text:
# A simple sum rule for the thermal gluon spectral function and applications

## 1 Introduction

Photon production is considered to be a very interesting signal of the formation of a quark gluon plasma in heavy ion collisions . Indeed, because of their very weak coupling to matter, photons (and more generally any electromagnetic probe) have a large mean free path which enables them to escape without reinteractions from a medium the size of which is at best a few tens of fermis.

On the theoretical side, the calculation of the photon and dilepton rate is performed under the hypothesis of local equilibrium, i.e. one calculates a rate (number of photons produced per unit time and per unit volume) using thermal field theory in equilibrium, and then plugs this rate into some hydrodynamical model  which describes the system by dividing it in cells where a local equilibrium is assumed and by assigning a local temperature and fluid 4-velocity to each cell. Such a description is consistent as long as the photon formation time is small compared to the typical size of the cells in which an approximate equilibrium is realized .

Thermal field theory calculations of photon and dilepton production rates have been performed a long time ago , and have been reassessed under the new light shaded by the concept of hard thermal loops (HTL - ) . In this context, it has been found that some $`23`$ and $`32`$ processes which appear only in 2-loop diagrams  (like bremsstrahlung, as well as the process $`q\overline{q}\{q,g\}\gamma \{q,g\}`$ which can be deduced from bremsstrahlung by crossing symmetry - see figures 1 and 2) are also important.

These processes are in fact enhanced by a strong sensitivity to the forward emission of the photon, due to a collinear singularity regularized by a thermal mass of order $`gT`$ where $`g`$ is the gauge coupling. In particular, the process on the left of figure 2 has been found to enhance considerably the rate of hard photons . This collinear enhancement mechanism has also been shown to play a role in multi-loop diagrams belonging to the class of ladder corrections and self-energy-corrections , and a resummation of this family of diagrams has been carried out in . The effect of this resummation, also known as Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal (LPM) effect , leads to a small reduction (by about 25% for photons in the range interesting for phenomenology) of the photon rate.

However, the strength of the LPM suppression decreases as one increases the invariant mass of the photon since the photon mass helps to regularize the collinear singularities. It is therefore expected that the dilepton rate can be accounted for by limiting oneself to a 2-loop calculation, and that the production of hard dileptons of intermediate invariant mass is dominated by the process shown on the left of figure 2. Under this assumption, the calculation of  has been extended recently to the case where the photon mass cannot be neglected any longer, with emphasis on the “off-shell annihilation” process that was already dominant for hard photons . In this paper, we found a simple generalization to the case of massive photons of the formula known for the imaginary part of the real photon polarization tensor. This formula reads:

$`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }__R{}_{\mu }{}^{\mu }(Q){\displaystyle \frac{e^2g^2N_cC__F}{2\pi ^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{T}{q_0^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}dp_0[n__F(r_0)n__F(p_0)]`$
$`\times \left\{(p_0^2+r_0^2)(J__TJ__L)+2{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2p_0r_0+M_{\mathrm{}}^2(p_0^2+r_0^2)}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}(K__TK__L)\right\}.`$ (1)
with $`r_0p_0+q_0`$ and111Let us recall here that $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2`$ can become negative if $`Q^2>4M_{\mathrm{}}^2`$. Those definitions are only appropriate for $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2>0`$, because they have been obtained by rescaling the transverse momentum $`l_{}`$ of the gluon by writing $`l_{}^2M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2w`$. However, it was argued in  that the correct result for $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2<0`$ can be obtained as the real part of the analytic continuation of the result for $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2>0`$. Most of this paper deals with the case of a positive $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2`$.

$`J_{_{T,L}}M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{x}}\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(x){\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑w{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{w/(w+4)}\mathrm{tanh}^1\sqrt{w/(w+4)}}{(M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2w+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(x))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(x))^2}},`$
$`K_{_{T,L}}M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{x}}\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(x){\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{w}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{w/(w+4)}\mathrm{tanh}^1\sqrt{w/(w+4)}w/4}{(M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2w+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(x))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(x))^2}},`$
where the $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}`$ are the transverse and longitudinal self-energies resummed on the gluon propagator, and where we denote

$$M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2M_{\mathrm{}}^2+\frac{Q^2}{q_0^2}p_0r_0,$$
(3)
with $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$ the thermal mass of a hard quark ($`M_{\mathrm{}}^2=g^2C__FT^2/4`$). The functions $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}`$ are the usual transverse and longitudinal HTL gluon self-energies:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }__T(L)=3m_\mathrm{g}^2`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{x(1x^2)}{4}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x+1}{x1}}\right)\right]`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }__L(L)=3m_\mathrm{g}^2`$ $`\left[(1x^2){\displaystyle \frac{x(1x^2)}{2}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x+1}{x1}}\right)\right],`$
where we denote $`xl_0/l`$ and where $`m_\mathrm{g}^2g^2T^2[N_c+N__F/2]/9`$ is the gluon thermal mass in a $`SU(N_c)`$ gauge theory with $`N__F`$ flavors.

