text:
# Noncoaxial multivortices in the complex sine-Gordon theory on the plane

## I Introduction

Topological solutions of nonlinear partial differential equations on the plane have been a subject of intensive investigations in recent years, with applications ranging from nonlinear optics to cosmic strings. The simplest type of topological solitons arise in systems involving one complex field. In this case the solitons realise a $`S^1S^1`$ map of the circle of a sufficiently large radius on the $`(x,y)`$-plane into a unit circle in the internal space $`(\mathrm{Re}\psi ,\mathrm{Im}\psi )`$ and can be classified according to the Brouwer degree of the map, or the winding number,

$$Q=\underset{R\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{2\pi }_{C_R}\mathrm{d}(\mathrm{arg}\psi )=\frac{1}{2\pi }_{R^2}ϵ_{nk}_n_k(\mathrm{arg}\psi )d^2x.$$
(1)
One celebrated model of this kind is the Ginzburg-Landau model (also known as the stationary Gross-Pitaevskii equation) arising in the description of boson condensates (in particular, superconductors and superfluids) :

$$^2\psi +\psi (1|\psi |^2)=0.$$
(2)
(Here $`=𝐢_x+𝐣_y`$.) Another system of a similar type which received considerable attention in literature, is the Heisenberg ferromagnet with easy-plane anisotropy . In terms of the stereographically projected field this can be written as

$$^2\psi 2\frac{(\psi )^2\overline{\psi }}{1+|\psi |^2}+\psi \frac{1|\psi |^2}{1+|\psi |^2}=0.$$
(3)
In physics literature the winding number (1) is usually referred to as vorticity and the planar topological solitons as vortices. Both the Ginzburg-Landau and the easy-plane ferromagnet equation are well known to possess axially-symmetric solutions describing $`n`$ vortices sitting on top of each other, $`\psi ^{(n)}=e^{in\theta }\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)`$, where the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)1`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$. (Here $`r`$ and $`\theta `$ are the polar coordinates on the $`(x,y)`$-plane.) Of fundamental importance, both physically and mathematically, is the question of whether noncoaxial multivortices exist. However, despite some encouraging recent insights , very little is known about this.

The present paper is devoted to another physically meaningful system§§§Some references to the applications of the complex sine-Gordon theories can be found in the concluding section below. which shares a lot of similarities with (2) and (3), the so-called complex sine-Gordon equation:

$$^2\psi +\frac{(\psi )^2\overline{\psi }}{1|\psi |^2}+\psi (1|\psi |^2)=0.$$
(4)
The equation (4) is similar to (2) and (3) in that it is also an equation for one complex field on the plane, and that it also possesses coaxial multivortex solutions. An important difference, however, is that this model is integrable and hence the complex sine-Gordon multivortices are given by explicit analytic formulas whereas their Ginzburg-Landau and magnetic counterparts are available only numerically, even in the single-vortex case. The single-vortex solution of eq.(4) has the form

$$\psi ^{(1)}(r,\theta )=\frac{I_1(r)}{I_0(r)}e^{i\theta },$$
(5)
where $`I_0`$ and $`I_1`$ are the modified Bessel functions. Using a purely algebraic recursive procedure  one can construct axially-symmetric solutions of arbitrarily high vorticity. For example, the $`Q=2`$ and $`Q=3`$ solutions are given by

$$\psi ^{(2)}(r,\theta )=\frac{I_1(r)^2I_0(r)I_2(r)}{I_0(r)^2I_1(r)^2}e^{2i\theta }$$
(6)
and

$$\psi ^{(3)}(r,\theta )=\frac{[I_3(r)I_1(r)][I_0^2(r)I_1^2(r)]+I_1(r)[I_0(r)I_2(r)]^2}{[I_0(r)I_2(r)][I_0(r)I_2(r)2I_1^2(r)+I_0^2(r)]}e^{3i\theta },$$
(7)
respectively.

The primary objective of this paper is to show that the complex sine-Gordon equation has an infinite-parameter family of exact, explicit, noncoaxial multivortices. This family includes the axially-symmetric $`n`$-vortex solution which, therefore, admits a continuous into $`n`$ spatially separated single vortices. We calculate the energy (i.e. the Euclidean action) of the noncoaxial $`n`$-vortex configuration and demonstrate that it does not depend on the positions of the individual vortices. This implies that the individual vortices making up the $`n`$-vortex configuration are non-interacting.

Having established the existence of a general $`n`$-vortex solution for equation (4), a natural question to ask is: Do the Ginzburg-Landau model (2) and the easy-plane ferromagnet (3) have multivortex solutions other than the axially-symmetric ones? Confining ourselves to the case of the Ginzburg-Landau equation, we attempt to answer this question via the analysis of the spectra of linearised excitations of its symmetric solutions. If the axially-symmetric solution admitted a $`p`$-parameter nonsymmetric continuation, the corresponding linearised operator would have $`p`$ zero eigenvalues. We study the linearised spectra of the Ginzburg-Landau axisymmetric solutions numerically; the upshot of this study is that they have only three zero modes related to obvious symmetries of the equation and therefore do not belong to a broader family of noncoaxial multivortices.

On the contrary, each of the coaxial multivortices of the complex sine-Gordon theory admits an infinite number of zero-frequency excitations. This is an expected fact, of course, given the existence of the infinite-parameter nonsymmetric configurations. However, as we show below, the presence of the infinite number of zero modes in this case can be established even without knowledge of the nonsymmetric generalisations. In other words, the possibility of the nonsymmetric continuation of the coaxial multivortex could have been predicted simply on the basis of the analysis of its linearisation.

The paper is organised as follows. In the next section we derive the noncoaxial $`n`$-vortex solution and in section 3 discuss some of its general properties. Section 4 deals with the simplest special case of the new solution when it depends only on one free parameter. We consider, in detail, the $`n=1`$, $`n=2`$ and $`n=3`$-solutions, and then extrapolate our conclusions to the situation of the general $`n`$. The energies of the multivortices are evaluated in section 5. In section 6 we study, numerically, the linearised excitations of axially-symmetric multivortices of the Ginzburg-Landau equation and compare them to their complex sine-Gordon counterparts. Finally, some concluding remarks are made in section 7.

## II The general multivortex solution

As in , we start with rewriting the second-order equation (4) as a system of two first order equations:

$`\overline{}\psi ^{(n1)}+\psi ^{(n)}(1|\psi ^{(n1)}|^2)=0,`$ (8)
$`\psi ^{(n)}\psi ^{(n1)}(1|\psi ^{(n)}|^2)=0.`$ (9)
Here $`=/z`$, $`\overline{}=/\overline{z}`$, and $`z=(x+iy)/2`$, $`\overline{z}=(xiy)/2`$. This first-order system has a field-theoretic interpretation of its own; it is nothing but the Euclidean version of the massive Thirring model . Both $`\psi ^{(n1)}`$ and $`\psi ^{(n)}`$ satisfy equation (4), hence eqs.(8)-(9) can be seen as the Bäcklund transformations relating two solutions of the complex sine-Gordon equation.

Let $`n=1`$ in eqs.(8)-(9). For any $`\psi ^{(1)}`$ eq.(8) is solved by $`\psi ^{(0)}=1`$. Letting $`\psi ^{(0)}=1`$ in eq.(9), we get

$$\psi ^{(1)}=1|\psi ^{(1)}|^2.$$
(10)
Decomposing $`\psi ^{(1)}=f+ig`$, the imaginary part of (10) yields

$`_xg=_yf,`$

whence we can define the potential $`(x,y)`$ such that $`f=_x`$ and $`g=_y`$, or, equivalently,

$$\psi ^{(1)}=\overline{}.$$
(11)
The real part of (10) is then

$`^2+()^2=1.`$

Letting $`=\mathrm{ln}𝒵_0`$, this reduces to the (modified) Helmholtz equation

$$^2𝒵_0𝒵_0=0.$$
(12)
In polar coordinates, the general solution of (12), regular at the origin, is given by

$$𝒵_0(r,\theta )=\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}I_m(r)\sigma _m(\theta ),$$
(13)
where $`I_m(r)`$ is the modified Bessel’s function of order $`m`$ (of the first kind); $`\sigma _m=\beta _m\mathrm{cos}(m\theta +\delta _m)`$, and $`\beta _m,\delta _m`$ are arbitrary real constants. (In particular, all $`\beta _m`$ with $`m`$ greater than a certain $`M`$ can be set equal to zero in which case the series (13) becomes a finite sum.) Returning to the variable $`\psi ^{(1)}`$, we obtain

$$\psi ^{(1)}=e^{i\theta }\left\{\frac{I_m^{}(r)\sigma _m(\theta )}{I_m(r)\sigma _m(\theta )}+\frac{i}{r}\frac{I_m(r)_\theta \sigma _m(\theta )}{I_m(r)\sigma _m(\theta )}\right\},$$
(14)
where $`I_m^{}=dI_m/dr`$ and all sums run over $`m=0,1,\mathrm{}\mathrm{}`$. We will assume that $`\beta _00`$; otherwise the above solution is singular. Without loss of generality we can let $`\sigma _0=\beta _0\mathrm{cos}\delta _0=1`$ in (14) and this convention will be implied throughout this paper. At infinity, the solution (14) tends to $`e^{i\theta }`$; more precisely

$$\psi ^{(1)}(r,\theta )=e^{i\theta }\left\{1\frac{1i\kappa }{2r}+\frac{\mu _1+i\nu _1}{r^2}+O\left(\frac{1}{r^3}\right)\right\}\text{as}r\mathrm{},$$
(15)
where $`\kappa ,\mu _1`$ and $`\nu _1`$ are functions of $`\theta `$:

$$\kappa =\frac{2_\theta \sigma _m}{\sigma _m},\mu _1=\frac{(4m^21)\sigma _m}{8\sigma _m},\nu _1=_\theta \mu _1(\theta ).$$
(16)
Therefore, equation (14) gives a solution with infinite number of parameters and vorticity $`Q=1`$. For purposes of this paper we will be referring to (14) as the “general one-vortex solution”. Now the general solutions with $`Q=2`$ and all higher vorticities can be obtained in a purely algorithmic way. We simply use eq.(8) to express $`\psi ^{(n)}`$ via $`\psi ^{(n1)}`$:

$$\psi ^{(n)}=\frac{1}{1|\psi ^{(n1)}|^2}\overline{}\psi ^{(n1)},n=2,3,\mathrm{}$$
(17)
This recursive procedure can be made rather efficient by introducing auxiliary variables

$$𝒵_k(r,\theta )=\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\gamma _m\xi _{k+m}+\overline{\gamma }_m\xi _{km}\right),k=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{},$$
(18)
where

$$\xi _s(r,\theta )=I_s(r)e^{is\theta },\gamma _m=\frac{\beta _m}{2}e^{i\delta _m}.$$
(19)
Note that $`𝒵_k=\overline{𝒵}_k`$; also note that the function $`𝒵_0`$ has already been defined before (see eq.(13).) What makes the variables $`𝒵_k`$ useful is that the differential operators $``$ and $`\overline{}`$ act on them simply as index lowering and raising operators:

$$𝒵_k=𝒵_{k1},\overline{}𝒵_k=𝒵_{k+1}.$$
(20)
Indeed, writing $``$ as $`e^{i\theta }(_r\frac{i}{r}_\theta )`$, $`\overline{}`$ as $`e^{i\theta }(_r+\frac{i}{r}_\theta )`$ and using the identities

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}I_m}{\mathrm{d}r}=\frac{I_{m1}+I_{m+1}}{2},\frac{mI_m}{r}=\frac{I_{m1}I_{m+1}}{2},$$
(21)
one can readily verify that

$`\xi _m=e^{i(m1)\theta }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}I_m}{\mathrm{d}r}}+{\displaystyle \frac{m}{r}}I_m\right)=I_{m1}e^{i(m1)\theta }=\xi _{m1},`$

$`\overline{}\xi _m=e^{i(m+1)\theta }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}I_m}{\mathrm{d}r}}{\displaystyle \frac{m}{r}}I_m\right)=I_{m+1}e^{i(m+1)\theta }=\xi _{m+1}.`$

From here the relations (20) are straightforward.

Recalling that $`=\mathrm{ln}𝒵_0`$ and using equation (11), the general 1-vortex solution (14) can be written simply as

$$\psi ^{(1)}(r,\theta )=\frac{𝒵_1}{𝒵_0}.$$
(22)
Now applying (17) and using (20) gives

$$\psi ^{(2)}(r,\theta )=\frac{𝒵_1^2𝒵_2𝒵_0}{𝒵_0^2𝒵_1𝒵_1},$$
(23)
$$\psi ^{(3)}(r,\theta )=\frac{𝒵_3(𝒵_0^2𝒵_1𝒵_1)+𝒵_1𝒵_2^2+𝒵_1^32𝒵_0𝒵_1𝒵_2}{𝒵_0(𝒵_0^22𝒵_1𝒵_1𝒵_2𝒵_2)+𝒵_1^2𝒵_2+𝒵_1^2𝒵_2},$$
(24)
and so on. Setting to zero all $`\beta _m`$ with $`m1`$, eqs.(22), (23) and (24) reduce to the axially-symmetric vortex solutions (5), (6) and (7).

