text:
# Baby Verma modules for rational Cherednik algebras

## 1. Introduction

### 1.1.

Symplectic reflection algebras algebras of complex reflection groups (the so–called rational Cherednik algebras) arise in many different mathematical disciplines: integrable systems, Lie theory, representation theory, differential operators, symplectic geometry. Early on a dichotomy (depending on a single parameter $`t`$) appears in the behaviour of these algebras: when $`t0`$ the algebras are rather non–commutative and relations with differential operators come to the fore; when $`t=0`$ the algebras have very large centres and connections between the geometry of the centre and representation theory are of interest. This paper concentrates on the second case. We introduce a family of finite dimensional modules called baby Verma modules and present their most basic properties. By analogy with the representation theory of reductive Lie algebras in positive characteristic, we believe these modules are fundamental to the understanding of the representation theory and associated geometry of the rational Cherednik algebras at parameter $`t=0`$.

### 1.2.

Let $`W`$ be a complex reflection group and $`𝔥`$ its reflection representation over $``$. The rational Cherednik algebras introduced by Etingof and Ginzburg, , are deformations of the skew–group ring $`[𝔥𝔥^{}]W`$ depending on parameters $`t`$ and $`c`$. We denote them by $`H_{t,c}`$. It can be shown that when $`t=0`$ there is an embedding of $`[𝔥^{}]^W[𝔥]^W`$ into $`Z_c`$, the centre of $`H_{0,c}`$, and thus a map

$$\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)𝔥^{}/W\times 𝔥/W.$$

The baby Verma modules are $`H_{0,c}`$–modules naturally associated to points in the (reduced) zero fibre, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$. Studying their properties allows us to deduce some properties of $`Z_c`$ and of the map $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$. We prove the following results:

* There is a surjective map, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, from the isomorphism classes of irreducible representations of $`W`$ over $``$ to the elements in the fibre $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ .
* The map $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is an isomorphism if and only if the points of $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ are smooth in $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$.
* If $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is an isomorphism and $`S`$ a simple $`W`$–module, then the component of the scheme theoretic fibre $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^{}(0)`$ corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)`$ has a $`^{}`$–action whose associated Poincaré polynomial is explicitly described. The component has, in particular, dimension $`dim(S)^2`$.
* The variety $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ is singular for $`W`$ a finite Coxeter group of type $`D_{2n},E,F,H`$ and $`I_2(m)`$ ($`n2,m5`$).

These results are related to problems of Etingof and Ginzburg, confirming \[5, Conjecture 17.14\], answering \[5, Question 17.15\] and partially answering \[5, Question 17.1\].

### 1.3.

The final result above should be compared to recent results on the non–existence of a crepant resolution for the orbit space $`(𝔥^{}\times 𝔥)/W`$. It is shown in  that the orbit space admits no crepant resolution if $`W`$ is the Coxeter group of type $`G_2`$; folding arguments then imply no such resolution for $`W`$ of type $`D`$ and $`E`$. It is an interesting problem to make the relationship between resolutions and deformations of $`(𝔥\times 𝔥^{})/W`$ precise.

### 1.4.

Recall Calogero–Moser phase space defined by

$$𝒞_n=\{(X,Y)\mathrm{Mat}_n()\times \mathrm{Mat}_n():[X,Y]+Id=\text{rank 1 matrix}\}//PGL_n().$$

In the particular case of $`W=𝔖_n`$, the symmetric group on $`n`$ letters, it is known that for $`c0`$ there is an isomorphism between $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ and $`𝒞_n`$ under which the map $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ corresponds to sending the pair of matrices $`(X,Y)`$ to their eigenvalues. Since it is known that $`𝒞_n`$ is smooth, our results mentioned in 1.2 associate to each point in $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ a partition of $`n`$, as in . Let $`\lambda n`$. We prove:

* The Poincaré polynomial of the component of the scheme–theoretic fibre $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^{}(0)`$ corresponding to $`\lambda `$ is $`K_\lambda (t)K_\lambda (t^1)`$, where $`K_\lambda `$ is the Kostka polynomial corresponding to $`\lambda `$.
* For the point $`M_\lambda \mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ corresponding to $`\lambda `$, there is a relationship between the finite dimensional algebra $`H_{0,c}/M_\lambda H_{0,c}`$ and Springer theory for the nilpotent orbit in $`\mathrm{Mat}_n()`$ with Jordan normal form of type $`\lambda `$.

These results confirm a pair of conjectures of Etingof and Ginzburg, \[5, Conjectures 17.12 and 17.13\], and give an elementary proof of a recent theorem of Finkelberg and Ginzburg, . As noted later, the extension of the first result to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }𝔖_n`$, the wreath product of a finite subgroup of $`SL_2()`$ by the symmetric group, is straightforward.

### 1.5.

The paper is organised as follows. Sections 2–3 introduce notation and present the embedding of $`[𝔥^{}]^W[𝔥]^W`$ into $`Z_c`$. In Section 4 we define and study baby Verma modules. Section 5 sees the proofs of all but the last result stated in 1.2, whilst Section 6 deals with the special case of the symmetric group, $`𝔖_n`$. In Section 7 we prove the final result of 1.2 and present a couple of basic open problems.

### 1.6. Acknowledgements

The author is grateful to Alexander Kuznetsov for explaining to me the relationship between fixed points in Calogero–Moser spaces and Hilbert schemes used at the end of Section 6, and to Ken Brown for allowing me to include his unpublished result in 7.2. The author is partially supported by the Nuffield Foundation grant NAL/00625/G.

## 2. Notation

### 2.1.

Let $`W`$ be a complex reflection group and $`𝔥`$ its reflection representation over $``$. Let $`𝒮`$ denote the set of complex reflections in $`W`$. Let $`\omega `$ be the canonical symplectic form on $`V=𝔥𝔥^{}`$. For $`s𝒮`$, let $`\omega _s`$ be the skew–symmetric form which coincides with $`\omega `$ on $`\mathrm{im}(\text{id}_Vs)`$ and has $`\mathrm{ker}(\text{id}_Vs)`$ as the radical. Let $`c:𝒮`$ be a $`W`$–invariant function sending $`s`$ to $`c_s`$. The rational Cherednik algebra at parameter $`t=0`$ (depending on $`c`$) is the quotient of the skew group algebra of the tensor algebra on $`V`$, $`TVW`$, by the relations

$$[x,y]=\underset{s𝒮}{}c_s\omega _s(x,y)s$$

for all $`y𝔥^{}`$ and $`x𝔥`$. This algebra is denoted by $`H_c`$.

### 2.2.

We will denote a set of representatives of the isomorphism classes of simple $`W`$–modules by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

### 2.3.

Let $`R=R_i`$ be a finite dimensional $``$-graded $``$–algebra. We will let $`R\mathrm{mod}`$ ($`R\mathrm{mod}_{}`$) denote the category of finite dimensional (graded) left $`R`$–modules. Given an object $`M`$ in $`R\mathrm{mod}_{}`$, let $`M[i]`$ denote the $`i`$th shift of $`M`$, defined by $`M[i]_j=M_{ji}`$. The graded endomorphism ring of $`M`$ is defined as

$$\mathrm{End}(M)=\underset{i}{}\mathrm{Hom}_{R\mathrm{mod}_{}}(M,M[i]).$$

Given $`N`$, a $``$–graded right $`R`$–module, the graded dual $`N^{}`$ is the object of $`R\mathrm{mod}_{}`$ defined by

$$(N^{})_i=\{f:N:f(N_j)=0\text{ for all }ji\}.$$

The forgetful functor is denoted $`F:R\mathrm{mod}_{}R\mathrm{mod}`$.

## 3. The centre of $`H_c`$

### 3.1.

Throughout $`Z_c=Z(H_c)`$ and $`A=[𝔥^{}]^W[𝔥]^W`$. Thanks to \[5, Proposition 4.15\], $`AZ_c`$ for any finite complex reflection group $`W`$ and any parameter $`c`$. We will give an elementary proof of this inclusion.

### 3.2.

Let $`s𝒮`$. There exists $`\alpha _s𝔥`$ such that $`𝔥=𝔥_s\alpha _s`$, where $`𝔥_s=\{h𝔥:s(h)=h\}`$ and $`s(\alpha _s)=e^{2\pi in_s}\alpha _s`$ for some rational number $`0<n_s<1`$. Similarly, we have $`\alpha _s^{}`$, $`n_s`$ and $`𝔥_s^{}`$. We don’t choose to normalise $`\alpha _s`$ and $`\alpha _s^{}`$, but note that for all $`h𝔥_s`$ it follows from

$$\alpha _s^{}(h)=\alpha _s^{}(s(h))=e^{2\pi in_s}\alpha _s^{}(h)$$

that $`\alpha _s^{}(𝔥_s)=0`$. Similarly, $`\alpha _s(𝔥_s^{})=0`$.

### 3.3.

For any reflection $`sW`$, an explicit calculation shows, for $`y𝔥^{}`$ and $`x𝔥`$

$$\omega _s(x,y)=\frac{\alpha _s(y)\alpha _s^{}(x)}{\alpha _s^{}(\alpha _s)}.$$

The principal commutation relation for $`H_c`$ is

$$[x,y]=\underset{sS}{}c_s\frac{\alpha _s(y)\alpha _s^{}(x)}{\alpha _s^{}(\alpha _s)}s.$$
(1)
### 3.4.

Let $`s`$ be a reflection in $`W`$ and set $`\lambda _s=1e^{2\pi in_s}`$. For $`h𝔥`$

$$s(h)=h\lambda _s\frac{\alpha _s^{}(h)}{\alpha _s^{}(\alpha _s)}\alpha _s.$$

This action extends multiplicatively to $`[𝔥^{}]`$.

### 3.5.

The functional $`\alpha _s^{}`$ extends inductively to a $``$–linear operator on $`[𝔥^{}]`$ as follows: $`\alpha _s^{}|_{}0`$ and for $`p,p^{}[𝔥^{}]`$,

$$\alpha _s^{}(pp^{})=\alpha _s^{}(p)p^{}+p\alpha _s^{}(p^{})\lambda _s\frac{\alpha _s^{}(p)\alpha _s^{}(p^{})}{\alpha _s^{}(\alpha _s)}\alpha _s.$$
(2)
Define a graded operator on $`[𝔥^{}]`$ by

$$\stackrel{~}{s}(p)=p\lambda _s\frac{\alpha _s^{}(p)}{\alpha _s^{}(\alpha _s)}\alpha _s.$$
(3)
An inductive calculation proves that

$$\text{the operators }s\text{ and }\stackrel{~}{s}\text{ agree on }[𝔥^{}].$$
(4)
In particular,

$$p[𝔥^{}]^W\text{ if and only if }\alpha _s^{}(p)=0\text{ for all reflections }sW.$$
(5)
### 3.6.

Let $`y𝔥^{}`$ and $`p[𝔥^{}]`$. One proves inductively using (1), (2), (3) and (4) that

$$[p,y]=\underset{s}{}c_s\frac{y(\alpha _s)\alpha _s^{}(p)}{\alpha _s^{}(\alpha _s)}s.$$

It follows from (5) that if $`p[𝔥^{}]^W`$ then $`pZ_c`$. Of course similar arguments apply to $`[𝔥]^W`$, so we have proved

###### Proposition.

Let $`H_c`$ be a Cherednik algebra. Then $`AZ_c`$.

We denote the corresponding morphism of varieties

$$\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)\mathrm{Spec}(A)=𝔥^{}/W\times 𝔥/W.$$
(6)
## 4. Baby Verma modules

### 4.1.

Recall by Proposition Proposition that $`AZ_c`$. Let $`A_+`$ denote the elements of $`A`$ of with no scalar term. Define

$$\overline{H_c}=\frac{H_c}{A_+H_c}.$$

This is a $``$–graded algebra where $`\mathrm{deg}(x)=1`$ (respectively $`\mathrm{deg}(y)=1`$, $`\mathrm{deg}(w)=0`$) for $`x𝔥`$ (respectively $`y𝔥^{},wW`$). The PBW theorem, \[5, Theorem 1.3\], shows that $`\overline{H_c}`$ has a (vector space) triangular decomposition

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\overline{H_c}& \stackrel{}{}& [𝔥^{}]^{coW}[𝔥]^{coW}W,\end{array}$$
(7)
where “$`coW`$” stands for $`W`$–coinvariants, that is $`[𝔥^{}]^{coW}=[𝔥^{}]/[𝔥^{}]_+^W[𝔥^{}]`$. Thanks to Chevalley’s Theorem these coinvariant rings are graded versions of the regular representation of $`W`$, so in particular $`dim(\overline{H_c})=|W|^3`$.

### 4.2.

Let $`\overline{H_c^{}}=[𝔥]^{coW}W`$, a subalgebra of $`\overline{H_c}`$. The algebra map $`\overline{H_c^{}}W`$ sending an element $`qw`$ to $`q(0)w`$, makes any $`W`$–module into an $`\overline{H_c^{}}`$–module.

Given $`S\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, a simple $`W`$–module, we define $`M(S)`$, a baby Verma module, by

$$M(S)=\overline{H_c}_{\overline{H_c^{}}}S.$$

By construction $`M(S)`$ is an object of $`\overline{H_c}\mathrm{mod}_{}`$. Equation (7) shows that $`dim(M(S))=|W|dim(S)`$. Furthermore for $`T\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, set

$$f_T(t)=\underset{i}{}([𝔥^{}]^{coW}:T[i])t^i.$$
(8)
The polynomials $`f_T(t)`$ are called the fake degrees of $`W`$ and have the property $`f_T(1)=dimT`$. They have been calculated for all finite Coxeter groups. In the graded Grothendieck group of $`W`$, we have by construction

$$[M(S)]=\underset{T\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}f_T(t)[TS].$$
(9)
### 4.3.

