text:
# I Introduction

## I Introduction

It is believed that cosmic strings are fundamental bridges in the understanding of the Universe formation due to that several cosmological phenomena can be described by means of the cosmic strings properties. Besides of these there are other kinds of cosmic objects possesing different properties of those inherited to ordinary cosmic strings, for example: domain walls, hybrid structures like domain walls bounded by strings and so forth, . They can arise in several Grand Unified Theories whenever exist an appropriate symmetry breaking scheme. However, there is other class of cosmological objects that can emerge with the ability to carry some sort of charge. For instance, as was suggested by Witten  in the middle of the eighties, cosmic strings could behave like superconductors.

Since that time the vast research on superconducting strings has thrown a new variety of cosmic objects. The cosmology resulting of supersymmetric theories (SUSY) was also considered yielding to other class of cosmic strings, namely chiral cosmic strings. These objects are the result of a symmetry breaking in SUSY where a $`U(1)`$ symmetry is broken with a Fayet-Iliopoulos $`D`$ term, turning out a sole fermion zero mode traveling in only one direction in the string core . In other words, when the current along the superconducting string shows a light-like causal structure then we have a chiral string. Carter and Peter  have made an exhaustive study of this kind of cosmic strings and a few time later on it has been continued by other authors .

The purpose of this contribution is extend in an alternative geometrical way the dynamical results for chiral strings reported in  using a Kaluza-Klein (KK) reduction mechanism  and following closely the variational techniques developed in . Bearing in mind the KK idea, and assuming our original background spacetime to be 4-dimensional, the generalization to higher dimensional objects (membranes) tracing out worldsheets is possible. From this assumption we found that the dynamics of the chiral membranes resemble to a 5-dimensional DNG case. We describe now our membrane with an extended embedding. This description has the advantadge of treat the new membrane on the same footing as an ordinary DNG membrane. It is often the case that while an existing theory admits a number of equivalent descriptions, one of them suggets generalizations and simplicities more readily than others. It is our goal.

The equations of motion are a generalization of those of DNG type, i.e., the motion of the chiral membranes looks like minimal surfaces in a KK space but subject to a particular condition. In addition, we have the current conservation on the membrane which emerges as the remain equation of motion for the extra variable.

The note is organized as follows: In section 2 we develop the essential mathematical features to describe the superconducting chiral membranes. This is done by exploting the theory of deformations achieved in . In section 3, we present a simplified version for the dynamics of chiral extended objects, in contrast with others approachs. In section 4 we specialize to the chiral string model. We found a new method of integrability for chiral string model using a light-cone gauge. In section 5 we found integrability for a simple chiral domain wall model. Finally, we give some conclusions.

## II Geometry for Chiral Membranes

In this section we describe both the intrinsic and extrinsic geometry for chiral membranes, i.e., possesing null currents on the worldsheet ($`\omega =\gamma ^{ab}\varphi _{,a}\varphi _{,b}=0`$), based in the Kaluza-Klein approach achieved in . The present development is close to the conceptual framework made in . To begin with, we consider a relativistic membrane of dimension $`d`$, whose worldsheet $`\{m,\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}\}`$ is an oriented timelike $`d+1`$-dimensional manifold, embedded in a 5-dimensional extended arbitrary fixed background spacetime $`\{,g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}\}`$, $`\overline{\mu }=0,1,\mathrm{},4`$. We shall describe the worldsheet by the extended embedding

$$X^{\overline{\mu }}=\left(\begin{array}{c}X^\mu (\xi ^a)\hfill \\ \varphi (\xi ^a)\hfill \end{array}\right),$$
(1)
where $`\varphi `$ is a field living on the worldsheet $`m`$; $`a,b=0,1,2`$, and $`\xi ^a`$ are coordinates on the worldsheet. With the former embedding, we can make contact with the Kaluza-Klein description for the background space-time metric

$$g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}g_{\mu \nu }\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & g_{44}\hfill \end{array}\right),$$
(2)
where $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ is the metric of the original background spacetime, and $`g_{44}`$ is a constant. The tangent basis for the worldsheet is defined by $`e_a:=X^{\overline{\mu }}{}_{,a}{}^{}_{\overline{\mu }}^{}=e^{\overline{\mu }}{}_{a}{}^{}_{\overline{\mu }}^{}`$ where the prime denotes partial derivative with respect to the coordinates $`\xi ^a`$. The tangent vectors $`e^{\overline{\mu }}_a`$, associated with the embedding (1), can be written as

$$e^{\overline{\mu }}{}_{a}{}^{}=\left(\begin{array}{c}e^\mu _a\hfill \\ \varphi _{,a}\hfill \end{array}\right).$$
(3)
The metric induced on $`m`$ is given by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}=g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}e^{\overline{\mu }}{}_{a}{}^{}e_{}^{\overline{\nu }}{}_{b}{}^{}=\gamma _{ab}+g_{44}\varphi _{,a}\varphi _{,b},`$ where $`\gamma _{ab}=g_{\mu \nu }e^\mu {}_{a}{}^{}e_{}^{\nu }_b`$ is the standard metric for the worldsheet without the field $`\varphi `$. The normal basis for the worldsheet is denoted by $`n^{\overline{\mu }I}`$ which is intrinsically defined by

$$g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}n^{\overline{\mu }I}n^{\overline{\nu }J}=\delta ^{IJ},g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}n^{\overline{\mu }I}e^{\overline{\nu }}{}_{a}{}^{}=0,$$
(4)
where $`I,J=1,2,\mathrm{},Nd`$. We can write explicitly the complete orthonormal basis, which we label as $`n^{\overline{\mu }I}=\{n^{\overline{\mu }i},n^{\overline{\mu }(4)}\}`$ as follows,

$$n^{\overline{\mu }i}=\left(\begin{array}{c}n^{\mu i}\hfill \\ 0\hfill \end{array}\right),n^{\overline{\mu }(4)}=\sqrt{g_{44}}\left(\begin{array}{c}e^\mu {}_{a}{}^{}\varphi _{}^{,a}\hfill \\ g^{44}\hfill \end{array}\right),$$
(5)
where we have assumed that $`n^{\mu i}`$ satisfy $`g_{\mu \nu }n^{\mu i}n^{\nu j}=\delta ^{ij}`$, and $`i`$ take the values $`i=1,\mathrm{},4d`$. One of the more important quantities determining the extrinsic geometry is the extrinsic curvature $`K_{ab}^I`$ along the normal basis is defined as

$$K_{ab}^I=n_{\overline{\mu }}{}_{}{}^{I}D_{a}^{}e^{\overline{\mu }}{}_{b}{}^{}.$$
(6)
where $`D_a:=e^{\overline{\mu }}{}_{a}{}^{}D_{\overline{\mu }}^{}`$ is the gradient along the tangential basis, and $`D_{\overline{\mu }}`$ is the covariant derivative compatible with $`g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}`$. The last expression can be splitted as follows: i) For $`I=i`$ we have, $`K_{ab}^i=n_\mu {}_{}{}^{i}D_{a}^{}e^\mu _b`$ which is the well known expression for the extrinsic curvature for the worldsheet of the membrane , and ii) for $`I=4`$, $`K_{ab}^{(4)}=\sqrt{g_{44}}_a_b\varphi `$, where $`_a`$ is the covariant derivative compatible with $`\gamma _{ab}`$. The index $`(4)`$ denotes the direction along the normal $`n^{\overline{\mu }(4)}`$.

## III Chiral Membrane Dynamics

In this section we will show the equivalence between the chiral membrane dynamics and the DNG dynamics in an extended background spacetime plus a chirality condition. The starting point to discuss the dynamics of chiral membranes is the DNG like action which is invariant under reparametrizations of the worldsheet $`m`$,

$$S=\mu _0_md^{d+1}\xi \sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }},$$
(7)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the determinant of the induced metric (2) from the spacetime by the embedding (1), and $`\mu _0`$ is a constant. The determinant is straightforward computed and given by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\gamma (1+g_{44}\omega )`$, where $`\gamma `$ is the determinant of the old induced metric on the worldsheet, $`\gamma _{ab}`$. The action (7) turn into

$$S=\mu _0_md^{d+1}\xi \sqrt{\gamma }(1+g_{44}\omega )^{1/2}.$$
(8)
Observe that the resulting action from the DNG like action (7), is the one for superconducting strings involving the Nielsen model, where $`(\omega )=\sqrt{1+g_{44}\omega }`$, . In other words, the superconducting string theory with the Nielsen model is equivalent to DNG like action (7).

An important issue that deserve attention is that of the equations of motion which are already known . We want rebound here the geometrical framework introduced in section 2 in the attainment of chiral membrane dynamics. Using similar variational techniques to that developed in  we can get the equations of motion from the action (7). It is worthy to mention that this method is very graceful because rebound the geometrical nature of the worldsheet. The variation of the action (7) gives

$`\delta S`$ $`=`$ $`\mu _0{\displaystyle _m}d^{d+1}\xi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{ab}\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}=\mu _0{\displaystyle _m}d^{d+1}\xi \sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{ab}K_{ab}^I\mathrm{\Phi }_I=0,`$ (9)
where we have considered only normal deformations to the worldsheet***The tangential deformations can be identified with the actions of worldsheet diffeomorphisms so we can ignore them since we are interested in quantities invariant under reparameterizations of the worldsheet. These tangential deformations are important in the study of composite objects ., $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$ are the deformation normal vector fields and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{ab}`$ is the inverse metric of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}`$ given by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{ab}=\gamma ^{ab}g_{44}^a\varphi ^b\varphi `$. We can immediately read the equations of motion

$$\mu _0\mathrm{\Gamma }^{ab}K_{ab}^I=0.$$
(10)
Let is worth noticing the similarity of these equations with those ones arising for minimal surfaces, namely, $`\gamma ^{ab}K_{ab}^i=K^i=0`$, . In fact, in our description $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{ab}`$ play the role of a metric. Let us now decode the several cases involve in the Eq. (10). a) $`I=i`$. The equations of motion take the form,

$$\mu _0\gamma ^{ab}K_{ab}^i\mu _0g_{44}^a\varphi ^b\varphi K_{ab}^i=0.$$
(11)
On other hand, in the generic superconducting membranes picture, the strees-energy-momentum tensor adquires the form $`T_{ab}=(\omega )\gamma _{ab}2(d/d\omega )_a\varphi _b\varphi `$, where $`(\omega )`$ is a function of $`\omega `$, depending on the particular models . When the chiral current limit is taken into account, the quantities $`(\omega )`$ and $`d/d\omega `$, adquire constant values. If we define $`g_{44}:=2(d/d\omega )|_{\omega =0}`$ and $`\mu _0=(\omega )|_{\omega =0}`$, we can identify the Eq. (11) with the standard equations of motion, namely: $`T^{ab}K_{ab}^i=0`$, . b) $`I=(4)`$. In this case we have now directly,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }^{ab}K_{ab}^{(4)}=0=_a^a\varphi ,$$
(12)
which is a wave equation for $`\varphi `$, corresponding to a conserved current carrying onto the worldsheet for chiral currents.

## IV Chiral String Model

We specialize now to the case of chiral strings. We illustrate the chiral string model from a Lagrangian point of view.

The presence of the gauge symmetry in a field theory means that not all of the field components, $`X^{\overline{\mu }}(\xi ^a)`$, are dynamical. In our case, the reparameterization invariance allow us to choose a gauge in which the dynamical equations are tractable. Due to we have considered a DNG like action, (7), we have the freedom of choice an acceptable gauge condition. Several authors have reported solutions for the chiral string model using specific ansatzs . In this contribution we get a solution for the mentioned model using a different gauge. For a review of those solutions using our description, see the Ref. .

We consider the light-cone gauge over the spacetime coordinates adapted to our description. It is well known that the orthonormal gauge do not fully fix the gauge because there is residual reparametrization invariance. A favorite gauge choice that fix the gauge and allow us to solve the constraints is the light-cone gauge. This gauge was used by Hoppe in the search for explicit solutions for the classical equations of motion of relativistic membranes . We shall use this orthonormal light-cone gauge in the search of integrability for the chiral string model.

