text:
# Untitled Document

KERR-SCHILD METRICS REVISITED I. THE GROUND STATE Research supported by OTKA fund no. 1826 László Á. Gergely Present address: Research Group on Laser Physics of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, H-6720 Szeged, Dóm tér 9, Hungary and Zoltán Perjés Central Research Institute for Physics  H-1525 Budapest 114, P.O.Box 49, Hungary  ABSTRACT The Kerr-Schild pencil of metrics $`g_{ab}+\mathrm{\Lambda }l_al_b`$ is investigated in the generic case when it maps an arbitrary vacuum space-time with metric $`g_{ab}`$ to a vacuum space-time. The theorem is proved that this generic case, with the field $`l`$ shearing, does not contain the shear-free subclass as a smooth limit. It is shown that one of the Kóta-Perjés metrics is a solution in the shearing class.

PACS classification: 04.20Jb

1. INTRODUCTION

The challenge of Kerr-Schild metrics for researchers in general relativity appears unabated for many years now. The particular way Kerr-Schild metrics incorporate a congruence of null curves in space-time geometry is a sure source of the fascination. And then, an eminent member of this class is the Kerr black hole. A brief critical review of the literature below will help us through the ups and downs of the subject.

The original Kerr-Schild Ansatz maps1 Minkowski space-time with a null field $`l`$, to an empty curved space-time with a metric quadratic in $`l`$. Boyer and Lindquist2 show that the image of the map is an algebraically special space-time in which $`l`$ is a multiple principal null direction of the Weyl tensor. Hence $`l`$ is tangent to a congruence of null geodesics. The problem has been investigated in detail by G rses and G rsey3, who derive many of the properties of the resulting empty space-time. Their treatment is unduly cumbersome though, as they introduce a large number of various new fields.

Another important contribution to the subject by Debever4 employs a Newman-Penrose (NP) null tetrad adapted to the vector field $`l`$. He normalises the tangent vector $`l`$ of the null geodesics such that the parameter is not affine. Unfortunately, however, his definition of the shear, a key notion in the paper, is the one used elsewhere in the affine gauge. McIntosh5 and McIntosh and Hickman6 have considered the conditions that a Kerr-Schild vacuum have twistfree principal null directions and to be of Petrov type D. For a review of the original Kerr-Schild Ansatz, cf. Chandrasekhar7.

Remarkably, even the general solution of the original Kerr-Schild problem is known8. The solution is provided by the Kerr theorem, stating that there is a one-to one correspondence between geodesic and shear-free null congruences in Minkowski space-time and zeroes of analytic functions in three complex variables.

The status of the original Kerr-Schild Ansatz and its generalisation where both the base space-time (to be named parent space-time) and the total space-time are curved is reviewed in the Exact Solution Book9. However, the subject appears to be plagued by false statements. It is claimed in connection with the works of Thompson10 and Dozmorov11, that the vector $`l`$ must be a multiple null principal vector of the curvature in both space-times12. (There is, moreover, a list of corrections issued by the authors of the book which advises to cancel the paragraph on double Kerr-Schild metrics in Sec. 28.5.) Thompson10 has obtained various results on the generic pencil. Thus he has proved that the null vector field $`l`$ of the pencil is geodesic provided it is a geodesic of the parent space-time. For the vacuum-vacuum Kerr-Schild maps, Xanthopoulos13 has proven that the full field equations are implied by the equations linear in the pencil parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Urbantke14 has derived Kerr-Schild solutions in alternative theories of gravitation.

Recently, Nahmad-Achar15 has investigated the types of energy-momentum tensors which can be generated from an arbitrary space-time by the generalised Kerr-Schild map. By using the NP approach, he proved that the ensuing space-time is algebraically special whenever the parent space-time is an algebraically special vacuum.

Despite these developments, there remain some tantalising questions about the Kerr-Schild metrics. The original motivation for our work was question (Q1): Is it possible to construct a ‘Fock space’ for vacuum gravitational fields by creating a multitude of Kerr-Schild congruences on some fixed vacuum base space-time? We propose that the answer is no. This conclusion is based on our research on question (Q2): what is the condition on a vacuum space-time that it can contain a Kerr-Schild congruence mapping to a vacuum space-time. In this paper we find a restriction on the parent space-time of the vacuum-vacuum Kerr-Schild map. This may be concisely put such that the generic Kerr-Schild map does not arise as a smooth extension of the shear-free class. Our result casts a serious doubt on the chances that attempts relying on the Kerr theorem to carry over to general relativity a complex-manifold description of Minkowski space time can be successful.

In Sec. 2, we obtain the set of three field equations of the vacuum-vacuum Kerr-Schild map. One of these is the condition that $`l`$ is a geodesic vector field, a fact already known to Thompson10. In Sec. 3, we present the spin-coefficient form of the pencil equations in the affinely parametrized gauge. Hence we get the affine-parameter dependence of the field quantities $`\rho ,\sigma `$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$. Sec. 4 contains our main theorem, the proof of which employs the set of coupled equations for the spin coefficient fields $`\alpha ,\beta ,\pi ,\tau `$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$. It follows from our theorem that in the generic case, this set of equations is homogeneous and linear. In Sec. 5. we get the ‘ground solution’ of the general Kerr-Schild map by taking the trivial solution of this set and of the coupled homogeneous linear equations for $`\lambda ,\mu `$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$. The solution is then shown to be one of the Kóta-Perj’es metrics, by use of an Eddington-type coordinate transformation.

2. VACUUM CONDITIONS

Let $`g_{ab}`$ be the metric of a vacuum space-time and $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{ab}`$ a pencil of vacuum metrics of the Kerr-Schild form

$$\stackrel{~}{g}_{ab}=g_{ab}+\mathrm{\Lambda }l_al_bl_al^a=0$$
$`(2.1)`$
where the real constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the pencil parameter and $`l^a`$ is a null congruence. In consequence of (2.1) we have

$$\stackrel{~}{g}^{ab}=g^{ab}\mathrm{\Lambda }l^al^bl^a=\stackrel{~}{g}^{ab}l_b=g^{ab}l_b\stackrel{~}{g}=g.$$
$`(2.2)`$
The covariant derivatives $`\stackrel{~}{}_a`$ and $`_a`$ annihilating $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{ab}`$ and $`g_{ab}`$ respectively, have the difference tensor $`C_{ab}^c`$. The Ricci tensor $`\stackrel{~}{R}_{ac}`$ may be computed by use of the relations16

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \stackrel{~}{}_a\omega _b_a\omega _b=C_{ab}^c\omega _c\hfill \\ & C_{ab}^c=\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{g}^{cd}\left(_a\stackrel{~}{g}_{bd}+_b\stackrel{~}{g}_{ad}_d\stackrel{~}{g}_{ab}\right)\hfill \\ & \stackrel{~}{R}_{ac}=R_{ac}2_{[a}C_{b]c}^b+2C_{c[a}^eC_{b]e}^b\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(2.3)`$
where $`R_{ac}`$ is the Ricci tensor of the metric $`g_{ab}`$, defined in terms of the Riemann tensor, $`R_{ac}=R_{abc}^b`$. The Ricci tensor $`\stackrel{~}{R}_{ac}`$ is a polynomial of degree 3 in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. As the vacuum Einstein equations $`\stackrel{~}{R}_{ac}=0`$ hold for all real values of the pencil parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we can equate the coefficients of each power of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ with zero. We get four tensor relations, but one of them is satisfied identically. Thus we are left with the equations:

$$_b\left[_a\left(l_cl^b\right)+_c\left(l_al^b\right)^b\left(l_al_c\right)\right]=0$$
$`(2.4)`$
$$(_bl^b)l_{(a}Dl_{c)}+\frac{1}{2}(Dl_a)(Dl_c)+l_{(a}DDl_{c)}+l_al_c(_bl_d)(^{[b}l^{d]})(Dl^b)(_bl_{(a})l_{c)}=0$$
$`(2.5)`$
$$l_al_c(Dl_b)(Dl^b)=0$$
$`(2.6)`$
where the tensor notation refers to the parent space-time and $`D=l^a_a`$. From (2.6), the vector $`l^a`$ satisfies the geodesic condition:

$$Dl^a=fl^a$$
$`(2.7)`$
Using (2.7) and the Ricci identity

$$(_a_b_b_a)l^c=R_{dab}^cl^d$$
$`(2.8)`$
we get from (2.5) and (2.4):

$$f_bl^b+\frac{1}{2}f^2+Df+(_bl_d)^{[b}l^{d]}=0$$
$`(2.9)`$
$$^b_b\left(l_al_c\right)+2R_{abcd}l^bl^d2_{(a}\left[l_{c)}\left(_bl^b+f\right)\right]=0.$$
$`(2.10)`$
Equations (2.7), (2.9) and (2.10) ensure that a Kerr-Schild pencil will generate a vacuum space-time from a vacuum space-time. For future reference, we now rewrite these equations in a Newman-Penrose form17, choosing $`l`$ a vector of the null tetrad $`(l,n,m,\overline{m})`$. We choose the phase of the complex vector $`m`$ such that the spin coefficient $`ϵ`$ is real,

$$ϵ=\overline{ϵ}.$$
$`(2.11)`$
We can still perform spatial rotations

$$\stackrel{~}{m}=e^{i\mathrm{\Phi }}m,$$
$`(2.12)`$
with $`D\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$, as well as arbitrary null rotations about $`l`$,

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \stackrel{~}{l}=l\hfill \\ & \stackrel{~}{m}=m+El\hfill \\ & \stackrel{~}{n}=n+\overline{E}m+E\overline{m}+E\overline{E}l.\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(2.13)`$
The geodesic condition (2.7) becomes

$$\kappa =0,f=2ϵ.$$
$`(2.14)`$
Eq.(2.9) takes the form

$$2Dϵ=\frac{1}{2}(\rho \overline{\rho })^2+2ϵ(\rho +\overline{\rho })4ϵ^2.$$
$`(2.15)`$
The tetrad components of Eq.(2.10) are

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathrm{\Psi }_0& =\sigma (4ϵ+\rho \overline{\rho })\hfill & (2.16.a)\hfill \\ \hfill 4ϵ(\rho +\overline{\rho })& =(\rho +\overline{\rho })^22(\rho \overline{\rho }+\sigma \overline{\sigma })\hfill & (2.16.b)\hfill \\ \hfill D(4ϵ\rho \overline{\rho })& =8ϵ^2+2ϵ(\rho +\overline{\rho })2(\rho \overline{\rho }+\sigma \overline{\sigma })\hfill & (2.16.c)\hfill \\ \hfill D\tau \overline{\delta }\sigma +\delta \overline{\rho }& 4\delta ϵ2\mathrm{\Psi }_1=4ϵ(\tau \overline{\alpha }\beta )\hfill & \\ & \sigma \overline{\tau }+\sigma (\alpha +5\overline{\beta })\rho \tau +(2\rho \overline{\rho })(\overline{\alpha }+\beta )+\pi \sigma +\overline{\pi }\rho \hfill & (2.16.d)\hfill \\ \hfill D(\gamma +\overline{\gamma })& 2\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ+\mathrm{\Delta }(\rho +\overline{\rho })\delta (\alpha +\overline{\beta })\overline{\delta }(\overline{\alpha }+\beta )2Re\mathrm{\Psi }_2=\hfill & \\ & \pi (\tau +\overline{\alpha }+\beta )+\overline{\pi }(\overline{\tau }+\alpha +\overline{\beta })4ϵ(\gamma +\overline{\gamma })2ϵ(\mu +\overline{\mu })\hfill & \\ & \sigma \lambda \overline{\sigma }\overline{\lambda }\rho \mu \overline{\rho }\overline{\mu }\tau (\alpha +\overline{\beta })\overline{\tau }(\overline{\alpha }+\beta )\hfill & \\ & +4(\alpha +\overline{\beta })(\overline{\alpha }+\beta )(\alpha +\overline{\beta })(\overline{\alpha }\beta )(\alpha \overline{\beta })(\overline{\alpha }+\beta ).\hfill & (2.16.e)\hfill \end{array}$$

These relations are complemented by the vacuum NP equations (NP 4.2), the Bianchi identities (NP 4.5) and the commutators (NP 4.4) of the four derivative operators $`D,\mathrm{\Delta },\delta `$ and $`\overline{\delta }`$. Equations (2.15) and (2.16.c) turn out to be consequences of (2.16.a), (2.16.b), (NP 4.2.a) and (NP 4.2.b). Hence, Eq. (2.5) follows from Eq. (2.4). Moreover, Xanthopoulos13 proves that also the geodesic condition (2.6) follows from (2.4).

