text:
# Faraday instability on viscous ferrofluids in a horizontal magnetic field: Oblique rolls of arbitrary orientation

## I  Introduction

The Faraday instability denotes the parametric generation of standing waves on the free surface of a fluid subjected to vertical vibrations. The study of this phenomenon dates back to the observations by Faraday in 1831 Faraday (1831). The initially flat free surface of the fluid becomes unstable at a certain intensity of the vertical vibrations of the whole system. As a result of the instability, a pattern of standing waves is formed at the fluid surface. The typical response is subharmonic, i.e., the wave frequency is half the frequency of the excitation. The harmonic response can be observed on a shallow fluid at low frequencies Müller et al. (1997). Faraday waves allows one to investigate symmetry breaking phenomena in a spatially extended nonlinear system. Therefore they experience a renewed interest in recent years. A detailed experimental study of the various patterns on a viscous fluid has been performed by Edwards and Fauve Edwards and Fauve (1994) who used a one-frequency as well as a two-frequency forcing. Parallel rolls, hexagons, and a twelvefold quasi-pattern were observed. Though typical Faraday waves are subharmonic, the twelvefold quasi-pattern appears to be harmonic in a certain region of parameters. Binks et al. have shown experimentally that the depth of the layer Binks et al. (1997) and the excitation frequency Binks and van de Water (1997) affect significantly the regions, where either rolls or hexagons or squares are observed. In Müller (1993); Kudrolli et al. (1998); Arbell and Fineberg (1998, 2000) it is revealed that a two-frequency excitation leads to a great variety of wave patterns. In particular, the observed patterns were triangles Müller (1993), superlattices formed by small and large hexagons Kudrolli et al. (1998), squares Müller (1993); Kudrolli et al. (1998); Arbell and Fineberg (1998, 2000), and rhomboid pattern Arbell and Fineberg (2000).

The comprehensive linear stability analysis of the Faraday instability on an arbitrarily deep layer of a viscous nonmagnetic fluid has been performed by Kumar and Tuckerman Kumar and Tuckerman (1994). This analysis was tested experimentally in Bechhoefer et al. (1995) and an excellent agreement between the predicted and experimental data was found. Weizhong and Rongjue Weizhong and Rongjue (1998) extended the linear analysis Kumar and Tuckerman (1994) for the case of an arbitrary periodic excitation. In Müller et al. (1997); Cerda and Tirapegui (1997) the low frequency region is studied in great detail. Bicritical points, where transitions from one type of response to others occur, are predicted and experimentally confirmed in Müller et al. (1997). In Lioubashevski et al. (1997); Kumar (2000) an analogy between the Faraday instability and a periodically driven version of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability is exploited. In Lioubashevski et al. (1997) a scaling law is suggested, which satisfactorily describes the behavior of the system in a wide range of parameters. Kumar Kumar (2000) discusses the mechanism of the wave number selection in the Faraday instability on high-viscous fluids.

In order to solve the pattern selection problem for the Faraday instability it is necessary to take into account nonlinear interactions between different excited modes. The nonlinear behavior of the system has been studied theoretically in a great number of papers (see Milner (1991); Zhang and Viñals (1995); Chen and Viñals (1999, 1997); Silber and Skeldon (1999) and references therein). An amplitude equation for an infinitely deep layer of a viscous fluid is derived by Chen and Viñals Chen and Viñals (1997). A good agreement between the predicted frequencies for the transition between regions of different symmetry Chen and Viñals (1997) and the experimental observations Binks and van de Water (1997) is found.

Magnetic fluids (or ferrofluids) are colloidal dispersions of single domain nanoparticles in a carrier liquid. The attractiveness of ferrofluids stems from the combination of a normal liquid behavior with the sensitivity to magnetic fields. This enables the use of magnetic fields to control the flow of the fluid, giving rise to a great variety of new phenomena and to numerous technical applications Rosensweig (1993).

One of the most interesting phenomena of pattern formation in ferrofluids is the Rosensweig instability Cowley and Rosensweig (1967). At a certain intensity of the normal magnetic field the initially flat surface of a horizontal ferrofluid layer becomes unstable. Peaks appear at the fluid surface, which typically form a static hexagonal pattern at the final stage of the pattern forming process Abou et al. (2000). By including vertical vibrations to that setup, Müller Müller (1999) analyzed the Faraday instability on viscous ferrofluids subjected to a vertical magnetic field in the frame of a linear stability analysis. It has been found that the joint action of the two destabilizing factors leads to a delay of the Rosensweig instability. By an appropriate choice of the system parameters one can observe either a normal or anomalous dispersion. The predictions of Müller (1999) were confirmed experimentally in Pétrélis et al. (2000).

Parametric waves on the surface of a ferrofluid can be excited using a vertical Browaeys et al. (1999) or a horizontal Cebers and Maiorov (1989); Bacri et al. (1994) alternating magnetic field. This phenomenon is called the magnetic Faraday instability. In Browaeys et al. (1999) the dispersion relation was investigated experimentally and it displays two significant features. The response of the surface waves is harmonic with respect to the frequency of the magnetic field and the wave vector of the resulting rolls is parallel to the field, i.e. the crests and troughs of the rolls are perpendicular to the field. In Bacri et al. (1994) a supercritical transition from rolls to rectangles was observed and explained by means of a weakly-nonlinear analysis.

In the present paper the stability of the surface of a ferrofluid subjected to vertical vibrations and a static horizontal magnetic field is studied in a wide range of the system parameters. The horizontal magnetic field tends to decrease the curvature of the ferrofluid surface along the direction of the field Zelazo and Melcher (1969), i.e. it tends to stabilize the flat surface. On the other hand, vertical vibrations tends to destabilize a flat surface. Thus the aim of the linear stability analysis is to study the behavior of a ferrofluid subjected to two, in a certain sense competing factors. It will be shown that the magnetic field allows one to control the stability of the surface significantly and to affect the symmetry of the linearly most unstable pattern. This opportunity can be used in numerous technical applications, where magnetic fields tangential to the fluid surface and perpendicular vibrations are typical.

## II System and basic equations

A dielectric, viscous, and incompressible magnetic fluid with constant density $`\rho `$ and permeability $`\mu _r`$ is considered. The laterally infinite ferrofluid layer of arbitrary depth $`h`$ is subjected to a homogeneous dc horizontal magnetic field and harmonic vertical vibrations (Fig. 1). The plane $`z=0`$ coincides with the nondeformed surface of the ferrofluid. The fluid layer is bounded from below by the bottom of the nonmagnetic container and has a free surface described by $`\zeta (t,x,y)`$ with air above. A homogeneous magnetic field $`𝐇_\mathrm{𝟎}=(H_0,0,0)`$ is applied along the $`x`$-axis. Due to zero electrical conductivity of the fluid, the static form of the Maxwell equations is used for the strength $`𝐇`$ and the induction $`𝐁`$ of the magnetic field in all three media

$$\text{div}𝐁^{(i)}=0,\text{rot}𝐇^{(i)}=0,i=1,2,3,$$
(1)
where superscripts denote the different media: 1 air, 2 magnetic fluid, and 3 container. A linear relation between the magnetization of the fluid $`𝐌^{(2)}`$ and the strength of the magnetic field inside is assumed, $`𝐌^{(2)}=\mu _0(\mu _r1)𝐇^{(2)}`$.

The fluid motion is governed by the continuity equation and the Navier-Stokes equations

$`\text{div}𝐯`$ $`=0,`$ (2a)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{𝐯}{t}}+\left(𝐯\text{grad}\right)𝐯`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}\text{grad}p+\nu \mathrm{\Delta }𝐯+𝐠(t).`$ (2b)
Here $`𝐯=(u,v,w)`$ is the fluid velocity, $`p`$ is the pressure, and $`\nu `$ is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid. The vertical vibrations add a periodic term to the gravity acceleration $`𝐠_0`$, i.e., a modulated value $`𝐠(t)=(0,0,g_0a\mathrm{cos}(\omega t))`$ appears in the Navier-Stokes equations. Here $`a`$ is the acceleration amplitude and $`\omega `$ is the angular frequency of the vibrations. The components of the stress tensor $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{T}}^{(2)}`$ read

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill T_{ij}^{(2)}=& \left\{p\mu _0\underset{0}{\overset{H}{}}M𝑑H^{}\mu _0\frac{H^2}{2}\right\}\delta _{ij}\hfill \\ & +H_iB_j+\rho \nu (_iv_j+_jv_i).\hfill \end{array}$$
(3)
The governing set of equations has to be supplemented by the boundary conditions. For the magnetic field the conditions are the decay of all perturbations far from the ferrofluid ($`z\pm \mathrm{}`$) and the continuity of the normal (tangential) component of the induction (strength) of the magnetic field across the air-fluid interface ($`z=\zeta `$) and at the bottom of the container ($`z=h`$)

$`𝐇^{(1)}`$ $`=𝐇_\mathrm{𝟎}`$ $`\text{at}z`$ $`\mathrm{},`$ (4a)
$`B_n^{(1)}`$ $`=B_n^{(2)},H_\tau ^{(1)}=H_\tau ^{(2)}`$ $`\text{at}z`$ $`=\zeta ,`$ (4b)
$`B_n^{(2)}`$ $`=B_n^{(3)},H_\tau ^{(2)}=H_\tau ^{(3)}`$ $`\text{at}z`$ $`=h,`$ (4c)
$`𝐇^{(3)}`$ $`=𝐇_\mathrm{𝟎}`$ $`\text{at}z`$ $`\mathrm{}.`$ (4d)
The subscripts $`n`$ and $`\tau `$ denote the normal and tangential components of the vector.

