text:
# Hurewicz theorem for extension dimension

## 1. Introduction

The classical Hurewicz theorem states that for a mapping of finite-dimensional compacta $`f:XY`$ we have

$$\mathrm{dim}X\mathrm{dim}Y+\mathrm{dim}f,\text{where}\mathrm{dim}f=\mathrm{max}\{\mathrm{dim}(f^1(y)yY\}.$$

There are several approaches to extension dimensional generalization of Hurewicz theorem ,,,,,.

Using the idea from  we improve Theorem 7.6 from :

###### Theorem 3.1.

Let $`f:XY`$ be a closed mapping of a $`k`$-space $`X`$ onto paracompact $`C`$-space $`Y`$. Suppose that $`\text{e-dim}Y[M]`$ for a finite $`CW`$-complex $`M`$. If for every point $`yY`$ and for every compactum $`Z`$ with $`\text{e-dim}Z[M]`$ we have $`\text{e-dim}(f^1(y)\times Z)[L]`$ for some $`CW`$-complex $`L`$, then $`\text{e-dim}X[L]`$.

The notion of extension dimension was introduced by Dranishnikov : for a $`CW`$-complex $`L`$ a space $`X`$ is said to have extension dimension $`[L]`$ (notation: $`\text{e-dim}X[L]`$) if any mapping of its closed subspace $`AX`$ into $`L`$ admits an extension to the whole space $`X`$.

To prove Theorem 3.1 we need an extension dimensional version of Uspenskij’s selection theorem . In section 2 we prove Theorem 2.8 on selections of multivalued mappings of C-space. Then Theorem 2.5 helps us to prove Theorem 2.9 — a needed version of Uspenskij’s theorem.

Filtrations of multivalued maps are proved to be very useful for construction of continuous selections . And we state our selection theorems in terms of filtrations. Note that Valov  used filtrations to prove a selection theorem for mappings of finite $`C`$-spaces.

Let us recall some definitions and introduce our notations. A space $`X`$ is called a $`k`$-space if $`UX`$ is open in $`X`$ whenever $`UC`$ is relatively open in $`C`$ for every compact subset $`C`$ of $`X`$. The graph of a multivalued mapping $`F:XY`$ is the subset $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_F=\{(x,y)X\times Y:yF(x)\}`$ of the product $`X\times Y`$.

We denote by $`\mathrm{cov}X`$ the collection of all coverings of the space $`X`$. For a cover $`\omega `$ of a space $`X`$ and for a subset $`AX`$ let $`\mathrm{St}(A,\omega )`$ denote the star of the set $`A`$ with respect to $`\omega `$. We say that a subset $`AX`$ refines a cover $`\omega \mathrm{cov}X`$ if $`A`$ is contained in some element of $`\omega `$. A covering $`\omega ^{}\mathrm{cov}X`$ strongly star refines a covering $`\omega \mathrm{cov}X`$ if for any element $`W\omega ^{}`$ the set $`\mathrm{St}(W,\omega ^{})`$ refines $`\omega `$.

###### Definition 1.1.

A topological space $`X`$ is called $`C`$-space if for each sequence $`\{\omega _i\}_{i1}`$ of open covers of $`X`$, there is an open cover $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of $`X`$ of the form $`_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}\sigma _i`$ such that for each $`i1`$, $`\sigma _i`$ is a pairwise disjoint collection which refines $`\omega _i`$.

If the space $`X`$ is paracompact, we can choose the cover $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ to be locally finite and every collection $`\sigma _i`$ to be discrete.

###### Definition 1.2.

A multivalued mapping $`F:XY`$ is said to be strongly lower semicontinuous (briefly, strongly l.s.c.) if for any point $`xX`$ and any compact set $`KF(x)`$ there exists a neighborhood $`V`$ of $`x`$ such that $`KF(z)`$ for every $`zV`$.

###### Definition 1.3.

Let $`L`$ be a $`CW`$-complex. A pair of spaces $`VU`$ is said to be $`[L]`$-connected (resp., $`[L]_c`$-connected) if for every paracompact space $`X`$ (resp., compact metric space $`X`$) of extension dimension $`\text{e-dim}X[L]`$ and for every closed subspace $`AX`$ any mapping of $`A`$ into $`V`$ can be extended to a mapping of $`X`$ into $`U`$.

An increasing111We consider only increasing filtrations indexed by a segment of the integral series. sequence of subspaces $`Z_0Z_1\mathrm{}Z`$ is called a filtration of space $`Z`$. A sequence of multivalued mappings $`\{F_k:XY\}`$ is called a filtration of multivalued mapping $`F:XY`$ if $`\{F_k(x)\}`$ is a filtration of $`F(x)`$ for any $`xX`$.

###### Definition 1.4.

A filtration of multivalued mappings $`\{G_i:XY\}`$ is said to be fiberwise $`[L]_c`$-connected if for any point $`xX`$ and any $`i`$ the pair $`G_i(x)G_{i+1}(x)`$ is $`[L]_c`$-connected.

## 2. Selection theorems

The following notion of stably $`[L]`$-connected filtration of multivalued mappings provides a key property of the filtration for our construction of continuous selections.

###### Definition 2.1.

A pair $`FH`$ of multivalued mappings from $`X`$ to $`Y`$ is called stably $`[L]`$-connected if every point $`xX`$ has a neighborhood $`O_x`$ such that the pair $`F(O_x)_{zO_x}H(z)`$ is $`[L]`$-connected.

We say that the pair $`FH`$ is called stably $`[L]`$-connected with respect to a covering $`\omega \mathrm{cov}X`$, if for any $`W\omega `$ the pair $`F(W)_{xW}H(x)`$ is $`[L]`$-connected.

A filtration $`\{F_i\}`$ of multivalued mappings is called stably $`[L]`$-connected if every pair $`F_iF_{i+1}`$ is stably $`[L]`$-connected.

Clearly, any stably $`[L]`$-connected pair of multivalued maps of a space $`X`$ is stably $`[L]`$-connected with respect to some covering of $`X`$.

We denote by $`Q`$ the Hilbert cube. We identify a space $`Y`$ with the subspace $`Y\times \{0\}`$ of the product $`Y\times Q`$ and denote by $`\mathrm{pr}_Y`$ the projection of $`Y\times Q`$ onto $`Y`$.

###### Definition 2.2.

For a subspace $`ZY\times Q`$ we say that $`Y`$ projectively contains $`Z`$. We say that a multivalued mapping $`F:XY`$ projectively contains a multivalued mapping $`G:XY\times Q`$ if for any point $`xX`$ the set $`\mathrm{pr}_YG(x)`$ is contained in $`F(x)`$.

###### Lemma 2.3.

Let $`L`$ be a finite $`CW`$-complex. If a topological space $`Y`$ contains a compactum $`K`$ of extension dimension $`\text{e-dim}K[L]`$ such that the pair $`KY`$ is $`[L]_c`$-connected, then $`Y`$ projectively contains a compactum $`K^{}`$ of extension dimension $`\text{e-dim}K^{}[L]`$ such that $`K`$ lies in $`K^{}`$ and the pair $`KK^{}`$ is $`[L]`$-connected.

###### Proof.

There exists $`AE([L])`$-compactum $`K^{}`$ of extension dimension $`\text{e-dim}K^{}[L]`$ containing the given compactum $`K`$ . Clearly, the pair $`KK^{}`$ is $`[L]`$-connected. Since $`\text{e-dim}K^{}[L]`$, there exists a mapping $`p:K^{}Y`$ extending the inclusion of $`K`$ into $`Y`$.

