text:
# Reissner-Nordström black hole lensing

## 1 Introduction

The theory of General Relativity predicts the deflection of light in presence of a mass distribution. A. Einstein in 1936  noted that an image due to the deflection of the light of a background star by another star can have a great magnification if the observer, the lens, and the source are highly aligned. He also pointed out that the angular separation of the images was too small to be resolved by the optical telescopes available at that time.

It was the discovering of quasars in 1963 which opened the possibility of really observing gravitational lensing effects. Quasars are very bright objects, located at cosmological distances, and have a central compact optical emitting region. When a galaxy is interposed in the line of sight to them, the resulting gravitational magnification can be large and the images are well separated in some particular cases. In 1979 the first example of gravitational lensing was discovered (the quasar QSO 0957+561 A,B).

The weak field theory of gravitational lensing, developed, among others, by Y. G. Klimov, S. Liebes, S. Refsdal, R. R. Bourassa, and R. Kantowski, has been successful in explaining the astronomical observations up to now. This theory is based on a first order expansion of the small deflection angle (for a detailed treatment see , and references therein).

When the lens is a very compact object (e.g. a black hole) the weak field approximation is no longer valid. Virbhadra and Ellis recently studied the strong field situation . They obtained the lens equation using an asymptotically flat background metric and analyzed the lensing by a Schwarzchild black hole in the center of the Galaxy using numerical methods. Besides the primary and secondary images, they found that there exist two infinite sets of faint relativistic images. Fritelli et al.  found an exact lens equation without any reference to a background metric and compared their results with those of Virbhadra and Ellis for the Schwarzchild black hole case. Bozza et al.  obtained analytical expressions for the positions and magnification of the relativistic images using the strong field limit approximation.

In this paper we study the lensing situation when the lens is a slowly rotating Kerr-Newman black hole. The introduction of charged bodies in the strong-field lensing theory is justified since charged black holes are thought to be final result of the catastrophic collapse of very massive ($`M>35`$ $`M_{}`$) magnetized stars. Although selective accretion from the surroundings would neutralize the charged black hole if it is located in a high-density medium, there remains the possibility that if the Kerr-Newman hole is surrounded by a co-rotating, opposite charged magnetosphere, it might not discharge so quickly. Such a configuration would present zero net charge from infinity and consequently it could survive for a significant time span ($`10^310^5`$ yr) if located in a low density environment . Moreover, the magnetosphere would have observational effects due to particle acceleration in electrostatic polar gaps, similar to those presented by pulsars . The relativistic wind created by the Kerr-Newman black hole could be responsible for detectable gamma-ray emission . Hence, the study of other possible observational signatures from charged black holes presents particular interest.

In Sec. 2 of this paper we introduce the basic equations using the Reissner-Nordström’s metric for the black hole and a flat background metric. The Reissner-Nordström case can be used also to study slowly rotating Kerr-Newman black holes. Highly rotating objects break the spherical symmetry introducing unnecessary complications in the lensing calculations, which do not lead to qualitatively different results. In Sec. 3 we use the strong field limit approximation to obtain analytical expressions for the positions and amplifications of the relativistic images. In Sec. 4 we calculate the positions and magnifications of the primary and secondary images using the weak field approximation. In Sec. 5 we apply the formalism to a small black hole (7 solar masses) in the galactic halo. We close with Sec. 6, where some conclusions are drawn.

## 2 Basic equations

In this paper we use geometrized units (speed of light in vacuum $`c=1`$ and gravitational constant $`G=1`$).

Black holes are characterized uniquely by $`M`$ (mass), $`Q`$ (charge) and $`S`$ (intrinsic angular momentum) . Written in the $`t`$, $`r`$, $`\theta `$,$`\phi `$ coordinates of Boyer and Lindquist, the Kerr-Newman geometry has the form:

$$ds^2=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\rho ^2}(dta\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi )^2+\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\rho ^2}[(r^2+a^2)d\phi adt]^2+\frac{\rho ^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }}dr^2+\rho ^2d\theta ^2,$$
(1)
where

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=r^22Mr+a^2+Q^2,$$
(2)
$$\rho ^2=r^2+a^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta ,$$
(3)
$$a=\frac{S}{M}.$$
(4)
The Kerr-Newman geometry is axially symmetric around z axis. The horizon of events is placed at

$$r_\mathrm{H}=r_+=M+\sqrt{M^2Q^2a^2}.$$
(5)
A non-rotating black hole corresponds to an isotropic black hole with charge Q. The metric is the Reissner-Nordström’s one:

$$ds^2=\left(1\frac{2M}{r}+\frac{Q^2}{r^2}\right)dt^2+r^2\left(\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2+d\theta ^2\right)+\left(1\frac{2M}{r}+\frac{Q^2}{r^2}\right)^1dr^2.$$
(6)
The horizon is located at

$$r_\mathrm{H}=M+\sqrt{M^2Q^2},$$
(7)
and the photon sphere radius is at

$$r_{\mathrm{ps}}=\frac{3}{2}M\left(1+\sqrt{1\frac{8}{9}\frac{Q^2}{M^2}}\right).$$
(8)
We study the lens situation shown in Fig. 1. The background space-time is considered asymptotically flat, with the observer and the source immersed in the flat space-time region, which can be embedded, if necessary, in a Robertson-Walker expanding Universe. From Fig. 1 we see that the lens equation can be expressed

$$\mathrm{tan}\beta =\mathrm{tan}\theta \frac{D_{\mathrm{ls}}}{D_{\mathrm{os}}}\left(\mathrm{tan}\theta +\mathrm{tan}(\alpha \theta )\right),$$
(9)
where $`\beta `$ and $`\theta `$ are respectively the angular source and image positions and $`\alpha `$ is the deflection angle due to the black hole.

Following Sec. 8.5 of , we have that the deflection angle for a light ray is

$$\alpha (r_0)=2_{r_0}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dr}{r\sqrt{\left(\frac{r}{r_0}\right)^2\left(1\frac{2M}{r_0}+\frac{Q^2}{r_0^2}\right)\left(1\frac{2M}{r}+\frac{Q^2}{r^2}\right)}}\pi ,$$
(10)
where $`r_0`$ is the closest distance of approach. The impact parameter is

$$J(r_0)=r_0\left(1\frac{2M}{r_0}+\frac{Q^2}{r_0^2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$
(11)
From the lens diagram (Fig. 1) we see that

$$J(r_0)=D_{\mathrm{ol}}\mathrm{sin}\theta .$$
(12)
Defining the distances and the charge in terms of the Schwarzschild radius $`(2M)`$:

$`x={\displaystyle \frac{r}{2M}},x_0={\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{2M}},b={\displaystyle \frac{J}{2M}},`$
$`d_{\mathrm{ol}}={\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{ol}}}{2M}},d_{\mathrm{os}}={\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{os}}}{2M}},d_{\mathrm{ls}}={\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{ls}}}{2M}},`$
$`q={\displaystyle \frac{Q}{2M}},`$
we have that

$$\alpha (x_0)=2_{x_0}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dx}{x\sqrt{\left(\frac{x}{x_0}\right)^2\left(1\frac{1}{x_0}+\frac{q^2}{x_0^2}\right)\left(1\frac{1}{x}+\frac{q^2}{x^2}\right)}}\pi ,$$
(13)
$$b(x_0)=x_0\left(1\frac{1}{x_0}+\frac{q^2}{x_0^2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}=d_{\mathrm{ol}}\mathrm{sin}\theta ,$$
(14)
$$x_\mathrm{H}=\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{1}{4}q^2},$$
(15)
$$x_{\mathrm{ps}}=\frac{3}{4}\left(1+\sqrt{1\frac{32}{9}q^2}\right).$$
(16)
The deflection angle $`\alpha `$ for a light ray passing at the right of the black hole is plotted as a function of the closest approach distance $`x_0`$ in Fig. 2. We see that when $`x_0`$ takes values near $`x_{\mathrm{ps}}`$ the angle of deflection $`\alpha `$ is greater than $`2\pi `$ , so the light ray can take several turns around the black hole before reaching the observer. In this way, besides the primary and secondary images (with $`\left|\alpha \right|<2\pi `$), we have two infinite sets of relativistic images, one produced by clockwise winding around the black hole ($`\alpha >0`$ ) and the other by counter-clockwise winding ($`\alpha <0`$). These images are located, respectively, at the same side and at the opposite side of the source. This is qualitatively shown in Fig. 3.

For a given source position $`\beta `$ , we must solve Eq. (9) with Eqs. (13) and (14) to obtain the positions of the images. The trascendental equation (9) is hard to solve even numerically.

The magnification for a circular symmetric lens is given by

$$\mu =\left|\frac{\mathrm{sin}\beta }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }\frac{d\beta }{d\theta }\right|^1.$$
(17)
Differentiating both sides of Eq. (9) and with some algebra, we have

$$\frac{d\beta }{d\theta }=\left(\frac{\mathrm{cos}\beta }{\mathrm{cos}\theta }\right)^2\left\{1\frac{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}{d_{\mathrm{os}}}\left[1+\left(\frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{\mathrm{cos}(\alpha \theta )}\right)^2\left(\frac{d\alpha }{d\theta }1\right)\right]\right\},$$
(18)
where

$$\frac{d\alpha }{d\theta }=\frac{d\alpha }{dx_0}\frac{dx_0}{d\theta },$$
(19)
with

$$\frac{d\alpha }{dx_0}=_{x_0}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{x^4\left(x_02q^2\right)+x_0^4\left(x2q^2\right)}{x_0^5x^3\left[\left(\frac{x}{x_0}\right)^2\left(1\frac{1}{x_0}+\frac{q^2}{x_0^2}\right)\left(1\frac{1}{x}+\frac{q^2}{x^2}\right)\right]^{\frac{3}{2}}}𝑑x,$$
(20)
obtained by differentiating Eq. (13) and

$$\frac{dx_0}{d\theta }=\frac{x_0^2\left(1\frac{1}{x_0}+\frac{q^2}{x_0^2}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}\sqrt{1\left(\frac{x_0}{d_{\mathrm{ol}}}\right)^2\left(1\frac{1}{x_0}+\frac{q^2}{x_0^2}\right)^1}}{\frac{1}{2d_{\mathrm{ol}}}\left(2x_0^23x_0+2q^2\right)},$$
(21)
obtained by differentiating both sides of Eq. (14) and doing some extra algebraic tricks.

## 3 Strong field limit

In this section we shall do some approximations. The first one is that when the source and the lens are almost aligned we can replace $`\mathrm{tan}\theta `$ by $`\theta `$ and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ by $`\beta `$. For the relativistic images with clockwise winding of the rays around the black hole, we can write $`\alpha =2\mathrm{n}\pi +\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _\mathrm{n}`$ with n integer and $`0<\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _\mathrm{n}<<1,`$ so that $`\mathrm{tan}(\alpha \theta )`$ can be approximated by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _\mathrm{n}\theta `$. As in the case of Schwarzschild black hole lensing, if a ray of light emitted by the source $`S`$ is going to reach the observer after turning around the black hole, $`\alpha `$ must be very close to a multiple of $`2\pi `$.

Then the lens equation takes the form :

$$\beta =\theta \frac{D_{\mathrm{ls}}}{D_{\mathrm{os}}}\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _\mathrm{n}=\theta \frac{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}{d_{\mathrm{os}}}\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _\mathrm{n},$$
(22)
and the impact parameter is

$$b\frac{D_{\mathrm{ol}}}{2M}\theta =d_{\mathrm{ol}}\theta .$$
(23)
The relativistic images are formed when the light rays pass very close to the photon sphere. So it is convenient to write the closest approach distance $`x_0`$ as

$$x_0=x_{\mathrm{ps}}+\epsilon ,$$
(24)
where $`0\epsilon <<1`$. Bozza et al  have shown for the Schwarzschild black hole that the deflection angle can be approximated by:

$$\alpha =2\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{2+\sqrt{3}}{18}\epsilon \right)\pi .$$
(25)
From Fig. 2 we see that the curves representing the deflection angle have similar form for the different values of $`Q`$. Therefore, we shall also look for a similar approximation

$$\alpha =A\mathrm{ln}(B\epsilon )\pi ,$$
(26)
where $`A`$ and $`B`$ are to-be-defined positive numbers which will depend only on $`q=Q/2M`$.

