text:
# On the 𝑆𝑈(1,1) Thermal Group of Bosonic Strings and 𝐷-Branes

## 1 Introduction

The physical and geometrical properties of $`D`$-branes have been under intense investigation for some time. In particular, the statistics of $`D`$-branes has attracted a certain attention mainly when formulated in the low energy limit of string theory . Progress has been done in understanding the thermodynamics of black holes and string gases . Since in this limit the $`D`$-branes are solitons of (super)gravity, the statistics of $`D`$-branes has been naturally formulated in the Matsubara approach to quantum fields at finite temperature. However, despite the success achieved at low energies, up to now there has been little progress in understanding the microscopic description and the statistical properties of $`D`$-branes in the perturbative limit of string theory where the $`D`$-branes are described by coherent states in the Fock space of the closed string sector. Due to this interpretation, it is natural do seek for a construction of thermal branes in the framework of Thermo Field Dynamics in which the statistical mechanics is implemented by a thermal Bogoliubov operator acting on the Fock space and on the operators. Along this line of thought, a new approach to thermal $`D`$-branes has been proposed in  by using the basic concepts of Thermo Field Dynamics (TFD)  (which is known to be equivalent to the Matsubara formalism at thermodynamical equilibrium.) The construction from  has the advantage of maintaining explicit the interpretation of $`D`$-branes as coherent boundary states in the Fock space of closed bosonic sector. The very interpretation is used to define the $`D`$-branes at finite temperature .

One of the crucial ingredients of TFD is the thermal Bogoliubov transformation that maps the theory from zero to finite temperature. In particular, one can construct a thermal vacuum $`|0(\beta _T)`$ annihilated by thermal annihilation operators and one can express the average value of any observable $`Q`$ as the expectation value in the thermal vacuum

$$Z^1(\beta _T)\text{T}r[\rho Q]=0(\beta _T)\left|Q\right|0(\beta _T),$$
(1)
where $`\rho `$ is the distribution function, $`\beta _T=(k_BT)^1`$ and $`k_B`$ is the Boltzmann’s constant. In order to fulfill the above requirement, the vacuum should belong to the direct product space between the original Fock space by an identical copy of it denoted by a tilde (see bellow), which justifies the notation used for vectors.

As discussed in , it is possbile to define various Bogoliubov operators for any theory. They form an oscillator representation of $`SU(1,1)`$ group for bosons and $`SU(2)`$ for fermions. If all these operators are taken into account, the thermal transformation is generated by a linear combination of generators of $`SU(1,1)`$. The coefficients of the generators determine if the transformation is unitary or not and if the generator satisfy the basic requirements of TFD, like the tilde invariance of the most general thermal generator and of vacuum . The aim of this paper is to investigate this group in the case of the closed bosonic string and bosonic $`D`$-brane. This represents a part of the construction of a TFD-based formulation of thermal bosonic vacuum of string theory and thermal $`D`$-branes.

The outline of the paper is as follows. In the second Section we discuss the $`SU(1,1)`$ group for the case of the bosonic string and construct the most general $`SU(1,1)`$ thermal transformation. The choice of the parameters in the general Bogoliubov generator is taken such that the thermal transformation be unitary. With this choice we compute the entropy of the string. In the third Section we give the boundary conditions and the $`D`$-brane state under the general unitary thermal transformation and compute the entropy of the $`D`$-brane. In the last section we discuss the results and the main problems raised by implementing the $`SU(1,1)`$ thermal group.

## 2 Thermal $`SU(1,1)`$ Group for Closed String

Let us consider a closed bosonic string in the Minkowski space-time and in the light-cone gauge $`X^0\underset{¯}{+}X^{25}`$. The most general solution of the equations of motion with the periodic boundary conditions $`X^\mu (\tau ,0)=X^\mu (\tau ,\pi )`$ has a Fourier expansion. Upon the quantization, the Fourier coefficients are interpreted as operators on the Fock space of the closed string. They must obey the canonical commutation relations

$$[\alpha _k^\mu ,\alpha _l^\nu ]=k\delta ^{\mu \nu }\delta _{k+l,0},$$
(2)
where $`\alpha _k`$ denote the operators for the right-hand moving modes. Similar commution relations hold for the left-hand moving modes $`\beta _k`$ and the right-modes and left-modes are independent . It is useful to introduce the oscillator operators

$`A_k^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{k}}}\alpha _k^\mu ,A_k^\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{k}}}\alpha _k^\mu ,`$
$`B_k^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{k}}}\beta _k^\mu ,B_k^\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{k}}}\beta _k^\mu k>0.`$ (3)
Following the TFD construction, we construct the direct product between the Fock space of the string and an identical copy of it. The quantities referring to the second (unphysical) copy of string are denoted by $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. Thus, the extended space is given by

$$\widehat{}=\stackrel{~}{}.$$
(4)
The vectors of $`\widehat{}`$ are constructed by acting with the string operators on the vacuum state

$$|0=|0_\alpha |0_\beta =\left(\right|0_\alpha \stackrel{~}{|0}_\alpha )\left(\right|0_\beta \stackrel{~}{|0}_\beta )=\left(\right|0_\alpha |0_\beta \left)\right(\stackrel{~}{|0}_\alpha \stackrel{~}{|0}_\beta ),$$
(5)
where the vacua of the right/left Fock spaces are given by

$`|0_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`|0_\alpha \stackrel{~}{|0}_\alpha =|0,0_\alpha ,`$
$`|0_\beta `$ $`=`$ $`|0_\beta \stackrel{~}{|0}_\beta =|0,0_\beta .`$ (6)
The original string and its copy with each other. Therefore, the operator algebra of the extended system is given by the following relations

$`[A_k^\mu ,A_m^\nu ]`$ $`=`$ $`[\stackrel{~}{A}_k^\mu ,\stackrel{~}{A}_m^\nu ]=\delta _{km}\eta ^{\mu \nu },`$
$`[A_k^\mu ,\stackrel{~}{A}_m^\nu ]`$ $`=`$ $`[A_k^\mu ,\stackrel{~}{A}_m^\nu ]=[A_k^\mu ,\stackrel{~}{B}_m^\nu ]=\mathrm{}=0.`$ (7)
The Hamiltonian of the extended system is constructed by demanding that the thermal vacuum, which will be constructed later, be invariant under time translation. This can be obtained if we define the following Hamiltonian operator

$$\widehat{H}=H\stackrel{~}{H}=\underset{n>0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}n\left(A_n^{}A_n+B_n^{}B_n\stackrel{~}{A}_n^{}\stackrel{~}{A}_n\stackrel{~}{B}_n^{}\stackrel{~}{B}_n\right)$$
(8)
The relation (8) shows that, if the new vacuum state is time invariant, then the copy of the string is non-physical. Indeed, by adding the second Fock space corresponds to furnishing new thermal degrees of freedom rather than dynamical degrees of freedom, necessary for discussing the statistics. Consequently, the physical observables are defined by operators without tilde.

In order to construct a finite temperature model of string, one has to act on zero temperature Fock space and oscillator operators with the Bogoliubov operators which produce a thermal noise .

### 2.1 Thermal Bogoliubov Transformation

The first step in constructing the string theory at finite temperature is to provide a thermal vacuum. This can be obtained by acting on the extended system vacuum (5) with any operator that: i) mixes the operators $`A_k^\mu `$, $`\stackrel{~}{A}_k^\mu `$ for the right modes and $`B_k^\mu `$, $`\stackrel{~}{B}_k^\mu `$ for the left modes; ii) commutes with the Hamiltonian (8) and iii) takes the form of a Bogoliubov transformation . The right/left transformations should be independent from the algebra (7). The general form of the Bogoliubov transformation that fix the form of the generator is given by the following relation

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}A^{}\\ \stackrel{~}{A}^{}\end{array}\right)=e^{iG}\left(\begin{array}{c}A\\ \stackrel{~}{A}^{}\end{array}\right)e^{iG}=\left(\begin{array}{c}A\\ \stackrel{~}{A}^{}\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{cc}A^{^{}}& \stackrel{~}{A}^{}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A^{}& \stackrel{~}{A}\end{array}\right)^1,$$
(9)
where $``$ is a $`2\times 2`$ complex unitary matrix

$$=\left(\begin{array}{cc}u& v\\ v^{}& u^{}\end{array}\right),\left|u\right|^2\left|v\right|^2=1,$$
(10)
and $`G`$ is the generator of the transformation, called the Bogoliubov operator. The operators that satisfy the relations (9) and (10) have the following form

$`g_{1_k}^\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\theta _{1_k}\left(A_k\stackrel{~}{A}_k+\stackrel{~}{A}_k^{}A_k^{}\right),g_{1_k}^\beta =\theta _{1_k}\left(B_k\stackrel{~}{B}_k+\stackrel{~}{B}_k^{}B_k^{}\right),`$
$`g_{2_k}^\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`i\theta _{2_k}\left(A_k\stackrel{~}{A}_k\stackrel{~}{A}_k^{}A_k^{}\right),g_{2_k}^\beta =i\theta _{2_k}\left(B_k\stackrel{~}{B}_k\stackrel{~}{B}_k^{}B_k^{}\right),`$
$`g_{3_k}^\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\theta _{3_k}\left(A_k^{}A_k+\stackrel{~}{A}_k^{}\stackrel{~}{A}_k+\delta _{kk}tr\eta ^{\mu \nu }\right),g_{3_k}^\beta =\theta _{3_k}\left(B_k^{}B_k+\stackrel{~}{B}_k^{}\stackrel{~}{B}_k+\delta _{kk}tr\eta ^{\mu \nu }\right),`$ (11)
where the index $`\alpha `$ refeers to the right-moving modes and $`\beta `$ to the left-moving modes, respectively and the $`\theta `$’s are real parameters depending on the temperature which, for convenience, have been included in the operators. We assume that they are are monotonous increasing functions on $`T`$. It is easy to very that the generators (11) satisfy the $`SU(1,1)`$ algebra

$$[g_{1_k}^{\alpha ,\beta },g_{2_k}^{\alpha ,\beta }]=i\mathrm{\Theta }_{123}g_{3_k}^{\alpha ,\beta },[g_{2_k}^{\alpha ,\beta },g_{3_k}^{\alpha ,\beta }]=i\mathrm{\Theta }_{231}g_{1_k}^{\alpha ,\beta },[g_{3_k}^{\alpha ,\beta },g_{1_k}^{\alpha ,\beta }]=i\mathrm{\Theta }_{312}g_{2_k}^{\alpha ,\beta },$$
(12)
where we have defined

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{ijk}2\frac{\theta _{i_k}\theta _{j_k}}{\theta _{k_k}}.$$
(13)
As we can see from (11), the most general thermal transformation takes the following form

$$G=\underset{k}{}\left(G_k^\alpha +G_k^\beta \right),$$
(14)
where the right/left generators are given by the relations

$`G_k^\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _{1_k}\stackrel{~}{A}_k^{}A_k^{}\lambda _{2_k}A_k\stackrel{~}{A}_k+\lambda _{3_k}\left(A_k^{}A_k+\stackrel{~}{A}_k^{}\stackrel{~}{A}_k+\delta _{kk}tr\eta ^{\mu \nu }\right),`$ (15)
$`G_k^\beta `$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _{1_k}\stackrel{~}{B}_k^{}B_k^{}\lambda _{2_k}B_k\stackrel{~}{B}_k+\lambda _{3_k}\left(B_k^{}B_k+\stackrel{~}{B}_k^{}\stackrel{~}{B}_k+\delta _{kk}tr\eta ^{\mu \nu }\right)`$ (16)
and the coefficients represent complex linear combinations of $`\theta `$’s

$$\lambda _{1_k}=\theta _{1_k}i\theta _{2_k},\lambda _{2_k}=\lambda _{1_k}^{},\lambda _{3_k}=\theta _{3_k}.$$
(17)
The operator (14) generates the thermal transformation. The dependence on temperature is contained in the complex parameters $`\lambda `$.

