format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recent observations of the solar neutrinos  and the atmospheric neutrinos  at Super Kamiokande suggest that neutrinos have small masses and there are large flavor mixings in the lepton sector. These features are quite different from the ones of the quark sector and it may be a clue to the developement of a unification picture of quarks and leptons for us to ask ”what is the origin of these differences?”.

The mixing in the lepton sector is represented by the so-called MNS matrix which is defined by $`V^{\mathrm{MNS}}=U_{\mathrm{}}^{}U_\nu `$, where $`U_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`U_\nu `$ are the mixing matrices for charged leptons and neutrinos, respectively. Thus the origin of large mixings in the lepton sector exists in either $`U_{\mathrm{}}`$ or $`U_\nu `$. A famous example of possible mass matrices to realize large mixings is a democratic form, which takes the form such as

$$m\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 1& 1\\ 1& 1& 1\\ 1& 1& 1\end{array}\right).$$
(1)
However, this matrix has a serious problem to apply it to the neutrino sector. It has only a nonzero eigenvalue and then both the solar and atmospheric neutrino problems cannot be explained. It needs a suitable deviation from the exact democratic form to overcome this fault. It may be worthy to study how to generate an appropriately deviated form from it based on a certain physical principle. We study this problem on the basis of supersymmetry and an extra U(1) symmetry in a TeV region. The former one is related to the gauge hierarchy problem and the latter one often appears in the effective theory of superstring. So this kind of study is considered to be sufficiently motivated.

In the supersymmetric theory there generally exists a discrete symmetry called $`R`$-parity, which is defined by $`R_p=(1)^{3B+L+2S}`$ where $`B`$ and $`L`$ are a baryon number and a lepton number, respectively and $`S`$ stands for a spin. Under this symmetry particles in the standard model (SM) have $`R_p=+1`$ and their superpartners have $`R_p=1`$. Thus the SM particles cannot mix with their superpartners without an $`R`$-parity violation. In the minimal supersymmetric SM (MSSM) there are neutral fermions with $`R_p=1`$ in addition to the neutrinos. They are called neutralinos and contain $`(\lambda _{W_3},\lambda _Y,\stackrel{~}{H}_1^0,\stackrel{~}{H}_2^0)`$. $`\lambda _{W_3}`$ and $`\lambda _Y`$ are gauginos for SU(2)$`{}_{L}{}^{}\times `$ U(1)Y gauge symmetry and $`\stackrel{~}{H}_1^0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{H}_2^0`$ stand for Higgsinos. If $`R_p`$ is not broken, neutrinos and neutralinos cannot mix. However, if there are $`R_p`$ violations such as an explicit breaking due to the bilinear $`R`$-parity violating terms $`ϵ_\alpha L_\alpha H_2`$ in superpotential or a spontaneous breaking due to the nonzero vacuum expectation values (VEVs) of sneutrinos, mass mixings $``$ among neutrinos and neutralinos appear in the form such as

$$(\nu _e,\nu _\mu ,\nu _\tau )\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\sqrt{2}g_2\stackrel{~}{\nu }_e& \sqrt{2}g_1\stackrel{~}{\nu }_e& ϵ_e\\ \sqrt{2}g_2\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu & \sqrt{2}g_1\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu & ϵ_\mu \\ \sqrt{2}g_2\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau & \sqrt{2}g_1\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau & ϵ_\tau \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}i\lambda _{W_3}\\ i\lambda _Y\\ \stackrel{~}{H}_2^0\end{array}\right).$$
(2)
A study of the scalar potential indicates that $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\alpha `$ is proportional to $`ϵ_\alpha `$. As a result of this feature, all column vectors of $``$ are proportinal to each other. Under the assumption that gaugino masses $`M_1,M_2`$ and a supersymmetric Higgs mass $`\mu `$ are much larger than $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\alpha `$ and $`ϵ_\alpha `$, we find that the neutrino mass matrix satisfies $`M_{ij}^\nu \stackrel{~}{\nu }_i\stackrel{~}{\nu }_j`$ as a result of the seesaw mechanism . Unfortunately, the light neutrino mass matrix $`M_{ij}^\nu `$ obtained in this way has only one nonzero mass eigenvalue. For the explanation of the atmospheric and solar neutrinos, we need a mass perturbation to resolve this mass degeneracy. A well-known example of such possibilities is an inclusion of one-loop effects and several works in this direction have been done by now .

In this talk we would like to propose an another possibility. We consider a tree level solution to this problem and study whether we can obtain large flavor mixings and also appropriate mass eigenvalues in the lepton sector in such a scenario.

## 2 A simple Model

We introduce an extra U(1) gauge symmetry to the MSSM, which is assumed to remain unbroken at a TeV region. This kind of extra U(1) has several interesting aspects to take it seriously. In fact, such a kind of symmetry often appears in the effective theory of superstring and it can also present a natural solution to the $`\mu `$-problem . So there is a certain physical motivation to consider such a symmetry in the model building. It should be noted that there are experimental constraints on the extra U(1) from the precision measurements at LEP. Its mass should be generally larger than 600GeV and its mixing angle $`\xi `$ with the ordinary $`Z^0`$ gauge boson has to be less than $`10^3`$.

In the present consideration we assume that the extra U(1) has flavor diagonal but generation dependent interactions such as

$$=\overline{\nu }_\alpha i\gamma ^\mu (_\mu ig_Xq_\alpha A_\mu )\nu _\alpha +i\sqrt{2}g_X(\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\alpha ^{}\lambda _Xq_\alpha \nu _\alpha \stackrel{~}{\nu }_\alpha \overline{\lambda }_Xq_\alpha \overline{\nu }_\alpha )+\mathrm{}.$$
(3)
If sneutrinos get nonzero vacuum expectation values $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\alpha 0`$ in eq. (3), neutrino-gaugino mixing appears through $`\sqrt{2}g_Xq_\alpha \stackrel{~}{\nu }_\alpha `$, which can break the previously mentioned proportional relation among column vectors of the extended neutrino-neutralino mixing matrix corresponding to (2).***In this discussion we can safely ignore the contributions from the mixings with Higgsinos.  As a result, we can have two nonzero mass eigenvalues of neutrinos at the tree level . In the following discussion we study neutrino oscillation phenomena and other phenomenological features of this model.

We take charge assingments of this extra U(1) gauge symmetry for each generation of the leptons as follows,

$$\mathrm{}_{L\alpha }:(q_I,q_I,q_{III}),\overline{\mathrm{}}_{R\alpha }:(q_I,q_I,q_{III}),$$
(4)
where $`\mathrm{}_{L\alpha }`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{}}_{R\alpha }`$ stand for SU(2)L doublet fields and its singlet charged ones, respectively. We assume Higgs chiral superfields have no charge of the extra U(1). At this stage we do not identify the lepton flavor. If we assume that sneutrinos get VEVs such as $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_e=\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu =\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\tau u0`$, we have a neutrino-gaugino mass matrix

$`=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& m^T\\ m& M\end{array}\right),`$ (7)
$`m=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a_2& a_1& b\\ a_2& a_1& b\\ a_2& a_1& c\end{array}\right),M=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}M_2& 0& 0\\ 0& M_1& 0\\ 0& 0& M_X\end{array}\right),`$ (14)
where $`a_{\mathrm{}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}g_{\mathrm{}}u`$, $`b=\sqrt{2}g_Xq_Iu`$ and $`c=\sqrt{2}g_Xq_{III}u`$. If elements of $`m`$ are much smaller than the ones of $`M`$, we can use the seesaw formula and then the neutrino mass matrix is found to be written as We can consider the same type texture of neutrino mass matrix in the ordinary seesaw framework with right-handed neutrinos by introducing suitable symmetries .

$$M^\nu =m^TM^1m=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}m_0+ϵ^2& m_0+ϵ^2& m_0+ϵ\delta \\ m_0+ϵ^2& m_0+ϵ^2& m_0+ϵ\delta \\ m_0+ϵ\delta & m_0+ϵ\delta & m_0+\delta ^2\end{array}\right),$$
(15)
where $`m_0=\frac{g_2^2u^2}{2M_2}`$, $`ϵ=\frac{g_Xq_Iu}{\sqrt{M_X}}`$ and $`\delta =\frac{g_Xq_{III}u}{\sqrt{M_X}}`$. A diagonalization matrix $`U`$ of $`M^\nu `$ which is defined by $`U^{}M^\nu U=M_{\mathrm{diag}}^\nu `$ is easily found to be

$$U=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{cos}\theta & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{cos}\theta & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \\ 0& \mathrm{sin}\theta & \mathrm{cos}\theta \end{array}\right).$$
(16)
The mass eigenvalues and the mixing angle $`\theta `$ are written as

$`m_1=0,m_{2,3}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[3m_0+2ϵ^2+\delta ^2\sqrt{(m_0+2ϵ^2\delta ^2)^2+8(m_0+ϵ\delta )^2}\right],`$ (17)
$`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta ={\displaystyle \frac{8(m_0+ϵ\delta )^2}{(m_0+2ϵ^2\delta ^2)^2+8(m_0+ϵ\delta )^2}}.`$ (18)
If we assume that the charged lepton mass matrix is diagonal, a transition probability for the neutrino oscillation $`\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta `$ can be written by using the elements of the mixing matrix $`U`$ as

$$𝒫_{\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta }(L)=\delta _{\alpha \beta }4\underset{i>j}{}U_{\alpha i}U_{\beta i}U_{\alpha j}U_{\beta j}\mathrm{sin}^2\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{ij}^2}{4E}L\right),$$
(19)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{ij}^2=|m_i^2m_j^2|`$. We summarize the contributions of the possible modes to the neutrino oscillation $`\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta `$ in Table 1.

Here we assume that an inverse hierarchy and also an approximate degeneracy between $`\nu _2`$ and $`\nu _3`$: $`m_1m_2m_3`$. In that case we find that the atmospheric neutrino requires

$$2\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2{}_{}{}^{<}\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2{}_{}{}^{<}6\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2.$$

The solar neutrino is also found to require that $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ should take a value in a solution dependent way in the region such as

$$10^{10}\mathrm{eV}^2{}_{}{}^{<}\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2{}_{}{}^{<}1.5\times 10^4\mathrm{eV}^2.$$

Taking account of this, we find that we should identify the flavor $`(I,II,III)`$ with $`(\tau ,\mu ,e)`$. Then we can rewrite eq. (16) into the usual MNS mixing matrix as

$$U^{\mathrm{MNS}}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& \mathrm{sin}\theta & \mathrm{cos}\theta \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{cos}\theta & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{cos}\theta & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \end{array}\right).$$
(20)
The atmospheric neutrino is explained by $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ which comes from the modes (A) and (B) in Table 1. On the other hand, the solar neutrino is explained by $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ (E) and $`\nu _e\nu _\tau `$ (D) whose total amplitude is $`𝒜=\mathrm{sin}^22\theta `$. Thus if we assume $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta 10^2`$, the small mixing MSW solution (SMA) is realized. The large mixing MSW solution (LMA) and others (LOW and VO) are possible for the case of $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta 1`$.

We order several aspects of other neutrino phenomenology in this model here.
(1) CHOOZ constraint  : It is related to the neutrino oscillations $`\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$ which are relevant to the atmospheric neutrinos. Their ampitudes are propotinal to $`U_{e1}^{\mathrm{MNS}}`$ in this model. However, it is zero and then the CHOOZ constraint is trivially satisfied.
(2) Neutrinoless double $`\beta `$-decay  : The effective mass parameter relevant to the neutrinoless double $`\beta `$ decay can be estimated as

$$|m_{ee}|=|\underset{j}{}|U_{ej}|^2e^{i\varphi _j}m_j|=m_2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +m_3\mathrm{cos}^2\theta m_3,$$
(21)
where we assume $`\varphi _j=0`$ and use the fact $`m_2m_3`$. Then we have $`|m_{ee}|0.040.08`$ eV independently of the value of $`\mathrm{sin}\theta `$. This value seems to be a promising one for near future experiments.
(3) Effects of the mode (C) : This corresponds to the oscillation $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$, which is irrelevant to the atmospheric neutrino and also the short baseline experiments because of the smallness of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$. However, if $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta 1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^210^4\mathrm{eV}^2`$ which correspond to the LMA solution are satisfied, it can effectively contribute to the deviation from the simple two flavor oscillation scenario at $`L{}_{}{}^{>}2000`$ km.

## 3 Various issues of the model

In this section we will briefly comment on the issues which are crucial for the model to be a phenomenologically viable model.

