format: text

text:
# Invariants of tangles with flat connections in their complements.I. Invariants and holonomy 𝑅-matrices

## 1 Introduction

A breakthrough in the theory of invariants of knots came with the discovery of the Jones polynomial \[J\] and its generalizations (HOMFLY and Kauffman). The construction of the Jones invariant based on a solution to the Yang-Baxter equation was given in \[J-1\] and was generalized to HOMFLY polynomial and to more general case in \[T\]. It involved a solution to the Yang-Baxter equation which satisfies certain extra condition. Then it was shown in \[R\] \[RT\] that such invariants can be obtained from quantized universal algebras for any simple Lie algebra. In \[R-1\] it was proven that the non-degeneracy and the cross-nondegeneracy of a solution of the Yang-Baxter equation is enough to construct the invariants.

In this paper we re-examine the construction of invariants of links from \[RT\] and \[R-1\] (for details see \[T-1\]. Using systems of holonomy $`R`$-matrices we construct the invariant of tangles in $`^2\times I`$ ( here $`I`$ is a unit interval) with a flat connection in a principle $`G`$-bundle ( where $`G`$ is a simple complex algebraic group) over the complement of a tangle. We show that this invariant depends only on a gauge class of this connection.

In the follow-up paper we will show that quantized universal $`R`$-matrices provide examples of holonomy $`R`$-matrices.

In the second section of this paper we describe the moduli space of flat connections in the complement to a tangle in $`^3`$. In the third section we describe the category of tangles with flat connections in the complement. This construction is very similar to $`\pi `$-tangles introduced and studied in \[T-2\]. Then in section 4 we construct invariants of tangles with flat connections in the complement using non-degenerate solutions to the holonomy Yang-Baxter equations. In section 5 we show that these invariants are gauge invariant, and in particularly for links they can are functions (sections of a line bundle) over the moduli space of flat connections in the complement of tangle. Some proofs are moved to the Appedix.

This paper is one of a series of papers in which we will analyze invariants of tangles and 3-manifolds related to quantized universal enveloping algebras with large center. Some outline of this program is given in the conclusion (section 6).

The main results of this paper and of the part II were announced at the conference ”Graphs and Patterns in Mathematics and Physics”. Both authors were partly supported by the NSF grant DMS-0070931 and by the CRDF grant RM1-2244.

## 2 Flat connections in the complement of a tangle

### 2.1 The fundamental group of the complement of a tangle

Let $`I[0,1]`$ be the unit closed interval. A geometric tangle $`t^2\times I`$ is the image of an embedding

$$\underset{k\mathrm{times}}{\underset{}{I\mathrm{}I}}\underset{l\mathrm{times}}{\underset{}{S^1\mathrm{}S^1}}^2\times I$$

with oriented components such that

$$t^2\times I=^2\times \{0,1\}$$

and $`t^2\times I=t^2\times I`$.

Let $`(x,y,z)`$, $`x,y`$, $`zI`$, be Cartesian coordinates on $`^2\times I`$. Denote by $`D_t`$ the image of $`t`$ under the projection

$$p:^2\times I(x,y,z)(y,z)^2$$
(1)
We call geometric tangle $`t`$ restricted if it is based on lines $`L_\pm =\{(0,y,(1\pm 1)/2)\}`$, i.e. $`tL_+L_{}`$. Denote by

$$_\pm ttL_\pm ,_\pm D_tp(_\pm t)$$

the boundary components of $`t`$ and $`D_t`$ which belong to $`L_\pm `$ and their images in $`D_t`$, respectively.

Projection $`D_t`$ is called regular if it has only double points at which segments intersect transversely, all critical points in $`z`$-direction are non-degenerate, and non of the critical points coincide with any of the double points. A regular projection $`D_t`$ will be called *diagram* of $`t`$. The vertices of a diagram are its double points, critical points in $`z`$-direction and boundary points, while edges are the segments running between the vertices. A vertex of $`D_t`$ is called *positive or $`(+)`$ crossing* if it is a double point and the angle between lower and upper components is positive. If the angle is negative, the vertex is called *negative or $`()`$ crossing*, see Fig. 1.

For each double point $`v`$ of diagram $`D_t`$ denote by $`a_v,b_v,c_v,d_v`$ the adjacent edges in accordance with Fig. 2, and for each critical point $`v`$ denote by $`l_v,r_v`$ the adjacent edges as in Fig. 3.

Define group $`\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t)`$ generated by edges of $`D_t`$ with the following defining relations:

* for each double point $`v`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill (+)\text{ crossing:}& a_v=d_v,b_v=d_v^1c_vd_v\hfill \\ \hfill ()\text{ crossing:}& b_v=c_v,a_v=c_vd_vc_v^1\hfill \end{array}$$
* for each critical point $`v`$: $`l_vr_v=1`$.

The isomorphism class of this group does not depend on the diagram representing $`t`$ and is isomorphic to the fundamental group of the complement to $`t`$:

$$\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t)\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t)$$

In fact, the definition of $`\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t)`$ concides with the Wirtinger presentation of $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t)`$. One can fix an isomorphism by choosing a base point $`x_0`$ in $`^2\times I\backslash t`$ and associating to each edge $`e`$ in $`D_t`$ element $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e^{x_0}`$ of $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t,x_0)`$ which is represented by the loop at $`x_0`$ with projection as in Fig. 4. We shall call such correspondence a *monodromy* map.

Associated with boundary of $`D_t`$, group $`\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t)`$ has two natural subgroups $`\mathrm{\Pi }(_\pm D_t)`$ generated by edges intersecting with corresponding boundary components. One has the following commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\mathrm{\Pi }(_{}D_t)& & \mathrm{\Pi }(D_t)& & \mathrm{\Pi }(_+D_t)\\ & & |& & \\ \pi _1(^2\times \{0\}_{}t,x_0^{})& & \pi _1(^2\times It,x_0)& & \pi _1(^2\times \{1\}_+t,x_0^+)\end{array}$$

where the hookarrows are embeddings while the arrows are natural group homomorphisms, and we denote $`x_0^\pm =(x,y,(1\pm 1)/2)`$ the projections of the base point $`x_0=(x,y,z)`$. The base point is chosen such that it projects to the plane of the diagram $`D_t`$ to the far left of it (in the $`y`$-direction).

### 2.2 The moduli space of flat connections in the complement to a tangle

For a Lie group $`G`$ let $`A`$ be the 1-form corresponding to a flat connection in a principle $`G`$-bundle over the complement to tangle $`t`$ in $`^2\times I`$. Such form defines a group homomorphism $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t,x_0)G`$ which maps the element generated by path $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to the holonomy of $`A`$ along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Because we have the isomorphism $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t,x_0)\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t)`$ a flat $`G`$-connection also defines a group homomorphism

$$\gamma :\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t)e\gamma _eG$$

We denote the space of all such homomorphisms as $`\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t,G)`$. The group $`G`$ acts on $`\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t,G)`$ by conjugations

$$g:\gamma _eg\gamma _eg^1$$

In terms of $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t,x_0)\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t)`$ this action corresponds to the changes of the trivialization of the $`G`$-bundle at the base point, i.e. to gauge transformations.

Thus, the gauge class of the flat connection $`A`$ defines an element in the coset space $`\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t,G)/G`$. This gives a combinatorial description of the space of isomorphism classes of representations of the fundamental group of $`^2\times I\backslash t`$ in $`G`$ ( or equivalently, of the modulai space of flat connections):

$$\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t,G)/G\{\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t,x_0)G\}/G$$

Notice that this description of the isomorphism classes of representations of the fundamental group works also in cases when $`G`$ is not a Lie group.

Notice that the homomorphism $`f:\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash ,x_0)G`$ does not define a flat connection in the complement of the tangle. It only defines a gauge class of a flat connection.

For what will follow we need slightly more then a representation of the fundamental group, but less then a flat connection. Let $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$ be a point which projects to the far right from $`D_t`$. A pair $`(f,g)`$ where $`f`$ is a representation of the fundamental group and $`gG`$ is called a ramified representation of the fundamental group if $`g`$ has a meaning of the holonomy of a flat connection whose gauge class is defined by $`f`$ along the path connection $`x_0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$ in such a way that it projects ”over” the diagram $`D_t`$ (see Fig. 5).

Let $`\{g_e\}_{eE(D_t},g_r`$ be a ramified representation of the fundamental group. The gauge group acts on it as $`g_egg_eg^1,g_rgg_rh^1`$. Thus the action of the gauge group on ramified representations reduces to the action of $`G\times G`$. The isomorphism class does not depend on the ramification.

### 2.3 Factorizable groups and Lie groups

We say that group $`G`$ is factorizable into two subgroups $`G_\pm G`$ if any element $`gG`$ can be represented in a unique way as

$$g=g_+g_{}^1=\overline{g}_{}^1\overline{g}_+$$
(2)
where $`g_\pm ,\overline{g}_\pm G_\pm `$.

Let $`G`$ be a Lie group with Lie algebra $`𝔤`$. We say that Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ is factorizable into two Lie subalgebras $`𝔤_\pm `$ if for each $`x𝔤`$ there exists unique pair $`x_\pm 𝔤_\pm `$ such that

$$x=x_+x_{}$$

A Lie group with factorizable Lie algebra is almost factorizable (i.e. factorizable on an open dense subset). It will be called factorizable Lie group. We will be especially interested in the case when $`G`$ is an algebraic Lie group with factorizable Lie algebra. Then it is factorizable on a Zariski open subset of $`G`$.

Another important case is the conditional factorization. In conditionally factorizable Lie algebras factorization (2) is unique only under extra conditions on $`x_\pm `$. For example, fixing a Borel subalgebra $`𝔟_+`$ in a simple Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ makes $`𝔤`$ conditionally factorizable with $`𝔤_\pm =𝔟_\pm `$ and with the condition $`x_+|_𝔥=x_{}|_𝔥`$, where $`𝔥`$ is the corresponding Cartan subalgebra.

###### Remark 1.

We can choose $`G_+=\{e\}`$ and $`G_{}=G`$. We call it trivial factorizability.

Let $`G`$ be a factorizable group. Define a binary operation

$$gh=g_+h_+(g_{}h_{})^1$$

which obviously defines a group structure on $`G`$ with the same identity element as for the original group structure. The inverse to $`g`$ in this group is $`i(g)=g_+^1g_{}`$. For factorizable Lie groups this structure is defined on a dense open subset of $`G`$ (or on $`G_+\times G_{}`$).

### 2.4 Combinatorial description of the moduli space for factorizable groups

Assume $`G`$ is a factorizable group and $`D_t`$ is a regular diagram of a tangle.

###### Definition 1.

The map $`E(D_t)G`$ which associates to edge $`e`$ element $`x_eG`$ is called a $`G`$-coloring of diagram $`D_t`$ if it satisfies the relations:

* double point: $`x_{b_v}=(x_{a_v})_\pm ^1x_{c_v}(x_{a_v})_\pm `$$`x_{d_v}=(x_{c_v})_{}^1x_{a_v}(x_{c_v})_{}`$, for $`(\pm )`$ crossing,
* critical point: $`x_{e_v}=x_{r_v}`$.

###### Theorem 1.

There is one to one correspondence between $`G`$-colorings of a regular diagram of a tangle and generic representations of the fundamental group of the complement.

###### Proof.

We define a representation of $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t)`$ which maps the homotopy class of path $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$ (see Fig. 4) to the element

$$(x_{e_1})_{}^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}(x_{e_n})_{}^{ϵ_n}x_e(x_{e_n})_{}^{ϵ_n}\mathrm{}(x_{e_1})_{}^{ϵ_1}$$
(3)
where $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_n`$ is the sequence of edges, intersected by corresponding to edge $`e`$ monodromy path (enumeration is given along the opposite direction to its orientation), while $`ϵ_i`$ are the signs defined by the projection of edges $`e_i`$ to vertical axis:

$$ϵ_i=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& \text{if }e_i\text{ is oriented upwards}\hfill \\ \hfill 1& \text{if }e_i\text{ is oriented downwards}\hfill \end{array}$$

In other words, the holonomy along a monodromy path is computed as a product of elements corresponding to ”elementary intersections” between edges of the diagram and this path, taken in the order opposite to the orientation of the path. Elements corresponding to the ”elementary intersections” are given on Fig. 6.