There is some arbitrariety in choosing the parameters $`\theta `$. This freedom can be used to fix the type of transformation. There are two conditions that are imposed on a general thermal transformation: i) unitarity and ii) invariance under tilde transformation that acts on any arbitrary operator as follows

$$(AB)^{}=\stackrel{~}{A}\stackrel{~}{B},(\alpha A)^{}=\alpha ^{}\stackrel{~}{A},$$
(18)
where $`\alpha `$ is a complex number and $``$ is the complex conjugation. The invariance under tilde operation guarantees the invariance of the thermal vacuum under the same operation. However, working with the thermal $`SU(1,1)`$ implies choosing one type of transformation. The unitarity and the tilde invariance are not always simultaneously compatible . In general, the two conditions will select only the generator $`g_{2_k}`$ from the three generators above and reduce the problem to the TFD with one generator. In what follows, we will stick to the unitarity condition as being the most natural one for the system at hand, i. e. string theory. The other choice will be commented in the final section.

### 2.2 Thermal Vacuum and Thermal String Operators

The thermal vacuum of the system at finite temperature is obtained by acting on the vacuum at zero temperature (5) with the operator (14)

$$|0\left(\theta \right)=e^{iG}|0.$$
(19)
Since the left/right-moving terms commute among themselves, there are two distinct contributions from the $`\alpha `$ sector and the $`\beta `$ sector, respectively. Consider the right-hand thermal vacuum. By applying the disentanglement theorem for $`SU(1,1)`$ , one can write the thermal vacuum under the following form

$`|0\left(\theta \right)={\displaystyle }_ke^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1_k}\left(\stackrel{~}{A}_k^{}A_k^{}\right)}e^{\mathrm{log}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{3_k}\right)\left(A_k^{}A_k+\stackrel{~}{A}_k^{}\stackrel{~}{A}_k+\delta _{kk}tr\eta ^{\mu \nu }\right)}e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2_k}\left(A_k\stackrel{~}{A}_k\right)}`$ (20)
$`\times e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1_k}\left(\stackrel{~}{B}_k^{}B_k^{}\right)}e^{\mathrm{log}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{3_k}\right)\left(B_k^{}B_k+\stackrel{~}{B}_k^{}\stackrel{~}{B}_k+\delta _{kk}tr\eta ^{\mu \nu }\right)}e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2_k}\left(B_k\stackrel{~}{B}_k\right)}|0`$ (21)
where the coefficients of various generators are given by the relations

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1_k}=\frac{\lambda _{1_k}\mathrm{sinh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\mathrm{cosh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)+\lambda _{3_k}\mathrm{sinh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)},\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2_k}=\frac{\lambda _{2_k}\mathrm{sinh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\mathrm{cosh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)+\lambda _{3_k}\mathrm{sinh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)},$$
(22)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{3_k}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\mathrm{cosh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)+\lambda _{3_k}\mathrm{sinh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)},$$
(23)
and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^2\left(\lambda _{3_k}^2+\lambda _{1_k}\lambda _{2_k}\right).$$
(24)
Since the vacuum at zero temeprature is annihilated by $`A_k^\mu `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{A}_k^\mu `$, the only contribution to the thermal vacuum is given by

$$|0(\theta )=\underset{k}{}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{3_k})^{2\delta _{kk}tr\eta ^{\mu \nu }}e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1_k}\left(\stackrel{~}{A}_k^{}A_k^{}\right)}e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1_k}\left(\stackrel{~}{B}_k^{}B_k^{}\right)}|0.$$
(25)
The thermal vacuum of the left-moving modes is constructed in the same way. The total vacuum at finite temperature is the direct product between the $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ vacua. The string operators are mapped to finite temperature by the corresponding Bogoliubov generators

$`A_k^\mu \left(\theta \right)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{iG_k^\alpha }A_k^\mu e^{iG_k^\alpha },\stackrel{~}{A}_k^\mu \left(\theta \right)=e^{iG_k^\alpha }\stackrel{~}{A}_k^\mu e^{iG_k^\alpha },`$
$`B_k^\mu \left(\theta \right)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{iG_k^\beta }B_k^\mu e^{iG_k^\beta }\stackrel{~}{B}_k^\mu \left(\theta \right)=e^{iG_k^\beta }\stackrel{~}{B}_k^\mu e^{iG_k^\beta }.`$ (26)
Similar relations hold for the creation operators. One can easily show that the thermal operators satisfy the same canonical commutation relations as the operators at zero temperature. Alternatively, one can organize the operators in thermal doublets  and obtain the thermal operators by acting on the doublet with $``$ matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}A_k^\mu \left(\theta \right)\\ \stackrel{~}{A}_k^\mu \left(\theta \right)\end{array}\right)=_k\left(\begin{array}{c}A_k^\mu \\ \stackrel{~}{A}_k^\mu \end{array}\right),$$
(27)
where the explicit form of $`_k`$ operators is given by the following relation

$$_k=\mathrm{cosh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)𝕀+\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)}{\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)}\left(\begin{array}{cc}i\lambda _{3_k}& i\lambda _{1_k}\\ i\lambda _{2_k}& i\lambda _{3_k},\end{array}\right)$$
(28)
where $`𝕀`$ is the identity matrix. With all these elements at hand, one can construct a solution of the string equations of motion with periodic boundary conditions at finite temperature. This reduces to replacing the string operators by thermal string operators. Since the later satisfy the usual canonical commutations, the equations of motion and its solution satisfy the Virasoro algebra with the following thermal generators

$$L_m^\alpha \left(\theta \right)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{k𝒵}{}\alpha _k\left(\theta \right)\alpha _{k+m}\left(\theta \right),L_m^\beta \left(\theta \right)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{k𝒵}{}\beta _k\left(\theta \right)\beta _{k+m}\left(\theta \right)$$
(29)
which guarantees that we are working with thermal strings .

### 2.3 Entropy of Thermal String

The entropy operator is defined such that its average value be proportional to the entropy of the bosonic field at thermal equilibrium divided by the Boltzmann’s constant . From (1), the entropy of the bosonic field can be computed as the expectation value of the entropy operator in the thermal vacuum

$$\frac{1}{k_B}0\left(\theta \right)\left|K\right|0\left(\theta \right)=\left\{\underset{k}{}\left[\left(1+n_k\right)\mathrm{log}\left(1+n_k\right)n_k\mathrm{log}\left(n_k\right)\right]\right\},$$
(30)
where $`n_k`$ is the density of particles. Consequently, one defines the entropy operator for the bosonic string as

$$K=K^\alpha +K^\beta ,$$
(31)
where the entropies of the right- and left-moving modes are given by the following relations

$`K^\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\left[A_k^{}A_k\mathrm{log}\left(g{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{1_k}\lambda _{2_k}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^2}}\mathrm{sinh}^2\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)\right)A_kA_k^{}\mathrm{log}\left(1+g{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{1_k}\lambda _{2_k}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^2}}\mathrm{sinh}^2\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)\right)\right]`$ (32)
$`K^\beta `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\left[B_k^{}B_k\mathrm{log}\left(g{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{1_k}\lambda _{2_k}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^2}}\mathrm{sinh}^2\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)\right)B_kB_k^{}\mathrm{log}\left(1+g{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{1_k}\lambda _{2_k}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^2}}\mathrm{sinh}^2\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)\right)\right].`$ (33)
With this definition of the entropy operator one recovers the entropy of  in the case when there is a single transformation generated by $`g_{2_k}`$, that is when $`\theta _{1_k}=\theta _{3_\kappa }=0`$. Also, this choice gives the operator of  when $`g=1`$. One obtains the entropy of the bosonic closed string as the average of (31) in the thermal vacuum

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`k_B0\left(\theta \right)\left|K\right|0\left(\theta \right)`$ (34)
$`=`$ $`2k_B{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\left[\left(g+n_k\right)\mathrm{log}\left(1+n_k\right)n_k\mathrm{log}\left(n_k\right)\right],`$
where

$$n_k=g\left[\frac{\lambda _{1_k}\lambda _{2_k}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^2}\mathrm{sinh}^2\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)\right],$$
(35)
and

$$g=0\left|\stackrel{~}{A}_k\stackrel{~}{A}_k^{}\right|0=0\left|\stackrel{~}{B}_k\stackrel{~}{B}_k^{}\right|0.$$
(36)
Note that the entropy operator for the bosonic closed string has been constructed as the sum between the right- and the left-moving modes treated as two independent subsystems of the string. Thus, the entropy operator obeys the extensivity property of the physical quantity. Also, from (34), we see that entropy of the bosonic closes string goes to zero when the system is in equilibrium, that is

$$n_k=\frac{e^{\left(k_BT\right)^1\omega }}{1e^{\left(k_BT\right)^1\omega }},$$
(37)
and take the limit $`T0`$. This guarantees that third principle of the Thermodynamics is satisfied .

## 3 Boundary States under $`SU(1,1)`$ Transformation

At $`T=0`$, a rigid $`Dp`$-brane located along the $`\{X^a\}`$ directions in the target-space, $`a=1,2,\mathrm{},p`$ at $`\{X^i=y^i\}`$, where $`i=p+1,\mathrm{}24`$ in the presence of the constant Kalb-Ramond field $`F_{ab}`$. The $`Dp`$-brane is described by a superposition of coherent boundary states in the Fock space defined by the boundary conditions in the closed string sector. In order to find the thermal $`Dp`$-brane, one has to write down the boundary conditions at finite temperature. This can be achieved by interpreting the string coordintes and their derivatives as operators and then by acting on them with the Bogoliubov transformation. In the case when one considers just a single Bogoliubov generator , the boundary conditions at finite temperature admit solution. In this section we are going to investigate the case when the thermal transformation is generated by the general $`SU(1,1)`$ generator, i.e. by the Bogoliubov operator (14).