To proceed further, we assume the original background metric to be flat, $`g_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }`$, with signature $`(,+,+,+)`$ and the embedding (1). For the KK spacetime we define light-cone coordinates, $`X^+`$ and $`X^{}`$, as

$`X^+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(X^0+\sqrt{g_{44}}\varphi ),`$ (13)
$`X^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(X^0\sqrt{g_{44}}\varphi ),`$ (14)
$`\stackrel{}{X}`$ $`=`$ $`(X^1,X^2,X^3).`$ (15)
The light-cone gauge points $`\tau `$ along $`X^+`$,

$$X^+=X_0^++P^+\tau ,$$
(16)
where $`X_0^+`$ and $`P^+`$ are constants. The idea is solve for $`X^{}`$ leaving the $`X^i`$ variables, where $`i=1,2,3`$. Laying hold of the orthonormal light-cone gauge ,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\tau \tau }\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB}\hfill \end{array}\right),$$
(17)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}`$ is given by (2) and $`A,B=1,\mathrm{},d`$, besides of $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\tau \tau }=1`$, we can simplify the equations of motion, $`_a(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{ab}X^{\overline{\mu }}{}_{,b}{}^{})=0`$ in the set of equations

$`𝒟X^{\overline{\mu }}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (18)
$`2P^+\dot{X}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\dot{\stackrel{}{X}}\dot{\stackrel{}{X}}+\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }},`$ (19)
$`P^+X^{}_{,A}`$ $`=`$ $`\dot{\stackrel{}{X}}\stackrel{}{X}_{,A}`$ (20)
where we have defined $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}:=\text{det}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB})=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\tau \tau }`$ and we have defined the differential operator

$$𝒟:=_\tau ^2+_A(\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{AB}_B).$$
(21)
The Eq. (18) represents the equations of motion in this gauge, (19) and (20) are the constraints relations for the system. Deriving with respect to $`\tau `$ the Eq. (19), we can rewrite it as $`P^+𝒟X^{}=\dot{\stackrel{}{X}}𝒟\stackrel{}{X}`$; so if

$$𝒟\stackrel{}{X}=0,$$
(22)
we get the condition $`𝒟X^{}=0`$, which we can observe from (18). Thus, we have reduced the problem to solve the set (19), (20) and (22). So far the results are general for minimal surfaces of arbitrary dimension. Now we specialize to the case of chiral strings. In order to get integrability for the chiral string model, besides of Eqs. (19), (20) and (22), the condition $`\omega =0`$ must be considered. Using the stringy notationAs is well known, in such case the worldsheet is parametrized by the coordinates $`\xi ^0=\tau `$ and $`\xi ^1=\sigma `$. The symbols . and  denote partial derivatives with respect to $`\xi ^0`$ and $`\xi ^1`$, respectively., the appropiate expressions are

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{}{X}^{}\stackrel{}{X}^{}\hfill & \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}0}\hfill \\ \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}0}\hfill & \stackrel{}{X}^{}\stackrel{}{X}^{}\hfill \end{array}\right),$$
(23)
with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\tau \tau }=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\sigma \sigma }`$. The equations of motion (22) transform in the wave equation: $`𝒟\stackrel{}{X}=(_\tau ^2+_\sigma ^2)\stackrel{}{X}=\ddot{\stackrel{}{X}}+\stackrel{}{X}^{\prime \prime }=0`$, whose general solution is given by

$$\stackrel{}{X}=\stackrel{}{a}(\tau +\sigma )+\stackrel{}{b}(\tau \sigma ).$$
(24)
The constraints (19) and (20) adquire the form

$`P^+\dot{X}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`|\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`}|^2+|\stackrel{}{b}\mathrm{`}|^2,`$ (25)
$`P^+X^{^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`|\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`}|^2|\stackrel{}{b}\mathrm{`}|^2,`$ (26)
where we have used the notation $`\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{b}\mathrm{`}`$ to denote derivatives with respect to their arguments. From the Eqs. (13) and (14) as well as Eq. (2), we can separate the metric $`\gamma _{ab}`$,

$$\gamma _{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{}{X}^{}\stackrel{}{X}^{}\frac{1}{2}(P^+\dot{X}^{})^2\hfill & \frac{1}{2}(P^+\dot{X}^{})X^{^{}}\hfill \\ \frac{1}{2}(P^+\dot{X}^{})X^{^{}}\hfill & \stackrel{}{X}^{}\stackrel{}{X}^{}\frac{1}{2}(X^{^{}})^2\hfill \end{array}\right),$$
(27)
Now, the chirality condition becomes

$`\omega `$ $`=`$ $`\gamma ^{ab}_a\varphi _b\varphi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\gamma g_{44}}}[(P^+\dot{\stackrel{}{X}}^2)^2(X^{^{}})^2](\stackrel{}{X}^{}\stackrel{}{X}^{})=0,`$ (28)
from which is deduced that

$$X^{^{}}=\pm (P^+\dot{\stackrel{}{X}}^2).$$
(29)
Plugging the Eq. (29) in the constraint (20) we get the conditions that should satisfy $`\stackrel{}{a}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{b}`$ in the chiral string solution, namely,

$$\pm (P^+)^2=(\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`}+\stackrel{}{b}\mathrm{`})[\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`}\stackrel{}{b}\mathrm{`}\pm P^+(\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`}+\stackrel{}{b}\mathrm{`})].$$
(30)
Thus, this equation suggest to consider some cases.

For instance, if we assume $`P^+=1`$, we get

$$1=2(\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`}+\stackrel{}{b}\mathrm{`})\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`},$$
(31)
which is different for the values for $`\stackrel{}{a}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{b}`$ reported in .

It is worthy to mention that the integrability for the last cases was reached in absence of electromagnetic field coupled to superconducting strings. From the equations defining $`X^+`$, $`X^{}`$ and the contraints (25) and (26) we can find the value for $`\varphi `$. Again the vortons states are obtained when $`\stackrel{}{b}\mathrm{`}=0`$ and in such case $`\stackrel{}{a}`$ satisfy the relation $`\pm P^{+2}=\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`}[\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`}(1\pm P^+)]`$.

## V Chiral Domain Wall Model

In this section applying a similar mechanism to that for conformal gauge chiral string model we get integrability for a chiral domain wall model by means of a special ansatz. For such intention, with all the former ingredients, we study a worldsheet described by the embedding ,

$$X^{\overline{\mu }}(\tau ,\xi ^1,\xi ^2)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\tau \hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}\hfill \end{array}\right),$$
(32)
where

$$\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{}{X}\hfill \\ \varphi \hfill \end{array}\right).$$
(33)
Now we can choose a gauge similar to the conformal gauge for strings , as follows

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\tau \tau }\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB}\hfill \end{array}\right),$$
(34)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB}=g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}X^{\overline{\mu }}{}_{,A}{}^{}X_{}^{\overline{\nu }}_{,B}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\tau A}=0`$. We assume the special form for the embedding (32), as

$$\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}=\widehat{\stackrel{~}{n}}\xi ^2+\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}(\tau ,\xi ^1),$$
(35)
with the conditions on $`\widehat{\stackrel{~}{n}}`$ to be a unit vector and perpendicular to $`\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}`$. So, in this conformal gauge we have the constraints

$`\dot{\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}}_{}\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (36)
$`\dot{\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}}_{}\dot{\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}}_{}+\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}^{}\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`1,`$ (37)
and the condition $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\tau \tau }=1`$. It is straightforward to demonstrate that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}:=\text{det}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB})=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\tau \tau }`$. In this part of the work, . and  denote derivatives with respect to $`\tau `$ and $`\xi ^1`$, respectively.

Assuming $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ to be Minkowski’s metric and resting in the constraints (36) and (37), the induced metric $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}`$ takes the form,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}|\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}^{}|^2\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & |\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}^{}|^2\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & 0\hfill & 1\hfill \end{array}\right).$$
(38)
According to the standard DNG equations of motion, in our present case the corresponding ones are promoted as $`\ddot{\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}}_{}\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}^{\prime \prime }=0`$, whose solutions have the form

$$\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}=\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{a}}(t+\xi ^1)+\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{b}}(t\xi ^1).$$
(39)
Imposition of the chirality for superconducting domain walls, lead us to the relation

$$|\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}{}_{}{}^{}|_{}^{2}(n^4)^2=\dot{\varphi }_{}^2\varphi _{}^{\prime \prime }{}_{}{}^{2},$$
(40)
where $`n^4`$ is the four component of the vector $`\widehat{\stackrel{~}{n}}`$. Furthermore, the constraints (36) and (37) read as $`|\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{a}}{}_{}{}^{}|_{}^{2}=1`$ and $`|\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{b}}{}_{}{}^{}|_{}^{2}=1`$, or explicitly they are given by

$`|\stackrel{}{a}{}_{}{}^{}|_{}^{2}+g_{44}\varphi ^{}^2`$ $`=`$ $`1,`$ (41)
$`|\stackrel{}{b}{}_{}{}^{}|_{}^{2}+g_{44}\overline{\varphi }^{}^2`$ $`=`$ $`1,`$ (42)
where we have considered the notation $`\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{a}}=(\stackrel{}{a},\varphi )`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{b}}=(\stackrel{}{b},\overline{\varphi })`$, i.e.,

$$\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{}{X}_{}=\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{}{a}(t+\xi ^1)+\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{}{b}(t\xi ^1)\hfill \\ \varphi _{}=\frac{1}{2}\varphi (t+\xi ^1)+\frac{1}{2}\overline{\varphi }(t\xi ^1)\hfill \end{array}\right).$$
(43)
Plugging (43) in the condition (40), the chirality condition is expressed now as

$$\varphi \mathrm{`}\overline{\varphi }\mathrm{`}[1+g_{44}(n^4)^2]=(n^4)^2(1\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{`}\stackrel{}{b}\mathrm{`}).$$
(44)
In a similar way as in the chiral string model case, the last equation suggest some cases. For example, the solution considering $`n^4=0`$ and $`\varphi =0`$ (or $`\overline{\varphi }=0`$), correspond to a straight superconducting domain wall with a carrying current arbitrary cross section, but not including current along the $`\xi ^2`$ direction.

## VI Conclusions

In this work we have developed the dynamics of chiral membranes using geometrical techniques. Using our description we can able of reproduce the results of  in order to show consistency of our description. In fact, our scheme is resemble to DNG theory in five dimensions using a Kaluza-Klein approach. Integrability for both chiral string model and chiral domain wall model was obtained using a simple ansatz. Besides of this description, the Hamiltonian analysis for the chiral model is part of an extense work . The full physical description is not over yet because a deep understanding of integration of equations of motion has not been accompplished. The search of new solutions for the case of chiral superconducting membranes is part of a forthcoming paper.

## VII Acknowledgements

ER is indebted to R. Capovilla for many valuable discussions and suggestions. The support in part from SNI (México) and CONACYT is grateful.


format: text

text:
# Multiple delays in QSO 0957+561: observational evidence and interpretation

## 1 Introduction

The observed optical luminosity of QSOs is probably generated in a source including an accretion disk around a supermassive black hole and a circumnuclear stellar region (e.g., Umemura, Fukue & Mineshige 1997, and references therein). Therefore, some kind of intrinsic variability could be due to local and violent physical phenomena (flares) taking place in the accretion disk (e. g., hot-spots) or in the innermost stellar region (e. g., star bursts). These two standard regions for flares have very different sizes, and thus, if we were able to map several locations of flares within a source QSO, we would measure the size of the RF (region of flares) and determine the environment in which the local and violent variability is originated (Yonehara 1999). A standard accretion disk has a radius of the order of 10-2 pc, whereas the innermost stellar region may be extended as far as 102-103 pc.

