text:
# Non-perturbative gluon evolution, squeezing, correlations and chaos in jets

## 1 Introduction

Many experiments at $`e^+e^{},p\overline{p},ep`$ colliders are devoted to hadronic jet physics, since detailed studies of jets are important for better understanding and testing both perturbative and non-perturbative QCD and also for finding manifestations of new physics. Although the nature of jets is of a universal character, $`e^+e^{}`$\- annihilation stands out among hard processes, since jet events admit a straightforward and clear-cut separation in this process. In the reaction $`e^+e^{}hadron`$ four evolution phases are recognized by various time and space scales. These are (I) the production of a quark-antiquark pair: $`e^+e^{}q\overline{q};`$ (II) the emissions of gluons and quarks from primary partons — perturbative evolution of the quark-gluon cascade; (III) the non-perturbative evolution and the hadronization of quarks and gluons; (IV) the decays of unstable particles.

The second phase of $`e^+e^{}`$\- annihilation has been well understood and sufficiently accurate predictions for it have been obtained within the perturbative QCD (PQCD) . But predictions of the PQCD are limited by small effective coupling $`\alpha (Q^2)<1`$ and third phase is usually taken into account either through a constant factor which relates partonic features with hadronic ones (within local parton-hadron duality) or through the application of various phenomenological models of hadronization. As a consequence, theoretical predictions both for intrajet and for interjet characteristics remain unsatisfactory. For example, the width of the multiplicity distribution (MD) according to the predictions of PQCD is larger than the experimental one. The discrepancies between theoretical calculations and experimental data suggest that after perturbative stage the quark-gluon cascade undergoes non-perturbative evolution after that hadronization effects come into play. New gluon states, generated at the non-perturbative stage, contribute to various features of jets. For example, such a contribution to the multiplicity distribution can be in the form of the sub-Poissonian distribution . Therefore we must take into account both perturbative and non-perturbative stage of the jet evolution.

Calculations performed within PQCD  show that multiplicity distribution at the end of the perturbative cascade is close to a negative binomial distribution. At the same time, gluon MD in the range of the small transverse momenta (thin ring of jet) is Poissonian . Thus parton MD in the whole jet at the end of the perturbative cascade can be represented as a combination of Poissonian distributions each of which corresponds to a coherent state. Studying a further evolution of gluon states at the non-perturbative stage of jet evolution we obtain new gluon states that are squeezed states (SS) -. These states are formed as a result of non-perturbative self-interaction of the gluons expressed by nonlinearities of Hamiltonian. In this paper we prove that non-perturbative stage of jet evolution can be one of sources of a gluon SS by analogy with nonlinear medium for photon SS -. Squeezed states posses uncommon properties: they display a specific behaviour of the factorial and cumulant moments  and can have both sub-Poissonian and super-Poissonian statistics corresponding to antibunching and bunching of photons. Moreover oscillatory behaviour MD of photon SS is differentiated from Poissonian and Negative binomial distributions (NBD). Because of analogy between photon and gluon, MD of gluon SS must have oscillations and using Local parton hadron duality (LPHD) we can compare derived gluon MD with hadron MD. It is clear that in this case behaviour of hadron MD in jet events is differentiated from NBD and this fact is confirmed by experiments for $`pp,p\overline{p}`$-collisions -.

In series of works - it was shown that presence of a chaos amplifies effect of squeezing. At the same time condition of appearance of chaos is sufficiently understood,basically, in classical systems -. Indeed, originally chaos was considered within classical and statistical physics. It was demonstrated that one of the causes of chaos is a local instability of a dynamical system  which can lead to mixing of trajectories in phase space and as result to non-regular behaviour of considered system .

Large progress in understanding of chaos was achieved in semi-classical limit of quantum mechanics . But not all criteria of the classical chaos are useful for quantum case. In particular, by virtue of Heisenberg uncertainty relation describing chaotic motion on the basis of exponentially separation of neighboring trajectories is not possible in quantum mechanics.

A keen interest to chaos in field theories is connected with the facts that all four fundamental particle interactions have chaotic solutions . At the same time there are also some problems with definition of the chaos in the theory of field. In  it was shown that exponential decreasing of the Green function may serve as criterion of chaos both in the classical and quasiclassical theory of field. Therefore we assume that conditions of appearance of chaos for quantum field systems, where squeezing exists, can find by studying features of the correlators of the field operators, which are analogue of the Green functions.

Since the chaos phenomenon can be related with confinement  and with fractality for the factorial moments  then the question about condition of the appearance of the chaos in jet is important. In this connection we investigate SU(2)-jet model for the purpose of revealing of the local instability which can lead to chaos.

## 2 The colour evolution of gluon states

The solution of the Schr$`\ddot{\mathrm{o}}`$dinger evolution equation for small time $`t`$

$$|f|iitH_g|i$$
(1)
provides a possibility to observe an evolution of an initial state vector $`|i`$ for small time. Here the Hamiltonian111Here we suggest that a motion equation is satisfied, i.e. $`_\mu F_a^{\mu \nu }+gf_{abc}A_\mu ^bF_c^{\mu \nu }=0.`$ $`H_g`$ has the form

$$\widehat{H}_g=H_0+V,$$
(2)
where $`H_0={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \left(𝐄_a𝐄_a+𝐁_a𝐁_a\right)d^3x}`$ is the Hamiltonian of the ”free” gluons and the Hamiltonian of gluon self-interaction $`V`$ is

$$V=gf_{abc}𝐄_a𝐀_bA_c^0d^3x\frac{g}{2}f_{abc}𝐁_a[𝐀_b𝐀_c]d^3x+\frac{g^2}{2}\left(f_{abc}𝐀_bA_c^0\right)^2d^3x+\frac{g^2}{8}\left(f_{abc}[𝐀_b𝐀_c]\right)^2d^3x,$$
(3)
$`𝐄_a=A_a^0_0𝐀_a,𝐁_a=[A_a],A_a^\mu `$ – is the potential of gluon field ($`\mu =\overline{0,4},a=\overline{1,8}`$). In the momentum representation the Hamiltonian of gluon self-interaction for the jet ring of thickness $`d\theta `$ can be represented in the form222By performing integration with respect to $`\theta `$, it is easy to obtain the gluon Hamiltonian for the whole jet; this Hamiltonian differs from the original one (2) only by a factor. Hence, all of the further conclusions about the existence of squeezed states remain valid in this case.

$`V`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k_0^4}{4(2\pi )^3}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{q_0^2}{k_0^2}})^{3/2}g^2\pi f_{abc}f_{ade}\{(2{\displaystyle \frac{q_0^2}{k_0^2}})[a_{1212}^{bcde}+a_{1313}^{bcde}]+a_{2323}^{bcde}+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{q_0^2}{k_0^2}})[2a_{2323}^{bcde}a_{1212}^{bcde}a_{1313}^{bcde}]\}\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta .`$
Here $`a_{lmlm}^{bcde}=a_l^{b+}a_m^{c+}a_l^da_m^e+a_l^{b+}a_m^ca_l^{d+}a_m^e+a_l^ba_m^{c+}a_l^{d+}a_m^e+h.c.,a_l^b(a_l^{b+})`$ is the operator annihilating (creating) a gluon of colour $`b`$ and vector component $`l`$, $`q_0^2`$ and $`k_0`$ are correspondingly the virtuality and energy of the gluon at the end of the perturbative cascade, g is the coupling constant, $`f_{abc}`$ stands for the structure constants of the $`SU_c(3)`$ group, $`\theta `$ is the angle between the jet axis and the momentum $`𝐤`$ ($`0\theta \theta _{\mathrm{max}},\theta _{\mathrm{max}}`$ is half of the opening angle of the jet cone).

Evolution of a single-gluon state vector $`|a_l^b`$ with colour $`b`$ and vector component $`l`$ has the evident form

$$|a_𝐥^b(t)|a_l^b(0)itC|a_l^b(0),$$
(5)
where quantity C depends from coupling constant, energy and virtuality of gluon. As a result of single-gluon state evolution the state vector with different colour is not appear. In this respect evolution of gluon coherent state $`|\alpha _l^b`$ is more interesting. For example, evolution of gluon coherent state with colour $`b=1`$ and vector component $`l=1`$ in jet ring is the following

$$\begin{array}{c}\alpha _1^1(t)\left\{1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}it\pi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta (u_3+u_4\alpha _1^1^2)\right\}|\alpha _1^1(0)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}it\pi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta u_4\alpha _1^1D\left(\alpha _1^1\right)a_1^1\hfill \\ \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}it\pi u_2\left(1+u_1\frac{u_1}{2}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \right)\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta \left(\alpha _1^1\right)^2\underset{k=2}{\overset{7}{\stackrel{}{}}}\underset{n=2}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _1^1(0),2a_n^k,\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
where $`a_l^b(0)`$ is a single gluon vector, $`D(\alpha )=exp\{\alpha a^+\alpha ^{}a\}`$ is the unitary displacement operator of amplitude $`\alpha `$,

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{k=2}{\overset{7}{\stackrel{}{}}}\left(\right)=\underset{k=2}{\overset{3}{}}\left(\right)+\frac{1}{4}\underset{k=4}{\overset{7}{}}\left(\right),u_1=\left(1\frac{q_0^2}{k_0^2}\right),u_2=\frac{k_0^4}{4(2\pi )^3}\frac{g^2}{2}\sqrt{u_1^3},\hfill \\ \\ u_3=\frac{15}{2}k_0^3\sqrt{u_1}\left(1+u_1+\frac{q_0^4}{2k_0^4}\right)+\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}24}u_2(3+2u_1),\hfill \\ \\ u_4=\frac{k_0^3}{2}\sqrt{u_1}\left[\frac{q_0^4}{k_0^4}+\left(1+u_1\frac{q_0^4}{k_0^4}\right)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \right]+\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}6}u_2[2(1+u_1)u_1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta ].\hfill \end{array}\}$$
(7)
Analogously we can also investigate the evolution of gluon coherent states with any other colour charges and vector components.

As a result the following conclusions have been obtained:
1) for the initial vectors with the colour indices b=1,2,3 the vectors with another colour indices k$`=\overline{4,7}`$ appear;
2) if the initial vectors have the colour indices b=$`\overline{4,7}`$ then the new vectors with colour indices k=1,2,3,8 and the vectors with the combination of the colour indices 3,8: $`\alpha _l^b,a_l^3,a_l^8`$ appear;
3) as a result of the evolution of colour coherent state with b=8 the mixed colour states with colour indices 4,5,6,7 appear.

It is clear that namely the difference among the structure constants of the $`SU_c(3)`$-group for different colour indices leads to the different evolution of the corresponding colours.

Since product of the gluon coherent states with different colour and vector indices $`\underset{c=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _l^c(0)`$ corresponds to Poissonian distribution of the multimode gluon states in thin ring of jet, present state vector may be considered as initial state vector333For whole jet we have a superposition of these gluon coherent states with specific weights as initial state vector. prepared by the perturbative stage. Therefore evolution problem of this initial state vector within a small interval of time $`t`$, which is defined according (1) as

$$|f=\underset{c=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _l^c(t)\underset{c=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _l^c(0)itV\underset{c=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _l^c(0),$$
(8)
is actual. In this case the time is reckoned from the beginning of non-perturbative stage and the Hamiltonian of the gluon self-interaction $`V`$ in the jet ring is determined by formula (2). The explicit form of the evolved state vector $`|f`$ is given in the Appendix A.

Because of producing of new evolved mixed state vectors the question, connected with identification of these states, arises, in particular, about fulfillment of squeezing condition for these new states.

