text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The evaluation of static properties of baryonic resonances, like the magnetic moment, is a standard exercise when one has a wave function for the states. This is the case of the quark models where a thorough investigation of magnetic moments and other static properties , such as masses and couplings to the $`\pi N`$ system , has been done.

The introduction of unitary chiral techniques has allowed one to show that the octet of the lowest energy $`J^P=1/2^{}`$ baryonic resonances can be generated dynamically from the lowest order chiral Lagrangian and by the use of natural size cut-offs or regularizing scales to make the divergent loop integrals finite. These findings allow one to classify those states as quasibound meson-baryon states, or equivalently, ordinary multiple scattering resonances in coupled channels. The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ was one of the first resonances to receive attention from the chiral unitary perspective . The $`N^{}(1535)`$ was also generated within chiral unitary schemes in  and has been recently revised in  with the inclusion of $`\pi \pi N`$ channels. Recently the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(1620)`$  and the $`\mathrm{\Xi }(1620)`$ states  have also been generated within the same scheme, thus completing the octet of dynamically generated states.

In the chiral unitary method, one computes scattering matrices in all meson and baryon channels and poles for resonances are searched in the second Riemann sheet. The poles provide the mass and the width of the resonance states and, in addition, the residues at the poles provide the product of the couplings of the resonance to the initial and final states of the considered transition scattering matrix element. In this method, it is not straightforward to evaluate other properties of the resonance, like magnetic moments, since, unlike ordinary quantum mechanical problems, in the present approach we do not have wave functions and operators manifestly. Therefore, we need to explore an alternative method to compute resonance magnetic moments from scattering matrices. This is the subject of the present work. We compute the magnetic moments of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ resonances, as well as the transition magnetic moment from the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ to the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$, which allows us to determine the partial decay width for the decay $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)\gamma `$. We also compare the results obtained here with those of ordinary quark models showing that there are appreciable differences between them. This offers an evidence that the nature of these states as dynamically generated from multiple scattering of coupled channels of mesons and baryons differs from an ordinary quark model description.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we briefly describe the model that we use and show in detail the method to compute scattering matrices. In section 3, we compare the scattering matrices with a resonance dominant form and extract the magnetic moments. In section 4, we present our numerical results, which are compared with quark model results in section 5. The final section summarizes our findings.

## 2 Evaluation of the magnetic moment

The procedure to evaluate the magnetic moment of the resonances proceeds in an analogous way to that for the $`N^{}N^{}\pi `$ coupling in . We evaluate the $`T`$-matrix for the process $`MBM^{}B^{}\gamma `$ using the chiral Lagrangian for the coupling of the mesons and baryons and for the photon to the mesons and baryons. We sum the Feynman diagrams which generate the resonance both on the left and on the right of the photon coupling. Isolation of resonance poles from these diagrams then allows us to evaluate the resonance magnetic moment.

The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ resonance is generated in  by means of the Bethe-Salpeter equation with a cut-off to regularize the loop integrals. The Bethe-Salpeter equation is given by

$$T=V+VGT,$$
(1)
where in the present method the term $`VGT`$ is given as a matrix product of the potential $`V`$, the meson-baryon propagator $`G`$ and the $`T`$-matrix $`T`$. The diagonal matrix $`G`$ contains the loop integral of a meson and baryon propagators. In general, the product $`VGT`$ involves an integral over off-shell momenta. In the present approach that integral is greatly simplified reducing the problem to a matrix product due to the on-shell factorizations of $`V`$ and $`T`$. The on-shell factorization in  was done by incorporating the off-shell part of the loops into renormalization of couplings of the lowest order Lagrangian, in analogy to what was done in the meson-meson interaction in . An explicit demonstration of the cancellation of these terms with tadpole corrections can also be seen in  for the $`p`$-wave meson-meson interaction in the $`\rho `$ channel. The on-shell factorization allows one to solve eq.(1) to give

$$T=[1VG]^1V,$$
(2)
in a simple matrix inversion. This has also been derived using the unitarization with the $`N/D`$ method and dispersion relations in . In this latter paper  the regularization of the loops is done by means of dimensional regularization with subtraction constants in the $`G`$ function. The same method was used in  to obtain the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ resonances, which is the one we follow here. The Feynman diagrams summed by eqs. (1) and (2) are given in Fig.1.

The $`s`$-wave meson-baryon interaction potential $`V`$ is derived from the second order terms in the meson field of the chiral Lagrangian :

$$V_{ij}=C_{ij}\frac{1}{4f^2}(2\sqrt{s}M_iM_j)\left(\frac{M_i+E}{2M_i}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{M_j+E^{}}{2M_j}\right)^{1/2},$$
(3)
where the coefficients $`C_{ij}(=C_{ji})`$ are given in  and the meson decay constant $`f`$ is taken as an average value $`f=1.123f_\pi `$. The $`G`$ function for each meson-baryon channel is given by

$`G_l(\sqrt{s})`$ $`=`$ $`i2M_l{\displaystyle \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{1}{(Pq)^2M_l^2+iϵ}\frac{1}{q^2m_l^2+iϵ}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2M_l}{16\pi ^2}}\{a(\mu )+\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{M_l^2}{\mu ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{m_l^2M_l^2+s}{2s}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_l^2}{M_l^2}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{q}_l}{\sqrt{s}}}[\mathrm{ln}(s(M_l^2m_l^2)+2\overline{q}_l\sqrt{s})+\mathrm{ln}(s+(M_l^2m_l^2)+2\overline{q}_l\sqrt{s})`$
$`\mathrm{ln}(s+(M_l^2m_l^2)+2\overline{q}_l\sqrt{s})\mathrm{ln}(s(M_l^2m_l^2)+2\overline{q}_l\sqrt{s})]\},`$
where $`m`$ and $`M`$ are taken to be the observed meson and baryon masses, respectively, and $`\mu `$ is a regularization scale which is chosen to be 630 MeV as in . The subtraction constants $`a_l`$ are of the order of $`2`$, which is a natural size as shown in . The values chosen in , which reproduce the results of  calculated with just one cut-off, are

$`a_{\overline{K}N}=1.84,a_{\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }}=2.00,a_{\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }}=1.83`$
$`a_{\eta \mathrm{\Lambda }}=2.25,a_{\eta \mathrm{\Sigma }}=2.38,a_{K\mathrm{\Xi }}=2.67`$ (5)
The elementary couplings of the photon to the components of the meson-baryon amplitude at lowest order of the chiral expansion are shown in fig.2. Now if we want to generate the resonance on the left and right sides of the photon coupling we must consider the diagrams shown in fig.3. The diagrams of row b) in fig.3 vanish, given the $`s`$-wave nature of the meson-baryon vertices and the $`\stackrel{}{ϵ}\stackrel{}{q}_L`$ coupling of the photon to the mesons, which makes the integral over the loop variable $`q_L`$ vanish. The remaining couplings are those of the photon to the baryons and the analogous ones with two extra meson lines. The spin dependent part of these couplings needed for the evaluation of magnetic moments is given by

$$=\frac{i}{4M_p}b_6^F\overline{B}[S^\mu ,S^\nu ][F_{\mu \nu }^+,B]\frac{i}{4M_p}b_6^D\overline{B}[S^\mu ,S^\nu ]\{F_{\mu \nu }^+,B\}$$
(6)
with

$`F_{\mu \nu }^+`$ $`=`$ $`e(u^{}QF_{\mu \nu }u+uQF_{\mu \nu }u^{})`$ (7)
$`F_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu ,`$ (8)
where $`M_p`$ is the mass of proton, $`A_\mu `$ is the electromagnetic field, and $`b_6^F`$ and $`b_6^D`$ are parameters to be fitted so as to reproduce the magnetic moments of the ground state baryons. In eq.(6), $`\mathrm{}`$ means the trace over flavor indices, $`B`$ is the SU(3) matrix for the baryon field , and $`S^\mu `$ are spin matrices as explained below. In eq.(7) $`Q`$ is the charge matrix for the $`u,d,s`$ quarks: $`Q=\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{diag}(2,1,1)`$ and $`u^2=U=\mathrm{exp}(i\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Phi }/f)`$ where $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the SU(3) matrix of the pseudoscalar meson field . In the baryon rest frame the operator $`S^\mu `$ becomes $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }/2`$ and then,

$$[S^\mu ,S^\nu ]F_{\mu \nu }(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\times \stackrel{}{q})\stackrel{}{ϵ}$$
(9)
in the Coulomb gauge ($`ϵ^0=0`$, $`\stackrel{}{ϵ}\stackrel{}{q}=0`$) and for an outgoing photon. Thus the vertex from the Lagrangian of eq.(6) can be written as

$``$ $``$ $`e{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\sigma }\times \stackrel{}{q}}{2M_p}}\stackrel{}{ϵ}({\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}b_6^F\overline{B}[(u^{}Qu+uQu^{}),B]`$ (11)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}b_6^D\overline{B}\{(u^{}Qu+uQu^{}),B\}).`$
By expanding $`u`$ in terms of the meson field we obtain the expressions for both the $`\gamma BB^{}`$ and $`\gamma BB^{}MM^{}`$ vertices. By taking $`u=1`$ we obtain the magnetic moments of the ground state octet baryons,

$$\mu _i=d_ib_6^D+f_ib_6^F,$$
(12)
where the coefficients $`d_i`$ and $`f_i`$ are given in table 1. One immediately realizes that by setting $`b_6^D=0`$ and $`b_6^F=1`$ one obtains the ordinary magnetic moments of the baryons without anomalous contributions. Fitting the values of eq.(12) to the observed magnetic moments of the baryons one obtains

$$b_6^D=2.40,b_6^F=1.82$$
(13)
very similar to those given in , $`b_6^D=2.39,b_6^F=1.77`$.

Similarly, by expanding $`u`$ up to two meson fields we obtain the vertices of diagram a) of fig.2 with the result

$$it_{ij}^{a)}=\frac{e}{2M_p}(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\times \stackrel{}{q})\stackrel{}{ϵ}\frac{1}{2f^2}[X_{ij}b_6^D+Y_{ij}b_6^F],$$
(14)
where the coefficients $`X_{ij}`$ and $`Y_{ij}`$ are given in tables 2 and 3.

The evaluation of the amplitudes corresponding to the diagrams of fig.3 (the magnetic part) is straightforward. We obtain,

$$it_{ij}^\gamma =i\stackrel{~}{t}_{ij}\frac{e}{2M_p}(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\times \stackrel{}{q})\stackrel{}{ϵ}$$
(15)
and

$$i\stackrel{~}{t}_{ij}=\left(\underset{lm}{}t_{il}G_lA_{lm}G_mt_{mj}+\underset{l}{}t_{il}\stackrel{~}{G}_lt_{lj}\mu _{B_l}\right).$$
(16)
In this equation $`t_{ij}`$ is the scattering amplitude from the channel $`i`$ to $`j`$,

$$A_{lm}=\frac{1}{2f^2}[X_{lm}b_6^D+Y_{lm}b_6^F],$$
(17)
and

$$\stackrel{~}{G}_l(p)=i\frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}D(k)G(pk)G(pk)$$
(18)
with $`D`$ and $`G`$ the meson and baryon propagators. Here, by keeping up to linear terms in $`q`$, we have neglected the small momentum of the photon in the second baryon propagator. Therefore, we can write

$$\stackrel{~}{G}_l(\sqrt{s})=\frac{}{\sqrt{s}}G_l.$$
(19)
This approximation allows us to obtain an analytic expression for $`\stackrel{~}{G}_l(\sqrt{s})`$. In eq.(16), we omit to write contributions from the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-$`\mathrm{\Sigma }^0`$ transition magnetic moment. The contributions are negligible since the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-$`\mathrm{\Sigma }^0`$ transition changes the isospin, therefore either the left or right resonances must have isospin 1, which is not the present case.

## 3 Comparison to the resonance description

In order to extract a resonance magnetic moment from the scattering amplitude, (15) or (16), we assume that resonances are dynamically generated on the left and right of the photon coupling. First we parameterize the meson-baryon scattering amplitude $`t_{ij}`$ as shown in fig.4(b) by the resonance dominant Breit-Wigner form:

$$it_{ij}=ig_i\frac{i}{\sqrt{s}M_R+i\mathrm{\Gamma }/2}(ig_j^{}).$$
(20)
Here we have introduced the resonance mass $`M_R`$, the total decay width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and the decay constant to the channel $`i`$, $`g_i`$. Then the photon coupling amplitude $`t_{ij}^\gamma `$ is parameterized as shown in fig.4(a) by the expression:

$$it_{ij}^\gamma =ig_i\frac{i}{\sqrt{s}M_R+i\mathrm{\Gamma }/2}\frac{e\mu _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}}{2M_p}(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\times \stackrel{}{q})\stackrel{}{ϵ}\frac{i}{\sqrt{s}M_R+i\mathrm{\Gamma }/2}(i)g_j^{}.$$
(21)
Dividing $`it_{ij}^\gamma `$ by $`t_{ij}`$ and by $`\frac{e}{2M_p}(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\times \stackrel{}{q})\stackrel{}{ϵ}`$ we cancel the coupling constants and one propagator. Thus by evaluating this ratio at the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$ pole, where the amplitudes are dominated by the resonance, and recalling eq.(15), we have

$$\mu _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}=\underset{zz_R}{lim}(zz_R)\frac{i\stackrel{~}{t}_{ij}(z)}{t_{ij}(z)}=\mathrm{Res}\frac{i\stackrel{~}{t}_{ij}(z)}{t_{ij}(z)}|_{z=z_R}.$$
(22)
where $`z_R`$ denotes the position of the pole in the second Riemann sheet, $`z_RM_R+i\mathrm{\Gamma }/2`$. In fact, there exist two poles around the region of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ , located at $`z_R=1426+16i`$ and $`1390+66i`$ MeV. The former pole largely couples to the $`\overline{K}N`$ state, whereas the latter one couples predominantly to the $`\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ state. Both poles may contribute to the resonance $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$. We evaluate the magnetic moment at both poles. For the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ the pole position is $`z_R=1680+20i`$ MeV.