### 3.1 Thermal Boundary Conditions and Boundary States

The boundary conditions in the closed string sector at $`T=0`$ are given by the following relations

$`\left(_\tau X_a(\tau ,\sigma )+F_{ba}_\sigma X^b(\tau ,\sigma )\right)|_{\tau =0}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (38)
$`X^i(\tau ,\sigma )y^i|_{\tau =0}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (39)
One can obtain the corresponding relations for the second copy of the string from (39) by replacing the string coordinates by the coordinates of the tilde string. In order to find the boundary conditions at finite temperature, one substitutes the general solution of the equations of motion in (39) and apply the general Bogoliubov (14)

$$X^\mu (\theta )=e^{iG}X^\mu e^{iG}.$$
(40)
The thermal boundary conditions in terms of string operators at finite temperature represent a set of constraints on the Fock space of the extended system of the following form

$`[(𝕀+\widehat{𝔽})_b^aA_n^b\left(\theta \right)+(𝕀+\widehat{𝔽})_b^aB_n^b\left(\theta \right)]|B(\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`[(𝕀+\widehat{𝔽})_b^aA_n^b\left(\theta \right)+(𝕀+\widehat{𝔽})_b^aB_n^b\left(\theta \right)]|B(\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`[A_n^i\left(\theta \right)B_n^i\left(\theta \right)]|B(\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`[A_n^i\left(\theta \right)B_n^i\left(\theta \right)]|B(\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (41)
for any $`n>0`$. The coordinates of the center of mass and their conjugate momenta do not transform under the Bogoliubov transformation, neither does the constant Kalb-Ramond field . Then, we have to add to the set (41) the following relations

$$\widehat{p}^a|B(\theta )=[\widehat{q}^iy^i]|B(\theta )=0.$$
(42)
Similar boundary conditions should be imposed for the tilde string and the thermal $`Dp`$-brane $`|B(\theta )`$ must satisfy the two of them. It is easy to see that a general solution of the equations (41) and (42) has the following form

$`|B\left(\theta \right)_1`$ $`=`$ $`N_p^2(F,\theta )\delta ^{\left(d_{}\right)}(\widehat{q}y)\delta ^{\left(d_{}\right)}(\stackrel{~}{\widehat{q}}\stackrel{~}{y})\times `$ (43)
$`e^{\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}A_n^{}\left(\theta \right)MB_n^{}\left(\theta \right)}e^{\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\stackrel{~}{A}_n^{}\left(\theta \right)M\stackrel{~}{B}_n^{}\left(\theta \right)}|0\left(\theta \right),`$
where

$$M_\nu ^\mu =[\left(\frac{𝕀\widehat{𝔽}}{𝕀+\widehat{𝔽}}\right)_b^a;\delta _j^i]$$
(44)
and $`N_p(F,\theta )`$ is the thermal normalization constant equal to the one of the tilde system and identical to the normalization constant at $`T=0`$

$$N_p(F,\theta )=N_p\left(F\right)=\sqrt{\text{det}(\delta +2\pi \alpha ^{}F)}.$$
(45)
Note that (45) corresponds to the first solution found in . We interpret this solution as describing a thermal $`Dp`$-brane and postpone to the last section the discussion of the degeneracy of thermal brane in this case.

### 3.2 The Entropy of Thermal $`D`$-Branes

The thermal $`D`$-brane given by (43) represent a superposition of coherent states in the Fock space of the thermal string. Therefore, calculating the entropy of the $`D`$-brane is equivalent to computing the average value of the entropy operator (31) in the state (43). One way of doing that is by expressing all the operators and states in terms of operators and states at $`T0`$. To this end we need the inverse of the Bogoliubov matrix (28) which has the following form

$$_k^1=\mathrm{cosh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)𝕀\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)}{\left(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k\right)}\left(\begin{array}{cc}i\lambda _{3_k}& i\lambda _{1_k}\\ i\lambda _{2_k}& i\lambda _{3_k}\end{array}\right),$$
(46)
By using (46), we can write the entropy operator $`K^\alpha `$ in terms of the thermal operators

$`A_k^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\left[\mathrm{cosh}(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k)}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k}}\lambda _{3k}\right]A_k^\mu (\theta ){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k)}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k}}\lambda _{1k}\stackrel{~}{A}_k^\mu (\theta )`$
$`A_k^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\left[\mathrm{cosh}(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k)}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k}}\lambda _{3k}\right]A_k^\mu (\theta ){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k)}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k}}\lambda _{2k}\stackrel{~}{A}_k^\mu (\theta ).`$
Then, the entropy in the right-moving sector has the following form

$$0\left(\theta \right)\left|K\right|0\left(\theta \right)=\underset{k}{}\{\left[1+2n_k\right]𝒜_k\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{n_k}{1+n_k}\right)+n_k\mathrm{log}\left(n_k\right)\left(g+n_k\right)\mathrm{log}(1+n_k)\},$$
(48)
where

$$n_k=g\frac{\lambda _{1k}\lambda _{2k}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_k}\mathrm{sinh}^2(i\mathrm{\Lambda }_k),$$
(49)
as in (35), and

$$𝒜_k=B(\theta )\left|\underset{\mu =1}{\overset{24}{}}N_k^\mu (\theta )\right|B(\theta ).$$
(50)
In order to calculate the action of the thermal number operator, we expand the exponentials in the coherent state. Since all the operators are at non-zero temperature, we ignore the $`\theta `$ simbol in the notation. For example, by expanding the non-tilde part of the coherent state we obtain the following expression for the $`𝒜_k`$

$$B^2\stackrel{~}{B}^20(\theta )|e^{\stackrel{~}{S}^{}}e^{\stackrel{~}{S}}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{\mu }{}\underset{\nu }{}\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{()^l}{l!}\left(A_n^\mu M_{\mu \nu }B_n^\nu \right)^l|N_m^\alpha |\underset{k}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{\rho }{}\underset{\sigma }{}\underset{s=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{()^s}{s!}\left(A_k^\rho M_{\rho \sigma }B_k^\sigma \right)^s|0(\theta ),$$
(51)
where $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ represents the exponential operator for the thermal tilde part of the brane state and $`B=N_p(F,\theta )\delta ^{\left(d_{}\right)}\left(\widehat{q}y\right)`$. By expanding the products in (51), one is left with the expression of $`𝒜_m`$ in terms of states that describe the number of excitations of string in each direction of space-time and for each oscillation mode. These states are orthogonal and of unit norm and after some short but tedious algebra one can show that the (50) has the following form

$$B^2\stackrel{~}{B}^2\underset{t_1^{1,1},\mathrm{},t_\nu ^{24,24}}{}\underset{s_1^{1,1}\mathrm{}s_\nu ^{24,24}}{}\underset{\rho }{}\underset{\sigma }{}(M_{24,24})^{^{2t_1^{24,24}}}\mathrm{}(M_{1,1})^{^{2t_\nu ^{1,1}}}(M_{24,24})^{^{2s_1^{24,24}}}\mathrm{}(M_{1,1})^{^{2s_\nu ^{1,1}}}s_m^{\rho ,\sigma }.$$
(52)
Here, $`s_i^{\rho ,\sigma }=0,1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$ , $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},n`$ , $`n\mathrm{}`$$`\rho ,\sigma =1,\mathrm{},24`$ represent the indices for all excitation $`s`$ of all frequencies $`n`$ and in all space-time directions. The expression (52) is not normalized. It contains the full dependence on the Kalb-Ramond field in the entropy (48). The temperature dependence of entropy is contained only in the $`n_k`$ terms, more exactly in $`\lambda `$’s. However, it is not allways possible to write down the explicit form of $`\lambda `$‘s as functions of temperature even in the case of a single generator. (The relation leading to this function is obtained by equating the corresponding coefficient in the Bogoliubov transformation to the statistical distribution in the thermal vacuum .) In this case, approximation or numerical methods should be used. The total entropy of the $`D`$-brane is obtained as twice the (48) since the left modes contribute with the same ammount to it.

## 4 Final Discussions and Conclusions

To conclude, we have analysed the $`SU(1,1)`$ thermal group formed by all possible unitary thermal Bogoliubov generators in the case of the bosonic string and $`D`$-brane. The reason for this analysis is that we have constructed the thermal brane and string in the framework of TFD where $`SU(1,1)`$ represents the most general structure underlying the Bogoliubov transformations. By choosing a certain type of parameters $`\theta `$ the most general Bogoliubov transformation can be fixed to be unitary or non-unitary. We have choosen a unitary trasformation in order to preserve the structure of the Hilbert space at zero temperature and the usual interpretation of quantum mechanics. However, the tilde invariance of the thermal vacuum of the theory is lost with this choice, which is an undesirable feature in TFD. The solution is to construct the thermal vacuum as the direct product between the original thermal vacuum, i. e. the vacuum obtained by acting with the Bogoliubov transformation on the vacuum at zero temperature, and its conjugate under the tilde operation. In this case, the thermal vacuum factorizes in a tilde and a non-tilde part as does the vacuum at zero temperature. By using a non-unitary transformation, one would have lost states from the Fock space and the isomorphism between the Fock space and its dual conjugate. The normalization constant of the $`D`$-brane state would have changed and we would have expected that different bra coherent states satisfied the boundary conditions. With two non-isomorphic bra and ket states it would not have been possible to take the average of the entropy operator in one $`D`$-brane state. Note that the general Bogoliubov transformation be simultaneously unitary and generated by a tilde invariant Bogoliubov operator implies that two generators of $`SU(1,1)`$ do not appear in it. Therefore, we might conclude that unless the thermal vacuum is the product of the original thermal vacuum with its tilde conjugate, there is no $`SU(1,1)`$ thermal group whose general transformation be compatible with the unitarity of quantum mechanics and the tilde invariance of TFD.

We have obtained the entropy of the closed string in (34) and the entropy of the bosonic $`D`$-brane as twice the entropy of the right-modes (48). An analysis of this expression in various temperature limits should be performed in an approximation or a numerical scheme for the $`\theta `$’s. However, if one supposes that the $`\theta `$’s are monotonous functions at least at low temperatures, then, by taking $`\lambda _{ik}ϵ`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$, we see that as $`ϵ0`$ the entropy goes as

$$\underset{m}{}(𝒜_m+\delta _{mm}\text{T}r\delta ^{\mu \nu }),$$

which in a normalized theory should be a finite constant. This represents an improved entropy at low temperatures compared with the entropy given in () which is divergent in that limit.

Note that the method used for computing the $`D`$-brane entropy in () and in the present paper are slightly different from the standard TFD. Indeed, since the $`D`$-branes are states in the Fock space of the bosonic string vacuum different from the vacuum state of the conformal field theory, the entropy of $`D`$-brane was identified with the entropy of the closed string in this coherent boundary state. A standard TFD would require to identify the very $`D`$-brane with some vacuum state in a field theory, but no such of approach to $`D`$-branes is known at present. Also, as noted in , our approach to thermal strings is different from the one in literature in which understanding the ideal gase of the bosonic strings and the string field theory were the main motivations to implement TFD in ensembles of strings and in string field theory  much as was done for the standard field theory. In our approach, due to the interpretation of brane, the TFD has been applied to the bosonic vacuum of string theory, i.e. to the two dimensional conformal field theory describing it, rather than to ensembles of strings or string fields. Therefore, we have been working with the thermal bosonic vacuum and its thermal fluctuations some of which are thermal $`D`$-branes.