The explicit expressions of the multivortices with $`n4`$ become cumbersome and we restrict ourselves to producing only their asymptotic behaviours as $`r\mathrm{}`$:

$$\psi ^{(n)}(r,\theta )e^{in\theta }=1\frac{n}{2r}+\frac{\mu _n(\theta )}{r^2}+i\left(\frac{n}{2r}\kappa (\theta )+\frac{\nu _n(\theta )}{r^2}\right)+O\left(\frac{1}{r^3}\right),$$
(25)
where $`\mu _n`$ and $`\nu _n`$ are defined by recurrence relations

$`\mu _n`$ $`=`$ $`\mu _{n2}+{\displaystyle \frac{4\mu _{n1}}{n1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{_\theta \kappa }{2}},`$ (26)
$`\nu _n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{n+1}{n1}}\nu _{n1}{\displaystyle \frac{_\theta \mu _{n1}}{n1}}{\displaystyle \frac{n\kappa }{4}}_\theta \kappa ;n2,`$ (27)
with $`\mu _0=0`$ and $`\mu _1`$, $`\nu _1`$ and $`\kappa `$ as in (16). Equations (25)-(27) can be easily proved by induction with the help of the Bäcklund transformation (8)-(9). The recurrence relation for $`\mu _n`$ can be easily resolved yielding an explicit expression

$$\mu _n=n^2\mu _1+\frac{n(n1)}{4}_\theta \kappa ,n2.$$
(28)
(Unfortunately, there are no similar closed formulas for $`\nu _n`$.)

The relations (18) can be seen as expansions over the eigenfunctions of the angular momentum, with $`\beta _m`$ being the coefficient of the eigenfunction associated with the orbital quantum number $`m`$. Accordingly, solutions (22)-(25) can be interpreted as orbital deformations of the axially-symmetric multivortices. Below, in section IV, we will discuss several particular orbital deformations in more detail.

## III Some general properties

### A Regularity and convergence considerations

It is not difficult to realise that inequality

$$\underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|\beta _m|1$$
(29)
is sufficient to ensure the regularity of the general 1-vortex solution (22). (It is not necessary though; see the next subsection.) Indeed, due to the positivity of $`I_m(r)`$ for $`r>0`$ and the second identity in (21), we have $`I_0(r)>I_{2m}(r)`$ and $`I_1(r)>I_{2m+1}(r)`$ for all $`m1`$. Combining these inequalities with $`I_0(r)>I_1(r)`$ gives $`I_0(r)>I_m(r)`$ for all $`m1`$ and $`r>0`$. This latter inequality, taken together with (29), guarantees that $`𝒵_0>0`$ and hence the solution (22) is bounded on the entire $`(x,y)`$-plane.

In case of infinitely many nonzero coefficients $`\beta _m`$ we need to make sure that the series in (29) converges. This can be accomplished by imposing, for example, that

$$|\beta _m|q^m,$$
(30)
with some $`0<q<1`$. The inequalities (29) and (30) are also sufficient for the convergence of the series in the asymptotic formula (15).

Next, the 2-vortex solution resulting from the Bäcklund transformation (17) will only be regular if the seed 1-vortex solution is bounded by 1 in absolute value, that is, if $`|𝒵_1|<𝒵_0`$. That the latter inequality holds true can be easily verified using the representation

$$𝒵_k=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\underset{|\mathrm{}|=1}{}\frac{\text{d}\mathrm{}}{\mathrm{}^{k+1}}G(\mathrm{})e^{z\mathrm{}+\overline{z}/\mathrm{}},G(\mathrm{})=\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\gamma _m\mathrm{}^m+\overline{\gamma }_m\mathrm{}^m\right)$$
(31)
which arises by replacing $`\xi _m`$ in eq.(18) by

$$\xi _m(r,\theta )=I_m(r)e^{im\theta }=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\underset{|\mathrm{}|=1}{}\frac{\text{d}\mathrm{}}{\mathrm{}^{m+1}}\mathrm{exp}\left(z\mathrm{}+\frac{\overline{z}}{\mathrm{}}\right).$$
(32)
Eq.(32), in turn, follows from the integral formula for the modified Bessel function :

$`I_m(r)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle \underset{|\zeta |=1}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}\zeta }{\zeta ^{m+1}}}\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{r}{2}}\left(\zeta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\zeta }}\right)\right\},`$

where we only need to set $`\zeta =\mathrm{}e^{i\theta }`$. (We remind the reader that $`z=\frac{1}{2}re^{i\theta }`$.) To show that $`|𝒵_1|<𝒵_0`$, assume that the series $`|\beta _m|`$ converges, with eq.(29) being in place. The function $`G(e^{i\phi })=1+_{m=1}^{\mathrm{}}\beta _m\mathrm{cos}(m\phi +\delta _m)`$ is obviously positive for all $`\phi `$ and hence using equation (31) with $`\mathrm{}=e^{i\phi }`$ we get, finally,

$`|𝒵_1|={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}\left|{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}}\text{d}\phi e^{i\phi }G(e^{i\phi })e^{r\mathrm{cos}(\phi +\theta )}\right|<{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}}\text{d}\phi G(e^{i\phi })e^{r\mathrm{cos}(\phi +\theta )}=𝒵_0.`$

Q.E.D.

### B Translations of the vortices

It is interesting to note that for certain choices of parameters $`\beta _1,\beta _2,\mathrm{}`$ solutions $`\psi ^{(1)}`$, $`\psi ^{(2)}`$, $`\psi ^{(3)}`$ etc., describe pure translations of the corresponding coaxial multivortices. The translations are associated with infinite numbers of nonzero $`\beta `$’s. Consider, for example, the translation along the $`x`$-axis:

$$\widehat{x}=xR,\widehat{y}=y.$$
(33)
The transformation (33) can be written as one formula,

$`\widehat{r}\mathrm{cos}(\widehat{\theta }+\phi )=r\mathrm{cos}(\theta +\phi )R\mathrm{cos}\phi ,`$

which holds for an arbitrary fixed angle $`\phi `$. Hence, picking up $`G(e^{i\phi })=e^{R\mathrm{cos}\phi }`$ in the representation (31), we obtain

$$𝒵_k=\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}d\phi e^{ik\phi }e^{R\mathrm{cos}\phi }e^{r\mathrm{cos}(\theta +\phi )}=\xi _k(\widehat{r},\widehat{\theta }),$$
(34)
where $`\xi _k`$ were defined in eq.(19): $`\xi _k(r,\theta )=I_k(r)e^{ik\theta }`$. According to (34), in the reference frame $`(\widehat{x},\widehat{y})`$ our functions $`𝒵_k`$ of which the solution $`\psi ^{(n)}`$ is to be built, have the form (18) with all $`\beta _m=0`$ except $`\beta _0=1`$. In other words, in the translated reference frame the solutions $`\psi ^{(n)}`$ constructed using $`G(e^{i\phi })=e^{R\mathrm{cos}\phi }`$, have the form of coaxial $`n`$-vortices.

The orbital coefficients $`\beta _m`$ associated with the translation can be found by expanding the function $`G=e^{R\mathrm{cos}\phi }`$ in the Fourier series:

$$e^{R\mathrm{cos}\phi }=\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\gamma _me^{im\phi }+\overline{\gamma }_me^{im\phi }\right),$$
(35)
where

$$\gamma _0=\frac{1}{2}I_0(R);\gamma _m=(1)^mI_m(R),m1.$$
(36)
It is not difficult to check that the series (35) converges. Indeed, the large-$`m`$ asymptotic behaviour of the modified Bessel’s function is given by Horn’s formula :

$$I_m(R)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\mathrm{exp}\left\{m\left(1+\mathrm{ln}\frac{R}{2}\right)\left(m+\frac{1}{2}\right)\mathrm{ln}m\right\}\left(1+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{m}\right)\right),m\mathrm{}.$$
(37)
Using (37), one can easily verify that the coefficients (36) pass the ratio test:

$$\underset{m\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\gamma _{m+1}(R)}{\gamma _m(R)}=0.$$
(38)
We can normalise the coefficients according to our convention that $`\beta _0`$ be equal to 1. This is done simply by replacing $`\gamma _m`$ in eq.(36) with

$$\gamma _0=\frac{1}{2};\gamma _m=(1)^m\frac{I_m(R)}{I_0(R)},m1.$$
(39)
(Note that the corresponding $`\beta _m`$, $`\beta _m=2(1)^mI_m(R)/I_0(R)`$, do not satisfy the sufficient condition (29). Despite that, the translated vortex is perfectly regular.)

Thus we conclude that the recursion procedure (17)-(18) with an infinite sequence of nonzero orbital coefficients $`\gamma _m`$ defined by eq.(39), gives rise to the coaxial multivortex centred at the point $`x=R`$, $`y=0`$. In the next section we will show that choosing a finite number of nonzero $`\gamma `$’s may also result in a shift of the vortex; however that shift will always be accompanied by a deformation. On the contrary, the infinite sequence (39) produces a pure translation.

Our final remark in this section is on the convergence of yet another series:

$`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}m^k|\gamma _m(R)|<\mathrm{}.`$

(This is a useful by-product of eq.(38).) The fact that the above series converges for all $`k`$ allows one to use the asymptotic formula (15) in the case of the translated 1-vortex. Restricting ourselves to terms of order $`r^1`$, we find that the axially-symmetric (undeformed) vortex (5) moved to the point $`(x=R,y=0)`$, has the asymptotic behaviour

$$\psi ^{(1)}(r,\theta )=e^{i\theta }\left\{1\frac{1}{2r}+\frac{iR\mathrm{sin}\theta }{r}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\right\}\mathrm{as}r\mathrm{}.$$
(40)
## IV One-parameter deformations of the axially-symmetric multivortices

### A The $`n=1`$ vortex

In this subsection we analyse in detail the simplest situation of a single nonzero orbital perturbation: $`\beta _k\beta 0`$ for $`k`$ equal some fixed $`m`$, and $`\beta _k=0`$ for all other $`k`$. Without loss of generality we can set $`\delta _m=0`$ and consider $`\beta `$ to be non-negative: $`0\beta 1`$. Eq.(22) gives

$$\psi ^{(1)}=\frac{I_1(r)e^{i\theta }+(\beta /2)\left[I_{m+1}(r)e^{i(m+1)\theta }+I_{m1}(r)e^{i(m1)\theta }\right]}{I_0(r)+\beta I_m(r)\mathrm{cos}(m\theta )}.$$
(41)
The first three orbital perturbations ($`m=1,2,3`$) of the one-vortex solution are shown in figure 1. The unperturbed vortex (i.e. eq.(41) with $`\beta =0`$) is also reproduced for comparison.

The one-parameter solution (41) is symmetric with respect to the rotation $`\theta \theta +2\pi /m`$ in the $`(x,y)`$-plane. This accounts for the number of symmetric folds in the modulus of $`\psi ^{(1)}`$ seen in figures 1(b-d). The solution (41) with $`m>3`$ is different from figures 1(b-d) only in that it will have $`m`$ symmetric folds.

It also follows from the cyclic symmetry that out of all one-parameter perturbations, only the $`m=1`$ perturbations give rise to the shift of the vortex from the origin. This shift breaks the rotational $`_m`$-symmetry completely and therefore, is compatible only with $`m=1`$. This can be easily verified by the Taylor’s expansion at the origin,

$$\psi ^{(1)}(r,\theta )=\frac{\beta _1}{2}e^{i\delta _1}+𝒪(r).$$
(42)
According to (42), the value of $`\psi ^{(1)}|_{r=0}`$ is not equal to zero — unless $`\beta _1=0`$.

### B The $`n=2`$ multivortex

The one-parameter deformations of the coaxial two-vortex with $`m=1,2,3`$ are shown in figure 2. Each of these three perturbations splits the repeated zero of $`\psi ^{(2)}(x,y)`$ into several single zeros, or, equivalently, splits the coaxial two-vortex into several monovortices. The perturbations with $`m=1`$ and $`m=2`$ give rise to two single vortices. For $`m=2`$, the indices of the newly born zeros are equal due to the discrete rotation symmetry $`\theta \theta +2\pi /m=\theta +\pi `$; hence in this case the perturbed solution consists of two individual vortices of vorticity $`Q_1=Q_2=+1`$. Here the vorticity of the $`k`$-th vortex is defined as the index of the corresponding zero of the field:

$$Q_k=\frac{1}{2\pi }_{C_k}\mathrm{d}(\mathrm{arg}\psi ),$$
(43)
where $`C_k`$ is a closed contour enclosing the $`k`$-th zero of the solution but no other zeros.