The following proposition gathers results from \[12, Section 3\]. Recall $`F:\overline{H_c}\mathrm{mod}_{}\overline{H_c}\mathrm{mod}`$ is the forgetful functor.

###### Proposition.

Let $`S,T\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

1. The baby Verma module $`M(S)`$ has a simple head, denoted $`L(S)`$.
2. $`M(S)`$ is isomorphic to $`M(T)[i]`$ if and only if $`S`$ and $`T`$ are the same element of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`i=0`$.
3. $`\{L(S)[i]:S\mathrm{\Lambda },i\}`$ gives a complete set of pairwise non–isomorphic simple graded $`\overline{H_c}`$–modules.
4. $`F(L(S))`$ is a simple $`\overline{H_c}`$–module, and $`\{F(L(S)):S\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$ is a complete set of pairwise non–isomorphic simple $`\overline{H_c}`$–modules.
5. Let $`P(S)`$ be the projective cover of $`L(S)`$. Then $`F(P(S))`$ is the projective cover $`F(L(S))`$.

### 4.4.

Lemma.  Let $`S,T\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`i`$ be a positive integer. Then $`(M(S)[i]:L(T))=0`$ and $`(M(S):L(T))=\delta _{S,T}.`$

###### Proof.

By construction the baby Verma module $`M(T)`$ is concentrated in non–negative degree and generated by its degree zero component, $`1T=M(T)_0`$. Since $`M(T)`$ is a homomorphic image of $`P(T)`$, we can find $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$, a $`W`$–submodule of $`P(T)_0`$ isomorphic to $`T`$ which maps onto $`M(T)_0`$. Since $`P(T)`$ has a simple head, it follows that $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ generates $`P(T)`$.

If $`L(T)`$ is a composition factor of $`M(S)[i]`$, there exists a non–zero graded homomorphism from $`P(T)`$ to $`M(S)[i]`$, sending $`P(T)_0`$ to $`M(S)_i`$. As $`M(S)_i`$ is zero for positive values of $`i`$, this proves the first claim of the lemma. If $`i`$ is zero, then $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ maps to $`M(S)_0`$ and the second claim follows. ∎

### 4.5.

An object $`V`$ in $`\overline{H_c}\mathrm{mod}_{}`$ is said to have an $`M`$-filtration if it has a filtration

$$0=V_0V_1\mathrm{}V_{n1}V_n=V$$

such that for $`1jn`$, $`V_j/V_{j1}M(S)[i]`$ for $`S`$ a simple $`W`$–module and $`i`$. By \[12, Corollary 4.3\] the numbers

$$[V:M(S)[i]]=|\{j:V_j/V_{j1}M(S)[i]\}|$$

are independent of the filtration used.

### 4.6.

Let $`\overline{H_c^+}=[𝔥^{}]^{coW}W`$. Given a simple $`W`$–module, we define

$$M^{}(S)=(S^{}_{\overline{H_c^+}}\overline{H_c})^{}.$$

It is shown in \[12, Theorem 4.5\] that for a simple $`W`$–module $`S`$, the projective cover $`P(S)`$ has an $`M`$-filtration such that for any $`i`$ and simple $`W`$–module $`T`$

$$[P(S):M(T)[i]]=(M^{}(T)[i]:L(S)).$$
(10)
### 4.7.

For this paragraph only suppose that $`W`$ is a finite Coxeter group. Then (10) can be improved to the following Brauer–type reciprocity formula

$$[P(S):M(T)[i]]=(M(T)[i]:L(S)).$$
(11)
This follows from an adaptation of \[12, Theorem 5.1\] with two special ingredients. Firstly, we require the antiautomorphism, $`\omega `$, of $`H_c`$ which sends $`x𝔥`$, respectively $`y𝔥^{}`$, to the corresponding element $`\stackrel{~}{x}`$ of $`𝔥^{}`$, respectively $`\stackrel{~}{y}`$ of $`𝔥`$, under the $`W`$–invariant form $`(,)`$ on $`𝔥`$ and $`w`$ to $`w^1`$ for $`wW`$. Secondly, we must observe that any simple $`W`$–module is self–dual (since the characters of $`W`$ all take values in $``$).

## 5. On the fibre $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^{}(0)`$

### 5.1.

Recall the morphism $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ given in (6). We will study the scheme theoretic fibres $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^{}(0)`$ of the point $`0𝔥^{}/W\times 𝔥/W`$. The closed points of these fibres, denoted $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$, are precisely the maximal ideals of $`Z_c`$ lying over $`A_+`$. Given such an ideal, $`M`$, the component of $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^{}(0)`$ corresponding to $`M`$ is defined to be $`\mathrm{Spec}(𝒪_M)`$, where

$$𝒪_M=(Z_c)_M/A_+(Z_c)_M.$$

The algebra $`𝒪_M`$ inherits a $``$–grading from $`\overline{H_c}`$, seen as follows. The $``$–grading on $`\overline{H_c}`$ corresponds to an algebraic action of $`^{}`$ which preserves both $`Z_c`$ and $`A`$ and makes $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ a $`^{}`$-equivariant morphism. Since $`0`$ is the unique fixed point of $`𝔥^{}/W\times 𝔥/W`$, each fibre $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^{}(0)`$ inherits a $`^{}`$–action, in other words a $``$–grading.

### 5.2.

Recall that a point $`M\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ is called Azumaya if and only if there is a unique simple $`H_c`$–module annihilated by $`M`$ and its dimension equals $`|W|`$. By \[5, Theorem 1.7\] the Azumaya points are precisely the smooth points of $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ and any simple $`H_c`$–module lying over an Azumaya point is isomorphic, as a $`W`$–module, to the regular representation of $`W`$.

### 5.3.

The algebra $`\overline{H_c}`$ of 4.1 splits into a direct sum of indecomposable algebras, the blocks, which by \[3, Corollary 2.7\] are in one–to–one correspondence with the elements of $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$

$$\overline{H_c}=\underset{M\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)}{}_M.$$

If $`M`$ is an Azumaya point of $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ there is an isomorphism

$$_M\mathrm{Mat}_{|W|}(𝒪_M),$$
(12)
by \[3, Proposition 2.2\].

### 5.4.

For any simple $`W`$–module $`S`$, the baby Verma module $`M(S)`$ is a $``$–graded indecomposable $`\overline{H_c}`$–module by Proposition Proposition(1), and so a non–trivial module for a unique block. This gives a mapping

$$\mathrm{\Theta }:\{\text{isomorphism classes of simple }W\text{–modules}\}\{\text{elements of }\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)\}.$$
(13)
This mapping is surjective, since each simple $`\overline{H_c}`$–module is a quotient of a baby Verma by Proposition Proposition(3).

### 5.5.

Suppose that $`M\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ is smooth in $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$. It follows from 5.2 and (12) that

$$_M\mathrm{Mat}_{|W|}(𝒪_M).$$

In particular, $`_M`$ has a unique simple module, implying that $`M=\mathrm{\Theta }(S)`$ for a unique element $`S`$ of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Moreover, we have an isomorphism

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝒪_M& \stackrel{}{}& \mathrm{End}(P(S)).\end{array}$$

The map is graded since it is given by multiplication by elements of $`𝒪_M`$. Thus we have a formula for $`p_S(t)[t,t^1]`$, the Poincaré polynomial of $`𝒪_M`$,

$`p_S(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}dim\left(\mathrm{Hom}_{R\mathrm{mod}_{}}(P(S),P(S)[i])\right)t^i`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}(P(S)[i]:L(S))t^i.`$
Since the block $`_M`$ has only the simple modules $`L(S)[i]`$ ($`i`$) it follows from (10) that

$`p_S(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}[P(S)[i]:M(S)[j]](M(S)[j]:L(S))t^i`$ (14)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}(M^{}(S)[ji]:L(S))(M(S)[j]:L(S))t^{ij}t^j`$
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}(M^{}(S)[i]:L(S))t^i\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}(M(S)[i]:L(S))t^i\right).`$
### 5.6.

Recall the fake polynomials, $`f_S(t)`$, defined in (8). Let $`b_S`$ be the lowest power of $`t`$ appearing in $`f_S(t)`$.

###### Theorem.

Suppose $`M\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ is smooth in $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$. Then there exists a unique simple module $`S\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)=M`$. Furthermore $`p_S(t)`$, the Poincaré polynomial of $`𝒪_M`$, is given by

$$p_S(t)=t^{b_S^{}b_S}f_S(t)f_S^{}(t^1).$$

###### Proof.

Following 5.5, it remains to prove the formula for the Poincaré polynomial $`p_S(t)`$. By 5.2 $`L(S)`$ is isomorphic to the regular representation of $`W`$ and $`L(S)`$ is the only possible composition factor of $`P(S)`$. We begin by determining the unique integer $`l_S`$ for which $`(L(S)_{l_S}:\mathrm{𝟏})0`$, where $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ denotes the trivial $`W`$–module. Let $`j`$ be the smallest integer such that $`(M(S)_j:\mathrm{𝟏})0`$. Since $`L(S)`$ is a homomorphic image of $`M(S)`$, $`jl_S`$. If $`j<l_S`$ then necessarily $`(M(S)[l_Sj]:L(S))0`$, contradicting Lemma 4.4. Hence $`j=l_S`$.

If $`T`$ is a simple $`W`$–module, $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ is a summand of $`TS`$ if and only if $`TS^{}`$. Hence, by (9),

$$\underset{i}{}(M(S)_k:\mathrm{𝟏})t^k=f_S^{}(t).$$

Thus $`l_S`$ equals $`b_S^{}`$, the lowest power of $`t`$ appearing in $`f_S^{}(t)`$. Moreover, for each copy of $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ in $`M(S)_k`$ there occurs a corresponding copy of $`L(S)[kb_S^{}]`$ in $`M(S)`$, yielding

$$\underset{i}{}(M(S)[i]:L(S))t^i=\underset{i}{}(M(S):L(S)[i])(t^1)^i=t^{b_S^{}}f_S^{}(t^1).$$

A similar argument shows that

$$\underset{i}{}(M^{}(S)[i]:L(S))t^i=t^{b_S}f_S(t).$$

The result follows. ∎

### 5.7.

We remark that the statement of Theorem Theorem simplifies if $`W`$ is a finite Coxeter group. As observed in 4.7 every simple $`W`$–module is self–dual, so the Poincaré polynomial above becomes

$$p_S(t)=f_S(t)f_S(t^1).$$

### 5.8.

On specialising $`t`$ to $`1`$ and recalling that $`f_S(1)=dimS`$, we obtain the following corollary, which generalises \[5, Proposition 4.16\], solves \[5, Problem 17.15\] and incidentally confirms \[5, Conjecture 17.14\].

###### Corollary.

Suppose $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ consists of smooth points in $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Theta }:\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ is a bijection such that the scheme theoretic multiplicity of $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ at the point $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)`$ is $`dim(S)^2`$.

## 6. The symmetric group case

### 6.1.

Throughout this section $`W`$ will be the symmetric group $`𝔖_n`$ and $`H_c`$ will be the Cherednik algebra of $`W`$ with non–zero parameter $`c`$. This choice of $`c`$ ensures that $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ is smooth, \[5, Corollary 16.2\].

### 6.2.

We recall notation and several basic facts on the representation theory of $`𝔖_n`$ over $``$. The simple $`𝔖_n`$–modules are indexed by partitions of $`n`$, which we will write as $`\lambda =(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\mathrm{})`$. For such a partition $`\lambda n`$, we denote the simple module by $`S_\lambda `$. In particular $`S_{(n)}=\mathrm{𝟏}`$ and $`S_{(1^n)}=\mathrm{𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧}`$, the trivial and sign representation of $`𝔖_n`$ respectively. Given $`\lambda `$, a partition of $`n`$, we let $`\lambda ^{}n`$ denote the transpose of $`\lambda `$. We have $`S_\lambda ^{}S_\lambda ^{}`$, where, for any $`𝔖_n`$–module $`V`$, we set $`V^{}=V\mathrm{𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧}`$. The Young subgroup $`𝔖_\lambda 𝔖_n`$ is the row stabiliser of the Young tableau of shape $`\lambda `$, with the tableau numbered in the order that one reads a book. As an abstract group it is isomorphic to the product $`_i𝔖_{\lambda _i}`$.

### 6.3.

We recall two polynomials which arise in the theory of symmetric functions. The (two variable) Kostka–Macdonald coefficients $`K_{\lambda \mu }(q,t)`$ are the transition functions between the Macdonald polynomials and Schur functions, see \[14, VI.8\]. The Kostka polynomials are defined as $`K_{\lambda \mu }(0,t)`$. In particular, we have

$$K_\lambda (t)t^{n(\lambda )}K_{\lambda (1^n)}(0,t)=(1t)\mathrm{}(1t^n)\underset{u\lambda }{}(1t^{h_\lambda (u)})^1[t,t^1],$$

where $`n(\lambda ^{})=_{i1}(i1)\lambda _i^{}`$ and $`h_\lambda (u)`$ is the hook–length of $`u`$ in $`\lambda `$.

### 6.4.

The first part of the following theorem recovers \[6, Theorem 1.2\].