Let us end by observing that we have considered just a single solution of $`D`$-brane type and not all solutions obtained in . The reason for that is that the other solutions appear when the vacuum is not invariant under tilde operation. If we impose the tilde invariance as is done in TFD, the degeneracy of $`D`$-brane solutions should be removed.

Acknowledgements We would like to thank B. C. Vallilo, P. K. Panda, D. Nedel, B. M. Pimentel, H. Q. Placido and W. P. de Souza for useful discussions. I. V. V. also acknowledge to S. A. Dias and J. A. Helayël-Neto for hospitality at DCP-CBPF and GFT-UCP where part of this work was done. A. L. G. acknowledges a CAPES doctoral fellowship. I. V. V. was supported by a FAPESP postdoc fellowship.


format: text

text:
# Gravitomagnetism in Metric Theories: Analysis of Earth Satellites Results, and its Coupling with Spin

## 1 Introduction

The gravitomagnetic field  is one of the most important predictions of general relativity (GR), which has no Newtonian counterpart, and that emerges as a consequence of mass–energy currents. Though this field has already been detected  it is also important to mention that this fact does not imply that Eintein’s theory of gravity is the correct one. One of the reasons for this last claim stems from the fact that there are several metric theoris of gravity, this will be shown below, that predict exactly the same gravitomagnetic field as GR does, for instance, Rosen’s bimetric theory of gravity . In other words, restricting ourselves to Ciufolini’s measurement outputs we may not conclude if the perturbation of the orbit of the LAGEOS and LAGEOS II satellites was caused, for instance, by GR or by Rosen’s theory.

Clearly, at this point it may be argued that there are other experiments that discard Rosen’s theory as a viable idea, nevertheless, this last argumentation can not be applied to the case of Brans–Dicke (BD) model , in which a free parameter can be used to reproduce the aforementioned results.

An additional point concerns the fact that the gravitomagnetic field has been detected using classical systems, namely its effects upon the orbit of the involved satellites, but the possible consequences on quantum systems, particularly the coupling spin–gravitomagnetic field, has always been forgotten, i.e., usually it is assumed that the coupling orbital angular momentum–gravitomagnetism can be extended to explain the coupling spin–gravitomagnetic field . Neverwithstanding this assumption has not only to be fathomed better, but also it must be subject to experimental scrutiny .

In this work the gravitomagnetic field of any metric theory will be used to analyze the Earth satellite results . It will be shown that several theories predict the same field, GR included. Hence LAGEOS and LAGEOS II results can be taken as a proof that the orbital angular momentum of a body does indeed generate space–time geometry, neverwithstanding these results do not endow general relativity with an outstanding relevance among metric theories. At most it can be claimed that GR is a viable model.

Additionally we introduce two experimental proposals that could lead to the detection of the coupling between intrinsic spin and the gravitomagnetic field. In order to do this, we will analyze, using the PPN formalism , the role that the gravitomagnetic field of the Earth, in the context of any metric theory of gravity, could have on a quantum system with spin $`1/2`$. In particular we will deduce, with the additional introduction of an electromagnetic field, a Rabi formula , which depends on the coupling between the spin of the quantum system and the gravitomagnetic field of the Earth. Afterwards, the continuous measurement of the energy of the spin $`1/2`$ system is considered . This last part of the work is an extension of a previous result , where only GR was considered. It will be shown that these proposals could allows us, not only to confront against future experiments the usual assumption of the coupling spin–gravitomagnetism, but also to bound some PPN parameters and to obtain functional dependences among them.

## 2 Gravitomagnetic Field and PPN Formalism

Let us consider a rotating uncharged, idealized spherical body with mass $`M`$ and angular momentum $`\stackrel{}{J}`$. In the weak field and slow motion limit the gravitomagnetic field may be written, using the PPN parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ , as

$`\stackrel{}{H}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{G}{c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{J}3(\stackrel{}{J}\widehat{x})\widehat{x}}{|\stackrel{}{x}|^3}}.`$ (1)
The case of GR implies $`\frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}=2`$, while BD appears if $`\frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}=\frac{12+8\omega }{8+4\omega }`$. A quite interesting point emerges when we consider the situation of Ni’s theory , where $`\frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}=0`$, i.e., there is no gravitomagnetic field. This example shows that not every metric theory has a non–vanishing gravitomagnetic field, in this sense Ni’s model is closer to the Newtonian situation.

If we now resort to other metric theories of gravity, for instance, Rosen’s , or Rastall’s model , we may readily see that $`\frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}=2`$, in other words, we found three different gravitation theories that have exactly the same gravitomagnetic field. This should be no suprise at all, indeed, it is a known fact that, for instance, Rosen’s theory has identical PPN parameters as those of GR, with only one exception .

These last cases imply that Ciufolini’s measurement readouts  can only be taken as an indirect proof of the validity of GR, i.e., there are at least two additional theories of gravity that predict exactly the same gravitomagnetic field as GR does. Directly they only prove that local inertial frames of reference are influenced and dragged by mass–energy currents, and that this effect is very close to the predictions of some metric theories, GR included. Clearly these experimental outputs do discard at least one metric theory, namely Ni’s model, where $`\frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}=0`$ .

Considering the experimental resolution  we may assert that the aforementioned experiment does not even discard BD, as a matter of fact if we consider that Ciufolini’s results differ from the general–relativistic predictions by a $`20\%`$ percent, then we may deduce that in connection with BD this means that the free parameter of this theory ($`\omega `$) satisfies the condition $`\omega [3.6,3.0]`$. In other words, not only GR, Rosen, or Rastall s theories match with the experiment, it is also possible to find and interval for $`\omega `$ such that BD reproduces the measurement outputs.

Some interesting conclusions may be drawn if we consider Lee’s theory . If we analyze this model in the context of the experimental results , then we may impose bounds upon an expression that involves three of its PPN parameters ($`e`$, $`c_0`$, and $`c_1`$)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{4\sqrt{c_0c_1}}}[0.9,1.3],`$ (2)
which means that $`e`$ is a function of $`c_0c_1`$. In other words, the arbitrary parameter $`e`$ is, through the gravitomagnetic effect, given as a function of the cosmological variables $`c_0`$ and $`c_1`$. Additionally from this functional dependence the two remaining arbitrary parameters of this model , $`\kappa _1`$ and $`\kappa _2`$, are also fixed as a function of the cosmological variables.

## 3 Coupling Spin–Gravitomagnetism in Metric Theories

Let us consider a spin $`1/2`$ system immersed in the gravitomagnetic field given by expression (1). We will assume that the expression that describes the precession of orbital angular momentum can be also used to the description of the dynamics in the case of intrinsic spin. In the context of GR this is a usual assumption , though if we adopt a more critical position this fact has to be put under experimental scrutiny, moreover it has to be underlined that up to now there is a lack of experimental evidence in this direction.

Let us now denote the angular momentum of our spherical body by $`\stackrel{}{J}=J\widehat{z}`$, being $`\widehat{z}`$ the unit vector along the direction of the angular momentum. Our quantum particle is prepared such that $`\stackrel{}{S}=S_z\widehat{z}`$. For simplicity we will also assume that our system carries vanishing small velocity and acceleration, and that it is located on the $`z`$–axis, with coordinate $`Z`$.

Following this analogy between gravitomagnetism and magnetism we may now write down the interaction Hamiltonian (acting in the two–dimensional spin space of our spin $`1/2`$ system) which gives the coupling between $`\stackrel{}{H}`$ and the spin, $`\stackrel{}{S}`$, of our particle.

$`H=\stackrel{}{S}\stackrel{}{H}.`$ (3)
With (1) we may rephrase this Hamiltonian as

$`H=\left({\displaystyle \frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{GJ\mathrm{}}{c^2Z^3}}[|+><+||><|].`$ (4)
Here $`|+>`$ and $`|>`$ represent the eigenkets of $`S_z`$. Clearly, the introduction of the gravitomagnetic field renders two energy states, i.e., it breaks the existing symmetry in the Hilbert spin–space.

$`E_{(+)}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{GJ\mathrm{}}{c^2Z^3}},`$ (5)
$`E_{()}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{GJ\mathrm{}}{c^2Z^3}},`$ (6)
where $`E_{(+)}`$ ($`E_{()}`$) is the energy of the spin state $`+\mathrm{}/2`$ ($`\mathrm{}/2`$). Let us now define the frequency

$`\mathrm{\Omega }=(E_{(+)}E_{()})/\mathrm{}=2\left({\displaystyle \frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{GJ}{c^2Z^3}}.`$ (7)
But this analogy between gravitomagnetism and magnetism allows us to consider the emergence of Rabi transitions  (with the introduction of a rotating magnetic field), in which the transition probabilities will depend upon the coupling between the intrinsic spin of our quantum system and the gravitomagnetic field of $`M`$. Thus, in principle, gravitomagnetism could be detected by means of Rabi transitions.

In order to do this let us now introduce a rotating magnetic field, which, at the point where the particle is located, has the following form

$`\stackrel{}{b}=b\left[cos(wt)\widehat{x}+sin(wt)\widehat{y}\right],`$ (8)
where $`\widehat{x}`$ and $`\widehat{y}`$ are two unit vectors perpendicular to the $`z`$–axis, and $`b`$ is a constant magnetic field.

Looking for a solution in the form $`|\alpha >=c_{(+)}(t)|+>+c_{()}(t)|>`$, we find, assuming that our quantum system has been initially prepared such that $`c_{()}(0)=1`$ and $`c_{(+)}(0)=0`$, that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{|c_{()}(t)|^2}{|c_{()}(t)|^2+|c_{(+)}(t)|^2}}=\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{(\frac{eb}{2mc\mathrm{\Gamma }})^2sin^2(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)}{cos^2(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+\frac{(w\mathrm{\Omega })^2}{4\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}sin^2(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)}}\right]^1.`$ (9)
Rabi transitions depend upon the coupling between spin and the gravitomagnetic field, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\sqrt{(\frac{eb}{2mc})^2+\frac{(w\mathrm{\Omega })^2}{4}}`$. This frequency allows us, in principle, to detect the metric theory that generates this transition, up to a class defined by those metric theories that have the same value of $`\frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}`$.

Let us now measure the energy of our spin $`1/2`$ system, such that this experiment lasts a time $`T`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ denotes the resolution of the experimental device. From previous work  we expect the inhibition of the evolution of our system, this is the so called quantum Zeno effect. Proceeding in a similar way as in  we find that the probability of having as a measurement output the state $`|>`$ is (assuming that $`\frac{(E_{(+)}E_{()})^4}{4T^2\mathrm{\Delta }E^4}>\gamma ^2/\mathrm{}^2`$) is

$`P_{()}(t)=\left\{1+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}^2(\frac{\gamma }{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}t)}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^2[\mathrm{cosh}(\frac{\gamma }{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}t)+\frac{\mathrm{}(E_{(+)}E_{()})^2}{2T\gamma \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\mathrm{\Delta }E^2}\mathrm{sinh}(\frac{\gamma }{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}t)]^2}}\right\}^1,`$ (10)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}=\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{}^2(E_{(+)}E_{()})^4}{4T^2\gamma ^2\mathrm{\Delta }E^4}1}`$, $`\gamma =\frac{eb\mathrm{}}{2mc}`$.