For $`m=3`$ there are four zeros. They are not clearly visible in figure 2(d) but become evident if one plots the level curves of $`|\psi ^{(2)}|^2`$, figure 3. First of all, we have an antivortex with $`Q_0=1`$ sitting at the origin. In addition, there are three vortices with vorticities $`Q_{1,2,3}=+1`$ placed symmetrically around it. The fact that the origin is a zero with index $`1`$, can be readily concluded from the Taylor expansion for small $`r`$:

$$\psi ^{(2)}(r,\theta )|_{m=3}=\frac{\beta r}{4}e^{i\theta }+𝒪(r^2).$$
(44)
Perturbations with higher orbital numbers do not produce the splitting of the 2-vortex. For all $`m4`$ the solution has a zero only at the origin. For example, for $`m=4`$ and $`5`$ the Taylor expansions about $`r=0`$ are:

$$\psi ^{(2)}(r,\theta )|_{m=4}=\frac{r^2}{8}\left(1\frac{\beta }{2}e^{4i\theta }\right)e^{2i\theta }+𝒪(r^4),$$
(45)
$$\psi ^{(2)}(r,\theta )|_{m=5}=\frac{r^2}{8}e^{2i\theta }+𝒪(r^3).$$
(46)
Since $`0\beta 1`$, the argument of the term in brackets in (45) is a periodic function of $`\theta `$ and hence the index at the origin equals +2. The sole effect of perturbations with higher orbital numbers on the 2-vortex solution amounts to the symmetric deformations, similarly to the effect of $`m2`$-perturbations on the 1-vortex solution.

### C The $`n=3`$ multivortex

We conclude our discussions of one-parameter deformations with the case of the $`(n=3)`$-solution. The absolute values of $`\psi ^{(3)}`$ are shown in figure 4 for $`m=1,2,3`$ and in figure 6 for $`m=4`$ and $`m=5`$. (As we explain below, all higher orbital numbers cannot produce the splitting of the 3-vortex and are less interesting, therefore.) The location of the positions of individual vortices is facilitated by plotting the level curves of $`|\psi ^{(3)}|^2`$, figures 5 and 7. A poor visibility of zeros in figure 6(b) is due to a significant disproportion in the widths of the central and surrounding vortices. In figure 7(b) we have attempted to improve the visualisation by contouring the central vortex at lower levels of $`|\psi |^2`$ than the surrounding ones.

For $`m2`$, the indices of the surrounding zeros can be found from the symmetry considerations provided the index of the zero at the origin is known. The Taylor expansion about $`r=0`$ gives:

$$\psi ^{(3)}(r,\theta )|_{m=2}=\frac{\beta }{4}\left(e^{i\theta }+\frac{\beta /2}{4\beta ^2}e^{i\theta }\right)r+𝒪(r^3),$$
(47)
$$\psi ^{(3)}(r,\theta )|_{m=4}=\frac{\beta r}{4}e^{i\theta }+𝒪(r^3),$$
(48)
$$\psi ^{(3)}(r,\theta )|_{m=5}=\frac{\beta r^2}{16}e^{2i\theta }+𝒪(r^3).$$
(49)
For higher orbital quantum numbers, $`m6`$, the $`(n=3)`$-solution consists of just one vortex (of vorticity $`+3`$) sitting at the origin.

### D The one-parameter deformations of the coaxial multivortices with general $`n`$

Having analysed a number of particular combinations of $`n`$ and $`m`$, we can now formulate general conjectures on the indices of one-parameter multivortex solutions. We have identified three distinct cases depending on the relation between $`n`$ and $`m`$.

(i.) The simplest situation occurs if $`m2n`$. In this case, it is sufficient to determine the index of the vortex at the origin. We conjecture that the Taylor’s expansion, as $`r0`$, is

$$\psi ^{(n)}=\frac{r^n}{2^nn!}[1(1)^n\delta _{m,2n}\frac{\beta }{2}e^{2in\theta }]e^{in\theta }+𝒪(r^{n+1}),m2n.$$
(50)
(Here $`\delta _{m,2n}`$ is Kronecker’s delta.) According to (50), in this case we have a single multivortex sitting at the origin, with vorticity $`Q_0=+n`$.

(ii.) Next, let $`n<m<2n`$. In this case we suggest the following expansion, as $`r0`$:

$$\psi ^{(n)}=\frac{\beta (1)^{n+1}r^{mn}}{2^{mn+1}(mn)!}e^{i(mn)\theta }+𝒪(r^{n+1}),n<m<2n.$$
(51)
Eq.(51) shows that there is a vortex with vorticity $`Q_0=(mn)`$ at the origin and $`m`$ vortices with indices $`Q_{1,2,\mathrm{}m}=+1`$ placed symmetrically about the origin in accordance with the rotation symmetry $`\theta \theta +2\pi /m`$.

(iii.) Finally, it remains to consider the case $`mn`$. This is the most nontrivial situation as in this case there may be no vortices at the origin at all. \[See e.g. figures 3(b),(c) and 4(b),(d)\]. The analysis of several combinations of $`n`$ and $`m`$ suggests that the index $`Q_0`$ at the origin is the smallest-modulus remainder (positive or negative) from the division of $`n`$ by $`m`$. That is, $`Q_0`$ is equal to the smallest of all positive and negative integers $`q`$ satisfying

$$n=km+q,|q|<m,$$
(52)
where $`k`$ is a positive integer. In case there is a positive and negative remainder of equal modulus (i.e. if $`m=2l`$ and $`n=km\pm l`$ with $`l>0`$), the index equals the positive remainder: $`Q_0=l`$. Each of the $`km`$ surrounding vortices has index $`+1`$. These are placed symmetrically about the origin (except for the case of $`m=1`$, of course) in accordance with the rotation symmetry $`\theta \theta +2\pi /m`$. For instance, the $`n=4`$, $`m=2`$ solution consists of four vortices centred on the $`x`$-axis and grouped in two pairs symmetrically with respect to the origin.

All particular solutions considered so far verify equations (50)-(52). However we do not yet have proofs of these formulae in the case of general $`n`$ and $`m`$.

## V The energy of the multivortices

In this section we calculate the action integral for the vortices. In the phenomenological theory of phase transitions this integral characterises the free energy of the system. (Apparently for this reason this quantity is also referred to as energy in mathematics literature  — although it gives the stationary Hamiltonian only for particular (2+1)-dimensional extensions of our (2+0)-dimensional model (4).) Besides its fundamental role in physical applications, the action can be used as a powerful variational tool in a purely mathematical analysis of stationary and moving topological solitons (see e.g. ).

The action integral for equation (4) has the form

$$E[\psi ]=_{D_R}\left(\frac{|\psi |^2}{1|\psi |^2}+1|\psi |^2\right)d^2x=_{D_R}\left(\frac{\overline{}\psi \overline{\psi }+\overline{}\overline{\psi }\psi }{2(1|\psi |^2)}+1|\psi |^2\right)d^2x,$$
(53)
where the integration is over a disc of a large radius $`R`$ centered at the origin. The massive Thirring model (8)-(9), in its turn, is derivable from the action

$$S[\psi ^{(n1)},\psi ^{(n)}]=_{D_R}\{\overline{\psi ^{(n1)}}\psi ^{(n)}\overline{\psi ^{(n)}}\overline{}\psi ^{(n1)}+(|\psi ^{(n1)}|^21)(|\psi ^{(n)}|^21)+c.c.\}d^2x.$$
(54)
The two systems are equivalent; expressing $`\psi ^{(n1)}`$ through $`\psi ^{(n)}`$ from eq.(9) and substituting into (8) produces eq.(4) for $`\psi ^{(n)}`$. Accordingly, the integrands in (53) and (54) differ only by a divergence:

$$S[\psi ^{(n1)},\psi ^{(n)}]=2E[\psi ^{(n)}]_{D_R}𝐀^{(n)}d^2x;n1,$$
(55)
where

$$𝐀^{(n)}=\mathrm{ln}(1|\psi ^{n)}|^2)+2𝒲(|\psi ^{(n)}|^2)\times \text{arg}\psi ^{(n)},$$
(56)
and

$`𝒲(\rho )={\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{1\rho }}+\mathrm{ln}(1\rho ).`$

Alternatively, we can express $`\psi ^{(n)}`$ through $`\psi ^{(n1)}`$; substituting this into (8) produces eq.(4) for $`\psi ^{(n1)}`$. This equivalence is, again, reflected by the corresponding actions. We have

$$S[\psi ^{(n1)},\psi ^{(n)}]=2E[\psi ^{(n1)}]_{D_R}𝐁^{(n1)}d^2x;n2,$$
(57)
where

$$𝐁^{(n1)}=\mathrm{ln}(1|\psi ^{(n1)}|^2)2𝒲(|\psi ^{(n1)}|^2)\times \text{arg}\psi ^{(n1)}.$$
(58)
Both $`𝐀^{(n)}`$ and $`𝐁^{(n1)}`$ are regular in the finite part of the $`(x,y)`$-plane and therefore the double integrals in (55) and (57) can be transformed to contour integrals over the boundary of the disc $`D_R`$:

$$S[\psi ^{(n1)},\psi ^{(n)}]=2E[\psi ^{(n)}]_{D_R}𝐀^{(n)}\widehat{𝐫}𝑑l,n1,$$
(59)
$$S[\psi ^{(n1)},\psi ^{(n)}]=2E[\psi ^{(n1)}]_{D_R}𝐁^{(n1)}\widehat{𝐫}𝑑l,n2.$$
(60)
Here $`\widehat{𝐫}=𝐫/r`$. For large $`r`$ eq.(25) gives

$$|\psi ^{(n)}|^2=1\frac{n}{r}+\frac{1}{r^2}\left[n^2\left(2\mu _1+\frac{1+\kappa ^2}{4}\right)+\frac{n(n1)}{2}\kappa _\theta \right]+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^3}\right).$$
(61)
As one can easily check using (16), the $`𝒪(r^2)`$ term in (61) is a total derivative:

$`2\mu _1+{\displaystyle \frac{1+\kappa ^2}{4}}=_\theta ^2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle |\sigma _m|},`$

and so (61) can be written as

$$|\psi ^{(n)}|^2=1\frac{n}{r}+\frac{1}{r^2}_\theta \lambda ^{(n)}.$$
(62)
Therefore

$$𝒲(|\psi ^{(n)}|^2)=\frac{r}{n}\mathrm{ln}\frac{r}{n}+\frac{_\theta \lambda ^{(n)}}{n}1+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)\text{as}r\mathrm{},$$
(63)
and using this in (59)-(60) we obtain, finally,

$$S[\psi ^{(n1)},\psi ^{(n)}]=2E[\psi ^{(n)}]4\pi \left(Rn\mathrm{ln}\frac{R}{n}n+\frac{1}{2}\right),n1,$$
(64)
$$S[\psi ^{(n1)},\psi ^{(n)}]=2E[\psi ^{(n1)}]+4\pi \left(R(n1)\mathrm{ln}\frac{R}{n1}n+\frac{1}{2}\right),n2.$$
(65)
Subtracting (65) from (64) we arrive at the formula relating the sine-Gordon actions of the solutions with vorticities $`n`$ and $`(n1)`$:

$$E^{(n)}E^{(n1)}=2\pi \left(2Rn\mathrm{ln}\frac{R}{n}(n1)\mathrm{ln}\frac{R}{n1}2n+1\right);n2.$$
(66)
This equation can be used to calculate, recursively, the energies of all vortices; the only outstanding ingredient is the action of the vortex with $`n=1`$. The $`E^{(1)}`$ can be found from (64), provided we know the Thirring action $`S(\psi ^{(0)},\psi ^{(1)})`$. This action is obtained directly from eq.(54) where we only need to set $`\psi ^{(0)}=1`$:

$$S(\psi ^{(0)},\psi ^{(1)})=_{D_R}(\overline{}\overline{\psi ^{(1)}}+\psi ^{(1)})d^2x=_{D_R}\left(\overline{\psi ^{(1)}}e^{i\theta }+\psi ^{(1)}e^{i\theta }\right)𝑑l.$$
(67)
Making use of the asymptotic expansion (25), eq.(67) yields

$$S(\psi ^{(0)},\psi ^{(1)})=2\pi (2R1)+𝒪(R^1).$$
(68)
Finally, the sine-Gordon action of the single-vortex solution is

$$E^{(1)}=2\pi (2R\mathrm{ln}R1)+𝒪(R^1).$$
(69)
The formulas (66)+(69) provide the actions for vortices with any $`n`$. As one could have expected, the actions do not depend on any of the parameters $`\beta _m,\delta _m`$ of the solution (14). Note also that we can use equations (66) and (69) to define the energy of the vorticity-free state $`\psi ^{(0)}1`$. Consistently with one’s physical intuition, eq.(66) with $`n1`$ yields $`E^{(0)}=0`$.

Solving the recursion relation (66) with initial condition (69) we can obtain the action $`E^{(n)}`$ in closed form:

$$E^{(n)}=2\pi \left[2nRn^2\mathrm{ln}R+n(\mathrm{ln}n1)+2\underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}k(\mathrm{ln}k1)\right],n2.$$
(70)
Note that eq.(70) remains valid for $`n=1`$ (in which case one should simply disregard the sum $`_{k=1}^{n1}`$) and for $`n=0`$ (in which case one should also set $`n\mathrm{ln}n=0`$).