To prove the theorem one has to check that holonomies (3) satisfy the relations defining the set $`\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t,G)`$ and that on an open dense subset of $`\mathrm{\Pi }(D_t,G)`$ one can solve equations (3) recursively. These are simple straightforward calculations. ∎

For factorizable $`G`$ we will make the standard choice of ramification of a representation of the fundamental group of the complement. Assume that the representation is generic and that $`\{x_e\}`$ is the $`G`$-coloring corresponding to it. Then the standard ramification is obtained by applying rules from Fig. 6 to the path ramification path connection points $`x_0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$:

$$g=(x_{e_1})_{}^1\mathrm{}(x_{e_n})_{}^1$$

Here $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_n`$ are edges of $`D_t`$ which intersect with the ramification path.

## 3 The category of tangles with flat connections in their complements

In this section we will define the category of tangles with ramified representations of the fundamental group of the complement. Since a flat connection defines a ramified representation of the fundamental group, by the abuse of language we will call this category the category of tangles with flat connections in the complement.

### 3.1 The equivalence

Restricted geometric tangle $`t`$ is called standard if $`_\pm t=\{(0,1,1),(0,2,1)\mathrm{}(0,n_\pm ,1)\}`$ for some $`n_\pm _0`$. We identify planes $`^2\times \{0\}`$ and $`^2\times \{1\}`$ with $`^2`$ through the projection $`p`$ defined in (1).

Consider the set of pairs $`(t,f,g)`$, where $`t`$ is a standard tangle and $`f:\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t,x_0)G`$ is a group homomorphism and $`gG`$ is its ramification. Define the following equivalence relation on this set. Pair $`(t,f,g)`$ is equivalent to $`(t^{},f^{},g)`$ if $`t`$ is isotopic to $`t^{}`$ in $`^2\times I`$ by an isotopy preserving the boundary and points $`x_0,\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$ (so, in particular, $`_\pm t=_\pm t^{}`$), which brings flat connection $`f`$ to $`f^{}`$. Equivalence class $`[t,f,g]`$ will be called a (standard) tangle with a ramified representation of the fundamental group in the complement.

### 3.2 The composition

From now on the point $`x_0`$ will have coordinates $`(0,y_0,1/2)`$ with $`y_0<<1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$ will have coordinates $`(0,\stackrel{~}{y}_0,1/2)`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{y}_0>>1`$.

Let $`t_1`$ and $`t_2`$ be two standard geometrical tangles with $`_+t_1=_{}t_2`$. Define their composition $`t_1t_2`$ as the tangle with the following defining properties:

$$t_1t_2^2\times [0,1/2]t_1,$$
(4)
$$t_1t_2^2\times [1/2,1]t_2.$$
(5)
Here the identifications are given by linear maps, $`(x,y,z)(x,y,2z)`$ for the first one, and $`(x,y,z)(x,y,2z1)`$ for the second.

Let $`[t_1,f_1,g]`$ and $`[t_2,f_2,g]`$ be two tangles with flat connection in their complements such that $`_+t_1=_{}t_2`$ and $`f_1|_{\pi _1(^2\backslash _+t_1,p(x_0))}=f_2|_{\pi _1(^2\backslash _{}t_2,p(x_0))}`$ and $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ have the same ramifications. Define the mapping $`f_{12}`$

$$f_{12}|_{^2\times [0,1/2]}=\stackrel{~}{f_1},f_{12}|_{^2\times [1/2,1]}=\stackrel{~}{f_2},$$

where we identified elements of fundamental groups using (4) and (5). The map $`f_{12}`$ is a representation of the fundamental group of the complement of $`t_1t_2`$. We define the composition of two tangles with flat connections $`[t_1,f_1,g]`$ and $`[t_2,f_2,g]`$ as the equivalence class $`[t_1t_2,f_{12},g]`$ and denote it as $`[t_1,f_1,g][t_2,f_2,g]`$. It is clear that the composition of two tangles with flat connections defined this way does not depend on the choice of representatives in $`[t_1,f_1,g]`$, $`[t_2,f_2,g]`$, and it is associative.

### 3.3 Tensor product

Let $`[t_1]`$ and $`[t_2]`$ be isotopy classes of two standard tangles. Let $`|X|`$ be the cardinality of a finite set $`X`$. Consider the map $`\phi :^2\times I^2\times I`$ acting at the boundary as

$$(x,y,0)(x,y+|_{}t_1|,0)$$

$$(x,y,1)(x,y+|_+t_1|,1)$$

Let $`x_0(i)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0(i)`$ be the reference points for $`t_i`$ ($`i=1,2`$). Assume that the map $`\phi `$ brings a representative $`t_2`$ of $`[t_2]`$ to $`t_2^{}`$ and that it brings $`x_0(2)`$ to $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0(1)`$. Choose representatives of $`t_1`$ and $`t_2`$ in such a way that one dimensional submanifolds $`t_1`$ and $`t_2^{}`$ do not tangle with each other ( that their diagrams do not intersect). The isotopy class of $`t_1t_2^{}`$ is called the tensor product $`[t_1][t_2]`$ of $`[t_1]`$ and $`[t_2]`$ \[T-1\]. It is clear that $`[t_1][t_2]`$ does not depend on the choice of representatives.

Let $`[t_1,f_1]`$ and $`[t_2,f_2]`$ be two tangles with given representations of the fundamental group of the complement. Let $`t_1`$ and $`t_2^{}`$ be geometrical tangles as above. It is clear that $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_1t_2^{},x_0(1))`$ is isomorphic to the group freely generated by $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_1,x_0(1))`$ and $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_2^{},x_0(2))`$. Definition of the tensor product will depend on how we embed groups $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_i,x_0(i))`$ into $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_1t_2^{},x_0(1))`$.

Fix an isomorphism by identifying elements of $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_1t_2^{},x_0(1))`$ with corresponding elements of $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_1,x_0(1))`$ and $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_2^{},x_0(2))`$ in accordance with Fig. 7. This identification means that we identify elements of $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_2^{},x_0(2))`$ with elements of $`\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_1t_2^{},x_0(1))`$ by gluing them with the ramification path for $`t_1`$.

For a pair of group ramified homomorphisms $`f_i:\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_i,x_0)G`$, $`i=1,2`$, with ramifications $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$ respectively define the group homomorphism

$$f_{1_g2}:\pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_1t_2^{},x_0)G$$

by assigning

$$f_{12}(\gamma )=\{\begin{array}{cc}f_1(\gamma )& \text{if }\gamma \pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_1,x_0)\\ g_1f_2(\gamma )g_1^1& \text{if }\gamma \pi _1(^2\times I\backslash t_2^{},x_0^{})\end{array}$$

The ramification of $`f_{12}`$ we will define as $`g_1g_2G`$. The equivalence class of $`(t_1t_2^{},f_{12})`$ will be called the tensor product of $`[t_1,f_1,g_1]`$ and $`[t_2,f_2,g_2]`$ and will be denoted $`[t_1,f_1,g_1][t_2,f_2,g_2]`$. This operation is associative.

### 3.4 Framing

A framing of a geometric tangle $`t`$ is a continuous nonsingular section of the normal bundle to $`t`$. A framing of a tangle is the homotopy class of a geometric framing. We assume that the framing is parallel to the $`x`$-axis at $`_\pm t`$, has positive projection to this axis and unit length.

### 3.5 The category of framed G-tangles

Here $`G`$-framed tangle is a tangle with a ramified representation of the fundamental group of the complement.

Define the category of framed $`G`$-tangles $`\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$ as follows:

* Objects are pairs $`(\mathrm{};f)`$ where $`f:\pi _1(^2)eG`$ with the trivial ramification ($`g=1`$) and $`((ϵ_1,\mathrm{},ϵ_n);f,g)`$ where $`ϵ_i=\pm 1`$, $`f`$ is a representation of the fundamental group of $`^2\backslash \{(0,1),\mathrm{},(0,n)\}`$ with the ramification $`g`$.
* Morphisms between $`((ϵ_1,\mathrm{},ϵ_n);f_+;g_+)`$ and $`((\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _k);f_{};g_{})`$ are nontrivial only if $`g_+=g_{}`$. They are oriented framed tangles with flat connections (with ramified representation of the fundamental group of the complement) $`[t,f,g]`$ where $`t`$ is a tangle with $`|_{}t|=k`$, $`|_+t|=n`$ and $`f`$ is a flat connection in the complement of $`t`$ such that $`f|_{\pi _1(^2\backslash _\pm t,x_0)}=f_\pm `$. The ramification $`g`$ is defined by the ramifications of the objects $`g=g_+=g_{}`$. The orientation of boundary components should agree with signs $`ϵ_i,\sigma _j`$ as is shown on Fig. 8.
* The composition is defined above in Subsection 3.2.
* The identity element in End$`((ϵ_1,\mathrm{},ϵ_n),f,g)`$ consists of the identity tangle (see Fig. 9) with the representation of the fundamental group and the ramification uniquely defined by its values on the boundary.

The category $`\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$ is braided monoidal with the tensor product described above.

The braiding is given by the tangle corresponding to the diagram from Fig. 10. The corresponding ramified representation of the fundamental group of its complement is completely determined by the boundary values which are fixed by the choice of objects.

### 3.6 The combinatorial description of $`\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$

The category $`\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$ can be described in terms of equivalence classes of diagrams with elements of $`G`$ assigned to edges of the diagram.

Representations of the fundamental group of the complement to a tangle are in bijections with maps $`E(D_t)G`$ which satisfy Wirtinger relations. Therefore a tangle with a flat connection in the complement can be regarded as an equivalence class of diagrams equipped with such data modulo Redemeister moves. If the tangle is framed, one has to consider only framed Reidemeister moves (see Figures 11, 12 13).

A representation of the fundamental group of the complement to $`n`$ distinct points in $`^2`$ is fixed uniquely by the monodromies along a system of fundamental cycles. Choose them as on Fig. 14 then an object of the category $`\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$ can be written as a collection $`(ϵ_1,\mathrm{},ϵ_n;g_1,\mathrm{},g_n;g)`$ where $`g_iG`$ is a monodromy along the cycle shown on Fig. 14 around the point $`(0,i,0)`$ and $`g`$ is the ramification.

Thus, we can describe the category $`\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$ as follows:

* Objects are collections $`(ϵ_1,\mathrm{},ϵ_n;g_1,\mathrm{},g_n;g)`$, where $`ϵ_i=\pm `$ and $`g_i,gG`$.
* Morphisms between the object $`(ϵ_1,\mathrm{},ϵ_n;g_1,\mathrm{},g_n;g)`$ and the object $`(\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _m;h_1,\mathrm{},h_m;g)\}`$ are diagrams of oriented framed tangles with elements of $`G`$ assigned to edges modulo Redemeister moves and Wirtinger relations. The orientation and group elements assigned to boundary components should agree the orientation and group elements of corresponding boundary components.
* Composition is the usual composition of diagrams of tangles with group elements assigned to edges.
* Tensor product for objects is $`(\{ϵ_i\};\{g_i\};g)(\{\sigma _i\};\{h_i\};h)=(\{ϵ_i\}\{\sigma _i\};\{g_i\}\{h_i\};gh)`$. The tensor product of two morphisms $`(D_1,\{g_e\},g)`$ and $`(D_2,\{h_e\},h`$ is the diagram which $`D_1D_2`$ is the tensor product of two diagrams (juxtaposition) with the elements $`g_e`$ assigned to the edges of $`D_1`$ and elements $`g^1h_eg`$ assigned to edges of $`D_2`$. The ramification of the tensor product is $`gh`$.

### 3.7 Combinatorial description of $`\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$ for factorizable $`G`$

Let $`G`$ be a factorizable group. According to Theorem 1 a $`G`$-coloring of diagram $`D_t`$ is in one to one correspondence with a flat $`G`$-connection in the complement to tangle $`t`$ by assigning monodromies $`\gamma _e`$ to edges of the diagram:

$$\{x_e\}_{eD_t}\{\gamma _e=(x_{e_1})_{}^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}(x_{e_n})_{}^{ϵ_n}x_e(x_{e_n})_{}^{ϵ_n}\mathrm{}(x_{e_1})_{}^{ϵ_1}\}_{eD_t}$$
(6)
More precisely, it is a bijection for factorizable groups and a bijection on an open dense subset of $`G^{\times E(D_t)}`$ for almost factorizable Lie groups. This suggests the description of the the category $`\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$ in term of $`G`$-colored diagrams.