Similarly, we can also evaluate the transition amplitude between the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ resonances. This is accomplished by putting different energies, $`\sqrt{s_1}`$ and $`\sqrt{s_2}`$, on the transition amplitudes $`t_{ij}`$ appearing on the left and right of the photon coupling in eq. (16). Then by taking $`\sqrt{s_1}z_{1R}`$ for the first resonance ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$) and $`\sqrt{s_2}z_{2R}`$ for the second resonance ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$), we would find

$$\mu _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)}=\underset{\stackrel{z_1z_{1R}}{z_2z_{2R}}}{lim}\frac{i\stackrel{~}{t}_{ij}(z_1,z_2)g_i(1670)g_j^{}(1405)}{t_{ii}(z_1)t_{jj}(z_2)}.$$
(23)
The analysis in the complex plane has the advantage of making the background contributions negligible since the evaluations are done exactly at the poles of the resonances. The magnetic moment evaluated in the complex plane, however, has a complex value, which might induce uncertainties since one is extrapolating from the real axis to the complex plane. Hence, to avoid these uncertainties, we also calculate the amplitudes on the real axis in the first Riemann sheet. The magnetic moments are then defined by

$$\mu _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}=\frac{i\stackrel{~}{t}_{ij}(\sqrt{s})}{\frac{}{\sqrt{s}}t_{ij}(\sqrt{s})},$$
(24)
where both the coupling constants and the resonance propagators cancel to provide the magnetic moment of the resonance. In order to eliminate background we choose external channels which have a large coupling to the resonances and, furthermore, we take the $`I=0`$ isospin combination. In particular, we take the $`\overline{K}N`$ state with $`I=0`$ for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and the $`K\mathrm{\Xi }`$ state with $`I=0`$ for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ because of their large couplings to the corresponding channels . For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ we also calculate the magnetic moment in the $`\overline{K}N\gamma \pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ channel, since this channel may be used in the experiments to determine the magnetic moment of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$. We show the numerator and the denominator of eq.(24) in fig.5 with the $`\overline{K}N`$ channel, in fig.6 with the $`\overline{K}N\gamma \pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and in fig.7 with the $`K\mathrm{\Xi }`$ channel for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$. We take the ratio of these amplitudes around the energy close to the resonance where the real part of the two functions has maximum strength. In order to estimate uncertainties we also evaluate the ratio at the point where either the imaginary part of the numerator or denominator becomes zero, as well as the ratio of the dominant real parts. In principle, in the absence of background contamination, these evaluations should give the same value.

As for the transition magnetic moment, in order to cancel the couplings and propagators, we take the ratio

$$\mu _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)}^2=\frac{(i\stackrel{~}{t}_{K\mathrm{\Xi }\gamma \overline{K}N}(\sqrt{s_1},\sqrt{s_2}))(i\stackrel{~}{t}_{\overline{K}N\gamma K\mathrm{\Xi }}(\sqrt{s_2},\sqrt{s_1}))}{\left(\frac{}{\sqrt{s}}t_{K\mathrm{\Xi }}(\sqrt{s_1})\right)\left(\frac{}{\sqrt{s}}t_{\overline{K}N}(\sqrt{s_2})\right)}$$
(25)
and we proceed as before to evaluate the ratio and the uncertainties. We show in fig.8 the numerator and the denominator of eq.(25), for fixed $`\sqrt{s_2}=1681`$ MeV as a function of $`\sqrt{s_1}`$ in the left panels, and for fixed $`\sqrt{s_1}=1423`$ MeV as a function of $`\sqrt{s_2}`$ in the right panels.

Experimentally, magnetic moments of resonances may be extracted from bremsstrahlung processes, which are carefully compared with theoretical models. On the other hand, the transition magnetic moment between $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ could be directly investigated from the decay $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)\gamma `$. The width for this transition is given by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\frac{1}{\pi }\frac{M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)}}{M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)}}q^3\left(\frac{e\mu _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)}}{2M_p}\right)^2$$
(26)
with $`q`$ the photon momentum in the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ rest frame.

## 4 Results

Comparison of the numerator and denominator in eq.(24) for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ with the $`\overline{K}N\gamma \overline{K}N`$ and $`\overline{K}N\gamma \pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ channel and performing the ratios discussed in the former section we obtain a value

$$\mu _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)}=+0.240.45$$
(27)
in units of the nuclear magneton $`\mu _N=e/2M_p`$. The large uncertainty in the result obtained comes from the energy range where the amplitudes of the ratio of eq.(24) are evaluated. As seen in figs. 5 and 6 the value of this energy, which signals the position of the resonance in the real axis, is around 1418-1422 MeV for the $`\overline{K}N`$ channel and 1403-1416 MeV for the $`\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ channel. The evaluation in the $`\overline{K}N`$ channel gives $`\mu _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)}=+0.44\pm 0.06`$, while in the $`\overline{K}N\gamma \pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ we obtain $`+0.26\pm 0.07`$. We also evaluate the magnetic moment using the ratio of eq.(22) at the pole in the second Riemann sheet, which gives a complex number with the module $`0.41\pm 0.01`$ for the case of $`z_R=1426+16i`$ and $`0.30\pm 0.01`$ for $`z_R=1390+66i`$. All possible isospin $`I=0`$ combinations, $`\overline{K}N`$, $`\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$, $`\eta \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`K\mathrm{\Xi }`$, provide approximately the same value (the channel dependence is shown in the small error bar of the presented value.) This channel insensitivity in the evaluation in the complex plane implies that the ratio of eq.(22) at the pole is dominated by the resonance and is not affected by background contaminations. It is interesting to note that the values in the complex plane are comparable with the value of eq.(27). In addition, recalling that the pole at $`z_R=1426+16i`$ couples largely to $`\overline{K}N`$ and that at $`z_R=1390+66i`$ to $`\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$, the channel (or energy) dependence of the magnetic moment evaluated on the real axis stems from a different contribution of each pole to the values of the amplitudes in the real axis.

For the case of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ the ratio obtained from fig.7 with the $`K\mathrm{\Xi }`$ channel gives us

$$\mu _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)}=0.29\pm 0.01$$
(28)
with small uncertainty, and we find that the ratio of eq. (24) is stable around the resonance region. It is also interesting to note that the analysis in the complex plane in the pole in the second Riemann sheet (eq.(22)) gives in this case a value for the modulus of $`0.23`$, which is similar to that of eq.(28). As in the preceding case, the analysis in the real plane allows us to obtain a real magnetic moment with a given sign.

Finally for the case of the transition magnetic moment we obtain the value from eq.(25) and fig.8

$$\left|\mu _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)}\right|=0.023\pm 0.009$$
(29)
We also evaluate the transition magnetic moment from eq.(23) in the complex plane, which gives the modulus $`0.019\pm 0.002`$ with $`z_{1R}=1680+20i`$, $`z_{2R}=1426+16i`$ and $`0.093\pm 0.003`$ with $`z_{1R}=1680+20i`$, $`z_{2R}=1390+66i`$. The values obtained in the complex plane are less reliable in this case because they involve an extrapolation of two variables to the complex plane, each of which induces uncertainties. Even then, the agreement with the evaluation on the real axis is fair if we take into account the fact that, given the smallness of these numbers, their differences are of the same order of magnitude than those for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ case. The results discussed here are summarized in table 4.

With the value of the transition magnetic moment of eq.(29) and using eq.(26) we obtain a partial width for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)\gamma `$ decay which corresponds to a branching ratio $`2\times 10^6`$.

## 5 Quark Model Results

In this section we compute the resonance magnetic moments in the non-relativistic quark model. This demonstrates that the nature of the resonances differ appreciably from the chiral unitary description. In the $`SU(6)`$ quark model, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ are described as $`p`$-wave excitations of the 70-dimensional representation, whose $`SU(2)\times SU(3)`$ decomposition is given by

$`70={}_{}{}^{2}8+{}_{}{}^{4}8+{}_{}{}^{2}1+{}_{}{}^{2}10.`$ (30)
Here in the notation on the right hand side, $`{}_{}{}^{2j+1}D`$, $`j`$ represents the resonance spin and $`D`$ the dimension of the flavor $`SU(3)`$ representation.

Since the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ particles are isosinglet, their wave functions are spanned by the flavor octet and singlet states. Explicitly, these states are given as

$`|^28;jm`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}([\psi (\rho ),\chi _\rho ]_{jm}\varphi _\lambda +[\psi (\rho ),\chi _\lambda ]_{jm}\varphi _\rho `$
$`+[\psi (\lambda ),\chi _\rho ]_{jm}\varphi _\rho +[\psi (\lambda ),\chi _\lambda ]_{jm}\varphi _\lambda ),`$
$`|^48;jm`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left([\psi (\lambda ),\chi _S]_{jm}\varphi _\lambda +[\psi (\rho ),\chi _S]_{jm}\varphi _\rho \right),`$ (31)
$`|^21;jm`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left([\psi (\lambda ),\chi _\rho ]_{jm}[\psi (\rho ),\chi _\lambda ]_{jm}\right)\varphi _A.`$
Here we have employed standard notations:

$`\stackrel{}{\rho }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(\stackrel{}{x}_2\stackrel{}{x}_1)`$
$`\stackrel{}{\lambda }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}}(\stackrel{}{x}_2+\stackrel{}{x}_12\stackrel{}{x}_3)`$
$`\psi (\stackrel{}{x}):p\mathrm{wave}\mathrm{orbital}\mathrm{wave}\mathrm{functions}`$
$`\chi _{\rho ,\lambda ,S}:\mathrm{flavor}\mathrm{wave}\mathrm{functions}\mathrm{of}\rho ,\lambda \mathrm{and}S\mathrm{symmetry}`$
$`\varphi _{\rho ,\lambda ,A}:\mathrm{flavor}\mathrm{wave}\mathrm{functions}\mathrm{of}\rho ,\lambda \mathrm{and}A\mathrm{symmetry}`$
Furthermore, in eq. (31), the orbital and spin wave functions are coupled to the total spin $`jm`$.

In the non-relativistic description, the magnetic moment operator is given by the sum of twice the spin and the orbital angular momentum:

$`\stackrel{}{\mu }={\displaystyle \frac{e}{2m}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\left(\stackrel{}{\sigma }(i)+\stackrel{}{l}(i)\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\lambda _3(i)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}}\lambda _8(i)\right).`$ (32)
In this equation $`m`$ is a constituent quark mass for which we take for simplicity a common value $`mM_N/3`$ for the three quarks. Furthermore, we have written the charge matrix as a sum of $`SU(3)`$ components. Due to the isosinglet nature of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ particles, the matrix elements of the isovector ($`\lambda _3`$) term vanish and only the $`\lambda _8`$-term contributes. The actual computation is straightforward and therefore here we present only the final result. By writing a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ state as

$`|\mathrm{\Lambda }=a_1|^28+a_2|^48+a_3|^21,`$ (33)
where the coefficients must satisfy the normalization condition, $`a_1^2+a_2^2+a_3^3=1`$, we find for the diagonal element:

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }|\mu _z|\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}a_2^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{9}}a_1a_3.`$ (34)
Similarly we can compute the off-diagonal matrix element.

The coefficients are determined by assuming suitable interactions between quarks. Here we employ two parameter sets; Isgur-Karl (IK)  and Hey-Litchfield-Cashmore (HLC) , the values of which are shown in Table 5. We summarize the results for the magnetic moments in Table 6, where the results for the transition magnetic moment are also shown. We find that the magnetic moment of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ is small and negative, as opposed to the result of the chiral unitary method. For the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ the HLC parameters provide a value similar to the chiral unitary method. For the transition magnetic moment, however, the quark model values are significantly larger than the chiral unitary ones, by about a factor ten. This in turn results in the branching ratio in the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ decay about hundred times larger than the chiral unitary result. In general, the magnetic moments are sensitive to the choice of the mixing coefficients. However, absolute values are small for a reasonable range of the mixing parameters. In the quark model, there are two reasons for this:

1. Only the isoscalar ($`\lambda _8`$) component contributes, which has relatively small contributions.
2. For spin doublet $`{}_{}{}^{2}8`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{2}1`$ states, the spin $`\stackrel{}{s}`$ and orbital angular momentum $`\stackrel{}{l}`$ are aligned such that their contributions roughly cancel. Classically, to form a $`(jm)=(1/2,1/2)`$ state, $`\stackrel{}{l}`$ orients to the $`+z`$ direction, while $`\stackrel{}{s}`$ orients to the $`z`$ directions; $`l_z=1`$ and $`s_z=1/2`$. The magnetic moment of this configuration vanishes:

$`\mu _z=1l_z+2s_z=0.`$ (35)

## 6 Conclusion

We have introduced here the formalism to evaluate magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moment of the two $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$ resonances, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$, which are dynamically generated within $`U\chi PT`$. At the same time we have done the numerical evaluations and have determined the actual value for these magnitudes. The values obtained are $`\mu _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)}=+0.20.5\mu _N`$, smaller than that of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ ($`0.6\mu _N`$) and of opposite sign. For the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ we obtain $`\mu _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)}0.29\mu _N`$, also smaller than that of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and with the same sign, while for the transition magnetic moment we obtain a value $`|\mu _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)}|0.023\mu _N`$, which leads to a branching ratio of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)\gamma `$ channel of the order of $`2\times 10^6`$. The results of the $`U\chi PT`$ method are different from those obtained with the quark models, reflecting the different nature attributed to the resonances in those models. One of the interesting results obtained in this work is the abnormally small decay width for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1670)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)\gamma `$ transition, which differs in two orders of magnitude from the quark model predictions. Short of a measurement of the transition, which could be difficult given the small numbers predicted, even the determination of an upper bound would provide interesting information about the nature of these resonances.