It is easy to see that there exists a mapping $`q:K^{}Q`$ such that $`q^1(0)=K`$ and $`q`$ is an embedding on $`K^{}K`$. Now define an embedding $`j:K^{}Y\times Q`$ as $`j=p\times q`$. Since $`q^1(0)=K`$, the mapping $`j`$ coincide with $`p`$ on $`K`$ which is inclusion on $`K`$. ∎

###### Definition 2.4.

We say that a filtration $`F_0F_1\mathrm{}`$ of multivalued mappings from $`X`$ to $`Y`$ projectively contains a filtration $`G_0G_1\mathrm{}`$ of multivalued mappings from $`X`$ to $`Y\times Q`$ if for any point $`xX`$ and any $`n`$ the set $`\mathrm{pr}_YG_n(x)`$ is contained in $`F_n(x)`$.

###### Theorem 2.5.

For a finite $`CW`$-complex $`L`$ any fiberwise $`[L]_c`$-connected filtration of strongly l.s.c. multivalued mappings of paracompact space $`X`$ to a topological space $`Y`$ projectively contains stably $`[L]`$-connected filtration of compact-valued mappings.

###### Proof.

For a given fiberwise $`[L]_c`$-connected filtration $`F_0F_1\mathrm{}`$ of strongly l.s.c. multivalued mappings we construct stably $`[L]`$-connected filtration $`G_0G_1\mathrm{}`$ of compact-valued mappings $`G_n:XY\times Q^n`$ as follows: successively for every $`n0`$ we construct a covering $`\omega _n=\{W_\lambda ^n\}_{\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_n}\mathrm{cov}X`$ and a family of subcompacta $`\{K_\lambda ^n\}_{\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_n}`$ of $`Y\times Q^n`$, and define the mapping $`G_n`$ by the formula

$$G_n(x)=\{K_\lambda ^nxW_\lambda ^n\}.$$

First, we construct $`G_0`$, i.e. the covering $`\omega _0`$ and the family $`\{K_\lambda ^0\}_{\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_0}`$. Since $`F_0`$ is strongly l.s.c., there exists a locally finite open covering $`\omega _1=\{W_\lambda ^1\}_{\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_1}\mathrm{cov}X`$ and a family $`\{M_\lambda ^1\}_{\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_1}`$ of points in $`Y`$ such that $`W_\lambda ^1\times M_\lambda ^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_{F_0}`$ for any $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$. Denote by $`H_0`$ a multivalued mapping taking a point $`xX`$ to the set $`H_0(x)=\{M_\lambda ^1xW_\lambda ^1\}`$. Note that $`H_0(x)`$ is contained in $`F_0(x)`$ and consists of finitely many points. By Lemma 2.3 for any $`xX`$ there exists a compactum $`\widehat{H}_0(x)F_1(x)\times Q`$ of extension dimension $`\text{e-dim}\widehat{H}_0(x)[L]`$ such that the pair $`H_0(x)\widehat{H}_0(x)`$ is $`[L]`$-connected. Since $`F_1`$ is strongly l.s.c., any point $`xX`$ has a neighborhood $`𝒪_0(x)`$ such that the product $`𝒪_0(x)\times \widehat{H}_0(x)`$ is contained in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{F_1}\times Q`$. Since $`X`$ is paracompact, we can choose neighborhoods $`𝒪_0(x)`$ in such a way that the covering $`𝒪_0=\{𝒪_0(x)\}_{xX}`$ strongly star refines $`\omega _1`$. Let $`\omega _0=\{W_\lambda ^0\}_{\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_0}`$ be a locally finite open cover of $`X`$ refining $`𝒪_0`$. For every $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ we fix a point $`x_\lambda `$ such that $`W_\lambda ^0𝒪_0(x_\lambda )`$ and put $`M_\lambda ^0=\widehat{H}_0(x_\lambda )`$. For every $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ we fix $`\alpha (\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$ such that $`\mathrm{St}(W_\lambda ^0,𝒪_0)W_{\alpha (\lambda )}^1`$ and put $`K_\lambda ^0=M_{\alpha (\lambda )}^1`$.

Inductive step of our construction is similar to the first step. Suppose that a covering $`\omega _{n1}=\{W_\lambda ^{n1}\}_{\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}}\mathrm{cov}X`$ and a family $`\{M_\lambda ^{n1}\}_{\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}}`$ of compacta in $`Y\times Q^{n1}`$ are already constructed such that $`\text{e-dim}M_\lambda ^{n1}[L]`$ and the product $`W_\lambda ^{n1}\times M_\lambda ^{n1}`$ is contained in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{F_n}\times Q^n`$ for any $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}`$. Denote by $`H_n`$ a multivalued mapping taking a point $`xX`$ to the compactum $`H_n(x)=\{M_\lambda ^{n1}xW_\lambda ^{n1}\}`$. Note that $`H_n(x)`$ is contained in $`F_n(x)\times Q^n`$ and has extension dimension $`\text{e-dim}H_n(x)[L]`$. By Lemma 2.3 for any $`xX`$ there exists a compactum $`\widehat{H}_n(x)F_{n+1}(x)\times Q^{n+1}`$ of extension dimension $`\text{e-dim}\widehat{H}_n(x)[L]`$ such that the pair $`H_n(x)\widehat{H}_n(x)`$ is $`[L]`$-connected. Since $`F_{n+1}`$ is strongly l.s.c., any point $`xX`$ has a neighborhood $`𝒪_n(x)`$ such that the product $`𝒪_n(x)\times \widehat{H}_n(x)`$ is contained in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{F_{n+1}}\times Q^{n+1}`$. Since $`X`$ is paracompact, we can choose neighborhoods $`𝒪_n(x)`$ in such a way that the covering $`𝒪_n=\{𝒪_n(x)\}_{xX}`$ strongly star refines $`\omega _{n1}`$. Let $`\omega _n=\{W_\lambda ^n\}_{\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_n}`$ be a locally finite open cover of $`X`$ refining $`𝒪_n`$. For every $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ we fix a point $`x_\lambda `$ such that $`W_\lambda ^n𝒪_n(x_\lambda )`$ and put $`M_\lambda ^n=\widehat{H}_n(x_\lambda )`$. For every $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ we fix $`\alpha (\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}`$ such that $`\mathrm{St}(W_\lambda ^n,𝒪_n)W_{\alpha (\lambda )}^{n1}`$ and put $`K_\lambda ^n=M_{\alpha (\lambda )}^{n1}`$.

To show that the pair $`G_{n1}G_n`$ is stably $`[L]`$-connected, we prove that the pair $`G_{n1}(W_\lambda ^n)\{G_n(x)xW_\lambda ^n\}`$ is $`[L]`$-connected for any $`W_\lambda ^n\omega _n`$. By the construction of $`G_n`$, the set $`K_\lambda ^n`$ is contained in $`\{G_n(x)xW_\lambda ^n\}`$. We know that the pair $`H_{n1}(x_{\alpha (\lambda )})\widehat{H}_{n1}(x_{\alpha (\lambda )})=M_{\alpha (\lambda )}^{n1}=K_\lambda ^n`$ is $`[L]`$-connected. Therefore it is enough to show the following inclusion:

$$\begin{array}{c}G_{n1}(W_\lambda ^n)=\hfill \\ \hfill \{K_\beta ^{n1}W_\lambda ^nW_\beta ^{n1}\mathrm{}\}\{M_\nu ^{n2}x_{\alpha (\lambda )}W_\nu ^{n2}\}=H_{n1}(x_{\alpha (\lambda )})\end{array}$$

which follows from the fact that $`W_\lambda ^nW_\beta ^{n1}\mathrm{}`$ implies $`x_{\alpha (\lambda )}W_{\alpha (\beta )}^{n2}`$ (note that $`M_{\alpha (\beta )}^{n2}=K_\beta ^{n1}`$). By the choice of $`\alpha (\lambda )`$ we have $`W_\lambda ^n𝒪_{n1}(x_{\alpha (\lambda )})`$. Then $`W_\lambda ^nW_\beta ^{n1}\mathrm{}`$ implies $`𝒪_{n1}(x_{\alpha (\lambda )})W_\beta ^{n1}\mathrm{}`$ and $`x_{\alpha (\lambda )}𝒪_{n1}(x_{\alpha (\lambda )})\mathrm{St}(W_\beta ^{n1},𝒪_{n1})W_{\alpha (\beta )}^{n2}`$. ∎

###### Definition 2.6.

For a space $`Z`$ a pair of spaces $`VU`$ is said to be $`Z`$-connected if for every closed subspace $`AZ`$ any mapping of $`A`$ into $`V`$ can be extended to a mapping of $`Z`$ into $`U`$.