The hydrodynamic equations are closed by the no-slip condition at the bottom of the container,

$$𝐯=0\text{at}z=h,$$
(5)
and the kinematic boundary condition at the free surface of the fluid

$$w=_t\zeta +(𝐯\text{grad})\zeta \text{at}z=\zeta .$$
(6)
The equations for magnetic field and the fluid motion are coupled by the continuity condition for the stress tensor across the air-fluid interface, which completes the statement of the problem,

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill n_j\left\{p^{(1)}+p+\mu _0\underset{0}{\overset{H}{}}M𝑑H^{}+\mu _0\frac{M_n^2}{2}\right\}& \\ \hfill \rho \nu n_i(_iv_j+_jv_i)& =\sigma Kn_j.\hfill \end{array}$$
(7)
Here $`\sigma `$ is the surface tension, $`K=\text{div}𝐧`$ is the surface curvature, $`p^{(1)}`$ is the atmospheric pressure above the fluid (assumed to be constant), and $`𝐧`$ is the unit vector normal to the surface given by

$$𝐧=\frac{\text{grad}[z\zeta (t,x,y)]}{|\text{grad}[z\zeta (t,x,y)]|}.$$
(8)
## III Linear stability analysis

Following the standard procedure Kumar and Tuckerman (1994); Müller (1999), the governing equations and the boundary conditions have been linearized in the vicinity of the nonperturbed state

$`𝐯`$ $`=0,\zeta =0,𝐇^{(i)}=𝐇_0,i=1,2,3,`$
$`p_0`$ $`=p^{(1)}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _0}{2}}M_0H_0g(t)z,`$
where $`M_0=(\mu _r1)H_0`$ and $`p_0`$ is the pressure in the unperturbed state. The linearized governing equations for the small perturbations, which encompass the magnetic field strength $`𝐇_1`$, the pressure $`p_1`$, and a nonzero velocity $`𝐯`$ of the fluid, read

$`\mu _0\mu _r\text{div}𝐇_1^{(i)}`$ $`=0,\text{rot}𝐇_1^{(i)}=0,i=1,2,3,`$ (9a)
$`\text{div}𝐯`$ $`=0,`$ (9b)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{𝐯}{t}}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}\text{grad}p_1+\nu \mathrm{\Delta }𝐯.`$ (9c)
Here the linear relation between the induction and the strength of the magnetic field is used. At the first order with respect to the perturbations, the boundary conditions are

$`𝐇_1^{(1)}`$ $`=0\text{at}z\mathrm{},`$ (10a)
$`H_{1n}^{(1)}=\mu _rH_{1n}^{(2)},H_{1\tau }^{(1)}`$ $`=H_{1\tau }^{(2)}\text{at}z=0,`$ (10b)
$`\mu _rH_{1n}^{(2)}=H_{1n}^{(3)},H_{1\tau }^{(2)}`$ $`=H_{1\tau }^{(3)}\text{at}z=h,`$ (10c)
$`𝐇_1^{(3)}`$ $`=0\text{at}z\mathrm{},`$ (10d)
$`𝐯`$ $`=0\text{at}z=h,`$ (10e)
$`w_t\zeta `$ $`=0\text{at}z=0,`$ (10f)
$`_zu+_xw`$ $`=0\text{at}z=0,`$ (10g)
$`_zv+_yw`$ $`=0\text{at}z=0,`$ (10h)
$`g(t)\zeta p_1\mu _0M_0H_1`$ $`+2\rho \nu _zw=\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }_{}\zeta \text{at}z=0,`$ (10i)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}=_{xx}+_{yy}`$. The stability of the flat surface with respect to standing waves is analyzed by using the Floquet ansatz for the surface deformations and the $`z`$-component of the velocity

$`\zeta (t,x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{𝐤𝐫})e^{(s+i\alpha \omega )t}{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\zeta _ne^{in\omega t},`$ (11a)
$`w(t,x,y,z)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{𝐤𝐫})e^{(s+i\alpha \omega )t}{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}w_n(z)e^{in\omega t},`$ (11b)
where $`𝐤=(k_x,k_y)`$ is the two-dimensional wave vector, $`s`$ is the growth rate, and $`\alpha `$ is the parameter determining the type of the response. For $`\alpha =0`$ the response is harmonic whereas for $`\alpha =1/2`$ it is subharmonic. Expansions similar to (11b) are made for all other small perturbations and are inserted into the linearized governing equations (9). The functions of the vertical coordinate in the Floquet expansion are given by linear combinations of the exponential functions $`e^{\pm kz}`$ and $`e^{\pm q_nz}`$ with $`q_n^2=k^2+[s+i(\alpha +n)\omega ]/\nu `$ and $`\mathrm{}(q_n)>0`$. The condition of reality for $`\zeta (t,x,y)`$ leads to the equations Kumar and Tuckerman (1994)

$`\zeta _n`$ $`=\zeta _n^{},`$ $`\alpha `$ $`=0,`$ (12a)
$`\zeta _n`$ $`=\zeta _{n1}^{},`$ $`\alpha `$ $`=1/2.`$ (12b)
The boundary conditions (10) allow one to express all the perturbed quantities in terms of the coefficients $`\zeta _n`$ which satisfy the equation

$$\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(W_n\zeta _na\zeta _{n1}a\zeta _{n+1}\right)e^{[s+i(\alpha +n)\omega ]t}=0,$$
(13)
where

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill W_n=& 2[\frac{\nu ^2}{k[q_n\mathrm{coth}(q_nh)k\mathrm{coth}(kh)]}\hfill \\ & \times (q_n[4k^4+(k^2+q_n^2)^2]\mathrm{coth}(kh)\mathrm{coth}(q_nh)\hfill \\ & k[4k^2q_n^2+(k^2+q_n^2)^2]\frac{4q_nk^2(k^2+q_n^2)}{\mathrm{sinh}(kh)\mathrm{sinh}(q_nh)})\hfill \\ & +g_0+\frac{\sigma k^2}{\rho }+\frac{k(\mu _r1)^2\mathrm{\Lambda }(kh)}{\rho \mu _0}\left(\frac{k_xB_0}{k}\right)^2]\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(kh)=\frac{e^{kh}(\mu _r+1)+e^{kh}(\mu _r1)}{e^{kh}(\mu _r+1)^2e^{kh}(\mu _r1)^2}.$$
(15)
Here $`𝐁_0=\mu _0𝐇_0`$ is the induction of the applied magnetic field.

The essential differences of Eqs. (13)–(15) in comparison with the dispersion relation for the surface instability in a vertical magnetic field Abou et al. (1997); Müller (1999); Lange et al. (2000) are the following: First, the term proportional to $`B_0^2`$ has the same sign as the terms related to surface tension and gravity. This implies that a horizontal magnetic field alone cannot induce any instability. Second in the same term, the factor $`k_x`$ appears instead of $`k`$ in the case of the normal magnetic field. This allows one to introduce the effective field

$$𝐁_{\text{eff}}=\frac{(\mathrm{𝐤𝐁}_0)}{k^2}𝐤=B_0\mathrm{cos}(\theta )\frac{𝐤}{k},$$
(16)
where $`\theta `$ is the angle between $`𝐤`$ and $`𝐁_0`$. Hence, the influence of a magnetic field with induction $`𝐁_0`$ on a wave propagating along an arbitrary direction $`𝐤`$ is equivalent to the influence of a field with induction $`𝐁_{\text{eff}}`$, which is parallel to $`𝐤`$.

Equation (13) has to be satisfied for all times which implies that each term of the sum equals to zero. Using the relations between $`\zeta _n`$ with positive and negative numbers (12), one gets the set of equations

$`W_0\zeta _0a\zeta _1^{}a\zeta _1`$ $`=0,\alpha =0,`$ (17a)
$`W_0\zeta _0a\zeta _0^{}a\zeta _1`$ $`=0,\alpha =1/2,`$ (17b)
$`W_n\zeta _na\zeta _{n1}a\zeta _{n+1}`$ $`=0,n=1,\mathrm{}\mathrm{}.`$ (17c)
A cutoff at $`n=N`$ (in the present work $`N=100`$) leads to a self-consistent equation for the acceleration amplitude $`a`$ Chen and Viñals (1997, 1999),

$$a=|F(a,k,\omega ,B_{\text{eff}},\nu ,\sigma ,\rho ,\mu _r)|,$$
(18)
where $`F`$ is a complex function expressed in terms of continued fractions. Equation (18) can be solved numerically and gives the dependence of $`a`$ on $`k`$ at fixed parameters. The critical values of the acceleration amplitude $`a_c`$ and the wave number $`k_c`$ correspond to an absolute minimum of the curve $`a(k)`$ at zero growth rate ($`s=0`$).

## IV  Results and discussion

In the following the effective field is given in units of the critical induction $`B_{cR}`$ for the Rosensweig instability on an infinitely deep layer of ferrofluid Cowley and Rosensweig (1967). Figure 2 presents marginal stability curves for a viscous ferrofluid at low frequency. The dependence of acceleration amplitude on the wave number for $`s=0`$ divides the phase space into regions, where the surface of the ferrofluid is stable or unstable with respect to parametrically driven standing waves. The principal data which can be extracted are the critical acceleration amplitude, the wave number, and the number of the tongue to which they belong. The number of a tongue $`l`$ (from left to right) is the order of response: the basic wave frequency related to the $`l`$-th tongue is $`\mathrm{\Omega }=l\omega /2`$. The odd and even tongues are the regions, where either a subharmonic or a harmonic instability develops. It can be seen that all tongues shift towards smaller wave numbers under the influence of an applied magnetic field. In the case presented in Fig. 2 the field also causes a transition from a subharmonic to a harmonic response.

The dependencies of the critical acceleration amplitude and the critical wave number on the excitation frequency $`f=\omega /2\pi `$ are presented in Fig. 3. In the high frequency region, the instability is subharmonic, i.e. $`l=1`$. In the small frequency region bicritical points appear, which is why the dependence of $`a_c(f)`$ is not smooth and the dependence of $`k_c(f)`$ is discontinuous (see inserts in Fig. 3). Bicritical points are those points in the parameter space, where the absolute minima of $`a(k)`$ is equal to the local minima of two neighbouring tongues. In the zero field case for instance, such an overlap happens between the first subharmonic tongue ($`l=1`$) and the first harmonic tongue ($`l=2`$) at $`f_{\text{bc},1}1.86`$ Hz. For frequencies below $`f_{\text{bc},1}`$, the tongue of $`2`$nd order gives the critical acceleration until the next bicritical point at $`f_{\text{bc},2}1.55`$ Hz. Below $`f_{\text{bc},2}`$ the tongue of $`3`$rd order gives there the lowest threshold until the third bicritical point and so on. Thus with decreasing frequency subsequent transitions from a tongue of the order $`l`$ to a tongue of the order $`l+1`$ occur.

It is seen in the insert in Fig. 3(b) that the magnetic field shifts the bicritical points. If the fluid viscosity is low (as in Fig. 3), then the magnetic field decreases the frequencies of the transitions. For higher viscosities, e.g., $`\nu =10^4`$ m2/s, the bicritical points are shifted towards higher frequencies. This is exemplarily shown in Fig. 4 for the frequency of the first bicritical point, $`f_{\text{bc},1}`$, for a high-viscous fluid (curve 1) and a low-viscous fluid (curve 2). For frequencies above (below) the curves the response of the system is subharmonic (harmonic). Thus for a high-viscous fluid and an excitation frequency of $`f=10`$ Hz at zero applied field a subharmonic response ($`\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega /2`$) is expected, whereas at $`B_{\text{eff}}=B_{cR}`$ a harmonic response ($`\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega `$) precedes. For ordinary (nonmagnetic) fluids bicritical points were also found in the case of both low-viscous fluids Müller et al. (1997) and high-viscous fluids Cerda and Tirapegui (1997).

A feature of the dependence of $`a_c(f)`$ \[Fig. 3(a)\] is the appearance of a pronounced minimum for all tested fields. To explain this behavior, one has to recall that viscous damping is the reason for the finite (nonzero) value of the critical acceleration amplitude. The damping occurs due to the stresses in the bottom layer and in the bulk fluid. The dimensionless quantity $`d=k_ch`$ can be used to determine which part of the damping is predominant. For a shallow fluid layer the inequality $`d1`$ holds and therefore the damping in the bottom layer is predominant (first regime). For a deep layer, where the relation $`d1`$ is fulfilled, the damping in the bottom layer is of no importance and the damping in the bulk fluid is predominant (second regime).