Therefore, in addition to the function $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ already introduced in the case of quasi-real photons222The term in $`M_{\mathrm{}}^2K_{_{T,L}}`$ was forgotten in . It comes from the HTL correction to the $`\gamma q\overline{q}`$ vertex. This vertex correction was also neglected in , without any damage to this approach since it affects only the component $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{zz}`$ of the polarization tensor, while only the transverse components are calculated in these papers (see  for more details on this issue)., we need two new functions $`K_{_{T,L}}`$ for the term proportional to the photon invariant mass squared $`Q^2`$. All are dimensionless functions of the ratio of $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ to the plasmon mass $`m_\mathrm{g}`$ which appears as a prefactor in the self-energies $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}`$. Up to now, the $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ and $`K_{_{T,L}}`$ have only been evaluated numerically (, with a mistake corrected by ), which is sufficient for the case of real photons since in this case they are fixed numbers that depend only on the number of colors and flavors but not on kinematical parameters ($`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2=M_{\mathrm{}}^2`$). However, the cost of this procedure increases significantly in the case of virtual photons since the value of $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2`$ depends on the invariant mass $`Q`$, energy $`q_0`$ and quark energy $`p_0`$. In addition, obtaining asymptotic limits is far from trivial at this point333Some very partial asymptotic results have been obtained in  for $`J_{_{T,L}}`$..

The aim of the present paper is to derive some analytical results regarding those functions. We first show how the integral over the variable $`x`$ can be performed exactly in the functions $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ and $`K_{_{T,L}}`$ by means of a simple sum-rule (section 2). This leads to either a very simple integral representation of these functions or even to closed formulas in terms of dilogarithms (section 3). Thanks to these results, we can easily study the asymptotic properties of the functions $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ and $`K_{_{T,L}}`$. Non trivial asymptotic expansions are obtained, which would have been very difficult to obtain otherwise (section 4). In section 5, we show that the above analytic results can also give some insight on the fact that the processes of figure 2 depend only on parameters like the gluon screening masses and the hard quark thermal mass, in a generic model where the quark gluon plasma is described as a gas of quasi-particles. Finally, we show that one can also calculate analytically the collision integral that appears in the resummation of ladder diagrams  (section 6). In appendix A, we derive the asymptotic behavior of a function introduced at an intermediate stage. In appendix B, we prove analytically an anecdotical property which was first noticed numerically : the integrals $`J__T`$ and $`J__L`$ are exactly opposite if $`M_{\mathrm{}}=m_\mathrm{g}`$ and $`Q^2=0`$.

## 2 Derivation of the sum-rule

We want to calculate the integral:

$$f(z)_0^1\frac{dx}{x}\frac{2\mathrm{I}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{\Pi }(x)}{(z+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(x))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(x))^2},$$
(5)
for a positive $`z`$, where $`\mathrm{\Pi }(x)`$ is some self-energy depending only on $`xk_0/k`$ as is the case for instance with the HTL gluonic self-energy. The factor $`1/x`$ comes from a Bose-Einstein factor in the soft approximation $`dk_0n__B(k_0)Tdk_0/k_0=Tdx/x`$. The first step in this calculation is to rewrite it as

$$f(z)=_0^1\frac{dx}{x}(1x^2)\frac{2\mathrm{I}\mathrm{m}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(x)}{(z(x^21)\mathrm{Re}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(x))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(x))^2},$$
(6)
where we define $`\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(x)(1x^2)\mathrm{\Pi }(x)`$. Interpreting now $`z`$ ($`z>0`$) as the square of a three-momentum $`k`$ and $`x`$ as the ratio $`x=k_0/k`$, we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{I}\mathrm{m}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(x)}{(z(x^21)\mathrm{Re}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(x))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(x))^2}}`$ $`=2\mathrm{R}\mathrm{e}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{k_0^2k^2\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(k_0,k)+ik_0ϵ}}`$ (7)
$`\overline{\rho }(k_0,k).`$
Note that this function is nothing but the spectral function $`\overline{\rho }(k_0,k)`$ associated with the “propagator” appearing in the right hand side. This is what enables us to relate the integral