$`A`$ and $`B`$ are chosen to satisfy

$$\underset{x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}}}{lim}\left(\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}\alpha _{\mathrm{approx}.}\right)=0,$$
(27)
with $`\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}`$ given by Eq. (13)111The integral of Eq. (13) can be calculated in terms of elliptic integrals and it is done in the Appendix, Eq. (73). and $`\alpha _{\mathrm{approx}.}`$ is given by Eq. (26). Eq. (27) can be written in the form

$$\underset{x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}}}{lim}\left[\alpha _{\mathrm{approx}.}\left(\frac{\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}}{\alpha _{\mathrm{approx}.}}1\right)\right]=0.$$
(28)
A necessary (but not sufficient) condition for this limit is:

$$\underset{x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}}}{lim}\frac{\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}}{\alpha _{\mathrm{approx}.}}=1.$$
(29)
As $`\alpha \mathrm{}`$ when $`x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}}`$, using the L’Hospital’s rule in the limit of Eq. (29), it is easy to find $`A`$:

$$A=\underset{x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}}}{lim}\left[(x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}})\frac{d\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}}{dx_0}\right],$$
(30)
with $`\frac{d\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}}{dx_0}`$ given by Eq. (20)222 Or, in terms of elliptic integrals, by Eq. (79) of the Appendix..

To obtain $`B`$, we replace Eq.(26) in Eq. (27):

$$\underset{x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}}}{lim}\left[\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}+A\mathrm{ln}B(x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}})+\pi \right]=0,$$
(31)
which, using properties of logarithms can be expressed as

$$\underset{x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}}}{lim}A\mathrm{ln}\left[B(x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}})\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}+\pi }{A}\right)\right]=0,$$
(32)
so

$$\underset{x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}}}{lim}B(x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}})\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}+\pi }{A}\right)=1,$$
(33)
then

$$B=\underset{x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}}}{lim}\frac{\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{(\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}+\pi )}{A}\right]}{(x_0x_{\mathrm{ps}})}.$$
(34)
$`A`$ and $`B`$ are given in Table 1 for some values of $`Q`$.

The ratio $`\alpha _{\mathrm{exact}}/\alpha _{\mathrm{approx}.}`$ is plotted in Fig. 4 for $`0\epsilon 0.05`$. The error using $`\alpha _{\mathrm{approx}.}`$ is very small, less than 1.5 percent for $`\left|Q\right|0.5M`$ and less than 2 percent for $`0.5M\left|Q\right|M`$.

The impact parameter given by Eq. (14) can be approximated, using a second order Taylor expansion in $`\epsilon `$, by

$$b=C+D\epsilon ^2,$$
(35)
with

$$C=\frac{\left(3+\sqrt{932q^2}\right)^2}{4\sqrt{616q^2+2\sqrt{932q^2}}},$$
(36)
and

$$D=\frac{72256q^2}{\left(932q^2+\sqrt{932q^2}\right)\sqrt{616q^2+2\sqrt{932q^2}}},$$
(37)
where we have made use of Eqs. (16, 24). Inverting the Eq. (35) to obtain $`\epsilon `$

$$\epsilon =\sqrt{\frac{bC}{D}},$$
(38)
replacing Eqs. (23) and (38) in Eq. (26) we have

$$\alpha A\mathrm{ln}\left(B\sqrt{\frac{d_{\mathrm{ol}}\theta C}{D}}\right)\pi .$$
(39)
The position of the n-th relativistic image can be approximated by a first order Taylor expansion around $`\alpha =2\mathrm{n}\pi `$

$$\theta _\mathrm{n}\theta _\mathrm{n}^0\rho _\mathrm{n}\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _\mathrm{n},$$
(40)
with

$$\theta _\mathrm{n}^0=\theta (\alpha =2n\pi ),$$
(41)
and

$$\rho _\mathrm{n}=\frac{d\theta }{d\alpha }|_{\alpha =2n\pi }.$$
(42)
Inverting Eq. (39) we have that

$$\theta =\frac{1}{d_{\mathrm{ol}}}\left\{\frac{D}{B^2}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{2}{A}(\alpha +\pi )\right]+C\right\},$$
(43)
then

$$\theta _\mathrm{n}^0=\frac{1}{d_{\mathrm{ol}}}\left\{\frac{D}{B^2}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{2}{A}(2n+1)\pi \right]+C\right\},$$
(44)
and

$$\rho _\mathrm{n}=\frac{2D}{d_{\mathrm{ol}}AB^2}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{2}{A}(2n+1)\pi \right].$$
(45)
From Eq. (40)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _\mathrm{n}\frac{\theta _\mathrm{n}\theta _\mathrm{n}^0}{\rho _\mathrm{n}},$$
(46)
replacing it in the lens equation, Eq. (22):

$`\beta `$ $`=`$ $`\theta _\mathrm{n}+{\displaystyle \frac{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}{d_{\mathrm{os}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _\mathrm{n}\theta _\mathrm{n}^0}{\rho _\mathrm{n}}}`$ (47)
$`=`$ $`\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}{d_{\mathrm{os}}\rho _\mathrm{n}}}\right)\theta _\mathrm{n}+{\displaystyle \frac{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}{d_{\mathrm{os}}\rho _\mathrm{n}}}\theta _\mathrm{n}^0.`$
Using that $`\rho _\mathrm{n}\frac{1}{d_{\mathrm{ol}}}`$, then $`\frac{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}{d_{\mathrm{os}}\rho _\mathrm{n}}\frac{d_{\mathrm{ls}}d_{\mathrm{ol}}}{d_{\mathrm{os}}}>>1`$, we can neglect the $`1`$ inside the parentheses to obtain the approximate positions of the relativistic images:

$$\theta _\mathrm{n}=\theta _\mathrm{n}^0+\frac{d_{\mathrm{os}}\rho _\mathrm{n}}{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}\beta .$$
(48)
Note that the second term in the last equation is a small correction on $`\theta _\mathrm{n}^0`$. When the source and the lens are aligned, $`\beta =0`$ and we obtain the relativistic Einstein rings with angular radius $`\theta _\mathrm{n}^\mathrm{E}=\theta _\mathrm{n}^0`$.

The amplification of the n-th image is given by

$$\mu _\mathrm{n}\left|\frac{\beta }{\theta _\mathrm{n}}\frac{d\beta }{d\theta _\mathrm{n}}\right|^1,$$
(49)
which, using Eq. (48), gives

$$\mu _\mathrm{n}=\left|\left(\theta _\mathrm{n}^0+\frac{d_{\mathrm{os}}\rho _\mathrm{n}}{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}\beta \right)\frac{d_{\mathrm{os}}\rho _\mathrm{n}}{\beta d_{\mathrm{ls}}}\right|,$$
(50)
neglecting the term with $`\left(\frac{d_{\mathrm{os}}\rho _\mathrm{n}}{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}\right)^2`$ we have

$$\mu _\mathrm{n}\frac{1}{\left|\beta \right|}\frac{d_{\mathrm{os}}}{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}\theta _\mathrm{n}^0\rho _\mathrm{n}.$$
(51)
We see that $`\mu _\mathrm{n}\frac{d_{0S}}{\beta d_{\mathrm{ls}}d_{\mathrm{ol}}^2}`$, so the amplification of the relativistic images is very small unless the observer, the lens and the source are highly aligned.

With a similar treatment for the images formed with counter-clockwise winding of light rays around the black hole, the positions of the relativistic images are

$$\theta _\mathrm{n}=\theta _\mathrm{n}^0+\frac{d_{\mathrm{os}}\rho _\mathrm{n}}{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}\beta ,$$
(52)
and the amplifications are given again by Eq. (51), but with opposite parity.

To obtain the total magnification of the relativistic images, we must take into account both sets of relativistic images, and sum

$$\mu _\mathrm{R}=2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\mu _\mathrm{n}=\frac{2}{\left|\beta \right|}\frac{d_{\mathrm{os}}}{d_{\mathrm{ls}}}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\theta _\mathrm{n}^0\rho _\mathrm{n},$$
(53)
which, using that the sum of a geometrical series is $`\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}a^\mathrm{n}=\frac{a}{1a}`$ for $`\left|a\right|<1`$, gives

$$\mu _\mathrm{R}\frac{1}{\left|\beta \right|}\frac{d_{\mathrm{os}}}{d_{\mathrm{ls}}d_{\mathrm{ol}}^2}\frac{4D}{AB^2}\left(\frac{D}{B^2}\frac{e^{12\pi /A}}{1e^{8\pi /A}}+C\frac{e^{6\pi /A}}{1e^{4\pi /A}}\right).$$
(54)
## 4 Primary and secondary images

We saw in the last section that relativistic images have a very small amplification unless the aligment is high. Now we shall obtain the positions and amplifications for the primary and secondary images in the aproximation of very small source angle ($`\beta `$).

Very small $`\beta `$ implies, from the lens equation, that $`\alpha `$ is very small too for the primary ($`P`$) and secondary images ($`S`$), so we can use the weak field aproximation to obtain the positions and amplifications. The first step is to calculate the deflection angle $`\alpha `$. Expanding the integrand of Eq. (13) and doing the integration we have that

$$\alpha =\frac{2}{x_0}+\left[\left(\frac{15}{16}\pi 1\right)\frac{3}{4}\pi q^2\right]\frac{1}{x_0^2}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{x_0^3}\right).$$
(55)
The charge only introduces a small correction in the second order term of the deflection angle. As usual in the weak field aproximation, we shall use a first order expansion, taking $`\alpha 2/x_0`$ and $`bx_0d_{\mathrm{ol}}\theta `$. Introducing $`\alpha `$ in the lens equation and inverting it to obtain the positions of the images, we have:

$$\theta _\mathrm{p}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\beta +\sqrt{\beta ^2+4\theta _\mathrm{E}^2}\right)\theta _\mathrm{E}+\frac{1}{2}\beta ,$$
(56)
$$\theta _\mathrm{s}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\beta \sqrt{\beta ^2+4\theta _\mathrm{E}^2}\right)\theta _\mathrm{E}+\frac{1}{2}\beta ,$$
(57)
where $`\theta _\mathrm{E}=\sqrt{\frac{2d_{\mathrm{ls}}}{d_{\mathrm{os}}d_{\mathrm{ol}}}}`$ is the Einstein ring angular radius. Using Eq. (17), the amplifications are given by:

$$\mu _\mathrm{p}=\frac{\left(\frac{\beta }{\theta _\mathrm{E}}\right)^2+2}{2\left|\frac{\beta }{\theta _\mathrm{E}}\right|\sqrt{\left(\frac{\beta }{\theta _\mathrm{E}}\right)^2+4}}+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\theta _\mathrm{E}}{2\left|\beta \right|},$$
(58)
$$\mu _\mathrm{s}=\frac{\left(\frac{\beta }{\theta _\mathrm{E}}\right)^2+2}{2\left|\frac{\beta }{\theta _\mathrm{E}}\right|\sqrt{\left(\frac{\beta }{\theta _\mathrm{E}}\right)^2+4}}\frac{1}{2}\frac{\theta _\mathrm{E}}{2\left|\beta \right|}.$$
(59)
So, the total amplification $`\mu _{\mathrm{wf}}`$ of the weak field images is

$$\mu _{\mathrm{wf}}=\mu _\mathrm{p}+\mu _\mathrm{s}\frac{\theta _\mathrm{E}}{\left|\beta \right|}=\frac{1}{\left|\beta \right|}\sqrt{\frac{2d_{\mathrm{ls}}}{d_{\mathrm{os}}d_{\mathrm{ol}}}}.$$
(60)
Dividing Eq. (54) by (60) we have that

$$\frac{\mu _\mathrm{R}}{\mu _{\mathrm{wf}}}=\left(\frac{d_{\mathrm{os}}}{d_{\mathrm{ls}}d_{\mathrm{ol}}}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}f(q),$$
(61)
where

$$f(q)=\frac{4D}{\sqrt{2}AB^2}\left(\frac{D}{B^2}\frac{e^{12\pi /A}}{1e^{8\pi /A}}+C\frac{e^{6\pi /A}}{1e^{4\pi /A}}\right).$$
(62)
f(q) takes values between $`1\times 10^2`$ and $`3\times 10^2`$, for $`|q|[0,0.5]`$, so the relativistic images are much less amplified than the weak field images. To give an example, the prefactor multiplying $`f(q)`$ is $`(𝒟/2M)^{3/2}`$, if the lens is halfway between the observer and the source, $`𝒟D_{os}/4`$ which, unless the black hole is very massive and or near the Earth makes the amplification extremely small.