In order to compare the predictions coming from different metric theories, let us now denote with $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^{(r)}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(r)}`$ the corresponding frequencies that appear when $`\frac{7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{4}=2`$, a condition that comprises GR. Then the last probability becomes ($`\alpha =\frac{|7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2|}{8}`$)

$`P_{()}(t)=\left\{1+\left[\alpha ^2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^{(r)}\mathrm{coth}(\alpha ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\mathrm{}}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}^{(r)}t)+\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^3(\mathrm{\Omega }^{(r)})^2}{4T\gamma \mathrm{\Delta }E^2}}\right]^2\right\}^1.`$ (11)
Expression (11) gives us the possibility of imposing bounds on some PPN parameters. For instance, if we take Lee’s gravitational theory  (where $`\frac{|7\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2|}{8}=\frac{e}{4\sqrt{c_0c_1}}`$), then we may obtain $`\frac{e}{4\sqrt{c_0c_1}}`$ as a function of $`P_{()}(t)`$ and of the remaining experimental variables. Hence we would obtain, for instance, $`e`$ as a function of $`\sqrt{c_0c_1}`$. This renders a possibility of testing the validity of the assumption concerning the interaction betwen spin and gravitomagnetism. Indeed, in this context we have a functional dependence between $`e`$ and $`\sqrt{c_0c_1}`$, and this result could be confronted with expression (2)), which is a consequence of an experiment that involves orbital angular momentum, and not spin.

It is readily seen that though here we have employed Lee’s model the aforementioned argument may be used to analyze the validity of this ubiquitous assumption in the context of other metric theories of gravity, including GR. For instance, in the case of the so called BSLL bimetric theory , two arbitray parameters, $`a`$ and $`K`$, and two cosmological variables, $`\omega _0`$ and $`\omega _1`$, would be involved in the corresponding functional dependences. In other words, Ciufolini’s experiment, and the results that would come from (11), would allow us to refute or validate, upon experimental grounds, this Ansatz. This would be done finding the bounds upon the corresponding PPN parameters, that  imposes, and then check them with those bounds appearing as a consequence of (11).

## 4 Conclusions

In this work the gravitomagnetic field of any metric theory has been used to analyze the Earth satellite results. It was shown that there are several theories which have exactly the same kind of prediction that appears in connection with GR. Hence LAGEOS results are only an indirect proof of the validity of GR. Nevertheless they allow us, not only to discard some theories, for instance, Ni’s model, but also to find some bounds and functional dependences among PPN parameters.

In this context it is noteworthy to comment that the bounds found for the BD case ($`\omega [3.6,3.0]`$) have an interesting connection with the existence of black holes that are absent in GR , where this possibility appears if $`\omega [5/2,3/2)`$. This last statement may be rephrased claiming that the LAGEOS results contain the possibility of having black holes which would not appear in GR.

Additionally we introduced two experimental proposals that could allow us to confront, against future experiments, the usual assumption concerning the interaction spin–gravitomagnetism. It was shown that our quantum expression depends critically upon the PPN parameters of the involved theory, and therefore they could be employed as tool to check, experimentally, the validity of this Ansatz, where Ciufolini’s results would be used as a confronting framework for the results obtained at quantum level.

The confirmation of the Zeno quantum effect  sets a sound background for the present proposal, though several experimental issues need to be addressed yet, in order to say something about its feasibility, for instance, how to screen the quantum system from external perturbations, as the magnetic field of the Earth.

Acknowledgments.

The author would like to thank A. A. Cuevas–Sosa for his help. This work was partially supported by CONACYT (México) Grant No. I35612–E.


text:
# Progressive motion of an ac-driven kink in an annular damped system

## I Introduction

It is well known that progressive motion of topological solitons (kinks ) in lossy media can be supported by a dc (constant) field which couples to the soliton’s topological charge review . In this case, the kink is, effectively, a quasiparticle. The same quasiparticle approximation strongly suggests that ac (time-periodic with zero mean value) field(s) applied to the kink in an infinitely long homogeneous system can only give rise to its oscillatory motion.

A more sophisticated possibility is to drive a kink by a pure ac force in a lossy system subjected to a periodic spatial modulation. In particular, spatial periodicity is an inherent feature of discrete systems (dynamical lattices). As it was first predicted in an analytical form for damped lattices of the Frenkel-Kontorova (FK) and Toda types in Refs. Bonilla  and Toda , respectively, and for a periodically modulated lossy continuum system of the sine-Gordon (sG) type in Ref. Bob , resonances (of different orders) between the time-periodic driving force and periodic passage of a moving kink through the spatial inhomogeneities make it possible to support progressive motion of the kink without any dc field. This mechanism selects absolute values of the mean velocity of the ac-driven kink which provide for the resonance of the order $`m:n`$,

$$u=\frac{m\omega L}{2\pi n},$$
(1)
where $`\omega `$ and $`L`$ are the frequency of the ac drive and the period of the spatial modulation. The sign of the velocity is determined by a random initial push applied to the kink. While the velocity selected by the locking condition (1) does not depend on the amplitude of the ac drive, the driven progressive motion cannot take place unless the drive’s amplitude $`ϵ`$ exceeds a certain minimum (threshold) value $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thr}}`$, which is usually proportional to the friction coefficient Bonilla ; Toda ; Bob .

The effect was generalized to include a case when a combination of ac and dc fields is applied Mario . In this case, a constant-velocity step is predicted, in the form of an ac-frequency-locked value (1) of the mean velocity of the driven kink in a finite interval of values of the dc component of the drive.

The possibility of stable ac-driven motion of the soliton in the lossy Toda lattice has been later demonstrated in simulations Jarmo  and in a laboratory experiment with an electrical transmission line described by this model Tom . Search for such regimes in FK models turned out to be more difficult, but simulations have finally demonstrated that the soliton in the form of a dislocation may be driven with a nonzero mean velocity by the ac force Giovanni .

In terms of physical applications, the most appropriate medium where these effects may be realized is provided by long Josephson junctions (LJJs) Bob ; Mario , which support topological solitons in the form of trapped fluxons (magnetic-flux quanta Barone ). A convenient way to implement the periodic spatial modulation in LJJ is to apply constant (dc) magnetic field to an annular (and sufficiently long) junction, with the field’s vector lying in the plane of the annular junction. In this case, the full length of the ring-shaped junction plays the role of the modulation period $`L`$ in Eq. (1). Note that the use of the LJJ of the annular shape is very natural also because it preserves the number of fluxons trapped in it. The necessary drive can be readily provided by ac electric bias current distributed along the junction.

As it was first proposed in Ref. Denmark , this configuration gives rise to a harmonic spatial modulation in the corresponding sG model, the modulation amplitude being proportional to the external magnetic field (the perturbation generated by the magnetic field is formally tantamount to an additional spatially modulated dc drive with zero average). The resonant relation (1) applies to this case, the period $`L`$ being the circumference of the annular junction, as it was mentioned above. Experimental observation of the ac-driven motion of a fluxon in the annular LJJ in the presence of the constant magnetic field was reported in Ref. Lyosha , in the form of nonzero dc voltage across the junction, induced by ac bias current applied to it.

A related issue is progressive motion of the fluxon under the action of a pure ac drive, or even a random drive, in the so-called ratchet (asymmetric) effective potential Goldobin:RatchetT . However, a principal difference is that, in the case of the ratchet, there is an a priori selected preferred direction of motion. Experimental realization of a ratchet for fluxons in LJJs was very recently reported in Ref. Carapella:RatchetE .

Thus, ac-driven progressive motion of a topological soliton in an indefinitely long lossy system can only be possible if it is assisted by the spatial periodic modulation. The objective of this work is to show, both numerically and analytically, that, quite surprisingly, the ordinary spatially uniform ac drive may support progressive, on average, motion of a fluxon in either direction in the perfectly uniform annular junction with non-zero losses, provided that the amplitude of the drive exceeds a certain threshold value. The effect is clearly stipulated by the finite size of the ring-like junction, being possible because a fluxon perturbed by the driving field may emit small-amplitude (quasi-linear) waves (radiation, alias “plasmons” or “phonons”) propagating along the junction and eventually hitting the same fluxon.

We note that a somewhat similar effect was observed in numerical simulations reported in recent preprints Salerno ; Dresden , which, however, was related to the above-mentioned ratchet mechanism supporting unidirectional motion of ac-driven fluxons, and the ac drive was always a two-frequency one. It was stated that the progressive motion is possible due to the simultaneous action of driving forces oscillating at frequencies $`\omega `$ and $`2\omega `$ in the absence of static spatial potential. We stress that in our work the ac drive is always represented by a single-frequency harmonic.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Numerical results which show the ac-driven progressive motion of the fluxon are displayed in section II. A theoretical explanation, that reflects our understanding of the effect, which is based on interaction of the fluxon with its own radiation “tails”, is set forth in section III. Comparison of the analytical and numerical results is presented in section IV, and section V concludes the work.

## II Numerical results

### II.1 The model and computational procedure

The ac-driven weakly damped annular Josephson junction is described by the well-known perturbed sG equation for the Josephson phase $`\varphi (x,t)`$ Barone ,

$$\varphi _{xx}\varphi _{tt}\mathrm{sin}\varphi =\alpha \varphi _t\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}\mathrm{sin}(\omega t),$$
(2)
where the subscripts stand for the partial derivatives, the coordinate $`x`$, running along the junction, and the time $`t`$ are normalized so that the Josephson penetration length and plasma frequency are both equal to $`1`$, $`\alpha `$ is the damping coefficient, and $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$ is the amplitude of ac drive. In the infinite system without perturbations ($`\alpha =\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}=0`$), the fluxon is described by the kink solution to the sG equation,

$$\varphi _{\mathrm{fl}}=4\mathrm{arctan}\left[\mathrm{exp}\left(\sigma \frac{x\xi (t)}{\sqrt{1u^2}}\right)\right],$$
(3)
where $`u`$ is the velocity of the fluxon, $`\sigma =\pm 1`$ is its polarity, and $`\xi `$ is the instantaneous coordinate of its center, which is $`\xi (t)=\xi _0+ut`$ in the case of free motion of the fluxon. If a single fluxon is trapped in the annular junction, Eq. (2) is supplemented by the boundary conditions (b.c.)

$`\varphi (L,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi (0,t)+2\pi ,`$ (4)
$`\varphi _x(L,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _x(0,t),`$ (5)
where $`L`$ is the circumference of the ring.