$$f(z)=\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}\frac{dx}{x}(1x^2)\overline{\rho }(\sqrt{z}x,\sqrt{z})$$
(8)
to the spectral representation of this propagator. Indeed, it is known that the resummed propagator $`i/(K^2\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(K))`$ is related to its spectral function $`\overline{\rho }(k_0,k)`$ via the following spectral representation :

$$\frac{i}{k_0^2k^2\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(k_0/k)+ik_0ϵ}=_0^+\mathrm{}\frac{dE}{\pi }E\overline{\rho }(E,k)\frac{i}{k_0^2E^2+ik_0ϵ}.$$
(9)
Taking the real part of this identity444Note that the spectral function $`\overline{\rho }(k_0,k)`$ is by definition a real function., one recovers the definition Eq. (7) of the spectral function. Taking its imaginary part and denoting $`Ekx`$ and $`k_0=ky`$, one obtains the following non-trivial integral:

$$_0^+\mathrm{}\frac{dx}{\pi }x\overline{\rho }(kx,k)\frac{1}{y^2x^2}=\frac{k^2(y^21)\mathrm{Re}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(y)}{(k^2(y^21)\mathrm{Re}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(y))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(y))^2}.$$
(10)
Taking the limit $`y\mathrm{}`$, we find

$$_0^+\mathrm{}\frac{dx}{\pi }x\overline{\rho }(kx,k)=\frac{1}{k^2lim_y\mathrm{}\mathrm{Re}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(y)/y^2}=\frac{1}{k^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{})}.$$
(11)
Having in mind that $`\mathrm{\Pi }(y)`$ is a gluonic self-energy obtained from the hard thermal loop approximation, its imaginary part vanishes if $`y1`$ and therefore does not contribute in the limit $`y\mathrm{}`$. Alternatively, taking the limit $`y0`$ and assuming similarly that $`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(y=0)=0`$, we obtain:

$$_0^+\mathrm{}\frac{dx}{\pi }\frac{1}{x}\overline{\rho }(kx,k)=\frac{1}{k^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(0)}.$$
(12)
We can combine these two relations into

$$_0^+\mathrm{}\frac{dx}{x}(1x^2)\overline{\rho }(kx,k)=\pi \left[\frac{1}{k^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(0)}\frac{1}{k^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{})}\right].$$
(13)
In order to obtain from there the function $`f(z)`$, we need to subtract the contribution coming from $`x`$ between $`1`$ and $`+\mathrm{}`$. Fortunately, since $`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(x)=0`$ for $`x1`$, the contribution in this range comes only from the poles of the propagator $`i/(K^2\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(K))`$, via the formula555If $`\mathrm{Im}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(x)=0`$, then $`\overline{\rho }(kx,k)=2\pi \delta (k^2(x^21)\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(x))`$.

$$_1^+\mathrm{}\frac{dx}{x}(1x^2)\overline{\rho }(kx,k)=\pi \underset{\mathrm{poles}x_i}{}\frac{Z(x_i)}{k^2}\frac{1x_i^2}{x_i^2},$$
(14)
where $`Z(x_i)`$ is the residue of the propagator at the corresponding pole. For the above propagator, the equation that determines the poles is

$$k^2(x^21)=\mathrm{Re}\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}(x)=(1x^2)\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(x).$$
(15)
This “dispersion equation” has a trivial solution $`x=1`$, which does not contribute when plugged in Eq. (14) because the other factors in the integrand vanish if $`x=1`$. Any non trivial pole would be a solution of the equation

$$k^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(x)=0,$$
(16)
but under the reasonable assumption that the resummation of the self-energy $`\mathrm{\Pi }(x)`$ leads to well behaved quasi-particles (i.e. that the equation $`k_0^2k^2=\mathrm{\Pi }(k_0/k)`$ has a solution for every value of $`k_0/k`$ larger than $`1`$), we have $`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(x)0`$ for $`x>1`$ and therefore there are no additional poles. As a consequence, the integral of Eq. (13) does not receive any contribution from the range $`x[1,+\mathrm{}]`$, and we can write directly a closed expression for the function $`f(z)`$:

$$f(z)=_0^1\frac{dx}{x}\frac{2\mathrm{I}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{\Pi }(x)}{(z+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(x))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(x))^2}=\pi \left[\frac{1}{z+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{})}\frac{1}{z+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(0)}\right].$$
(17)
This is the basic sum-rule from which we are going to derive some results regarding photon production by a quark-gluon plasma. The validity of this result can also be checked numerically.