### Acknowledgments

E. O. and D.J. wish to acknowledge the hospitality of the University of Barcelona. A. H. thanks the members of the nuclear theory group at the University of Valencia, where part of this work was done. This work is also partly supported by DGICYT contract numbers BFM2000-1326, PB98-1247, by the EU TMR network Eurodaphne, contract no. ERBFMRX-CT98-0169, and by the Generalitat de Catalunya project SGR2000-24.


format: text

text:
# On certain generalized Hardy’s inequalities and applications

##### Introduction

The classical inequality of Hardy for smooth functions $`fC_0^{\mathrm{}}(f𝐑\{0\})`$:

$$_𝐑x^sf^2\frac{4}{(s+1)^2}_𝐑x^{s+2}(f^{})^2$$

for $`s1`$ can be generalized in various ways and provides a weighted version of Poincaré’s inequality. The standard generalizations replace the weight $`x^s`$ with the radial variable or the boundary defining function of a smooth domain, are reduced to the one-dimensional case and are proved directly by partial integration, as far as the weight stays smooth. Here we we replace the weight by a homogeneous polynomial that is singular also away from the origin, so its zero set is a singular algebraic cone. In this case no direct method of the preceding form is available: the rectilinearization of such a set being non-trivial along its singularities. Specifically, singular algebraic varities are rectilinearized under the process of ”resolution of singularities” then, their singularities unfold and appear as ”normal crossings”. We follow this procedure to the extent of ” reduction of multiplicity ” of an algebraic set and prove following generalization.

Let $`P(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ be a homogeneous polynomial of degree $`d`$ in $`n`$-real variables belonging to the class $`𝒫^{gH}`$ that we define in the next paragraph. Let $`V(P)=\{x𝐑^n/P(x)=0\}`$ be the algebraic set that it defines. We introduce the Hardy factors:

$$^1(P)=P^{\frac{2}{d}},^2(P)=\left|\frac{P}{P}\right|^2$$

We prove the following generalized Hardy inequalities $`\text{GHI}_i`$:

$$_{𝐑^n}^i(P)f^2C_i(P)_{𝐑^n}|f|^2$$

for functions $`fC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^nV(P))`$. This inequality while it is elementary to prove when the algebraic variety $`V(P)`$ is smooth away from the origin, it is rather cumbersome when the variety is singular. The above inequality may be viewed as direct generalization of Hardy’s Here, we will consider the stratification of the algebraic variety $`V(P)`$ by multiplicity and the inequality will be examined through the resolution of singularities process. This provides a finite covering, in every chart of which the algebraic set is reduced to normal crossings. The inequality is readily reduced to a corresponding one for inhomogeneous polynomials.

###### Theorem 1

Let $`P`$ be a nonhomogeneous polynomial of degree $`d`$. Then there is a constant $`c_1^{}(P)>0,i=1,2`$ such that

$$_{𝐑^n}^1(P)f^2c_1^{}(P)\underset{i=1}{\overset{h_1}{}}^if_2^2$$

If $`P𝒫^{gH}`$ then we have the following:

$$_{𝐑^n}^2(P)f^2c_1^{}(P)\underset{i=1}{\overset{h_2}{}}^if_2^2$$

However, it is worthnoticing that we can refine the crude form of the preceding inequality for an inhomogeneous polynomial of degree $`d`$, belonging in the class described below; precisely there is a constant $`c_3(P)>0`$ such that in the operator sense on the domain $`C_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^nV(P))`$ there holds:

$$_{𝐑^n}^1(P)f^2c_3(P)_{𝐑^n}|f|^2+(1+|x|^2)f^2$$

We present two applications of this inequality:

* We apply the inequality to a particular case of a problem that motivated the study of these inequalities: the existence of an asymptotic expansion in powers and logarithms of the distributional trace of the heat operator corresponding to

$$H_{c,\alpha }=\mathrm{\Delta }+\frac{c}{|P|^\alpha }$$

for $`cC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^n)`$ and small $`\alpha >0`$. The inequalities provide the required estimates for the domain, closure and the Neumann series of a suitable power of the resolvent of $`H_{c,\alpha }`$. The existence of the asymptotic expansion follows, in view of the singular asymptotics lemma \[C1\], from the well known theorem of Bernshtein-Gelfand, \[BG\], for the meromorphic extension of integrals containing complex powers of polynomials.
* We consider a smooth domain that approaches arbitrarily close a non-smooth one: it is defined by the level sets of a polynomial. In this domain we compare the growth of functions to the growth of the polynomial defining it. This allows us to compare values of functions in the following manner: in a smooth metric in a Euclidean domain represent the domains of given curvature growth by the semialgebraic sets defined by specific polynomials. Then we obtain estimates of the local growth of laplacian eignefunctions in terms of the curvature growth. Here we prove the simple inequality that provides the growth of integrals of functions is such semilagebraic domains.

The article begins with a review of the local reduction of an algebraic set to normal crossings according to \[BM1\] with certain comments that adjust the process with our purposes. In the sequel we prove the preceding theorem and its further generalizations and then we proceed to the applications.

## 2 Local reduction of an algebraic set to normal crossings.

We commence by reviewing the necessary definitions and results on blowing up and local desingularization of an algebraic set with guide essentially the presentation in \[BM1\].

### 2.1  Standard Constructions

#### 2.1.1 Blown up space

In the various steps we will use conical partitions of unity covering the euclidean ball centered at the origin

$$B_{0,ϵ,n}=\{x𝐑^n/|x|^2:=x_1^2+\mathrm{}x_n^2<ϵ\}$$

subordinate to the cones

$$C_{\alpha ;j}=\{x𝐑^n/x_j^2>\frac{1}{1+\alpha }|x|^2\}$$

for $`\alpha >1`$. Let $`𝐏^n`$ denote the $`n`$-dimensional projective space of lines through the origin in $`𝐑^{n+1}`$. Let $`B_{0,ϵ,n+1}^{}=B_{0,ϵ,n+1}\{0\}`$ be the punctured euclidean ball around the origin in $`𝐑^{n+1}`$, set

$$\widehat{B}_{0,ϵ,n+1}=\overline{\{(x,l)B_{0,ϵ,n+1}^{}\times 𝐏^n:xl\}}$$

and let $`\sigma :\widehat{B}_{0,ϵ,n+1}B_{0,ϵ,n+1}(x,l)x`$. Then $`\sigma `$ is proper, restricts to a homeomorphism over $`B_{0,ϵ,n+1}^{}`$, and $`\sigma ^1(0)=𝐏^n`$. This mapping is called the blowing up of $`B_{0,ϵ,n}`$ with center $`\{0\}`$. In a natural way, $`B_{0,ϵ,n+1}^{}`$ is an algebraic submanifold of $`B_{0,ϵ,n}\times 𝐏^n`$:

##### Coordinates

Let $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{n+1})`$ denote the affine coordinates in $`𝐑^{n+1}`$ and let $`t=[t_1:\mathrm{}:t_{n+1}]`$ denote the homogeneous coordinates of $`𝐑^n`$. Then

$$\widehat{B}_{0,ϵ,n+1}=\{(x,t)B_{0,ϵ,n+1}\times 𝐏^n:xt=0\}$$

Furthermore $`\widehat{B}_{0,ϵ,n}`$ is covered for $`\alpha >1`$ by the conical charts $`j=1,\mathrm{},n+1`$:

$$\widehat{C}_{\alpha :j}=\{(x,t)\widehat{B}_{0,ϵ,n+1}:t_i^2>\frac{1}{1+\alpha }|t|^2\},$$

with coordinates $`(x_{1,i},\mathrm{},x_{n+1,i})`$, for each $`i`$, where

$$x_{ii}=x_i,x_{ji}=\frac{t_j}{t_i},ij$$

with respect to these local coordinates, $`\sigma `$ is given by

$$x_i=x_{ii}x_j=x_{ii}x_{ji},ij$$

Let $`n>c`$ and $`B_ϵ^{nc}(0)`$ then the mapping $`\sigma \times id:\widehat{B}_{0,ϵ,c}\times B_{0,ϵ,c}B_ϵ^c(0)\times B_ϵ^{nc}(0)`$ is called the blowing up of $`B_ϵ^c(0)\times B_ϵ^{nc}(0)`$ with center $`C:=\{0\}\times B_ϵ^{nc}(0)𝐑^n`$ and it is denoted by $`\text{Bl}_C(B_ϵ^c(0)\times B_ϵ^{nc}(0))=\widehat{B}_{0,ϵ,c}\times B_ϵ^{nc}`$.

#### 2.1.2 Blown up volumes and vector fields

Let the usual volume in $`𝐑^n`$ be denoted by $`v_n`$, then under blow up with center of codimension $`c>1`$ considered in the $`i`$-th chart it pulls back the volume

$$v_n=x_i^{c1}\widehat{v_n}$$

It is noteworthy the way that the vector fields that generate dilation transform under blowing up or down. Let then $`x=\sigma (y)`$ and

$`D_{x_i}=x_i{\displaystyle \frac{}{x_i}},D_{y_i}=y_i{\displaystyle \frac{}{y_i}},`$
$`E_0={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}x_i{\displaystyle \frac{}{x_i}},E_1={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}y_i{\displaystyle \frac{}{y_i}}`$
then in the $`k`$-th chart we have the formulas:

$`ik:D_{x_i}=D_{y_i},`$
$`D_{k_1}=E_0,`$
$`E_1=2E_0D_{x_k}`$
Notice theat the Euler vector field $`E`$ is expressed in the radial variable $`r=|x|`$ as

$$E=r_r=D_r$$

We will consider mappings obtained as a finite sequence of local blow-ups ; i.e., $`\pi _N=\sigma _1\mathrm{}\sigma _N`$, where for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},r,\sigma _i:\widehat{V}_iV_i`$ is a local blow up with center $`C_i=\{0\}\times B_{0,ϵ,nc}`$ of the preceding form with $`\widehat{V}_i=\widehat{B}_{0,ϵ,c_i}\times B_{0,ϵ,nc_i}`$ and $`V_i=B_{0,ϵ,c_i}\times B_{0,ϵ,nc_i}`$.

##### The conical atlas partition of unity

We conclude with the partition of unity of the punctured ball $`B_{0,ϵ,n+1}^{}`$ subordinate to its conical covering. Let $`\phi C_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑_+)`$ with $`\text{supp}(\phi )[0,1+\epsilon ),\varphi 1`$ in $`[0,1]`$ then set

$$\chi _j(x)=\phi \left(\frac{r}{\sqrt{1+\alpha }|x_j|}\right)$$

We compute its derivatives:

$$|^{\mathrm{}}\chi _j|\frac{1}{r^{\mathrm{}}}\underset{i_1+\mathrm{}+i_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{}}{}|\phi ^{i_1}|\mathrm{}|\phi ^{i_l}|\frac{C_{\mathrm{}}}{r^{\mathrm{}}}$$

This formula is very important because in the end of the blow-up process we encounter the derivatives of the localizations functions. These will require the further application of the one dimensional Hardy inequality, i.e. in the radial variable.

### 2.2 The local desingularization algorithm.

Here we ’ll follow the proof of the local desingularization theorem in algorithm devised in \[BM\] and developed in the conventions that we need for the inequalities. It consists of two steps the determination of the center and the reduction of the multiplicity.

###### Theorem 3

Let $`P:𝐑^n𝐑`$ be a regular function. Then there is a countable collection of regular mappings $`\pi _r:W_r𝐑^n`$ such that:

1. Each $`\pi _r`$ is the composition of a finite sequence of local blows up (with smooth centers)
2. There is a locally finite covering $`U_r`$ of $`𝐑^n`$ such that $`\pi _r(W_r)U_r`$ for all $`r`$.
3. If $`K`$ is a compact subset of $`𝐑^n`$, there are compact subsets $`M_rW_r`$ such that $`K=_r\pi _r(M_r)`$. The union is finite by (2).
4. For each $`r,P\pi _r`$ is locally normal crossings.

