text:
# Dynamical density correlation function of 1D Mott insulators in a magnetic field

## I Introduction

Quasi 1D Mott insulators Mott  display unusual phenomena like spin-charge separation and dynamical generation of a spectral gap and have therefore attracted much attention in recent years. At present the best realizations of 1D Mott insulators are found in anisotropic antiferromagnets like $`\mathrm{SrCuO}_2`$ or $`\mathrm{Sr}_2\mathrm{CuO}_3`$. The dynamics of the latter compound has been studied both by angular-resolved photoemission arpes  and by electron energy-loss spectroscopy (EELS) eels . EELS measures the dynamical density-density correlation function. Theoretical descriptions of 1D itinerant antiferromagnets are based on the half-filled Hubbard model with a large on-site repulsion $`U`$ (compared to the hopping matrix element $`t`$), which ensures that the single-particle Mott gap is large. In the case of $`\mathrm{Sr}_2\mathrm{CuO}_3`$ it is believed that $`U8t`$ and that density-density interactions between neighboring sites need to be taken into account arpes ; eels . Given that $`U`$ is “much” larger than $`t`$, strong-coupling expansions around $`U=\mathrm{}`$ are an appropriate starting point. They have been used to determine dynamical correlation functions Marburger ; sp  and to successfully model the EELS data for $`\mathrm{SrCuO}_2`$ eels .

There exist other materials believed to be quasi-1D Mott insulators (e.g. the Bechgaard salts bech ), in which the Mott gap is small compared to $`t`$. The “weak-coupling” regime $`U2t`$ in which the Mott gap becomes small is manifestly beyond the range of applicability of strong-coupling expansions. The very existence of a gap precludes the application of conformal field theory FK ; EF . However, this regime is accessible by an approach based on exact field theory methods FF ; lukyanov . In Refs JGE, ; cet, ; EGJ, ; ET,  this method has been used to determine the optical conductivity and the single-particle Green’s function for 1D Mott insulators in the weak-coupling regime. Here we employ this approach to calculate the dynamical density-density correlation function. Motivated by suggestions that a magnetic field may generate X-ray edge like threshold singularities kawakami  in the density-density response, we take into consideration the effects of a magnetic field. The outline of this paper is as follows: in section II we present the field theory description for the low energy degrees of freedom. In section III we determine the dynamical density-density correlation function $`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,q)`$. In section IV we consider an extended Hubbard model with sufficiently strong nearest and next-nearest neighbor density-density interactions. Here excitons are formed and we determine their contributions to $`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,q)`$. We summarize our results in section V.

## II Field Theory description

The extended Hubbard model in a magnetic field is described by the Hamiltonian

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`t{\displaystyle \underset{l;\sigma }{}}(c_{l,\sigma }^{}c_{l+1,\sigma }+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.)+U{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}n_{l,}n_{l,}`$ (1)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}}V_j{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}n_ln_{l+j}{\displaystyle \frac{h}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}\left(n_{l,}n_{l,}\right),`$
where $`c_{l,\sigma }`$ are fermionic annihilation operators of spin $``$ ($`\sigma =1`$) and $``$ ($`\sigma =1`$), $`n_{l,\sigma }=c_{l,\sigma }^{}c_{l,\sigma }`$ and $`n_l=n_{l,}+n_{l,}`$. For $`h=0`$ the ground state has spin projection $`S^z=0`$ whereas for very large fields $`h>h_c`$ it is fully polarized. We constrain our analysis to the case where the ground state is partially magnetized, which corresponds to fields $`0h<h_c`$. A description of the low-energy degrees of freedom of (1) for weak interactions $`0<2V_2<2V_1<Ut`$ is then obtained by standard techniques GNT . In the presence of the field $`h`$ there are four Fermi points $`\pm k_{F,\sigma }`$ with $`k_{F,}+k_{F,}=\pi /a_0`$, where $`a_0`$ is the lattice spacing. Taking into account only modes in the vicinity of $`k_{F,\sigma }`$ we expand

$$c_{l,\sigma }\sqrt{a_0}\left[e^{ik_{F,\sigma }x}R_\sigma (x)+e^{ik_{F,\sigma }x}L_\sigma (x)\right],$$
(2)
where $`x=la_0`$. The resulting fermionic field theory can be bosonized with the result

$`_s`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16\pi }}\left[v_s(_x\mathrm{\Phi }_s)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_s}}(_t\mathrm{\Phi }_s)^2\right],`$ (3)
$`_c`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16\pi }}\left[v_c(_x\mathrm{\Phi }_c)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_c}}(_t\mathrm{\Phi }_c)^2\right]\lambda \mathrm{cos}(\beta _c\mathrm{\Phi }_c).`$ (4)
The spin sector is a free bosonic theory whereas the charge sector is described by the integrable Sine-Gordon model (SGM) SGM . Fermionic operators are expressed in terms of the canonical charge and spin bose fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{c,s}`$ and their respective dual fields

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{c,s}(t,x)=\frac{1}{v_{c,s}}_{\mathrm{}}^x𝑑y_t\mathrm{\Phi }_{c,s}(t,y)$$
(5)
by

$`L_\sigma `$ $`=`$ $`\eta _\sigma e^{\frac{i}{4}\left(\beta _c\mathrm{\Phi }_c\frac{1}{\beta _c}\mathrm{\Theta }_c\right)}e^{\frac{i}{4}\sigma (\beta _s\mathrm{\Phi }_s\frac{1}{\beta _s}\mathrm{\Theta }_s)},`$
$`R_\sigma `$ $`=`$ $`\eta _\sigma e^{\frac{i}{4}\left(\beta _c\mathrm{\Phi }_c+\frac{1}{\beta _c}\mathrm{\Theta }_c\right)}e^{\frac{i}{4}\sigma (\beta _s\mathrm{\Phi }_s+\frac{1}{\beta _s}\mathrm{\Theta }_s)}.`$ (6)
Here $`\eta _\sigma =\eta _\sigma ^{}`$ are Klein factors that fulfill $`\{\eta _\sigma ,\eta _\tau \}=2\delta _{\sigma ,\tau }`$. The spin and charge velocities $`v_{c,s}`$ and the parameters $`\beta _{c,s}`$ depend on $`t`$, $`h`$, $`U`$ and $`V`$.

### II.1 Hubbard model ($`V_{1,2}=0`$)

For the Hubbard model $`\beta _{c,s}`$ and $`v_{c,s}`$ can be calculated exactly from the Bethe Ansatz solution. The “$`\eta `$-pairing” SU(2) symmetry of the half-filled Hubbard model so4  fixes $`\beta _c=1`$, whereas $`\beta _s(h,U)`$ is obtained from the solution of a linear integral equation woynarFSC ; FK

$`\beta _s`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2}Z(\mathrm{\Lambda }),`$
$`Z(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`1+{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mathrm{\Lambda }}𝑑\mu a_2(\lambda \mu )Z(\mu ),`$ (7)
where $`2\pi a_2(x)=U[x^2+U^2/4]^1`$. The integration boundary $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is determined by the condition $`ϵ(\mathrm{\Lambda })=0`$, where

$`ϵ(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`h4\mathrm{R}\mathrm{e}\sqrt{1(\lambda iU/4)^2}+U`$ (8)
$`+{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mathrm{\Lambda }}𝑑\mu a_2(\lambda \mu )ϵ(\mu ).`$
In the limit $`U/h0`$ $`\beta _s`$ can be calculated analytically by means of a Wiener-Hopf analysis

$$\beta _s1+\frac{U}{16\pi t\mathrm{cos}(\pi )},$$
(9)
where $``$ is the magnetization that is calculated from the solution to an integral equation similar to (8) (see Ref. FK, ). We note that $`\beta _s`$ varies between $`1`$ for $`h=0`$ and $`\sqrt{2}`$ for $`hh_c`$. The behavior of $`\beta _s`$ as a function of $`h`$ for different values of $`U`$ is shown in Fig.1. We see that for small values of $`U`$ $`\beta _s`$ remains very close to $`1`$ up to large fields very close to $`h_c`$.

The spin and charge velocities can be calculated in a similar way. Field theory is exact in the scaling limit, which has been constructed in the absence of a magnetic field in Ref.ezer,  using exact results for the half-filled Hubbard model smat . The $`h>0`$ case can be mapped onto the attractive Hubbard model below half-filling by means of the particle-hole transformation for spin down $`c_{j,1}(1)^jc_{j,1}^{}`$. The scaling limit for the latter model has been found by Woynarovich and Forgacs wf  and is obtained by taking $`t\mathrm{}`$, $`U0`$ while keeping

$`\sqrt{Ut\mathrm{cos}^3(\pi )}e^{\pi t\mathrm{cos}(\pi )/2U}=\mathrm{fixed}.`$ (10)
In this limit $`\beta _s=1`$ and the low-energy effective field theory is $`SU(2)\times SU(2)`$ symmetric. However, on the level of the large-distance asymptotics of correlation functions of the underlying Hubbard model this enhanced symmetry is broken down to $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ by the oscillating factors in (2). For example, the leading asymptotical behavior of the spin-spin correlation functions is

$`S^x(x)S^x(0)`$ $`=`$ $`S^y(x)S^y(0)={\displaystyle \frac{B(1)^{x/a_0}}{x}}+\mathrm{},`$
$`S^z(x)S^z(0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{A\mathrm{cos}2k_{F,\sigma }x}{x}}+\mathrm{},`$ (11)
and the spin-$`SU(2)`$ symmetry is broken. Previous experience JGE ; EGJ  suggests that field theory gives a good description of the lattice model in an extended vicinity of the scaling limit, provided the gap is small compared to $`t`$. This is the case as long as $`U2t`$. We will apply field theory in the regime defined by this criterion and therefore allow $`\beta _s`$ to be different from $`1`$.

### II.2 Extended Hubbard model

For $`V_{1,2}0`$ no exact results for the lattice model (1) are available. However, the low-energy degrees of freedom of (1) in the regime $`0<V_2<V_1<\frac{U}{2}t`$ are still described by (3)-(4), but now with $`\beta _c<1`$ vic . Recently it was shown in Ref.EGJ,  that for sufficiently large values of $`U,V_1,V_2`$ it is possible to reach the attractive regime of the SGM $`\beta _c<1/\sqrt{2}`$, in which excitonic holon-antiholon bound states form. We will first consider the range $`1/\sqrt{2}<\beta _c1`$, where no excitons exist and field theory results for the optical conductivity cet  have been found to be in good agreement with dynamical density matrix renormalization group computations for the lattice model (1) eric . In section IV we extend the analysis to the regime $`\beta _c<1/\sqrt{2}`$.