The first regime occurs at the low frequency region in Fig. 3, where $`k_c500`$ m-1. Inside this region, as the frequency increases the effective depth $`d`$ of the fluid is increasing, too. Therefore the viscous stress in the bottom layer is weakening and consequently the critical acceleration amplitude decreases. The second damping regime is typical for waves with $`k_c`$ above 500 m-1. Since dissipation in the bulk fluid is proportional to $`k_c^2`$ Landau and Lifshitz (1959), the damping becomes stronger and as a result the critical acceleration amplitude increases with frequency. The transition from the first to the second damping regime leads to the nonmonotonic dependence of the critical acceleration amplitude on the excitation frequency.

The most pronounced effect caused by the magnetic field is the decrease of the critical wave number \[cf. curves D–A in Fig. 3(b)\] as already observed in Zelazo and Melcher (1969). The reduction of the critical wave number affects the critical acceleration amplitude. This influence is different at low and high frequencies due to the following reason. The decrease of $`k_c`$ results in (i) the reduction of the effective fluid depth $`d`$, which intensifies the stress in the bottom layer and (ii) the weakening of the dissipation in the bulk fluid. Therefore in the case of the first damping regime the viscous dissipation is intensified, whereas in the case of the second regime it is reduced by the magnetic field.

In the low frequency region ($`d=k_ch1`$), the first damping regime occurs independent of the magnetic field. Therefore the critical acceleration amplitude increases with the growth of the effective field.

At high frequencies the dependence of the critical acceleration amplitude on the effective field is more intricate.

In Fig. 5(a) the dependence of $`a_c(B_{\text{eff}})`$ is presented for a frequency $`f=100`$ Hz. It is seen that for an infinitely deep fluid the critical acceleration amplitude decreases monotonicly with the increase of the magnetic field. In the case of a finite depth of the layer, there are two different forms of the dependence of $`a_c`$ on $`B_{\text{eff}}`$. In the case of $`h1.14`$ mm a minimum in the critical acceleration amplitude is observed. It implies that a moderate magnetic field lowers the threshold value of the acceleration amplitude whereas a strong magnetic field stabilizes the surface, i.e., the critical acceleration amplitude is increasing. With the decrease of the layer depth \[from curve D to A in Fig. 5(a)\], the observed minimum shifts to the lower fields and becomes less pronounced. At $`h1.13`$ mm the critical acceleration amplitude monotonicly increases with the effective field.

To explain these qualitative changes in the dependence of $`a_c(B_{\text{eff}})`$ it is useful to consider $`d(B_{\text{eff}})`$ \[see Fig. 5(b)\]. The analysis shows that in the region $`d1`$ (the second damping regime) the decrease of the critical wave number caused by the magnetic field leads to a weakening of the viscous damping. Therefore the critical acceleration amplitude is decreasing with the increase of the field until the effective depth $`d`$ of the fluid becomes of the order of unity. A further decrease of $`d`$ caused by the magnetic field increases the viscous damping in the bottom layer and consequently the critical acceleration amplitude. Thus, the transition from the second damping regime to the first one results in the nonmonotonic dependence of $`a_c(B_{\text{eff}})`$ \[Fig. 5(a)\]. The effective field, where the transition occurs, is decreasing with decrease of $`h`$, and in the case of a very shallow fluid (here, $`h1.13`$ mm), the second damping regime is not observed at all.

The nonmonotonic dependence of $`a_c(B_{\text{eff}})`$ allows one to select the type of the linearly most unstable pattern (corresponding to a minimal $`a_c`$) by applying a horizontal magnetic field. When the induction $`B_0`$ of the applied field is smaller than $`B_{\text{eff}}^{}`$ \[$`a_c(B_{\text{eff}})`$ is minimal at $`B_{\text{eff}}^{}`$\] Faraday waves with $`𝐤||𝐁_0`$ are favorable. In this case $`B_{\text{eff}}=B_0`$ \[see Eq. (16)\], i.e., $`B_{\text{eff}}`$ has a maximal possible value at given $`B_0`$. It implies that the first unstable pattern are rolls perpendicular to the magnetic field. If $`B_0B_{\text{eff}}^{}`$ then the angle between the favorable wave vector of perturbation and the applied magnetic field satisfies the relation $`\mathrm{cos}\theta =\pm B_{\text{eff}}^{}/B_0`$. Thus, for $`B_0>B_{\text{eff}}^{}0`$ rolls with an angle $`+\theta `$ or an angle $`\theta `$ or a rhombic pattern as a superposition of both is most probable. If the layer depth is small enough $`B_{\text{eff}}^{}`$ becomes zero \[see curve A in Fig. 5(a)\]. That is equivalent to $`\mathrm{cos}\theta =0`$, i.e., rolls parallel to the magnetic field are expected.

The parametrical generation of surface waves by a horizontal alternating magnetic field was observed in Cebers and Maiorov (1989); Bacri et al. (1994). In these studies the driving force is the magnetic field and it is anisotropic. Only perturbations with a wave vector parallel to the field can be unstable in the linear approximation. Therefore the first unstable pattern observed in the experiments were always rolls perpendicular to the field. In Bacri et al. (1994) a supercritical transition was observed from rolls to a rectangular pattern. This transition is caused by nonlinear interactions of the different modes. In the present study there is no anisotropic driving and therefore Faraday waves along an arbitrary direction can be excited. As a consequence, different patterns can be generated (rolls along an arbitrary direction or a rhombic pattern as discussed above).

In the case of low viscosity the obtained results for the critical acceleration amplitude are in the very good agreement with an approximation suggested by Müller et al. (Eq. (9) in Müller et al. (1997) and Eq. (4.1) in Müller (1999)). It should be noted that the influence of a normal magnetic field (studied in Müller (1999); Browaeys et al. (1999)) and a horizontal field (studied in the present paper) on Faraday waves are different. The normal magnetic field increases the critical wave number of the Faraday waves Browaeys et al. (1999), whereas the horizontal magnetic field decreases the wave number. Thus, the sensitivity of ferrofluids to magnetic fields allows one both to increase and to decrease the critical wave number. In this way the relative importance of the stress in the bottom layer and the dissipation in the bulk fluid can be changed. Therefore magnetic fields are a convenient way to control the stability of the surface.

The Faraday instability on nonmagnetic fluids with high viscosity has been investigated in Lioubashevski et al. (1997). The authors suggest a scale for the acceleration based on an analogy between the Faraday instability and a periodically driven version of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability. They observe a data collapse in the range of the dissipation parameter $`(\delta /h)^2`$ from 0.1 to 0.3, where $`\delta =\sqrt{\nu /\omega }`$ is the dissipative length scale. In this parameter range our results are in a good agreement with the suggested scaling law. However, at low frequencies the scaling behavior suggested in Lioubashevski et al. (1997) strongly underestimates $`a_c`$. Additionally, the remaining parameters neglected in Lioubashevski et al. (1997) become essential at $`k_ch1`$. Therefore, the scaling propagated in Lioubashevski et al. (1997) is of limited use for ferrofluids in magnetic fields.

The aim now is to reveal a scaling law for the threshold values of the Faraday instability. The behavior of the critical acceleration amplitude as a function of the parameters of the system is determined by the dimensionless depth $`d`$ of the fluid (see Figs. 35). Therefore, it is natural to look for a scaling law of the form $`\overline{a}_c=\overline{a}_c(d)`$, where $`\overline{a}_c`$ is the scaled acceleration. As $`h\mathrm{}`$ the required function should approach an asymptotic value. Thus, the appropriate scale for the acceleration amplitude is the value $`a_{c,\mathrm{}}`$ of the critical acceleration for an infinitely deep fluid. The quantity $`k_c\mathrm{\Omega }\nu `$ is a reasonable estimation for $`a_{c,\mathrm{}}`$ Lioubashevski et al. (1997). Introducing this scale for the acceleration amplitude $`\overline{a}_c=a_c/(\nu \mathrm{\Omega }k_c)`$, it is possible to map all the above presented dependencies in a single plot as it has been done in Fig. 6.

Figure 6 presents the dimensionless amplitude as a function of the effective depth $`d=k_ch`$ of the fluid. The latter can be varied by means of changing the physical depth of the layer (pluses, down triangles, and squares in Fig. 6), varying the applied magnetic field (up triangles), excitation frequency (left and right triangles), and the viscosity of the fluid (diamonds). It is seen that for a wide range of parameters the dependencies of $`\overline{a}_c`$ related to different fluids and varying parameters are in a rather good agreement with each other. The only deviation from the common behavior appears for a low frequency (pluses) at intermediate $`d`$. For $`d`$ up to unity the dimensionless acceleration amplitude can be reasonable approximated by $`\overline{a}_c21d^{2.6}`$ (solid line in Fig. 6). For $`d1`$ an estimation $`\overline{a}_{c,\mathrm{}}7`$ approximates the exact results with a maximal error of about 12 %. It is worth noting that the dependencies of the critical acceleration amplitude on the surface tension and the fluid density follow the same common behavior as shown in Fig. 6.

## V  Conclusion

The linear analysis of the Faraday instability on a viscous ferrofluid subjected to a horizontal magnetic field has been performed. A horizontally unbounded ferrofluid layer of a finite depth has been considered. The dependencies of the critical acceleration amplitude $`a_c`$ and the critical wave vector on the excitation frequency $`f`$ and the induction $`B_{\text{eff}}`$ of the magnetic field have been obtained for different depths of the layer in a wide range of fluid viscosities. The regions have been found, where the viscous stress either in the bottom layer (the first regime) or in the bulk fluid (second regime) are predominant. A transition from the second damping regime to the first one can be caused by decreasing the excitation frequency or by applying a horizontal magnetic field. The transition results in the nonmonotonic dependencies of $`a_c(f)`$ and $`a_c(B_{\text{eff}})`$. It is shown that one can select the first unstable pattern of Faraday waves by the appropriate choice of the depth of the ferrofluid and the induction of the magnetic field. A scaling law is suggested, which describes the behavior of the system in a wide range of the system parameters.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft under Grant No. LA 1182/2.


format: text

text:
# A remark about Donaldson’s construction of symplectic submanifolds

## 1. Introduction

Donaldson’s construction of symplectic submanifolds  is unquestionably one of the major results obtained in the past ten years in symplectic topology. What sets it apart from many of the results obtained during the same period is that it appeals neither to Seiberg-Witten theory, nor to pseudo-holomorphic curves; in fact, most of Donaldson’s argument is a remarkable succession of elementary observations, combined in a particularly clever way. One ingredient of the proof that does not qualify as elementary, though, is an effective version of Sard’s theorem for approximately holomorphic complex-valued functions over a ball in $`^n`$ (Theorem 20 in ). The proof of this result, which occupies a significant portion of Donaldson’s paper (§4 and §5 of ), appeals to very subtle considerations about the complexity of real algebraic sets, following ideas of Yomdin .