Equation (2) with b.c. (4) and (5) was simulated by means of the “StkJJ” software package, described in detail elsewhere StkJJ . The results have been checked by comparing them with simulations carried out with the “Soliton” package backbend-99 , and good agreement was found in all the cases considered.

The simulations were performed as follows. We started with an initial state corresponding to a fluxon trapped in the system at the zero amplitude of ac drive. Then the amplitude was increased by small steps $`\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$, each time calculating the average dc voltage $`V_{\mathrm{dc}}`$ across the junction,

$`V_{\mathrm{dc}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi TL}}{\displaystyle _0^T}𝑑t{\displaystyle _0^L}𝑑x\varphi _t(x,t)`$ (6)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi TL}}{\displaystyle _0^L}𝑑x\left[\varphi (x,T)\varphi (x,0)\right],`$
where $`T`$ is a sufficiently large time-averaging interval \[in physical units, the average voltage is given by the expression (6) multiplied by the magnetic flux quantum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$\]. The value of $`T`$ was taken as multiple of the ac-drive’s period $`2\pi /\omega `$.

The dependence $`V_{\mathrm{dc}}(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}})`$ characterizes the average velocity of the progressive motion of the fluxon in the annular junction. Indeed, substituting a solution for the moving fluxon in the form $`\varphi (x,t)=`$ $`\varphi _{\mathrm{fl}}(x\xi (t))`$, see Eq. (3), into the first integral expression in Eq. (6), we obtain

$`V_{\mathrm{dc}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi TL}}{\displaystyle _0^T}𝑑t{\displaystyle \frac{d\xi }{dt}}{\displaystyle _0^L}𝑑x\varphi _{\mathrm{fl}}^{}\left(x\xi (t)\right)`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi TL}}{\displaystyle _0^T}𝑑t{\displaystyle \frac{d\xi }{dt}}\left[\varphi _{\mathrm{fl}}(L,t)\varphi _{\mathrm{fl}}(0,t)\right]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{TL}}{\displaystyle _0^T}𝑑t{\displaystyle \frac{d\xi }{dt}},`$
where b.c. (5) was used. A natural definition of the fluxon’s average velocity being

$$\overline{u}=\frac{1}{T}_0^T𝑑t\frac{d\xi }{dt},$$

Eq. (7) yields an expression for the average velocity in terms of the average dc voltage,

$$\overline{u}=LV_{\mathrm{dc}}.$$
(8)
The results of the simulations are displayed below in the form $`\overline{u}=\overline{u}(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}})`$, using numerically found dependencies $`V_{\mathrm{dc}}(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}})`$ and the relation (8). This way of the presentation of results is the most appropriate one if the objective is to look for dynamical regimes with a nonzero average velocity of the ac-driven kink.

For some values of $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$ the motion of fluxon is apparently chaotic (see below). In such cases, the average velocity calculated with Eq. 7 will not converge as $`T\mathrm{}`$. To avoid this problem, we used two different averaging procedures:

* (i) The averaging was made simply over one period $`2\pi /\omega `$ of the ac drive, and the amplitude $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$ was changed in extremely small steps, $`\delta \gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}=0.0001`$, while, otherwise, $`\delta \gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}=0.01`$ is used. This, in a sense, means that instead of one point on the $`\overline{u}(\gamma _ac)`$ dependence we get 100 closely situated points. If the dynamics is chaotic those 100 points will have large spread in $`\overline{u}`$. On the other hand, all the points will give almost equal values of $`\overline{u}`$ if the dynamics is regular and averaging converges. Although some artifacts may appear around bifurcation points, this technique provides very good insight into dynamical states of the system.
* (ii) The averaging was performed iteratively for gradually increasing value of $`T`$ until the convergence of $`\overline{u}`$ with the accuracy $`0.001`$ was reached, but not longer than for $`T=1000`$. In this case, for the non-chaotic states the averaging gives the true value of equilibrium average velocity $`\overline{u}`$, while for chaotic states averaging was interrupted at $`T=1000`$, and the corresponding non-converged value of $`\overline{u}`$ was included into the plot.

Results produced by means of both methods will be displayed below.

### II.2 The ac-driven progressive motion

First, we present dependencies $`\overline{u}(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}})`$ generated by the averaging method (i). Four characteristic examples of the dependencies, obtained by increasing (gray points) and decreasing (black points) the drive’s amplitude $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$ for the annular LJJ of the length $`L=10`$, with the dissipation constant $`\alpha =0.1`$ and four different values of the driving frequency $`\omega `$, are shown in Fig. 1. In Fig. 1(a), corresponding to $`\omega =0.75`$, the average velocity of the fluxon remains zero in the region $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}<0.38`$. However, in the interval $`0.38<\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}<0.6`$ the average velocity is different from zero, which means that the fluxon moves, on average, in one direction. As one sees in Fig. 1 (a), the signs of the average velocity are different for the branches of the characteristic $`\overline{u}(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}})`$ corresponding to “sweeping up” and “sweeping down”, i.e., increasing and decreasing $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$. Due to the symmetry of the system, these signs are actually picked up randomly, depending on the initial conditions and peculiarities of the simulations, such as the way $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$ was varied.

At the frequency $`\omega =1.05`$, corresponding to Fig. 1(b), the fluxon is set into motion in the region $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}>0.1`$. The average velocity $`\overline{u}`$ increases with $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$, but at $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}0.26`$ a transition to a chaotic-like behavior takes place. In the latter case, the averaging over a long time interval does not produce any definite value of the mean velocity. Closer inspection of this region shows that we are dealing not with true chaos, but rather with a deterministic quasi-periodic regime with a nonzero average velocity. In particular, the fundamental frequency of the corresponding time series is, effectively, incommensurate with the ac driving frequency in this case, that is why the average velocity cannot be effectively calculated using the algorithm described above.

Continuing the consideration of Fig. 1(b), we notice a split branch in the interval $`0.48<\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}<0.54`$, where the average velocity is $`\overline{u}0.3`$. Accurate inspection shows that the averaging during one period yields a point belonging to one branch, while averaging over the next period produces a point situated on the other branch, and so on. This means that the fundamental frequency of the oscillatory component of the fluxon’s motion is half the driving frequency. While generation of higher harmonics is common to all nonlinear systems, the appearance of sub-harmonics is a more specific effect, implying the existence of a certain form of parametric instability. For larger values of $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$, the system enters the region of chaos, which is shortly interrupted by a deterministic branch with a nonzero average velocity in the interval $`0.75<\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}<0.80`$.

For driving frequencies that are $`10\%20\%`$ higher than the Josephson plasma frequency (which is $`1`$ in the notation adopted above), one can observe the fluxon’s motion with a nonzero average velocity in a broad range of $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$, see Figs. 1(c) and (d). It is noteworthy that the average velocity may attain relatively large values, which become comparable to the Swihart velocity of the junction ($`1`$ in our notation). For instance, in Fig. 1(d) $`\overline{u}0.5`$ at $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}=0.5`$, and reaches the value $`0.7`$ for larger values of $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$.

It is also interesting to note that the dependence $`u(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}})`$ shown in Fig. 1(d) features an additional step at $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}0.6`$, which suggests that there are two different mechanisms which generate the nonzero average velocity. The additional step may correspond to switching of the system between these two different mechanisms.

To visualize the fluxon motion, in Fig. 2 we present the law of motion, $`\xi (t)`$, of the fluxon’s center for different values of the ac driving amplitude and fixed driving frequency $`\omega =1.05`$, which corresponds to the dependence $`\overline{u}(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}})`$ shown in Fig. 1(b). It is clearly seen in Fig. 2(a) that, indeed, at $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}=0.2`$ a systematic drift of the fluxon in one direction is superimposed on periodic oscillations. In Fig. 2 (b), which corresponds to the quasi-periodic motion at $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}=0.4`$, we see that the fluxon motion is qualitatively similar to that displayed in Fig. 2, but it is less regular and nonperiodic.

The fluxon’s law of motion for the case which corresponds to the generation of the sub-harmonic at $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}=0.5`$ is shown in Fig. 2(c). One can easily see that the period of the oscillatory part of the soliton’s motion in this case is indeed twice the period of the ac drive, as the trajectories look slightly different during alternating (even and the odd) periods of the ac drive.

Finally, in Fig. 2(d) one can see the trajectories corresponding to the point $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}=0.8`$, which belongs to a narrow window in Fig. 1(b), where a deterministic law of motion becomes stable again. Qualitatively, this plot is similar to that in Fig. 2(a), but has a higher average velocity.

Results produced by the averaging method (ii) are displayed, for $`\omega =1.05`$, in Fig. 3(a). As is seen from the comparison of this figure with Fig. 1(b), details of the pictures generated by the averaging procedures (i) and (ii) are somewhat different inside the chaotic regions. Nevertheless, both methods identify the same regions of the regular motion, and yield the same dependencies $`\overline{u}(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}})`$ in the regular cases. In fact, the consideration of the regular motion with nonzero average velocity, rather than of chaotic regimes, is the main subject of this work.

Our numerical simulations of the perturbed sG equation (2) used a finite-difference scheme. Since the ac-driven progressive motion of kinks is possible in indefinitely long discrete lossy lattices Bonilla ; Toda ; Jarmo ; Giovanni , it is necessary to check that the effects reported above are not artifacts produced by the discretization of the model. To this end, simulations were run with the smaller value of the step size $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ of the finite-difference scheme. Comparing the results, we have concluded that they are almost identical, except for small variations in the location of the thresholds at which the system switches from one state to the other. For example, Fig. 3(b) displays the dependence $`\overline{u}(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}})`$ obtained for the same case as in Fig. 1(b), but with $`\mathrm{\Delta }x=0.005`$, rather than $`\mathrm{\Delta }x=0.01`$ used in Fig. 1(b). As for the different signs of the average velocity in some regions of the regular motion in Figs. 1(b) and 3(b), this sign is always randomly selected by the initial conditions, as it was explained above.

The numerical results presented above clearly demonstrate that progressive motion of fluxon can indeed be supported, in either direction, by the uniformly distributed ac drive (bias current) in annular uniform weakly damped LJJ. An explanation to the effect will be proposed in the next section.

## III Analytical consideration

### III.1 Radiation waves emitted by the ac-driven fluxon

The analysis developed below is based on a basic property of the system under consideration: the fluxon oscillating under the action of the ac drive emits plasma waves in both directions, and, due to the annular shape of the junction, these waves interact with the same fluxon after completing a round trip. However, this property does not offer an immediate explanation to the possibility that the fluxon will be able to systematically drift in one direction, if pushed initially. Therefore, a detailed analysis is necessary, which is developed below.

As it is known from earlier works on the perturbation theory (PT) for the sG equation (see a review review ), a kink (fluxon) oscillating, without any systematic progressive motion, under the action of the ac drive emits radiation, in the lowest approximation, to the left and to the right at two wavenumbers $`\pm k`$, where

$$k=\sqrt{\omega ^21},$$
(9)
provided that $`\omega >1`$, i.e., that the driving frequency exceeds the plasma frequency of the junction. If $`\omega <1`$, the emission takes place in higher orders of PT (at higher harmonics).