It may be useful to recall that, even if the derivation has been made having in mind a hard thermal loop for the self-energy $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$, this result has a broader range of validity. In fact, it is valid for any self-energy satisfying the following assumptions:

1. $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ depends only on $`xk_0/k`$
2. $`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(x=0)=0`$
3. $`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(x)=0`$ if $`x1`$
4. $`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(x)0`$ if $`x1`$.

Note that the condition (1) can in fact be relaxed since what is done here can be reproduced if the self-energy depends separately on $`k`$ and $`x`$, the only difference being that the result would depend on $`k`$. The condition (2) is always true. Conditions (3) and (4) depend on the nature of the resummation under consideration, but are reasonable approximations in any system of well defined quasiparticles.

In , a formula for the photon rate based on sum rules was also presented. However, in this paper, the use of sum rules led only to a very complicated result (involving explicitly the gluon dispersion equations as well as the residues of the gluon poles) that was not useful for any practical purpose. By comparing the two methods, we can trace the simplification achieved in the present paper to a different choice for the integration variables. Indeed, in  the sum rules were applied to an integral over the variables $`xl_0/l`$, $`l=|l|`$ (where $`L`$ is the momentum of the exchanged gluon), while in the present approach, we take as independent integration variables $`x`$ and $`wL^2/M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2=l^2(1x^2)/M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2`$. It appears that trading $`l`$ in favor of $`w`$ before using sum rules to perform the integral over $`x`$ leads to a dramatic simplification of the result, because some non trivial parts of the $`x`$ dependence get absorbed in the new variable $`w`$. There are in fact many sum rules satisfied by the HTL spectral functions. The interested reader may find other examples in .

## 3 Expression of $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ and $`K_{_{T,L}}`$

Thanks to the formula derived in the previous section, one can first simplify the functions $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ and $`K_{_{T,L}}`$ so that we have only one-dimensional integrals over the variable $`w`$:

$`J_{_{T,L}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑w\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{w}{w+4}}}\mathrm{tanh}^1\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{w}{w+4}}}`$
$`\times \left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w+\frac{\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(\mathrm{})}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w+\frac{\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(0)}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}}\right],`$
$`K_{_{T,L}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{w}}\left[\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{w}{w+4}}}\mathrm{tanh}^1\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{w}{w+4}}}{\displaystyle \frac{w}{4}}\right]`$
$`\times \left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w+\frac{\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(\mathrm{})}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w+\frac{\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(0)}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}}\right].`$ (18)
At this point, using the change of variable $`u\sqrt{w/(w+4)}`$, we can write in a simpler way the following elementary integrals:

$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑w\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{w}{w+4}}}\mathrm{tanh}^1\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{w}{w+4}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w+a}}\right]=2F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4}{a}}\right),`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{w}}\left[\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{w}{w+4}}}\mathrm{tanh}^1\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{w}{w+4}}}{\displaystyle \frac{w}{4}}\right]\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w+a}}\right]`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{a}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4}{a}}\right),`$ (19)
where we define the function

$$F(x)\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑u\frac{\mathrm{tanh}^1(u)}{(x1)u^2+1}.$$
(20)
Recalling now the following properties of the HTL self-energy of the gluon

$`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(\mathrm{})=m_\mathrm{g}^2`$
$`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }__T(0)=0`$
$`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }__L(0)=3m_\mathrm{g}^2`$ (21)
where $`m_\mathrm{g}`$ is the plasmon mass, we easily obtain the following expressions in terms of the function $`F(x)`$:

$`J__T=\pi F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right),`$
$`J__L=\pi \left[F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{3m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right)F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right)\right],`$
$`K__T=\pi \left[{\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right)\right],`$
$`K__L=\pi \left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\mathrm{ln}(3)+{\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\left(F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{3m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right)\right)\right].`$ (22)
Therefore, those results demonstrate that in order to study the properties of the functions $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ and $`K_{_{T,L}}`$, one needs only to study the properties of the much simpler function $`F(x)`$. In fact, it is even possible to write the function $`F(x)`$ in closed form in terms of dilogarithms666Explicitly, we have:    $`F(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4ip}}[\mathrm{Li}_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{2p}{p+i}}\right)2\mathrm{L}\mathrm{i}_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{p}{p+i}}\right)\mathrm{Li}_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{2p}{pi}}\right)+2\mathrm{L}\mathrm{i}_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{p}{pi}}\right)`$    $`+2\mathrm{ln}(2)\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{ip}{i+p}}\right)],\mathrm{with}p\sqrt{x1}\mathrm{and}\mathrm{Li}_2(x){\displaystyle }_{n=1}^+\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{x^n}{n^2}}.`$  (23) . We are not going to make use of this possibility here since it is simpler to keep $`F(x)`$ in its integral form given by Eq. (20).

