M_a`$ is locally free, this functor is exact and hence it also induces a map

$$\mathrm{Ext}^i(E,F)\mathrm{Ext}^i(M_aE,M_aF),$$

which we shall also denote by $`f1f`$. This map is easily understood in the Yoneda picture, where $`\mathrm{Ext}^i`$ classifies exact sequences from $`F`$ to $`E`$ with $`i`$ intermediate terms. However, for our purposes we need the following equivalent formulation. If $`F^{}`$ is any resolution of $`F`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{f}\mathrm{Hom}(E,F^i)`$ is a cocyle representing $`f\mathrm{Ext}^i(E,F)`$, then $`1\stackrel{~}{f}\mathrm{Hom}(M_aE,M_aF^i)`$ is a cocyle representing $`1f\mathrm{Ext}^i(M_aE,M_aF)`$.

With this understood, we can state and prove our theorem. The context is the general one of Section 3: $`(X,𝒪_X)`$ is a ringed space, $`Q`$ is a quiver and $`M_a`$ are locally free $`𝒪_X`$-module for each $`aQ_1`$. Then $`B`$ is the $`M`$-twisted path algebra over $`X`$.

###### Theorem 4.1.

For any $`B`$-modules $`V`$ and $`W`$, there is a long exact sequence

$`0\mathrm{Hom}_B(V,W)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{iQ_0}{}}\mathrm{Hom}_{𝒪_X}(V_i,W_i)\stackrel{}{}{\displaystyle \underset{aQ_1}{}}\mathrm{Hom}_{𝒪_X}(M_aV_{ta},W_{ha})`$
$`\mathrm{Ext}_B^1(V,W)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{iQ_0}{}}\mathrm{Ext}_{𝒪_X}^1(V_i,W_i)\stackrel{}{}{\displaystyle \underset{aQ_1}{}}\mathrm{Ext}_{𝒪_X}^1(M_aV_{ta},W_{ha})`$
$`\mathrm{Ext}_B^2(V,W)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{}.`$
The maps $``$ are given by

$$:\left(f_i\right)_{iQ_0}\left(f_{ha}\varphi _a\psi _a(1f_{ta})\right)_{aQ_1}$$

where $``$ is the Yoneda product.

###### Proof.

Let $`I(W)^{}`$ be the injective resolution of $`W`$ given by Proposition 3.5, i.e. the total complex of the double complex $`C(W)^{}`$ of (3.5). Then the group $`\mathrm{Ext}_B^i(V,W)`$ is the $`i`$th cohomology group of the complex $`\mathrm{Hom}_B(V,I(W)^{})`$, which can be computed from the spectral sequence for the double complex $`\mathrm{Hom}_B(V,C(W)^{})`$. Using the adjunction of Corollary 3.3, this double complex can be written

(4.1)
If we pass to the $`E_1`$ term of the spectral sequence by computing vertical cohomology, then we obtain the required groups

$$_{iQ_0}\mathrm{Ext}_{𝒪_X}^q(V_i,W_i)\text{and}_{aQ_1}\mathrm{Ext}_{𝒪_X}^q(M_aV_{ta},W_{ha}).$$

The fact that we started with a two column complex means that the spectral sequence converges at the $`E_2`$ term and yields precisely the long exact sequence of the theorem.

To see that the maps are as claimed, observe that the horizontal maps in (4.1) are given by

$$\left(\stackrel{~}{f}_i\right)_{iQ_0}\left(\stackrel{~}{f}_{ha}\varphi _a\psi _a^q(1\stackrel{~}{f}_{ta})\right)_{aQ_1}$$
(4.2)
where $`\stackrel{~}{f}_i\mathrm{Hom}(V_i,W_i^q)`$ is a cocycle representing $`f_i\mathrm{Ext}^q(V_i,W_i)`$, while $`\psi _a^q\mathrm{Hom}(M_aW_{ta}^q,W_{ha}^q)`$ are the lifts of $`\psi _a\mathrm{Hom}(M_aW_{ta},W_{ha})`$, as in (3.4). In (4.2) the symbol $``$ just denotes composition of maps.