For completeness, we also evaluate the Thirring action. Using (70) in (64), we have

$$S[\psi ^{(n1)},\psi ^{(n)}]=2\pi \left[2(2n1)R2n(n1)\mathrm{ln}R+4\underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}k(\mathrm{ln}k1)1\right];n2.$$
(71)
Like the previous formula, this expression remains valid for $`n=1`$.

The main conclusion of this section is that the action (or “energy”) of an $`n`$-vortex solution does not depend on parameters $`\beta _m`$, $`\delta _m`$ and therefore, on the relative positions of the individual vortices. This implies that in any ($`2+1`$)-dimensional (i.e. time-dependent) extension of the planar complex sine-Gordon theory, vortices may form non-interacting configurations.

## VI Complex sine-Gordon vs Ginzburg-Landau:
Analysis of zero modes

The aim of this section is to find out whether the Ginzburg-Landau axially-symmetric vortices admit non-symmetric deformations similar to those arising in the complex sine-Gordon equation. Let $`\psi ^{(n)}`$ be an axially-symmetric solution of equation (2): $`\psi ^{(n)}(r,\theta )=\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)e^{in\theta }`$. If this $`\psi ^{(n)}`$ is a member of a broader family of solutions parameterised by $`p`$ continuous parameters $`\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\mathrm{},\alpha _p`$, i.e.

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)e^{in\theta }=\psi (r,\theta ;\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _p)|_{\alpha _1=\alpha _2=\mathrm{}=\alpha _p=0},$$
(72)
the equation (2) linearised about the symmetric multivortex will have $`p`$ solutions of the form

$$\delta \psi _j(r,\theta )=\frac{\psi (r,\theta ;\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _p)}{\alpha _j}|_{\alpha _1=\alpha _2=\mathrm{}=\alpha _p=0};j=1,\mathrm{},p.$$
(73)
Therefore our strategy will be to examine the spectrum of linearised perturbations of the Ginzburg-Landau vortices. We will also be considering the linearisation of the complex sine-Gordon equation (4); the comparison of the corresponding sets of zero modes for the two systems will give rise to some interesting observations.

### A Linearised eigenvalue problem

Technically, it is convenient to treat the linearised boundary-value problem as an eigenvalue problem. With this purpose in mind, we consider the ($`2+0`$)-dimensional Ginzburg-Landau equation (2) as a time-independent reduction of a ($`2+1`$)-dimensional Higgs-field equation

$$\psi _{tt}^2\psi (1|\psi |^2)\psi =0.$$
(74)
(Alternatively, we could have considered it as a reduction of the Gross-Pitaevskii equation $`i\psi _t+^2\psi +(1|\psi |^2)\psi =0`$, but the relativistic generalisation (74) is computationally advantageous as it gives rise to a symmetric eigenvalue problem.) In a similar way we can define a ($`2+1`$)-dimensional generalisation of the planar complex sine-Gordon (4):

$$\psi _{tt}^2\psi \frac{(\psi )^2}{1|\psi |^2}\overline{\psi }\psi (1|\psi |^2)=0.$$
(75)
(Note that (75) is not relativistically invariant and can hardly claim any physical relevance; we are introducing this equation just for auxiliary purposes here.) Assuming a solution of the form

$$\psi (r,\theta ,t)=\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)e^{in\theta }+\delta \psi (r,\theta ,t)\left[\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)+ϵ\varphi (r,\theta )\mathrm{cos}\omega t\right]e^{in\theta }$$
(76)
and linearising (74) in small $`ϵ`$, we obtain

$$_r^2\varphi \frac{1}{r^2}(_\theta +in)^2\varphi \varphi +2\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2\varphi +\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2\overline{\varphi }=\omega ^2\varphi ,$$
(77)
where $`_r^2\varphi =\varphi _{rr}+r^1\varphi _r`$. In a similar way, the linearisation of equation (75) gives

$`_r^2\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}_\theta ^2\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_n}{1\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2}}_r\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{2in}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2}}_\theta \varphi `$ (78)
$`+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(n^2/r^2)(\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{})^2\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2}{(1\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2)^2}}+2\mathrm{\Phi }_n^21\right]\varphi +\left[\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2+{\displaystyle \frac{(n^2/r^2)\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2(\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{})^2}{(1\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2)^2}}\right]\overline{\varphi }=\omega ^2\varphi ,`$ (79)
where the prime over $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n`$ denotes the derivative with respect to $`r`$. Equations (77) and (79) can be regarded as eigenvalue problems, with $`\omega ^2`$ being an eigenvalue and $`(\varphi ,\overline{\varphi })`$ the associated eigenvector. Expanding $`\varphi `$ in the Fourier series in $`\theta `$:

$$\varphi (r,\theta )=\underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\varphi _m(r)e^{im\theta }=\underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left\{a_m(r)+ib_m(r)\right\}e^{im\theta },$$
(80)
and transforming to

$$u_m(r)=a_m+a_m,v_m(r)=a_ma_m,$$
(81)
we obtain a sequence of one-dimensional eigenvalue problems, one for each value of the azimuthal number $`m`$:

$$_{n,m}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{u_m}{v_m}\right)=\omega ^2\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{u_m}{v_m}\right).$$
(82)
The operator $`_{n,m}`$ is defined by

$$_{n,m}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{_r^2+\frac{n^2+m^2}{r^2}+3\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2(r)1}{\frac{2mn}{r^2}}\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{2mn}{r^2}}{_r^2+\frac{n^2+m^2}{r^2}+\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2(r)1}\right)$$
(83)
in the Ginzburg-Landau case, and by

$$_{n,m}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{_r^2+𝔅_n(r)\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}r}+\frac{m^2}{r^2}+_n(r)+𝔇_n(r)}{m𝔄_n(r)}\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m𝔄_n(r)}{_r^2+𝔅_n(r)\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}r}+\frac{m^2}{r^2}+_n(r)𝔇_n(r)}\right)$$
(84)
in the complex sine-Gordon case. In (84) we have introduced the notations

$`𝔄_n(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2n}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2}},`$ (85)
$`𝔅_n(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2n}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2}{1\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2}}2\mathrm{\Phi }_n\mathrm{\Phi }_{n1},`$ (86)
$`_n(r)`$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2\mathrm{\Phi }_{n1}^21+{\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1+\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2}{1\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2n}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_{n1}\mathrm{\Phi }_n^3}{1\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2}},`$ (87)
$`𝔇_n(r)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2\mathrm{\Phi }_{n1}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2n}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_n\mathrm{\Phi }_{n1}}{1\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2}}.`$ (88)
The imaginary parts of the Fourier coefficients $`\varphi _m`$ satisfy the same eigenvalue problem (82) with $`_{n,m}`$ as in (83) or (84), where the eigenfunctions $`(u_m,v_m)`$ should only be defined by

$$u_m(r)=b_mb_m,v_m(r)=b_m+b_m.$$
(89)
(Note that the eigenfunctions $`(u_m,v_m)`$ do depend on the vorticity $`n`$ but we are omitting the corresponding subscript to keep the notation simpler.)

Thus the spectrum of linearised excitations of the symmetric multivortex $`\psi ^{(n)}`$ is given by eigenvalues of the operator $`_{n,m}`$ with $`m`$ varying from $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$. In fact in view of equations (81) and (89) we can restrict ourselves to nonnegative $`m`$ only. If $`(u_m,v_m)`$ is an eigenvector of the operator $`_{n,m}`$ associated with an eigenvalue $`\omega ^2`$, then $`(u_m,v_m)`$ is an eigenvector of the operator $`_{n,m}`$ associated with the same eigenvalue $`\omega ^2`$.

We solved the eigenvalue problem (82)-(83) numerically. Before discussing the results of the numerical analysis, it is instructive to compare the spectrum structure of the Ginzburg-Landau operator (83) with that of its complex sine-Gordon counterpart.

### B The spectrum structure

For any positive $`n`$ and $`m0`$ we introduce two bases of solutions of the linear system (82)-(83). One basis can be defined by the asymptotic behaviours at the origin. To this end, we rewrite the system in terms of $`\stackrel{~}{u}=(u_m+v_m)/2`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{v}=(u_mv_m)/2`$ (where the subscript $`m`$ is omitted for simplicity of notation):

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}L_{m+n}+2\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2& \mathrm{\Phi }_n^2\\ \mathrm{\Phi }_n^2& L_{mn}+2\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{u}\\ \stackrel{~}{v}\end{array}\right)=\omega ^2\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{u}\\ \stackrel{~}{v}\end{array}\right).$$
(90)
Here $`L_s=^2+(s^2/r^2)1`$. The advantage of the formulation (90) is in that for $`r0`$, the cross-coupling potentials $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n^2r^{2n}`$ are small and the equation for $`\stackrel{~}{u}(r)`$ decouples from the equation for $`\stackrel{~}{v}(r)`$. Expanding each of the $`\stackrel{~}{u}(r)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{v}(r)`$ in power series in $`r`$ (supplemented by logarithmic terms where necessary), e.g.

$`\stackrel{~}{u}(r)=(\stackrel{~}{u}_0+\widehat{u}_0\mathrm{ln}r)r^𝔭+(\stackrel{~}{u}_1+\widehat{u}_1\mathrm{ln}r)r^{𝔭+2}+\mathrm{}`$

and substituting into (90), one can easily verify that for each pair $`(n,m)`$ there are four solutions with the following asymptotic behaviour:

$`\stackrel{~}{Z}_1=\left(\begin{array}{c}r^{m+n}[1+o(r)]\\ 𝒪(r^{m+n+2n+2})\end{array}\right);\stackrel{~}{Z}_2=\left(\begin{array}{c}𝒪(r^{|mn|+2n+2})\\ r^{|mn|}[1+o(r)]\end{array}\right);\stackrel{~}{Z}_3=\left(\begin{array}{c}r^{(m+n)}[1+o(r)]\\ o(r^{(m+n)+2n+1})\end{array}\right);`$
$`\stackrel{~}{Z}_4=\left(\begin{array}{c}o(r^{|mn|+2n+1})\\ r^{|mn|}[1+o(r)]\end{array}\right)(\text{for}mn);\stackrel{~}{Z}_4=\left(\begin{array}{c}𝒪(r^{2n+2}\mathrm{ln}r)\\ \mathrm{ln}r[1+o(r)]\end{array}\right)(\text{for}m=n).`$
(Here $`\stackrel{~}{Z}`$ denotes the column $`(\stackrel{~}{u},\stackrel{~}{v})^T`$, of course.) Transforming back to $`u_m`$ and $`v_m`$ and introducing the notation $`Z=(u_m,v_m)^T`$, we have four linearly independent solutions of the system (82)-(83) (as $`r0`$):

$`Z_1=r^{m+n}[1+o(r)]\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 1\end{array}\right);Z_2=r^{|mn|}[1+o(r)]\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill 1\\ \hfill 1\end{array}\right);Z_3=r^{(m+n)}[1+o(r)]\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 1\end{array}\right);`$

$`Z_4=r^{|mn|}[1+o(r)]\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill 1\\ \hfill 1\end{array}\right)(\text{for}mn)`$ , (95)
$`Z_4=\mathrm{ln}r[1+o(r)]\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill 1\\ \hfill 1\end{array}\right)(\text{for}m=n)`$ . (98)
The solutions $`Z_1,Z_2`$ are bounded and $`Z_3,Z_4`$ unbounded for all $`m`$ and $`n`$.

In a similar way one can show that the linearised complex sine-Gordon (82)-(84) also has two bounded and two unbounded solutions near the origin. In this case one should only take into account that as $`r0`$,

$`\begin{array}{cc}𝔄={\displaystyle \frac{2n}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2n}{(2^nn!)^2}}r^{2n2}+𝒪(r^{2n}),\hfill & 𝔅={\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{2n}{(2^nn!)^2}}r^{2n1}+𝒪(r^{2n+1}),\hfill \\ ={\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{r^2}}1+{\displaystyle \frac{2n^2}{(2^nn!)^2}}r^{2n2}+𝒪(r^{2n}),\hfill & 𝔇=𝒪(r^{2n}).\hfill \end{array}`$
The four basis solutions are given by the same equations (98) as in the case of the Higgs field. We should emphasise here that eqs.(98) are valid for all $`\omega `$ (including $`\omega =0`$), both in the Higgs and sine-Gordon cases.