###### Theorem.

Let $`\lambda `$ be a partition of $`n`$.
$`(1)`$ The Poincaré polynomial of $`𝒪_{\mathrm{\Theta }(S_\lambda )}`$ is given by

$$p_{S_\lambda }(t)=K_\lambda (t)K_\lambda (t^1).$$

$`(2)`$ The image of the simple $`H_c`$–module $`L(S_\lambda )`$ in the graded Grothendieck group of $`W`$ is

$$[L(S_\lambda )]=\underset{\mu n}{}K_{\mu \lambda }(t,t)[S_\mu ].$$

###### Proof.

Let $`\mu ,\rho `$ be partitions of $`n`$. We let $`H_\mu (t)=_{u\mu }(1t^{h_\mu (u)})`$ denote the hook length polynomial. We will write $`\chi ^\lambda `$ for the character of $`𝔖_n`$ corresponding to $`S_\lambda `$, and $`\chi _\rho ^\lambda `$ for the evaluation of $`\chi ^\lambda `$ on a conjugacy class with cycle type $`\rho `$.

(1) By \[18, Theorem 3.2\]

$$f_{S_\lambda }(t)=(1t)\mathrm{}(1t^n)s_\lambda (1,t,t^2,\mathrm{}),$$
(15)
where $`s_\lambda `$ is the Schur function for partition $`\lambda `$. The result follows from 5.7 and \[14, Example I.3.2\] which shows that

$$s_\lambda (1,t,t^2,\mathrm{})=t^{n(\lambda )}H_\lambda (t)^1.$$
(16)
(2) Let $`p_{\lambda ,\mu }(t)=_i[L(S_\lambda )_i:S_\mu ]t^i.`$ In the Grothendieck group of graded $`W`$–modules we have, by the proof of Theorem Theorem,

$`[M(S_\lambda )]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}[M(S_\lambda )_i:S_\mu ]t^i\right)[S_\mu ]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}[M(S_\lambda )[j]:L(S_\lambda )][L(S_\lambda )_{i+j}:S_\mu ]t^i\right)[S_\mu ]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}t^{b_\lambda }f_{S_\lambda }(t)p_{\lambda ,\mu }(t)[S_\mu ].`$
By Lemma 4.4, the transition matrix between the baby Verma modules and the simple $`\overline{H_c}`$–modules is invertible in $`[[t]]`$, so it is enough to show that

$$[M(S_\lambda )]=\underset{\mu }{}t^{b_\lambda }f_{S_\lambda }(t)K_{\mu \lambda }(t,t)[S_\mu ].$$
(17)
We will prove (17) by showing that the characters of both sides are equal.

By (9) the character of $`[M(S_\lambda )]`$ is $`_\mu f_{S_\mu }(t)\chi ^\mu \chi ^\lambda ,`$ so we need to show that for all partitions $`\rho `$

$$\underset{\mu }{}f_{S_\mu }(t)\chi _\rho ^\mu \chi _\rho ^\lambda =\underset{\mu }{}t^{b_\lambda }f_{S_\lambda }(t)K_{\mu \lambda }(t,t)\chi _\rho ^\mu .$$

By \[14, p.355\]

$$\underset{\mu }{}K_{\mu \lambda }(t,t)\chi _\rho ^\mu =\frac{H_\lambda (t)}{_{i1}(1t^{\rho _i})}\chi _\rho ^\lambda ,$$
(18)
and by (16)

$$f_{S_\mu }(t)=t^{n(\mu )}\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}(1t^j)H_\mu (t)^1.$$

Note in particular this shows that $`b_\mu =n(\mu )`$ for all partitions $`\mu `$. Therefore we have to prove that

$$\underset{\mu }{}f_{S_\mu }(t)\chi _\rho ^\mu \chi _\rho ^\lambda =\frac{_{j=1}^n(1t^j)}{_{i1}(1t^{\rho _i})}\chi _\rho ^\lambda $$

The particular case of (18) with $`\lambda =(n)`$ reduces the above equation to

$$\underset{\mu }{}f_{S_\mu }(t)\chi _\rho ^\mu \chi _\rho ^\lambda =\underset{\mu }{}K_{\mu ,(n)}(t,t)\chi _\rho ^\mu \chi _\rho ^\lambda .$$
(19)
By \[14, p.82 and p.362\] $`K_{\mu ,(n)}(t,t)=f_{S_\mu }(t)`$, proving that indeed (19) holds. ∎

### 6.5.

In \[6, Theorem 1.5\] it is shown that an analogue of Theorem Theorem(1) holds for the wreath product $`W=(/N)𝔖_n`$. This result can be proved as above, using the fake degrees as described in \[18, (5.5)\].

### 6.6. Springer theory

Before proving Theorem Theorem we need to recall several results from Springer theory. Conjugacy classes of nilpotent matrices in $`\mathrm{Mat}_n()`$ are classified by partitions of $`n`$ thanks to the Jordan normal form: for each partition $`\lambda n`$, fix a representative of the corresponding nilpotent conjugacy class, $`e_\lambda `$. Let $``$ be the flag variety of the Lie algebra $`\mathrm{Mat}_n()`$, consisting of all Borel subalgebras of $`\mathrm{Mat}_n()`$, and let $`_\lambda `$ denote the Borel subalgebras containing $`e_\lambda `$. (Note that $`=_{(1^n)}`$.) Let $`d_\lambda =2dim_{}_\lambda `$. Let $`H^{}(_\lambda ,)`$ denote the singular cohomology of $`_\lambda `$ with complex coefficients. The following theorem presents the results we will use.

###### Theorem.

For $`\lambda n`$ and $`i`$, there is an action of $`𝔖_n`$ on $`H^i(_\lambda ,)`$ enjoying the following properties.

1. There is a $`𝔖_n`$–equivariant isomorphism of algebras $`[𝔥^{}]^{co𝔖_n}H^{}(,)`$ doubling degree.
2. The simple module $`S_\lambda `$ is not a component of $`H^i(,)`$ for $`i<d_\lambda `$.
3. As an $`𝔖_n`$–module, $`H^{d_\lambda }(_\lambda ,)S_\lambda `$, whilst for odd $`i`$ or $`i>d_\lambda `$ $`H^i(_\lambda ,)=0`$.
4. As an $`𝔖_n`$–module, $`H^{}(_\lambda ,)\mathrm{Ind}_{𝔖_\lambda }^{𝔖_n}\mathrm{𝟏}.`$
5. The inclusion $`_\lambda `$ induces a surjective $`𝔖_n`$–equivariant graded algebra homomorphism

$$\pi _\lambda :H^{}(,)H^{}(_\lambda ,).$$
6. Under the $`[𝔥^{}]^{coW}𝔖_n`$–module structure induced by $`\pi _\lambda `$, $`H^{}(_\lambda ,)`$ has socle $`S_\lambda `$.

###### Proof.

For (1)–(5) see ,, and .

(6) Define a partial order on monomials in $`[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ by declaring $`x_1^{i_1}\mathrm{}x_n^{i_n}x_1^{j_1}\mathrm{}x_n^{j_n}`$ if and only if $`i_kj_k`$ for all $`k=1,\mathrm{},n`$. By \[8, Proposition 4.2\], the algebra $`[𝔥^{}]^{coW}/\mathrm{ker}\pi _\lambda `$ has a basis $`𝔅(\lambda )`$ consisting of (the images of) monomials of $`[𝔥^{}]=[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ with the following property: the elements of $`𝔅(\lambda )`$ are the monomials which are smaller in the above partial order than the monomials in $`𝔅(\lambda )`$ of degree $`d_\lambda `$. We see therefore that the socle of $`H^{}(_\lambda ,)`$ as a $`[𝔥^{}]^{coW}`$–module is concentrated in degree $`d_\lambda `$. The result follows from (3). ∎

In this situation, the Springer correspondence is simply the association of the nilpotent class parametrised by $`\lambda `$ to the simple $`𝔖_n`$–module $`S_\lambda H^{d_\lambda }(_\lambda ,)`$.

### 6.7.

Let $`M_\lambda =\mathrm{\Theta }(S_\lambda )\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$. By 5.2 we have an isomorphism

$$\psi :\frac{H_c}{M_\lambda H_c}\mathrm{End}_{}(L(S_\lambda ))$$
(20)
defined by the action of $`H_c`$ on $`L(S_\lambda )`$. Let $`𝐞,𝐞_{}𝔖_nL(S_\lambda )`$ denote the trivial and sign idempotents respectively. Fix $`ϵ_\lambda `$ (respectively $`ϵ_\lambda ^{}`$), a base vector in the one–dimensional space $`𝐞(H_c/M_\lambda H_c)𝐞_{}`$ (respectively $`𝐞_{}(H_c/M_\lambda H_c)𝐞`$). The subalgebras $`[𝔥^{}],[𝔥]H_c`$ generate two subspaces $`[𝔥^{}]ϵ_\lambda ,ϵ_\lambda [𝔥]H_c/M_\lambda H_c`$ which are invariant under the left, respectively right $`𝔖_n`$-action on $`H_c/M_\lambda H_c`$ by multiplication.

The following theorem confirms \[5, Conjecture 17.12\].

###### Theorem.

In the above notation there are $`𝔖_n`$–module isomorphisms

$$[𝔥^{}]ϵ_\lambda \mathrm{Ind}_{𝔖_\lambda ^{}}^{𝔖_n}\mathrm{𝟏},ϵ_\lambda [𝔥]\mathrm{Ind}_{𝔖_\lambda }^{𝔖_n}\mathrm{𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧}.$$

In particular, these two $`𝔖_n`$–modules have a single non–zero irreducible component in common: it is isomorphic to $`S_\lambda ^{}`$.

###### Proof.

Throughout the proof let $`R=[𝔥^{}]^{co𝔖_n}`$. Let $`N=1/2n(n1)=d_{(1^n)}`$. By Theorem 6.6 $`R_j=0`$ if $`j>N`$ and $`R_N`$ is the sign representation. Let $`0sR_N`$. Recall that given $`V`$, a $`𝔖_n`$–module, we set $`V^{}=V\mathrm{𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧}`$.

Under the isomorphism $`\psi `$ of (20), the elements $`𝐞`$ and $`𝐞_{}`$ correspond to projection onto the trivial and sign components of $`L(S_\lambda )`$ respectively. Thus $`ϵ_\lambda `$ (respectively $`ϵ_\lambda ^{}`$) is the unique (up to scalars) transformation which sends the sign (respectively trivial) component of $`L(S_\lambda )`$ to the trivial (respectively sign) component of $`L(S_\lambda )`$ and is zero on all other isotypic components. As a left $`𝔖_n`$–module therefore, $`[𝔥^{}]ϵ_\lambda `$ (respectively $`[𝔥^{}]ϵ_\lambda ^{}`$) corresponds to the subspace $`X=Rt_\lambda L(S_\lambda )`$ (respectively $`Y=Rs_\lambda `$) where $`t_\lambda `$ (respectively $`s_\lambda `$) is a base vector for the trivial (respectively sign) representation in $`L(S_\lambda )`$.

By \[5, Theorem 1.7(ii)\], $`H_c`$ and $`Z_c`$ are Morita equivalent, so in particular their injective dimensions both equal $`dim\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)=2(n1)`$. Since $`\overline{H}_c`$ is obtained from $`H_c`$ by factoring out a regular sequence in $`Z_c`$ of length $`2(n1)`$ it follows that the injective dimension of $`\overline{H}_c`$ is $`0`$. It follows that the projective cover $`P(S_\lambda )`$, and thus $`M(S_\lambda )`$, has socle $`L(S_\lambda )`$. Therefore $`t_\lambda `$ (respectively $`s_\lambda `$) belongs to the tensor product $`S_\lambda S_\lambda L(S_\lambda )M(S_\lambda )`$ (respectively $`S_\lambda ^{}S_\lambda L(S_\lambda )M(S_\lambda )`$) where the first tensorand is the highest degree component of $`R`$ isomorphic to $`S_\lambda `$ (respectively $`S_\lambda ^{}`$). To be explicit, let $`\{v_i\}`$ be a basis of $`S_\lambda `$ and let $`\{f_i\}`$ (respectively $`\{g_i\}`$) be the corresponding basis for the copy of $`S_\lambda `$ (respectively $`S_\lambda ^{}`$) in the highest possible degree of $`R`$. We take

$$t_\lambda =\underset{i}{}f_iv_i(\text{respectively }s_\lambda =\underset{i}{}g_iv_i).$$

Consider the map

$$\tau :RX=Rt_\lambda ,(\text{respectively }\tau ^{}:R^{}Y=rs_\lambda ,)$$

sending $`p`$ to $`pt_\lambda `$ (respectively $`p1`$ to $`ps_\lambda `$). Since $`t_\lambda \mathrm{𝟏}`$ (respectively $`s_\lambda \mathrm{𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧}`$), $`\tau `$ (respectively $`\tau ^{}`$) is a $`𝔖_n`$–equivariant surjective homomorphism.

We prove first that $`\tau `$ (respectively $`\tau ^{}`$) factors through $`\pi _\lambda ^{}:H^{}(,)H^{}(_\lambda ^{},)`$ (respectively $`\pi _\lambda \text{id}:H^{}(,)^{}H^{}(_\lambda ,)^{}`$). Recall the non–degenerate form

$$(,):R\times R,$$

defined by setting $`(p,q)`$ equal to the coefficient of $`pq`$ in $`R_N`$ with respect to $`s`$. The form pairs $`R_i`$ with $`R_{Ni}`$ and, since $`(wr,ws)=\text{sign}(w)(r,s)`$, a representation $`V`$ with $`V^{}`$. Let $`p\mathrm{ker}\pi _\lambda ^{}`$ (respectively $`q\mathrm{ker}\pi _\lambda `$). Observe that since $`\pi _\lambda ^{}(Rp)=0`$ (respectively $`\pi _\lambda (Rq)=0`$) the intersection of $`Rp`$ (respectively $`Rq`$) with the $`S_\lambda ^{}`$–component of $`H^{d_\lambda ^{}}(,)`$ (respectively the $`S_\lambda `$–component of $`H^{d_\lambda }(,)`$) is zero, by Parts (3) and (5) of Theorem 6.6. Thus $`(R,pf_i)=(Rp,f_i)=0`$ (respectively $`(R,qg_i)=(Rq,g_i)=0`$) for all $`i`$ . This confirms that $`\tau `$ (respectively $`\tau ^{}`$) factors through $`\pi _\lambda ^{}`$ (respectively $`\pi _\lambda `$).