(1) Realization of oscillation parameters
We have $`M_A,g_A(A=2,1,X)`$, $`q_\alpha `$ and $`u`$ as the parameters in our model. If we assume a gauge coupling unification and a universal gaugino mass $`M_0`$ at $`M_{\mathrm{GUT}}`$, gaugino masses at a low energy region are determined by renormalization group equations as

$$M_2(\mu )=\frac{M_0}{g_U^2}g_2^2(\mu ),M_{1,X}(\mu )=\frac{M_0}{g_U^2}g_{1,X}^2(\mu ).$$
(22)
Under this assumption, the number of parameters can be effectively reduced and we can take $`q_I,q_{III}`$ and $`\frac{g_U^2}{M_0}u^2`$ as the remaining parameters. Every oscillation parameter can be written down by using them. Taking account of this fact, we find that the atmospheric neutrinos require $`0.017\mathrm{eV}{}_{}{}^{<}\frac{g_U^2}{M_0}u^2{}_{}{}^{<}0.023\mathrm{eV}`$. This means that $`u`$ should be $`6070`$ keV if we take $`M_0100`$ TeV and $`g_U0.72`$, for example. The solar neutrinos impose $`(q_I,q_{III})`$ to be in a certain region, which is shown in Fig.1. From this figure we find that the LMA solution is allowed in the wider region than other solutions. Here it is a crucial problem whether the gauge symmetry including U(1)X can be anomaly free in a consistent way with the above required region of $`(q_I,q_{III})`$. On this point, we find that the model can be consistent, although we need to introduce additional chiral superfields such as $`\mathrm{𝟐}_0,\mathrm{𝟏}_{\pm 1}`$ and $`4(\mathrm{𝟏}_0)`$ of SU(2)$`{}_{L}{}^{}\times `$ U(1)Y, for example. If we impose the anomaly free conditions and also the massive conditions for the chiral superfields $`\mathrm{𝟐}_0,\mathrm{𝟏}_{\pm 1}`$ at the TeV region which seems to be required from experiments, $`q_I`$ and $`q_{III}`$ are found to satisfy a certain relation as shown in Fig.1. From this analysis we find that this kind of model can be easily constructed in a consistent way.

(2) $`Z^{}`$ nonuniversal coupling and FCNC
We assume that U(1)X has the flavor diagonal but generation dependent interactions. In general, such kind of interactions can induce dangerous FCNC processes, for example, a coherent $`\mu `$-$`e`$ conversion, $`\tau 3e,3\mu `$, $`\mu e\gamma `$ and so on. The additional new $`Z^{}`$ interactions can be written in mass eigenstates as

$`_Z^{}=g_1\left({\displaystyle \frac{g_X}{g_1}}\mathrm{cos}\xi J_{(X)}^\mu \mathrm{sin}\xi J_{(1)}^\mu \right)Z_\mu ^{},`$ (23)
$`J_{(X)}^\mu ={\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}\left(\overline{\nu }_{Li}B_{ij}^{\nu _L}\nu _{Lj}+\overline{\mathrm{}}_{Li}B_{ij}^\mathrm{}_L\mathrm{}_{Lj}+\overline{\mathrm{}}_{Ri}B_{ij}^\mathrm{}_R\mathrm{}_R\right),`$ (24)
$`B_{ij}^\psi =V^\psi \mathrm{diag}(q_{III},q_I,q_I)V^\psi ,`$ (25)
where $`\mathrm{}_L`$ and $`\mathrm{}_R`$ stand for the charged leptons. $`V^\psi `$ is a diagonalization matrix of the charged lepton mass matrix and it is defined as

$$V^\psi _\psi V^\psi =\mathrm{diagonal},_\psi =\{\begin{array}{cc}m_D^{}m_D\hfill & (\psi =\mathrm{}_R)\hfill \\ m_Dm_D^{}\hfill & (\psi =\mathrm{}_L)\hfill \end{array},$$
(26)
where $`m_D`$ is a Dirac mass matrix defined by $`\overline{\mathrm{}}_Lm_D\mathrm{}_R`$. Because of the U(1)X constraint, we find that $`B_{ij}^{\mathrm{}_{L,R}}\delta _{ij}`$. So nonuniversal coupling of U(1)X induces no serious problem in this model. If the usual conditions $`m_Z^{}{}_{}{}^{>}600`$ GeV and $`\xi {}_{}{}^{<}10_{}^{3}`$ are satisfied, no contradiction to the present experimental data appears.

(3) Sneutrino VEVs
Small but nonzero VEVs of sneutrinos $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\alpha `$ are crucial in this model. If bilinear $`R`$-parity violating terms $`ϵL_\alpha H_2`$ exist in the superpotential, the minimization of the scalar potential results in

$$uϵ\frac{\mu H_1+B_ϵH_2}{\stackrel{~}{m}^2},$$
(27)
where $`B_ϵ`$ is a soft breaking parameter for $`ϵL_\alpha H_2`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{m}^2`$ is an averaged value of the squared soft scalar masses of Higgs scalars. This implies that $`u`$ can be very small for the small $`ϵ`$ satisfying $`ϵ\mu ,m,B_ϵ`$. The problem is how we can explain the smallness of $`ϵ`$. Several possible solutions can be considered as in the case of $`\mu `$-term . (i) Giudice-Masiero mechanism : If Kähler potential includes a term $`ZL_\alpha H_2`$ and the supersymmetry is broken by an $`F`$-term of the chiral superfield $`Z`$, for example, we have a small one such as $`ϵ\frac{F_Z}{M_{\mathrm{pl}}}`$. (ii) Higher dimensional term in the superpotential : We consider that the superpotential includes a nonrenormalizable term such as $`\frac{\overline{N}N}{M_{\mathrm{pl}}^2}SL_\alpha H_2`$. If scalar components of $`\overline{N}`$ and $`N`$ get the VEVs of the intermediate scale through a $`D`$-flat direction and a scalar component of $`S`$ gets a TeV scale VEV, for example, we can have $`ϵ\frac{N^2}{M_{\mathrm{pl}}^2}S`$ which can be sufficiently small. (iii) Coupling to the superconformal sector : If the MSSM fields couple to the superconformal sector, they get large anomalous dimensions . This can be applied to the explanation of the hierarchy among Yukawa couplings and the universality of soft scalar masses . This idea is also applicable to the explanation of the smallness of $`ϵ`$. For example, we consider superpotentials $`W_{\mathrm{sc}}=y_1\stackrel{~}{H}_1\overline{T}S+y_2\stackrel{~}{H}_2T\overline{S}`$ and $`W_\mu =ϵ_\alpha L_\alpha \stackrel{~}{H}_2+\mu _1\stackrel{~}{H}_1H_2+\mu _2H_1\stackrel{~}{H}_2`$, where $`T,\overline{T}`$ and $`S,\overline{S}`$ are chiral superfields in the superconformal sector and $`\stackrel{~}{H}_{1,2}`$ are the extended Higgs chiral superfields. As a result of the couplings with the superconformal sector, $`\stackrel{~}{H}_{1,2}`$ can have a large anomalous dimension $`\gamma `$ and the bilinear $`R`$-parity violating parameters $`ϵ_\alpha `$ behave as $`ϵ_\alpha (\mathrm{\Lambda })=ϵ_\alpha (\mathrm{\Lambda }_0)\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}\right)^\gamma `$ . We find that there is a large suppression in the case of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ even if $`ϵ(\mathrm{\Lambda }_0)`$ is a weak scale. Anyway we have many candidates for the mechanism to realize the small bilinear $`R`$-parity violating terms and we can expect that they are applicable to our model.

## 4 An extension of the model

We consider here an extension of our simple model to include the quark sector. For this purpose we introduce two Abelian symmetries U(1)$`{}_{F}{}^{}\times `$U(1)X . Although U(1)X is assumed to be unbroken at a TeV region which is the same as in the previous simple model, we take U(1)F to be an anomalous U(1) symmetry which is broken near the Planck scale. It is used for the Froggatt-Nielsen mechanism to generate the quark and lepton mass hierarchy. The field contents in this extended models are summarized as follows:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& U(1)_F& U(1)_X\\ \mathrm{𝟏𝟎}_f(q,u^c,d)_f\hfill & (3,2,0)& (\alpha ,\alpha ,\alpha )\\ \mathrm{𝟓}_f^{}(d^c,\mathrm{})\hfill & (1,0,0)& (q_1,q_1,q_2)\\ \mathrm{𝟓}^a(D,H_2)^a\hfill & ((0,0),(0,0))& ((x,z),(p,r))\\ \mathrm{𝟓}^a(\overline{D},H_1)^a\hfill & ((0,0),(0,0))& ((y,w),(q,s))\\ \mathrm{𝟏}_0S_0\hfill & (1)& (0)\\ \mathrm{𝟏}_iS_i\hfill & (0,\mathrm{},0)& (Q_1,\mathrm{},Q_6)\end{array}$$
(28)
where we use the SU(5) representation for the description of the quarks and the leptons. We introduce a pair of Higgs doublet chiral superfields only to guarantee the SM gauge couplings unification additionally to the above list of field contents. They have no affect to the following results. Here we impose several phenomenological conditions, that is, the gauge anomaly cancellation, the proton stability by prohibitting dangerous couplings of the extra colored triplets to the SM fields, and also the existence of Higgs mixings such as

$$(H_2^1,H_2^2)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\kappa _1S_1& \kappa _2S_2\\ \kappa _4S_4& \kappa _5S_5\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}H_1^1\\ H_1^2\end{array}\right).$$
(29)
The last condition comes from the requirement to make only one pair of Higgs doublets massless. These requirements bring the constraints on the U(1)X charges introduced above. We must study neutrino masses under these constraints. If $`\kappa _5S_5/\kappa _4S_4`$ is equal to $`\kappa _1S_1/\kappa _2S_2`$ in eq. (29), we find that $`(H_2^1,H_1^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{sin}\zeta H_1^1+\mathrm{cos}\zeta H_1^2)`$ can play a role of the usual Higgs fields, where the mixing angle $`\zeta `$ is defined as $`\mathrm{tan}\zeta =\kappa _1S_1/\kappa _2S_2`$.

Now we discuss the masses and the flavor mixings in the quark and lepton sectors. We assume that U(1)F is broken by the VEV of the scalar component of $`S_0`$ which takes a value nearly equal to $`M_{\mathrm{pl}}`$. In the quark sector U(1)F controls the flavor mixing by regulating the number of $`S_0`$ contained in each nonrenormalizable terms through the so-called Froggatt-Nielsen mechanism . If we introduce a parameter $`\lambda S_0/M_{\mathrm{pl}}`$, the quark mass matrix can be written as

$$M_u\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^6& \lambda ^5& \lambda ^3\\ \lambda ^5& \lambda ^4& \lambda ^2\\ \lambda ^3& \lambda ^2& 1\end{array}\right)H_2^1,M_d\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^4\mathrm{sin}\zeta & \lambda ^3\mathrm{sin}\zeta & \lambda \mathrm{sin}\zeta \\ \lambda ^3\mathrm{sin}\zeta & \lambda ^2\mathrm{sin}\zeta & \mathrm{sin}\zeta \\ \lambda ^3\mathrm{cos}\zeta & \lambda ^2\mathrm{cos}\zeta & \mathrm{cos}\zeta \end{array}\right)H_1^{\mathrm{}}.$$
(30)
From these mass matrices we can obtain the mass eigenvalues and the CKM mixing as follows,

$`m_u:m_c:m_t=\lambda ^6:\lambda ^4:1,`$
$`m_d:m_s:m_b=\lambda ^4\mathrm{sin}\zeta :\lambda ^2\mathrm{cos}\zeta :\mathrm{cos}\zeta ,`$
$`V_{us}\lambda ,V_{ub}\lambda ^3,V_{cb}\lambda ^2.`$ (31)
This seems to have qualitatively nice features if we take $`\lambda 0.22`$. In the lepton sector the charged lepton mass matrix has the same form as $`M_d^T`$ because of the SU(5) relation and then we obtain

$$m_e:m_\mu :m_\tau =\lambda ^4\mathrm{sin}\zeta :\lambda ^2\mathrm{cos}\zeta :\mathrm{cos}\zeta .$$
(32)
A diagonalization matrix $`\stackrel{~}{U}_{\mathrm{}}`$ of the charged lepton mass matrix is found to be

$$\stackrel{~}{U}_{\mathrm{}}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& \lambda \mathrm{sin}\zeta \\ \lambda \mathrm{sin}^2\zeta & \mathrm{cos}\zeta & \mathrm{sin}\zeta \\ \lambda \mathrm{sin}\zeta \mathrm{cos}\zeta & \mathrm{sin}\zeta & \mathrm{cos}\zeta \end{array}\right).$$
(33)
For the neutrino sector we can directly use the result in the previous simple model. Then, for example, if we take $`\lambda 0.22`$, $`\mathrm{cos}\theta 1`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}\zeta \mathrm{cos}\zeta \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}`$, we find that the solar and atmospheric neutrinos can be explained simultaneously and the LMA solution can be applied to the solar neutrino. The neutrino mass spectrum has a normal hierarchy in this case and the MNS-matrix can be written as

$$U^{\mathrm{MNS}}=\stackrel{~}{U}_{\mathrm{}}^{}U_\nu \left(\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{\lambda }{2}\\ \frac{1}{2}& \frac{1}{2}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\\ \frac{1}{2}& \frac{1}{2}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\end{array}\right).$$
(34)
Although the CHOOZ constraint is satisfied , the maximal mixing is not realized for the solar neutrino and we have a rather large value of $`U_{e3}^{\mathrm{MNS}}`$ such as $`\frac{\lambda }{2}0.11`$. This is an interesting prediction of this model. Neutrinoless double $`\beta `$-decay seems difficult to be found in the near future experiments since $`|M_{ee}|\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{solar}}^2}+\frac{\lambda ^2}{4}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{atm}}^2}`$ is so small. On the model parameters, if we take $`M_0100`$ TeV and $`g_U0.72`$, $`u`$ should be $`0.761.6`$ MeV. The U(1)X charges $`(q_1,q_2)`$ should be in the region shown in Fig.2, in which we also draw the lines which represent a relation between $`q_1`$ and $`q_2`$ required by the previously mentioned various constraints. Because of the flavor dependent interactions of U(1)X, FCNC seems to give severe constraints on the model. However, if $`m_Z^{}{}_{}{}^{>}100`$ TeV and $`\xi {}_{}{}^{<}10_{}^{6}`$ are satisfied, the present experimental bounds for the FCNC can be satisfied.