The second basis is defined by the asymptotic behaviours as $`r\mathrm{}`$. Consider, first, the Higgs system (82)-(83) and let $`0<\omega <\sqrt{2}`$. The four solutions are given by

$`Y_{1,2}={\displaystyle \frac{e^{\pm i\omega r}}{\sqrt{r}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill \frac{mn}{r^2}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^3}\right)\\ \hfill 1\pm \frac{(1/4)m^2}{2i\omega r}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\end{array}\right);`$ (102)
$`Y_{3,4}={\displaystyle \frac{e^{\pm \sqrt{2\omega ^2}r}}{\sqrt{r}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill 1\pm \frac{2n^2+(1/4)m^2}{2\sqrt{2\omega ^2}r}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\\ \hfill \frac{mn}{r^2}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^3}\right)\end{array}\right).`$ (105)
The solutions $`Y_1`$, $`Y_2`$, and $`Y_4`$ are bounded and $`Y_3`$ unbounded as $`r\mathrm{}`$. Similarly, for all $`0<\omega <2`$ the linearised complex sine-Gordon (82)-(84) has three bounded and one unbounded solution as $`r\mathrm{}`$:

$`Y_{1,2}={\displaystyle \frac{e^{\pm i\omega r}}{r}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill \frac{m}{2r}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\\ \hfill 1+\left(\frac{12m^2}{16}\pm \frac{m^2n}{4i\omega }\right)\frac{1}{r^2}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^3}\right)\end{array}\right);`$ (108)
$`Y_{3,4}=e^{\pm \sqrt{4\omega ^2}r}r^𝔭\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill 1\frac{2m^21𝔭(𝔭+1)}{2\sqrt{4\omega ^2}r}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\\ \hfill \frac{m}{2r}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\end{array}\right),`$ (111)
where $`𝔭=2n(4\omega ^2)^{1/2}1`$. In the derivation of (108)-(111) we made use of the asymptotic expansions, as $`r\mathrm{}`$, of the coefficient functions in (88):

$`𝔄_n(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4r^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2r^4}}+𝒪\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^5}}\right),`$ (112)
$`𝔅_n(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4r^3}}+𝒪\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^4}}\right),`$ (113)
$`_n(r)`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{2n}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{3n}{4r^3}}+𝒪\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^4}}\right),`$ (114)
$`𝔇_n(r)`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{2n}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{3n}{4r^3}}+𝒪\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^4}}\right).`$ (115)
Each of the solutions $`Z_i`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{}4`$) can be expanded over the basis $`Y_j`$:

$`Z_i(r)={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{4}{}}}T_{ij}^{(n,m)}(\omega )Y_j(r).`$

For all $`0<\omega <\sqrt{2}`$ in the Higgs case and all $`0<\omega <2`$ in the complex sine-Gordon case, the linear combination $`T_{23}^{(n,m)}Z_1(r)T_{13}^{(n,m)}Z_2(r)`$ represents a solution which is bounded both as $`r0`$ and $`r\mathrm{}`$. Therefore, in both cases small nonzero $`\omega `$ belong to the continuous spectrum. The question that is of concern to us, of course, is whether $`\omega =0`$ belongs to the continuum; in other words, is there a bounded solution for $`\omega =0`$? Surprisingly, the answers for the Higgs (alias Ginzburg-Landau) and complex sine-Gordon linearisation, are different.

Let us start with the Higgs case and let $`r\mathrm{}`$. Two asymptotic solutions, $`Y_{3,4}`$, are given by eq.(105) where we only need to set $`\omega =0`$. The other two asymptotic formulas, eq.(102), cannot be used for $`\omega =0`$. Instead, we have two solutions with the asymptotics

$`Y_{1,2}=r^{\pm m}\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill \frac{mn}{r^2}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^4}\right)\\ \hfill 1+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\end{array}\right)(\text{for}m0);`$ (118)
$`Y_1=\mathrm{ln}r\left[1+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\right]\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right);Y_2=\left[1+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\right]\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right)(\text{for}m=0).`$ (123)
Therefore, for $`\omega =0`$ we only have two, not three, solutions bounded as $`r\mathrm{}`$: $`Y_2`$ and $`Y_4`$. The solutions $`Z_1`$ and $`Z_2`$, bounded at the origin, can still be expanded over the basis $`Y_j`$ $`(j=1,\mathrm{}4)`$; however, this time in order for the linear combination $`c_1Z_1+c_2Z_2`$ to remain bounded as $`r\mathrm{}`$, the constants $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ have to satisfy two conditions: $`c_1T_{11}^{(n,m)}(0)+c_2T_{21}^{(n,m)}(0)=0`$ and $`c_1T_{13}^{(n,m)}(0)+c_2T_{23}^{(n,m)}(0)=0`$. This imposes a requirement on the matrix $`T^{(n,m)}(\omega )`$ at the point $`\omega =0`$:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{(n,m)}\left|\begin{array}{cc}T_{11}^{(n,m)}(0)& T_{21}^{(n,m)}(0)\\ T_{13}^{(n,m)}(0)& T_{23}^{(n,m)}(0)\end{array}\right|=0,$$
(124)
which is not a priori satisfied for all values of $`n`$ and $`m`$. Consequently, the zero mode (i.e. a solution $`u_m(r),v_m(r)`$ pertaining to $`\omega =0`$ and bounded for all $`0r<\mathrm{}`$) can only arise for some pairs $`(n,m)`$.

Consider now the linearised complex sine-Gordon (82)+(84). As in the Higgs case, the asymptotic solutions $`Y_{3,4}(r)`$ (eqs.(111)) are valid for $`\omega =0`$ whereas the formulas (108) are not. Instead, for $`\omega =0`$ the two solutions $`Y_{1,2}(r)`$ have the asymptotics

$$Y_1=\frac{1}{r}\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill \frac{m}{2r}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\\ \hfill 1+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\end{array}\right);Y_2=\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill \frac{m}{2r}+𝒪\left(\frac{\mathrm{ln}r}{r^2}\right)\\ \hfill 1+m^2n\frac{\mathrm{ln}r}{r}+𝒪\left(\frac{\mathrm{ln}r}{r^2}\right)\end{array}\right),r\mathrm{}.$$
(125)
Thus in the complex sine-Gordon case we have three bounded solutions as $`r\mathrm{}`$: $`Y_1`$, $`Y_2`$, and $`Y_4`$ (and not two as in the Higgs case.) Accordingly, there always is a solution bounded for all $`r[0,\mathrm{})`$: $`(u_m,v_m)=T_{23}^{(n,m)}Z_1(r)T_{13}^{(n,m)}Z_2(r)`$, and so we may conclude that there is a zero mode for any pair $`(n,m)`$ — without having to find this solution analytically or numerically. In this sense, in the complex sine-Gordon case the value $`\omega =0`$ belongs to the continuous spectrum whereas in the Ginzburg-Landau case zero modes can only appear as discrete eigenvalues. In the latter case we had to resort to the help of computer.

### C Ginzburg-Landau zero modes: a numerical search

To find eigenvalues and eigenfunctions numerically, we replaced derivatives in eq.(83) (and eqs.(127)-(128) below) with the second order-accurate finite differences. Typically we took a grid with $`1000`$ points on an interval $`0<r80`$ (i.e. with the step size $`\mathrm{\Delta }r=0.08`$). The coaxial multivortices $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)`$ of which the potentials in (83) are formed, were pre-computed using Newton’s method.

The appropriate boundary conditions at the origin follow from the asymptotic behaviours (98):

$`u_r(0)=v_r(0)=0,\text{for}mn\pm 1;`$ (126)
$`u(0)=v(0)=0,\text{for}m=n\pm 1.`$ (127)
At infinity, the boundary conditions are chosen to accomodate the bounded solutions in eqs.(105)+(123):

$$u_r0,v_r0\text{as}r\mathrm{}.$$
(128)
Numerically, zero modes appear as small nonzero eigenvalues and one still has to distinguish them from small eigenvalues arising from the continuous spectrum when the infinite line is approximated by a finite interval $`[0,80]`$. The genuine zero modes can be discerned by considering the large-$`r`$ behaviours of the associated eigenvectors. The “true” zero modes are allowed to decay exponentially (as in (105)) or as $`r^m`$ (as in (123)) whereas the continuous spectrum solutions will generically decay as $`1/\sqrt{r}`$ (see eq.(102)).

Before calculating the eigenvalues of the Higgs vortices, we tested our numerical scheme on the complex sine-Gordon operator (84). As expected, we obtained one zero mode for each $`n`$ and $`m`$. (We tested $`m=0,1,\mathrm{},5`$ for each of $`n=1,2,3`$.) The associated eigenfunctions were found to coincide with the derivatives of the general $`n`$-vortex solution $`\psi ^{(n)}`$ w.r.t. the azimuthal parameters $`\beta _m`$ (see the next subsection.)

Proceeding to the Higgs system, we examined the one-, two and three-vortex solutions, i.e., $`n=1,2`$ and $`3`$. The azimuthal quantum number of the analysed perturbation ranged from $`m=0`$ to $`5`$ in each case. Zero eigenvalues were only found for $`m=0`$ and $`1`$; both result from obvious symmetry properties of the Ginzburg-Landau/Higgs equation.

For $`m=0`$, the complex eigenfunction $`\varphi (r)`$ of the operator (77) associated with the numerically-found zero eigenvalue, was found to coincide with the function $`i\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)`$ (i.e., $`u_0=0`$, $`v_0=2\mathrm{\Phi }_n`$.) This zero mode is related to the $`U(1)`$ invariance of the Ginzburg-Landau equation (2):

$$\varphi (r)e^{in\theta }=\frac{}{\alpha }\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)e^{in\theta +i\alpha }|_{\alpha =0}.$$
(129)
For $`m=1`$, the numerical eigenvector $`(u_1,v_1)`$ associated with the zero eigenvalue was found to be equal to $`(\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{},\frac{n}{r}\mathrm{\Phi }_n)`$. (There is, of course, a zero mode for $`m=1`$ as well: $`(u_1,v_1)=(\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{},\frac{n}{r}\mathrm{\Phi }_n)`$.) The corresponding complex perturbations (76) are the translation modes, one $`\varphi e^{in\theta }`$ given by $`_x\left[\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)e^{in\theta }\right]`$ and the other one by $`_y\left[\mathrm{\Phi }_n(r)e^{in\theta }\right]`$.

Both the translational and the $`U(1)`$-zero modes are well known to workers in this field. (See e.g. ). There is a simple analytical argument showing that zero modes cannot arise for $`m2n`$ ; this fact is also known to specialists. However, the nonexistence of zero modes for $`1<m<2n`$ does not seem to have appeared in literature before.

Since the only zero-frequency excitations of the axially-symmetric vortices are those associated with the phase shifts and translations, we conclude that the coaxial multivortices of the stationary Ginzburg-Landau model do not admit continuous nonsymmetric deformations. In particular, two vortices sitting, symmetrically, on top of each other cannot be continuously separated. This does not mean, of course, that the Ginzburg-Landau model does not admit noncoaxial multivortex solutions at all. Multivortex configurations with finite separations between individual vortices may exist (and in fact there are indications that they do exist ). However, the intervortex separations will only admit discrete sets of values, or will be allowed to vary continuously but be bounded from below by certain finite distances.

This is in sharp contrast with the coaxial multivortices of the complex sine-Gordon theory which can be continuously split and moved apart. As we have shown in previous sections, each axially-symmetric solution of this model is a member of an infinite-parameter family of solutions corresponding to a specific choice of azimuthal deformation parameters: $`\beta _1=\beta _2=\mathrm{}=0`$. We conclude this section by demonstrating that each of these continuous parameters gives rise to a zero mode in the spectrum of the corresponding linearised operator (84).