Methods similar to those in  were subsequently used to perform various other constructions, leading in particular to Donaldson’s result that symplectic manifolds carry structures of symplectic Lefschetz pencils , or to the result that symplectic 4-manifolds can be realized as branched coverings of $`^2`$ . It was observed in  that, whereas Donaldson’s construction of submanifolds can be thought of in terms of an estimated transversality result for sections of line bundles, the subsequent constructions can be interpreted in terms of estimated transversality with respect to stratifications in jet bundles.

As remarked at the end of §4 in , the transversality of the $`r`$-jet of a section to a given submanifold in the bundle of $`r`$-jets is equivalent to the non-intersection of the $`(r+1)`$-jet of the section with a certain (possibly singular) submanifold of greater codimension in the bundle of $`(r+1)`$-jets. This is of particular interest because the effective Sard theorem for approximately holomorphic functions from $`^n`$ to $`^m`$ admits a conceptually much easier proof in the case where $`m>n`$ . In the case of the construction of symplectic submanifolds, the formalism of jet bundles can be completely eliminated from the presentation; the purpose of this note is to present the resulting simplified argument for Donaldson’s result (§§2–3). We also observe (see §4) that a similar simplification is possible for the higher-rank local result required for the construction of symplectic Lefschetz pencils .

## 2. Overview of Donaldson’s argument

We first review Donaldson’s construction of symplectic submanifolds , using the terminology and notations of . Let $`(X^{2n},\omega )`$ be a compact symplectic manifold, and assume that the cohomology class $`\frac{1}{2\pi }[\omega ]`$ is integral. Endow $`X`$ with an $`\omega `$-compatible almost-complex structure $`J`$ and the corresponding Riemannian metric $`g=\omega (,J)`$. Consider a Hermitian line bundle $`L`$ over $`X`$ such that $`c_1(L)=\frac{1}{2\pi }[\omega ]`$, equipped with a Hermitian connection $``$ having curvature $`i\omega `$. The almost-complex structure $`J`$ induces a splitting of the connection into $`=+\overline{}`$. We are interested in approximately holomorphic sections of the line bundles $`L^k`$ ($`k0`$) satisfying a certain estimated transversality property: indeed, if we can find a section $`s`$ such that $`|\overline{}s||s|`$ at every point where $`s`$ vanishes, then the zero set of $`s`$ is automatically a smooth symplectic submanifold in $`X`$ (cf. e.g. Proposition 3 of ). The philosophical justification of the construction is that, as the twisting parameter $`k`$ increases, one starts probing the geometry of $`X`$ at very small scales, where the effects due to the non-integrability of $`J`$ become negligible. This phenomenon is due to the curvature $`ik\omega `$ of the connection on $`L^k`$, and leads us to work with a rescaled metric $`g_k=kg`$ (the metric induced by $`J`$ and $`k\omega `$).

Let $`(s_k)_{k0}`$ be a sequence of sections of Hermitian vector bundles $`E_k`$ equipped with Hermitian connections over $`X`$. We make the following definitions:

###### Definition 1.

The sections $`s_k`$ are asymptotically holomorphic if there exist constants $`(C_p)_p`$ such that, for all $`k`$ and at every point of $`X`$, $`|s_k|C_0`$, $`|^ps_k|_{g_k}C_p`$ and $`|^{p1}\overline{}s_k|_{g_k}C_pk^{1/2}`$ for all $`p1`$.

###### Definition 2.

The sections $`s_k`$ are uniformly transverse to $`0`$ if there exists a constant $`\eta >0`$ independent of $`k`$ such that the sections $`s_k`$ are $`\eta `$-transverse to $`0`$, i.e. if at any point $`xX`$ where $`|s_k(x)|<\eta `$, the linear map $`s_k(x):T_xX(E_k)_x`$ is surjective and has a right inverse of norm less than $`\eta ^1`$ w.r.t. the metric $`g_k`$.

When $`\mathrm{rank}(E_k)>n`$, uniform transversality means that $`|s_k(x)|\eta `$ at every point of $`X`$; on the other hand, when $`E_k`$ is a line bundle and the sections $`s_k`$ are asymptotically holomorphic, uniform transversality can be rephrased as a uniform lower bound on $`|s_k|`$ at all points where $`|s_k|<\eta `$ (which by the above observation is enough to ensure the symplecticity of $`s_k^1(0)`$ for large $`k`$). With this terminology, Donaldson’s result can be reformulated as follows (cf. Theorem 5 of ):

###### Theorem 1.

For large values of $`k`$, the line bundles $`L^k`$ admit sections $`s_k`$ that are asymptotically holomorphic and uniformly transverse to $`0`$.

The proof of Theorem 1 starts with a couple of preliminary lemmas about the existence of approximately holomorphic rescaled Darboux coordinates on $`X`$ and of large families of well-concentrated asymptotically holomorphic sections of $`L^k`$.

###### Lemma 1.

There exists a constant $`c>0`$ such that near any point $`xX`$, for any integer $`k`$, there exist local complex Darboux coordinates $`z_k=(z_k^1,\mathrm{},z_k^n):(X,x)(^n,0)`$ for the symplectic structure $`k\omega `$, such that the following estimates hold uniformly in $`x`$ and $`k`$ at every point of the ball $`B_{g_k}(x,c\sqrt{k})`$: $`|z_k(y)|=O(\mathrm{dist}_{g_k}(x,y))`$, $`|\overline{}z_k(y)|_{g_k}=O(k^{1/2}\mathrm{dist}_{g_k}(x,y))`$, $`|^r\overline{}z_k|_{g_k}=O(k^{1/2})`$, $`|^rz_k|_{g_k}=O(1)`$ $`r1`$; and denoting by $`\psi _k:(^n,0)(X,x)`$ the inverse map, the estimates $`|\overline{}\psi _k(z)|_{g_k}=O(k^{1/2}|z|)`$, $`|^r\overline{}\psi _k|_{g_k}=O(k^{1/2})`$ and $`|^r\psi _k|_{g_k}=O(1)`$ hold $`r1`$ at every point of the ball $`B_^n(0,c\sqrt{k})`$, where $`\overline{}\psi _k`$ is defined with respect to the almost-complex structure $`J`$ on $`X`$ and the standard complex structure on $`^2`$.

Lemma 1 is identical to Lemma 3 of , or to the discussion on pp. 674–675 of  if one keeps track carefully of the available estimates; the idea is simply to start with usual Darboux coordinates for $`\omega `$, compose them with a linear transformation to ensure holomorphicity at the origin, and then rescale them by a factor of $`\sqrt{k}`$.

###### Definition 3.

A section $`s`$ of $`E_k`$ has Gaussian decay in $`C^r`$ norm away from a point $`xX`$ if there exist a polynomial $`P`$ and a constant $`\lambda >0`$ such that for all $`yX`$, $`|s(y)|`$, $`|s(y)|_{g_k}`$, …, $`|^rs(y)|_{g_k}`$ are all bounded by $`P(d(x,y))\mathrm{exp}(\lambda d(x,y)^2)`$, where $`d(.,.)`$ is the distance induced by $`g_k`$. The decay properties of a family of sections are said to be uniform if $`P`$ and $`\lambda `$ can be chosen independently of $`k`$ and of the point $`x`$ at which decay occurs for a given section.

###### Lemma 2.

Given any point $`xX`$, for all large enough $`k`$, there exist asymptotically holomorphic sections $`s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ of $`L^k`$ over $`X`$, such that $`|s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}|c_0`$ at every point of the ball of $`g_k`$-radius $`1`$ centered at $`x`$, for some universal constant $`c_0>0`$, and such that the sections $`s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ have uniform Gaussian decay away from $`x`$ in $`C^2`$ norm.

Lemma 2 is essentially Proposition 11 of . Considering a local trivialization of $`L^k`$ where the connection 1-form is $`\frac{1}{4}(z_k^jd\overline{z}_k^j\overline{z}_k^jdz_k^j)`$, the sections $`s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ are constructed by multiplication of the function $`\mathrm{exp}(|z_k|^2/4)`$ by a suitable cut-off function at distance $`k^{1/6}`$ from the origin.

The central ingredient is the following result about the near-critical sets of approximately holomorphic functions (used in the special case $`m=1`$):

###### Proposition 1.

Let $`f`$ be a function defined over the ball $`B^+`$ of radius $`\frac{11}{10}`$ in $`^n`$ with values in $`^m`$. Let $`\delta `$ be a constant with $`0<\delta <\frac{1}{4}`$, and let $`\eta =\delta \mathrm{log}(\delta ^1)^p`$ where $`p`$ is a fixed integer depending only on $`n`$ and $`m`$. Assume that $`f`$ satisfies the bounds $`|f|_{C^0(B^+)}1`$ and $`|\overline{}f|_{C^1(B^+)}\eta `$. Then there exists $`w^m`$ with $`|w|\delta `$ such that $`fw`$ is $`\eta `$-transverse to $`0`$ over the interior ball $`B`$ of radius $`1`$.

The case $`m=1`$ is Theorem 20 of ; the comparatively much easier case $`m>n`$ is Proposition 2 of ; the general case is proved in . In all cases the proof begins with an approximation of $`f`$ first by a holomorphic function (using general elliptic theory), then by a polynomial $`g`$ of degree $`O(\mathrm{log}(\eta ^1))`$ (by truncating the power series expansion at the origin). The proof in the case $`m=1`$ then appeals to a rather sophisticated result on the complexity of real algebraic sets to control the size of the set of points where $`g`$ is small (the near-critical points) . Meanwhile, in the case $`m>n`$, since we only have to find $`w`$ such that $`|fw|\eta `$ at every point of $`B`$, it is sufficient to observe that the image of the polynomial map $`g`$ is contained in a complex algebraic hypersurface $`H`$ in $`^m`$; the result then follows from a standard result about the volume of a tubular neighborhood of $`H`$, which can be estimated using an explicit bound on the degree of $`H`$ .

Given asymptotically holomorphic sections $`s_k`$ of $`L^k`$ and a point $`xX`$, one can apply Proposition 1 to the complex-valued functions $`f_k=s_k/s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ (defined over a neighborhood of $`x`$) in order to find constants $`w_k`$ such that the functions $`f_kw_k`$ are uniformly transverse to $`0`$ near $`x`$; multiplying by $`s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$, it follows that the sections $`s_kw_ks_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ are uniformly transverse to $`0`$ near $`x`$. Therefore, we have:

###### Proposition 2.

There exist constants $`c`$, $`c^{}`$, $`p`$, $`\delta _0>0`$ such that, given a real number $`\delta (0,\delta _0)`$, a sequence of asymptotically holomorphic sections $`s_k`$ of $`L^k`$ and a point $`xX`$, for large enough $`k`$ there exist asymptotically holomorphic sections $`\tau _{k,x}`$ of $`L^k`$ with the following properties: (a) $`|\tau _{k,x}|_{C^1,g_k}<\delta `$, (b) the sections $`\frac{1}{\delta }\tau _{k,x}`$ have uniform Gaussian decay away from $`x`$ in $`C^1`$ norm, and (c) the sections $`s_k+\tau _{k,x}`$ are $`\eta `$-transverse to $`0`$ at every point of the ball $`B_{g_k}(x,c)`$, with $`\eta =c^{}\delta \mathrm{log}(\delta ^1)^p`$.