## 5 An example: black hole in the galactic halo

In this section we consider as a lens a black hole with mass $`M=7M_{}`$ , negligible angular momentum ($`S0`$) and charge $`Q`$ placed at the galactic halo ($`D_{\mathrm{ol}}=4\mathrm{k}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}`$) . The source is a star with radius $`R_\mathrm{s}=R_{}`$ located in the galactic bulge ($`D_{\mathrm{os}}=8\mathrm{k}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}`$). This provides a model for lensing by black hole candidates similar to the case discussed in Ref.  and is only intended to give some feeling of the numerical values implied in the strong field lensing of charged compact objects.

The positions and magnifications of the relativistic images for a point source are given, respectively, by Eqs. (48, 52) and (51). The weak field images are formed near the Einstein angular radius $`\theta _\mathrm{E}2.669\mathrm{mas}`$ (milliarc second). The relativistic images have angular radius of the order of the relativistic Einstein rings, the outer one is $`\theta _1^\mathrm{E}`$ and the others approach to $`\theta _{\mathrm{}}^\mathrm{E}`$. In Table 2 the angular positions of the horizon, the photon sphere, the outer Einstein ring and the limiting value of the Einstein rings are given for different values of $`Q`$.

The source is extended, so we have to integrate over its luminosity profile to obtain the magnification:

$$\mu =\frac{_S\mu _p𝑑S}{_S𝑑S}$$
(63)
where $``$ is the surface intensity distribution of the source and $`\mu _p`$ is the magnification corresponding to each point of the source. We take the source as uniform, so

$$\mu =\frac{_S\mu _p𝑑S}{_S𝑑S}.$$
(64)
For both the relativistic and the weak field cases, the amplifications for a point source are proportional to $`1/\beta `$:

$$\mu I=\frac{_S\frac{1}{\beta }𝑑S}{_S𝑑S}.$$
(65)
To obtain $`I`$ we use polar coordinates $`(R,\phi )`$ in the source plane, with $`R=0`$ in the optical axis, and take the source as a disk $`D(R_\mathrm{C},R_\mathrm{S})`$ of radius $`R_\mathrm{S}`$ centered in $`R_\mathrm{C}`$. Then

$$I=\frac{_{D(R_C,R_S)}\frac{1}{\beta }R𝑑R𝑑\phi }{\pi R_S^2},$$
(66)
and, using that $`\beta =R/D_{\mathrm{os}}`$ is the angular position of each point of the source, we have

$$I=\frac{_{D(\beta _C,\beta _S)}\frac{1}{\beta }\beta 𝑑\beta 𝑑\phi }{\pi \beta _S^2}=\frac{_{D(\beta _C,\beta _S)}𝑑\beta 𝑑\phi }{\pi \beta _S^2}.$$
(67)
where $`D(\beta _\mathrm{c},\beta _\mathrm{s})`$ is the disk with angular radius $`\beta _\mathrm{s}=5.8\times 10^4\mathrm{mas}`$ centered in $`\beta _\mathrm{c}`$. The last integral can be calculated in terms of elliptic functions :

$`I`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2Sign[\beta _\mathrm{s}\beta _\mathrm{c}]}{\pi \beta _\mathrm{s}^2}}[(\beta _\mathrm{s}\beta _\mathrm{c})E({\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{4\beta _\mathrm{s}\beta _\mathrm{c}}{(\beta _\mathrm{s}\beta _\mathrm{c})^2}})+`$ (68)
$`+(\beta _\mathrm{s}+\beta _\mathrm{c})F({\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{4\beta _\mathrm{s}\beta _\mathrm{c}}{(\beta _\mathrm{s}\beta _\mathrm{c})^2}})],`$
where

$$F(\varphi _0,\lambda )=_0^{\varphi _0}\left(1\lambda \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi \right)^{\frac{1}{2}}𝑑\varphi ,$$
(69)
$$E(\varphi _0,\lambda )=_0^{\varphi _0}\left(1\lambda \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi \right)^{\frac{1}{2}}𝑑\varphi ,$$
(70)
are elliptic integrals of the the first and second kind respectively, with the arguments $`\varphi _0`$ and $`\lambda `$.

In Fig. 5 the light curves for a transit event are shown. The relative velocity between the lens and the source is $`v=300\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s}`$. The angular position of the center of the source is given by $`\beta _\mathrm{c}=\sqrt{\beta _0^2+\left(\frac{vt}{D_{\mathrm{os}}}\right)^2}`$, where $`\beta _0`$ is the minimum angular position of the center of the source corresponding to $`t=0`$. We see that the transit event takes only a few hours, with great amplification for the weak field images and, as expected, a negligible magnification for the relativistic images. However, it is interesting to remark that with the presence of charge the amplification of the relativistic images increases respect to the Schwarzschild case. For a charge $`|Q|=0.5M`$ we have about $`10`$ % more amplification than in a similar black hole with no charge. In the case $`|Q|=1M`$ the total amplification of the relativistic images is about $`140`$ % stronger than the corresponding value for a Schwarzschild black hole of the same mass.

## 6 Conclusions

In this paper we developed the formalism for charged black hole lensing. We find the positions and magnifications of the relativistic images within the strong field limit. The relativistic images are more prominent when there is a close alignment between the observer, the lens, and the source. They are, though, very faint, even with complete alignment, but much stronger than in the case of Schwarzschild black holes for large charges. The angular separation of the relativistic images is beyond the angular resolution of current optical technologies. For local black holes (e.g. in the Gould Belt, a star forming region at 600 pc), however, if radio or X-ray background sources can be used, the angular separations of $`\mu as`$ could be resolved with space techniques.

The NASA Constellation-X  mission, to be launched in 2008, is optimized to study the iron K$`\alpha `$ line features and will determine the black hole mass and spin for a large number of systems. Still, Constellation-X will provide an indirect measure of the properties of the region within a few event horizon radii. NASA-planned MAXIM mission , a $`\mu `$-arcsec X-ray imaging mission, will be able to take direct X-ray pictures of regions of the size of a black hole event horizon. Both of these space mission will have the ability to give us proofs of black hole existence, and possibly, to distinguish even among different black hole solutions. The project ARISE (Advanced Radio Interferometry between Space and Earth) will use the technique of Space VLBI. The mission, to be launched in 2008, will be based on a 25-meter inflatable space radio telescope working between 8 and 86 GHz . ARISE will provide resolution of 15 $`\mu `$arc-seconds or better, 5-10 times better than that achievable on the ground. At frequencies of 43 and 86 GHz, this would imply resolution of light weeks to light months in distant quasars and will complement the gamma-ray and X-ray observations. ARISE, then, could also study gravitational lenses at resolutions of tens of $`\mu `$arc-seconds, and as such, could prove important in the detection of charged black holes. However, it is not only resolution what is needed in order to detect the relativistic images. The main problem will be that they are very much demagnified. They would certainly pose a challenge to observations, if ever possible, enhanced by the fact that the relativistic images are closed to the non-relativistic ones, which are much more intense.

## Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge discussions with Salvatore Capozziello and Valerio Bozza (U. of Salerno, Italy). This work has been partially supported by UBA (UBACYT X-143, EFE), CONICET (DFT, and PIP 0430/98, GER), ANPCT (PICT 98 No. 03-04881, GER), and Fundación Antorchas (separate grants to GER and DFT).

## Appendix: Deflection angle in terms of elliptic integrals

It is convenient for the calculations to express the integrals of Eqs. (13) and (20) in terms of standard elliptic integrals.
Eq. (13) can be put in the form

$$\alpha (x_0)=\frac{2x_0}{\sqrt{1\frac{1}{x_0}+\frac{q^2}{x_0^2}}}_{x_0}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dx}{\sqrt{P(x)}}\pi ,$$
(71)
where

$$P(x)=x^4+x_0^2\left(1\frac{1}{x_0}+\frac{q^2}{x_0^2}\right)^1(x^2+xq^2),$$
(72)
is a fourth degree polynomial. The four roots of $`P(x)`$ depend only on $`x_0`$ and $`q`$ and they are real for $`x_0>x_{\mathrm{ps}}`$ and $`\left|Q\right|M`$. Calling these roots $`r_1>r_2>r_3>r_4`$ , the first one is $`r_1=x_0`$ and the others have long expressions (not given here for lack of space) that can be obtained with standard software. Then we can write the exact integral of Eq. (13) as

$$\alpha (x_0)=G(x_0)F(\varphi _0,\lambda )\pi ,$$
(73)
with

$$G(x_0)=\frac{4x_0}{\sqrt{1\frac{1}{x_0}+\frac{q^2}{x_0^2}}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{(r_1r_3)(r_2r_4)}},$$
(74)
and

$$F(\varphi _0,\lambda )=_0^{\varphi _0}\left(1\lambda \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi \right)^{\frac{1}{2}}𝑑\varphi ,$$
(75)
an elliptic integral of the first kind with arguments

$$\varphi _0=\mathrm{arcsin}\sqrt{\frac{(r_2r_4)}{(r_1r_4)}},$$
(76)
$$\lambda =\frac{(r_1r_4)(r_2r_3)}{(r_1r_3)(r_2r_4)}.$$
(77)
The derivative of the deflection angle can be expressed:

$$\frac{d\alpha }{dx_0}=F(\varphi _0,\lambda )\frac{dG}{dx_0}+G(x_0)\frac{F}{\lambda }\frac{d\lambda }{dx_0}+G(x_0)\frac{F}{\varphi _0}\frac{d\varphi _0}{dx_0},$$
(78)
and can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\alpha }{dx_0}}`$ $`=`$ $`F(\varphi _0,\lambda ){\displaystyle \frac{dG}{dx_0}}+G(x_0)\left({\displaystyle \frac{E(\varphi _0,\lambda )}{2(\lambda 1)\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{F(\varphi _0,\lambda )}{2\lambda }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _0)}{4(\lambda 1)\sqrt{1\lambda \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi _0}}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{d\lambda }{dx_0}}+`$ (79)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{G(x_0)}{\sqrt{1\lambda \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi _0}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\varphi _0}{dx_0}},`$
where

$$E(\varphi _0,\lambda )=_0^{\varphi _0}\left(1\lambda \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi \right)^{\frac{1}{2}}𝑑\varphi ,$$
(80)
is an elliptic integral of the second kind with the arguments $`\varphi _0`$ and $`\lambda `$ given above.


format: text

text:
# (Twisted) Toroidal Compactification of pp-Waves

## I Introduction

In addition to the maximally symmetric AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times `$S5 and Minkowski backgrounds, it has recently been realized that there is an additional background for the type IIB string which preserves 32 supercharges, namely the pp-wave.bfhp  As this background is achieved as a Penrose limit of AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times `$S5 bfhp2 ; bfp , string theory on this background has a CFT dual bmn . Remarkably, this CFT is powerful enough to see the perturbative string spectrum. These observations have caused a flurry of interest m ; mt ; bhk ; ikm ; go ; rt ; pzs ; hks ; clp ; as ; bp ; kprs ; tt ; fk ; gns .