## 5 Summary

In this talk we have discussed that the supersymmetry and the neutrino masses can be closely related by considering the $`R`$-parity violation. If we introduce a generation dependent extra U(1) gauge symmetry at a TeV region, the masses and mixings of neutrinos can be explained at a tree level due to the mixing among neutrinos and gauginos. Since the supersymmetry is a promising ingredient to solve the gauge hierarchy problem in the SM, it seems to be a very interesting possibility to explain the neutrino masses and mixings in relation to the supersymmetry.

Our model can be extended so as to include the quark sector straightforwardly. If we consider two Abelian flavor symmetries U(1)$`{}_{F}{}^{}\times `$ U(1)X, the mass and mixing in both quark and lepton sectors seem to be successfully explained by both the Froggatt-Nielsen mechanism and the neutrino-gaugino mixing.

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank George Zoupanos and organizers of the Summer Institute CORFU 2001 for their kind hospitality. This work is partially supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) from Japan Society for Promotion of Science (No.11640267).


text:
# Radiating spherical collapse with heat flow

## 1 INTRODUCTION

The theory of gravitional collapse has many interesting applications in astrophysics where the formation of cold compact stellar objects are usually preceded by a period of radiative collapse. The problem of gravitional collapse was first investigated by Oppenheimer and Snyder , who considered the contraction of a spherically symmetric dust cloud. Here the exterior spacetime was described by the Schwarzschild metric and the interior space time was represented by a Friedman-like solution. Thereafter, Vaidya  derived the line element which describes the exterior gravitational field of a spherically symmetric radiating mass. It then became possible to model the interior of radiating stars by matching the interior solution to the exterior space time given by Vaidya . The junction conditions for a spherically symmetric shear-free radiating star was completely derived by Santos . The crucial result that follows from Santos is that the pressure on the boundary of a radiating sphere is nonvanishing in general. Subsequently, many models of radiative gravitational collapse with heat flow were found by utilising these junction conditions. (See, e.g. .) In particular, special attention was given to models in which an initial static stellar configuration began collapsing by dissipating energy in the form of a radial heat flux . The initial static configuration was taken to be an exact solution of the Einstein field equations.

The aim of this paper is to consider the evolution of a star undergoing radiative gravitional collapse with its final state being that of a superdense star. We wish to study this evolutionary process starting from the final nonradiating state and interpolating to earlier times when it was emitting radiation.

In Section 2 we present the relevant background material and the line element for the interior space time. The Einstein equations for an energy momentum tensor with heat flux are solved without assuming a particular form for the final static configuration. The Vaidya solution is introduced in Section 3 and the matching condition is utilised to determine approximately the temporal evolution of the model. In Section 4 we use the solution of Mukherjee et al  to describe the final state of the star and find out its evolution by making use of the final static configuration. Although we are using a simple model, the results obtained analytically are expected to provide the general trends of results for realistic stars. In Section 5, we summarize our results.

## 2 INTERIOR SPACETIME

Let us assume that the interior spacetime of a star is represented by a line element of the form

$`ds^2=A^2(t,r)dt^2+B^2(t,r)(dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2)`$ (1)

The choice of a shear-free metric is motivated by the simplicity of the resulting equations, which remain tractable throughout. Moreover, as observed by Bonnor et al , it is possible to show through Raychaudhuri’s equation that the slowest possible collapse is for shear-free fluids. Thus our results will be appropriate in any case if the collapse is not very fast. Also, the choice of a shear-free metric will later on help us to apply the same junction conditions derived by Santos  in our model.

The energy momentum tensor for the interior matter distribution is taken to be

$`T_{\mu \nu }=(\rho +p)u_\mu u_\nu +pg_{\mu \nu }+q_\mu u_\nu +q_\nu u_\mu `$ (2)

where the flow vector satisfies

$$q^\mu u_\nu =0,$$

$`u^\mu `$ being a timelike four velocity vector.

Following Bonnor et al , we choose the metric functions as follows:

$`A(r,t)=A_0(r)+ϵa(r)T(t)`$ (3)

$`B(r,t)=B_0(r)+ϵb(r)T(t)`$ (4)

and the energy density $`\rho `$ and the isotropic pressure $`p`$ as

$`\rho (r,t)=\rho _0(r)+ϵ\overline{\rho }(r,t)`$ (5)

$`p(r,t)=p_0(r)+ϵ\overline{p}(r,t)`$ (6)

The radial heat flux is of the order of $`ϵ`$ $`(0<ϵ1)`$. However, unlike the case studied by Bonner et al , $`A_0`$ and $`B_0`$ describe here the final static solutions of the cold star.

Einstein’s field equations for the static configuration give the relations:

$`\rho _0=\frac{1}{B_0^2}\left[2\left(\frac{B_0^{\prime \prime }}{B_0}\right)\left(\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}\right)^2+\frac{4}{r}\left(\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}\right)\right]`$ (7)

$`p_0=\frac{1}{B_0^2}\left[\left(\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}\right)^2+2\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}+\frac{2}{r}\left(\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}+\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}\right)\right]`$ (8)

where prime $`()`$ denotes differentiation with respect to $`r`$.

The pressure isotropy equation is given by

$`\left(\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}+\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}\right)^{}\left(\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}+\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}\right)^2\frac{1}{r}\left(\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}+\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}\right)+2\left(\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}\right)^2=0`$ (9)

We assume that the presure isotropy condition is satisfied for a known static solution $`(A_0,B_0)`$. The perturbed field equations up to first order in $`ϵ`$ can be written as

$`\overline{\rho }=3\rho _0\frac{b}{B_0}T+\frac{1}{B_0^3}\left[\left(\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}\right)^2b+2\left(\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}\frac{2}{r}\right)b^{}2b^{\prime \prime }\right]T`$ (10)

$`\overline{p}=2p_0\frac{b}{B_0}T+\frac{2}{B_0^2}\left[\left(\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}+\frac{1}{r}+\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}\right)\left(\frac{b}{B_0}\right)^{}+\left(\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}+\frac{1}{r}\right)\left(\frac{a}{A_0}\right)^{}\right]T2\frac{b}{A_0^2B_0}\ddot{T}`$ (11)

$`q=\frac{2ϵ}{B_0^2}\left(\frac{b}{A_0B_0}\right)^{}\dot{T}`$ (12)

where an overhead dot denotes differentiation with respect to $`t`$.

The condition of pressure isotropy for the perturbed matter distribution can be written as

$`\left[\left(\frac{a}{A_0}\right)^{}+\left(\frac{b}{B_0}\right)^{}\right]^{}2\left[\left(\frac{a}{A_0}\right)^{}+\left(\frac{b}{B_0}\right)^{}\right]\left(\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}+\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}\right)`$

$`\frac{1}{r}\left[\left(\frac{a}{A_0}\right)^{}+\left(\frac{b}{B_0}\right)^{}\right]+4\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}\left(\frac{a}{A_0}\right)^{}=0`$ (13)

The general solution to this equation is

$`\frac{b}{B_0}=C_0rA_0^2B_0^2𝑑r+C_1rA_0^2B_0^2A_0^4\left(\frac{(\frac{a}{A_0})^{}A_0^2}{rB_0^2}\right)^{}𝑑r𝑑r`$ (14)

or, equivalently,

$`\frac{a}{A_0}=C_0\frac{rB_0^2}{A_0^2}𝑑r+C_1\frac{rB_0^2}{A_0^2}A_0^4\left(\frac{(\frac{b}{B_0})^{}}{rA_0^2B_0^2}\right)^{}𝑑r𝑑r`$ (15)

where $`C_0`$ and $`C_1`$ are constants.

Equation (14) or (15) gives a relation between $`a(r)`$ and $`b(r)`$. For specific calculations, however, it will be helpful to follow an alternative approach. We write $`\left(\frac{a}{A_0}\right)^{}=X(r)`$ and $`\left(\frac{b}{B_0}\right)^{}=Y(r)`$ and rewrite equation (13) as

$`\frac{(X+Y)^{}}{X+Y}\left(\frac{2A_0^{}}{A_0}+\frac{2B_0^{}}{B_0}+\frac{1}{r}\right)+4\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}\frac{X}{X+Y}=0.`$ (16)

Equation (16) can be integrated easily if we assume

$`\frac{X}{X+Y}=A_0\frac{dg(A_0)}{dA_0}`$ (17)

which gives

$`X=k_1rA_0^3B_0^2ye^{4g(A_0)}`$ (18)

and

$`Y=\left(\frac{1}{yA_0}1\right)X`$ (19)

where $`k_1`$ is an integration constant and $`y=\frac{dg(A_0)}{dA_0}`$.

Thus we obtain

$`\frac{a}{A_0}=k_1rA_0^3B_0^2ye^{4g(A_0)}𝑑r+k_2`$ (20)

where $`k_2`$ is another integration constant.

The right hand side of equation (20) can be integrated for different choices of the function $`g(A_0)`$. It is instructive to consider a simple case:

$`g(A_0)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}A_0`$ (21)

This gives

$`\frac{a}{A_0}=\frac{b}{B_0}=\frac{k_1}{2}rB_0^2𝑑r+k_2`$. (22)

It may be useful to calculate the total energy entrapped within the surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of the star. Up to first order in $`ϵ`$, this is given by

$`m(r_\mathrm{\Sigma },t)=m_0(r_\mathrm{\Sigma })+ϵ\overline{m}(r_\mathrm{\Sigma },t)`$ (23)

where

$`m_0(r_\mathrm{\Sigma })=\left(r^2B_0^{}+r^3\frac{B_0^2}{2B_0}\right)_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (24)

$`\overline{m}(r_\mathrm{\Sigma },t)=\left(\left[r^2b^{}r^3\frac{B_0^2}{2B_0}\left(2\frac{b^{}}{B_0^{}}\frac{b}{B_0}\right)\right]T(t)\right)_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (25)

where $`r_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ corresponds to the boundary. The evaluation of $`m_0(r_\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ and $`\overline{m}(r_\mathrm{\Sigma },t)`$ will be pursued in Section 4.

## 3 JUNCTION CONDITIONS

The boundary of the collapsing star divides spacetime into two distinct regions, the interior spacetime described by the metric (1) and the exterior spacetime. Since the collapsing star is radiating energy, the exterior spacetime is described by Vaidya’s outgoing metric

$`ds^2=\left(1\frac{2m(v)}{r}\right)dv^22dvdr+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2)`$ (26)

$`m(v)`$ being an arbitrary function of the retarded time $`v`$. The solution (26) is the unique spherically symmetric solution of the Einstein field equations for radiation in the form of a null fluid. The Vaidya solution is often used to describe the exterior gravitational field of a radiating star .

In order to facilitate the smooth matching of the interior space-time to the Vaidya exterior, we utilise the junction conditions deduced by Santos . We can rewrite equations (11) and (12) as

$`\overline{p}=2p_0\frac{b}{B_0}T+2\frac{b}{A_0^2B_0}\left(\alpha T\ddot{T}\right)`$ (27)

$`q=\frac{4bϵ}{A_0^2B_0^2}\beta \dot{T}`$ (28)

where

$`\alpha =\frac{A_0^2}{bB_0}\left[\left(\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}+\frac{1}{r}+\frac{A_0^{}}{A_0}\right)\left(\frac{b}{B_0}\right)^{}+\left(\frac{B_0^{}}{B_0}+\frac{1}{r}\right)\left(\frac{a}{A_0}\right)^{}\right]`$ (29)

$`\beta =\frac{A_0^2}{2b}\left(\frac{b}{A_0B_0}\right)^{}`$. (30)

To find $`T(t)`$ we make use of the junction condition $`p_\mathrm{\Sigma }=\left(qB\right)_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ together with $`\left(p_0\right)_\mathrm{\Sigma }=0`$ which gives

$`\alpha _\mathrm{\Sigma }T\ddot{T}=2\beta _\mathrm{\Sigma }\dot{T}`$ (31)

where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ represents the boundary of the star. The solution of (31) is given by

$`T(t)=T_0\mathrm{exp}\left[\left(\beta _\mathrm{\Sigma }+\sqrt{\alpha _\mathrm{\Sigma }+\beta _{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\right)t\right]`$ (32)

which satisfies the boundary conditions

$`T(t)|_{t=\mathrm{}}=0`$ and $`T(t)|_{t=0}=T_0`$ (33)

where $`T_0`$ is a constant. Since we expect $`T(t)`$ to decrease as $`t`$ increases, we have $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Sigma }>0`$. (see later.)

