text:
# References

On electric charge non-conservation
in brane world

S.L. Dubovsky and V.A. Rubakov

Institute for Nuclear Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences,
60th October Anniversary prospect 7a, Moscow 117312, Russia

## Abstract

In some models with infinite extra dimensions, gauge fields are localized on a brane by gravity. A generic property of these models is the existence of arbitrarily light bulk modes of charged fields. This property may lead to interesting low-energy effects such as electric charge non-conservation on the brane (decay of electron to nothing). One may worry that light charged Kaluza–Klein modes would lead to unacceptable phenomenology due to their copious production in, e.g., electron-positron annihilation and/or their contribution to QED observables like anomalous magnetic moments. We argue, however, that both loop effects and production of light charged Kaluza–Klein modes are suppressed due to screening effect of gapless spectrum of bulk photons.

An idea that we may live on a domain wall in a multi-dimensional space  has been revived recently, with emphasis on gauge hierarchy problem . A particularly noteworthy development of the brane world idea is the possibility to localize gravitational field on a brane in a theory with infinite extra dimension ; this became an alternative to the Kaluza–Klein (KK) compactification (see Ref.  for a review).

A phenomenologically viable implementation of the latter idea should involve a mechanism of the localization of gauge fields on a brane. While a number of field theoretical models aimed to solve this problem were proposed  (see also Ref.  for discussion of general properties of such models), it is tempting to use gravitational field of the brane itself to localize gauge fields, thus providing a universal mechanism for localization of gauge fields and gravity.

While there is no localized gauge field in the original Randall–Sundrum model, one can slightly modify this setup by adding extra warped compact dimensions to obtain a normalizable photon zero mode . Due to this mode, interactions of charged particles residing on the brane are described, at the classical level, by four-dimensional Maxwell’s electrodynamics, up to small power-law corrections suppressed by the ratio of energy to the inverse adS radius $`k`$.

One may expect a number of new effects in this setup. Indeed, a generic property of models with warped infinite extra dimensions is that the spectrum of bulk modes of all fields starts from zero four-dimensional mass irrespectively of the mass of the localized mode. As a result, massive brane particles in these models are metastable resonances in the continuous spectrum of bulk modes . Decay of such a resonance, i.e. escape of a particle from the brane, would show up, from the point of view of an observer on the brane, as literal disappearance of the particle. Of particular interest from both theoretical and phenomenological points of view would be a possibility for charged particles to escape from the brane. The processes like decay $`e^{}nothing`$ would be a convincing signature of infinite extra dimensions .

This proposal may appear controversial from both classical and quantum points of view. On the classical side, causality and four-dimensional Gauss’ law appear to forbid electric charge non-conservation. This apparent discrepancy is resolved by the fact that electric charge is conserved in the complete multi-dimensional theory. Namely, a charged particle escaping into the bulk leaves behind a spherical wave of electric field on the brane. This wave wipes out the four-dimensional Coulomb field on the brane in a causal manner  (see also Refs.  where gravitational analogue of this phenomenon is discussed). An equivalent description of the same process, inspired by the adS/CFT correspondence, would be to say that the charged particle decays into spherical cloud of charged (quasi-)conformal matter (cf. Ref. ).

Problems with this scenario appear much more severe at the quantum level. These are related to the observation that successful localization of gauge field necessarily implies charge universality . In particular, the bulk modes of the charged fields interact with the localized photon at the same strength as the brane modes. Then one may worry that the existence of light bulk modes may be phenomenologically unacceptable because of their loop contributions into precision QED observables and/or their copious production in various processes like, e.g, $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation.

The purpose of this note is to discuss this issue in some detail. We will argue that it is possible to have light bulk modes of charged fields (so that electron disappearance is allowed) without disastrous loop effects or overproduction of these modes in the processes like $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation. The corresponding suppression is due to the continuum of bulk photon modes which “screens” the interaction between charged bulk modes and charges residing on the brane.

To be specific, let us consider a model for the localization of gauge fields suggested in Refs. . One begins with the solution to ($`4+n+1`$)-dimensional Einstein equations,

$$ds^2=\frac{1}{(1+k|\xi |)^2}\left(dt^2d𝐱^2\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}R_i^2d\theta _i^2d\xi ^2\right)$$
(1)
where $`\theta _i[0,2\pi ]`$ are compact coordinates, $`R_i`$ are radii of compact dimensions and $`k`$ is the inverse adS radius determined by the bulk cosmological constant. There is a single brane located at $`\xi =0`$. The only difference between this metric and the Randall–Sundrum metric is the presence of extra compact dimensions $`\theta _i`$. These dimensions are added for obtaining a localized zero mode of the gauge field. In what follows we assume that their radii $`R_i`$ are the smallest length scales involved, so all fields are taken independent of $`\theta _i`$. The inverse adS radius $`k`$ is assumed to be the largest energy scale involved.

Let us now introduce the $`U(1)`$ gauge field propagating in the background metric (1). With appropriate rescaling, the effective action for $`\theta `$-independent gauge field is

$$S=\frac{1}{4g^2}\frac{d\xi d^4x}{(1+k|\xi |)^{n+1}}F_{\alpha \beta }F^{\alpha \beta },$$
(2)
where indices are raised and lowered by the metric of flat $`(4+1)`$-dimensional Minkowski space-time. We assume that there are no currents along compact dimensions and disregard $`A_{\theta _i}`$ components of the vector field, so that $`\alpha ,\beta =0,\mathrm{},3,\xi `$.

As discussed in Refs. , for $`n>0`$ there exists a localized zero mode

$$A_\mu ^{(0)}(\xi )=const$$

($`\mu =0,\mathrm{},3`$). Also, there is a continuous spectrum of bulk modes with four-dimensional masses $`m`$ starting from zero.

To study (apparent) charge non-conservation in this setup we introduce light charged fields both on the brane and in the bulk. One way to do this  is to introduce a single charged fermion field $`\psi `$. One finds the following effective action for the $`\theta `$-independent field,

$$S_{ferm}=𝑑\xi d^4x\sqrt{|g|}\overline{\psi }\left(i\gamma ^\alpha _\alpha \frac{k(n+4)}{2}\gamma ^5\text{sign}(\xi )+y\varphi _k(\xi )\right)\psi ,$$
(3)
where $`_\alpha `$ includes spinor connection corresponding to metric (1) and minimal interaction with the photon field $`A_\alpha `$. A term $`\frac{kn}{2}\gamma ^5\text{sign}(\xi )`$ comes from the $`\theta _i`$ components of spinor connection. To localize the fermion on the brane, we have added Yukawa-type interaction $`y\varphi _k(\xi )\overline{\psi }\psi `$ with the background scalar field $`\varphi _k(\xi )`$, having kink profile,

$$\varphi _k(\xi )=v\text{sign}(\xi ).$$

It is convenient to introduce rescaled fermion field

$$\chi (\xi )(1+k|\xi |)^{n/2+2}\psi (\xi ).$$

The action for the rescaled field takes the following simple form

$$S_{ferm}=𝑑\xi d^4x\left(\overline{\chi }i\gamma ^\alpha 𝒟_\alpha \chi +\frac{yv\text{sign}(\xi )}{1+k|\xi |}\overline{\chi }\chi \right)$$
(4)
where $`𝒟_\alpha `$ is flat space covariant derivative, which includes the field $`A_\alpha `$.

It is straightforward to check that a left-handed fermion zero mode localized on the brane and gapless continuum spectrum are present in this setup . Following Ref.  one can introduce small mass for the localized mode; the continuum will still start from zero whereas the massive brane particle will decay into light continuum modes, i.e. escape from the brane. From the point of view of four-dimensional observer, the latter process would show up as (apparent) charge non-conservation.

One remark is in order. The prefactor $`g^2(1+k|\xi |)^{n+1}`$ in Eq. (2) may be viewed as the $`\xi `$-dependent coupling constant. It increases towards large $`|\xi |`$, so once the charged bulk fields are introduced, the theory becomes strongly coupled at large $`|\xi |`$. We proceed under assumption that the overall features of the spectrum remain unaffected by gauge interactions: there are light bulk fermions which are capable of moving towards large $`|\xi |`$ and whose mixing with brane electrons makes the latter unstable against the escape into extra dimension.

The problem we would like to discuss exists already in the massless case. Namely, if one performs Kaluza–Klein decomposition of the fermion field, one finds that interactions of the photon zero mode with the localized fermion mode and with fermion modes from the continuum are of equal strength. A clear way to see this is to put a system in a large box of size $`L`$ in the $`\xi `$-direction. Then the effective charge $`g_{eff}`$ describing the interaction between the photon zero mode and a Kaluza–Klein mode with the wave function $`\chi (\xi )`$ is proportional to the overlap integral

$$g_{eff}_L^L𝑑\xi A_\mu ^{(0)}(\xi )\overline{\chi }(\xi )\chi (\xi ).$$

In our case, the photon zero mode $`A_\mu ^{(0)}(\xi )`$ is constant, so this integral reduces just to the normalization integral for the wave function $`\chi (\xi )`$ and leads to one and the same value of the effective charge irrespectively of the profile of the wave function $`\chi (\xi )`$ (charge universality). Were this the whole story, one would face complete phenomenological disaster: besides the zero fermion mode aimed to describe the four-dimensional electron there is a plethora of arbitrarily light particles (Kaluza–Klein modes) of the same charge. The latter would make strong contributions to precision QED observables and would be copiously produced in the processes like $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation.

However, there is also gapless continuum spectrum of photon bulk modes. The corresponding wave functions are small at $`\xi =0`$, but grow towards large $`|\xi |`$. Consequently, these modes interact weakly with the localized fermion, but their interaction with bulk fermion modes is quite strong. The main observation of this note is that in a certain regime, the latter interaction screens the effect of the photon zero mode, thus leading to phenomenologically acceptable results.

To be specific, let us study the annihilation of $`e^+e^{}`$-pair on the brane into bulk modes (the issue of loop effects is simpler, as we discuss in due course). From the above discussion it is clear that the Kaluza–Klein decomposition is not an adequate tool to study this process, as the couplings between bulk photons and bulk fermions are badly IR divergent due to the growth of the corresponding wave functions as $`|\xi |\mathrm{}`$. A way to soften this “strong coupling” problem is to work with propagators in the $`\xi `$-coordinate representation instead of performing the Kaluza–Klein decomposition (cf. Ref. ).

To avoid unnecessary technical difficulties and to make the underlying physics more transparent we simplify our setup further. First, instead of the bulk vector field $`A_\alpha `$ we consider scalar field $`A`$. Further, instead of considering the bulk charged fermion field we introduce an additional (tensionless) brane at $`\xi =\xi _0`$ and assume that the field content of our toy model consists of the scalar bulk field $`A(x,\xi )`$ (“photon”), fermion field $`e(x)`$ (“electron”) living on “our” brane at $`\xi =0`$ and fermion field $`b(x)`$ (“brother electron”) living on the second brane at $`\xi =\xi _0`$. Then the action takes the following form

$`S={\displaystyle }d^4xd\xi [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g^2(1+k|\xi |)^{n+1}}}(_\alpha A)^2+\delta (\xi )\overline{e}i\gamma ^\mu _\mu e+\delta (\xi \xi _0)\overline{b}i\gamma ^\mu _\mu b`$
$`+\delta (\xi )A\overline{e}e+\delta (\xi \xi _0)A\overline{b}b]`$ (5)
It is instructive to study first the same model in flat space, $`k=0`$. Then the photon zero mode is absent, so physics on the brane at $`\xi =0`$ is not four-dimensional even in the absence of the field $`b(x)`$. However, one may still ask whether introducing $`b`$-particles changes physics at the $`\xi =0`$ brane, i.e. whether $`b`$-particles affect cross-sections of processes at the $`\xi =0`$ brane, like $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into the bulk or into $`e^+e^{}`$.