###### Definition 2.7.

A pair $`FH`$ of multivalued mappings from $`X`$ to $`Y`$ is called stably $`Z`$-connected if every point $`xX`$ has a neighborhood $`O_x`$ such that the pair $`F(O_x)_{zO_x}H(z)`$ is $`Z`$-connected.

We say that the pair $`FH`$ is called stably $`Z`$-connected with respect to a covering $`\omega \mathrm{cov}X`$, if for any $`W\omega `$ the pair $`F(W)_{xW}H(x)`$ is $`Z`$-connected.

A filtration $`\{F_i\}`$ of multivalued mappings is called stably $`Z`$-connected if every pair $`F_iF_{i+1}`$ is stably $`Z`$-connected.

###### Theorem 2.8.

Let $`F:XY`$ be a multivalued mapping of paracompact C-space $`X`$ to a topological space $`Y`$. If $`F`$ admits infinite stably $`X`$-connected filtration of multivalued mappings, then $`F`$ has a singlevalued continuous selection.

###### Proof.

Let $`\{F_i\}_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ be the given filtration of $`F`$. Let $`\{\omega _i\}_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ be a sequence of coverings of $`X`$ such that $`\omega _{i+1}`$ refines $`\omega _i`$ and the pair $`F_iF_{i+1}`$ is stably $`X`$-connected with respect to the covering $`\omega _i`$. Since $`X`$ is paracompact C-space, there exists a locally finite closed cover $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of $`X`$ of the form $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=_{i=0}^{\mathrm{}}\sigma _i`$ such that $`\sigma _i`$ is discrete collection refining $`\omega _i`$. Define $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n=_{i=0}^n\sigma _i`$. We will construct a continuous selection $`f`$ of $`F`$ extending it successively over the sets $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$.

First, we construct $`f_0:\mathrm{\Sigma }_0Y`$. We define $`f_0`$ separately on every element $`s`$ of the discrete collection $`\sigma _0`$: take a point $`pF_1(s)`$ and put $`f_0(s)=p`$. Since the set $`s`$ refines $`\omega _0`$, then $`pF_0(x)`$ for any $`xs`$ and therefore $`f_0`$ is a selection of $`F_0|_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_0}`$.

Suppose that we already constructed $`f_n`$ — a continuous selection of $`F_n|_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_n}`$. Let us define $`f_{n+1}`$ on arbitrary element $`Z`$ of discrete collection $`\sigma _{n+1}`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is locally finite, the set $`A=Z\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$ is closed in $`X`$. Since $`f_n`$ is a selection of $`F_n`$, then $`f_n(A)`$ is contained in $`F_n(Z)`$. Since the pair $`F_n(Z)_{xZ}F_{n+1}(x)`$ is $`X`$-connected, we can extend $`f_n|_A`$ to a mapping $`f_n^{}:Z_{xZ}F_{n+1}(x)`$. Clearly, $`f_n^{}`$ is a selection of $`F_{n+1}|_Z`$. We define $`f_{n+1}`$ on the set $`Z`$ as $`f_n^{}`$.

Finally, we define $`f`$ to be equal to $`f_n`$ on the set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$. ∎

###### Theorem 2.9.

Let $`L`$ be a finite $`CW`$-complex and $`F:XY`$ be a multivalued mapping of paracompact C-space $`X`$ of extension dimension $`\text{e-dim}X[L]`$ to a topological space $`Y`$. If $`F`$ admits infinite fiberwise $`[L]_c`$-connected filtration of strongly l.s.c. multivalued mappings, then $`F`$ has a singlevalued continuous selection.

###### Proof.

By Theorem 2.5, the mapping $`F^{}:XY\times Q`$ defined as $`F^{}(x)=F(x)\times Q`$ contains a stably $`[L]`$-connected filtration of multivalued mappings. By Theorem 2.8 $`F^{}`$ has a singlevalued continuous selection $`f^{}`$. Then the mapping $`f=\mathrm{pr}_Yf^{}`$ is a singlevalued continuous selection of $`F`$. ∎

## 3. Hurewicz theorem

The proof of the following theorem is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.4 from .

###### Theorem 3.1.

Let $`f:XY`$ be a closed mapping of $`k`$-space $`X`$ onto paracompact $`C`$-space $`Y`$. Suppose that $`\text{e-dim}Y[M]`$ for a finite $`CW`$-complex $`M`$. If for every point $`yY`$ and for every compactum $`Z`$ with $`\text{e-dim}Z[M]`$ we have $`\text{e-dim}(f^1(y)\times Z)[L]`$ for some $`CW`$-complex $`L`$, then $`\text{e-dim}X[L]`$.

###### Proof.

Suppose $`AX`$ is closed and $`g:AL`$ is a map. We are going to find a continuous extension $`\stackrel{~}{g}:XL`$ of $`g`$. Let $`K`$ be the cone over $`L`$ with a vertex $`v`$. We denote by $`C(X,K)`$ the space of all continuous maps from $`X`$ to $`K`$ equipped with the compact-open topology. We define a multivalued map $`F:YC(X,K)`$ as follows:

$$F(y)=\{hC(X,K)h(f^1(y))K\{v\}\text{ and }h|_A=g\}.$$

Claim. $`F`$ admits continuous singlevalued selection.

If $`\phi :YC(X,K)`$ is a continuous selection for $`F`$, then the mapping $`h:XK`$ defined by $`h(x)=\phi (f(x))(x)`$ is continuous on every compact subset of $`X`$ and because $`X`$ is a $`k`$-space, $`h`$ is continuous. Since $`\phi (f(x))F(f(x))`$ for every $`xX`$, we have $`h(X)K\{v\}`$. Now if $`\pi :K\{v\}L`$ denotes the natural retraction, then $`\stackrel{~}{g}=\pi h:XL`$ is the desired continuous extension of $`h`$.

Proof of the claim. We are going to apply Theorem 2.9 to infinite filtration $`FFF\mathrm{}`$. To do this, we have to show that $`F`$ is strongly l.s.c. and that the pair $`F(y)F(y)`$ is $`[M]_c`$-connected for every point $`yY`$.