##### Determination of the center.

Let $`aV(P),mboxord_a(P)=:m`$ and choose coordinates $`x=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ such that $`x(a)=0`$ and, $`\text{in}_a(P)(0,\mathrm{},0,x_n)0`$ the lowest degree homogeneous component of the polynomial. Moreover denote by $`\stackrel{~}{x}=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{n1})`$ and let $`h_j=V(x_j)`$ be the coordinate hyperplanes. Since $`(_{x_n}^mP)(x)0`$ then

$$(_{x_n}^{m1}P)(x)x_nH(\stackrel{~}{x})=:x_n^{}$$

for some regular function $`H`$. Then we perform the division

$$P(x)=Q(x)x_n^m+\underset{0k<m}{}c_k(\stackrel{~}{x})x_n^k$$

Moreover, possibly after translation, we may assume that $`c_{m1}(\stackrel{~}{x})=0`$ and also observe that each $`c_k(\stackrel{~}{x})=_{x_n}^k|_{h_n}P,\stackrel{~}{x}_n_{x_n}^{m1}P`$

Let $`ah_n`$ then for $`0k<\text{ord}_aP=\mu _P(a)`$ introduce the sets

$$𝒫(a):=\{(P,\text{ord}_aP)\},𝒞_P(a):=\{(c_k,\mu _Pk)\}$$

The union of stata of multiplicity at least $`\mu _P(a)(=m)`$ is denoted by

$$S_{𝒫(a)}:=\{x:\text{ord}_xP\mu _P(a)\}$$

as well as that

$$S_{𝒞_P(a)}:=\{x:\text{ord}_xgp,\text{forall}g𝒞_P(\alpha )\}$$

First we will use an induction on $`n`$ (and on $`m`$), to arrive at the particular instance when for all $`k`$

$$()c_k(\stackrel{~}{x})=(\stackrel{~}{x}^\gamma )^{mk}c_k^{}(\stackrel{~}{x})$$

while $`\gamma \frac{1}{m!}𝐍^{n1}`$ and for some $`k_0,c_{k_0}^{}(0)0.`$ In order to handle at once the various $`c_k`$’s we define the auxiliary function

$$A_P(\stackrel{~}{x}):=\text{ product of all non zero}c_k^{\frac{m!}{mk}}\text{and all their nonzero differences}$$

The inductive assumption asserts that there is already a uniformization for $`A_P:`$

$$A_Px_1^{a_1}\mathrm{}x_{n1}^{a_{n1}}$$

This implies in first place that each nonzero $`c_k(\stackrel{~}{x})=(\stackrel{~}{x}^{\mathrm{\Omega }_k})c_k^{}(\stackrel{~}{x})`$ with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k𝐍^{n1}`$ and $`c_k(0)^{}0`$. Moreover each nonzero $`c_k^{\frac{m!}{mk}}c_j^{\frac{m!}{mj}}\stackrel{~}{x}^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ij}}`$, with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ij}(𝐍^{n1})^{}`$. The following elementary lemma suggests:

###### Lemma 4

Let $`x=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$. If $`a(x)x^\alpha b(x)x^\beta =c(x)x^\gamma `$ and $`a(0)b(0)c(0)0`$ then either $`\alpha \beta +𝐍^n`$ or $`\beta \alpha +𝐍^n`$

The lemma implies that the set $`:=\{\frac{1}{mk}\mathrm{\Omega }_k\}\frac{1}{m!}𝐍^{n1}`$ is totally ordered with the induced partial ordering from $`𝐍^{n1}`$ and therefore there exist a $`\rho =\mathrm{min}()\frac{1}{m!}𝐍^{n1}`$. Therefore we are reduced to the case (\*) with $`\gamma =\rho \frac{1}{m!}𝐍^{n1}`$. We show that the special case (\*) implies reduction in multiplicity by blowing up succesively the components of $`S_𝒫(a)`$.

$$S_{𝒫(a)}=S_{𝒞_P(a)}=\{x:x_n=0,\text{ord}_x(\stackrel{~}{x}^\gamma )1\}=\underset{I}{}Z_I$$

where $`Z_I=_{iI}(h_ih_n)`$ and $`I\{1,\mathrm{},n1\},\text{card}(I)=\nu _m1`$ minimal such that $`_{iI}\gamma _i1`$ or equivalently that $`0_{iI}\gamma _i1<\gamma _k`$ for all $`kI`$. Actually, these serve as centers of the desingularizing blowups $`C=Z_I`$, for all $`k`$ we have that

$$\text{ord}_Cc_kmk>0,$$

where $`\text{ord}_Cc_k=inf_{xC}\left(\text{ord}_xc_k\right)`$.

##### Reduction of the multiplicity.

Let $`aV(P)`$ and choose coordinates such that $`x(a)=0,I=(1,\mathrm{},\nu _m1)`$. Let further

$`C_{\alpha ;ϵ;j,n,\nu _m}=\left(C_{\alpha ;j,n}B_{0,ϵ,\nu _m}\right)\times B_{0,ϵ,n\nu _m}`$
$`\widehat{C}_{\alpha ;ϵ;n,\nu _m}=\left(\widehat{C}_{\alpha ;ϵ;j,n,\nu _m}B_{0,ϵ,\nu _m}\right)\times B_{0,ϵ,n\nu _m}`$
and the blowup

$$\sigma :\widehat{B}_{0,ϵ,n\nu _m}\times B_{0,ϵ,n\nu _m}\widehat{B}_{0,ϵ,\nu _m}\times B_{0,ϵ,n\nu _m}$$

at $`\beta \sigma ^1(0)`$. We calculate in these conical charts:

* Let $`\beta \widehat{C}_{\alpha ;ϵ;n,n,\nu _m}`$ then the strict transform $`\sigma |C_n`$ maps as follows

$$x_n=y_n,x_j=y_jy_n,j=1,\mathrm{},\nu _m1,x_s=y_s,n>s>\nu _m.$$

Its effect on the polynomial is

$$(\sigma ^{}(\chi _nP))(y)=y_n^mP_n^1(y)=y_n^m[(\sigma ^{}Q)(y)+\underset{0k<m}{}(\sigma ^{}c_k)(y)y_n^{km}]$$

and we observe that $`Q(\sigma (\beta ))0`$ while $`\left(_{0k<m}c_k(y)y_n^{km}\right)(\sigma (\beta ))=0`$ and hence $`P_n^1(\beta )0`$.
* In the conical sector $`\widehat{C}_{\alpha ;ϵ;j,n,\nu _m},jI`$ the strict transform $`\sigma `$ maps as follows

$$x_n=y_n,y_j,x_j=y_j,x_k=y_ky_j,jk=1,\mathrm{},c1,x_s=y_s,s>n.$$

Then the polynomial becomes

$$(\sigma ^{}(\chi _jP))(y)=y_j^mP_j^1(y)=y_j^m\left((\sigma ^{}Q(y))y_n^m+\underset{0k<m}{}(\sigma ^{}c_k)(\stackrel{~}{y})y_j^{km}y_n^k\right)$$

since in this sector

$$\stackrel{~}{x}=\sigma (\stackrel{~}{y}),\stackrel{~}{y}=(y_1,\mathrm{},y_{n1}).$$

Observe that $`_{y_n}^{m1}P_j^1y_n`$ since $`Q(\alpha )0`$ while $`h_n^{}=\sigma ^1(h_n)=\{y_n=0\}`$ and $`c_{m1}=0`$ identically.

We conclude that for all points on the exceptional divisor the order is not bigger than $`m`$, $`\beta \sigma ^1(C),\text{ord}_\beta P^1d`$ if $`P^1`$ denotes the resulting regular function. Therefore assume that $`\text{ord}_\beta P^1=m`$ iff $`\beta h_n\{\text{ord}_yC_k^{}mk\}`$ where

$$c_k^{}=y_j^{km}(\sigma ^{}c_k)(\stackrel{~}{y})=(\stackrel{~}{y}^\gamma ^{})^{mk}.(c_k^{}(\sigma (\stackrel{~}{y}))$$

and $`\stackrel{~}{y}^\gamma ^{}:=y_j^1.(\stackrel{~}{x}^\gamma \sigma )`$ and there is $`k_0,(c_{k_0}^{})(\sigma (\beta ))0`$ by the particular case (\*). Hence, $`\gamma _i^{}=\gamma _i`$, if $`ij`$ and $`\gamma _j^{}=_{iI}\gamma _i1`$ therefore $`1|\gamma ^{}|<|\gamma |`$ and since $`|\gamma |,|\gamma ^{}|\frac{1}{m!}𝐍^{n1}`$ it follows that after no more than $`|\gamma |m!`$ blows up of this type multiplicity has to decrease.

##### Remarks.

* Let $`P𝐑[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ and $`V(P):=V`$ the variety it defines. Set then

$$P^k(x)=\underset{j_1+\mathrm{}+j_n=k}{}(\frac{^kP}{x_1^{j_1}\mathrm{}x_n^{j_n}}(x))^2$$

and consequently $`V_k:=V(P_k)`$ The stratification by multiplicity we ’ll use consists of the strata that are semialgebraic sets:

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_k=(V_kV_{k+1})V$$

If $`P`$ is homogeneous then by Euler’s theorem $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{k+1}\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }_k}`$ while the implicit function theorem asserts that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_k`$ are smooth.
* Let $`I(V)`$ be the sheaf of germs of regular functions on $`𝐑^n`$ that vanish on $`V`$. Let $`x\mathrm{\Sigma }_k`$ then set

$$L_{x,k}=\{\xi 𝐑^n:PI_x(V),\underset{j}{}\xi _j\frac{P}{x_j}I_x(V)\}$$

and also that $`E_{x,k}=L_{x,k}^{}`$.
* The class $`𝒫^{gH}`$ of polynomials consists of those $`P`$ such that when $`codim\mathrm{\Sigma }_k=2`$ for some $`k`$ then

$$\{(x+E_{x,k})V_x\}\{x\}\mathrm{}$$

where $`V_x`$ is the germ of $`V`$ at $`x`$.
* If $`P0`$ everywhere as well as that $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_p0`$ everywhere and it is true that

$$P=\underset{j}{}P_j$$

then $`V(P)`$ is not a hypersurface. Then the same procedure with more complicated details brings the set to normal crossings, cf \[BM\]. However, if we assume that each of the $`P_j`$’s belongs to the class $``$ then we can proceed without appealing to the desingularization for codimension$`>1`$.
* We would assume that $`P`$ is irreducible otherwise split it in its factors and use Young’s inequality to deal with its factor separately.

##### The inequalities of Lojasiewicz.

Through the paper certain distances from algebraic sets are estimated by the values of the defining polynomials through the fundamental Lojasiewicz inequalities, cf \[BM\]:

###### Theorem 5

Let $`P`$ be a regular function on an open subspace $`M𝐑^n`$. Suppose that $`K`$ is a compact subset of $`M`$, on which $`V(|P|^2)V(P)`$. Then there exist $`c,c^{}>0`$ and $`\mu ,0<\mu 1,\nu >1`$ such that

$$|P(x)|c|f(x)|^{1\mu },|P(x)|c^{}d(x,V(P))^\nu $$

in a neighborhood of $`K,sup(\mu ),sup(\nu )𝐐`$.

It is true that $`\nu (K)sup_{aK}\mu _a(P)`$. Furthermore in the case of a homogeneous polynomial function in $`𝐑^n`$ the constant depends on conical neghborhoods of the origin.

In the case of a homogeneous polynomial $`P`$ of degree $`m`$ then the algebraic cone decomposes as $`V(P)=𝐑_+\times K`$ where $`K`$ is the trace of the cone on the sphere. Then Lojasiewicz inequality suggsets that for $`C(K)>0,\mu =\frac{1}{m}`$:

$$|P|C_m|P|^{1\mu }$$

This follows from the application of Lojasiewicz on the trace, under stereographic projection in coordinates $`(r,\xi )𝐑_+\times 𝐑^{n1}`$, and for applying Young’s inequality for $`p,q>1,pq=p+q,`$:

$`|P(x)|mr^{m1}|\stackrel{~}{P}(\xi )|+r^m|\widehat{P}(\xi )|`$
$`mr^{m1}|P|+Cr^m|P|^{1\mu }C_m^{}r^{\frac{1}{\mu p}\frac{m}{q}}|P(x)|^{1\frac{p}{\mu }}`$
We choose as $`p=\frac{m+\mu }{m}`$ scale and arrive at the result $`\mu =\frac{1}{m}`$.

## 6 The inequalities.

Here we will prove the inequalities $`\text{GHI}_1,\text{GHI}_2`$ for an inhomogeneous polynomial $`P`$ of degree $`d`$ in the class $``$ and an arbitrary function $`fC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^nV(P))`$:

$$I^i[P](f)=_{𝐑^n}^i(P)f^2C_{𝐑^n}\underset{j=0}{\overset{h_i}{}}|^jf|^2=f_{H^{h_i}(𝐑^)},(\text{GHI}_i)$$

where

$$^1(P)=P^{\frac{2}{d}},^2(P)=\left|\frac{P}{P}\right|^2$$

This inequality will be based on the fact that after a suitable number of blow-ups with suitably chosen centers the multiplicity of the polynomial has to decrease. The choice of centers is provided in the proof of the local desingularization theorem.