### D Zero modes of the complex sine-Gordon multivortices

The derivative of the general $`n`$-vortex solution w.r.t. the azimuthal parameter $`\beta _m`$ ($`m1`$), is given by

$$\frac{}{\beta _m}\psi ^{(n)}|_{\beta _1=\beta _2=\mathrm{}=0}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{k=1n}{\overset{n}{}}(e^{i\delta _m}\xi _{k+m}+e^{i\delta _m}\xi _{km})\frac{\psi ^{(n)}}{𝒵_k}|_{\beta _1=\beta _2=\mathrm{}=0}.$$
(130)
To calculate the derivative $`\psi ^{(n)}/𝒵_k`$, we notice that each of the multivortices can be written as a rational function,

$$\psi ^{(n)}=\frac{𝒩^{(n)}}{^{(n)}},$$
(132)
where the numerator and denominator are homogeneous polynomials in $`𝒵_{1n},𝒵_{2n},\mathrm{},𝒵_n`$, of degree $`P`$ ($`P2^{n1}`$). These polynomials have the form

$`𝒩^{(n)}={\displaystyle \underset{1ni_1,i_2,\mathrm{}i_Pn}{}}C_{i_1i_2\mathrm{}i_P}\delta _{i_1+i_2+\mathrm{}+i_P,n}𝒵_{i_1}𝒵_{i_2}\mathrm{}𝒵_{i_P},`$ (133)
$`^{(n)}={\displaystyle \underset{1ni_1,i_2,\mathrm{}i_Pn1}{}}D_{i_1i_2\mathrm{}i_P}\delta _{i_1+i_2+\mathrm{}+i_P,0}𝒵_{i_1}𝒵_{i_2}\mathrm{}𝒵_{i_P},`$ (134)
where $`C_{i_1i_2\mathrm{}i_P}`$ and $`D_{i_1i_2\mathrm{}i_P}`$ are real coefficients and $`\delta _{s,l}`$ is Kronecker’s delta. Equations (130) are straightforward from the recurrence relation (17). Note that in eq.(133), products $`𝒵_{i_1}𝒵_{i_2}\mathrm{}𝒵_{i_P}`$ have their indices summing up to $`n`$; we will be referring to this property by saying that the polynomial $`𝒩^{(n)}`$ has level $`n`$. In this sense, the polynomial $`^{(n)}`$ (eq.(134)) has level $`0`$. When a polynomial of level $`l`$ is differentiated w.r.t. $`𝒵_k`$, its level is lowered down to $`lk`$. Therefore, the derivative $`\psi ^{(n)}/𝒵_k`$ is a rational function whose numerator is a polynomial of level $`nk`$ and denominator is a polynomial of level $`0`$. Since $`𝒵_s|_{\beta _1=\beta _2=\mathrm{}=0}=\xi _s=I_s(r)e^{is\theta }`$, one can easily check that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\psi ^{(n)}}{𝒵_k}}|_{\beta _1=\beta _2=\mathrm{}=0}=𝔤_k^{(n)}(r)e^{i(nk)\theta }`$

with some real function $`𝔤_k^{(n)}(r)`$. Substituting into (130) we obtain the zero-frequency eigenfunctions of the operator (79) pertaining to the orbital quantum numbers $`m`$ and $`m`$, respectively:

$$\varphi _m(r)=\underset{k=1n}{\overset{n}{}}𝔤_k^{(n)}(r)I_{k+m}(r);\varphi _m(r)=\underset{k=1n}{\overset{n}{}}𝔤_k^{(n)}(r)I_{km}(r)$$
(135)
$`(m1)`$. The zero modes (135) translate into zero-frequency eigenvectors of the operator (84):

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}u_m\\ v_m\end{array}\right)=\underset{k=1n}{\overset{n}{}}𝔤_k^{(n)}(r)\left(\begin{array}{c}I_{k+m}(r)+I_{km}(r)\\ I_{k+m}(r)I_{km}(r)\end{array}\right).$$
(136)
## VII Concluding remarks

In this paper we have constructed families of explicit solutions of the complex sine-Gordon equation. In literature, the complex sine-Gordon model is usually considered in the (1+1)-dimensional Minkowski space where it has the form

$$\psi _{xx}\psi _{tt}+\frac{(\psi _x^2\psi _t^2)\overline{\psi }}{1|\psi |^2}+\psi (1|\psi |^2)=0.$$
(137)
This equation was introduced in the late 1970s in three independent field-theoretic contexts: (i) as a reduction of the $`O(4)`$ nonlinear $`\sigma `$-model ; (ii) in the description of relativistic strings in a uniform antisymmetric tensor field , and (iii) in the theory of massless fermions with a scalar contact interaction . Later on, eq.(137) reappeared in an entirely unrelated physical context — it turned out to be equivalent to the Maxwell-Bloch and self-induced transparency equations as well as the system governing stimulated Raman scattering in nonlinear optics . In mathematics literature it is common to call eq.(137) the Lund-Regge model and write it as

$`\alpha _{xx}\alpha _{tt}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\alpha }{\mathrm{cos}^3\alpha }}(\chi _x^2\chi _t^2)+\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\alpha =0,`$ (138)
$`(\chi _x\mathrm{tan}^2\alpha )_x=(\chi _t\mathrm{tan}^2\alpha )_t,`$ (139)
where $`\mathrm{sin}\alpha `$ and $`\chi `$ are the modulus and argument of the complex function $`\psi (x,t)`$ in (137): $`\psi =\mathrm{sin}\alpha e^{i\chi }`$. Geometrically, the Lund-Regge model gives the Gauss-Codazzi equations for the embedding of pseudospherical surfaces into a flat three-dimensional Euclidean space .

More recent studies of the Lorentzian complex sine-Gordon theory (137) and its Euclidean counterpart given by eq.(4), were motivated by the fact that eqs.(137) and (4) define integrable deformations of 2D conformal field theories, more specifically of the $`SU(2)/U(1)`$ coset model and $`Z_n`$ parafermions . Other (not unrelated) sources of interest have been the search for exactly solvable conformal theories with black-hole background metrics  and exact factorisable $`S`$-matrices on the quantum level . In the current mathematics literature, the hyperbolic Lund-Regge equation (139) is being discussed in connection with the localised induction hierarchy describing the motion of vortex filaments in an inviscid incompressible fluid . Its applications to pseudospherical surfaces continue to attract attention (see e.g. ) while the elliptic equation (4) has been derived in the description of the “middle surfaces” of generalised Weingarten surfaces .

The (1+1)-dimensional system (137) was shown to be integrable via the inverse scattering transform  and, by virtue of this approach, broad classes of its exact solutions have become available . The inverse scattering framework for the (2+0)-dimensional solitons was formulated in . Solutions obtained in this way describe nonlinear superpositions of one-dimensional fronts intersecting at arbitrary angles on the $`(x,y)`$-plane .

In Ref. axially symmetric solutions were constructed describing $`n`$ vortices ($`n1`$) sitting on top of each other. In the present paper we have shown that each of these coaxial multivortices belongs to an infinite-parameter family of nonsymmetric solutions, which includes, in particular, configurations of $`n`$ single vortices located at separate points of the plane. (The constellation of $`n`$ separated monovortices is not the only splitting possibility for the coaxial $`n`$-vortex though; there can also be various combinations of vortices and antivortices with indices summing up to $`n`$, the total topological charge characterising that particular family.) Our current construction, as well as the one of Ref., is based on the Bäcklund transformation of the complex sine-Gordon equation. (In the axially-symmetric case there is also an alternative technique employing the Painlevé reduction .) For the understanding of the structure of the phase space, however, it would be instructive to embed the vortex solutions in the inverse scattering formalism; we are planning to return to this issue in future publications. The fact that even a one-vortex solution is characterised by an infinite number of parameters seems to indicate that vortices should be associated with the continuous spectrum rather than discrete eigenvalues (which account for front-like solitons.)

We have computed the energy (more precisely, the Euclidean action) for each family of multivortices. The action is found to be entirely determined by the total topological charge and independent of parameters specifying a particular solution within each topological class. This is not an unexpected result; the nontrivial dependence of the action on some of the continuous parameters entering the solution would contradict the stationarity of this configuration.

That axially-symmetric multivortices of the complex sine-Gordon theory admit noncoaxial continuations, follows already from their spectra of linearised perturbations. As we have shown in this work, the existence of a zero mode with any azimuthal number $`m=0,1,2,3\mathrm{}`$ is ensured by the availability of the necessary number of bounded asymptotic solutions of the linearised equations as $`r0`$ and $`r\mathrm{}`$. On the contrary, the axially symmetric solutions of the Ginzburg-Landau model do not have enough bounded linearised perturbations as $`r\mathrm{}`$; consequently, the existence of a zero mode for a particular choice of $`n`$ and $`m`$ cannot be guranteed a priori. Our numerical analysis has demonstrated that the Ginzburg-Landau coaxial multivortices have only translational and rotational zero modes and therefore do not admit continuous deformations and/or splitting into separate vortices.

###### Acknowledgements.

We are grateful Nora Alexeeva for her help with the numerics. Many thanks to Stavros Komineas and Nikos Papanicolaou for useful discussions on various aspects of topological solitons. This research was supported by grants from the NRF of South Africa and the URC of UCT.


format: text

text:
# MERLIN observations of Stephan’s Quintet

## 1 Introduction

Stephan’s Quintet (also known as Arp319 and VV228), which can be regarded as the prototype of the compact group class of galaxies (H92 in the Hickson 1982 catalog), was the first to be discovered 120 years ago by Stephan (1877). It has been studied intensively in almost every wavelength domain and it is a remarkable example of a group of galaxies visited by infalling neighbours.

There has been much controversy regarding the redshifts of its galaxies and their nature. The members of the group (Fig. 1) were initially thought to be NGC 7317, NGC 7318A, NGC 7318B, NGC 7319, NGC 7320 and NGC 7320C. However, it was later found that NGC 7318B had a velocity almost 1000 km s-1 lower than the mean redshift of the group ($``$6600 km s-1) and NGC 7320 was at a redshift of only $``$800 km s-1. Moles et al. (1997) have argued that the discordant-redshift galaxy, NGC 7320, is an unrelated foreground galaxy and have suggested that the kernel of three galaxies, NGC 7317, NGC 7318A and NGC 7319, has been visited by two “intruders” (NGC 7320C and NGC 7318B) at different times in the past few 108 years. As a result of these “intrusions”, the intragroup medium has been filled with HI gas, stripped from the spiral members of the group (Allen & Sullivan 1980; Sulentic & Arp 1983; Shostak et al. 1984; Pietsch et al. 1997; Williams 1998).

Allen & Hartsuiker (1972) produced the first continuum radio image of Stephan’s Quintet at a wavelength of 21 cm using the Westerbork Synthesis Radio Telescope. At a resolution of $``$ 20$``$ $``$ $`\times `$ 45$``$ $``$ , it showed an unresolved source coincident with NGC 7319, and an unusual semi-circular arc of emission which appeared to envelop it. Since then, VLA observations at 20 cm wavelength by van der Hulst & Rots (1981) with a resolution of 6$``$ $``$ have shown more clearly the main components of the radio emission associated with Stephan’s Quintet. These are shown in the schematic in Fig. 2. More recent VLA observations at 3.6 cm, 6 cm and 20 cm by Aoki et al. (1999) show that the source centered on NGC 7319 has three compact components, aligned perpendicular to the disc of the galaxy and embedded in more diffuse emission. According to Aoki et al. (1999), all the components of the emission have steep spectra which, they indicate, is commonly found in Seyfert galaxies. Van der Hulst & Rots (1981) resolved the arc of emission between NGC 7319 and NGC 7318B into distinct sources embedded in more diffuse emission which is partly coincident with spiral-arm-like features in NGC 7318B. They considered this arc of emission to be more like a letter “W” on its side, associating it with the starburst region. They also noted a discrete, unresolved source, just to the north of the “W”, which, with no optical counterpart, they considered to be an unrelated background object.

In this paper, high resolution MERLIN radio observations at L band (18 cm) are presented for the first time. Also presented are the results of a re-analysis of L band (20 cm) VLA archive data and a combination of this and the MERLIN data to reveal in much more detail the structure of the radio emission, not only of NGC 7319, but of the hitherto unresolved sources in the field. An archival near-UV high resolution HST image of NGC 7319 is also analyzed and the UV, optical and radio emission correlation is examined and discussed. In Section 2, the MERLIN and HST observations and data analysis as well as a re-analysis of the VLA data are described. Maps and results are included in Section 3 and the paper finishes with a discussion and conclusions. Throughout this paper we use H$`{}_{0}{}^{}=`$ 65 km s-1 Mpc-1 unless otherwise specified. 1$``$ $``$ corresponds to 485 pc at the redshift z=0.02251 of NGC 7319.

## 2 Observations & Data Reduction

### 2.1 MERLIN data

Observations of Stephan’s Quintet were made with MERLIN at L band in April and June 1999. A bandwidth of 16 MHz in both left and right circular polarizations was used, centered on 1658.0 MHz. The observations were made in “wide-field” mode in order to cover as much as possible of the environment of Stephan’s Quintet. The total extent of Stephan’s Quintet is $``$ 6 $`\times `$ 6 arcmin2 which is easily accessible to MERLIN in its “wide field” mode with a field of view at L band of $``$ 20 $`\times `$ 20 arcmin2, though with image-smearing towards the edges of the field. In this mode, the cross-hands of polarization (LR and RL) are not correlated in order to increase by a factor of 2 the number of channels into which the 16 MHz LL and RR correlations can be divided; i.e. 32 channels of 0.5 MHz bandwidth. By preserving these 0.5 MHz bandwidth channels in the subsequent processing, it is this 0.5 MHz and not the full 16 MHz bandwidth correlated that determines the field of view. Thus the angular radius from the pointing centre at which a 10% image smearing due to the 0.5 MHz ‘bandwidth’ occurs is $``$ 4.7 arcminutes. The integration time per data point was 4 seconds, which would give rise to a 10% integration time smearing at an angular distance from the pointing centre of $``$ 5.3 arcminutes. The pointing centre for the MERLIN observations was at $`\alpha =`$22h36m00.51s and $`\delta =`$3358$``$ 03$`\text{ }\text{ }.`$76 (J2000). Observations of Stephan’s Quintet were interleaved with those of a nearby phase calibration source, 2243+357, with a total cycle time (including telescope drive times) of 7.5 min (5.5 min on source, 2 min on the calibrator). Although the total on source time was $``$ 70 hours, one or more telescopes were lost for significant periods of time during the observations because of weather conditions; i.e. wind.