First, we show that $`F`$ is strongly l.s.c. Let $`y_0Y`$ and $`PF(y_0)`$ be compact. We have to find a neighborhood $`V`$ of $`y_0`$ in $`Y`$ such that $`PF(y)`$ for every $`yV`$. For every $`xX`$ define a subset $`P(x)=\{h(x)hP\}`$ of $`K`$. Since $`PC(X,K)`$ is compact and $`X`$ is a $`k`$-space, by the Ascoli theorem, each $`P(x)`$ is compact and $`P`$ is evenly continuous. This easily implies that the set $`W=\{xXP(x)K\{v\}\}`$ is open in $`X`$ and, obviously, $`f^1(y_0)W`$. Since $`f`$ is closed, there exists a neighborhood $`V`$ of $`y_0`$ in $`Y`$ with $`f^1(V)W`$. Then, according to the choice of $`W`$ and the definition of $`F`$, we have $`PF(y)`$ for every $`yV`$.

Fix an arbitrary point $`yY`$. Let us prove that the pair $`F(y)F(y)`$ is $`[M]_c`$-connected. Consider a pair of compacta $`BZ`$ where $`\text{e-dim}Z[M]`$ and a mapping $`\phi :BF(y)`$. Since $`B\times X`$ is a $`k`$-space (as a product of a compact space and a $`k`$-space), the map $`\psi :B\times XK`$ defined as $`\psi (b,x)=\phi (b)(x)`$ is continuous. Extend $`\psi `$ to a set $`Z\times A`$ letting $`\psi (z,a)=g(a)`$. Clearly, $`\psi `$ takes the set $`Z\times f^1(y)(Z\times AB\times X)`$ into $`K\{v\}L\times [0,1)`$. Since $`\text{e-dim}(Z\times f^1(y))[L]`$, we can extend $`\psi `$ over the set $`Z\times f^1(y)`$ to take it into $`K\{v\}`$. Finally extend $`\psi `$ over $`Z\times X`$ as a mapping into $`AE`$-space $`K`$. Now define an extension $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }:ZF(y)`$ of the mapping $`\phi `$ by the formula $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(z)(x)=\psi (z,x)`$. ∎

###### Corollary 3.2 (cf. Theorem 2.25 from ).

Let $`f:XY`$ be a mapping of finite-dimensional compacta where $`\text{e-dim}Y=[M]`$ for finite $`CW`$-complex $`M`$. If for some $`CW`$-complex $`L`$ we have $`\text{e-dim}(f^1(y)\times Y)[L]`$ for every point $`yY`$, then $`\text{e-dim}X[L]`$.

###### Proof.

By Theorem 6.3 from  for any compactum $`Z`$ with $`\text{e-dim}Z\text{e-dim}Y`$ we have $`\text{e-dim}(f^1(y)\times Z)[L]`$. Thus, we can apply Theorem 3.1

## 4. Acknowledgments

Authors wish to express their indebtedness to S.M. Ageev for outlining the proof of Theorem 2.5 and to A.N. Dranishnikov for helpful discussions during the development of this work.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Noncommutative open string (NCOS) theories are defined by a scaling limit in which one takes an electric field on a brane to its critical value and at the same time scale $`g_s`$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ appropriately so that the closed strings decouple and the open strings experience maximal noncommutativity in the electric direction . Their properties including S-duality and T-duality have been studied extensively -.

It is of great interest to compare the dynamics of NCOS theories and their S-duals, but our limited understanding of the strong coupling dynamics allows only a few explicit checks. One such example is the decoupling phenomenon of massless modes in NCOS theories . The authors of  observed that the S-dual super-Yang-Mills theories, in (1+1) or (3+1) dimensions for example, contain massless $`U(1)`$ fields which are free and decouple from the rest of the theory when their momenta have components only in the electric directions. S-duality implies then that the massless modes of NCOS theories also should be free. They showed that this is indeed the case by computing some amplitudes explicitly and also by giving a general argument based on holomorphy of world-sheet correlators. Subsequently, Ref.  gave more details of decoupling of the (1+1) dimensional NCOS and Ref.  generalized the holomorphy argument to prove that vanishing of the relevant amplitudes is exact to all order in perturbation theory.

So far, explicit computations have been limited to (1+1) dimensional NCOS. In the present work, we compute the amplitudes in (2+1) or higher dimensional NCOS theories and check that the decoupling phenomenon remains to be valid in higher dimensions. We also review the proof of the decoupling to all order given in  from a slightly different point of view.

## 2 Explicit Computation

Higher dimensional NCOS theories are more complicated than the (1+1)-dimensional one in two ways. First, the string modes can carry momentum in the non-electric directions. Second, the massless spectrum contains not only the transverse scalars but also gauge bosons. The goal of this section is to confirm by explicit computation that the decoupling phenomenon holds for arbitrary world-volume dimensions.

As a warm-up exercise, we first compute the amplitudes in the bosonic theory. We will see that they share all the essential features of decoupling with the superstring theory.

### 2.1 Bosonic String

Following , we check the amplitudes involving massless modes and tachyons. The vertex operators are given by

$`V_T`$ $`=`$ $`G_oe^{ipX},`$
$`V_\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o}{\sqrt{\alpha _e^{}}}}\zeta _iX^ie^{ipX},`$
$`V_A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o}{\sqrt{\alpha _e^{}}}}e_\alpha X^\alpha e^{ipX},`$ (1)
where the scalars represent the transverse fluctuation of the world-volume ($`\zeta _i`$) and the gauge bosons are polarized along the world-volume ($`e_\alpha `$). The world-sheet correlators are

$`X^\alpha (y)X^\beta (y^{})`$ $`=`$ $`2\alpha _e^{}\eta ^{\alpha \beta }\mathrm{ln}|yy^{}|+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ϵ^{\alpha \beta }\mathrm{sign}(yy^{}),`$
$`X^i(z)X^j(z^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _e^{}}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{ij}}{(zz^{})^2}},`$ (2)
where $`\alpha =0,\mathrm{},p`$ and $`i=p+1,\mathrm{},25`$. $`ϵ^{01}=ϵ^{10}=1,ϵ^{\alpha \beta }=0`$ otherwise and $`\theta =2\pi \alpha _e^{}E`$. In the NCOS limit, $`E1`$ and hence $`\theta 2\pi \alpha _e^{}`$. We introduce the dimensionless Mandelstam variables,

$`s`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha _e^{}(p_1+p_2)^2,`$
$`t`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha _e^{}(p_1+p_4)^2,`$
$`u`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha _e^{}(p_1+p_3)^2.`$ (3)
Noncommutativity gives rise to phase factors. To each of the three inequivalent cyclic ordering, we associate a phase factor in the following way ($`p\times q=\theta ϵ^{\alpha \beta }p_\alpha q_\beta `$),

$`\gamma _1`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(p_1\times p_4+p_2\times p_3)\right],`$
$`\gamma _2`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(p_1\times p_2+p_3\times p_4)\right],`$
$`\gamma _3`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(p_1\times p_3p_2\times p_4)\right].`$ (4)
The simplest amplitude of our interest is the scattering of a scalar off a tachyon. For obvious reasons, the result is formally the same as the (1+1)-dimensional answer given in . The transverse scalars are taken to have momenta $`p_1`$ and $`p_4`$ and polarization tensors $`\zeta `$ an $`\zeta ^{}`$, respectively, while tachyons have $`p_2`$ and $`p_3`$. Then the four-point scattering amplitude $`𝒜_{\varphi \varphi TT}`$ is given by

$$𝒜_{\varphi \varphi TT}=\frac{G_o^2}{\alpha _e^{}}\zeta \zeta ^{}\left[B(1t,u)\gamma _1+B(1t,s)\gamma _2+B(u,s)\gamma _3\right],$$
(5)
where $`B(a,b)`$ is the beta function and Mandelstam variables satisfy $`s+t+u=2`$. It is convenient to rewrite this amplitude by using an identity for the gamma function, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)\mathrm{\Gamma }(1z)=\pi /\mathrm{sin}(\pi z).`$ The right hand side of Eq. (5) then becomes