Moreover, the pp-wave has 30 isometries—the same number as AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times `$S5 by virtue of the Penrose limit—of which sixteen are spatial and noncompact. These therefore provide a way to compactify the pp-wave to lower dimensions. In fact, the maximal number of commuting, noncompact and spatial Killing vectors is eight, the same number as for toroidal compactification of ordinary Minkowski space to the light cone.

The study of toroidal compactifications has provided a very rich structure of phenomena and dualities. In this paper such a study is initiated for pp-waves. The first step, given after a review of the pp-wave geometry in section II, is to identify spacelike isometries on which to compactify. This is done in section III.

An analysis of Killing spinors, in section III, shows that compactification preserves at least half the supersymmetries, up to $`3/4`$, or 24 supercharges. While surprising, this can occur because of the reduced rotational symmetry of the system, due to the nontrivial curvatures. In gh  an analysis of the central charge matrix gave rise to the possibility of $`3/4`$ BPS states; it would be interesting if the geometry studied here is employing this mechanism.

In section VI, the T-dual solution is given and lifted to M-theory. It is then shown that the M-theory solution also preserves 24 supercharges. This is because the Killing spinors on the IIB side do not involve the compact coordinate. Otherwise there would be “supersymmetry without supersymmetry” duff ; duff2 .

Since the isometries derive from AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times `$S5 isometries, it is possible to find the corresponding quotient of AdS5, which has a CFT dual. As discussed in section VII, the quotient turns out to be one of those previously discussed by Ghosh and Mukhi gm .

In addition we can perform a Melvin-like twist, as was previously done in the flat space context in many papers, including dgkt ; dggh1 ; dggh2 ; rtmel1 ; tmel1 ; tmelrev ; rtmel2 ; tmel ; gc ; dgmm . This breaks all the supersymmetries. In flat space, the result was a tachyon in the spectrum. Understanding this closed string tachyon is a very interesting problem which has been addressed in e.g. gs ; rtt1 ; aps ; tu ; rtt2 ; hkmm ; dv ; my ; s ; dgmm ; af . A closed string tachyon is similarly expected here, the difference being that there should also be a dual CFT description. This could be a good way to get some control over closed string tachyon condensation.

The paper is organized as follows. In section II the supersymmetric type IIB pp-wave is reviewed with an emphasis on the symmetries, their algebra and the introduction of a convenient coordinate system for use in most of the paper. These results are used in section III to identify spacelike Killing vectors and study the supersymmetries preserved by compactification along their orbits. The Green-Schwarz string is quantized on these geometries in section IV. The SO(8) symmetry of the metric means that the quantization of the bosonic part of the string is independent of the choice of spacelike Killing vector. For the fermionic part of the string, we analyse the maximally supersymmetric compactification in section IV.2.1 and the minimally (half) supersymmetric S1 compactification in section IV.2.2. In the latter case, the Hamiltonian is time dependent. The effect on the compactification of adding a twist is analysed in section V. Then T-duality and supersymmetry is discussed in section VI. Finally the AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times `$S5 parent orbifold, and the choices therein, is described in section VII. Section VIII contains some conclusions. Two appendices contain some additional useful formulas. Although most of the text is devoted to compactification on a single circle, in many cases, the results generalize to higher tori in an obvious way. One exception is a compactification on a $`T^2`$ involving the same two coordinates (in the “standard” coordinate system of bfhp ). Appendix A presents a (singular) coordinate system adapted to this compactification. In Appendix B some additional expressions for the Killing spinors are given.

## II The pp-wave

In this section some useful facts about the pp-wave geometry, its isometries and its Killing spinors are collected.

The supergravity solution is bfhp

$`ds^2`$ $`=2dx^+dx^{}4\mu ^2x^ix^i(dx^+)^2+dx^idx^i,`$ (1a)
$`{}_{}{}^{(5)}F`$ $`=\mu dx^+(dx^1dx^2dx^3dx^4+dx^5dx^6dx^7dx^8),`$ (1b)
where $`i=1\mathrm{}8`$, the constant $`\mu 0`$ will be kept arbitrary although it can be set to any convenient value by a coordinate transformation, and $`{}_{}{}^{(5)}F`$ is the self dual Ramond-Ramond (RR) five-form field strength. All other fields vanish. These satisfy the IIB equations of motion, including

$$G_{\mu \nu }=\frac{4}{3}F_{\mu \alpha \beta \gamma \delta }F_\nu {}_{}{}^{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }.$$
(2)
Greek indices run over all the coordinates.

It will be convenient to make the change of coordinates,

$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\hfill x^+& =X^+,\hfill & \hfill x^{}& =X^{}2\mu X^1X^2,\hfill & \hfill x^I& =X^I,I=3\mathrm{}8\hfill \end{array}$$
(3a)
$$\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill x^1& =X^1\mathrm{cos}(2\mu X^+)X^2\mathrm{sin}(2\mu X^+),\hfill & \hfill x^2& =X^1\mathrm{sin}(2\mu X^+)+X^2\mathrm{cos}(2\mu X^+),\hfill \end{array}$$
(3b)
Then the metric takes the form

$`ds^2`$ $`=2dX^+dX^{}4\mu ^2X^IX^I(dX^+)^28\mu X^2dX^1dX^++dX^idX^i,`$ (4a)
$`{}_{}{}^{(5)}F`$ $`=\mu dX^+(dX^1dX^2dX^3dX^4+dX^5dX^6dX^7dX^8).`$ (4b)
In this coordinate system, $`_1=\frac{}{X^1}`$ is a manifest isometry. This is one of the circles on which we will consider compactification. In this coordinate system, $`X^1`$, $`X^2`$ are no longer massive bosons but instead have the quantum mechanics of a particle in a plane with constant magnetic field.

### II.1 Isometries and Killing Vectors

There is an obvious SO(4)$`\times `$SO(4)$`_2`$ symmetry which rotates and exchanges the $`\{x^1,x^2,x^3,x^4\}`$ and $`\{x^5,x^6,x^7,x^8\}`$ subspaces. In fact, 30 Killing vectors were identified in bfhp , namely

$$\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill k_{e_+}& =_+,\hfill & \hfill k_e_{}& =_{},\hfill \end{array}$$
(5a)
$$k_{e_i}=\mathrm{cos}(2\mu x^+)_i2\mu \mathrm{sin}(2\mu x^+)x^i_{},$$
(5b)
$$k_{e_i^{}}=2\mu \mathrm{sin}(2\mu x^+)_i+4\mu ^2\mathrm{cos}(2\mu x^+)x^i_{},$$
(5c)
$$k_{M_{ij}}=x^i_jx^j_i,\text{both }i,j\text{=}1\mathrm{}4\text{ or both }i,j\text{=}5\mathrm{}8.$$
(5d)
These obey the algebra

$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\hfill [k_e_{},\text{all}]& =0,\hfill & & & \hfill [k_{e_+},M_{ij}]& =0,\hfill \\ \hfill [k_{e_+},k_{e_i}]& =k_{e_i^{}},\hfill & \hfill [k_{e_+},k_{e_i^{}}]& =4\mu ^2k_{e_i},\hfill & \hfill [k_{e_i},k_{e_j^{}}]& =4\mu ^2\delta _{ij}k_e_{},\hfill \\ \hfill [k_{M_{ij}},k_{e_k}]& =\delta _{jk}k_{e_i}\delta _{ik}k_{e_j},\hfill & & & \hfill [k_{M_{ij}},k_{e_k^{}}]& =\delta _{jk}k_{e_i^{}}\delta _{ik}k_{e_j^{}},\hfill \end{array}$$
(6a)
$$[k_{M_{ij}},k_{M_{kl}}]=\delta _{jk}k_{M_{il}}\delta _{ik}k_{M_{jl}}\delta _{jl}k_{M_{ik}}+\delta _{il}k_{M_{jk}}.$$
(6b)
In particular, $`M_{ij}`$ are the SO(4)$`\times `$SO(4) rotational generators.

### II.2 Killing Spinors and the Superalgebra

Before listing the Killing spinors, some notation must be introduced. The ten dimensional $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices obey

$$\{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{\mu }},\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{\nu }}\}=2\eta ^{\stackrel{˘}{\mu }\stackrel{˘}{\nu }},\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{\pm }}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{9}}\pm \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{0}}),$$
(7)
where $`\eta ^{\stackrel{˘}{\mu }\stackrel{˘}{\nu }}`$ is the mostly positive Minkowski metric of the tangent bundle. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _p}`$ are products of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices, antisymmetrized with unit weight. The zenbein is bfhp

$`e^\stackrel{˘}{}`$ $`=dx^{}2\mu ^2(x^i)^2dx^+,`$ $`e^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}`$ $`=dx^+,`$ $`e^{\stackrel{˘}{ı}}`$ $`=dx^i.`$ (8)
I have used the cup to emphasize the tangent-space labels; this is important as the following formulas employ this choice of local frame. It is convenient to define

$`I`$ $`=\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{4}},`$ $`J`$ $`=\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{5}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{6}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{7}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{8}}.`$ (9)
In terms of the one-form $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu =\frac{i}{24}F_{\mu \alpha \beta \gamma \delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }`$,

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}`$ $`=0,`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$ $`=\mu (I+J),`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_i`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ı}}I,\hfill & i=1\mathrm{}4,\hfill \\ \mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ı}}J,\hfill & i=5\mathrm{}8,\hfill \end{array}`$ (10)
to each constant, complex positive chirality spinor $`\psi `$ is associated the Killing spinor bfhp

$$ϵ(\psi )=\left[1ix^i\mathrm{\Omega }_i\right]\left[\mathrm{cos}(\mu x^+)\text{l}\text{1}i\mathrm{sin}(\mu x^+)I\right]\left[\mathrm{cos}(\mu x^+)\text{l}\text{1}i\mathrm{sin}(\mu x^+)J\right]\psi .$$
(11)
These obey the Killing spinor equation

$$(_\mu +\frac{i}{24}F_{\mu \alpha \beta \gamma \delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta })ϵ(\psi )=0.$$
(12)
Since there are 32 linearly independent $`\psi `$s, there are 32 linearly independent positive chirality Killing spinors, corresponding to $`𝒩=2B`$ supersymmetry in ten dimensions.

These are acted on nontrivially by the Killing vectors. Specifically, the Lie derivative on spinors is defined by (see fp  and references therein)

$$\mathrm{\pounds }_kϵ=k^\mu _\mu ϵ+\frac{1}{4}(_\mu k_\nu )\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\mu \nu }ϵ.$$
(13)
Then, bfhp ; m

$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\hfill \mathrm{\pounds }_{k_e_{}}ϵ(\psi )& =0,\hfill & \hfill \mathrm{\pounds }_{k_{e_+}}ϵ(\psi )& =ϵ(i\mu (I+J)\psi ),\hfill & \hfill \mathrm{\pounds }_{M_{ij}}ϵ(\psi )& =ϵ(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ı}\stackrel{˘}{ȷ}}\psi ),\hfill \end{array}$$
(14a)
$$\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill \mathrm{\pounds }_{k_{e_{i=1\mathrm{}4}}}ϵ(\psi )& =ϵ(i\mu I\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ı}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\psi )\hfill & \hfill \mathrm{\pounds }_{k_{e_{i=1\mathrm{}4}^{}}}ϵ(\psi )& =ϵ(2\mu ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ı}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\psi )\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\pounds }_{k_{e_{i=5\mathrm{}8}}}ϵ(\psi )& =ϵ(i\mu J\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ı}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\psi )\hfill & \hfill \mathrm{\pounds }_{k_{e_{i=5\mathrm{}8}^{}}}ϵ(\psi )& =ϵ(2\mu ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ı}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\psi ).\hfill \end{array}$$
(14b)
This information will be used to count the number of supersymmetries preserved by compactification.