We have an induced $`R𝔖_n`$–homomorphism

$$\sigma :H^{}(_\lambda ^{},)X,(\text{respectively }\sigma ^{}:H^{}(_\lambda ,)^{}Y).$$

Thanks to the non–degeneracy of the form $`(,)`$, we can find $`f_i^{}R`$ such that $`f_i^{}f_j=\delta _{ij}sR_N`$. Then, for any $`i`$, $`f_i^{}t_\lambda =ss_iX`$. Taking the span over all $`i`$ shows that $`S_\lambda ^{}R_NS_\lambda X`$. It follows from Parts (2) and (6) of Theorem 6.6 that the socle of $`H^{}(_\lambda ^{},)`$ does not lie in the kernel of $`\sigma `$, and so $`\sigma `$ is injective. By Part (4) of Theorem 6.6 we deduce that

$$\mathrm{Ind}_{𝔖_\lambda ^{}}^{𝔖_n}\mathrm{𝟏}H^{}(_\lambda ^{},)X[𝔥^{}]ϵ_\lambda .$$

Arguing as in the above paragraph we see that

$$\mathrm{Ind}_{𝔖_\lambda }^{𝔖_n}\mathrm{𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧}H^{}(_\lambda ,)^{}Y[𝔥^{}]ϵ_\lambda ^{}.$$

Let $`\omega `$ be the antiautomorphism of $`H_c`$ discussed in 4.7. Since $`\omega (M_\lambda )`$ annihilates $`L(S_\lambda ^{})L(S_\lambda )`$ there is an induced antiautomorphism on $`H_c/M_\lambda H_c`$. Under this antiautomorphism $`[𝔥^{}]ϵ_\lambda ^{}`$ is sent to $`ϵ_\lambda [𝔥]`$. Since all $`𝔖_n`$–modules are self–dual, we deduce that

$$ϵ_\lambda [𝔥]\mathrm{Ind}_{𝔖_\lambda }^{𝔖_n}\mathrm{𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧}.$$

The final sentence of the theorem is a restatement of Young’s construction of the irreducible representations of $`𝔖_n`$, \[10, Corollary 4.16\]. ∎

### 6.8.

We end this section by associating Theorem Theorem to similar results found in the study of principal nilpotent pairs.

### 6.9.

By \[5, Theorem 11.16\], there is an isomorphism of varieties

$$\mathrm{Spec}Z_c𝒞_n,$$

where $`𝒞_n`$ denotes the Calogero–Moser space $`\{(X,Y)\mathrm{Mat}_n()\times \mathrm{Mat}_n():[X,Y]+\text{Id}=\text{rank 1 matrix}\}//PGL_n().`$ Under this isomorphism, the morphism $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:\mathrm{Spec}Z_c𝔥^{}/W\times 𝔥/W`$ corresponds to the morphism sending the matrices $`(X,Y)`$ to the pair of $`n`$–tuples consisting of their eigenvalues. An explicit description of the bijection between the partitions of $`n`$ and the elements of $`𝒞_n`$ in $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ is given in \[19, Section 6\].

### 6.10.

Let $`\mathrm{Hilb}^\mathrm{n}(^2)`$ be the Hilbert scheme of $`n`$ points in the plane, whose points are codimension $`n`$ ideals in $`[X,Y]`$, see  for details. The Chow morphism $`\mathrm{Hilb}^\mathrm{n}(^2)(𝔥^{}𝔥)/W=\mathrm{Sym}^\mathrm{n}(^2)`$ sends such an ideal to its support (counted with multiplicity). There is a $`^{}\times ^{}`$–action on $`\mathrm{Hilb}^\mathrm{n}(^2)`$ induced from the $`^2`$–grading on $`[X,Y]`$ where $`X`$ (respectively $`Y`$) is homogeneous of degree $`(1,1)`$ (respectively $`(1,1)`$). The $`^{}\times ^{}`$–fixed points on $`\mathrm{Hilb}^\mathrm{n}(^2)`$ are in bijection with the partitions of $`n`$: on the ideal corresponding to the fixed point of type $`\lambda `$, multiplication by $`X`$ (respectively $`Y`$) yields a nilpotent transformation with Jordan form of type $`\lambda `$ (respectively $`\lambda ^{}`$). It follows that these fixed points correspond to conjugacy classes of principal nilpotent pairs in $`𝔰𝔩_n()`$, \[10, Section 5\].

### 6.11.

Nakajima’s quiver varieties relate Calogero–Moser space and the Hilbert scheme. There is a geometric family $`(𝒞_n)_t`$ over $``$ whose generic fibre $`(𝒞_n)_t`$ for $`t0`$ is $`𝒞_n`$ and whose degenerate point at $`t=0`$ is $`\mathrm{Hilb}^\mathrm{n}(^2)`$, \[15, Section 3.2\]. This family admits a $`^{}\times ^{}`$–action, which agrees with the above $`^{}\times ^{}`$–action on $`\mathrm{Hilb}^\mathrm{n}(^2)`$ when $`t=0`$. For $`t0`$, the diagonal $`^{}`$–action dilates $`t`$ and the anti–diagonal action corresponds to the $`^{}`$–action on $`Z_c`$ considered in 4.1. Fixing a partition $`\lambda n`$, the anti–diagonal $`^{}`$–fixed points corresponding to $`\lambda `$ give a section of the family $`(𝒞)_t`$ over $`\{0\}`$. The closure of this section yields the $`^{}\times ^{}`$–fixed point of $`\mathrm{Hilb}^\mathrm{n}(^2)`$ corresponding to $`\lambda `$ and hence a representative $`(X_\lambda ,Y_\lambda )`$ in the conjugacy class of principal nilpotent pairs of type $`\lambda `$ of $`𝔰𝔩_n()`$. The Springer correspondence associates to $`X_\lambda `$ (respectively $`Y_\lambda `$) the simple module $`S_\lambda `$ (respectively $`S_\lambda ^{}`$), \[10, Corollary 4.16\]. This confirms (an amended form) of \[5, Conjecture 17.13\].

## 7. Remarks

### 7.1.

A basic problem in the representation theory of $`H_c`$ is:

Problem 1: Find the graded $`W`$–character of $`L(S)`$ for all $`S\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.
This simply means finding the composition multiplicities in $`[L(S)]=_{T\mathrm{\Lambda }}(L(S):T[i])q^i[T]`$. By Lemma 4.4 this is equivalent to the problem:

Problem 1: For all $`S\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ find the polynomials $`m_{S,T}(q)=_{T\mathrm{\Lambda }}(M(S):L(T)[i])q^i`$.
Obviously, to solve Problem 1 we can work in the blocks of the algebra $`\overline{H_c}`$. Thus an important subproblem is to describe which simple modules lie in a given block:

Problem 2: Determine the partition of simple $`W`$–modules yielding the blocks of $`\overline{H_c}`$.
In the notation of (13) this corresponds to determining the fibres of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

In Section 4 we have solved Problems 1 and 2 for simple $`W`$–modules, $`S`$, such that $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)`$ is a smooth point of $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ and in Section 5 we explictly solved Problem 1.

### 7.2.

Problem 2 is closely related to the determination of which complex reflection groups have $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ smooth for generic values of $`c`$. Thanks to Section 4, a point of $`M\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ is singular in $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ if $`\mathrm{\Theta }^1(M)`$ is not a singleton. The following lemma, due to Brown, proves the converse, showing that an arbitrary point $`M^{}\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ is Azumaya if and only if there is a unique simple $`H_c`$-module annihilated by $`M^{}`$. One might hope that if the points of $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ are all smooth then $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ is smooth.

###### Lemma (K.A.Brown).

Let $`𝔪`$ be a maximal ideal of $`H_c`$. Suppose there exists a unique maximal ideal $`M`$ of $`H_c`$ with $`MZ_c=𝔪`$. Then $`𝔪`$ is an Azumaya point of $`\mathrm{Spec}Z_c`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`H=H_c`$ and $`Z=Z_c`$. Since $`M`$ is the unique maximal ideal of $`H`$ lying over $`𝔪`$ we can localise at $`M`$ in $`H`$ to obtain $`H_M`$. Moreover $`HH_M`$ since $`H`$ is prime. Let $`𝐞`$ be the trivial idempotent of $`W`$, considered as an element of $`H`$. Since $`H_M`$ is a local ring, by \[7, Theorem 1\] there exists a positive integer $`t`$ such that $`H_M𝐞=P^t`$, where $`P`$ is the unique indecomposable projective $`H_M`$–module. But, by \[5, Theorem 3.1\] $`𝐞H𝐞Z`$, so that $`𝐞H_M𝐞Z_𝔪.`$ Thus $`\mathrm{End}_{H_M}(H_M𝐞)Z_𝔪`$, showing that $`t=1`$. Since $`H_MP^n`$ for some $`n`$ we have

$$H_M\mathrm{End}_{H_M}(H_M)\mathrm{Mat}_n(Z_𝔪).$$

Therefore $`Z_M`$ and $`H_M`$ are Morita equivalent, and since $`H_M`$ has finite global dimension so too does $`Z_𝔪`$. It follows that $`𝔪`$ is a smooth point of $`\mathrm{Spec}Z_c`$. The lemma follows from 5.2. ∎

### 7.3.

The analysis of Section 4 does provide a list of new examples for which $`\mathrm{Spec}(Z_c)`$ is not smooth at generic values of $`c`$. The following results generalises the dihedral case studied in \[5, Section 16\].

###### Proposition.

Suppose $`W`$ is a finite Coxeter group of type $`D_{2n}`$ ($`n2`$), $`E`$, $`F`$, $`H`$ or $`I_2(m)`$ ($`m5`$). Then $`Z_c`$, the centre of $`H_c`$, is singular for all values of $`c`$.

###### Proof.

Suppose there exists a value $`c`$ such that $`Z_c`$ is smooth. Thanks to Corollary Theorem(1) the blocks of $`\overline{H_c}`$ are in bijective correspondence with the simple $`W`$–modules and by 5.2 each simple $`H_c`$–module, $`L(S)`$, is isomorphic to the regular representation of $`W`$. The proof of Theorem Theorem shows that $`(M(S):L(S))`$ equals the coefficient of $`q^{b_S}`$ in the fake degree $`f_S^{}(q)`$. Since Lemma 4.4 shows that $`(M(S):L(S))=1`$ this coefficient is necessarily $`1`$ for all fake degrees. But there fake degrees for $`D_{2n},E_7`$ and $`E_8`$ which have coefficient 2, \[9, Remark 5.6.7\], .

Let $`j_S`$ be the degree of $`f_S^{}(q)`$, so that the trivial module appears in $`M(S)_{j_S}`$. Since $`L(S)`$ is the only composition factor of $`M(S)`$ we thus find a bound on the dimension of $`L(S)`$ given by

$$dimL(S)dim(S)\left(dim[𝔥^{}]_{<b_S}^{coW}+dim[𝔥^{}]_{>j_S}^{coW}+\mathrm{min}\{dim[𝔥^{}]_{b_S}^{coW},dim[𝔥^{}]_{j_S}^{coW}\}\right).$$
(21)
Using  and  we can calculate the right hand side of (21) and hence show that there exists a simple $`W`$–module $`S`$ such that $`dimL(S)<|W|`$ in types $`E_6,F_4,H_3,H_4`$ and $`I_2(m)`$ ($`m5`$).

For $`W`$ the Coxeter group of type $`E_6`$ (respectively $`F_4`$, $`H_4`$, $`I_2(m)`$ for $`m5`$) we take $`S`$ to be the unique 10–dimensional simple module (respectively the unique 12–dimensional simple module, the representation labelled $`\chi _7`$ in , the reflection representation); the right hand side of (21) equals $`49960`$ (respectively $`1020`$, $`8808`$, $`8`$) which is less than the order of $`W`$.

For $`W`$ the Coxeter group of type $`H_3`$ let $`S`$ be the reflection representation, which has fake degree $`f_S(q)=q+q^5+q^9`$. In this case the right hand side of (21) equals $`120`$, the order of the group $`W`$. Let $`S^{}=Sϵ`$ be the tensor product of $`S`$ with the sign representation. The fake degree of $`S^{}`$ is $`q^{(9+5+1)}f_s(q^1)=q^{14}+q^{10}+q^6`$. Thus there are two copies of the sign representation in $`M(S)_{>9}`$, one in degree 10, the other in degree 14. Hence we can subtract $`1`$ from our estimate in (21), showing that $`dimL(S)<120=|W|`$, as required. ∎

There are a number of other complex reflection groups whose fake degrees have leading coefficient greater than $`1`$, so we can prove non–smoothness in greater generality. The techniques above do not work for $`D_{2n+1}`$ however.