The first composite $`\stackrel{~}{f}_{ha}\varphi _a`$ is immediately seen to be a cocyle representing the Yoneda product $`f_{ha}\varphi _a`$. For the second composite, observe, from the remark preceding the statement of the theorem, that

$$1\stackrel{~}{f}_{ta}\mathrm{Hom}(M_aV_{ta},M_aW_{ta}^q)$$

is a cocyle representing $`1f_{ta}\mathrm{Ext}^q(M_aV_{ta},M_aW_{ta})`$ and thus that the composite $`\psi _a^q(1\stackrel{~}{f}_{ta})`$ is a cocyle representing the Yoneda product $`\psi _a(1f_{ta})`$

Note for the careful reader: because it makes no difference to the result, for simplicity we have not carried the signs $`(1)^q`$ attached to the maps $`d`$ of (3.5) through to the maps $``$ of the theorem. ∎

## 5 Hypercohomology

Let $`V`$ and $`W`$ be $`B`$-modules. When $`V`$ is locally free, we show in this section how to give a description of $`\mathrm{Ext}^i(V,W)`$ in terms of hypercohomology.

Consider the exact sequence of sheaves given by Proposition 3.1:

$$\begin{array}{c}0W\stackrel{\mathit{ϵ}}{}\underset{iQ_0}{}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(e_iB,W_i)\hfill \\ \hfill \stackrel{𝑑}{}\underset{aQ_1}{}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(M_a_{𝒪_X}e_{ta}B,W_{ha})0.\end{array}$$
(5.1)
Applying the functor $`\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_B(V,\text{})`$ and using Corollary 3.3 we obtain the exact sequence

$$\begin{array}{c}0\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_B(V,W)\underset{iQ_0}{}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(V_i,W_i)\hfill \\ \hfill \stackrel{𝛿}{}\underset{aQ_1}{}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(M_a_{𝒪_X}V_{ta},W_{ha}),\end{array}$$
(5.2)
where $`\delta `$ is given by

$$\left(f_i\right)_{iQ_0}\left(f_{ha}\varphi _a\psi _a(1f_{ta})\right)_{aQ_1}$$
(5.3)
The complex of sheaves

$$C^{}(V,W):\underset{iQ_0}{}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(V_i,W_i)\stackrel{𝛿}{}\underset{aQ_1}{}\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(M_a_{𝒪_X}V_{ta},W_{ha})$$

formed by the last two terms of this sequence is important because of the following result.

###### Theorem 5.1.

Let $`(X,𝒪_X)`$ be a ringed space, let $`Q`$ be a quiver, let $`M_a`$ be a locally free $`𝒪_X`$-module for each $`aQ_1`$ and let $`B`$ be the $`M`$-twisted path algebra over $`X`$. Let $`V`$ and $`W`$ be $`B`$-modules and suppose that $`V`$ is locally free. Then

$$\mathrm{Ext}_B^p(V,W)^p(C^{}(V,W)).$$

We shall need the following three lemmas for the proof.

###### Lemma 5.2.

Let $`V`$ and $`W`$ be $`B`$-modules and consider the two term complex obtained by applying the global sections functor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`C^{}(V,W)`$. Then

$`H^0(\mathrm{\Gamma }(C^{}(V,W)))`$ $`\mathrm{Hom}_B(V,W).`$
If, moreover, $`W`$ is injective, then
$`H^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }(C^{}(V,W)))`$ $`=0`$
for $`p1`$.

###### Proof.

Observe that the complex $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(C^{}(V,W))`$ coincides with the part of the long exact sequence of Theorem 4.1 made up by the second and third term. The result follows. ∎

###### Lemma 5.3.

Let $`W`$ be an injective $`B`$-module. Then each $`W_i`$ is an injective $`𝒪_X`$-module.

###### Proof.

We claim that the left adjoint of the forgetful functor $`WW_i`$ from $`B`$-modules to $`𝒪_X`$-modules is the functor $`LBe_iL`$. This latter functor is exact because the $`M_a`$ are locally free and hence its right adjoint (the forgetful functor) preserves injectives. Thus the lemma follows from the claim.