Define the category $`T(G)`$ of $`G`$-colored framed diagrams as follows:

* Objects are sequences $`\{(ϵ_1,x_1),\mathrm{},(ϵ_n,x_n)\}`$ where $`\epsilon _i=\pm 1`$ and generic $`x_iG`$.
* Morphisms are $`G`$-colored framed diagrams modulo framed Reidemeister moves (see Figures 11, 12, 13)

This category is monoidal, braided. The composition is obvious. The tensor product is essentially the same as the tensor product of diagrams of framed tangles (see for example \[T-1\]). The decoration of the tensor product is defined by the decoration of factors.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ be the category of tangles with flat connections in the complement with the standard ramification (see section 2.4).

###### Proposition 1.

Consider the map $`E:T(G)\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$ acting on objects as

$$\{(ϵ_1,x_1),\mathrm{},(ϵ_n,x_n)\}\{(ϵ_1,g_1),\mathrm{},(ϵ_n,g_n)\}$$

where

$$g_i=(x_1)_{}^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}(x_{i1})_{}^{ϵ_{i1}}x_i(x_{i1})_{}^{ϵ_{i1}}\mathrm{}(x_1)_{}^{ϵ_1}$$

and on morphisms as $`(D_t`$ with a $`G`$-coloring$`)(t`$ with ramified representations of the $`\pi _1`$ of the complement to $`t`$ defined by the $`G`$-coloring of $`D_t)`$. It is a monoidal, braided functor $`T(G)\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$. This functor is also an equivalence of categories.

The proof follows from the bijection between tangles with given representation of the fundamental group of the complement and the equivalence classes of $`G`$-colored diagrams.

Because the categories $`\stackrel{~}{T}(G)`$and $`T(G)`$ are naturally equivalent we will abuse notations and will denote both of them by $`T(G)`$.

When $`G`$ is an almost factorizable Lie group the category of $`G`$-colored diagrams has the tensor product, but the dual object exists only on an open dense subset of objects. The braiding in this case also exists only on an open subset of objects of this category.

### 3.8 Elementary diagrams

The following fact is a key for construction of invariants of tangles via braided monoidal categories.

###### Proposition 2.

Framed $`G`$-colored tangles are compositions of tensor products of elementary diagrams. Elementary diagrams are given on Fig. 15 .

The proof of this proposition and the definition of elementary diagrams are the same as for the category of framed tangles (see \[T-1\]).

## 4 Holonomy Yang-Baxter equation and invariants of tangles with flat connections

Let $`G`$ be a factorizable group (or a factorizable Lie group).

### 4.1 Holonomy Yang-Baxter equation

Assume we have the following data:

* Collection of finite-dimensional vector spaces $`𝔛`$
* For each pair $`(X,Y)`$ of vector spaces from this collection we have a map

$$R^{X,Y}:G\times GEnd(XY)$$
(7)
(or, more generally, a section of a vector bundle over $`G\times G`$ with the fiber $`XY`$).

Let $`x_L,x_R:G\times GG`$ be mappings acting as

$$x_L(x,y)=x_{}yx_{}^1,x_R(x,y)=x_L(x,y)_+^1xx_L(x,y)_+$$
(8)
###### Definition 2.

The data described above define a system of holonomy $`R`$-matrices if the equation

$`R_{12}^{X,Y}(x_R(x,x_L(y,z)),x_R(y,z))R_{13}^{X,Z}(x,x_L(y,z))R_{23}^{Y,Z}(y,z)=`$ (9)
$`R_{23}^{Y,Z}(x_L(x,y),x_L(x_R(x,y),z))R_{13}^{X,Z}(x_R(x,y),z)R_{12}^{X,Y}(x,y)`$ (10)
holds for any generic triple $`x,y,zG`$ and any $`X,Y,Z𝔛`$. Here the mappings $`x_{L,R}`$ are as above, all factors act in $`XYZ`$ and lower indices in the $`R`$-matrices indicate in which factors of the tensor product they act nontrivially.

We will call the equation (9) the holonomy Yang-Baxter equation.

For a liner operator $`f:VV`$ we denote by $`f^t`$ the dual linear operator $`f^t:V^{}V^{}`$.

###### Definition 3.

Let $`V`$ and $`W`$ be two finite-dimensional vector spaces and $`W^{}`$ be the vector space dual to $`W`$. We will say that the liner map $`R:VWVW`$ is a *c*ross-nondegenerate if the corresponding linear map $`R^{t_2}:VW^{}VW^{}`$ is nondegenerate.

For cross-nondegenerate holonomy $`R`$-matrix acting in $`XX`$ define the map ( more generally a section of the trivial vector bundle) $`d^X:GEnd(X)`$.

$$d^X(a)=(trid)(P((R^{t_1}(a,i(a)^1)^1)^{t_1})$$

Here and below we will use the notation $`t_i`$ for taking dual to an operator acting in a tensor product with respect to the $`i`$-th factor.

###### Lemma 1.

For generic $`aG`$ the linear operator $`d^X(a)`$ is invertible and

$$d^X(a)^1=(idtr)((((R(i(a)^1,a)^1)^{t_2})^1)^{t_2}P)$$

###### Proposition 3.

For $`X,Y𝔛`$ and generic $`x,yG`$ the following identities hold

$$R_{12}^{X,Y}(x,y)=d_2(a)^1(((R_{12}^{X,Y}(x,y)^1)^{t_2})^1)^{t_2})d_2(y)$$
(11)
$$R_{12}^{X,Y}(a,b)=d_1(y)^1(((R_{12}^{X,Y}(a,b)^{t_1})^1)^{t_1})^1)d_1(a)$$
(12)
$$d_1^X(b)d_2^Y(a)R^{X,Y}(x,y)=R^{X,Y}(x,y)d_1^X(x)d_2^Y(y)$$
(13)
where $`a=x_L(x,y)`$ and $`b=x_R(x,y)`$.

For $`X𝔛`$ and generic $`xG`$ define the linear operator $`w_X(x)End(X)`$ as

$$w_X(x)=tr_1tr_2(P_{12}((R_{12}^1(x,b)^{t_2})^1)^{t_2}P_{13}R_{13}(b,x))$$
(14)
where $`b=i(x^1)`$.

###### Proposition 4.

For each $`X,Y𝔛`$ we have

$$(1w_Y(x_L(x,y))R^{X,Y}(x,y)=R^{X,Y}(x,y)(1w_Y(y))$$

$$(w_X(x_R(x,y))1)R^{X,Y}(x,y)=R^{X,Y}(x,y)(w_X(x)1)$$

The proof of this proposition and of the lemma are very similar. Each of the equalities follows from a sequence of equalities where each one corresponds to an elementary moves of corresponding diagrams. They are completely parallel to the proofs of similar statements from \[R-1\] ( see Fig. 8, Fig. 13-17 from that paper and corresponding sequences of equalities). The only difference is that $`G`$-coloring should be taken into account.

### 4.2 The category $`T(G,𝔛)`$

Let $`(D,\{x_e\}_{eE(D_t)})`$ be a $`G`$-colored diagram of a tangle. We will call it decorated by vector spaces $`𝔛`$ if a vector space from $`𝔛`$ is assigned to each connected component of the corresponding tangle.

Define the category $`C(G,𝔛)`$ of $`𝔛`$-decorated $`G`$-colored diagrams as follows.

* Objects of $`C(G,𝔛)`$ are sequences $`\{(\epsilon _1,g_1,X_1),\mathrm{}(\epsilon _n,g_n,X_n)\}`$ where $`\epsilon _i=\pm 1`$, $`g_iG^{}G`$ (recall that $`G^{}G`$ is the set of elements in $`G`$ which admit left and right factorization) and $`X_a𝔛`$.
* Morphisms between two objects $`\{(\epsilon _a,g_a,X_a)\}_{a=1}^n`$ and $`\{(\sigma _a,h_a,Y_a)\}_{a=1}^k`$ are $`G`$-colored diagrams decorated by vector spaces from $`𝔛`$ modulo framed Redemeiseter moves. Decorations of boundary components are determined by the initial and the target object. Elements $`g_a`$ and $`h_a`$ are colorings of boundary edges of such diagrams.
* Composition of morphisms is defined by gluing decorated diagrams along the common boundary.

It is clear that $`Ad_G`$ of the $`G`$-coloring of a morphism in this category can be naturally identified with a gauge class of a flat connections in the complement to the corresponding tangle with connected components colored by $`𝔛`$. The category $`T(G,𝔛)`$ is braided monoidal. The tensor product and the braiding are essentially the same as in the category $`T(G)`$.

### 4.3 The functor $`F:T(G,𝔛)\underset{¯}{Vect}`$

Here we will show how to use a system of holonomy $`R`$-matrices to construct invariants of tangles with flat $`G`$-connections in the complement. The construction is similar to the one of invariants of tangles given in \[RT\]. We will construct the monoidal functor from the category $`\stackrel{~}{C}(G,𝔛)`$ to the category of all vector spaces.

###### Theorem 2.

There exists a unique covariant functor $`F:T(G,𝔛)\underset{¯}{Vect}`$ such that

* $`F(\{(\epsilon _1,g_1,X_1),\mathrm{}(\epsilon _n,g_n,X_n)\})=X_1^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}X_n^{ϵ_n}`$, where $`X^+=X,X^{}=X^{}`$.
* $`F`$ is a monoidal functor, i.e.

$$F(\widehat{D}_1\widehat{D}_2)=F(\widehat{D}_1)F(\widehat{D}_2)$$

where $`\widehat{D}_i`$ are decorated diagrams.
* Values of $`F`$ on elementary diagrams are:

1. If $`I^\epsilon :(\epsilon ,X,x)(\epsilon ,X,x)`$ is the identity morphism then

    $$F(I^\epsilon )=id_{X^ϵ}.$$
    2. For the morphism $`e^r:(\epsilon ,X,x)^{}(\epsilon ,X,x)1`$ we have:

    $$F(e^r)=\{\begin{array}{cc}e_X:X^{}X,lvl(d_X(x)v),\hfill & \text{if }\epsilon =+1\hfill \\ XX^{},vll(v),\hfill & \text{if }\epsilon =1\hfill \end{array}$$
    3. For $`i^r:1(\epsilon ,X,x)(\epsilon ,X,x)^{}`$ we have

    $$F(i^r)=\{\begin{array}{cc}i_X:XX^{},1_id_X(x)^1e_ie^i,\hfill & \text{ if }\epsilon =+1\hfill \\ X^{}X,1_ie^ie_i,\hfill & \text{ if }\epsilon =1\hfill \end{array}$$

    Here $`e_i`$ is a linear basis in $`X`$ and $`e^i`$ is the dual linear basis in $`X^{}`$.
    4. If $`c:(+,X,x)(+,Y,y)(+,Y,y)(+,X,x)`$ is the braiding morphism,

    $$F(c)=P^{X,Y}R^{X,Y}(x,y):XYYX.$$

    $$F(c^1)=(P^{X,Y}R^{X,Y)}(x,y))^1:XYYX.$$

    Here $`P^{V,W}:VWWV`$ is the linear map $`P^{V,W}(xy)=yx`$.

The proof of this theorem is completely parallel to the proof from of the corresponding theorem for tangles without flat connections (see \[RT\]). One should check the defining relations between elementary tangles, which is a routine exercise.

The value of $`F`$ on a diagram is a linear map between the vector spaces which are defined by the decoration of the boundary of the diagram. The value of the functor $`F`$ on a diagram depends only on its isotopy class and therefore $`F`$ is an invariant of framed tangles. In the next section we will show that the functor $`F`$ is gauge invariant.