In a pioneer work, Yonehara (1999) has suggested a way to map the positions of the intrinsic flares in a gravitationally lensed quasar. For a double-imaged QSO, with optical images A and B, there is a time delay between a given intrinsic event in image A and its twin event (a similar feature) in image B. However, if the optical variability is generated in different points of a source with finite size, it must be not expected a unique time delay for different pairs of twin events. So, the discovery of multiple delays in a double QSO indicates the presence of twin events induced by flares, and the time delay distribution must inform us about the size and nature of the RF. In this paper (Section 2), we searched for multiple delays in the light curves of the lensed quasar Q0957+561A,B. The light curves of both images in this gravitational mirage show variability on very different timescales, but we concentrated on the well-sampled intrinsic events with an amplitude of about 100 mmag and lasting several months ($``$ 100-300 days), which were recently found by Kundić et al. (1995, 1997) and Serra-Ricart et al. (1999).

In Section 3, we interpret the results derived from the careful analysis of the best available optical light curves of Q0957+561A,B. Finally, we summarize our conclusions in Section 4. Scenarios for flares as diverse as accretion disk instabilities, disruption of stars in the gravitational field of a supermassive black hole, stellar collisions or violent stellar evolution are also put in perspective in this last section (see Cid Fernandes, Sodré & da Silva 2000, and references therein).

## 2 Time delay(s) between the components A and B of QSO 0957+561

### 2.1 Historical background and description of the data

The two optical components of QSO 0957+561 have been monitored during about 20 years (Lloyd 1981; Keel 1982; Florentin-Nielsen 1984; Schild & Cholfin 1986; Vanderriest et al. 1989; Schild 1990; Schild & Thomson 1995; Kundić et al. 1995; 1997; Serra-Ricart et al. 1999; Oscoz et al. 2001; Slavcheva-Mihova, Oknyanskij & Mihov 2001), and the datasets inferred from the observations have been usually analyzed from standard techniques, which look for a unique time delay between Q0957+561A and Q0957+561B. However, only if all features come from a common zone in the source (or the emitting points are included within a very small region), we can properly speak of a well-defined time delay. The use of a standard procedure, in general, leads to an effective time delay that will correspond to either the time delay associated with the dominant twin features or the average of several time delays associated with several pairs of twin features in the light curves of the system.

The best available optical light curves, in terms of sampling rate, signal-to-noise ratio and intrinsic character, were obtained by Kundić et al. (1995, 1997) and Serra-Ricart et al. (1999), and these trends could shed light on the existence of a well-defined delay (when there are no discrepancies between time delays for different pairs of twin events or the possible discrepancies cannot be resolved) or the opposite case. Thus, we concentrate our attention on the events with a width of $``$ 100-300 days and an amplitude of about 100 mmag (sharp features with high signal-to-noise ratio), which are included in the brightness record obtained at the Apache Point Observatory (APO) and the Teide Observatory (TO) for the period 1995-1998. Another large dataset compiled by R. Schild shows clear evidences in favor of extrinsic variability (Schild 1996), and therefore, we avoid this dataset. We remark that Schmidt & Wambsganss (1998) and Gil-Merino et al. (2001) have not found reliable microlensing imprints in the records of brightness by Kundić et al. (1995, 1997) and Serra-Ricart et al. (1999), respectively, although Schmidt & Wambsganss (1998) showed a difference light curve with an anomaly during the central dates which is directly related with the subject of this paper (a group of data is slightly but coherently above the zero-line and the next group of data is coherently below the zero-line).

### 2.2 First evidence for multiple delays

The observations carried out at TO from 1996 through 1998 (in the $`R`$ band) were used to compare the light curves of images A and B and obtain effective time delays using pairs of seasons (Serra-Ricart et al. 1999). In principle, two comparisons are possible: 1996(A)-97(B) seasons and 1997(A)-98(B) seasons, but the signal-to-noise ratio in the first pair was very small, and only the two twin features seen in the last pair (with an amplitude of 120 mmag and a duration of about 300 days; see Serra-Ricart et al. 1999; Gil-Merino et al. 2001) can be seriously considered to measure an accurate time delay. Using the data included in this last pair of seasons and the $`\delta ^2`$-test, Serra-Ricart et al. (1999) derived a reliable delay of 425 $`\pm `$ 4 days (1 $`\sigma `$). As they basically compared two twin events, we do not consider their detection as an effective delay but the time delay between the quoted prominent features. So, taking into account the TO events with $`S/N`$ 2.5 (we define the signal-to-noise ratio as the ratio between the semi-amplitude of the events and the mean photometric error), it is inferred an optimal delay of 425 days. We remark that brightness records with $`S/N`$ 1 are not suitable for measuring time delays, because the techniques fail in this situation. With regard to this issue, the section 3 of Pijpers (1997) is very instructive. In order to infer reliable delays, it seems reasonable to work with signals characterized by $`S/N>`$ 2.

On the other hand, CCD images of Q0957+561A,B were taken with the APO 3.5 m telescope in the $`g`$ and $`r`$ bands, during the 1995 and 1996 seasons (Kundić et al. 1995, 1997). The light curve of the image A in the first season ($`A95`$) exhibited a significant variability. In particular, $`A95`$ included a sharp drop of about 100 mmag in 1994 December (data in $`A95`$ encompass 6 months of observations between 1994 December 2 and 1995 May 31), which represents the second half of a whole event. The twin event of this feature in $`A95`$ was observed in the light curve of the image B during the 1996 season ($`B96`$). In the $`g`$ band, the twin event is characterized by an amplitude and a width of 130 mmag and about 100 days, respectively. Just after these two APO main events in $`A95`$ and $`B96`$, we can find other two sharp twin features. The APO secondary events have a duration slightly less than the main ones and an amplitude of 50-70 mmag in the $`g`$ band. Fig. 1 shows the main event (top panel) and the secondary event (bottom panel) in $`B96`$. The data in the $`g`$ band (light filled squares) and in the $`r`$ band (dark filled squares) are depicted. We note the high signal-to-noise ratios in the $`g`$ band: $`S/N`$ 6.5 in the main event and $`S/N`$ 3 in the secondary one. The $`(S/N)_{gband}`$ value in the secondary events is similar to the $`(S/N)_{rband}`$ value in the main features. The secondary events in the $`r`$ band are very noisy. Using $`A95`$ and $`B96`$ in the $`g`$ band, and three different techniques to infer the effective time delay (linear interpolation, optimal reconstruction and dispersion spectrum), Kundić et al. (1997) derived a best value of 417 days. Fig. 2 displays together $`A95`$ (open circles) and $`B96`$ (filled squares) in the $`g`$ band. $`A95`$ was shifted by a time delay of 417 days, while $`B96`$ was shifted by an optimal magnitude offset of 118 mmag (see Kundić et al. 1997). Only the main overlaping region of $`A95`$ and $`B96`$ is showed, i.e., that one including the two pairs of twin features, and to guide the eye, a line joins the data for the A component. One sees in Fig. 2 an excellent agreement between the APO main twin features (from day 1100 to day 1150) as well as an $`anomaly`$ with regard the two APO secondary events. The secondary event in the flux of image A is not aligned with the secondary one in the flux of image B, or in other words, the secondary event in the time-shifted (+ 417 days) $`A95`$ seems still delayed with respect to its twin event in $`B96`$. As an additional problem, the best solution for the delay from TO data (425 days) is out of the 95 per cent confidence interval claimed by Kundić et al. (1997): 417 $`\pm `$ 3 days. From another point of view, the solution of 417 days is in clear disagreement with the TO photometry (see Fig. 16 in Serra-Ricart et al. 1999).

The three methods used by Kundić et al. (1997) to infer an optimal effective time delay of 417 days, seem very sensitive to the two main features. In a manner of speaking, these classical methods forget the rest of data, and we need to find some discrete technique to compare all information in both brightness records. The discrete cross-correlation method has several variants which may be sensitive to the whole light curves, and we choose the $`\delta ^2`$-test (e.g., Serra-Ricart et al. 1999), in which the shifted discrete autocorrelation function ($`DAC`$) is matched to the discrete cross-correlation function ($`DCC`$). From the $`\delta ^2`$-test we infer optimal effective time delays of 424 days (using bins with size of 5 days) and 422 days (using bins with size of 15 days), both in agreement with the measurement from TO data. We note that the TO data were studied with a relatively poor time resolution (bins with size of 40 days), while we analyzed the APO data with a good time resolution: smoothing size of 5–15 days. In Fig. 3 (top panel) the $`DAC`$ for the A component shifted by 424 days (open circles) and the $`DCC`$ (filled circles) are presented. In this $`DAC`$ vs. $`DCC`$ comparison we used bins with size of 5 days (results with the best time resolution). Using bins with size of 5 days (solid line) and 15 days (dashed line), possible values of the effective time delay ($`\theta `$) versus the associated $`\delta ^2(\theta )`$ values, normalized by its minimum value $`\delta ^2(\theta _0)`$, have been also plotted in Fig. 3 (bottom panel). As it was already mentioned, the new optimal values close to 425 days are in good agreement with the measurement made by the IAC group. However, is there a good alignment between twin features?. To answer this question we have redrawn in Fig. 4 the combined photometry of Q0957+561A,B for the 1995-96 seasons in the $`g`$ band, but shifting $`A95`$ by a time delay of 424 days. We conclude that an effective delay of 424 days is not able to align neither the APO main events nor the APO secondary events, although this larger value can be considered as the estimate of an average time delay. The 424 days solution leads to some discrepancies whose imprints can be seen in the top panel of Fig. 3 (e.g., there is a clear lag between the ”humps” to the right of the central peaks). Only the existence of two different delays can lead to the alignment of both pairs of twin events.

### 2.3 Detection of multiple delays

Our last task must be to obtain, in a consistent way, the time delay between the APO main events and the time delay between the APO secondary events. From the data included in the sharp drop of the main events, we make a first $`\delta ^2`$ function. Moreover, using the data corresponding to the secondary events, we do a second $`\delta ^2`$-test. The two new $`\delta ^2`$ functions together with the $`\delta ^2`$ function inferred from all data (see bottom panel of Fig. 3) are showed in Fig. 5. When we only take data corresponding to the main events, we obtain a narrow peak in $`\delta ^2`$ and recover the expected result of a delay of 417 days, whereas if only data in the secondary events are used, then another narrow peak centered on 432 days is derived. In Fig. 6, we draw our best solution for the 1995-96 seasons in the $`g`$ band: the first part of $`A95`$ is shifted by + 417 days (main drop) and the second part is shifted by + 432 days (secondary event). Finally, to sum up, a time delay of 425 $`\pm `$ 4 days explains the signal recorded at Teide Observatory in the $`R`$ band (two twin events with a relatively long time-scale of about 300 days), while a unique time delay does not align the two pairs of twin events detected at Apache Point Observatory in the $`g`$ band. From the APO light curves, a double time delay of 417.0 $`\pm `$ 0.6 days (for the main features) and 432.0 $`\pm `$ 1.9 days (for the secondary events) is favored, and thus, three different delays are detected from APO/TO data (the APO/Main-APO/Secondary difference delay is of $``$ 15.0 $`\pm `$ 2.0 days, the APO/Main-TO difference delay is of $``$ 8.0 $`\pm `$ 4.0 days and the APO/Secondary-TO difference delay is of $`+`$ 7.0 $`\pm `$ 4.4 days; see Table 1).

We computed 1 $`\sigma `$ uncertainties (68.3 per cent confidence limits) for the time delays inferred from the $`\delta ^2`$-test. Each 1 $`\sigma `$ confidence interval was derived through intensive simulations: we made $`10^5`$ possible underlying signals which are consistent with the observed light curve of the image A, and $`10^5`$ possible underlying brightness trends of the image B (in agreement with the photometric behaviour of this image). From the $`10^5`$ pairs of possible underlying signals, we can estimate $`10^5`$ time delays (using the $`\delta ^2`$-test), and therefore, the distribution of delays and the standard confidence interval. The whole procedure is similar to the methodology used by Serra-Ricart et al. (1999). By means of intensive simulations, other studies are also interesting and viable. For example, from the APO main twin events, we found that 99.9 per cent of the delays are included in the range 417 $`\pm `$ 2 days. On the other hand, from the APO secondary twin events, the delay distribution is broader. However, a delay $``$ 425 days has a probability higher than 99 per cent. So, we unambiguously found two different time delays in the APO light curves.