This result lets us achieve estimated transversality over a small ball in $`X`$ by adding to $`s_k`$ a small well-concentrated perturbation. Uniform transversality over the entire manifold $`X`$ is achieved by proceeding iteratively, adding successive perturbations to the sections in order to obtain transversality properties over larger and larger subsets of $`X`$. The key observation is that estimated transversality is an open property (preserved under $`C^1`$-small perturbations). Since the transversality estimate decreases after each perturbation, it is important to obtain global uniform transversality after a number of steps that remains bounded independently of $`k`$; this is made possible by the uniform decay properties of the perturbations, using a beautiful observation of Donaldson. The reader is referred to §3 of  or to Proposition 3 of  for details.

## 3. The simplified argument

Keeping the same general strategy, the proof of Theorem 1 can be simplified by appealing to a result weaker than Proposition 1, namely the following statement:

###### Proposition 3.

Let $`f`$ be a function defined over the ball $`B^+`$ of radius $`\frac{11}{10}`$ in $`^n`$ with values in $``$. Let $`\delta `$ be a constant with $`0<\delta <\frac{1}{4}`$, and let $`\eta =\delta \mathrm{log}(\delta ^1)^p^{}`$ where $`p^{}`$ is a fixed integer depending only on $`n`$. Assume that $`f`$ satisfies the bounds $`|f|_{C^1(B^+)}1`$ and $`|\overline{}f|_{C^2(B^+)}\eta `$. Then there exists $`w=(w_0,w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)^{n+1}`$ with $`|w|\delta `$ such that the function $`fw_0w_iz_i`$ is $`\eta `$-transverse to $`0`$ over the interior ball $`B`$ of radius $`1`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`g=(g_0,\mathrm{},g_n):B^+^{n+1}`$ be the function defined by $`g_i=f/z_i`$ for $`1in`$ and $`g_0=f_{i=1}^nz_ig_i`$. The bounds on $`f`$ immediately imply that $`|g|_{C^0(B^+)}C_n`$ and $`|\overline{}g|_{C^1(B^+)}C_n\eta `$, for some constant $`C_n`$ depending only on the dimension. We can safely choose the constant $`p^{}`$ appearing in the definition of $`\eta `$ to be larger than the constant $`p`$ appearing in Proposition 1. Therefore we can apply Proposition 1 in its easy version ($`m=n+1`$) to the function $`g`$, after scaling down by the constant factor $`C_n`$. This gives us a constant $`w=(w_0,\mathrm{},w_n)^{n+1}`$, bounded by $`\delta `$, and such that $`|gw|\alpha `$ at every point of $`B`$, where $`\alpha =\delta \mathrm{log}((\delta /C_n)^1)^p`$.

Define $`\stackrel{~}{f}=fw_0w_iz_i`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{g}=gw`$, and observe that $`\stackrel{~}{f}/z_i=\stackrel{~}{g}_i`$ for $`1in`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{f}_{i=1}^nz_i\stackrel{~}{g}_i=\stackrel{~}{g}_0`$. Let $`zB`$ be a point where $`|\stackrel{~}{f}|<\frac{1}{4}\alpha `$. Since $`\stackrel{~}{f}/z_i=\stackrel{~}{g}_i`$, and since $`|\stackrel{~}{g}(z)|\alpha `$ by construction, we have the inequality $`|\stackrel{~}{g}_0(z)|>\frac{3}{4}\alpha `$. However, $`|\stackrel{~}{f}(z)\stackrel{~}{g}_0(z)|=|z_i\stackrel{~}{g}_i(z)||z||\stackrel{~}{f}(z)|<\frac{1}{4}\alpha `$ (recall that $`z`$ belongs to the unit ball). Therefore $`|\stackrel{~}{f}(z)|>\frac{1}{2}\alpha `$.

Conversely, at any point $`zB`$ where $`|\stackrel{~}{f}|\frac{1}{2}\alpha `$ we must have $`|\overline{}\stackrel{~}{f}(z)|\frac{1}{4}\alpha `$. However, because of the bound on $`\overline{}\stackrel{~}{f}=\overline{}f`$, if we assume that $`\eta <\frac{1}{8}\alpha `$ then this inequality implies that $`\stackrel{~}{f}(z)`$ is surjective and admits a right inverse of norm at most $`(\frac{1}{8}\alpha )^1`$. Hence we conclude from the previous discussion that $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is $`\frac{1}{8}\alpha `$-transverse to $`0`$ over $`B`$. Finally, we observe that, because $`\delta <\frac{1}{4}`$, if the constant $`p^{}`$ is chosen large enough then $`\eta =\delta \mathrm{log}(\delta ^1)^p^{}<\frac{1}{8}\alpha =\frac{1}{8}\delta \mathrm{log}((\delta /C_n)^1)^p`$, so that $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is $`\eta `$-transverse to $`0`$ over $`B`$. ∎

Although it is weaker, Proposition 3 is in practice interchangeable with the case $`m=1`$ of Proposition 1, in particular for the purpose of proving Proposition 2.

###### Proof of Proposition 2.

We use the same argument as Donaldson : we work in approximately holomorphic Darboux coordinates on a neighborhood of the given point $`x`$, using Lemma 1. Using the sections $`s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ given by Lemma 2 to define local trivializations of $`L^k`$, the sections $`s_k`$ can be identified with complex-valued functions $`f_k=s_k/s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$. The estimates on $`s_k`$ and $`s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ imply that the functions $`f_k`$ are approximately holomorphic near the origin (in particular $`|\overline{}f_k|_{C^2}=O(k^{1/2})`$); after a suitable rescaling of the coordinates and of the functions by uniform constant factors, we can assume additionally that $`|f_k|_{C^1}1`$ near the origin, and that the estimates hold over a neighborhood of the origin that contains the ball $`B^+`$. Therefore, the assumptions of Proposition 3 are satisfied provided that $`k`$ is sufficiently large to ensure that $`k^{1/2}\eta `$.

By Proposition 3, we can find $`w_k=(w_{k,0},\mathrm{},w_{k,n})^{n+1}`$, with $`|w_k|\delta `$, such that $`\stackrel{~}{f_k}=f_kw_{k,0}w_{k,i}z_i`$ is $`\gamma `$-transverse to $`0`$ over the unit ball, where $`\gamma =\delta \mathrm{log}(\delta ^1)^p^{}`$. Define $`\tau _{k,x}=w_{k,0}s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}w_{k,i}z_k^is_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$. The estimates on $`z_k^i`$ from Lemma 1 and on $`s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ from Lemma 2 imply that the sections $`z_{k,i}s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ of $`L^k`$ are asymptotically holomorphic and have uniform Gaussian decay away from $`x`$. Therefore, it is easy to check that the sections $`\frac{1}{\delta }\tau _{k,x}`$ are asymptotically holomorphic and have uniform Gaussian decay. Moreover, because there exist uniform bounds on $`s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ and $`z_k^is_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$, one easily checks that $`|\tau _{k,x}|_{C^1,g_k}`$ is bounded by some constant multiple of $`\delta `$; decreasing the required bound on $`|w_k|`$, we can assume that the constant is equal to $`1`$, to the expense of inserting a constant factor in the above expression for $`\gamma `$. Finally, observing that $`s_k+\tau _{k,x}=\stackrel{~}{f}_ks_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ over a neighborhood of $`x`$, it is straightforward to check that the $`\gamma `$-transversality to $`0`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{f}_k`$ and the lower bound satisfied by $`s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ imply a uniform transversality property of the desired form for the section $`s_k+\tau _{k,x}`$. ∎

###### Remark 1.

Proposition 3 also admits a version for one-parameter families of functions: given functions $`f_t:B^+`$ depending continuously on a parameter $`t[0,1]`$ and satisfying the assumptions of Proposition 3 for all values of $`t`$, we can find constants $`w_t^{n+1}`$, depending continuously on $`t`$, such that the conclusion holds for all values of $`t`$. This is because the auxiliary functions $`g_t:B^+^{n+1}`$ introduced in the proof also depend continuously on $`t`$, which allows us to appeal to the one-parameter version of Proposition 1 (cf. e.g. Proposition 2 of ). We can therefore simplify the argument proving the asymptotic uniqueness of the constructed submanifolds  in the same manner as the construction itself.

###### Remark 2.

The idea behind the modified argument can be interpreted as follows in terms of $`1`$-jets of sections: let $`𝒥^1L^k=L^k(T^{}X^{1,0}L^k)`$, and define the $`1`$-jet of a section $`s_k\mathrm{\Gamma }(L^k)`$ as $`j^1s_k=(s_k,s_k)\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝒥^1L^k`$). The jet bundles carry natural Hermitian metrics (induced by those on $`L^k`$ and the metrics $`g_k`$ on the cotangent bundle), and natural Hermitian connections for which the $`1`$-jets of asymptotically holomorphic sections of $`L^k`$ are asymptotically holomorphic sections of $`𝒥^1L^k`$. It is worth noting that the natural connection on $`𝒥^1L^k`$ is not the connection $``$ induced by the connection on $`L^k`$ and the Levi-Civita connection, because $`\overline{}^{}(s_k,s_k)=(\overline{}s_k,\overline{}s_k)`$ differs from $`(\overline{}s_k,\overline{}s_k)`$ (which is bounded by $`O(k^{1/2})`$) by the curvature term $`ik\omega s_k`$. Therefore, we must instead work with the Hermitian connection $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ characterized by the formula $`\overline{}^\stackrel{~}{}(\sigma ^0,\sigma ^1)=\overline{}^{}(\sigma ^0,\sigma ^1)+(0,ik\omega \sigma ^0)`$, where $`\omega `$ is viewed as a $`(0,1)`$-form with values in $`T^{}X^{1,0}`$.

Observe that the 1-jets $`j^1\sigma _{k,x,0},\mathrm{},j^1\sigma _{k,x,n}`$, where $`\sigma _{k,x,0}=s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ and $`\sigma _{k,x,i}=z_k^is_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ for $`1in`$, are asymptotically holomorphic sections of $`𝒥^1L^k`$, with uniform Gaussian decay away from $`x`$, which form a local frame of the jet bundle over a neighborhood of $`x`$. Therefore, given asymptotically holomorphic sections $`s_k`$ and a point $`xX`$, there exist local complex-valued functions $`g_{k,0},\mathrm{},g_{k,n}`$ such that $`j^1s_k=g_{k,i}j^1\sigma _{k,x,i}`$. Moreover, remark that a section of $`L^k`$ is uniformly transverse to $`0`$ if and only if its $`1`$-jet satisfies a uniform lower bound. Therefore, our argument actually amounts to a local perturbation of $`j^1s_k`$, using the given local frame $`\{j^1\sigma _{k,x,i}\}`$, in order to bound it away from $`0`$; because the rank of the jet bundle is $`n+1>n`$, the easy version of Proposition 1 is sufficient for that purpose. The curious reader is referred to  for a more detailed discussion of estimated transversality using the formalism of jet bundles.