## 5 Gauge invariance

### 5.1 The gauge group action and the dressing action

Let $`g_1,\mathrm{}g_n`$ be a $`G`$-coloring of edges $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_n`$ on Fig. 16 and let $`\gamma _i`$ be the holonomy along the path $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$. For generic colorings we have:

$$\gamma _i=(g_1)_+^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}(g_i)_+^{ϵ_i}(g_i)_{}^{ϵ_i}\mathrm{}(g_1)_{}^{ϵ_1}$$
(15)
or, equivalently,

$$ϵ_i(g_i)=(\gamma _{i1})_+^1\gamma _i(\gamma _{i1})_{}$$
(16)
Here $`ϵ_i`$ is the orientation of the edge $`e_i`$ ($`+`$ for going up and $``$ for going down) and

$$ϵ(g)=\{\begin{array}{cc}g& \text{for }ϵ=+1\\ i(g)& \text{for }ϵ=1\end{array}$$

Holonomies $`\gamma _i`$ and colorings $`g_i`$ can be regarded as an element of $`G^{\times n}`$. Then formulae (15), (16) describe two mutually inverse birational mappings of $`G^{\times n}`$ to itself.

The gauge group acts on $`\gamma _i`$ by diagonal conjugation in $`G^{\times n}`$:

$$x:\gamma _ix\gamma _ix^1$$
(17)
The gauge action of $`G`$ on this space is the diagonal action by conjugations.

For $`xG`$ consider the (birational) mapping $`\alpha _x:G^{\times n}G^{\times n}`$ defined as:

$$ϵ_i(\alpha _x(g_i))=x^{\gamma _{i1}}ϵ_i(g_i)(x^{\gamma _{i1}})^1$$
(18)
where $`\gamma _i`$ are as above and

$$x^\gamma =(x\gamma x^1)_+^1x\gamma _+=(x\gamma x^1)_{}^1x\gamma _{}$$
(19)
is the dressing action of $`\gamma `$ on $`x`$.

Notice that the dressing action preserves the subgroups $`G_\pm `$ and

$$(x_+)^\gamma =(\gamma _{}^1x_+^1)_+^1$$
(20)
$$(x_{})^\gamma =(x_{}\gamma _+)_{}^1$$
(21)
###### Proposition 5.

The mapping (16) intertwines the gauge action of $`xG`$ and the mapping $`\alpha _x`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`g^x=\{(g^x)_1,\mathrm{},(g^x)_n\}`$ be the result of the gauge action of $`xG`$ on $`g`$-coordinates. We have:

$$\begin{array}{c}ϵ_i((g^x)_i)=(x\gamma _{i1}x^1)_+^1x\gamma _ix^1(x\gamma _{i1}x^1)_{}\hfill \\ \hfill =(x\gamma _{i1}x^1)_+^1x(\gamma _{i1})_+ϵ_i(g_i)(\gamma _{i1})_{}^1x^1(x\gamma _{i1}x^1)_{}=x^{\gamma _{i1}}ϵ_i(g_i)(x^{\gamma _{i1}})^1=ϵ_i(\alpha _x(g)_i).\end{array}$$

Here we used formulae (19) for the dressing action. ∎

###### Corollary 1.

If $`x`$ belongs to one of the subgroups $`G_\pm G`$ we have

$$ϵ_i(\alpha _{x_+}(g)_i)=x_+^{(g_{i1})_{}^{ϵ_{i1}}\mathrm{}(g_1)_{}^{ϵ_1}}ϵ_i(g_i)\left(x_+^{(g_{i1})_{}^{ϵ_{i1}}\mathrm{}(g_1)_{}^{ϵ_1}}\right)^1$$
(22)
$$ϵ_i(\alpha _x_{}(g)_i)=x_{}^{(g_1)_+^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}(g_{i1})_+^{ϵ_{i1}}}ϵ_i(g_i)\left(x_{}^{(g_1)_+^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}(g_{i1})_+^{ϵ_{i1}}}\right)^1$$
(23)
###### Lemma 2.

Let $`x,y,a,b`$ be $`G`$-colorings of the diagram from Fig. 17. Then,

$$ϵ_e(a)=x_+ϵ_e(y)x_+^1,b_+=\left(y_{}^{ϵ_e}x_+^1\right)_+^1$$

###### Proof.

According to the definition of $`G`$-coloring we have:

$$b=a_{}^{ϵ_e}xa_{}^{ϵ_e},ϵ_e(a)=x_+ϵ_e(y)x_+^1$$

This gives the formula for $`a`$. In particular,

$$a_{}=\left(y_{}^{ϵ_e}x_+^1\right)_{}^{ϵ_e}$$

so that

$$b_+=\left(a_{}^{ϵ_e}x_+\right)_+=\left(\left(y_{}^{ϵ_e}x_+^1\right)_{}^1x_+\right)_+=\left(\left(y_{}^{ϵ_e}x_+^1\right)_+^1y_{}^{ϵ_e}x_+^1x_+\right)_+=\left(y_{}^{ϵ_e}x_+^1\right)_+^1$$

###### Lemma 3.

Let $`x,y,a,b`$ be colorings the diagram from Fig. 18. Then

$$ϵ_e(a)=x_{}^1ϵ_e(y)x_{},b_{}=\left(x_{}^1y_+^{ϵ_e}\right)_{}$$

###### Proof.

From the definition of $`G`$-coloring we have

$$ϵ_e(a)=x_{}^1ϵ_e(y)x_{},b=y_+^{ϵ_e}xy_+^{ϵ_e}$$

so the required formulas are straightforward. ∎

###### Proposition 6.

If $`g_1,\mathrm{},g_n`$ are $`G`$-colorings of ”lower” edges of diagrams in Figures 19, 20, then the colorings of ”upper” edges are

$$ϵ_i(\stackrel{~}{g}_i)=x_+^{(g_{i1})_{}^{ϵ_{i1}}\mathrm{}(g_1)_{}^{ϵ_1}}ϵ_i(g_i)\left(x_+^{(g_{i1})_{}^{ϵ_{i1}}\mathrm{}(g_1)_{}^{ϵ_1}}\right)^1$$

for the diagram in Fig 19 and

$$ϵ_i(\stackrel{~}{g}_i)=\left(x_{}^1\right)^{(g_1)_+^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}(g_{i1})_+^{ϵ_{i1}}}ϵ_i(g_i)\left(\left(x_{}^1\right)^{(g_1)_+^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}(g_{i1})_+^{ϵ_{i1}}}\right)^1$$

for the diagram in Fig 20.

###### Proof.

Let us consider first the diagram from Fig.19. Lemma 2 implies the following relations between $`G`$-colorings:

$$ϵ_i(\stackrel{~}{g}_i)=(x_{i1})_+ϵ_i(g_i)(x_{i1})_+^1,(x_i)_+=\left((g_i)_{}^{ϵ_i}(x_{i1})_+^1\right)_+^1$$

From here we deduce that

$$(x_i)_+=\left(\left(g_i\right)_{}^{ϵ_i}\mathrm{}\left(g_1\right)_{}^{ϵ_1}x_+^1\right)_+^1=x_+^{\left(g_i\right)_{}^{ϵ_i}\mathrm{}\left(g_1\right)_{}^{ϵ_1}}$$

This, together with the formula (20) imply the first statement of the proposition.

Similarly, for the $`G`$-coloring of the diagram from Fig. 20 we have

$$ϵ_i(\stackrel{~}{g}_i)=(x_{i1})_{}^1ϵ_i(g_i)(x_{i1})_{},(x_i)_{}=\left((x_{i1})_{}^1(g_i)_+^{ϵ_i}\right)_{}$$

This gives the formula for $`(x_i)_{}`$:

$$(x_i)_{}=\left(x_{}^1(g_1)_+^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}(g_i)_+^{ϵ_i}\right)_{}=\left(\left(x_{}^1\right)^{(g_1)_+^{ϵ_1}\mathrm{}(g_i)_+^{ϵ_i}}\right)^1$$

Together with the formula (21) this implies the last statement of the proposition and completes the proof.

### 5.2 Gauge invariance of the functor $`F`$

Let $`R^{X,Y}(x,y)`$ be a holonomy $`R`$-matrix acting in $`XY`$ where $`X,Y𝔛`$. Define the operator

$$\sigma (R^{X,Y}(x,y))=P^{YX}R^{X,Y}(x,y)P^{XY}:YXXY$$

Let $`t`$ be an $`𝔛`$-decorated $`G`$-colored tangle. Assume that

$$tHom_{\stackrel{~}{T}(G,𝔛)}((ϵ_1,Y_1,y_1)\mathrm{}(ϵ_n,Y_n,y_n),(\sigma _1,Z_1,z_1)\mathrm{}(\sigma _k,Z_k,z_k))$$

Denote by $`F(t)`$ the value of functor $`F`$ described in Subsection 4.3.

###### Theorem 3.

Let $`t^x`$ be an $`𝔛`$-decorated $`G`$-colored tangle with the $`G`$-coloring obtained by the gauge action of $`xG`$ on the $`G`$-coloring of the the tangle $`t`$. Then the following relations hold for $`x_\pm G_\pm `$

$$\begin{array}{c}(1F(t^{x_+}))R_{0n}^{\epsilon _n,n}(\{y\},x)^1\mathrm{}R_{01}^{\epsilon _1,1}(\{y\},x)^1=\hfill \\ \hfill R_{0k}^{\sigma _k,k}(\{z\},x)^1\mathrm{}R_{01}^{\sigma _1,1}(\{z\},x)^1(1F(t))\end{array}$$
(24)
$$\begin{array}{c}(F(t^x_{})1)\stackrel{~}{R}_{1,n+1}^{\epsilon _1,1}(\{y\},x)^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{R}_{n,n+1}^{\epsilon _n,n}(\{y\},x)^1=\hfill \\ \hfill R_{1,k+1}^{\sigma _1,1}(\{z\},x))^1\mathrm{}R_{k,k+1}^{\sigma _k,k}(\{z\},x)^1(F(t)1)\end{array}$$
(25)
Both sides in (24) are linear maps $`XY_1\mathrm{}Y_nXZ_1\mathrm{}Z_k`$ with

$$R_{0i}^{(+,i)}(\{y\},x)=\sigma (R^{Y_i,X}(\alpha _x_{}(y)_i,x_i))_{0i}$$

$$R_{0i}^{(,i)}(\{y\},x)=\sigma ((R^{Y_i,X}(\alpha _x_{}(y)_i,x_{i1})^{t_1})^1)_{0i}$$

Here we used the notation

$$(ab)_{0i}=a_01\mathrm{}b_i\mathrm{}1End(XY_1\mathrm{}Y_n)$$

Both sides in (25) are linear maps $`Y_1\mathrm{}Y_nXZ_1\mathrm{}Z_kX`$ with

$$\stackrel{~}{R}_{i,n+1}^{(+,i)}(\{y\},x)=\sigma (R^{X,Y_i}(x_{i1},\alpha _{x_+}(y)_i))_{i,n+1}$$

$$\stackrel{~}{R}_{i,n+1}^{(,i)}(\{y\},x)=\sigma ((R^{X,Y_i}(x_i,\alpha _{x_+}(y)_i)^1)^{t_2})_{i,n+1}$$

where

$$(ab)_{i,n+1}=1\mathrm{}a_i\mathrm{}1b_{n+1}$$

The maps $`\alpha _{x_\pm }`$ are defined in (22) (23), and the elements $`x_i,\stackrel{~}{x_i},x^i,\stackrel{~}{x^i}`$ are determined by the recurrence relations

$$x_{i1}=(\alpha _x_{}(y)_i)_{}^{ϵ_i}x_i(\alpha _x_{}(y)_i)_{}^{ϵ_i}$$

$$x^{i1}=(y_i)_+^{ϵ_i}x_i(y_i)_+^{ϵ_i}$$

with $`x_0=x_+`$ and $`x^0=x_{}`$. Replacing $`y`$ by $`z`$ and $`n`$ by $`k`$ we will have the definition of the remaining $`R`$-matrices.

Proof. First let us prove the equation (24). Consider the diagram which is represented on the Fig. 22. The value of the functor $`F`$ on this diagram coincide with the value of this functor on the diagram which obtained from it by moving the component colored by $`x`$ under the tangle to top of the diagram. This equality is exactly the equality (24). Similarly, moving the component colored by $`x`$ on the diagram from Fig. 21 we prove the second equality. Evaluation of the functor $`F`$ on these diagrams is an easy routine. Formulae from Appendix 7.2 are useful.

Q.E.D.

Thus, the functor $`F`$ is an invariant of tangles with flat $`G`$-connection in the complement which is transforms as it is described above with respect to the action of the gauge group.