To fix the ideas assume that we are localised in a tubular neighbourhood of $`V(P)`$ of width $`ϵ^{\frac{1}{d}}`$:

$$N_ϵ(P)=\{x𝐑^n/|P(x)|<ϵ\}$$

and also the tubes of width $`ϵ_k^{\frac{1}{d}}`$ that enclose the strata of multiplicity $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_k`$:

$$N_{ϵ_k,k}(P)=\{x𝐑^n/Q_k(x)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}P^j(x)<ϵ_k^2\}$$

We assume that $`ϵ_1,\mathrm{},ϵ_m,ϵ`$ are chosen so that this system of tubes $`N_1,\mathrm{},N_m`$ exhaust $`N_ϵ`$ and using functions of the form $`\chi \left(\frac{Q_k}{ϵ_k}\right)`$, for $`\chi `$ a one-dimensional cut-offs we localize in these sets. Thanks to Lojasiewicz these cut-off functions when differentiated stay away from the variety. The integral then is splitted up as

$$I^i[P](f)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{m}{}}I_j^i[P](f)$$

where

$$I_j^i[P](f)=_{N_j}^i(P)f^2$$

As a matter of fact we have that

$$\text{supp}(f)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{m}{}}(\text{supp}(f)N_j)$$

We are ready to set-up the multiplicity reducing algorithm. Select then points

$$aV(P)N_{m,ϵ}(P):\text{ord}_aP=m,\text{codim}(S_{P(a)})=\nu _m$$

and choose a system of coordinates such that $`x(a)=0`$ and also that

$$P(0,\mathrm{},0,x_n)x_n^m$$

The initial change of coordnates that rectifies the center we will denote by $`K_m:N_m𝐑^{n\nu _m}\times 𝐑^{\nu _m}`$, which consists of algebraic maps localized through $`\phi _{m,\mathrm{}_m}`$ at such points on $`aS_m`$ :

$$K_m=\underset{\mathrm{}_m=1}{\overset{N_m}{}}\phi _{m;\mathrm{}_m}K_{m;\mathrm{}_m}$$

These maps have jacobians $`0<c_m(ϵ_m)J(K_{m;\mathrm{}_m})C_m(ϵ_m)`$

### 6.1 The inequality $`\text{GHI}_1`$ for $`^1=P^{\frac{2}{d}}`$

##### The inequality in the multiplicity reduction step $`mm1`$

Using the conical partition of unity $`\{\chi _{m,k}\}`$ subordinate to the covering in

$$\underset{k=1}{\overset{\nu _m}{}}K_m(N_{ϵ,m}(P))𝐑^{n\nu _m}\times C_k$$

we localize and compute that

$$I_m(P)[f]=_{N_{ϵ_m,m}}^1(P)f^2(x)v_nc\underset{k=1}{\overset{\nu _m}{}}_{N_{m;1,k}}\left|D_k(|P_{1,m,k}|^{\frac{1}{d}}f_{m;1,k})\right|^2\left(𝒟_k^1\right)^2\widehat{v}_n$$
(1)
where

$`c=\kappa _m(\nu _m,d)=\left({\displaystyle \frac{16d^2}{d(\nu _m+1)+m)}}\right)^2`$
$`N_{m;1,k}=\sigma ^1(N_{m;0,k}),N_{m,0,k}=K_m(N_{ϵ_m})𝐑^{n\nu _m}\times C_k`$
$`D_k=x_k_{x_k},𝒟_k^1=x_k^{\frac{m}{d}+\frac{\nu _m1}{2}}`$
$`f_{m,1,k}=\chi _{m,k}f`$
The last integral is majorized further by:

$$_{N_{ϵ_m,m}^1}^1(P_{m;1,k})\left[|D_kf_k^1|^2+\left(Q_{1,k,1}^m(P)f_{m;1,k}\right)^2\right]\left(𝒟_k^1\right)^2\widehat{v}_n$$

The singular term is made of the following factors that we are going to keep track in the process:

$`Q_{1,k,1}^m(P)=D_k(\mathrm{log}|P_k^{m,1}|),`$
$`_{m;1,k}^1=\left(P_{m;1,k}\right)^{\frac{2}{d}},P_{m;1,k}=x_k^m\sigma ^{}(\chi _kP)`$
We perform successive blowups of this type in order to reduce the multiplicity of the algebraic set and every time apply the one dimensional inequality. Therefore, we introduce inductively for the blow up years $`j>1`$ and corresponding blow - up chart $`k_j`$ the following functions that can come out:

$`N_{m;j}=\sigma ^1(N_{m;j1}),N_{m;0}=N_{ϵ,m}`$
$`f_{m;0,k,0}=\chi _{m,k}f,f_{m;j,k_j,l}=\sigma ^{}(\chi _{k_j}f_{m;j1,k_{j1},l}),`$
$`f_{m;j,k_j,l}=D_{k_j}\left(f_{m;j,k_{j1},l1}\right)`$
$`_{m;j,k_j}^1=x_{m,k_j}^{\frac{2m}{d}}\sigma ^{}(\chi _{m,k_j}_{m;j1,k_{j1}}^1),`$
$`𝒟_{m;j,k_j,l}=D_{k_j}(𝒟_{m;j,k_{j1},l1}),`$
$`𝒟_{m;j,k_j,l}=\sigma ^{}(\chi _{m,k_j}𝒟_{m;j1,k_{j1},l})𝒟_{k_j}^1,`$
$`Q_{j,k_j,l}^m=D_{k_j}(Q_{j,k_j,l1}^m)`$
$`Q_{j,k_j,l}^m=\sigma ^{}(\chi _{m,k_j}Q_{j1,k_{j1},l}^m)`$
The integral is then majorised by the sum after $`\gamma _m`$ generations of blow-ups that are neccessary for the multiplicity to reduce to $`m1`$:

$$I_m(P)[f]C(ϵ_m,m,d,\nu _m)_{N_{\gamma _m}}\underset{k_{\gamma _m}=1}{\overset{c}{}}_{m;\gamma _m,k_{\gamma _m}}^1\mathrm{\Phi }_{m,1;k_{\gamma _m}}^2$$

for the functions that encode the history of blow ups

$$\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_{m,1;k_{\gamma _m}}\right)^2=\chi _{k_{\gamma _m}}^2\left[\underset{l_1+l_2+l_3=\gamma _m}{}\left(f_{m;\gamma _m,k_{\gamma _m},l_1}𝒟_{m;\gamma _m,k_{\gamma _m},l_2}Q_{\gamma _m,k_{\gamma _m},l_3}^m\right)^2\right]$$

This sum extends over the set of all $`\nu _m`$-adic numbers with $`\gamma _m`$ digits: $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\gamma _m}(c)`$. After these blow ups the polynomial $`P_{m;\gamma _m,k_{\gamma _m}}`$ has multiplicity $`m1`$. In the next $`\gamma _{m1}`$ generations of blow-ups:

$$I_m(P)[f]c\underset{k_{\gamma _m}=1}{\overset{\nu _m}{}}I_{m1}[P_{m;\gamma _m,k_{\gamma _m}}](\mathrm{\Phi }_{m,1;k_{\gamma _m}})$$

Therefore we have to work with

$$I_m[P](f)+I_{m1}(P)[f]c_{N_{m;\gamma _m}}_1(P_{m;\gamma ,k_{\gamma _m}})\mathrm{\Phi }_{m,1;k_{\gamma _m}}^2+_{N_{ϵ_{m1},m1}}_1(P)f^2$$

and proceed analogously. The desingularization algorithm guarantees that on the set $`N_{m;\gamma _m}N_{ϵ_{m1},m1}`$ the polynomials $`P_{m;\gamma _m,k_{\gamma _m}},P`$ have multiplicity $`m1`$. Therefore the choice of blow up centers entails the change of coordinates $`K_{m1}`$ that we trace in the summands. Their appearance modifies the constant $`c`$. Thus we have $`m`$ generations of $`\gamma _1,\mathrm{},\gamma _m`$ years of blow-ups.

##### Summing up for $`m=1`$ and final step

We arrive at the $`m=1`$ stratum with the following sum of integrals:

$$I_1(P)[f]=\underset{1i_2i_1m}{}_{N_{i_1,i_2}}^1(P_{i_1;i_2,k_{i_2}})\mathrm{\Phi }_{i_1,i_2;k_{i_2}}^2$$

where the pair of indices stands keeps track of the origin of the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{i_1,i_2;k_{i_2}}`$ while the polynomials $`P_{i_1;i_2,k_{i_2}}`$ have multiplicity $`1`$. Hence we change coordinates by the map $`K_1`$ and conclue with an applcation of Hardy’s inequality.

##### Return to $`N_ϵ`$

In order to return back to $`N_ϵ`$. We summarize the process that we followed:

Rectilinearization of the centers, blow up till we reduce the multiplicity by 1, again rectilinearization of the new centers and new blow ups etc

This finally made up a map: $`:N_ϵ\stackrel{~}{N}_ϵ`$, which is a piece-wise algebraic diffeomorphism outside a variety of positive codimension originating from the exceptional divisors of the blow ups. Clearly the process can be reversed and the formula derived above. We will perturb back the centers and blow down. The rectilinearization maps just modify the constants back. The terms that have been produced will be examined then. We examine now the $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{i_1,i_2}`$ terms: the $`Q`$ factors are constants hence they just modify the consntant coefficients. The $`𝒟`$-terms split in two terms: those that consist of the jacobians and the ”Hardy divisor factor” $`y_k^{2\frac{i_1}{d}}`$. In the course of the blow down process the jacobian terms dissapear while in the conical charts of the $`𝐑^{\nu _m}`$ factor of the coordinate system we have that for the radial variable $`r`$ :

$$y_k^{2\frac{i_1}{d}}cr^{2\frac{i_1}{d}}$$

which combine with the blow down formula to give us that

$$|D_{y_k}(f\sigma )|^2=|E(f)|^2r^2|f|^2$$

If $`r^\beta `$ persists then we apply again the usual Hardy inequality. The blowing down process will effect the replacement of the $`|D(f𝒟)\sigma )|`$ with a term $`|f|`$ and finally we get the result stated in the introduction

### 6.2 The inequality $`\text{GHI}_2`$ for $`^2(P)=\left|\frac{P}{P}\right|^2`$.

Here we separate at each year of blow up the ”Hardy divisor term”, $`x_k^2`$ and blow down directly, which could have been done also in the preceding case. We apply the following elementary generalization of the Hardy’s inequality refered in the introduction, for $`\mathrm{}𝐍,fC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑\{0\})`$:

$$_𝐑\frac{f^2}{x^2\mathrm{}}C_{\mathrm{}}_𝐑\left(f^{(\mathrm{})}\right)^2,\text{(EGHI)}$$

and the appropriate detemination of the factors $`𝒟,Q`$ that appear during the process. Therefore we start with the first blow up in the conical charts and obtain in view of

$$^2(P)\frac{m^2}{x_k^2}+\frac{4}{x_k^4}+4(^2(P_{m;1,k})^2,$$

that since $`m2`$

$`I_m(P)[f]={\displaystyle _{N_{ϵ_m,m}}}^2(P)f^2(x)v_nc{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\nu _m}{}}}{\displaystyle _{N_{m;1,k}}}\left(\left|D_kf_{m;1,k}\right|^2+\left|D_k^2f_{m;1,k}\right|^2\right)(_{m;1,k_1})^2`$
$`+c{\displaystyle \underset{k_1=1}{\overset{\nu _m}{}}}{\displaystyle _{N_{m;1,k_1}}}\left(_{m;1,k_1}^2\right)^2f_{m;1,k_1}^2(_{m;1,k_1})^2\widehat{v}_n`$
where

$`c=\kappa _m(\nu _m,d)={\displaystyle \frac{16m^2}{(2\nu _m+1)^2}}`$
$`N_{m;1,k_1}=\sigma ^1(N_{m;0,k_1}),N_{m,0,k_1}=K_m(N_{ϵ_m})\left(𝐑^{n\nu _m}\times C_{k_1}\right)`$
$`f_{m;1,k_1}=\sigma ^{}(\chi _{m,k_1}f)`$
$`D_{k_1}f_{m;1,k_1}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{x_{k_1}}}E(f),_{m;1,k_1}=|x_{k_1}|^{\frac{\nu _m1}{2}},`$
$`_{m;1,k_1}^2=\left(\mathrm{log}|P_{m;1,k_1}|\right)^2,P_{m;1,k_1}=x_{k_1}^m\sigma ^{}(\chi _{k_1}P)`$
The first terms is blown down directly since in the conical chart

$$C_k:|x_k|^2\frac{\alpha ^2}{1+\alpha ^2}r^2$$

and hence implies that

$$|D_kf_{m,k,1}|\frac{\alpha ^2}{1+\alpha ^2}|f|^2$$

Therefore we have by an application of Hardy to the derivative of the jacobian $`_{m;1,k_1}`$ we could comprise all terms in the following inequality

$$I_m[P](f)C\left(f_{H_1(N_m)}^2+I_{1;m;j}[P](f)\right)$$

where we have the usual Sobolev space norm:

$$f_{H^1(N_m)}=_{N_m}|f|^2+|^2f|^2$$

and

$$I_{1;m;1}[P](f)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{\nu _m}{}}_{N_{m;1,k}}\left(_{m;1,k}^2\right)^2\left(f_{m;1,k}_{1,k}\right)^2\widehat{v}_n$$

Set then

$`f_{m;j,k_j}=\sigma ^{}\left(\chi _{k_j}f_{m;j1,k_{j1}}_{m;j1,k_{j1}}\right),_{m;j,k_j}=\sigma ^{}(\chi _{m,k_j}_{m;j1,k_{j1},l})`$
and

$$I_{\mathrm{};m;\mathrm{}}[P](f)=\underset{k_{\mathrm{}}=1}{\overset{\nu _m}{}}_{N_{\mathrm{},k_{\mathrm{}}}}\left(^2(P_{m;\mathrm{},k_{\mathrm{}}})\right)^{\mathrm{}+1}\left(f_{m;\mathrm{},k_{\mathrm{}}}_{\mathrm{},k_{\mathrm{}}}\right)^2$$