## 3 Interpretation of the results

We assume that the observed optical luminosity of QSO 0957+561 is due to a standard hybrid source (accretion disk and circumnuclear stellar region), and consequently, exotic sources are not taken into account in this paper (e.g., two accretion disks around two close supermassive black holes). The total luminosity is the superposition of a dominant non-variable ”background” component and a variable part, where the background luminosity is mainly originated in either the full accretion disk or the full stellar environment, and the QSO variability can be made by flares or another kind of activity. In this scenario, the APO/TO events must be caused by flares in the source QSO.

If the source centre is placed at an angular position $`𝜷`$, the time delay between its images A (at $`𝜽_A`$) and B (at $`𝜽_B`$) is given by (e.g., Schneider, Ehlers & Falco 1992)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _{BA}(𝜷)=\frac{D}{2c}(1+z_d)[𝜽_B^2𝜽_A^2+2(𝜽_A𝜽_B).𝜷2\psi (𝜽_B)+2\psi (𝜽_A)],$$
(1)
where $`D`$ = $`D_sD_d`$/$`D_{ds}`$ ($`D_d`$, $`D_s`$ and $`D_{ds}`$ are the angular diameter distances from us to the lens, from us to the source and from the lens to the source, respectively), $`c`$ is the velocity of light in vacuum, $`z_d`$ is the redshift of the lens and $`\psi `$ is the deflection potential, which is directly related to the scaled deflection angle $`𝜶`$: $`𝜶`$ = $`\mathbf{}\psi `$. However, when a flare occurs, the corresponding signal originated at an angular position $`𝜷+\delta 𝜷`$ will be gravitationally lensed at $`𝜽_A+\delta 𝜽_A`$ and $`𝜽_B+\delta 𝜽_B`$. Therefore, from Eq. (1), considering an expansion up to the first order in the angular displacements ($`\delta 𝜷`$, $`\delta 𝜽_A`$, $`\delta 𝜽_B`$) and the lens equation ($`\mathbf{}\psi `$ = $`𝜶`$ = $`𝜽𝜷`$), we infer the time delay difference

$$\delta (\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _{BA})=\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _{BA}(𝜷+\delta 𝜷)\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _{BA}(𝜷)=\frac{D}{c}(1+z_d)[(𝜽_A𝜽_B).\delta 𝜷].$$
(2)
Using the distance displacement in the source plane $`\delta 𝐫`$ = $`D_s\delta 𝜷`$, Eq. (2) can be rewritten as

$$\delta (\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _{BA})=\frac{D}{cD_s}(1+z_d)[(𝜽_A𝜽_B).\delta 𝐫].$$
(3)
Eq. (3) has two remarkable aspects. Firstly, the time delay difference does not depend on the lens model (the distribution of mass in the lens). This property is very important to do robust estimates with complex lenses as the galaxy + cluster system in QSO 0957+561. Secondly, the time delay differences are only useful to map the projections of the relative positions of flares on the $`𝜽_A𝜽_B`$ direction (see also Yonehara 1999).

In a cosmology with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ = 0 and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ = 1, the observational parameters $`z_d`$ = 0.36, $`z_s`$ = 1.41 (the redshift of the source) and $`𝜽_A𝜽_B`$ = 6”.1 lead to

$$[\delta (\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _{BA})](\mathrm{days})=0.057\delta y(\mathrm{pc}),$$
(4)
being $`\delta y`$ = $`[(𝜽_A𝜽_B).\delta 𝐫]`$/$`𝜽_A𝜽_B`$. Here, the $`y`$-axis is parallel to $`𝜽_A𝜽_B`$, while the $`x`$-axis is perpendicular to this privileged direction of the gravitational mirage. A more realistic cosmology (e.g., Wang et al. 2000) could be suitable to obtain very refined estimates, but in this first approach to the problem, our aim is not so ambitious. We wish to obtain some robust bound on the size of the region associated with the flares inducing the prominent APO/TO events. The three time delays claimed in Section 2 suggest a time delay of 425 days for hypothetical signals emitted from the source centre (the average of all delays), as well as time delay differences of $`\delta (\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _{BA})`$ = $``$ 8.0 $`\pm `$ 0.6 days (APO main events), $`\delta (\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _{BA})`$ = $`+`$ 7.0 $`\pm `$ 1.9 days (APO secondary events) and $`\delta (\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _{BA})`$ = 0 $`\pm `$ 4 days (TO events). From Eq. (4), it is easy to derive the projected relative positions ($`\delta y`$): $``$ 140 $`\pm `$ 10, $`+`$ 123 $`\pm `$ 33 and 0 $`\pm `$ 70 pc. We ignore the components $`\delta x`$ corresponding to the three flares, however, the information on the components $`\delta y`$ is sufficient to reach important conclusions. Fig. 7 presents the possible relative positions of the flares (shading rectangles). The rectangles corresponding to the two $`g`$-band flares are depicted in the left panel, while the rectangle drawn in the right panel is associated with the $`R`$-band flare. A circle with a radius of 90 pc is also shown in the left panel of Fig. 7. A region of flares with outer radius less than 90 pc is in disagreement with all possible relative positions of the g-band flares, and the two far flares were probably generated at distances of 100-200 pc from the central black hole. This result indicates that at least two flares are related to a stellar environment. On the other hand, the $`R`$-band flare might be produced far from the central engine, and thus it could be also related to the stellar ring. However, we cannot decide on this issue.

## 4 Conclusions and discussion

Using the best available optical light curves of Q0957+561A,B, which contain three pairs of twin events with significant signal-to-noise ratio ($`S/N`$ 2.5), we found a clear evidence for three different time delays. As far as we know, this is the first detection of multiple delays in a double-imaged QSO. Our analysis based on data of a lens system sampled during many years could be extended to other lens systems in a near future.

We concentrated on relatively violent events with an amplitude of $``$ 100 mmag (a fluctuation of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m`$ 0.1 mag represents a relative fluctuation in flux of $`\mathrm{\Delta }F/F_{back}`$ 10 per cent) and a duration of $``$ 100-300 days. If these events are originated inside a standard hybrid source (accretion disk and circumnuclear stellar region), the observed time delay multiplicity suggests that they do not come from a common zone in the source (Yonehara 1999). So, the studied events may be related to violent and local physical phenomena (flares). Accepting the hypothesis of events caused by flares in a standard hybrid source, in Sect. 3 we discussed on the size and nature of the region of flares. In particular, it is showed that two of the three flares must be generated at distances (from the central black hole) larger than 90 pc. Therefore, taking into account that the radius of a typical accretion disk is of 10-2 pc, accretion disk instabilities or collisions of stars with the black hole + hot disk complex (e.g., Haardt, Maraschi & Ghiselini 1994; Kawaguchi et al. 1998; Ayal, Livio & Piran 2000) can be discarded as candidates to these two flares far away from the black hole. However, in principle, the observed flux variability may be due to either stellar collisions in dense clusters separated from the centre (e.g., Courvoisier, Paltani & Walter 1996) or the violent evolution of stars in the circumnuclear stellar region (e.g., Aretxaga, Cid Fernandes & Terlevich 1997). A more complex scenario, involving star-gas encounters in a extended gaseous disk or bar, is also possible.

We can roughly estimate the rest-frame $`B`$-band energy released in the flare related to the main events in the $`g`$-band APO data, and compare it with the rest-frame $`B`$-band energy released in a typical event occuring in a given stellar scenario. To do the estimation/comparison we followed several steps. Firstly, from the light curve of the image A in the first season ($`A95`$), it is deduced a $`g`$-band background of $`m_{back}(g)`$ = 17.08 mag. We transformed this $`g`$-band background component to a $`B`$-band background contribution using the $`gr`$ color and the equations of Kent (1985). The $`B`$ magnitude can be then converted to a monochromatic flux (4400 Å) using standard laws (e.g., Allen 1973; Henden and Kaitchuck 1990; Léna, Lebrun & Mignard 1998). The relevant flux, $`F[\lambda 4400(1+z_s)]`$, may be found by multiplying the monochromatic flux $`F(\lambda 4400)`$ by the $`k`$-correction $`(1+z_s)^{0.5}`$ (e.g., Schmidt & Green 1983). Thus, $`F_{back}[\lambda 4400(1+z_s)]`$ 10-15 erg cm-2 s-1 Å-1. Secondly, using the luminosity distance $`D_L`$, one obtains: $`\tau _{back}L_{back}(\lambda 4400)=4\pi D_L^2F_{back}[\lambda 4400(1+z_s)]`$, where $`L_{back}(\lambda 4400)`$ is the background intrinsic luminosity (at 4400 Å) and $`\tau _{back}`$ is the extinction-magnification factor. This last factor is due to both the magnification of the light from image A by the lens, and the extinction by dust in the lens galaxy, the Milky Way and so on. The magnification can be easily obtained, whereas it is difficult to estimate the total extinction. In a cosmology with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ = 0, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ = 1 and $`H`$ = 100 $`h`$ km s-1 Mpc-1, we inferred $`h^2\tau _{back}L_{back}(\lambda 4400)`$ 3 1042 erg s-1 Å-1. Thirdly, the observed event has a duration of $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ = 100 days and an effective (top hat) amplitude of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m(g)`$ = $``$ 0.07 mag. We assumed that $`\mathrm{\Delta }m(B)`$ $``$ 0.07 mag and found an intrinsic luminosity of the associated flare given by $`h^2\tau _{flare}L_{flare}(\lambda 4400)`$ 2 1041 erg s-1 Å-1. Taking $`h^2\tau _{flare}`$ 1, a time scale of $`\mathrm{\Delta }t_{flare}=\mathrm{\Delta }t/(1+z_s)`$ 40 days, and a width of the filter’s bandpass of 1000 Å, the rest-frame $`B`$-band energy released in the flare will be $`E_{flare}(B)10^{51}`$ erg. Finally, we compared the result on $`E_{flare}(B)`$ with the energy released in a supernova explosion and in a head-on stellar collision. The mean rest-frame $`B`$-band energy released in a SN explosion is of $`E_{SN}(B)`$ 0.5 1051 erg (Aretxaga, Cid Fernandes & Terlevich 1997). On the other hand, the energy released in a collision of two solar-mass stars with a velocity parameter $`\beta =v/c`$ will be of $`E_{COL}(B)<E_{COL}M_{}c^2\beta ^210^{54}\beta ^2`$ erg (Courvoisier, Paltani & Walter 1996). Therefore, the value of $`E_{flare}(B)`$ agrees with the energy released in a supernova explosion and in a relativistic stellar collision ($`\beta `$ 0.1), and a stellar collision at moderate velocities ($`\beta 10^310^2`$) cannot produce so high energy in the rest-frame $`B`$ band.

For Seyfert nuclei, the isolated SN events have a characteristic time-scale of $``$ 300 days. However, the evolution of SNs in QSOs can be very much faster, with time-scales of $``$ 10 days (see Aretxaga, Cid Fernandes & Terlevich 1997). So, the time-scale and the energy corresponding to the $`g`$-band flares agree with the expected ones in a starburst scenario. On the other hand, for QSO 0957+561, a picture including only a starburst nucleus or ring has one difficulty. Kawaguchi et al. (1998) claimed that the measured slope of the first-order structure function is in clear disagreement with the pure starburst model. However, as it was remarked by Kawaguchi et al. (1998), the assumption of either a realistic shape of each SN event or a hybrid scenario could conciliate the existence of supernova explosions and the observed structure function. Moreover, the observational sampling was not taken into account in the simulations, and the observed structure function included observational noise, which was absent in model calculations.