$$\frac{G_o^2}{\alpha _e^{}}\zeta \zeta ^{}\frac{B(1t,s)}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi u)}\mathrm{\Phi }_{}.$$
(6)
Here we have defined $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\pm `$ as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\pm \mathrm{sin}(\pi s)\gamma _1+\mathrm{sin}(\pi u)\gamma _2\pm \mathrm{sin}(\pi t)\gamma _3.$$
(7)
The factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\pm `$, which combine the $`\gamma `$ factors due to the space-time noncommutativity and sine functions of Mandelstam variables, are crucial for showing the decoupling of massless modes from the rest of the NCOS modes. Other amplitudes involving massless modes also turn out to contain the factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\pm `$. Since higher dimensional NCOS theories have dynamical gauge fields in addition to the transverse scalars, we still need to compute $`𝒜_{\varphi \varphi \varphi \varphi }`$, $`𝒜_{AA\varphi \varphi }`$, $`𝒜_{AATT}`$, $`𝒜_{AAAA}`$. The standard recipe for computing the amplitudes gives

1. Four scalars with momenta $`p_n`$ and polarizations $`\zeta _n`$ ($`n=1,\mathrm{},4`$) :

$`𝒜_{\varphi \varphi \varphi \varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o^2}{2\alpha _e^{}}}[\zeta _1\zeta _2\zeta _3\zeta _4{\displaystyle \frac{B(1t,1u)}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi s)}}+\zeta _1\zeta _3\zeta _2\zeta _4{\displaystyle \frac{B(1t,1s)}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi u)}}`$ (8)
$`+\zeta _1\zeta _4\zeta _2\zeta _3{\displaystyle \frac{B(1s,1u)}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi t)}}]\mathrm{\Phi }_+`$
2. Two gauge bosons with $`(p_1,e)`$ and $`(p_4,e^{})`$, and two transverse scalars ($`p_2,\zeta )`$ and $`(p_3,\zeta ^{})`$ :

$`𝒜_{AA\varphi \varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o^2}{2\alpha _e^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta \zeta ^{}}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi t)}}`$ (9)
$`\times `$ $`\{[ee^{}2\alpha _e^{}(ep_2e^{}p_2+ep_3e^{}p_3)]B(1s,1u)`$
$`+2\alpha _e^{}[ep_2e^{}p_3B(2u,s)+ep_3e^{}p_2B(2s,u)]\}\mathrm{\Phi }_+`$
3. Two gauge bosons with $`(p_1,e)`$ and $`(p_4,e^{})`$ and two tachyons :

$`𝒜_{AATT}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o^2}{\alpha _e^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi t)}}`$ (10)
$`\times `$ $`\{2\alpha _e^{}[ep_2e^{}p_3B(1u,1s)+ep_3e^{}p_2B(1s,1u)]`$
$`+[ee^{}2\alpha _e^{}(ep_2e^{}p_2+ep_3e^{}p_3)]B(s,u)\}\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$

The expression for $`𝒜_{AAAA}`$ is more complicated. For our purposes, it suffices to note that it is proportional to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_+`$. We observe that the appearance of the factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\pm `$ is universal in the sense that the scattering amplitudes between massless states among themselves are always proportional to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_+`$ and the ones between massless modes and massive modes are proportional to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$. In order to check the vanishing of the amplitude in the NCOS limit, it is sufficient to show that these factors vanish.

We show the vanishing of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ first. There are three types of physical processes to consider: (a) Pair annihilation of massless particles and a subsequent pair creation of massive ones (b) Forward scattering of a massless particle off a massive one (c) Backward scattering. Our choice of center of mass momenta and the resulting phase factors are summarized in the following table.

|  | Pair annihilation | Forward scattering | Backward scattering |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`p_1`$ | $`(p,p,\stackrel{}{0})`$ | $`(p,p,\stackrel{}{0})`$ | $`(p,p,\stackrel{}{0})`$ |
| $`p_4`$ | $`(p,p,\stackrel{}{0})`$ | $`(p,p,\stackrel{}{0})`$ | $`(p,p,\stackrel{}{0})`$ |
| $`p_2`$ | $`(p,q,\stackrel{}{k})`$ | $`(e,p,\stackrel{}{k})`$ | $`(e,p,\stackrel{}{0})`$ |
| $`p_3`$ | $`(p,q,\stackrel{}{k})`$ | $`(e,p,\stackrel{}{k})`$ | $`(e,p,\stackrel{}{0})`$ |
| $`\gamma _1`$ | $`\mathrm{cos}(\pi E(u+1))`$ | 1 | $`\mathrm{cos}(\pi E(u+1))`$ |
| $`\gamma _2`$ | $`\mathrm{cos}(\pi E(s+1))`$ | 1 | $`\mathrm{cos}(\pi E(s+1))`$ |
| $`\gamma _3`$ | 1 | $`\mathrm{cos}(\pi E(s+1))`$ | 1 |

For instance, in the case of pair annihilation,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=\mathrm{sin}(\pi s)\mathrm{cos}\left(\pi E(u+1)\right)+\mathrm{sin}(\pi u)\mathrm{cos}\left(\pi E(s+1)\right)\mathrm{sin}(\pi t),$$
(11)
which vanishes in the NCOS limit ($`E1`$) due to the fact that $`s+t+u=2`$. The backward scattering is shown to vanish in the same way. Note that the forward scattering vanishes even before taking the NCOS limit.

The vanishing of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_+`$ can be verified similarly. The only change from the previous case is that the mass-shell condition is different. If we replace $`(u+1)`$ by $`u`$ and $`(s+1)`$ by $`s`$ in the phase factors $`\gamma _{1,2,3}`$, the above table becomes valid for the case at hand. This replacement together with the condition that $`s+t+u=0`$ for massless modes make sure that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_+`$ also vanishes.

### 2.2 Superstring

Strictly speaking, the NCOS theories and their S-duals are well-defined only in Type II superstring theories. However, as we saw in the previous subsection, the reason for the decoupling is mainly kinematical and is not sensitive to supersymmetry. Therefore, we expect that the main feature of the amplitude we found in the bosonic case will persist in the superstring case.

The massless spectrum is basically the same as before. Instead of the tachyon of the bosonic theory, we consider the first massive states. Our notation for the polarization tensors is as follows.

* $`e_\alpha `$ : massless gauge field
* $`\zeta _i`$ : massless transverse scalar or $`SO(9p)`$ vector
* $`ϵ_{\alpha \beta }`$ : massive $`m^2=1/\alpha _e^{}`$ $`SO(1,p)`$ tensor
* $`\xi _{ij}`$ : massive $`m^2=1/\alpha _e^{}`$ $`SO(9p)`$ tensor

The vertex operator for the gauge field on the brane with polarization $`e_\alpha `$ is

$`V_1`$ $`=`$ $`G_oe^\varphi e\psi e^{ikX}(y),`$
$`V_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o}{\sqrt{\alpha _e^{}}}}e_\alpha (X^\alpha +i\alpha _e^{}k\psi \psi ^\alpha )e^{ikX}(y).`$ (12)
The vertex operator for the transverse massless scalar is defined in the same way with $`e_\alpha `$ replaced by $`\zeta _i`$. The vertex operator for the massive tensor $`N_{ij}`$ with mass square $`1/\alpha _e^{}`$ and polarization transverse to the brane, $`\xi _{ij}`$ is

$`V_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o}{\sqrt{\alpha _e^{}}}}e^\varphi \xi _{ij}\psi ^iX^je^{ikX}(y),`$
$`V_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o}{\alpha _e^{}}}\xi _{ij}(X^iX^j\alpha _e^{}\psi ^i\psi ^j+i\alpha _e^{}(k\psi )\psi ^iX^j),e^{ikX}(y)`$ (13)
where $`k^2=1/\alpha _e^{}`$. The vertex operator for the massive tensor $`M_{\alpha \beta }`$ is defined similarly. The world-sheet propagator for the fermion is

$$\psi ^\mu (z)\psi ^\nu (z^{})=\frac{\eta ^{\mu \nu }}{zz^{}}.$$
(14)
A straightforward calculation following the standard recipe gives the amplitudes. There are seven different amplitudes involving massless states. Here we present five of them.