One must stress the fact that all these functions depend only on the ratio of two masses. In the case of real photons ($`Q^2=0`$), we have in addition $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2=M_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ and for $`N_c=3`$ colors, we can write:

$$\frac{4M_{\mathrm{}}^2}{3m_\mathrm{g}^2}=\frac{8}{6+N__F},$$
(24)
i.e. the temperature and strong coupling constant also drop out of this ratio. It appears that there is an additional (and purely accidental) simplification for $`N__F=2`$ flavors: in this case, the differences $`J__LJ__T`$ and $`K__LK__T`$ can be expressed in a very simple fashion:

$`J__LJ__T|_{N_c=3,N__F=2}=\pi \mathrm{ln}(2),`$
$`K__LK__T|_{N_c=3,N__F=2}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}(12\mathrm{ln}(2)).`$ (25)
For the case of $`N__F=3`$ flavors, the results are less simple, but one can still obtain explicit expressions:

$`J__LJ__T|_{N_c=3,N__F=3}=\pi [{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{8}}{\displaystyle \frac{33}{8}}\mathrm{ln}^2(2)+3\mathrm{ln}(2)\mathrm{ln}(3)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\mathrm{Li}_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})],`$
$`K__LK__T|_{N_c=3,N__F=3}=\pi [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{36}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(2)}{8}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(3)}{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{11}{12}}\mathrm{ln}^2(2)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\mathrm{ln}(2)\mathrm{ln}(3)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mathrm{Li}_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})].`$
Had these exact formulas been known, the confusion due to the erroneous factor $`4`$ in the numerical evaluation of these coefficients in  would have been avoided .

## 4 Asymptotic behavior of $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ and $`K_{_{T,L}}`$

### 4.1 Limit $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}`$

Using the above results, we can recover in a rather simple and elegant way all the asymptotic limits given in  for $`J_{_{T,L}}`$, as well as the limits used for $`K_{_{T,L}}`$ in order to obtain the behavior of 2-loop dilepton production near the threshold $`Q^2=4M_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ (a region which is dominated by small values of $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2)`$ .

To that effect, we need only the behavior of $`F(x)`$ when $`x0`$. This is derived in the appendix A, where we prove that:

$$F(x)\underset{x0^+}{=}\frac{1}{8}\mathrm{ln}^2\left(\frac{4}{x}\right)+\frac{\pi ^2}{24}+𝒪\left(x\mathrm{ln}^2(1/x)\right).$$
(27)
Thanks to this formula, a trivial calculation gives777These leading log formulas are not affected by the fact that the asymptotic expansion of $`F(x)`$ is slightly modified if $`x`$ approaches $`0`$ with negative values (see Eq. (79)).

$`J__T\underset{M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}}{}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{8}}\mathrm{ln}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{g}^2}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}\right),`$
$`J__L\underset{M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}}{}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{ln}(3)}{4}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{g}^2}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}\right),`$
$`K__T\underset{M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}}{}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{8}}\left[\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{g}^2}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}\right)2\right],`$
$`K__L\underset{M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}}{}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{ln}(3)}{8}}.`$ (28)
These relations in fact go well beyond the results for $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ obtained in , since in this new approach we obtain for free the prefactor of the leading term and we could even have calculated some subleading terms, down to the constant term.

### 4.2 Limit $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}`$

Using Eqs. (22), it is also very simple to obtain the behavior of the functions $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ and $`K_{_{T,L}}`$ in the opposite limit where $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}`$. In order to do that, we need to know the behavior of $`F(x)`$ for large values of $`x`$. The following formula is also derived in appendix A:

$$F(x)\underset{x1}{=}\frac{\mathrm{ln}(x)}{2x}+\frac{1\mathrm{ln}(2)}{x}+\frac{\mathrm{ln}(x)}{3x^2}+\frac{56\mathrm{ln}(2)}{9x^2}+𝒪\left(\frac{\mathrm{ln}(x)}{x^3}\right).$$
(29)
From this formula, it is easy to obtain

$`J__T\underset{M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}}{}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{8}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{g}^2}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right),`$
$`J__L\underset{M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}}{}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{g}^2}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right)2J__T,`$
$`K__T\underset{M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}}{}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{48}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{g}^2}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right),`$
$`K__L\underset{M_{\mathrm{eff}}m_\mathrm{g}}{}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{24}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{g}^2}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_\mathrm{g}^2}}\right)2K__T.`$ (30)
## 5 Beyond the HTL approximation

In section 2, we mentioned the fact that the sum rule in Eq. (17) is in fact valid for a gluon self-energy $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ more general than the standard case of hard thermal loops. Assuming it can be applied, we see that the result depends only on the four numbers $`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(\mathrm{})`$ and $`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_{_{T,L}}(0)`$. The first two are the plasmon mass (longitudinal) and the mass of the transverse gluon at zero momentum, and can be shown to be equal thanks to Slavnor-Taylor identities . Physically, this property means that there is no way to distinguish transverse and longitudinal modes for a particle at rest. Therefore, we need only to introduce one plasmon mass:

$$\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }__T(\mathrm{})=\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }__L(\mathrm{})m_P^2.$$
(31)
The quantities on the second line are squares of the screening masses for the transverse and longitudinal static gluon exchanges. The longitudinal screening mass is the familiar Debye mass:

$$m_D^2\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }__L(0)$$
(32)
In the HTL approximation, there is no screening for the transverse static gluons, but this is not expected to hold generally. The corresponding screening mass is the magnetic mass, and is denoted

$$m_{\mathrm{mag}}^2\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }__T(0).$$
(33)
In terms of those parameters, it is straightforward to write down the expressions of $`J_{_{T,L}}`$ and $`K_{_{T,L}}`$ for photon production in a description where we use gluon propagators that are more general than the HTL propagators:

$`J__T=\pi \left[F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_{\mathrm{mag}}^2}}\right)F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_P^2}}\right)\right],`$
$`J__L=\pi \left[F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_D^2}}\right)F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_P^2}}\right)\right],`$
$`K__T=\pi \left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_{\mathrm{mag}}^2}{m_P^2}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_P^2}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_P^2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_{\mathrm{mag}}^2}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_{\mathrm{mag}}^2}}\right)\right],`$
$`K__L=\pi \left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D^2}{m_P^2}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_P^2}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_P^2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_D^2}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_D^2}}\right)\right].`$ (34)
It is easy to check that these relations fall back to Eqs. (22) if we set $`m_{\mathrm{mag}}=0`$, $`m_P=m_\mathrm{g}`$ and $`m_D=\sqrt{3}m_\mathrm{g}`$, which are the relations between masses in the HTL framework.

There is another general property of the processes of figure 2 which is worth mentioning here. Their rate in fact depends only on the combinations $`J__TJ__L`$ and $`K__TK__L`$ (see Eq. (1)) after one has summed the contributions of transverse and longitudinal gluons. Using the above formulas, we obtain:

$`J__TJ__L=\pi \left[F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_{\mathrm{mag}}^2}}\right)F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_D^2}}\right)\right],`$
$`K__TK__L=\pi \left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D^2}{m_{\mathrm{mag}}^2}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_D^2}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_D^2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_{\mathrm{mag}}^2}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{4M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{m_{\mathrm{mag}}^2}}\right)\right].`$ (35)
In other words, all the dependence on the plasmon mass drops out for the processes of figure 2. This property is in fact reasonable since we are looking at processes that involve only space-like gluons, and it would have been surprising if the result had depended on the plasmon mass, a property of time-like gluons. The practical consequence of this for a phenomenological approach to photon production based on some quasi-particle picture is that we do not need to know the full gluon propagator, but only the two screening masses and the quark thermal mass888This is not true for the $`22`$ processes calculated in . Indeed, since these processes involve time-like gluons, they can depend on the plasmon mass.. Note also that these quantities remain finite even if the magnetic mass is very small or vanishing.

In particular, it is now known from lattice calculations  that the masses of quasi-particles increase when the temperature approaches the critical temperature from above, while at the same time the screening masses decrease. The formulas of this section are important to deal with such a situation, since they do not assume any particular relationship between the screening masses and the quasi-particle masses. For instance, for a temperature just above $`T_c`$, we can make use of Eqs. (30), and predict a suppression of the production rate of photons and low-mass dileptons simply due to the fact that screening masses are much smaller than the quasi-particle masses (in addition to the standard suppression due to the fact that the temperature is smaller).

## 6 Resummation of ladder diagrams and LPM effect

### 6.1 Integral equation in momentum space

The authors of  performed the resummation of all the ladder diagrams, as well as all the self-energy corrections that are required to preserve gauge invariance, in order to account for the LPM effect in the production of real photons. Indeed, such photons may have a formation time larger than the mean free path of the quarks in the medium , so that multiple quark scatterings contribute coherently to the formation of the photon.

In the formulation of , the imaginary part of the retarded photon polarization tensor is given by999Note that this equation includes only the two transverse modes of the photon, and is therefore incomplete for the production of virtual photons. It is however not difficult to include the longitudinal mode as well .

$`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }__R{}_{\mu }{}^{\mu }(Q){\displaystyle \frac{e^2N_c}{8\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}dp_0[n__F(r_0)n__F(p_0)]{\displaystyle \frac{p_0^2+r_0^2}{p_0^2r_0^2}}`$
$`\times \mathrm{Re}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2p_{}}{(2\pi )^2}p_{}f(p_{})},`$
(36)
where $`r_0p_0+q_0`$ and $`f(p_{})`$ is a dimensionless transverse vector that represents the resummed coupling of a quark to the transverse modes of the photon, satisfying the following integral equation

$$2p_{}=i\delta Ef(p_{})+g^2C__FT\frac{d^2l_{}}{(2\pi )^2}𝒞(l_{})[f(p_{})f(p_{}+l_{})],$$
(37)
where $`\delta Eq_0(p_{}^2+M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2)/(2p_0r_0)`$ and in which $`𝒞(l_{})`$ is the collision integral defined by

$`𝒞(l_{}){\displaystyle \frac{dl_0dl_z}{(2\pi )^2}2\pi \delta (l_0l_z)\frac{1}{l_0}}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =L,T}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{I}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{\Pi }_\alpha (L)}{(L^2\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_\alpha (L))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_\alpha (L))^2}}P_\alpha ^{\mu \nu }(L)\widehat{Q}_\mu \widehat{Q}_\nu ,`$ (38)
with $`\widehat{Q}_\mu (1,q/q)`$ and $`P_{_{T,L}}^{\mu \nu }(L)`$ the transverse or longitudinal projector for a gluon of momentum $`L`$. Note that $`\delta E^1`$ is nothing but the typical formation time of the photon . Note also that in an iterative solution of these integral equations, the first term that contributes to the imaginary part of the photon polarization tensor is of order $`g^2`$ since $`f(p_{})`$ and $`g(p_{})`$ are purely imaginary at the order $`g^0`$. This reflects the fact that the direct production of a photon by the processes $`q\overline{q}\gamma `$ or $`qq\gamma `$ is kinematically forbidden. This remark ceases to be valid if $`\delta E`$ can vanish, in which case an $`iϵ`$ prescription must be used, so that the zeroth order solution can have a real part. This happens if $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2`$ can become negative, i.e. if $`Q^2>4M_{\mathrm{}}^2`$.

Using the fact that we have101010One can use
$$P__T^{\mu \nu }(L)+P__L^{\mu \nu }(L)=g^{\mu \nu }\frac{L^\mu L^\nu }{L^2},$$
(39)  and
$$\widehat{Q}_\mu \widehat{Q}_\nu \left(g^{\mu \nu }\frac{L^\mu L^\nu }{L^2}\right)=0\mathrm{if}l_0=l_z$$
(40)  in order to obtain the second contraction.

$$P__T^{\mu \nu }(L)\widehat{Q}_\mu \widehat{Q}_\nu =\frac{l_z^2}{l^2}1=P__L^{\mu \nu }(L)\widehat{Q}_\mu \widehat{Q}_\nu ,$$
(41)
and introducing the variable $`xl_0/l`$, we can rewrite111111This change of coordinates has the following Jacobian:
$$\left(1\frac{l_0^2}{l_0^2+l_{}^2}\right)\frac{dl_0}{l_0}d(l_{}^2)=\frac{dx}{x}d(l_{}^2).$$
(42)  the collision integral in Eq. (38) as

$`𝒞(l_{})={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{x}}[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }__L(x)}{(l_{}^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }__L(x))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }__L(x))^2}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }__T(x)}{(l_{}^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }__T(x))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }__T(x))^2}}].`$ (43)
At this point, the sum rule derived in section 2 gives directly the result of the integral over the variable $`x`$, so that the collision integral can be rewritten as:

$$𝒞(l_{})=\frac{1}{l_{}^2}\frac{1}{l_{}^2+3m_\mathrm{g}^2}.$$
(44)
We observe again that summing over the contributions of transverse and longitudinal gluon exchanges cancels the terms involving the plasmon mass.