Very recently, Collier (2001) found evidence for accretion disk reprocessing in QSO 0957+561. He compared the two events depicted in the top panel of Fig. 1 (the $`g`$-band APO main event and the $`r`$-band APO main event in $`B96`$) and obtained that the event in the $`r`$ band lags the event in the $`g`$ band by $``$ 1 day. This non-zero chromatic lag seems to support a reverberation within an accretion disk, and therefore, flares originated at points very close to the black hole. The result disagrees with our suggestion about the origin of the flare related to the APO main events in the $`g`$ band, but with regard to this discrepancy, we must do a remark. The detection of a non-zero lag is only based in an interpolated cross-correlation method. Another discrete technique ($`ZDCF`$) led to an 1 $`\sigma `$ interval including a lag equal to zero. In any case, we can conciliate the claim by Collier (2001) and the measured delays in a simple way. The $`g`$-band APO main events could come from a flare in the hot disk, with the other two flares (which generated the $`g`$-band APO secondary events and the $`R`$-band TO events) having a stellar origin and typical time delay differences of $`+`$ 8 and $`+`$ 15 days. In this new scheme, the projected (on a direction joining both images of the QSO) relative positions of the two stellar flares are $`\delta y`$ = $`+`$ 140 pc and $`\delta y`$ = $`+`$ 263 pc. However, the solution to the possible conflict is not very comfortable. As the direction defined by the vector $`𝜽_A𝜽_B`$ is not a privileged one in relation to the physics of the source (obviously, it is a privileged direction of the gravitational mirage), there is an apparent bias in the 2D distribution of stellar flares: the two flares are produced in the semicircle defined by $`𝜽_A𝜽_B`$. Of course the statistic is very poor with only a few flares, and we must analyze new monitoring campaigns to find more flares and a reliable estimate of the time delay associated with hypothetical signals from the centre of the source.

## Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Atsunori Yonehara and Joachim Wambsganss for interesting discussions during the GLITP Workshop held at the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias (IAC). I also acknowledge the anonymous referee for criticisms that helped improve the paper. This work was supported by Universidad de Cantabria funds, the DGESIC (Spain) grant PB97-0220-C02 and the Spanish Department of Science and Technology grant AYA2001-1647-C02.


text:
# Two-dimensional kinematics and stellar populations of early-type galaxies: First results from the SAURON survey

## 1. Introduction

The formation and evolution of galaxies is an important topic of study for the main next-generation space (e.g., NGST) and ground-based (e.g., VLT) telescopes. The coming decade will provide a wealth of high-quality observational data on high redshift galaxies. However, a full understanding of galaxy formation and evolution can only be achieved by completing our knowledge of the present status of galaxies.

According to the ‘standard’ scenario, elliptical galaxies and spiral bulges are the result of complex processes, including successive mergers and star formation events. Evidence for this scenario can be found by studying the intrinsic shapes and internal dynamics of these objects. In the past years, a number of photometric and spectroscopic studies using ground-based telescopes and HST were devoted to this. From these studies, two classes of spheroidal galaxies emerge:

*
* Giant ellipticals. These galaxies are red, have a high metal content and boxy isophotes, are supported by anisotropic velocity distributions and have triaxial figures. Their nuclear luminosity profiles have shallow cusps.
* Low-luminosity ellipticals and spiral bulges. These objects are blue, less metal rich, have disky isophotes, are flattened by rotation and have nearly-oblate shapes. Their central luminosity profiles show steep cusps.

Until recently, kinematical studies were conducted with long-slit spectrographs. The limited spatial coverage of these instruments is not sufficient to capture the complicated velocity fields of triaxial galaxies. Furthermore, the few two-dimensional kinematical observations that were obtained with previous integral-field spectrographs show more complexity than often assumed, even for objects that were supposedly axisymmetric (e.g. M31, Bacon et al. 2001 and references therein).

The SAURON project is aimed to study the morphology, two-dimensional kinematics and stellar populations of a representative sample of early-type galaxies. To achieve this goal we have designed and built a dedicated panoramic integral-field spectrograph and developed new software for data reduction, analysis and state-of-the-art modeling. Here we present the project and describe some preliminary results, with emphasis on the stellar kinematics. Other contributions to this volume present different aspects of the project, including preliminary results on line-strengths.

## 2. Instrument

The instrument is a lenslet integral-field spectrograph, similar to the TIGER (Bacon et al., 1995) and OASIS (Bacon et al., 2000) instruments that have been operated successfully at CFHT. By contrast to OASIS, which is optimized for high spatial resolution, SAURON was designed to have a large field of view (Table 1). The instrument incorporates a system for obtaining simultaneous sky spectra to ensure accurate sky subtraction. SAURON was commissioned at the William Herschel Telescope in early February 1999 (Fig. 1).

The current spectral window is 4810–5340 Å, a wavelength range that contains absorption lines for stellar dynamical and line-strength measurements (H$`\beta `$, Mg and Fe) and emission lines for ionized gas studies (H$`\beta `$, \[OIII\]). The full spectral range of SAURON covers 4500–7200 Å.

## 3. Data reduction

The goal of the data reduction software is to produce uniformly reduced data of high quality. Depending on its size (expressed in terms of the effective radius $`r_e`$), a galaxy will be observed in (a series of) one, two or, in some rare cases, three or more telescope pointings. Every pointing is split in a number of individual exposures, thirty minutes each. This implies that the reduced data-set will consist of roughly 170,000 independent spectra, corresponding to a large volume of raw data (of the order of 100 Gb). We are currently in the process of building a dedicated pipeline to reduce this large data set in an efficient way.

To obtain a large field of view, the SAURON spectra are more densely packed than was the case for OASIS. This means that special attention had to be paid to the extraction of the spectra. We also developed tools to mosaic and merge datacubes. Furthermore, specific software for the spatial binning of spectra in two dimensions was developed, in order to obtain almost uniform signal-to-noise over the field of view (Cappellari & Copin, this conference).

## 4. Sample

We have built a complete sample of nearby E/S0/Sa of 327 galaxies, using the following constraints:

*
* radial velocity: $`cz<`$ 3000 km s-1
* declination: $`6^o<\delta <64^o`$
* $`|b|15^o`$
* absolute magnitude: $`M_B18`$

From this, we selected a representative sample of 72 galaxies by uniformely populating the absolute magnitude–ellipticity plane. The sample spans a large range of global and nuclear properties, covering over four magnitudes in brightness $`M_B`$, 0.6 magnitudes in color $`(BV)_e`$, 0.35 in central Mg2 index, a factor 100 in rotational support $`(V/`$sigma$`)^{}`$, a factor 10 in central cusp-slope brightness profile and a factor 1000 in black hole mass. Half of the representative sample is located in ‘cluster’ environments, while the other half is in a less dense environment.

At the time of this conference 53 of the 72 galaxies were observed (Fig. 2). The survey should be completed after the two scheduled runs of January and April 2002. The complete list of galaxies can be found in de Zeeuw et al. (2002).

## 5. Science verification

We have performed extensive scientific verifications to check the quality of the SAURON measurements. This analysis demonstrates that the SAURON data is of similar or even higher quality than the best published long-slit measurements (de Zeeuw et al. 2002). An example of such a comparison is shown in Fig. 3, where long-slit kinematics along the major and minor photometric axis of the SB0 galaxy NGC3384 (Fisher 1997) is compared with similar measurements from a simulated long-slit extracted from SAURON maps. The RMS deviation between the two data sets is 7 km s-1 in $`V`$ and 8 km s-1 in $`\sigma `$. The important advantage of the SAURON measurements, as illustrated by the kinematic maps of NGC3384 (Fig. 4), is that they are two-dimensional and homogeneous111SAURON observations of NGC3384 are presented in Bureau et al (this conference)..

## 6. Stellar kinematics

The stellar kinematical maps (line-of-sight velocity V, velocity dispersion $`\sigma `$ and the third and fourth order Gauss-Hermite moments $`h_3`$, $`h_4`$) display a rich variety of shapes. We have empirically classified them according to their morphology, distinguishing the following classes (the object name between the brackets refers to the corresponding panel in Fig. 5):

*
* Normal. The rotation axis and the line that joins the velocity extremes are aligned with the photometric minor and major axes, respectively. The velocity dispersion map generally exhibits a well-defined central peak (NGC2974).
* Disk. A stellar disk is clearly present in the velocity field. The velocity dispersion field shows a peak that is elongated perpendicularly to the rotation axis (NGC2549).
* Cylinder. The velocity field displays cylindrical rotation (NGC6501).
* S-shaped. The photometric minor axis and the rotation axis are misaligned in the center (NGC1023).
* Kinematically decoupled core. The velocity field shows a clearly located, well-defined and radical change in its shape and/or amplitude (NGC4365).
* Strongly misaligned. The kinematical axis is misaligned from the photometric minor axis. An example is the bar-type rotation where the kinematical axis in the center is aligned with the photometric major axis in the outer regions (NGC4477).
* Complex. The velocity and dispersion fields display unexpected features. This is generally due to the presence of multiple components in the line-of-sight velocity distribution, which cannot be taken properly into account by simple Gaussian fitting schemes.

We quantify these kinematical maps by means of a new tool, ‘kinemetry’, which extracts the relevant parameters from the velocity field (e.g., Copin et al. 2001). It is similar to the photometric ellipse fitting analysis that is often used to quantify the morphology of light distributions in early-type galaxies.

Fully general dynamical models for some of the sample galaxies are under construction. We use Schwarzschild’s method (Schwarzschild 1979, 1982, 1993), together with a Multi-Gaussian expansion of the light distribution (Monnet et al. 1992; Emsellem et al. 1994). The axisymmetric three-integral software that is used (van der Marel et al. 1998; Cretton et al. 1999) is fully general and makes no assumptions about the distribution function or degree of anisotropy.

We applied this powerful tool first to the SAURON observations of M32 (Verolme et al. 2002). We selected M32 as a test-case because of the availability of high-quality data, including FOS and STIS observations, and reliable (dynamical) estimates of its relevant properties (van der Marel et al. 1998). Our results illustrate the superiority of the two-dimensional SAURON-data over multiple position angle long-slit data: we find strong limits on the inclination angle, which is essentially unconstrained with long-slit data only.

Other examples of axisymmetric Schwarzschild models using SAURON data are given in this conference (NGC3377, Cretton et al.; NGC7332, Falcon et al.). An extension of the Schwarzschild software to triaxiality is nearly complete.

## 7. Preliminary conclusions

The SAURON survey is not yet completed, and the analysis of this large data set has only recently started. However, we can already draw a few preliminary conclusions. As shown in Fig. 5, stellar kinematical maps of early-type galaxies and spiral bulges exhibit a large variety of morphologies. While some are simple axisymmetric systems, most are more complex than often assumed. This confirms that two-dimensional spectroscopy is mandatory to measure the complex behaviour of stars and gas in these galaxies. Furthermore, most of these signatures do not have counterparts in the light distribution (see Fig. 5). This implies that information contained in the light distribution is unreliable and may even be misleading. We illustrate this point further in Fig. 6, where we show the velocity fields of four E/S0 galaxies with similar light distributions. It is clear that the kinematical behaviour is different for every object, ranging from a fast-rotating axisymmetric object (NGC524) to a slow and cylindrically rotating object (NGC6501), including a kinematically decoupled core (NGC4406) and an object with non-axisymmetric rotation (NGC4459).

A meaningful statistical analysis of the SAURON observations requires the complete sample and adequate tools such as kinemetry. However, there are already indications that the kinematical properties of nearby E/S0 galaxies do not correspond to the often assumed simplistic two-family model, in which the giant non-rotating triaxial ellipticals are opposed to the fast-rotating axisymmetric faint ellipticals and S0s. We will investigate this further by studying the statistical incidence of kinematically decoupled cores, stellar disks, and asymmetries, and by constructing detailed self-consistent models for individual galaxies. This is a challenging undertaking. In the first step towards this goal, we have successfully built an axisymmetric three-integral Schwarzschild model for M32 (Verolme et al. 2002). This work shows that the presence of the SAURON data helps to constrain the inclination of the galaxy, which was not possible by using long-slit observations only. Presently, we are developing a general triaxial Scharzschild code, which will be applied to the many non-axisymmetric objects in the SAURON survey.

The SAURON observations are not limited to stellar kinematics only. They also provide line-strength and emission line maps (see Emsellem et al., this conference). Our aim is to combine all this information and thus gain more understanding of the current properties of normal early-type galaxies and to derive strong constraints on their formation and evolution. As an example, our study of the line-strength maps of NGC4365 show that its kinematical decoupled core (Fig. 1) is a long-lived structure that has almost the same age as the rest of the galaxy (Davies et al., 2001).