Then we derive the recursive formula for these integrals. and then through the inequality, which is derived thorugh Young’s inequality and for $`|x_k_{\mathrm{}}|<1`$

$$\left(^2(P_{m;\mathrm{}1,k_\mathrm{}1})\right)^{\mathrm{}}C_{\mathrm{}}m^2\mathrm{}\left(\frac{1}{x_k_{\mathrm{}}^{4\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)}}+\left(^2(P_{m;\mathrm{},k_{\mathrm{}}})\right)^{\mathrm{}+1}\right)$$

then

$`I_{\mathrm{}1;\mathrm{}1}[P](f)C_{\mathrm{},m,ϵ}\left(f_{H^{2\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)}(N_m)}+I_\mathrm{};\mathrm{}[P](f)\right)`$
The first term originates from the (EGHI), Leibniz’s rule and the application of Hardy’s inequality for the term $`D_{k_j}_{m;j,k_j}`$ to transfer the derivative to the $`f`$-term. The blow down process in the conical charts gives us the Sobolev space norms. Specifically we have that

$$|D_{x_k_{\mathrm{}}}^jf_{m;\mathrm{},k_{\mathrm{}}}|=|\left(\frac{1}{x_k_{\mathrm{}}}E\right)^j(\sigma ^{}\left(\chi _{k_j}f_{m;j1,k_{j1}}_{m;j1,k_{j1}}\right))|$$

Therefore by expanding the differentiation we arrive at

$`|D_{x_k_{\mathrm{}}}^jf_{m;\mathrm{},k_{\mathrm{}}}|^2C{\displaystyle \underset{i_1+i_2+i_3=j}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^{2i_1}}}|^{i_2}\sigma ^{}(\chi _{k_j}f_{m;j1,k_{j1}}|^2|^{i_3}_{m;j1,k_{j1}}^2)`$
$`C^{}{\displaystyle \underset{i_1+i_2=j}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^{2i_1}}}|^{i_2}f_{m;j1,k_{j1}}|^2_{m;j1,k_{j1}}^2`$
We iterate this process and finally we end up with the following inequality

$`I_m[P](f)C\left(f_{H^{\beta _m}(N_m)}+I_{m;1}[P](f)\right)`$
where the term

$$I_{m;1}[P](f)=\underset{k_\gamma =1}{\overset{\nu _m}{}}_{N_{m;\gamma _m,k_{\gamma _m}}}\left(^2(P_{m;\gamma _m,k_{\gamma _m}})\right)^{\gamma _m+1}(f_{m;\gamma _m,k_{\gamma _m}})^2$$

contains the polynomial mith mulitplicity $`m1`$ after the first generation of $`\gamma _m`$ years of blow-ups for the $`m`$ stratum and $`\beta _m=2_{\mathrm{}=1}^{\gamma (m)}(\mathrm{}^2+\mathrm{})=2S_2(\nu _m)+S_1(\nu _m)\nu _m^3`$.

##### Conclusion

Having exhausted the first generation of $`\gamma _m`$-years of blow -ups we reduced the multiplicity to $`m1`$ at the cost of bringing in the Hardy - factor in the $`\gamma _m+1`$ power, and we integrate in the tubular neighbourhood of set of lower multiplicity. Again the ”center defining maps” enter and are composed and we proceed. Higher order derivatives appear but they are treated due to the formula that we calculated above.

### 6.3 The inequality for homogeneous polynomials.

Let $`P𝒫^{gH}`$ then the inequality receives the simple form with the first derivatives. We start blowing up the origin which supports the maximal multiplicity of $`V`$ we obtain inequalities corresponding to the traces of the algebraic set on the balls

$$B_{0,\alpha ,n}=V(x_j1)C_{\alpha ;j,n+1},j=1,\mathrm{},n+1$$

Then we use the preceding inequalities for inhomogeneous polynomials and by a scaling transformation we obtain the desired result by trowing the “higher order terms”. In the sequel we assume without loss of generality that we are already reduced to the essential variables and proceed through the conical partition of unity and the notation of the preceding paragraph:

$$I_d[P](f)=_{𝐑^{n+1}}^1(P)f^2(x)v_{n+1}=\underset{j=1}{\overset{\nu _d}{}}_{\widehat{C}_{\alpha ;j,n+1}}(f_{d;1,j})^2x_j^{\nu _d3}(P_{d;1,j})^{\frac{2}{d}}\widehat{v}_{n+1}$$

Now in each cone $`\widehat{C}_{\alpha ;j,1}`$ the function $`f_{d,1,j}=\sigma ^{}(\chi _jf)`$ is compactly supported and wehave that the volume form decomposes for the volume form of $`𝐑^n,v_n`$

$$\widehat{v}_{n+1}=dx_jv_n$$

and the integral splits as

$`I_d[P](f)={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{\nu _d}{}}}{\displaystyle _𝐑}I_{d1}[P_{d;1,j}](f_{d;1,j})(x_j)x_j^{\nu _d3}𝑑x_j(\text{CS})`$
In each term we have $`\text{GHI}_1`$ in the cross section: we obtain for $`\stackrel{~}{}_j`$ the gradient in all but the $`x_j`$-variable:

$$I_{d1}[P_{d;1,j}](f_{d;1,j})C_{B_{0,\alpha ,n}}\underset{i=0}{\overset{h_{1,j}}{}}|\stackrel{~}{}^if_{d;1,j}|^2=\left(R_{d,1,j}[P](f_{d;1,j})(x_j)\right)^2$$

where the function is compactly supported in $`𝐑`$ and smooth with respect to $`x_j`$. Hence we return back to (CS) and we have that

$$I_d[P](f)C\underset{j=1}{\overset{\nu _d}{}}_𝐑\left(R_{d,1,j}[P](f_{d;1,j})(x_j)\right)^2x_j^{\nu _d3}𝑑x_j$$

We apply the Hardy’s inequality in each summand and obtain:

$$_𝐑\left(R_{d,1,j}[P](f_{d;1,j})(x_j)\right)^2x_j^{\nu _d3}𝑑x_j\frac{16}{(\nu _d1)^2}_𝐑\left|_{x_j}R_{d,1,j}[P](f_{d;1,j})(x_j)\right|^2x_j^{\nu _d1}𝑑x_j$$

Cauchy-Schwarz inequality suggests that

$$\left|_{x_j}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}G_i^2\right)^{1/2}\right|=\left|\frac{1}{_{i=1}^NG_i^2}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}G_i_{x_j}G_i\right)\right|\left|\underset{i=1}{}_{x_j}G_i\right|$$

Then apply this for $`G_i(x_j)=\left(_{𝐑^n}f^2(,x_j)\right)^{1/2}`$ and thanks to Cauchy-Schwarz again we pass under the integral to obtain thanks to Leibniz’ srule that in gives us the following

$$_𝐑\left|_{x_j}R_{d,1,j}[P](f_{d;1,j})(x_j)\right|^2x_j^{\nu _d1}𝑑x_j_{\widehat{C}_{\alpha ;j,n+1}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{h_{1,j}}{}}|^if|^2x_j^{\nu _d1}\widehat{v}_{n+1}$$

Then we blow down in each conical chart and taking into account the usual estimates (we apply Hardy’s inequlaity for the conical atlas partition of unity) and obtain that

$$I_d[P]fC\underset{j=1}{\overset{n+1}{}}_{\widehat{C}_{\alpha ;j,n+1}}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{h_{i,j}}{}}|_if|^2\right)v_{n+1}$$

In the end we scale $`x\stackrel{~}{x}:=(\lambda ^1x_1,\mathrm{},\lambda ^1x_{n+1})`$ Evidently, we let $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$ to obtain the inequality. Similarly we obtain the inequality for $`^2(P)`$. q.e.d.

Remark. Sticking on the inequality for $`^2=\left|\frac{P}{P}\right|^2`$ one could also deduce the following inequality, actually by partial integration: for $`C_3(P)`$ we have

$$_{𝐑^n}\left|\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }P}{P}\right|f^2C_3(P)_{𝐑^n}|f|^2$$

### 6.4  Further inequalities.

Let $`P𝒫^{gH}`$ of degree $`d`$ and for $`s𝐑`$ then the following more general inequality is true for $`fC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^nV(P))`$:

$$_{𝐑^n}|P|^sf^2C(P,s)_{𝐑^n}|P|^{s+\frac{2}{d}}|f|^2$$

First we observe that the homogeneity we localize near $`V(P)`$, the rest being treated by rectilinearization and partial integration. We have for $`fC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^nV(P)),\beta =s+\frac{2}{d}`$: and Young’s inequality for $`p,q>1,pq=p+q`$:

$$|P|^sf^2\frac{\epsilon ^p|P|^{p\beta }f^2}{p}+\frac{1}{\epsilon ^qq}|P|^{\frac{2q}{m}}f^2,(\text{BI}_1)$$

then we have that

$`{\displaystyle _{𝐑^n}}|P|^2f^2{\displaystyle _{𝐑^n}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}|P|^{p\beta }f^2+{\displaystyle \frac{|P|^{\frac{2q}{m}}f^2}{q}}`$
$`{\displaystyle _{𝐑^n}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}|P|^{p\beta }f^2+C{\displaystyle _{𝐑^n}}\left|\left(P^{\frac{2(q1)}{m}}f\right)\right|^2`$
Then the last term gives us that for $`\kappa _1=\frac{(q1)^2}{m^2}`$

$$_{𝐑^n}|\left(P^{\frac{2(q1)}{m}}f\right)|^22\left(\kappa _1I_1+I_2\right)$$

where

$$I_2=_{𝐑^n}|P|^{\frac{2(q1)}{m}}\left|f\right|^2$$

Now

$$I_1=_{𝐑^n}P^{\frac{2(q1)}{2m}}^2(P)f^2C_1(P)\left[(1+ϵ)\kappa _1I_1+(1+\frac{1}{ϵ})I_2\right]$$

Now we selct $`q`$ such that:

$$C_1\kappa _1(1+ϵ)\frac{1}{1+ϵ}q1+\frac{m}{C_1(1+ϵ)}$$

and we have that

$$I_1C_3I_2$$

and finally we have that:

$$_{𝐑^n}|P|^sf^2C\left(_{𝐑^n}|P|^{2\beta p}f^2+_{𝐑^n}|P|^{\frac{2(q1)}{m}}|f|^2\right)$$

Now we split $`N_\eta (P)=\{x𝐑^n/|P(x)|\eta ^m\},\eta <1`$ in sets

$$N_i=\{x𝐑^n/\eta ^{m(i+1)}|P(x)|\eta ^{mi}\}$$

and accordingly $`F_i=\text{supp}(f)N_i`$:

$$_{𝐑^n}|P|^sf^2=\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_{F_i}|P|^sf^2+_{𝐑^nN_\eta }|P|^sf^2$$

The second term is reduced to the 1-d problem by change of variable. The integral near the zero set is treated using the inequality derived from $`(\text{BI}_1)`$ for $`\epsilon =\eta ^{m(i+1}`$ or $`\epsilon =\eta ^{mi}`$ analogously for $`\beta >0,<0`$. Finally we scale and obtain tyhe result. q.e.d.

The inequality for the homogeneous polynomial allows to improve the inequality for inhomogeneous polynomials, keeping only first derivatives:

###### Proposition 7

Let $`P:𝐑^n𝐑`$ be a polynomial function of degree $`d`$ from the class $`𝒫^{gH}`$ with $`V(|P|^2)V(P)`$. Let $`fC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^nV(P))`$ then for $`C_3(P)`$ it is true that:

$$_{𝐑^n}P^{\frac{2}{d}}f^2v_nC_3(P)_{𝐑^n}f^2+(1+|x|^2)|f|^2v_n$$

Proof. From the assumption we localize near $`V(P)`$, the rest being treated by rectilinearization and partial integration. We stratify the algebraic set $`V(P)`$ by multiplicity:

$$V(P)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mu $$

Since $`P`$ is inhomogeneous then $`d>\mu `$. The smooth part being clear, we will study the singular strata. Let $`a\mathrm{\Sigma }_m,x(a)=0`$ and $`P_{0,m}=\text{in}_a(P)`$ and introduce the tubular neighbourhood of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_m`$ of width $`ϵ^{\frac{d}{m}}`$

$$N_ϵ=\{x𝐑^n/P_{0,m}^2(x)+P^2(x)<ϵ^{2d}\}$$

We write this as

$$N_ϵ=C_ϵS_ϵR_ϵ$$

where for suitable $`\delta <1`$:

$`C_{ϵ,\delta }=\{xN_ϵ:|P|\delta ^2|P_{0,m}|\}`$
$`S_{ϵ,\delta }=\{xN_ϵ:|P|\delta |P_{0,m}|\}`$
$`R_{ϵ,\delta }=\{xN_ϵ:\delta ^2|P_{0,m}||P|<\delta |P_{0,m}|\}`$
Notice that the stratum of multiplicity $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_mS_{ϵ,\delta },C_{ϵ,\delta },R_{ϵ,\delta }`$.