1. Four transverse scalars with momenta and polarizations ($`p_n`$, $`\zeta _n`$) ($`n=1,\mathrm{},4`$):

$`𝒜_{\varphi \varphi \varphi \varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o^2}{\alpha _e^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(t)\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ts)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi u)}}`$ (15)
$`\times `$ $`\left(su\zeta _1\zeta _4\zeta _2\zeta _3+ut\zeta _1\zeta _2\zeta _3\zeta _4+st\zeta _1\zeta _3\zeta _2\zeta _4\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_+`$
2. Gauge fields with ($`p_1`$, $`e`$) and ($`p_4`$, $`e^{}`$) and transverse scalars with ($`p_2`$, $`\zeta `$) and ($`p_3`$, $`\zeta ^{}`$):

$$𝒜_{AA\varphi \varphi }=\frac{G_o^2}{\alpha _e^{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(t)\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ts)}\frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi u)}\zeta \zeta ^{}\left(suee^{}2\alpha _e^{}uep_2e^{}p_32\alpha _e^{}sep_3e^{}p_2\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_+$$
(16)
3. Transverse scalars with ($`p_1`$, $`\zeta `$) and ($`p_4`$, $`\zeta ^{}`$) and massive $`SO(9p)`$ tensors with ($`p_2`$, $`\xi `$) and ($`p_3`$, $`\xi ^{}`$):

$`𝒜_{\varphi \varphi NN}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o^2}{2\alpha _e^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(t)\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3ts)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi u)}}[us(1s)(1u)\zeta \zeta ^{}\mathrm{Tr}(\xi ^T\xi ^{})`$ (17)
$`+tu(1u)\zeta \xi ^T\xi ^{}\zeta ^{}+ts(1s)\zeta ^{}\xi ^T\xi ^{}\zeta `$
$`+stu(1s)\zeta \xi ^{}\xi ^T\zeta ^{}+stu(1u)\zeta ^{}\xi ^{}\xi ^T\zeta ]\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$
4. Transverse scalars ($`p_1`$, $`\zeta `$) and ($`p_4`$, $`\zeta ^{}`$) and massive $`SO(1,p)`$ tensor with ($`p_2`$, $`ϵ`$) and ($`p_3`$, $`ϵ^{}`$):

$`𝒜_{\varphi \varphi MM}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o^2}{2\alpha _e^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(t)\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3ts)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi u)}}\zeta \zeta ^{}[su(1s)(1u)\mathrm{Tr}(ϵ^{}ϵ^T)`$ (18)
$`+2\alpha _e^{}su(1u)p_4ϵ^{}ϵ^Tp_1+2\alpha _e^{}su(1s)p_1ϵ^{}ϵ^Tp_4]\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$
5. Gauge fields with ($`p_1`$, $`e`$) and ($`p_4`$, $`e^{}`$) and massive $`SO(9p)`$ tensor with ($`p_2`$, $`\xi `$) and ($`p_3`$, $`\xi ^{}`$):

$`𝒜_{AANN}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_o^2}{2\alpha _e^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(t)\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3ts)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi u)}}\mathrm{Tr}(\xi ^T\xi ^{})[su(1s)(1u)ee^{}`$ (19)
$`+2\alpha _e^{}su(1s)ep_2e^{}p_3+2\alpha _e^{}su(1u)ep_3e^{}p_2]\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$

The expressions for the other two amplitudes, namely, $`𝒜_{AAAA}`$ and $`𝒜_{AAMM}`$ are more complicated, but for our purposes it suffices to note that $`𝒜_{AAAA}\mathrm{\Phi }_+`$ and $`𝒜_{AAMM}\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$. We realize that the factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\pm `$ appear in the same way as in the bosonic case. Thus it is clear that the decoupling is valid in all NCOS theories.

## 3 Vanishing of the Loop Amplitudes

A general argument for decoupling was given in  based on holomorphy of the world-sheet correlators in the NCOS limit. The authors of  generalized this argument to all orders using a first order formalism to describe NCOS. The formalism made it possible to prove the decoupling without computing higher loop amplitudes explicitly. In this section, we present a version of the proof to all orders with more emphasis on the explicit form of the world-sheet correlators.

### 3.1 Disk

When the background electric field is turned on in the $`x^1`$ direction, the world sheet propagator on a disk becomes

$`X^\alpha (z,\overline{z})X^\beta (w,\overline{w})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _e^{}}{2}}\eta ^{\alpha \beta }\left[(1E^2)\mathrm{ln}|zw|^2+(1+E^2)\mathrm{ln}|z\overline{w}|^2\right]`$ (20)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _e^{}}{2}}ϵ^{\alpha \beta }(2E)\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{z\overline{w}}{\overline{z}w}}.`$
We obtain the open-string propagator by taking the insertion points to the boundary. Suppose we take $`w`$ to the boundary first. In the light cone coordinates $`X^\pm =X^0\pm X^1`$, the propagator becomes

$$X^\pm (z,\overline{z})X^{}(0)=2\alpha _e^{}(1\pm E)\mathrm{ln}(z)+2\alpha _e^{}(1E)\mathrm{ln}(\overline{z}).$$
(21)
It follows that in the NCOS limit ($`E1`$), $`X^+(z)X^{}(0)`$ becomes a holomorphic function of $`z`$ and $`X^{}(z)X^+(0)`$ anti-holomorphic. This is not quite a coincidence. When we act Laplacian on the propagator (20), the $`\mathrm{ln}|zw|^2`$ term produces a delta function. In the NCOS limit, this term drops out due to the $`(1E^2)`$ factor, so the propagator satisfies a source-free Laplace equation. The most general solution to the source-free equation is a sum of a holomorphic function and an anti-holomorphic function. Now the boundary condition (after Wick rotation)

$$_nX^0+iE_tX^1=0,_nX^1iE_tX^0=0$$
(22)
implies that $`_{\overline{z}}X^+(z,\overline{z})X^{}(0)=_zX^{}(z,\overline{z})X^+(0)=0`$. This boundary condition can be satisfied only if either the anti-holomorphic or the holomorphic part vanishes.

When a massless mode has momentum only in the electric direction, the on-shell condition implies $`p_+p_{}=0`$. Assume that $`p_{}=0`$ so that the anti-holomorphic $`X^{}X^+`$ drops out. If we make the branch cuts lie outside the disk, the amplitude becomes an integral of a holomorphic function. Then by shrinking the contour, we can show that the amplitude vanishes.

### 3.2 Annulus

The world-sheet propagator on an annulus in the presence of background magnetic field is given in -. Repeating the same exercise with electric field, taking one of the insertion points to a boundary and taking the NCOS limit, we find that

$$X^+(z,\overline{z})X^{}(0)=4\alpha _e^{}\left[\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\theta _1(z|iT)}{\theta _1^{}(0|iT)}\right)+\frac{\pi }{T}(z^2+z)\right].$$
(23)
It is holomorphic as expected from the argument given in the previous section. The quadratic term and the linear term in $`z`$ in (23) ensure periodicity for $`zz+iT`$. In fact, the propagator does not have to be strictly periodic because a constant shift drops out due to momentum conservation when we actually compute the amplitude.