## References

Bacon R., Adam G., Baranne A., Courtes G., Dubet D., Dubois J.P., Emsellem E., Ferruit P., Georgelin Y., Monnet G., Pecontal E., Rousset A., Say F., 1995, A&AS, 113, 347

Bacon R., Emsellem E., Copin Y., Monnet G., 2000, in Imaging the Universe in Three Dimensions, eds W. van Breugel & J. Bland–Hawthorn, ASP Conf. Ser. 195, 173

Bacon R., Copin Y., Monnet G., et al. 2001, MNRAS, 326, 23

Bacon R., Emsellem E., Combes F., Copin Y., Monnet G., Martin P., 2001, A&A, 371, 409

Bureau M. et al, this conference

Cappellari M., Copin Y., this conference

Copin Y., Bacon R., Bureau M., Davies R.L., Emsellem E., Kuntschner H., Miller B.W., Peletier R.F., Verolme E.K., de Zeeuw P.T., 2001, SF2A 2001, eds F. Combes, D. Barret, F. Thévenin, EDPS Conf. Series in Astronomy & Astrophysics, 289–292

Cretton N., de Zeeuw P.T., van der Marel R.P., Rix H.-W., 1999, ApJS, 124, 383

Cretton N. et al., this conference

Davies R., Kuntschner H., Emsellem E., Bacon R., Bureau M., Carollo C.M., Copin Y., Miller B.W., Monnet G., Peletier R.F., Verolme E.K., de Zeeuw P.T., 2001, ApJL, 548, 33

Emsellem E., Monnet G., Bacon R., 1994, A&A, 285, 739

Emsellem E. et al., this conference

Falcon J. et al., this conference

Fisher D., 1997, AJ, 113, 950

van der Marel R.P., Cretton N., de Zeeuw P.T. & Rix H.-W., 1998, ApJ, 493, 613

Monnet G., Bacon R., Emsellem E., 1992, A&A, 253, 366

Schwarzschild M., 1979,, ApJ, 232, 236

Schwarzschild M., 1982, ApJ, 263, 599

Schwarzschild M., 1993, ApJ, 409, 563

Verolme E.K., Cappellari M., Copin Y., van der Marel R.P., Bacon R., Bureau M., Davies R.L., Miller B.M., de Zeeuw P.T., 2002, MNRAS, submitted (/astro-ph/0201086)

de Zeeuw P.T., Bureau M., Emsellem E., Bacon R., Carollo C.M., Copin Y., Davies R.L., Kuntschner H., Miller B.W., Monnet G., Peletier R.F., Verolme E.K., 2002, MNRAS 329, 513


text:
# QCD evolution equations

## 1 Unraveling layers of matter: from atoms to partons

A wisdom goes back to ancient Greeks who philosophized that the matter consists of tiny particles — atoms. However, the atomic structure remained a puzzle till the beginning of the 20th century when the radioactivity was discovered and used by Rutherford in his seminal experiments on large angle scattering of $`\alpha `$ particles off atoms which suggested that the atom bears a localized core — the nucleus. On the other hand, electron beams were found to pass through atoms with no or very little deflection forcing Lenard to hypothesize that atoms have wide empty spaces inside. $`\alpha `$ particles having much larger wave length comparable to the nucleus size scattered more frequently with a low intensity beams than their ‘cousins’ $`\beta `$ particles having much smaller wave length and which, for available luminosity, had a very low cross section. Similar experiments but rather with light sources or neutrons are exploited nowadays to study the crystal structure. If one puts a crystal in front of a source of visible light, the object just leaves a shadow on a screen behind it and one does not see elementary building blocks which form it. Obviously, the visible light, having the wave length $`\lambda _{\mathrm{light}}0.40.7\mu \mathrm{m}`$ cannot do the job and resolve the internal structure of a crystal. The size of an individual atom, say hydrogen, is of order $`r_{\mathrm{atom}}\left(\alpha _{\mathrm{em}}m_e\right)^1\left(10\mathrm{KeV}\right)^1`$. Therefore, to ‘see’ atoms in crystals one has to have photons with a comparable or smaller wave length $`\lambda _\gamma r_{\mathrm{atom}}`$, or equivalently, of energy $`E_\gamma r_{\mathrm{atom}}^1`$. To do this kind of ‘nano-photography’ one need a beam of X-rays. To go beyond and look into the structure of atoms one needs even smaller wave lengths.

After the discovery of nucleus’ building blocks — nucleons, i.e., protons and neutrons, the attention has been shifted to the study of these ‘elementary’ particles. However, their elementarity has been questioned starting from Stern’s measurements in 1933 that demonstrated a large proton’s magnetic moment. Hofstadter’s experiments with elastic electron scattering off nucleons, $`eNe^{}N^{}`$, and measurement of their charge distribution revealed that the nucleon has a spatial extent of order 1 fm. To probe femtometer scales one has resort to scattering experiments with high energy beams. Inelastic lepton-nucleon scattering experiments, $`eNe^{}X`$, conducted at SLAC fulfilled this goal and led finally to the discovery of a new layer of matter by observing events with the transfer of a large momentum from the electron to the proton. If the latter would be a hard ball or a diffuse distribution of matter, such kind of scattering would be improbable. Rather it was explained by conjecturing the existence of point-like constituents inside the nucleon which absorb a highly virtual $`\gamma ^{}`$-quantum emitted by leptons, see Fig. 1 (a). Analogous representations holds for the elastic scattering alluded to above, Fig. 1 (b). These partons are nothing else than QCD quark and gluons described by a rigid $`SU(3)`$ gauge field theory.

## 2 Hard scattering and QCD

A QCD scattering amplitude is given by a successive sequence of interactions and free propagations through rife intermediate states created by QCD field operators. At $`n`$th order in the coupling $`g=\sqrt{4\pi \alpha _s}`$ it reads in the time-ordered form

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑t_n{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t_n}{}}}𝑑t_{n1}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t_2}{}}}𝑑t_1G_{n,n1}(t_n)V_{n1}G_{n1,n2}(t_{n1})\mathrm{}V_1G_{1,0}(t_1).`$
The summation in repeated indices runs over states which are eigenfunctions of free equations of motion. $`V_{n,m}=n|V|m`$ is a matrix element of a perturbation, — the interaction potential, — and the free particle propagation is expressed in terms of a time-underintegrated free action, $`S`$, which defines a Hamiltonian of the noninteracting system,

$`G_{n,m}(t)=\mathrm{exp}\left\{it\left(S_nS_m\right)\right\}.`$
At this point, one immediately concludes that there is no sensitivity to long-time scales as long as the total phase, the free particle action is time dependent . In this case, cancellations of long-time contributions occur due to oscillatory nature of the integrand. However, if the phase is stationary, which corresponds to a stationary classical action, particles travel along their classical trajectories and the amplitude becomes sensitive to large-time dynamics. Since at large space-time scales $`\alpha _s`$ is large, one cannot evaluate the amplitude in a perturbative expansion and effects of quark confinement are relevant. In the opposite situation, which goes under the name of infrared safe, an observable can be computed as a power series in QCD coupling alone. These include the total inclusive $`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}`$ and jet $`\sigma _{\mathrm{jet}}`$ cross sections in electron-positron annihilation, etc. Indeed in $`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}0|T\{j_\mu ^{}j_\mu \}|0`$, once a pair of quark and antiquark is created by the source $`j_\mu `$, they travel back-to-back with a speed of light and cannot reassemble back into a physical state absorbed by $`j_\mu ^{}`$. Since there are no classical trajectories which allow this processes, the observable is not sensitive to infrared physics according to the criterion spelled out above.

A hard scattering cross section having at least one hadron in the initial state cannot be infrared safe since in a preparation of the asymptotic hadron state partons which form it had interacted strongly with each other for a long time in a bound state. Obviously, the wave functions of quarks in a bound state differ from what one would have if they were free. So this inevitably affects the cross section. Let us discuss in detail the deeply inelastic scattering example in Fig. 1 (a). The incoming lepton fluctuates into a lepton and a photon, $`ee^{}\gamma ^{}`$, and the latter interacts with partons in the target $`|N`$ fragmenting into a number of hadrons in the final state $`|n`$. Since the electromagnetism is very weak as compared to the strong interaction, one can restrict the analysis to a single-photon exchange with spacelike momentum $`q`$, $`q^2Q^2`$. In order to initiate a hard scattering, the electron has to pass close to one of the partons, i.e., at the distance $`z^21/Q^2`$, to exchange a photon of virtuality $`Q^2`$. This process is described by the amplitude $`n|j_\mu |N`$ with the local quark electromagnetic current $`j_\mu `$. The measurement is totally inclusive with respect to final states and only the scattered lepton is detected. The cross section reads

$$\sigma (x_\mathrm{B},Q^2)=\frac{1}{\pi }\mathrm{}\mathrm{m}id^4z\mathrm{e}^{iqz}N(p)|T\left\{j_\mu ^{}(z)j_\mu (0)\right\}|N(p).$$
(1)
Let us turn to the physical picture of the deep-inelastic event in the photon-hadron center-of-mass frame. For a highly virtual photon, the transverse distance probed by it, in a Lorentz contracted hadron, is of order $`\delta z_{}1/Q`$. Due to a Lorentz dilation, the virtual photon ‘sees’ the partons in a frozen state during the time of transiting the target. Therefore, since the number of parton which carry the bulk of the hadron momentum is small, the photon will ‘see’ mostly only one parton per collision. The probability for multiparton correlations is suppressed by the hard momentum,

$$n\text{-parton probability}\left(\left(\delta z_{}\right)^2/\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}\right)^n1/\left(Q^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}\right)^n,$$
(2)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}=\pi R_N^2`$ is the transverse area of the nucleon of the radius $`R_N`$. These power suppressed multiparticle correlations go under the name of higher twists. Thus, to leading approximation one can restrict considerations to a single-parton scattering at high $`Q^2`$. As compared to the inclusive annihilation mentioned above, the underlying physical picture for the forward Compton scattering admits a classical trajectory. A quark taken from the hadron absorbs the virtual photon and, as a result, accelerates. Then it reemits a photon and falls in the same momentum state. After the energy is freed into the final state the parton merges back into the parent hadron. As we already discussed above, the process is not infrared safe and depends on the quark binding inside the nucleon. The higher is the virtuality of the virtual photon $`Q^2`$, the shorter are the distances traveled by the parton. The points of absorption and emission are separated by a light-like distance. The character of relevant distances in the Compton amplitude is a consequence of deep Euclidean kinematics $`Q^2\mathrm{}`$. Large $`Q^2`$ and energies $`\nu pq`$, at fixed $`x_\mathrm{B}=Q^2/(2\nu )`$, probe short distance and time structures of the process, respectively. To identify scales involved in deeply inelastic scattering let us go to a reference frame where the target proton is at rest and the virtual photon’s three-momentum is directed along the $`z`$-axis, $`q=(q^0,0,0,q^3)`$. Then

$$q=(\frac{Q^2}{2Mx_\mathrm{B}},0,0,\frac{Q^2}{2Mx_\mathrm{B}}\sqrt{1+4M^2x_\mathrm{B}^2/Q^2}).$$
(3)
For light-cone components of the momentum transfer, $`q_\pm (q_0\pm q_3)/\sqrt{2}`$, we have for a large momentum transfer $`Q^2`$

$$q_{}Q^2/\left(Mx_\mathrm{B}\right),q_+Mx_\mathrm{B}.$$
(4)
The integrand in Eq. (1) is an oscillatory function and thus gives vanishing result unless the distances involved are

$$z_{}1/\left(Mx_\mathrm{B}\right),z_+Mx_\mathrm{B}/Q^2.$$
(5)
Therefore, provided transverse separations $`z_{}`$ are small, the deeply inelastic scattering probes strong interaction dynamics close to the light-cone $`z^20`$, and we can neglect the dependence on all coordinate components except for $`z_{}`$. The latter is called Ioffe time and has the meaning of the longitudinal distance probed in the process. Its Fourier conjugated variable is the momentum fraction $`x`$ of the nucleon carried by a parton interacting with the probe. In lowest order approximation $`x=x_\mathrm{B}`$.