###### Corollary 2.

If $`t`$ is a link, the invariant $`F(t)`$ is a scalar, i.e. it takes values in the base field which was assumed $``$. It is invariant with respect to the gauge group action on the flat connection and therefore is a function ( or a section of a line bundle) on the moduli space of flat $`G`$-connections on the complement to the tangle $`t`$.

## 6 Conclusion

We described a construction of invariants of tangles with flat connections in the complement which is based on a system of nondegenerate and cross-nondegenerate holonomy $`R`$-matrices. In the second paper of this series we will show how to construct holonomy $`R`$-matrices from the representation theory of quantum groups at roots of 1. We will also show how to use these holonomy $`R`$-matrices to construct invariants of 3-manifolds with flat $`G`$-connection in it.

## 7 Appendix

### 7.1

Let us show that the crossing rules from Fig. 6 imply the rules in the definition of the $`G`$-coloring. Indeed, consider pairs of pathes from Fig. 23-26. Isotopy equivalence of these pathes imply the equality of corresponding monodromies. Computing monodromies along these pathes according to crossing rule from Fig. 6 we obtain the definition of the $`G`$-coloring.

### 7.2

Let $`t_1,t_2`$ and $`t_1^1,t_2^1`$ be diagrams from Fig. 27-30. The functor $`F`$ can be evaluated on them using the second framed Redemeister. As a result we have the following linear maps:

$$F(t_1)=((R^{VW}(b,y)^1)^{t_2})^1P^{W^{}V}:W^{}VVW^{}$$

$$F(t_2)=P^{W^{}V}((R^{WV}(a,x))^{t_1})^1:W^{}VVW^{}$$

$$F(t_1^1)=F(t_1)^1=P^{VW^{}}(R^{VW}(b,y)^1)^{t_2}$$

$$F(t_2^1)=F(t_2)^1=(R^{WV}(a,x))^{t_1}P^{VW^{}}$$


text:
# Scaling, Multiscaling, and Nontrivial Exponents in Inelastic Collision Processes

## I Introduction

Inelastic gases consist of hard sphere particles that interact via contact interactions and dissipate kinetic energy upon collisions . They are used extensively to study dynamics of granular materials. Numerically, molecular dynamics simulations are quite successful in modeling many of the observed collective phenomena that include size segregation, phase transitions, shocks, clustering, and development of other spatial structures . In parallel, kinetic theory is utilized to systematically derive macroscopic properties from the microscopic collision dynamics .

Inelastic gases, a prototype nonequilibrium interacting particle system, are interesting on their own rights. Recent theoretical and experimental studies show that the velocity distributions exhibit anomalous large-velocity statistics with exponential, stretched exponential, and Gaussian tails. Inelastic gases involve significant velocity and spatial correlations in contrast with traditional molecular gases . Kinetic theory assumes that spatial velocity correlations are small. While this assumption can be justified for strongly driven gases, the situation for freely evolving gases is more difficult since velocity correlations can be ignored only in the early homogeneous phase , but must be taken into account in the asymptotic clustering phase. Clearly, the strong energy dissipation raises challenging new questions .

Yet, even more elementary questions remain unanswered. For example, random collision processes effectively generate thermal, purely Maxwellian, velocity distributions when the collisions are elastic. In particular, different components of the velocity become uncorrelated. In this study, we consider these very same processes but with inelastic collisions. We show that energy dissipation fundamentally alters the behavior. The system is intrinsically a nonequilibrium one, and the resulting velocity distributions are far from thermal.

We consider a collision process where random pairs of particles undergo inelastic collisions with a random impact direction. This process, often called the Maxwell model, is described by a Boltzmann equation with a uniform collision rate. In classical kinetic theory of gases, the analytically tractable Maxwell model precedes the Boltzmann equation . Historically, it played an important role in the development of kinetic theory , and it still remains the subject of current research .

Very recently, it has been noted that the Maxwell model is analytically tractable even for inelastic collisions . Interesting behavior emerges in the freely evolving case. In one dimension, while moments of the velocity distribution exhibit multiscaling , the velocity distribution itself still approaches a scaling form with an algebraic large velocity tail . Here, we show analytically that in arbitrary spatial dimension the velocity distribution admits a scaling solution with an algebraic large velocity tail. The corresponding exponent, a root of a transcendental equation, depends on the spatial dimension and the restitution coefficient. Additionally, we find that the multiscaling behavior extends to higher dimensions, and that the velocity autocorrelation function exhibits aging and nonuniversal asymptotic behavior. In general, velocity components develop significant correlations. Such correlations diminish in the forced case, although the velocity distribution remains non-Maxwellian.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The basic Boltzmann equation for the velocity distribution and its Fourier transform are presented in Sec. II. In Sec. III, we investigate the scaling regime, and obtain the extremal velocity statistics, moments of the velocity scaling function, and velocity correlations. In Sec. IV, we illuminate the nonequilibrium dynamics by studying the time dependent behavior of the moments and the velocity autocorrelation function. In Sec. V, we consider nonequilibrium steady states in the driven case, and obtain the steady state distribution as a cumulant expansion. A few generalizations are briefly mentioned in Sec. VI, and conclusions are given in Sec. VII.

## II The Maxwell Model

We study a homogeneous system of identical inelastic spherical particles. The mass and the cross-section are set to unity without loss of generality. Particles interact via binary collisions that lead to exchange of momentum along the impact direction. The post-collision velocities $`𝐯_{1,2}`$ are given by a linear combination of the pre-collision velocities $`𝐮_{1,2}`$,

$$𝐯_{1,2}=𝐮_{1,2}(1ϵ)(𝐠𝐧)𝐧.$$
(1)
Here $`𝐠=𝐮_1𝐮_2`$ is the relative velocity and $`𝐧`$ the unit vector connecting the particles’ centers. In each collision, the normal component of the relative velocity is reduced by the restitution coefficient $`r=12ϵ`$. The energy dissipation equals $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=ϵ(1ϵ)(𝐠𝐧)^2`$, so for $`ϵ=0`$ collisions are elastic, while for $`ϵ=1/2`$ collisions are perfectly inelastic with maximal energy dissipation. Since the collision rule (1) is Galilean invariant, the average velocity can be set to zero without loss of generality.

We investigate the “Maxwell model” where the collision rate in the Boltzmann equation equals the typical velocity, rather than the actual relative velocity . This kinetic theory describes a stochastic process where randomly chosen pairs of particles undergo inelastic collisions according to (1) with a randomly chosen impact direction $`𝐧`$. In such a process, no spatial correlations develop, and the normalized velocity distribution function, $`P(𝐯,t)`$, obeys

$`{\displaystyle \frac{P(𝐯,t)}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`g{\displaystyle 𝑑𝐧𝑑𝐮_1P(𝐮_1,t)𝑑𝐮_2P(𝐮_2,t)}`$ (2)
$`\times `$ $`\left\{\delta \left[𝐯𝐮_1+(1ϵ)(𝐠𝐧)𝐧\right]\delta (𝐯𝐮_1)\right\}.`$ (3)
The overall collision rate equals $`g=\sqrt{T}`$ where $`T`$ is the granular temperature, or the average velocity fluctuation per degree of freedom, $`T=\frac{1}{d}𝑑𝐯v^2P(𝐯,t)`$ with $`v|𝐯|`$. The restriction $`𝐠𝐧>0`$ on the angular integration range in Eq. (2) can be tacitly ignored, because the integrand obeys the reflection symmetry $`𝐧𝐧`$. This angular integration should be normalized, $`𝑑𝐧=1`$.

We study primarily the freely evolving case where in the absence of energy input the system “cools” indefinitely. From the Boltzmann equation (2), the temperature rate equation is

$$\frac{d}{dt}T=\lambda T^{3/2},\mathrm{with}\lambda =\frac{2ϵ(1ϵ)}{d}.$$
(4)
The constant $`\lambda =2ϵ(1ϵ)𝑑𝐧n_1^2`$, is obtained using the identity $`n_1^2+\mathrm{}+n_d^2=1`$ that yields $`𝑑𝐧n_1^2=1/d`$. Solving Eq. (4) we find that the temperature decays according to Haff’s cooling law

$$T(t)=T_0(1+t/t_{})^2,$$
(5)
with the time scale $`t_{}=d/\left[ϵ(1ϵ)\sqrt{T_0}\right]`$ set by the initial temperature, $`T_0`$.

Given the convolution structure of the Boltzmann equation (2), we introduce the Fourier transform  of the velocity distribution function,

$$F(𝐤,t)=𝑑𝐯e^{i𝐤𝐯}P(𝐯,t).$$
(6)
We conveniently reset the collision rate to unity by modifying the time variable. The collision counter $`\tau `$ is defined via the transformation $`\frac{d}{d\tau }=\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}}\frac{d}{dt}`$. Specifically,

$$\tau =\frac{2}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}\left(1+t/t_{}\right)$$
(7)
equals the average number of collisions experienced by a particle. Applying the Fourier transform to Eq. (2) and integrating over the velocities gives

$$\frac{}{\tau }F(𝐤,\tau )+F(𝐤,\tau )=𝑑𝐧F[𝐤𝐪,\tau ]F[𝐪,\tau ],$$
(8)
with $`𝐪=(1ϵ)(𝐤𝐧)𝐧`$. This equation reflects the momentum transfer occurring during collisions.

We restrict our attention to isotropic situations, and write the Fourier transform $`F(𝐤,\tau )F(z,\tau )`$ in terms of the variable $`z=k^2`$. To perform the angular integration, it proves useful to employ spherical coordinates with the polar axis parallel to $`𝐤`$, so that $`\widehat{𝐤}𝐧=\mathrm{cos}\theta `$. The $`\theta `$-dependent factor of the measure $`d𝐧`$ is proportional to $`(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{d2}d\theta `$. In terms of the variable $`\mu =\mathrm{cos}^2\theta `$ one has $`d𝐧𝒟\mu `$, with

$$B(\frac{1}{2},\frac{d1}{2})𝒟\mu =\mu ^{\frac{1}{2}}(1\mu )^{\frac{d3}{2}}d\mu $$
(9)
where $`B(a,b)`$ is the beta function. This integration measure is properly normalized, $`_0^1𝒟\mu =1`$. Hereinafter, we denote angular integration with brackets

$$f=_0^1𝒟\mu f(\mu ).$$
(10)
The governing equation (8) for the Fourier transform can now be rewritten in the convenient from

$$\frac{}{\tau }F(z,\tau )+F(z,\tau )=F(\xi z,\tau )F(\eta z,\tau ),$$
(11)
with the shorthand notations $`\xi =1(1ϵ^2)\mu `$ and $`\eta =(1ϵ)^2\mu `$. Hence, the Fourier equation is both non-linear and non-local. Interestingly, while it is difficult to integrate this equation with respect to time, most of the physically relevant features of the velocity distributions including large velocity statistics and the time dependent behavior of the moments can be found analytically, as will be shown below.

## III Scaling Solutions

Numerical simulations in two-dimensions suggest that the velocity distribution approaches the scaling form

$$P(𝐯,t)\frac{1}{T^{d/2}}𝒫\left(\frac{v}{\sqrt{T}}\right).$$
(12)
The scaling form of the Fourier transform reads

$$F(𝐤,t)=\mathrm{\Phi }(x),\mathrm{with}x=k^2T.$$
(13)
In the $`k0`$ limit, the Fourier transform behaves as $`F(𝐤,t)1\frac{1}{2}k^2T`$. This implies that the first two terms in the Taylor expansion of the corresponding scaling function are universal, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)1\frac{1}{2}x`$. Substituting the above scaling form into the governing equation (11) and using the temperature cooling rate $`\frac{d}{d\tau }T=\lambda T`$ yields the governing equation for the scaling function

$$\lambda x\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(x)+\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi x)\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta x).$$
(14)
One can check that the velocity distribution is purely Maxwellian $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=e^{x/2}`$ in the elastic case . Indeed, $`\lambda =0`$ and $`\xi +\eta =1`$ in this case. A stochastic process of elastic collisions effectively randomizes the velocities and leads to a thermal distribution.