The data were edited, corrected for elevation-dependent effects, non-closing baseline errors and bandpass response using the standard MERLIN analysis programs. The flux calibration was established from observations of 3C286, whose flux was computed to be 13.639 Jy at 1658 MHz on both the scale of Baars et al. (1977) and the VLA calibration list. The telescope relative sensitivities, bandpass and non-closing corrections were obtained from observations of the point source OQ208, whose flux density was determined to be 1.18 Jy from a comparison of its signal amplitude with that from 3C286 on the shortest MERLIN baseline.

After combining the data from the different days, further processing was carried out using the MERLIN automated pipeline procedure, which uses the NRAO aips tasks. In this, the target source (Stephan’s Quintet) was mapped after its data had been corrected for further amplitude and phase errors derived as a result of mapping the phase-calibration source, 2243+357. Finally, those fields within the MERLIN primary beam showing radio emission were carefully mapped using different data weighting functions to produce the final images.

### 2.2 VLA data

Although the observations of Aoki et al. (1999) were directed solely at the Seyfert galaxy, NGC 7319, within Stephan’s Quintet, it has been possible to use the data from their 20 cm observations on 4 November 1996 (VLA programme AA206) to produce a 20 cm image of a much wider field. The data were obtained from the VLA archive, together with corresponding observations of the flux and baseline calibrator, 3C48, and a phase reference source, 2236+286. The flux density of 3C48 in the two IFs centered at 1364.9 MHz and 1435.1 MHz were taken to be 15.617 Jy and 16.319 Jy respectively, based on the VLA calibration scale. As for the MERLIN observations, after initial calibration using 3C48, the data were corrected for additional amplitude and phase errors derived as a result of mapping the phase calibration source. The images obtained solely from the VLA data, were produced using the NRAO aips tasks.

Finally, after ensuring correct positional and flux scale alignment, images of those fields showing radio emission within the primary beam of the telescope were produced from the combined MERLIN+VLA data. The maps for the northern discrete source and for NGC 7319 are shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 6 respectively. The resolution of the combined data is 0$``$ $``$ .15 and the rms noise level is 30 $`\mu `$Jy/beam. Although the core emission (component B) of NGC 7319 is now less obvious than in the MERLIN only image as it blends into the extended emission, the overall structure of NGC 7319 and, in particular, the structure of the previously unidentified northern source are now much more clear.

### 2.3 HST/ACS data

An HST image of NGC 7319 was obtained in 2002 with the High Resolution Channel (HRC) of the ACS camera as part of the HST proposal 9379 on Near Ultraviolet imaging of Seyfert galaxies. The image was taken through the F330W (HRC U) filter (effective wavelength 3354Å/ 588Å) with a 1200 sec exposure. The HRC has a 29$``$ $``$ $`\times `$ 25$``$ $``$ field of view and a plate scale of $``$0.027 $``$ $``$ pixel. Basic two-dimensional image reductions (overscan, bias, dark subtraction and flat fielding) as well as cosmic ray rejections from the CR-SPLIT=2 data were performed with the CALACS pipeline processing. The observations used the dither patterns and so further processing by PyDrizzle corrected for geometric distortion of the ACS camera and combined the dithered images into one final reduced and calibrated image. Using IRAF we removed any remaining cosmic ray events from the data and rotated the image to the cardinal orientation (North up and East to the left) by means of the keyword “ORIENTAT” in the data header. At the redshift z=0.0225 of the galaxy, 1 pixel corresponds to 13.1 pc for H$`{}_{0}{}^{}=`$ 65 km s-1 Mpc-1.

The final calibrated reduced ACS image is shown in Fig. 7. The Ultraviolet observation through the F330W filter is the optimal configuration to detect faint star forming regions around the nuclei. The image, calibrated in counts in e-, was multiplied by the PHOTFLAM keyword from the image header and converted to erg cm-2Å-1. A U magnitude of 16.01 was measured using the zero point, PHOTZPT.

## 3 Maps and Results

### 3.1 Stephan Quintet’s radio detections

The resulting naturally weighted VLA map of Stephan’s Quintet with a beam size of 1$``$ $``$ .3 is shown in Fig. 3 (rms noise level 27 $`\mu `$Jy/beam). The total intensity contour map is overlaid of the optical Digital Sky Survey image of the same area. The lowest believable contour is at a level of approximately a factor of 2 lower than that in the published map of NGC 7319. The improvement in this image is probably due in part to taking into account all of the radio emission in the field in the ‘reconstruction’ of the image from the data. As might be expected, in comparison with the MERLIN images, this shows the extended structure more clearly, though even at this resolution, much of the north-south arc of emission is considerably resolved and the emission that is visible in the region at $`\alpha `$ 22h35m59.8s, $`\delta `$ 3357$``$ 34$``$ $``$  (J2000) is at the limit of sensitivity. However, the northern unidentified source is clearly visible, though somewhat resolved. Also visible in the image is radio emission at a position corresponding to the core of NGC 7318A. More specifically the radio detections in the VLA image are:

a) NGC 7318A: The two elliptical contours seen at $`\alpha =`$ 22h35m56.8s , $`\delta =`$ 3357$``$ 55$``$ $``$  (J2000) (Fig. 3), correspond to the centre of NGC 7318A. This is the weak radio detection also mentioned by van der Hulst& Rots (1981), Menon (1995), Williams et al. (2002) and Xu et al. (2003) who measured 1.3, 0.8, 1.4 and 0.95 mJy, respectively. Our measured flux density is slightly lower, $``$0.61$`\pm `$01 mJy. Bushouse (1987) reported detection of modest H$`\alpha `$ emission from the nuclear region of NGC 7318A although more recently Moles et al. (1998) did not detect any emission from NGC 7318A using longslit spectroscopy. NGC 7318A is completely resolved by our MERLIN only observations.

b) Tails of NGC 7318B: The radio emission at the map sensitivity limit seen at the southerly position $`\alpha =`$ 22h35m59.8s, $`\delta =`$ 3357$``$ 34$``$ $``$  (J2000) in Fig. 3 is all that remains at this resolution of the arc of emission, probably related to the southern tail of NGC 7318B and in particular to the bright emission-line regions 12 and 14 as labelled by Mendes de Oliveira et al. (2001). These regions are examples of non-rotating structures, possibly associated with HII regions and have star formation rates of $``$0.1 M yr-1. They are regions rich in cold and ionized gas.

c) The North Discrete Source: The unidentified source seen at the northern end of the arc of radio emission between NGC 7319 and NGC 7318B was first mentioned by van der Hulst & Rots (1981), who could not, however, unambiguously say whether this source was associated with Stephan’s Quintet or whether it was an unrelated background source. The MERLIN+VLA image of it is shown in (Fig. 4). The image indicates that the source is still something of an enigma. Xu et al. (2003) identify the binary radio source in VLA 1.4 and 4.86 GHz images as the cosmologically distant background source seen in projection behind SQ (van der Hulst & Rots 1981, Williams et al. 2002), and note that there is no optical counterpart brighter than 29 mag arcsec-2 (Williams et al. 2002), nor any IR counterpart in the ISO images (Xu et al. 1999, Sulentic et al. 2001). The total measured flux density from our radio images, including the southernmost component at $`\alpha =`$ 22h35m59.85s, $`\delta =`$ 3359$``$ 02$``$ $``$  (J2000), is 7.16$`\pm `$0.5 mJy. This flux is less than the 9 mJy flux measured by van der Hulst & Rots (1981), and 10.3 mJy measured by Xu et al. (2003) and Williams et al. (2002), indicating that more extended weak emission has been resolved.

Although it has been assumed that this is a background source, it seems a remarkable coincidence that it almost appears to be a continuation of the extended arc of emission thought to be associated with NGC 7318B and therefore with Stephan’s Quintet. In the NVSS image of the region with an angular resolution of 45$``$ $``$ , it can be seen that there is extended emission to the northwest of NGC 7319 which extends beyond and to the south-west of the unidentified source position. The peak of this extended continuum emission does not coincide with the unidentified source, but does encompass the dwarf galaxies and emission line regions (1A and 1B) associated with NGC 7318B as found by Mendes de Oliveira et al. (2001) (indicated as Dwarf Galaxies and Region 1 in Fig. 2). The peak of the radio emission seen in the MERLIN+VLA image lies just to the north-east of Region 1. The positional offset is similar to that of the radio emission (still visible in our new VLA image at the southern end of the arc) from the bright emission line region 14 found by Mendes de Oliveira et al. (2001).

### 3.2 NGC7319

#### 3.2.1 Radio

Aoki et al. (1999) have indicated that the previously known compact components (labelled A, B and C in Fig. 5 after Aoki et al. 1999) and diffuse emission of NGC 7319 all have steep spectra. However, our MERLIN only 20 cm image (Fig. 5), which resolves out much of the extended emission, indicates component B to be unresolved and to have a flux 1.07 mJy, which is very comparable with the value of 1 mJy quoted by Aoki et al. (1999) for its 6 cm flux. At the same time the flux densities of components A and C shown in Table 1, although lower than the 20 cm VLA fluxes measured by Aoki et al. (1999), are more than double in flux than the 6 cm flux densities quoted by Aoki et al. (1999) (see their Table 1). Component B then would appear to have a flat spectrum, and as such is considered to be the core of the galaxy. We are also able to measure a size for component B. This could not be defined by Aoki et al. (1999) due to the closeness of components A and B, and indeed a merging of these components in their 20 cm map. The positions, flux densities, and sizes (FWHM) of the three compact components were measured using the aips task jmfit, a two-dimensional elliptical Gaussian fitting program. These parameters are given in Table 1. The sizes are given after deconvolution from the beams.

The radio structure of NGC7319 looks like a small, asymmetric FRII radio source, with a flat-spectrum core and two extended lobes, both containing compact hot-spots. There is no evidence of a jet as is often the case. However, the size, luminosity and spiral host galaxy of NGC 7319 is consistent with it being a Seyfert 2 galaxy (Durret 1987). The asymmetric arm ratio of 1:3.1 for the distances between the core (component B) and the two hotspots (components A and C respectively) possibly indicates that material to the north-east is blocking the outflow of plasma in that direction whereas plasma outflow to the south-west is much less inhibited.

High resolution radio surveys of Seyfert galaxies (eg. Thean et al. 2000; Thean et al. 2001 and references therein) show that Seyfert 1 and 2 galaxies have a range of radio structures and sizes. At 0$``$ $``$ .25 resolution, the majority are unresolved or only marginally resolved, but approximately 10% show double structures and a similar fraction show triple or multi-component linear structures.

NGC 7319 has a radio luminosity typical of a Seyfert 2 galaxy and a linear size at the upper end of the size distribution. It’s FRII-like (such as Cygnus A - which have very well collimated jets ending at high surface brightness hotspots and large diffuse lobes) structure is similar to NGC 5929 (Su et al. 1996), Mrk 463 (Kukula et al. 1999) or IC 5063 (Morganti et al. 1998). The identification of a growing number of Seyferts with a simple FRII-like triple structure is providing increasing evidence for the presence of shocks due to the interaction of radio jets with the ISM in the inner few kpc and calling into question the usual assumption that the compact radio components of Seyfert galaxies, which often closely correspond to peaks in the NLR emission, represent the galaxy nucleus. If NGC 7319 were at twice the distance, components B and C would probably not be detected and it would be assumed that A is a barely resolved single component Seyfert galaxy.

In addition to the known three compact components and diffuse emission aligned along the minor axis of NGC 7319, the new image formed from the VLA archive data also shows, for the first time, emission of extent $``$20$``$ $``$  perfectly aligned with the strong bar at a PA = 142$``$  (Durret 1987), which is also the position angle of the major axis of the ‘optical’ Seyfert galaxy. Assuming a heliocentric systemic velocity of 6740 km s-1, this corresponds to $``$ 9.7 kpc for H$`{}_{0}{}^{}=`$ 65 km s-1 Mpc-1. Being close to the limit of detection, only an approximate estimate for its flux can be made and this value is 5.6$`\pm `$0.3 mJy. This weak extended emission, may be associated with backflow from the lobes of the “double” radio source. However, it may also be associated with star formation in the nuclear region of this interacting galaxy and be unrelated to the radio lobes. Assuming the latter to be true, and using the formulae given in Mobasher et al. (1999), SFR1.4 = $`\frac{L_{1.4}}{8.07\times 10^{20}WHz^1}`$ M yr-1, it is possible to calculate a star formation rate for the Seyfert galaxy of 8.4 Myr-1, from the monochromatic luminosity at 1.4 GHz $`L_{1.4}`$ = 6.89 $`\times `$ $`10^{21}WHz^1`$ (once again assuming a value for H0 of 65 km s-1 Mpc-1 and z=0.02251 for NGC 7319). A 10.2$`\pm `$0.5 mJy flux density was also measured from the VLA data for the extended emission along the minor axis.