### 7.4.

Type $`G_2`$ is the smallest example of a Weyl group for which $`Z_c`$ is singular for generic values of $`c`$. In this case, calculation shows that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(0)`$ has five elements, with $`D_\pm `$, the pair of two dimensional simple modules, being the only simple $`W`$–modules sent to the same element under $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. The polynomials of Problem 1 are

$$m_{D_+,D_+}(q)=m_{D_{},D_{}}(q)=1+q^4,m_{D_+,D_{}}(q)=m_{D_{},D_+}(q)=q+q^3.$$


format: text

text:
# A gauge covariant approximation to QED

## Introduction

The non-linear integral Dyson-Schwinger equation has been extensively analysed with a particular vertex ansatz or in the quenched approximation to deal with the dynamical symmetry breaking in Quantum Field Theory.Sometimes the approximations made do not satisfy the Ward-Takahashi (W-T) Identity.In any case one may use the divergence of the axial-vector current to show dynamical chiral symmetry breaking via the axial Ward identity,

$$_{\mu x}T(J_5^\mu (x)\overline{\psi }(y)\gamma _5\psi (y))=2\delta (xy)\overline{\psi }\psi \mathrm{and}\overline{\psi }\psi =i\mathrm{tr}(S_F(x))$$

in QED4,3 and QCD4,where the right hand side of the above equation depends on the dynamics.Thus an effective mass, induced by gauge interaction of the fermions,with a non vanishing order parameter $`\overline{\psi }\psi 0`$ has been found which is similar to the gap equation in superconductivity.This is the familiar scenario of dynamical symmetry breaking.But there remains ambiguities as they consider only continuum contributions in Euclidian space of the fermion self energy and the structure of the propagator is not clear.Thus we have an interest to see what type of solutions exist in Minkowski space which satisfy the gauge identities.On the other hand in the ladder approximation and in the Landau gauge,W-T is valid only at one loop level of perturbation theory. Atkinson and Blatt have studied the singurality of the propagator after an analytic continuation of the Dyson-Schwinger equation to Minkowski space;the only physically meaningful answer for the propagator is a branch point(cut) on the real axis associated with zero mass photon,but the analytic continuation from Euclidean to Minkowski space is not unique and the result depends on the way the vertex is treated;sometimes it leads to a complex singurality.Hereafter we confine ourselves in QED$`_{2+1}.`$Main difficulty in ($`2+1)`$-dimension is the infrared divergences that was first demonstrated and improved by R. Jackiw and S.Templeton in the case of massless fermions.To aviod the infrared divergences in QED2+1,the infrared behaviour was modified by introducing massless fermions into the photon vaccum polarization since it affects the low energy behaviour of the photon.After that we explicitly shown the absence of infrared divergences in the lowest approximation.

We shall discuss the structure of the fermion propagator in Minkowski space using a gauge covariant approximation, which obeys the vertex W-T identity.The gauge covariant approximation,which is based on dispersion relations,leads to a linear Dyson-Schwinger equation that admits an analytic solution.In this paper,we analyse a lowest order approximation,where we treat the 2-spinor representation of fermions in (2+1)-dimension and do not introduce massless sources.We derive a linear integral equation for the specral function but which does not admits analytic solution in the Landau gauge.However we derive the infrared behaviour of the propagator for arbitrary gauges.We first make a subtraction of the self-energy as usual in the integral equation and suceed in avoiding an infrared divergences in 3-dimension;threshold behaviour is modified to smooth one. In our analysis,the structure of the propagator has an essential singurality at $`p^2=m^2`$ in arbitrary gauge.We also examine the fermion-antifermion pair condensation since there is no chiral symmetry in our model and find that the vacuum expectation value $`\overline{\psi }\psi `$ is finite in three dimension if we remove the ultraviolet divergence.In four dimension our approximation admits analytic solutions for arbitrary gauge.We discuss the problems of dynamical chiral symmetry breaking in four dimension regarding the vanishment of the bare mass $`m_0Z_2^1=0`$.We compare the results in QED3+1 with that in QED2+1 in the same way.

## 1 Zeroth Gauge approximation

W-T identities between Green function in gauge theory are well known.Thus,with photon legs amputated,the first few identities read

$$k^\mu S(p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu (p,pk)S(pk)=S(pk)S(p),$$

$$k^\mu S(p^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu \mu }(p^{}k^{};pk)S(p)=S(p^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }_\nu (p^{},p^{}+k^{})S(p^{}+k^{})S(pk^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }_\nu (pk^{},p)S(p),$$
(1)
where $`S`$ is a complete electron propagator and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ stands for the fully amputated connected Green function; coupling constants have been factorized out of eq(1).In QED the propagators $`S`$ and $`D`$ of fermion and photon,and the vertex part $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu `$ play a central role via Dyson-Schwinger equations

$$1=Z_2(\gamma pm+\delta m)S(p)ie^2Z_2\frac{d^nk}{(2\pi )^n}S(p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu (p,pk)S(pk)\gamma _vD^{\mu \nu }(k).$$
(2)
This expression is the same with well known form of renormalized Dyson-Schwinger equation

$`S^1`$ $`=Z_2(S_0^1+\mathrm{\Sigma }),`$
$`Z_2^1S_0`$ $`=S(1+\mathrm{\Sigma }S_0),`$
$$D_{\mu \nu }^1(k)=Z_3[k^2g_{\mu \nu }k_\mu k_\nu (1\eta ^1)]+ie^2Z_2Tr\frac{d^np}{(2\pi )^n}\gamma _\nu S(p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu (p,pk)S(pk),$$
(3)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu (p,pk)=Z_2\gamma _\mu ie^2Z_2\frac{d^np^{}}{(2\pi )^n}\gamma _\lambda S(p^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu \mu }(p^{}k^{};pk)D^{\lambda \nu }(k).$$
(4)
where $`\eta `$ is a covariant gauge parameter and we are working in $`n`$ -dimensions at this stage.In the gauge covariant approximation one seeks solutions to equations (2)-(4) in the form given above.To this end, begin with the Lehmann-Kallen spectral representation for the fermion propagator in the form

$`S(p)`$ $`=({\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^m}+{\displaystyle _m^{\mathrm{}}}){\displaystyle \frac{dw\rho (w)}{\gamma pw+iϵϵ(w)}}`$
$`={\displaystyle _{m^2}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{ds(\gamma p\rho _1(s)+m\rho _2(s))}{p^2s+iϵ}}`$ (5)
where $`\rho (w)`$ is a positive definite distribution in a non-gauge theory,

$$\rho (w)=ϵ(w)\rho (w)\mathrm{where}ϵ(w)=\theta (w)\theta (w).$$

In the high energy limit $`S\mathrm{\Sigma }S_00`$,thus the relation between renormalization constant and the spectral function reads

$`S_0(p)`$ $`=Z_2S(p),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{Z_2^1}{\gamma pm_0}}`$ $`={\displaystyle _{m^2}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑s{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma p\rho _1(s)+m\rho _2(s)}{p^2s}}.`$ (6)
Since

$$S(pk)S(p)=𝑑w\rho (w)\frac{1}{\gamma pw}\gamma k\frac{1}{\gamma (pk)w},$$
(7)
the simplest possible (but by no means unique) solution of (1) is to take

$$S(p^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu ^{(0)}(p^{},p)S(p)=𝑑w\rho (w)\frac{1}{\gamma p^{}w}\gamma _\mu \frac{1}{\gamma pw}.$$
(8)
The above formula represents a bare vertex weighted by a spectral function $`\rho (w)`$ for an electron of mass $`w`$.This form of the vertex includes the well known soft photon limit

$$S(p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu ^{(0)}(p,p)S(p)=\frac{S(p)}{p_\mu }.$$
(9)
If the ansatz for the vertex in equation (2) is used the renormalized Dyson-Schwinger equation is written in n-dimension as

$`Z_2^1`$ $`=S(p)(\gamma pm_0)ie^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^nk}{(2\pi )^n}S(p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu ^{(0)}(p,pk)S(pk)\gamma _\nu D^{\mu \nu }(k)}`$
$`=(\gamma pm_0){\displaystyle \frac{\rho (w)dw}{\gamma pw}}ie^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^nk}{(2\pi )^n}𝑑w\rho (w)\frac{1}{\gamma pw}\gamma _\mu }`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{1}{\gamma (pk)w}}\gamma _\nu (g_{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{k_\mu k_\nu }{k^2}}(1\eta )){\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\rho (w)dw}{\gamma pw}(\gamma pm_0+\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,w))},`$ (10)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,w)`$ is obtained from lowest-order self energy of fermion with mass $`w.`$Recalling $`Z_2^1=\rho (w)𝑑w,`$equation(10) can be written in the renormalized form

$`Z_2^1`$ $`={\displaystyle 𝑑\omega \rho (\omega )\frac{(\gamma pm_0+\delta m+\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,\omega ))}{\gamma p\omega +iϵϵ(\omega )}}`$
$`={\displaystyle 𝑑\omega \rho (\omega )(1+\frac{\omega +m+\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,\omega )\mathrm{\Sigma }(\omega ,\omega )}{\gamma p\omega +iϵϵ(w)})},`$
$`\delta m`$ $`=m+m_0\mathrm{\Sigma }(m,m).`$ (11)
Here we rewrite this equation in the Klein-Gordon form

$`0`$ $`={\displaystyle 𝑑\omega \rho (\omega )\frac{[(\gamma p+\omega )(m+\omega +\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,\omega )](p,\omega )(p\omega )}{p^2\omega ^2+iϵϵ(w)}},`$ (12)
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,m)`$ $`=\gamma p\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,m)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,m)`$
Taking imaginary part yields two eqations ;$`\gamma p\rho _1(\omega )+\omega \rho _2(\omega )=(\gamma p+\omega )\rho (\omega )`$

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑\omega \frac{\rho _1(\omega )\mathrm{}[\omega \mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,\omega )+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,\omega )(p\omega )]}{p^2\omega ^2}}`$
$`=i\pi {\displaystyle 𝑑\omega ϵ(\omega )\delta (p^2\omega ^2)\rho _1(\omega )(\omega m)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{i\pi }{2|p|}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\omega ϵ(\omega )(\delta (\omega p)+\delta (\omega +p))\rho _1(\omega )(\omega m)}`$ (13)
$`{\displaystyle 𝑑\omega \frac{\rho _2(\omega )\mathrm{}[p^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,\omega )+\omega \mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,\omega )(p\omega )]}{p^2\omega ^2}}`$
$`=i\pi {\displaystyle 𝑑\omega ϵ(\omega )\delta (p^2\omega ^2)\rho _2(\omega )\omega (\omega m)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{i\pi }{2|p|}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\omega ϵ(\omega )(\delta (\omega p)+\delta (\omega +p))\rho _2(\omega )\omega (\omega m)},`$ (14)
here the real part does not appear thanks to renormalzation of the self energy $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,\omega )`$ within the dispersion integral.This is the main advantage of our method and gauge technique.In QED3+1the threshold behaviour is different from QED2+1 and $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{3+1}(w,w)=0.`$In fact it is given as

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{3+1}(p,w)=\frac{e^2(p^2w^2)}{16\pi p^4}[\eta (p^2+w^2)\gamma p(\eta +3)wp^2]\theta (p^2w^2).$$

In this case there is no need for subtraction of $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,w)`$ at $`p=w.`$But QED2+1is a super renormalzable theory and there are infrared singularities.In our method renormalization of the self energy removes the infrared divergences and the subtracted imaginary part of the self energy smoothes the threshold behaviour as we see in the next section.Infrared problem for massless fermion was first discussed by Jakiw and Templeton in connection with the dressed photon.In the case of massive fermion the pair production is supressed at low energy in the case of massive fermion loop is concerned for photon vacuum polarization,Therefore the bare photon propagator is dominant in the infrared.

## 2 Zeroth Green function

Now the self-energy of the fermion can be written as $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,m)=\gamma p\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,m)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,m)`$. ($`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$ are often referred to as the vector and scalar parts of the self-energy respectively.) In (2+1) dimensions to $`O(e^2)`$ and in the photon gauge specified by $`\eta `$,the self energy of the fermion is written as follows,

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,m)=ie^2\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\gamma ^\mu \frac{\gamma (pk)+m}{(pk)^2m^2}\gamma ^\nu [\frac{g_{\mu \nu }}{k^2}\frac{k_\mu k_\nu }{k^4}(1\eta )].$$
(15)
It is convieniant to separate $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,m)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,m)`$ by taking traces of the self-energy,

$$Tr(\gamma p\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,m)),Tr(\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,m)).$$

In Euclidean space after angular integrations are performed they can be written in the following form

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,m)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\eta e^2}{4\pi ^2p^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}dk{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{k^2+m^2}}[1{\displaystyle \frac{p^2+k^2}{2pk}}\mathrm{ln}|{\displaystyle \frac{p+k}{pk}}|`$
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,m)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(\eta +2)e^2}{4\pi ^2p}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑k{\displaystyle \frac{mk}{k^2+m^2}}\mathrm{ln}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{p+k}{pk}}\right|.`$ (16)
It can be evaluated by using contour integral,

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1E}(p,m)`$ $`=1{\displaystyle \frac{\eta e^2m}{8\pi p^2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^2m^2}{mp}}\mathrm{tan}^1({\displaystyle \frac{p}{m}}))`$
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{2E}(p,m)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(\eta +2)e^2}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{m}{p}}\mathrm{tan}^1({\displaystyle \frac{p}{m}}).`$ (17)
In Minkowski space after Wick rotation we get

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,m)`$ $`=1+{\displaystyle \frac{\eta e^2m}{8\pi p^2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^2+m^2}{mp}}\mathrm{tanh}^1({\displaystyle \frac{p}{m}}))`$
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,m)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(\eta +2)e^2}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{m}{p}}\mathrm{tanh}^1({\displaystyle \frac{p}{m}}).`$
Then the imaginary parts are given by

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{tanh}^1(\frac{p}{m})=i\frac{\pi }{2}ϵ(\frac{p}{m})\theta (p^2m^2)$$