The task of solving the field equations is, however, better served by a different gauge in which an affinely parametrized tangent vector $`l^{}`$is selected for the Kerr-Schild congruence. This gauge will be used in the subsequent sections.

3. THE GAUGE WITH AFFINE PARAMETRIZATION

The Kerr-Schild map (2.1) may be postulated in the slightly different form

$$\stackrel{~}{g}_{ab}=g_{ab}+Vl_a^{}l_b^{}$$
$`(3.1)`$
where $`V`$ is a scalar function. Reparametrizing by

$$l=\varphi l^{},$$
$`(3.2)`$
where $`\varphi `$ is a real function, the pencil (2.1) becomes (3.1) with

$$V=\mathrm{\Lambda }\varphi ^2.$$
$`(3.3)`$
The scale of $`l^{}`$ is arbitrary in (3.1), and we fix it by adopting an affine parametrization

$$D^{}l_a^{}=0,$$
$`(3.4)`$
where $`D^{}=l^a_a`$. The rest (2.4) and (2.9) of the Kerr-Schild pencil equations take then the form

$$_b\left[_a\left(Vl_c^{}l^b\right)+_c\left(Vl_a^{}l^b\right)^b\left(Vl_a^{}l_c^{}\right)\right]=0$$
$`(2.4^{})`$
$$D^{}D^{}V+(^al_a^{})D^{}V+2V(_bl_d^{})^{[b}l^{d]}=0.$$
$`(2.9^{})`$
Some useful spin coefficients transform under (3.2) as follows: $`2ϵ=D^{}\varphi ,\rho =\varphi \rho ^{},\sigma =\varphi \sigma ^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\varphi ^2\mathrm{\Psi }_0^{}`$.

Dropping the primes, we have in terms of the affine parameter $`r`$:

$$D=/r,$$

and

$$\kappa =ϵ=0.$$
$`(3.5)`$
We find that a step-by-step process of integrating the field equations can be launched in this gauge. The key observation is that Eqs. (2.16a) and (2.16b), together with (NP 4.2.a) and (NP 4.2.b), i.e.,

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\sigma (2Dln\varphi +\rho \overline{\rho })$$

$$2(\rho +\overline{\rho })Dln\varphi =(\rho +\overline{\rho })^22(\rho \overline{\rho }+\sigma \overline{\sigma })$$

$$D\rho =\rho ^2+\sigma \overline{\sigma }$$

$$D\sigma =(\rho +\overline{\rho })\sigma +\mathrm{\Psi }_0,$$
$`(3.6)`$
form a closed set of equations. Introducing the real functions $`x,y`$ and $`z`$ by

$$x=\rho +\overline{\rho }y=\rho \overline{\rho }z=\sigma \overline{\sigma },$$
$`(3.7)`$
we obtain the autonomous system

$$\begin{array}{cc}& Dx=x^2+2(zy)\hfill \\ & Dy=x(y+z)\hfill \\ & xDz=4z(y+z).\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(3.8)`$
Solution of Eqs. (3.8), by taking the $`D`$ derivatives and decoupling, yields the spin coefficients

$$\rho =\frac{1}{2r}\left[1+cos\eta \frac{r^{cos\eta }iB}{r^{cos\eta }+iB}\right]$$
$`(3.9)`$
$$\sigma =\frac{sin\eta }{2r}\frac{r^{cos\eta }+iB}{r^{cos\eta }iB}.$$
$`(3.10)`$
Here one of the constants has been eliminated by the appropriate choice of the origin of the affine parameter $`r`$. Also we used the remaining spatial rotations (2.12) to eliminate the $`r`$-independent part of the phase factor of $`\sigma `$. The integration functions $`\eta `$ and $`B`$ may depend on the coordinates $`(u,x^2,x^3)`$. While $`B`$ can take any real value, $`\eta `$ ranges in the interval $`[0,360^{})`$.

For the value $`B=0`$, the null congruence with tangent $`l`$ is twist-free, and for $`\eta =0`$ or $`\eta =180^{}`$, it is shear-free. When both $`B=0`$ and $`\eta =180^{}`$ holds, there is no expansion.

From (3.6), (3.9) and (3.10) we get the curvature quantity

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\frac{sin2\eta }{4r^2}$$
$`(3.11)`$
and for $`r0`$, the scaling function can be written

$$\varphi =A^2\left(\frac{r^{cos\eta }}{r^{2cos\eta }+B^2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}$$
$`(3.12)`$
where $`A`$ is another integration function of $`u,x^2`$ and $`x^3`$.

We have yet the freedom of performing the null rotations (2.13). We use these to set

$$\pi =\alpha +\overline{\beta },$$
$`(3.13)`$
removing thereby the term with $`D`$ from the commutator $`[D,\delta ]`$. There remain further null rotations (2.13) compatible with (3.13) where $`E`$ satisfies

$$DE=\overline{\rho }E+\sigma \overline{E}.$$
$`(3.14)`$
Let us denote the components of the complex vector $`m`$ by

$$m=\mathrm{\Omega }\frac{}{r}+m^i\frac{}{x^i}x^i=u,x^2,x^3.$$
$`(3.15)`$
The second commutator in (NP 4.4), when applied to the coordinates, yields the equations:

$$D\mathrm{\Omega }=\overline{\rho }\mathrm{\Omega }+\sigma \overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}$$
$`(3.16)`$
$$Dm^i=\overline{\rho }m^i+\sigma \overline{m}^i.$$
$`(3.17)`$
Noticing that equations (3.14) and (3.16) have identical forms, we use the remaining null rotations to arrange

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=0.$$
$`(3.18)`$
We next integrate Eq. (3.17) to obtain the rest of the components of $`m`$:

$$m^j=\frac{1}{\sqrt{r}}\frac{1}{r^{cos\eta }iB}\left[Q_1^jr^{\frac{cos\eta \mathrm{sin}\eta }{2}}+iQ_2^jr^{\frac{cos\eta +\mathrm{sin}\eta }{2}}\right],j=1,2,3$$
$`(3.19)`$
where $`Q_1^j`$ and $`Q_2^j`$ are again real functions of $`u,x^2,x^3`$.

4. THE MAIN THEOREM

We now rewrite the remaining Kerr-Schild equations (2.16.d) and (2.16e) in the affine gauge. Eq. (2.16.d) takes the form18, using (NP 4.2.c), (NP 4.2.k), (2.14), (3.2) and (3.4):

$$\delta \left(\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{2\sigma }\right)+\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{\sigma }\delta ln\varphi 2\sigma \overline{\delta }ln\varphi \mathrm{\Psi }_1=\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{2\sigma }(\tau \overline{\alpha }\beta )2\sigma (\overline{\tau }\alpha \overline{\beta })+\overline{\tau }\sigma \tau \rho .$$
$`(4.1)`$
Note that the $`\sigma 0`$ limit is well-behaved as follows from the relation $`\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{2\sigma }=\frac{1}{2r}\rho `$. From (2.16e), with (NP 4.2.f), (NP 4.2.q), (2.14),(3.2) and (3.4):

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \delta (\overline{\tau }\alpha \overline{\beta })+& \overline{\delta }(\tau \overline{\alpha }\beta )(\delta \overline{\delta }+\overline{\delta }\delta )ln\varphi +(\rho +\overline{\rho })\mathrm{\Delta }ln\varphi \hfill & \\ & +(2\overline{\tau }3\alpha 5\overline{\beta })\delta ln\varphi +(2\tau 3\overline{\alpha }5\beta )\overline{\delta }ln\varphi 4(\delta ln\varphi )(\overline{\delta }ln\varphi )=\hfill & \\ & 2Re\mathrm{\Psi }_2(\gamma +\overline{\gamma })(\rho +\overline{\rho })+\frac{1}{2}(\mu +\overline{\mu })(\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{\sigma }+\rho \overline{\rho })(\mu \overline{\mu })(\rho \overline{\rho })\hfill & \\ & +\tau (\overline{\tau }\alpha 3\overline{\beta })+\overline{\tau }(\tau \overline{\alpha }3\beta )\hfill & \\ & +4(\alpha +\overline{\beta })(\overline{\alpha }+\beta )(\alpha +\overline{\beta })(\overline{\alpha }\beta )(\alpha \overline{\beta })(\overline{\alpha }+\beta ).\hfill & (4.2)\hfill \end{array}$$

Using (3.13) in (NP 4.2.c), (NP 4.2.d), (NP 4.2.e), and the first Bianchi equation (NP 4.5), we have

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill D\tau & =\rho (\tau +\overline{\pi })+\sigma (\overline{\tau }+\pi )+\mathrm{\Psi }_1\hfill & (4.3a)\hfill \\ \hfill D\pi & =2\rho \pi +2\overline{\sigma }\overline{\pi }+\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_1\hfill & (4.3b)\hfill \\ \hfill D\alpha & =\rho (\pi +\alpha )+\overline{\sigma }(\overline{\pi }\overline{\alpha })\hfill & (4.3c)\hfill \\ \hfill D\beta & =\overline{\rho }\beta +\sigma (2\pi \overline{\beta })+\mathrm{\Psi }_1\hfill & (4.3d)\hfill \\ \hfill D\mathrm{\Psi }_1& =4\rho \mathrm{\Psi }_1+(\overline{\delta }+\pi 4\alpha )\mathrm{\Psi }_0.\hfill & (4.3e)\hfill \end{array}$$

This is a set of coupled linear, inhomogeneous equations for the functions $`\tau ,\pi ,\alpha ,\beta `$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ and their complex conjugates, with the constraints (3.13) and (4.1), algebraic in $`r`$. Furthermore, we need Eq. (NP 4.2k),

$$\delta \rho \overline{\delta }\sigma =\rho \overline{\pi }+\sigma (\pi 4\alpha )+(\rho \overline{\rho })\tau \mathrm{\Psi }_1$$
$`(4.4)`$
for the proof of our

Theorem: For a generalized vacuum-vacuum Kerr-Schild pencil, either of the following conditions hold:

(i) The parameter $`\eta `$ assumes one of the special values given by

$$sin\eta =0,_{}^+1,_{}^+2^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$
$`(4.5)`$
(ii) The $`\delta `$ derivatives are restricted by

$$\delta \rho =\delta \overline{\rho }=\delta \sigma =\delta \overline{\sigma }=\delta \mathrm{\Psi }_0=\delta \varphi =0.$$
$`(4.6)`$
We prove the theorem by taking the $`D`$ derivative of both sides of (4.1) and using Eqs. (4.3), (3.9), (3.10), (3.11) and the second commutator (NP 4.4) for eliminating the $`D`$ derivatives. We remove $`\pi 4\alpha `$ from (4.3e) by Eq. (4.4). All the unknown spin coefficients cancel and we arrive at an equation of the form $`a\delta \varphi +b\overline{\delta }\varphi =0`$. Eliminating next $`\overline{\delta }\varphi `$ with the help of the complex conjugate equation, we get

$$\frac{cos\eta (r^{2cos\eta }+B^2)+r^{2cos\eta }B^2}{r^{10}(r^{2cos\eta }+B^2)}P\delta \varphi =0$$
$`(4.7)`$
where $`P`$ is the polynomial in $`sin\eta `$ and $`cos\eta `$

$$P=(2sin^2\eta 1)sin^3\eta cos\eta $$
$`(4.8)`$
with roots given in (i). For other values of $`\eta `$, equation (4.7) together with (3.12) yields $`\delta A=\delta B=\delta \eta =0`$. Using this information, part (ii) of the theorem is proved.

Condition (4.7) is trivially satisfied in the absence of shear, $`sin\eta =0`$. Thus the Kerr solution will not emerge as a limiting case of the shearing solutions.

Setting aside case (i), the parameter $`\eta `$ may take real values. At the next step of the integration process, we are confronted with the set of coupled homogeneous linear equations (4.3) for the field quantities $`\alpha ,\beta ,\pi ,\tau ,\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ and their complex conjugates. Two linear algebraic relations among these quantities follow from the adopted gauge, $`\pi \alpha \overline{\beta }=0`$, and from the Kerr-Schild condition (4.1):

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_1=\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{2\sigma }(\overline{\pi }\tau )+\sigma (\overline{\tau }2\pi )+\rho \tau .$$
$`(4.9)`$
Equation (4.4) yields a further algebraic constraint:

$$4\sigma \alpha =\sigma (3\pi \overline{\tau })+\left(\rho \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{2\sigma }\right)\overline{\pi }+\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{2\sigma }\overline{\rho }\right)\tau .$$
$`(4.10)`$
Eqs. (4.3c), (4.3d) and (4.3e) are a consequence of the algebraic relations and Eqs. (4.3a) and (4.3b).