## 4 FINAL STATIC SOLUTION

We assume that the line element (1) represents a static solution at large times i.e. as $`t\mathrm{}`$, and the metric coefficients are then represented by $`A_0`$ and $`B_0`$, the static part of equations (3) and (4), respectively.

For the static solution we take the solutions of Mukherjee et al  of the Vaidya-Tikekar  model for a class of static spherically symmetric stars, viz.

$`ds^2=e^{2\nu (\overline{r})}dt^2+e^{2\mu (\overline{r})}d\overline{r}^2+\overline{r}^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2)`$ (34)

where

$`e^{2\mu (\overline{r})}=\frac{1+\lambda \overline{r}^2/R^2}{1\overline{r}^2/R^2}`$ (35)

and

$`e^{\nu (\overline{r})}=D\left[\frac{\mathrm{cos}[(n+1)\zeta +\omega ]}{n+1}\frac{\mathrm{cos}[(n1)\zeta +\omega ]}{n1}\right]`$ (36)

In equations (35) and (36), $`D`$, $`\omega `$ and $`R`$ are constants, $`\zeta =\mathrm{cos}^1z`$, $`n^2=\lambda +2`$ and $`z^2=(\frac{\lambda }{\lambda +1})(1\frac{\overline{r}^2}{R^2})`$.

The solution satisfies strong and weak energy conditions as well as the causality condition and is valid for any value of $`\lambda \frac{3}{17}`$ . The boundary of the star $`b`$ is determined by imposing the condition $`p_0=0`$ at $`\overline{r}=b`$. At the boundary of the star, the solution is matched to the Schwarzchild exterior solution. The model has four parameters $`\lambda `$, $`R`$, $`D`$ and $`\omega `$, of which three, say $`R`$, $`D`$ and $`\omega `$, are determined by the matching condition ($`p_0=0`$ at $`\overline{r}=b`$ and the continuity of two metric coefficients). The choice of the remaining parameter $`\lambda `$, then, fixes the relevant equation of state of the star. Thus, in the present model, for a given mass and radius, there is a one-parameter class of equations of state parametrized by $`\lambda `$. Previous works  show that this model can describe cold compact stars like Her X-1 and SAX J1808.4-3658. The model also has a scaling property which allows a description of a class of stars with the same compactness . Moreover, the stability of the stellar configurations for various $`\lambda `$ can be verified easily in this model, as shown in . Thus although the solution provides a toy model of a star, its simple analytic form is found to be very useful in studying the gross features of a star with an equation of state specified by the value of $`\lambda `$.

However, to make use of this solution, we need to transform the metric (1) to the form given by (34), i.e. we need to change the radial coordinate $`r`$ to $`\overline{r}`$.

A comparison of equations (1) and (34) yields

$`\overline{r}=rB_0(r)`$ and $`e^{\mu (\overline{r})}d\overline{r}=B_0(r)dr`$ (37)

Using equations (35) and (37), we obtain the inverse transformation relation as

$`r=k_3\mathrm{exp}\left[\mathrm{tanh}^1\left(\frac{\mathrm{sin}\chi }{\sqrt{1+\lambda \mathrm{cos}^2\chi }}\right)\sqrt{\lambda }\mathrm{sin}^1\left(\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{\lambda +1}}\mathrm{sin}\chi \right)\right]`$ (38)

where $`\chi =\mathrm{cos}^1\left(\frac{\overline{r}}{R}\right)`$ and $`k_3`$ is an integration constant.

The integration in equation (22) is over $`r`$, but using equation (37) we can integrate it over $`\overline{r}`$ so that the final results are expressed in terms of $`\overline{r}`$. We obtain

$`\frac{a}{A_0}=\frac{b}{B_0}=\frac{k_1}{4l^2}R^2\sqrt{\lambda }\left[\mathrm{sin}^1(lx)+lx\sqrt{1l^2x^2}\right]+k_2`$ (39)

where $`l=\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{\lambda +1}}`$, $`x=\sqrt{1\frac{\overline{r}^2}{R^2}}`$.

To get a feel for the behaviour of the solution, we need to consider specific numeric cases. As an example, we consider a star whose final state has a mass $`m=0.88M_{}`$ and radius $`b=7.7`$ km. Note that, these values fall well within the estimated mass and radius of the well known X-ray pulsar Her X-1 . Moreover, with a particular choice of the parameter $`\lambda `$ ($`\lambda =100`$), it has been shown elsewhere  that the equation of state obtained using the model discussed in Section 4, agrees accurately with the equation of state obtained by Horvath and Pacheco  for a quark-diquark mixture. Matching the static solution to the Schwarzchild exterior solution and using the boundary condition $`p_0=0`$ at $`\overline{r}=b`$ (note that in the evolutionary stage pressure does not vanish at the boundary), we calculate the values of the constants as $`R=108.779`$km, $`\omega =2.58577`$ and $`D=26.6039`$.

We, then, choose the constants $`k_1`$, $`k_2`$ & $`k_3`$ in such a way that our model describes the expected early evolutionary stage of the star. The time dependence of $`T(t)`$, heat flux $`q(t)`$ and mass $`m(r,t)`$ are shown in figures 1, 2 and 3, respectively, where we considered two exemplary cases: (1) $`k_1=1`$, $`k_2=10^5`$ and $`k_3=1`$ (solid lines) and (2) $`k_1=1`$, $`k_2=10^{5.2}`$ and $`k_3=1`$ (dashed lines). Arbitrary choices of these values may not give realistic results. In figures 1 and 2, we find that both $`T(t)`$ and $`q(t)`$ decreases with time, as expected. In figure 3, the mass of the star decreases with increasing time and it can be shown that as time goes to infinity the mass saturates to its final static value of $`0.88M_{}`$.

## 5 CONCLUSIONS

Our model gives a description of the evolution of a radiating star. For a known static configuration of a star, this model generates solutions for the earlier stages of the star by a perturbative approach. This may be looked upon as complementary to the approach of Bonner et al . Possibly, the two methods, when combined carefully, will be able to give a total picture of the radiative collapse of a star, which ends up as a cold compact star. In our method, we have made use of the general solution given by Mukherjee et al . It has been shown elsewhere that the static solution can describe very compact cold stars, with an equation of state relevant for deconfined quarks  as well as a mixture of quarks and diquarks . The possibility that a compact star could have a deconfined quark phase in the core, surrounded by a crust of baryons and separated by a layer where the relevant density permits a hadronic phase transition, has also been considered  in the static model. Since a variety of final states are now available in the static model, the approach presented here may be useful.

## Acknowledgements

RS acknowledges financial support from CSIR, New Delhi, India. TKD is thankful to the UGC, New Delhi, India, for financial assistance and to IUCAA Reference Centre and the Physics Department, North Bengal University for hospitality during the period of this work. KSG thanks the University of Natal for ongoing support.


text:
# Quantum deformations of fundamental groups of oriented 3-manifolds

## 1 Introduction

Let $`M`$ be a compact oriented $`3`$-manifold (possibly with boundary). Throughout link will mean framed and oriented link in $`M`$.

In \[P1\] (see also \[Ki\]) J. Przytycki defines the quantum deformation of $`\pi _1(M)`$ in the following way: Let $`𝔏(M)`$ be the set of isotopy classes of links in $`M`$. Let $`𝒮(M)`$ be the quotient of the free $`[q^{\pm 1}]=:R`$-module with basis $`𝔏(M)`$ by the relations $`K_+=q^2K_{}`$ and $`K^{(1)}=qK`$. Here $`K_\pm `$ are two links, which differ only inside a $`3`$-ball in $`M`$ by a crossing change. The link $`K^{(1)}`$ is defined from $`K`$ by introducing a positive twist into the framing of one of its components. The pictures below show projections onto a plane contained in some oriented $`3`$-ball in $`M`$. We assume that framings are induced from the projection plane.

$`K_+`$ $`K_{}`$ $`K^{(1)}`$ $`K`$

Let $`\widehat{\pi }(M)`$ be the set of conjugacy classes of the fundamental group $`\pi _1(M)`$. For each ring $`A`$ let $`SA\widehat{\pi }(M)`$ be the symmetric algebra of the free module with basis $`\widehat{\pi }(M)`$.

Theorem (Przytycki). (a) If $`M`$ has no non-separating $`2`$-spheres and tori then $`𝒮(M)`$ is isomorphic to $`SR\widehat{\pi }(M)`$.

(b) If $`M`$ contains a non-separating $`2`$-sphere or torus then $`𝒮(M)`$ has a torsion element:

1. If $`K`$ is a link in $`M`$ with intersection number with some $`2`$-sphere equal to $`k0`$ then
$`(q^{2k}1)K=0`$ in $`𝒮(M)`$.
2. Let $`K^{}`$ be a link in $`M`$ with intersection number with some torus equal to $`k0`$. Let $`K`$ be a link obtained from $`K^{}`$ by adding to $`K^{}`$ a non-contractible curve on the torus. Then $`(q^{2k}1)K=0`$ in $`𝒮(M)`$.

The results (b) are proven in (\[P1\], 1.3) by explicit construction and (a) has been announced there. We will give a proof of Przytycki’s theorem in section 5. A similar and related skein module based on homology of framed links has been computed in \[P3\]. This module has been described as the quantum deformation of the first homology group of $`M`$ in the same way as $`𝒮(M)`$ can be considered as the quantum deformation of the fundamental group of $`M`$. Note that the ring homomorphism $`R1`$ mapping $`q`$ to $`1`$ induces the $`(R,)`$-homomorphism

$$𝒮(M)S\widehat{\pi }(M).$$

In this paper we give a complete description of $`𝒮(M)`$, which is based on ideas from Vassiliev theory, see also \[KL\],\[K1\],\[V1\]. This settles Problem I. 92, Part I from Kirby’s problem list. We will reduce the understanding of relations in a natural presentation of $`𝒮(M)`$ to certain problems in the theory of singular $`2`$-spheres and tori in $`M`$. The relation with Przytycki’s result is based on D. Gabai’s generalization of the sphere theorem relating singular with embedded surface theory \[G\].

For $`r0`$ let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_r(M):=map(_rS^1,M)/\mathrm{\Sigma }_r`$, where $`map`$ denotes the set of smooth maps and the permutation group $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_r`$ acts on domains in the obvious way. Note that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(M)=:𝕃(M)`$ is the space of smooth free loops in $`M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0(M)`$ is a point by definition. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(M):=_{r0}\mathrm{\Lambda }_r(M)`$ be the generalized free loop space of $`M`$. Let $`I(M)\mathrm{\Lambda }(M)`$ be the subspace of immersed maps.

We will prove the following two results:

Theorem 1. There exists a system of local coefficients $``$ in $`I(M)`$, with $`_xR`$ for $`xI(M)`$, such that

$$H_0(I(M),)𝒮(M).$$

Note that $`\pi _0(𝕃(M))`$ is in 1-1 correspondence with $`\widehat{\pi }(M)`$ and $`\pi _0(\mathrm{\Lambda }(M))\pi _0(I(M))`$ is in 1-1 correspondence with the set $`𝔟(M)`$ of unordered sequences in $`\widehat{\pi }(M)`$. Also $`𝔟(M)`$ is the natural basis of the module $`SA\widehat{\pi }(M)`$, which is isomorphic to the homology module $`H_0(\mathrm{\Lambda }(M),A)`$ ($`A`$ any ring).

Theorem 2. For each $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$ there is a non-negative integer $`\epsilon (\alpha )`$, which is determined by oriented intersection numbers in $`M`$, and an isomorphism of $`R`$-modules:

$$𝒮(M)\underset{\alpha 𝔟(M)}{}R/(q^{2\epsilon (\alpha )}1).$$

The isomorphism of the theorem is determined by a choice of standard links with given free homotopy classes of components. A precise description of the index $`\epsilon (\alpha )`$ of $`\alpha `$ is given below.

Note that each $`0`$-dimensional twisted homology module is a direct sum of cyclic modules with cyclic summands corresponding to path components \[W\]. The theorems above provide a description of the relations in the skein module through monodromies of paths in $`I(M)`$. The skein module $`𝒮(M)`$ is free if and only if all monodromies are trivial, and $`𝒮(M)SR\widehat{\pi }(M)`$ in this case.