In order to prove the claim we use the adjunction

$$\mathrm{Hom}_B(VL,W)\mathrm{Hom}_{𝒪_X}(L,\mathrm{Hom}_B(V,W))$$

for an $`𝒪_X`$-module $`L`$ and $`B`$-modules $`V`$ and $`W`$: taking $`V=Be_i`$ it follows that the functor $`LBe_iL`$ is the left adjoint of $`W\mathrm{Hom}_B(Be_i,W)`$. We finish the proof by observing that there is a natural isomorphism $`W_i=e_iW\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Hom}_B(Be_i,W)`$ given by $`e_iw(xe_ixw)`$, with inverse $`\alpha \alpha (e_i)=e_i(\alpha (e_i))`$. ∎

###### Lemma 5.4.

Let $`L`$ and $`M`$ be locally free $`𝒪_X`$-modules and let $`I`$ be an injective $`𝒪_X`$-module. Then $`\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(ML,I)`$ is an injective $`𝒪_X`$-module.

###### Proof.

This follows from the standard adjunction

$$\mathrm{Hom}_{𝒪_X}(N,\mathrm{𝑜𝑚}_{𝒪_X}(ML,I))\mathrm{Hom}_{𝒪_X}(MLN,I)$$

by an argument similar to that used in the proof of Propositions 2.5 and 3.4. ∎

###### Proof of Theorem 5.1.

We begin by noting that the statement is true for $`p=0`$. For any complex of sheaves $`^{}`$ one has $`^0(^{})=H^0(\mathrm{\Gamma }(^{}))`$ and therefore we have, using Lemma 5.2, that

$$^0(C^{}(V,W))H^0(\mathrm{\Gamma }(C^{}(V,W)))\mathrm{Hom}_B(V,W).$$

Thus it suffices to show that the functor $`^p(C^{}(V,\text{}))`$ on $`B`$-modules is a universal $`\delta `$-functor. Let $`0W^{}WW^{\prime \prime }0`$ be a short exact sequence of $`B`$-modules. Then, because $`M_a`$ and $`V`$ are locally free, we get a corresponding short exact sequence of complexes

$$0C^{}(V,W^{})C^{}(V,W)C^{}(V,W^{\prime \prime })0.$$

Hence, by general properties of hypercohomology, we get the required long exact sequence

$`0`$ $`^0(C^{}(V,W^{}))^0(C^{}(V,W))^0(C^{}(V,W^{\prime \prime }))`$
$`^1(C^{}(V,W^{}))\mathrm{},`$
natural with respect to morphisms of short exact sequences. Thus $`^p(C^{}(V,\text{}))`$ is a $`\delta `$-functor.

It remains to show that $`^p(C^{}(V,\text{}))`$ is universal. Since the category of $`B`$-modules has enough injectives it suffices to show that for any injective $`B`$-module $`I`$, one has $`^p(C^{}(V,I))=0`$ for all $`p1`$. Consider the first hypercohomology spectral sequence

$${}_{}{}^{I}E_{2}^{pq}=H^p(R^q\mathrm{\Gamma }(C^{}(V,I)))^{p+q}C^{}(V,I).$$

(Here we have denoted sheaf cohomology by $`R^q\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to avoid confusion, i.e., $`R^q\mathrm{\Gamma }(C^{}(V,I))`$ is the complex obtained from $`C^{}(V,I)`$ by taking the $`q`$th sheaf cohomology group of each term.) By Lemma 5.3 we have that each $`I_i`$ is an injective $`𝒪_X`$-module. Hence Lemma 5.4 shows that each term of $`C^{}(V,I)`$ is an injective $`𝒪_X`$-module and thus has vanishing higher sheaf cohomology. It follows that the spectral sequence collapses at the $`E_2`$-term and we get

$$^p(C^{}(V,I))=H^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }(C^{}(V,I)))$$

which vanishes for $`p1`$ by Lemma 5.2. This finishes the proof. ∎

Departamento de Matemática Pura
Faculdade de Ciências
Universidade do Porto
Rua do Campo Alegre
4169-007 Porto, Portugal
E-mail: pbgothen@fc.up.pt

Mathematical Sciences
University of Bath
Claverton Down
Bath BA2 7AY, U.K.
E-mail: A.D.King@maths.bath.ac.uk