### II.3 Density Operator

The density operator is expressed in terms of the spin and charge bosonic fields as GNT

$`n(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`n_0(x,t)+{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}n_{2k_{F,\sigma }}(x,t),`$
$`n_0(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`A_x\mathrm{\Phi }_c,`$
$`n_{2k_{F,\sigma }}(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`A^{}e^{2ik_{F,\sigma }x}\mathrm{sin}({\displaystyle \frac{\beta _c}{2}}\mathrm{\Phi }_c)e^{\frac{i\sigma \beta _s}{2}\mathrm{\Phi }_s}.`$ (12)
Here $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$ are numerical constants. For a less than half-filled band there is an additional contribution GNT

$$n_U(x,t)=A_U\mathrm{cos}\left(2[k_{F,}+k_{F,}]x+\beta _c\mathrm{\Phi }_c\right),$$
(13)
which is obtained by integrating out the high-energy degrees of freedom in the path integral representation for the density-density correlation function of the lattice model. The operator (13) corresponds to scattering processes involving two particles and two holes with momentum transfer $`2(k_{F,}+k_{F,})=2\pi /a_0`$. As a result $`A_U`$ is proportional to $`U/t`$ and thus is small. At half-filling we have $`A_U=0`$. This can be established by considering the following discrete symmetry of the lattice model

$$c_{j,\sigma }(1)^jc_{j,\sigma }^{}.$$
(14)
The lattice density operator transforms as $`n_j2n_j`$. In the field theory this symmetry corresponds to inverting the signs of the charge boson and its dual field $`\mathrm{\Phi }_c\mathrm{\Phi }_c`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }_c\mathrm{\Theta }_c`$. The (normal ordered) density operator $`n(x,t)`$ must transform to $`n(x,t)`$ under this change of sign and this implies that $`A_U=0`$.

## III Density Correlations for $`\frac{1}{2}<\beta _c^21`$

The density-density correlation function is given by

$`G_{nn}(x,t)=G_{nn}^0+{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}G_{nn}^{2k_{F,\sigma }},`$ (15)
where

$`G_{nn}^0`$ $`=`$ $`0|n_0(x,t)n_0(0,0)|0,`$
$`G_{nn}^{2k_{F,\sigma }}`$ $`=`$ $`0|n_{2k_{F,\sigma }}(x,t)n_{2k_{F,\sigma }}(0,0)|0.`$ (16)
We note that there are no “mixed terms” as can be shown by exploiting the transformation properties under charge conjugation. Due to spin-charge separation the correlation functions in (16) factorize into spin and charge pieces. In the spin sector (3) we are dealing with a simple Gaussian model and elementary considerations give

$`{}_{s}{}^{}0|e^{i\frac{\beta _s}{2}\mathrm{\Phi }_s(x,t)}e^{i\frac{\beta _s}{2}\mathrm{\Phi }_s(0)}|0_{s}^{}=[x^2(v_st+iϵ)^2]^d,`$
(17)
where $`|0_s`$ denotes the vacuum in the spin sector and

$$d=\beta _s^2/2.$$
(18)
In the Hubbard model the exponent $`d`$ varies between $`\frac{1}{2}`$ for zero field and $`1`$ for $`hh_c`$. In order to determine the charge part of the correlators (16) we make use of the integrability of the SGM (4) describing the charge sector. In the range of $`\beta _c`$ considered here the spectrum of the SGM consists of scattering states of solitons and antisolitons, which are particles of mass $`M`$, charge $`Q=\pm e`$ and relativistic dispersion $`e(p)=\sqrt{p^2+M^2}`$. In the Hubbard model they correspond to holons and antiholons respectively. It is convenient to parametrize energy and momentum in terms of the rapidity variable $`\theta `$

$$p=\frac{M}{v_c}\mathrm{sinh}\theta ,e=M\mathrm{cosh}\theta .$$
(19)
We introduce an index $`\epsilon =\pm `$ for solitons and antisolitons. Then a scattering state of $`n`$ solitons/antisolitons with rapidities $`\{\theta _k\}`$ and internal indices $`\{\epsilon _k\}`$ is denoted by $`|\theta _n\mathrm{}\theta _1_{\epsilon _n,\mathrm{},\epsilon _1}`$. In the spectral representation of this basis of (anti)soliton scattering states we may express the two-point function of an operator $`𝒪`$ in the charge sector as

$`{}_{c}{}^{}0|𝒪(x,t)𝒪^{}(0)|0_{c}^{}={\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\epsilon _i}{}}{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _n}{(2\pi )^nn!}}`$
$`\times \mathrm{exp}[i{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}e_jtp_jx]|_c0|𝒪(0)|\theta _n\mathrm{}\theta _1_{\epsilon _n\mathrm{}\epsilon _1}|^2.`$ (20)
Here $`p_j`$ and $`e_j`$ are given by (19), and the form factors $`{}_{c}{}^{}0|𝒪(0)|\theta _n\mathrm{}\theta _1_{\epsilon _n\mathrm{}\epsilon _1}^{}|`$ can be calculated by exploiting the integrability of the SGM FF ; lukyanov . As a consequence of the transformation properties under charge conjugation of the operators appearing in (15), only intermediate states with an even number of particles will contribute to (III). In order to obtain an accurate result for the large-distance asymptotics it is sufficient to take into account intermediate states with only a small number of particles in the spectral sum (III) oldff1 . For the case at hand we have FF ; lukyanov

$`|_c0|_x\varphi _c|\theta _1,\theta _2_\pm |^2`$ $`=`$ $`|f(2\theta _{})\mathrm{sinh}\theta _+|^2,`$ (21)
$`|_c0|\mathrm{sin}({\displaystyle \frac{\beta _c\mathrm{\Phi }_c}{2}})|\theta _1,\theta _2_\pm |^2`$ $`=`$ $`Z_1|f(2\theta _{})|^2,`$ (22)
where $`\theta _\pm =(\theta _1\pm \theta _2)/2`$, $`Z_1`$ is a known constant lukyanov  and

$`f(\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F(\theta )}{\mathrm{cosh}\left(\frac{\theta +i\pi }{2\xi }\right)}},`$
$`F(\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}\mathrm{exp}[{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dk}{k}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2(\frac{k}{2}[\frac{\theta }{\pi }+i])\mathrm{sinh}(\frac{1\xi }{2}k)}{\mathrm{sinh}\left(\frac{\xi k}{2}\right)\mathrm{cosh}\left(\frac{k}{2}\right)\mathrm{sinh}k}}],`$
$`\xi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _c^2}{1\beta _c^2}}.`$ (23)
EELS measures the imaginary part of the retarded dynamical density-density correlation function

$`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,k)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Im}\{i{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}dx{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}dte^{i\omega tikx}[G_{nn}(x,t)`$ (24)
$`G_{nn}(x,t)]\}`$
We evaluate $`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,k)`$ in the vicinity of the low-energy modes at $`k=0,2k_{F,\sigma }`$ by Fourier transforming the large-distance asymptotics of the density-density correlation function. The latter is obtained by carrying out the form factor expansion (III) in the charge sector and multiplying it by the spin-piece (17) in the case of the $`2k_{F,\sigma }`$ response.

### III.1 Small $`k`$ behavior

In the vicinity of $`k=0`$ the dynamical density response is dominated by the contribution from $`G_{nn}^0(x,t)`$. This contribution does not involve the spin sector and straightforward calculations give

$`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,q)`$ $`=`$ $`A^28M^2{\displaystyle \frac{(v_cq)^2|f_0(\theta _0)|^2}{s^3\sqrt{s^24M^2}}}\mathrm{\Theta }(s^24M^2),`$
with $`s^2(\omega ,q)=\omega ^2(v_cq)^2`$ and $`\theta _0=2`$arcosh$`(s/2M)`$. Above the threshold at $`\omega =\sqrt{v_c^2q^2+4M^2}`$, $`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,q)`$ increases from zero in a universal square root fashion. This is due to the momentum dependence of the form factors.

From the Heisenberg equations of motions for the lattice density operator one can derive a relation between $`\chi _{nn}`$ and the optical conductivity $`\sigma (\omega )`$

$$\mathrm{Re}\sigma (\omega )=\underset{q0}{lim}\frac{\omega }{q^2}\chi _{nn}(\omega ,q).$$
(26)
The optical conductivity has been calculated in cet  and agrees with (26) and (LABEL:q0). We note that a contribution of the type (13) to the density operator would violate the relation (26), which is an independent argument showing that $`A_U=0`$ conteq .

### III.2 Behavior around $`k=2k_{F,\sigma }`$

In the vicinity of $`k=2k_{F,\sigma }`$ the dynamical density response is dominated by the contribution from $`G_{nn}^{2k_{F,\sigma }}(x,t)`$ and involves both the spin and the charge sector. The threshold can be determined by considering the lowest intermediate state that couples to the density operator at $`k=2k_{F,\sigma }`$, which is a scattering state of one soliton, one antisoliton and one spinon. The total momentum and energy of this state are

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`p+q_1+q_2,`$
$`E`$ $`=`$ $`v_s|p|+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\sqrt{M^2+v_c^2q_j^2}.`$ (27)
The threshold is obtained by minimizing the energy at fixed total momentum with respect to $`p,q_1,q_2`$

$`E_{\mathrm{thres}}`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{q_1,q_2}{\mathrm{min}}\left[v_s|Pq_1q_2|+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\sqrt{M^2+v_c^2q_j^2}\right]`$ (28)
$`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}\sqrt{4M^2+v_c^2P^2}\hfill & \text{if}|P|Q\hfill \\ v_s|P|+2M\sqrt{1\alpha ^2}\hfill & \text{if}|P|Q\hfill \end{array},`$
where

$$\alpha =\frac{v_s}{v_c},Q=\frac{2Mv_s}{v_c\sqrt{v_c^2v_s^2}}.$$
(29)
The behavior is quite similar to what is found for the spectral function ET .

#### III.2.1 Equal velocities $`v_s=v_c=v`$

For $`v_s=v_c=v`$ one can obtain the following representation

$`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,2k_{F,\sigma }+q){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2(1d)Z_1A_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{\pi (2v)^{2d1}}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\theta {\displaystyle \frac{|f_1(2\theta )|^2}{c(\theta )^{22d}}}`$
$`\times \mathrm{Im}F(1d,1d,1,{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2v^2q^2}{c^2(\theta )}}),`$ (30)
where $`c(\theta )=2M\mathrm{cosh}(\theta )`$. The imaginary part of the hypergeometric function vanishes unless $`c(\theta )<\sqrt{\omega ^2v^2q^2}`$. This implies that the response function is nonzero only if $`\omega ^2>v^2q^2+4M^2`$, in agreement with (28). Just above the threshold ($`0<s/2M1`$) we may use the transformation formulas for hypergeometric functions to obtain ($`s^2=\omega ^2v^2q^2`$)

$`\mathrm{Im}F(1d,1d,1,{\displaystyle \frac{s^2}{c^2(\theta )}})={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12d)\mathrm{sin}(\pi 2d)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2(1d)}}`$
$`\times F(d,d,2d,1{\displaystyle \frac{s^2}{c^2(\theta )}})\left({\displaystyle \frac{s^2}{c^2(\theta )}}1\right)^{2d1}`$
$`\times \mathrm{\Theta }(s^2c^2(\theta )),`$ (31)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }(x)`$ is the Heaviside function. The remaining $`\theta `$-integral in (30) is therefore over a very small interval $`[\mathrm{arccosh}(s/2M),\mathrm{arccosh}(s/2M)]`$ and can be taken by Taylor-expanding the integrand. The leading contribution to the behavior just above the threshold is

$`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,2k_{F,\sigma }+q)`$ $``$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{s2M}{M}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}+2d},`$ (32)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{s2M}{M}}0.`$
Here we have used that $`\beta _c^2>1/2`$, in which case we have

$$f_1(2\theta )\theta ,\mathrm{for}\theta 0.$$
(33)
At the Luther-Emery point $`\beta _c^2=\frac{1}{2}`$ LuE  there is a different power law increase in (32) (the exponent is $`2d\frac{1}{2}`$). As $`\beta _c^2\frac{1}{2}`$ from above the region is which (32) holds shrinks to zero. The important result here is that $`\chi _{nn}`$ vanishes as the threshold is approached from above. There are no threshold singularities! The behavior for large frequencies $`\omega \sqrt{v^2q^2+4M^2}`$ (but necessarily $`\omega t`$ for field theory to apply) is

$$\chi _{nn}(\omega ,2k_{F,\sigma }+q)s^{2d2+\beta _c^2},sM.$$
(34)
#### III.2.2 Different velocities $`v_sv_c`$

In the case of different spin and charge velocities $`\frac{v_s}{v_c}\alpha <1`$ one may represent $`\chi _{nn}`$ as

$`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,2k_{F,\sigma }+q){\displaystyle \frac{Z_1A_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2(d)(2v_s)^{2d1}}}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}d\theta _+d\theta _{}|f_1(2\theta _{})|^2\left(\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }^{}\right)^{d1}\mathrm{\Theta }(\mathrm{\Omega })\mathrm{\Theta }(\mathrm{\Omega }^{}),`$
(35)
where

$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ $`=`$ $`\omega v_sq2M\mathrm{cosh}(\theta _{})\left[\mathrm{cosh}(\theta _+)\alpha \mathrm{sinh}(\theta _+)\right],`$
$`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\omega +v_sq2M\mathrm{cosh}(\theta _{})\left[\mathrm{cosh}(\theta _+)+\alpha \mathrm{sinh}(\theta _+)\right].`$
One easily checks that (35) leads to a threshold described by (28). The remaining integrals in (35) are evaluated numerically.

A remarkable feature of the half-filled Mott insulator is the presence of two dispersing features in the spectral function, that are associated with $`v_s`$ and $`v_c`$ respectively arpes ; ET . A natural question is whether an analogous feature exists in the density-density response. We have analyzed (35) for several sets of parameters $`\beta _c`$, $`\beta _s`$, $`\alpha `$ and found that in all cases $`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,2k_{F,\sigma }+q)`$ is rather featureless. There are no singularities or peaks that can be associated with $`v_c`$ and $`v_s`$ separately. We also do not find any threshold singularities as the magnetic field is increased. In Fig. 2 we plot $`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,2k_{F,\sigma }+q)`$ for $`\beta _c=\beta _s=1`$ and $`\alpha =0.851`$, which corresponds to the half-filled Hubbard model in zero magnetic field at $`U=1`$ ($`v_c=2.15ta_0`$, $`v_s=1.83ta_0`$). At $`\omega 8M`$ one can just see that the threshold is below the curve $`\sqrt{4M^2+v_c^2q^2}`$.

## IV Excitons: $`\beta _c^2<\frac{1}{2}`$

In the regime $`\beta _c^2<\frac{1}{2}`$ soliton and antisoliton can form excitonic bound states which for the SGM are known as breathers. There are

$$𝒩=\left[\frac{1\beta ^2}{\beta ^2}\right]$$
(37)
different types of excitons, where $`[x]`$ denotes the integer part of $`x`$. We denote the different excitons by $`e_1,e_2,\mathrm{}`$. The exciton gaps are given by

$$M_n=2M\mathrm{sin}(n\pi \xi /2),n=1,\mathrm{},𝒩.$$
(38)
It follows from the transformation properties under $`\mathrm{\Phi }_c\mathrm{\Phi }_c`$ that only the “odd” excitons $`e_{2n+1}`$ couple to the density operator. For simplicity we take $`\beta _c>1/2`$ from now, in which case we only have to consider the first exciton $`e_1`$. In this regime of $`\beta _c`$ the leading contributions of the spectral sum to the dynamical density-density correlator are given by

$`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,k)=\chi _{nn}^{\mathrm{exc}}(\omega ,k)+\chi _{nn}^{s\overline{s}}(\omega ,k),`$ (39)
where $`\chi _{nn}^{\mathrm{exc}}(\omega ,k)`$ and $`\chi _{nn}^{s\overline{s}}(\omega ,k)`$ denote the contributions from intermediate states with one exciton and many spinons and one soliton, one antisoliton and may spinons respectively. We have already calculated $`\chi _{nn}^{s\overline{s}}(\omega ,k)`$ above. For small $`k`$ it is given by (LABEL:q0) and for $`kk_{F,\sigma }`$ by (35). The exciton contribution can be calculated by the same method FF  and we now present the results.

### IV.1 Behavior around $`k=0`$

Here the exciton is visible as a sharp $`\delta `$-function peak at an energy below the soliton-antisoliton scattering continuum

$`\chi _{nn}^{\mathrm{exc}}(\omega ,q)=A^2g_0{\displaystyle \frac{v_c^2q^2}{\omega }}\delta (\omega \sqrt{v_c^2q^2+M_1^2}),`$ (40)
where

$`g_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \lambda ^2\xi ^2}{\mathrm{sin}^2(\pi \xi )}},`$
$`\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{cos}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi \xi }{2}}\right)\sqrt{2\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi \xi }{2}}\right)}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\pi \xi }}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\mathrm{sin}t}}\right).`$
The result (40) is again related by the equations of motion (26) to the corresponding contribution to the optical conductivity EGJ . The dynamical density susceptibility, (39), for $`v_cq=0.2M`$, is plotted in Fig. 3. For $`\beta _c<1/\sqrt{2}`$ the breather contribution (40) appears and the spectral weight is gradually transferred from the soliton-antisoliton continuum to the coherent peak.

### IV.2 Behavior around $`q=2k_{F,\sigma }`$

In the vicinity of $`q=2k_{F,\sigma }`$ the exciton contributes to the dynamical density-density correlation function via an exciton-spinon scattering continuum with threshold

$`E_{\mathrm{thres}}`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{q}{\mathrm{min}}\left[v_s|Pq|+\sqrt{M_1^2+v_c^2q^2}\right]`$ (42)
$`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}\sqrt{M_1^2+v_c^2P^2}\hfill & \text{if}|P|Q^{}\hfill \\ v_s|P|+M_1\sqrt{1\alpha ^2}\hfill & \text{if}|P|Q^{}\hfill \end{array},`$
where

$$Q^{}=\frac{M_1v_s}{v_c\sqrt{v_c^2v_s^2}}.$$
(43)
The exciton contribution to the dynamical density -density correlation function is given by

$`\chi _{nn}^{\mathrm{exc}}(\omega ,2k_{F,\sigma }+q){\displaystyle \frac{2\pi Z_1A_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2(d)(2v_s)^{2d1}}}`$
$`\times \left[{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \xi }{2\mathrm{cos}(\pi \xi /2)}}\right]^2{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\theta \left(\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}\right)^{d1}\mathrm{\Theta }(\mathrm{\Sigma })\mathrm{\Theta }(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}),`$
(44)
where

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ $`=`$ $`\omega v_sqM_1\left[\mathrm{cosh}(\theta )\alpha \mathrm{sinh}(\theta )\right],`$
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\omega +v_sqM_1\left[\mathrm{cosh}(\theta )+\alpha \mathrm{sinh}(\theta )\right].`$ (45)
One readily deduces by inspection of equations (45) and (44) that for fixed $`q`$ the exciton contribution to $`\chi _{}`$ exhibits a cusp at a frequency

$$\omega _{\mathrm{cusp}}=\sqrt{M_1^2+v_c^2q^2}.$$
(46)
If we fix the momentum transfer to be $`q=Q^{}`$, this cusp turns into a singularity. In order to exhibit these interesting features we plot $`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,2k_{F,\sigma }+q)`$ for $`\xi =0.6`$, $`\alpha =0.8`$ and different values of $`q`$ in Fig.4.

## V Summary

We have studied the dynamical density-density response of half-filled 1D Mott insulators for the case where the Mott gap is small compared to the hopping matrix element $`t`$. We have allowed for the presence of a magnetic field that partially magnetizes the ground state. Unlike the spectral function, the density-density response function does not exhibit prominent, dispersing features associated with the spin and charge degrees of freedom respectively. Due to the momentum dependence of the matrix elements in the gapped charge sector, $`\chi _{nn}(\omega ,k)`$ tends to zero as the threshold is approached from above: irrespective of the magnitude of the applied magnetic field there are no threshold singularities.

In the parameter region of the extended Hubbard model where excitons are formed, the dynamical density-density response exhibits a cusp at some specific value of energy transfer for momentum transfers $`k`$ close to $`2k_{F,\sigma }`$. This cusp turns into a singularity for one particular value of $`k`$. These features should be experimentally observable in small-gap quasi-1D Mott insulators.

###### Acknowledgements.

FHLE ackowledges support by the DOE (DE-AC02-98 CH 10886) and the EPSRC (grants AF/100201 and GR/N19359). We thank M. Fabrizio, F. Gebhard and A.A. Nersesyan for discussions.


format: text

text:
# References

A Kerr Metric Solution in Tetrad Theory of Gravitation

Gamal G.L. Nashed

Mathematics Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

e-mail:nashed@asunet.shams.eun.eg

Using an axial parallel vector field we obtain two exact solutions of a vacuum gravitational field equations. One of the exact solutions gives the Schwarzschild metric while the other gives the Kerr metric. The parallel vector field of the Kerr solution have an axial symmetry. The exact solution of the Kerr metric contains two constants of integration, one being the gravitational mass of the source and the other constant $`h`$ is related to the angular momentum of the rotating source, when the spin density $`S_{ij}^{}{}_{}{}^{\mu }`$ of the gravitational source satisfies
$`_\mu S_{ij}^{}{}_{}{}^{\mu }=0`$. The singularity of the Kerr solution is studied.

1. Introduction

The Riemann Cartan space-time is characterized by the non vanishing of the curvature tensor and the torsion tensor . When we use the teleparallel condition the space-time reduces to the Weitzenb$`\ddot{o}`$ck space-time which is characterized by the torsion tensor only . There are many theories constructed using the Weitzenb$`\ddot{o}`$ck space-time . Among these theories is the theory given by Hayashi and Shirafuji which is called new general relativity and invariant under global Lorentz transformations but not under local Lorentz transformations .

This theory contains three dimensionless parameters $`a_1`$, $`a_2`$ and $`a_3`$. Two of these parameters were determined by comparison with solar-system experiments, while an upper bound was estimated for the $`a_3.`$ It was found that the numerical value of $`(a_1+a_2)`$ should be very small, consistent with being zero. Throughout this paper we will assume this condition.

S$`\stackrel{´}{e}`$az  obtained a set of tetrads satisfying Møller field equations and leading to the Kerr metric by using a particular procedure but without giving an explicit form of this tetrads. Fukui and Hayashi  has pointed out that axially symmetric and stationary solution can be obtained in the new general relativity but also without giving an explicit form. Toma  gives an exact solution to the vacuum field equation of the new general relativity.

It is our aim to obtain an exact axially symmetric solution of the gravitational field equation of the new general relativity using another procedure different from that used by Toma. In section 2 we briefly review the new general relativity. In section 3 we apply the parallel vector field which is axially symmetric to the field equation of the new general relativity. Two particular exact solutions of the resulting differential equations are obtained. One of these solutions contains one constant of integration and gives the Schwarzschild metric. The other contains two constants of integration and gives the Kerr metric. The physical meaning of these two constants is discussed in section 4. The singularity of the Kerr solution is discussed in section 5. The final section is devoted to the main results.

2. The teleparallel theory of gravitation

The fundamental fields of gravitation are the parallel vector fields $`b_{k}^{}{}_{}{}^{\mu }`$. The component of the metric tensor $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ are related to the dual components $`b_{}^{k}{}_{\mu }{}^{}`$ of the parallel vector fields by the relation

$$g_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{ij}b_{}^{i}{}_{\mu }{}^{}b_{}^{j}{}_{\nu }{}^{},$$
(1)
where $`\eta _{ij}=diag.(,+,+,+)`$. The nonsymmetric connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{\lambda }{}_{\mu \nu }{}^{}`$***Latin indices $`(i,j,k,\mathrm{})`$ designate the vector number, which runs from $`(0)`$ to $`(3)`$, while Greek indices $`(\mu ,\nu ,\rho ,\mathrm{})`$ designate the world-vector components running from 0 to 3. The spatial part of Latin indices is denoted by $`(a,b,c,\mathrm{})`$, while that of Greek indices by $`(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,\mathrm{})`$. are defined by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{\lambda }{}_{\mu \nu }{}^{}=b_{k}^{}{}_{}{}^{\lambda }b_{}^{k}{}_{\mu ,\nu }{}^{},$$
(2)
as a result of the absolute parallelism .

The gravitational Lagrangian $`L`$ of this theory is an invariant constructed from the quadratic terms of the torsion tensor

$$T_{}^{\lambda }{}_{\mu \nu }{}^{}\stackrel{\mathrm{def}.}{=}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{\lambda }{}_{\mu \nu }{}^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{\lambda }{}_{\nu \mu }{}^{}.$$
(3)
The following Lagrangian

$$\stackrel{\mathrm{def}.}{=}\frac{1}{3\kappa }\left(t^{\mu \nu \lambda }t_{\mu \nu \lambda }v^\mu v_\mu \right)+\zeta a^\mu a_\mu ,$$
(4)
is quite favorable experimentally . Here $`\zeta `$ is a constant parameter, $`\kappa `$ is the Einstein gravitational constant and $`t_{\mu \nu \lambda },v_\mu `$ and $`a_\mu `$ are the irreducible components of the torsion tensor:

$`t_{\lambda \mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(T_{\lambda \mu \nu }+T_{\mu \lambda \nu }\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\left(g_{\nu \lambda }V_\mu +g_{\mu \nu }V_\lambda \right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}g_{\lambda \mu }V_\nu ,`$
$`V_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`T_{}^{\lambda }{}_{\lambda \nu }{}^{},`$
$`a_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}ϵ_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }T^{\nu \rho \sigma },`$ (5)
where $`ϵ_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }`$ is defined by

$$ϵ_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }\stackrel{\mathrm{def}.}{=}\sqrt{g}\delta _{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }$$
(6)
with $`\delta _{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }`$ being completely antisymmetric and normalized as $`\delta _{0123}=1`$.

By applying the variational principle to the Lagrangian (4), the gravitational field equation are given by We will denote the symmetric part by ( ), for example, $`A_{(\mu \nu )}=(1/2)(A_{\mu \nu }+A_{\nu \mu })`$ and the antisymmetric part by the square bracket \[ \], $`A_{[\mu \nu ]}=(1/2)(A_{\mu \nu }A_{\nu \mu })`$ .:

$$G_{\mu \nu }+K_{\mu \nu }=\kappa T_{(\mu \nu )},$$
(7)
$$b_{}^{i}{}_{\mu }{}^{}b_{}^{j}{}_{\nu }{}^{}_\lambda (\sqrt{g}J_{ij}^{}{}_{}{}^{\lambda })=\lambda \sqrt{g}T_{[\mu \nu ]},$$
(8)
where the Einstein tensor $`G_{\mu \nu }`$ is defined by

$$G_{\mu \nu }=R_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu }R,$$
(9)
$$R_{}^{\rho }{}_{\sigma \mu \nu }{}^{}=_\mu \{{}_{\sigma \nu }{}^{\rho }\}_\nu \{{}_{\sigma \mu }{}^{\rho }\}+\{{}_{\tau \mu }{}^{\rho }\}\{{}_{\sigma \nu }{}^{\tau }\}\{{}_{\sigma \mu }{}^{\tau }\}\{{}_{\tau \nu }{}^{\rho }\},$$
(10)
$$R_{\mu \nu }=R_{}^{\rho }{}_{\mu \rho \nu }{}^{},$$
(11)
$$R=g^{\mu \nu }R_{\mu \nu },$$
(12)
and $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ is the energy-momentum tensor of a source field of the Lagrangian $`L_m`$

$$T^{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}\frac{\delta _M}{\delta b_{}^{k}{}_{\nu }{}^{}}b^{k\mu }$$
(13)
with $`L_M=_M/\sqrt{g}`$. The tensors $`K_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`J_{ij\mu }`$ are defined as

$$K_{\mu \nu }=\frac{\kappa }{\lambda }\left(\frac{1}{2}\left[ϵ_{\mu }^{}{}_{}{}^{\rho \sigma \lambda }(T_{\nu \rho \sigma }T_{\rho \sigma \nu })+ϵ_{\nu }^{}{}_{}{}^{\rho \sigma \lambda }(T_{\mu \rho \sigma }T_{\rho \sigma \mu })\right]a_\lambda \frac{3}{2}a_\mu a_\nu \frac{3}{4}g_{\mu \nu }a^\lambda a_\lambda \right),$$
(14)
$$J_{ij\mu }=\frac{3}{2}b_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{\rho }b_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{\sigma }ϵ_{\rho \sigma \mu \nu }a^\nu ,$$
(15)
respectively. The dimensionless parameter $`\lambda `$ is defined by

$$\frac{1}{\lambda }=\frac{4}{9}\zeta +\frac{1}{3\kappa }.$$
(16)
In this paper we are going to consider the vacuum gravitational field:

$$T_{(\mu \nu )}=T_{[\mu \nu ]}=0.$$
(17)
3. Axially symmetric solution

The covariant form of a tetrad space having axial symmetry in spherical polar coordinates, can be written as

$$\left(b_{}^{i}{}_{\mu }{}^{}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{i}{A}& 0& 0& iB\\ 0& C\mathrm{cos}\varphi & 0& rF\mathrm{sin}\varphi \\ 0& 0& E& 0\\ 0& C\mathrm{sin}\varphi & 0& rF\mathrm{cos}\varphi \end{array}\right),$$
(18)
where $`A`$, $`B`$, $`C`$, $`E`$ and $`F`$ are five unknown functions of $`(r)`$ and $`(\theta )`$ and he zeroth vector $`b_{}^{i}{}_{\mu }{}^{}`$ has the factor $`i=\sqrt{1}`$ to preserve Lorentz signature. We consider an asymptotically flat space-time in this paper, and impose the boundary condition that for $`r\mathrm{}`$ the tetrad (18) approaches the tetrad of Minkowski space-time, $`(\lambda ___i{}_{\mu }{}^{})=\mathrm{diag}(i,\delta _{a}^{}{}_{}{}^{\alpha })`$.

Applying (18) to the field equations (7) and (8), we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2r^2A^2E^3F^2}}(B^2E^2A_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+2ABE^3A_rB_r+2r^2A^2E^2FE_rF_r+2rA^2E^2F^2E_r2r^2AE^2F^2A_rE_r`$
$`+2r^2A^2C^2EFF_{\theta \theta }2r^2A^2C^2FE_\theta F_\theta 2ABC^2EA_\theta B_\theta +2r^2AC^2F^2A_\theta E_\theta +4r^2C^2EF^2A_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$
$`2r^2AC^2EF^2A_{\theta \theta }2rAE^3F^2A_\theta 2r^2AC^2EFA_\theta F_\theta 2r^2AE^3FA_rF_r+A^2E^3B_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$
$`B^2C^2EA_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}A^2C^2EB_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2})=0,`$ (19)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2A^2CEF^2}}(ABCEA_\theta B_r+B^2CEA_rA_\theta +ABCEA_rB_\theta 2r^2CEF^2A_rA_\theta rA^2CEFF_\theta `$
$`r^2A^2CEFF_{r\theta }+A^2CEB_rB_\theta +r^2A^2EFC_\theta F_r+rA^2EF^2C_\theta +r^2A^2CFE_rF_\theta `$
$`r^2AEF^2A_rC_\theta r^2ACF^2A_\theta E_r+r^2ACEF^2A_{r\theta })=0,`$ (20)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2A^2C^3F^2}}(2rACE^2F^2A_r+2r^2AC^3FA_\theta F_\theta +2r^2ACE^2FA_rF_r+2r^2ACE^2F^2A_{rr}+2AC^2F^2A_\theta C_\theta `$
$`4r^2CE^2F^2A_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+2r^2A^2E^2FC_rF_r+2rA^2E^2F^2C_r2r^2A^2C^2FC_\theta F_\theta +2ABCE^2A_rB_r`$
$`2r^2A^2CE^2FF_{rr}4rA^2CE^2FF_r2r^2AE^2F^2A_rC_r2ABC^3A_\theta B_\theta A^2C^3B_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$
$`B^2C^3A_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+A^2CE^2B_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+B^2CE^2A_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})=0,`$ (21)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2r^2A^2C^3E^3F^2}}(3B^4CE^3A_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+r^2A^2CE^3F^2B_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+r^2A^2C^3EF^2B_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}2r^2A^2BE^3F^2B_rC_r`$
$`2r^2A^2BC^3F^2B_\theta E_\theta +3A^2B^2C^3EB_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}4rA^2BCE^3F^2B_r+3A^2B^2CE^3B_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}7r^2B^2C^3EF^2A_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$
$`+2r^2A^2BC^2EF^2B_\theta C_\theta +2r^2A^2BCE^2F^2B_rE_r4r^2A^2BCE^3FB_rF_r+6AB^3CE^3A_rB_r`$
$`4r^2AB^2CE^3FA_rF_r4r^2A^2BC^3EFB_\theta F_\theta 4r^2AB^2C^3EFA_\theta F_\theta 7r^2B^2CE^3F^2A_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$
$`+6AB^3C^3EA_\theta B_\theta 4rAB^2CE^3F^2A_r+2rA^2BC^2E^3FB_r+2rAB^2C^2E^3FA_r2r^4AC^3EF^4A_{\theta \theta }`$
$`+2r^2A^2BC^3EF^2B_{\theta \theta }+2r^2A^2BCE^3F^2B_{rr}+2r^4AC^3F^4A_\theta E_\theta 2r^2ABC^3EF^2A_\theta B_\theta +2r^4AE^3F^4A_rC_r`$
$`2r^2ABCE^3F^2A_rB_r2r^4AC^2EF^4A_\theta C_\theta +2r^2AB^2C^2EF^2A_\theta C_\theta +2rA^2B^2E^3F^2C_r2r^4A^2E^2F^4C_rE_r`$
$`2r^4A^2C^2F^4C_\theta E_\theta 2r^4ACE^2F^4A_rE_r+4r^4C^3EF^4A_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+4r^4CE^3F^4A_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+2r^4A^2CE^2F^4E_{rr}`$
$`2A^2B^2C^3EFF_{\theta \theta }2r^2A^2B^2CE^3FF_{rr}2r^2A^2B^2CE^2F^2E_{rr}2r^2A^2B^2C^2EF^2C_{\theta \theta }+2r^2AB^2C^3EF^2A_{\theta \theta }`$
$`+2r^2AB^2CE^3F^2A_{rr}+2r^4A^2C^2EF^4C_{\theta \theta }2r^4ACE^3F^4A_{rr}+2r^2A^2B^2C^3FE_\theta F_\theta +2r^2A^2B^2C^2F^2C_\theta E_\theta `$
$`4rA^2B^2CE^3F_r2rA^2B^2CE^2F^2E_r+2r^2A^2B^2E^3FC_rF_r+2r^2A^2B^2E^2F^2C_rE_r2r^2AB^2E^3F^2A_rC_r`$
$`+2r^2AB^2CE^2F^2A_rE_r2r^2AB^2C^3F^2A_\theta E_\theta 2r^2A^2B^2C^2EFC_\theta F_\theta `$
$`2r^2A^2B^2CE^2FE_rF_r+3B^4C^3EA_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2})=0,`$ (22)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2r^2A^3C^3E^3F^2}}(2r^2A^2BCE^3FF_{rr}+2r^2A^2BC^2EF^2C_{\theta \theta }+2r^2A^2BCE^2F^2E_{rr}`$
$`+4r^2BCE^3F^2A_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}r^2A^2C^3F^2B_{\theta \theta }+2r^2A^2BC^3EFF_{\theta \theta }r^2ABC^3EF^2A_{\theta \theta }r^2A^2CE^3F^2B_{rr}`$
$`r^2ABCE^3F^2A_{rr}+r^2A^2E^3F^2B_rC_r+2rA^2CE^3F^2B_r+r^2ABE^3F^2A_rC_r`$
$`+r^2ABC^3F^2A_\theta E_\theta +2r^2ACE^3F^2A_rB_rr^2A^2C^2EF^2B_\theta C_\theta r^2ABC^2EF^2A_\theta C_\theta `$
$`+r^2A^2C^3F^2B_\theta E_\theta r^2A^2CE^2F^2B_rE_rr^2ABCE^2F^2A_rE_r6AB^2CE^3A_rB_r`$
$`+2rABCE^3F^2A_r+2r^2A^2CE^3FB_rF_r+2r^2ABCE^3FA_rF_r+2r^2A^2C^3EFB_\theta F_\theta 6AB^2C^3EA_\theta B_\theta `$
$`+2r^2ABC^3EFA_\theta F_\theta 3A^2BC^3EB_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}3A^2BCE^3B_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}3B^3C^3EA_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+2r^2AC^3EF^2A_\theta B_\theta `$
$`+4r^2BC^3EF^2A_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}3B^3CE^3A_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}2r^2A^2BC^3FE_\theta F_\theta +2r^2A^2BCE^2FE_rF_r+2rA^2BCE^2F^2E_r`$
$`2rA^2BE^3F^2C_r2r^2A^2BE^3FC_rF_r+2r^2A^2BC^2EFC_\theta F_\theta 2r^2A^2BC^2F^2C_\theta E_\theta +4rA^2BCE^3FF_r`$
$`2r^2A^2BE^2F^2C_rE_rrA^2C^2E^3FB_rrABC^2E^3FA_r)=0,`$ (23)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2r^2A^4C^3E^3F^2}}(2r^2A^2CE^2F^2E_{rr}2r^2A^2E^3FC_rF_r+4rA^2CE^3FF_r+2rA^2CE^2F^2E_r`$
$`+2r^2A^2CE^2FE_rF_r+2r^2A^2C^3EFF_{\theta \theta }2r^2A^2C^3FE_\theta F_\theta +2r^2A^2C^2EFC_\theta F_\theta +2r^2A^2CE^3FF_{rr}`$
$`2r^2A^2C^2F^2C_\theta E_\theta 2r^2A^2E^2F^2C_rE_r+2r^2A^2C^2EF^2C_{\theta \theta }6ABC^3EA_\theta B_\theta 2rA^2E^3F^2C_r`$
$`6ABCE^3A_rB_r3A^2C^3EB_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}3B^2EC^3A_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}3A^2CE^3B_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}3B^2CE^3A_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})=0,`$ (24)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2rA^3C^3E^3F}}(2rBC^3EFA_{\theta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}rA^2C^3EFB_{\theta \theta }+rA^2C^3FB_\theta E_\theta +2rBCE^3FA_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}rA^2CE^3FB_{rr}`$
$`+rABC^3FA_\theta E_\theta +rA^2E^3FB_rC_rrABCE^3FA_{rr}+rABE^3FA_rC_r+A^2C^2E^3B_r+ABC^2E^3A_r`$
$`rABC^3EFA_{\theta \theta }rA^2CE^2FB_rE_rrABC^2EFA_\theta C_\theta rABCE^2FA_rE_r`$
$`rA^2C^2EFB_\theta C_\theta )=0,`$ (25)
where $`A_r=dA/dr`$, $`A_{rr}=d^2A/dr^2`$, $`A_\theta =dA/d\theta `$ $`A_{\theta \theta }=d^2A/d\theta ^2`$.

A special vacuum solutions of equations (19)$``$(25) are
I) The solution in which the five functions $`A`$, $`B`$, $`D`$, $`F`$ and $`H`$ take the form

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{a_1}{r}}}}},`$
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`C`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1{\displaystyle \frac{a_1}{r}}}}},`$
$`E`$ $`=`$ $`r,`$
$`F`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\theta ,`$ (26)
where $`a_1`$ is a constant of integration. Using (26) in (18), the metric tensor takes the form

$$ds^2=\eta _1dt^2+\frac{dr^2}{\eta _1}+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2,$$
(27)
where

$$\eta _1(r)=(1\frac{a_1}{r}).$$
(28)
which is the Schwarzschild solution when the constant $`a_1=2m`$.

II) The solution in which the five functions $`A`$, $`B`$, $`D`$, $`F`$ and $`H`$ take the form

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{a\rho }{\mathrm{\Sigma }}}}}},`$
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ah\rho \mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Sigma }(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta a\rho )}}},`$
$`C`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}},`$
$`E`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Sigma }},`$
$`F`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{(\rho ^2+h^2){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\rho ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{ah^2\rho \mathrm{sin}^4\theta }{\rho ^2\mathrm{\Sigma }}}+{\displaystyle \frac{a^2h^2\mathrm{sin}^4\theta }{\mathrm{\Sigma }(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta a\rho )}}},`$ (29)
where $`a`$, $`h`$ are two constants of integration and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are given by

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }=\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta ,\mathrm{\Delta }=\rho ^2+h^2a\rho .$$
(30)
The metric tensor associated with the tetrad (18) in this case is given by

$$ds^2=(1\frac{a\rho }{\mathrm{\Sigma }})dt^2+\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\mathrm{\Delta }}d\rho ^2+\mathrm{\Sigma }d\theta ^2+\left\{(\rho ^2+h^2)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +\frac{a\rho h^2\mathrm{sin}^4\theta }{\mathrm{\Sigma }}\right\}d\varphi ^2+2\frac{a\rho h\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\mathrm{\Sigma }}dtd\varphi ,$$
(31)
which is the Kerr metric written in the Boyer-Lindquist coordinates. Using the solution (29) the tetrad (18) takes the form

$$\left(b_{}^{i}{}_{\mu }{}^{}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}i\sqrt{1\frac{a\rho }{\mathrm{\Sigma }}}& 0& 0& i\frac{ah\rho \mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Sigma }(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta a\rho )}}\\ 0& \sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}\mathrm{cos}\varphi & 0& \rho \sqrt{(\rho ^2+h^2)\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\rho ^2}+\frac{ah^2\rho \mathrm{sin}^4\theta }{\rho ^2\mathrm{\Sigma }}+\frac{a^2h^2\mathrm{sin}^4\theta }{\mathrm{\Sigma }(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta a\rho )}}\mathrm{sin}\varphi \\ 0& 0& \sqrt{\mathrm{\Sigma }}& 0\\ 0& \sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}\mathrm{sin}\varphi & 0& \rho \sqrt{(\rho ^2+h^2)\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\rho ^2}+\frac{ah^2\rho \mathrm{sin}^4\theta }{\rho ^2\mathrm{\Sigma }}+\frac{a^2h^2\mathrm{sin}^4\theta }{\mathrm{\Sigma }(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta a\rho )}}\mathrm{cos}\varphi \end{array}\right).$$
(32)
Thus a vacuum solution which gives the Kerr metric has been given. The parallel vector fields (32) are axially symmetric in the sense that they are form invariant under the transformation

$`\overline{\varphi }\varphi +\delta \varphi ,\overline{b^0}_0b_{}^{0}{}_{0}{}^{},\overline{b^1}_1b_{}^{1}{}_{1}{}^{}\mathrm{cos}\delta \varphi +b_{}^{3}{}_{3}{}^{}\mathrm{sin}\delta \varphi ,`$
$`\overline{b^2}_2b_{}^{2}{}_{2}{}^{},\overline{b^3}_3b_{}^{3}{}_{3}{}^{}\mathrm{cos}\delta \varphi b_{}^{1}{}_{1}{}^{}\mathrm{sin}\delta \varphi .`$ (33)
The solution (26) satisfy the field equation (7) and (8), but the solution (32) is a solution to the field equation (7) only, i.e., the solution (32) is a solution of general relativity. It is of interest to note that general relativity has a solution which give the Kerr metric in which the parallel vector fields take the form

$$\left(b_{}^{i}{}_{\mu }{}^{}\right)_{Sq}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}i\sqrt{1\frac{a\rho }{\mathrm{\Sigma }}}& 0& 0& i\frac{ah\rho \mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Sigma }(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta a\rho )}}\\ 0& \sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& \sqrt{\mathrm{\Sigma }}& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& \rho \sqrt{(\rho ^2+h^2)\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\rho ^2}+\frac{ah^2\rho \mathrm{sin}^4\theta }{\rho ^2\mathrm{\Sigma }}+\frac{a^2h^2\mathrm{sin}^4\theta }{\mathrm{\Sigma }(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta a\rho )}}\end{array}\right),$$
(34)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are given by (30). As is clear from (34) that this is just the square root of the Kerr metric.

4. The Physical Meaning of $`a`$ and $`h`$

Following Toma  to clarify the physical meaning of the constants $`a`$ and $`h`$ in the solution (32), we consider the weak field approximation

$$b_{}^{k}{}_{\mu }{}^{}(x)=\delta _{}^{k}{}_{\mu }{}^{}+a_{}^{k}{}_{\mu }{}^{},|a_{}^{k}{}_{\mu }{}^{}|<<1,$$
(35)
the field $`a_{\mu \nu }`$ can be expressed as

$$a_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}h_{\mu \nu }+A_{\mu \nu },$$
(36)
with $`h_{\mu \nu }=h_{\nu \mu }`$ and $`A_{\mu \nu }=A_{\nu \mu }`$. The gravitational field equations (7) and (8) takes the forms

$`\mathrm{}\overline{h}_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`2\kappa T_{(\mu \nu )},`$
$`\mathrm{}A_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda T_{[\mu \nu ]}.`$ (37)
Here the d’Alembertian operator is given by $`\mathrm{}=^\mu _\mu `$, $`\overline{h}_{\mu \nu }`$ denotes

$$\overline{h}_{\mu \nu }=h_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{2}\eta _{\mu \nu }h,h=\eta _{\mu \nu }h^{\mu \nu }.$$
(38)
Since we have solve the field equations (7) and (8) in the vacuum case then from (37) we require

$$A_{\mu \nu }=0.$$
(39)
The tensor $`T_{[\mu \nu ]}`$ is related to the spin density

$$S_{kl}^{}{}_{}{}^{\mu }=i\frac{_m}{\psi _{,\mu }}S_{kl}\psi $$
(40)
of the source field $`\psi `$ through

$$\sqrt{g}T_{[\mu \nu ]}=\frac{1}{2}b_{}^{k}{}_{\mu }{}^{}b_{}^{i}{}_{\nu }{}^{}_\lambda S_{kl}^{}{}_{}{}^{\lambda }.$$
(41)
Here $`S_{kl}`$ is the representation group of the Lie algebra of the Lorentz group to which $`\psi `$ belongs. Using (39) in (37) we get

$$_\mu S_{kl}^{}{}_{}{}^{\mu }=0.$$
(42)
Using the condition (42), the physical meaning of $`a`$ and $`h`$ are given by

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa M}{4\pi }}`$
$`h`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{J}{M}},`$ (43)
where M is the gravitational mass of a central gravitating body and J represent the angular momentum of the rotating source. The relation (43) is obtained by comparing the metric (31) with the metric

$$ds^2=\left(1\frac{\kappa M}{4r\pi }\right)dt^2+\left(1+\frac{\kappa M}{4r\pi }\right)dx^adx^a\frac{\kappa J}{2r\pi }\mathrm{sin}^2\theta dtd\varphi .$$
(44)
5. Study of Singularities

In teleparallel theory of gravity by singularity of space-time we mean the singularity of the scalar concomitants of the torsion and curvature tensors.

The space-time given by (32) does not have singularities for the Ricci scalar and for the concomitants of the Ricci tensor because we have

$$R=R^{\mu \nu }R_{\mu \nu }=0,$$
(45)
using (10) and (32) we obtain

$$R^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }R_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }=12a^2\frac{\left(h^6\mathrm{cos}\theta ^615\rho ^2h^4\mathrm{cos}\theta ^4+15\rho ^4h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta \rho ^6\right)}{(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )^6}.$$
(46)
As is clear from (46) that there is a singularity at $`(\rho ,\theta )=(0,\pi /2)`$ when $`h0`$, which agrees with the singularity of solution (34). The scalar of the torsion tensor and the irreducible components of it  are given by

$`T^{\mu \nu \lambda }T_{\mu \nu \lambda }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_1(\rho ,\theta )}{\mathrm{sin}^{3/2}\theta (\rho ^2+h^2a\rho )(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta a\rho )^{5/2}(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )^3}},`$
$`t^{\mu \nu \lambda }t_{\mu \nu \lambda }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_2(\rho ,\theta )}{\mathrm{sin}^{3/2}\theta (\rho ^2+h^2a\rho )(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta a\rho )^{5/2}(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )^3}},`$
$`V^\mu V_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_3(\rho ,\theta )}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta (\rho ^2+h^2a\rho )(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )^3}},`$
$`a^\mu a_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_4(\rho ,\theta )}{(\rho ^2+h^2a\rho )^3(\rho ^2+h^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )^5}},`$ (47)
where $`F_1(\rho ,\theta )`$, $`F_2(\rho ,\theta )`$, $`F_3(\rho ,\theta )`$ and $`F_4(\rho ,\theta )`$ are some complicated functions in $`\rho `$ and $`\theta `$. From (47) we see that, when $`h0`$, there are singularities of the scalar of the torsion tensor, the scalar of the traceless part and the scalar of the basic vector given by $`\theta =0`$ and/or $`(\rho ,\theta )=(0,\pi /2)`$, but for the axial vector the singularity is given by $`(\rho ,\theta )=(0,\pi /2)`$. Also all the above scalars have a common singularity at $`\rho =0`$ when $`h=0`$

6. Main results

The results of the proceeding sections can be summarized as follow:
1) An exact solution (26) for the field equations (7) and (8) which gives the Schwarzschild metric has been obtained.
2) An exact solution (32) for the field equation (7) which gives the static Kerr metric is obtained. It is axially symmetric, but differs from (34) of general relativity. There is a modification of the Kerr metric for a source that carries an electric charge e. Replacing the definition of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ given in (30) by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\rho ^2+h^2a\rho +e^2,$$

leads to the Kerr-Newman metric . It is shown that special relativity for the spin $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}`$ electron can be seen to emerge from Kerr-Newman metric . Also it is shown that  a particle can be treated as a relativistic vortex, that is a vortex where the velocity of a circulation equals that of light or a spherical shell, whose constituents are again rotating with the velocity of light or as a black hole described by the Kerr-Newman metric for a spin $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}`$ particles.
3) The space-time given by (32) has a singularity at $`(\rho ,\theta )=(0,\pi /2)`$ for the concomitants of the Riemann Christoffel tensor and the concomitants of the axial vector part when $`h0`$ but for the concomitants of the torsion, tracless part and the basic vector there are singularities at $`(\rho ,\theta )=(0,\pi /2)`$ and/or $`\theta =0`$ when $`h0`$ and all the concomitants have a common singularity at $`\rho =0`$ and $`h=0`$.
4) There are two solutions of general relativity both of them gave the Kerr metric, but the parallel vector fields reproducing them are quite different in its structures in spite that the singularities of them are quite the same. We believe that the physical contents of these two parallel vector fields (32) and (34) are quite different and this will be our future work by studying the energy contents for the both tetrad.
5) We have solved the non linear partial differential equations (19)$``$(25) and obtained two different exact vacuum solutions. From those partial differential equation one can get many physical solutions and may be can solve them in the general case. This also will be our future work.


text:
# 1 INTRODUCTION

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Despite its age the issue about the relationship between quantum and classical world, perhaps most deeply stressed at the very beginning of quantum mechanics by Niels Bohr, cannot be considered settled and still gives rise to a lively debate, as confirmed for example by a book recently published on the subject , tackling it from the point of view of decoherence. This very word has in fact recently become very popular for the description of phenomena connected to the transition from quantum to classical regime. While the interest in the phenomenon of decoherence was previously mainly connected to foundational issues, it is now mostly related to applications in quantum computing. The extremely short time scales associated to the phenomenon of decoherence, even in few-body systems, are in fact one of the key problems to solve in order to leave the possibility open of realizing in the future practically useful quantum computers .

The term decoherence is used to denote the transition to dynamics other than unitary even for few- or one-body systems, the effective non-unitary subdynamics for these systems arising from the impossibility to completely isolate them from the rest of the laboratory, at least on sufficiently long time scales. As a result one cannot expect that the physics of the microscopic system can be correctly described by a unitary, reversible evolution driven by a suitable self-adjoint Hamiltonian. Thus a simple picture in terms of a Schrödinger equation fails, the correspondence principle is no longer useful in order to envisage the generator of the dynamics, and one is compelled to resort to a more general formalism. In this connection the studies on the foundations of quantum mechanics, in particular on quantum structures  and on quantum measurement theory , have led to important results, indicating possible new sceneries for quantum dynamics and especially putting into evidence mathematical structures and properties relevant for the quantum realm. More specifically a more modern formulation of quantum mechanics has by now emerged , where the notions of effect (first introduced by Ludwig ), coexistent observable, POV-measure, operation and instrument allow for a better formulation of irreversible dynamics and measurement processes. Based on these concepts a formulation of continuous measurement theory in quantum mechanics has been given, mainly developed by Davies , the Milan group  and Holevo  (for an extensive review see ). This theory relies on the introduction of the generator of a quantum dynamical semigroup  for the dynamics of the observed microscopic system, to which an operation-valued stochastic process can be associated. It is then possible to introduce well-defined functional probability densities in the space of time trajectories of certain observables of the system, thus recovering, in this highly non trivial way, elements of objective description, the very notion of trajectory being a classical one (see  for a compact review on the subject and  for a related approach to the problem of objectivity in quantum mechanics). The observables for which trajectories can be introduced depend on the very structure of the quantum dynamical semigroup giving the irreversible time evolution, the operators appearing in it and determining the irreversible part of the dynamics also indicating the possible measuring decompositions of the mapping giving the time evolution.

The general structure of bounded generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, also satisfying the property of complete positivity , has been fully characterized by Lindblad , while in the unbounded case only a few results are available . It is therefore of interest to obtain physical examples of generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, especially in the case in which the generator is unbounded. In the following we will recall a result recently obtained in this framework for the description of the motion of a test particle in a quantum fluid , giving a new formulation in terms of superoperators and further calculating the diffusion coefficient for interaction potentials of physical interest. The considered generator of quantum dynamical semigroups, obtained through a microphysical derivation based on a scattering theory approach, falls within a class known as quantum Brownian motion . This class of models has already been considered within the framework of continuous measurement theory , leading to a description in terms of trajectories for the expectation values of the operators position and momentum of the particle. The starting point for  was the phenomenological structure of generator of quantum Brownian motion proposed by Lindblad  on the basis of his general result on completely positive quantum dynamical semigroups and physical requirements on the dynamics originated from a classical analogy. The result presented here gives a physically motivated particular expression for the coefficients, determined in terms of microphysical quantities, and for the selection of contributions appearing in the structure of the generator.

## 2 MASTER EQUATION FOR A TEST PARTICLE IN A QUANTUM GAS IN TERMS OF THE DYNAMIC
STRUCTURE FACTOR

Let us consider the following problem of non-equilibrium statistical mechanics: a test particle interacts through collisions with a fluid. This model is known as Rayleigh gas  and on a suitable time scale, much longer than the typical relaxation time of the macroscopic fluid, one expects a Markovian dynamics described in terms of a master-equation. In the quantum case an expression has recently been proposed for the generator of such a dynamics, which is in particular the generator of a completely positive quantum dynamical semigroup . The master-equation takes the following form

$$\frac{d\widehat{\varrho }}{dt}=\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}[\widehat{𝖧}_0,\widehat{\varrho }]+[\widehat{\varrho }],$$
(2.1)
where $`\widehat{\varrho }`$ is the statistical operator associated to the test particle of mass $`M`$, $`\widehat{𝖧}_0`$ the free Hamiltonian $`\widehat{𝗉}^2/2M`$ and the mapping giving the dissipative part of the time evolution has the following Lindblad structure

$$[]=\frac{2\pi }{\mathrm{}}(2\pi \mathrm{})^3n_{𝐑^3}d^3𝐪|\stackrel{~}{t}(q)|^2\left[\widehat{U}(𝐪)\sqrt{S(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉})}\sqrt{S(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉})}\widehat{U}^{}(𝐪)\frac{1}{2}\{S(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉}),\}\right].$$
(2.2)
The unitary operators $`\widehat{U}(𝐪)`$ are given by $`e^{\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}𝐪\widehat{𝗑}}`$, while the function $`\stackrel{~}{t}(q)`$ is the Fourier transform with respect to the transferred momentum $`𝐪`$ of the T-matrix describing the collisions between test particle and fluid, supposed to depend only on the modulus of the momentum transfer and in a negligible way on energy. The function $`S(𝐪,𝐩)`$ appearing operator-valued in (2.2) is a positive two-point correlation function known in the physical community as dynamic structure factor , and it is usually expressed as a function of momentum and energy transfer, $`𝐪`$ and $`E`$. It is defined by

$$S(𝐪,E)S(𝐪,𝐩)=\frac{1}{2\pi \mathrm{}}_𝐑𝑑t_{𝐑^3}d^3𝐱e^{\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}[E(𝐪,𝐩)t𝐪𝐱]}\frac{1}{N}_{𝐑^3}d^3𝐲N(𝐲)N(𝐲+𝐱,t),$$
(2.3)
with

$$E(𝐪,𝐩)E=\frac{(𝐩+𝐪)^2}{2M}\frac{p^2}{2M}=\frac{q^2}{2M}+\frac{𝐩𝐪}{M}$$

thus being the Fourier transform of the two-point time dependent density correlation function of the fluid, calculated with respect to the statistical operator describing the fluid at equilibrium. The dynamic structure factor is always positive since it is proportional to the energy dependent scattering cross-section of a microscopic probe off a macroscopic sample , and it gives the spectrum of spontaneous fluctuations of the macroscopic sample.

In particular the dynamic structure factor can be exactly calculated in the case of a free quantum gas, thus obtaining close expressions for Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac statistics, which both go over to Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics in the limit of low density. Denoting by $`S_{\mathrm{BE}}(𝐪,𝐩)`$ the dynamic structure factor for a free gas of particles of mass $`m`$ obeying Bose-Einstein statistics one has

$`S_{\mathrm{BE}}(𝐪,𝐩)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi \mathrm{})^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi m^2}{n\beta q}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\beta }{2m}\left(2\sigma (𝐪,𝐩)qq^2\right)\right]}}`$
$`\times \mathrm{log}\left[1\left\{1\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2m}}\left(2\sigma (𝐪,𝐩)qq^2\right)\right]\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\beta }{2m}\sigma ^2(𝐪,𝐩)\right]}{1z\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\beta }{2m}(\sigma (𝐪,𝐩)q)^2\right]}}\right]`$
with $`\beta =1/kT`$ the inverse of the temperature, $`n`$ the particle density, $`z`$ the fugacity of the gas, which is a number positive and less than one for Bose-Einstein particles , and

$$\sigma (𝐪,𝐩)=\frac{1}{2q}\left[q^2+2mE(𝐪,𝐩)\right].$$

Similarly for Fermi-Dirac statistics

$`S_{\mathrm{FD}}(𝐪,𝐩)`$ $`=`$ $`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi \mathrm{})^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi m^2}{n\beta q}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\beta }{2m}\left(2\sigma (𝐪,𝐩)qq^2\right)\right]}}`$
$`\times \mathrm{log}\left[1+\left\{1\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2m}}\left(2\sigma (𝐪,𝐩)qq^2\right)\right]\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\beta }{2m}\sigma ^2(𝐪,𝐩)\right]}{1+z\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\beta }{2m}(\sigma (𝐪,𝐩)q)^2\right]}}\right],`$
so that the difference only lies in a suitable change of signs and in the range of the fugacity $`z`$ which is positive without further restrictions for Fermi-Dirac particles . Both (2) and (2) in the limit of low density, corresponding to $`z`$ much smaller than one, lead in a straightforward way to the expression for a gas of Maxwell-Boltzmann particles, as can be seen expanding the logarithm:

$$S_{\mathrm{MB}}(𝐪,𝐩)=\frac{1}{(2\pi \mathrm{})^3}\frac{2\pi m^2}{n\beta q}z\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\beta }{2m}\sigma ^2(𝐪,𝐩)\right],$$
(2.6)
where the fugacity is now given by the explicit expression

$$z=n\left(\frac{2\pi \mathrm{}^2\beta }{m}\right)^{3/2}.$$

A case of particular interest in which to apply (2.1) is the description at quantum level of Brownian motion, that is the case in which the mass $`M`$ of the test particle is much bigger than the mass $`m`$ of the gas particles. One therefore needs expressions for the dynamic structure factor in the Brownian limit in which the ratio $`\alpha =m/M`$ is much smaller than one. To do this one writes the argument of the exponentials in (2), (2) and (2.6) as a polynomial in $`\alpha `$, keeping only the contributions in the lowest order. Concentrating on the simplest case of a gas of Maxwell-Boltzmann particles, writing $`\sigma ^2`$ as a polynomial in $`\alpha `$

$$\sigma ^2(𝐪,𝐩)=\frac{q^2}{4}+\frac{1}{2}\alpha [q^2+2𝐩𝐪]+\frac{1}{4}\frac{\alpha ^2}{q^2}[q^2+2𝐩𝐪]^2,$$

and keeping terms up to first order one has

$$S_{\mathrm{MB}}^{\mathrm{}}(𝐪,𝐩)=\frac{1}{(2\pi \mathrm{})^3}\frac{2\pi m^2}{n\beta q}ze^{\frac{\beta }{8m}q^2}e^{\frac{\beta }{2}[\frac{q^2}{2M}+\frac{𝐪𝐩}{M}]},$$
(2.7)
where the index $`\mathrm{}`$ denotes the Brownian limit $`\alpha 1`$. Eq. (2.1) now becomes

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\varrho }}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}[\widehat{𝖧}_0,\widehat{\varrho }]+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\mathrm{}}}(2\pi \mathrm{})^3n{\displaystyle _{𝐑^3}}d^3𝐪|\stackrel{~}{t}(q)|^2`$ (2.8)
$`\times \left[\widehat{U}^{}(𝐪)\sqrt{S_{\mathrm{MB}}^{\mathrm{}}(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉})}\widehat{\varrho }\sqrt{S_{\mathrm{MB}}^{\mathrm{}}(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉})}\widehat{U}(𝐪){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{S_{\mathrm{MB}}^{\mathrm{}}(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉}),\widehat{\varrho }\}\right]`$
and in view of (2.7), introducing the operators

$$V(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉},\widehat{𝗑})=e^{\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}𝐪\widehat{𝗑}}e^{\frac{\beta }{4M}𝐪\widehat{𝗉}}$$

(2.8) takes the more manifest Lindblad structure

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\varrho }}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}[\widehat{𝖧}_0,\widehat{\varrho }]+z{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2m^2}{\beta \mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _{𝐑^3}}d^3𝐪{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{~}{t}(q)|^2}{q}}e^{\frac{\beta }{8m}(1+2\alpha )q^2}`$ (2.9)
$`\times \left[V(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉},\widehat{𝗑})\widehat{\varrho }V^{}(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉},\widehat{𝗑}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{V^{}(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉},\widehat{𝗑})V(𝐪,\widehat{𝗉},\widehat{𝗑}),\widehat{\varrho }\}\right]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}[\widehat{𝖧}_0,\widehat{\varrho }]+z{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2m^2}{\beta \mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _{𝐑^3}}d^3𝐪{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{~}{t}(q)|^2}{q}}e^{\frac{\beta }{8m}(1+2\alpha )q^2}`$
$`\times \left[e^{\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}𝐪\widehat{𝗑}}e^{\frac{\beta }{4M}𝐪\widehat{𝗉}}\widehat{\varrho }e^{\frac{\beta }{4M}𝐪\widehat{𝗉}}e^{\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}𝐪\widehat{𝗑}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{e^{\frac{\beta }{2M}𝐪\widehat{𝗉}},\widehat{\varrho }\}\right].`$
The action of the operators position and momentum of the microsystem $`\widehat{𝗑}`$ and $`\widehat{𝗉}`$ is best seen introducing the following superoperators

$`_{\widehat{𝖠}}^{}[]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}[\widehat{𝖠},]_{}={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}[\widehat{𝖠},]`$ (2.10)
$`_{\widehat{𝖠}}^+[]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}}}[\widehat{𝖠},]_+={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}}}\{\widehat{𝖠},\},`$
which will also prove useful for future expansions. In terms of (2.10) eq. (2.9) takes the remarkably simple structure

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\varrho }}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}[\widehat{𝖧}_0,\widehat{\varrho }]+z{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2m^2}{\beta \mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _{𝐑^3}}d^3𝐪{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{~}{t}(q)|^2}{q}}e^{\frac{\beta }{8m}(1+2\alpha )q^2}`$
$`\times \left[\mathrm{exp}\left(_{𝐪\widehat{𝗑}}^{}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(_{\kappa 𝐪\widehat{𝗉}}^+\right)[\widehat{\varrho }]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\kappa }{\mathrm{}}}𝐪\widehat{𝗉}\right),\widehat{\varrho }\}\right]`$
with $`\kappa =\frac{\beta \mathrm{}}{4M}`$. The master-equation (2.9) gives a physical realization of a general structure of generators of translation-covariant quantum dynamical semigroups recently introduced by Holevo . In fact (2.9) and more generally (2.1) are invariant under spatial translations in the sense that

$$[𝒰_𝐚[\widehat{𝗐}]]=𝒰_𝐚[[\widehat{𝗐}]],$$
(2.12)
with $`\widehat{𝗐}`$ a statistical operator and $`𝒰_𝐚[]=e^{\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}𝐚\widehat{𝗉}}e^{+\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}𝐚\widehat{𝗉}}`$. In particular, provided the macroscopic system is in a $`\beta `$-KMS state , thus implying the detailed balance condition for the dynamic structure factor , a stationary solution of (2.1) is given by

$$\widehat{𝗐}_0(\widehat{𝗉})=e^{\beta \frac{\widehat{𝗉}^2}{2M}}.$$
(2.13)
Further formal properties of (2.1) are discussed in .

## 3 FOKKER-PLANCK EQUATION FOR THE
DESCRIPTION OF QUANTUM DISSIPATION

Given the master-equation (2) one is naturally led to the question, whether some small parameter having a definite physical meaning exists, allowing for a Kramers-Moyal expansion leading from the master-equation to a Fokker-Planck equation . This is in fact the case for the momentum transfer $`𝐪`$, small $`𝐪`$ corresponding through the physical meaning of the dynamic structure factor to the long wavelength part of the density fluctuations’ spectrum of the macroscopic system with which the Brownian particle is interacting. In the limit of small momentum transfer, keeping terms at most second order as typical in Fokker-Planck equations , the operator part of (2) becomes

$`\left[\mathrm{exp}\left(_{𝐪\widehat{𝗑}}^{}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(_{\kappa 𝐪\widehat{𝗉}}^+\right)[\widehat{\varrho }]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\kappa }{\mathrm{}}}𝐪\widehat{𝗉}\right),\widehat{\varrho }\}\right]`$
$``$ $`_{𝐪\widehat{𝗑}}^{}[\widehat{\varrho }]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_{𝐪\widehat{𝗑}}^2[\widehat{\varrho }]+_{\kappa 𝐪\widehat{𝗉}}^+[\widehat{\varrho }]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_{\kappa 𝐪\widehat{𝗉}}^{+2}[\widehat{\varrho }]+_{𝐪\widehat{𝗑}}^{}_{\kappa 𝐪\widehat{𝗉}}^+[\widehat{\varrho }]_{\kappa 𝐪\widehat{𝗉}}^+[\widehat{\varrho }]_{\kappa ^2/\mathrm{}\left(𝐪\widehat{𝗉}\right)^2}^+[\widehat{\varrho }]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}𝐪_i_{\widehat{𝗑}_i}^{}[\widehat{\varrho }]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i,j=1}{\overset{3}{}}}𝐪_i𝐪_j\left\{_{\widehat{𝗑}_i}^{}_{\widehat{𝗑}_j}^{}[\widehat{\varrho }]+_{\kappa \widehat{𝗉}_i}^{}_{\kappa \widehat{𝗉}_j}^{}[\widehat{\varrho }]+_{\widehat{𝗑}_i}^{}_{2\kappa \widehat{𝗉}_j}^+[\widehat{\varrho }]\right\}.`$
Integrating over $`𝐪`$ only terms bilinear in the momentum transfer with $`i=j`$ survive, and exploiting further the isotropy of the gas implying $`𝐪_i^2=\frac{1}{3}q^2`$ one obtains

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\varrho }}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}[\widehat{𝖧}_0,\widehat{\varrho }]+z{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2m^2}{\beta \mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _{𝐑^3}}d^3𝐪|\stackrel{~}{t}(q)|^2qe^{\frac{\beta }{8m}(1+2\alpha )q^2}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\{_{\widehat{𝗑}_i}^2[\widehat{\varrho }]+_{\kappa \widehat{𝗉}_i}^2[\widehat{\varrho }]+_{\widehat{𝗑}_i}^{}_{2\kappa \widehat{𝗉}_i}^+[\widehat{\varrho }]\}.`$
We now want to evaluate the overall coefficient for some cases of physical interest. Before this we note that the linear dependence on the fugacity $`z`$ in (3) is a result typical of a gas of Maxwell-Boltzmann particles. Keeping effects due to quantum statistics into account  the factor $`z`$ has to be replaced by a function $`\zeta (z)`$ defined in the following way

$$\zeta (z)=\{\begin{array}{cc}z& \mathrm{Maxwell}\mathrm{Boltzmann}\\ z/(1z)& \mathrm{Bose}\\ z/(1+z)& \mathrm{Fermi}\end{array},$$

so that we will generally consider the coefficient

$$D_{pp}=\zeta (z)\frac{2}{3}\frac{\pi ^2m^2}{\beta \mathrm{}}_{𝐑^3}d^3𝐪|\stackrel{~}{t}(q)|^2qe^{\frac{\beta }{8m}q^2}.$$
(3.2)
We will give two examples. We consider first the case of a short range potential characterized by a strength $`v_0`$ and a typical range $`r_0`$, according to

$$t(\text{x})=v_0e^{|\text{x}|^2/r_0^2}.$$
(3.3)
The Fourier transform of (3.3) is given by

$$\stackrel{~}{t}(\text{q})=_{𝐑^3}d^3𝐱\frac{e^{\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}𝐪𝐱}}{(2\pi \mathrm{})^3}t(\text{x})=\frac{\pi ^{3/2}}{(2\pi \mathrm{})^3}v_0r_0^3e^{\frac{q^2r_0^2}{4\mathrm{}^2}}$$

and the coefficient (3.2) becomes accordingly

$$D_{pp}=\zeta (z)\frac{1}{48}v_0^2\frac{m}{\mathrm{}}\frac{\upsilon ^3}{(1+\upsilon )^2}$$

with $`\upsilon `$ a characteristic constant given by the square ratio between potential range and thermal wavelength $`\lambda _T=\sqrt{2\pi \beta \mathrm{}^2/m}`$ of the particles of the gas

$$\upsilon =8\pi \frac{r_0^2}{\lambda _T^2}.$$
(3.4)
As a second example we consider the case in which the range of the potential shrinks to zero, so that the collisions are described by an effective T-matrix of the form

$$t(\text{x})=\frac{2\pi \mathrm{}^2}{M}a_0\delta ^3(\text{x}),$$
(3.5)
where $`a_0`$ is a characteristic scattering length. The Fourier transform of (3.5) is

$$\stackrel{~}{t}(\text{q})=\frac{1}{4\pi ^2}\frac{a_0}{\mathrm{}M}$$

and as a consequence

$$D_{pp}=\zeta (z)\frac{32}{3}\frac{m}{\mathrm{}\beta ^2}\alpha ^2\frac{a_0^2}{\lambda _T^2}.$$

As it can be seen, given some exact expression or some phenomenological Ansatz for the T-matrix describing the collisions, one obtains a definite expression for the coefficient $`D_{pp}`$, which as we shall see is connected to diffusion in momentum, depending on the physical parameters of interest.

To make the comparison with the literature easier (3) using (2.10) can be also written

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\varrho }}{dt}}=`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}[\widehat{𝖧}_0,\widehat{\varrho }]`$ (3.6)
$``$ $`D_{pp}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}^2}}[\widehat{𝗑}_i,[\widehat{𝗑}_i,\widehat{\varrho }]]+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{\mathrm{}^2}}[\widehat{𝗉}_i,[\widehat{𝗉}_i,\widehat{\varrho }]]{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}^2}}2\kappa [\widehat{𝗑}_i,\{\widehat{𝗉}_i,\widehat{\varrho }\}]\right\}.`$
The Fokker-Planck equation (3.6) gives an example of unbounded generator of a completely positive quantum dynamical semigroup and corresponds to a particular physical realization of the diffusive continuous component of the general structure of translation-covariant quantum dynamical semigroup characterized by Holevo . In fact (3.6) is invariant under translations according to (2.12), moreover an operator of the form (2.13) is still a stationary solution due to the particular ratio between the friction coefficient and the coefficient of diffusion in momentum , as discussed in the following. To draw a connection with the classical description of Brownian motion the last three terms of (3.6) can be recognized as being due to diffusion in momentum, diffusion in position and friction respectively . In fact exploiting the correspondence principle the commutator with the position operator corresponds to a derivative with respect to momentum, the commutator with the momentum operator corresponds to a derivative with respect to position and the anti-commutator with the momentum operator corresponds to a linear multiplication by momentum with a factor two, as can also be most directly seen in terms of the Wigner function . In particular the ratio between the coefficient responsible for diffusion in momentum and the coefficient responsible for friction is given by $`M/\beta `$ as in the classical Kramers’ equation for Brownian motion in phase space , thus granting the expected stationary solution (2.13).

Eq. (3.6) is a particular realization, obtained on the basis of a microphysical model, of the general phenomenological expression for quantum Brownian motion considered in  as a starting point for the application of the theory of measurement continuous in time. It does provide a physically motivated structure of generator of quantum dynamical semigroup allowing for the introduction of an objective description in terms of trajectories in the sense clarified in .

## 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author would like to thank Prof. L. Lanz for useful discussions on the subject of this paper. The work was supported by MURST under Cofinanziamento and Progetto Giovani.