The image of a link $`K`$ in the skein module is determined by the free homotopy classes of its components (some element $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$ determining a path component of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(M)`$) and some integer number $`w(K)`$, which is well-defined modulo $`2\epsilon (\alpha )`$. It follows from the skein relations that this number can be interpreted as the writhe (relative to a chosen standard link) of $`K`$. Thus, by computing the skein module, the indeterminancy of the universal writhe invariant is determined. But it should be noted that the writhe defined in this way does not satisfy the usual behaviour with respect to smoothing of crossings as known for $`S^3`$. This homological writhe of links is measured in the quantum deformation of the first homology group of $`M`$ \[P3\].

Now we describe the index function $`\epsilon `$. Throughout we will use the natural Hurewicz isomorphism from oriented singular bordism to oriented homology in dimensions $`1`$ and $`2`$ (see e. g. (\[Ka\], 13.15)). Let

$$\lambda :H_2(M)H_1(M)$$

be defined by the oriented intersection number of oriented (maybe singular) closed surfaces and loops in $`M`$. Let

$$\mu :𝔟(M)H_1(M)$$

be defined by taking the sum of the homology classes resulting by application of the Hurewicz homomorphism to the free homotopy classes in $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$. For $`\beta \widehat{\pi }(M)`$ let $`f_\beta :S^1M`$ be a representing map. Let

$$\mu :\pi _1(𝕃(M),f_\beta )H_2(M)$$

be defined by taking the homology class of the map $`c^{}:S^1\times S^1M`$ adjoint to $`c\pi _1(𝕃(M),f_\beta )`$. Now for $`\alpha =[\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r]𝔟(M)`$ let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )`$ be the subgroup of $``$ generated by all elements in

$$\lambda (\mu (\pi _1(𝕃(M),f_{\alpha _i})),\mu (\alpha ))$$

for all $`1ir`$. If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )`$ is nontrivial let $`\epsilon (\alpha )`$ be a positive generator, otherwise let $`\epsilon (\alpha )`$ be $`0`$. Note that $`\epsilon (\mathrm{})=0`$, where $`\mathrm{}`$ is the unique sequence in $`𝔟(M)`$ of length $`0`$. Obviously $`\epsilon (\alpha )`$ does not depend on the choice of maps $`f_\beta `$.

The following result can be considered as the singular version of Przytycki’s theorem, (a) (also the proof gives the idea for (b)):

Proposition. $`𝒮(M)`$ is isomorphic to $`SR\widehat{\pi }(M)`$ (equivalently is free) if and only if each mapping from a torus to $`M`$ is homologous into $`M`$.

Proof. If each mapping from a torus to $`M`$ is homologous into $`M`$ then all oriented intersection numbers of closed curves and tori are trivial. Thus the index is trivial for each $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$. Assume that there is a mapping from a torus, which is not homologous into $`M`$. It follows by Poincare duality (see (\[K2\], App. A)) that there exists an oriented loop, which has nontrivial intersection number with the singular torus. The map from the torus is the adjoint map of a representative of some element in $`\pi _1(𝕃(M),f_\beta )`$ for some $`\beta \widehat{\pi }(M)`$. Assume that the intersection number of the torus map and $`f_\beta `$ is non-trivial. Then each knot with homotopy class $`\beta `$ is torsion in $`𝒮(M)`$ by theorem 2. Otherwise we can find $`\beta ^{}\widehat{\pi }(M)`$ such that $`\beta ^{}`$ has non-trivial intersection number with the torus map. Then for $`\alpha :=[\beta ,\beta ^{}]`$ we have $`\epsilon (\alpha )0`$. Thus $`𝒮(M)`$ has torsion. $`\mathrm{}`$.

## 2 The general results

The quantum deformation of the fundamental group determines the writhe invariants of links in oriented $`3`$-manifolds in a universal way. The writhe of a link in $`S^3`$ naturally is the sum of the self-writhe and the total linking number (sum of pairwise linking numbers). Accordingly one can define a skein module of oriented $`3`$-manifolds, which contains the self-writhe and total linking number invariants. It turns out that the computation of this module does not require ideas beyond those used for the computation of the module $`𝒮(M)`$.

Let $`R^{}:=[q_1^{\pm 1},q_2^{\pm 1}]`$. Let $`𝒮^{}(M)`$ be the quotient of $`R^{}𝔏(M)`$ by the submodule generated by all elements of the form $`K_+=q_1^2K_{}`$ resp. $`K_+=q_2^2K_{}`$ for crossings of same resp. distinct components, and $`K^{(1)}=q_1K`$. Using the coefficient homomorphism $`R^{}R`$, which maps $`q_1`$ and $`q_2`$ to $`q`$, Pryztycki’s universal coefficient theorem \[P2\] induces the natural isomorphism

$$𝒮(M)𝒮^{}(M)_R^{}R.$$

Similarly, the coefficient homomorphism $`R^{}R`$, which maps $`q_1`$ to $`1`$ and $`q_2`$ to $`q`$ induces the homomorphism onto the linking number skein module $`(M)`$ considered in \[K1\]. Finally there is the naturally homomorphism of skein modules defined from the ring homomorphism $`R^{}R`$, which maps $`q_2`$ to 1 and $`q_1`$ to $`q`$. Let $`𝒲(M)`$ denote the resulting skein module. In this skein module the relative self-writhe of links is measured. We will state some detailed results about this module in theorem 5 and the following corollaries. The modules discussed in this paper can be summarized in the following diagram of natural $`(R^{},R)`$-epimorphisms:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}(M)& & 𝒮^{}(M)& & 𝒲(M)\\ & & & & \\ & & 𝒮(M)& & \end{array}$$

The modules $`(M)`$ resp. $`𝒲(M)`$ contain the link homotopy resp. anti-link homotopy part of $`𝒮^{}(M)`$ in a natural way.

The following two results are immediate generalizations of theorems 1 and 2. Let $``$ denote the set of non-negative integers.

Theorem 3. There exists a system of local coefficients $`^{}`$ in $`I(M)`$ with $`_x^{}R^{}`$ such that

$$H_0(I(M),^{})𝒮^{}(M).$$

Theorem 4. For each $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$ there exists an index

$$\epsilon ^{}(\alpha )=(\epsilon _1(\alpha ),\epsilon _2(\alpha ),\epsilon _3(\alpha )\times \times ,$$

determined by oriented intersection numbers as described below, such that

$$𝒮^{}(M)\underset{\alpha 𝔟(M)}{}R^{}/(q_1^{2\epsilon _1(\alpha )}q_2^{2\epsilon _2(\alpha )}1,q_1^{2\epsilon _3(\alpha )}1).$$

For $`\alpha =[\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r]`$ and $`f_{\alpha _i}`$ representing $`\alpha _i`$ let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(\alpha )`$ be the subgroup of $`\times `$ generated by all elements (omitting the Hurewicz homomorphisms from the notation):

$$(\lambda (c,\alpha _i),\lambda (c,\alpha \alpha _i)),$$

where $`c`$ runs through $`\pi _1(𝕃(M),f_{\alpha _i})`$ and $`1ir`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(\alpha )`$ is generated by two elements $`(\epsilon _1(\alpha ),\epsilon _2(\alpha ))`$ and $`(\epsilon _3(\alpha ),0)`$ with $`\epsilon _1(\alpha ),\epsilon _3(\alpha )`$. ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(\alpha )`$ is cyclic if and only if $`\epsilon _3(\alpha )=0`$.)

It follows from the skein relations that the image of a given link $`K`$ in $`𝒮^{}(M)`$ can be written as $`q_1^{w_1(K)}q_2^{w_2(K)}`$ multiplied by a standard link with homotopy classes determined by some $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$. Here $`w_1(K)`$ and $`w_2(K)`$ are the relative self-writhe and total linking number of $`K`$. The pair $`(w_1(K),w_2(K))^2`$ is well-defined modulo the subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(\alpha )`$. Obviously the sum of the total linking number and the self-writhe is the writhe discussed before. The number $`\epsilon _2(\alpha )`$ is the linking number index as defined in \[K1\]. The $`gcd`$ of $`(\epsilon _1(\alpha )+\epsilon _2(\alpha ))`$ and $`\epsilon _3(\alpha )`$ is just $`\epsilon (\alpha )`$ as defined in section 1.

Proposition. $`𝒮^{}(M)`$ is isomorphic to $`SR^{}\widehat{\pi }(M)`$ if and only if each mapping from a torus to $`M`$ is homologous into $`M`$.

Proof. The only if part follows from Przytycki’s universal coefficient result and the proposition in section 1. If every singular torus is homologous into $`M`$ then all intersection numbers of singular tori and loops are zero. So the subgroups $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(\alpha )\times `$ are trivial for all $`\alpha `$. It follows that $`𝒮^{}(M)`$ is free. $`\mathrm{}`$

In section 6 we will show that the relations in the natural presentation of the module $`𝒲(M)`$, equivalently the indeterminancies of the relative self-writhe invariants of links in $`M`$, are determined only from intersection numbers of $`2`$-spheres and loops. More precisely the following result is shown:

Theorem 5. For $`\beta \widehat{\pi }(M)`$ let $`\mu (\beta )`$ be the smallest positive intersection number with a singular $`2`$-sphere, or $`0`$ if all intersection numbers are trivial. Then there is an isomorphism

$$𝒲(M)\underset{\alpha 𝔟(M)}{}R/(q^{2\mu (\alpha )}1),$$

where $`\mu (\alpha )`$ is the $`gcd`$ of the $`\mu (\alpha _i)`$ for $`\alpha =[\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r]𝔟(M)`$.

Remarks. (a) Obviously $`\mu (\alpha )`$ only depends on the homology classes of the $`\alpha _i\widehat{\pi }(M)`$ in $`\alpha `$.

(b) It follows from the sphere theorem (see e. g. \[J\], I. 9. ) that if a loop $`\gamma `$ is intersected by a singular $`2`$-sphere with non-trivial intersection number then there is also some embedded $`2`$-sphere intersecting that loop with non-trivial intersection number. (Let $`N_\gamma `$ be the $`\pi _1(M)`$-invariant subgroup of $`\pi _2(M)`$ consisting of all those classes in $`\pi _2(M)`$, which have trivial intersection number with $`\gamma `$. Then given the assumption there exists an embedded $`2`$-sphere not in $`N_\gamma `$.)

Corollary 1. The module $`𝒲(M)`$ is isomorphic to $`SR\widehat{\pi }(M)`$ if and only if there are no non-separating $`2`$-spheres in $`M`$ (equivalently each mapping of a $`2`$-sphere to $`M`$ is homologous into $`M`$).

If $`𝒲(M)`$ is free then the relative writhe of knots is defined without any indeterminancy for all free homotopy classes of loops in $`M`$.

Corollary 2 (Chernov, Hoste and Przytycki). The framing of an oriented knot can be changed by a self-isotopy of the underlying oriented link if and only if $`M`$ has a separating $`2`$-sphere.

This result has been announced in (\[HP\], p. 488), and is proved in \[C\]. For the proof of corollary 2 we only have to remark that if there exists a non-separating 2-sphere then the construction in section 5 performed on a knot actually gives rise to an isotopy of knots.

Our results show that freeness of the modules $`𝒮^{}(M)`$, $`𝒮(M)`$ or $`(M)`$ is equivalent to the geometric condition that each singular torus is homologous into $`M`$. (For $`(M)`$ see (\[K1\], theorem 1.2)). The freeness of $`𝒲(M)`$ is equivalent to the condition that each singular $`2`$-sphere is homologous into $`M`$. Note that the quantization of the first homology group of $`M`$ is free if and only if all surfaces (and thus also all singular surfaces) are homologous into $`M`$ \[P3\] (equivalently $`M`$ is a submanifold of a rational homology $`3`$-sphere (\[K2\], App. A)). It seems to be an interesting question whether it is possible to describe the geometric condition that all singular surfaces of genus $`g`$ are homologous into $`M`$ in terms of link theory in $`M`$.

## 3 Skein relations are monodromies

In this section we prove theorem 3. Many of the arguments used here are similar to those in \[K1\].

Recall that elements of $`I(M)`$ are unordered oriented immersions of circles in $`M`$. For a given element $`xI(M)`$ consider all unordered framed immersions with the same underlying oriented immersion $`x`$. We will consider two such immersions equivalent if (i) their framings are homotopic or (ii) if they differ by twists in the framings of the components, such that the total signed number of these twists is zero. An equivalence class of framed immersions like this is called a total framing of $`x`$. We define $`_x^{}`$ resp. $`_x`$ to be the free $`[q_2^\pm ]`$-module resp. the free abelian group generated by all total framings of $`x`$. Note that there is a transitive action of $``$ on the set of total framings of $`x`$ for each $`xI(M)`$.

There is an obvious notion of isotopy of totally framed links in $`M`$. Let $`𝔗(M)`$ denote the corresponding set of isotopy classes. It is immediate from the definitions that the skein module $`𝒮^{}(M)`$ can also be defined from the set $`𝔗(M)`$ using the same relations as in the original definition of $`𝒮^{}(M)`$. Note that the total framing of the link $`K^{(1)}`$ is given by the action of $`+1`$ on the total framing of $`K`$.