## 4. The higher-rank local result

We now formulate and prove an analogue of Proposition 3 for functions with values in $`^m`$ ($`mn`$); as in the case $`m=1`$, the statement differs from Proposition 1 by allowing the extra freedom of affine perturbations rather than restricting oneself to constants.

###### Proposition 4.

Let $`f`$ be a function defined over the ball $`B^+`$ of radius $`\frac{11}{10}`$ in $`^n`$ with values in $`^m`$, $`mn`$. Let $`\delta `$ be a constant with $`0<\delta <\frac{1}{4}`$, and let $`\eta =\delta \mathrm{log}(\delta ^1)^p^{}`$ where $`p^{}`$ is a fixed integer depending only on $`m`$ and $`n`$. Assume that $`f`$ satisfies the bounds $`|f|_{C^0(B^+)}1`$ and $`|\overline{}f|_{C^1(B^+)}\eta `$. Then there exists $`w=(w_0,w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)^{m(n+1)}`$ $`(`$each $`w_i`$ is an element of $`^m)`$ with $`|w|\delta `$ such that the function $`fw_0w_iz_i`$ is $`\eta `$-transverse to $`0`$ over the interior ball $`B`$ of radius $`1`$.

Moreover, given a one-parameter family of functions $`f_t:B^+`$ depending continuously on a parameter $`t[0,1]`$ and satisfying the above assumptions for all $`t`$, we can find constants $`w_t^{m(n+1)}`$, depending continuously on $`t`$, such that the conclusion holds for all values of $`t`$.

This statement is essentially interchangeable with Proposition 1 for all practical applications, and in particular the case $`m=n`$ allows us to simplify noticeably the argument for Donaldson’s construction of symplectic Lefschetz pencils . Indeed, the main problem to be solved is the following: given pairs of asymptotically holomorphic sections $`(s_k^0,s_k^1)`$ of $`L^k`$, defining $`^1`$-valued maps $`f_k=[s_k^0:s_k^1]`$ away from the base loci, one must perturb them so that the differentials $`f_k`$ (which are sections of rank $`n`$ vector bundles) become uniformly transverse to $`0`$. This ensures the non-degeneracy of the singular points of the pencil. The manner in which the problem reduces to the $`m=n`$ case of Proposition 1 is explained in detail in , and the reduction to Proposition 4 is essentially identical except that the resulting perturbations of $`(s_k^0,s_k^1)`$ are products of $`s_{k,x}^{\mathrm{ref}}`$ by quadratic (rather than linear) polynomials.

###### Proof.

Although for technical reasons we cannot use directly the case $`m>n`$ of Proposition 1, the argument presents many similarities with §2.3 of ; we accordingly skip the details whenever the two arguments parallel each other in an obvious manner. As in the case of Proposition 1, we first use the bounds on $`f`$ to find an approximation by a polynomial $`h:^n^m`$ of degree $`d=O(\mathrm{log}(\eta ^1))`$ such that $`|hf|_{C^1(B)}c\eta `$ for some constant $`c`$ (see Lemmas 27 and 28 of ). Observe that, if we can perturb $`h`$ by less than $`\delta `$ to make it $`(c+1)\eta `$-transverse to $`0`$ over $`B`$, then because transversality is an open property the desired result on $`f`$ will follow immediately. So we are reduced to the case of a polynomial function $`h=(h^1,\mathrm{},h^m)`$ of degree $`d=O(\mathrm{log}(\eta ^1))`$.

If $`w=(w_0,\mathrm{},w_n)`$ is a vector in $`^{m(n+1)}`$, denote by $`(w_i^j)_{1jm}`$ the components of $`w_i`$, and let $`\stackrel{}{w}=(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)^{m\times n}`$. The set of choices to be avoided for $`w`$ is

$$S=\{w^{m(n+1)},zB\text{s.t.}h(z)w_0w_iz_i=0,^m(h(z)\stackrel{}{w})=0\}.$$

Indeed, observe that $`hw_0w_iz_i`$ is transverse to $`0`$ over $`B`$ (without any estimate) if and only if $`wS`$. We now define a polynomial function $`g:^{N1}^N`$, where $`N=m(n+1)`$, which parametrizes a dense subset of $`S`$. Given elements $`z=(z_i)_{1in}^n`$, $`\theta =(\theta _i^j)_{1in,1jm1}^{(m1)n}`$ and $`\lambda =(\lambda _j)_{1jm1}^{m1}`$, we define $`g(z,\theta ,\lambda )^{m(n+1)}`$ by the formulas

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}g_i^j(z,\theta ,\lambda )=\frac{h^j}{z_i}(z)+\theta _i^j\hfill & \mathrm{for}1in,1jm1,\hfill \\ g_i^m(z,\theta ,\lambda )=\frac{h^m}{z_i}(z)+\underset{j=1}{\overset{m1}{}}\lambda _j\theta _i^j\hfill & \mathrm{for}1in,\hfill \\ g_0^j(z,\theta ,\lambda )=h^j(z)\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}g_i^j(z,\theta ,\lambda )z_i\hfill & \mathrm{for}1jm.\hfill \end{array}$$

One easily checks that the image by $`g`$ of the subset $`\{(z,\theta ,\lambda )^{N1},zB\}`$ is contained in $`S`$, in which it is a dense subset. Observe that $`g`$ is a polynomial map with the same degree $`d`$ as $`h`$ (provided that $`d2`$). Therefore, the image $`g(^{N1})`$ is contained in an algebraic surface $`H^N`$, of degree at most $`D=Nd^{N1}`$. Indeed, denoting by $`E`$ the space of polynomials of degree at most $`D`$ in $`N`$ variables and by $`E^{}`$ the space of polynomials of degree at most $`dD`$ in $`N1`$ variables, we have $`dimE=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{D+N}{N}\right)>\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{dD+N1}{N1}\right)=dimE^{}`$, so that the map from $`E`$ to $`E^{}`$ defined by $`PPg`$ cannot be injective, and a non-zero element of its kernel provides an equation for the hypersurface $`H`$ (see §2.3 of  for details).

Since $`g(B\times ^{(m1)n}\times ^{m1})`$ is dense in $`S`$, we conclude that $`SH`$. From this point on, the argument is very similar to §2.3 of , to which the reader is referred for details. Standard results on complex algebraic hypersurfaces, essentially amounting to the well-known monotonicity formula, allow us to bound the size of $`S`$ and of its tubular neighborhoods (cf. e.g. Lemma 4 of ). In particular, denoting by $`\overline{B}`$ the ball of radius $`\delta `$ centered at the origin in $`^N`$ and by $`V_0`$ the volume of the unit ball in dimension $`2N2`$, we have $`vol_{2N2}(H\overline{B})DV_0\delta ^{2N2}`$, while given any point $`xH`$ we have $`vol_{2N2}(HB(x,\eta ))V_0\eta ^{2N2}`$. Therefore, choosing a suitable covering of $`\overline{B}`$ by balls of radius $`\eta `$, one can show that $`H\overline{B}`$ is contained in the union of $`M=CD\delta ^{2N2}\eta ^{(2N2)}`$ balls of radius $`\eta `$, where $`C`$ is a constant depending only on $`N`$. As a consequence, the neighborhood $`Z=\{w^N,|w|\delta ,\mathrm{dist}(w,S)(3c+3)\eta \}`$ is contained in the union of $`M`$ balls of radius $`(3c+4)\eta `$.

A simple comparison of the volumes implies that, if the constant $`p^{}`$ is chosen suitably large, then the volume of $`Z`$ is much smaller than that of the ball $`\overline{B}`$, and therefore $`\overline{B}Z`$ is not empty, i.e. $`\overline{B}`$ contains an element $`w`$ which lies at distance more than $`(3c+3)\eta `$ from $`S`$. Moreover, using a standard isoperimetric inequality we can show that $`\overline{B}Z`$ contains a unique large connected component; it follows that, in the case where the data depends continuously on a parameter $`t[0,1]`$, the subset $`\{t\}\times (\overline{B}Z_t)[0,1]\times \overline{B}`$ contains a preferred large connected component, in which we can choose elements $`w_t`$ depending continuously on $`t`$.

To complete the proof of Proposition 4, we only need to show that, if $`w\overline{B}`$ lies at distance more than $`(3c+3)\eta `$ from $`S`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{f}=fw_0w_iz_i`$ is $`\eta `$-transverse to $`0`$ over $`B`$. In fact, it is sufficient to show that $`\stackrel{~}{h}=hw_0w_iz_i`$ is $`(c+1)\eta `$-transverse to $`0`$ over $`B`$, because $`|\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{f}|_{C^1(B)}=|hf|_{C^1(B)}c\eta `$ and transversality is an open property. We conclude using the following lemma:

###### Lemma 3.

If $`w`$ lies at distance more than $`3\alpha `$ from $`S`$ for some constant $`\alpha >0`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{h}=hw_0w_iz_i`$ is $`\alpha `$-transverse to $`0`$ over $`B`$.

To prove Lemma 3, we first provide an alternative definition of $`\alpha `$-transversality:

###### Lemma 4.

Let $`L:EF`$ be a linear map between Hermitian complex vector spaces, and choose a constant $`\alpha >0`$. The two following properties are equivalent:

$`(i)`$ $`L`$ is surjective and has a right inverse $`R:FE`$ of norm at most $`\alpha ^1`$,

$`(ii)`$ for every unit vector $`v`$ in $`F`$, the component $`v,L=v^{}L`$ of $`L`$ along $`v`$ is a linear form on $`E`$ such that $`|v^{}L|\alpha `$.

###### Proof.

If $`(i)`$ holds, then given any unit vector $`vF`$, the vector $`u=Rv`$ is such that $`|u|\alpha ^1`$ and $`v,Lu=|v|^2=1`$. Therefore the linear form $`v,L`$ has norm at least $`\alpha `$, and $`(ii)`$ holds.