One can make use of the algebraic constraints to obtain equations for various closed subsets of the unknown functions. For example, using the Kerr-Schild constraint (4.9) for eliminating $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ in (4.3a) and (4.3b), we get a set of four coupled equations for $`\pi ,\tau `$:

$$\begin{array}{cc}& D\tau =(2\rho \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{2\sigma })\tau +\sigma (2\overline{\tau }\pi )+(\rho +\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{2\sigma })\overline{\pi }\hfill \\ & D\pi =(2\rho +\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{2\overline{\sigma }})\pi +\overline{\sigma }\tau +(\overline{\rho }\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{2\overline{\sigma }})\overline{\tau }\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(4.11)`$
and their complex conjugates. Eqs. (4.3c), (4.3d) and (4.3e) are a consequence of the algebraic relations and Eqs. (4.11). Therefore, the knowledge of the solution of Eqs. (4.11) suffices for determining the solution of the complete system (4.1), (4,3) and (4.4).

Alternatively, Eqs. (4.3b), (4.3c) and (4.3e) form a closed set for $`\alpha ,\pi ,\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ and their complex conjugates.

Systems of homogeneous linear differential equations always have nontrivial solutions19 in the domain of continuity of the coefficients. The general solution of $`n`$ coupled equations is given by $`n`$ linearly independent solution vectors. We will not attempt to tackle this problem here, but in the next section we shall seek for space-times characterised by the trivial solution.

5. A PARTICULAR SOLUTION

The purpose of this section is to demonstrate that the class of vacuum space-times (2.1) with nonvanishing shear $`\sigma `$ is not empty. It will suffice for us to take the trivial solution of Eqs. (4.3):

$$\tau =\pi =\alpha =\beta =\mathrm{\Psi }_1=0.$$
$`(5.1)`$
Equations (4.9) and (4.10) are identically satisfied. Eqs. (NP 4.2.g), (NP 4.2.h) and the second relation of (NP 4.5) form a closed system of linear homogeneous equations for the field quantities $`\lambda ,\mu `$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& D\lambda =\rho \lambda +\overline{\sigma }\mu \hfill & (5.2a)\hfill \\ & D\mu =\overline{\rho }\mu +\sigma \lambda +\mathrm{\Psi }_2\hfill & (5.2b)\hfill \\ & D\mathrm{\Psi }_2=3\rho \mathrm{\Psi }_2\lambda \mathrm{\Psi }_0.\hfill & (5.2c)\hfill \end{array}$$

Equations (NP 4.2.f) and (NP 4.2.l) involve the spin coefficient $`\gamma `$,

$$\begin{array}{cc}& D\gamma =\mathrm{\Psi }_2\hfill \\ & \mathrm{\Psi }_2=\mu \rho \lambda \sigma +\gamma (\rho \overline{\rho }).\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(5.3)`$
When $`B0`$, we may use the second equation (5.3) to obtain $`\gamma `$. The first equation is compatible with this. The curl-free fields with $`B=0`$ will be considered elsewhere.

In the case when one of the quantities $`\lambda ,\mu ,\mathrm{\Psi }_2,\gamma `$ vanishes, Eqs. (5.2) and (5.3) imply that the remainder must also vanish. (The general solution of the system will be given in Paper II.) From (NP 4.2.o) $`\nu =0`$, from (NP 4.2.i) $`\mathrm{\Psi }_3=0`$ and from (NP 4.2.j) we get $`\mathrm{\Psi }_4=0`$. Let us choose again this simplest case:

$$\lambda =\mu =\gamma =\nu =\mathrm{\Psi }_2=\mathrm{\Psi }_3=\mathrm{\Psi }_4=0.$$
$`(5.4)`$
From the commutators (NP 4.4) we obtain that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ commutes both with $`\delta `$ and $`D`$. Thus we can adopt such coordinates that $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\frac{}{u}`$, $`Q_1^1=Q_1^1(x^2,x^3)`$ and $`Q_2^1=Q_2^1(x^2,x^3)`$. The functions $`A,B`$ and $`\eta `$ are, in fact, constants in this case because we already have $`\delta A=\delta B=\delta \eta =0`$, the fifth relation of (NP 4.5) implies $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Psi }_0=0`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }\eta =0`$ and from (4.2) we have $`\mathrm{\Delta }ln\varphi =0`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }A=\mathrm{\Delta }B=0`$. Furthermore $`Q_1=Q_1^j\frac{}{x^j}`$ and $`Q_2=Q_2^j\frac{}{x^j}`$ are noncommutative but they commute with $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`D`$. This enables us to choose the coordinates such that

$$Q_1^j=(cos\eta Bx^2,0,1)$$

$$Q_2^j=(0,1,0).$$
$`(5.5)`$
By use of the completeness relation

$$g^{ab}=l^an^b+n^al^bm^a\overline{m}^b\overline{m}^am^b,$$
$`(5.6)`$
we obtain the inverse metric

$$g^{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 1& 0& 0& \\ 1& hQ_1^2& 0& hQ_1\\ 0& 0& hr^{2\mathrm{sin}\eta }& 0\\ 0& hQ_1& 0& h\end{array}\right)$$
$`(5.7)`$
where

$$h(r)=2\frac{r^{cos\eta sin\eta 1}}{r^{2cos\eta }+B^2}Q_1=cos\eta Bx^2.$$

Hence we get the metric

$$d\stackrel{~}{s}^2=ds^2V_o\frac{r^{cos\eta }}{r^{2\mathrm{cos}\eta }+B^2}(ducos\eta Bx^2dx^3)^2$$
$`(5.8)`$
where $`V_0=\lambda A^4`$ is a constant and $`ds^2`$ is the parent metric of the Kerr-Schild pencil:

$$ds^2=2drdu2cBx^2drdx^3\frac{r^{2cos\eta }+B^2}{2r^{cos\eta }}\left[r^{1sin\eta }(dx^2)^2+r^{1+sin\eta }(dx^3)^2\right]$$
$`(5.9)`$
By performing the Eddington-type coordinate transformation

$$du=dt+\frac{r^{2cos\eta }+B^2}{V_or^{cos\eta }}dr,$$
$`(5.10)`$
the metric assumes the form

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill d\stackrel{~}{s}^2& =V_o\frac{r^{cos\eta }}{r^{2\mathrm{cos}\eta }+B^2}(dtcos\eta Bx^2dx^3)^2\hfill \\ & \frac{r^{2cos\eta }+B^2}{2r^{cos\eta }}\left[\frac{2}{V_o}dr^2+r^{1sin\eta }(dx^2)^2+r^{1+sin\eta }(dx^3)^2\right].\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(5.11)`$
This is one of the Kóta-Perjés20 vacuum solutions, and thus (5.11) admits a Killing vector $`/t`$ whose eigenrays are geodesic.

6. CONCLUDING REMARKS

The picture we glean in this work is as follows. The vacuum space-times in which vacuum Kerr-Schild metrics can be generated are characterized either (i) by special values of the parameter $`\eta `$, or by condition (ii) of our theorem. The metrics in class (ii) are a dynamical system governed by two sets of homogeneous linear equations (4.3), with $`\overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Psi }_0=0`$, and (5.2). The spectrum of the system is constrained by the nonradial Newman-Penrose and Kerr-Schild equations. The ground state is a Kóta-Perjés space-time. At the moment of writing it appears to us that the excited states can all be generated in terms of elementary functions. This issue will be discussed in Paper II. ACKNOWLEDGMENT We thank Professor Roy P. Kerr for providing inspiration for our work. REFERENCES

 Kerr, R. P. and Schild, A., Atti Del Convegno Sulla Relativit Generale: Problemi Dell’ Energia e Onde Gravitazionali (Anniversary Volume, Forth Centenary of Galileo’s Birth), G. Barb ra, Ed. (Firenze, 1965), p. 173, and Trautman, A., in Recent Developments in General Relativity, Pergamon Press, p. 459 (1962)

 Boyer, R. H. and Lindquist. R. W., J. Math. Phys. 8, 256 (1967)

 G rses, M. and G rsey, F. J. Math. Phys. 16, 2385 (1975)

 Debever, R. , Bull. Acad. Roy. Belgique Cl. Sci. 60, 998 (1974)

 McIntosh, C.B.G.: Kerr-Schild Spacetimes Revisited, in Conference on Mathematical Relativity, Ed. R. Bartnik, Proc. Centre for Mathematical Analysis, Australian National University, Canberra, 1988.

 McIntosh, C.B.G. and Hickman, M.S., Gen. Rel. Grav. 20, 793 (1988)

 Chandrasekhar, S.: The Mathematical Theory of Black Holes, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1983, Chap.57.

 Debney, G. C., Kerr, R. P. and Schild, A. , J. Math. Phys. 10, 1842 (1969)

 D. Kramer et al.: Exact Solutions of Einstein Field Equations, Cambridge Univ. Press (1980)

 Thompson, A.H., Tensor 17, 92 (1966)

 Dozmorov, I.M., Izv. VUZ. Fiz.11, 68 (1971)

 What Thompson really proves is that the image of the Kerr-Schild map from vacuum to vacuum is algebraically special provided the parent space-time is algebraically special, and the Kerr-Schild null vector $`l`$ is a multiple principal vector

 Xanthopoulos, B. C., J. Math. Phys. 19, 1607 (1978)

 H. Urbantke, Acta Physica Austriaca 41,1 (1975)

 E. Nahmad-Achar, J.Math.Phys. 29,1878 (1988)

 Wald, R.M.: General Relativity, The University of Chicago Press (1984)

 Newman, E. and Penrose, R., J. Math. Phys. 3, 566 (1962)

 Equations (4.1) and (4.2) are given here in a form which is valid with no regard to the gauge condition (3.13)

 Kamke, E.: Differentialgleichungen - L sungsmethoden und L sungen I., Sec. 8.2. Teubner, Stuttgart, 1977

 Kóta, J. and Perjés, Z., J. Math. Phys. 13, 1695 (1972)


format: text

text:
# Commun. Math. Phys. 26, 222-236 (1972) Coherent States for Arbitrary Lie Group

## 1 Introduction

In a number of fields of quantum theory, and especially in quantum optics and radiophysics, it is convenient to use the system of so called coherent states \[1–3\].

These states are in close connection with the nilpotent group first considered by Weyl .

A question arises: are there exist analogous systems of states for other Lie groups?

The recent paper  generalizes the concept of coherent states to some Lie groups. However, the method proposed in this paper cannot be applied to all Lie groups and, in particular, it is inapplicable to compact groups. Besides, with this approach the set of coherent states is noninvariant relative to the action of the group representation operators.

The present paper proposes another method to extend the concept of coherent state111 Note in the connection that although some states of such type were considered previously, the properties of the system of states as a whole do not appear to have been investigated (except for the Weyl group).. This method can be applied to any Lie group and is consistent with the action of the group on the set of coherent states (see Section 2). Sections 3–5 of the paper deal with construction of the system of coherent states and with the investigation of its features for the simplest Lie groups.

## 2 General Properties of Coherent States

Let $`G`$ be an arbitrary Lie group and $`T`$ be its irreducible unitary representation acting in the Hilbert space $``$. A vector of this space is denoted by the symbol $`|\psi `$, the scalar product of the vector $`|\psi `$ and $`|\phi `$, linear on $`|\psi `$ and antilinear on $`|\phi `$, by the symbol $`\phi |\psi `$, and the projection operator on the vector $`|\psi `$ by $`|\psi \psi |`$.

Let $`|\psi _0`$ be some fixed vector in the space $``$. Consider the set of vectors $`\{|\psi _g\}`$, where $`|\psi _g=T(g)|\psi _0`$ and $`g`$ goes over all the group $`G`$. It is easy to see that two vectors $`|\psi _{g_1}`$ and $`|\psi _{g_2}`$ differ from one another only by a phase factor $`(|\psi _{g_1}=e^{i\alpha }|\psi _{g_2},|e^{i\alpha }|=1)`$, or in other words determine the same state only if $`T\left(g_2^1g_1\right)|\psi _0=e^{i\alpha }|\psi _0`$.