## 3 Squeezed gluon states in QCD jet

The Hamiltonian of the gluon self-interaction $`V`$ in the jet ring (2) includes the squares of the creation and annihilation operators for gluons with specified colour and vector indices. As is known from quantum mechanics and quantum optics, the presence of such structure in the Hamiltonian and, consequently, in the evolution operator is a necessary condition for emergence of squeezed states , since the unitary squeezing operator involves quadratic combinations of the creation and annihilation operators:

$$S(z)=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{z^{}}{2}a^2\frac{z}{2}(a^+)^2\right\},$$
(9)
where $`z=re^{i\delta }`$ is an arbitrary complex number, $`r`$ is a squeeze factor, phase $`\delta `$ defines the direction of squeezing maximum .

In order to verify whether the final gluon state vector describes the single-mode SS, it is necessary to introduce the phase-sensitive Hermitian operators $`(X_l^b)_1=\left[a_l^b+(a_l^b)^+\right]/2`$ and $`(X_l^b)_2=\left[a_l^b(a_l^b)^+\right]/2i`$ by analogy with quantum optics and to establish conditions under which the variance of one of them can be less than the variance of a coherent state.

Mathematically, the condition of squeezing is expressed in the form of the inequalities

$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(X_l^b)_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{2}}\right)^2=N\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(X_l^b)_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{2}}\right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}<{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}`$
or

$`N\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(X_l^b)_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{2}}\right)^2<\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}.`$ (10)
Here $`N`$ is the normal-ordering operator such as

$`N\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(X_l^b)_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{2}}\right)^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\{\pm [\left(a_l^b\right)^2a_l^b^2]\pm [\left(a_l^{b+}\right)^2a_l^{b+}^2]`$
$`+2[a_l^{b+}a_l^ba_l^{b+}a_l^b]\}.`$
The expectation values of the creation and annihilation operators for gluons with specified colour and vector components is taken for the vector $`\underset{c=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _l^c(t)`$ (A.1).

Let us consider the specific case where the colour index is $`b=1`$ and the vector index $`l`$ is arbitrary. Then we have

$`N\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(X_l^1)_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{2}}\right)^2=`$ $`\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}4}\pi u_2t\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta \{(1+u_1)[\delta _{l1}(Z_{33}+Z_{22})+(1\delta _{l1})Z_{11}]+[\delta _{l2}Z_{33}+\delta _{l3}Z_{22}]`$ (12)
$`+u_1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _{l1}(Z_{22}+Z_{33})+\delta _{l2}(Z_{33}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Z_{11})+\delta _{l3}(Z_{22}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Z_{11})]\}.`$
Here $`Z_{mn}=\underset{k=2}{\overset{7}{^{}}}(X_m^k)_1(X_n^k)_2(m,n=1,2,3).`$ Since at small value of the squeeze factor we have

$$r\mathrm{cos}\delta =\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}N\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(X)_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{2}}\right)^2,$$
(13)
then taking into account formula (12) the expression (13) can be rewrite in the form

$$\begin{array}{c}r_l^1\mathrm{cos}\delta =\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}\pi u_2t\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta \{(1+u_1)[\delta _{l1}(Z_{33}+Z_{22})+(1\delta _{l1})Z_{11}]+\delta _{l2}Z_{33}+\delta _{l3}Z_{22}\hfill \\ +u_1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta [\frac{1}{2}\delta _{l1}(Z_{22}+Z_{33})+\delta _{l2}(Z_{33}\frac{1}{2}Z_{11})+\delta _{l3}(Z_{22}\frac{1}{2}Z_{11})]\}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
Evidently that $`N\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(X)_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{2}}\right)^20`$ if $`r0`$ and $`\delta {\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{2}}.`$ In final state being consideration fluctuations of one of the squared components of the gluon field, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(X_l^1)_2`$, are less than those in the initial coherent state under the following conditions: $`(X_m^k)_1<0,(X_m^k)_2<0`$ or $`(X_m^k)_1>0`$ and $`(X_m^k)_2>0`$$`(k1,ml)`$ then, as following from (14), $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}<\delta <{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{2}}`$. In this case we have phase-squeezed gluon states by analogy with quantum optics . If the conditions $`(X_m^k)_1>0,(X_m^k)_2<0`$ or $`(X_m^k)_1<0`$ and $`(X_m^k)_2>0`$$`(k1,ml,{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}<\delta <{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}})`$ are satisfied, fluctuations in another squared component of the gluon field, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(X_l^1)_1`$, will be less in the final state vector $`\underset{c=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _l^c(t)`$ than in the coherent state. In this case we arrive at the amplitude-squeezed states (as in the case of photons ).

Rewriting the expression (14) in terms of the amplitude and phase of the gluon coherent states ($`\alpha _l^b=\alpha _l^be^{i\gamma _l^b}`$)

$`r_l^1\mathrm{cos}\delta =`$ $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}\pi u_2t\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta {\displaystyle \underset{k=2}{\overset{7}{\stackrel{}{}}}}\{(1+u_1{\displaystyle \frac{u_1}{2}}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta )[\delta _{l1}{\displaystyle \underset{n=2}{\overset{3}{}}}|\alpha _n^k|^2\mathrm{sin}(2\gamma _n^k)+(1\delta _{l1})|\alpha _1^k|^2\mathrm{sin}(2\gamma _1^k)]`$ (15)
$`+(1+u_1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta )[\delta _{l2}|\alpha _3^k|^2\mathrm{sin}(2\gamma _3^k)+\delta _{l3}|\alpha _2^k|^2\mathrm{sin}(2\gamma _2^k)]\},`$
we see that effect of the single-mode squeezing is absent ($`r_l^1\mathrm{cos}\delta =0`$) then the initial gluon coherent fields are either real ($`\gamma _n^k=0,nl,k1`$) or imaginary ($`\gamma _n^k=\pi /2,nl,k1`$). Similar conclusions will also be valid for a gluon field featuring other colour indices.

Thus, the vector $`\underset{c=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _l^c(t)`$ describes the squeezed state of gluons that are produced at the non-perturbative stage of the jet evolution within a small interval of time $`t`$. Here, the corresponding fluctuations of the squared components of the gluon field will be less than those in the case of the initial coherent state.

It should be noted that the Hamiltonian of the three-gluon self-interaction which in momentum representation has the next form

$$\begin{array}{c}V^{}=\frac{ig}{(2\pi )^{3/2}}f_{abc}\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\left(\frac{d^3k_i}{\sqrt{2k_{0i}}}\right)\{[(\stackrel{}{a}_a\stackrel{}{a}_b)(\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{a}_c)+[\frac{k_{01}}{k_{03}}\stackrel{}{a}_a\frac{\stackrel{}{k}_1}{k_{03}k_{01}}(\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{a}_a)]\stackrel{}{a}_b(\stackrel{}{k}_3\stackrel{}{a}_c)]e^{i(k_{01}+k_{02}+k_{03})t}\hfill \\ \times \delta (\stackrel{}{k}_1+\stackrel{}{k}_2+\stackrel{}{k}_3)+\left[(\stackrel{}{a}_a\stackrel{}{a}_b^+)(\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{a}_c)+[\frac{k_{01}}{k_{03}}\stackrel{}{a}_a\frac{\stackrel{}{k}_1}{k_{03}k_{01}}(\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{a}_a)]\stackrel{}{a}_b^+(\stackrel{}{k}_3\stackrel{}{a}_c)\right]e^{i(k_{01}k_{02}+k_{03})t}\delta (\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{k}_2+\stackrel{}{k}_3)\hfill \\ +\left[(\stackrel{}{a}_a\stackrel{}{a}_b)(\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{a}_c^+)+[\frac{k_{01}}{k_{03}}\stackrel{}{a}_a\frac{\stackrel{}{k}_1}{k_{03}k_{01}}(\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{a}_a)]\stackrel{}{a}_b(\stackrel{}{k}_3\stackrel{}{a}_c^+)\right]e^{i(k_{01}+k_{02}k_{03})t}\delta (\stackrel{}{k}_1+\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3)\hfill \\ +[(\stackrel{}{a}_a\stackrel{}{a}_b^+)(\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{a}_c^+)+[\frac{k_{01}}{k_{03}}\stackrel{}{a}_a\frac{\stackrel{}{k}_1}{k_{03}k_{01}}(\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{a}_a)]\stackrel{}{a}_b^+(\stackrel{}{k}_3\stackrel{}{a}_c^+)]e^{i(k_{01}k_{02}k_{03})t}\delta (\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3)h.c.\}\hfill \end{array}$$
(16)
don’t lead to squeezing effect. In fact, rewriting the expression for $`N\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(X_l^h)_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{2}}\right)^2`$ (3) for small time as

$$\begin{array}{c}N\left(\mathrm{}(X_l^h)_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{2}}\right)^2=\frac{it}{4}\left\{\alpha |[a_l^h\left(k\right),[a_l^h\left(k\right),V]]|\alpha \alpha |[[V,a_l^{+h}\left(k\right)],a_l^{+h}\left(k\right)]\alpha \right\},\hfill \end{array}$$
(17)
it can be shown that $`[a_l^h\left(k\right),[a_l^h\left(k\right),V^{}]]=0,[[V^{},a_l^{+h}\left(k\right)],a_l^{+h}\left(k\right)]=0`$ since $`f_{hhb}=0,`$ that is the squeezing condition (10) does not hold.

## 4 Correlation functions for squeezed gluon states

The behaviour of a correlation function can serve one of a criterion of the existence of squeezed gluon states. It is common to define the normalized second-order correlation function as

$`K_{(2)}(\theta _1,\theta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{C_{(2)}(\theta _1,\theta _2)}{\rho _1(\theta _1)\rho _1(\theta _2)}},`$ (18)
$`C_{(2)}(\theta _1,\theta _2)=\rho _2(\theta _1,\theta _2)\rho _1(\theta _1)\rho _1(\theta _2)`$, with $`\rho _2(\theta _1,\theta _2)(\rho _1(\theta ))`$ being the two-particle (single-particle) inclusive distribution. Then for gluons with a colour $`b`$ and a vector component $`l`$ we can write

$`K_{l(2)}^b(\theta _1,\theta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _{l(2)}^b(\theta _1,\theta _2)}{\rho _{l(1)}^b(\theta _1)\rho _{l(1)}^b(\theta _2)}}1.`$ (19)
At the same time, we have

$$\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }}{}\rho _1(\theta )𝑑\theta =n=a^+a=\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }}{}f(\theta ,t)|a^+a|f(\theta ,t)𝑑\theta ,$$
(20)
where $`|f(\theta ,t)`$ is the final state vector. From (20) we find that the single- and two-particle inclusive distributions can be represented as

$$\begin{array}{c}\rho _1(\theta )=f(\theta ,t)|a^+a|f(\theta ,t),\hfill \\ \\ \rho _2(\theta _1,\theta _2)=f(\theta _2,t),f(\theta _1,t)|a^+a^+aa|f(\theta _1,t),f(\theta _2,t).\hfill \end{array}\}$$
(21)
By taking the expectation values over the vector444That this vector also describes squeezed gluon states can be proven by verifying the squeezing condition (10). $`\underset{c=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _l^c(\theta _1,t),\alpha _l^c(\theta _2,t)`$, we obtain the explicit form of the normalized second-order correlation function for squeezed gluon states:

$$K_{l(2)}^b(\theta _1,\theta _2)=M_1(\theta _1,\theta _2)/\{\alpha _l^b^42\alpha _l^b^2M_1(\theta _1,\theta _2)+M_2(\theta _1,\theta _2)\}.$$
(22)
For the colour index $`b=1`$ and an arbitrary vector component $`l`$ we have here

$`M_1(\theta _1,\theta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`24tu_2\pi \alpha ^2\beta ^2\mathrm{sin}(\delta +{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}})\{(1+\delta _{l1})(2+u_1\delta _{l1})(\mathrm{sin}\theta _1+\mathrm{sin}\theta _2)`$ (23)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u_1(3\delta _{l1}1)(\mathrm{sin}^3\theta _1+\mathrm{sin}^3\theta _2)\},`$
$`M_2(\theta _1,\theta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`80tu_2\pi \alpha ^3\beta ^3\mathrm{sin}({\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}})\{(1+\delta _{l1})(2+u_1\delta _{l1})(\mathrm{sin}\theta _1+\mathrm{sin}\theta _2)`$ (24)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u_1(3\delta _{l1}1)(\mathrm{sin}^3\theta _1+\mathrm{sin}^3\theta _2)\}.`$
In deriving these formulae, for simplicity we assumed that $`\alpha _l^1=\alpha e^{i\gamma _1},`$ $`l=\mathrm{any}`$, and $`\alpha _l^b=\beta e^{i\gamma _2},`$ when $`b1`$ and an arbitrary $`l`$, $`\gamma _1\gamma _2=\delta /2+\pi /4`$.