As before, we can put all the branch cuts outside the annulus. Since the integration measure is obviously the same for the two boundaries, we can again deform the contour and show that the amplitude vanishes.

### 3.3 Higher Loops

Generalization to higher loop is straightforward. Ref.  gives some details of higher loop propagator in the presence of noncommutativity. We refer the reader to  for our notation. The propagator in the NCOS limit is

$$X^+(z,\overline{z})X^{}(c=\overline{c})=4\alpha _e^{}\left[\mathrm{ln}(E(z,c|iT))+\pi (T^1)^{ij}\mathrm{\Omega }_i\mathrm{\Omega }_j\right],$$
(24)
where $`E(z,c)`$ is the prime form, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_i(z,c)=_c^z\omega _i`$ and $`\omega _i`$ is an Abelian differential. In the one-loop case, the prime form reduces to the theta function and the abelian differential to $`dz`$, hence we are back to the annulus answer (up to an irrelevant linear term).

One may wonder whether the integration measure for the massless vertex operator is the same for all boundaries thereby allowing deformation of the contour. The behavior of the prime form under coordinate transformation and modular transformation dictates that the integration measure is simply proportional to $`dz`$ restricted to boundary. In particular, the integration measure does not depend on the moduli parameters. As such, all the boundaries are on the same footing and the integration measure should thus be the same.

## Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Youngjai Kiem for helpful discussions. The work of S.H. was supported in part by grant No. 2000-1-11200-001-3 from the Basic Research Program of the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation.


text:
# Dark Matter as Dense Color Superconductor

## 1 Introduction

The presence of large amounts of non-luminous components in the Universe has been known for a long time. In spite of the recent advances in the field, the mystery of the dark matter/energy remains: we still do not know what it is. The main goal of this talk is to argue that the dark matter could be nothing but well-known quarks which however are not in the “normal” hadronic phase, but rather in some “exotic”, the so-called color superconducting (CS) phase.

This is a novel phase in QCD when light quarks form the condensate in diquark channels, and it is analogous to Cooper pairs of electrons in ordinary superconductors described by BCS theory. There existence of CS phase in QCD represents our first crucial element for our scenario to work. The study of CS phase received a lot of attention last few years . It has been known that this regime may be realized in nature in neutron stars interiors and in the violent events associated with collapse of massive stars or collisions of neutron stars, so it is important for astrophysics. The goal of this talk is to argue that such conditions may occur in early universe during the QCD phase transition, so it might be important for cosmology as well.

The force which squeezes quarks in neutron stars is gravity; the force which does a similar job in early universe during the QCD phase transition is a violent collapse of a bubble formed from the axion domain wall. If number of quarks trapped inside the bulk is sufficiently large, the collapse stops due to the internal Fermi pressure. In this case the system in the bulk may reach the critical density when it undergoes a phase transition to CS phase with the ground state being the diquark condensate. We shall call the configuration with a large number of quarks in color superconducting phase formed during the QCD phase transition as the QCD-ball. Therefore, an existence of the axion domain wall represents our second crucial element for our scenario to work. As is known, the axion is one of the favorite candidates for the cold dark matter, see recent reviews . In the present scenario the axion field plays the role of squeezer rather than dark matter itself.

As will be shown below, once such a configuration is formed, it will be extremely stable soliton like particle. The source of the stability of the QCD-balls is related to the fact that its mass $`M_B`$ growth as $`M_BB^{8/9}`$ for the large baryon (quark) charge $`B`$ and becomes smaller than the mass of a collection of free separated nucleons with the same baryon charge. The region of the absolute stability of the QCD-balls is determined by inequality $`m_N>\frac{M_B}{B}`$ which can be always satisfied for very large $`B>B_c`$. However, even for sufficiently large $`B`$ but smaller than $`B_c`$, i.e. $`1B<B_c`$, we still expect that QCD-balls will be very long-lived metastable states. This is because the elementary excitations carrying the baryon charge in CS phase and hadronic phase are very different: in CS phase they carry color charge along with baryon charge; in hadronic phase they are color singlets. Therefore, if sufficiently large number of quarks is trapped inside the axion bubble during its shrinking, it may result in formation of an absolutely stable ( or long lived, metastable) QCD-ball with the ground state being a diquark condensate. Such QCD-balls, therefore, may serve as the cold dark matter candidate and contribute to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DM}0.3`$.

Strictly speaking, the QCD-balls being the baryonic configurations, would behave like nonbaryonic dark matter. In particular, QCD-balls, in spite of their QCD origin, would not contribute to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Bh^20.02`$ in nucleosynthesis calculations because the QCD-balls would complete the formation by the time when temperature reaches the relevant for nucleosynthesis region $`T1MeV`$. Once QCD-balls are formed, their baryon charge is accumulated in form of the diquark condensate, rather than in form of free baryons, and in such a form the baryon charge is not available for nucleosynthesis.

## 2 QCD-balls

Crucial for our scenario is the existence of a squeezer, axion domain wall which will be formed during the QCD phase transition. We assume that the standard problem of the domain wall dominance is resolved in some way as discussed previously in the literature . We also assume that quarks which are trapped inside of the axion bubble, can not easily escape the bulk when the bubble is shrinking. In different words, the axion domain wall is not transparent due to the QCD sandwich structure of the wall as discussed in ,. The collapse is halted due to the Fermi pressure. Therefore, we assume that a large number of quarks remains in the bulk of volume $`V`$ when the Fermi pressure cancels the surface tension. Exactly this condition determines a typical radius $`R_0`$ of the QCD-ball at the moment of formation. The pressure due to the surface tension is $`P_\sigma =\frac{2\sigma }{R}`$, while the fermi pressure $`P_f`$ in the bulk can be easily estimated from the thermodynamical potential for the non-interacting relativistic fermi gas, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=P_fV`$ with $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ given by:

$`\mathrm{\Omega }=gV{\displaystyle _0^\mu }{\displaystyle \frac{(p\mu )d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}}={\displaystyle \frac{gV\mu ^4}{24\pi ^2}}=P_fV,`$ (1)
Here $`\mu `$ is the Fermi momentum of the system to be expressed in terms of the fixed baryon charge $`B`$ trapped in the bubble;

$$B=gV_0^\mu \frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}=\frac{2g}{9\pi }\mu ^3R^3,\mu =\left(\frac{9\pi B}{2gR^3}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}},$$

$`g2N_cN_f=18`$ is the degeneracy factor for massless degrees of freedom. The condition $`P_\sigma P_f`$ determines a typical radius of the QCD-ball with a fixed initial baryon charge $`B`$ at the moment of formation:

$`P_fP_\sigma {\displaystyle \frac{g}{24\pi ^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{9\pi B}{2gR^3}}\right)^{\frac{4}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\sigma }{R}}`$
$`R_0^3{\displaystyle \frac{cB^{4/3}}{8\pi \sigma }},c{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}({\displaystyle \frac{9\pi }{2g}})^{1/3}0.7.`$ (2)
Here $`\sigma f_am_\pi f_\pi `$ is the axion domain wall tension with $`f_a(10^{10}10^{12})GeV`$ being constrained by the axion search experiments. As the first approximation, we neglected many contributions in (1, 2) which might be important numerically but can not drastically change our main results. In particular, we neglected the quark-quark interaction on the Fermi surface, which brings the system into superconducting phase for relatively large $`\mu 400MeV`$ . The corresponding contribution gives some correction to the energy of order $`(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\mu })^2`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }100MeV`$ is the superconducting gap, and can be neglected for the asymptotically large $`\mu `$. We also neglected the so-called bag constant contribution which is a phenomenological way to simulate the confinement. Parametrically this contribution is also suppressed as $`(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}}{\mu })^4`$ but in reality might be important. Let us emphasize: we are not attempting to solve the problem of equilibrium between CS and hadronic phases111 Such a problem has been recently discussed in ref. where the interface region between nuclear matter and CFL (color flavor locking) superconducting phase was analyzed.. Rather, we are attempting to estimate the initial size $`R_0`$ of the QCD ball which is formed due to the collapse of the axion domain wall halted by the fermi pressure. Other contributions, such as quark-quark interaction or the bag constant, may change the numerical estimates for $`R_0`$ however they can not replace the main player of the game, the fermi pressure which is responsible for the stopping of the collapse.