The collection of modules $`_x^{}`$ forms a bundle of modules in $`I(M)`$. The corresponding local system of coefficients in $`I(M)`$ is defined by describing, for each $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$, the action of $`\pi _1(I(M),x)`$ on $`_x^{}`$. Here $`x=x_\alpha `$ is a link with free homotopy classes of components given by $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$.

By fixing an order of link components we define covering spaces $`\stackrel{~}{I(M)}I(M)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }(M)}\mathrm{\Lambda }(M)`$ in the obvious way. We will have to choose the base points $`x=x_\alpha `$ in a specific way. If $`\alpha `$ contains a conjugacy class repeatedly then we can choose $`x_\alpha `$ to be symmetric in the following way: All components with the same free homotopy class will be parallel to each other with respect to some framing. It follows that there are isotopies (supported in a neighboorhood of the link), which change the order of those components. Note that by composition with loops of this form we can achieve that each loop in $`I(M)`$ lifts to a loop in $`\stackrel{~}{I(M)}`$. The loops in $`I(M)`$ defined by those isotopies are called small. Note that the bundle of modules lifts to the covering space.

Now for $`\gamma \pi _1(I(M),x)`$ let $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ be the loop, which results, possibly after composition with a small loop, by lifting to $`\stackrel{~}{I(M)}`$. We choose a total framing on $`x`$ and lift this total framing to the corresponding basepoint on $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$. It follows from Hirsch theory that the framing canonically transports along $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ and defines a new total framing on $`x`$. It is easily seen to be well-defined and independent of all choices made. The difference to the original framing is determined by some element $`k_1(\gamma )`$.

Next perturb the loop $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ to be transversal so that all singular maps along the path are immersions with a single double point. Let $`k_2(\gamma )`$ resp. $`k_3(\gamma )`$ be the signed sum of those immersions along $`\gamma `$ (or $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$) (i. e. positive resp. negative crossing changes), where the double point of the immersion is a self-crossing resp. a crossing of distinct components.

Theorem 6. The collection of homomorphisms (of groups)

$$k=k_\alpha :\pi _1(I(M),x_\alpha )Aut(R^{}),$$

defined by: $`k(\gamma )`$ is multiplication by

$$q_1^{k_1(\gamma )+2k_2(\gamma )}q_2^{2k_3(\gamma )},$$

defines a system of local coefficients $`^{}`$ in $`I(M)`$.

Proof. We have to show that the maps $`k`$ are constant under homotopies of loops in $`I(M)`$. The homomorphism property follows easily from the definitions. We will show more generally that $`k`$ is well-defined on $`\pi _1(\mathrm{\Lambda }(M),x)`$. (This will be important later on). We can assume that $`\gamma `$ lifts to a loop in $`\stackrel{~}{I(M)}`$ and consider a loop $`\gamma ^{}`$ homotopic to $`\gamma `$. The homotopy lifts to a homotopy in $`\stackrel{~}{I(M)}`$ and we can apply Lin’s transversality results \[L\] to change the homotopy to transversal position with respect to the complex of singular links in $`M`$. Then the preimage of the set of singular links is a $`1`$-dimensional complex in the domain of the homotopy (annulus), with vertices in the boundary and interior vertices of valence $`4`$ or $`1`$. Those of valence $`4`$ describe immersions with two double points, those of valence $`1`$ describe kink resolutions (for more details see \[KL\] or \[K1\]). In order to show that the contributions from the two loops are equal deform one into the other one across the annulus in a finite number of steps, crossing only over a single interior vertex at a time. It is easy to see that $`k`$ does not change by crossing over a vertex of valence $`4`$ because the corresponding contribution around the vertex is zero. If we cross over a vertex of valence $`1`$ we encounter a crossing change, which does not change the oriented isotopy type but does change the total framing. The framing change cancels the singularity contribution. Thus crossing over any vertex does not change the value of $`k`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

By theorem 6 the homology module $`H_0(I(M),^{})`$ is defined. In theorem 7 we will define the isomorphism with $`𝒮^{}(M)`$. Recall that, as a twisted $`0`$-dimensional homology module, $`𝒮^{}(M)`$ is a direct sum of cyclic modules $`R^{}/I(\alpha )`$, where $`\alpha `$ runs through the set of path components of $`I(M)`$ (which is in 1-1 correspondence with $`𝔟(M)`$). Moreover the ideal $`I(\alpha )`$ is generated by all elements of the form $`k(\gamma )1`$, where $`\gamma `$ runs through all elements of $`\pi _1(\mathrm{\Lambda }(M),f_\alpha )`$ (compare e. g. (\[W\], theorem 3.2)). Thus the proofs of theorem 4 resp. 2 reduce to the problem of relating the monodromies to the intersection numbers as explained in sections 1 and 2. This will be done in section 4.

Theorem 7. There is a natural isomorphism

$$𝒮^{}(M)H_0(I(M),^{}).$$

Proof. There is the obvious map $`𝔗(M)H_0(I(M),^{})`$ defined by mapping a link to the $`0`$-chain represented by a representative link $`x`$. Note that the framing determines an element in the fibre over $`x`$. So we have defined a $`0`$-cycle for homology with twisted coefficients, see (\[W\], p. 266). Recall that $`H_0(I(M),^{})`$ is an $`R^{}`$-module (this can be seen e. g. from the definition as a homology group of the chain complex $`C_{}(\overline{I(M)})R^{}`$, where $`\overline{I(M)}`$ is the universal covering space of $`I(M)`$, and the tensor product is over the action of the fundamental group defining the system of local coefficients). The map above extends uniquely to an $`R^{}`$-homomorphism $`R^{}𝔗(M)H_0(I(M),^{})`$. This homomorphism is onto because every $`0`$-cycle can be represented, up to homology, by a link in $`M`$. It remains to prove that the skein relations are contained in the kernel of this homomorphism. It is shown in (\[W\], p. 263) how the action of the fundamental group determines a bundle of modules in $`I(M)`$, from which the boundary operator is defined. It follows from the definitions preceding theorem 6 that skein equivalent links are homologous in the twisted homology module. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 Computation of the monodromies

Recall from the proof of theorem 6 that the images $`k(\gamma )`$ only depend on the homotopy class of $`\gamma `$ in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(M)`$. Moreover, by using the small loops of embeddings, which change the order of components (described before theorem 6), we can assume that $`\gamma `$ actually lifts to a loop in $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }(M)}`$. But $`\pi _1(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }(M)},(f_1,\mathrm{},f_r))`$ is isomorphic to the direct product of groups $`\pi _1(𝕃(M),f_i)`$. Because of the homomorphism property of $`k`$ (see theorem 6) it suffices to compute $`k(\gamma )`$ on those loops in $`I(M)`$, which fix all but one component. For such a special loop in $`I(M)`$ let $`\alpha _i`$ be the free homotopy class of the nontrivial component(which actually moves in $`M`$ along $`\gamma )`$. As before let $`\alpha _i`$ be represented by $`f_{\alpha _i}:S^1M`$ and let $`c\pi _1(𝕃(M),f_{\alpha _i})`$ be a loop in the free loop space based in $`f_\alpha `$ and consider a loop in $`I(M)`$ defined in this way.

Next consider the trace of the nontrivial component of such a loop, which is an immersion from $`S^1\times I`$ to $`M\times I`$. The immersions over the two boundary components can be glued together to yield an immersion (after perturbation near the boundary)

$$f:S^1\times S^1M\times S^1,$$

which is framed except along the gluing circle. The difference of the framings on the top and bottom is precisely given by $`k_1(\gamma )`$ and is the normal Euler number $`\chi (f)`$ of the immersion. This is well-known from the singularity interpretation of the normal Euler number by using a section of the $`2`$-dimensional normal bundle, which is generic with respect to the zero-section.

Then $`k(\gamma )`$ is obviously computed from the self-intersections of this immersion and from the intersection numbers of the projection to $`M`$ with the constant components. The oriented intersection numbers of the torus in $`M`$ with the other components determine $`k_3(\gamma )`$. So we only have to consider the immersed torus.

It is a classical result, in its original version due to Whitney \[Wh\] (discussed e. g. in the work of Lashof and Smale \[LS\]), that the homological intersection number of $`[f]H_2(M\times S^1)`$ satisfies the following relation:

$$[f][f]=2D(f)+\chi (f).$$

Here $`D(f)`$ is the oriented self-intersection number of the immersion $`f`$, which is equal to $`k_2(\gamma )`$ by definition.

Thus the proof of theorem 4 is complete by proving the

Lemma. The homological intersection number $`[f][f]`$ is equal to $`2\lambda (c,\alpha _i)`$.

It follows that

$$2\lambda (c,\alpha _i)=[f][f]=k_1(\gamma )+2k_2(\gamma ).$$

By considering corresponding powers of $`q_1`$ resp. $`q_2`$ we see that $`\epsilon ^{}`$ is determined as described in theorem 4.

Proof of Lemma. Decompose $`[f]`$ by the Künneth theorem $`H_2(M\times S^1)H_2(M)(H_1(M)H_1(M))`$ into a sum $`a+b`$ with $`aH_2(M)`$ and $`bH_1(M)H_1(M)`$ (using obvious identifications). Note that $`aa=bb=0`$ (intersection numbers in $`M\times S^1`$). Thus $`[f][f]=2ab`$. But if $`a`$ comes from the homology class of a singular torus in $`M`$ (by inclusion into $`M\times S^1`$) and $`b`$ is of the form $`\mu (\alpha _i)\times 1`$, where $`1`$ is the generator of $`H_1(S^1)`$, then $`ab`$ is the intersection number of $`aH_2(M)`$ and $`\alpha _i`$ in $`M`$. In order to see that $`[f]b`$ is equal to $`a`$ we use an easy bordism argument. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 Computational tools and Proof of Przytycki’s result

Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }M`$ be the based loop space of $`M`$. Consider the fibration:

$$\mathrm{\Omega }M\stackrel{𝑖}{}𝕃M\stackrel{𝑝}{}M,$$

where $`i`$ is the inclusion and $`p`$ is the evaluation at the basepoint (see \[V2\] and \[K1\]). For given $`b\pi _1(M)`$ let let $`f_b`$ be a basepoint in $`\mathrm{\Omega }(M)`$ corresponding to $`b`$ and let $`\beta \widehat{\pi }(M)`$ be the corresponding free homotopy class.

There is the exact sequence of homotopy groups:

$$\pi _1(\mathrm{\Omega }M,f_b)\stackrel{i_{}}{}\pi _1(𝕃M,f_b)\stackrel{p_{}}{}\pi _1(M)\stackrel{[,b]}{}\pi _1(M).$$

Note that there are isomorphisms $`\pi _1(𝕃(M),f_b)\pi _1(𝕃M,f_\beta )`$, where the map $`f_\beta :S^1M`$ is the map chosen in section 1.

There is an obvious isomorphism $`\pi _2(M)\pi _1(\mathrm{\Omega }M,f_\alpha )`$. (Deform a loop in $`f_b`$ in $`\mathrm{\Omega }(M)`$ such that all the mappings $`S^1M`$ along the loop are constant on a fixed neighbourhood of the basepoint. We can assume that $`f_b`$ is chosen to have this property. Then the difference to the constant loop in $`f_b`$ is uniquely determined by some element in $`\pi _2(M)`$.)

Now the image $`i_{}(c)`$ for $`c\pi _2(M)`$ can be described as follows. Represent $`c`$ by a mapping of a $`2`$-sphere $`g`$, which is transverse to $`f_b`$. Now deform the restriction of $`f_b`$ on a neighbourhood of the basepoint in $`S^1`$ as follows: Choose an arc joining $`f_b()`$ with $`g()`$. Then deform $`f_b`$ along this arc until a small neighbourhood of $``$ is mapped to $`g(S^2)`$. Now deform across the image of the $`2`$-sphere in the obvious way. This is a description of $`i_{}(c)\pi _1(𝕃M,f_b)`$. Note that if the intersection number of $`f_b`$ and $`g`$ is $`k`$ then

$$\lambda (\mu (i_{}(c)),\mu (f_b))=k.$$

Note that this intersection number is trivial for all $`2`$-sphere mappings, which are homotopic to $`M`$.

Example. Let $`M=S^2\times S^1`$. Then $`\widehat{\pi }(M)=H_1(M)`$ and $`𝔟(M)`$ can be identified with the set of unordered sequences of integer numbers. Note that $`p_{}`$ is onto and $`\pi _1(𝕃M,f_b)`$ is the union of sets $`p_{}^1(b^{})`$ with a transitive action of $`\pi _2(M)`$ on each of these sets.

Since $`\pi _1(M)`$ is cyclic, a mapping from a torus (representing some $`x\pi _1(𝕃M,f_b)`$) can be homotoped to a map $`f`$ so that the restriction to the $`1`$-skeleton $`S^1S^1`$ maps into the core $`\times S^1`$. Now this restriction can be extended to a map of a torus into $`\times S^1`$. Thus the collection of intersection numbers $`\lambda (\mu (x),\mu (\alpha ))`$, where $`x`$ runs through all of $`p^1(b^{})`$, does not depend on $`b^{}`$. Here $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$ is any sequence of free homotopy classes. So we can restrict the computation to $`b^{}=0`$ and compute all intersection numbers from singular tori resulting from elements in the image of $`i_{}`$.