### A Algebraic tails

It is instructive to consider first the one-dimensional case. Here, integration over $`\mu `$ is immediate as this variable equals unity, and the scaling function satisfies $`\lambda x\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(x)+\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=\mathrm{\Phi }\left[ϵ^2x\right]\mathrm{\Phi }\left[(1ϵ)^2x\right]`$. Remarkably, this non-local non-linear differential equation admits a very simple solution

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=\left(1+\sqrt{x}\right)e^\sqrt{x}.$$
(15)
Performing the inverse Fourier transform gives the velocity distribution as a squared Lorentzian

$$𝒫(w)=\frac{2}{\pi }\left(1+w^2\right)^2.$$
(16)
The scaling solution (16) is universal as it is independent of the dissipation coefficient $`ϵ`$. Its key feature is the algebraic tail, $`𝒫(w)w^4`$ as $`|w|\mathrm{}`$.

In general dimension $`d`$, the large velocity behavior of the velocity distribution can be determined from the small wave number behavior of its Fourier transform. For example, the small-$`x`$ expansion of the one-dimensional solution (15) contains both regular and singular terms: $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=1\frac{1}{2}x+\frac{1}{3}x^{3/2}+\mathrm{}`$, and the dominant singular $`x^{3/2}`$ term reflects the $`w^4`$ tail of $`𝒫(w)`$. In general, an algebraic tail of the velocity distribution (12),

$$𝒫(w)w^\sigma \mathrm{as}w\mathrm{},$$
(17)
indicates the existence of a singular component in the Fourier transform,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{sing}}(x)x^{(\sigma d)/2}\mathrm{as}x0.$$
(18)
The inverse is also correct. This can be seen by recasting the Fourier transform $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑ww^{d1}𝒫(w)e^{iw\sqrt{x}}`$ into a Laplace transform $`I(s)_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑ww^{d1}𝒫(w)e^{ws}`$ by writing $`x=s^2`$. The small-$`s`$ expansion of $`I(s)`$ contains regular and singular components. For example, when $`\sigma <d`$, the integral $`I(s)`$ diverges as $`s0`$ and integration over large-$`w`$ yields the dominant contribution $`I_{\mathrm{sing}}(s)s^{\sigma d}`$. When $`d<\sigma <d+1`$, $`I(0)`$ is finite, but the next term is the above singular term, so $`I(s)=I(0)+I_{\mathrm{sing}}(s)+\mathrm{}`$. In general, the singular contribution is $`I_{\mathrm{sing}}(s)s^{\sigma d}`$, thereby leading to Eq. (18).

The exponent $`\sigma `$ can be now obtained by inserting $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{reg}}(x)+\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{sing}}(x)`$ into Eq. (14) and balancing the dominant singular terms. We find that $`\sigma `$ is a root of the integral equation

$$1\lambda \frac{\sigma d}{2}=\xi ^{(\sigma d)/2}+\eta ^{(\sigma d)/2}.$$
(19)
This relation, originally derived in Refs., can be recast as an eigenvalue problem. Indeed, defining $`\lambda _\nu =1\xi ^\nu \eta ^\nu `$ we can re-write Eq. (19) as $`\lambda _\mu =\mu \lambda _1`$ with $`\mu =\frac{\sigma d}{2}`$. Note that $`\lambda \lambda _1`$, so there is an obvious solution $`\mu =1`$, or $`\sigma =d+2`$. In this case, the singular term simply coincides with the dominant regular term, $`x^{(\sigma d)/2}=x`$. Hence, this solution is trivial and in the following we shall seek a solution with $`\sigma >d+2`$.

The integral equation (19) can also be rewritten in terms of special functions. The first integral on the right-hand side of (19) can be expressed in terms of the hypergeometric function $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c;z)`$  and the second as a ratio of beta functions:

$`1ϵ(1ϵ){\displaystyle \frac{\sigma d}{d}}=`$ (20)
$`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}[{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma }{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}};{\displaystyle \frac{d}{2}};1ϵ^2]+(1ϵ)^{\sigma d}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\sigma d+1}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\sigma }{2}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)}}.`$ (21)
We conclude that the exponent $`\sigma \sigma (d,ϵ)`$ depends in a nontrivial fashion on the spatial dimension $`d`$ as well as the dissipation coefficient $`ϵ`$.

First, let us investigate the dependence on the dissipation coefficient by considering the quasi-elastic limit $`ϵ0`$. In the elastic case, the Maxwellian distribution, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=e^{x/2}`$, implies a diverging exponent $`\sigma \mathrm{}`$ as $`ϵ0`$. Therefore, the right-hand side of Eq. (20) vanishes in the quasi-elastic limit and to leading order

$$\sigma \frac{d}{ϵ}.$$
(22)
Clearly, the quasi-elastic limit is singular. Dissipation, even if minute, seriously changes the nature of the system . Further corrections can be obtained via a systematic perturbation expansion in $`ϵ`$. We merely quote the two leading corrections in the physically relevant dimensions

$`\sigma (2,ϵ)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{ϵ}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\left(e^2+1\right)}{\sqrt{\pi ϵ}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi (e^2+1)^2}{\pi }}+𝒪(ϵ^{1/2}),`$
$`\sigma (3,ϵ)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{ϵ}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{2ϵ}}}+\left[6e^3{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}\right]+𝒪(ϵ^{1/2}).`$
Next, we discuss the dependence on the dimension. First, one can verify that $`\sigma =4`$ when $`d=1`$ by utilizing the identity $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;b;z)=(1z)^a`$. In the infinite dimension limit, the second integral $`\eta ^{(\sigma d)/2}`$ in Eq. (19) is negligible as it vanishes exponentially with the dimension. To evaluate the second integral we take the limits $`d\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mu 0`$ with $`z=\mu d/2`$ fixed. The integration measure (9) is transformed according to $`𝒟\mu (\pi z)^{1/2}e^zdz`$, and the basic Eq. (19) becomes $`1ϵ(1ϵ)u=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z(\pi z)^{1/2}e^{[1+(1ϵ^2)u]z}`$ with the shorthand notation $`u=\frac{\sigma }{d}1`$. Performing the integration yields $`1ϵ(1ϵ)u=[1+(1ϵ^2)u]^{1/2}`$. This cubic equation has the aforementioned trivial solution $`u=0`$ and two non-trivial solutions. Choosing the physically relevant $`u`$, we obtain that as $`d\mathrm{}`$

$$\frac{\sigma }{d}=\frac{1+\frac{3}{2}ϵϵ^3ϵ^{1/2}\left(1+\frac{5}{4}ϵ\right)^{1/2}}{ϵ(1ϵ^2)}.$$
(23)
In general, $`\sigma d`$, and therefore, the algebraic decay becomes sharper as the dimension increases. The exponent $`\sigma (d,ϵ)`$ increases monotonically with increasing $`d`$, and additionally, it increases monotonically with decreasing $`ϵ`$ (see Fig. 1). Both features are intuitive as they mirror the monotonic dependence of the energy dissipation rate $`\lambda =2ϵ(1ϵ)/d`$ on $`d`$ and $`ϵ`$. Hence, the completely inelastic case provides a lower bound for the exponent, $`\sigma (d,ϵ)\sigma (d,ϵ=1/2)`$ with $`\sigma (d,1/2)=6.28753`$, $`8.32937`$, for $`d=2`$, $`3`$, respectively. Numerical simulation results are consistent with the former value . The algebraic tails are characterized by unusually large exponents which may be difficult to measure accurately in practice; for instance, typical granular particles are characterized by the dissipation coefficient $`ϵ0.1`$ yielding $`\sigma 30`$ in three dimensions. Figure 1 also shows that the quantity $`\sigma /d`$ weakly depends upon the dimension, and the large-$`d`$ limit (23) provides a good approximation even at moderate dimensions.

### B Divergence of the moments

The algebraic tail of the velocity distribution implies that sufficiently small moments of the scaling function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$ are finite, while moments larger than some index diverge. In the scaling regime, moments of the velocity distribution can be calculated by expanding the Fourier transform in powers of $`x`$,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=\underset{n0}{}\varphi _n(x)^n.$$
(24)
The coefficients $`\varphi _n`$ yield the leading asymptotic behavior of the velocity moments, $`M_k(t)=𝑑𝐯v^kP(𝐯,t)`$, via the relation $`(2n)!T^n\varphi _n\mu ^nM_{2n}`$. Inserting the moment expansion into the governing equation (14) yields the closed hierarchy of equations

$`(\lambda _nn\lambda _1)\varphi _n={\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}\lambda _{m,nm}\varphi _m\varphi _{nm},`$ (25)
with $`\lambda _n=1\xi ^n\eta ^n`$ and $`\lambda _{m,l}=\xi ^m\eta ^l`$. The first few coefficients are written explicitly in Appendix A. Starting with $`\varphi _0=1`$ and $`\varphi _1=1/2`$, further coefficients are determined recursively from (25). In the elastic case ($`ϵ=0`$), one has $`\varphi _n=(n!\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}^n)^1`$, consistent with $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=e^{x/2}`$. For general $`ϵ`$, the first two terms are

$`\varphi _2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}{\displaystyle \frac{13\frac{1ϵ^2}{d+2}}{13\frac{1+ϵ^2}{d+2}}},`$ (26)
$`\varphi _3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{48}}{\displaystyle \frac{13\frac{1ϵ^2}{d+2}}{13\frac{1+ϵ^2}{d+2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{13\frac{(1ϵ)(1+3ϵ)}{d+2}+30\frac{ϵ(1ϵ)(1ϵ^2)}{(d+2)(d+4)}}{13\frac{(1+ϵ)^2}{d+2}+10\frac{ϵ(1ϵ)(3+ϵ^2)}{(d+2)(d+4)}}}.`$ (27)
The behavior is determined by two parameters: $`d`$ and $`ϵ`$. Fixing $`ϵ`$, we see that a given moment $`\varphi _n`$ is finite only if the dimension is sufficiently large, $`d>d_n(ϵ)`$. In particular, $`\varphi _n`$ is finite only if the left-hand side of Eq. (25) is positive, $`\lambda _nn\lambda _1>0`$. This condition is satisfied only if the dimension is sufficiently large $`d>d_n`$, with $`d_n`$ being the spatial dimension at which $`\lambda _n=n\lambda _1`$. For example, $`\varphi _2>0`$ when $`d>d_2`$, and $`\varphi _3`$ is finite only when $`d>d_3`$ with the following crossover dimensions

$`d_2`$ $`=`$ $`1+3ϵ^2,`$ (28)
$`d_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\left(ϵ^2+2ϵ1\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{2560ϵ+186ϵ^24ϵ^3+49ϵ^4}.`$ (29)
Conversely, for a fixed dimension, a given moment is finite only if the dissipation is sufficiently small. For example, $`\varphi _3`$ is positive only when $`ϵ<0.302074,0.427438`$ at $`d=2,3`$. Such values, obtained by solving polynomial equations yield integer values of the large velocity decay exponent $`\sigma (2,0.302074)=8`$ and $`\sigma (3,0.427438)=9`$, in accord with direct numerical solution of Eq. (20).

### C Velocity correlations

Maxwell’s seminal derivation of the Maxwellian distribution (see Ref., p. 36) relies on two basic assumptions: (1) Isotropy of the velocity distribution, and (2) Absence of correlations between the velocity components. The latter assumption is directly probed using the following correlation measure

$$Q=\frac{v_x^2v_y^2v_x^2v_y^2}{v_x^2v_y^2}.$$
(30)
A non-vanishing $`Q`$ indicates that velocity correlations do exist, and the larger $`Q`$ the larger the correlation. In the freely evolving case, this quantity easily follows from the small-$`x`$ behavior of the scaling function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$. By definition, $`v_x^2=v_y^2=T`$ and furthermore, $`v_x^2v_y^2=\frac{^2}{k_x^2}\frac{^2}{k_y^2}F|_{𝐤=0}=4T^2\mathrm{\Phi }^{\prime \prime }(0)`$. Consequently, one has $`Q=4\mathrm{\Phi }^{\prime \prime }(0)1=8\varphi _21`$. Using Eq. (26) we find

$$Q=\frac{6ϵ^2}{d(1+3ϵ^2)},$$
(31)
when $`d>d_2=1+3ϵ^2`$, and $`Q=\mathrm{}`$ otherwise. While the quantity $`Q`$ is physical when $`d2`$, it is sensible to use analytic continuation to reveal the underlying divergence. Velocity correlations vanish for elastic gases. Interestingly, inelasticity introduces strong velocity correlations, and the larger $`ϵ`$ the larger the correlations as $`Q`$ increases monotonically with increasing $`ϵ`$. The perfectly inelastic case ($`ϵ=1/2`$) again provides a bound: $`Q<Q_{\mathrm{max}}=6`$, $`6/5`$ for $`d=2`$, $`3`$, respectively. This behavior is somewhat intuitive as the unisotropic collision rule (1) discriminates the velocity component normal to the impact direction.