Here, we concentrate on the case $`\omega >1`$. The numerical results (both displayed in Fig. 1 and those which are not shown here) suggest that the strongest effect takes place when $`\left(\omega ^21\right)`$ is a positive but relatively small parameter. In this case, the application of PT, which needs the drive’s amplitude $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$ and the damping coefficient $`\alpha `$ to be small, predicts that the oscillating fluxon emits two waves, which, far from the fluxon, have the following form (neglecting, for the time being, the action of the dissipation):

$$\varphi _\pm =A_0\mathrm{sin}\left(\pm kx\omega t\right).$$
(10)
The amplitude of the two emitted waves is predicted by PT to be review

$$A_0=\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}/k^2,$$
(11)
which is correct if

$$k^2\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}^{2/3}\mathrm{and}k^2\alpha .$$
(12)
In fact, the former inequality does not hold in many cases when the simulation reveal the progressive motion of the ac-driven fluxon, but this is not a principal limitation: instead of the expression (11), one can use more general ones (6.23) and (6.18) from Ref. review . In such a case, a relation between $`A_0`$ and the drive’s amplitude $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$ is more complex than that given by Eq. (11), but there will be no essential change in the analysis presented below, nor significant changes in the final results.

Attenuation of the emitted waves due to the presence of the loss term in Eq. (2) will play a crucially important role below. To consider the attenuation, it is convenient to use a reference frame ($`x^{},t^{}`$) moving at a constant velocity $`\overline{u}`$, which, as well as in the previous section, is the average velocity of the fluxon (if it moves on average). In the analysis, we will treat $`\overline{u}`$ as the smallest parameter, in comparison with $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$, $`\alpha `$, and $`\omega ^21k^2`$, the main objective being to show that, at a certain threshold value $`\left(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}\right)_{\mathrm{thr}}`$ of the ac-drive’s amplitude, the state with $`\overline{u}=0`$ becomes unstable, and a symmetric pair of new nontrivial states with finite but very small average velocities $`\pm \overline{u}`$ appears as a result of an instability-triggered pitchfork bifurcation bifurcation  if $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$ slightly exceeds $`\gamma _{\mathrm{th}}`$.

In the moving reference frame, the linearized version of Eq. (2), which governs the propagation and attenuation of the radiation waves, becomes

$$\varphi _{x^{}x^{}}\varphi _{t^{}t^{}}\varphi =\frac{\alpha }{\sqrt{1\overline{u}^2}}\varphi _t^{}\frac{\alpha v}{\sqrt{1\overline{u}^2}}\varphi _x^{},$$
(13)
where $`x^{}=(x\overline{u}t)/\sqrt{1\overline{u}^2}`$ and $`t^{}=(t\overline{u}x)\sqrt{1\overline{u}^2}`$. A stationary shape of the radiation wave in the moving reference frame is sought for as \[cf. Eq. (10)\]

$$\varphi _\pm =A_\pm (x^{})\mathrm{sin}\left(\pm \sqrt{\omega ^{}{}_{}{}^{2}1}x^{}\omega ^{}t^{}\right),$$
(14)
where a slow dependence $`A(x^{})`$ is produced by the dissipative damping of the wave, and $`\omega ^{}`$ is the driving frequency in the moving reference frame,

$$\omega ^{}=\frac{\omega }{\sqrt{1\overline{u}^2}}.$$
(15)
In the first approximation, which assumes that both the loss constant $`\alpha `$ and the average velocity $`\overline{u}`$ are small, the substitution of Eq. (14) into Eq. (13) gives rise to an equation

$$\frac{dA_\pm }{dx^{}}=\frac{\alpha }{2u_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}}\left(1\pm u_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}\overline{u}\right)A_\pm ,$$
(16)
where the notation for the radiation-wave’s group velocity was introduced

$$u_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}\frac{d\omega ^{}}{dk^{}}=\sqrt{\omega ^{}{}_{}{}^{2}1}/\omega ^{}k\left[1+\overline{u}^2/\left(2k^2\right)\right].$$
(17)
To obtain the final expression in Eq. (17), it was assumed that, in accord with what was said above, $`\overline{u}^2k^21`$ (hence the second term in the square brackets is a small correction).

A solution to Eq. (16) is obvious:

$$A_\pm (x^{})=A_0\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\alpha }{2u_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}\sqrt{1\overline{u}^2}}\left(1\pm u_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}\overline{u}\right)|x^{}|\right].$$
(18)
In particular, we will need the value of the emitted-wave’s amplitude after the completion of the round trip, from $`x^{}=0`$ to $`x^{}=L^{}=L\sqrt{1\overline{u}^2}`$, where the Lorentz contraction is taken into regard. According to Eqs. (18) and (17), we find

$$A_\pm (L^{})=\stackrel{~}{A}_0\left(1\frac{1}{2}\alpha L\overline{u}\right),$$
(19)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_0A_0\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\alpha L}{2u_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}}\right)A_0\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\alpha L}{2k}\right)\left(1+\frac{\alpha L\overline{u}^2}{4k^3}\right)$$
(20)
(hereafter, it is implied that $`k\sqrt{\omega ^21}`$ is taken as a positive square root). As it was said above, the fundamental assumption in the analysis is that the velocity $`\overline{u}`$ is very small. Nevertheless, small corrections $`\overline{u}`$ and $`\overline{u}^2`$, which are retained in Eqs. (19) and (20), respectively, will play an important role below.

### III.2  Dragging the fluxon by the radiation waves in the circular system

As we are dealing with the circular system, each emitted wave, after having completed its round trip, strikes the fluxon and exerts some dragging force acting on it. Dragging a kink by a radiation wave passing through it was analyzed in detail in Ref. Japan . It was found that a nonzero dragging force appears at the second order in the dragging-wave’s amplitude, provided that $`\alpha 0`$. An expression for the dragging forces induced by the two waves $`\varphi _\pm `$ can be shown to take the following form:

$$F_{\mathrm{drag}}^\pm =\pm \left(\pi /4\right)^2\alpha kA_\pm ^2$$
(21)
(this expression assumes that the kink’s mass is normalized to be $`1`$). However, taking the expressions (19) for the amplitudes $`A_\pm `$ and substituting them into the expression (21), one can readily see that the resultant force, produced by the asymmetry between the two waves, would be not accelerating, but braking the fluxon’s motion.

A key point for the explanation of the possibility of the ac-driven progressive motion is to notice that the waves (14) act on the fluxon in combination with the direct ac drive. To take all the forces into regard, a known perturbative technique may be applied review : the net wave field is sought for in the form

$$\varphi (x,t)=\psi (x,t)+\varphi _0(t)+\varphi _+(x,t)+\varphi _{}(x,t),$$
(22)
where $`\psi (x,t)`$ is the field of the fluxon, $`\varphi _\pm `$ are the emitted waves (10), and

$$\varphi _0(t)\left(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}/k^2\right)\mathrm{sin}(\omega t)$$
(23)
is a term representing uniform background oscillations generated by the ac drive, as it follows from a straightforward solution to the linearized equation (2) (recall that $`k\sqrt{\omega ^21}`$). Then, an effective equation for the fluxon field $`\psi `$ is obtained by the substitution of the combination (22) into the underlying perturbed sG equation (2), expansion of $`\mathrm{sin}\varphi `$, and taking into regard the expression (23) for the background component of the field. The final result (written in the laboratory reference frame) is

$`\psi _{tt}\psi _{xx}+\mathrm{sin}\psi +\alpha \psi _t=(1\mathrm{cos}\psi )\{`$
$`\stackrel{~}{A}_0\left[\mathrm{sin}\left(kx\omega t+kL\right)+\mathrm{sin}\left(kx\omega t+kL\right)\right]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha L\stackrel{~}{A}_0\overline{u}\left[\mathrm{sin}\left(kx\omega t+kL\right)\mathrm{sin}\left(kx\omega t+kL\right)\right]`$
$`(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}/k^2)\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega t\right)\},`$ (24)
where the amplitude $`\stackrel{~}{A}_0`$ is defined by Eq. (20), and the corrections $`(1/2)\alpha L\overline{u}`$ from Eq. (19) are taken into account. The phase shift $`kL`$ appearing on the right-hand side of Eq. (24) is accumulated by the wave after the completion of the round trip along the ring. Note that the renormalization of the driving amplitude in the first term on the right-hand side of Eq. (24) is quite essential in the present case, when $`k^2\omega ^21`$ is small.

It is straightforward to derive in the lowest (adiabatic) approximation review  an equation of motion for the coordinate $`\xi `$ of the fluxon driven by the terms on the right-hand side of Eq. (24). In the “non-relativistic’ approximation (for small velocities), it takes the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\xi }{dt^2}}+\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{d\xi }{dt}}={\displaystyle \frac{\sigma \pi }{4}}\left(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}/k^2\right)\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega t\right)`$
$`+\stackrel{~}{A}_0\left[\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega tkLk\xi \right)+\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega tkL+k\xi \right)\right]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha L\stackrel{~}{A}_0\overline{u}\left[\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega tkLk\xi \right)\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega tkL+k\xi \right)\right],`$ (25)
\[recall that $`\sigma =\pm 1`$ is the fluxon’s polarity, see Eq. (3)\].

The right-hand side (r.h.s.) of Eq. (25) may be expanded for small $`\xi `$. Then one concludes that the first term and the following pair of terms on r.h.s. are essentially similar to each other (in the lowest approximation, they do not contain $`\xi `$), but, with regard to Eqs. (11) and (20), the amplitude in front of the latter pair of terms, $`\stackrel{~}{A}_0`$, differs from the amplitude in front of the first term by the exponential factor $`\mathrm{exp}\left[\alpha L/\left(2k\right)\right]`$, that we assume to be small enough. Therefore, this pair may be neglected, and, keeping a term linear in $`\xi `$ which is produced by the expansion of the last pair of terms on r.h.s. in Eq. (25), we arrive at a simplified equation of motion for the driven fluxon,

$$\frac{d^2\xi }{dt^2}+\alpha \frac{d\xi }{dt}=\frac{\sigma \pi }{4}\left[\frac{\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}}{k^2}\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega t\right)+\alpha L\stackrel{~}{A}_0k\overline{u}\mathrm{cos}\left(\omega tkL\right)\xi \right]$$
(26)
We seek for a solution to Eq. (26) in a natural form (similar to that employed in Ref. Japan ),

$$\xi (t)=\frac{\sigma \pi \gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}}{4k^2}\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega t\right)+\xi _0(t),$$
(27)
where the first term is a response to the ac driving force on r.h.s. of Eq. (26) (we neglect a small correction to it from the friction force on the left-hand side of the equation, and set $`1/\omega ^21`$, which is true in the case under consideration), and the term $`\xi _0(t)`$ takes into regard a possibility of a slow systematic motion (drift) of the fluxon.