The total MERLIN flux of NGC 7319 is 12.61$`\pm `$0.5 mJy. This value is much lower than $``$ 28.5$`\pm `$0.5 mJy measured by Van der Hulst & Rots (1981), Aoki et al. (1999), Williams et al. (2002) and Xu et al. (2003). This is expected as in the high resolution MERLIN image, most of the extended diffuse emission has been completely washed out. This diffuse emission however is pronounced in the VLA+MERLIN map (Fig. 6) extending between components A and C. The core, component B, is now lost in the diffuse emission and we mark its position, as defined from the MERLIN only map, with a cross in Fig. 6.

#### 3.2.2 Comparing radio and ultraviolet images

It is unfortunate that although the angular resolution of the MERLIN and HST images is 0$``$ $``$ .15 and 0$``$ $``$ .027 respectively, due to absolute astrometric uncertainties for HST data, registration of the two images can not be better than 0$``$ $``$ .5. This problem can be mitigated in cases where there is a bright compact core in the HST image which is reasonably assumed to be associated with the compact inverted spectrum radio core. Aoki et al. (1999) attempted to align HST/WFPC2 and VLA data for NGC 7319 using more accurate astrometric coordinates for the HST image by smoothing the HST image to ground-based seeing and assigning an absolute position for the nucleus determined by ground-based astrometry (Clements 1983). However, the registration caused a systematic separation of $``$0$``$ $``$ .7 between features in HST and radio images which is larger than the uncertainties in the Clements’ position. Due to this and also to more systematic differences between the optical and radio astrometric frames they resorted to shift the optical peak onto the position of the radio component B with a resulting shift in the HST coordinates of 1$``$ $``$ .26. Since we know that we can not do better than the HST astrometry we follow the same method of registering the images by shifting the peak of the UV bright core to the center of the radio nucleus. This involves a shift of 0$``$ $``$ .65 in DEC (the shift in RA is subpixel, 6 mas). This shift is smaller that the HST astrometric uncertainties. Using this registration, contours of the MERLIN L-band image are overlaid on the HST/ACS image in Fig. 8.

Star formation is evident only in the bright core and the north lobe. There are only hints of UV emission from component C and three very compact regions of star formation, north of component C, trailing the region of the south lobe. The Ultraviolet emission starts from component B, the core, and has an extent that matches the north lobe (Fig. 9). The emission raps around the north lobe and strong star formation appears at the position of component A, the end hotspot of the north lobe. Almost midway between components A and B, an extended intense star formation region is almost perpendicular to the radio axis. The UV emission follows closely the elongated contours (jet-like extension) seen in the MERLIN image below component A. The SE-NW extent of this UV structure is 0$``$ $``$ .85 or 0.45 kpc. A 0$``$ $``$ .13 smoothed version of the HST/ACS UV image (Fig. 10) brings out an additional star formation region to the W of this region and just below to what seems now a more marked, pronounced and extended UV structure between components A and B, almost arclike in shape. A difference image (the smoothed image was subtracted from the original unsmoothed image) identifies the UV emission in the region of the core as the brightest UV region with the most intense star formation.

## 4 Discussion

Based on the similar properties (strongly interacting galaxies with tidal tails and bridges, most spirals and S0s, X-ray emitting intragroup gas with similar X-ray properties) and the HI mass, Smith et al. (2003) have put forward an evolutionary scenario from spiral dominated groups to elliptical dominated groups. In this scheme Stephan’s Quintet is probably in an intermediate transition state between HCG 16 (earlier stage), in which the HI mass is in both the inner region and tidal features, and NGC 4410 (later stage), with less HI mass than Stephan’s Quintet distributed mostly in the tidal features. The HI mass of Stephan’s Quintet (MHI $``$ 1010 M$``$, Verdes-Montenegro et al. 2001) is mostly found outside the galaxies of the group and in tidal features. The galaxies have almost been completely stripped of their neutral hydrogen (Shostak et al. 1984, Williams et al. 2002). Interactions between the galaxies rather than ram pressure have been suggested by Verdes-Montenegro et al. (2001) to create HI rich tidal features while depleting the inner regions of galaxies of HI. NGC 4410 is also the only group of the three that contains a radio galaxy with radio lobes extending beyond the optical galaxy. The existence of large radio lobes in the merging galaxy NGC 4410A shows that such structures can occur fairly early in the formation of an elliptical, when it is not yet an elliptical (Smith et al. 2003). Both HCG 16 and Stephan’s Quintet contain Seyfert galaxies. However, in Stephan’s Quintet, a triple radio structure is also present within the dominant galaxy NGC 7319. Is NGC 7319 an example of a spiral galaxy in which jets are present but smothered by dense interstellar clouds as suggested by Wang et al. (2000)? The evidence in this paper seems to point to this. The jet-cloud interaction is evident in the arclike-structure seen in NGC 7319 midway between components B and A. We believe that incidence of the jet on the cloud/dense ambient gas at this region causes a strong bow-shock that is driven into the cloud and creates the bright star-formation perpendicular to the direction of the shock and aligned with the extended radio contours (see below for UV-radio correlation). The arclike shape of this structure, as revealed in the smoothed image, is further support of the presence of bow-shock (e.g. Bicknell et al. 2000). The jet deposits much of its momentum at this site and it continues upward to component A where the decelerated jet plasma accumulates as a radio “lobe”. Wang et al. (2000) present a model in which weak and intermediate power jets can effectively be halted or destroyed by reasonably massive clouds and this can be related to the paucity of extended radio jets in spiral galaxies. After the jet impacts the cloud, it makes slow headway and finally is effectively stalled by the cloud. A tilted interaction area forms in front of the jet nonetheless the vortical backflow exerts pressure on the jet from the top side, thus causing the penetrating part of the jet to bent slightly downward. The curved structure seen at the very end of the UV continuum can be a result of the bent of the jet as the UV emission trails the radio emission. Eventually a very extensive cocoon forms on the top side of the jet and interaction between the cocoon and the jet induces the jet to evince a substantially wiggly structure.

But is there evidence of such a cloud and dense material in or near NGC 7319? Observational evidence for dense and cool gas in high redshift galaxies has been plentiful and includes the detection of dust, HI, extended line emission, associated absorption line systems and molecular gas (e.g. De Breuck et al. 2003). NGC 7319 has lost all detectable (upper limit $``$10$`{}_{}{}^{8}M`$) HI, the vast majority of HII regions (expected in a typical $``$SBb spiral) and an uncertain fraction of stellar mass. At this epoch NGC 7319 is without an ISM that could sustain the star formation necessary to propagate and define a Population I spiral pattern. However, a very bright condensation of young blue stars is found in the northeast edge of the disk and both this H$`\alpha `$ and CO emission (Yun et al. 1997) in NGC 7319 is $``$8 kpc north-northeast of the nucleus (6.2$`\times `$10$`{}_{}{}^{8}M`$). This region of material is most probably responsible for confining the North lobe within the spiral structure of NGC 7319. A second massive CO complex is found within 2 kpc of the nucleus (Yun et al. 1997), although Gao & Xu (2000) place this source on the nucleus. This material coincides with the UV bright core and is most possibly responsible for the birth of the bow-shock above the core. The inferred H2 mass for NGC 7319 is 4-7 $`\times `$ 10$`{}_{}{}^{9}M`$ (Yun et al. 1997, Gao & Xu 2000, Smith & Struck 2001). The central region of NGC 7319 is luminous from X-ray to radio wavelengths. It contributes more than half of the MIR/FIR emission observed from SQ. ISOCAM observations of Stephan’s Quintet (Xu et al. 1999) in the 15 $`\mu `$m emission, a good nearly extinction-free star formation rate (SFR) indicator, show the strongest peak surface brightness on the Seyfert 2 nucleus of NGC 7319 with a flux of 79.8 mJy.

Alignment of the rest-frame UV continuum emission from the parent galaxies with the nonthermal radio emission has been discovered in high-redshift radio galaxies (McCarthy et al. 1987, Chambers et al. 1987). The nature of this continuum and “alignment effect” has remained however unclear. It appears that interactions between the radio plasma and the ambient gas determine the morphology of the UV with the radio ejecta sweeping up and compressing the interstellar medium. In nearby radio galaxies, evidence has been found for jet-induced star formation, scattered light from hidden quasar-like AGN and nebular recombination continuum (van Breugel 1985a,b, van Breugel & Dey 1993, Dey et al. 1996, Tadhunter et al. 1996, Cimatti et al. 1996). van Breugel et al. (2004) show that shocks associated with jets may trigger the collapse of clouds to form stars. Whether this occurs at the impact area, or along the sides of expanding lobes depends on jet power and the ambient gas density distribution. It is natural to interpret enhanced UV continuum as tracing the locus of newly formed stars. NGC 7319 can most possibly be the first example of jet induced star formation in a Seyfert galaxy. Up to now there was little evidence for star formation in the nuclear region of NGC 7319 (e.g. Malkan et al. 1998, Yun et al.1999). A bright UV core is seen for the first time in Fig. 7. The size of this compact emission is 0$``$ $``$ .4 or 195 pc. The star formation appears more pronounced to the N slightly displaced from the nucleus. Both the orientation and the elongation of this region is in perfect agreement with the blue elongated region 1$``$ $``$ .1 (533 pc) N of the nucleus at a PA of 10$``$ , discovered by Kotilainen (1998) in a B$``$I map of NGC 7319. The UV and blue emission also agree well with the radio axis as well as with the \[O III\] and the blueward sloping asymmetry detected in the \[O III\] line profiles at the nucleus and northeast of the nucleus (Aoki et al. 1999). Kotilainen (1998) suggested the blue elongation might represent scattered light from the nucleus. However, he hinted at the idea that the blue structures that he saw in Seyfert 2 galaxies might be due to an intrinsically nonstellar continuum, e.g. emission from high velocity shock waves generated from the interaction of a radio jet with the extended Narrow Line Region Gas (e.g. Sutherland 1993). Such an explanation would require a very close morphological correlation between the continuum and the high velocity ionized gas which he was not finding. An accurate knot-to-knot and feature-to-feature matching between the UV structure and linear radio structure is however established in Fig. 8. Furthermore we have direct evidence for sharp boundaries and knotty UV morphology which is the signature of star forming regions. The extent of the UV emission is the same as the extent of the radio structure $``$5$``$ $``$ (2.42 kpc) and at the same PA$``$25$``$ , further supporting close correlation between jet emission and star formation. In addition, the UV emission in our Fig. 7 resembles the optical fine structure, similar to a curved jet, revealed in the difference WFPC2 (Fig. 5) of Aoki et al (1999)

The absence of any evidence for a polarized, scattered AGN continuum would support the notion that the active nucleus is not responsible for the extended UV emission. However, the hard X-ray emission, peaked on NGC 7319, is consistent with an absorbed powerlaw, and exhibits a strong Fe K line, providing strong evidence for an obscured nucleus in NGC 7319 (Awaki et al. 1997). Optical data (Aoki et al. 1996) also show a strong anisotropic nuclear ionization radiation which could be produced by an obscuring torus. On the other hand, the mass of molecular gas in the central complex observed, is $`<`$ 2$`\times `$10$`{}_{}{}^{8}M`$, but this is inconsistent with the bulk of the observed MIR/FIR emission originating in a hidden nuclear burst (Xu et al. 1999). Furthermore, the data show that there is substantial turbulence produced by a jet-cloud interaction in the vicinity of the radio components B and A and that the emission lines from the galaxy are probably related either to the star-forming region or to emission from radiative cloud shocks rather than excitation by UV-X-ray emission from the active nucleus. The smoothed image shows further disturbed UV continuum associated with the extended structure between components B and A and this disturbance might have promoted more star formation unveiled in the smoothed image.

In summary, our high resolution radio observations of Stephan’s Quintet have shown that the Seyfert 2 galaxy, NGC 7319, has a flat spectrum core and two very asymmetrically distributed lobes with hotspots on opposite sides of the core. This adds to the evidence which calls into question the usual assumption that the compact radio components of Seyfert galaxies represent the galaxy nucleus. A knot-to-knot morphological correlation between this triple radio structure and UV emission unveiled in an HST/ACS HRC image of NGC 7319 may suggest that star formation in this Seyfert galaxy is induced by the collision of a jet with dense ambient material. We plan to present a detail analysis (star formation rates and kinematical data) for the UV components in NGC 7319, as well as a proposed model/simulation for the jet-cloud interaction in a follow-up paper. We then hope to also answer the question of whether NGC 7319 will eventually evolve into a classical double-lobed radio galaxy. To our knowledge, this may well be the first example of jet induced star-formation in a Seyfert galaxy.

## Acknowledgments

MERLIN is operated as a National Facility by the Jodrell Bank Observatory, University of Manchester, on behalf of the UK Particle Physics & Astronomy Research Council. The VLA is operated by the National Radio Astronomy Observatory which is supported by the National Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc. This research was supported by European Commission, TMR Programme, Research Network Contract ERBFMRXCT96-0034 “CERES”. EXs work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration by the University of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract No. W-7405-Eng-48 and she also acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation (grant AST 00-98355). The authors would like to thank the anonymous referee for helpful suggestions that improved the presentation of this work.