## III S1 and $`T^d`$ Compactification of the pp-wave

In bfhp , the authors considered compactification along the circle generated by the \[manifest in equation (1)\] isometry $`k_e_{}+k_{e_+}`$.111This was also one of the two isometries that was compactified in rt , in the context of the Penrose limit of AdS$`{}_{3}{}^{}\times `$S$`{}_{}{}^{3}\times T^4`$. The other isometry considered in rt  is one associated with the $`T^4`$. However, that is not spacelike:

$$k_e_{}+k_{e_+}^2=24\mu ^2(x^i)^2.$$
(15)
Though compactification of timelike circles has been considered in hull , for example, such a circle is likely to introduce complications that I do not want to consider here.222After much of this paper was written, clp  appeared which discusses this type of compactification with interesting results. Also, the isometry (15) breaks all the supersymmetries, except at special values of the radius. Instead, there are several isometries that, while not yet manifest, are spacelike of unit norm. Namely, define

$$k_{S_{ij}^\pm }=k_{e_i}\pm \frac{1}{2\mu }k_{e_j^{}},$$
(16)
and note that

$$k_{S_{ij}^\pm }^2=1,ij.$$
(17)
We will use this set of isometries to compactify the pp-wave geometry. (For fixed $`i`$, $`k_{S_{ii}^\pm }^2=1\pm \mathrm{sin}4\mu x^+`$ goes null at $`x^+=\frac{(2n1)\pi }{8\mu }`$.) Note that, in contrast to toroidal compactification of flat space, the isometries (16) are not hypersurface orthogonal.

Although there are many of these isometries, the SO(4)$`\times `$SO(4)$`_2`$ symmetry333Including the $`_2SO(4)`$ element $`x^i,x^jx^i,x^j`$ (with $`i,j=1\mathrm{}4`$ or $`i,j=5\mathrm{}8`$) which takes $`S_{ij}^\pm S_{ij}^\pm `$, $`S_{ik}^\pm S_{ik}^{}`$ and $`S_{kj}^\pm S_{kj}^{}`$, $`ki,j`$. implies that we can, without loss of generality, choose the “$`+`$” sign and $`i=1`$; then there are only two distinct choices of $`j`$, namely $`j=2`$ or $`j=5`$. Although the metric behaviour is the same for both choices, the RR field is quite different.

For the first choice, $`j=2`$, the isometry $`k_{S_{12}^+}`$ is manifest in equation (4). Also,

$$\frac{}{X^+}=k_{e_+}+2\mu k_{M_{12}}$$
(18)
is a Killing vector of the geometry. For $`j=5`$ the RR field is more complicated in manifest coordinates:

$`ds^2`$ $`=2dX^+dX^{}4\mu ^2X^{\widehat{I}}X^{\widehat{I}}(dX^+)^28\mu X^5dX^1dX^++dX^idX^i,`$ (19a)
$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill {}_{}{}^{(5)}F& =\mu dX^+[\mathrm{cos}(2\mu X^+)dX^1dX^2dX^3dX^4\mathrm{sin}(2\mu X^+)dX^5dX^2dX^3dX^4\hfill \\ & +\mathrm{sin}(2\mu X^+)dX^1dX^6dX^7dX^8+\mathrm{cos}(2\mu X^+)dX^5dX^6dX^7dX^8],\hfill \end{array}`$ (19b)
where $`\widehat{I}=2,3,4,6,7,8`$. In particular note that

$$\frac{}{X^+}=\frac{}{x^+}+2\mu \left(x^1\frac{}{x^5}x^5\frac{}{x^1}\right)$$
(20)
is not an isometry of the field configuration. For this choice of circle compactification, then, the light-cone Hamiltonian will be time dependent.

Focusing on the $`S_{12}^+`$ compactification, the nine dimensional field configuration is easily read off ms  as

$`ds_9^2`$ $`=2dX^+dX^{}4\mu ^2[4(X^2)^2+X^{\widehat{I}}X^{\widehat{I}}](dX^+)^2+dX^{\widehat{ı}}dX^{\widehat{ı}},`$ (21a)
$`A_9`$ $`=4\mu X^2dX^+,`$ (21b)
$`{}_{}{}^{(3)}A_{9}^{}`$ $`=\mu X^+dX^2dX^3dX^4,`$ (21c)
where $`\widehat{ı}=2\mathrm{}8`$, $`A_9`$ is the KK gauge field and $`{}_{}{}^{(3)}A_{9}^{}`$ is the dimensionally reduced potential for the ten dimensional self dual five-form field strength.

All of the $`S_{ij}^\pm `$ compactifications preserve at least $`1/2`$ of the supersymmetry, or 16 supercharges. If $`i,j`$ are in the same $`SO(4)`$ subgroup, then $`3/4`$, or 24 supercharges, is preserved. This is seen from equations (14), since

$$\mathrm{\pounds }_{k_{e_i}+\frac{1}{2\mu }k_{e_j^{}}}ϵ(\psi )=ϵ(i\mu Q^{ij}\psi ),$$
(22)
where

$$Q^{ij}=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ȷ}}(\frac{1}{2}_{k,l=1}^4ϵ_{ijkl}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{k}\stackrel{˘}{l}}i\text{l}\text{1})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}},\hfill & i,j=1\mathrm{}4\text{,}\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ȷ}}(\frac{1}{2}_{k,l=5}^8ϵ_{ijkl}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{k}\stackrel{˘}{l}}i\text{l}\text{1})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}},\hfill & i,j=5\mathrm{}8\text{,}\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ȷ}}(\frac{1}{6}_{k,l,m=1}^4ϵ_{iklm}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{k}\stackrel{˘}{l}\stackrel{˘}{m}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ȷ}}+i\text{l}\text{1})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}},\hfill & i=1\mathrm{}4,j=5\mathrm{}8,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ȷ}}(\frac{1}{6}_{k,l,m=5}^8ϵ_{iklm}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{k}\stackrel{˘}{l}\stackrel{˘}{m}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{ȷ}}+i\text{l}\text{1})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}},\hfill & i=5\mathrm{}8,j=1\mathrm{}4,\hfill \end{array}$$
(23)
For the periodic spin structure, the supersymmetries preserved by the compactification are those whose Killing spinors are preserved by the isometry. That is, we want to count the number of complex, constant, positive chirality spinors annihilated by $`Q`$. \[In principle, we should require only $`e^{2\pi iR\mathrm{\pounds }_k}ϵ(\psi )=ϵ(\psi )`$; however, since $`Q^{ij}`$ is nilpotent, this is the same thing. In particular, there are no special radii of enhanced supersymmetry.\] Clearly, these include the 16 spinors annihilated by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}`$. For $`i,j`$ in different $`SO(4)`$ subgroups—the last two lines of equation (23)—the matrix in parenthesis is nondegenerate, so there are no other supersymmetries. When $`i,j`$ are in the same $`SO(4)`$ grouping, then the matrix in parenthesis annihilates an additional 8 spinors. In this latter case,

$$P^{ij}=_+\frac{1}{8}Q_{}^{ij}{}_{}{}^{}Q^{ij}_+,\text{(no sum; }i,j\text{ in the same SO(4) grouping)},$$
(24)
is the projection operator onto these 24 spinors, where $`_+`$ is the projection onto positive chirality spinors.

More generally, we can consider other linear combinations of Killing vectors. However, from the previous analysis it is easy to see that generic linear combinations of $`k_{e_i}`$ and $`k_{e_j^{}}`$ will break all the supersymmetries. Although the addition of any multiple of $`k_e_{}`$ to, say, $`k_{S_{12}^+}`$ does not affect the norm—that is, $`k_{S_{12}^+}+\alpha k_e_{}`$ provides a nice spacelike isometry—such an addition can be removed via a coordinate transformation generated by $`k_{S_{21}^{}}`$; thus there is no need to consider this linear combination. Including $`k_{e_+}`$ or $`k_{M_{ij}}`$ would generically break all the supersymmetries (though we will consider the latter in section V). This leaves one interesting possibility:

$$\alpha k_{S_{12}^+}+\beta k_{S_{56}^+},\alpha ^2+\beta ^2=1,$$
(25)
has unit norm and preserves 20 supercharges, namely those preserved by the projection $`P^{12}P^{56}`$.

Finally, note that if we compactify simultaneously on the circles generated by both $`k_{S_{ij}^+}`$ and $`k_{S_{ij}^{}}`$, then we break half the supersymmetry; namely the half not annihilated by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}`$. This is also true for compactification with respect to both $`k_{S_{ij}^+}`$ and $`k_{S_{ji}^+}`$. For simultaneous compactification on, say, $`k_{S_{ij}^+}`$ and $`k_{S_{ik}^+}`$, $`kj`$, again half the supersymmetry is broken. Although $`k_{S_{ji}^{}}`$ preserves the same supersymmetries as $`k_{S_{ij}^+}`$, the two do not commute, and so the compactification on both does not correspond to a $`T^2`$ compactification. More specifically, in the coordinates (3), if $`S_{ij}^+`$ is compactified on a circle of radius $`R_1`$ and $`S_{ji}^{}`$ is compactified on a circle of radius $`R_2`$, then we must also identify the null coordinate $`X^{}X^{}+8\pi \mu R_1R_2`$.

Thus, we can compactify on at most three circles before we have, at most, sixteen supercharges. The coordinate transformation which manifests the circles is an obvious generalization of equation (3), and in this coordinate system we have obvious generalizations of (4) and (19).

The compactification also breaks some bosonic symmetry. For compactification on $`S_{12}^+`$, the SO(4)$`\times `$SO(4) is broken to SO(2)$`\times `$SO(4), and for the compactification on $`S_{15}^+`$, the residual rotational symmetry is SO(3)$`\times `$SO(3). Also, though $`k_{e_+}`$, $`k_{e_j}`$, $`k_{e_i^{}}`$ are no longer isometries after compactification on the orbit of $`S_{ij}^+`$, the linear combinations $`k_{e_+}2\mu k_{M_{12}}`$ and $`k_{e_j}+\frac{1}{2\mu }k_{e_i^{}}`$ are still isometries. Thus, the residual isometry group is 23 \[$`g`$(SO(3)$`\times `$SO(3))\] or 24-dimensional \[$`g`$(SO(2)$`\times `$SO(4))\] where $`g`$ is the 17-dimensional group generated by the noncompact Killing vectors $`k_e_{}`$, $`k_{e_+}2\mu k_{M_{12}}`$, $`S_{ji}^+`$, $`e_{kj}`$, $`e_{ki}^{}`$. For each additional compactified direction, the rotational group decreases further (to what depends on the details of the compactification; see table 1), but only removes one additional generator from $`g`$.

This is summarized in Table 1 (on page 1).

## IV The Green-Schwarz String on the Compactified pp-Wave

In this section the Green-Schwarz string is quantized on the compactified pp-wave. The focus is on the compactification along the orbit of $`k_{S_{12}^+}`$; that is, $`X^1X^1+2\pi R`$ for the solution (4). Section IV.2.2 will briefly discuss the $`S_{15}^+`$ compactification. The bosons, of course, are impervious to the difference between $`S_{12}^+`$ and $`S_{15}^+`$.