## IV Nonequilibrium Dynamics

Thus far, we focused on the leading asymptotic behavior of the velocity distribution. The diverging moments and the dissipative nature of this system suggest that the time dependence may exhibit rich behavior. Thus, we study relaxation of velocity characteristics such as the moments and the autocorrelation function.

### A Multiscaling of the moments

While moments of the scaling function diverge, the actual moments must remain finite at all times, particularly at the scaling regime. Therefore, the above moment analysis suggests that knowledge of the leading asymptotic behavior is not sufficient to characterize the time dependent behavior of sufficiently large moments.

The time evolution of the moments can be studied using the expansion

$$F(z,\tau )=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}f_n(\tau )(z)^n.$$
(32)
The actual moments are related to the coefficients via $`(2n)!f_n=\mu ^nM_{2n}`$. Substituting the expansion (32) into (11) yields the evolution equations

$$\frac{d}{d\tau }f_n+\lambda _nf_n=\underset{m=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\lambda _{m,nm}f_mf_{nm}.$$
(33)
We demonstrate multiscaling asymptotic behavior by evaluating the second, fourth, and sixth moments. The second moment is obtained from $`\frac{d}{d\tau }f_1+\lambda _1f_1=0`$ with $`\lambda _1=\lambda =2ϵ(1ϵ)/d`$. Hence, we recover Haff’s law $`f_1(\tau )=f_1(0)e^{\lambda _1\tau }`$, or $`f_1(t)=f_1(0)\left(1+t/t_{}\right)^2`$. Asymptotically, the second moment of the velocity distribution has the universal behavior, $`M_2t^2`$. The next coefficient $`f_2`$ satisfies

$$\frac{d}{d\tau }f_2+\lambda _2f_2=\lambda _{1,1}f_1^2.$$
(34)
Solving Eq. (34) we find that $`f_2(\tau )`$ is a linear combination of two exponentials, $`e^{\lambda _2\tau }`$ and $`e^{2\lambda _1\tau }`$, whose decay coefficients are equal $`\lambda _2=2\lambda _1`$ at the crossover dimension $`d_2`$. Integrating the rate equation (34) and translating back to the physical time $`t`$, we obtain

$$f_2(t)=C_1\left(1+t/t_{}\right)^4+C_2\left(1+t/t_{}\right)^{2\alpha _2}$$
(35)
for $`dd_2`$. Here, $`\alpha _n=\lambda _n/\lambda _1`$, $`C_1=\lambda _{1,1}f_1^2(0)/(\lambda _22\lambda _1)`$, and $`C_2=f_2(0)C_1`$. When $`d=d_2`$ one finds

$$f_2(t)=\left[C_1\mathrm{ln}\left(1+t/t_{}\right)+C_2\right]\left(1+t/t_{}\right)^4,$$
(36)
with $`C_1=\lambda _{1,1}f_1^2(0)`$ and $`C_2=f_2(0)`$. Thus for $`d>d_2`$, the fourth moment exhibits ordinary scaling, $`f_2t^4`$, or $`M_4M_2^2t^4`$. When $`d<d_2`$, multiscaling becomes apparent as $`f_2t^{2\alpha _2}`$ and therefore the ratio $`M_4/M_2^2`$ diverges asymptotically. This is consistent with the divergence of the fourth moment of the scaling function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$ that occurs at the same crossover dimension $`d_2`$. A logarithmic correction occurs at this dimension. In summary, we find the following leading asymptotic behavior of the fourth moment

$$M_4(t)\{\begin{array}{cc}t^4\hfill & d>d_2\text{,}\hfill \\ t^4\mathrm{ln}t\hfill & d=d_2\text{,}\hfill \\ t^{2\alpha _2}\hfill & d<d_2\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(37)
A similar calculation can be carried for the sixth moment. The solution of $`\frac{d}{d\tau }f_3+\lambda _3f_3=(\lambda _{1,2}+\lambda _{2,1})f_1f_2`$, with $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ given above involves three exponentials: $`e^{\lambda _3\tau }`$, $`e^{(\lambda _1+\lambda _2)\tau }`$, and $`e^{3\lambda _1\tau }`$. Asymptotically, the first exponential dominates when $`d<d_3`$, and consequently, $`M_6t^{2\alpha _3}`$; otherwise, the third exponential dominates and thence ordinary scaling occurs, $`M_6t^6`$. Generally, the leading asymptotic behavior of the $`2n`$-th moment is characterized by two different regimes

$$M_{2n}(t)\{\begin{array}{cc}t^{2n}\hfill & d>d_n\text{,}\hfill \\ t^{2n}\mathrm{ln}t\hfill & d=d_n\text{,}\hfill \\ t^{2\alpha _n}\hfill & d<d_n\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(38)
Further logarithmic corrections affecting sub-dominant terms occur at the crossover dimensions $`d_2,\mathrm{},d_{n1}`$.

The dependence of $`d_n(ϵ)`$ on the dissipation coefficient is shown in Figure 2. In the physical dimensions $`d=2,3`$, the fourth moment exhibits ordinary scaling behavior. The sixth order moment exhibits multiscaling if the dissipation coefficient is large enough: $`ϵ>0.302074,0.427438`$ for $`d=2,3`$, respectively. In the large $`n`$ limit, $`\lambda _n1`$ so from $`\lambda _n=n\lambda _1`$ we find $`d_n2ϵ(1ϵ)n`$. Thus, regardless of the dissipation parameters and the dimension, sufficiently large moments exhibit multiscaling:

$$M_{2n}M_2^{\alpha _n},\alpha _n=\lambda _n/\lambda _1.$$
(39)
Interestingly, the multiscaling exponents saturate asymptotically, $`\alpha _nd/\left[2ϵ(1ϵ)\right]`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$. Of course, if the dimension increases or the dissipation parameter decreases, the order of the lowest moment exhibiting multiscaling increases, and in practice, it may be difficult to observe deviations from ordinary scaling. For example, at $`d=3`$ and $`ϵ=0.1`$, multiscaling occurs only for moments whose index exceeds $`30`$!

### B Non-universal velocity autocorrelations

The autocorrelation function quantifies memory in the velocity of a tagged particle . The velocity autocorrelation, $`A(t_w,t)`$, is defined via

$$A(t_w,t)=\overline{𝐯(t_w)𝐯(t)}$$
(40)
where the overline denotes averaging over all particles and $`t_w`$ is the “waiting” time, $`t_w<t`$.

It is simple to show (see appendix B) that the autocorrelation evolves according to the following linear equation

$$\frac{d}{d\tau }A(\tau _w,\tau )=\frac{1ϵ}{d}A(\tau _w,\tau ),$$
(41)
where time is again expressed in terms of the collision counters $`\tau _w`$ and $`\tau `$. Equation (41) is solved to give $`A(\tau _w,\tau )=A(\tau _w,\tau _w)\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1ϵ}{d}(\tau \tau _w)]`$, or equivalently

$$A(t_w,t)=A_0\left(1+t_w/t_{}\right)^{1/ϵ2}\left(1+t/t_{}\right)^{1/ϵ},$$
(42)
with $`A_0=dT_0`$. Therefore, $`A(t_w,t)`$ is a function of the waiting time $`t_w`$ and the observation time $`t`$, and not simply of their difference, $`tt_w`$. This interesting history dependence or “aging” is another signature of the nonequilibrium nature of our system.

Memory of the initial conditions can be quantified by setting $`t_w=0`$. Writing $`A(t)A(0,t)`$ we arrive at the following algebraic decay

$$A(t)=A_0\left(1+t/t_{}\right)^{1/ϵ}.$$
(43)
In contrast with the temperature which decays with a universal law, $`T(t)t^2`$, the autocorrelation decays with a non-universal law, $`A(t)t^{1/ϵ}`$. The exponent is independent of the dimension. However, it strongly depends on the dissipation, and the stronger the dissipation, the stronger the memory of the initial conditions. This decay exponent is bounded by $`21/ϵ\mathrm{}`$. In the elastic case, $`ϵ=0`$, a simple exponential decay occurs, and in the totally inelastic case, $`ϵ=1/2`$, the autocorrelation and the temperature are proportional to each other.

The autocorrelation function allows calculation of the long-time spread in the position of a tagged particle $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2(t)|𝐱(t)𝐱(0)|^2`$. Using $`𝐱(t)𝐱(0)=_0^t𝑑t^{}𝐯(t^{})`$, one can immediately express $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2(t)`$ via the autocorrelation function, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2=2_0^t𝑑t^{}_0^t^{}𝑑t^{\prime \prime }A(t^{\prime \prime },t^{})`$. Substituting (42) into this expression and performing the integration yields $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2(t)=C_1\mathrm{ln}\left(1+t/t_{}\right)+C_2\left[(1+t/t_{})^{11/ϵ}1\right]`$ with $`C_1=2A_0t_{}^2ϵ/(1ϵ)`$ and $`C_2=C_1ϵ/(1ϵ)`$. Asymptotically, the second term is negligible, and the spread has a generic logarithmic behavior

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{\mathrm{ln}t}$$
(44)
reflecting the $`t^1`$ decay of the overall velocity scale .

## V Steady States

Thus far, we have discussed freely cooling systems where the energy decreases indefinitely. In typical experimental situations, however, the system is supplied with energy to balance the energy dissipation . Theoretically, it is natural to consider white noise forcing , i.e., coupling to a thermal heat bath which leads to a nonequilibrium steady state. Interestingly, a stretched exponential behavior, $`P(v)\mathrm{exp}(v^{3/2})`$, is found for the driven inelastic hard sphere gas .

Specifically, we assume that in addition to changes due to collisions, velocities may also change due to an external forcing: $`\frac{dv_j}{dt}|_{\mathrm{heat}}=\xi _j`$ with $`j=1,\mathrm{},d`$. We use standard uncorrelated white noise $`\xi _i(t)\xi _j(t^{})=2D\delta _{ij}\delta (tt^{})`$ with a zero average $`\xi _j=0`$. The rate equation for the temperature is modified by the additional source term $`\frac{d}{dt}T+\lambda T^{3/2}=2D`$, and the system approaches a steady state, $`T_{\mathrm{}}=(2D/\lambda )^{2/3}`$. The relaxation toward this state is exponential, $`|T_{\mathrm{}}T|e^{\mathrm{const}.\times t}`$.

Uncorrelated white noise forcing amounts to diffusion in velocity space. Therefore, Eq. (8) is modified as follows, $`\frac{}{\tau }\frac{}{\tau }+Dk^2`$. In the steady state, the Fourier transform, $`F_{\mathrm{}}(𝐤)\mathrm{\Psi }(y)`$ with $`y=Dk^2`$, obeys

$$(1+y)\mathrm{\Psi }(y)=\mathrm{\Psi }(\xi y)\mathrm{\Psi }(\eta y).$$
(45)
This equation is solved recursively by employing the cumulant expansion

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(y)=\mathrm{exp}\left[\underset{n=1}{}\psi _n(y)^n\right].$$
(46)
The cumulants $`\kappa _n`$, defined as

$$F_{\mathrm{}}(𝐤)=\mathrm{exp}\left[\underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\kappa _m(ik)^m}{m!}\right],$$
(47)
are related to the coefficients $`\psi _n`$, viz. $`\kappa _n=(2n)!D^n\psi _n`$. Writing $`1+y=\mathrm{exp}\left[_{n1}(y)^n/n\right]`$, we recast Eq. (45) into

$`1=\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left(\stackrel{~}{\psi }_nn^1\right)(y)^n\right],`$ (48)
with the auxiliary variables $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_n=\psi _n(1\xi ^n\eta ^n)`$. The desired cumulants $`\psi _n`$ are obtained by evaluating recursively the angular integrals of the auxiliary variables, $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_n`$, and then using the identities $`\psi _n=\stackrel{~}{\psi }_n/\lambda _n`$. In one dimension, $`\mu ^n=1`$ and one immediately obtains $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_n=n^1`$, and consequently $`n\psi _n=[1ϵ^{2n}(1ϵ)^{2n}]^1`$. In higher dimensions, the quantities $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_n`$ acquire non-trivial dependence on $`n`$, e.g., $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_1=1`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_2=\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_1^2`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_3=\stackrel{~}{\psi }_1\stackrel{~}{\psi }_2\frac{1}{6}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_1^3`$. The first few values for $`\psi _n`$ can be then evaluated. In particular, $`\psi _1=1/\lambda _1`$ and $`\psi _2=(1\xi \eta )^2/\left(2\lambda _1^2\lambda _2\right)`$, from which one can determine explicit expressions:

$`\psi _1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{2ϵ(1ϵ)}},`$ (49)
$`\psi _2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3d^2}{4(d+2)(1ϵ^2)12(1ϵ)^2(1+ϵ^2)}}.`$ (50)
Thus, the steady state distribution is not purely Maxwellian.