A struck quark can emit a gluon or many gluons before actual interaction with the photon, see the left drawing in Fig. 2. When it spills a gluon the scattered quark looses a portion of its original momentum. Although it can be small for a single event, quarks tend to emit more being a relativistically moving particle. Thus, the bremsstrahlung of many gluons drifts the quark into the low momentum fraction region. Since gluons in turn can decay into a quark-antiquark pair, there is a proliferation of partons with small momentum fractions and correspondingly a decrease in the large-$`x`$ domain. Thus, the probability to find a quark with small momentum fraction is higher at larger $`Q^2`$, see the right drawing in Fig. 2. The same phenomenon can be viewed from the resolution perspective discussed above. The higher $`Q^2`$ the smaller is the distance probed by the photon. Therefore, one sees more and more partons in the cloud forming the parent ‘fat’ quark.

Since the hard subprocess occupies a very small space-time volume, the scales involved in the formation of their nonperturbative wave function are much larger, of order of a typical hadronic scale, $`1\mathrm{GeV}`$. Hence, it is quite likely that they are uncorrelated and will not interfere. Thus, although the process depends on the hadronic state the parton has come from, this is basically irrelevant for the hard interactions occurred. Moreover, all final state interactions cancel in the deeply inelastic process. This is exhibited by the relation (1) stemming form the optical theorem. Thus, there is no sensitivity to soft final-state interactions. The quantum mechanical incoherence property of physics at different scales results into the factorization property of the cross section (1). This is the base for the predictive power of perturbative QCD in many hadronic processes which one writes as

$$\sigma (x_\mathrm{B},Q^2)=𝑑xC(x_\mathrm{B}/x;Q^2/\mu ^2)F(x;\mu ^2),$$
(6)
where $`F`$ is a parton distribution, — the probability to find a parton in the nucleon with the momentum fraction $`x`$, — and $`C`$ is a perturbatively computable short-distance coefficient function.

## 3 Evolution equations

Due to intrinsic ultraviolet divergences, parton distributions and coefficients functions in Eq. (6) depend on a renormalization scale $`\mu ^2`$. However, it cancels, as it has to, in the total result since the left-hand side being a physical observable does not depend on the arbitrary scale $`\mu ^2`$. Thus, factorization implies evolution as a consequence of this independence,

$$\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{ln}\mu ^2}=0.$$
(7)
Separation of variables results into complementarity equations for $`F`$ and $`C`$

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}\mu ^2}}C(x;Q^2/\mu ^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑x^{}P(x/x^{};\alpha _s)C(x^{};Q^2/\mu ^2)},`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}\mu ^2}}F(x;\mu ^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑x^{}P(x/x^{};\alpha _s)F(x^{};\mu ^2)}.`$ (8)
The coefficient function $`C`$ is computable perturbatively and so is the evolution kernel $`P`$. The second of these equation is an inclusive evolution equation and allows to predict $`F`$ at a scale $`\mu ^2`$ from the function $`F`$ determined at some reference scale $`\mu _0^2`$. Obviously, a change in $`\mu ^2`$ is in one-to-one correspondence to a change in $`Q^2`$ 111We will not discuss presently the evolution in longitudinal momentum with fixed transverse scales. This domain is described by another type of evolution equations addressed in ..

In the previous discussion we talked only about quark momentum probabilities. To describe a real experiment one has to account for another type of partons which are equally important dynamical degrees of freedom — gluons. Gluons contribute on equal footing with quarks and both enter in a multiplet, $`(F_q,F_g)`$. This multiplet obeys a matrix evolution equation of the type (8) with a quark-gluon mixing matrix of kernels

$$𝑷=\left(\begin{array}{cc}{}_{}{}^{qq}P& {}_{}{}^{qg}P\\ {}_{}{}^{gq}P& {}_{}{}^{gg}P\end{array}\right),\text{with}{}_{}{}^{ab}P(x)=|A_{abc}|^2,$$
(9)
where $`A_{abc}`$ represent amplitudes of elementary splittings, demonstrated in Fig. 3. The solution to the evolution equation (8), where one includes also QCD radiative corrections as well, results to a perfect description of experimental data for the unpolarized deeply inelastic cross section, shown in the same figure.

We consider below a more general case of functions which interpolates between inclusive parton distribution and exclusive distributions amplitudes and, thus, possess a very rich structure. They are known as generalized parton distributions  $`F(x,\eta )`$ and are measurable in a number of hard exclusive reactions  such as in Fig. 1 (b) with a photon emission into the final state. They admit an operator representation which reads, e.g., for quarks

$$N(p_2)|\overline{q}(z_{})q(z_{})|N(p_1)=𝑑x\mathrm{e}^{ixz_{}(p_1+p_2)_+}F(x,\eta ).$$
(10)
It is a correlation function of fields on the light cone separated by the distance $`2z_{}`$ which acquire a scale dependence under renormalization. We omitted an inessential to our present consideration Dirac matrix projecting quark spinor indices. Due to different momenta of incoming and outgoing hadrons, the specifics of these functions lies in a presence of a non-zero $`t`$-channel momentum transfer $`\eta =(p_2p_1)_+/2`$, varying which one probes correlations of partons in different momentum states. The evolution equation has the same schematic form as (8),

$$\frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}\mu ^2}F(x,\eta ;\mu ^2)=𝑑x^{}K(x/\eta ,x^{}/\eta ;\alpha _s)F(x^{},\eta ;\mu ^2).$$
(11)
The evolution kernel interpolates between two known limits, i.e.,

$`\underset{\eta 0}{lim}K(x/\eta ,x^{}/\eta ;\alpha _s)=P(x/x^{};\alpha _s),\underset{\eta 1}{lim}K(x/\eta ,x^{}/\eta ;\alpha _s)=V(x,x^{};\alpha _s),`$
the fully inclusive case we have discussed above $`(\eta =0)`$ and another one which corresponds to distribution amplitudes which enter the description of a number of exclusive processes .

The moments of the function $`F(x,\eta )`$ correspond to the operator matrix elements of local operators, e.g., for quarks,

$$𝑑xx^jF(x,\eta )=P_2|\overline{q}\underset{+}{\overset{j}{\stackrel{}{}}}q|P_1,$$
(12)
where $`\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{}`$. Under renormalization the operators in Eq. (12) get mixed with operators containing total derivatives $`\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{}+\stackrel{}{}`$ but, indeed, the same total number of derivatives as a consequence of Poincaré invariance

$$_{jk}=\overline{q}\underset{+}{\overset{k}{\stackrel{}{}}}\underset{+}{\overset{jk}{\stackrel{}{}}}q.$$
(13)
Since the operators with total derivatives matter for each moment we have to diagonalize a $`j\times j`$ matrix equation,

$$\frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}\mu ^2}\left(\begin{array}{c}_{j0}\\ \mathrm{}\\ _{jj}\end{array}\right)=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\gamma _{jj}& \mathrm{}& \gamma _{j0}\\ & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ & & \gamma _{00}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}_{j0}\\ \mathrm{}\\ _{jj}\end{array}\right),$$
(14)
with zeros below the diagonal. The matrix has obviously a triangular form since the operator containing at least one total derivative cannot mix with operators involving none of them. Otherwise one would run in a contradiction for the forward matrix elements where total derivatives are irrelevant $`p|(\mathrm{})|p=0`$. Another important observation is that the diagonal elements of the anomalous dimensions are the moments of the splitting functions (9)

$${}_{}{}^{ab}\gamma _{j}^{\mathrm{D}}=2𝑑xx^j{}_{}{}^{ab}P(x).$$
(15)
## 4 Use of conformal symmetry

Recall the diagonalization of the Schrödinger equation for a hydrogen atom. The $`O(3)`$ symmetry of the potential allows to reduce the three-dimensional problem to a one-dimensional one, i.e., one performs a partial wave decomposition in terms of spherical harmonics. The spherical harmonics are eigenfunctions of the quadratic Casimir operator of the rotation group.

For the case at hand one can use the space-time symmetries of QCD Lagrangian to simplify significantly and ultimately solve the problem. Classical QCD is Poincaré, i.e., Lorentz $`_{\mu \nu }`$ and translation $`𝒫_\mu `$, invariant as any realistic field theory describing nature, a well as due to absence of any dimensionful parameters for massless quarks, invariant under dilatation $`𝒟`$ and special conformal $`𝒦_\mu `$ transformations . Coordinates transform as follows under them,

$`z_\mu \stackrel{}{}\omega _{\mu \nu }z_\nu ,z_\mu \stackrel{𝒫}{}z_\mu +a_\mu ,z_\mu \stackrel{𝒟}{}\lambda z_\mu ,z_\mu \stackrel{𝒦}{}c_\nu \left(z^2g_{\mu \nu }z_\mu z_\nu \right).`$
The special conformal transformation can be visualized as a sequence $`𝒦_\mu 𝒫_\mu `$ of inversion $`z_\mu =z_\mu /z^2`$, translation and inversion. This fifteen transformations form a group, $`SO(4,2)`$. It is easy to construct the representation of the group on field operators using induced representations . For instance, $`\delta _\mu ^𝒫qi[q,𝒫_\mu ]_{}=_\mu q`$, etc. The eigenvectors of the quadratic Casimir operator of the projected collinear conformal group,

$$𝑱{}_{}{}^{2}=\frac{1}{2}𝒫_+𝒦_{}\frac{1}{4}(𝒟+_++2i)(𝒟+_+),$$
(16)
in the basis of the bilinear operators (13) are called conformal operators with eigenvalues222The indices attached to $`𝑱^2`$ stand for the conformal spin $`j_a=(d_a+s_a)/2`$ of fields, having the dimension $`d_a`$ and spin $`s_a`$, which build $`𝒪_{jl}`$.

$$𝑱{}_{ab}{}^{2}𝒪_{jl}^{}=J_{ab}(J_{ab}1)𝒪_{jl},J_{ab}=j+j_a+j_b.$$
(17)
For quarks $`j_q=1`$ and conformal operators are given in terms of Gegenabauer polynomials  ($`lj`$)

$$𝒪_{jl}=\overline{q}\underset{+}{\overset{l}{\stackrel{}{}}}C_j^{2j_q1/2}\left(\underset{+}{\overset{}{}}/\underset{+}{\overset{}{}}\right)q,$$
(18)
which is a very specific combination of local operators $`_{jk}`$ (13).

Generally, the renormalization group equation reads for the conformal operators

$$\frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}\mu ^2}𝒪_{jl}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}\left(\gamma _j^\mathrm{D}\delta _{jk}+\gamma _{jk}^{\mathrm{ND}}\right)𝒪_{kl}.$$
(19)
As is well known a renormalization group equation is a Callan-Symanzik equation, i.e., the scale Ward identity for a Green function with a (conformal, for the case at hand) operator insertion,

$$𝒢(z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)DqD\overline{q}DA\mathrm{e}^{i{\scriptscriptstyle 𝑑z(z)}}𝒪_{jl}\overline{q}(z_1)\mathrm{}q(z_k)\mathrm{}A(z_N).$$
(20)
The anomalous dimensions of operators arise due to development of an anomaly in the trace of the energy-momentum tensor,

$$\delta ^𝒟=\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mu \mu }=\frac{\beta _d}{g}\left(G_{\mu \nu }^a\right)^2,$$
(21)
where $`\beta _d`$ is a $`d`$-dimensional QCD beta function $`\beta _d=\beta +g(d4)/2`$. We did not display other terms which could not affect the physical sector . The anomalous dimensions show up in the renormalization of an operator product,

$$𝒪_{jl}id^dz\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mu \mu }(z)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}\left(\gamma _j^\mathrm{D}\delta _{jk}+\gamma _{jk}^{\mathrm{ND}}\right)𝒪_{kl}.$$
(22)
Since the conformal algebra is fulfilled on interacting (Heisenberg) field operators one can derive a constraint on the anomalous dimension from it. It is provided by the commutator

$$[𝒟,𝒦_\mu ]=i𝒦_\mu ,$$
(23)
which results into a commutator equation

$$[\gamma ^\mathrm{D}+\gamma ^{\mathrm{ND}},a+\gamma ^c+2\frac{\beta }{g}b]_{}=0,$$
(24)
in terms of $`\alpha _s`$-independent matrices $`a`$ and $`b`$; QCD beta-function $`\beta `$ and a special conformal anomaly $`\gamma ^c`$ which arises, similarly to Eq. (22), in the renormalization of the product

$$𝒪_{jl}d^dz\delta _{}^𝒦(z)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}\gamma _{jk}^c𝒪_{k,l1}.$$
(25)
The special conformal variation of the action is given in terms of a coordinate moment of the energy-momentum tensor, $`\delta _{}^𝒦(z)=2z_{}\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mu \mu }(z)`$.