Physically, due to locality, it is clear that one should not see the new particles in “hard” processes with characteristic momenta $`p\xi _0^1`$. To make this statement precise, let us consider the Källen-Lehmann representation for the photon propagator on the $`\xi =0`$ brane,

$$TA(\xi ;p)A(\xi ^{};p)|_{\xi =\xi ^{}=0}=𝑑s\frac{\rho (s)}{p^2s}$$
(6)
where, as usual, $`\rho (s)`$ is proportional to the total cross section of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation. The contribution of the field $`b(x)`$ to this propagator comes from the diagrams of the type shown in Fig. 1.

Taking into account the explicit form of the free propagator $`G_0(\xi ,\xi ^{};p)`$ for the field $`A(x)`$,

$$G_0(\xi ,\xi ^{};p)=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\mathrm{e}^{ip|\xi \xi ^{}|}}{2p}$$
(7)
we see that this contribution is exponentially small,

$$(bloops)\mathrm{exp}(2|p|\xi _0),$$
(8)
at “large” Euclidean momenta,

$$|p|\xi _01,p^2<0.$$

This means, in the first place, that contributions of $`b`$-particle loops into processes on $`\xi =0`$ brane are exponentially suppressed, i.e. anomalous magnetic moments, Lamb shift, etc., are unaffected, provided that $`m_e\xi _01`$. This property persists in warped models with localized photon (cf. Ref. ).

The situation with the production of $`b`$-particles is more subtle. In terms of the quantity of interest — spectral density $`\rho (s)`$ — the exponential suppression of the diagrams of Fig. 1 at “large” Euclidean momenta implies that the corrections to $`\rho (s)`$ due to $`b`$-particles have the form of rapid oscillations

$$\delta \rho (s)a\mathrm{cos}(2\sqrt{s}\xi _0)+b\mathrm{sin}(2\sqrt{s}\xi _0)$$
(9)
at large values of $`\sqrt{s}\xi _0`$. Consequently, additional terms in the $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation cross-section also have the oscillating form. In the flat space model we discuss at the moment, the oscillatory behavior (9) is the only reason of why $`b`$-particles are harmless for large enough $`\xi _0`$: rapidly oscillating contribution into the annihilation cross-section is impossible to detect provided the incoming electrons have an energy-momentum spread larger than $`\xi _0^1`$. We will see that in the original model with warped space and localized photon, $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into bulk modes is additionally suppressed.

Let us proceed with flat space model and illustrate the general reasoning leading to Eq. (9). Let us study the diagrams of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation directly, to the lowest orders of perturbation theory. In the absence of the field $`b(x)`$, the dominant channel of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into the bulk is the process $`e^+e^{}\gamma `$. This process is kinematically allowed, since there is no momentum conservation along the $`\xi `$-direction. The cross-section for this process is determined by the diagram shown in Fig. 2

and is equal to

$$\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})=4\pi ^2g^2/E$$
(10)
where $`E`$ is the center of mass energy. As there is no localization of the gauge field in flat space, this cross-section is not suppressed relative to the cross-section of $`e^+e^{}e^+e^{}`$-annihilation, given by

$$\sigma (e^+e^{}e^+e^{})=\pi g^4/4.$$
(11)
Let us now study what happens when $`b`$-particles are added. Now one has a new channel for $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into the bulk — annihilation into the $`b^+b^{}`$ pair. The leading order contribution to this process comes from the diagram shown in Fig. 3

and the corresponding cross-section is equal to the cross-section of $`e^+e^{}e^+e^{}`$,

$$\sigma (e^+e^{}b^+b^{})=\pi g^4/4.$$

Naively, this result contradicts our general statement that the correction due to $`b`$-particles should have oscillatory behavior, Eq. (9). To see what actually happens, we recall that from the point of view of the observer on the $`\xi =0`$ brane, $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into $`b^+b^{}`$ is indistinguishable from $`e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk}`$, as this observer cannot detect $`b`$-particles or bulk photons. Consequently, an observable quantity is the sum of $`\sigma (e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})`$ and $`\sigma (e^+e^{}b^+b^{})`$. The former cross-section itself acquires loop corrections due to $`b`$-particles. Working consistently to order $`g^4`$, we should take into account the one-loop diagram shown in Fig. 4.

It produces the energy-dependent multiplicative “renormalization” of the tree cross section (10),

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{1loop}(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})}{\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})}}=`$
$`1{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{16\pi }}E{\displaystyle \frac{g^2\mathrm{cos}(2E\xi _0)}{16\pi }}E+{\displaystyle \frac{g^2\mathrm{cos}(2E\xi _0)}{16\pi ^2}}ElnE^2/\mu _{UV}^2,`$ (12)
where we used dimensional regularization and $`\mu _{UV}`$ is the normalization scale. Here the last two (oscillating) terms are corrections to the cross-section to emit a photon with negative momentum along the $`\xi `$-direction. The origin of oscillations in these terms is quite clear physically. Qualitatively, these terms are due to the interference between the photon emitted from the $`\xi =0`$ brane towards negative $`\xi `$ and the photon which was originally emitted with the positive momentum but reflected from the second brane at $`\xi =\xi _0`$.

The second term does not oscillate. This term is the one-loop correction to the cross-section of the emission of the photon with positive momentum along the $`\xi `$-direction. It is straightforward to see that this term exactly cancels the cross-section of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into the $`b^+b^{}`$-pair in the physically interesting quantity — the inclusive cross-section of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into the bulk. This cancelation is precisely what we have anticipated from the unitarity argument.

So we see that the physically interesting quantity — inclusive cross-section of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into the bulk receives multiplicative corrections due to $`b`$-particles. The overall factor differs from unity by a rapidly oscillating function of energy; to the order $`g^4`$ one has

$`\sigma _{tot}(e^+e^{}bulk)=\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})\times `$
$`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{g^2\mathrm{cos}(2E\xi _0)}{16\pi }}E+{\displaystyle \frac{g^2\mathrm{cos}(2E\xi _0)}{16\pi ^2}}ElnE^2/\mu _{UV}^2\right).`$ (13)
Similar result holds for other processes, for instance, $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into $`e^+e^{}`$.

Let us discuss now what changes in the warped space, when the localized photon mode is present. First of all, because of the localization, the tree-level cross-section of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into the bulk photon is suppressed relative to the cross-section of the annihilation into $`e^+e^{}`$ pair. Indeed, the former cross-section is equal to

$$\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})=\frac{8\pi g^2k}{N_{\nu 1}(E/k)^2+J_{\nu 1}(E/k)^2}\frac{1}{E^2}$$
(14)
where

$$\nu =1+\frac{n}{2},$$

while the latter has the standard four-dimensional behavior at $`Ek`$,

$$\sigma _0(e^+e^{}e^+e^{})=\frac{\pi g^4}{4}\left|\frac{H_\nu ^{(1)}(E/k)}{H_{\nu 1}^{(1)}(E/k)}\right|^2\frac{\pi g^4k^2}{E^2}(\nu 1)^2.$$
(15)
Consequently, assuming that the effective four-dimensional coupling constant $`gk^{1/2}`$ is not too small, we see that $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into a bulk photon is suppressed by a factor

$$\frac{\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})}{\sigma _0(e^+e^{}e^+e^{})}\alpha (E/k)=\frac{1}{N_{\nu 1}(E/k)^2+J_{\nu 1}(E/k)^2}\left(\frac{E}{k}\right)^{2\nu 2}.$$
(16)
Now, the photon propagator $`G_A(0,\xi ;p)`$ from the $`\xi =0`$ brane to $`\xi =\xi _0`$ brane has the following form

$$G_A(0,\xi _0;p)=\frac{i}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{(1+k\xi _0)^\nu }{2p}\frac{H_\nu ^{(1)}(p/k+p\xi _0)}{H_{\nu 1}^{(1)}(p/k)}.$$
(17)
This propagator is again exponentially suppressed at relatively large Euclidean momenta

$$G_A\text{e}^{2|p|\xi _0},|p|\xi _0^1,p^2<0,$$

so the contributions of $`b`$-particles into precision QED observables are again exponentially suppressed at $`\xi _0m_e^1`$. Furthermore, the general argument based on the spectral representation of the photon Green’s function still applies to $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into $`b^+b^{}`$. Let us elaborate on this argument a bit more. In the Abelian theory, the only contribution (besides $`e^+e^{}`$-loops) into the photon Euclidean two-point function, the left hand side of Eq. (6), which is not suppressed by $`\text{exp}(2|p|\xi _0)`$, comes from the free photon propagator itself. The corresponding contribution into the spectral density $`\rho (s)`$ is due to the small tree-level cross section $`\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})`$, see Eq. (16). $`b`$-particle loops in the Euclidean two-point function all involve at least two propagators (17), so they all have exponential behavior (8) in the Euclidean domain, which corresponds to the oscillatory behavior (9) of the spectral density. One immediately concludes that the inclusive cross section of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into bulk particles has the form

$$\sigma _{tot}(e^+e^{}bulk)=\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})+(\text{oscillating terms}).$$

Since this cross section is positive, the amplitude of oscillations should not exceed $`\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})`$. We thus argue that the full inclusive cross section should be suppressed, relative to $`e^+e^{}e^+e^{}`$, by the same factor $`(E/k)^{2\nu 2}`$ as the tree-level cross section of $`e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk}`$.

Let us see how diagrammatics for the cross section of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into bulk particles works in the warped space. In this case the cross-sections of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into $`e^+e^{}`$\- and $`b^+b^{}`$-pairs are no longer equal to each other. Instead, their ratio is

$$\frac{\sigma (e^+e^{}b^+b^{})}{\sigma (e^+e^{}e^+e^{})}=\left|\frac{H_\nu ^{(1)}(E/k+E\xi _0)}{H_\nu ^{(1)}(E/k)}\right|^2(1+k\xi _0)^{2\nu }$$
(18)
At small $`\xi _0`$ this ratio approaches unity as it should be, while at large values of $`\xi _0`$ it equals $`(E\xi _0)^{2\nu }`$ up to a numerical coefficient of order one. So, naively, the cross section of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into $`b`$-particles is even enhanced in warped space relative to the annihilation into the usual electrons. However, the observable quantity is, as before, the inclusive cross-section of annihilation into the bulk. To the order $`g^4`$, the latter is the sum $`\sigma _{tot}`$ of the cross-section (18) and one-loop improved cross-section $`\sigma (e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})`$. One finds that its ratio to the tree-level cross section (14) is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{tot}(e^+e^{}bulk)}{\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma )}}=1+{\displaystyle \frac{g^2k(1+k\xi _0)^{2\nu }}{32}}\times `$
$`[f(E/k)(N_\nu ^2(E/k+E\xi _0)J_\nu ^2(E/k+E\xi _0))+`$
$`g(E/k)\left(N_\nu (E/k+E\xi _0)J_\nu (E/k+E\xi _0)\right)]`$ (19)
Here

$`f(E/k)={\displaystyle \frac{E^2}{k^2}}\alpha (E/k)(N_{\nu 1}(E/k)^2J_{\nu 1}(E/k)^2+`$
$`2\pi lnE^2/\mu _{UV}^2N_{\nu 1}(E/k)J_{\nu 1}(E/k))`$
and