To probe velocity correlations or alternatively, deviations from a factorizing Maxwellian distribution, we consider the quantity $`Q`$, defined in Eq. (30). At the steady state, it is given by

$$Q=\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }^{\prime \prime }(0)}{[\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(0)]^2}1.$$
(51)
In terms of the first two coefficients of the cumulant expansion, $`Q=2\psi _2/\psi _1^2`$. Substituting the value of these coefficients yields

$$Q=\frac{6ϵ^2(1ϵ)}{(d+2)(1+ϵ)3(1ϵ)(1+ϵ^2)}.$$
(52)
Note that for a fixed spatial dimension, this quantity is maximal in the completely inelastic case. For instance, $`Q_{\mathrm{max}}=2/11`$ in two dimensions and $`Q_{\mathrm{max}}=2/15`$ in three dimensions. These values are smaller by an order of magnitude or more than the corresponding values in the unforced case. Intuitively, one expects that white noise forcing randomizes the velocities of the particles. Indeed, velocity correlations are much less pronounced in this case, as seen in Figure 3. Additionally, velocity correlations diminish as the dimension increases. At large dimensions, velocity correlations vanish according to $`Qd^1`$, indicating that the velocity distribution becomes purely Maxwellian, $`\mathrm{\Psi }(y)\mathrm{exp}(y/2)`$, when $`d\mathrm{}`$.

## VI Generalizations

The above results can be generalized in a number of ways. For example, the development of spatial correlations can be considered by placing particles on a lattice and allowing for nearest-neighbor collisions only. In this section we briefly mention two straightforward generalizations to: (1) energy generating collisions, and (2) distribution of restitution coefficients.

Thus far, we discussed only the physical case of dissipative collisions, namely $`ϵ<0`$. However, the above results in the freely evolving case hold for energy generating collisions, i.e., $`ϵ>0`$ as well. Although the typical velocity scale diverges, the velocity distribution still follows the scaling solution (12) with algebraic large velocity statistics. The corresponding exponent $`\sigma `$ is still obtained from Eq. (20). However, the behavior does change, as follows from the analytically tractable $`d\mathrm{}`$ behavior. In contrast with the dissipative case, the second term on the right-hand side of Eq. (20) now dominates, and it grows exponentially as $`a^{(\sigma d)/2}`$. Since the left-hand side of Eq. (20) is of order unity, the constant $`a`$ must be equal to one. On the other hand, the constant $`a`$ is evaluated using the Stirling formula $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(x)(x/e)^x`$ to give $`a=(1ϵ)^2(\sigma d)d^{d/(\sigma d)}\sigma ^{\sigma /(\sigma d)}`$. Equating $`a=1`$, we arrive at

$$\sigma d\nu ,\mathrm{with}(\nu 1)\nu ^{\frac{\nu }{\nu 1}}=(1ϵ)^2.$$
(53)
While the exponent rises linearly with the dimension, it exhibit different $`ϵ`$-dependence. Numerical solution of $`\nu `$ shows that this large dimension estimate again yields a useful approximation even at moderate dimensions.

Several recent studies have used a distribution of restitution coefficients to model driven granular systems, including for example, a one-dimensional gas of rods with internal degrees of freedom , and vertically vibrated layers . By tuning the distribution properly, one can have a situation were overall, energy is conserved as dissipative collisions are balanced by energy generating collisions. When the restitution coefficient is drawn from the distribution $`\rho (ϵ)`$, one simply integrates the collision integral in the Boltzmann equation (2) with respect to the measure $`\rho (ϵ)`$. In one dimension, one can check that the scaling solution $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=\left(1+\sqrt{x}\right)e^\sqrt{x}`$ still holds, and in particular the exponent $`\sigma =4`$ is robust. In general dimension, the exponent $`\sigma `$ is given by

$$1\lambda \frac{\sigma d}{2}=𝑑ϵ\rho (ϵ)\xi ^{(\sigma d)/2}+\eta ^{(\sigma d)/2}$$
(54)
with the decay rate $`\lambda =𝑑ϵ\rho (ϵ)\lambda (ϵ)`$. We conclude that algebraic large-velocity statistics extend to situations where the dissipation coefficient $`ϵ`$ is drawn from a given distribution.

## VII Conclusions

We have studied inelastic gases within the framework of the Maxwell model, a Boltzmann equation with a uniform collision rate. We have shown that this kinetic theory is analytically tractable as closed evolution equations characterize the Fourier transform and consequently moments of the velocity distribution. In the freely evolving case, the system approaches a scaling regime, and the velocity distribution has an algebraic large velocity tail. The corresponding exponent varies continuously with the spatial dimension and the degree of dissipation. The decay exponents can be very large and therefore it may be difficult to distinguish a power law from a stretched exponential. In the driven case, we have determined the cumulants of the velocity distribution.

The time dependent behavior displays a number of interesting features. Moments of the velocity distribution exhibit multiscaling asymptotic behavior, and knowledge of the typical velocity is insufficient to characterize all moments. The velocity autocorrelation decays algebraically with time, and the corresponding exponent depends on the restitution coefficient only.

In contrast with elastic collisions, stochastic inelastic collision processes are not effective in mixing particle velocities. The stronger the inelasticity, the stronger the history dependence, i.e., memory of previous behavior. Additionally, inelasticity can generate significant correlations between different velocity components. Such correlations do develop even in the forced case, where dissipation is balanced by energy input, and one may expect that Maxwellian velocity distribution emerge.

The Maxwell model is truly mean field in nature with all aspects of the collision process being random. While it is not surprising that such a theory is solvable, the rich structure of the solution is somewhat unexpected. For example, the exponent follows from a transcendental equation, and can not be obtained from heuristic arguments or dimensional analysis. Remarkably, even the leading asymptotic behavior in the large dimension limit remains nontrivial as it involves roots of cubic or transcendental equations.

We have explored only the basic characteristics. Clearly, one can study higher order velocity correlation measures as well as higher order autocorrelations. Furthermore, the relaxation toward the steady state appears analytically tractable. The straightforward analysis is cumbersome and it may be useful to expand first the solutions in terms of more natural building blocks, e.g., orthogonal polynomials.

We stress that the Maxwell model is exact for stochastic inelastic collision processes with random collision partners and impact angles. It may be applicable in situations where an effective stirring mechanism leads to perfect mixing. Otherwise, it should be regarded as an uncontrolled approximation of the Boltzmann equation. Indeed, existing theoretical and numerical studies give little evidence for algebraic tails characterizing inelastic gases. The only exception was observed in a system with random restitution coefficients drawn from a broad distribution. In one dimension, both molecular dynamics simulation and direct integration of the Boltzmann equation for inelastic hard spheres show that the velocity distribution has a power law tail .

In conclusion, our results, combined with previous kinetic theory studies that find exponential, stretched exponential, and Gaussian tails, indicate that extremal velocity characteristics can be sensitive to the details of the model, let alone parameters such as the restitution coefficient, and the dimension.

We thank A. Baldassari and M. H. Ernst for fruitful correspondence, and H. A. Rose for useful discussions. This research was supported by DOE (W-7405-ENG-36), NSF(DMR9978902), and ARO (DAAD19-99-1-0173).

## A The $`\lambda `$-coefficients

To compute the coefficients $`\lambda _n=1\xi ^n\eta ^n`$ and $`\lambda _{n,m}=\xi ^n\eta ^m`$ we use $`\xi =1(1ϵ^2)\mu `$ and $`\eta =(1ϵ)^2\mu `$. Thus, the following integrals are required

$`\mu ^n={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(n+\frac{d}{2}\right)}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{d}}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2+d}}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{2(n1)+1}{2(n1)+d}}.`$
In particular, $`\mu =\frac{1}{d},\mu ^2=\frac{3}{d(d+2)},\mu ^3=\frac{15}{d(d+2)(d+4)}`$, so the first few coefficients are

$`\lambda _1`$ $`=`$ $`2ϵ(1ϵ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{d}},`$
$`\lambda _2`$ $`=`$ $`2(1ϵ^2){\displaystyle \frac{1}{d}}2(1ϵ)^2\left(1+ϵ^2\right){\displaystyle \frac{3}{d(d+2)}},`$
$`\lambda _3`$ $`=`$ $`3(1ϵ^2){\displaystyle \frac{1}{d}}3(1ϵ^2)^2{\displaystyle \frac{3}{d(d+2)}}`$
$`+2ϵ(1ϵ)^3(3+ϵ^2){\displaystyle \frac{15}{d(d+2)(d+4)}},`$
$`\lambda _{1,1}`$ $`=`$ $`(1ϵ)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{d}}(1ϵ)^2(1ϵ^2){\displaystyle \frac{3}{d(d+2)}}.`$
## B The autocorrelation evolution equation

It is useful to work with the collision counter $`\tau `$. In an infinitesimal time interval $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$, the velocity of a particle changes from $`𝐯𝐯(\tau )`$ to

$`𝐯(\tau +\mathrm{\Delta }\tau )=\{\begin{array}{cc}𝐯\hfill & \text{prob. }1\mathrm{\Delta }\tau \text{,}\hfill \\ 𝐯(1ϵ)(𝐯𝐮)𝐧𝐧\hfill & \text{prob. }\mathrm{\Delta }\tau \text{.}\hfill \end{array}`$
Here $`𝐮`$ is chosen randomly from all particles and the impact direction $`𝐧`$ is drawn from a uniform distribution. The rate of change in the autocorrelation function $`A(\tau _w,\tau )=\overline{𝐯(\tau _w)𝐯(\tau )}`$ is evaluated as follows

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\tau }}`$ $`A`$ $`(\tau _w,\tau )=\underset{\mathrm{\Delta }\tau 0}{lim}\overline{𝐯(\tau _w)\left[𝐯(\tau +\mathrm{\Delta }\tau )𝐯(\tau )\right]/\mathrm{\Delta }\tau }`$ (B1)
$`=`$ $``$ $`(1ϵ){\displaystyle 𝑑𝐮P(𝐮,\tau )𝑑𝐧\overline{\left[𝐯(\tau _w)𝐧\right]\left[(𝐯𝐮)𝐧\right]}}`$ (B2)
$`=`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1ϵ}{d}}\overline{𝐯(\tau _w)𝐯(\tau )}+{\displaystyle \frac{1ϵ}{d}}{\displaystyle 𝑑𝐮P(𝐮,\tau )\overline{𝐯(\tau _w)𝐮}}`$ (B3)
$`=`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1ϵ}{d}}A(\tau _w,\tau ).`$ (B4)
The angular integration in the second line of Eq. (B1) was performed using the identity

$$H(𝐚,𝐛)=𝑑𝐧(𝐚𝐧)(𝐛𝐧)=\frac{1}{d}(𝐚𝐛).$$
(B5)
This identity can be deduced by re-writing the integral as $`H(𝐚,𝐛)=𝐚𝐡(𝐛)`$. By symmetry, $`𝐡(𝐛)=𝑑𝐧𝐧(𝐛𝐧)`$ is a vector along $`𝐛`$, say $`\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐛`$, implying $`H(𝐚,𝐛)=\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝐚𝐛)`$. Evaluating the special case $`H(𝐚,𝐚)=\mu a^2`$ we obtain (B5). Finally, the second term in the third line vanishes, $`\overline{𝐯(\tau _w)𝐮(\tau )}=0`$, since the velocity $`𝐮(\tau )`$ of the randomly chosen collision partner is uncorrelated with $`𝐯(\tau _w)`$.