In the next approximation, we replace the multiplier $`\xi (t)`$ in the second term on r.h.s. of Eq. (26) by the first term from the expression (27). In order to single out terms contributing to the slow drift, we perform averaging in the rapid oscillations. Thus we arrive at an effective evolution equation for the slow variable $`\xi _0`$, in which $`d\xi _0/dt`$ may be identified by the average velocity $`\overline{u}`$ of the systematic motion of the fluxon. Finally, the equation for the slow motion can be cast into the form of a first-order evolution equation for the average velocity,

$$\frac{d\overline{u}}{dt}=\alpha \overline{u}\frac{\pi ^2L\stackrel{~}{A}_0\gamma ^{(\mathrm{ac})}}{32k}(\alpha \overline{u})\mathrm{sin}\left(kL\right).$$
(28)
The amplitude $`\stackrel{~}{A}_0`$ in Eq. (28) can be replaced by the expressions (11) and (20), which casts the equation into a form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\overline{u}}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}\right)^2}{\gamma _{\mathrm{thr}}^2}}1\right]\alpha \overline{u}`$ (29)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi L\alpha \gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}}{8k^3}}\right)^2\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha L}{2k}}\right)\mathrm{sin}\left(kL\right)\overline{u}^3,`$
where the threshold value of the drive’s amplitude is defined as

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{thr}}^2\frac{\left(32/\pi ^2\right)k^3}{L\mathrm{sin}\left(kL\right)}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\alpha L}{2k}\right).$$
(30)
The equation of motion (29) has a trivial stationary solution (trivial fixed point, FP) $`\overline{u}=0`$, which, obviously, corresponds to no systematic motion of the fluxon. A crucially important issue is the stability of this FP. The linearization of Eq. (29) for $`\overline{u}0`$ immediately demonstrates that the trivial FP is unstable if the drive’s amplitude exceeds the threshold value given by Eq. (30). In this case, a transition to a nontrivial regime with a nonzero velocity of the progressive motion (in other words, a bifurcation) must take place.

An essential feature of the expression (30) is its dependence on the phase $`kL`$ gained by the emitted wave as a result of the round trip. In fact, the ac-driven motion is predicted to exist only if $`\gamma _{\mathrm{thr}}^2>0`$, or, as it follows from Eq. (30),

$$\mathrm{sin}\left(kL\right)<0.$$
(31)
In the opposite case, the effect is absent, or, possibly, the threshold amplitude is very large (then the perturbative approach is irrelevant).

If $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}^2>\gamma _{\mathrm{thr}}^2>0`$, the existence of two mutually symmetric nontrivial FPs, with finite velocities $`\pm \overline{u}`$, may be expected. One can try to find these velocities close to the bifurcation point, i.e., for a case $`0<\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}^2\gamma _{\mathrm{thr}}^2\gamma _{\mathrm{thr}}^2`$, taking into account the cubic corrections in Eq. (29). In fact, in the particular approximation in which the cubic term, which is present in Eq. (29), was derived, a formal result will be $`\overline{u}^2<0`$, which, actually, implies that the bifurcation is subcritical, i.e., it takes place by a finite jump; in the opposite case, one should expect a soft supercritical transition (corresponding to a bifurcation of the usual pitchfork type bifurcation ) without a jump.

The bifurcations observed in Figs. 1(a) and, especially, in Fig. 1(b) look very much like a supercritical pitchfork bifurcation, while Figs. 1(c) and 1(d), corresponding to larger values of the parameter $`k^2\omega ^21`$, strongly suggest that a subcritical bifurcation (the one giving rise to a jump) takes place in these cases. In many other runs of the simulations, not displayed here, we observed a very similar trend, namely, to have a supercritical bifurcation for very small values of $`k^2`$, and a transition to a subcritical bifurcation at somewhat larger $`k^2`$. An accurate prediction of the type of the bifurcation (sub- or super-critical) is a rather difficult issue, as it demands precise summation of the lowest-order nonlinear corrections at the order $`\overline{u}^2`$, that may originate from many different terms in the above analysis.

Lastly, we note that the case shown in Fig. 1(a), with the driving frequency $`\omega =0.75`$, which is smaller than $`1`$, cannot be directly explained in the framework of the approach developed here. However, it seems very plausible that the persistent motion of the ac-driven fluxon in this case can be explained if one takes into regard the fact that the kink oscillating under the action of the driving frequency $`\omega <1`$ emits radiation at the second-harmonic frequency $`2\omega `$, provided that $`2\omega >1`$ review , which is the case in Fig. 1(a). In accord with this, the effect seen in Fig. 1(a) is very weak because it is accounted for by the second order of PT.

## IV Comparison of analytical and numerical results

The main prediction of the analysis presented in the previous section is the loss of stability of the zero-average-velocity state of the fluxon in the ac-driven weakly damped annular uniform LJJ. As a result, the fluxon must inevitably perform a transition to a nontrivial state with a nonzero average velocity, which we consider as the cause for the effect revealed by the simulations. Besides that, the analysis may, in principle, predict the character of the bifurcation – super- or sub-critical.

While the comparison of the particular type of the analytically predicted bifurcation with results of the simulations is a sophisticated problem, it is much more straightforward (and more important) to compare the theoretically predicted and numerically found points of the transition to the progressive motion, i.e., as a matter of fact, dependencies of the threshold amplitude of the ac drive on various parameters of the system. A crucially important prediction of the analysis is the fact that the transition to the nonzero velocity occurs (within the framework of the perturbation theory) only in those intervals of values of the ring’s length $`L`$ (if all the other parameters are fixed) where the condition (30) holds. Another important and, in the same time, simple prediction is that the threshold value (30) remains finite (neither vanishes nor diverges) in the limit $`\alpha 0`$.

Comparing the analytical and numerical results, we focused on these two basic features. In Fig. 4, the threshold value of the ac-drive’s amplitude, as found from the simulations, is plotted vs. the length $`L`$ of the annular junction for fixed values $`\omega =1.12`$ and $`\alpha =0.1`$. Salient peculiarities of the dependence are existence of two minima at

$$\left(L_{\mathrm{min}}^{(1)}\right)_{\mathrm{num}}8.5,\left(L_{\mathrm{min}}^{(2)}\right)_{\mathrm{num}}20.5.$$
(32)
On the other hand, the value of the wavenumber corresponding to $`\omega =1.12`$ is $`k0.53`$ \[see Eq. (9)\], and Eq. (30) then predicts minimum values of the threshold at the points where $`\mathrm{sin}\left(kL\right)=1`$, i.e., at

$$\left(L_{\mathrm{min}}^{(1)}\right)_{\mathrm{theor}}=\frac{3\pi }{2k}8.95,\left(L_{\mathrm{min}}^{(2)}\right)_{\mathrm{theor}}=\frac{7\pi }{2k}20.90.$$
(33)
Comparison of the numerical results (32) with the analytical predictions (33) demonstrates very good agreement.

Figure 4 also shows that $`\gamma _{\mathrm{thr}}`$ diverges at some point between the two minima, and in a part of the region between them, where the data is absent in the figure, the effect does not take place at all (or the threshold is extremely high). This feature also agrees well with the theoretical prediction (30), which yields divergences at points $`L=\pi n/k`$ with integer $`n`$, and nonexistence of the effect in the intervals where the condition (31) does not hold. However, unlike the minima points, detailed comparison of the numerically found and analytically predicted positions of the divergence points is not relevant, as the perturbation theory which was used to derive Eq. (30) clearly breaks down in a vicinity of the divergence points.

To verify the analytical prediction for the threshold amplitude of the ac drive as a function of the dissipative constant $`\alpha `$, the dependence $`\gamma _{\mathrm{thr}}(\alpha )`$ is shown in Fig. 5. The first noteworthy feature of the plot is strong hysteresis. For the comparison with the analytical prediction, the relevant branch is the upper one, which corresponds to “sweeping up”, i.e., gradual increase of $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ac}}`$, as precisely in this case we can detect the point at which the zero-average-velocity state becomes unstable, and the fluxon starts its progressive motion.

As it is evident in Fig. 5, this branch of the dependence of $`\gamma _{\mathrm{thr}}`$ vs. $`\alpha `$ indeed yields a finite value in the limit $`\alpha 0`$, as it is predicted by Eq. (30); it should be stressed, though, that accurate simulations are quite difficult for very small $`\alpha `$, as relaxation of the dynamical regime to its established form is very slow in this case. A particular value that Eq. (30) yields for $`\alpha =0`$ in the case shown in Figs. 4 and 5, i.e., $`L=10`$ and $`\omega =1.12`$, is $`\gamma _{\mathrm{thr}}\left(\alpha =0\right)0.2`$, which roughly agrees with what can be read off from Fig. 5.

## V Conclusion

This work presents a novel dynamical effect: systematic drift of a topological soliton in an ac-driven weakly damped system with periodic boundary conditions. The effect has been demonstrated in a physically relevant model of a long Josephson junction in the form of a ring, where fluxons play the role of kinks, and the ac drive is realized as bias current uniformly applied to the junction. Unlike earlier considered cases of progressive motion of the ac driven fluxon, in the present case the long junction and the ac driving force are spatially uniform. Numerical simulations reveal that progressive (on average) motion of the fluxon commences if the amplitude of the ac drive exceeds a certain threshold value. With the increase of the amplitude, both regular and chaotic dynamical regimes are observed. The direction of the progressive motion is randomly selected by initial conditions, and regular dynamical regimes are characterized by strong hysteresis. The simulations demonstrate the effect in a well-pronounced form in the case when the driving frequency exceeds, but its rather close to, the plasma frequency of the junction.

The analytical approach to the problem was based on consideration of the interaction between plasma waves emitted by the fluxon oscillating under the action of the ac drive and the fluxon itself, after the waves complete the round trip along the annular junction and hit the fluxon. In particular, a weaker effect, which is observed in the case when the driving frequency is smaller than the plasma frequency, may be explained by the emission of the plasma waves at the second harmonic by the oscillating fluxon. The main finding which the analytical consideration yields is possible instability of the zero-average-velocity state of the fluxon interacting with its own radiation tails. The instability sets in if the drive’s amplitude exceeds an explicitly found threshold. The analysis predicts that the effect is only possible if the phase shift $`\phi kL`$ of the radiation wave, gained after the round trip, is such that $`\mathrm{sin}\phi <0`$ \[see Eq. (31)\], and the threshold amplitude strongly depends on $`\phi `$, see Eq. (30). Numerical results show a similar dependence, and analytically predicted values of the length of the annular junction at which the threshold has well-pronounced minima are found to be in very good agreement with numerical findings, see Eqs. (32) and (33). Additionally, the analysis predicts that the threshold amplitude remains finite as the dissipative constant is vanishing, which is also confirmed by the numerical results.

## Acknowledgements

We are indebted to M. Fistul for valuable discussions. One of the authors (B.A.M.) appreciates financial support provided by DAAD (Deutscher Akademischer Austaustauschdienst) under the research-visit grant No. A/01/24657. E.G. and B.A.M. appreciate hospitality of the Physikalisches Institut at the Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg.