text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recently there has been considerable interest in understanding the possible supersymmetric states of D0 branes on D2, D4, D6 and D8 in IIA string theories. While the D0-D2 and D0-D4 systems are relatively well understood with or without the NS-NS $`B`$ field background, the D0-D6 and D0-D8 cases remain veiled.

A pioneering work on higher than four dimensional gauge theories was done by Corrigan, et al. . They investigated the higher dimensional analogues of ‘self-duality’, seeking linear relations amongst components of the field strength

$$F_{ab}+\frac{1}{2}T_{abcd}F_{cd}=0,$$
(1)
with constant four form tensor $`T_{abcd}`$. In four spatial dimensions it is essentially unique, i.e. $`\pm ϵ_{abcd}`$. One immediate consequence of the above equation is that the Yang-Mills field equations $`D_aF_{ab}=0`$ are automatically followed due to the Jacobi identity. The constant four form tensor was introduced by hand in order to match the indices of the field strength. On the Euclidean space of dimension $`D>4`$, it inevitably breaks the $`\text{SO}(D)`$ invariance and the resulting first order equations may be classified by the unbroken rotational symmetries .

There have been much attention to these higher dimensional ‘self-dual’ equations. Especially notable ones include the ADHM-like construction in $`4k`$ dimensions  and the octonionic instantons in eight dimensions . The solutions constructed in this context have infinite energy. In fact, by using the conservation of the energy momentum tensor, one can show that there exits no static finite energy solution in Yang-Mills theories on commutative space of dimension $`D>4`$ .

However, the above theorem does not apply to the noncommutative Yang-Mills theories essentially due to the scale symmetry breaking. In the decoupling limit of string theory with a constant NS-NS $`B`$ field background, the field theories describing the worldvolume of D branes become non-commutative . Several localized solutions with unbroken supersymmetries have been found to have a finite energy or action in the non-commutative gauge theories . Some exact localized solutions are also constructed by directly solving full field equations  and as a result they are not always stable. Thus even with explicit solutions the number of the preserved supersymmetries remains sometimes unclear.

In this note, we shall classify all the possible BPS equations in the higher dimensional Yang-Mills theories, which are eventually related to the first order linear equations above. In particular, we consider the super Yang-Mills theories on Euclidean space of even dimension, $`D`$, which may be obtained by a dimensional reduction of the $`D=10`$ $`N=1`$ super Yang-Mills theory. The $`D=2,4,6,8`$ theories are realized as the field theoretic description of D2, D4, D6, and D8 branes. For the supersymmetry counting in the intersecting brane picture see .

The methods we employ here is fairly straightforward. The unbroken supersymmetries are basically determined by setting the gaugino variation of the supersymmetry to vanish. Namely, for the unbroken supersymmetries, the gaugino transformation should have non-vanishing kernel or the space of zero eigenspinors. The vacuum solution, for example, is invariant under all supersymmetry transformations and so the dimension of the kernel is maximal. We shall classify all the possible kernels and obtain the corresponding set of BPS equations. This is done by analyzing the projection operator to the kernel and in turn the complete characterization of the above constant four form tensor naturally emerges. One of the technical key observations will be to find out the ‘canonical form’ for the four form tensor which enables us to figure out the corresponding projection operator for each kernel. In six dimensions, as the four form is dual to a two form, the analysis is relatively simple. In eight dimensions the general constant four form tensor has 70 independent components. We decompose them into chiral and anti-chiral sectors of 35 components. We utilize the $`\text{SO}(8)`$ triality among $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{v}`$, $`\mathrm{𝟖}_+`$, $`\mathrm{𝟖}_{}`$ to show that the $`\text{SO}(8)`$ rotation which has 28 independent parameters can reduce any sector down to 7 independent components but not simultaneously. In general we shall prove that the generic projection operators are built up by the elementary building blocks which lead to the BPS equations for the minimally supersymmetric BPS states. The higher supersymmetric BPS equations then follow from imposing multi-sets of the minimal BPS equations. Our analysis holds for both commutative and non-commutative spaces as well as for both Abelian and non-Abelian gauge groups.

In the field theory on four dimensional space the BPS configurations should satisfy self-dual or anti-self-dual equations carrying 1/2 of the original supersymmetry. In the six dimensional case, the minimal supersymmetric one preserves non-chiral $`1/4`$ of the original supersymmetry. This is the only genuinely six dimensional one. The 1/2 supersymmetric configurations also exist but they are four dimensional in its character. The dimension eight shows more variety. The minimal supersymmetry is chiral 1/16. The bit of octonions appears here. From the minimal we build up to chiral 6/16. For the chirally mixed supersymmetries, the story is more complicated and our analysis may not be complete.

The plan of the paper is as follows: In section 2 we study the general property of the projection operators in even dimensions. We briefly note the two and four dimensional cases. In sections 3 and 4 the complete analysis on six and eight dimensional spaces are presented separately. In section 5, by utilizing the results on the projection operators and the BPS equations, we present some identities which spell the Yang-Mills Lagrangian as a positive definite term plus a total derivative term. This shows the “energy bound” of the BPS configurations as the positive definite term vanishes when the BPS equations are satisfied. In the section 6 we apply our results to some known explicit BPS configurations of finite or infinite energy on commutative or non-commutative spaces. We conclude with some remarks in section 7.

There is one caution in the interpretation of the BPS equations; the fact that a certain configuration satisfies the BPS equations of a given fraction implies that the solution preserves at least the fraction of supersymmetries.

## 2 The BPS Condition

The BPS state refers a field configuration which is invariant under some supersymmetry. In super Yang-Mills theories on Euclidean space of even dimension $`D`$, a bosonic configuration is BPS if there exits a nonzero constant spinor, $`\epsilon `$ of dimension $`2^{D/2}`$ such that the infinitesimal supersymmetric transformation of the gaugino field vanishes

$$\delta \lambda =F_{ab}\gamma _{ab}\epsilon =0.$$
(2)
Such zero eigenspinors of the $`2^{D/2}\times 2^{D/2}`$ matrix $`F_{ab}\gamma _{ab}`$ form the kernel space $`V`$. We consider global supersymmetry and so we take the kernel $`V`$ to be independent of the spatial coordinates. The kernel $`V`$ could be different from the “local” kernel of $`F_{ab}(x)\gamma _{ab}`$ at each point $`x`$. The dimension of the kernel counts the unbroken supersymmetry of a given BPS configuration. For the vacuum $`F_{ab}=0`$, the unbroken supersymmetry is maximal, while for the non-BPS configuration $`V`$ is simply null.

The BPS field strength should satisfy certain consistency conditions or the BPS equations in order to have a given number of unbroken supersymmetries. The key tool we employ here is the projection operator $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to the kernel space. With an orthonormal basis for the kernel, $`V=\{|l\}`$, $`1lN=\text{dim}V2^{D/2}`$, the projection operator is

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\underset{l=1}{\overset{N}{}}|ll|,$$
(3)
satisfying

$$\begin{array}{ccc}F_{ab}\gamma _{ab}\mathrm{\Omega }=0,& \mathrm{\Omega }^2=\mathrm{\Omega },& \mathrm{\Omega }^{}=\mathrm{\Omega }.\end{array}$$
(4)
Note that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is basis independent or unique, as it is essentially the identity on the kernel space.

In the even dimensional Euclidean space the gamma matrices can be chosen to be Hermitian, $`\gamma _a^{}=\gamma _a`$, and the charge conjugation matrix, $`C`$ satisfies

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\gamma _a^T=(\gamma _a)^{}=C^{}\gamma _aC,\hfill & CC^{}=1.\hfill & \end{array}$$
(5)
It follows from counting the number of symmetric $`2^{D/2}\times 2^{D/2}`$ matrices

$$C^T=(1)^{\frac{1}{8}D(D2)}C.$$
(6)
We let

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\gamma _{D+1}=i^{D/2}\gamma _{12\mathrm{}D},\hfill & \gamma _{D+1}{}_{}{}^{}=\gamma _{D+1},\hfill & \gamma _{D+1}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}=1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(7)
Then from

$$\begin{array}{cc}[\gamma _{ab},\gamma _{D+1}]=0,\hfill & \gamma _{ab}C=C(\gamma _{ab})^{},\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
$`|lV`$ implies

$$\begin{array}{cc}\gamma _{D+1}|lV,\hfill & C|l^{}V,\hfill \end{array}$$
(9)
so that each of $`\{\gamma _{D+1}|l\}`$ and $`\{C|l^{}\}`$ also forms an orthonormal basis for $`V`$ separately. Consequently

$$\begin{array}{cc}[\gamma _{D+1},\mathrm{\Omega }]=0,& C\mathrm{\Omega }^{}C^{}=\mathrm{\Omega }.\end{array}$$
(10)
As the anti-symmetric products of the gamma matrices form a basis for the $`2^{D/2}\times 2^{D/2}`$ matrices, one can expand $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in terms of them. The first equation in (10) indicates only the even products contribute, and with $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ being Hermitian the second equation implies that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ should be a sum of foursome products of the gamma matrices with real coefficients

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\nu \left(1+\underset{1n\frac{D}{4}}{}\frac{1}{(4n)!}T_{a_1a_2\mathrm{}a_{4n}}\gamma _{a_1a_2\mathrm{}a_{4n}}\right).$$
(11)
Furthermore with the chiral and anti-chiral projection operators

$$P_\pm =\frac{1}{2}(1\pm \gamma _{D+1}),$$
(12)
one can decompose the projection operator as

$$\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }_++\mathrm{\Omega }_{},& \mathrm{\Omega }_\pm \mathrm{\Omega }P_\pm =P_\pm \mathrm{\Omega },\end{array}$$
(13)
satisfying

$$\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm =\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}=\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm ^{},\hfill & \mathrm{\Omega }_\pm \mathrm{\Omega }_{}=0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
When combined with the charge conjugation,

$$C\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm ^{}C^{}=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm \hfill & \text{for }D0\text{mod }4\hfill \\ & \\ \mathrm{\Omega }_{}\hfill & \text{for }D2\text{mod }4.\hfill \end{array}$$
(15)
Essentially the action $`|vC|v^{}`$ preserves the chirality in $`D0`$ mod $`4`$ while it flips in $`D2`$ mod $`4`$. This implies that in $`D2`$ mod $`4`$, the dimension $`N`$ of the kernel $`V`$ must be even and the projection operator can be written as

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Omega }=\underset{l=1}{\overset{N/2}{}}\left(|l_+l_+|+|l_{}l_{}|\right),& \gamma _{D+1}|l_\pm =\pm |l_\pm ,& |l_{}=C|l_+^{}.\end{array}$$
(16)
Since the eigenvalues of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ are either $`0`$ or $`1`$ and the non-trivial products of the gamma matrices are traceless, we have

$$N=\mathrm{tr}\mathrm{\Omega }=\nu \times 2^{D/2}.$$
(17)
The constant $`\nu `$ denotes the fraction of the unbroken supersymmetry so that $`0\nu 1`$. The $`\nu =0`$ or $`1`$ cases are trivial, either meaning the non-BPS state or the vacuum, $`F_{ab}=0`$.

The remaining constraint to ensure $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ be the projection operator is $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2=\mathrm{\Omega }`$. In the below we will focus on obtaining its general solutions in each dimension. Once we solve the constraint completely we are able to obtain all the possible BPS equations. With a given projection operator, the formula, $`F_{ab}\gamma _{ab}\mathrm{\Omega }=0`$ can be expanded as a sum of the anti-symmetric products of even number of gamma matrices. The BPS equations stem from requiring each coefficient of these products to vanish. After a brief review on $`D=2,4`$ cases, we explore the $`D=6,8`$ separately. Our analysis holds for both commutative and non-commutative spaces as well as for both Abelian and non-Abelian gauge groups.

In the $`D=2`$ case the projection matrix is trivial. Either $`\mathrm{\Omega }=0`$ or $`1`$. Thus there is no BPS configuration. Of course this is well known. In the $`D=4`$ case apart from the trivial ones $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is given by the chiral or anti-chiral projection operator itself

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\frac{1}{2}(1\pm \gamma _{1234}),$$
(18)
which gives the usual self-dual equations

$$F_{ab}=\pm \frac{1}{2}ϵ_{abcd}F_{cd}.$$
(19)
## 3 On Six Dimensional Space

In $`D=6`$ case as the four form is dual to a two form, we can rewrite the projection operator as

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\nu \left(1+\frac{1}{2}T_{ab}\gamma _{ab}\gamma _{12\mathrm{}6}\right),$$
(20)
from which we get

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^2=\nu ^2\left[1+\frac{1}{2}T_{ab}T_{ab}+(T_{ab}+\frac{1}{8}ϵ_{abcdef}T_{cd}T_{ef})\gamma _{ab}\gamma _{12\mathrm{}6}\right].$$
(21)
The condition $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2=\mathrm{\Omega }`$ implies

$$\begin{array}{cc}\nu ^11=\frac{1}{2}T_{ab}T_{ab},& (2\nu ^1)T_{ab}+\frac{1}{4}ϵ_{abcdef}T_{cd}T_{ef}=0.\end{array}$$
(22)
For a nontrivial $`\nu 0`$, the supersymmetric condition becomes

$$0=F_{ab}\gamma _{ab}\mathrm{\Omega }=\nu (F_{ab}+\frac{1}{4}ϵ_{abcdef}T_{cd}F_{ef})\gamma _{ab}\nu (2F_{ac}T_{bc}\gamma _{ab}+F_{ab}T_{ab})\gamma _{12\mathrm{}6},$$
(23)
so that the BPS states satisfy

$`F_{ab}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}ϵ_{abcdef}T_{cd}F_{ef}=0,`$ (24)
$`F_{ac}T_{bc}F_{bc}T_{ac}=0,`$ (25)
$`F_{ab}T_{ab}=0.`$ (26)
The first equation guarantees the on shell condition, $`D_aF_{ab}=0`$ due to the Jacobi identity. The others follow from the first equation and the conditions (22) as we shall see below.

To solve Eq.(22) we use the global $`\text{SO}(6)`$ transformations to rotate the real two form $`T_{ab}`$ to the block diagonal canonical form so that the only non-vanishing components are $`T_{12}=T_{21}`$, $`T_{34}=T_{43}`$ and $`T_{56}=T_{65}`$. In terms of these variables the constraints (22) become

$$\begin{array}{cc}\nu ^11=T_{12}^2+T_{34}^2+T_{56}^2,\hfill & (\frac{1}{2}\nu ^11)T_{12}T_{34}T_{56}=0,\hfill \\ & \\ (\frac{1}{2}\nu ^11)T_{34}T_{56}T_{12}=0,\hfill & (\frac{1}{2}\nu ^11)T_{56}T_{12}T_{34}=0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(27)
Solving the above equations is straightforward. The nontrivial solutions are $`\nu =1/4,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}/4,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}/4`$. The dimension of the kernel $`N`$ is then $`2,4,6`$. There is no projection operator of odd dimension in six dimensions as argued after Eq.(15).

For the $`\nu =1/4`$ case the two form tensor is

$$\begin{array}{ccc}T_{12}=\alpha _1\alpha _2,& T_{34}=\alpha _1,& T_{56}=\alpha _2,\end{array}$$
(28)
where $`\alpha _1,\alpha _2`$ are two independent signs

$$\alpha _1^2=\alpha _2^2=1.$$
(29)
There are four possibilities of $`\alpha =(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ as $`(++)`$, $`(+)`$, $`(+)`$, $`()`$, and for each $`\alpha `$ there exists a corresponding projection operator which is orthogonal to each other

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\alpha \mathrm{\Omega }_\alpha ^{}=\delta _{\alpha \alpha ^{}}\mathrm{\Omega }_\alpha .$$
(30)
They are also complete as

$$\underset{\alpha }{}\mathrm{\Omega }_\alpha =1_{8\times 8}.$$
(31)
Explicitly the BPS equations (24) become

$$\begin{array}{cc}\multicolumn{2}{c}{F_{12}+\alpha _2F_{34}+\alpha _1F_{56}=0,}\\ & \\ F_{13}+\alpha _2F_{42}=0,\hfill & F_{14}+\alpha _2F_{23}=0,\hfill \\ & \\ F_{15}+\alpha _1F_{62}=0,\hfill & F_{16}+\alpha _1F_{25}=0,\hfill \\ & \\ F_{35}+\alpha _1\alpha _2F_{64}=0,\hfill & F_{36}+\alpha _1\alpha _2F_{45}=0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(32)
The remaining equations (25) and (26) are equivalent to the above equations and so do not provide any additional restriction.

To analyze the general BPS states of $`\nu =1/2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}/4`$ we first note that $`\gamma _{2s\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}2}s}\gamma _{123456}`$, $`s=1,2,3`$ can be written as a linear combination of the $`\nu =1/4`$ projection operators

$$\gamma _{2s\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}2}s}\gamma _{123456}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{++}+(1)^s\mathrm{\Omega }_++(1)^{\frac{1}{2}s(s+1)}\mathrm{\Omega }_++(1)^{\frac{1}{2}s(s1)}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}.$$
(33)
Thus the general $`\nu =N/8`$ projection operator in the canonical form is also a linear combination, in fact $`N/2`$ sum of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\alpha `$’s as in (16).

The $`\nu =1/2`$ projection operator is a sum of any two different $`1/4`$ BPS projection operators, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{1/2}=\mathrm{\Omega }_\alpha +\mathrm{\Omega }_\alpha ^{}`$. The BPS equations for this $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ are naturally obtained by imposing two sets of the $`\nu =1/4`$ conditions (32) with $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$. For example with $`\alpha =(++)`$ and $`\alpha ^{}=(+)`$, the non-vanishing two form components are $`T_{56}=T_{65}=1`$ so that the projection operator is $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{1/2}=\frac{1}{2}(1\gamma _{1234})`$ and the BPS equations are those of the four dimensional $`1/2`$ BPS equations on the first four indices while the rest of the field strength vanishes

$$\begin{array}{cccc}F_{12}+F_{34}=0,& F_{13}+F_{42}=0,& F_{14}+F_{23}=0,& F_{a5}=F_{a6}=0.\end{array}$$
(34)
One can see a different choice of $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ leads to a self-dual or anti-self-dual BPS equations on a different four dimensional subspace. Essentially different choices are related by the $`\text{O}(6)`$ rotations.

The $`\nu =3/4`$ projection operator can be built from a sum of any three different $`1/4`$ BPS projection operators. Each of them imposes the $`1/4`$ BPS equations on the field strength. Nevertheless three sets of BPS equations are too much and the only possible solution is the vacuum, $`F_{ab}=0`$.

Attempts to construct ADHM-like solutions of the 1/4 BPS equations (32) would end up with the 1/2 BPS solutions which are essentially four dimensional in its character . This is of course consistent with the string theory prediction that there exists no D0-D6 bound state without the background $`B`$ field.

## 4 On Eight Dimensional Space

In $`D=8`$, the projection operator can be split to chiral, $`+`$ and anti-chiral, $``$ parts

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm =\nu (2P_\pm \frac{1}{4!}T_{\pm abcd}\gamma _{abcd}),$$
(35)
where $`T_{\pm abcd}`$ is a self-dual or anti-self-dual four form tensor depending on the chirality, $`\pm `$

$$T_{\pm abcd}=\pm \frac{1}{4!}ϵ_{abcdefgh}T_{\pm efgh},$$
(36)
so that $`T_{\pm abcd}\gamma _{abcd}\gamma _9=\pm T_{\pm abcd}\gamma _{abcd}`$. The possible $`\nu `$ values are $`\nu =N/16,N=1,2,\mathrm{}8`$.

The square of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm `$ can be simplified by using the self-duality of the four form tensor and noticing, for example $`T_{abcd}T_{abce}\gamma _{de}=0`$ due to the symmetries of the term. We get

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}=\nu ^2\left[2(2+\frac{1}{4!}T_{\pm abcd}T_{\pm abcd})P_\pm (\frac{1}{6}T_{\pm abcd}+\frac{1}{8}T_{\pm abef}T_{\pm cdef})\gamma _{abcd}\right].$$
(37)
The condition $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}=\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm `$ implies

$$\begin{array}{c}\nu ^1=2+\frac{1}{4!}T_{\pm abcd}T_{\pm abcd},\hfill \\ \\ (\nu ^14)T_{\pm abcd}=T_{\pm abef}T_{\pm cdef}+T_{\pm acef}T_{\pm dbef}+T_{\pm adef}T_{\pm bcef}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(38)
On the other hand the supersymmetric condition reads

$$0=F_{ab}\gamma _{ab}\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm =2\nu (F_{ab}+\frac{1}{2}T_{\pm abcd}F_{cd})\gamma _{ab}P_\pm \frac{1}{3}\nu F_{ae}T_{\pm ebcd}\gamma _{abcd},$$
(39)
so that the BPS states satisfy

$`F_{ab}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}T_{\pm abcd}F_{cd}=0,`$ (40)
$`F_{ae}T_{\pm ebcd}+F_{be}T_{\pm ecad}+F_{ce}T_{\pm eabd}+F_{de}T_{\pm ecba}=0.`$ (41)
As shown in Eq.(A.4), the second equation follows from the first one with the properties of the four form tensor (38).

Solving Eq.(38) utilizes the $`\text{SO}(8)`$ triality among $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{v}`$, $`\mathrm{𝟖}_+`$, $`\mathrm{𝟖}_{}`$ which will enable us to rotate the self-dual or anti-self-dual four form tensor to a ‘canonical form’. Eight dimensional Euclidean space admits Majorana spinors so that one can take the gamma matrices to be real and symmetric i.e. $`C=1`$. Further, the choice, $`\gamma _9=(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}0}\hfill \\ 01\hfill \end{array})`$ forces the gamma matrices to be off block diagonal

$$\gamma _a=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \rho _a\\ \rho _a^T& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(42)
The real $`8\times 8`$ matrix $`\rho _a`$ satisfies

$$\rho _a\rho _b^T+\rho _b\rho _a^T=2\delta _{ab},$$
(43)
which in turn implies $`\rho _a\text{O}(8)`$ and $`\rho _a^T\rho _b+\rho _b^T\rho _a=2\delta _{ab}`$. With the above choice of gamma matrices the spinors are real, and the traceless chiral matrix $`T_\pm \frac{1}{4!}T_{\pm abcd}\gamma _{abcd}`$ is also real and symmetric. Consequently $`T_\pm `$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm `$ are diagonalizable by the $`\text{SO}(8)`$ transformations of the eight dimensional chiral or anti-chiral real spinors, $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\pm `$.

The $`\text{SO}(8)`$ triality is apparent when we write the $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{v}`$ generators in the basis

$$\gamma _{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\rho _{[a}\rho _{b]}^T& 0\\ 0& \rho _{[a}^T\rho _{b]}\end{array}\right).$$
(44)
Clearly $`\rho _{[a}\rho _{b]}^T`$ and $`\rho _{[a}^T\rho _{b]}`$ are the $`\mathrm{𝟖}_+`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟖}_{}`$ generators respectively. Thus $`T_+`$ or $`T_{}`$ can be diagonalized, though not simultaneously, by a $`\text{SO}(8)`$ transformation of the vectors, $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{v}`$.

To proceed further it is convenient to define the following seven quantities

$$\begin{array}{cccc}E_{\pm 1}=\gamma _{8127}P_\pm ,& E_{\pm 2}=\gamma _{8163}P_\pm ,& E_{\pm 3}=\gamma _{8246}P_\pm ,& E_{\pm 4}=\gamma _{8347}P_\pm ,\\ & & & \\ E_{\pm 5}=\gamma _{8567}P_\pm ,& E_{\pm 6}=\gamma _{8253}P_\pm ,& E_{\pm 7}=\gamma _{8154}P_\pm .& \end{array}$$
(45)
Here we organize the subscript spatial indices of the gamma matrices such that the three indices after the common $`8`$ are identical to those of the totally anti-symmetric octonion structure constants (e.g. )

$$\begin{array}{c}e_ie_j=\delta _{ij}+c_{ijk}e_k,i,j,k=1,2,\mathrm{},7\\ \\ 1=c_{127}=c_{163}=c_{246}=c_{347}=c_{567}=c_{253}=c_{154}\text{(others zero)}.\end{array}$$
(46)
It is easy to see that $`E_{\pm i}`$ forms a representation for the “square” of the octonions

$$\begin{array}{cc}E_{\pm i}E_{\pm j}=\delta _{ij}\pm c_{ijk}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}E_{\pm k},& E_{\pm i}\pm e_ie_i.\end{array}$$
(47)
As they commute each other, they form a maximal set of the mutually commuting traceless symmetric and real matrices of a definite chirality, $`\gamma _9E_{\pm i}=\pm E_{\pm i}`$. Thus, again using the $`\text{SO}(8)`$ transformations one can choose an orthonormal real basis where $`E_{\pm i}`$’s are simultaneously diagonal.

All together, $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\pm `$ can transform $`T_\pm `$ to a linear combination of $`E_{\pm i}`$’s. The $`\text{SO}(8)`$ triality (44) then implies that $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{v}`$ can rotate the self-dual or anti-self-dual four form tensor to a ‘canonical form’ where the non-vanishing components are only seven as $`T_{\pm 1278}`$, $`T_{\pm 1638}`$, $`T_{\pm 2468}`$, $`T_{\pm 3478}`$, $`T_{\pm 5678}`$, $`T_{\pm 2538}`$, $`T_{\pm 1548}`$ up to permutations and the duality. This is consistent with the parameter counting as $`35=28+7`$, where $`35`$ is the number of independent self-dual or anti-self-dual components $`T_{\pm abcd}`$ , and $`28`$ is the dimension of $`\text{so}(8)`$.

Apparently for a general $`\nu =N/16`$ BPS states of a definite chirality, the corresponding projection operator $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm `$ is invariant under the $`\text{SO}(N)\times \text{SO}(8N)`$ subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\pm `$. The $`\text{SO}(8)`$ triality then shows that the self-dual or anti-self-dual four form tensor is invariant under $`\text{SO}(N)\times \text{SO}(8N)`$ subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{v}`$.

(1) $`\nu =1/16`$, $`\text{SO}(7)`$
For the minimal case $`\nu =1/16`$, as shown in the appendix, the projection operator is of the general form

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm =\frac{1}{8}\left[P_\pm \pm \left(\alpha _1\alpha _2E_{\pm 1}+\alpha _1\alpha _3E_{\pm 2}+\alpha _3E_{\pm 3}+\alpha _2E_{\pm 4}+\alpha _1E_{\pm 5}+\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3E_{\pm 6}+\alpha _2\alpha _3E_{\pm 7}\right)\right],$$
(48)
where $`\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\alpha _3`$ are three independent signs

$$1=\alpha _1^2=\alpha _2^2=\alpha _3^2.$$
(49)
The corresponding $`1/16`$ BPS states satisfy

$$\begin{array}{c}F_{12}+\alpha _1F_{34}+\alpha _2F_{56}\pm \alpha _1\alpha _2F_{78}=0,\hfill \\ \\ F_{13}+\alpha _1F_{42}+\alpha _3F_{57}\pm \alpha _1\alpha _3F_{86}=0,\hfill \\ \\ F_{14}+\alpha _1F_{23}+\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3F_{76}\pm \alpha _2\alpha _3F_{85}=0,\hfill \\ \\ F_{15}+\alpha _2F_{62}+\alpha _3F_{73}\pm \alpha _2\alpha _3F_{48}=0,\hfill \\ \\ F_{16}+\alpha _2F_{25}+\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3F_{47}\pm \alpha _1\alpha _3F_{38}=0,\hfill \\ \\ F_{17}+\alpha _3F_{35}+\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3F_{64}\pm \alpha _1\alpha _2F_{82}=0,\hfill \\ \\ \pm F_{18}+\alpha _1\alpha _2F_{27}+\alpha _1\alpha _3F_{63}+\alpha _2\alpha _3F_{54}=0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(50)
They are seven BPS equations for 28 components of $`F_{ab}`$, each of which appears once.

Especially when $`\alpha _1=\alpha _2=\alpha _3=1`$,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}T_{\pm ijk8}=\pm c_{ijk}& \text{and}& F_{i8}\pm \frac{1}{2}c_{ijk}F_{jk}=0.\end{array}$$
(51)
Three independent signs leads to eight possible combinations, covering all chiral or anti-chiral spinor spaces. For each set of $`\alpha =(\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\alpha _3)`$ there exists a corresponding zero eigenspinor, say $`|\alpha _\pm `$ which forms an orthonormal real basis for the chiral or anti-chiral spinor spaces. Accordingly the projection operator (48) can be rewritten as $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\pm \alpha }=|\alpha _\pm \alpha _\pm |`$ satisfying the orthogonal completeness

$$\begin{array}{cc}\underset{\alpha }{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\pm \alpha }=P_\pm ,& \mathrm{\Omega }_{\pm \alpha }\mathrm{\Omega }_{\pm \alpha ^{}}=\delta _{\alpha \alpha ^{}}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\pm \alpha }.\end{array}$$
(52)
From Eq.(48) $`E_{\pm i}`$ can be expressed as a linear combination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\pm \alpha }`$’s and hence they are diagonal in the basis. Consequently the general $`\nu =N/16`$ projection operator in the canonical form is an $`N`$ sum of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\pm \alpha }`$’s. Furthermore, from the triality, the $`\frac{8!}{N!(8N)!}`$ possibilities for the $`N`$ sum are equivalent to each other up to $`\text{SO}(8)`$. Higher supersymmetric BPS states then satisfy $`N`$ copies of the $`1/16`$ BPS equations of different $`\alpha `$ choices.

(2) $`\nu =2/16`$, $`\text{SO}(2)\times \text{SO}(6)`$
With the $`\alpha `$ choices as $`(+++),(++)`$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\multicolumn{3}{c}{F_{12}+F_{34}+F_{56}\pm F_{78}=0,}\\ & & \\ F_{13}+F_{42}=0,\hfill & F_{57}\pm F_{86}=0,\hfill & F_{15}+F_{62}=0,\hfill \\ & & \\ F_{14}+F_{23}=0,\hfill & F_{76}\pm F_{85}=0,\hfill & F_{16}+F_{25}=0,\hfill \\ & & \\ F_{73}\pm F_{48}=0,\hfill & F_{17}\pm F_{82}=0,\hfill & F_{35}+F_{64}=0,\hfill \\ & & \\ F_{47}\pm F_{38}=0,\hfill & F_{18}\pm F_{27}=0,\hfill & F_{63}+F_{54}=0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(53)
(3) $`\nu =3/16`$, $`\text{SO}(3)\times \text{SO}(5)`$
With the $`\alpha `$ choices as $`(+++),(++),(++)`$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}F_{12}+F_{34}=0,\hfill & F_{13}+F_{42}=0,\hfill & F_{14}+F_{23}=0,\hfill \\ & & \\ F_{56}\pm F_{78}=0,\hfill & F_{75}\pm F_{68}=0,\hfill & F_{67}\pm F_{58}=0,\hfill \\ & & \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{F_{15}=F_{26}=F_{37}=\pm F_{48},}\\ & & \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{F_{16}=F_{52}=F_{47}=\pm F_{83},}\\ & & \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{F_{17}=F_{53}=F_{64}=\pm F_{28},}\\ & & \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{\pm F_{18}=F_{72}=F_{36}=F_{54}.}\end{array}$$
(54)
Some relevant references include .

(4) $`\nu =4/16`$, $`\text{SO}(4)\times \text{SO}(4)`$
With the $`\alpha `$ choices as $`(+++),(++),(++),(+)`$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}F_{12}+F_{34}=0,\hfill & F_{13}+F_{42}=0,\hfill & F_{14}+F_{23}=0,\hfill \\ & & \\ F_{56}\pm F_{78}=0,\hfill & F_{75}\pm F_{68}=0,\hfill & F_{67}\pm F_{58}=0,\hfill \\ & & \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{F_{ab}=0\text{for}a\{1,2,3,4\}b\{5,6,7,8\}.}\end{array}$$
(55)
(5) $`\nu =5/16`$, $`\text{SO}(5)\times \text{SO}(3)`$
With the $`\alpha `$ choices as $`(+++),(++),(++),(+),(++)`$

$$\begin{array}{c}F_{12}=F_{43}=F_{65}=\pm F_{78},\\ \\ F_{13}=F_{24}=F_{75}=\pm F_{86},\\ \\ F_{14}=F_{32}=F_{76}=\pm F_{58},\\ \\ F_{ab}=0\text{for}a\{1,2,3,4\}b\{5,6,7,8\}.\end{array}$$
(56)
(6) $`\nu =6/16`$, $`\text{SO}(6)\times \text{SO}(2)`$
With the $`\alpha `$ choices as $`(+++),(++),(++),(+),(++),(+)`$

$$F_{12}=F_{43}=F_{65}=\pm F_{78},$$
(57)
and other components are zero.

(7) The $`7/16`$ BPS states do not exist, since the seven sets of $`1/16`$ BPS equations have only the vacuum solution, $`F_{ab}=0`$ which does not break any supersymmetry.

We have not analyzed the generic BPS states having both chiralities, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }_++\mathrm{\Omega }_{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+0`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}0`$. In general, the global $`\text{SO}(8)`$ transformations can take only one of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}`$ to the canonical form, but not both simultaneously. Nevertheless, the special case where both projection operators are in the canonical form is manageable from our results. One can check that the case involves a dimensional reduction. For example, for $`\nu =\left(\frac{1}{16}\right)_++\left(\frac{1}{16}\right)_{}`$ with $`\alpha =(+++)`$ we get

$$\begin{array}{cc}F_{12}+F_{34}+F_{56}=0,\hfill & F_{13}+F_{42}+F_{57}=0\hfill \\ & \\ F_{14}+F_{23}+F_{76}=0,\hfill & F_{15}+F_{62}+F_{73}=0,\hfill \\ & \\ F_{16}+F_{25}+F_{47}=0,\hfill & F_{17}+F_{35}+F_{64}=0,\hfill \\ & \\ F_{27}+F_{63}+F_{54}=0,\hfill & F_{a8}=0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(58)
This is essentially seven dimensional.

## 5 Energy Bound

Pure Yang-Mills theories in the Minkowski spacetime of the dimension $`D+1`$, $`D`$ for space, admit no local static solution having finite energy when $`D4`$, which can be seen easily from a scaling argument . However this is for the commutative case and on the non-commutative space local static configurations can exist. In this section we present some identities for $`\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{tr}(F_{ab}^2)`$ on both six and eight dimensional space which will show the energy “bound” of the BPS states.

(1) $`D=6`$
Using the two form tensor solution of the minimal case $`\nu =1/4`$, by noticing for example $`T_{ab}T_{bc}=\delta _{ac}`$, one can obtain the following identity for the generic configurations

$$\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{tr}(F_{ab}^2)=\frac{1}{8}\mathrm{tr}(F_{ab}+\frac{1}{4}ϵ_{abcdef}T_{cd}F_{ef}+\kappa T_{ab}T_{cd}F_{cd})^2\frac{1}{16}ϵ_{abcdef}T_{ab}\mathrm{tr}(F_{cd}F_{ef}),$$
(59)
where $`\kappa =\frac{1}{2}\pm \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}`$. As usual, with the convention $`F_{ab}=_aA_b_bA_ai[A_a,A_b]`$ the last term is topological as

$$\frac{1}{16}ϵ_{abcdef}T_{ab}\mathrm{tr}(F_{cd}F_{ef})=\frac{1}{4}ϵ_{abcdef}T_{ab}_c\mathrm{tr}\left(A_d_eA_fi\frac{2}{3}A_dA_eA_f\right).$$
(60)
From Eq.(22) the vanishing of the first term of the right hand side of (59) actually implies the $`1/4`$ BPS equation (24) itself and vice versa. As any BPS state satisfies at least one set of the $`1/4`$ BPS equations, the above equation shows the energy bound of the generic BPS states.

(2) $`D=8`$
With the four form tensor of the minimal case $`\nu =1/16`$, a straightforward manipulation gives using (A.6) and (A.12)

$$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{tr}(F_{ab}^2)\hfill & =\frac{1}{16}\mathrm{tr}\left(F_{ab}+\frac{1}{2}T_{\pm abcd}F_{cd}\right)^2\frac{1}{8}T_{\pm abcd}\mathrm{tr}(F_{ab}F_{cd})\hfill \\ & \\ & =\frac{1}{16}\mathrm{tr}\left(F_{ab}+\frac{1}{2}T_{\pm abcd}F_{cd}\right)^2\frac{1}{2}T_{\pm abcd}_a\mathrm{tr}\left(A_b_cA_di\frac{2}{3}A_bA_cA_d\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(61)
As in $`D=6`$, since any BPS state satisfies at least one set of $`1/16`$ BPS equations, this equation shows the energy bound of the generic BPS states.

Apart from the above quadratic topological charge, there is another topological charge

$$Q=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^{D/2}(D/2)!}\mathrm{tr}(\underset{D/2\text{product}}{\underset{}{FF\mathrm{}F}}).$$
(62)
which does not need to be related to the above quadratic topological charge directly.

## 6 Examples in $`D=6`$ and $`D=8`$

Here we comment on the known solutions of pure Yang-Mills theories on commutative or non-commutative spaces with gauge group $`\text{U}(1)`$ or non-Abelian. As stated before, there is no static finite energy configurations on commutative space of dimension higher than four.

### 6.1  Octonionic Instantons

In eight dimensional Euclidean space, with the gauge group $`SO(7)^+`$ as a subgroup of $`SO(8)`$, an explicit solution of the octonionic BPS equation (51) has been found . It has infinite energy, but its four-form charge over the corresponding four dimensional hyperplane is finite. Namely the integration of $`\mathrm{tr}(F_{ab}F_{cd})\mathrm{d}x_a\mathrm{d}x_b\mathrm{d}x_c\mathrm{d}x_d`$ over $`(x_a,x_b,x_c,x_d)`$ hyperplane is finite and in fact proportional to $`T_{\pm abcd}`$. Our analysis in the previous section tells us that it has $`1/16`$ supersymmetry.

### 6.2 Constant Field Strength

One can think of a constant field strength and so they are independent of space. Let us consider the $`\text{U}(1)`$ theory first. Strictly speaking, in this case there exit non-linearly realized additional supersymmetries in the super Yang-Mills theories where the gaugino transforms as $`\delta \lambda =\epsilon ^{}`$ with the gauge fields fixed. As a result any constant field strength preserves all the supersymmetries. Let us then consider the $`\text{SU}(2)`$ case where all the the constant fields are diagonal i.e. $`F_{ab}=f_{ab}\sigma _3`$ with $`\sigma _3`$ being the third Pauli matrix. The additional supersymmetries do not play any role here. In this special case one may not have to go through all the previous projection operator analysis. Using the global rotation, $`\text{O}(D)`$, one can block diagonalize the field strength so that $`f_{ab}\gamma _{ab}=_{s=1}^{D/2}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}f_{2s\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}2}s}\gamma _{2s\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}2}s}`$. As the $`\gamma _{2s\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}2}s}`$, $`s=1,2,\mathrm{},D/2`$ are commuting each other and have eigenvalues $`\pm 1`$, the constant configuration, $`f_{2s\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}2}s}f_s`$ is BPS if and only if

$$\pm f_1\pm f_2\pm f_3\pm \mathrm{}\pm f_{D/2}=0.$$
(63)
The number of possible sign combinations out of $`2^{D/2}`$ choices counts the number of unbroken supersymmetries. The multiplication of all the signs determines the chirality of the corresponding zero eigenspinor. Due to the freedom to flip the over all signs, the number of unbroken supersymmetries is always even. This over all sign change leaves the chirality invariant for even $`D/2`$, while it flips for odd $`D/2`$. Surely this is consistent with the results in section 2, and Eq.(63) corresponds to (32) or (53).

More explicitly, fully using the $`\text{O}(D)`$ rotation we arrange $`f_1f_2f_3\mathrm{}f_{D/2}0`$. For $`D=6`$ the configuration is BPS if $`f_1f_2f_3=0`$. As there are two possible over all signs, it corresponds to the $`1/4`$ BPS state. For $`D=8`$ there are several possibilities. For $`f_1>f_2f_3f_4>0`$, it can only satisfy either $`f_1f_2f_3+f_4=0`$ or $`f_1f_2f_3f_4=0`$, which has $`1/8`$ supersymmetry with the positive or negative chirality respectively. For $`f_1>f_2f_3>f_4=0`$, it satisfies both so that $`\nu =1/4`$. For $`f_1=f_2>f_3=f_4>0`$, it can satisfy $`f_1f_2\pm (f_3f_4)=0`$, which has also 4 supersymmetries and hence $`\nu =1/4`$ with positive chirality. For $`f_1=f_2>f_3=f_4=0`$, we have $`\nu =1/2`$. Finally for $`f_1=f_2=f_3=f_4>0`$, it can satisfy $`f_1f_2+f_3f_4=0`$ and others so that it has six supersymmetries of the positive chirality. This agrees with the previous $`3/8`$ BPS equations (57).

For the non-Abelian gauge group, we have $`F_{ab}=F_{ab}^\alpha t^\alpha `$ and one can not block diagonalize all of $`F_{ab}^\alpha `$’s simultaneously by a single $`\text{SO}(D)`$ rotation in general. Nevertheless, we point out that if the gauge group is semi-simple of rank two or higher, a constant field strength configuration in eight dimensions can be a $`1/16`$ BPS state. For example, if $`[t^1,t^2]=0`$, one can construct a non-Abelian constant field strength of which the non-vanishing components are $`F_{12}^1,F_{34}^1,F_{56}^1,F_{78}^1`$ and $`F_{13}^2,F_{42}^2,F_{57}^2,F_{86}^2`$ only up to the anti-symmetric property. When $`F_{ab}^1`$ and $`F_{ab}^2`$ satisfy the first and second equations of the $`1/16`$ BPS equations (50) respectively with a unique choice of $`\alpha `$, it is certainly a $`1/16`$ BPS state.

### 6.3 Non-commutative Exact Solutions

The non-commutative space is specified by the commutation relation

$$[x_a,x_b]=i\theta _{ab}.$$
(64)
Using the global $`\text{O}(D)`$ rotation one can take the block diagonal canonical form for $`\theta `$ so that the non-vanishing components are $`\theta _{2s\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}2}s}\theta _s>0`$, $`s=1,2,\mathrm{},D/2`$ only up to the anti-symmetric property. This choice clearly manifests the $`D/2`$ pairs of harmonic oscillators, $`[a_s,a_r^{}]=\delta _{sr}`$, $`a_s=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\theta _s}}(x_{2s1}+ix_{2s})`$.

On non-commutative space any $`\text{U}(n)`$ gauge theories are equivalent to another, in particular to a $`\text{U}(1)`$ theory provided that all the fields are in the adjoint representation . Hence we restrict on the $`\text{U}(1)`$ gauge group only here without loss of generality. Writing $`A_a=Y_a\theta _{ab}^1x_b`$ gives

$$F_{ab}=\theta _{ab}^1i[Y_a,Y_b].$$
(65)
1) Shift Operator Solitons
The shift operator, $`S`$ in the harmonic oscillator Hilbert space is almost unitary

$$\begin{array}{cc}SS^{}=1,& S^{}S=1P_0.\end{array}$$
(66)
where $`P_0`$ is a projection operator of finite dimension to the Hilbert space. The shift operator solution satisfying $`D_aF_{ab}=0`$ reads

$$\begin{array}{ccc}Y_a=\theta _{ab}^1S^{}x_bS& & F_{ab}=\theta _{ab}^1P_0.\end{array}$$
(67)
Similar to the constant solutions, this localized field configuration is supersymmetric if and only if

$$\pm \frac{1}{\theta _1}\pm \frac{1}{\theta _2}\pm \frac{1}{\theta _3}\pm \mathrm{}\pm \frac{1}{\theta _{D/2}}=0,$$
(68)
and hence the counting of the supersymmetry proceeds identically as in the constant solutions . The energy of the solution is

$$E_0=\frac{1}{2e^2}(2\pi )^{D/2}\left(\underset{s=1}{\overset{D/2}{}}\theta _s\right)\left(\frac{1}{\theta _1^2}+\frac{1}{\theta _2^2}+\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{\theta _{D/2}^2}\right)\mathrm{Tr}P_0,$$
(69)
and the $`D`$-form topological charge is

$$Q_0=\left(\underset{s=1}{\overset{D/2}{}}\theta _s\right)\mathrm{Tr}(F_{12}F_{34}\mathrm{}F_{D1D})=(1)^{D/2}\mathrm{Tr}P_0.$$
(70)
2) Kraus and Shigemori Solutions
From (65) $`D=6`$ $`\nu =1/4`$, or $`D=8`$ $`\nu =1/8`$ BPS equations (32,53) are equivalent, with the positive $`\alpha `$ choice, to

$$\begin{array}{cc}\underset{s=1}{\overset{D/2}{}}[Z_s,\overline{Z}_s]=\underset{s=1}{\overset{D/2}{}}\frac{1}{\theta _s},\hfill & [Z_s,Z_r]=0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(71)
where we complexified $`Y_a`$ so that $`Z_s=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(Y_{2s1}+iY_{2s})`$, $`s,r=1,2,\mathrm{},D/2`$.

Kraus and Shigemori found a class of finite energy configurations satisfying $`D_aF_{ab}=0`$ in the special case where all the $`\theta _s`$’s are equal, $`\theta _s=\theta `$. Their solutions are specified by two non-negative numbers, $`Ll0`$ and the energy is minimized when $`L=l`$. In this case their solution reduces to

$$Z_r=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\theta }}Sf(N)a_rS^{},$$
(72)
where with total number operator, $`N=_sa_s^{}a_s`$,

$$f(N)=\sqrt{1\underset{j=1}{\overset{D/2}{}}\left(\frac{l+j}{N+j}\right)},$$
(73)
and $`S`$ is a shift operator satisfying $`1S^{}S=P_l`$, a projection operator to the states, $`Nl`$. It is straightforward to show that this is a solution of the above non-commutative BPS equation (71) having $`\nu =(\frac{1}{2})^{(D2)/2}`$ supersymmetry. Its energy is

$$E_{KS}=\frac{1}{8e^2}D(D2)(2\pi )^{D/2}\theta ^{(D4)/2}\mathrm{Tr}P_l,$$
(74)
while the $`D`$-form topological charge is

$$Q_{KS}=(1)^{D/2}\mathrm{Tr}P_l.$$
(75)
This is exactly the “opposite” of $`Q_0`$ in (70).

3) Comparison
Let us now compare the shift operator solutions with the K-S solutions. First from (69) and (74) we get $`E_{KS}E_0`$. The equality holds only in $`D=4`$, and for $`D=6,8`$ the K-S solitons are heavier. In six dimensions both of them can have two supersymmetries or 1/4 of the original one. However the $`\theta _{ab}`$ condition of the K-S solutions, $`\theta _1=\theta _2=\theta _3`$ forbid the shift operator solution from being supersymmetric, which would require $`1/\theta _1=1/\theta _2+1/\theta _3`$. In eight dimensions both can be supersymmetric at the same time. The shift operator solution carries $`3/8`$ of the original supersymmetry while the K-S solution carries $`1/8`$. As their topological charges are “opposite”, they can be thought as $`D0D8`$ and $`\overline{D0}D8`$ systems.

## 7 Conclusion

In this note, we considered the maximally supersymmetric pure Yang-Mills theories on Euclidean space of six and eight dimensions. We determine, in a systematic way, all the possible fractions of the supersymmetry preserved by the BPS states and present the corresponding BPS equations. In six dimensions, the intrinsic one has 1/4 of supersymmetry while the 1/2 BPS states here are essentially four dimensional. In eight dimensions, the minimal fraction is chiral 1/16. Within chiral or anti-chiral sector one could build up to 6/16 without dimensional reduction. We have applied our BPS equations to various known solutions, counted the numbers of supersymmetries and compared their topological charges.

In our eight dimensional analysis we decomposed the constant four form tensor into chiral and anti-chiral sectors as the BPS conditions work separately. Using the $`\text{SO}(8)`$ triality, we were able to bring any chiral sector into the canonical form, but not both simultaneously. Considering both chiralities in the canonical form simultaneously, we have obtained the BPS equations that are essentially seven dimensional in its character. There is no reason not to consider the generically mixed chiralities where only one sector is in the canonical form. Further clarification is necessary in this direction.

As we considered the Euclidean pure Yang-Mills theories in even dimensions, we turned on only the magnetic field strength for the D brane systems and did not included the effect of electric fields. One such example involving the electric fields is the BPS equations describing dyons in three spatial dimensions. In this respect it would be interesting to generalize our results to the case where non-vanishing electric fields are allowed. Others we did not consider includes the super Yang-Mills theory of nine spatial dimensions. From the view point of the dimensional reduction, this corresponds to the eight dimensional theory plus one adjoint Higgs. Our project will be complete in some sense if one is able to classify all the possible BPS equations in the $`9+1`$ dimensional super Yang-Mills theory. Nevertheless our eight dimensional results are ready for the reduction to the lower dimensions to generate some adjoint Higgs.

Acknowledgements We wish to thank Piljin Yi for the valuable conversation and Sang-Heon Yi for pointing out the relevance of the K-S solutions to our BPS equations. This work is supported in part by KOSEF 1998 Interdisciplinary Research Grant 98-07-02-07-01-5.

Appendix

There is an identity for an arbitrary self-dual or anti-self-dual four form tensor in $`D=8`$. From the relation

$$\begin{array}{cc}T_{\pm acde}T_{\pm bcde}\hfill & =\left(\frac{1}{4!}\right)^2ϵ_{acdefghi}ϵ_{bcdejklm}T_{\pm fghi}T_{\pm jklm}\hfill \\ & \\ & =\frac{1}{4}\delta _{ab}T_{\pm cdef}T_{\pm cdef}T_{\pm acde}T_{\pm bcde},\hfill \end{array}$$
(A.1)
we obtain

$$T_{\pm acde}T_{\pm bcde}=\frac{1}{8}\delta _{ab}T_{\pm cdef}T_{\pm cdef}.$$
(A.2)
With the four form tensor in $`D=8`$ projection operator we set

$$Q_{abcd}=F_{ae}T_{\pm ebcd}+F_{be}T_{\pm ecad}+F_{ce}T_{\pm eabd}+F_{de}T_{\pm ecba}.$$
(A.3)
From the identity (A.2) and the properties of the four form tensor (38) which come from $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}=\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm `$ we obtain

$$\begin{array}{cc}0Q_{abcd}Q_{abcd}\hfill & =4F_{ab}F_{ac}T_{\pm bdef}T_{\pm cdef}12F_{ab}T_{\pm bcde}F_{cf}T_{\pm fade}\hfill \\ & \\ & =12(\nu ^12)F_{ab}F_{ab}6\left[F_{ab}F_{cd}T_{\pm abef}T_{\pm cdef}+(4\nu ^1)F_{ab}F_{cd}T_{\pm abcd}\right]\hfill \\ & \\ & =12(F_{ab}+\frac{1}{2}T_{\pm abcd}F_{cd})\left[(\nu ^12)F^{ab}T_{\pm abef}F_{ef}\right].\hfill \end{array}$$
(A.4)
Therefore Eq.(40) makes $`Q_{abcd}`$ vanish.

Henceforth we solve $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm =\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}`$ for the case $`D=8`$, $`\nu =1/16`$. With the canonical choice of the self-dual or anti-self-dual four form tensor we write

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm =\frac{1}{8}P_\pm \left(1\pm \underset{i=1}{\overset{7}{}}\beta _iE_{\pm i}\right),$$
(A.5)
where

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\beta _1=T_{\pm 3456}=\pm T_{\pm 1278},\hfill & \beta _2=T_{\pm 2475}=\pm T_{\pm 1638},\hfill & \beta _3=T_{\pm 1357}=\pm T_{\pm 2468},\hfill \\ & & \\ \beta _4=T_{\pm 1256}=\pm T_{\pm 3478},\hfill & \beta _5=T_{\pm 1234}=\pm T_{\pm 5678},\hfill & \beta _6=T_{\pm 1476}=\pm T_{\pm 2538},\hfill \\ & & \\ \beta _7=T_{\pm 2376}=\pm T_{\pm 1548}.\hfill & & \end{array}$$
(A.6)
Direct calculation using Eq.(47) gives

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}=\frac{1}{64}P_\pm \left(1+\underset{i=1}{\overset{7}{}}\beta _i^2\pm (2\beta _i+\underset{j,k}{}c_{ijk}^2\beta _j\beta _k)E_{\pm i}\right).$$
(A.7)
As the square of the projection operator is itself, we obtain eight equations to solve

$`7{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{7}{}}}\beta _i^2=0,`$ (A.8)
$`6\beta _i{\displaystyle \underset{j,k}{}}c_{ijk}^2\beta _j\beta _k\kappa _i=0.`$ (A.9)
Among the latter seven, with seven distinct indices $`(i,j,k,l,m,r,s)`$, typical four of $`\kappa _i\pm \kappa _j=0`$, $`\kappa _m\pm \kappa _r=0`$ give

$$\begin{array}{c}(3\pm \beta _k)(\beta _i\beta _j)=(\beta _l\beta _s)(\beta _m\beta _r),\hfill \\ \\ (3\pm \beta _k)(\beta _m\beta _r)=(\beta _l\beta _s)(\beta _i\beta _j),\hfill \end{array}$$
(A.10)
which in turn imply

$$\left[(3\pm \beta _k)^2(\beta _l\beta _s)^2\right](\beta _i\beta _j)=0.$$
(A.11)
If $`\beta _i^2\beta _j^2`$ then $`9+\beta _k^2=\beta _l^2+\beta _s^2`$ and $`3\beta _k+\beta _l\beta _s=0`$ so that either $`\beta _l^2=9`$ or $`\beta _s^2=9`$. However, this violates the constraint on the size of $`\beta _i^2`$ (A.8). Thus $`\beta _i^2=\beta _j^2`$ and hence, in general, all the coefficients are of the same norm. From (A.8) we get $`\beta _i^2=1`$ for all $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},7`$. Now noticing $`\beta _i\beta _j\beta _k=1\text{or}1`$, the seven equations (A.9) reduce to

$$1=\beta _1\beta _2\beta _7=\beta _1\beta _6\beta _3=\beta _1\beta _5\beta _4=\beta _2\beta _5\beta _3=\beta _2\beta _4\beta _6=\beta _3\beta _4\beta _7=\beta _5\beta _6\beta _7.$$
(A.12)
Essentially there remain three independent signs. Our choice of the solution is $`\beta _5=\alpha _1`$, $`\beta _4=\alpha _2`$, $`\beta _3=\alpha _3`$ and

$$\begin{array}{cccc}\beta _1=\alpha _1\alpha _2,\hfill & \beta _2=\alpha _1\alpha _3,\hfill & \beta _6=\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3,\hfill & \beta _7=\alpha _2\alpha _3.\hfill \end{array}$$
(A.13)


format: text

text:
# Damage Thermodynamics of Quasibrittle Materials

## Introduction

Fracture phenomena are most complicated and intrigued fundamental problem of the present-day. As of now, a sequence of fresh approaches to attacking of this problem is outlined. Statistical mechanics of cracks is most rigorous and sequential from them , but very hard at a times. It is used out and developed the methods of the complex systems, methods of the percolation and fractal theories and setera . Next way for consideration of the problem is using of purely mechanic descriptions  and non-equilibrium thermodynamics . Very interest and promising results are obtained with the phase-field model  based on the phase transition concept . In the phase-field models a order parameter describes microscopic distribution of mass density in he transition zone between a solid (phase I) and a separate crack (phase II).

It is known approaches for describing of the fracture problem as the first-order phase transition . One may regard an each separate crack as nucleus or droplet of new phase with determinate activation energy. Such approaches are more suitable for description of ideal zero-defects solid, for which the activation has thermal character and activation energy haven enough high value is fixed.

In the other side it is known opposite approaches for the same seemingly problem with position of the second-order phase transition . Real structural inhomogeneous solids have the multitude manifest and latent defects in its bulk. They may be activated at different energies from zero for manifest defects to theoretical limit for ideal solid. Thus one may suppose that quantity of defects in a solid rests constant at all times, and to describe degree its activation by average energy per one defect . Such ”order parameter” describes mesoscopic level state, a elementary unit of which consist multitude structural inhomogencities.

Practically relaxation of quasibrittle solid with the plastic (viscous) mechanism even at slow deformation is too hard owing to large rigidity of their molecular organisation. Therefore, probably, the unique mechanism of relaxation in this case is activation and growth of microcracks, their further merge and branching (damage) and, at the end, failure thereof. The destruction of quasibrittle solid with this mechanism enough frequently is naturally observed, for example at deformation of rock around of a underground working on too large depth .

In present paper the behaviour of quasibrittle solids at high loading (deformation) is considered from general thermodynamic positions. The applicability of performances of equilibrium thermodynamics in this case is limited to intermediate temporary scale smaller necessary for diffusion healing of microcracks. From consideration are excluded both infinite timeout, and may be processes of microcrack origin. It is considered, that a real fragile solid already has natural loosenings, defects etc., which are only made active by an applied external mechanical field.

It is known the destruction is irreversible thermodynamic process. In classical thermodynamics irreversibility and non-equilibribility are taken as interrelation notes . That is any irreversible process is non-eqilibrium, and conversely any non-equilibrium one is irreversible. It is true for infinite slow processes. In real situation of intermediate time there is possibility when process has irreversible character, but one is equilibrated or more precisely quasiequilibrated.

## 1. Constitutive relations

The occurrence of microcracks (damage) conducts to growth of internal energy of a solid on value of work of external force equal to total energy of the broken off bandings. In this case for slow equilibrium processes basic equation of thermodynamics is possible to write down as:

(1)
$$du=Tds+\sigma _{ij}d\epsilon _{ij}+\phi d\nu ,$$

where $`u`$ \- is density of internal energy, $`J/m^3`$, $`T`$ \- is temperature; $`s`$ \- is density of entropy, $`J/degreem^3`$, $`\sigma _{ij}`$ \- is tensor of stress, $`N/m^2`$; $`\epsilon _{ij}`$ \- is reversible (elastic) part of deformation tensor; $`\phi `$, $`\nu `$ \- is accordingly average additional energy of system per one microcrack, $`J`$, and thermodynamically paired quantity, connected to it having dimension of microcrack density, $`m^3`$. The relationship (1) can be presented in other, more known form

(2)
$$du=Tds+\sigma _{ij}d\epsilon _{ij}+\sigma _{ij}d\epsilon _{ij}^n,$$

where $`\epsilon _{ij}^n`$ \- tensor of inelastic deformations. From the given expression it is visible, that ”pumping” of internal energy is carried out through an irreversible part of work of a external stress. As other channels of dissipation are not considered, this part of work can go on ”pumping” of internal energy in the form or thermal movement (that is taken into account by first term in (1)), or in the form surface energy and energy of microcracks interaction (that is taken into account by last term in (1)). The form of the relationship (1) is more convenient, if the research of a model of a solid are limited to energetic level of consideration, that, however, it is quite enough for reception of many useful and common results. If necessary of more detailed analysis between macroscopic parameters $`\sigma _{ij}`$, $`\epsilon _{ij}^n`$ and internal ones $`\phi ,h`$ is necessary to establish additional connection similar those in the thermodynamic theory of dislocations .

In essence, the relation (1) is tantamount to stating that irreversible part of external work is substituted with effective external microcrack flow in a manner like thermal flow. Motivation for such presentation is concluded that information about solid state in form of inelastic deformation is lost for system. In other side this information residues in the system in the form it’s changed microcrack structure. In this context there is quite deep analogy between first and last terms of expression (1). Namely, temperature $`T`$ has meaning of average energy per one particle rather per one degree of freedom, while entropy has meaning of measure of such effective degree of freedom. Parameter $`\phi `$, as reported above, has meaning of average additional energy per one defect (in our case, microcrack), that is it plays a role of static ”temperature”. Logically to surmise that density of microcracks is some analogue of static ”entropy”. Really, when system transits from a nonequilibrium state to it’s equilibrium one both entropy and density of microcracks have similar feature: namely at suit external conditions each of them tends to increasing. It is necessary to note, that the additional internal energy connected to occurrence of a separate microcrack, is proportional to the sizes by last, and the increase of average energy of microcracks is equivalent to increase of their average size. This additional energy is caused by direct break of banding, formation of a free surface limiting a microcrack, and reorganization of nuclear layers near the surface with arising of additional internal stress.

Free energy of a system is such part of it’s internal energy, which is able to perform mechanical work. Unavailable energy is that lost part of internal energy, which isn’t able to perform mechanical work. The thermal part of unavailable energy is well known and equal to $`Ts`$. It is clear, that part energy accumulated in the microcracks is lost for work too. In the context of said above let this part of unavailable energy be equal to $`\phi \nu `$. Then new expression for density of free energy first has been wrote in the form:

(3)
$$f=uTs\phi \nu ,$$

so, that its complete differential can be written down in the form

(4)
$$df=sdT+\sigma _{ij}d\epsilon _{ij}\nu d\phi ,$$

Ignoring by thermal contribution one may rewrite down (4) as

(5)
$$df=\sigma _{ij}d\epsilon _{ij}\nu d\phi ,$$

From a relationship (5) follows, that the free energy is potential, if variables $`\epsilon _{ij},\phi `$ are chosen as arguments, i.e. $`f=f(\epsilon _{ij},\phi )`$. If the explicit arguments dependence of free energy density was known, variables $`\sigma _{ij}`$ and $`\nu `$ thermodynamically connected with arguments could be determined by simple differentiation:

(6)
$$\sigma _{ij}=\frac{f}{\epsilon _{ij}},\nu =\frac{f}{\phi }.$$

It is necessary to note, that on sense of the relationship (1), the relationships (6) should express external influences on elementary unit. At the same time parameter $`\nu `$ can make sense of external parameter only for the mobile defects capable to move through external interface of elementary unit. If the defects are motionless, and can only arise or disappear inside volume, that, strictly speaking, it is necessary to put $`\nu =const`$. Without the loss of generality it is believed that $`const=0`$. Validity of some extreme ”principle” from here follows :

(7)
$$\frac{f}{\phi }=0.$$

By this meant that in the equilibrium stationary state the irreversible work isn’t carried out. If one exerts additional constant stress new microcracks are arisen (activated) in the bulk for as long as new equilibrium state is achieved. In the other side condition (7) is meant the free energy has minimum in any equilibrium state as $`\phi `$ is conceptually internal parameter.

## 2. Expanding at power series

As the definition of an explicit expression for free energy density is a hard task, we apply standard in such cases reception, namely, we shall expand free energy on its arguments:

(8)
$$f(\epsilon _{ij},\phi )=f_0\nu _0\phi +\frac{1}{2}a\phi ^2\frac{1}{3}b\phi ^3+\frac{1}{2}\lambda \epsilon _{ii}^2+\mu \epsilon _{ij}^2g\phi \epsilon _{ii}+\frac{1}{2}\overline{\lambda }\phi \epsilon _{ii}^2+\overline{\mu }\phi \epsilon _{ij}^2+e\phi ^2\epsilon _{ii}+\mathrm{}$$

First term $`f_0`$ is free energy of the non-loaded body in absence of microcracks. The following three terms describe features of dependence of free energy from microcracs in absence external mechanical load. Term $`\nu _0\phi `$ is meaningful to bulk density of superficial energy of the completely isolated and not interacted among themselves microcracks ( $`\nu _0`$ \- is their natural density). Square term with $`\phi `$ describes dimensional effect taking into account that fact, that the growth of energy of a microcrack with increase of its size is slowed down. Cubic term with $`\phi `$ takes into account an opportunity of merge of microcracks, when the average energy per one merged microcrack, grows at common reduction of energy of system (sign ”minus” at $`b>0`$).

Terms $`\lambda \epsilon _{ii}^2/2`$ and $`\mu \epsilon _{ij}^2`$ in (8) describe decomposition of an elastic part of energy through invariant of deformation tensor in a continuous solid (in absence of microcracks).

Subsequent mixed terms have double interpretation: from the point of view of influence of microcracks on deformation field and, on the contrary, from the point of view of influence of deformation field on behaviour of microcracks. Term $`g\phi \epsilon _{ii}`$, on the one hand, takes into account loosening up (increase of volume) non-loaded material at presence of microcracks, and, on the other hand, change of ”own” energy of microcracks owing to work of mechanical forces.

Cubic mixed terms $`\overline{\lambda }\phi \epsilon _{ii}^2/2`$ and $`\overline{\mu }\phi \epsilon _{ij}^2`$ also describe increase or reduction of free energy at the expense of the uncoordinated deformation of various elementary volumes, for which size of average energy of microcracks $`\phi `$ (or their average size) is a measure of such incoordination. As a matter of fact, these terms describe additional interaction of elementary volumes, however only formally they can be treated as effective interaction of microcracks. The given interaction is carried out through far-acted field of macroscopic deformations. It is need to distinguish such interaction from interactions of own deformation field of microcracs, which decreases quickly enough  and can play an appreciable role only at large density of microcracks. The parameters $`\overline{\lambda },\overline{\mu }`$ in this context take into account change of stiffness of a material for the account of microcracs. Discussed terms are possible to interpret and as influence on energy of a microcrack of deformation field owing to the same uncoordinated deformation.

At last, term $`e\phi ^2\epsilon _{ii}`$ describes, on the one hand, smaller growth of a degree of material loosening with growth of the microcrack sizes, with another - influence of interaction through own deformed field. Notice that the centre of the expansion may be not only zero as in (8), but any other value of $`\phi `$.

Leaving in (8) explicit dependence only from average energy of microcracks, we receive:

(9)
$$f(\phi )=\overline{f_0}\overline{\nu }\phi +\frac{1}{2}\overline{a}\phi ^2\frac{1}{3}b\phi ^3+\mathrm{},$$

where

$`\overline{f_0}=f_0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\lambda \epsilon _{ii}^2+\mu \epsilon _{ij}^2`$
(10) $`\overline{\nu }=\nu _0+g\epsilon _{ii}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\lambda }\epsilon _{ii}^2\overline{\mu }\epsilon _{ij}^2`$
$`\overline{a}=a+2e\epsilon _{ii}.`$
The diagram of free energy generally represents a cubic parabola, the variants of possible forms of which and arrangement of them concerning of coordinate axes at various values of tensor components of deformation are given in the fig. 1. Three forms of a cubic parabola - with two extremes on the diagram, with a point inflexion and monotonously falling down diagram (fig. 1a) are generally possible. From extreme ”principle” (7) the equation for definition of equilibrium values of average energy follows

(11)
$$f^{}(\phi )=\overline{\nu }+\overline{a}\phi b\phi ^2=0.$$

The decisions of the equation

(12)
$$\phi _{1/2}=\frac{1}{2b}(\overline{a}\pm (\overline{a}^24b\overline{\nu })^{1/2})$$

are those, that is valid $`\phi _1>\phi _2`$. The stability of roots of the equation (11) is determined by sign of the second derivative of free energy:

(13)
$$f^{\prime \prime }(\phi _{1/2})=\overline{a}2b\phi _{1/2}=(\overline{a}^24b\overline{\nu })^{1/2}),$$

The first root is unstable, second one is steady and determines some equilibrium value of average energy come on one microcrack. As the state of a solid with microcracks, strictly speaking, is nonequilibrium, but can exist long enough, it as a matter of fact is metastable. The extreme principle in the form (11) determines conditions of existence of its metastable state. If the deviation of the current value of average energy from equilibrium is insignificant, the solid keeps the integrity . Here it is meant, that the current value of average energy of microcracks can, both lag behind, and outstrip equilibrium value , which with (12) follows change of a mode of elastic loading of a sample. If the current value of average current average energy is those, that , the system passes on a falling down branch of free energy (curve 1, fig. 1a), that is equivalent to creep or later to macroscopic destruction of a solid or, at least, to transition of destruction to the following structural level (merge of microcracks). Existence of a potential barrier separating a steady state from of the falling down branch, depends from sign of the discriminate:

(14)
$$D=\overline{a}^24b\overline{\nu }.$$

At $`D=0`$ (curve 2, fig. 1a) the potential barrier is absent. In this case body begins to creep at slightest change of parameter $`\phi `$. At negative values of discriminant (curve 3, fig. 1a) the equilibrium values are absent at all, and the solid creeps constantly. Under condition $`D>0`$ it takes place two different decisions, between which should be observed an inequality $`\phi _1>\phi _2`$. Increasing deformation of a material so that to pass from negative values of discriminant $`D`$ to positive them, it is possible to transfer a solid from a conditionally equilibrium state to nonequilibrium state. In result the value of average energy of microcracks will grow continuously (creep), that will be achieved for the account, both growth of the sizes of separate microcracks, and their merge at general downturn of energy of system. Value $`D=0`$ separates regions of equilibrium states and creep. Further, varying the free energy on deformation, it is possible to determine a field of pressure:

(15)
$$\sigma _{ij}=\frac{f}{\epsilon _{ij}}=[(\lambda _{ef}\epsilon _{ii}g\phi )\delta _{ij}2\mu _{ef}\epsilon _{ij}],$$

Where

$`\lambda _{ef}=\lambda +\overline{\lambda },`$
(16) $`\mu _{ef}=\mu +\overline{\mu }`$
As it is visible, the elastic modules is varied of depending on presence of microcracks. The positive values of parameters $`\overline{\lambda }`$ and $`\overline{\mu }`$ ($`\overline{\lambda }>0`$ and $`\overline{\mu }>0`$) correspond to growth of effective stiffness of a material with growth of average microcrack energy. The last takes place, if during deformation, despite of break of a part of the bindings the rest of them are capable to keep additional action promoting more hard response. Growing of average microcrack energy may be accompanied by strengthening of rest bonds with increasing of internal stress around a microcrack. If it not so, the break of bindings will cause downturn of rigidity of a material, and the inequalities $`\overline{\lambda }<0`$ and $`\overline{\mu }<0`$ will be carried out. The first case is quite exotic, but the letter one is thermodynamically more correct.

## 3. Transition through zero

As to metastable states correspondingly dependence of sign of the parameter $`\phi _2`$ three qualitatively various situations are possible. The positive values of this parameter (curve 3, fig. 1a) describe a real physical state of a solid. The negative values (curve 1, fig. 1a) have no physical sense, and the free energy formally does not depend in any way on microcracks. The independence of free energy of parameter $`\phi `$ in the field of its negative values is represented by horizontal lines (fig. 1a). The equality to zero of this parameter determines the instant of disappearance (in statistical sense) microcracks for the reason that their sizes at zero their average energy are equal to zero (collapse).

We shall consider features of transition of system through zero of equilibrium parameter $`\phi _2`$. Near to this point the large powers in expansion of free energy it is possible to reject and to be limited only to square-law approximation. Then the point $`\phi _2=0`$ is achieved at deformation with hydrostatic compression:

(17)
$$\epsilon _{ii}^{(0)}=\frac{\nu }{g}<0,$$

To the left of a point $`\phi =0`$ the free energy, as was told above, does not depend from variable $`\phi `$ and, hence, it’s derivative of all orders on this variable identically address in zero. To the right of a point $`\phi =0`$ derivative from free energy are not equal to zero and can be determined by double differentiation of expression (8). Thus, second derivative of free energy will have discontinuity at transition of a point $`\phi =0`$:

$`f_\phi ^{\prime \prime }=\overline{a}=0\mathrm{}.if\mathrm{}.\epsilon _{ii}>{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{g}}<0,`$
(18) $`f_\phi ^{\prime \prime }=0\mathrm{}.if\mathrm{}.\epsilon _{ii}<{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{g}}<0,`$
And also

$`f_{\phi ,\epsilon _{ii}}^{\prime \prime }=g>0\mathrm{}.if\mathrm{}.\epsilon _{ii}>{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{g}}<0,`$
(19) $`f_{\phi ,\epsilon _{ii}}^{\prime \prime }=0\mathrm{}.if\mathrm{}.\epsilon _{ii}<{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{g}}<0,`$
In second by derivative on deformation the discontinuity is absent, but the break on the diagram of dependence from parameter $`\phi `$ takes place. The behaviour and character of two derivatives free energy discontinuity testifies that we have to deal with some analogue of a second kind phase transition.

## 4. ”Elastic-creep” transition

The presented here theory can be applied to qualitative explanation of a phenomenon of destruction of rock around of underground workings. It is known, that ones carried out on small depths have enough large stability. Around workings carried out on large depths the phenomena of the abnormal large displacement of rock are observed. This is cause fast reduction of section of working and, eventually, its complete destruction . According to the theory at small deformation, $`\epsilon _{ii}`$ this is at small depths (the estimates are given below) for rock around working, will be satisfied condition of existence of an equilibrium state (case $`D<0`$), which is described by free energy with one minimum. (curve 1 in the fig. 1a). At increase of shear deformations (the bulk deformation in elastic approximation is equal to zero), this is at the large depths, the character of dependence of free energy will change, and it will be described already by curve which is not having extremes (a curve 3 on the fig. 1a). In this case system has no equilibrium states (at $`D>0`$) and, hence, will be constant to creep.

Own to creep system evaluates in the side of growing of average microcrack energy. After a time system lands in region of a large $`\phi `$ and power expansion of free energy (8) becomes not true. The state becomes exclusively non-equilibrium and new assumptions are need for description of system. For example, one can assume that creep changes medium parameters with rate in proportion to deviator of stress tensor  and so on.

The described above phenomenon prompts a graceful way of an establishment of estimated connection between parameters of the theory. Let’s assume, that depth $`H`$ of a working, since which the specified phenomenon begins to be shown, is equal 200m. The hydrostatic pressure, appropriate to it, makes $`\gamma H`$, and tangential tensor component of pressure on a contour of the working is $`2\gamma H`$ (where $`\gamma =\rho g`$, $`\rho `$ \- is density of rock equal on the average $`2.610^3kg/m^3`$, $`g`$ \- is free fall acceleration). From here $`\sigma _\tau =10.4MPa`$. Believing, that shear stiffness of a rock $`30GPa`$, for shear components of deformation tensor we receive value of the order $`\epsilon _\tau =\sigma _\tau /\mu =0.00035`$. The square of this value has the order second tensor invariant of deformations $`\epsilon _{ij}^2`$ appearing in expanding of free energy (8). Taking into account, that on contour of the working first tensor invariant of deformation is identically equal zero (it follows from exact decision of the problem in elastic production), from condition of equality zero of a determinant (14) is possible to write down as:

(20)
$$a^24b(\nu _00.00035\overline{\mu })=0.$$

The given connection between parameters of the theory, alongside with attraction of results of special experiments, can be useful to numerical estimate. At the present moment the complete complex of such experiments directed on measurement of parameters $`a,b,\nu _0,\overline{\mu }`$, and other parameters of the theory, to my mind, are absent. The offered here consideration can serve as stimulus for development of experimental development in this direction.

## 5. Practical sequels

From the above an original idea of increasing of opening stable in the Mining field is followed. The much troubles with traditional ways for opening timbering is - one combats with no cause, but with effects.

Usual evolution of natural fracture of rock around opening passes through such stages as a) accumulation of microcracks and b) macroscopical fracture

The first stage has rate in proportion to value of nonequilibrium factor (intensity of stress tensor deviator) with maximum on the ”free” surface on the opening. The second stage passes by means of microcrack association with production of randomly oriented internal surfaces and with rock breakage maximum on the ”free” surface of the opening.

Random character of the internal surfaces orientation has led to a situation, when among multitude of rock fragments may be found such, which have acute angle directed in opposition to the ”free” surface. As a consequence with relative ease they may be displaced in the region of the free space of the opening under a pressure of another fragments. The availability of such fragments sharply decreases the stability of rock toward further fracture. Fracture covers larger and larger region of rock massive, that sharply reduces net section of the opening and requires major repairs of it.

The crux of the way next one mustn’t wait as long as rock massive will be collapsed as unwanted, but one may specially destroys it as necessary. It should be prevented the generation of fragments described above by means of timely cutting of fragments with such orientations of its faces, which are favored for further locking. Moreover, the removal of some part of matter in result of cutting will have led to its partly or total unloading and to transfer of maximum of support pressure (and nonequilibrium factor too) in the region of basements of cut rock fragments. The transfer of maximum of nonequilibrium factor at certain distance from ”free” surface into rock massive forms conditions for accumulation of microcracks in this distance and for further macroscopical fracture along region covering the basements of cut fragments. Such fracture is favorable to finish separation of cut fragments from the main rock massive. This is tantamount to creating of a firm rock ring playing a role of power rock casing for the rest of rock massive. During fracture in the internal region both loading of the rock ring will increase and its reverse action on the fracture region will decrease nonequilibrium factor and as consequence will slow down the fracture in the whole.

Thus the ”partition” of massive by the offered way will have led to essential (at favor conditions in many times) increasing of stability and lifetime of a opening. Moreover, at favor conditions (firm rock, absence of foliation, tectonic dislocations and cetera) it is possible dispense with traditional synthetic timbering and to limit with light closed support. For execution of way one must cut rock massive around a cylindrical opening on fragments with some plans. The firsts of this plans must approximately pass through the axis of the cylindrical opening, the another are approximately oriented at right angles to axis (along contour of the opening). The distance between cuttings, its depth, form and cetera are questions for principal new technology in the Mining.

## 6. Conclusions

Introduction in the basic ratio (1) thermodynamics of such internal parameters, as average additional energy per one microcrack, and density of microcracks, has allowed to give the physical contents, apparently, to only mechanical task of destruction of a material and to apply to its analysis standard methods.

The condition of absence of external sources of microcracks has allowed to deduce extreme property of free energy (consisting in equality to zero by its by first by derivative on internal parameter) from the general positions of thermodynamics, instead of postulate it as a separate principle.

The equilibrium values of internal parameter are found and the discontinuity of the second derivative free energy are determined at transition through zero of average energy come per microcrack. The equation of a state (18) for a body with microcracks and expression (19) for effective elastic modules is received.

The developed approach allows to describe process of destruction of solids from uniform thermodynamic positions. The feature of destruction of such solids is that under action of mechanical pressure all kinds genetic discontinuity - microcrack, micropores, easing etc., always available in any real solid are made active. At small mechanical influences there is some average size of microcracks responding an equilibrium state. Since enough large level of mechanical pressure, the equilibrium state degenerates, and the system passes in a nonequilibrium mode. In this mode there is a unlimited growth and merge of microcracks (creep) resulting, at the end, to macroscopic destruction of a solid. See Figure 1

With the help of a developed formalism it is possible simply enough to explain the reason essential (under the order of size) distinction of stability of rock around workins on small and large depths.