$`g(E/k)={\displaystyle \frac{E^2}{k^2}}\alpha (E/k)(4N_{\nu 1}(E/k)J_{\nu 1}(E/k)`$
$`2\pi lnE^2/\mu _{UV}^2(N_{\nu 1}(E/k)^2J_{\nu 1}(E/k)^2))`$ (20)
are smooth functions of energy, which are both small at $`E/k1`$. We see that at large $`\xi _0`$, the inclusive cross-section of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into the bulk particles is again modified by a multiplicative factor, which differs from unity by a smooth function of energy times a rapidly oscillating function,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{tot,1loop}(e^+e^{}bulk)}{\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})}}=`$
$`1{\displaystyle \frac{g^2k(1+k\xi _0)^{2\nu }}{16\pi E\xi _0}}\left(f(E/k)\mathrm{cos}2E\xi _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g(E/k)\mathrm{sin}2E\xi _0\right).`$ (21)
In spite of the smallness of functions $`f(E/k)`$ and $`g(E/k)`$, the oscillating terms in Eq. (S0.Ex18) appear to be large due to the fact that the effective coupling constant at the $`\xi =\xi _0`$ brane is equal to $`gk^{1/2}(k\xi _0)^\nu `$. Clearly, this is an indication that one cannot trust the perturbative calculations of the coefficients in front of $`\mathrm{cos}2E\xi _0`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}2E\xi _0`$ in Eq. (S0.Ex18). The unitarity argument together with diagrammatics suggest that the complete cross section has the general form

$`\sigma _{tot}(e^+e^{}bulk)=`$
$`\sigma _0(e^+e^{}\gamma _{bulk})\times \left(1+f_r(E/k)\mathrm{cos}2E\xi _0+g_r(E/k)\mathrm{sin}2E\xi _0\right)`$ (22)
with coefficients $`g_r`$ and $`f_r`$ always smaller unity. The suppression of $`e^+e^{}`$-annihilation into the bulk valid in the absence of bulk fermions should hold after these fermions are taken into account.

Clearly, the general argument based on the spectral representation applies not only to the two-point Green’s function (relevant to the annihilation processes) but to more general Green’s functions as well. One may still worry that $`b`$-particles may dramatically enhance bremsstrahlung of very soft photons, $`E\xi _0^1`$, into the bulk. Such an enhancement will certainly be avoided if $`b`$-particles are given a mass $`\mu \xi _0^1`$. This mass may be quite small, so that electron decay is still possible, yet $`b`$-particles decouple at energies below $`\mu `$, and do not contribute into bulk photon bremsstrahlung at $`E\xi _0^1`$. A more elegant way to avoid the dangerous enhancement of bulk photon bremsstrahlung is to consider the genuine bulk field described by the action (4) instead of $`b`$-particles living on the additional brane. Then, if one takes the Yukawa coupling $`y`$ large enough,

$$\frac{yv}{k}1$$

the wave function of a bulk fermion mode with four-dimensional mass $`\mu `$ is unsuppressed only at $`\xi \mu ^1`$, more precisely, at

$$\xi \frac{yv}{k\mu }.$$

The Euclidean photon propagator with $`|p|\mu `$ is exponentially small in that region, so the above suppression mechanism works for all bulk momenta.

It is worth noting that our general argument does not work in the non-Abelian case. Indeed, in that case self-interaction of vector fields becomes important precisely at the same values of $`\xi `$ where the Euclidean gauge field propagator starts to decay exponentially. Hence, it is unclear whether the setup (1) is suitable to localize non-Abelian gauge fields in a phenomenologically acceptable way. Perhaps, one can try to solve this problem by tuning the profile of the warp factor.

To conclude, let us point out an analogy between multi-dimensional models discussed in this note and purely four-dimensional models with charge non-conservation. The discussion of whether electric charge may not be exactly conserved has long history and the conclusion is that even tiny non-conservation of electric charge leads to contradiction to low-energy tests of QED unless millicharged particles are introduced  (see, however, Ref. ). Millicharged particles appear “naturally” in models with two massless Abelian gauge bosons $`A_\mu ^1`$ and $`A_\mu ^2`$ . In that case, mixing in kinetic term, $`ϵF_{\mu \nu }^1F_{\mu \nu }^2`$, may be introduced. To see that this term indeed gives rise to particles with small (proportional to $`ϵ`$) charges, it is convenient to work in the basis where photon $`\gamma `$ is a linear combination of $`A^1`$ and $`A^2`$ interacting with ordinary quarks and leptons, and the second gauge boson $`\gamma ^{}`$ (paraphoton) is another linear combination, such that the kinetic term for gauge fields is diagonal. Then “shadow” matter charged under $`A^2`$ gauge field interacts with physical photon with strength proportional to $`ϵ`$.

To see the link between the model with paraphoton and multi-dimensional models, let us consider a different orthogonal basis for gauge fields in the former model, namely, introduce fields

$$A^\pm =A^1\pm A^2.$$

In this basis, the interaction of the “photon” $`A^+`$ with shadow matter is of the same strength as its interaction with normal matter (up to a correction of order $`ϵ`$). However, the interaction between shadow and normal matter is very weak due to the screening effect of $`A^{}`$. Now the analogy between the model with paraphoton and multi-dimensional models is transparent — the photon zero mode plays a role of $`A^+`$, while bulk photon modes collectively play a role of $`A^{}`$-field<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1It is worth noting that the analogy is not complete, as the $`A^{}`$-field interacts at equal strength with normal and shadow matter, while bulk photon modes interact weakly with localized matter and strongly with bulk (“shadow”) matter. A more complete analogy may be obtained if one considers $`A^+`$-photon interacting with charge $`e`$ with all types of matter, and $`A^{}`$-photon interacting with charge $`e/N`$ with normal matter and with charge $`Ne`$ with shadow matter ($`N1`$).. Analogs of millicharged particles are the bulk modes of electron.

This analogy stresses the point that the real physical photon created by brane matter is not a bare Kaluza–Klein zero mode but a certain energy-dependent admixture of the zero mode and bulk modes. There is one more aspect of this analogy: a holographic interpretation of the brane image of a charged particle moving in the bulk would be a charged cloud of (quasi-)conformal matter. This cloud has a clear analogy to a cloud of millicharged particles, into which an electron would decay in paraphoton models.

We are indebted to M. Libanov, J. Polchinski, R. Rattazzi, P. Tinyakov, N. Seiberg and M. Shaposhnikov for useful discussions. We thank the organizers of Francqui Meeting on Strings and Gravity and XXXVII Rencontres de Moriond for warm and stimulating atmosphere. This work has been supported in part by Russian Foundation for Basic Research, grant 02-02-17398, and Swiss Science Foundation grant 7SUPJ062239. The work of S.D. has been supported in part by the INTAS grant YS 2001-2/128.


format: text

text:
# Theory of nonlinear rheology and yielding of dense colloidal suspensions

## Abstract

A first principles approach to the nonlinear flow of dense suspensions is presented which captures shear thinning of colloidal fluids and dynamical yielding of colloidal glasses. The advection of density fluctuations plays a central role, suppressing the caging of particles and speeding up structural relaxation. A mode coupling approach is developed to explore these effects.

The properties of dispersions under flow are central to their processing and technological use larson ; russel . But especially the non-linear rheology is not yet well understood. For the simplest case of steady shearing, the low density behavior is known Blawzdziewicz93 , but upon increasing the density the growing importance of particle interactions requires theoretical approximation Lionberger00 ; Bergenholtz01b , hinders simulations Foss00 , and calls for studies of model systems, e.g. Laun92 ; Nommensen99 . Of major interest is the arrest of the structural relaxation when approaching solidification for higher densities, which raises the question of how the imposition of steady shearing might interfere with glass formation. The linear phenomenology is familiar: a colloidal fluid possesses a viscosity and flows, while a colloidal glass characterized by elastic constants, only distorts under strain larson ; russel . But the nonlinear rheology of glassy colloids, which exhibit a continuous slowing down of the structural relaxation due to particle blocking (the “cage effect”) larson , is less clear. While the mode coupling theory (MCT) recovers the linear phenomenology of this fluid-to-glass transition from microscopic starting points Bengtzelius84 , a nonlinear external driving introduces new time scales whose influence on (non-)equilibration is not understood, and has been addressed only in minimal models Fielding00  or mean-field approaches Berthier00 . Moreover, as the true nature of the glass is still uncertain, its behavior under shearing may provide broader new insights (as suggested by recent simulation studies Yamamoto98 ; Barrat01 ).

Here we develop a first-principles approach for the simplest case of a disordered colloidal suspension under steady imposed shear, neglecting both many-body hydrodynamics and the resulting velocity fluctuations. We first identify some generic features in the yield properties of glass; approximations suggested by the MCT are then introduced in order to derive quantitative predictions.

The system consists of $`N`$ spherical particles (diameter $`d`$) dispersed in a volume $`V`$ of solvent with imposed flow profile $`𝐯(𝐫)=𝜿𝐫`$, where for simple shear with velocity along the $`x`$-axis and its gradient along the $`y`$-axis, the shear rate tensor is $`\kappa _{ij}=\dot{\gamma }\delta _{ix}\delta _{jy}`$. The effect of the shear rate $`\dot{\gamma }`$ on the particle dynamics is measured by the Peclet number russel , Pe$`{}_{0}{}^{}=\dot{\gamma }d^2/D_0`$, formed with the bare diffusion coefficient $`D_0`$ of a particle. Dimensionless units are obtained by setting $`d=D_0=k_BT=1`$. The evolution of the distribution function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ of the particle positions, $`𝐫_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{}N`$, under internal forces $`𝐅_i`$ and shearing, but neglecting hydrodynamic interactions, is given by the Smoluchowski equation russel ; dhont :

$$_t\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Omega }^{(\dot{\gamma })}\mathrm{\Psi }\text{, where }\mathrm{\Omega }^{(\dot{\gamma })}=\underset{i}{}_i(_i𝐅_i𝜿𝐫_i).$$
(1)
The system is taken to be in quiescent equilibrium ($`\dot{\gamma }=0`$) at $`t0`$ when averages $`\mathrm{}^{(\dot{\gamma }=0)}`$ are the canonical equilibrium ones. Then at $`t=0^+`$, the velocity profile is switched on instantaneously, so that the steady state distribution function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_s`$, which satisfies $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(\dot{\gamma })}\mathrm{\Psi }_s=0`$, will be approached at long times, $`t\mathrm{}`$. If $`\mathrm{\Psi }_s`$ was known the steady state average $`\sigma =\sigma _{xy}^{(\dot{\gamma })}`$ of the (thermodynamic) shear stress Batchelor77  could be found. From this the shear viscosity would follow as $`\eta (\dot{\gamma })=\eta _{\mathrm{}}+\sigma /\dot{\gamma }`$ (where the solvent viscosity is denoted $`\eta _{\mathrm{}}`$). But the rapid increase of $`\eta (0)`$ close to the glass transition suggests that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_s`$ is sensitively dependent on shear rate, which makes a direct calculation of it difficult.