Note that $`\pi _2(M)`$ is generated by multiples of the standard sphere $`S^2\times `$. Moreover, a loop in $`M`$ has homology class $`k`$ if and only if the loop intersects $`S^2\times `$ with intersection number $`k`$. It follows that for $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$

$$\epsilon (\alpha )=\epsilon [\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r]=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\alpha _i.$$

The subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )`$ of $`\times `$ is generated by the elements $`(\alpha _i,_{ji}\alpha _j)`$. So if we consider $`\alpha =[1,1,\mathrm{},1]`$ of length $`r`$, we have the contributions $`(1,r1)`$ for all $`i`$. Then $`\epsilon ^{}(\alpha )=(1,r1,0)`$ and the corresponding cyclic summand of the skein module is $`R^{}/(q_1^2q_2^{2(r1)}1)`$. For $`\alpha =[1,2]`$ the resulting subgroup of $`\times `$ is generated by $`(1,2)`$ and $`(2,1)`$. The summand of the skein module corresponding to this $`\alpha `$ is given by $`R^{}/(q_1^4q_2^21,q_1^61)`$. Even though the computation is easy for each given $`\alpha `$ there seems to be some tricky combinatorics involved in order to be able to state a general answer.

Now we give a proof of the theorem of J. Przyycki from theorem 2.

First we show (b). Note that $`\lambda (\mu (i_{}(c)),\mu (K))=k`$ for $`K`$ a knot in $`M`$ intersecting the $`2`$-sphere with homotopy class $`c\pi _2(M)`$ with intersection number $`k`$. This shows (i). To prove (ii) we define the element $`c\pi _1(𝕃M,f_\beta )`$, where $`f_\beta :S^1M`$ is a representative of the given non-contractible curve on the torus with free homotopy class $`\beta \widehat{\pi }(M)`$, by a deformation of the non-contractible curve over the torus back into itself. Then let $`\alpha =[\beta ,\gamma ]`$ where $`\gamma \widehat{\pi }(M)`$ is the free homotopy class of $`K^{}`$. It follows that $`\lambda (\mu (c),\mu (\alpha ))=k`$ because pushing the non-contractible curve away from the embedded torus shows that the intersection number of $`\gamma `$ with $`c`$ is zero. This proves (ii).

In order to prove part (a) of Przytycki’s result we have to show that $`\epsilon (\alpha )=0`$ if there are no non-separating $`2`$-spheres or tori in $`M`$. Conversely we claim that $`\epsilon (\alpha )0`$ implies the existence of a non-separating $`2`$-sphere or torus. Now it is immediate from the definitions that there exists $`\alpha 𝔟(M)`$ satisfying $`\epsilon (\alpha )0`$ if and only if there a singular torus and an oriented loop in $`M`$, which have non-trivial intersection number. Note that each singular $`2`$-sphere, by composition with the canonical projection $`S^1\times S^1S^2`$, induces a singular torus, preserving intersection numbers with a loop. Obviously (see e. g. (\[K2\], App. A)) each oriented embedded surface with non-trivial intersection number with an oriented loop is non-separating.

Thus Przytycki’s theorem follows from the following easy consequence of D. Gabai’s fundamental results.

Theorem. Suppose that $`M`$ is a compact oriented $`3`$-manifold and let $`\gamma `$ be an oriented loop in $`M`$. If there is a singular torus in $`M`$ with non-trivial intersection number with $`\gamma `$ then there also exists an embedded $`2`$-sphere or torus with non-trivial intersection number with $`\gamma `$.

Proof. We apply corollary 6.18. from \[G\] to the homology class $`zH_2(M)`$ determined by the singular torus. It follows that the singular Thurston norm of $`z`$ is zero, so by Gabai’s result also the embedded Thurston norm of $`z`$ is zero. It follows that $`z`$ can be represented by a disjoint union $`T`$ of embedded $`2`$-spheres and tori. This representative of $`z`$ has the same intersection number with $`\gamma `$ as the original singular torus. Obviously there is at least one component of $`T`$, which has non-trivial intersection number with $`\gamma `$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark. Note that it is not possible to conclude from singular to embedded tori and $`2`$-spheres preserving the intersection number. In section 6 we will show that this is possible if we have the assumption of a singular $`2`$-sphere.

## 6 The indeterminancy of the self-writhe

Throughout we denote the homology class of a map $`h`$ from a sphere or torus to $`M`$ by $`[h]`$.

Consider a singular torus $`f:T:=S^1\times S^1M`$ with $`f|\gamma =:g`$ for some non-contractible curve $`\gamma `$ on $`T`$ such that $`\lambda ([f],[g])=k0`$. We will show that there exists a singular $`2`$-sphere, which has intersection number $`k`$ with $`g`$. Then theorem 5 follows from theorem 4 and the results of section 5.

First assume that $`M`$ is a connected sum of $`3`$-manifolds $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$, or $`M`$ is $``$-compressible. In the second case $`M`$ is the result of attaching a $`1`$-handle $`H`$ (the neighbourhood of the attaching disk) along a pair of disks to a manifold $`M^{}`$. We can assume that $`f`$ intersects the corresponding $`2`$-sphere resp. disk pair, denoted by $`D`$ in each case, transversely such that $`f^1(D)=:C`$ is a disjoint union of closed curves on $`T`$. Suppose all components of $`C`$ are trivial on $`T`$. Then we can assume that $`\gamma `$ is disjoint from $`C`$. By the usual cut and paste arguments we construct a torus mapping to one of $`M_1`$ or $`M_2`$ resp. to $`M^{}`$, without changing the intersection number with $`g`$. (Note that the resulting mapping of torus cannot map into $`H`$ because intersection numbers of tori and curves in $`H`$ are trivial.) Suppose $`C`$ is a union of parallel copies of some non-contractible curve on $`T`$ (and possibly trivial curves). We do surgery on the torus mapping as before. Now the result is a mapping from a union of $`2`$-spheres to $`M`$. Note that in the process of glueing maps from disks (into $`D`$) along the boundaries of $`TN(C)`$, where $`N(C)`$ is a neighbourhood of $`C`$ in $`T`$, the intersection number with $`g`$ is not changed. (In order to see this note that $`f(C)`$ is a collection of immersed circles in $`D`$ and we can assume that $`g`$ intersects $`D`$ only in a finite number of points away from $`f(C)`$. This shows that, when cutting the torus, the intersection number does not change. When disks are glued back in pairs with different orientations in the second step of the surgery the intersection number also remains unchanged.) Finally we can construct an oriented connected sum of the resulting collection of maps of $`2`$-spheres and have found a mapping from a $`2`$-sphere to $`M`$ having intersection number $`k`$ with $`g`$. (Omit all components with trivial intersection number with $`g`$, the remaining $`2`$-spheres are non-separating so there is no problem in forming the oriented connected sum.)

By iteration of the argument above it follows that either we find a $`2`$-sphere with homotopy class $`c\pi _2(M)`$ such that $`\lambda (c,[g])=k`$, or we can assume that $`T`$ maps into a $`3`$-manifold, which is irreducible and $``$-irreducible or is homeomorphic to $`S^2\times S^1`$.

In the last case the result follows from the considerations in the example in section 5.

So we can assume that $`f`$ maps into a $`3`$-manifold $`M`$, which is irreducible and $``$-incompressible. Since there is a non-trivial intersection number we know that $`M`$ is sufficently large. It follows from the main result of Jaco-Shalen-Johannson theory (\[JS\], p. 173) that $`f`$ is homotopic to a mapping into a Seifert fibred space $`N`$ contained in $`M`$. Moreover the boundary of $`N`$ is incompressible in $`M`$. Using this it follows easily from a theorem of Alexander (\[R\], p. 107) that $`N`$ is irreducible. Now consider the closed oriented Seifert fibred space $`N^{}`$ defined by the double of $`N`$. It is not hard to show that $`N^{}`$ is irreducible. It follows from the parallizability of oriented $`3`$-manifolds and results of M. Hirsch that $`f`$ can be approximated by an immersion (\[H\], 5.7). Thus we can apply a result of P. Scott (\[S\], 6.4) to conclude that $`f`$ is homotopic, inside $`N^{}`$, to an immersion of a torus without triple points or to a composition of the projection $`T`$ onto the Klein bottle $`K`$ with some immersion $`KM`$. Then the result follows from the following lemma.

Lemma. Suppose that $`f:TM`$ is either an immersion without triple points or a composition of the double cover $`TK`$ with a mapping $`KM`$. Then $`\lambda ([f],[g])=0`$, where $`g=f|\gamma `$ and $`\gamma `$ is a non-contractible loop on $`T`$.

Proof. In the second case the result follows easily from the different orientations in the two intersection points on $`T`$ corresponding to some intersection point of $`K`$ and $`g`$, and in fact holds for all loops in $`M`$. In the first case the self-intersection curves of $`f`$ consist of a disjoint union $`C`$ of non-contractible curves, all parallel to a single curve $`\rho `$, and a collection of trivial curves on $`T`$. Obviously $`\lambda ([f],[\rho ])=0`$. Let $`\sigma `$ be a non-contractible curve on $`T`$, which intersects $`\rho `$ in single point. Then $`\lambda ([f],[\sigma ])=0`$ also holds. In fact, $`f`$ restricts to a trivial double cover $`CC^{}`$. Moreover we can assume that $`\sigma `$ does not intersect any trivial components of $`C`$. Then the two contributions in $`\lambda ([f],[\sigma ])`$, which result from intersections of $`\sigma `$ with the two parallel copies of $`\rho `$ in $`C`$ ( mapping to the same circle in $`C^{}`$) cancel. This proves the result. $`\mathrm{}`$

Acknowledgements.

It is a pleasure to thank J. Przytycki for bringing the problem discussed in this paper to my attention, and for many stimulating discussions and generous hospitality.

REFERENCES

\] V. Chernov. Framed knots in $`3`$-manifolds. preprint math.GT/0105139, http://xxx.lanl.gov, 2001

\] D. Gabai. Foliations and the topology of $`3`$-manifolds. J. Differential Geometry 18, 1983, 445–503

\] M. W. Hirsch. Immersions of manifolds. Transactions of the AMS 93, 1959, 242–276

\] J. Hoste, J. Przytycki. Homotopy skein modules of orientable $`3`$-manifolds. Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. (11990), 108, 475–488

\] W. Jaco. Lectures on Three-Manifold Topology. Regional Conference Series in Mathematics Number 43, AMS 1980

\] W. H. Jaco, P. B. Shalen. Seifert Fibred Spaces in $`3`$-manifolds Memoirs of the AMS 220, Vol 21, 1979

\] U. Kaiser. Presentations of $`q`$-homotopy skein modules of oriented $`3`$-manifolds. Journal of Knot Theory and its Ramifications, no. 3, 2001, 461–491

\] U. Kaiser. Link theory in manifolds. Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1669, Springer Verlag 1997, 59–77

\] L. Kauffman. On Knots. Annals of Mathematical Studies 115, Princeton University Press 1987

\] E. Kalfagianni, X. S. Lin. The HOMFLY polynomial for links in rational homology spheres. Topology 38, no. 1, 1999, 95–115

\] R. Kirby. Problems in low dimensional topology. in 1993 Georgia International Topology Conference Proceedings, Part II, ed. by W. Kazez, AMS/IP Studies in Advanced Mathematics 1997

\] R. K. Lashof, S. Smale. Self-intersections of immersed manifolds. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics, Vol. 8, N0. 1, 1959, 143–157

\] X. S. Lin. Finite type link invariants of $`3`$-manifolds. Topology 33, no.1, 1994, 45–71

\] J. Przytycki. Algebraic topology based on knots: an introduction. in Proceedings of Knots 96, edited by Shin’ichi Suzuki, 1997, 279–297

\] J. Przytycki. Skein modules of $`3`$-manifolds. Bull. Ac. Pol. Math. 39(1-2), 1991, 91-100

\] J. Przytycki. A $`q`$-analogue of the first homology group of a $`3`$-manifold. Contemporary Mathematics Volume 214, 1998, 135–143

\] D. Rolfsen. Knots and Links Mathematics Lecture Series 7, Publish or Perish Inc. , Second Printing 1990

\] P. Scott. There are no fake Seifert fibre spaces with infinite $`\pi _1`$. Annals of Mathematics, 117 (1983), 35–70

\] V. Vassiliev. On invariants and homology of spaces of knots in arbitrary manifolds. American Math. Soc. Translations (2), Vol. 185, 1998

\] V. Vassiliev. Complements of discriminants of smooth maps: topology and applications. Transl. Math. Monographs, vol. 98, AMS, Providence, RI 1994

\] G. W. Whitehead. Elements of Homotopy Theory. Graduate Texts in Mathematics Vol. 61, Springer Verlag 1978

\] H. Whitney. The self-intersections of a smooth $`n`$-manifold in $`2n`$-space. Ann. Math. (1944), 220–240


text:
# Spectral Functions, Maximum Entropy Method and Unconventional Methods in Lattice Field Theory

## 1 Introduction

The conventional approach of studying lattice hadronic correlation 2-point functions, $`G_2(t)`$, is to fit the large time, $`tt_{min}`$, interval of $`G_2(t)`$ to an exponential, $`Ze^{Mt}`$, where $`M`$ is the mass of the asymptotic state, and $`Z`$ is the overlap of that state with the interpolating operator used. This method can be extended by including further exponentials, $`Z_ie^{M_it}`$, which correspond to the lowest excited states of the channel in question. However, fundamentally, the small time part of the correlation function, $`t<t_{min}`$, is always thrown away. This paper presents two approaches which are able to include the $`t0`$ region of $`G_2(t)`$ in the analysis.