Once the QCD ball with radius $`R_0`$ is formed, the bulk of this object being in CS phase will be quite stable with respect to the decay on the free nucleons if some conditions are met, see below. The stability remains intact even if the original axion domain wall would decay: the configuration remains stable due to the CS phase itself, and not because of the support from the axion domain wall. The only role the axion domain wall plays in our scenario is the squeezing the matter at the very first instant in order to bring the large number of quarks into the CS phase. The later stages of the evolution of the QCD ball will determine the precise structure of this configuration at the equilibrium, including the interface region separating the CS phase with nuclear matter phase; we do not expect, though, that this evolution would considerably change our estimates for $`R_0`$ presented above.

Once a typical radius $`R_0`$ for a QCD ball is estimated (2), the total energy $`E`$ ( fermion energy + axion domain wall energy) and baryon number density $`n`$ of the QCD-ball can be also estimated with the result

$`E4\pi \sigma R_0^2+gV{\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^4}{8\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(8\pi c^2)^{\frac{1}{3}}B^{8/9}\sigma ^{1/3}`$
$`n={\displaystyle \frac{B}{V}}{\displaystyle \frac{6\sigma }{c}}B^{1/3}`$ (3)
The most important consequence of this result is the behavior $`EB^{8/9}`$ which implies that for sufficiently large $`B`$ the QCD-ball becomes an absolutely stable object. It happens when $`\frac{m_N}{3}>\frac{E}{B}`$, i.e.222Our normalization for the baryon charge corresponds to $`B=1`$ for the quark, thus factor $`\frac{m_N}{3}`$.

$`B>B_c(2^9\pi c^2{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma }{m_N^3}})^310^{33},n_c9n_0,`$ (4)
where $`n_0`$ is the nuclear saturation density, $`n_00.16(fm)^3`$. Numerically, $`B_c10^{33}`$ corresponds to stabilization radius $`R_c10^{12}GeV^1`$ and mass $`E_c10^{33}GeV`$. Here we use $`f_a10^{10}GeV`$ which corresponds to $`\sigma 1.810^8GeV^3`$. As we mentioned in Introduction, we expect that the QCD-balls with much smaller $`B`$ can live long enough to serve as a dark matter. Therefore, in what follows we use a more realistic value for $`B_c^{exp}10^{20}`$ which follows from the experimental bounds on masses and fluxes of nontopological solitons, see below.

Few remarks are in order. First, we note that there is an upper limit on value $`\overline{B}`$ above which the QCD-balls can not be formed at the very first instant during the collapse of the domain walls. This follows from the expression (2) for the baryon number density which decreases when B increase. Therefore, at some point, the density $`n`$ reaches the magnitude where the phase transition between nuclear matter and CS phase occurs. Numerically it happens at $`\overline{B}10^2B_c`$. However, it does not preclude from formation of a larger object at the later stages of the QCD-ball evolution.

As our next remark, we would like to mention some similarity between the QCD-balls (which is the subject of this letter) and Q-balls which are nontopological solitons associated with some conserved global $`Q`$ charge. In both cases, a soliton mass as function of $`Q`$ has behavior, similar to our eq. (2), and therefore, it may become a stable configuration for relatively large $`Q`$ charge. Therefore, an effective scalar field theory with some specific constraint on potential (when $`Q`$ ball solution exists) is realized for QCD in high density regime. The big difference, of course, is that underlying theory for QCD-balls is well known: it is QCD with no free parameters, in huge contrast with the theory of Q-balls. Formal similarity becomes even more striking if one takes into account that the ground state of the CFL phase in QCD is determined by the diquark condensate with the following time dependence $`\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(e^{i2\mu t}),`$ with $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ being the original QCD quark fields, and $`\mu `$ being the chemical potential of the system, see formula (40) from ref. . As is known, such time-dependent phase is the starting point in construction of the Q balls.

Finally, we want to constraint the QCD-ball parameters from available data. We follow  and assume that a typical cross section of a neutral QCD-ball with matter is determined by their geometrical size, $`\pi R_0^2`$. We also assume that the QCD-balls is the main contributor toward the dark matter in the Galaxy, in which case their flux $`F`$ should satisfy

$`F<{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _{DM}v}{4\pi M_B}}7.210^5{\displaystyle \frac{GeV}{M_B}}cm^2sec^1sr^1,`$ (5)
where $`\rho _{DM}`$ is the energy density of the dark matter in the Galaxy, $`\rho _{DM}\frac{0.3GeV}{cm^3}`$, and $`v310^3c`$ is the Virial velocity of the QCD-ball. We identify $`M_B`$ in the expression (5) with the total energy $`E`$ (2) of the QCD ball at rest with given baryon charge $`B`$. Different experiments discussed in  give the following bound on the flux of neutral soliton-like objects: $`F<const.10^{16}cm^2sec^1sr^1,`$ This translates to the following lower limit of the neutral QCD-ball mass $`M_B`$ and baryon charge $`B`$,

$`M_B^{exp}>210^{21}GeV,B^{exp}>1.610^{20}.`$ (6)
These experimental bounds are well below the critical line of the absolute stability of the QCD-balls, given by eq. (4). However, as we mentioned above, we expect that QCD-balls will be very long-lived metastable states even if their baryon charge is below the critical limit (4). Therefore, we consider experimental constraint (6), rather than a theoretical stability bound (4) as a more realistic bound on $`M_B,B`$ for the QCD-balls.

We have seen that the observed relation $`\mathrm{\Omega }_B\mathrm{\Omega }_{DM}`$ within an order of magnitude finds its natural explanation in this scenario: both contributions are originated from the same physics at the same instant during the QCD phase transition. As is known, this fact is extremely difficult to explain in models that invoke a dark matter candidate not related to baryons. We have also seen that without adjusting any parameters the baryon density inside the QCD-ball falls exactly into appropriate region of the QCD phase diagram where color superconductivity takes place. The scenario is no doubt lead to important consequences for cosmology and astrophysics, which are not explored yet. In particular, some unexplained events, such as Centauro events, or even the Tunguska-like events (when no fragments or chemical traces have ever been recovered), can be related to the very dense QCD balls. If this is the case, the arrival directions should correlate with the dark matter distribution and show the halo asymmetry. Also: recent discovery suggests that the matter in some stars could be even denser than nuclear matter. It could be also related to the very dense QCD balls. Therefore, the “exotic”, dense color superconducting phase in QCD, might be much more common state of matter in the Universe than the “normal” hadronic phase we know. In conclusion, qualitative as our arguments are, they suggest that the dark matter could be originated at the QCD scale.