One can immediately draw important conclusions from Eq. (24). If one is interested in the one-loop anomalous dimension matrix, $`𝒪(\alpha _s)`$, one has to keep the $`\alpha _s`$-independent term $`a`$ only and write $`[\gamma ^{\mathrm{D}(0)}+\gamma ^{\mathrm{ND}(0)},a]=0`$. Since the matrix $`a`$ is diagonal  we conclude that $`\gamma ^{\mathrm{ND}(0)}=0\alpha _s`$. At next-to-leading order, we have to account for $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma ^c`$ in one-loop approximation. This provides via Eq. (24) an expression for two-loop nondiagonal elements $`\gamma ^{\mathrm{ND}(1)}`$ in terms of $`\gamma ^{\mathrm{D}(0)}`$, $`\beta _0`$ and $`\gamma ^{c(0)}`$,

$$\gamma ^{\mathrm{ND}(1)}=[\gamma ^{\mathrm{D}(0)},\frac{b}{a}\left(\beta _0\gamma ^{\mathrm{D}(0)}\right)+\frac{\gamma ^{c(0)}}{a}]_{}.$$
(26)
No two-loop calculation has to be done! The diagonal anomalous dimensions $`\gamma ^\mathrm{D}`$ coincide with the anomalous dimension of local operators without total derivatives and are available in the literature on deeply inelastic scattering.

## 5 Use of superconformal symmetry

As we shall see momentarily, supersymmetry provides relations between the anomalous dimensions of conformal operators, while the extension to superconformal case results into identities between the special conformal anomalies $`\gamma ^c`$ of quark and gluon operators.

If one puts the QCD quarks into the adjoint representation of the color group and sets the number of flavors to one, one recovers $`𝒩=1`$ super-Yang-Mills theory in the Wess-Zumino gauge. In four-dimensional space-time the Lagrangian is invariant under superconformal group, i.e., $`SO(4,2)`$ discussed above plus translational $`𝒬`$ and superconformal $`𝒮`$ transformations ,

$$\delta ^{}q^a=\frac{i}{2}G_{\mu \nu }^a\sigma _{\mu \nu }\xi iD^a\gamma _5\xi ,\delta ^{}B_\mu ^a=i\overline{\xi }\gamma _\mu q^a,\delta ^{}D^a=\overline{\xi }𝒟_\mu ^{ab}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5q^a,$$
(27)
with non-dynamical auxiliary field $`D^a`$ and transformation parameter $`\xi \xi _0i\overline{)}x\xi _1`$. The parameter $`\xi _0`$ ($`\xi _1`$) parametrizes $`=𝒬`$ ($`=𝒮`$) transformations.

One can construct an $`𝒩=1`$ chiral superfield from certain linear combinations of bosonic, i.e., $`\overline{q}q`$ and $`gg`$, and fermionic, i.e., $`gq`$, conformal operators, see Refs. . So that under (27) they transform as Wess-Zumino multiplet. This covariance simplifies the derivation of relations between the anomalies.

We follow the same procedure as in the previous section by using the commutator algebra of the supeconformal group for the Green function $`𝒢(z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)`$ (20) and use Ward identities to find out consequences. Because of the quantization which require a regularization procedure, the variation of the action develops an anomaly in $`d`$-dimensions for the $`𝒮`$-transformation but not for the $`𝒬`$-transformation

$$\delta ^𝒬=0,\delta ^𝒮=\frac{4d}{2}\overline{\xi }_1i\sigma _{\mu \nu }G_{\mu \nu }^aq^a.$$
(28)
Although there arise contributions in both due to explicit supersymmetry breaking by gauge fixing, however, these sources cannot affect gauge-invariant quantities we deal with. For our purposes we need two commutators from the algebra

$$[𝒬,𝒟]_{}=\frac{i}{2}𝒬,[𝒬,𝒦_\mu ]_{}=\gamma _\mu 𝒮.$$
(29)
In view of Eq. (28) the first one is non-anomalous and results into a number of relations between the elements of the quark-gluon mixing matrix , with the most trivial example involving only the diagonal elements

$${}_{}{}^{qq}\gamma _{j}^{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{6}{j}{}_{}{}^{gq}\gamma _{j}^{\mathrm{D}}=\frac{j}{6}{}_{}{}^{qg}\gamma _{j}^{\mathrm{D}}+{}_{}{}^{gg}\gamma _{j}^{\mathrm{D}}.$$
(30)
The second commutator in Eq. (29) possesses the superconformal anomaly (28) and, as a result, relations of the type (30), but with $`\gamma `$ being replaced by $`\gamma ^c`$, are affected in a controllable manner by a computable addendum $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ which arises from renormalization of the operator product

$$𝒪_{jl}id^dz\delta ^S(z)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_{jk}𝒪_{k,l1}.$$
(31)
The knowledge of a complete set of such relations allows to compute all entries of the quark-gluon mixing matrix from the knowledge of only one element, e.g., $`{}_{}{}^{qq}\gamma _{}^{\mathrm{D}}+{}_{}{}^{qq}\gamma _{}^{\mathrm{ND}}`$. This procedure has successfully been applied in the reconstruction of two-loop off-forward evolution kernels .

## 6 Integrability of three-particle problem

As we explained in the introduction, multi-particle correlations arise as power suppressed effects in hard cross sections and exhibit a genuine quantum mechanical interference of hadron wave functions with different number of constituents. The first non-trivial and the most interesting example is three-particle functions which emerge in hard forward  and off-forward  Compton scattering in the form of quark-gluon-quark $`\overline{q}gq`$ and three-gluon $`ggg`$ correlations. Another prominent example is baryon distribution amplitudes . For the sake of definiteness, let us discuss quark-gluon-quark correlators. As all other twist-three sectors, they are distinguished from all even higher-particle sectors by the fact that their basis can be reduced to the one consisting only of quasi-partonic operators . This implies that the three-particle kernel of the leading order evolution equation in QCD coupling constant,

$$\frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}\mu ^2}F(\{x\};\mu ^2)=\frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }\underset{i}{\overset{3}{}}dx_i\delta \left(\underset{j}{\overset{3}{}}x_j\eta \right)K(\{x\};\{x^{}\})F(\{x^{}\};\mu ^2),$$
(32)
with $`\{x\}=x_1,x_2,x_3`$, is merely given by the sum of pair-wise interactions of twist-two kernels discussed in the previous sections, $`K=K_{\overline{q}g}+K_{qg}+K_{\overline{q}q}`$. As a result of the conformal covariance, established there, the pair-wise kernels in the basis of local conformal operators, to be called $`_{ab}`$ later, depend only on two-particle Casimir operators, $`𝑱{}_{ab}{}^{2}J_{ab}(J_{ab}1)`$, of the conformal group,

$$=_{\overline{q}g}\left(J_{\overline{q}g}\right)+_{qg}\left(J_{qg}\right)+_{\overline{q}q}\left(J_{\overline{q}q}\right).$$
(33)
The color structure of pair-wise interaction allows to simplify further the diagonalization problem by noticing that $`_{\overline{q}q}`$ vanishes as $`1/N_c^2`$ relative to $`_{(\overline{q},q)g}`$ in multicolor limit, i.e., $`N_c\mathrm{}`$. Therefore, the three-particle problem on a ring is reduced to the one on a line with the interaction of end sites being neglected, see Fig. 4. Our cherished goal is to solve a Schrödinger equation

$$^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Psi }\left(_{\overline{q}g}^{\mathrm{}}+_{qg}^{\mathrm{}}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=N_c^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Psi }.$$
(34)
The explicit form of the pair-wise Hamiltonians depends on the $`t`$-channel quantum numbers. For instance, for the operators of the Dirac-color structure $`\overline{q}\sigma _{\rho \{\mu }t^cG_{\nu \}\rho }^cq`$ they are

$$\frac{1}{N_c}_{ab}^{\mathrm{}}(J_{ab})=\psi \left(J_{ab}+3/2\right)+\psi \left(J_{ab}3/2\right)2\psi (1),$$
(35)
where $`\psi (x)=d\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Gamma }(x)/dx`$ and the indices run over $`a=(\overline{q},q)`$ and $`b=g`$. The large-$`N_c`$ Hamiltonian $`^{\mathrm{}}`$ describes a three-site inhomogeneous integrable open spin chain model. Integrability means that it possesses a complete set of integrals of motion matching the number of degrees of freedom. The problem admits a representation in terms of the $``$-matrix acting on a tensor product of vector spaces $`V_aV_b`$ and satisfying Yang-Baxter relation ,

$$_{ab}(\lambda )\text{},\text{}$$
(36)
One of the solutions to the Yang-Baxter equation is given by $`_{ab}(\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }(J_{ab}+\lambda )/\mathrm{\Gamma }(J_{ab}\lambda )`$. The construction by Sklyanin  allows to find the Hamiltonian corresponding to this $``$-matrix via the following graphic equation

$$^{\mathrm{}}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{d\lambda }|_{\lambda =0}\mathrm{ln}\left\{\text{}\right\}.$$
(37)
The spectral parameter $`\lambda `$ in the $`q`$ and $`\overline{q}`$ sites is shifted as $`\lambda \pm 3/2`$. The picture is self explanatory: the three $``$-matrices with dimensions of spaces as displayed are aligned next to each other, then reflected with the unity matrix and traced in the auxiliary space with their inverse. The resulting object is called the transfer matrix. Its logarithmic derivative determines the $`qgq`$ Hamiltonian up to an additive constant.

The Yang-Baxter equation holds for an arbitrary dimension of the vector spaces. When the auxiliary space is two-dimensional, one finds another solution to (36), $`_{a,1/2}(\lambda )=\lambda 1+\sigma ^iJ_a^i`$. Calculating the transfer matrix for the two-dimensional auxiliary space, one identifies two operators

$$𝑱{}_{}{}^{2}=𝑱{}_{\overline{q}g}{}^{2}+𝑱{}_{qg}{}^{2}+𝑱{}_{\overline{q}q}{}^{2},𝓠=[𝑱{}_{qg}{}^{2},𝑱{}_{\overline{q}g}{}^{2}]_+2(3/2)^2(𝑱{}_{qg}{}^{2}+𝑱{}_{\overline{q}g}{}^{2}),$$
(38)
which commute with the Hamiltonian (37) by construction since all of them are deduced from bundles satisfying the Yang-Baxter equation.

Thus instead of diagonalizing the Hamiltonian one can attempt to solve a much simple eigenvalue problem for the fourth-order differential operator $`𝓠`$. Because of commutativity, the Hamiltonian shares the same eigenfunctions $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Thus the eigenvalues $`^{\mathrm{}}`$ of $`^{\mathrm{}}`$ are functions of quantized values $`J`$ and $`Q`$ of the integrals of motion $`𝑱^2`$ and $`𝓠`$. The problem was solved using WKB, i.e., large-$`J`$, approximation with the result for energy levels

$`_0^{\mathrm{}}(J)`$ $`=`$ $`\psi (J+3)+\psi (J+4)2\psi (1)1/2,`$ (39)
$`^{\mathrm{}}(J,Q)`$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{ln}J+2\mathrm{}\mathrm{e}\psi \left(3/2+i\sqrt{(2Q/J^23)/4}\right)4\psi (1)3/2,`$
where the special value $`_0^{\mathrm{}}`$ is separated from the rest of the spectrum by a gap and was known for some time . Full account of this and other exactly solvable cases can be found in the literature .

We would like to thank the organizers of the workshop for such an interesting meeting and INT (Seattle) for support. This work was supported by the US Department of Energy under contract DE-FG02-93ER40762.