Conversely, assume $`(ii)`$ holds. Then for any $`vF`$ we have $`|v^{}L|\alpha |v|`$, i.e. $`v^{}LL^{}v\alpha ^2|v|^2`$. Therefore, the Hermitian endomorphism $`LL^{}`$ of $`F`$ is positive definite and has eigenvalues $`\alpha ^2`$. It follows that it admits an inverse $`U=(LL^{})^1`$ of operator norm at most $`\alpha ^2`$. We have $`LL^{}U=\mathrm{Id}`$, and $`|L^{}Uv|^2=v,ULL^{}Uv=v,Uv\alpha ^2|v|^2`$, so that $`R=L^{}U`$ is a right inverse of norm at most $`\alpha ^1`$. ∎

###### Proof of Lemma 3.

Assume that $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ is not $`\alpha `$-transverse to $`0`$ over $`B`$: using the definition and Lemma 4, there exists a point $`zB`$ and a unit vector $`v^m`$ such that $`|\stackrel{~}{h}(z)|<\alpha `$ and $`|v,\stackrel{~}{h}(z)|<\alpha `$. Let $`u=(u_0,u_1,\mathrm{},u_n)^{m(n+1)}`$ be such that $`u_i=v,\stackrel{~}{h}/z_iv`$ and $`u_0=\stackrel{~}{h}(z)z_iu_i`$. We clearly have $`|(u_1,\mathrm{},u_n)|<\alpha `$, and $`|u_0|<2\alpha `$, so that $`|u|<3\alpha `$. On the other hand, if we consider the function $`\widehat{h}=h(w_0+u_0)(w_i+u_i)z_i`$, then by construction $`\widehat{h}(z)=0`$ and $`v,\widehat{h}(z)=0`$. Therefore $`w+uS`$, and so $`w`$ is within distance $`3\alpha `$ of $`S`$. ∎


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The gluon chain model \[1-4\] is a picture of the formation and composition of the QCD string in terms of the perturbative excitations of the theory. In this talk I would like to discuss some recent work  in this area, which was carried out in collaboration with Charles Thorn.

Normally gluon (particle) excitations are useful for describing high-energy scattering processes, while non-perturbative effects, such as confinement and chiral symmetry breaking, are usually ascribed to some special class of field configurations with particular topological properties. However, it is not excluded that particle and field descriptions of various phenomena in QCD can overlap in some cases. An example is the color screening of higher representation Wilson loops. In this case one is easily convinced, just by thinking about string breaking due to gluon pair production, that the asymptotic string tension of a higher-representation loop can depend only on the transformation properties of the representation with respect to the center subgroup (i.e. on the “N-ality” of the representation). For an adjoint string in particular, one ends up with two gluelump states, each consisting of a gluon bound to a heavy source. On the other hand, from the “field” point of view, the area law falloff of the Wilson loop is due to large scale vacuum fluctuations of some kind. The N-ality dependence of the string tension tells us that these large-scale field fluctuations must induce fluctuations in Wilson loop holonomies only among the center elements, rather than coset elements, of the SU(N) gauge group. This simple fact implies (very strongly, in my opinion) the existence of a center vortex mechanism of some kind.

In principle we then have two complementary ways of understanding the N-ality dependence of the QCD string tension: (i) in terms of color-screening by constituent gluons; and (ii) in terms of the vortex confinement mechanism. But if we can picture string *breaking* in terms of particle excitations, is it also possible to describe string *formation* in terms of constituent gluons? As it happens, large-$`N_c`$ considerations lead to just such a description. Consider a very high-order planar Feynman diagram contributing to a Wilson loop expectation value, as shown in Fig. 1. A time-slice of the diagram reveals a sequence of gluons, interacting only with their nearest neighbors in the diagram. If we take this picture seriously, it suggests that the QCD string might be regarded, in some gauge, as a “chain” of constituent gluons, with each gluon held in place by its attraction to its two nearest neighbors in the chain.

The linear potential in this “gluon chain” model comes about in the following way: As the heavy quarks separate, we expect that at some point the interaction energy increases rapidly due to the running coupling. Eventually, it becomes energetically favorable to insert a gluon between the quarks, to reduce the color charge separation. As the quarks continue to separate, the process repeats, as shown in Fig. 2, and we end up with a chain of gluons. The average gluon separation $`R`$ along the axis joining the quarks is fixed, regardless of the quark separation $`L`$, and the total energy of the chain is the energy per gluon times the number $`N`$ of gluons in the chain, i.e.

$$E_{chain}NE_{gluon}=\frac{E_{gluon}}{R}L=\sigma L$$
(1)
where $`E_{gluon}`$ is the (kinetic+interaction) energy per gluon, and $`\sigma =E_{gluon}/R`$ is the string tension. In this picture, the linear growth in the number of gluons in the chain is the origin of the linear potential.

Every theory of confinement aims at explaining the linearity of the static quark potential at large distances. However, it is by now well understood that linearity is only one of several conditions that a theory of the confining force must satisfy. The requirements also include:

1. Casimir Scaling. At intermediate distance scales, the string tension should be proportional to the quadratic Casimir of the quark color group representation.
2. Center Dependence. Asymptotically, the string tension should depend only on the N-ality, not the Casimir, of the quark color group representation.
3. String Behavior:

* Roughening. There is a logarithmic broadening of the flux tube with quark separation $`L`$.
    * Lüscher term. There is a universal $`c/L`$ term in the static quark potential at large distances.

Taken together, this is a challenging set of conditions. The abelian projection theory, for example, has difficulties with both Casimir scaling  and center dependence . Other proposals, which seek to derive confinement from a $`1/k^4`$ behavior of the gluon propagator in some gauge, will run into trouble when confronted with roughening and the Lüscher term. So does the gluon chain model, which is yet another idea about confinement, do any better in meeting these conditions?

Having already discussed the linearity of the static potential, let us consider Casimir scaling. In any SU($`N_c`$) representation $`r`$, the group character can be expressed as a product

$$\chi _r[g]\left(\chi _F[g]\right)^n\left(\chi _F^{}[g]\right)^{\overline{n}}+\text{sub-leading terms}.$$
(2)
where $`F`$ denotes the fundamental representation. By factorization at large-$`N_c`$, a Wilson loop in representation $`r`$ has a string tension

$$\sigma _r=M_r\sigma _F$$
(3)
at $`N_c\mathrm{}`$, where $`M_r=n+\overline{n}`$. In this limit, the quadratic Casimir is $`C_r=M_rN_c/2`$. Exact Casimir scaling is therefore a property of the planar limit. The gluon chain model, which is motivated by large-$`N_c`$ considerations, inherits this property. In the gluon-chain model, there are $`M_r`$ chains terminating at each heavy source, and these are non-interacting at $`N_c\mathrm{}`$. The total energy of the system is then proportional to the number of chains times the length of each chain, and in this way Casimir scaling

$$\sigma _rC_r(N_c\mathrm{})$$
(4)
is obtained at large $`N_c`$. The situation for heavy adjoint-representation quarks, which have two chains between them, is shown in Fig. 3(I).

The appropriate center dependence of the string tension is due to color screening. Screening is accomplished by a ($`1/N_c^2`$ suppressed) contact interaction between constituent gluons in different chains, leading to string-breaking processes such as those shown in Fig. 3.

As for string behavior, the gluon chain is clearly some sort of discretized string, so string-like properties are not entirely unexpected. I will return to this topic in section 4, below.

## 2 The Force Renormalization Scheme

The growth of the running coupling with color charge separation is an essential ingredient of gluon chain picture, but the relationship of the running coupling to the interaction potential, which depends on the choice of renormalization scheme, is an important consideration. Suppose one defines the running coupling in terms of the static potential via

$$V_{q\overline{q}}(R)=\left(1\frac{1}{N_c^2}\right)\frac{N_c\alpha _s^V(R)}{2R}.$$
(5)
This is the $`V`$-renormalization scheme. But if $`\alpha _s^V`$ grows monotonically, the resulting behavior of $`V(R)`$ is the *opposite* of what is required for confinement, behaving roughly like the curve labeled “running coupling” in the sketch shown in Fig. (4). In order that the potential becomes positive at some point, as it does in the actual potential found in numerical simulations, it is obviously necessary that $`\alpha _s^V(R)`$ becomes smaller and eventually *changes sign* as $`R`$ increases. This is asking a lot of perturbation theory, which tends in the opposite direction. A better renormalization scheme, advocated by Grunberg , Sommer , and also by Thorn, is to define the running coupling in terms of the force

$$|F(R)|=\left(1\frac{1}{N_c^2}\right)\frac{N_c\alpha _s^F(R)}{2R^2}$$
(6)
and derive the potential at intermediate distances from integration

$$V_{q\overline{q}}(R)=V_{q\overline{q}}(R_A)+_{R_A}^R𝑑R\left|F(R)\right|$$
(7)
In this “F-scheme” the running coupling doesn’t have to change sign, and in fact the three loop term in the beta function

$$\beta (g)=g^3\left(\frac{11}{(4\pi )^2}+\frac{102}{(4\pi )^4}g^2+\frac{1.65}{(4\pi )^3}g^4\mathrm{}\right)$$
(8)
is substantially smaller (by a factor of 2.6) in the F-scheme than the V-scheme. The three-loop potential has been computed in the F-scheme by Necco and Sommer in ref. . I have extracted Fig. 5 below from their article; this figure displays the perturbative potential compared to the corresponding Monte Carlo data. The parameter $`r_00.5`$ fm is the Sommer scale. Notice that the F-scheme gives a remarkably good fit to the numerical data almost up to the Landau pole, while the V-scheme results in a very poor fit to the data in this interval.

According to a rigorous theorem , the static potential must be concave downwards; i.e. the force cannot increase with distance. This implies that the the perturbative 3-loop result must certainly break down at quark separation $`L0.6r_00.3`$ fm in the F-scheme. In the gluon-chain model, the rising force is avoided by inserting constituent gluons between the quarks. From the breakdown of perturbation theory at $`L=0.6r_0`$, we can estimate that the inter-gluon separation along the line joining the quarks is $`R=0.3r_0`$.

## 3 A Variational Approach

Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0[A]`$ be the QCD vacuum wavefunctional. An excited state can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{ex}[A]=Q[A]\mathrm{\Psi }_0[A].$$
(9)
e.g. for a glueball

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_G[A]=\underset{N=1}{\overset{N_{max}}{}}\mathrm{\Psi }_G^{(N)}[A]$$
(10)
where

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_G^{(N)}[A]`$ $`=`$ $`\{{\displaystyle }d\stackrel{}{x}_1d\stackrel{}{x}_2\mathrm{}d\stackrel{}{x}_Nf_{\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _N}(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2,\mathrm{},\stackrel{}{x}_N)`$ (11)
$`\text{Tr}A_{\mu _1}(\stackrel{}{x}_1)A_{\mu _2}(\stackrel{}{x}_2)\mathrm{}A_{\mu _N}(\stackrel{}{x}_N)\}\mathrm{\Psi }_0[A]`$
is the N constituent gluon state. The energy is

$$E=\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_{ex}|H|\mathrm{\Psi }_{ex}}{\mathrm{\Psi }_{ex}|\mathrm{\Psi }_{ex}}H$$
(12)
Defining

$$Q_tQ[A(\stackrel{}{x},t)]$$
(13)
it is easy to show that

$$E=\frac{1}{2}\underset{T0}{lim}\frac{d}{dT}\mathrm{log}Q_T^{}Q_T$$
(14)
where $`\mathrm{}`$ represents the Euclidean VEV.