$`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,m)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\eta e^2}{16}}{\displaystyle \frac{p^2+m^2}{p^3}}ϵ({\displaystyle \frac{p}{m}})\theta (p^2m^2)`$
$`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,m)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2(\eta +2)e^2}{16}}{\displaystyle \frac{m}{p}}ϵ({\displaystyle \frac{p}{m}})\theta (p^2m^2).`$ (18)
The final form of the imaginary part of the self energy is presented in the following form,

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{2+1}(p,m)=\frac{e^2}{16}[\gamma p\frac{p^2+m^2}{p^3}\frac{2(\eta +2)m}{p}]ϵ(\frac{p}{m})\theta (p^2m^2).$$
(19)
If we substitute the above expression into the equation (13),(14) they can be written to this order,

$`ϵ(p)(pm)\rho _1(p)`$ $`=({\displaystyle _m^{ϵ(p)p}}{\displaystyle _{pϵ(p)}^m}){\displaystyle \frac{dw\rho _1(w)[\mathrm{}((w\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2)(p,w)(pw)]}{p^2w^2}}`$
$`={\displaystyle _m^p}𝑑w[\rho _1(w)+\rho _1(w)]K(p,w),`$
$`K(p,w)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{8\pi }}({\displaystyle \frac{\eta \left|p\right|w}{p^3}}+4{\displaystyle \frac{\left|p\right|}{p(p+w)}})`$ (20)
$`ϵ(p)(pm)\rho _2(p)`$ $`=({\displaystyle _m^{ϵ(p)p}}{\displaystyle _{pϵ(p)}^m}){\displaystyle \frac{dw\rho _2(w)[\mathrm{}((p^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+w\mathrm{\Sigma }_2)(p,w)(pw)]}{p^2w^2}}`$
$`={\displaystyle _m^p}𝑑w[\rho _2(w)\rho _2(w)]L(p,w),`$
$`L(p,w)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{8\pi }}({\displaystyle \frac{\eta (w2p)}{pw}}+4{\displaystyle \frac{w}{p(p+w)}}.`$ (21)
In this way the spectral function obeys the more sensible integral equation.We assume that the spectral function is real. Delbourgo,Waites derived the equation with gauge technique but not carried out renormalization.In that case the equation for the spectral functions contais the real part of the self energy and it means that the spectral function becomes complex function in the dispersion theory.Further they could not avoid infrared divergences in quenched case.In our approximation this point is modified to be consitent with original equation (11).Thanks to subtraction,kernel $`K,L`$ does not contain infrared singularities at $`p=w`$.We see that it is suitable to use the variable $`p`$ instead of $`p^2`$ since the coupling constant $`e^2`$ has a dimension of mass.First we seek the infrared behaviour of the solution near $`p=m.`$It is possible to find in any gauge by virtue of $`\rho (w)\rho (p)`$ on the r.h.s of (20),(21) in the limit $`pm.`$Thus the $`\rho `$ equation simplifies to

$$\frac{d}{dp}[(pm)\rho (p)]=\rho (p)\underset{pwm}{lim}\frac{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,w)}{\pi (p^2m^2)}=\rho (p)\frac{e^2}{8\pi m}(2\eta ).$$
(22)
It follows that near the electron mass shell

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\omega }}[(\omega 1)\rho (\omega )]`$ $`\chi (2\eta )\rho (\omega )`$
$`\rho (\omega )`$ $`C(\omega 1)^{1+\chi (2\eta )},\chi ={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{8\pi m}},\omega ={\displaystyle \frac{p}{m}}.`$ (23)
And the propagator near the threshold is then found to be

$$S(p)_{p^2m^2}\frac{(\gamma p+m)}{p^2m^2}(\frac{2m^2}{p^2m^2})^{\chi (\eta 2)}.$$
(24)
This approximation corresponds to Bloch-Nordsieck Model in 4-dimension,where only the retarded propagator is considered.We see the same feature of QED$`_{2+1},`$from the threshod behaviour of the propagator.In QED$`_{3+1},`$the Yennie gauge $`\eta =3`$ produces a free particle pole(Abrikosov1956) in the lowest approximation:

$$S(p)_{p^2m^2}\frac{(\gamma p+m)}{p^2m^2}(\frac{m^2}{p^2m^2})^{\alpha (3\eta )/2\pi }.$$
(25)
In four dimension our method also reproduces the same behaviour in the same approximation we took above as well as gauge technique.Now let us return to equations (20),(21).Unfortnately we cannot solve the equations analytically.Instead we use inequalities for the integral kernels that admit us to evaluate two approximate solutions in the Landau gauge.Notice that the numerator of the propagator; $`\gamma p\rho _1(w)+w\rho _2(w),\rho _1(w)`$ is odd and $`\rho _2(w)`$ is even in $`w.`$If we use the inequalities for (20),(21)

$$\frac{1}{2p}\frac{1}{w+p}\frac{1}{w+m},$$

we derive the following equations for positive and negative $`\omega =w/m;`$

$`(\omega 1)\rho _1(\omega )`$ $`=2\chi {\displaystyle _1^\omega }𝑑\omega ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1(\omega )+\rho _1(\omega )}{\omega +\omega ^{}}},\omega >0`$
$`(\omega +1)\rho _1(\omega )`$ $`=2\chi {\displaystyle _1^\omega }𝑑\omega ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1(\omega )+\rho _1(\omega )}{\omega +\omega ^{}}},\omega <0`$ (26)
$`(\omega 1)\rho _2(\omega )`$ $`=2\chi {\displaystyle _1^\omega }𝑑\omega ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^{}(\rho _2(\omega )\rho _2(\omega ))}{\omega (\omega +\omega ^{})}},\omega >0`$
$`(\omega +1)\rho _2(\omega )`$ $`=2\chi {\displaystyle _1^\omega }𝑑\omega ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^{}(\rho _2(\omega )\rho _2(\omega ))}{\omega (\omega +\omega ^{})}},\omega <0`$ (27)
Here we define

$`\rho _1^w(\omega )`$ $`\rho _1(\omega )\rho _1(\omega )`$
$`\rho _2^w(\omega )`$ $`\rho _2(\omega )+\rho _2(\omega ).`$ (28)
It is easy to convert them into differential equations with two cases;

$$\frac{1}{2\omega }\frac{1}{\omega +\omega ^{}}\frac{1}{\omega +1}.$$
(29)
The rhs is an infrared approximation;$`\omega ^{}=1(p=m).`$The solutions are derived for $`\rho ^w(\omega )`$ and they are given

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega }}(\omega +1)^{1\chi }(\omega 1)^{1+\chi }`$ $`\rho _1^w(\omega )\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{2\chi }{\omega +1}})(\omega +1)^{2\chi }(\omega 1)^{1+\chi },`$ (30)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega ^2}}(\omega +1)^{1\chi }(\omega 1)^{1+\chi }`$ $`\rho _2^w(\omega )\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{2\chi }{\omega +1}})(\omega +1)^{2\chi }(\omega 1)^{1+\chi }/\omega .`$ (31)
The functions in both sides are normalized by integrals which define the normalization conditions for $`\rho _1(\omega )`$ and $`\rho _2(\omega )`$ below

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑\omega \rho _1^U(\omega )}`$ $`={\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\omega \mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{2\chi }{\omega +1}})(\omega +1)^{2\chi }(\omega 1)^{1+\chi }=N(\chi )`$
$`{\displaystyle 𝑑\omega \rho _1^L(\omega )}`$ $`={\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\omega {\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega }}(\omega +1)^{1\chi }(\omega 1)^{1+\chi }`$ (32)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\chi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\mathrm{sin}(\chi \pi )}}+2\mathrm{\Phi }(1,1,\chi )={\displaystyle 𝑑\omega \omega \rho _2^L(\omega )}`$ (33)
$$𝑑\omega \omega \rho _2^U(\omega )=N(\chi )$$

,where $`N(\chi )`$ is expressed in terms of Whittaker’s function and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a Lerch’s function.

$`N(\chi )`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\chi ^{1\frac{\chi }{2}}\mathrm{exp}(\frac{\chi }{2})M(\frac{\chi }{2}+1,\frac{\chi }{2}+\frac{1}{2},\chi )}{4\chi (\chi +1)}},`$ (34)
$`M_{\kappa ,\mu }(z)`$ $`=\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}})z^{\frac{1}{2}+\mu }M({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+\mu \kappa ,1+2\mu ,z),`$ (35)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }(z,a,\nu )=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{z^n}{(\nu +n)^a},$$
(36)
where $`M(a,b,z)`$ is a Kummer’s function

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(ba)\mathrm{\Gamma }(a)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(b)}M(a,b,z)=_0^1𝑑t\mathrm{exp}(zt)t^{a1}(1t)^{ba1}.$$
(37)
In order to agree with the free field limit $`\rho (\omega )\delta (\omega 1)`$ for small $`\chi `$ where the condition $`\rho (\omega )𝑑\omega =1`$ holds,spectral functions are normalized and renormalized quantities for small coupling are

$`m_0Z_2^1`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{[n]}}\underset{p^2\mathrm{}}{lim}tr(p^2S(p))=m{\displaystyle \omega \rho _2(\omega )𝑑\omega }m`$ (38)
$`Z_2^1`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{[n]}}\underset{p^2\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}{lim}tr(\gamma pS(p))={\displaystyle \rho _1(\omega )𝑑\omega }1.`$ (39)
The normalization constants for $`\rho _1^U=\omega \rho _2^U,\rho _1^L=\omega \rho _2^L`$ are $`C^U=\chi ^2/M(\frac{\chi }{2}+1,\frac{\chi }{2}+\frac{1}{2},\chi ),C^L=\chi `$ respectively.Here we should notice that two spectral functions are same in the Landau gauge(i.e.$`\rho _1(\omega )=\omega \rho _2(\omega )).`$It is interesting to examine the possible occurence of confinement and dynamical mass generation in our model.In general $`Z_2=0`$ is a compositeness condition and $`m_0=0`$ is a signpost of dynamical mass generation.However in our case two conditions are not satisfied.But the vacuume expectation value $`\overline{\psi }\psi `$ is a gauge invariant quantity in general.And the trace of the propagator itself is gauge independent if the approximation made is sufficent.The gauge transformation of the propagator from the Landau gauge to other covariant $`\eta `$ gauge in three dimension is determined$`[6]`$

$$S(x,\eta )=\mathrm{exp}(\frac{\eta e^2\left|x\right|}{8\pi })S(x,0).$$
(40)
This shows a gauge invariance of the order parameter$`\overline{\psi }\psi `$ in three dimension.We examine the order parameter for fermion-antifermion pair condensation in the case of bare mass and find

$`\overline{\psi }\psi `$ $`=itrS(x)=2{\displaystyle \frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}_1^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\omega \frac{m\omega \rho _2(\omega )}{p^2+m^2\omega }}`$ (41)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{2\pi }}\chi {\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}\omega ^2\rho _2^L(\omega )𝑑\omega `$ $`\overline{\psi }\psi {\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}\omega ^2\rho _2^U(\omega )𝑑\omega `$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{4\pi }}\chi `$ $`\overline{\psi }\psi {\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{4\chi ^2C}{M(\frac{\chi }{2}+1,\frac{\chi }{2}+\frac{1}{2},\chi )}},`$ (42)
$`C`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑t\mathrm{exp}(\chi t)(1t)^{\chi 1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑t\mathrm{exp}(\chi t)(1t)^{\chi 1}t`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}M(1,\chi +1,\chi ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}M(2,\chi +2,\chi ).`$ (43)
Here we used the dimensional reguralization;

$$\frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^D}\frac{1}{(k^2+L)^a}=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(a\frac{D}{2})}{(4\pi )^{\frac{D}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(a)}L^{\frac{D}{2}a},$$

and took into account the most attractive effect in the long distance and strong dumps at short distance for the spectral function $`\rho _2^U.`$If we remove the linear ultraviolet divergence the order parameter is finite and vanishes in the weak couling limit.Thus we conclude that fermion-antfermion pair condensation occurs in our approximation with finite bare mass.It might be related to some physical phemomena;for example gapless superconductivity.Here we notice the non-linear relation of the bare mass and coupling constant,

$$m_0Z_2^1=\frac{\chi ^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{exp}(\frac{\chi }{2})m}{\chi +1}\&(1+\frac{2\pi \chi }{\mathrm{sin}(\pi \chi )}+\chi \mathrm{\Phi }(1,1,\chi )m$$
(44)
for $`\rho _2^U`$ and $`\rho _2^L.`$It is compared with the solution of gap equation in superconductivity;

$`1`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{g}{2(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle d^3p(ϵ^2(p)+\left|M_d\right|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}},`$
$`\left|M_d\right|`$ $`\omega _D\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{2}{g\nu _F}}),`$ (45)
where $`\nu _F`$ is the energy density of the number of states of elctrons on the fermi surface and $`\omega _D`$ is the Debye frequency.Finally we show the results of gauge technique,in whch we set $`\gamma p=p`$ in the infrared.In this case the integral equation for one spectral function we get.The integral kernels are classified into four pieces

$`(1)`$ $`p>0,w>0`$

$`K_1(p,w)`$ $`=(p+w)[(p\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,w)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,w))(pw)]`$
$`=\eta {\displaystyle \frac{(p^2w^2)(pw)}{p^2}}+4{\displaystyle \frac{(p^2w^2)}{p}}`$ (46)
$`(2)`$ $`p>0,w<0`$

$`K_2(p,w)`$ $`=(pw)[p\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,w)+w\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,w)(pw)]`$
$`=\eta {\displaystyle \frac{(pw)^2(3p+w)}{p^2}}+4{\displaystyle \frac{(pw)^2}{p}}`$ (47)
$`(3)`$ $`p<0,w>0`$