The first follows the approach of Leinweber where a QCD Sum Rule technique is used to model the short time behaviour of $`G_2(t)`$. This is detailed in the next section where new results for non-degenerate mesons are presented, and in Section 3 where these calculations are extended to include lattice artefacts coming from the Wilson action.

The second approach uses the “Maximum Entropy Method” of numerical analysis to invert $`G_2(t)`$ into its spectral function representation. Section 4 describes this method and its application to the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model in (2+1)D.

## 2 QCD Sum Rule approach and non-degenerate mesons

In  a method was presented which combines two of the main non-perturbative approaches to strongly coupled field theory: the lattice and QCD Sum Rules. This section presents an overview of this approach and its extension to the case of non-degenerate mesons with non-zero momentum.

The basic quantity considered is the short distance expansion (OPE) of the quark propagator, $`S_q(x)`$,

$$S_q^{OPE}(x)=\frac{\gamma x}{2\pi ^2x^4}+\frac{m}{(2\pi x)^2}\frac{:\overline{q}q:}{2^23}+\mathrm{},$$
(1)
where $`m`$ is the quark mass.

The 2-point correlation function at zero momentum, $`G_2(t)`$, can be written as,

$$G_2^\mathrm{\Gamma }(t)=\underset{\underset{¯}{x}}{}0|𝒯\{J_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\underset{¯}{x},t)\overline{J}_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\underset{¯}{0},0)\}|0,$$
(2)
or, Wick contracting, as

$$G_2^\mathrm{\Gamma }(t)=d^3xTr\left\{S_q(x)\mathrm{\Gamma }S_q(x)\mathrm{\Gamma }\right\}.$$
(3)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a spinor matrix which defines the quantum numbers of the interpolating operator, $`J_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and thereby of the channel considered. In Eq.(3) we have restricted our attention to mesons (although in  baryons were considered).

The QCD Sum Rules approach (and the method of ) substitutes the short distance expansion $`S_q^{OPE}`$ into the expression for $`G_2`$ in Eq.(3). This defines $`G_2^{OPE}`$.

We now introduce the spectral density, $`\rho (s)`$, which is defined via the Laplace transform of $`G_2(t)`$,

$$G_2(t)=_0^{\mathrm{}}\rho (s)e^{st}𝑑s.$$
(4)
The spectral density, $`\rho (s)^{OPE}`$, corresponding to $`G_2^{OPE}`$, is obviously valid for large values of $`s`$ (i.e. short distances). We cannot expect $`\rho (s)^{OPE}`$ to reproduce the non-perturbative behaviour of QCD which generates bound states. The QCD Sum Rules “Continuum Model” allows for this by introducing a “continuum threshold”, $`s_0`$, above which $`\rho (s)^{OPE}`$ is assumed valid. The non-perturbative, confining features of the system are modelled with a delta function at $`s=M<s_0`$. The full spectral function is,

$$\rho (s)=Z\delta (sM)+\xi \theta (ss_0)\rho (s)^{OPE}.$$
(5)
$`Z`$ is the normalisation of the ground state whose mass is $`M`$. and $`\xi `$ a parameter which takes account of the different normalisations of the lattice versus continuum states (see ).

For completeness, we write here the two-point function that Eq.(5) defines:

$$G_2(t)=Ze^{Mt}+\xi _{s_0}^{\mathrm{}}\rho (s)^{OPE}e^{st}𝑑s.$$
(6)
The above method was first employed in the study of lattice data in  where the analytic expressions for Eq.(6) were derived in the case of zero-momentum baryonic channels. In , this work was extended to zero-momentum mesons and the continuum limit of the Ansatz, Eq.(6), was studied. In , we extend this approach still further by studying non-degenerate mesons at both momentum $`\stackrel{}{p}=\stackrel{}{0}`$ and $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(1,1,1)`$. We show here the expression for $`G_2^{OPE}`$ in the case of the (spatial) vector channel at zero momentum.

$`G_2^{Vi}(t)^{OPE,cont}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi ^2t^3}}`$ (7)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{8\pi ^2t}}[m_1^2+m_2^22m_1m_2]`$
where $`m_{1,2}`$ are the two valence quark masses of the meson, and the superscript $`cont`$ refers to the fact that the continuum expression for $`S_q`$, Eq.(1), was used in the derivation of Eq.(7).

In this work the Monte Carlo data for $`G_2(t)`$ was generated using UKQCD computing resources. Table 1 lists the lattice parameters used in this simulation.

In Figure 1 we show the effective mass for the vector channel at $`\kappa _{1,2}=0.1385`$. In this plot the QCD Continuum Model fitting function Eq.(7) is shown together with the result of a 2-exponential fit. The fitting range for both Eq.(7) and the 2-exponential fit was $`t=220`$.

As can be seen from this plot, the QCD Continuum Model fit, Eq.(7), clearly gives a better fit. This can be seen quantitatively in Table 2 where the $`\chi ^2`$ values for both fits are shown together with the estimates of the $`Z`$ and $`M`$ values for a wide range of $`\kappa `$ values. The results of a 1-exponential fit (using $`t=1220`$) are shown as a control.

## 3 Analytic lattice results for non-degenerate mesons

In Section 2, an analytic expression for the 2-point function $`G_2`$ was derived by using the continuum, short-distance expansion for the quark propagator, $`S_q`$. In this section we extend this work still further using the lattice expression for (the co-ordinate space) quark propagator, $`S_q(x)^{LAT}`$, recently derived by Paladini for Wilson quarks.

While the momentum space expression for lattice propagators has a simple, closed form, the co-ordinate space representation does not. Before the work of , $`S_q(x)^{LAT}`$ was known in two cases only: the massless limit ; and the $`x=0`$ limit .

In , $`S_q(x)^W`$ (for Wilson Quarks) was derived as a continuum expansion (i.e. as a Taylor expansion in the lattice spacing, $`a`$). To obtain this expression the authors of  used a special asymptotic series they developed for the modified Bessel functions which appear in the standard form of $`S_q(x)^{LAT}`$. Their result, expressed to $`𝒪(a)`$ is,

$`(4\pi )^2S_q(x)^W`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4m^2}{(x^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{ram}{2}}\right)K_1\left[m(x^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right]`$ (8)
$`+`$ $`2ram^4K_2\left[m(x^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right]`$
$`+`$ $`2ram^4{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma x}{(x^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}}}K_1\left[m(x^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right]`$
$`+`$ $`4m^2(1+ram){\displaystyle \frac{\gamma x}{x^2}}K_2\left[m(x^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right]`$
$`+`$ $`𝒪(a^\mathit{2}),`$
where $`K_1`$ and $`K_2`$ are modified Bessel functions of the second kind.

In , $`S_q(x)^W`$ was used instead of Eq.(1) in Eq.(3) thereby obtaining an expression for $`G_2(t)`$ for Wilson fermions correct to $`𝒪(a)`$.  lists results for all of the commonly used mesonic channels. Here we list only the result for the vector channel:

$`G_2^{Vi}(t)^{OPE,W}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi ^2t^3}}[1+ra(m_1+m_2)]`$ (9)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{8\pi ^2t}}[m_1^2+m_2^22m_1m_2`$
$`+2ra(m_1m_2^2+m_1^2m_2)],`$
where $`r`$ is the Wilson parameter. Note that, as expected, $`G_2^{OPE,W}=G_2^{OPE,cont}+𝒪(a)`$.

Table 2 shows the results for the lattice-QCD Continuum Model fit, Eq.(9). In this table the $`\chi ^2`$ values are shown together with the estimates of the $`Z`$ and $`M`$ values. The lattice-QCD Continuum Model fits are very similar to the QCD Continuum Model fits from Eq.(7), but they become significantly better (i.e. have a smaller $`\chi ^2`$) as the quark mass increases. This is to be expected since the lattice artefacts $`ma`$. (Note that in Figure 1 where the effective mass for the vector channel at $`\kappa _{1,2}=0.1385`$ is plotted, the results from the fit to Eq.(9) is indistinguishable by eye to that from Eq.(7).)

## 4 Maximum Entropy Method and the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio Model

In the above two sections, an Ansatz for the spectral function $`\rho (s)`$ was derived using an analytic expression for the quark propagator, $`S_q(x)`$, valid at small $`x`$. This Ansatz was then used as a fitting function for Monte Carlo data for 2-point hadronic functions, $`G_2(t)`$. It is interesting to ponder if $`\rho (s)`$ itself can be directly extracted from Monte Carlo $`G_2(t)`$ data.

At first sight this aim appears impossible to achieve due to the intrinsic ambiguity in the inversion. $`G_2(t)`$ is known at $`N_t𝒪(10)`$ values of $`t`$ whereas, in order to reveal spectral structure, $`\rho (s)`$ must be calculated at $`N_s>𝒪(100)`$ $`s`$ values. This means that there are an infinite number of solutions for $`\rho (s)`$ which perfectly fit the data $`G_2(t)`$.

In  the Maximum Entropy Method (which is well known in almost every numerical field outside lattice gauge theory!) was used to overcome this seemingly insurmountable problem. Bayes’ theorem can be used to express the probability of $`\rho (s)`$ given the data $`G_2(t)`$, $`P(\rho |G_2)`$, as

$$P(\rho |G_2)P(G_2|\rho )\times P(\rho ).$$
(10)
Here, $`P(G_2|\rho )`$ can be written as the usual exponential of the standard $`\chi ^2`$ function of the Maximum Likelyhood Method. The probability, $`P(\rho )`$ can be expressed in terms of the entropy function, $`S`$. The best solution for $`\rho `$ is obtained by “just” maximising $`P(\rho |G_2)`$ in Eq.(10).

Since the work of  there have been several applications of the MEM method to lattice simulations. In this paper, we concentrate on applying the MEM to the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model in (2+1)D. This work is discussed in more detail in . For details of applying MEM to lattice simulations see .

The continuum (Euclidean) NJL Lagrangian is:

$`=\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_i(/+m_0+\sigma +i\gamma _5\pi )\mathrm{\Psi }_i+{\displaystyle \frac{N_f}{2g^2}}(\sigma ^2+\pi ^2).`$
The fields $`\mathrm{\Psi }_i`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_i`$ are four-component spinors and the index $`i`$ runs over $`N_f`$ fermion flavours. The model has an interacting continuum limit and has been used to model the strong interaction. It exists in two phases defined by a chiral order parameter. The lattice simulation used the staggered fermion formulation.

Figure 2 shows the spectral function obtained from MEM for the $`\pi `$, fermion (f) and massive PS meson in the broken phase with $`N_f=4`$ flavours and coupling of $`\beta =1/g^2=0.55`$. This plot represents approximately 30,000 configurations of data. It shows that MEM is easily able to isolate the ground states in these channels. Furthermore, estimates of the binding energy of the PS state can be obtained using the MEM spectral functions which are in agreement with expectations from large $`N_f`$ expansions .

In Figure 3, the $`\pi `$ mass squared is plotted against the quark mass showing that the PCAC scaling relationship holds.

Further results for both phases are detailed in  and future work where MEM is applied to the UKQCD dynamical data set is detailed in .

## 5 Conclusions

This paper summarises the results from two interesting “unconventional” approaches to the study of 2-point hadronic correlation functions in lattice Monte Carlo simulations, $`G_2(t)`$. The first approach aims at obtaining an accurate analytic expression for the short distance behaviour of $`G_2(t)`$ via the QCD Sum Rules Continuum Model. In particular, the recently derived expression for the Wilson quark propagator  was used. Further work in this area will include the derivation of the analytic expression for the clover quark propagator and, from that, the calculation of the analogous expression for $`G_2(t)`$ at short distances for this action.

The second approach uses the Maximum Entropy Method to calculate the spectral function, $`\rho (s)`$, given the 2-point function, $`G_2(t)`$. This technique is being used by a growing number of researchers in this context. In this work we used MEM to study the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model and found it to work admirably.

## 6 Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Simon Hands, Craig McNeile and Costas Strouthos for invaluable help and they acknowledge the UKQCD Collaboration for use of Cray T3E resources.