A more robust way to approximate steady-state quantities comes from the insight that the growth of $`\eta `$ at the glass transition arises by slowing down of structural relaxations Bengtzelius84 , whose characteristic time $`\tau `$ in the quiescent state defines a second, “dressed” Peclet (or Weissenberg larson ) number, Pe $`=\dot{\gamma }\tau `$. This characterizes the influence of shear on structural relaxation and increases without bound at the glass transition, even while Pe$`{}_{0}{}^{}1`$. We argue that the competition of structural rearrangement and shearing that arises when Pe$`>1`$Pe0 dominates the non-linear rheology of colloids near the glass transition. Therefore steady state quantities shall be determined by considering the structural relaxation under shearing and “integrating through the transient dynamics”. Because Pe$`{}_{0}{}^{}1`$, we expect ordering or layering transitions to be absent Laun92 ; and as hydrodynamic interactions are presumed to play a subordinate role during the structural relaxation Bergenholtz01b  we neglect these too, focusing solely on the Brownian contribution to the transverse (shear) stress.

With $`t_0`$ the time passed since the start of shearing, the correlation function of fluctuations in variables $`f`$ and $`g`$ separated by time $`t`$ is given by:

$$C_{fg}(t,t_0)=e^{\mathrm{\Omega }_B^{(\dot{\gamma })}t_0}f^{}\left(e^{\mathrm{\Omega }_B^{(\dot{\gamma })}t}g\right)^{(0)},$$
(2)
where the backwards Smoluchowski operator $`\mathrm{\Omega }_B^{(\dot{\gamma })}`$ arises from partial integrations: $`\mathrm{\Omega }_B^{(\dot{\gamma })}=_i(_i+𝐅_i+𝐫_i𝜿^T)_i`$, and $`t,t_0>0`$. Steady state expectation values, $`g^{(\dot{\gamma })}=C_{1g}(t,t_0\mathrm{})`$, and variances, $`f^{}g^{(\dot{\gamma })}=C_{fg}(t=0,t_0\mathrm{})`$ then follow.

An important property of the sheared system is translational invariance Onuki79 . It leads to spatially independent averages, or, in Fourier space at wavevector $`𝐪`$, to $`f_𝐪^{(\dot{\gamma })}=f_0^{(\dot{\gamma })}\delta _{𝐪,0}`$. In the two-time correlation functions of Eq. (2), it leads to a coupling of fluctuations of wavevector $`𝐪`$ with later fluctuations of the advected wavevector $`𝐪(t)=𝐪+𝐪𝜿t`$, suggesting the definition: $`C_{f_𝐤g_𝐪}^{}(t,t_0)=NC_{fg;𝐪}(t,t_0)\delta _{𝐪(t),𝐤}`$. Figure 1 sketches the advection of a fluctuation with initial wavelength $`\lambda _x`$ to one with $`\lambda _x`$ and $`\lambda _y(t)=\lambda _x/(\dot{\gamma }t)`$ at later time $`t`$. Brownian particle motions (assisted by the interaction forces) “smear out” the fluctuation with time and cause the decay of the corresponding correlator. Because the wavenumber $`q(t)`$ increases upon shearing, smaller and smaller motions can cause the fluctuation to decay Onuki79 .

Equation (2) is an exact consequence of Eq. (1) (for the given shear flow); but to proceed further requires additional approximations. With our assumption that applied shear interacts with slow structural rearrangements, we build on the description achieved by the MCT, and analyse the approach into the steady state by monitoring the fluctuations of density ($`\varrho _𝐪=_{i=1}^Ne^{i\mathrm{𝐪𝐫}_i}`$) and of the “pair density” (the square of the density in real space), aiming to establish nonlinear closed equations for these. This entails elimination of forces $`𝐅_i`$ in favor of the quiescent-state structure factor $`S_q`$ (taken to be known) – a near-equilibrium assumption (see below) that is formally uncontrolled but motivated, at least in part, by the smallness of Pe0.

Steady state correlators are now approximated by projection onto the density modes, giving

$$f^{}g^{(\dot{\gamma })}f^{}g^{(0)}+\frac{\dot{\gamma }}{2}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t\underset{𝐤}{}\frac{k_xk_y(t)S_{k(t)}^{}}{k(t)NS_{k(t)}^2}V_𝐤^{fg}\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐤^2(t),$$
(3)
with $`t`$ now the time since switch-on, $`S_k^{}=S_k/k`$, and $`V_𝐤^{fg}`$ an easily found static overlap overlap . The transient density fluctuations are given by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐪(t)=C_{\varrho \varrho ;𝐪}(t,0)/S_q`$, and are normalized by $`S_q`$. They enter Eq. (3) via a factorization–approximation of the density pair fluctuation functions. With the choice $`f=g=\varrho _𝐪/\sqrt{N}`$, Eq. (3) gives the steady state structure factor under shear, whereas $`f=1`$ and $`g=\sigma _{xy}/V`$ give the transverse stress, for which $`V_𝐤^{fg}=(Nk_xk_y/Vk)S_k^{}`$.

The problem of calculating the steady state averages is thus “reduced” to first finding the transient density fluctuations $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐪(t)`$, given by the structural rearrangements after switching on the flow, and integrating these in Eq. (3). From Zwanzig-Mori (type) manipulations Kawasaki95 , one finds the exact equation of motion:

$$\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}_𝐪(t)+\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐪(t)\left\{\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐪(t)+_0^t𝑑t^{}m_𝐪(t,t^{})\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}_𝐪(t^{})\right\}=0.$$
(4)
where $`\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}_𝐪(t)=_t\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐪(t)`$, and the “initial decay rate” $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐪(t)`$ exhibits the familiar Taylor dispersion dhont ; taylorconv . It is not known how to evaluate the microscopic expression for the memory function $`m_𝐪(t,t^{})`$ exactly. In the MCT spirit of our approach, this is approximated by projecting the fluctuating forces onto density pairs and factorizing the resulting pair-density correlation functions as

$$m_𝐪(t,t^{})\frac{1}{2N}\underset{𝐤}{}V_{𝐪,𝐤}^{(\dot{\gamma })}(t,t^{})\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐤(tt^{})\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝐪𝐤}(tt^{}).$$
(5)
The vertex $`V^{(\dot{\gamma })}`$, whose lengthy formula will be published elsewhere, is evaluated in the limit Pe$`{}_{0}{}^{}1`$ (as argued above) but for large times so that $`\dot{\gamma }t`$ and $`\dot{\gamma }t^{}`$ are finite. As $`\dot{\gamma }0`$, it reduces to the standard MCT vertex Bengtzelius84  and like the latter is uniquely determined by the equilibrium structure factor, $`S_q`$. For long times, it vanishes as $`V^{(\dot{\gamma })}q_yq_x^3\dot{\gamma }^3t_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}(tt^{})^1`$ for $`q_x0`$.

Equations (3) to (5) complete our derivation of closed, self-consistent equations for the steady state properties of dense sheared suspensions. They contain the bifurcation singularities which lie at the core of MCT. For $`\dot{\gamma }=0`$, upon smooth changes of the input equilibrium state parameters, a fluid with $`\mathrm{\Phi }_q(t\mathrm{})0`$ turns into an amorphous solid, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_q(t\mathrm{})f_q>0`$. The $`f_q`$ are called glass form factors and describe the arrested structure. While transport coefficients of the fluid, like the viscosity, are connected to the longest relaxation time of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_q(t)`$, elastic constants of the solid, like the transverse elastic modulus $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$, are given by the $`f_q`$ Bengtzelius84 .

In the limit of small shear rates, a stability analysis of the amorphous solid can be performed and leads to a generalization of the factorization theorem of MCT Goetze85 . Close to the bifurcation, the dynamics are governed by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_q(t)=f_q^c+h_q𝒢(t)`$, where the $`f_q^c`$ describe the glassy structure at the instability and the critical amplitude $`h_q`$ is connected to the cage-breaking particle motion; both retain their definition from the unsheared situation. Here $`𝒢(t)`$ contains the essential non-linearities of the bifurcation dynamics which arise from the physical feedback mechanism (the cage effect). It depends on a few material parameters only and, for $`|𝒢(t)|1`$, follows from:

$$\epsilon c^{(\dot{\gamma })}(\dot{\gamma }t)^2+\lambda 𝒢^2(t)=\frac{d}{dt}_0^t𝑑t^{}𝒢(tt^{})𝒢(t^{}).$$
(6)
Here, $`\epsilon `$ measures the distance to the transition and $`\lambda `$ is known for some systems Bengtzelius84 . Monte Carlo estimations of the microscopic expression for the (new) parameter $`c^{(\dot{\gamma })}`$ give $`c^{(\dot{\gamma })}3`$ for hard spheres. Corrections of higher order in the small quantities ($`\epsilon ,\dot{\gamma },𝒢`$) are neglected; see Franosch97  for background on Eq. (6) for $`\dot{\gamma }=0`$.

Equation (6) is our central result. As expected, the sign of $`\dot{\gamma }`$ does not enter, although it affects the Taylor dispersion. Because $`(\dot{\gamma }t)^2`$ dominates for long times, always $`𝒢(t\mathrm{})t/\tau ^{(\dot{\gamma })}`$, with $`\tau ^{(\dot{\gamma })}=\sqrt{(\lambda 1/2)/c^{(\dot{\gamma })}}/|\dot{\gamma }|`$. Hence, under flow, density fluctuations always decay, as this decrease of $`𝒢(t)`$ for long times initiates the final relaxation (where the corrections to Eq. (6) become important) of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐪(t)`$ to zero. Arbitrarily small shear rates $`\dot{\gamma }`$ melt the glass and so “interrupt” aging, as has also been found for spin-glasses where shearing was mimicked by breaking detailed balance Berthier00 . This vindicates our decision to ignore aging and to proceed via Eq. (3) in order to obtain steady state properties.

While the non-Newtonian fluid behavior ($`\epsilon <0`$) includes two slow time scales, the familiar $`\tau `$ and the shear induced $`\tau ^{(\dot{\gamma })}`$, the rheology of glass ($`\epsilon 0`$) is determined by $`\tau ^{(\dot{\gamma })}`$ only Fuchs02 . For $`\epsilon 0+`$ and $`\dot{\gamma }=0`$, a fraction $`f_q=f_q^c+h_q\sqrt{\epsilon /(1\lambda )}`$ of the density fluctuations would stay arrested, while with shear these decay at a rate set by $`\dot{\gamma }`$: $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐪(t)f_q\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐪^+(t/\tau ^{(\dot{\gamma })})`$, where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐪^+(x0)1x`$, as follows from Eq. (6).

For $`\epsilon 0`$ and $`\dot{\gamma }0`$, the time for the final decay can become arbitrarily slow compared to the time characterizing the decay onto $`f_q`$. Inserting $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐪^+(t/\tau ^{(\dot{\gamma })})`$ into Eq. (3), the long time contributions separate out, and depend on time only via $`\dot{\gamma }t`$. Hence the glass has nontrivial shear-rate-independent limits for steady state values: $`f^{}g^{(\dot{\gamma })}f^{}g^{(+)}f^{}g^{(0)}`$ for $`\dot{\gamma }0`$. The $`f^{}g^{(+)}`$ are given by integrals over the $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐪^+(t/\tau ^{(\dot{\gamma })})`$ and quantify those fluctuations that require the presence of shearing to avoid their arrest. For the case of the shear stress, a finite (dynamical) yield stress, $`\sigma ^+=lim_{\dot{\gamma }0}\sigma _{xy}^{(\dot{\gamma })}`$ for $`\epsilon 0`$, is thereby found. Since the glass transition is often identified by a divergence of viscosity (in terms of which we have shear thinning: $`\eta (\dot{\gamma }0)\dot{\gamma }^m`$ with $`m=1`$) our prediction of a finite yield stress throughout the glass phase is far from trivial. It excludes e.g. power-law fluid behavior ($`\sigma \dot{\gamma }^{1m}`$ with $`0<m<1`$; see Fielding00 ).