The idea is to choose $`Q`$ as a function of a few parameters, and then determine the optimal parameters by minimizing the value of $`E`$ computed perturbatively . For the gluon chain, we propose to use

$`Q_{chain}[A]`$ $`=`$ $`q^{a_1}(\mathrm{𝟎})\{{\displaystyle }d\stackrel{}{x}_1d\stackrel{}{x}_2\mathrm{}d\stackrel{}{x}_N\psi _{\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _N}(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2,\mathrm{},\stackrel{}{x}_N)`$ (15)
$`A_{\mu _1}^{a_1a_2}(\stackrel{}{x}_1)A_{\mu _2}^{a_2a_3}(\stackrel{}{x}_2)\mathrm{}A_{\mu _N}^{a_Na_{N+1}}(\stackrel{}{x}_N)\}\overline{q}^{a_{N+1}}(𝐋)`$
Before trying this approach in the full-blown field theory, it is interesting to apply these ideas to a simple quantum-mechanical model with most of the same qualitative features. Let us take the multi-gluon Hamiltonian to be

$$H=\underset{n=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\left|𝐩_n\right|+\underset{n=2}{\overset{N1}{}}V(\stackrel{}{x}_n\stackrel{}{x}_{n1})+V_{qg}(\stackrel{}{x}_1)+V_{qg}(𝐋\stackrel{}{x}_{N1})$$
(16)
The Product Ansatz for the (N-1)-gluon chain ground state is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2,\mathrm{},\stackrel{}{x}_{N1})=A\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\psi (𝐮_i)$$
(17)
where

$$𝐮_i=\stackrel{}{x}_i\stackrel{}{x}_{i1}$$
(18)
and

$$\psi (𝐮)=e^{u^2/2r^2}.$$
(19)
with the constraint

$$\stackrel{}{x}_0\mathrm{𝟎},\stackrel{}{x}_N=𝐋$$
(20)
After some work, one finds that the string tension (= energy/unit length) is

$$\frac{}{L}=\frac{1}{rR}\sqrt{\frac{8}{\pi }}+\frac{1}{R}V(u)$$
(21)
In particular, taking for $`V`$ the instantaneous Coulomb potential $`V(u)=C_F\alpha _s/|u|`$, we have

$$\frac{}{L}=\frac{1}{rR}\sqrt{\frac{8}{\pi }}\frac{C_F\alpha _s}{R^2}\text{erf}\left(\frac{R}{r}\right).$$
(22)
where both $`r`$ and $`N`$ (no. of gluons), or equivalently $`r`$ and $`R=L/N`$, are taken as variational parameters.

Our second trial wavefunction, the String Ansatz, is adapted from discretized light-cone string theory :

$$a_m^i\mathrm{\Psi }(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2,\mathrm{},\stackrel{}{x}_{N1})=0\{\begin{array}{c}m=1,2,..,N1\hfill \\ i=1,2,3\hfill \end{array}$$
(23)
with

$`\stackrel{}{x}_k`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝐋}{N}}k+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{NT_0}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega _m}}}\left(\stackrel{}{a}_m+\stackrel{}{a}_m^{}\right)\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m\pi }{N}}k\right)`$
$`\stackrel{}{p}_k`$ $`=`$ $`i\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2T_0}{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _m}{2}}}\left(\stackrel{}{a}_m\stackrel{}{a}_m^{}\right)\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m\pi }{N}}k\right)`$ (24)
where $`\omega _m=2\mathrm{sin}\frac{m\pi }{2N}`$. Define $`r2/\sqrt{\pi T_0}`$. For a Coulomb potential, we then find

$$\frac{}{L}=\frac{1}{rR}\frac{8}{\pi ^{3/2}}\frac{C_F\alpha _s}{R^2}\text{erf}\left(\frac{R}{r}\right)$$
(25)
Comparison with the product ansatz shows that the string ansatz achieves a slightly lower energy.

To estimate the string tension, we begin from

$$\frac{}{L}=\frac{1}{R}\left[\frac{8}{\pi ^{3/2}}\frac{1}{r}+V(𝐮)\right].$$
(26)
and make the approximation that $`V(𝐮)=V(s)`$, where

$$\frac{1}{s}\frac{1}{|𝐮|}=\frac{1}{R}\text{erf}\left(\frac{R}{r}\right)$$
(27)
Minimizing wrt $`R`$ and $`r`$ results in two conditions

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{L}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{s}{R}}F(s)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{8}{\pi ^{3/2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{s}{r}}F(s)`$ (28)
which together imply

$$\sigma =\frac{s}{R}\left(\frac{s}{r}\right)^1\frac{8}{\pi ^{3/2}}\frac{1}{r^2}$$
(29)
Given $`F(s)dV/ds`$, we could determine $`r,R`$ and $`\sigma `$. Even without $`F(s)`$, we can still make a “ballpark” estimate of $`\sigma `$. First, the static force increases beyond $`L=0.6r_0`$, so a constituent gluon must appear between the quarks at that point, to stabilize the force. This suggests that $`R=0.3r_0.`$ Secondly, the running coupling $`\alpha (s)`$ must be O(1), if the growth in potential energy over-compensates the falloff in kinetic. This argues for $`s0.6r_0`$ and $`r0.63r_0`$. With these guesses, one finds $`\sigma =1.26/r_0^2`$, which is to be compared with the experimental value $`\sigma _{exp}=(430\text{Mev})^2=1.18/r_0^2`$. We conclude that the value of the string tension *may* work out in a genuine field-theory/variational calculation, but of course this remains to be seen.

## 4 String Behavior

Using the string ansatz wavefunction, one finds for the transverse coordinate of the $`k`$-th gluon in the chain

$`0|𝐱_k^2|0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{D2}{2NT_0}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2(m\pi k/N)}{\mathrm{sin}(m\pi /2N)}}`$ (30)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{D2}{2\pi T_0}}\mathrm{ln}N`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{r^2(D2)}{8}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{L}{R}}`$
which demonstrates the expected logarithmic broadening of the flux tube with quark separation. Note that there is no need to insert a high-frequency cutoff; this is taken care of by the discreteness of the gluon chain.

The total energy of the gluon chain in the string ansatz can also be computed, and the result minimized wrt the variational parameters. The result is

$``$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L}{\pi ^{3/2}}}{\displaystyle d^3ue^{𝐮^2}\frac{\stackrel{}{R}}{R}V\left(\stackrel{}{R}+2\stackrel{}{u}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }_1}\right)}`$ (31)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{24L}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4R}{r\sqrt{\pi }}}\right)\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{4}{r\pi ^{3/2}}}`$
(see ref.  for details). The first term on the rhs is the linear potential, the second is a Lüscher-like term. For the bosonic string, the factor multiplying $`\pi /24L`$ in the Lüscher term would be $`D2=2`$. With our estimate above of $`Rr/2`$ this coefficient is estimated to be $`2/\sqrt{\pi }1.13`$. At this stage, however, numerical values should not be taken too seriously.

## 5 Numerical Studies

It is possible to investigate the constituent gluon composition of the QCD string by numerical methods, and in fact a study along these lines was carried out many years ago (second reference of ref. ). The idea is the following: Observe that the ground state of the QCD flux tube, in a physical gauge, can be written as

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{string}[A_\mu (x,t=0)]=`$ (32)
$`\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim}\left(W(R,2T)Z\right)^{1/2}{\displaystyle DA_\mu (x,t<0)\delta [F(A)]\mathrm{\Delta }[A]}`$
$`\times P\mathrm{exp}[i{\displaystyle _C_{}}𝑑x^\mu A_\mu ]\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^0}𝑑tL[A]\right]`$
where $`C_{}`$ is the $`R\times T`$ open contour shown in Fig. 6. The $`R\times 2T`$ Wilson loop factor $`W(R,2T)`$ ensures that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{string}`$ is normalized to unity.

If the gluon chain model is correct, then $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{string}`$ can also be expressed as a sum of n-gluon states

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{string}[A]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}c_n\mathrm{\Psi }_n[A]`$
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_n[A]`$ $`=`$ $`N_nQ_n\mathrm{\Psi }_0[A]`$ (33)
where $`Q_n`$ is an n-gluon operator, and

$$N_n=\frac{1}{2}\text{Tr}[Q_n^{}Q_n]^{1/2}$$
(34)
is a normalization constant. Assuming the $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n`$ states are orthogonal, the overlap of an n-gluon state with the true string state is given, in the $`T\mathrm{}`$ limit, by

$$c_n=\frac{\text{Tr}[Q_n^{}P\mathrm{exp}[i_C_{}dx^\mu A_\mu ]}{\sqrt{\text{Tr}[Q_n^{}Q_n]W(R,2T)}}$$
(35)
The second article of ref.  used the following trial operators on the lattice (with $`A_\mu =(U_\mu U_\mu ^{})/2i`$):

$`Q_0^{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta ^{ab}`$
$`Q_1^{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{x_1<x<x_2}{}}\overline{A}_x^{ab}(x)`$
$`Q_2^{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{x_1<x<x_2}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{x<x^{}<x_2}{}}\left[\overline{A}_x^{ac}(x)\overline{A}_x^{ca}(x^{}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{Tr}[\overline{A}_x(x)\overline{A}_x(x^{})]\right]`$ (36)
where

$$\overline{A}_x^{ab}(x)=\underset{y,z}{}A_x^{ab}(x,y,z)e^{\delta r_{}}$$
(37)
is a “smeared” vector potential, $`r_{}`$ is the transverse distance from the flux tube axis, and $`\delta `$ is a variational parameter. The corresponding zero, one, and two-gluon overlaps ($`c_0,c_1,c_2`$) were then computed from eq. (35) via lattice Monte Carlo. It was found that for small $`R`$, the zero-gluon overlap $`c_0`$ is the largest of the three overlaps. As $`R`$ increases, the $`c_0`$ overlap falls and the $`c_1`$ term becomes dominant, and at the largest $`R`$ separations that were used in the simulations we found the two-gluon overlap $`c_2`$ becoming the largest of the three. The sum of the three overlaps accounts for about 90% of the norm of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{string}`$, which means that for the given range of $`R`$ the sum of zero, one and two gluon states is a fairly good approximation to the true flux tube state. For details, please see the cited reference.

All of this is in good qualitative agreement with the gluon chain picture, but the old results can surely be much improved. It may be useful to repeat the investigation of ref.  with modern computers and better noise-reduction techniques.

## 6 Conclusions

The gluon-chain model offers a simple and concise explanation of many features of the confining force $``$ Casimir scaling at large-$`N_c`$, center dependence, roughening, and the Lüscher term $``$ which are problematic in many other approachs. The model is essentially a “particle” picture of string formation, and I regard it as complementary to the “field” explanation of confinement in terms of center vortices. The next step will be to apply the field theory/variational approach outlined above to obtain quantitative estimates for the string tension and, perhaps, for the masses of the low-lying glueballs.