Let $`H=\{h\}`$ be the set of elements of the group $`G`$ such that $`T(h)|\psi _0=e^{i\alpha (h)}|\psi _0`$. It is evident that $`H`$ is a subgroup of the group $`G`$ and we denote it as the stationary group of the state $`|\psi _0`$.

From this construction we see that the vectors $`|\psi _g`$ for all $`g`$ which belong to one left coset $`G`$ on $`H`$ differ from one another only by a phase factor and that these vectors determine the same state.

Selecting in each coset $`x`$ one represenatative $`g(x)`$ of the group $`G`$222 The group $`G`$ can be considered as a fiber bundle with the base $`M=G/H`$, and the fiber $`H`$. Then the choice of $`g(x)`$ is the choice of a certain cross section of this fiber bundle. we get the set of states $`\{|\psi _{g(x)}\}`$, or in abridged form of writing $`\{|x\}`$ where $`|x`$, $`xM=G/H`$.

Now we may give the definition of generalized coherent states.

The system of coherent states of the type $`(T,|\psi _0)`$ ($`T`$ is the representation of the group $`G`$ acting in the some space $``$ and $`|\psi _0`$ is a fixed vector of this space) is called a set of states $`\{|\psi _g\}`$, $`|\psi _g=T(g)|\psi _0`$, where $`g`$ runs over all group $`G`$. Let $`H`$ be a stationary subgroup of the state $`|\psi _0`$. Then the coherent state $`|\psi _g`$ is determined by the point $`x=x(g)`$ of the factor space $`G/H`$ corresponding to the element $`g`$:

$$|\psi _g=e^{i\alpha }|x,|\psi _0=|0.$$

Let us consider some general properties of the coherent states. It is easy to see that $`e^{i\alpha (h_2h_1)}=e^{i\alpha (h_2)}e^{i\alpha (h_1)}`$, i.e. $`e^{i\alpha (h)}`$ is a one-dimensional unitary represenataion of the group $`H`$.

If this representation is not identity, i.e. if $`\alpha (h)0`$, then the factor group $`A`$ of the group $`H`$ on its commutant $`H^{}`$ 333 Remind that the commutant $`H^{}`$ of the group $`H`$ consists of the elements $`h^{}`$ of the type of $`h^{}=h_1h_2h_1^1h_2^2`$. The commutant is an invariant subgroup of the group $`H`$ and the factor group $`H/H^{}`$ is the Abelian group. is not trivial, i.e. it contains elements different from unity and the character of the group $`A`$ determines completely the representation of the group $`H`$.

If $`\alpha (h)0`$, then $`H`$ is the stationary subgroup of the vector $`|\psi _0`$ in the usual sense. In the first (second) case the representation $`T`$ of the group $`G`$ being restricted on the subgroup $`H`$ has to contain the one-dimensional (identity) representation of the group $`H`$444 In many cases a useful information on possible representations $`T(g)`$ may be obtained from the reciprocity theorem of Frobenius, stating that if $`T_\alpha `$ is the representation of the group $`G`$ induced by the character $`e^{i\alpha }`$ of the group $`H`$, then the representation $`T`$ has to be conatined in the decomposition of representation $`T_\alpha `$ into irreducible representation ..

Note that if the subgroup $`H`$ is connected then the vector $`|\psi _0`$ is the eigenvector of the infinitesimal operators of the representation of the subgroup itself.

Let us consider now the action of the operator $`T(g)`$ on the state $`|\psi _0=|0`$

$$T(g)|0=e^{i\alpha (g)}|x(g).$$
(1)
Here the function $`\alpha (g)`$ is determined on the whole group $`G`$ and at $`gH`$ it coincides with the previously considered function $`\alpha (h)`$555 Formula (1) defines the mapping $`\pi :G\stackrel{~}{M}`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ is the fiber bundle the base of which is $`M=G/H`$ and the fiber is a circle.. Substituting in Eq.(1) $`g`$ by $`gh`$ we get

$$\alpha (gh)=\alpha (g)+\alpha (h).$$
(2)
Let us now act by the operator $`T(g)`$ on an arbirary coherent state $`|x`$

$$T(g_1)|x=e^{i\alpha (g)}T(g_1)T(g)|0=e^{i\beta (g_1,g)}|g_1x.$$
(3)
Here $`\beta (g_1,g)=\alpha (g_1g)\alpha (g)`$; $`x=x(g)`$, $`g_1x=x_1M`$ and the element $`x_1`$ is determined by the action of the group $`G`$ on the homogeneous space $`M=G/H`$. Note that due to (2), Eq.(3) is correct, i.e., the right-hand side of equality depends not on $`g`$ but only on the cosets of $`x(g)`$: $`\beta (g_1,g)=\beta (g_1,x)`$.

It can be easily seen that the scalar product of two coherent states $`|x_1=|x(g_1)`$ and $`|x_2=|x(g_2)`$ is of the form

$$x_1|x_2=e^{i[\alpha (g_1)\alpha (g_2)]}0|T(g_1^1g_2)|0$$
(4)
and due to (2) it is independent of the choice of the representatives $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$. But due to unitarity of the representations $`T(g)`$, $`|x_1|x_2|<1`$ at $`x_1x_2`$ and the following equalities take place

$$x_1|x_2=\overline{x_2|x_1},$$
(5)
$$gx_1|gx_2=e^{i[\beta (g,x_1)\beta (g,x_2)]}x_1|x_2.$$
(6)
Turning to the problem of completeness, note first of all that the completeness of the system follows immediately from the irreducibility of the representation $`T`$. Let it exist the invariant measure $`dg`$ on the group $`G`$. In many cases it induces the invariant mesure $`dx`$ on the homogeneous space $`M=G/H`$. Supposing the convergence conditions to be fulfilled let us consider the operator

$$B=𝑑x|xx|.$$
(7)
From definition of $`B`$, the invariance of measure $`dx`$ and from formula (3) it immediately follows that

$$T(g)BT(g)^1=B.$$
(8)
Thus $`B`$ commutes with all the operators $`T(g)`$ and so due to irreducibility of the representation $`T`$, the operator $`B`$ is multiple of the identity operator

$$\frac{1}{d}B=I.$$
(9)
To find the constant $`d`$ let us calculate the average value of the operator $`B`$ in the state $`|y`$ ($`y|y=1`$)

$$y|B|y=|y|x|^2𝑑x=|0|x|^2𝑑x=d.$$
(10)
Hence it is, in particular, seen that a necessary condition for the existence of the operator $`B`$ is the convergence of the integral (10). In this case, which we call the case of the square-integrable system of coherent states, an importnat identity holds

$$\frac{1}{d}𝑑x|xx|=I.$$
(11)
Making use of this one may expand the arbitrary state in coherent states

$$|\psi =\frac{1}{d}𝑑xc(x)|x,c(x)=x|\psi .$$
(12)
Here

$$\psi |\psi =\frac{1}{d}𝑑x|c(x)|^2$$
(13)
and the function $`c(x)`$ is not arbitrary but it must satisfy the condition

$$c(x)=\frac{1}{d}x|yc(y)𝑑y.$$
(14)
Thus the kernel $`K(x,y)=(1/d)x|y`$ is the reproducing one

$$K(x,z)=𝑑yK(x,y)K(y,z)$$
(15)
and the function $`\widehat{f}(x)=K(x,y)f(y)𝑑y`$ satisfies Eq.(14) for an arbitrarily chosen function $`f(x)`$.

It can be also easily seen that between the coherent states there are ”linear dependences”. Indeed, from (12) it follows that

$$|x=\frac{1}{d}y|x|y𝑑y.$$
(16)
It means that the system of coherent states is overcomplete, i.e., it contains subsystems of coherent states which are complete systems.

The simplest subsets arise from consideration of the discrete subgroups of the group $`G`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a discrete subgroup of the group $`G`$ such that the volume $`V_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of the factor space $`M/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is finite. Let us consider the subsystem of the coherent states

$$\{|x_l\},x_l=x(\gamma _l),\gamma _l\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
(17)
A question arises concerning the completeness of such subsystems. It would be interesting to know whether the following statement is valid: at $`V_\mathrm{\Gamma }>d`$ the system of states $`\{|x_l\}`$ is not complete but at $`V_\mathrm{\Gamma }<d`$ this system is complete and remains complete even after eliminating any finite number of states. The most interesting case is characterized by $`V_\mathrm{\Gamma }=d`$ (if such a condition can be fulfilled) and it requires a separate, more detailed consideration. Note that for the simplest nilpotent group this problem has been solved in the paper .

Let us now illustrate the concept of generalized coherent states using concrete examples.

## 3 Case of the Special Nilpotent Group

This group appears if one writes the Heisenberg commutation relations in the Weyl form  666 Its properties are considered in details in the paper ..

Let us first review some well known facts. The Lie algebra of this group is isomorphic to the Lie algebra produced by the annihilation operators $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_N`$, Hermitian-conjugate creation operators $`a_1^+,\mathrm{},a_N^+`$ and the identity operator $`I`$. The commutation relations between these operators are of the form

$$[a_i,a_j]=[a_i^+,a_j^+]=[a_i,I]=[a_j^+,I]=0,[a_i,a_j^+]=\delta _{ij}I.$$
(18)
A general element of the Lie algebra can be written as

$$tI+i\left(\overline{\alpha }a\alpha a^+\right),$$
(19)
where $`t`$ is a real number, $`\alpha =(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _N)`$, $`a=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_N)`$ are $`N`$-dimensional vectors , $`\alpha _i`$ and $`\overline{\alpha }_i`$ are complex conjugate to each other. Here and in the following we use an abbreviated notation for the scalar product of two such vectors

$$\overline{\alpha }a=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\overline{\alpha }_ia_i,\alpha a^+=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\alpha _ia_i^+.$$

The Lie group $`W_N`$ is obtained from the Lie algebra by means of the exponential mapping. Thus to the element of the algebra (19) corresponds the element $`g`$ of the group which is denoted by $`(t,\alpha )`$. Then the multiplication law in $`W_N`$ is given by the formula

$$(s,\alpha )(t,\beta )=(s+t+\text{Im}(\alpha \overline{\beta }),\alpha +\beta ).$$
(20)
The operators of the irreducible unitary representation of the group $`W_N`$ are of the form

$$T(g)=T(t,\alpha )=e^{it}D(\alpha ).$$
(21)
From (21) it follows in particular that to the set of elements $`G_0=\{g_k=(2\pi k,0)\}`$ ($`k`$ is integer) corresponds the identity operator, i.e., the representation under consideration is not a faithful one.

Making use of the commutation relations (18) we can easily obtain the multiplication law of the operators

$$D(\alpha )D(\beta )=e^{i\text{Im}(\alpha \overline{\beta })}D(\alpha +\beta ).$$
(22)
Let us now take some vector $`|\psi _0`$ in the representation space. We denote the stationary subgroup of this vector as $`H`$. Consider two different cases.

I. Let $`|\psi _0`$ be an arbitrary vector of the Hilbert space $``$. In this case the subgroup $`H`$ consists of the elements of type $`(t,0)`$ and the factor space $`M=W_N/H`$ is the $`N`$-dimensional complex space $`𝐂^N`$. In correspondence with Section 2 of this paper, the system of generalized coherent states is the set of vectors where

$$|\alpha =D(\alpha )|\psi _0.$$
(23)
Note that the usual system of coherent states whose properties have been considered in detail for instance in the papers \[1–3\] corresponds to the choice in (23) of the so called ”vacuum” vector $`|0`$777 The vacuum vector $`|0`$ is determined by the equations $`a_i|0=0`$. as initial vector $`|\psi _0`$. However, it can be readily shown that the system of generalized coherent states possesses the same properties as the usual system of coherent states. In particular the main identity

$$\frac{1}{\pi ^N}d^{2N}\alpha |\alpha \alpha |=I,d^{2N}\alpha =\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}d\text{Re}\alpha _id\text{Im}\alpha _i$$
(24)
remains valid for it.

II. Let us extend the Hilbert space $``$ up to the space of generalized functions $`_{\mathrm{}}`$888 The definition of space $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ and the consideration of some of its properties is given in paper . and try to find the eigenvector $`|\theta _0_{\mathrm{}}`$ of the operators $`T(h)`$, where $`h=(t,\alpha _n)`$ is the element of the subgroup $`H`$, $`\alpha _n=_{j=1}^{2N}n_j\omega _j`$, $`n_j`$ are integer numbers. The set of vectors $`\alpha _n`$ form a lattice $`L`$ in the space $`𝐂^N`$ and we suppose the periods $`\omega _j`$ of this lattice to be really linearly independent. It can be easily seen that the commutant $`H^{}`$ of the group $`H`$ consists of the elements $`h^{}=(t_n,0)`$, where $`t_n=2\pi _{ij}B_{ij}n_in_j`$ and the $`2N\times 2N`$ matrix $`B`$ has the form $`B_{ij}=(1/\pi )\text{Im}(\omega _i\overline{\omega }_j)`$. But according to Section 2 the operator $`T(h^{})`$ must be equal to the identity operator, and from this follows that the elements of the matrix $`B`$ are integer numbers:

$$B_{ij}=\frac{1}{\pi }\text{Im}(\omega _i\overline{\omega }_j)0(\text{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}).$$
(25)
we call such lattice $`L`$ admissible 999 Note that the factor space $`M=G/H`$ is a complex torus and in the case of admissible lattice it can be considered as an Abelian variety.. The conditions $`T(h)|\theta _0=e^{i\alpha (h)}|\theta _0`$ are in this case equivalent to the equations

$$D(\omega _i)|\theta _0=e^{i\pi \epsilon _i}|\theta _0.$$
(26)
The state $`|\theta _0`$ is determined by the real numbers $`\epsilon _i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},2N`$. Acting with the operator $`D(\alpha )`$ on $`|\theta _0`$ we get the system of generalized coherent states

$$|\theta _\alpha =D(\alpha )|\theta _0,$$
(27)
where $`\alpha `$ runs over the complex torus $`M=G/H`$. It appears that the states $`|\theta _\alpha `$ under the choice of a definite realization of space $``$ coincide in the essence with the theta functions. Some properties of the theta functions in frame of such approach are considered in the papers .

## 4 Case of the Simplest Compact Group – $`SU(2)`$ Group

The $`SU(2)`$ group is the unitary matrix group of the second order with unity determinant. It is locally isomorphic to the $`SO(3)`$ group – the rotation group of three-dimensional space and it is the most investigated group among all the non-Abelian Lie groups 101010 The properties of this group are considered in details e.g. in the books .. Nevertheless, the coherent states for this group as a special system do not appear to have been considered so far.

Let us first review some well known facts. The $`T^j`$ representation of this group is determined by the non-negative number $`j`$, integer or half-integer. The basis vectors $`|j,\mu `$ of the space in which the representation acts are labelled by a number $`\mu `$ that takes the $`2j+1`$ integer (if $`j`$ is integer) or half-integer (if $`j`$ is half-integer) values from $`j`$ up to $`j`$. The vectors $`|j,\mu `$ satisfy the condition

$$T^j(h)|j,\mu =e^{i\mu \phi }|j,\mu ,h=\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{i\phi /2}\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & e^{i\phi /2}\hfill \end{array}\right).$$
(28)
Here $`h`$ is the element of the rotation subgroup $`H`$ around the axis $`x_3`$. Note that the vector $`|j,\mu `$ is the eigenvector of the infinitesimal operator $`J_3`$ of the representation $`T^j`$ corresponding to the subgroup $`H`$

$$J_3|j,\mu =\mu |j,\mu .$$
(29)
The factor space $`G/H`$ is the two-dimensional sphere $`S^2`$, the point of this sphere is determined by the unit vector $`𝐧`$, $`𝐧^2=1`$. Let $`g(𝐧)`$ be the element of the group $`G`$ which transforms the vector $`𝐧_0=(0,0,1)`$ into the vector $`𝐧=(\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi ,\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi ,\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$. As $`g(𝐧)`$ we may choose, for example, the element $`g_\phi ^3g_\theta ^2`$ where $`g_\phi ^3`$ corresponds to rotation around the axis $`x_3`$ by the angle $`\phi `$ and $`g_\theta ^2`$ to rotation around the axis $`x_2`$ by the angle $`\theta `$. We thus come to the system of coherent states $`\{|\mu ,𝐧\}`$:

$$|\mu ,𝐧=T(g(𝐧))|\mu =T(g_\phi ^3)T(g_\theta ^2)|\mu .$$
(30)
(Here we have to omit for simplicity index $`j`$ to abbreviate the notations).

The system of coherent states can be also determined up to the phase factor $`e^{i\alpha (𝐧)}`$ using the equation

$$(n_iJ_i)|\mu ,𝐧=\mu |\mu ,𝐧,$$
(31)
where $`J_i`$ is the infinitesimal operator of the represenatation which corresponds to a rotation around the axis $`x_i`$. Here $`\mu `$ should be considered as a fixed parameter and the vector $`𝐧`$ as a variable quantity.

Let us consider the properties of this system. The scalar product of two coherent states is generally speaking non-zero and it equals

$$\mu ,𝐧^{}|\mu ,𝐧=e^{i\varphi (𝐧^{},𝐧)}d_{\mu \mu }^j(\theta )=e^{i\varphi }\left(\mathrm{cos}\frac{\theta }{2}\right)^{2|\mu |}P_{j|\mu |}^{(0,2|\mu |)}(\mathrm{cos}\theta ),$$
(32)
where $`\mathrm{cos}\theta =𝐧^{}𝐧`$, $`d_{\mu \nu }^j(\theta )`$ are standard matrix elements of the $`SU(2)`$ group  and $`P_n^{(a,b)}`$ are Jacobi polynomials. Hence we find that

$$d=|\mu ,𝐧^{}|\mu ,𝐧|^2𝑑𝐧=\frac{4\pi }{2j+1}$$
(33)
and correspondingly

$$\frac{2j+1}{4\pi }𝑑𝐧|\mu ,𝐧\mu ,𝐧|=I.$$
(34)
Especially simple is the system of coherent states for $`\mu =j`$. Then, for instance, we get from Eq.(32)

$$|j,𝐧^{}|j,𝐧|^2=\left(\frac{1+𝐧^{}𝐧}{2}\right)^{2j}.$$
(35)
Let us also give the expression for the coherent states in the so-called $`z`$-representation . In this case the representation $`T`$ acts in the space of polynomials of $`2j`$ degree and the operator of the representation is given by the formula

$`T^j(g)f(z)`$ $`=`$ $`(\beta z+\overline{\alpha })^{2j}f\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha z\overline{\beta }}{\beta z+\overline{\alpha }}}\right),`$
$`g`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \beta \\ \overline{\beta }& \overline{\alpha }\end{array}\right),|\alpha |^2+|\beta |^2=1.`$ (39)
The basis vectors $`|j,\mu `$ in this representation are of the form

$$z|j,\mu =\sqrt{\frac{(2j)!}{(j+\mu )!(j\mu )!}}z^{j+\mu }.$$
(40)
In this case from (30) and (36) it immediately follows

$$z|\mu ,𝐧=\sqrt{\frac{(2j)!}{(j+\mu )!(j\mu )!}}(\beta z+\overline{\alpha })^{j\mu }(\alpha z\overline{\beta })^{j+\mu },$$
(41)
where

$$\alpha =\mathrm{cos}\frac{\theta }{2}e^{i\phi /2},\beta =\mathrm{sin}\frac{\theta }{2}e^{i\phi /2}.$$

Let us map the sphere $`S^2`$ onto the plane of the complex variables $`\zeta `$ using the stereographic projection

$$\zeta =\text{ctg}\frac{\theta }{2}e^{i\phi }.$$
(42)
Expression (38) takes now the form

$$z|\mu ,𝐧=e^{i\varphi }z|\mu ,\zeta ,\text{where}e^{i\varphi }=(1)^{j+\mu }e^{i\mu \phi },$$
(43)
$$z|\mu ,\zeta =\sqrt{\frac{(2j)!}{(j+\mu )!(j\mu )!}}(1+|\zeta |^2)^j(z+\overline{\zeta })^{j\mu }(1\zeta z)^{j+\mu }.$$
(44)
Acting on the function $`|\mu ,\zeta `$ by the operator $`T(g)`$ we get $`T(g)|\mu ,\zeta =e^{i\varphi }|\mu ,g\zeta `$, where

$$e^{i\varphi }=\left(\frac{\overline{\beta }\zeta +\overline{\alpha }}{\beta \overline{\zeta }+\alpha }\right)^\mu ,g\zeta =\frac{\alpha \zeta \beta }{\overline{\beta }\zeta +\overline{\alpha }}.$$
(45)
Let us now give the formula for the scalar product of coherent states in this representation

$$j,\zeta ^{}|j,\zeta =(1+|\zeta ^{}|^2)^j(1+|\zeta |^2)^j(1+\overline{\zeta }^{}\zeta )^{2j}.$$
(46)
Note that just as the usual coherent states appear naturally in the problem of an oscillator which is under the action of an external time-dependent force  the states $`|\mu ,𝐧`$ appear naturally when one considers the problem of the spin motion in a time-dependent magnetic field. In this case the variation of the state over time is determined by the Schrödinger equation

$$i\frac{}{t}|\psi (t)=\mathrm{𝐚𝐉}|\psi (t),$$
(47)
where $`𝐚=\mu 𝐇`$, $`\mu `$ is the magnetic moment of the particle, $`𝐇(t)`$ is the magnetic field, $`𝐉=(J_1,J_2,J_3)`$, $`J_i`$ is the operator of infinitesimally small rotations around the axis $`x_i`$.

It can be easily seen that if at initial time we have the coherent state $`|\psi (0)=|𝐧_0`$, then at any following time this state remains coherent, i.e.,

$$|\psi (t)=e^{i\alpha (t)}|𝐧(t),$$
(48)
where the vector $`𝐧(t)`$ is determined by the classical equation of motion

$$\dot{𝐧}(t)=[𝐚(t),𝐧(t)].$$
(49)
The coherent states may be also used to describe the density matrix $`\rho `$ of a particle with spin 111111 The description of the oscillator density matrix using the usual coherent states can be found in the papers \[1–3\].. Namely, the density matrix $`\rho `$ is completely determined either by the function $`P(𝐧)`$ or $`Q(𝐧)`$, according to the formulae

$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑𝐧P(𝐧)|𝐧𝐧|},`$ (50)
$`Q(𝐧)`$ $`=`$ $`𝐧|\rho |𝐧.`$ (51)
Note one more useful identity

$`|𝐧𝐧|`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2j+1}{16\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle c(𝐧,g^1)T(g)𝑑g},`$ (52)
$`c(𝐧,g)`$ $`=`$ $`𝐧|T(g)|𝐧`$ (53)
which follows from the orthogonality of the matrix elements $`T_{\mu \nu }^j(g)`$.

Note that if in (47) $`P(𝐧)`$ is expanded in a series of spherical functions

$$P(𝐧)=\underset{l,m}{}C_{l,m}Y_{l,m}(𝐧)$$
(54)
one gets the expansion of the density matrix

$$\rho =\underset{l,m}{}C_{l,m}\widehat{P}_{l,m}$$
(55)
in operators

$$\widehat{P}_{l,m}=𝑑𝐧Y_{l,m}(𝐧)|\mu ,𝐧\mu ,𝐧|.$$
(56)
Calculating the integral entering (53) we find

$$\nu ^{}|\widehat{P}_{l,m}|\nu =\frac{\sqrt{4\pi (2l+1)}}{2j+1}(j,\nu ^{};l,m|j,\nu )(j,\mu ;l,0|j,\mu ),$$
(57)
where $`(j,\nu ^{};l,m|j,\nu )`$ is the Clebsch–Gordan coefficient.

In conclusion note that the formulae obtained in this section carry over to the case arbitrary compact Lie group. In order to do this it is only necessary to replace the group $`H`$ by the Cartan subgroup and to take into consideration that $`2j+1`$ is the dimension of the representation $`T(g)`$ and $`4\pi `$ is the volume of the factor space $`M=G/H`$.

## 5 Case of the Simplest Noncompact Group – $`SU(1,1)`$ Group

The $`SU(1,1)`$ group is the group of unimodular matrices that leave the form $`|z_1|^2|z_2|^2`$ invariant. The element $`g`$ of this group has the form

$$g=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \beta \\ \overline{\beta }& \overline{\alpha }\end{array}\right),|\alpha |^2|\beta |^2=1.$$
(55)
The $`SU(1,1)`$ group is isomorphic to the $`Sp(2,R)`$ group (to the group of real symplectic second order matrices) and it is locally isomorphic to the $`SO(2,1)`$ group, the group of ”rotations” of the three-dimensional pseudoeuclidian space. It has several series of unitary irreducible representations and, in particular, two discrete series $`T^+`$ and $`T^{}`$. It is sufficient to consider only one of these, e.g. $`T^+`$, because all the results are automatically carried over to the other case.

The representation of the series $`T^+`$ is characterized by the positive integer or half-integer numbers $`k`$. It may be realized in the space of the function $`_k`$ that are analytic in the unit disk $`|\zeta |1`$ and satisfy the condition

$$f^2=𝑑\mu _k(z)|f(z)|^2<\mathrm{},$$
(56)
where

$$d\mu _k(z)=\frac{2k1}{\pi }\left(1|z|^2\right)^{2k2}d^2z.$$
(57)
It is not difficult to see that if $`f(z)=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}c_nz^n`$ then

$$f^2=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2k)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+2k)}|c_n|^2.$$
(58)
The space $`_k`$ becomes a Hibert space if the scalar product of two vectors is defined in it according to the formula

$$f|g=𝑑\mu _k(z)\overline{f}(z)g(z).$$
(59)
Now it can be easily checked that the functions

$$|n=f_n(z)=\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+2k)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2k)}}z^n$$
(60)
form an orthonormal basis in the space $`_k`$121212 Note that if $`k`$ tends to infinity and $`z`$ to zero so that $`kz`$=const then as the functions $`f_n(z)`$, and all other quantities go over into corresponding quantities for a special nilpotent group (see Section 3)..

Let us define the action of the operators $`T(g)`$ in the space $`_k`$

$$T^k(g)f(z)=(\beta z+\overline{\alpha })^{2k}f\left(\frac{\alpha z+\overline{\beta }}{\beta z+\overline{\alpha }}\right).$$
(61)
It can be shown \[10–12\] that the operators $`T^k(g)`$ determine the unitary irreducible representation of the $`SU(1,1)`$ group.

Let us choose in $`_k`$ the vector of the lowest weight $`|0`$ as the fixed vector $`|\psi _0`$ (the corresponding function $`f_0(z)1`$). Acting on it by the operators $`T^k(g)`$ we get the system of states

$$|g=T(g)|0=(\beta z+\overline{\alpha })^{2k}.$$
(62)
The expression can be easily transformed to the form

$$|g=e^{i\varphi }|\zeta ;|\zeta =(1|\zeta |^2)^k(1\zeta z)^{2k},|\zeta |<1.$$
(63)
The set $`\{|\zeta \}`$ is just the system of coherent states.

Note that the group of matrices of type $`h=\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{i\varphi /2}\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & e^{i\varphi /2}\hfill \end{array}\right)`$ is the stationary subgroup $`H`$ of the vector $`|0`$ and the factor space $`G/H`$ is the unit disk. We see that according to Section 2, the coherent state $`|\zeta `$ is completely determined by the point $`\zeta `$ of the factor space $`G/H`$. Note that this space could be also realized as an upper sheet of the hyperboloid $`n_0^2n_1^2n_2^2=1`$.

Expanding the state $`|\zeta `$ on the states $`|n`$ we get

$$|\zeta =\left(1|\zeta |^2\right)^k\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+2k)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2k)}}\zeta ^n|n.$$
(64)
Hence for the scalar product of two coherent states the following formula obtains

$$\zeta ^{}|\zeta =\left(1|\zeta ^{}|^2\right)^k\left(1|\zeta |^2\right)^k\left(1\overline{\zeta }^{}\zeta \right)^{2k}.$$
(65)
Correspondingly

$$d=𝑑\mu (\zeta )|0|\zeta |^2=\frac{\pi }{2k1}$$
(66)
and the condition of completeness takes the form

$$\frac{2k1}{\pi }𝑑\mu (\zeta )|\zeta \zeta |=I.$$
(67)
Here $`d\mu (\zeta )=(d^2\zeta )/\left(1|\zeta |^2\right)^2`$ is the invariant measure on the disk $`|\zeta |<1`$.

Let us now consider an arbitrary normalized vector $`|\psi `$ belonging to the Hilbert space $``$. To this vector the function $`\zeta |\psi `$ may be taken into correspondance and if $`|\psi =c_n|n`$, then

$$\zeta |\psi =\left(1|\zeta |^2\right)^k\psi (\overline{\zeta }),$$
(68)
where

$$\psi (\zeta )=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+2k)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2k)}}c_n\zeta ^n.$$
(69)
Note that in this case

$$\psi ^2=\psi |\psi =𝑑\mu _k(\zeta )|\psi (\zeta )|^2,$$
(70)
i.e., $`\psi (\zeta )_k`$. The formula (69) establishes the isomorphism between the spaces $``$ and $`_k`$.

Moreover, from the inequality $`|\zeta |\psi |^2\psi ^2`$ follows a restriction on the growth of function $`\psi (\zeta )`$

$$|\psi (\zeta )|^2\left(1|\zeta |^2\right)^{2k}\psi ^2.$$
(71)
From (71) we immediately obtain that strong convergence of the sequence $`|\psi _n`$ implies pointwise convergence $`\psi _n(\zeta )`$ uniform on any compact subset of the plane $`\zeta `$.

A characteristic feature of spaces of the type $`_k`$ are the so called ”reproducing kernels” which play the role of usual $`\delta `$-functions. Such kernel can be found in the usual way. Namely

$$\delta _z^{}(z)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\overline{f_n(z^{})}f_n(z)=(1\overline{z}^{}z)^{2k}.$$
(72)
At fixed $`z^{}`$, $`\delta _z^{}(z)`$ is a function of $`z`$ and its norm is equal to

$$\delta _z^{}^2=\left(1|z^{}|^2\right)^{2k}.$$
(73)
It can be easily checked by direct calculations that $`\delta _z^{}(z)`$ is the analog of $`\delta `$-function, i.e., the equality

$$\delta _z|f=𝑑\mu (z^{})\overline{\delta }_z(z^{})f(z^{})f(z),(f(z)_k)$$
(74)
holds.

Up to now we considered the representations of the $`SU(1,1)`$ group. One can however consider also the representations of its universal covering group, namely the group $`\overline{SU(1,1)}`$131313 Note that the group $`\overline{SU(1,1)}`$ is a dynamical symmetry group in some model many body problems . which as is well known, covers the group $`SU(1,1)`$ an infinite number of times. It can be easily seen that this results only in replacing the number $`k`$, that was previously restricted to non-negative integer or half-integer values, by an arbitrary non-negative number.

Note that analogous results obtain also for other semi-simple Lie groups, having a discrete series of representations.

In this paper we have briefly considered the simplest systems of coherent states. It would be interesting to consider other systems of such states, in particular, the systems related to the continuous spectrum.

Thanks are due to F.A. Berezin for the discussion of these results and F. Calogero for his help in translating of the paper into English.


text:
# Dynamic creation and annihilation of metastable vortex phase as a source of excess noise

## Abstract

The large increase in voltage noise, commonly observed in the vicinity of the peak-effect in superconductors, is ascribed to a novel noise mechanism. A strongly pinned metastable disordered vortex phase, which is randomly generated at the edges and annealed into ordered phase in the bulk, causes large fluctuations in the integrated critical current of the sample. The excess noise due to this dynamic admixture of two distinct phases is found to display pronounced reentrant behavior. In the Corbino geometry the injection of the metastable phase is prevented and, accordingly, the excess noise disappears.

The appearance of large noise with the onset of motion of a condensate in the presence of random pinning potential, has been studied extensively in incommensurate charge density waves , Wigner crystals in two-dimensional electron gas , and most notably, in vortex matter in type-II superconductors . In all cases, the noise is thought to reflect spatio-temporal irregularities of the moving condensate due to its interaction with the underlying pinning potential, though its precise origin remains obscure and controversial. The voltage noise due to vortex motion in a current-biased superconductor is generally referred to as flux-flow noise for which various mechanisms have been considered (for an early review see ). They include vortex shot noise and the associated density fluctuations , velocity fluctuations resulting from vortex-pin interactions  or turbulent flow of surface currents , critical slowing down of vortex dynamics , and several suggestions  and numerical simulations  of various plastic vortex flow mechanisms. Each of these mechanisms may make a substantial contribution to the total measured noise. Yet the puzzling observation, which has no satisfactory explanation, is that in a specific and narrow region of the $`HT`$ phase diagram the noise is enhanced drastically. This excess noise exceeds the usual flux-flow noise level by orders of magnitude . In low-$`T_c`$ superconductors the excess noise occurs in the vicinity of the peak effect (PE) below $`H_{c2}`$, where the critical current $`I_c`$ anomalously increases with field . In high-$`T_c`$ superconductors (HTS) similar noise enhancement was found in the vicinity of the melting or order-disorder transitions . This low frequency excess noise is apparently inconsistent with the common flux-flow noise mechanisms due to its unusually high amplitude, strong field and current dependence, and non-Gaussian character .

In this paper we demonstrate that the excess noise does not result from any previously known flux-flow noise mechanism, but rather is due to a conceptually different phenomenon of random creation and annihilation of a metastable phase. The conventional models consider various types of irregularities and defects in the vortex lattice which are perturbations within an otherwise single thermodynamic phase of the vortex matter. In contrast, it has recently been suggested that the PE in low-$`T_c`$ superconductors, as well as the second magnetization peak in HTS, reflects a first-order phase transition between two distinct thermodynamic phases of the vortex matter : an ordered phase (OP, or Bragg glass ), and an amorphous disordered phase (DP). The DP is the equilibrium thermodynamic phase above the peak field of the PE, whereas the OP is the equilibrium phase below the peak field. However, the DP can be also present as a ‘wrong’ metastable supercooled phase below the PE instead of the equilibrium OP . As shown below the excess noise results from the dynamic coexistence of these two distinct phases of the vortex matter. In the lower part of the PE the random penetration of vortices through the sample edges does not just create some defects in the OP, but rather generates a distinct, albeit metastable, phase. The random generation and annihilation of this strongly pinned metastable DP is shown to be the cause of large fluctuations in the instantaneous $`I_c`$ of the sample, leading to greatly enhanced voltage noise. We demonstrate accordingly that the excess noise can be eliminated by preventing the formation of the ‘wrong’ phase in the Corbino disk geometry. In addition, the excess noise, which was previously observed only in the vicinity of the PE where $`I_c`$ increases with field $`H`$, is found also at low fields, where $`I_c`$ decreases with $`H`$.

To investigate the origin of the excess noise we have studied 2H-NbSe2 crystals using a special contact configuration (Fig. 1b, inset) that enables measurements in both the Corbino and strip-like geometry in the same crystal . By applying the current to the +S,-S contacts, the vortices penetrate through the edge and flow across the sample, similarly to the standard configuration. In contrast, by applying the current to the +C,-C contacts, the vortices circulate in the bulk without crossing the edges, as in a Corbino disk. In both configurations the voltage and the corresponding noise are measured across the same contacts +V,-V. The distance between the voltage contacts is 0.15 mm and the diameter of the Corbino is 1.1 mm. The data presented here were obtained on a Fe-doped (200 ppm) NbSe2 single crystal 2.2 $`\times `$ 1.5 $`\times `$ 0.04 mm3 with $`T_c`$=5.7 K . Similar results were obtained on a number of additional crystals.

The inset of Fig. 1a shows the voltage response $`V`$ vs. the field $`H`$c-axis at 4.4 K in the Corbino and strip configurations. The applied current $`I=`$ 26 mA in the strip configuration and 34 mA in the Corbino. Since the current density varies across the sample, this difference in $`I`$ is chosen to give the same average current density between +V,-V contacts in the two geometries. As a result, the measured $`V`$ and the corresponding vortex velocity are identical at high fields. Upon decreasing the field from above $`H_{c2}(T)`$, the voltage decreases rapidly and vanishes in the PE region (4 to 8 kOe, Fig. 1a inset) where $`I_c`$ of the sample is large due to the presence of the strongly pinned DP. The voltage becomes finite at intermediate fields before vanishing again at $`H`$ 1.2 kOe. We shall concentrate on the intermediate fields where the excess noise appears and where significantly different response in the two geometries is observed.

In the Corbino, $`V`$ increases linearly with $`H`$ (Fig. 1a) in accord with the well-known flux-flow behavior in undoped NbSe2 , indicating that the lattice is in the OP. The voltage vanishes abruptly at both high and low fields. The high-field point $`H_{DT}^H`$ is the sharp disorder-driven transition at the PE between the equilibrium OP and the equilibrium DP, whereas the low-field point $`H_{DT}^L`$ is the reentrant disorder-driven transition . The strip configuration displays qualitatively different behavior (Fig. 1a). In contrast to Corbino, no sharp transitions are observed and the voltage remains vanishingly small below $`H_{DT}^H`$ as well as above $`H_{DT}^L`$. At intermediate fields $`V`$ increases, but it is still significantly suppressed relative to the Corbino response.

Figure 1b shows the low frequency noise in the two geometries. The large noise in the strip was previously observed only in the lower part of the PE . Here we find, for the first time, two peaks in the noise. The noise of the strip is maximal where voltage response is strongly suppressed, while the noise is reduced in the central region, where $`V`$ of the strip recovers. The most important observation in Fig. 1b, however, is that the large excess noise that is found in the usual strip configurations is absent in the Corbino geometry, and only two small peaks remain at $`H_{DT}^H`$ and $`H_{DT}^L`$. This is a first demonstration that the excess noise depends dramatically on sample geometry, and therefore does not reflect an intrinsic bulk property of the vortex system.

As shown previously, the difference in the dc voltage response of the two geometries is a result of the injection of a metastable DP . The DP, which is the equilibrium phase above $`H_{DT}^H`$, can exist as a metastable phase below $`H_{DT}^H`$ . In the presence of a driving current, vortices that penetrate through the rough edges locally destroy the equilibrium OP, and form instead the metastable DP near the edges. As the entire lattice flows deeper into the sample, this inadvertently injected ‘wrong’ phase anneals into the OP over a characteristic relaxation length $`L_r(H,I)`$. The value of $`L_r`$ is the key parameter that determines the voltage response and the noise of the system. Since the DP has a significantly larger critical current density $`J_c^{dis}`$ than $`J_c^{ord}`$ of the OP, the contamination by the metastable DP enhances the integrated $`I_c`$ of the strip: $`I_c=d_0^WJ_c(x)𝑑x=WdJ_c^{ord}+L_rd(J_c^{dis}J_c^{ord})(1exp(W/L_r))`$. Here $`d`$ and $`W`$ are the thickness and width of the sample and we have assumed, for simplicity, an exponential relaxation of $`J_c(x)=J_c^{ord}+(J_c^{dis}J_c^{ord})exp(x/L_r)`$. Since usually experimentally $`L_r<W`$ , we can approximate $`I_cL_rd(J_c^{dis}J_c^{ord})+WdJ_c^{ord}`$. Importantly, $`L_r(H,I)`$ depends strongly on field as well as on current. Close to the order-disorder transition fields $`H_{DT}`$ the free energies of the DP and OP are comparable; hence the metastable DP has a long lifetime and $`L_r`$ is large . This results in a large $`I_c`$ and consequently in almost vanishing $`V`$ in the strip at fields slightly below $`H_{DT}^H`$ (Fig 1a). A mirror-image-like behavior is observed in the vicinity of $`H_{DT}^L`$ where $`L_r`$ increases again upon approaching the reentrant transition from above. At intermediate fields, away from the transitions, the metastable phase becomes less favorable energetically and therefore $`L_r`$ shortens and $`V`$ is enhanced.

We now illustrate that the above edge contamination mechanism, which accounts for both the $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑐}`$ and the $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑐}`$ response of the system , also provides a compelling explanation of the excess noise. The generation of the metastable DP results from the non-uniform vortex penetration through the surface barriers at the sample edge. The generation mechanism and the subsequent annealing of the DP in the bulk constitute random processes both in time and in space, resulting in complex spatiotemporal fluctuations  of the vortex-lattice disorder and of the corresponding value of $`J_c(𝐫,t)`$. Two mechanisms actually contribute to the spatiotemporal variations: fluctuations of $`J_c^{dis}`$ at the sample edge, $`\delta J_c^{dis}`$, and local fluctuations in the relaxation length $`\delta L_r`$ within the bulk of the sample. Here we discuss for simplicity only $`\delta J_c^{dis}`$ fluctuations, although analogous conclusions are obtained on considering $`\delta L_r`$ fluctuations. In order to simplify the analysis we shall consider a one-dimensional $`J_c(x,t)`$ problem, which effectively averages out the sample properties along the current direction. Since $`J_c^{dis}`$ is typically an order of magnitude larger than $`J_c^{ord}`$ , $`\delta J_c^{dis}`$ fluctuations will result in large variations in $`I_c`$, causing large voltage noise. The detailed microscopic properties of $`\delta J_c^{dis}`$ fluctuations are presently unknown. However, from the above derivation of $`I_c`$, the fluctuation in the total critical current caused by a given $`\delta J_c^{dis}`$ is $`\delta I_cL_r(H,I)\delta J_c^{dis}d`$, which shows that $`I_c`$ fluctuations strongly depend on the value of $`L_r(H,I)`$.

The low frequency voltage noise $`\delta V`$ can be evaluated as follows. The dc voltage $`V`$, which appears at $`I>I_c`$, can be expressed as $`V=f(II_c)`$, where $`f`$ is a general function describing the dc $`VI`$ characteristics. Therefore, $`\delta V=(df/dI_c)\delta I_c=(df/dI)\delta I_c=(dV/dI)\delta I_c=L_r(dV/dI)\delta J_c^{dis}d`$. Consequently, as described below, the commonly observed large excess noise in the lower part of the PE, seen at about 3.5 kOe in Fig. 1b in the strip, is a result of the large $`L_r`$ in the vicinity of $`H_{DT}^H`$. The novel observation in Fig. 1b, however, is the existence of a second noise peak at about 2 kOe where $`L_r(H,I)`$ becomes large again on approaching $`H_{DT}^L`$. This low-field peak was not previously observed since the noise studies were carried out on undoped NbSe2  which does not show a reentrant disorder-driven transition. Our finding of the two peaks is an important manifestation of the proposed mechanism: It demonstrates that the excess noise is not a mere result of the fact that $`I_c`$ increases with $`H`$ at the PE since at low fields the same excess noise is found in the region where $`I_c`$ decreases with $`H`$. Furthermore, the same value of $`I_c`$ is attained at three values of $`H`$: above the reentrant $`H_{DT}^L`$ where $`I_c`$ decreases with $`H`$, below $`H_{DT}^H`$ where $`I_c`$ increases with $`H`$, and above $`H_{DT}^H`$ where $`I_c`$ decreases again in the upper part of the PE. The excess noise occurs only in the first two cases, where the metastable DP contaminates the equilibrium OP. In the third case, above $`H_{DT}^H`$, the DP is the thermodynamically stable phase and therefore no metastable phase is generated at the edges.

In order to test the validity of the described concept we have performed noise measurements in the Corbino geometry. Strikingly, we find that the excess noise is entirely absent in Corbino in the central-field region, as shown in Fig. 1b. This means that the motion of vortex lattice within the bulk of the sample does not, by itself, create excess noise. Any conventional bulk noise mechanism should have resulted in a similar noise level in the Corbino and strip geometries. One may even argue that some of the noise mechanisms, such as a bulk plastic vortex flow, could cause a larger noise level in the Corbino due to the enhanced vortex shear by the $`1/r`$ radial current distribution, contrary to the observations. The absence of the noise in the Corbino therefore clearly indicates the dominant role of the edge contamination in the noise process. The residual small and narrow peaks in the Corbino noise in Fig. 1b can be ascribed to small deviations from a perfect Corbino disk configuration. Since $`L_r`$ diverges at $`H_{DT}^H`$ and $`H_{DT}^L`$, any small non-radial part of the current or inhomogeneities may result in some injection of the metastable DP, giving rise to noise. In the vicinity of the mean-field $`H_{DT}`$ nonuniform disorder distribution may result in some parts of the sample being in the equilibrium DP, whereas others in the OP , similar to the solid-liquid coexistence at melting . Consequently, when the lattice is set in motion the DP drifts into regions of the OP, where it becomes metastable, and may cause noise in this narrow field region.

We now analyze the current dependence of the excess noise in the strip. Figure 2 shows the low frequency spectral density of the noise $`S`$(3 Hz) $`\delta V^2`$ as a function of $`I`$, along with the $`VI`$ characteristic. The $`VI`$ characteristic displays a rapid upturn and approaches linear behavior with a constant $`dV/dI`$ at elevated currents. $`S`$, in contrast, displays a large peak and vanishes rapidly at higher currents. According to our simplified analysis the voltage noise $`\sqrt{S}\delta V=\delta J_c^{dis}L_r(H,I)\frac{dV}{dI}d`$ is a product of three separate terms. $`\delta J_c^{dis}`$ describes the statistical process of the generation of the DP at the rough sample edges. There is currently no theoretical description of this random process which should generally be field and current dependent . There is also no theoretical description of the relaxation process, however, it is known experimentally that $`L_r(H,I)`$ decreases rapidly with current . When the lattice is displaced very slowly, the lifetime of the metastable DP is long and $`L_r`$ is large. However, as the pinning potential is tilted stronger by a larger driving force, the annealing process becomes progressively faster  resulting in a rapid decrease of $`L_r`$ with vortex velocity. Finally, even the third term $`dV/dI`$ is not well-defined experimentally. Due to the metastable nature of the system $`dV/dI`$ has large fluctuations and strong dependence on measurement frequency as well as on current ramp direction . These uncertainties in all three terms prevent quantitative analysis of the noise amplitude at this stage. Nevertheless we can understand the general form of the noise knowing the qualitative behavior of $`L_r(H,I)`$ and $`dV/dI`$. The inset of Fig. 2 shows a typical $`dV/dI`$ along with the noise intensity $`\sqrt{S}`$. $`dV/dI`$ shows a pronounced peak and reaches a constant value above about 30 mA. At low currents $`L_r(H,I)`$ is large and hence the noise initially follows $`dV/dI`$. Above about 15 mA, however, the increase of the noise is moderated due to the gradual decrease of $`L_r`$. At still higher current the noise starts to drop rapidly because of the rapid decrease of $`L_r(H,I)`$ with current. Above 28 mA, $`dV/dI`$ approaches a constant value of the flux-flow resistance of the OP, indicating that $`L_r`$ is small and that most of the sample volume is in the OP. Accordingly, noise decreases rapidly in this region with decreasing $`L_r(H,I)`$. Since the ordered part of the sample does not contribute to the noise, the noise level vanishes as the width of the DP near the edge diminishes.

¿From the above considerations we can analyze the general noise behavior of the strip, presented in Fig. 3. At the lowest current, $`I=`$ 15 mA, vortex motion occurs only in the central field region (Fig. 3a), since closer to $`H_{DT}^H`$ and $`H_{DT}^L`$ the integrated $`I_c`$ of the strip is larger than 15 mA due to the large $`L_r`$. As a result, the excess noise in Fig. 3b is present only in the central part. At 18 mA, the field range of the observable vortex motion and noise expands, and around 23 mA, two noise peaks become apparent. In the central-field region the DP is less stable, $`L_r(H,I)`$ drops with $`I`$, and hence the noise decreases rapidly with the current. Closer to the transition fields, however, the metastable DP is much more stable so that $`L_r`$ remains large and $`S`$ still increases with current. At 36 mA most of the sample is in the OP and the noise has accordingly dropped by two orders of magnitude. The strong excess noise is restricted now only to the narrow regions near $`H_{DT}`$ fields where the metastable DP survives even at high vortex velocities.

In summary, the comparative study of excess noise generation in Corbino and strip configurations shows that the flow of the vortex lattice in the Corbino does not generate an excess voltage noise. In contrast, very strong noise enhancement is found in the same samples measured in a strip-like geometry. The excess noise is found on the Bragg glass side of the disorder-driven transition both along the high-field and the reentrant transition lines, and results from random generation of a metastable disordered vortex phase at the sample edges and its subsequent dynamic annealing in the bulk.

We are grateful to D. E. Feldman and S. S. Banerjee for valuable discussions. This work was supported by the Israel Science Foundation - Center of Excellence Program and by the US-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF). EZ acknowledges support by the German-Israeli Foundation G.I.F. and by the Fundacion Antorchas - WIS program.

FIGURE CAPTIONS

Fig. 1. (a) The voltage response $`V`$ vs. magnetic field at 4.4 K measured in the Corbino ($``$) and strip ($``$) geometries. Inset: same data over a wider field range extending above $`H_{c2}`$. (b) The corresponding Corbino ($``$) and strip ($``$) noise power at 9 Hz showing the absence of the excess noise in the Corbino at intermediate fields. Inset: the electrode configuration allowing measurements in both the Corbino and strip configurations.

Fig. 2. The $`VI`$ characteristic ($``$) and the noise power density at 3 Hz ($``$) in the strip configuration. Inset: representative noise power spectra at various fields in the vicinity of $`H_{DT}^L`$.

Fig. 3. (a) Voltage response vs. field at 4.2 K in the strip configuration for $`I=`$ 36 mA ($`\mathrm{}`$), 23 mA ($``$), 18 mA ($`\mathrm{}`$) and 15mA ($``$). (b) The corresponding noise power density at 3 Hz.


text:
# The Environments of SGRs: A Brief & Biased Review

## 1 Introduction

The environments of soft gamma-ray repeaters (SGRs) can provide many important insights into these intriguing and unusual objects. First, the environment of an SGR may provide clues to its origins, including possible progenitor stars, the age of the SGR, its space velocity, etc. Such environmental clues may be gleaned from a surrounding supernova remnant, nearby stars, and unusual ISM features, among other things. Secondly, by studying the impact of the SGR on its surrounding ISM (or vice versa) we can also hope to learn more about the evolution of SGRs.

In this review, I will first go over what we knew (or thought we knew) about SGR environments previously. I will then go over our current state of knowledge regarding the environments of SGRs which are well-localized at the time of the Woods Hole 2001 meeting: SGR 0525-66, SGR 1900+14, and SGR 1806-20.

## 2 What We Used to “Know”

Prior to about 1998, the community had a reasonably clear (though not universally accepted) picture of SGR environments. The three well-localized SGRs were all “known” to be associated with supernova remnants. SGR 0525-66 lies inside the supernova remnant N49 in the LMC (Rothschild, et al., 1994). SGR 1900+14 was localized to within a few arcminutes of G42.8+0.6 (Hurley, et al. (1994); Vasisht, et al. (1994)), and also apparently coincident with an unusual double MIa star system (Vrba et al., 1996). Finally, SGR 1806-20 was found to lie very close to the apparent SNR G10.0-0.3 (Hurley, et al., 1994). This supposed SNR had a bright, variable radio core apparently associated with an X-ray source (Vasisht et al. (1993); Kulkarni & Frail (1993)), indicating a possible plerionic SNR similar to the Crab Nebula. Subsequent observations revealed a bright heavily-absorbed infrared star at the radio core position (Kulkarni et al., 1995), which was then found to be a candidate luminous blue variable (LBV) star based on its IR spectrum (van Kerkwijk et al., 1995). Due to the extreme rarity of both LBVs ans SGRs, a chance superposition of these two seemed very unlikely and led to the conclusion that the SGR must be related to the LBV. As I describe below, we now recognize that many of these associations are either coincidental or due to some more complicated underlying associations.

## 3 SGR 0525-66

Since the giant outburst of March 1979, SGR 0525-66 has been associated with the Large Magellanic Cloud (Mazets et al.,, 1979). More recently, Rothschild, et al. (1994) found an X-ray source within the $`\gamma `$-ray error box, which lies inside the contours of the N49 SNR. Simple analyses show that the chance projection of the SGR within this SNR is $`<1\%`$, even making rather stringent assumptions (Gaensler et al., 2001). Thus, this SGR/SNR association seems robust.

SGR 0525-66 and its host SNR also have the lowest extinction of any known SGR, with $`A_V1`$ mag. More recently, Kaplan et al. (2001) have obtained HST optical observations of the area surrounding SGR 0525-66. They find several stars within the X-ray positional error box, as well as some apparent bright “lumps” from the SNR itself. The stars are consistent with G/K main sequence stars. It is interesting to note, in comparison with the other well-localized SGRs, that there are no luminous stars nearby.

## 4 SGR 1900+14

The $`\gamma `$-ray IPN localization for SGR 1900+14 initially led to an apparent association with an X-ray source (Hurley, et al., 1994). This in turn led to an initial optical/IR identification of SGR 1900+14 with an unusual pair of M-type supergiant stars (Vrba et al., 1996). The relative scarcity of such pairings made a coincidental alignment of the SGR with them moderately unlikely.

However, the 1998 major outburst of SGR 1900+14 produced, among other things, a radio transient which Frail et al. (1999) localized to $`1`$-arcsec precision. This position was shown to be inconsistent with the M-star pair (Eikenberry & Dror, 2001) (see Figure 1), and no variable source was found from IR observations during the 1998 flare (Oppenheimer et al. (1998); Eikenberry & Dror (2001)).

More recently, Vrba et al. (2000) have shown that the M-star pair are in fact the two brightest members of an entire cluster of supergiant and giant stars. This dense cluster has a reddening consistent with the X-ray absorption towards SGR 1900+14, and, at an assumed distance of $`1015`$ kpc, lies a projected distance of $`1`$ pc from the SGR. The same arguments apply for the association with the SGR and the cluster – the odds of having two such unusual objects coincidentally aligned on the sky are low. One possible interpretation is that SGR 1900+14 was “born” in the cluster of stars, and either left in its progenitor stage or was ejected by a supernova kick (or both). If we assume this scenario and a “standard” pulsar kick velocity of a few hundred $`\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s}`$, then a separation of 1 pc implies an age for SGR 1900+14 of $`<10^4`$ years – consistent with several models for SGR activity.

## 5 SGR 1806-20

As noted above, SGR 1806-20 was thought to be associated with a luminous blue variable (LBV) star which lies at the time-variable (in both flux and morphology) core of the radio nebula G10.0-0.3 (Vasisht et al. (1993); Kulkarni & Frail (1993)). However, the recent Inter-Planetary Network (IPN) localization of SGR 1806-20 provides a position inconsistent with that of the LBV star and radio core (Hurley et al., 1999c). Furthermore, Gaensler et al. (2001) argue that G10.0-0.3 is not a supernova remnant at all, but is rather powered by the tremendous wind of the LBV star. Infrared observations of the field of SGR 1806-20 reveal that the LBV star is not alone, but appears to be part of a cluster of embedded, hot, luminous stars (Fuchs et al., 1999), and the IPN position for SGR 1806-20 is consistent with membership in that cluster. Recently, Eikenberry et al. (2002) have used near-infrared photometry and spectroscopy to conclude that this cluster contains what may be the most luminous star in the Galaxy (the LBV star), at least one Wolf-Rayet star of type WCL, and at least two blue “hypergiants” of luminosity class Ia+. These properties make the cluster resemble a somewhat smaller and older version of the “super” star cluster R136 (Massey & Hunter, 1998), making the potential association with SGR 1806-20 even more intriguing.

Chandra observations of SGR 1806-20 have provided a sub-arcsecond localization of the SGR in this crowded field (Kaplan et al. (2002); Eikenberry et al. (2001)). The localization matches the IPN position for SGR 1806-20, and completely excludes a direct association of the SGR with the LBV and radio core. This seems to confirm the conclusion of Gaensler et al. (2001) that G10.0-0.3 is in fact not a SNR, but is instead a radio nebula powered by the mass-loss wind of the LBV star at its core. Figure 2 shows J-, H-, and K-band infrared images taken with OSIRIS on the CTIO 4-m telescope of the region near SGR 1806-20, along with the 90% positional error circle. As noted above, SGR 1806-20 lies in the direction of an unusual embedded cluster of massive, luminous young stars (Fuchs et al. (1999); Eikenberry et al. (2002)), with a distance of $`14.5\pm 1.4`$ kpc and a reddening of $`A_V=29\pm 2`$ mag (Corbel et al., (1997); Eikenberry et al. (2002)). The fact that stars D and E in Figure 2 have $`JK=5.0`$ mag indicates that they are members of this cluster ($`E_{JK}=5.0`$ mag for $`A_V=29`$ mag), and thus that SGR 1806-20 lies within the radial extent of the cluster on the sky. Furthermore, the X-ray absorption towards SGR 1806-20 is $`56\times 10^{22}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ (see above, and Mereghetti et al. (2000)), which is consistent with the extinction towards the cluster. Thus, it seems likely that SGR 1806-20 is also a member of this massive star cluster at a distance of $`14.5\pm 1.4`$ kpc.

The IR colors (and upper limits) of the two candidate counterparts to SGR 1806-20 are consistent with both of them being stellar members of the star cluster ($`JK=5.0`$ mag, $`HK=2.0`$ mag). Note that the brighter star just outside the error circle (“C” in Figure 2) appears to be a foreground star ($`JK=3`$ mag), confirming that it is not a likely counterpart to the SGR. However, as can been seen in Figure 2, the field of SGR 1806-20 is highly crowded in the IR by both foreground/background objects and cluster members, and the simple fact that two stars lie within the 90% confidence error circle and another just outside it shows that the probability of a chance coincidence of unrelated IR objects is high. Thus, we cannot conclude definitely that either of the possible counterparts is actually related to SGR 1806-20. If both candidates are in fact members of the cluster, we can estimate their absolute magnitudes to be $`M_K=2.3`$ mag (A) and $`M_K=0.4`$ mag (B). For Star A, this is consistent with stars of luminosity matching a B1V or K3III star, and is inconsistent with any stars of luminosity class I. After correcting for the $`HK=2`$ mag differential extinction toward the cluster, the intrinsic color of $`(HK)_{intrins}=0.8\pm 1.2`$ mag is essentially consistent with all stellar spectra earlier than late M, and does not significantly constrain the classification. For Star B, the absolute magnitude is consistent with stars of luminosity matching a B8V star, and is inconsistent with any stars of luminosity class III or higher. It is important to note that no observations have yet probed the distribution of stars in the cluster with masses below that of late B main sequence stars. Thus, it is possible that there are even further stars within the error circle at significantly lower mass/luminosity, unless the cluster mass distribution shows a sharp lower cutoff.

One particularly intriguing aspect of the association between SGR 1806-20 and the star cluster is that a neutron star progenitor went supernova before the stars currently observed in the cluster. Since more massive stars evolve to the supernova stage more rapidly, if the progenitor of SGR 1806-20 formed at the same time as the currently observed massive stars, its mass must have been greater. However, the mass estimate for the LBV is $`>200M_{}`$ (Eikenberry et al., 2002), and several of the other stars are likely to have masses in the range of $`50100M_{}`$ (Eikenberry et al., 2002). While recent theories have predicted that very massive stars may produce neutron star remnants due to the effect of envelope loss via dense stellar winds, the upper limit on their masses is $`80M_{}`$, with higher mass stars producing massive black hole remnants. Thus, it seems unlikely that the SGR 1806-20 progenitor formed at the same time as the currently observed massive stars in the cluster.

Alternately, SGR 1806-20 may have formed prior to these stars – in fact, Kaplan et al. (2002) suggest that the supernova event that produced SGR 1806-20 may have triggered the star formation activity that produced the massive stars in the cluster. However, the massive stars we observe in the cluster are evolved, with ages of $`10^6`$ yr to reach the LBV and Wolf-Rayet stages of their lives. If the SGR 1806-20 supernova event led to the birth of these stars, then SGR 1806-20 is much older than the $`10^310^4`$ yr typically considered for magnetars. Alternately, SGR 1806-20 may simply be taken as evidence for prior massive star formation at this location. While at least one supernova occurred here, perhaps it was not the first, and an earlier supernova event triggered the formation of the currently observed massive stars.

## 6 Some Conclusions

Here I present some of the conclusions of the above discussions:

* Of the well-localized SGRs, only SGR 0525-66 seems to have a clear association with a SNR.
* SGR 1900+14 is not directly associated with the MIa double star system.
* SGR 1806-20 is not directly associated with the LBV star near it, nor is there a SNR evident in this neighborhood
* Both SGR 1806-20 and SGR 1900+14 are in/near dense clusters of massive stars. These are rare enough that a chance superposition is low.
* The association of SGRs with such clusters explain the apparent, but eventually false, association with some of the particular massive stars in the clusters.
* SGR 0525-66 is not associated with any apparent cluster of massive stars.
* Th environments of SGRs are giving some very interesting, if somewhat mixed, signals regarding the origins and evolutions of these objects.