These results follow from the general stability analysis of Eq. (6) and are predicted to be universal, i.e. to hold for the Brownian contribution to the shear stress and viscosity close to the glass transition in any colloidal dispersion. But because (in contrast to aging approaches Latz02 ) we approximate nonlinear couplings under shear using equilibrium averages, we require the system to remain “close to equilibrium” in some sense. The existence of a finite yield stress $`\sigma ^+`$ means that this is not guaranteed even as $`\dot{\gamma }0`$.

Insight into an important mechanism of shear-fluidization can be gained by considering transient density fluctuations with wavevector $`𝐪`$ perpendicular to the flow plane, $`𝐪=q\widehat{e}_z`$. Here $`V^{(\dot{\gamma })}`$ simplifies to the standard MCT vertex with advected (time-dependent) wavevectors isovertex . While for $`\dot{\gamma }=0`$ it exhibits the nonlinear coupling of density correlators with wavelength equal to the average particle distance, for $`\dot{\gamma }0`$, the (only) effect of shearing on this “neutral” direction consists in a shift of the advected wavevectors to higher values, where the effective potential decreases. This decreases the memory function and thus speeds up structural rearrangements. In this way the theory captures the faster decay of fluctuations caused by shear advection (cf Fig. 1).

The presence of shear advection in the neutral $`z`$-direction suggests an approximation that considers only the resulting competition of caging and advection-induced decay. In this “isotropically sheared hard sphere model” (ISHSM) isomodel , we neglect kinematic flow of particles so that all directions are treated as “neutral”. The quiescent $`S_q`$ depends only on the packing fraction $`\varphi `$, and the model’s glass transition lies at $`\varphi _c=0.51591`$ Franosch97 . Figure 2 shows the stress versus strain rate curves for $`\varphi `$ close to the transition. In the fluid, $`\varphi <\varphi _c`$, a Newtonian regime ($`\sigma =\eta \dot{\gamma }`$) is found for $`\dot{\gamma }`$ small enough that Pe $`<1`$. For Pe $`>1`$ there is a broad crossover to the critical yield stress value, $`\sigma _c^+=\sigma ^+(\epsilon 0+)`$, from which $`\sigma `$ starts to rise due to (non-universal) short-time effects for Pe0 around $`10^2`$ (where $`\eta _{\mathrm{}}`$ will also contribute). In the glass, $`\varphi \varphi _c`$, a yield stress plateau for $`\dot{\gamma }0`$ is obtained, and rises strongly with increasing packing fraction. We speculate that the lack of a clear yield stress plateau at Pe$`{}_{0}{}^{}10^3`$ (and likely hydrodynamic effects) explains shear-thinning exponents $`m<1`$ seen in experiments Laun92 .

In summary, we have presented a microscopic theory of the nonlinear rheology of colloidal fluids and glasses under steady shear. It predicts a universal transition between shear-thinning fluid flow, with diverging viscosity upon increasing the interactions, and solid yielding, with a yield stress that is finite at (and beyond) the glass point. Besides its interest for dispersion flow, our work suggests a further role of colloidal systems in elucidating glasses via the study of shear-melted states for small shear rates. This is of fundamental interest because, e.g., mean-field driven spin-glass theories predict nothing like a yield stress Berthier00 . While comparison with measurements in colloids Foss00 ; Laun92 ; Nommensen99  and simulations of sheared atomic glasses Yamamoto98 ; Barrat01  is promising, our approach represents only the first step toward rational prediction of the rheology of a glass; though physically motivated and in part inspired by the successful MCT description of the cage-effect, several of our approximations remain incompletely justified. Nor is it clear whether Eqs. (4,5) can exhibit “jamming” transitions Cates98  at finite shear rates, or how anisotropic Cates89  the fluctuations can become. Extension to time dependent shearing would be especially interesting because recent shear echo measurements Petekidis02  reveal intriguing glass-melting scenarios.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank J.-L. Barrat, J. Bergenholtz, L. Berthier, A. Latz and G. Petekidis for discussions. M.F. was supported by the DFG, grant Fu 309/3.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In this paper we report a preliminary determination of the semileptonic branching fractions $`b_+`$ and $`b_0`$ of charged and neutral $`B`$ mesons, respectively, obtained with measurements of electron111Charge-conjugation is implied throughout this note. spectra in events tagged by a fully reconstructed hadronic decay of a $`B`$ meson. Electrons from the prompt semileptonic decay of the second $`B`$ meson are separated from electrons of cascade semileptonic charm decays using the correlation between the electron charge and the flavor of the tag $`B`$ meson.

## 2 Data sample and detector

The data for this analysis were collected with the BABAR detector at the PEP-II asymmetric $`e^+e^{}`$ collider  in 1999–2000 and amount to an integrated luminosity of $`20.6\text{ fb}^1`$ taken at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$.

The BABAR detector is a large-acceptance solenoidal spectrometer . All components of the detector are used in the present analysis. Charged particles are detected and their momenta are measured with high precision in a five-layer double-sided silicon vertex tracker (SVT) and a 40-layer drift chamber (DCH). Both SVT and DCH also provide ionization measurements used in charged particle identification. Additional charged particle identification information is obtained from the Cherenkov angle measurement in a detector of internally reflected Cherenkov light (DIRC). Electromagnetic showers of photons and electrons are measured with excellent resolution in the electromagnetic calorimeter (EMC), composed of 6580 CsI(Tl) crystals. The iron flux return (IFR), used in the identification of muons, is segmented and instrumented with multiple layers of resistive plate chambers.

## 3 Event selection

We select multihadron events containing one fully reconstructed hadronic decay of a $`B^0`$ or $`B^+`$ candidate and at least one additional charged track. Continuum background consisting of non-resonant $`e^+e^{}q\overline{q}`$ production $`(q=u,d,s,c)`$ is reduced by requiring the ratio of the second to the zeroth Fox-Wolfram moment  to be $`R_2<0.5`$.

Electron candidates must have a ratio of calorimeter energy to track momentum of $`0.89<E/p<1.2`$. The profile of the energy deposit is required to be consistent with an electromagnetic shower, both in lateral  and azimuthal  extent. The ionization measurement in the DCH and the Cherenkov angle measured in the DIRC (if available) are required to be consistent with the electron hypothesis at the $`3\sigma `$ level. Candidates that are not matched to an EMC cluster are retained if their $`dE/dx`$ measurement in the DCH is consistent with the electron hypothesis. The misidentification probability for hadrons faking an electron signature in the detector is measured in data with samples of pions, kaons and protons that have been identified by kinematic requirements with high purity.

Muon candidates must pass requirements on the measured and expected number of interaction lengths penetrated, the position match between the extrapolated track and IFR hits, and on the average and spread of the number of IFR hits per layer.

Kaon candidates are identified with $`dE/dx`$ measurements both in the SVT and DCH and the number of Cherenkov photons and Cherenkov angle measured in the DIRC.

A photon candidate consists of a localized energy maximum in the EMC with a lateral energy profile consistent with a photon shower and a minimum energy of $`E>30\mathrm{MeV}`$. Pairs of photons measured in the EMC are constrained to the known $`\pi ^0`$ mass if their invariant mass is $`115<m_{\gamma \gamma }<150\mathrm{MeV}`$ and if the sum of their energies is larger than $`100\mathrm{MeV}`$.

Pairs of charged pions are combined to form $`K_S^0`$ candidates if their invariant mass is between 462 and $`534\mathrm{MeV}`$. Neutral and charged kaons are combined with pions to form $`K^{}`$ candidates, if their invariant mass is within $`100\mathrm{MeV}`$ of the nominal $`K^{}`$ mass. $`\rho ^+`$ and $`\rho ^0`$ candidates are reconstructed in the decay modes $`\pi ^+\pi ^0`$ and $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$, if their invariant mass is within $`\pm 150\mathrm{MeV}`$ of the nominal $`\rho `$ mass. $`a_1^+`$ candidates are formed by combining three charged pions, if their invariant mass is between $`1.0`$ and $`1.6\mathrm{GeV}`$ and the $`\chi ^2`$ probability of a vertex fit of the $`a_1^+`$ candidate is greater than $`0.1\%`$.

$`\overline{D}^0`$ candidates are reconstructed in the decay channels $`K^+\pi ^{}`$, $`K^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$, $`K^+\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^{}`$, and $`K_S^0\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$. $`D^{}`$ candidates are formed in the $`K^+\pi ^{}\pi ^{}`$ and $`K_S^0\pi ^{}`$ decay modes. $`D^{}`$ candidates are reconstructed by combining a $`\overline{D}^0`$ candidate and a soft pion. The selection of $`D^{}`$ candidates requires the mass difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }m=m_{\overline{D}{}_{}{}^{0}\pi _{}^{}}m_{\overline{D}^0}`$ to be within $`\pm 3\sigma `$ of the nominal value. $`D^0`$ candidates are reconstructed by combining a $`D^0`$ candidate with a $`\pi ^0`$ or a photon. $`J/\psi `$ candidates are reconstructed in the decay modes $`e^+e^{}`$ and $`\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ where at least one decay daughter must be positively identified as a lepton. $`J/\psi `$ candidates must have an invariant mass of $`2.95<m_{e^+e^{}}<3.14\mathrm{GeV}`$ and $`3.06<m_{\mu ^+\mu ^{}}<3.14\mathrm{GeV}`$, respectively. $`\psi (2S)`$ candidates are reconstructed in the decay channels $`\psi (2S)e^+e^{},\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ and $`\psi (2S)J/\psi \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$.

$`B^0`$ candidates are formed by combining a $`D^{()}`$ candidate with a $`\pi ^+`$, $`\rho ^+`$, or $`a_1^+`$. In addition, we reconstruct the decay channels $`B^0J/\psi K^{()0}`$ and $`B^0\psi (2S)K^{()0}`$. $`B^+`$ candidates are reconstructed by combining a $`D^{()0}`$ candidate with a $`\pi ^+`$, $`\rho ^+`$, or $`a_1^+`$. Furthermore, the decay channels $`B^+J/\psi K^{()+}`$ and $`B^+\psi (2S)K^{()+}`$ are reconstructed.

The selection of $`B`$ candidates is based on two nearly uncorrelated variables, the difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ between the energy of the $`B`$ candidate and the beam energy in the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ center-of-mass frame, and the beam-energy substituted mass $`m_{ES}=\sqrt{(s/2+𝐩𝐩_i)^2/E_i^2𝐩^2},`$ where $`\sqrt{s}`$ is the center-of-mass energy, $`E_i`$ and $`𝐩_i`$ are the total energy and the momentum of the initial state in the laboratory frame, and $`𝐩`$ is the momentum of the $`B`$ candidate in the same frame. In the $`(m_{ES},\mathrm{\Delta }E)`$ plane a mode-dependent signal region is defined as $`|m_{ES}m_{ES}^{peak}|<3\sigma (m_{ES})`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Delta }E\mathrm{\Delta }E^{peak}|<3\sigma (\mathrm{\Delta }E)`$, where the resolutions $`\sigma (m_{ES})`$ and $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Delta }E)`$ are measured in data. If several $`B`$ candidates fulfill these requirements, only the one with the smallest $`|\mathrm{\Delta }E\mathrm{\Delta }E^{peak}|`$ is retained. Signal and background yields are extracted from fits to the $`m_{ES}`$ distributions of $`B`$ candidates with a Gaussian distribution for the signal and a background given by

$$\frac{dN}{dm_{ES}}m_{ES}\times \sqrt{1\frac{m_{ES}^2}{E_{beam}^2}}\times \mathrm{exp}\left[\zeta \left(1\frac{m_{ES}^2}{E_{beam}^2}\right)\right],$$

where the only free parameters are $`\zeta `$ and the normalization. In total, we reconstruct $`7684\pm 120_{stat}B^+`$ candidates and $`6533\pm 112_{stat}B^0`$ candidates.

## 4 Measurement of the inclusive semileptonic branching fractions

In events with a reconstructed tag $`B`$ candidate we search for electron candidates with a well measured track originating from the known beam-spot. Requirements on the momentum $`p>0.5\mathrm{GeV}`$ (both in the laboratory and center-of-mass frames) and the polar angle $`23^{}<\theta <135.9^{}`$ in the laboratory frame are applied to ensure good discrimination against hadrons and the full containment of the shower in the EMC. The mean electron identification efficiency is $`(89.8\pm 0.7_{stat})\%`$.

This electron spectrum is corrected for various background contributions as described below. Electrons from $`J/\psi `$ decays, photon conversions in the beam pipe and support structure of the SVT, and $`\pi ^0e^+e^{}\gamma `$ are detected using the invariant mass of an electron paired with a track of opposite charge. We correct the background spectrum for the inefficiency of the pair-finding algorithm and subtract the resulting spectrum from the total electron spectrum. The contribution of electrons from converted photons is sizeable in the lowest momentum bin, while electrons from $`J/\psi `$ decays make only a very small contribution at high momenta. The contribution from continuum events and combinatoric background in the reconstruction of the tag $`B`$ meson is obtained with $`B`$ candidates in the $`m_{ES}`$ sideband and amounts to $`4.2\%`$ of the total spectrum. The hadron fake contribution is estimated using misidentification probabilities for all hadronic tracks in tagged events. The mean hadron fake probability is $`(0.25\pm 0.005_{stat})\%`$ and is dominated by kaons. The fake contribution is largest at low momenta and amounts to $`4.3\%`$ of the total electron spectrum.

Various processes other than prompt semileptonic $`B`$ decays contribute to the electron spectrum as well. Electrons from $`\tau `$ decays are estimated by Monte Carlo simulation, where a branching fraction of $`(B\tau X)=2.6\pm 0.4\%`$ is assumed . Electrons from charm mesons originate either from $`bc`$ (“lower vertex” charm) or from $`W^{}\overline{c}s`$ (“upper vertex” charm). The latter have the same charge as electrons from prompt $`B`$ decays and constitute a background, while the former are of opposite charge and are accounted for with the charge correlation to the flavor of the tag $`B`$ meson. Electrons from semileptonic “upper vertex” charm decays are estimated by Monte Carlo simulation, where the world average of the branching fractions for $`BD_sX`$, $`BD^{()}\overline{D}^{()}K^{()}`$, $`D_seX`$, $`D_s\tau X`$, and semileptonic $`D^0`$ and $`D^+`$ decays have been assumed. Semileptonic $`B`$ decays in the BABAR Monte Carlo simulation have been modeled according to the charm meson involved. A parametrization of HQET form factors, defined in , is used for $`BD^{}e\nu `$, the model of Goity and Roberts  is used for the non-resonant decays $`BD^{()}\pi e\nu `$, whereas the ISGW2 model  is used for all other semileptonic decays.

The correlation between the charge of the electron and the flavor of the reconstructed tag $`B`$ meson allows the separation of the measured electron spectrum into contributions from prompt semileptonic $`B`$ decays and from cascade semileptonic charm decays (from the “lower vertex”). For events tagged with a $`B^0`$ meson, $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing must be taken into account with the $`B_d`$ mixing probability $`\chi _d=0.174\pm 0.009`$ . In events tagged with a $`B^+`$ $`(B^0)`$ candidate, we find $`674\pm 34_{stat}`$ ($`597\pm 38_{stat}`$) prompt electrons. Figure 1 shows the spectra measured in events tagged with $`B^+`$ and $`B^0`$ candidates. The prompt $`B`$ semileptonic branching fractions are derived from these numbers and the normalization (given by the number of reconstructed $`B`$ mesons) after correcting for (1) the difference in event selection efficiency between events where both $`B`$ mesons decay fully hadronically and events where one $`B`$ meson decays semileptonically, (2) the geometric acceptance of electron detection of $`86.2\%`$, and (3) the extrapolation of the momentum spectrum of $`(5.3\pm 0.2)\%`$.

The measured values of the branching fractions are for charged $`B`$ mesons $`b_+=0.103\pm 0.006\pm 0.005`$ and for neutral $`B`$ mesons $`b_0=0.104\pm 0.008\pm 0.005`$. The ratio of the branching fractions is determined to be $`b_+/b_0=0.99\pm 0.10\pm 0.03`$. These results are consistent with and comparable in precision to . The average branching fraction $`b=0.104\pm 0.005\pm 0.004`$ is consistent with the many other measurements at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ and LEP.

The systematic errors are dominated by three sources: First, the uncertainty in the track reconstruction efficiency together with the systematics of the cross-feed in the $`B`$-reconstruction amount to a total of $`3.5\%`$. Second, electron identification ($`1.8\%`$) and the uncertainty in the hadron fake subtraction ($`1.4\%`$) have a significant contribution to the electron spectrum. The systematic errors associated with pair backgrounds from converted photons, Dalitz decays of $`\pi ^0`$, and $`J/\psi `$ decays are negligible. Third, the uncertainty of physics processes contributing to the electron spectrum (mostly from upper vertex charm decays) amounts to $`1.7\%`$. Only the first group of errors affects the determination of the ratio of branching fractions, the other two groups of errors cancel approximately.

## 5 Conclusions

We have presented a measurement of the inclusive semileptonic branching fractions of charged and neutral $`B`$ mesons in events tagged with a fully reconstructed hadronic decay of a $`B`$ meson. This analysis is statistics limited but already of comparable precision to the current world average. The systematic error can be improved with more statistics, leaving room for significant improvements as more data are accumulated at BABAR.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In one of their series papers on quantization of Lie bialgebras, Etingof and Kazhdan \[EK\] introduced a notion of nondegeneracy of a vertex operator algebra. A vertex operator algebra $`V`$ is said to be nondegenerate if for every positive integer $`n`$ the linear map $`Z_n`$ from $`V^nC((z_1,\mathrm{},z_n))`$ to $`V((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ defined by

$$Z_n(v^{(1)}\mathrm{}v^{(n)}f)=fY(v^{(1)},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(v^{(n)},z_n)\mathrm{𝟏}$$

is injective. It was proved therein that in their definition of the notion of braided vertex operator algebra, if the classical limit vertex operator algebra is nondegenerate, certain axioms are automatically satisfied. Let $`V(g,K)`$ be the vertex operator algebra associated with a (finite-dimensional) Lie algebra $`g`$ and a (complex) number $`K`$ (cf. \[FF\], \[FZ\], \[Lia\]). It was proved in \[EK\] that if $`V(g,K)`$ is an irreducible $`\widehat{g}`$-module, then $`V(g,K)`$ is nondegenerate. Notice that the irreducibility of $`V(g,K)`$ as a $`\widehat{g}`$-module amounts to the simplicity of the vertex operator algebra $`V(g,K)`$. So, it is reasonable to conjecture that general simple vertex operator algebras are nondegenerate. In this paper, we shall prove that this conjecture is indeed true.

In literature, there are certain results closely related to the injectivity of the maps $`Z_n`$. In \[DL\], among other results it was proved that if $`V`$ is a simple vertex operator algebra and $`W`$ is an irreducible $`V`$-module, then $`Y(v,z)w0`$ for $`0vV,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}wW`$. Furthermore, among other results it was proved in \[DM\] that the linear map $`Y`$ viewed as a map from $`VW`$ to $`W((z))`$ is injective. It is quite conceivable that ideas in \[DL\], \[DM\] and \[EK\] will be highly valuable for proving the conjecture. Indeed, our proof here essentially uses the same ideas.

Notice that in the notion of vertex operator algebra used in \[EK\], no conformal vector and no $`Z`$-grading are assumed. A vertex operator algebra in the sense of \[EK\] is often called a vertex algebra. In this paper we consider a general vertex algebra $`V`$. For any $`V`$-module $`W`$ we define a linear map $`Z_n^W`$ from $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ to $`W((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ by

$$Z_n^W(v^{(1)}\mathrm{}v^{(n)}wf)=fY(v^{(1)},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(v^{(n)},z_n)w.$$

It follows from \[FHL\] that $`V^{(n+1)}C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ is a natural vertex algebra with $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ as a module. We first prove that $`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W`$ is a submodule. To describe submodules of $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ we slightly generalize the result of \[FHL\] on the irreducibility of tensor product modules for tensor product vertex operator algebras in the context of vertex algebras of countable dimension. Using this, we show that if $`V`$ has countable dimension and irreducible in the sense that $`V`$ is an irreducible $`V`$-module and if $`W`$ is a $`V`$-module, then any submodule of $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ is of the form $`V^nU`$, where $`U`$ is a $`VC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$-submodule of $`WC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$. Then it follows that $`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W=0`$. From this we show that every irreducible vertex algebra of countable dimension is nondegenerate. In particular, this implies that every simple vertex operator algebra in the sense of \[FLM\] and \[FHL\] is nondegenerate.

## 2 The main result

We here shall recall the notion of nondegeneracy of a vertex algebra from \[EK\] and prove that every irreducible vertex algebra of countable dimension is nondegenerate.

Throughout this paper, the ground field is $`C`$. In this paper we shall use the following definition of the notion of vertex algebra (cf. \[B\], \[FLM\], \[FHL\], \[DL\], \[Li2\], \[LL\]):

###### Definition 2.1

A vertex algebra is a vector space $`V`$ equipped with a linear map, called the vertex operator map,

$`Y:V`$ $``$ $`(\mathrm{End}V)[[z,z^1]]`$
$`v`$ $``$ $`Y(v,z)={\displaystyle \underset{nZ}{}}v_nz^{n1}(v_n\mathrm{End}V)`$ (2.1)
and equipped with a distinguished vector $`\mathrm{𝟏}V`$, called the vacuum vector, such that the following axioms hold: For $`u,vV`$,

$`u_nv=0\text{ for }n\text{ sufficiently large};`$ (2.2)
$`Y(\mathrm{𝟏},z)=1;`$ (2.3)
for $`vV`$,

$`Y(v,z)\mathrm{𝟏}V[[z]]\text{ and }Y(v,z)\mathrm{𝟏}|_{z=0}\left(=v_1\mathrm{𝟏}\right)=v;`$ (2.4)
and for $`u,vV`$,

$`z_0^1\delta \left({\displaystyle \frac{z_1z_2}{z_0}}\right)Y(u,z_1)Y(v,z_2)z_0^1\delta \left({\displaystyle \frac{z_2z_1}{z_0}}\right)Y(v,x_2)Y(u,x_1)`$ (2.5)
$`=`$ $`z_2^1\delta \left({\displaystyle \frac{z_1z_0}{z_2}}\right)Y(Y(u,z_0)v,z_2)`$
(the Jacobi identity).

###### Remark 2.2

In literature, there are variant definitions of the notion of vertex algebra (cf. \[B\], \[DL\], \[Li2\], \[Ka\]). It was proved in \[Li2\] that the definition given in \[B\] is equivalent to the current definition (with ground field $`C`$). It follows immediately from a known duality result (\[G\], \[FHL\], \[DL\], \[Li2\]) that the definition given in \[EK\] and \[Ka\] (where the vacuum vector is denoted by $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$) is also equivalent to the current definition.