The integral

$$I_ϵ=_{N_ϵ}P^{2/d}f^2$$

splits in three parts , $`i=1,2,3`$:

$$I_i=_{N_ϵ}P^{2/d}\psi _i^2f^2$$

for the functions localizing in the sets $`C_{ϵ,\delta },S_{ϵ,\delta },R_{ϵ,\delta }`$ respectively :

$`\psi _1^2=\phi \left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2|P_{0,m}|}{|P|}}\right)`$
$`\psi _2^2=\phi \left({\displaystyle \frac{|P|}{\delta |P_{0,m}|}}\right)`$
$`\psi _1^2=1\varphi _1^2\varphi _2^2`$
We would estimate them seperately:

1. Estimate for $`I_3`$. The crucial observation is that $`\text{supp}(\psi _3f)V(P_{0,m})=\mathrm{}`$ hence we apply the inequality for $`P_{0,m}`$:

$$I_3\delta ^{2/d}_{R_{ϵ,\delta }}|(\varphi _3f)|^2$$

Now in $`R_{ϵ,\delta }`$ we have that for $`\kappa _1<\frac{1}{2}`$

$$|\psi _3|C_1+\kappa _1\left|\frac{P_{0,m}}{P_{0,m}}\right|^2$$

and we apply the inequality for $`^2(P_{0,m})`$ and we are done.
2. The integral $`I_2`$ is filtered in the sets, for $`j>1`$:

$$S_{ϵ,\delta ,j}=\{xN_ϵ/\delta ^{j+1}|P_{0,m}|<|P|<\delta ^j|P|\}$$

and we obtain through the cut-off estimate :

$$|\psi _2|C+\left(\frac{\delta }{2}\right)^j\left|\frac{P_{0.m}}{P_{0,m}}\right|^2$$

and the fact that $`\text{supp}(f)V(P_{0,m})`$ therefore we have that

$$I_2C_{𝐑^n}f^2+|f|^2$$
3. The last is the term near the cone $`V(P)`$. Then introduce the sets for $`\eta <1`$:

$$S_{ϵ,\eta ,j}=\{xN_ϵ/|P|\delta \eta ^j\delta |P_{0,m}|\}$$

Then through the cut-off estamates that allow us to select appropriately $`ϵ`$, we conclude that:

$$I_1_{𝐑^n}f^2+|f|^2$$

Summing up we find

$$I_{1,ϵ}C_{𝐑^n}|f|^2+f^2$$

q.e.d

### 7.1 Example: cubic hypersurfaces.

Here, we treat the inequality for cubic forms $`(n+1)`$\- variables, defining a conic variety with singular part containing a line through the origin. The case $`n=2`$ is treated in \[P\] with elementary methods.

If we choose the $`x_1`$ axis such that $`V(P)`$ is singular along it then the form is written as $`P(x)=x_1Q(\stackrel{~}{x})+C(\stackrel{~}{x})`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{x}=(x_2,\mathrm{},x_{n+1})`$ and $`Q,C`$ are quadratic and cubic forms without common factors since otherwise the inequality is fairly easier. The form $`P`$ defines a cubic hypersurface in $`𝐏^n`$ with a singularity at the point $`E_1`$ with homogeneous coordiantes

$$E_1[1:0:\mathrm{}:0]$$

as well as at the points of the variety $`T`$ where the varieties $`V(C),V(Q)`$ touch each other or the singular set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of $`V(C)`$ on the hypeplane $`H_1`$. We assume also without loss of generality that $`\text{rank}(Q)=n`$.

For the sake of simplicity we treat first the smooth part of the hypersurface defined for $`ϵ>0`$ by

$$V_ϵ(P)=\underset{j}{}V_{ϵ,j}(P),V_{ϵ,j}=\{x𝐑^{n+1}/\left|\frac{P}{x_j}\right|>ϵr^2\}$$

Observe that in $`V_ϵ(P)`$ it is true that for $`c_i>0`$, depending on the values of $`P`$ on $`S^n`$ that $`c_1r^2|P|c_2r^2,c_1=(n+1)ϵ`$ and also that $`c_3r\left|\frac{^2P}{x_i_j}\right|c_4r`$. Therefore the integral $`I_{1,ϵ}(P)[f]=I(P)[\chi _{1,ϵ}f]`$ is studied in $`V_ϵ(P)`$ by the change of variables for each $`j`$ by

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_j:V_{ϵ,j}𝐑^{n+1},`$
$`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{n+1})(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{j_1},\xi ,x_{j+1},\mathrm{},x_{n+1}),\xi =P(x)`$
Then we calculate $`v_{j,n+1}=dx_1\mathrm{}dx_{j1}d\xi dx_{j+1}\mathrm{}dx_{n+1}`$

$$_{V_ϵ(P)}P^{\frac{2}{3}}f^2v_{n+1}=\underset{j}{}_{\mathrm{\Psi }_j(V_{ϵ,j})}\xi ^{\frac{2}{3}}\stackrel{~}{f}^2\left|\frac{P}{x_j}\right|^2v_{j,n+1}C_{V_ϵ}|f|^2v_{n+1}$$

by applying the preceding inequalities in combination with that of Hardy.

To proceed to $`I_{2,ϵ}(P)[f]`$ further we blowup $`\sigma _{n+1}:\widehat{𝐑}^{n+1}𝐑^{n+1}`$ through the usual cones for $`\alpha >1`$:

$$C_{\alpha ;j,n+1}=\{x𝐑^{n+1}/x_j^2\frac{1}{1+\alpha }|x|^2\}$$

The procedure will incorporate an induction with respect to $`n`$. Explicitly we have the formulas:

Let $`j1`$ then after restriction to $`C_{\alpha ;j,n+1}`$, $`\sigma _{n+1}`$ maps as

$`ij:x_i=v_iv_j,`$
$`x_j=v_j,`$
$`P(\sigma _{n+1}(v))=x_j^3.P_j^1,`$
$`P_j^1=x_1Q_j^1(\stackrel{~}{v})+C_j^1(\stackrel{~}{v})`$
where $`\stackrel{~}{v}=(v_2,\mathrm{},v_{j1},v_{j+1},\mathrm{},v_{n+1})`$. At the point $`aT_j`$ or $`a\mathrm{\Sigma }_j`$ the order $`\text{ord}_a(P_j^1)=2`$ and we choose coordinates such that $`u(a)=0`$ and setting $`\stackrel{~}{u}=(u_2,\mathrm{},u_n)`$ we assume that $`P_j^1(u_1,0,\mathrm{},0)u_1^2`$ hence

$$P_j^1(u)=(1+l_j(u))u_1^2+b_j(\stackrel{~}{u})u_1+R_j(\stackrel{~}{u})$$

where

$`\text{deg}(l_j)=1,\text{deg}(\mu _j)=1,\text{ord}_a(l_j)=0,\text{ord}_a(b_j)=1`$
as well as that $`R_j`$ is of the smae form as $`P_j^1`$ but in $`(n1)`$variables. Then we determine inductively the center

$$K_{n,j}=\{xB_{0,\alpha ,n}/\text{ord}_x(P_j^1)=2\}$$

of blowups and the years $`\nu _2`$ of blow-ups for the generation $`m=2`$. The formulas for the blowups in the $`j_1`$-conical chart, $`j_11`$ are:

$$u_j=v_jv_{j_1},jj_1,v_{j_1}=u_{j_1}$$

implying that

$$P_j^1(u)=v_{j_1}^2P_{jj_1}^2(v),P_{jj_1}^2(v)=(1+v_{j_1}l_{jj_1}(v))v_1^2+b_{jj_1}(\stackrel{~}{v}))v_1+R_j(\stackrel{~}{v})$$

These blowups are repeated up to the desingularization of $`V(R_j)`$ and at each step we apply Hardy’s inequality for the factor coming out of the blowup; finally we obtain a smooth chart as precedingly and we apply Hardy’s inequality. The $`j=1`$ conical chart is carried through analogously.

In conclusion we have that

$$_{𝐑^{n+1}}P^{\frac{2}{3}}f^2v_{n+1}C_{𝐑^{n+1}}|f|^2v_{n+1}+\underset{\mathrm{}=2}{\overset{\nu _2}{}}_{𝐑^{n+1}}\left|^{\mathrm{}}f\right|^2v_{n+1}$$

and scaling we get the desired result.

## 8 Heat expansion for operators $`H_{c,\alpha }=\mathrm{\Delta }+c|P|^\alpha `$

In this section we will establish the existence of the small time expansion of the heat trace of the operator

$$H_{c,\alpha }=\mathrm{\Delta }+c|P|^\alpha $$

Actually we will prove the $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$ expansion of the distributional trace $`\text{tr}(R_{c,\alpha }(\lambda )^k\chi )`$ of the $`k`$-th power of

$$R_{c,\alpha }(\lambda )=(H_{c,\alpha }\lambda )^1$$

This will achieved in the following steps:

1. Determination of the domain of self-adjointness of $`H_{c,\alpha }`$
2. Estimates for $`R_{c,\alpha }(\lambda )=(H_{c,\alpha }\lambda )^1`$ in various operator norms
3. The preceding allow us to prove the expansion by considering the expansion of each term of the Neumann series for $`R_{c,\alpha }(\lambda )`$ around $`R_0(\lambda )=(\mathrm{\Delta }_n\lambda )^1`$.
4. After identifying the form of these terme we appeal to the usual Mellin transform theorem in view of the Atiyah-Bernshtein-Gelfand theorem on the meromorphic continuation of integrals depending on complex powers

##### Domain of Self-Adjointness

First we determine the domain of selfadjointness of the operator $`H_{c,\alpha }=\mathrm{\Delta }+c|P|^\alpha `$ where $`cC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^n)`$ and $`P`$ is a homogeneous polynomial of degree $`d`$ in the class $`𝒫^{gH}`$. We extend $`C_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^n)`$ provided that the exponent $`\alpha <\frac{n}{d}`$.

The Kato-Rellich theorem (\[RS\]) suggests that the operator $`H_{c,\alpha }`$ is essentially self adjoint on $`C_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^n)`$. The neccessary semiboundedness estimate reads as

###### Proposition 9

Let $`c0,\varphi C_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^n),\alpha <\frac{n}{d},\kappa <1`$ then it is true that

$$c.|P|^\alpha \varphi _{L^2}\kappa \mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _{L^2}+\beta \varphi _{L^2}$$

Furthermore the domain closure of the operator $`H_{c,\alpha }|(C_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^n))`$ for small $`\alpha `$ consists of $`H^2(𝐑^n)`$.

Proof. We decompose the integral in two parts, through a suitable partition of unity: one sufficiently close - at distance $`ϵ^{1/d}`$\- to the algebraic set and one in the complement. Set then

$$N_ϵ=\{x𝐑^n/|P(x)|<ϵ\}$$

and

$$K_ϵ=𝐑^nN_ϵ$$

Choose $`\chi _{1,ϵ}^2+\chi _{2,ϵ}^2=1`$, $`\text{supp}(\chi _{1,ϵ})K_ϵ`$ the functions that execute this decomposition (it just suffice to take functions of the form $`\chi \left(\frac{P}{ϵ}\right)`$) Split then

$$\varphi ^2=\varphi _1^2+\varphi _2^2=(\chi _{1,ϵ}\varphi )^2+(\chi _{2,ϵ}\varphi )^2$$

Then for the part localized in $`K_{2,ϵ}`$, we use the inequality :

$$|P|^\alpha \epsilon P^{2/d}+B_\epsilon $$

Hence, we compute and obtain

$`c|P|^\alpha \varphi _{L^2}=c.|P|^\alpha \varphi _1_{L^2}+c.|P|^\alpha \varphi _2_{L^2}`$
$`M.\varphi _L^{\mathrm{}}\chi _{1,ϵ}_{L^2}+\nu (\mathrm{\Delta })\varphi _2_{L^2}+\beta \varphi _{L^2}`$
having applied twice the inequality $`P^{2/d}C(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ for the second term where the first term is due to the fact for $`\alpha <\frac{n}{d}`$ then $`|P|^\alpha L_{\text{loc}}^1(𝐑^n)`$. Finally, we let $`ϵ0`$ and obtain the desired inequality. The Kato - Rellich theorem gives the essential self-adjointness we have been looking for; the operator $`H_{c,\alpha }`$ is bounded below by $`\beta `$. q.e.d

Further we will examine the closure of the operator, initially considered on $`C_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^n)`$. For this we write :

$`H_{c,\alpha }\varphi _{L^2}^2=\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _{L^2}^2+c|P|^\alpha \varphi _{L^2}+`$
$`+(\varphi ,[(\mathrm{\Delta })c|P|^\alpha |P|^\alpha +c|P|^\alpha (\mathrm{\Delta })]\varphi )`$
Therefore combining the obvious inequality for the inner product with the inequality obtained above, we get the desired estimate.