$`K_3(p,w)`$ $`=(p+w)[p\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,w)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,w)(pw)]`$
$`=\eta {\displaystyle \frac{(pw)^2(3p+w)}{p^2}}4{\displaystyle \frac{(pw)^2}{p}}`$ (48)
$`(4)`$ $`p<0,w<0`$

$`K_4(p,w)`$ $`=(p+w)[(p\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,w)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,w))(pw)]`$
$`=\eta {\displaystyle \frac{(pw)^2(3p+w)}{p^2}}4{\displaystyle \frac{(pw)^2}{p}}`$ (49)
$`1)\text{ }p`$ $`>0,(pm)\rho (p)={\displaystyle _m^p}{\displaystyle \frac{K_1\rho (w)+K_2\rho (w)}{p^2w^2}}𝑑w`$
$`2)\text{ }p`$ $`<0,(p+m)\rho (p)={\displaystyle _m^p}{\displaystyle \frac{K_3\rho (w)+K_4\rho (w)}{p^2w^2}}𝑑w`$ (50)
These equation could not be solved since it is converted into higher order differntial equation and not tractable.However the infrared behaviour is easily determined by choosing only positive $`p`$ in the kernel $`K_1`$ of equation (1) and set $`p=m`$ in front of the integral.The results we get

$`(\omega 1)\rho (\omega )`$ $`=\chi ({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +4}{\omega }}{\displaystyle _1^\omega }\rho (\omega )𝑑\omega {\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{\omega ^2}}{\displaystyle _1^\omega }\omega \rho (\omega )𝑑\omega ),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\omega }}[\omega (\omega 1)\rho (\omega )]`$ $`=\chi ((\eta +4)\rho (\omega )\eta \omega \rho (\omega )),`$ (51)
$`\rho (\omega )`$ $`C(\omega 1)^{1+^{4\chi }}\omega ^{1+4\chi (\eta 2)},\chi ={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{16\pi m}}.`$ (52)
More precisely the spectral function near the threshold is given

$`\rho (\omega )`$ $`F(2+z,3+z;4+2z+4\chi ;\omega )\omega ^z,`$
$`z`$ $`=Root(Z^2+(4\chi +3)Z+(8\chi +2+\eta \chi )=0).`$ (53)
Near $`\omega =1`$

$`\rho (\omega )`$ $`(\omega 1)^{1+4\chi }F(2+z,+4\chi ,1+z+4\chi ;8+4z+4\chi ;1\omega _{),}`$
$`S(p)_{p^2m^2}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma p+m}{p^2m^2}}({\displaystyle \frac{p^2m^2}{2m^2}})^{1+4\chi }.`$ (54)
This shows the gauge invariance near the threshold.If we evaluate the spectral function in perturbative way,first we put $`\rho ^{(0)}=\delta (wm),`$gauge dependent part of $`\rho ^{(1)}`$ does not contain $`1/(pm)`$ term and does not contribute the singurality near the threshold.

## 3 Analysis in four dimension

In this section we examine the QED3+1 which is familiar but not known except for the Landau gauge in gauge technique.In our method we show the analytic solution for the spectral functions in arbitrary gauge.The self energy of the fermion to $`O(e^2)`$ is well known

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }(p,m)`$ $`=\gamma p\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,m)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,m)`$
$`\pi ^1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ $`=\chi \eta {\displaystyle \frac{p^4m^4}{p^4}}\theta (p^2m^2)`$
$`\pi ^1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$ $`=\chi (\eta +3)m{\displaystyle \frac{p^2m^2}{p^2}}\theta (p^2m^2),\chi ={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{16\pi ^2}}.`$ (55)
In the same way in the previous section we derive the equation for the spectral functions

$`(\gamma p+m)\mathrm{}(\gamma p\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2)`$ $`=\mathrm{}(p^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+m\mathrm{\Sigma }_2+\gamma p(m\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2)),`$
$`ϵ(p){\displaystyle \frac{pm}{\left|p\right|}}\rho _1(p)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \rho _1(w)𝑑w\frac{\mathrm{}(w\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,w)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,w))}{p^2w^2+iϵϵ(w)}}`$
$`=2\chi ({\displaystyle _m^{ϵ(p)p}}{\displaystyle _{ϵ(p)p}^m})({\displaystyle \frac{\eta w^3}{p^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{3w}{p^2}})\rho _1(w)dw`$ (56)
$`ϵ(p)(pm)\rho _2(p)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \rho _2(w)𝑑w\frac{\mathrm{}(p^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(p,w)+w\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(p,w))}{p^2w^2+iϵϵ(w)}}`$
$`=2\chi ({\displaystyle _m^{ϵ(p)p}}{\displaystyle _{ϵ(p)p}^m})(\eta {\displaystyle \frac{3w^2}{p^2}})\rho _2(w)dw`$ (57)
It is helpful to separate $`\rho `$ into odd and even part in $`p;\rho _2=p\rho _o(p^2)+m\rho _e(p^2)`$ then the lhs is

$$ϵ(p)[(p^2\rho _om^2\rho _e)+mp(\rho _o\rho _e)].$$

The rhs is even in $`p`$ then it simplifies to

$$p^2\rho _om^2\rho _e=0\rho _e=\frac{p^2}{m^2}\rho _o,$$

$$ϵ(p)mp(\rho _e\rho _o)=2\chi (\eta (w\rho _o+m\rho _e)dw\frac{3}{p^2}w^2(w\rho _o+m\rho _e)dw.$$

Introducing dimensional variable $`\omega =w/m`$

$`ϵ(\omega )\omega (\omega ^21)\rho _o(\omega )`$ $`=2\chi (\eta {\displaystyle \omega ^{}(1+\omega ^{})\rho _o(\omega ^{})}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\omega ^2}}{\displaystyle \omega ^3(\omega ^{}+1)\rho _o(\omega ^{})𝑑\omega ^{}})`$
$`(\omega ^21)\rho _2(\omega )`$ $`=2\chi (\eta {\displaystyle }\omega ^{}\rho _2(\omega ^{})d\omega ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\omega ^2}}{\displaystyle }\omega ^3\rho _2(\omega ^{})d\omega ^{}`$ (58)
where

$`\omega \rho _o(\omega ^2)`$ $`=\rho _2(\omega ^2),s=\omega ^2`$
$`(s1)\rho _2(s)=2\chi (\eta {\displaystyle }\rho _2(s^{^{}})ds^{}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{s}}{\displaystyle }s^{^{}}\rho _2(s^{})ds^{},`$ (59)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{ds^2}}[s(s1)\rho _2(s)]`$ $`=2\chi ((\eta 3){\displaystyle \frac{d}{ds}}[s\rho _2(s)]+\eta \rho _2(s)),`$ (60)
$`\rho _2(s)`$ $`=ϵ(\omega )F(\alpha ,\beta ;2;s)\omega ,`$
$`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ $`=({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\chi (\eta 3){\displaystyle \frac{r^{}}{2}}),`$
$`r^{}_{}{}^{}2`$ $`=(1+6\chi )^2+4\chi ^2\eta ^224\chi ^2\eta +4\chi \eta .`$ (61)
Next we consider $`\rho _1=p\rho _o+m\rho _e.`$In the same way to $`\rho _2`$ the equation simplfies to

$`ϵ(p){\displaystyle \frac{pm}{\left|p\right|}}\rho _1(p)`$ $`=2\chi ({\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{p^4}}{\displaystyle w^3\rho _1(w)𝑑w}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{p^2}}{\displaystyle w\rho _1(w)𝑑w}),`$
$`ϵ(\omega ){\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{\left|\omega \right|}}(\omega ^21)\rho _o(\omega )`$ $`=2\chi ({\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{\omega ^4}}{\displaystyle }\omega ^4(\omega ^{}+1)\rho _o(\omega ^{}_{}{}^{}2)d\omega ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\omega ^2}}{\displaystyle }\omega ^2(\omega ^{}+1)\rho _o(\omega ^{})d\omega ^{}`$
$`(\omega ^21)\rho _o(\omega ^2)`$ $`=2\chi ({\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{\omega ^4}}{\displaystyle }\omega ^{}_{}{}^{}5\rho _o(\omega ^2)d\omega ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\omega ^2}}{\displaystyle }\omega ^{}_{}{}^{}3\rho _o(\omega ^{}_{}{}^{}2)d\omega ^{}.`$
The equation can be converted into differential equatison and its solution is given

$`(s1)\rho _o(s)`$ $`=2\chi ({\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{s^2}}{\displaystyle s^2\rho _o(s^{})𝑑s^{}}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{s}}{\displaystyle s^{}\rho _o(s^{})𝑑s^{}}),`$ (62)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{ds^2}}[s^2(s1)\rho _o(s)]`$ $`=2\chi ((\eta 3){\displaystyle \frac{d}{ds}}[s^2\rho _o(s)]3s\rho _o(s)),`$ (63)
$`\rho _1(s)`$ $`=ϵ(\omega )\omega \rho _o(s)=ϵ(\omega ){\displaystyle \frac{F(a,b;2;s)\omega }{s(s1)^{1+2\chi (3\eta )}}},`$
$`(a,b)`$ $`=({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+\chi (\eta 3)\pm {\displaystyle \frac{r}{2}}),`$
$`r^2`$ $`=(16\chi )^2+4\chi ^2\eta ^224\chi ^2\eta 4\chi \eta .`$ (64)
Same to three dimension we get $`\rho _1(s)=\rho _2(s)`$ in the Landau gauge.We obtain the full propagator in the dispersion integral

$$S_\eta (p)=_1^{\mathrm{}}𝑑s\frac{\gamma p\rho _1(s,\eta )+m\rho _2(s,\eta )}{p^2m^2s}$$
(65)
$$S(p)=\frac{RD\gamma p}{p^2}(I(a,b;c;1;0)I(a,b;c;1;\frac{p^2}{m^2})\frac{RE}{m}R_2EI(2\alpha ,2\beta ;c;1;\frac{p^2}{m^2}),$$
(66)
where

$$c=2\chi (\eta 3),D=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2ab)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2a)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2b)},E=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +\beta 2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta )}.$$

We have used the basic integral

$`I(a,b;c;d;y)`$ $`={\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}x^{c1}(x+y)^dF(a,b;c;x)𝑑x`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(c)\mathrm{\Gamma }(ac+d)\mathrm{\Gamma }(bc+d)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(a+bc+d)\mathrm{\Gamma }(d)}}`$
$`\times F(ac+d,bc+d;a+bc+d;1y).`$ (67)
Here we study the weak coupling limit of the propagator as we formally define the free field limit.First the vector part we obtain

$`S(p)_V`$ $`={\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑s[{\displaystyle \frac{F(a,b;c;1s)}{(p^2m^2s)(s1)^{1c}}}(p^20)]{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2ab)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2a)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2b)}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑xx^{c1}[(x+1{\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{m^2}})^1F(a,b;c;x)(p^20)]{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2ab)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2a)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2b)}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3))}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2)}}[1F(22\chi \eta ,1+6\chi ;2;{\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{m^2}})]`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3))[1F(2,1;2;{\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{m^2}})]`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3))}{p^2m^2}}.`$ (68)
The scalar part is

$`S(p)_S`$ $`={\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑s{\displaystyle \frac{mF(2\alpha ,2\beta ;c;1s)}{(p^2m^2s)(s1)^{1+2\chi (3\eta )}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +\beta 2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta )}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{m}{m^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑xx^{c1}(x+1{\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{m^2}})^1F(2\alpha ,2\beta ;c;x){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +\beta 2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta )}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3))F(2+6\chi ,12\chi \eta ;2;{\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{m^2}})`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3))}{p^2m^2}},`$ (69)
for weak coupling limit and it behaves as the free propagator.Next we examine the renormalization constants in this approximation by going to asymptotic values of $`p`$ in(68),(69) or else from the formal expression for the

$`Z_2^1`$ $`={\displaystyle \rho _1(s)𝑑s}=R{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2ab)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2a)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2b)}}{\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{F(a,b;c;1s)}{s(s1)^{c+1}}}𝑑s`$
$`=R\mathrm{\Gamma }(2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3))1`$ (70)
for small $`\chi ,`$then we choose the normalization constant as $`R=2\chi (\eta 3),`$and

$`m_0Z_2^1`$ $`=m{\displaystyle \rho _2(s)𝑑s}=mR{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +\beta 2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta )}}{\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{F(2\alpha ,2\beta ;c;1s)}{(s1)^{c1}}}𝑑s`$
$`=\underset{d0}{lim}I(2\alpha ,2\beta ;c;d;y)0.`$ (71)
It is not clear that the use of the formula (67) with limitting case $`d=0`$ for $`m_0`$ is correct or not.In the high energy limit propagator behaves as a free one in the weak coupling,we determine two quantities from the $`S(p)_V`$ and $`S(p)_S.`$Then it reads

$$S(p)_V=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3))}{p^2}[1F(22\chi \eta ,1+6\chi ;2;\frac{p^2}{m^2})].$$
(72)
This shows the residue of inverse power of $`p^2`$ up to normalization constant $`R`$

$$Z_2^1=\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3)).$$
(73)
$$S(p)_S=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3))}{m}F(2+6\chi ,12\chi \eta ;2;\frac{p^2}{m^2}).$$
(74)
Let us expand this in inverse powers of $`p^2.`$The results is

$`S(p)_S`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3))}{m}}`$
$`\times [{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2\chi (\eta +3))}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2+6\chi )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2\chi \eta )}}({\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{p^2}})^{12\chi \eta }F(12\chi \eta ,2\chi \eta ;2+2\chi (\eta +3);{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{p^2}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta +3))}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi \eta )\mathrm{\Gamma }(6\chi )}}({\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{p^2}})^{2+6\chi }F(2+6\chi ,1+6\chi ;2\chi (\eta +3);{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{p^2}})].`$ (75)
From this form we find that the first term corresponds to free field