For a vertex algebra $`V`$, the vertex operator map $`Y`$ is a linear map from $`V`$ to $`\mathrm{Hom}(V,V((z)))`$. The map $`Y`$ can alternatively be considered as a linear map from $`VV`$ to $`V((z))`$. Following \[EK\], we alternatively denote this map by $`Y(z)`$. Define a linear operator $`𝒟\mathrm{End}V`$ by

$`D(v)=v_2\mathrm{𝟏}\left(=\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dz}}Y(v,z)\mathrm{𝟏}\right)|_{z=0}\right).`$ (2.6)
Then (cf. \[LL\])

$`[𝒟,Y(u,z)]=Y(𝒟u,z)={\displaystyle \frac{d}{dz}}Y(u,z),`$ (2.7)
$`Y(u,z)v=e^{z𝒟}Y(v,z)u\text{ for }u,vV.`$ (2.8)
It was proved (\[FLM\], \[FHL\], \[DL\], \[Li2\]) that the Jacobi identity is equivalent to the following weak commutativity and associativity: For any $`u,vV`$, there exists a nonnegative integer $`k`$ such that

$`(z_1z_2)^kY(u,z_1)Y(v,z_2)=(z_1z_2)^kY(v,z_2)Y(u,z_1);`$ (2.9)
and for any $`u,v,wV`$ there exists a nonnegative integer $`l`$ such that

$`(z_0+z_2)^lY(u,z_0+z_2)Y(v,z_2)w=(z_0+z_2)^lY(Y(u,z_0)v,z_2)w.`$ (2.10)
A $`V`$-module (cf. \[Li2\]) is a vector space $`W`$ equipped with a linear map $`Y`$ from $`V`$ to $`(\mathrm{End}W)[[z,z^1]]`$ such that all the axioms in defining the notion of vertex algebra that makes sense hold. That is, the truncation condition (2.2), the vacuum property (2.3) and the Jacobi identity (2.5) hold.

The notion of ideal is defined in the obvious way; an ideal of a vertex algebra $`V`$ is a subspace $`U`$ such that $`u_mv,v_muU`$ for all $`vV,uU`$.

###### Definition 2.3

A vertex algebra $`V`$ is said to be simple if there is no nontrivial ideal and $`V`$ is said to be irreducible if $`V`$ is an irreducible $`V`$-module.

Clearly, an irreducible vertex algebra is simple, but simple vertex algebras are not necessarily irreducible. For example, the vertex algebra constructed in \[B\] from the commutative associative algebra $`C[x]`$ with the standard derivation is simple, but not irreducible. On the other hand, simple vertex operator algebras in the sense of \[FLM\] and \[FHL\] are always irreducible because any submodule of $`V`$ is an ideal (cf. \[FHL\]).

Let $`V`$ be a vertex algebra, fixed throughout this section. Following \[EK\], for a positive integer $`n`$, we define a linear map $`Z_n`$ from $`V^nC((z_1,\mathrm{},z_n))`$ to $`V((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ by

$`Z_n(v^{(1)}\mathrm{}v^{(n)}f)=fY(v^{(1)},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(v^{(n)},z_n)\mathrm{𝟏}.`$ (2.11)
In \[EK\], $`Z_n`$ was alternatively defined as

$`Z_n=Y(z_1)(1Y(z_2))\mathrm{}(1^{n1}Y(z_n))(1^n\mathrm{𝟏}).`$ (2.12)
The following notion was due to \[EK\]:

###### Definition 2.4

A vertex algebra $`V`$ is said to be nondegenerate if the linear maps $`Z_n`$ are injective for all positive integers $`n`$.

###### Remark 2.5

Consider the case $`n=1`$. For $`vV,fC((z))`$, we have

$$Z_1(vf)=fY(v,z)\mathrm{𝟏}=fe^{z𝒟}Y(\mathrm{𝟏},z)v=e^{z𝒟}fv.$$

Then $`Z_1=e^{z𝒟}\pi `$, where $`\pi `$ is the natural embedding of $`VC((z))`$ into $`V((z))`$. It follows immediately that $`Z_1`$ is injective.

Now, let $`W`$ be a $`V`$-module. Then we similarly define a linear map $`Z_n^W`$ from $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ to $`W((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ by

$`Z_n^W(v^{(1)}\mathrm{}v^{(n)}wf)=fY(v^{(1)},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(v^{(n)},z_n)w`$ (2.13)
for $`v^{(1)},\mathrm{},v^{(n)}V,wW,fC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$. Notice that $`C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ is a commutative associative algebra (with identity element) and that for any vector space $`U`$, $`U((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ is a $`C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$-module. It is clear that $`Z_n^W`$ is $`C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$-linear where $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ is considered as a $`C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$-module in the obvious way. Let $`E_n`$ be the embedding of $`V^n`$ into $`V^{(n+1)}`$ defined by

$`E_n(v^{(1)}\mathrm{}v^{(n)})=v^{(1)}\mathrm{}v^{(n)}\mathrm{𝟏}.`$ (2.14)
Then

$`Z_n=Z_n^VE_n.`$ (2.15)
In literature, there are certain results which are closely related to the injectivity of linear maps $`Z_n^V`$. The following result is due to Dong and Mason \[DM\] while the special case is due to Dong and Lepowsky \[DL\]:

###### Proposition 2.6

Let $`V`$ be a simple vertex operator algebra and let $`W`$ be an irreducible $`V`$-module. Let $`v^{(1)},\mathrm{},v^{(r)}V`$ be nonzero vectors and let $`w^{(1)},\mathrm{},w^{(r)}W`$ be linearly independent vectors. Then

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}}Y(v^{(i)},z)w^{(i)}0.`$ (2.16)
In particular,

$`Y(v,z)w0\text{ for }0vV,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}wW.`$ (2.17)
###### Remark 2.7

Proposition 2.6 exactly asserts that $`Y`$ viewed as a linear map from $`VW`$ to $`W((z))`$ is injective.

From \[FHL\], for any positive integer $`n`$, $`V^{(n+1)}`$ has a natural vertex algebra structure and for $`V`$-modules $`W_1,\mathrm{},W_{n+1}`$, $`W_1\mathrm{}W_{n+1}`$ has a natural $`V^{(n+1)}`$-module structure. For $`1in+1`$, let $`\pi _i`$ be the embedding of $`V`$ into $`V^{(n+1)}`$ sending $`v`$ to the product vector all of whose factors but the $`i`$th factor which is $`v`$ are the vacuum vector $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$. Let $`U`$ be any subspace of $`W_1\mathrm{}W_{n+1}`$. It is clear (cf. \[FHL\]) that $`U`$ is a submodule if and only if for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n+1`$,

$`Y(\pi _i(v),z)UU((z))\text{ for all }vV.`$ (2.18)
Note that any commutative associative algebra with identity is a natural vertex algebra. Then from \[FHL\], $`V^{(n+1)}C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ is a vertex algebra. Now we state our first result:

###### Proposition 2.8

For any positive integer $`n`$, $`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W`$ is a $`V^{(n+1)}C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$-submodule of $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$.

For convenience we first prove the following simple fact:

###### Lemma 2.9

Let $`U`$ be a vector space and let

$`f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n)U((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n)).`$ (2.19)
Assume that there exist nonnegative integers $`k_{ij}`$ for $`1i<jn`$ such that

$`\left({\displaystyle \underset{1i<jn}{}}(z_iz_j)^{k_{ij}}\right)f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n)=0.`$ (2.20)
Then $`f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n)=0`$.

Proof. The key issue here is the cancelation law. From \[FLM\], for any three formal series $`A,B`$ and $`C`$, if $`ABC`$, $`AB`$ and $`BC`$ all exist (algebraically), then

$`A(BC)=(AB)C=ABC.`$ (2.21)
Set

$$A=\underset{1i<jn}{}(z_iz_j)^{k_{ij}},B=\underset{1i<jn}{}(z_iz_j)^{k_{ij}},C=f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n),$$

where we use the usual binomial expansion convention (cf. \[FLM\]). Then it follows immediately from (2.20) that $`f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n)=0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proof of Proposition 2.8. Since $`Z_n^W`$ is already $`C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$-linear, what we must prove is that for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n+1`$,

$`Y(\pi _i(v),z)Z_n^WZ_n^W((z))\text{ for }vV.`$ (2.22)
That is, we must prove that if $`XV^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ with $`Z_n^W(X)=0`$, then for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n+1`$,

$`Z_n^W(Y(\pi _i(v),z)X)=0\text{ for all }vV.`$ (2.23)
We shall prove this in four steps.

Claim 1: For $`i=n+1`$, (2.23) holds.

Let

$`X={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha _i,\beta ,\gamma }{}}u^{1\alpha _1}\mathrm{}u^{n\alpha _n}w^\beta f_\gamma ,`$ (2.24)
(a finite sum). We shall use this general $`X`$ for the whole proof. Then

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha _i,\beta ,\gamma }{}}f_\gamma Y(u^{1\alpha _1},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(u^{n\alpha _n},z_n)w^\beta =Z_n^W(X)=0.`$ (2.25)
Let $`vV`$. From the weak commutativity there exists a nonnegative integer $`k`$ such that

$`(zz_i)^kY(v,z)Y(u^{i\alpha _i},z_i)=(zz_i)^kY(u^{i\alpha _i},z_i)Y(v,z)`$ (2.26)
for all the indices $`i`$ and $`\alpha _i`$. Multiplying (2.25) by $`(zz_1)^k\mathrm{}(zz_n)^kY(v,z)`$ (from left) and then using (2.26) we get

$`(zz_1)^k\mathrm{}(zz_n)^k{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha _i,\beta ,\gamma }{}}f_\gamma Y(u^{1\alpha _1},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(u^{n\alpha _n},z_n)Y(v,z)w^\beta =0.`$ (2.27)
In view of Lemma 2.9 we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha _i,\beta ,\gamma }{}}f_\gamma Y(u^{1\alpha _1},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(u^{n\alpha _n},z_n)Y(v,z)w^\beta =0.`$ (2.28)
Thus $`Z_n^W(Y(\pi _{n+1}(v),z)X)=0`$.

Claim 2: For $`i=n`$, (2.23) holds. From (2.25), using (2.26) we get

$`\left({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}(zz_i)^k\right){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha _i,\beta ,\gamma }{}}f_\gamma Y(u^{1\alpha _1},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(u^{(n1)\alpha _{n1}},z_{n1})Y(v,z)Y(u^{n\alpha _n},z_n)w^\beta =0.`$ (2.29)
In view of Lemma 2.9 we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha _i,\beta ,\gamma }{}}f_\gamma Y(u^{1\alpha _1},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(u^{n1\alpha _{n1}},z_{n1})Y(v,z)Y(u^{n\alpha _n},z_n)w^\beta =0.`$ (2.30)
From the weak associativity, there exists a nonnegative integer $`l`$ such that

$`(z_0+z_n)^lY(v,z_0+z_n)Y(u^{n\alpha _n},z_n)w^\beta =(z_0+z_n)^lY(Y(v,z_0)u^{n\alpha _n},z_n)w^\beta `$ (2.31)
for all the indices $`\alpha _n`$ and $`\beta `$, (which are finitely many). Then

$`(z_0+z_n)^l{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha _i,\beta ,\gamma }{}}f_\gamma Y(u^{1\alpha _1},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(u^{(n1)\alpha _{n1}},z_{n1})Y(Y(v,z_0)u^{n\alpha _n},z_n)w^\beta `$ (2.32)
$`=`$ $`(z_0+z_n)^l{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha _i,\beta ,\gamma }{}}f_\gamma Y(u^{1\alpha _1},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(u^{(n1)\alpha _{n1}},z_{n1})Y(v,z_0+z_n)Y(u^{n\alpha _n},z_n)w^\beta `$
$`=`$ $`0.`$
By Lemma 2.9 we get

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha _i,\beta ,\gamma }{}}f_\gamma Y(u^{1\alpha _1},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(u^{(n1)\alpha _{n1}},z_{n1})Y(Y(v,z_0)u^{n\alpha _n},z_n)w^\beta =0.`$ (2.33)
That is, $`Z_n^W(Y(\pi _n(v),z)X)=0`$.