##### Operator estimates.

For the Neumann series we will need the following estimates relative to the resolvent $`R_0(\lambda )=((\mathrm{\Delta })\lambda )^1`$:

###### Proposition 10

Let $`\lambda `$ be sufficiently large and outside a cone shaped region enclosing the positive real axis then the operator norm is,

$`|P|^\alpha R_0(\lambda )_{L^2}=0(|\lambda |^{1+\frac{d\alpha }{2}}),`$
$`|P|^\alpha R_0(\lambda )_i_{L^2}=0(|\lambda |^{\frac{1}{2}+\frac{d\alpha }{2}})`$
$`[|P|^\alpha ,R_0(\lambda )]_{L^2}=0(|\lambda |^{1+\frac{d\alpha }{2}}),`$
$`||[\mathrm{}[|P|^\alpha ,R_0(\lambda )],\mathrm{}],R_0(\lambda )]||_{L^2}=0(|\lambda |^{k+\frac{d\alpha }{2}})`$
Proof. Compute

$$(|P|^\alpha R_0(\lambda )\varphi ,|P|^\alpha R_0(\lambda )\varphi )$$

with $`\varphi L^2(𝐑^n)`$. For this use a suitable partition of unity as in Proposition (2), splitting $`\psi =R_0(\lambda )\varphi C_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^n)`$ as before, far and close to the algebraic set $`V(P)`$. For the term involving $`\psi _1=\chi _1\psi `$ apply Cauchy-Schwarz, while for $`\psi _2=\chi _2\psi `$ use the inequality as follows:

$`ab{\displaystyle \frac{a^p}{p}}+{\displaystyle \frac{b^q}{q}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{q}}=1,`$
$`p={\displaystyle \frac{2}{d\alpha }},a=\delta ^{\frac{1}{p}}P^{2\alpha },b=\delta ^{\frac{1}{p}},`$
and for the two terms we have that

$$P^\alpha \psi _2_{L^2}C_ϵ\varphi _2$$

and also that

$$\psi _2_{L^2}C_ϵ|\lambda |^{\frac{1}{2}}\varphi _2$$

Choosing then

$$\delta =\delta ^{\frac{\alpha d}{2\alpha d}}|\lambda |^1$$

we get the desired estimate.The other estimates follow in the same fashion as the first one. q.e.d.

##### The Neumann series

We will prove the existence of an asymptotic expansion for a suitable power

$$R_{c,\alpha }^k(\lambda )=(\lambda H_{c,\alpha })^k$$

and proving the existence for each term there. Actually, $`R_{c,\alpha }^k(\lambda )`$ is represented by an integral kernel since as we intend to show, it is in the Hilbert-Schmidt ideal.

The resolvent expansion for $`R_{c,\alpha }(\lambda )`$ is

$$R_{c,\alpha }(\lambda )=\underset{j=0}{\overset{N1}{}}(R_0(\lambda )|P|^\alpha )^j.R_0(\lambda )+O(|\lambda |^{(1\frac{d\alpha }{2})N1})$$

the remainder is considered in the $`L^2`$-norm. Use the fact that

$$R_{c,\alpha }^k(\lambda )=\frac{1}{k!}_\lambda ^k(R_{c,\alpha }(\lambda ))$$

to calculate the form of the Neumann series for $`R_{c,\alpha }^k(\lambda )`$. We set then

$$\mathrm{\Pi }^j(\lambda )=(R_0(\lambda )|P|^\alpha )^j,$$

so that

$$R_{c,\alpha }(\lambda )=\underset{i=0}{\overset{N1}{}}\mathrm{\Pi }^iR_0(\lambda )++0(|\lambda |^{(1\frac{d\alpha }{2})N1})$$

In order to obtain the Neumann series of $`R_{c,\alpha }(\lambda )^k`$ to study the beaviour of the terms in this series. Therefore we set us

$$I^{i,j}=_\lambda ^j\left(\mathrm{\Pi }^iR_0(\lambda )\right)=\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{j}{}}()^{j\mathrm{}+1}\left(_\lambda ^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }^i\right)R_0(\lambda )^{j\mathrm{}+1}$$

Therefore we need

$$_\lambda ^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }^i=\underset{m_1+\mathrm{}+m_{\mathrm{}+1}=i,m_11}{}\mathrm{\Pi }^{m_1}R_0(\lambda )\mathrm{\Pi }^{m_2}R_0(\lambda )\mathrm{}R_0(\lambda )\mathrm{\Pi }^{m_{\mathrm{}}+1}$$

Here observe that the number of $`R_0(\lambda )`$-factors is $`\mathrm{}`$ Conclusively we have that for the operator product factor

$$C_{i;\mathrm{};m_1,\mathrm{},m_{\mathrm{}+1}}=\mathrm{\Pi }^{m_1}R_0(\lambda )\mathrm{\Pi }^{m_2}R_0(\lambda )\mathrm{}R_0(\lambda )\mathrm{\Pi }^{m_{\mathrm{}}+1}$$

$$I^{i,j}=(1)^{j+1}\underset{0\mathrm{}j,m_11,m_1+\mathrm{}+m_{\mathrm{}+1}=i}{}C_{i;\mathrm{};m_1,\mathrm{},m_{\mathrm{}+1}}R_0(\lambda )^{j\mathrm{}+1}$$

Now we see that

$`C_{i;\mathrm{};m_1,\mathrm{},m_{\mathrm{}+1}}_{L^2}|\lambda |^{(1\frac{d\alpha }{2})i\mathrm{}}`$
$`I^{i,j}_{L^2}|\lambda |^{(1\frac{d\alpha }{2})ij1}`$
The trace class norm estimates are derived through the following estimate from \[C1\] :

###### Proposition 11

Suppose $`k>\frac{n(qll+2)}{4lq},l2,\chi L_0^{2p}(𝐑^n),\frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}=1`$. Then $`\chi .R_0(\lambda )`$ is in $`C_l(𝐑^n)`$ for $`\lambda 𝐂\overline{𝐑}_+`$ and

$$\chi R_0(\lambda )^k_lC_{l,ϵ}\chi _{2p}|\lambda |^{k+\frac{n(qll+2)}{4lq}}$$

for $`\text{supp}(\chi )K𝐑^n`$ for all $`\lambda `$ in $`|Im\lambda |>ϵRe\lambda +ϵ`$ for given $`ϵ>0`$.

Combining the preceding estimates (prop (9),(10)) we can conclude that $`I^{i,j}C_l(𝐑^n)`$ and furthermore that

$$\chi I^{i,j}(\lambda )_lC_{l,ϵ,j}\chi _{2p}|\lambda |^{j+\frac{n(qll+2)}{4lq}i(1\frac{d\alpha }{2})}$$

##### The existence of the Asymptotic Expansion for $`\text{tr}(\chi R_{c,\alpha }^k(\lambda ))`$.

We conclude this section with the proof of the existence of the $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$ asymptotic expansion of the trace $`tr(\chi R_{c,\alpha }^k(\lambda ))`$. The latter for $`k`$ chosen conveniently is a sum of integrals of the form

$`𝒯^{j,k}(\lambda ,\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _j):=\text{tr}(\chi ^{j,k})(\lambda ,\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _j)=`$
$`={\displaystyle _{𝐑^{nj}}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{i=1}^j(R_0^{k_i}(\lambda )(x_i,x_{i+1}))\mathrm{\Pi }_{i=1}^j|P|^{\alpha _i}(x_i)\chi (x)\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _j`$
with the convention $`x_{j+1}x_1,X=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_j)𝐑^{nj}`$. The resolvent is given by

$$R_0(\lambda )(x_1,x_2)=\frac{(\sqrt{\lambda })^{\frac{n}{2}+2}}{2^{\frac{n}{2}}|x_1x_2|^{\frac{n}{2}1}}K_{n\frac{1}{2}}(\sqrt{\lambda }|x_1x_2|)=\frac{1}{(4\pi )^{\frac{n}{2}}}_0^{\mathrm{}}e^{\lambda y\frac{(x_1x_2)^2}{4y}}\frac{dy}{y^{\frac{n}{2}}}$$

The existence of the asymptotic expansion of the trace $`𝒯^{j,k}(\lambda ,\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _j)`$ is proved using the Mellin transform suggested by the following classical result - stated in the terminology of \[C2\]:

###### Proposition 12

Let $`fC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑_+),m𝐑`$ such that $`x^mfL_{loc}^1(𝐑_+)`$. Suppose that the Mellin transform $`\widehat{f}`$ has a meromorphic extension from the half plane $`\{z𝐂/\mathrm{}z>m\}`$ with poles and multiplicity function $`S,d=deg(S)`$ and further that $`lim_\mathrm{}s\mathrm{}(|s|^d\widehat{f}(s))=0.`$ Then $`f\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\mathrm{}}(\overline{𝐑_+})`$.

Using the integral representations for the resolvent and changing variables we deduce that the Mellin transform of $`𝒯_{j,k}`$ with respect to $`\lambda `$ takes the form for $`k=k_1+\mathrm{}+k_j`$ :

$$\widehat{𝒯}^{j,k}(s,\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _j)=c_{n,j,k}(s)_{𝐑^{nj}\times \overline{𝐑_+}^j}𝒫_{(s,\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _j)}(x,y)\chi (x,y)𝑑x𝑑y$$

where we have set above

$$c_{n,j,k}(s):=4^{s\frac{(2kn)j}{2}j}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)\mathrm{\Gamma }(s\frac{(2kn)j}{2}j)$$

$`y:=(y_1,\mathrm{},y_j)`$ and the integrand consists of:

$$𝒫_{(s,\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _j)}(x,y)=\frac{_{i=1}^jP^{\alpha _i}(x_i)(_{i=2}^jy_i^{sj(k_i\frac{n}{2})1}(\stackrel{~}{𝒬}(x,y))^{s+(\frac{n}{2}k)j+1}}{(1+y_2+\mathrm{}+y_j)^s}$$

and $`\stackrel{~}{𝒬}=i^{}𝒬`$ is the restriction of the homogeneous polynomial function $`𝒬:𝐑^{nj}\times 𝐑^j𝐑`$ on the $`y_1=1`$ hyperplane

$$𝒬(x,y)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}(y_k+y_{k1})\pi _k(y)x_k^2\underset{i=1}{\overset{j}{}}\pi _{(i,i+1)}^j(y)(x_{i1}y_i+x_{i+1}y_{i1})x_i$$

where $``$ denotes the Euclidean inner product and we have set as well

$$\pi _i^j(y)=y_1\mathrm{}y_{i1}y_{i+1}\mathrm{}y_j,\pi _{(i,i+1)}^j(y)=y_1\mathrm{}y_{i1}y_{i+2}\mathrm{}y_j$$

The existence of the asymptotic expansion is a direct consequence of the following theorem on the meromorphic continuation of integrals depending on complex parameters, \[BG\].

###### Theorem 13

Let $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_k`$ be regular functions on $`𝐑^n`$ and $`\varphi C_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^n)`$, then the integral

$$I(\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _k)=_{𝐑^n}|P_1|^{\lambda _1}\mathrm{}|P_k|^{\lambda _k}\varphi \omega _n$$

can be continued as a meromorphic function on the whole space of the complex variables $`\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _k`$; at the same time the poles can be situated on a finite number of series of hyperplanes of the form $`a_1\lambda _1+\mathrm{}+a_k\lambda _k+b+s=0`$ where $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_k,b`$ are fixed nonnegative integers and $`s`$ runs through all the odd natural numbers

## 14 Growth of inegrals in semialgebraic sets

Let $`P𝒫^{gH}`$ be a homogeneous polynomial and consider the following semialgebraic sets:

$$N_P(\eta )=\{x𝐑^n/ϵ_0P(x)\eta \}$$

Then we consider the function $`\zeta ,\text{supp}(\zeta )B_{0,R}`$ that satisfies the gradient estimate for $`\gamma ,\delta >0`$:

$$|\zeta |\gamma |\zeta |+\delta $$

If $`\phi C_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑_+)`$ with $`\text{supp}(\phi )[0,1+\epsilon ),\varphi 1`$ in $`[0,1]`$ then $`\phi \left(\frac{P}{\eta }\right)`$ localizes in the space $`P<\eta `$. We will follow the classical identities for the monotonicity formulas, cf. \[HL\]. Then we have the following elementary identity:

$$\eta _\eta \varphi =\frac{P}{|P|^2}P\phi $$

we can differntiate the integral replacing $`\zeta `$ by $`\phi \left(\frac{ϵ_0}{P}\right)\zeta `$ in order to localize in $`N_P(\eta )`$:

$$I_\zeta (\eta )=_{𝐑^n}\varphi \zeta ^2$$

and get:

$$\eta \frac{dI_\zeta }{d\eta }=_{𝐑^n}\frac{P}{|P|^2}\zeta ^2P\phi $$

Then integrate by parts to obtain for $`Q=|P|^2`$:

$$\zeta \frac{dI_\zeta }{d\eta }_{𝐑^n}\left(\frac{P^2}{Q^2}\left|\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }P}{P}\right|+\delta +2\gamma \frac{P^2}{Q}+\frac{|P|}{|P|}\frac{|Q|}{Q}\right)\phi \zeta ^2+\text{vol}(N_\eta )$$

Then applying the conical Lojasiewicz inequality we obtain:

$$\frac{|P|}{|P|}c|P|^{1/m}c\eta ^{1/m}$$

If we assume that $`Q𝒫^{gH}`$ -it is not neccessary, since with partial integration we can avoid the term involving $`Q`$ \- then applying the generalized Hardy’s inequality we arrive at the differential inequality

$$\frac{dI_\zeta }{d\eta }C\left(\gamma ^2\eta ^{\frac{2}{m}1}I_\zeta +\eta ^{\frac{1}{m}}\right)$$

Then we arrive at the conclusion:

$$I_\zeta (\eta )c_1e^{c_2\gamma ^2\eta ^{2/m}}I_\zeta (\eta /2)$$

Actually this estimate combined with Harnack inequalities for semialgebraic sets (proved in \[P1\]) provide growth estimates for functions on semialgebraic sets.

Author’s address: TEI CRETE, Dept Electronics,

Chania, Crete, Greece

email address: dpliakis@gmail.gr