$`\underset{p^2\mathrm{}}{lim}[p^2S(p)_S]`$ $`=m_0Z_2^1=m{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2\chi (\eta +3))}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2\chi \eta )\mathrm{\Gamma }(2+6\chi )}}`$
$`\times \left[\begin{array}{cc}1& \eta =0\\ 0& \eta <0\\ \mathrm{}& \eta >0\end{array}\right],`$ (79)
for small $`\chi .`$The second case in the parenthesis corresponds to dynamical mass generation.In Ref,the relation between the vanishment of the bare fermion mass and dynamical chiral symmetry breaking was discussed in QED and QCD.In both cases $`m_0Z_2^1=0`$ was explicitly shown using renormalization group equations for the propagator;

$`m_0Z_2^1`$ $`=\underset{p^2\mathrm{}}{lim}p^2S(p)_S=m{\displaystyle \rho _2(s)𝑑s}=0,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{m_0}{m}}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\rho _2(s)𝑑s}{\rho _1(s)𝑑s}}=0,`$ (80)
where the existence of the ultraviolet stagnant point was assumed in QED;

$$\underset{\kappa \mathrm{}}{lim}g(\kappa )=g_{\mathrm{}},\beta (g_{\mathrm{}})=0,\beta ^{}(g_{\mathrm{}})<0.$$
(81)
We considered the infrared and ultraviolt boundary conditions.The spectral functions satisfying boundary conditions are

$$\rho _1(s)=R\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2ab)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2a)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2b)}\frac{F(a,b;2\chi (\eta 3);1s)}{s(s1)^{1+2\chi (3\eta )}},$$
(82)
$$\rho _2(s)=R\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +\beta 2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta )}\frac{F(2\alpha ,2\beta ;2\chi (\eta 3);1s)}{(s1)^{1+2\chi (3\eta )}}.$$
(83)
It is clear that the infrared behaviour is the same as Bloch-Nordsieck Model and in any gauge the spectral functions are normalizable for weak coupling in a sense of analytic continuation.Here we show the results in the Gauge Technique solution in the Landau gauge;

$$\rho (s)=\frac{2ϵR(ϵ)}{m(s1)^{1+2ϵ}}[\frac{1}{w}F(ϵ,ϵ;2ϵ;1s)+F(ϵ,1ϵ;2ϵ;1s)]$$
(84)
with $`ϵ=3e^2/16\pi ^2,s=(w/m)^2`$ and $`R(ϵ)`$ is the normailzation factor.Notice that first term corresponds to $`\rho _1`$ (odd in $`w)`$ and second term corresponds to $`\rho _2`$(even in $`w`$ ).Next we examine the pair condensation.The vacuum expectation value $`\overline{\psi }\psi `$ is proportional to

$$itrS(x)=4\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}S(p)_S=4C\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}_1^{\mathrm{}}𝑑s\frac{m\rho _2(s)}{p^2+m^2s}.$$
(85)
In equations (59),(62) spectral functions in the Landau gauge have a simple form

$$\rho _1(s)=\rho _2(s)=\frac{C}{s(s1)^{1+6\chi }}.$$
(86)
We change the variable $`s1/s,`$and get

$$\rho _2(s)=\frac{6\chi s^{6\chi }}{(1s)^{1+6\chi }},Z_2^1=_0^1\rho _1(s)𝑑s=\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+6\chi )\mathrm{\Gamma }(16\chi ).$$
(87)
Then we obtain the propagator

$`S(p)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m^2}}{\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma p+m)s\rho _2(s)}{sp^2m^2}}𝑑s`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma p+m)6\pi \chi (1+6\chi )}{m^2\mathrm{sin}(6\pi \chi )}}F(1,2+6\chi ;2;{\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{m^2}})`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+6\chi )\mathrm{\Gamma }(16\chi )(\gamma p+m)}{p^2}}(1(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{m^2}})^{16\chi }).`$ (88)
In this form bare mass and renormalization constant are

$$m_0Z_2^1=m\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+6\chi )\mathrm{\Gamma }(16\chi ),Z_2^1=\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+6\chi )\mathrm{\Gamma }(16\chi ).$$
(89)
If we use dimensional reguralization

$$\frac{d^Dp}{(2\pi )^D}\frac{1}{(p^2+L)^a}=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(a\frac{D}{2})}{(4\pi )^{\frac{D}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(a)}L^{\frac{D}{2}a},D=42ϵ,a=1,$$
(90)
we can avoid quadratic and infrared divergence and can evaluate the finite answer

$`\overline{\psi }\psi `$ $`=itrS(x)=4{\displaystyle \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}_1^{\mathrm{}}𝑑s\frac{m\rho _2(s)}{p^2+m^2s}}`$
$`=4\underset{ϵ0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+ϵ)}{16\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}s^{1ϵ}m^3\rho _2(s)𝑑s`$
$`=\underset{ϵ0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{m^3\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+ϵ)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2+6\chi +ϵ)\mathrm{\Gamma }(16\chi )}{4\pi ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }(ϵ)}}={\displaystyle \frac{m^3}{4\pi ^2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(2+6\chi )\mathrm{\Gamma }(16\chi ).`$ (91)
In general case if we apply the same formula (67),we obtain

$`R{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +\beta 2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta )}}{\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{s^{1ϵ}F(2\alpha ,2\beta ;2\chi (\eta 3);1s)ds}{(s1)^{1+2\chi (3\eta )}}}`$
$`=R{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +\beta 2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta )}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}x^{2\chi (\eta 3)1}(x+1)^{1ϵ}F(2\alpha ,2\beta ;2\chi (\eta 3);x)𝑑x`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2\chi (\eta 3))\mathrm{\Gamma }(6\chi +ϵ)\mathrm{\Gamma }(ϵ12\chi \eta )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(ϵ)\mathrm{\Gamma }(ϵ1)}}.`$ (92)
Thus the naive limit $`ϵ0`$ leads $`\overline{\psi }\psi =0`$ except for $`\eta =0.`$In the Landau gauge the result coincides the previous case.This result is suspicious for us too.Therefore we integrate explicitly in momentum space by changing variable $`xx`$ and get

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}S(ip)_S_0^{\mathrm{}}xF(a,b;2;x)𝑑x=0,$$
(93)
here we use the formula

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}x^{s1}F(a,b;c;x)𝑑x=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(a+s)\mathrm{\Gamma }(b+s)\mathrm{\Gamma }(c)\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(a)(b)\mathrm{\Gamma }(c+s)}.$$
(94)
If $`c=2`$ and $`s=2`$ it yields the same result with (71).Here we summarise our calculus of the vacuum expectation value.

$`\overline{\psi }\psi `$ $`=finite;m_0Z_2^10,\eta =0`$
$`=0;m_0Z_2^1=0,\mathrm{},\eta 0.`$ (95)
In the usual treatment of dynamical mass generation, if the bare mass vanishes order parameter becomes finite but not zero.In that case the Dyson-Schwinger equation is non-linear and non-trivial mass function $`(i.e.`$scalar part of the propagator) made it convergent and finite.In our model non-trivial propagator does not necessary leads to non-vanishing vacuum expectation value.

## 4 Improved Vertex function

Direct substitution of our solution $`\rho (w)`$ into equation $`(8)`$, gives the zeroth order vertex function,

$$S(p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu ^{(0)}S(p^{})=𝑑w\rho (w)\frac{1}{\gamma pw}\gamma _\mu \frac{1}{\gamma p^{^{}}w}.$$
(96)
We may improve the vertex by adding transverse combinations of terms such as

$$[(p_\mu \gamma p^{^{}}+p_\mu ^{^{}}\gamma ppp^{^{}}\gamma _\mu )+((p+p^{^{}})_\mu +i(p^{^{}}p)_\alpha ϵ_{\alpha \mu \nu }\gamma _\nu )w+w^2\gamma _\mu ]$$

in the numerator of the integral, allowing for a parity violating contribution.One may also include a form factor proportional to a linear combination of $`\gamma _\mu `$ and $`(p+p^{^{}})_\mu `$ and try to ensure that on-shell quantities are gauge invariant.

## 5 Summary

To solve the Dyson-Schwinger equation in QED in four and three dimension, gauge technique has been used,.In the annalysis in four dimension,it seems correct in the infrared but one is suspicious to other kinematical region and to its restriction only in the Landau gauge.For example in the Yennie gauge there is no solution due to the ultraviolet divergences.In three dimension the difficulty of infrared divergences had been suggested to modify the photon propagator or the introduction of Chern-Simons term.However the latter violates parity and is induced by quantum loop correction.Previously,to soften the infrared divergence,massless fermions were introduced into photon vacuum polarization but in that case no renormalization of the self energy was done.The main difficulty in that case is the use of the variable $`\omega ^2`$ for the spectral function $`\rho (\omega ^2)`$ in spite of the dimension-full coupling constant $`e^2`$.In this work we have instead analyzed the quenched case with renormalization that leads to avoid the infrared singularity.We estimated the solution of the spectral function $`\rho (\omega )`$ in the Landau gauge; these are simple functions like in $`QED_{3+1}[3].`$ The infrared behaviour in the arbitrary gauge is also determined.The gauge dependence near the mass shell is similar to that in $`QED_{3+1}`$ thanks to the renormalization; $`\rho (\omega )(\omega 1)^{1+\chi (2\eta )}`$.There is some difference in the infrared behaviour between our method and gauge technique.The latter show the gauge independence near the threshold.Here we summarize the differences between two approximations.The former shows the high energy behaviour of the spectral function is $`1/p^2`$ and the cut structure near the mass shell is given by massless fermion-loop;$`\rho (p)`$ $`=(pm)^{1e^2/c\pi ^2}`$ for $`pme^2`$ and $`c=e^2N/8`$ for $`N`$ massless fermions;the integral equation for $`\rho (\omega )`$ was not solved analytically because of its complexity due to higher order corrections.In our approximation the high energy behaviour is $`1/p^3`$ for $`\rho `$,and the structure near the mass shell is determined by coupling constant mass ratio $`\chi =e^2/(8\pi m)`$.Fermion antifermion pair condensation parameter is gauge invariant but approximation makes it not.The order parameter is finite if we remove the linear ultraviolet divergence and vanishes in the weak coupling limit with finite bare mass in our approximation.Both in three and four dimension,we find the non-linear relation between bare mass and coupling constant.They differ from the solution of gap equation in super conductivity.Since $`QED_{2+1}`$ is super renormalizable,ordinary renormalization group is not relevant,but the gauge covariant approximation is non-perturbative,and we have succeeded in finding the infrared behaviour of the fermion propagator.In four dimension there exists analytic solutions for the spectral functions which satisfy the boundary condition for arbitrary gauge instead gauge technique admits them for the Landau gauge.Both of them show the well known infrared behaviour as Bloch-Nordsieck.Without use gauge technique $`\gamma p=p`$ , ultraviolet divergence is absent for arbitrary gauge in the equation for the spectral functions.The vanishment of bare fermion mass occurs in the negative gauge parameter $`\eta `$ in our quenched approximation.The vacuum expectation value $`\overline{\psi }\psi `$ is shown to be finite which is different from the quenched ladder approximation in the Landau gauge.

## 6 Acknowledgement

The author is indebted to Prof.Delbourgo during his stay in March 2000 at the University of Tasmania for his hospitality and stimulating comments.He also thanks to Dr.Suzuki at Hokkaido University for his careful comments and discussion.

## 7 References

R.Jakiw,S.Templeton,Phys.Rev.23D.2291(1981);
T.Appelquist,D.Nash,L.C.R.Wijewardhana,Phys.Rev.Lett.60(1988)2575;
A.B.Waites,R.Delbourgo,Int.J.Mod.Phys.27A(1992)6857;
Y.Hoshino,T.Matsuyama,Phys.Lett.222B(1989)493.

D.Atkinson,D.W.E.Blatt,Nucl.Phys.151B(1979)342;
P.Maris, Phys.Rev.52D(1995)6087;Y.Hoshino,NuovoCim.112A(1999)335.

F.Bloch,A.Nordsieck,Phys.Rev.52(1937)54;Abrikosov,A.A,JETP,30,96(1956);
R.Delbourgo,P.West,J.Phys.10A(1977)1049;R.Delbourgo,Phys.Lett.72B(1977)96.

T.Maskawa,H.Nakajima,Prog.Theor.Phys.52(1974)1326,
Prog.Theor.Phys.54(1975)860;R.Fukuda,T.Kugo,Nucl.Phys.B117(1976)250,
H.D.Politzer,Nucl.Phys.B117(1976)397.

S.Deser,R.Jackiw,S.Templeton,Ann.Phys.140(1982)372.

C.J.Burden,J.Praschifka,C.D.Roberts,Phys.Rev.46D(1992)2695;
L.D.Landau,I.M.Kharatonikov,Zk.Eksp.Theor.Fiz.29.89(1958);
B.Zumino,J.Math.Phys.1(1960)1;
Landau,Lifshits”Quantum Electrodynamics”, Butterworth Heinemann.
R.Delbourgo,IL Nuovo Cim.49A(1979)485.
R.Delbourgo,B.W.Keck;J.Phys.G6(1980)275;
K.Nishijima,Prog.Theor.Phys.81(1989)878
in H.Nakajima”Introduction to Superconductivity”,Baihukan in Japanese.
in V A Miransky”Dynamical Symmetry Breaking in Quantum Field Theories”,World Scien