Let us perform a comparative analysis of the correlation function (22) for gluon squeezed states and the corresponding function for photon squeezed states, which was thoroughly studied in quantum optics.

In quantum optics, the normalized second-order correlation function is defined as

$`K_{l(2)}=g_l^{(2)}1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{a}_l^+\widehat{a}_l^+\widehat{a}_l\widehat{a}_l}{\widehat{a}_l^{1+}\widehat{a}_l^2}}1,`$ (25)
where the expectation values are taken over the evolved state vector at the instant $`t`$. If the correlation function is positive, occurs photon bunching (super-Poissonian distribution); otherwise ($`K_{l(2)}<0`$), we have photon antibunching (sub-Poissonian distribution) . For a coherent field obeying Poissonian statistics, the normalized second-order correlation function vanishes ($`K_{l(2)}=0`$).

For photon squeezed states whose state vector is defined as $`|\alpha ,z=S(z)|\alpha `$, the corresponding correlation function has the form (at small values of the squeezing parameter $`r_l`$)

$$K_{l(2)}=\frac{r_l[\alpha _l^2e^{i\delta }+(\alpha _l^{})^2e^{i\delta }]}{\alpha _l^42r_l\alpha _l^2[\alpha _l^2e^{i\delta }+(\alpha _l^{})^2e^{i\delta }]}.$$
(26)
In contrast to the correlation function for squeezed photon states, $`K_{l(2)}`$, the corresponding function for the squeezed gluon states, $`K_{l(2)}^b`$, includes, as follows from (22), the $`M_2(\theta _1,\theta _2)`$ which appears because the Hamiltonian (2) of the gluon self-interaction involves a nonlinear combination of the creation and annihilation operators of gluons with different colours and vector components.

The angular dependence of the correlation function for squeezed gluon states (with colour $`b=1`$) that are formed at the non-perturbative stage after a lapse of $`t=0.001`$ is investigated graphically at the following parameter values: $`\theta _2=0`$; $`g^2=4\pi `$ because $`\alpha _s={\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{4\pi }}1`$; $`q_o^2=1\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ that corresponds to the gluon virtuality at the beginning of the non-perturbative stage; $`k_o={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{s}}{2n_{\mathrm{gluon}}}}`$ corresponds to a gluon energy in the case of 2-jet events; $`\sqrt{s}=91\mathrm{GeV}`$ and $`n_{\mathrm{gluon}}=|\alpha |^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}+7|\beta |^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}`$.

If the amplitude $`|\alpha |`$ of the gluon field being considered is equal to the amplitudes $`|\beta |`$ of the cophased gluon fields having different colours and vector components, then the values of the correlation function lie in the negative region (Fig.1a), and there occurs the antibunching of gluons with the corresponding sub-Poissonian distribution. In this case, the correlation function tends to a constant ($`K_{1(2)}^1(\theta _1,\theta _2=0)=2.80094`$) as the angle $`\theta _1`$ increases. The behaviour of the angular correlations of the cophased squeezed gluon states $`(\delta =0)`$ is similar to correlations of the analogous photon states at small values of the squeezing parameter . If amplitude of selected gluon field with the colour ($`b=1`$) $`\alpha `$ begins to dominate in relation to the amplitudes of other colour fields ($`b1`$), that is, $`\alpha >\beta `$, then correlation function involves a singularity (Fig.1b) at $`\theta _11.208725\times 10^{11}`$ ($`|\alpha |^2=3`$, $`|\beta |^2=1`$).

For antiphased squeezed states of the gluons ($`\delta =\pi `$) correlation function lies in positive region and there occurs gluon bunching with the corresponding super-Poissonian distribution. In this case correlation function grows fast at small angles $`\theta _1`$ and tends to a constant irrespective of the values of the amplitudes $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$.

By using the transformation

$$\mathrm{sin}\theta =\sqrt{1\frac{\mathrm{tanh}^2y}{u_1}},$$
(27)
we can rewrite the correlation function for squeezed gluon states in terms of rapidities

$$\begin{array}{c}K_{l(2)}^b(\theta _1,\theta _2)=M_1(y_1,y_2)/\{\alpha _l^b^42\alpha _l^b^2M_1(y_1,y_2)+M_2(y_1,y_2)\},\hfill \end{array}$$
(28)
Rapidity correlations of the cophased gluon squeezed states (Fig.2) fall within the region of negative values and have a minimum in the center ($`K_{l(2)}^b(y_1=y_2=0)=0.0267894`$ at $`|\alpha |^2=1`$). For $`|\alpha |>|\beta |`$ the correlation function has a less pronounced minimum in the center
$`K_{l(2)}^b(y_1=y_2=0)=0.00887147`$ at $`|\alpha |^2=3`$.

Rapidity correlations of the antiphased gluon squeezed states fall within the region of positive values and have a maximum in the center ($`K_{l(2)}^b(y_1=y_2=0)=0.0241966`$ at $`|\alpha |^2=1,`$
$`K_{l(2)}^b(y_1=y_2=0)=0.0080179`$ at $`|\alpha |^2=3`$).

It should be noted that behaviour of the cophased gluon squeezed correlation function $`K_{l(2)}^b(y_1,y_2)`$ at $`\sqrt{s}=35`$ GeV (Fig.3) is similar to hadron correlations with distinctive minimum at $`y_1y_2=0.45`$ .

Thus the behavior of rapidity correlations for the cophased gluon squeezed states under investigation suggests that, at the non-perturbative stage of evolution of a QCD jet, there exists the effect of the gluon antibunching with the corresponding sub-Poissonian statistics.

## 5 Chaos in jets

There are a lot of evidences that phenomenon of a chaos may exist in high-energy physics (fractality for the factorial moments ), in nuclear physics (energy spacing distributions ), in quantum mechanics (chaos assisted quantum tunnelling ).

There is also direct relation between chaos and squeezing in some quantum-mechanical systems -. Let us verify this statement by the example of the next Hamiltonians:

$$1)H_1=\frac{p_1^2}{2}+\frac{p_2^2}{2}+\frac{g^2}{2}q_1^2q_2^2,$$
(29)
$$2)H_2=\frac{p_1^2}{2}+\frac{p_2^2}{2}+\frac{q_1^2}{2}+\frac{q_2^2}{2}+\frac{g}{2}(p_1q_1+q_1p_1+p_2q_2+q_2p_2),$$
(30)
$$3)H_3=g(p_1q_2+q_1p_2).$$
(31)
Hamiltonian $`H_1`$ is a mechanical analogue of Hamiltonian of the Yang-Mills field for SU(2) gauge in the case of spatially homogenous fields $`(_iA_j=0)`$ and $`A_1^2=A_2^1=0,A_i^3=0`$ . Hamiltonians $`H_2`$ and $`H_3`$ correspond to Hamiltonians described degenerate and non-degenerate parametric amplifiers in the interaction picture .

The local stability of the dynamical system is determined by the eigenvalues of the stability matrix G which has the next form

$$G=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\frac{^2H}{p_iq_j}& \frac{^2H}{q_iq_j}\\ & \\ \frac{^2H}{p_ip_j}& \frac{^2H}{q_ip_j}\end{array}\right]$$
(32)
If at least one of the eigenvalues of the matrix G is real then the separation of the trajectories grows exponentially and the motion is unstable. Imaginary eigenvalues correspond to stable motion. It was showed for $`H_1`$  that the stability matrix G has real eigenvalues. Therefore the motion of such systems is unstable.

The eigenvalues of G for systems described by $`H_2`$ and $`H_3`$ are $`\lambda _{1,2}=\pm \sqrt{g^21},\lambda =g`$ correspondingly, where we take into account that the interaction constant $`g`$ is real and positive. Obviously, the local nonstability for $`H_2`$ exists if $`g^2>1`$ and in the case $`H_3`$ — for an arbitrary $`g`$. Thus the motion of considered physical systems can be chaotic.

Investigating the variances $`(\mathrm{}p_i)^2`$ and $`(\mathrm{}q_i)^2`$ we can show that in the case of the Hamiltonian $`H_1`$ SS are not appear. At the same time from QO it is well known that SS appear for systems described by $`H_2`$ and $`H_3`$. It should be noted, if for two-mode degenerate parametric amplifier squeezing exists for single mode, so in the case of non-degenerate parametric amplifier we have two-mode squeezed states and the squeezing does not exist in the single mode .

Hamiltonians $`H_2`$ and $`H_3`$, for which the squeezing exists, have terms proportional to the product of the canonical momentum and coordinate $`(pq)`$. Indeed, let consider the next expression of the variance $`(\mathrm{}p_i)^2`$

$$(\mathrm{}p_i)^2=<f|p_i^2|f><f|p_i|f>^2,$$
(33)
where the evaluate vector $`|f>`$ is a solution of the Schr$`\ddot{\mathrm{o}}`$dinger equation for small time

$$|f>|i>itH|i>$$
(34)
Thus we have

$$(\mathrm{}p_i)^2=^2it(\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}).$$
(35)
We choose coherent state as initial state vector $`|i>=|\alpha >`$ because it is most similar to the classical case, any vector may be decompose on these basis vectors and these states are widely used in QO. Then as followed from (35) term which is proportional to time t is a measure of departure from initial value of the variance

$$it(<\alpha |[p_i^2,H]|\alpha >2<\alpha |p_i|\alpha ><\alpha |[p_i,H]|\alpha >)=t<\alpha |[q_i,[p_i,H]]|\alpha >.$$
(36)
As considered Hamiltonians are to polynomial like of $`p`$ and $`q`$ we may write (36) in the next general form

$$t<\alpha |[q_i,[p_i,H]]|\alpha >=t<\alpha |\frac{^2H}{p_iq_i}|\alpha >.$$
(37)
Squeezed states exist when $`(\mathrm{}p_i)^2<\alpha |p_i^2|\alpha ><\alpha |p_i|\alpha >^2`$ that is as followed from (35),(37)

$$<\alpha |\frac{^2H}{p_iq_i}|\alpha >0.$$
(38)
Analogously it can be shown that the multimode SS exist when

$$<\alpha |\frac{^2H}{p_iq_j}|\alpha >+<\alpha |\frac{^2H}{q_ip_j}|\alpha >0,(ij).$$
(39)
This means that if components $`\frac{^2H}{p_iq_i}`$ or sum of the components $`\frac{^2H}{p_iq_j}`$ and $`\frac{^2H}{q_ip_j}`$ from stability matrix G (32) are not equal zero then for corresponding quantum system the squeezing exists.