Claim 3: $`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W`$ is stable under the action of $`S_n`$. (Note that the symmetric group $`S_n`$ naturally acts on $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$.)

It suffices to prove that $`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W`$ is stable under the actions of transitions $`\sigma _{i(i+1)}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$. Let $`X\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W`$ and write $`X`$ as in (2.24). From the weak commutativity there exists a nonnegative integer $`k`$ such that

$`(z_iz_{i+1})^kY(u^{i\alpha _i},z_i)Y(u,z_{i+1})=(z_iz_{i+1})^kY(u,z_{i+1})Y(u,z_i)`$ (2.34)
for all the indices $`i`$ and $`\alpha _i`$. Then

$`(z_iz_{i+1})^kZ_n^W(\sigma _{i(i+1)}X)=(z_iz_{i+1})^kZ_n^W(X)=0.`$ (2.35)
In view of Lemma 2.9, we have $`Z_n^W(\sigma _{i(i+1)}X)=0`$. That is, $`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W`$ is stable under the action of $`\sigma _{i(i+1)}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W`$ is $`S_n`$-stable.

Claim 4: For $`1in`$, (2.23) holds.

Let $`\sigma `$ be the permutation $`(in)`$. Then we have

$`Y(\pi _i(v),z)X=\sigma (Y(\pi _n(v),z)\sigma (X))\text{ for }vV.`$ (2.36)
By Claim 3, $`\sigma (X)\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W`$. Furthermore, by Claim 2 we have

$$Y(\pi _n(v),z)\sigma (X)(\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W)((z)).$$

By Claim 3 again we get

$$\sigma (Y(\pi _n(v),z)\sigma (X))(\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W)((z)).$$

Therefore

$$Z_n^W(Y(\pi _i(v),z)X)=Z_n^W(\sigma (Y(\pi _n(v),z)\sigma (X)))=0.$$

This completes the proof. $`\mathrm{}`$

Noticing that for $`0wW,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}fC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$,

$`Z_n^W(\mathrm{𝟏}^nwf)=fY(\mathrm{𝟏},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(\mathrm{𝟏},z_n)w=fw0,`$ (2.37)
we have

$`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^WV^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n)).`$ (2.38)
If $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ is an irreducible $`V^{(n+1)}C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$-module, in view of Proposition 2.8 we will immediately have $`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W=0`$. When $`V`$ is a simple vertex operator algebra and $`W`$ is an irreducible $`V`$-module, it follows from \[FHL\] that $`V^nW`$ is an irreducible $`V^{(n+1)}`$-module. However, the result of \[FHL\] does not imply that $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$ is an irreducible $`V^{(n+1)}C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$-module. Motivated by this, we prove the following simple result (which might have been known somewhere):

###### Lemma 2.10

Let $`A_1`$ and $`A_2`$ be associative algebras with identity element and let $`U_1`$ and $`U_2`$ be modules for $`A_1`$ and $`A_2`$, respectively. Assume that $`U_1`$ is irreducible and $`\mathrm{End}_{A_1}U_1=C`$. Then any $`A_1A_2`$-submodule of $`U_1U_2`$ is of the form $`U_1U_2^{}`$, where $`U_2^{}`$ is an $`A_2`$-submodule of $`U_2`$. Furthermore, if $`U_2`$ is irreducible, then $`U_1U_2`$ is irreducible.

Proof. Fix a basis $`\{u_{1\alpha }|\alpha I\}`$ for $`U_1`$. Let $`U`$ be a nonzero $`A_1A_2`$-submodule of $`U_1U_2`$. Let $`u`$ be any nonzero element of $`U`$. Then

$$u=u_{1\alpha _1}u_{21}+\mathrm{}+u_{1\alpha _r}u_{2r},$$

where $`u_{21},\mathrm{},u_{2r}`$ are (finitely many) nonzero vectors in $`U_2`$. Since $`U_1`$ is irreducible and $`\mathrm{End}_{A_1}U_1=C`$, in view of the density theorem (cf. \[J\]), there exists $`aA_1`$ such that

$$au_{1\alpha _1}0\text{ and }au_{1\alpha _i}=0\text{ for }i=2,\mathrm{},r.$$

Then

$$0au_{1\alpha _1}u_{21}=(a1)uU.$$

Since $`U_1`$ is irreducible, we have $`A_1au_{1\alpha _1}=U_1`$. Thus $`U_1u_{21}=(A_1a1)uU`$. Similarly, we have $`U_1u_{2i}U`$ for $`i=2,\mathrm{},r`$. Set

$$U_2^{}(u)=A_2u_{21}+\mathrm{}+A_2u_{2r}U_2.$$

(Notice that $`u_{2i}`$’s are uniquely determined by $`u`$.) Then

$$uU_1U_2^{}(u)U.$$

Setting

$`U_2^{}={\displaystyle \underset{0uU}{}}U_2^{}(u)U_2,`$ (2.39)
we get $`U=U_1U_2^{}`$, completing the proof. $`\mathrm{}`$

Closely related to Lemma 2.10 is the following result which can be found in \[Di\], or \[CG\]:

###### Lemma 2.11

Let $`A`$ be an associative algebra with identity and let $`U`$ be an irreducible $`A`$-module of countable dimension. Then $`\mathrm{End}_AU=C`$.

We now apply Lemma 2.11 in vertex algebra theory.

###### Lemma 2.12

Let $`V`$ be a vertex algebra of countable dimension and let $`W`$ be an irreducible $`V`$-module. Then $`W`$ is of countable dimension and $`\mathrm{End}_VW=C`$.

Proof. Let $`w`$ be any nonzero element of $`W`$. It was proved in \[DM\] and \[Li1\] that the linear span of vectors $`v_mw`$ for $`vV,mZ`$ is a submodule of $`W`$. Consequently,

$$W=\mathrm{span}\{v_mw|vV,mZ\}.$$

Then we immediately see that $`W`$ has countable dimension. Furthermore, let $`A`$ be the subalgebra of $`\mathrm{End}W`$ generated by all the operators $`v_m`$ for $`vV,mZ`$. Then $`A`$ acts irreducibly on $`W`$ and $`\mathrm{End}_AW=\mathrm{End}_VW`$. In view of Lemma 2.11 we have $`\mathrm{End}_AW=C`$. Thus $`\mathrm{End}_VW=\mathrm{End}_AW=C`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

The following result slightly generalizes the corresponding result of \[FHL\]:

###### Proposition 2.13

Let $`V_1,\mathrm{},V_r`$ be vertex algebras of countable dimension and let $`W_1`$,$`\mathrm{}`$, $`W_r`$ be irreducible modules for $`V_1,\mathrm{},V_r`$, respectively. Then $`W_1\mathrm{}W_r`$ is an irreducible $`V_1\mathrm{}V_r`$-module with

$$\mathrm{End}_{V_1\mathrm{}V_r}(W_1\mathrm{}W_r)=C.$$

Proof. In view of Lemma 2.12, we have $`\mathrm{End}_{V_i}W_i=C`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. In particular, Proposition holds for $`r=1`$. For $`r=2`$, first it follows from Lemma 2.10 that $`W_1W_2`$ is an irreducible $`V_1V_2`$-module. Then by Lemma 2.12, $`\mathrm{End}_{V_1V_2}(W_1W_2)=C`$. Now, Proposition follows immediately from induction on $`r`$ and the assertion for $`r=2`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Now we are ready to prove our main result:

###### Theorem 2.14

Let $`V`$ be an irreducible vertex algebra of countable dimension and let $`W`$ be any $`V`$-module. Then for every positive integer $`n`$, the linear map $`Z_n^W`$ is injective. Furthermore, every irreducible vertex algebra $`V`$ of countable dimension is nondegenerate.

Proof. In view of Proposition 2.8, for any positive integer $`n`$, $`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W`$ is a $`V^{(n+1)}C((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$-submodule of $`V^nWC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$. It follows from Proposition 2.13 that $`V^n`$ is an irreducible $`V^n`$-module and that $`\mathrm{End}_{V^n}V^n=C`$. Let $`A_1`$ be the subalgebra of $`\mathrm{End}V^n`$ generated by all the operators $`u_m`$ for $`uV^n,mZ`$. Then $`A_1`$ acts irreducibly and $`\mathrm{End}_{A_1}V^n=C`$. In view of Lemma 2.10, we have

$$\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W=V^nU,$$

where $`U`$ is a $`VC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$-submodule of $`WC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$. Let

$$F=w_1f_1+\mathrm{}+w_rf_r$$

be a generic element of $`U`$, where $`w_1,\mathrm{},w_r`$ are linearly independent vectors in $`W`$ and $`f_iC((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))`$. Then we have $`\mathrm{𝟏}^nF\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W`$, so that

$`f_1w_1+\mathrm{}+f_rw_r={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}}f_iY(\mathrm{𝟏},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(\mathrm{𝟏},z_n)w_i=Z_n^W(\mathrm{𝟏}^nF)=0.`$ (2.40)
Consequently, $`f_i=0`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. This proves that $`U=0`$, so $`\mathrm{ker}Z_n^W=0`$. Furthermore, since $`Z_n=Z_n^VE_n`$, where $`E_n`$ is the embedding of $`V^n`$ into $`V^{(n+1)}`$, $`Z_n`$ must be injective. This proves that $`V`$ is nondegenerate. $`\mathrm{}`$

It follows from the definition of the notion of vertex operator algebra (\[FLM\], \[FHL\]) that any vertex operator algebra in the sense of \[FLM\] and \[FHL\] has countable dimension. We also know that a simple vertex operator algebra is irreducible. Then we immediately have:

###### Corollary 2.15

Let $`V`$ be a simple vertex operator algebra in the sense of \[FLM\] and \[FHL\] and let $`W`$ be a $`V`$-module. Then for every positive integer $`n`$, the linear map $`Z_n^W`$ is injective. Furthermore, every simple vertex operator algebra $`V`$ is nondegenerate.$`\mathrm{}`$

We also immediately have the following generalization of Proposition 2.6:

###### Corollary 2.16

Let $`V`$ be an irreducible vertex algebra of countable dimension and let $`W`$ be any (not necessarily irreducible) $`V`$-module. Then for each positive integer $`n`$, the linear map

$$F_n^W:V^nWW((z_1))\mathrm{}((z_n))$$

defined by

$`F_n^W(v^{(1)}\mathrm{}v^{(n)}w)=Y(v^{(1)},z_1)\mathrm{}Y(v^{(n)},z_n)w`$ (2.41)
is injective. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 2.17

Results of this paper can be appropriately generalized in terms of intertwining operators \[FHL\]. In fact, the corresponding result of \[DL\] was formulated in terms of intertwining operators in the more general context of generalized vertex algebras.