### IV.1 Bosonic Oscillations

The worldsheet coordinates are $`\tau ,\sigma `$ and the Lorentzian worldsheet metric is $`\gamma _{ab}`$. Light-cone gauge is given444Light-cone gauge is allowed since $`X^+`$ obeys a harmonic equation of motion before gauge fixing. by setting $`X^+=\tau `$, $`det\gamma =1`$, $`_\sigma \gamma _{\sigma \sigma }=0`$ and $`\gamma _{\tau \sigma }=0`$. The bosonic action in light-cone gauge is then

$$S_\text{B}=\frac{1}{4\pi \alpha ^{}}d^2\sigma \{\gamma _{\sigma \sigma }[2\dot{X}^{}4\mu ^2\left(X^I\right)^28\mu X^2\dot{X}^1+\left(\dot{X}^i\right)^2]+\gamma _{\sigma \sigma }^1(X^i{}_{}{}^{})^2\},$$
(26)
where overdots and primes denote differentiation with respect to $`\tau `$ and $`\sigma `$, respectively. This is supplemented with the constraint equation, of which the bosonic part \[see also equation (42)\] is

$$X^{}{}_{}{}^{}=4\mu X^2X^1{}_{}{}^{}\dot{X}^iX^i{}_{}{}^{}.$$
(27)
We see that, as usual, $`p_{}=\frac{\delta S}{\delta \dot{X}^{}}=\frac{\gamma _{\sigma \sigma }}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}`$, along with the equation \[which also gets a fermionic contribution in (43)\]

$$\dot{X}^{}=4\mu X^2\dot{X}^1+2\mu ^2X^IX^I\frac{1}{2}\left(\dot{X}^i\right)^2\frac{1}{2p_{}^2\alpha _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}(X^i{}_{}{}^{})^2.$$
(28)
The equation of motion for $`X^I`$ is the same massive equation as for the uncompactified pp-wave m ; mt . For $`X=X^1+iX^2`$,

$`\ddot{X}c^2X^{\prime \prime }`$ $`=4\mu i\dot{X},`$ (29a)
$`\ddot{\overline{X}}c^2\overline{X}^{\prime \prime }`$ $`=4\mu i\dot{\overline{X}},`$ (29b)
and $`XX+2\pi R`$, where $`c=(\alpha ^{}p_{})^1`$. Thus the mode expansion is

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill X& =X_0e^{2\mu i\tau }\mathrm{cos}2\mu \tau +{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{2\mu p_{}}}e^{2\mu i\tau }\mathrm{sin}2\mu \tau +wR\sigma \hfill \\ & +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{p_{}\sqrt{\alpha ^{}}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{2\mu i\tau }}{n\sqrt{c^2+4\frac{\mu ^2}{n^2}}}}\left[\alpha _ne^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau +\sigma \right)}+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_ne^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau \sigma \right)}\right],\hfill \end{array}`$ (30a)
$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \overline{X}& =\overline{X}_0e^{2\mu i\tau }\mathrm{cos}2\mu \tau +{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{p}_0}{2\mu p_{}}}e^{2\mu i\tau }\mathrm{sin}2\mu \tau +wR\sigma \hfill \\ & +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{p_{}\sqrt{\alpha ^{}}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{2\mu i\tau }}{n\sqrt{c^2+4\frac{\mu ^2}{n^2}}}}\left[\overline{\alpha }_ne^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau +\sigma \right)}+\overline{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}_ne^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau \sigma \right)}\right],\hfill \end{array}`$ (30b)
$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill X^I& =X_0^I\mathrm{cos}2\mu \tau +{\displaystyle \frac{p_0^I}{2\mu p_{}}}\mathrm{sin}2\mu \tau \hfill \\ & +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{p_{}\sqrt{\alpha ^{}}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n\sqrt{c^2+4\frac{\mu ^2}{n^2}}}}\left[\alpha _n^Ie^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau +\sigma \right)}+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^Ie^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau \sigma \right)}\right].\hfill \end{array}`$ (30c)
Note that $`\alpha _n`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n,\mathrm{}`$ is a positive (negative) frequency mode for $`n`$ positive (negative) (and large). The mode expansion for $`X,\overline{X}`$ is reminiscent of the mode expansion for the massive scalar, but is rotated by an extra time dependent phase factor $`e^{2\mu i\tau }`$. The canonical commutation relations are

$$\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill [X_0,\overline{p}_0]& =i=[\overline{X}_0,p_0]\hfill & \hfill [X_0^I,p_0^J]& =i\delta ^{IJ},\hfill \end{array}$$
(31a)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill [\alpha _n,\overline{\alpha }_m]& =2n\sqrt{1+4\frac{\mu ^2}{n^2c^2}}\delta _{n,m}=[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n,\overline{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}_m],\hfill \\ \hfill [\alpha _n^I,\alpha _m^J]& =n\sqrt{1+4\frac{\mu ^2}{n^2c^2}}\delta ^{IJ}\delta _{n,m}=[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^I,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^J],\hfill & \end{array}$$
(31b)
and all others vanish. Finally, note that

$`X_0^{}`$ $`=\overline{X}_0,`$ $`p_0^{}`$ $`=\overline{p}_0,`$ $`p_{0}^{I}{}_{}{}^{}`$ $`=p_0^I,`$ $`X_{0}^{I}{}_{}{}^{}`$ $`=X_0^I,`$ (32a)
$`\alpha _n^{}`$ $`=\overline{\alpha }_n,`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^{}`$ $`=\overline{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}_n,`$ $`\alpha _{n}^{I}{}_{}{}^{}`$ $`=\alpha _n^I,`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^I^{}`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^I.`$ (32b)
In terms of oscillators, the bosonic part of the Hamiltonian is (ignoring the zero-point energy, which supersymmetry cancels against the fermionic zero-point energy)

$$\begin{array}{c}H_\text{B}=2\mu ^2p_{}X_0\overline{X}_0+2\mu ^2p_{}(X_0^I)^2+\frac{p_0\overline{p}_0}{2p_{}}+\frac{(p_0^I)^2}{2p_{}}+\frac{(wR)^2}{2\alpha _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}p_{}}\hfill \\ \hfill +c\underset{n>0}{}\left(\alpha _n\overline{\alpha }_n+\overline{\alpha }_n\alpha _n+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n\overline{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}_n+\overline{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}_n\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n+2\alpha _n^I\alpha _n^I+2\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^I\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^I\right)\\ \hfill i\mu (X_0\overline{p}_0\overline{X}_0p_0)+c\underset{n>0}{}\frac{2\mu }{n\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}}\left(\alpha _n\overline{\alpha }_n\overline{\alpha }_n\alpha _n+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n\overline{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}_n\overline{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}_n\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n\right).\end{array}$$
(33)
Note that this is not the same Hamiltonian as in m ; mt ; in this coordinate system that is natural for compactification, the Hamiltonian includes the angular momentum generator in the 12-plane—see equation (18).

### IV.2 Fermionic Oscillations

The Type IIB Green-Schwarz string is written in terms of a pair of positive chirality Majorana-Weyl space-time spinors $`\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=1,2`$. Along with the index $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ come the matrices

$`\rho _0`$ $`=i\sigma ^2,`$ $`\rho _1`$ $`=\sigma ^1,`$ $`\rho _3`$ $`=\sigma ^3,`$ (34)
where the $`\sigma ^i`$ are the Pauli matrices. The starting point is the observation that with sufficient symmetry and the light-cone gauge-fixing

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }=0,$$
(35)
one can immediately write the covariantized action mt ; chsw ; ft

$$S_\text{F}=\frac{1}{2\pi }d^2\sigma \sqrt{\gamma }i\left(\gamma ^{ab}\delta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}+2\pi ϵ^{ab}\rho _{3\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}\right)_aX^\mu \overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu \left(𝒟_b\mathrm{\Theta }\right)^\mathrm{\Sigma },$$
(36)
where, in the Majorana representation $`\overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }=(\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda })^\text{T}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{0}}`$, and the covariant derivative on spinors is

$$𝒟_a=_a+\frac{1}{4}_aX^\mu \omega _{\mu \stackrel{˘}{\sigma }\stackrel{˘}{\tau }}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{\sigma }\stackrel{˘}{\tau }}\frac{1}{25!}{}_{}{}^{(5)}F_{\mu \nu \lambda \sigma \tau }^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\mu \nu \lambda \sigma \tau }_aX^\rho \mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho \rho _0,$$
(37)
where $`\omega _{\mu \stackrel{˘}{\sigma }\stackrel{˘}{\tau }}`$ is the spacetime spin connection and I have included the effect of a background five-form field strength, but no other background fields. (See e.g. mt  for a more complete expression.) The worldsheet metric is that of section IV.1 and $`ϵ^{ab}`$ is a true tensor with $`ϵ_{\tau \sigma }=\sqrt{\gamma }=1`$.

#### IV.2.1 Compactification on $`S_{12}^+`$

The natural coordinate system for compactification along $`k_{S_{12}^+}`$ is that of equation (4), for which the zenbein is

$`e^\stackrel{˘}{}`$ $`=dX^{}2\mu ^2(X^I)^2dX^+4\mu X^2dX^1,`$ $`e^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}`$ $`=dX^+,`$ $`e^{\stackrel{˘}{ı}}`$ $`=dX^i,`$ (38)
and the non-zero components of the spin connection are

$`\omega _{+\stackrel{˘}{+}\stackrel{˘}{I}}`$ $`=4\mu ^2X^I,`$ $`\omega _{1\stackrel{˘}{+}\stackrel{˘}{2}}`$ $`=2\mu =\omega _{2\stackrel{˘}{+}\stackrel{˘}{1}}=\omega _{+\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}.`$ (39)
In particular, note that, for this geometry, four-and-higher-Fermi Riemann curvature terms do not appear in equation (36), due to the gauge fixing (35).

Thus for the background (4), the fermionic action is

$$S_\text{F}=i\alpha ^{}p_{}d^2\sigma \left[\overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}\left(\delta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\tau +c\rho _{3\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\sigma \right)\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Sigma }2\mu \overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}I\rho _{0\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Sigma }\mu \overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{}\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }\right].$$
(40)
This leads to the equations of motion

$`\left(_\tau +c_\sigma \mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\right)\mathrm{\Theta }^12\mu I\mathrm{\Theta }^2`$ $`=0,`$ (41a)
$`\left(_\tau c_\sigma \mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\right)\mathrm{\Theta }^2+2\mu I\mathrm{\Theta }^1`$ $`=0.`$ (41b)
Also the constraint equation (27) should be replaced with

$$X^{}{}_{}{}^{}=4\mu X^2X^1{}_{}{}^{}\dot{X}^iX^i{}_{}{}^{}i\alpha ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}_\sigma \mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda },$$
(42)
and equation (28) gets a fermionic contribution so that it reads

$$\begin{array}{c}\dot{X}^{}=4\mu X^2\dot{X}^1+2\mu ^2X^IX^I\frac{1}{2}\left(\dot{X}^i\right)^2\frac{1}{2p_{}^2\alpha _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}(X^i{}_{}{}^{})^2\hfill \\ \hfill i\alpha ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}_\tau \mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }+i\alpha ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }+2i\alpha ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}I\rho _{0\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Sigma }.\end{array}$$
(43)
The general solution to the equations of motion (41), subject to the periodicity condition

$$\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }(\sigma +2\pi ,\tau )=\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }(\sigma ,\tau ),$$
(44)
is

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Theta }^1& =\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\tau }(\mathrm{cos}2\mu \tau )\theta _0^1+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\tau }(\mathrm{sin}2\mu \tau )I\theta _0^2\hfill \\ & +\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\tau }}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}c)}{2\mu }\right)^2}}}[e^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau \sigma \right)}\theta _n^1\hfill \\ & +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\mu }}n(\sqrt{c^2+{\displaystyle \frac{4\mu ^2}{n^2}}}c)e^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau +\sigma \right)}I\theta _n^2],\hfill \end{array}`$ (45a)
$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Theta }^2& =\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\tau }(\mathrm{cos}2\mu \tau )\theta _0^2\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\tau }(\mathrm{sin}2\mu \tau )I\theta _0^1\hfill \\ & +\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\tau }}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}c)}{2\mu }\right)^2}}}[e^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau +\sigma \right)}\theta _n^2\hfill \\ & {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\mu }}n(\sqrt{c^2+{\displaystyle \frac{4\mu ^2}{n^2}}}c)e^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau \sigma \right)}I\theta _n^1],\hfill \end{array}`$ (45b)
where $`\theta _n^\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are positive chirality Majorana-Weyl spinor-operators for which $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\theta _n^\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$. Comparing to m ; mt , we see that the fermions are rotated like the bosons, but in the spin representation, of course. Half of the $`\theta _n^\mathrm{\Lambda }`$s (or four for each $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}=i`$ and the other half have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}=i`$. Note that the periodicity condition (44) is unaffected by compactification in the $`X^1`$-direction, again due in part to the gauge fixing (35); thus equation (45) holds in winding sectors, as well.

Reality of $`\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ implies

$$\theta _n^{\alpha \mathrm{\Lambda }}{}_{}{}^{}=\theta _n^{\alpha \mathrm{\Lambda }},$$
(46)
as usual, where here, $`\alpha `$ is a spinor index; in particular, the zero modes are self-conjugate. The canonical commutation relations are

$$\{\theta _n^{\alpha \mathrm{\Lambda }},\theta _m^{\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }}\}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\delta _{n,m}\frac{\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}\right)^{\alpha \beta }}{2}\delta ^{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }},$$
(47)
where the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ matrices enforce light-cone gauge by projecting onto the subspace annihilated by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}`$.

The fermionic contribution to the Hamiltonian is (again ignoring the zero-point energy)

$$\begin{array}{c}H_\text{F}=i\mu \overline{\theta }_0^1\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{}\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\theta _0^1+i\mu \overline{\theta }_0^2\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{}\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\theta _0^2+4\mu i\overline{\theta }_0^1\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}I\theta _0^2\hfill \\ \hfill +2\underset{n>0}{}\left[\overline{\theta }_n^1\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}\left(n\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{n^2}}+i\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\right)\theta _n^1+\overline{\theta }_n^2\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}\left(n\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{n^2}}+i\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\right)\theta _n^2\right]\end{array}$$
(48)
Again, this is recognizable as the Hamiltonian of m ; mt  plus fermionic angular momentum in the 12-plane.

#### IV.2.2 Compactification on $`S_{15}^+`$

For compactification along the circle generated by $`k_{S_{15}^+}`$ the zenbein is

$`e^\stackrel{˘}{}`$ $`=dX^{}2\mu ^2(X^I)^2dX^+4\mu X^5dX^1,`$ $`e^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}`$ $`=dX^+,`$ $`e^{\stackrel{˘}{ı}}`$ $`=dX^i,`$ (49)
and more importantly, the field strength (19b) has gained some $`X^+`$-dependence. As a result, the action (36) is now

$$\begin{array}{c}S_\text{F}=i\alpha ^{}p_{}d^2\sigma [\overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}(\delta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\tau +c\rho _{3\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\sigma )\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Sigma }\hfill \\ \hfill 2\mu \overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}Ie^{2\mu \tau \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{5}}}\rho _{0\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Sigma }\mu \overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{}\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{5}}\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }].\end{array}$$
(50)
The action is now time dependent. Despite this difference, the classical solution to the equations of motion is still given by the mode expansion (45), after replacing $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}`$ with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{5}}`$. Note that unlike there, the ordering of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ matrices is important here since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{5}}`$ anticommutes with $`I`$. Explicitly,

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Theta }^1& =\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{5}}\tau }(\mathrm{cos}2\mu \tau )\theta _0^1e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{5}}\tau }\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}(\mathrm{sin}2\mu \tau )I\theta _0^2\hfill \\ & +\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{5}}\tau }}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}c)}{2\mu }\right)^2}}}[e^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau \sigma \right)}\theta _n^1\hfill \\ & +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\mu }}n(\sqrt{c^2+{\displaystyle \frac{4\mu ^2}{n^2}}}c)e^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau +\sigma \right)}I\theta _n^2],\hfill \end{array}`$ (51a)
$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Theta }^2& =\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{5}}\tau }(\mathrm{cos}2\mu \tau )\theta _0^2+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{5}}\tau }(\mathrm{sin}2\mu \tau )I\theta _0^1\hfill \\ & +\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{5}}\tau }}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}c)}{2\mu }\right)^2}}}[e^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau +\sigma \right)}\theta _n^2\hfill \\ & {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\mu }}n(\sqrt{c^2+{\displaystyle \frac{4\mu ^2}{n^2}}}c)e^{in\left(\sqrt{c^2+4\mu ^2/n^2}\tau \sigma \right)}I\theta _n^1].\hfill \end{array}`$ (51b)
So, not surprisingly, we again obtain the rotated uncompactified result.

## V Twisted Compactification

In this section the compactification is done along the isometry

$$k_{S_{12}^+}+\frac{q}{R}k_{M_{34}}.$$
(52)
In flat space, this compactification leads to the Melvin universe—see e.g. dgkt ; dggh1 ; dggh2 ; rtmel1 ; tmel1 ; tmelrev ; rtmel2 ; tmel .555Compared to much of the literature, $`q_{\text{here}}=(qR)_{\text{there}}`$. In particular, $`q_{\text{here}}`$ is dimensionless. I have chosen to rotate in the $`34`$-plane as the circle is traversed, but little will change in the following \[though the rotational symmetry of the resulting space would be SO(2)$`\times `$SO(2) instead of SO(4)\] if the rotation is, say, in the $`56`$-plane instead. Note that—unless $`q`$ is an even integer, at which point the theory is equivalent to compactification along $`k_{S_{12}^+}`$—all the supersymmetry is broken by this compactification.

With

$$Z=X^3+iX^4,$$
(53)
identification on the orbits of (52) is equivalent to the identification

$$\{X^1,Z,\overline{Z},\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }\}\{X^1+2\pi R,e^{2\pi iq}Z,e^{2\pi iq}\overline{Z},e^{\pi q\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}}\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }\}.$$
(54)
The action is the same as equations (26) and (40), but following the identification (54), the boundary conditions are replaced by

$`Z(\sigma +2\pi ,\tau )`$ $`=e^{2\pi iqw}Z(\sigma ,\tau ),`$ $`\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }(\sigma +2\pi ,\tau )`$ $`=e^{\pi qw\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}}\mathrm{\Theta }^\mathrm{\Lambda }(\sigma ,\tau ),`$ (55)
where $`w`$ is the winding number in the mode expansion (30). The effect of the twist is therefore to shift the moding of $`Z`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, when $`w0`$. (If $`q`$ is rational, the moding of $`Z`$ is not shifted whenever $`qw`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ modes are not shifted when $`qw2`$.) With the notation

$$\widehat{x}xx=\text{the fractional part of }x,$$
(56)
then for $`\widehat{qw}0`$, the mode expansion (30c) is replaced by

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill Z& ={\displaystyle \frac{i}{p_{}\sqrt{\alpha ^{}}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n\widehat{qw})\sqrt{c^2+4\frac{\mu ^2}{(n\widehat{qw})^2}}}}\beta _{n\widehat{qw}}e^{i(n\widehat{qw})\left(\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{(n\widehat{qw})^2}}\tau +\sigma \right)}\hfill \\ & +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n+\widehat{qw})\sqrt{c^2+4\frac{\mu ^2}{(n+\widehat{qw})^2}}}}\stackrel{~}{\beta }_{n+\widehat{qw}}e^{i(n+\widehat{qw})\left(\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{(n+\widehat{qw})^2}}\tau \sigma \right)}],\hfill \end{array}`$ (57a)
$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \overline{Z}& ={\displaystyle \frac{i}{p_{}\sqrt{\alpha ^{}}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n+\widehat{qw})\sqrt{c^2+4\frac{\mu ^2}{(n+\widehat{qw})^2}}}}\overline{\beta }_{n+\widehat{qw}}e^{i(n+\widehat{qw})\left(\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{(n+\widehat{qw})^2}}\tau +\sigma \right)}\hfill \\ & +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n\widehat{qw})\sqrt{c^2+4\frac{\mu ^2}{(n\widehat{qw})^2}}}}\overline{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}_{n\widehat{qw}}e^{i(n\widehat{qw})\left(\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{(n\widehat{qw})^2}}\tau \sigma \right)}],\hfill \end{array}`$ (57b)
and if $`\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}0`$ the expansion (45) is replaced by
$`\begin{array}{cc}& \mathrm{\Theta }^1(\sigma ,\tau )=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\tau }\hfill \\ & \times [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{\sqrt{(ni\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})^2c^2+4\mu ^2}c}{2\mu }\right)^2}}}e^{i(ni\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})\left(\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{(ni\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})^2}}\tau \sigma \right)}\theta _{ni\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}}^1\hfill \\ & +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{(n+i\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})\left(\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{(n+i\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})^2}}c\right)}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{\sqrt{(n+i\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})^2c^2+4\mu ^2}c}{2\mu }\right)^2}}}e^{i(n+i\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})\left(\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{(n+i\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})^2}}\tau +\sigma \right)}I\theta _{n+i\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}}^2],\hfill \end{array}`$ (57c)
$`\begin{array}{cc}& \mathrm{\Theta }^2(\sigma ,\tau )=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{c}{2\pi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}e^{\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\tau }\hfill \\ & \times [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{\sqrt{(n+i\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})^2c^2+4\mu ^2}c}{2\mu }\right)^2}}}e^{i(n+i\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})\left(\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{(n+i\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})^2}}\tau +\sigma \right)}\theta _{n+i\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}}^2\hfill \\ & {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{(ni\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})\left(\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{(ni\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})^2}}c\right)}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{\sqrt{(ni\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})^2c^2+4\mu ^2}c}{2\mu }\right)^2}}}e^{i(ni\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})\left(\sqrt{c^2+\frac{4\mu ^2}{(ni\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}})^2}}\tau \sigma \right)}I\theta _{ni\widehat{\frac{qw}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}}^1].\hfill \end{array}`$ (57d)
Although the labels would make more sense in a (complex) basis of eigenspinors of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}`$, the expression is unambiguous. The hermiticity properties and commutation relations are essentially the same as in section IV.2.1.

## VI T-duality

Performing a T-duality of the nine dimensional geometry (21) along the $`X^1`$-direction leads to the IIA configuration666The normalizations are that of bigbook , except that, $`{}_{}{}^{(5)}F_{\text{here}}^{}=\frac{1}{8}{}_{}{}^{(5)}F_{\text{bigbook}}^{}`$.

$`ds_{\text{IIA}}^2`$ $`=2dX^+dX^{}4\mu ^2\left[4(X^2)^2+(X^I)^2\right](dX^+)^2+(dX^i)^2,`$ (58a)
$`B`$ $`=4\mu X^2dX^1dX^+,`$ (58b)
$`{}_{}{}^{(3)}A`$ $`=8\mu X^+dX^2dX^3dX^4,`$ (58c)
where $`B`$ is the Neveu-Schwarz (NS-NS) two-form and $`{}_{}{}^{(3)}A`$ is the RR three-form potential. It is straightforward to check that these obey the IIA equations of motion.

This can be further lifted to M-theory, giving the field configuration

$`ds_\text{M}^2`$ $`=2dX^+dX^{}4\mu ^2\left[4(X^2)^2+(X^I)^2\right](dX^+)^2+(dX^i)^2+(dX^{11})^2,`$ (59a)
$`{}_{}{}^{(3)}C`$ $`=4\mu X^+dX^1dX^2dX^{11}+8\mu X^+dX^2dX^3dX^4.`$ (59b)
This solution preserves 24 supercharges. The M-theory Killing spinor equation is fp

$$0=𝒟_\mu ϵ_\mu ϵ\frac{1}{288}{}_{}{}^{(4)}F_{\sigma \tau \lambda \rho }^{}\left[\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\sigma \tau \lambda \rho }\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu +4\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\sigma \tau \lambda }\delta _\mu ^\rho \right].$$
(60)
The integrability condition, $`[𝒟_\mu ,𝒟_\nu ]ϵ=0`$ gives $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}\stackrel{˘}{11}}\text{l}\text{1})ϵ=0`$. Since the equation (60) is a first-order differential equation, this means that there are precisely 24 Killing spinors, namely

$$ϵ(\psi )=\left[1+\underset{i=2}{\overset{8}{}}X^i\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_i\right]\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\mu }{3}X^+(3\mathrm{\Gamma }^\stackrel{˘}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}})\mathrm{\Gamma }^2(2\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}+\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{11}})\right]\psi ,$$
(61)
with $`\psi `$ a constant spinor obeying $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}\stackrel{˘}{11}}\text{l}\text{1})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\psi =0`$, and

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_2=\frac{2}{3}\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{11}}),$$
(62a)
$$\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{I=3,4}& =\frac{1}{3}\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}\stackrel{˘}{2}\stackrel{˘}{I}}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}+\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{11}})\hfill & \hfill \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{I=5,\mathrm{},8}& =\frac{1}{3}\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}\stackrel{˘}{2}\stackrel{˘}{I}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{11}}).\hfill \end{array}$$
(62b)
The continued presence of the 24 Killing spinors after T-duality may not seem surprising, but it occurs only because the IIB Killing spinors do not carry momentum—or equivalently, are independent of $`X^1`$, as is shown in appendix B. Otherwise, some of the spinors would have winding and would not be visible in the T-dualized supergravity, as in duff2  (see also the recent clp ). Observe also that these M-theory Killing spinors are similarly independent of both $`X^1`$ and $`X^{11}`$.

## VII The AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times `$S5 Origin of the Circle

The pp-wave arises from the Penrose limit of AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times `$S5 bfhp2 ; bfp ; bmn . This is a powerful observation, as has been made clear by the CFT description of bmn . In bfp  it was explained that the Penrose limit preserves the isometries of the original spacetime (though not the algebra). Since we have not gained any isometries by taking the Penrose limit, the isometry on which we are compactifying must correspond to some isometry of AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times `$S5; that is, our compactified spacetime is the Penrose limit of a quotient of AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times `$S5. That quotient will be identified here.

AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times `$S5 has isometry group SO(4,2)$`\times `$SO(6), with generators $`M_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`P_\mu `$, where $`M_{\mu \nu }`$ are rotations and $`P_\mu `$ are “translations” which commute to rotations. (For unity of the presentation, either both $`\mu ,\nu =0\mathrm{}4`$ or both $`\mu ,\nu =5\mathrm{}9`$.) In terms of embedding coordinates $`Y^M`$, where $`\eta _{MN}Y^MY^N=\pm 1`$, the isometries are rotational: with $`M_{MN}=Y^M_NY^N_M`$ for $`M,N=1\mathrm{}4`$ or $`M,N=5\mathrm{}10`$, $`P_\mu `$ is then $`M_{1,\mu }`$ or $`M_{10,\mu }`$. In bfp ; hks , it was shown that under the Penrose limit,

$`P_i`$ $`e_i,`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}M_{0i},\hfill & i=1\mathrm{}4\hfill \\ M_{9i},\hfill & i=5\mathrm{}8\hfill \end{array}`$ $`2\mu e_i^{}.`$ (63)
Therefore, our quotient by the $`k_{S_{12}^+}`$ isometry corresponds to a quotient by the linear combination $`P_1+M_{02}`$. Alternatively, we could map it to a discrete quotient of the sphere by $`P_5+M_{96}`$. Interestingly, Behrndt and Lüst have shown that $`(`$AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}/_N)\times `$S5 orbifolds are U-dual to AdS$`{}_{5}{}^{}\times (`$S$`{}_{}{}^{5}/_N)`$ orbifolds.bl  We see that this obviously holds for $``$-orbifolds as well, at least after taking the Penrose limit. It would be interesting to understand if this is true before taking the Penrose limit, as well.

On the AdS side, this $``$-quotient is one of those discussed by Ghosh and Mukhi gm . Specifically, introducing “light-cone” coordinates in the embedding space,

$`z_1^\pm `$ $`=Y^0\pm Y^2,`$ $`z_2^\pm `$ $`=Y^1\pm Y^1,`$ $`w`$ $`=Y^3\pm iY^4,`$ (64)
and the corresponding AdS5 coordinates

$`z_1^\pm `$ $`=\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _1}{2}}e^{\pm \delta },`$ $`z_2^\pm `$ $`=\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _1}{2}}\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _2}{2}}e^{\pm \alpha },`$ $`w`$ $`=\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _1}{2}}\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _2}{2}},`$ (65)
then the quotient is by $`\frac{}{\delta }+\frac{}{\alpha }`$. This group action is free, and preserves half the supersymmetries. In section III, it was shown that after taking the Penrose limit, it preserves $`3/4`$ of the supersymmetries. It is already known that enhancement of supersymmetry often occurs upon taking the Penrose limit ikm ; go ; as ; kprs ; tt ; fk . Here we have the novel phenomenon that the supersymmetry is enhanced not to the full 32 supercharges but to 24.

The more complicated $`k_{S_{15}^+}`$ mixes the AdS with the sphere via $`P_1+M_{95}`$. The Melvin twist adds some $`M_{34}`$ (or $`M_{78}`$).

## VIII Conclusions

The most general set of spacelike isometries on which one can compactify the pp-wave has been identified. In contrast to Minkowski space, there are a large number of choices for compactification on supersymmetric circles and tori, even before considering the shape of the torus. Some of these are given in table 1. Even more remarkably, one finds compactifications to nine dimensions which preserve 20 or 24 supercharges, and compactifications to eight dimensions which preserve 18 or 20 supercharges. Whether these peculiar amounts of supersymmetry arise in a way related to the $`3/4`$ BPS states of gh  bears investigating. T-duality gives IIA and 11-dimensional supergravity solutions that also preserve precisely 24 supercharges.

It should be noted that it is easy to see a very similar story for the maximally supersymmetric M-theory wave fp . In particular, using the notation of fp , compactification on circles generated by $`k_{e_1}+\frac{3}{\mu }k_{e_2^{}}`$ and $`k_{e_4}+\frac{6}{\mu }k_{e_5^{}}`$ will preserve 24 supercharges.

Understanding the CFT dual to the compactifications described here would be very interesting. In section VII, it was seen that the pp-wave compactification arises from a free, and fairly simple, $``$-orbifold of AdS5, of a type discussed in gm . However, the simpleness of the orbifold could be quite deceptive; it has been noted in hm ; gao  that an orbifold of AdS by a discrete group is typically dual to a CFT on a non-Hausdorff space. For this reason, it may make more sense to try to consider, using the techniques of ks , the equivalent description of the pp-wave compactification via an S$`{}_{}{}^{5}/`$. (Finite orbifolds have recently been discussed in this context in as ; kprs ; tt ; fk .)

This problem is unlikely to improve for the orbifolding that includes the Melvin twist. However the rewards of such an investigation could include a definitive resolution of the fate of the Melvin tachyon. (An interesting analysis of a stable twisted compactification of AdS$`{}_{7}{}^{}\times `$S4 was given in chc .)

Finally we saw that simultaneous compactification on $`S_{12}^+`$ and $`S_{21}^{}`$ results in a noncompact, nonabelian orbifold that preserves 24 supercharges, and includes a null identification. It would be interesting to study this orbifold.

###### Acknowledgements.

I thank B. Acharya, D. Berenstein, C. Hofman, S. Kachru, H. Liu, N. Lambert, J. Majumder and G. Moore for stimulating conversations. This research was supported in part by DOE grant #DE-FG02-96ER40559.

## Appendix A More Manifest Isometries

In the text compactification was considered only along $`k_{S_{ij}^+}`$, but it was noted that it is possible to consider the $`T^2`$ compactification along $`k_{S_{12}^\pm }`$, say. This is made manifest via the coordinate transformation

$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\hfill x^+& =y^+,\hfill & \hfill x^{}& =y^{}+2\mu y^1y^2\mathrm{sin}(4\mu y^+),\hfill & \hfill x^I& =y^I,\hfill \end{array}$$
(66a)
$$\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill x^1& =(y^1+y^2)\mathrm{cos}(2\mu y^+),\hfill & \hfill x^2& =(y^1y^2)\mathrm{sin}(2\mu y^+).\hfill \end{array}$$
(66b)
The field configuration in these coordinates is

$`ds^2`$ $`=2dy^+dy^{}4\mu ^2y^Iy^I(dy^+)^2+(dy^1)^2+(dy^2)^2+2\mathrm{cos}4\mu y^+dy^1dy^2+dy^Idy^I,`$ (67a)
$`{}_{}{}^{(5)}F`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}d\mathrm{cos}(4\mu y^+)dy^1dy^2dy^3dy^4+\mu dy^+dy^5dy^6dy^7dy^8.`$ (67b)
Note that the metric—and the coordinate transformation—is singular at $`y^+=\frac{n\pi }{4\mu }`$. Of course, these are just coordinate singularities. The analysis of section III shows that this compactification preserves 16 supercharges.

## Appendix B Killing Spinors in the $`X^\mu `$ Coordinate System

In the coordinate system (3), and using the zenbein (38), the Killing spinors are

$$\begin{array}{c}ϵ(\psi )=\left[\text{l}\text{1}+\mu X^1\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\mu X^2\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}\stackrel{˘}{1}}iX^i\mathrm{\Omega }_i\right]\left[\mathrm{cos}(\mu X^+)\text{l}\text{1}+\mathrm{sin}(\mu X^+)\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{1}\stackrel{˘}{2}}\right]\hfill \\ \hfill \times \left[\mathrm{cos}(\mu X^+)\text{l}\text{1}i\mathrm{sin}(\mu X^+)I\right]\left[\mathrm{cos}(\mu X^+)\text{l}\text{1}i\mathrm{sin}(\mu X^+)J\right]\psi .\end{array}$$
(68)
Note that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu `$ has the same form (10) in this coordinate and frame. It was already noted in section III, via equation (13), that the Killing vector $`k_{S_{12}^+}=\frac{}{X^1}`$ preserves 24 supersymmetries. In this coordinate system the Lie derivative (13) with respect to $`k_{S_{12}^+}`$ is just

$$\mathrm{\pounds }_{k_{S_{12}^+}}ϵ(\psi )=\frac{}{X^1}ϵ(\psi )=ϵ\left(i\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{2}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}i\text{l}\text{1})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\psi \right),$$
(69)
which (again) vanishes precisely for $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}i\text{l}\text{1})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}\psi =0,`$ so the 24 Killing spinors are independent of the $`X^1`$ coordinate.

Reduced to nine dimensions, the Killing spinor equation (12) is

$$𝒟_\mu ϵ=[_\mu +\frac{i}{4}{}_{}{}^{(2)}F_{\mu \nu }^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^\nu +\frac{1}{6}{}_{}{}^{(4)}F_{\mu \alpha \beta \gamma }^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\alpha \beta \gamma }\frac{1}{24}{}_{}{}^{(4)}F_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }{}_{\mu }{}^{}]ϵ=0.$$
(70)
The integrability condition $`[𝒟_+,𝒟_2]ϵ=0`$ implies $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{3}\stackrel{˘}{4}}i\text{l}\text{1})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\stackrel{˘}{+}}ϵ=0`$ which is another way of demonstrating that there are twenty-four supercharges in nine dimensions. The other components of the integrability condition vanish.