One of criteria of the appearance chaos is a fast exponential decreasing of the Green function  which is analogy of the correlator of the field operators. Therefore in order to find conditions of appearance the non-stable motion in physical systems ($`H_2`$ and $`H_3`$) for which the squeezing exists we investigate the next temporal correlators of the field operators

$$R_{ij}=<a_i^+(t)a_j(0)>.$$
(40)
Here averaging is made over initial coherent states $`|\alpha >`$, $`a_i^+(t)`$ is a solution of the Heisenberg equations in the interaction picture.

For two-mode degenerate parametric amplifier we have

$$\begin{array}{c}a_1^+(t)=a_1^+\mathrm{cosh}(gt)+a_1\mathrm{sinh}(gt),\\ \\ a_2^+(t)=a_2^+\mathrm{cosh}(gt)+a_2\mathrm{sinh}(gt).\end{array}\}$$
(41)
Substituting these expressions in (40) we obtain the explicit forms of the correlators

$$R_{ij}(t)=\frac{\alpha _j}{2}(\alpha _i^{}+\alpha _i)e^{gt}+\frac{\alpha _j}{2}(\alpha _i^{}\alpha _i)e^{gt},i,j=1,2.$$
(42)
As follows from (42) the correlators $`R_{ij}(t)`$ decrease exponentially at equal phases $`\phi _1=\phi _2={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{2}}`$ $`(\alpha _i=|\alpha _i|e^{i\phi _i}).`$ In this case we have

$$R_{ij}(t)=|\alpha _i||\alpha _j|e^{gt},i,j=1,2.$$
(43)
As squeezing does not depend on $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$  then in this case the effects of squeezing and chaos coexist.

Using the solutions of the evolutions equations for $`a_1^+(t)`$ and $`a_2^+(t)`$ in the case non-degenerate parametric amplifier  we can obtain explicit expression for corresponding correlators

$$\begin{array}{c}R_{ii}(t)=\frac{1}{2}(|\alpha _i|^2+\alpha _1\alpha _2)e^{gt}+\frac{1}{2}(|\alpha _i|^2\alpha _1\alpha _2)e^{gt},i=1,2,\\ \\ R_{ij}(t)=\frac{\alpha _j}{2}(\alpha _i^{}+\alpha _j)e^{gt}+\frac{\alpha _j}{2}(\alpha _i^{}\alpha _j)e^{gt},(ij),i,j=1,2.\end{array}\}$$
(44)
Obviously, these correlators are exponentially reduced at $`|\alpha _1|=|\alpha _2||\alpha |,\phi _1=\phi _2={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{2}}`$ and then $`R_{ii}(t)=R_{ij}(t),`$

$$R_{ij}(t)=|\alpha |^2e^{gt}.$$
(45)
This clearly demonstrates the possibility of existence of chaos when the squeezing condition is fulfilled for any $`\alpha `$.

The problem of the existence of a chaos in model SU(2)-jet merits especial attention. Here we take the case of SU(2)-group only for simplification of calculations. Respective Hamiltonian of the interaction $`V_{\mathrm{int}}`$ is obtained from the Hamiltonian for SU(3)-jet (2) by replacing structure constants of the SU(3)-group the corresponding SU(2)-group constant, that is $`f_{abc}\epsilon _{abc}(a,b,c=\overline{1,3}),`$ and take into account that $`\epsilon _{abc}\epsilon _{ade}=\delta _{bd}\delta _{ce}\delta _{be}\delta _{cd}`$

$$\begin{array}{c}V_{\mathrm{int}}=\frac{k_0^4}{4(2\pi )^3}(1\frac{q_0^2}{k_0^2})^{3/2}g^2\pi \{(2\frac{q_0^2}{k_0^2}\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{2}(1\frac{q_0^2}{k_0^2}))[a_{1212}^{bcbc}+a_{1313}^{bcbc}a_{1212}^{bccb}a_{1313}^{bccb}]\hfill \\ +(1+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta (1\frac{q_0^2}{k_0^2}))[a_{2323}^{bcbc}a_{2323}^{bccb}]\}\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta .\hfill \end{array}$$
(46)
The local instability for the Hamiltonian (46) has been verified by Toda criterion. Analysis was made numerically accordingly the next algorithm:

we come to classical Hamiltonian by keeping the order of operators $`a^+,a`$ and consider them as c-numbers ($`\alpha ^{},\alpha `$);

we have 18 variables and calculate the instability matrix $`18\times 18`$ for this case;

next step is calculation of its eigenvalues to find out whether they are real or imaginary.

As a result the following conclusions have been obtained:
1) If all variable $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ are real or imaginary then the system of gluons described by the above mentioned Hamiltonian (46) is strictly ordered and effect of the squeezing is absent.

2) If at least one of $`\alpha `$ or $`\alpha ^{}`$ is imaginary and other are real or at least one of $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ is real and other are imaginary — we have the local instability, which can lead to chaotical system.

## 6 Conclusion

Investigating of the gluon fluctuations we have proved theoretically the possibility of existence of the gluon single-mode SS at non-perturbative stage of the QCD jet evolution. The emergence of such remarkable states becomes possible owing to the self-interaction of gluons with different colour indices.

As one of identification criterion of existence of gluon SS can served correlation function. Therefore we have analyzed the behaviour of angular and rapidity correlations and have compared our results with the corresponding correlation function for photon squeezed states, which was comprehensively investigated in quantum optics. The form of the normalized correlation function $`K_{l(2)}^b`$ for cophased squeezed states specifies the gluon antibunching effect if the amplitudes of all gluon fields (with various colour and vector components) are equal to one another. Such behaviour of angular correlations is analogous to the behaviour of the corresponding correlations of the photon squeezed states at small values of the squeezing parameter. At the same time, there is distinction between them: in contrast to the normalized correlation function known in quantum optics, the correlation function of the gluon SS has a singularity if the amplitude for the fixed-colour gluon field being studied is greater than the amplitudes for gluon fields with other colour indices. The correlations of the cophased squeezed states specifies the presence of the gluon antibunching effect, whereas the gluon bunching occurs for antiphased squeezed states. Hence, non-perturbative gluon evolution makes a contribution to the parton distribution prepared by the perturbative stage of jet evolution in the form of a sub-Poissonian (cophased squeezed states) or a super-Poissonian (antiphased squeezed states) distributions.

Thus, the behaviour of the two-particle angular and rapidity correlations can serve as one of the criteria of the existence of squeezed gluon states. At the same time for a comparison of our results with experimental data, we must take into account the contribution of the perturbative stage of jet evolution and hadronization effects. This can be done by using Monte-Karlo methods and will be the subject of our further investigations.

In this paper we investigate the possibility of coexistence both condition of squeezing and chaos for some physical systems: mechanical model of Yang-Mills field for SU(2) gauge, two-mode degenerate and non-degenerate parametric amplifiers, SU(2)-jet model. Using Toda criterion we check the local instability in the corresponding classical systems and determine conditions of the coexistence of this effect and squeezing at small time. It was shown that the squeezing exists at small time under condition that either components $`\frac{^2H}{p_iq_i}`$ or sum of the components $`\frac{^2H}{p_iq_j}`$ and $`\frac{^2H}{q_ip_j}`$ from stability matrix G are not equal zero.

The possibility of existence of squeezing and chaos in corresponding quantum systems is studied by using correlators of the field operators. The correlators of the field operators for degenerate and non-degenerate parametric amplifiers decrease exponentially independently from amplitude values of the initial coherent fields $`|\alpha _1|,|\alpha _2|`$ if phases $`\phi _1`$ and $`\phi _2`$ coincide and equal $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}`$ or $`{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{2}}.`$ Therefore in this case chaos may exist. Moreover for these systems squeezing does not depend on value of amplitude of initial coherent field.

Under investigation the local instability within SU(2)-jet model it was numerically shown that this effect existences under condition if at least one of amplitude of the coherent fields $`\alpha `$ or $`\alpha ^{}`$ is imaginary and other are real and vice versa.

Thus for degenerate and non-degenerate parametric amplifiers and also for SU(2)-jet model the effects of the squeezing and chaos can coexist under some conditions.

## Appendix A

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \underset{c=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _l^c(t)& (12it\pi u_3\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta )|i2it\pi u_4\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta \underset{k=1}{\overset{8}{}}\alpha _1^ka_1^{k+}|i2it\pi u_5\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta \underset{k=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{m=2}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _m^ka_m^{k+}|i\hfill \\ & 2it\pi u_2\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta \{(1+u_1)[B_{1122}+B_{2211}+B_{1133}+B_{3311}B_{1212}B_{2121}B_{1313}B_{3131}]\hfill \\ & +[B_{2233}+B_{3322}B_{2323}B_{3232}]+u_1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta [B_{2233}+B_{3322}B_{2323}B_{3232}\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{2}(B_{1122}+B_{2211}+B_{1133}+B_{3311}B_{1212}B_{2121}B_{1313}B_{3131})]\hfill \\ & +2(1+u_1)[C_{1122}+C_{2211}+C_{1133}+C_{3311}+D_{1212}+D_{2121}+D_{1313}+D_{3131}]\hfill \\ & +2[C_{2233}+C_{3322}+D_{2323}+D_{3232}]+2u_1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta [C_{2233}+C_{3322}+D_{2323}+D_{3232}\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{2}(C_{1122}+C_{2211}+C_{1133}+D_{1212}+D_{2121}+D_{1313}+D_{3131})]\}|i,(A.1)\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`|i=\underset{c=1}{\overset{8}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _l^c(0),`$ $`u_5={\displaystyle \frac{k_0^3}{2}}\sqrt{u_1}\{1+u_1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(1+u_1{\displaystyle \frac{q_0^4}{k_0^4}}\right)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \}+6u_2\{2+u_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u_1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \},`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill B_{ijmn}& =A_{mn}^{11}\underset{k=2}{\overset{7}{\stackrel{}{}}}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}+A_{mn}^{22}\underset{\begin{array}{c}k=1\\ k2\end{array}}{\overset{7}{\stackrel{}{}}}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}+A_{mn}^{33}\underset{\begin{array}{c}k=1\\ k3\end{array}}{\overset{7}{\stackrel{}{}}}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}+\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{44}\left[\underset{\begin{array}{c}k=1\\ k4\end{array}}{\overset{7}{}}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}+3\underset{k=5,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}}{}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}+\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{38}+\alpha _{ij}^{83})\right]\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{55}\left[\underset{\begin{array}{c}k=1\\ k5\end{array}}{\overset{7}{}}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}+3\underset{k=4,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}}{}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}+\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{38}+\alpha _{ij}^{83})\right]+\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{66}\left[\underset{\begin{array}{c}k=1\\ k6\end{array}}{\overset{7}{}}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}+3\underset{k=7,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}}{}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{38}+\alpha _{ij}^{83})\right]\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{77}\left[\underset{k=1}{\overset{6}{}}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}+3\underset{k=6,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}}{}\alpha _{ij}^{kk}\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{38}+\alpha _{ij}^{83})\right]+\frac{3}{4}A_{mn}^{88}\underset{k=4}{\overset{7}{}}\alpha _{ij}^{kk},(A.2)\hfill \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill C_{ijmn}& =A_{mn}^{12}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{21}+\frac{1}{4}\left[\alpha _{ij}^{76}\alpha _{ij}^{67}+\alpha _{ij}^{45}\alpha _{ij}^{54}\right]\right\}+A_{mn}^{13}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{31}+\frac{1}{4}\left[\alpha _{ij}^{64}\alpha _{ij}^{46}+\alpha _{ij}^{75}\alpha _{ij}^{57}\right]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{14}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{25}\alpha _{ij}^{36}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{52}\alpha _{ij}^{63}\alpha _{ij}^{41}\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{68}]\right\}\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{15}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{24}+\alpha _{ij}^{37}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{42}+\alpha _{ij}^{73}+\alpha _{ij}^{51}+\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{78}]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{16}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{34}\alpha _{ij}^{27}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{43}\alpha _{ij}^{72}\alpha _{ij}^{61}\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{48}]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{17}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{35}+\alpha _{ij}^{26}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{53}+\alpha _{ij}^{62}\alpha _{ij}^{71}\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{58}]\right\}+\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{18}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{46}+\alpha _{ij}^{64}+\alpha _{ij}^{57}+\alpha _{ij}^{75}\right\}\hfill \\ & +A_{mn}^{23}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{32}+\frac{1}{4}\left[\alpha _{ij}^{65}\alpha _{ij}^{56}+\alpha _{ij}^{47}\alpha _{ij}^{74}\right]\right\}+\frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{24}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{37}\alpha _{ij}^{15}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{73}\alpha _{ij}^{42}\alpha _{ij}^{51}+\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{78}]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{25}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{14}\alpha _{ij}^{36}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{41}\alpha _{ij}^{63}\alpha _{ij}^{52}\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{68}]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{26}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{35}+\alpha _{ij}^{17}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{53}+\alpha _{ij}^{71}\alpha _{ij}^{62}\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{58}]\right\}\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{27}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{16}+\alpha _{ij}^{34}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{72}+\alpha _{ij}^{43}+\alpha _{ij}^{61}\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{48}]\right\}+\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{28}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{56}+\alpha _{ij}^{65}\alpha _{ij}^{47}\alpha _{ij}^{74}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{34}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{16}\alpha _{ij}^{27}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{61}\alpha _{ij}^{43}\alpha _{ij}^{72}\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{48}]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{35}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{26}+\alpha _{ij}^{17}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{71}+\alpha _{ij}^{62}\alpha _{ij}^{53}\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{58}]\right\}\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{36}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{25}+\alpha _{ij}^{14}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{52}+\alpha _{ij}^{41}+\alpha _{ij}^{63}\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{68}]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}A_{mn}^{37}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{24}\alpha _{ij}^{15}+\frac{1}{2}[\alpha _{ij}^{42}\alpha _{ij}^{51}\alpha _{ij}^{73}+\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{78}]\right\}+\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{38}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{44}+\alpha _{ij}^{55}\alpha _{ij}^{66}\alpha _{ij}^{77}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{45}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{12}\alpha _{ij}^{21}+\alpha _{ij}^{67}\alpha _{ij}^{76}4\alpha _{ij}^{54}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{46}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{31}\alpha _{ij}^{13}+\alpha _{ij}^{75}\alpha _{ij}^{64}+2\alpha _{ij}^{57}+\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{18}+\alpha _{ij}^{81})\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{47}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{23}\alpha _{ij}^{32}\alpha _{ij}^{65}\alpha _{ij}^{74}2\alpha _{ij}^{56}\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{28}+\alpha _{ij}^{82})\right\}\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{48}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{34}+\alpha _{ij}^{16}\alpha _{ij}^{27}+\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{84}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{56}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{32}\alpha _{ij}^{74}\alpha _{ij}^{23}\alpha _{ij}^{65}2\alpha _{ij}^{47}+\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{28}+\alpha _{ij}^{82})\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{57}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{64}+\alpha _{ij}^{31}\alpha _{ij}^{13}\alpha _{ij}^{75}+2\alpha _{ij}^{46}+\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{18}+\alpha _{ij}^{81})\right\}\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{58}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{17}+\alpha _{ij}^{26}+\alpha _{ij}^{35}+\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{85}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{67}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{45}\alpha _{ij}^{54}+\alpha _{ij}^{21}\alpha _{ij}^{12}4\alpha _{ij}^{76}\right\}\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{68}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{14}+\alpha _{ij}^{25}\alpha _{ij}^{36}+\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{86}\right\}\hfill \\ & \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{78}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{15}\alpha _{ij}^{24}\alpha _{ij}^{37}+\sqrt{3}\alpha _{ij}^{87}\right\},(A.3)\hfill \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill D_{ijmn}& =A_{mn}^{12}\left\{2\alpha _{ij}^{12}\alpha _{ij}^{21}+\frac{3}{4}[\alpha _{ij}^{45}\alpha _{ij}^{54}+\alpha _{ij}^{76}\alpha _{ij}^{67}]\right\}+A_{mn}^{13}\left\{2\alpha _{ij}^{13}\alpha _{ij}^{31}+\frac{3}{4}[\alpha _{ij}^{64}\alpha _{ij}^{46}+\alpha _{ij}^{75}\alpha _{ij}^{57}]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{14}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{63}\alpha _{ij}^{52})+\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{86}\alpha _{ij}^{68})\alpha _{ij}^{41}+2\alpha _{ij}^{14}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{15}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{42}+\alpha _{ij}^{73})+\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{87}\alpha _{ij}^{78})\alpha _{ij}^{51}+2\alpha _{ij}^{15}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{16}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{72}\alpha _{ij}^{43})+\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{84}\alpha _{ij}^{48})\alpha _{ij}^{61}+2\alpha _{ij}^{16}\right\}\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{17}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{53}+\alpha _{ij}^{62})\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{85}\alpha _{ij}^{58})+\alpha _{ij}^{71}2\alpha _{ij}^{17}\right\}\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{18}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{46}+\alpha _{ij}^{64}+\alpha _{ij}^{57}+\alpha _{ij}^{75}\right\}\hfill \\ & +A_{mn}^{23}\left\{2\alpha _{ij}^{23}\alpha _{ij}^{32}+\frac{3}{4}[\alpha _{ij}^{56}\alpha _{ij}^{65}+\alpha _{ij}^{74}\alpha _{ij}^{47}]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{24}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{51}\alpha _{ij}^{73})\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{87}\alpha _{ij}^{78})\alpha _{ij}^{42}+2\alpha _{ij}^{24}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{25}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{63}\alpha _{ij}^{41})+\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{86}\alpha _{ij}^{68})\alpha _{ij}^{52}+2\alpha _{ij}^{25}\right\}\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{26}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{53}+\alpha _{ij}^{71})\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{85}\alpha _{ij}^{58})+\alpha _{ij}^{62}2\alpha _{ij}^{26}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{27}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{43}+\alpha _{ij}^{61})\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{84}\alpha _{ij}^{48})\alpha _{ij}^{72}+2\alpha _{ij}^{27}\right\}\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{28}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{56}+\alpha _{ij}^{65}\alpha _{ij}^{47}\alpha _{ij}^{74}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{34}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{72}\alpha _{ij}^{61})+\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{84}\alpha _{ij}^{48})\alpha _{ij}^{43}+2\alpha _{ij}^{34}\right\}\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{35}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{62}+\alpha _{ij}^{71})\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{85}\alpha _{ij}^{58})+\alpha _{ij}^{53}2\alpha _{ij}^{35}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{36}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{52}+\alpha _{ij}^{41})\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{86}\alpha _{ij}^{68})\alpha _{ij}^{63}+2\alpha _{ij}^{36}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{37}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{51}\alpha _{ij}^{42})\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{87}\alpha _{ij}^{78})\alpha _{ij}^{73}+2\alpha _{ij}^{37}\right\}\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{38}\left\{\alpha _{ij}^{44}+\alpha _{ij}^{55}\alpha _{ij}^{66}\alpha _{ij}^{77}\right\}\hfill \\ & +A_{mn}^{45}\left\{2\alpha _{ij}^{45}\alpha _{ij}^{54}+\frac{3}{4}[\alpha _{ij}^{12}\alpha _{ij}^{21}+\alpha _{ij}^{76}\alpha _{ij}^{67}]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{46}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{31}\alpha _{ij}^{13}\alpha _{ij}^{75})\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{18}+\alpha _{ij}^{81})\alpha _{ij}^{64}+2\alpha _{ij}^{46}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{47}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{23}\alpha _{ij}^{32}+\alpha _{ij}^{65})+\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{28}+\alpha _{ij}^{82})\alpha _{ij}^{74}+2\alpha _{ij}^{47}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{48}\left\{2(\alpha _{ij}^{61}\alpha _{ij}^{72}+\alpha _{ij}^{43})\alpha _{ij}^{16}+\alpha _{ij}^{27}\alpha _{ij}^{34}+\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{48}\alpha _{ij}^{84})\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{56}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{32}\alpha _{ij}^{23}+\alpha _{ij}^{74})\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{28}+\alpha _{ij}^{82})\alpha _{ij}^{65}+2\alpha _{ij}^{56}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{4}A_{mn}^{57}\left\{3(\alpha _{ij}^{31}\alpha _{ij}^{13}\alpha _{ij}^{64})\sqrt{3}(\alpha _{ij}^{18}+\alpha _{ij}^{81})\alpha _{ij}^{75}+2\alpha _{ij}^{57}\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{58}\left\{2(\alpha _{ij}^{71}+\alpha _{ij}^{62}+\alpha _{ij}^{53})\alpha _{ij}^{17}\alpha _{ij}^{26}\alpha _{ij}^{35}+\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{58}\alpha _{ij}^{85})\right\}\hfill \\ & +A_{mn}^{67}\left\{2\alpha _{ij}^{67}\alpha _{ij}^{76}+\frac{3}{4}[\alpha _{ij}^{21}\alpha _{ij}^{12}\alpha _{ij}^{45}+\alpha _{ij}^{54}]\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{68}\left\{2(\alpha _{ij}^{41}+\alpha _{ij}^{52}\alpha _{ij}^{63})\alpha _{ij}^{14}\alpha _{ij}^{25}+\alpha _{ij}^{36}+\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{68}\alpha _{ij}^{86})\right\}\hfill \\ & +\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}A_{mn}^{78}\left\{2(\alpha _{ij}^{51}\alpha _{ij}^{42}\alpha _{ij}^{73})\alpha _{ij}^{15}+\alpha _{ij}^{24}+\alpha _{ij}^{37}+\sqrt{3}(2\alpha _{ij}^{78}\alpha _{ij}^{87})\right\},(A.4)\hfill \end{array}$$

$`A_{mn}^{bc}=a_m^{b+}a_n^{c+},\alpha _{ij}^{bc}=\alpha _i^b\alpha _j^c.`$


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The fact that Jacobi elliptic functions arise naturally as traveling wave solutions of many nonlinear systems has been known for quite some time (see for example ). Although for the solitary wave solutions of these nonlinear equations, there is no superposition principle (except when the solitary waves are far apart), for the periodic solutions the situation turns out to be quite different. It has recently been shown  that certain specific linear combinations of known periodic solutions of the Korteweg-de Vries (KdV) and modified Korteweg-de Vries (mKdV) equations as well as $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ theory, also satify these equations. This unexpected result is a consequence of some remarkable, recently established, identities involving Jacobi elliptic functions . Basically, the identities take the cross terms generated by the nonlinear terms in the differential equations and convert them into a manageable form. The purpose of this article is to show that such a procedure also works for other well-known nonlinear equations, namely the Kadomtsev-Petviashvili (KP) equation, the nonlinear Schrödinger equation(NLSE), the sine-Gordon equation and the Boussinesq equation. It should be noted that the above list includes both integrable as well as nonintegrable systems. These equations are of interest in several diverse areas of physics. The NLSE governs the propagation of an electromagnetic wave in a glass fiber, or the spatial evolution of an electromagnetic field in a planar waveguide. Temporal solitons described by the NLSE were first observed in 1980 , and the first confirmation and studies of spatial solitons in planar waveguides were reported in 1988 . Similarly, the $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ and the sine-Gordon equations arise in several condensed matter physics applications.

## 2 The Kadomtsev-Petviashvili (KP) Equation

The KP equation is a two-dimensional generalization of the KdV equation and is given by

$$(u_t6uu_x+u_{xxx})_x+3u_{yy}=0.$$
(1)
Properties of the KP equation are discussed in many texts . In particular, the simplest, periodic, cnoidal traveling wave solution is

$$u_1(x,y,t)=2\alpha ^2\mathrm{dn}^2(\xi _1,m)+\beta \alpha ^2,\xi _1\alpha (x+\gamma \alpha yb_1\alpha ^2t),$$
(2)
where $`\alpha ,\gamma ,m`$ and $`\beta `$ are constants, and the “velocity” $`b_1`$ is given by

$$b_1=84m6\beta +3\gamma ^2.$$
(3)
In this article, for Jacobi elliptic functions, we use the standard notation $`\mathrm{dn}(\xi ,m),\mathrm{sn}(\xi ,m),\mathrm{cn}(\xi ,m)`$, where $`m`$ is the elliptic modulus parameter $`(0m1)`$. The solution (2) remains unchanged when $`x`$ is increased by $`2K(m)/\alpha `$, where $`K(m)`$ is the complete elliptic integral of the first kind . In the limiting case $`m=1`$ (and $`\beta =0`$), one recovers the familiar single soliton form $`2\alpha ^2\mathrm{sech}^2(\alpha (x+\gamma \alpha yb_1\alpha ^2t))`$.

We will make suitable linear combinations of solution (2) and show that the result is also a periodic solution of the KP equation. Our procedure consists of adding terms of the kind given in (2) but centered at $`p`$ equally spaced points along the period $`2K(m)/\alpha `$, where $`p`$ is any integer. The $`p`$-point solution is

$$u_p(x,y,t)=2\alpha ^2\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}d_i^2+\beta \alpha ^2;d_i\mathrm{dn}[\xi _p+\frac{2(i1)K(m)}{p},m],\xi _p\alpha (x+\gamma \alpha yb_p\alpha ^2t).$$
(4)
Clearly, $`p=1`$ is the original solution, but for any other $`p`$, we have new expressions which, as we shall show, also solve the KP equation. For convenience, we define the quantities $`s_i`$ and $`c_i`$ in analogy to the quantity $`d_i`$ defined above:

$$s_i\mathrm{sn}[\xi _p+\frac{2(i1)K(m)}{p},m],c_i\mathrm{cn}[\xi _p+\frac{2(i1)K(m)}{p},m].$$
(5)
The KP equation contains the KdV operator $`u_t6uu_x+u_{xxx}`$. It has been shown in detail in ref.  that eq. (4) with $`\gamma =0`$ is a solution of the KdV equation. The proof is based on the identity

$$\underset{i<j}{\overset{p}{}}d_i^2d_j^2=A_1(p,m)\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}d_i^2+A_2(p,m).$$
(6)
This is one of many powerful new identities  which reduce by 2 (or a larger even number) the degree of cyclic homogeneous polynomials in Jacobi elliptic functions. The constants $`A_1(p,m)`$ and $`A_2(p,m)`$ in identity (6) can be evaluated in general by choosing any specific convenient value of the argument $`\xi `$ of the Jacobi elliptic functions. The results for $`A_1(p,m)`$ for small values of $`p`$ are:

$$A_1(p=2,m)=0,A_1(p=3,m)=\frac{2(m1+q^2)}{1q^2},A_1(p=4,m)=2\sqrt{1m},$$
(7)
where

$$q\mathrm{dn}(2K(m)/3,m).$$
(8)
The limiting values at $`m=0,1`$ are also particularly simple:

$$A_1(p,m=0)=\frac{1}{3}(p1)(p2);A_1(p,m=1)=0.$$
(9)
Taking expression (4) and using identity (6), the left side of the KP equation (1) becomes

$$4m\alpha ^5\{84m6\beta b_p+12A_1(p,m)\}\frac{d}{dx}\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}s_ic_id_i+12m\gamma \alpha ^4\frac{d}{dy}\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}s_ic_id_i.$$
(10)
Clearly, this vanishes if the velocity is given by

$$b_p=84m6\beta +12A_1(p,m)+3\gamma ^2.$$
(11)
Thus for this choice of velocity, the KP equation is solved by our $`p`$-point expression (4). Effectively, our solutions of the KP equation and the corresponding solutions of the KdV equation have a difference of $`3\gamma ^2`$ in their velocities $`b_p`$. Note that as in the KdV case, the results for $`b_p`$ can be positive or negative depending on the values of the parameters . The behavior of $`u_1`$ for the parameters $`m=0.95`$, $`\alpha =\gamma =1`$, $`\beta =0`$ is shown in fig. 1.

In addition to the solution (2), another well known periodic solution of the KP eq. (1) of period $`4K(m)`$ is

$$v_1(x,y,t)=\alpha ^2\left[m\mathrm{sn}^2(\eta _1,m)\pm \sqrt{m}\mathrm{cn}(\eta _1,m)\mathrm{dn}(\eta _1,m)\right],\eta _1\alpha (x+\gamma \alpha yq_1\alpha ^2t)$$
(12)
with velocity $`q_1=(1m+3\gamma ^2)`$.

Starting from this solution, we can again obtain many additional periodic solutions of the KP equation of period $`4K(m)/p`$ in case $`p`$ is an odd integer. The general $`p`$-point solution is given by

$$v_p(x,y,t)=\alpha ^2\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}[m\stackrel{~}{s}_i^2\pm \sqrt{m}\stackrel{~}{c}_i\stackrel{~}{d}_i],p\mathrm{odd},$$
(13)
where we define

$$\stackrel{~}{s}_i\mathrm{sn}[\eta _p+\frac{4(i1)K(m)}{p},m],\stackrel{~}{c}_i\mathrm{cn}[\eta _p+\frac{4(i1)K(m)}{p},m],\stackrel{~}{d}_i\mathrm{dn}[\eta _p+\frac{4(i1)K(m)}{p},m].$$
(14)
As has been shown in detail in ref. , eq. (13) with $`\gamma =0`$ is a solution of the KdV equation with velocity

$$q_p=(1+m)6[B_1(p,m)C_1(p,m)],$$
(15)
where the quantities $`B_1(p,m)`$ and $`C_1(p,m)`$ come from the following identities:

$$m\underset{i<j}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i\stackrel{~}{s}_j=B_1(p,m),m\underset{i<j<k}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i\stackrel{~}{s}_j\stackrel{~}{s}_k=C_1(p,m)\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i.$$
(16)
It is easily checked that even in the KP case ($`\gamma 0`$), eq. (13) is an exact solution, the only difference being that the velocity in the KP case is larger by $`3\gamma ^2`$. As an illustration, for the $`p=3`$ case, it is easily shown that

$$B_1(3,m)=(1q^2),C_1(3,m)=m/(1q^2),$$
(17)
so that the velocity of the KP soliton is given by

$$q_3=1m+6(1q^2)\frac{6m}{1q^2}+3\gamma ^2,$$
(18)
where $`q`$ has been defined in eq. (8). Note that for $`p`$ even, we do not obtain any new solutions. To illustrate our results, in fig. 2 we plot $`v_3(x,y)`$ at time $`t=0`$ for the choice $`\alpha =\gamma =1`$ and $`m=0.95`$.

## 3 The Nonlinear Schrödinger Equation

The NLSE with both attractive and repulsive nonlinearity has found many physical applications in several diverse areas including fiber optics, Bose-Einstein condensates and waveguides .

### 3.1 Case I: Attractive Nonlinearity

The NLSE with attractive nonlinearity is given by ($`\mathrm{}=2m=1`$)

$$iu_t+u_{xx}+uu^2=0,$$
(19)
where without any loss of generality we have fixed the coefficient of the nonlinear term to be unity. As usual, one starts with the ansatz

$$u(x,t)=r(\xi )e^{i(\theta (\xi )+nt)},\xi xvt,$$
(20)
which on substituting in eq. (19) yields

$$\theta ^{}(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}(v+\frac{A}{r^2}),$$
(21)
$$r^2(\xi )=\frac{r^4}{2}+(n\frac{v^2}{4})r^2\frac{B}{2}\frac{A^2}{4r^2},$$
(22)
where prime denotes a derivative with respect to the argument $`\xi `$ and $`A`$, $`B`$ are constants of integration. Thus the whole problem reduces to finding the solutions of eq. (22), after which $`\theta `$ is easily obtained by using eq. (21) and performing one integration.

The well known soliton solution of eq. (22) is

$$r(\xi )=\sqrt{2}\mathrm{sech}\xi ,\theta =\frac{v\xi }{2},A=B=0,v^2=4(n1),$$
(23)
which is valid only for $`n1`$. It may be noted that a somewhat more general solution with arbitrary amplitude $`\alpha `$ is easily obtained, since if $`u(x,t)`$ is a solution of the NLSE, then $`\alpha u(\alpha x,\alpha ^2t)`$ is also a solution of the same equation.

The two simplest, periodic, cnoidal traveling wave solutions of eq. (22) are $`(\xi _1=xv_1t)`$

$$r_1(\xi )=\sqrt{2}\mathrm{dn}\xi _1,\theta _1=\frac{v_1\xi _1}{2},A=0,B=4(1m),v_1^2=4(n+m2),$$
(24)
$$r_1(\xi )=\sqrt{2m}\mathrm{cn}\xi _1,\theta _1=\frac{v_1\xi _1}{2},A=0,B=4m(1m),v_1^2=4(n+12m).$$
(25)
In the limiting case $`m=1`$, one recovers the familiar soliton solution (23).

We shall now show that suitable linear combinations of the solutions (24) and (25) are also solutions of eq. (22). Consider first the solution (24). Our solutions consist of adding terms of the kind given in this equation but centered at $`p`$ equally spaced points along the period $`2K(m)`$, where $`p`$ is any integer. The $`p`$-point solution is

$$r_p(x,t)=\sqrt{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}d_i,d_i\mathrm{dn}[\xi _p+\frac{2(i1)K(m)}{p},m],\xi _p(xv_pt).$$
(26)
Clearly, $`p=1`$ is the original solution, but for any other $`p`$, we have solutions of period $`2K(m)/p`$.

In order to verify that expression (26) is indeed a solution of eq. (22), one needs the identities

$`({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}d_i)^2={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}d_i^2+A(p,m),`$
$`({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}d_i)^4={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}d_i^4+C(p,m){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}d_i^2+D(p,m),`$
$`m^2{\displaystyle \underset{i<j}{\overset{p}{}}}s_ic_is_jc_j=E(p,m){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}d_i^2+F(p,m),`$ (27)
which can be easily established by following the procedure discussed in ref. . The general expression for the velocity $`v_p`$ is

$$v_p^2=4\left[n+m2C(p,m)2E(p,m)\right].$$
(28)
Some explicitly computed values of the constants $`C(p,m)`$ and $`E(p,m)`$ are

$`C(2,m)=4E(2,m)=4\sqrt{1m},C(3,m)=4E(3,m)={\displaystyle \frac{8mq}{1q^2}},`$
$`C(4,m)=4E(4,m)=4\stackrel{~}{t}(2+\stackrel{~}{t}+2\stackrel{~}{t}^2),`$ (29)
where $`q`$ is given by eq. (8) and $`\stackrel{~}{t}`$ is given by

$$\stackrel{~}{t}(1m)^{1/4}.$$
(30)
On the other hand, for any $`p`$ at $`m=0`$, $`C(p,0)=4E(p,0)=\frac{4(p^21)}{3}`$ and at $`m=1`$, $`C(p,1)=E(p,1)=0`$. It then follows from eq. (28) that the solution $`r_p`$ as given by eq. (26) is valid only if $`n2p^2`$, and in this case $`v^2`$ changes from $`4(n2p^2)`$ to $`4(n1)`$ as $`m`$ goes from 0 to 1.

For odd $`p`$, using the solution (25), we obtain the following solution of the NLSE (22) by linear superposition

$$r_p(x,t)=\sqrt{2m}\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i,\stackrel{~}{c}_i\mathrm{cn}[\eta _p+\frac{4(i1)K(m)}{p},m],\eta _p(xv_pt).$$
(31)
In order to verify that (31) is indeed a solution to the NLSE eq. (22) one needs the identities

$`({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i)^2={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i^2+G(p,m),`$
$`({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i)^4={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i^4+H(p,m){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i^2+I(p,m),`$
$`m^2{\displaystyle \underset{i<j}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i\stackrel{~}{d}_i\stackrel{~}{s}_j\stackrel{~}{d}_j=J(p,m){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i^2+K(p,m),`$ (32)
which can be established following the procedure discussed in ref. . The general expression for the velocity $`v_p`$ is

$$v_p^2=4\left[n+12mmH(p,m)2J(p,m)\right].$$
(33)
Some explicitly computed values of the constants $`H(p,m)`$ and $`J(p,m)`$ are

$$mH(3,m)=4J(3,m)=4q[\frac{q+2}{(1+q)^2}+\frac{q}{1q^2}],$$
(34)
where $`q`$ is given by eq. (8). Thus $`v^2`$ varies from $`4(n+9)`$ to $`4(n1)`$ as the elliptic modulus parameter $`m`$ changes from 0 to 1.

On the other hand, for even $`p`$, we have obtained the following solution of the NLSE eq. (22):

$$r_p(x,t)=\sqrt{2}\underset{i\mathrm{odd}}{\overset{p}{}}[d_id_{i+1}].$$
(35)
In order to verify that eq. (35) is a solution of the NLSE eq. (22) one needs the identities

$`\left({\displaystyle \underset{i\mathrm{odd}}{\overset{p}{}}}[d_id_{i+1}]\right)^2={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}d_i^2+P(p,m),`$
$`\left({\displaystyle \underset{i\mathrm{odd}}{\overset{p}{}}}[d_id_{i+1}]\right)^4={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}d_i^4+L(p,m){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}d_i^2+M(p,m),`$
$`m^2\left[{\displaystyle \underset{i+j\mathrm{even}}{\overset{p}{}}}s_ic_is_jc_j{\displaystyle \underset{i+j\mathrm{odd}}{\overset{p}{}}}s_ic_is_jc_j\right]=N(p,m){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}d_i^2+Q(p,m),`$ (36)
which can be established following the procedure discussed in ref. . The general expression for the velocity $`v_p`$ is

$$v_p^2=4\left[n+m2L(p,m)2N(p,m)\right].$$
(37)
Some explicitly computed values of the constants $`L(p,m)`$ and $`N(p,m)`$ are

$$L(2,m)=4N(2,m)=4\sqrt{1m};L(4,m)=4N(4,m)=4\stackrel{~}{t}(2\stackrel{~}{t}+2\stackrel{~}{t}^2),$$
(38)
where $`\stackrel{~}{t}`$ is as given by eq. (30). Thus for $`p=2[4]`$, $`v^2`$ varies from $`4(n+4)[4(n+16)`$\] to $`4(n1)`$ as $`m`$ changes from 0 to 1. Generalizing the results in eqs. (31) or (35), one finds that $`v^2`$ varies from $`4(n+p^2)`$ to $`4(n1)`$ as $`m`$ changes from 0 to 1.

### 3.2 Case II: Repulsive Nonlinearity

The NLSE with repulsive nonlinearity is given by

$$iu_t+u_{xx}uu^2=0,$$
(39)
We again start with the ansatz given by eq. (20) and on following the same steps as given in eqs. (20) to (22) it is easily seen that the $`\theta `$ equation (eq. (21)) is the same as before while the $`r`$ equation is almost the same except for the sign of the $`r^4`$ term. In particular, the $`r`$ equation is now given by

$$r^2(\xi )=\frac{r^4}{2}+(n\frac{v^2}{4})r^2\frac{B}{2}\frac{A^2}{4r^2},$$
(40)
The well known soliton solution to this equation is

$$r(\xi )=\sqrt{2}\mathrm{tanh}\xi ,\theta =\frac{v\xi }{2},A=0,B=4,v^2=4(n+2).$$
(41)
The simplest, periodic, cnoidal traveling wave solution to eq. (40) is

$$r_1(\xi )=\sqrt{2m}\mathrm{sn}\xi _1,\theta _1=\frac{v_1\xi _1}{2},A=0,B=4m,v_1^2=4(n+1+m).$$
(42)
For odd $`p`$, using the solution eq. (42), we obtain the following solutions of the NLSE eq. (22) by linear superposition

$$r_p(x,t)=\sqrt{2m}\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i,\stackrel{~}{s}_i\mathrm{sn}[\eta _p+\frac{4(i1)K(m)}{p},m],\eta _p(xv_pt).$$
(43)
In order to verify that eq. (43) is a solution to the NLSE eq. (40) one needs the identities

$`({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i)^2={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i^2+R(p,m),`$
$`({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i)^4={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i^4+S(p,m){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i^2+T(p,m),`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i<j}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i\stackrel{~}{d}_i\stackrel{~}{c}_j\stackrel{~}{d}_j=U(p,m){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i^2+Y(p,m),`$ (44)
which can be established by following . The general expression for the velocity $`v_p`$ is

$$v_p^2=4\left[n+1+m+mS(p,m)2U(p,m)\right].$$
(45)
Some explicitly computed values of the constants $`H(p,m)`$ and $`J(p,m)`$ are

$$mS(3,m)=4U(3,m)=4m[\frac{1}{1q^2}\frac{1q^2}{m}],$$
(46)
where $`q`$ is given by eq. (8). Thus $`v^2`$ changes from $`4(n+9)`$ to $`4(n+2)`$ as $`m`$ changes from 0 to 1.

For even integer $`p`$, the linear superposition of elementary solutions does not work. However, remarkably enough we find that the products of elementary solutions are also solutions. For example, the solution for $`p=2`$ is

$$r_2(x,t)=\sqrt{2}ms_1s_2,$$
(47)
and the corresponding velocity is given by $`v_2^2=4(n+42m)`$. Generalization to higher even values of $`p`$ is straightforward.

### 3.3 Solutions With $`A0`$

It may be noted that since $`A=0`$ for all the solutions discussed so far, the expressions for $`\theta `$ were rather trivial. One way of obtaining a solution with $`A0`$ is to start with the ansatz

$$r^2(\xi )=2\mathrm{d}\mathrm{n}^2\xi +\alpha ,$$
(48)
where $`\alpha `$ is a constant. It is easily checked that (48) is a solution to the NLSE (22) provided

$`\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}(n2+m{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{4}}),A^2=4\alpha \left[\alpha ^2(n{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{4}})\alpha +2(1m)\right],`$
$`B=3\alpha ^2+4(n{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{4}})\alpha 4(1m).`$ (49)
Starting from the solution (48) we can obtain a class of solutions by an appropriate linear superposition. For example, the 2-point solution is

$$r^2(\xi )=2(d_1^2+d_2^2)+\alpha ,$$
(50)
It is easily checked that this is indeed a solution provided

$`\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}(n2+m{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{4}}),B=3\alpha ^2+4(n{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{4}})\alpha 16(1m),`$
$`A^2=4[\alpha ^3(n{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{4}}\alpha ^2+8(1m)\alpha +8(1m)(n+2m{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{4}})].`$ (51)
Generalization to arbitrary $`p`$ is straightforward.

## 4 The $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ Model

The kink (domain wall) solutions to the $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ field theory in $`(1+1)`$ dimensions

$$\varphi _{xx}\varphi _{tt}=\lambda \varphi (\varphi ^2a^2),$$
(52)
have been widely discussed in the literature . The famous static kink solution is

$$\varphi (x)=a\mathrm{tanh}(\sqrt{\lambda /2}ax),$$
(53)
from which the time-dependent solution

$$\varphi (x,t)=a\mathrm{tanh}\left[\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{2(1v^2)}}a(xvt)\right],$$
(54)
is immediately obtained by Lorentz boosting. Therefore, to begin with, we shall discuss only the static periodic kink solutions in case $`v^2<1`$ (and $`\lambda >1`$). Later, we shall discuss time dependent solutions with $`v^2>1`$ (or $`\lambda <1`$).

### 4.1 Static Periodic Kink Solutions

It is well known that the static periodic kink solution to the field eq. (52) is

$$\varphi _1(x)=\sqrt{\frac{2m}{1+m}}a\mathrm{sn}(\eta _1,m),\eta _1\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{1+m}}ax.$$
(55)
For any odd integer $`p`$, we find the following static kink solutions of the $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ field theory by a specific linear superposition of the basic solution eq. (55):

$$\varphi _p(x)=\sqrt{2m}\alpha a\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i,p\mathrm{odd},$$
(56)
where $`\stackrel{~}{s}_i,\stackrel{~}{c}_i,\stackrel{~}{d}_i`$ are as given in eq. (14) with $`\eta _p\sqrt{\lambda }\alpha ax`$. In order to verify that eq. (56) is a static periodic kink solution to the $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ theory field eq. (52), one needs the identity

$$(\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i)^3=\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i^3+V(p,m)\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i.$$
(57)
The constant $`\alpha `$ is given by

$$\alpha =\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+m+2mV(p,m)}}.$$
(58)
As an illustration, consider $`p=3`$. $`V(3,m)`$ is given by

$$mV(3,m)=3\left[\frac{m}{1q^2}(1q^2)\right],$$
(59)
where $`q`$ is defined in eq. (8). Note that $`\alpha `$ varies from $`1/3`$ to $`1/\sqrt{2}`$ as $`m`$ varies from 0 to 1.

For even integer $`p`$, the linear superposition of elementary solutions does not work. However, remarkably enough we find that even in this case, the products of elementary solutions are solutions. For example, the solution for $`p=2`$ is

$$\varphi _2(x)=\sqrt{2}m\alpha as_1s_2,$$
(60)
where $`s_{1,2}`$ are as defined in eq. (5) with $`\xi \sqrt{\lambda }\alpha ax`$. Using the identities derived in ref. , it is easily shown that (60) is a static periodic kink solution to the field eq. (52) provided

$$\alpha =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2(2m)}}.$$
(61)
Note that $`\alpha `$ varies from $`1/2`$ to $`1/\sqrt{2}`$ as $`m`$ varies from 0 to 1. Generalization to arbitrary even $`p`$ is straightforward. It is thus clear that for arbitrary integer $`p`$, for static periodic kink solutions of $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ theory, $`\alpha `$ will vary from $`1/p`$ to $`1/\sqrt{2}`$ as $`m`$ varies from 0 to 1. For the values $`m=0.98`$ and $`\lambda =a=1`$, we plot $`\varphi _1(x)`$ from eq. (55), $`\varphi _2(x)`$ from eq. (60) and $`\varphi _3(x)`$ from eq. (56) in fig. 3.

### 4.2 Periodic Time-Dependent Kink Solutions

While in the relativistic field theory context with $`\lambda >0`$, eqs. (53) and (55) are the only solutions of $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ field theory, in the condensed matter physics context, where velocity $`v`$ can exceed velocity of sound (optical modes), or for relativistic case with $`\lambda <0`$, one also has another soliton solution given by

$$\varphi (x,t)=\sqrt{2}a\mathrm{sech}(\beta (xvt)),\beta =a\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{(v^21)}},$$
(62)
which is real if either $`\lambda <0`$ (and $`v^2<1)`$ or $`v^2>1`$ (and $`\lambda >0)`$.

The corresponding periodic soliton solutions to eq. (52) are well known and are given by

$$\varphi _1(\xi )=\sqrt{\frac{2}{2m}}a\mathrm{dn}(\xi _1,m),\xi _1=a\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{(2m)(v_1^21)}}(xvt),$$
(63)
$$\varphi _1(\eta )=\sqrt{\frac{2m}{2m1}}a\mathrm{cn}(\eta _1,m),\eta _1=a\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{(2m1)(v_1^21)}}(xvt).$$
(64)
Notice that the solution (64) is valid only for $`1/2<m<1`$ and both solutions (63) and (64) are only valid for $`v^2>1`$ (and $`\lambda >0`$) or $`\lambda <0`$ (and $`v^2<1`$).

Appropriate linear superposition of solutions (63) and (64) are also periodic time-dependent kink solutions. For example, by using the linear superposition of solutions (63), we have the following solution to the field eq. (52), which is valid for any integer $`p`$:

$$\varphi _p(\xi )=\sqrt{2}a\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}d_i,$$
(65)
where $`d_i`$ is as defined in eq. (5) with $`\xi _p=a\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{v_p^21}}\alpha (xv_pt)`$. In order to prove that this is a solution, one needs the identity

$$(\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}d_i)^3=\underset{i}{\overset{p}{}}d_i^3+W(p,m)\underset{i}{}d_i,$$
(66)
which is easily proved following ref. . Using this identity one finds that (65) is a solution provided

$$\alpha ^2=\frac{1}{[2m+W(p,m)]}.$$
(67)
Some explicitly computed values of $`W(p,m)`$ are

$$W(2,m)=3\sqrt{1m},W(3,m)=\frac{6mq}{1q^2},W(4,m)=3\stackrel{~}{t}[2+\stackrel{~}{t}+2\stackrel{~}{t}^2],$$
(68)
where $`\stackrel{~}{t}`$ is as defined in eq. (30) and $`q`$ is given by eq. (8). Further, $`W(p,0)=p^21`$ , while $`W(p,1)=0`$.

For any odd integer $`p`$, we also have the following solution to the field eq. (52) by linear superposition

$$\varphi (\eta )=\sqrt{2m}a\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i,$$
(69)
where $`\stackrel{~}{c}_i`$ is as defined in eq. (14) with $`\eta _p=a\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{v_p^21}}\alpha (xv_pt)`$. In order to prove that this is a solution, one needs the identity

$$(\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i)^3=\underset{i}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i^3+X(p,m)\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i.$$
(70)
Using this identity one finds that (69) is a solution provided

$$\alpha ^2=\frac{1}{[2m1+2mX(p,m)]}.$$
(71)
For example, one can check  that

$$X(3,m)=6(1m+q)+\frac{6q^2}{1q^2},$$
(72)
with $`q`$ being given by eq. (8), so that unlike the $`p=1`$ case, this is an acceptable solution for all values of $`m(0m1`$).

Similarly, for even integer $`p`$, we have solutions of the form

$$\varphi (\xi )=\sqrt{2}a\alpha \underset{iodd}{\overset{p}{}}[d_id_{i+1}],$$
(73)
where $`d_i`$ is as defined in eq. (5) with $`\xi _p=a\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{v_p^21}}\alpha (xv_pt)`$. Unfortunately, it appears that all these solutions are only valid in a very narrow range of values of $`m`$ corresponding to real values of $`\alpha `$.

## 5 Sine-Gordon Field Theory

In recent years, both sine-Gordon and $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ field theory have received considerable attention . In particular, sine-Gordon theory is the only relativistically invariant field theory having true soliton solutions. The equation under consideration is

$$\varphi _{xx}\varphi _{tt}=\mathrm{sin}\varphi .$$
(74)
### 5.1 Static Soliton Solution by Linear Superposition

The well known static one-soliton solution of this equation is given by

$$\varphi (x)=4\mathrm{tan}^1e^{\pm x}.$$
(75)
The corresponding time-dependent solution is easily obtained by Lorentz boosting and hence without any loss of generality we shall restrict our discussion to the static solution only (except when $`v^2>1`$). The solution (75) can also be written in the alternative form

$$\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\mathrm{sech}x.$$
(76)
The two corresponding periodic static soliton solutions are well known and are given by

$$\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\mathrm{dn}(x,m),$$
(77)
$$\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\mathrm{cn}(x/\sqrt{m},m),m>0.$$
(78)
For any odd integer $`p`$, we obtain the following periodic static soliton solutions by linear superposition:

$$\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{d}_i,$$
(79)
where $`\stackrel{~}{d}_i`$ is as defined in eq. (14) with $`\eta _p\alpha x`$, while $`\alpha `$ is given by

$$\alpha ^2=\frac{1}{[p+A(p,m)+mR(p,m)]}.$$
(80)
Here $`A(p,m)`$ and $`R(p,m)`$ are as defined by eq. (3.1) and (3.2) respectively, and with this choice of $`\alpha `$, one gets

$$\mathrm{cos}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\sqrt{m}\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i.$$
(81)
Note that use has been made of the identities

$$\stackrel{~}{s}_1[\stackrel{~}{c}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{c}_p]+c.p.=0,\stackrel{~}{s}_1[\stackrel{~}{d}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{d}_p]+c.p.=0,\stackrel{~}{d}_1[\stackrel{~}{c}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{c}_p]+c.p.=0,$$
(82)
in proving that (79) is indeed a solution to the field eq. (74). For $`p=3`$ the values of the constants are

$$A(3,m)=2q(q+2),mR(3,m)=2(q^21),$$
(83)
where $`q`$ is given by eq. (8), so that $`\alpha =1/(1+2q)`$ changes from $`1/3`$ to $`1`$ as $`m`$ varies from 0 to 1.

Another solution valid for any odd integer $`p`$ is

$$\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i,$$
(84)
where $`\stackrel{~}{c}_i`$ is as defined in eq. (14) with $`\eta _p\alpha x/\sqrt{m}`$. This solution is strictly valid only if $`m>0`$. It is easily checked that this is indeed a solution to the field eq. (74) provided

$$\alpha ^2=\frac{1}{[p+G(p,m)+R(p,m)]},$$
(85)
where $`G(p,m)`$ and $`R(p,m)`$ are as defined by eq. (23) and (40) respectively. Note that with this choice of $`\alpha `$

$$\mathrm{cos}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i.$$
(86)
For $`p=3`$, $`G(3,m)`$ is given by

$$G(3,m)=\frac{2q(q+2)}{(1+q)^2},$$
(87)
where $`R(3,m)`$ is as given by eq. (83), so that $`\alpha =\frac{1+q}{1q}`$ ($`m>0`$).

Similarly, for $`p=2`$ we have the solution

$$\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}d_i,$$
(88)
where $`d_i`$ is as defined in eq. (5) with $`\xi _2\alpha x`$. It is easily checked that this is indeed a solution of the field eq. (74) provided

$$\alpha =\frac{1}{1+\sqrt{1m}},$$
(89)
so that $`\alpha `$ varies between 1/2 and 1 as $`m`$ changes from 0 to 1. Note that with this choice of $`\alpha `$

$$\mathrm{cos}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=m\alpha s_1s_2.$$
(90)
In fig. 4, we have plotted $`\mathrm{sin}[\varphi /2]`$ vs. $`x`$ for $`p=1,2,3`$ corresponding to the right hand side of eqs. (77), (88) and (79).

Another solution for $`p=2`$ is

$$\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\alpha [d_1d_2],$$
(91)
where $`d_i`$ is as defined in eq. (5) with $`\xi _2\alpha x`$. It is easily checked that this is indeed a solution to the field eq. (74) provided $`0<m1`$ since $`\alpha `$ given by

$$\alpha =\frac{1}{1\sqrt{1m}},$$
(92)
diverges at $`m=0`$.

### 5.2 Periodic Time-Dependent Solutions

As in the $`\lambda \varphi ^4`$ field theory case, in this case also we get solutions by linear superposition, which are only valid for $`v^2>1`$. In particular, if $`p`$ is any odd integer, the periodic time-dependent solution is given by

$$\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\sqrt{m}\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i,$$
(93)
where $`\stackrel{~}{s}_i`$ is as defined in eq. (14) with $`\eta _p\alpha (xvt)/\sqrt{v^21}`$. It is easily checked that this is indeed a solution of the field eq. (74) provided $`\alpha ^2`$ is again given by eq. (80). Note that with this choice of $`\alpha `$

$$\mathrm{cos}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{d}_i.$$
(94)
Another solution for any odd integer $`p`$ is

$$\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{s}_i,$$
(95)
where $`\stackrel{~}{s}_i`$ is as defined in eq. (14) with $`\eta _p\alpha (xvt)/\sqrt{m(v^21)}`$. Thus, this solution is strictly valid only if $`m>0`$. It is easily checked that this is indeed a solution of the field eq. (74) provided $`\alpha ^2`$ is as given by eq. (85). Note that with this choice of $`\alpha `$,

$$\mathrm{cos}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\stackrel{~}{c}_i.$$
(96)
Finally, for $`p=2`$ we have the solution

$$\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=m\alpha s_1s_2,$$
(97)
where $`s_{1,2}`$ is as defined in eq. (5) with $`\xi _2\alpha (xvt)/\sqrt{v^21}`$. It is easily checked that this is indeed a solution of the field eq. (74) provided $`\alpha ^2`$ satisfies eq. (88). Note that with this choice of $`\alpha `$

$$\mathrm{cos}(\frac{\varphi (x)}{2})=\alpha \underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}d_i.$$
(98)
## 6 Boussinesq Equation

The Boussinesq equation is given by

$$u_{tt}u_{xx}+3(u^2)_{xx}u_{xxxx}=0.$$
(99)
The periodic one soliton solution of this equation is known to be

$$u(x,t)=2\alpha ^2\mathrm{dn}^2(\alpha (xvt))+\beta \alpha ^2,$$
(100)
where

$$2(42m3\beta )\alpha ^2=v^21.$$
(101)
Thus $`v^2<1`$ if $`\beta 4/3`$ and $`v^2>1`$ if $`\beta 2/3`$. For $`2/3<\beta <4/3,v^2`$ changes sign at some value of $`m(0m1`$). Note that in the limit $`m1`$ and $`\beta =2`$, this solution goes over to the one-soliton solution

$$u(x,t)=2\alpha ^2\mathrm{tanh}^2(\alpha (xvt)),\alpha =\sqrt{\frac{1v^2}{8}},$$
(102)
Now consider the linear superposition

$$u(x,t)=2\alpha ^2\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}d_i^2(\alpha (xvt))+\beta \alpha ^2,(p=1,2,3\mathrm{}).$$
(103)
It is easy to check that this is an exact solution to the Boussinesq eq. (99) provided

$$2\left[42m3\beta 6A_1(p,m)\right]\alpha ^2=v^21.$$
(104)
Here use has been made of the identity (6) with $`A_1(p,m)`$ given by eqs. (7) and (10). It may be noted that $`A_1(p,m)0`$.

In this article we have shown that in view of the remarkable identities satisfied by Jacobi elliptic functions, a kind of linear superposition principle works for several nonlinear equations, some of which are associated with integrable systems, the others not. It would indeed be worthwhile to obtain such solutions for other nonlinear systems where elliptic functions play a role in the space of exact solutions. A question which comes to mind is how the solutions obtained in this paper are related to previously known solutions. At first sight, it would appear that our procedure has given new solutions, but a closer investigation reveals that our solutions are expressible in terms of previous solutions via a non-trivial generalization of Landen’s formulas which connect Jacobi elliptic functions with two different modulus parameters . The reader is referred to Ref.  for more details.

One of us (A.K.) thanks the Department of Physics at the University of Illinois at Chicago for hospitality. We acknowledge grant support from the U.S. Department of Energy.