### 6.2 Solution in the Bethe-Heitler regime

As a check, one can solve this integral equation iteratively up to the order $`g^2`$. Indeed, the naive term of order $`g^0`$ is purely imaginary, and drops out of the imaginary part of the photon polarization tensor (see Eq. (36)). For the function $`f(p_{})`$, this expansion gives:

$`\mathrm{Re}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2p_{}}{(2\pi )^2}p_{}f(p_{})}\underset{𝒪(g^2)}{=}8g^2C__FT{\displaystyle \frac{(p_0r_0)^2}{q_0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2p_{}}{(2\pi )^2}\frac{p_{}}{p_{}^2+M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}`$
$`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^2l_{}}{(2\pi )^2}}𝒞(l_{})[{\displaystyle \frac{p_{}}{p_{}^2+M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_{}+l_{}}{(p_{}+l_{})^2+M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}}].`$
At this stage, performing the angular integrations is elementary. Making use of the following identity:

$$\underset{0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}d(p_{}^2)\left(\frac{1}{p_{}^2+M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}\frac{1}{\sqrt{(p_{}^2+l_{}^2+M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2)^24p_{}^2l_{}^2}}\right)=0,$$
(46)
this can be rewritten as:

$`\mathrm{Re}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2p_{}}{(2\pi )^2}p_{}f(p_{})}\underset{𝒪(g^2)}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{2g^2C__FT}{\pi ^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{(p_0r_0)^2}{q_0^2}}[J__TJ__L+2K__T2K__L].`$ (47)
Finally, plugging Eqs. (47) into Eq. (36) gives

$`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }__R{}_{\mu }{}^{\mu }(Q)\underset{𝒪(g^2)}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{e^2g^2N_cC__F}{2\pi ^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{T}{q_0^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}dp_0[n__F(r_0)n__F(p_0)]`$
$`\times (p_0^2+r_0^2)[J__TJ__L+2K__T2K__L],`$ (48)
which is equivalent to Eq. (1) for real photons ($`Q^2=0`$, $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2=M_{\mathrm{}}^2`$). This proves the agreement between the perturbative approach followed in  and the resummation of the LPM corrections, if one formally keeps only the $`𝒪(g^2)`$ terms. The fact that some terms proportional to $`Q^2`$ in Eq. (1) are not recovered in this limit is due to the fact that the LPM resummation of  is limited to the transverse modes of the produced photon, while massive photons also have a physical longitudinal mode.

### 6.3 Reformulation as a differential equation

Since the collision integral appearing under the integral over $`l_{}`$ is now known in closed form, it is possible to transform this integral equation into an ordinary differential equation by going to impact parameter space. We can first define

$$f(p_{})d^2be^{ip_{}b}g(b).$$
(49)
Note that the order zero (in $`g^2`$) solution of the integral equation is

$$g_0(b)=\frac{2}{\pi }\frac{p_0r_0}{q_0}_bK_0(M_{\mathrm{eff}}b)=\frac{2}{\pi }\frac{p_0r_0}{q_0}M_{\mathrm{eff}}\widehat{b}K_1(M_{\mathrm{eff}}b),$$
(50)
where the $`K_i`$’s are modified Bessel functions of the second kind. For the higher order terms $`g_1(b)`$, one obtains the following equation for $`g_1`$

$$i\frac{q_0}{2p_0r_0}(M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2\mathrm{\Delta }_{})g_1(b)+g^2C__FTD(m_\mathrm{g}b)(g_0(b)+g_1(b))=0,$$
(51)
with

$$D(m_\mathrm{g}b)\frac{1}{2\pi }\left[\gamma +\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\sqrt{3}m_\mathrm{g}b}{2}\right)+K_0(\sqrt{3}m_\mathrm{g}b)\right].$$
(52)
In addition, we have also

$$\mathrm{Re}p_{}\frac{d^2p_{}}{(2\pi )^2}f(p_{})=\underset{b0^+}{lim}\mathrm{Im}_{}g_1(b).$$
(53)
This differential equation can be further simplified by defining the following dimensionless quantities:

$`tM_{\mathrm{eff}}^2b^2,`$
$`u(t){\displaystyle \frac{\pi q_0}{2p_0r_0}}bg(b).`$ (54)
This transformation leads to

$$4tu_1^{\prime \prime }(t)u_1(t)+ig^2C__F\frac{p_0r_0}{q_0}\frac{T}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}D\left(\frac{m_\mathrm{g}}{M_{\mathrm{eff}}}\sqrt{t}\right)(u_0(t)+u_1(t))=0,$$
(55)
where the prime denotes the differentiation with respect to $`t`$, and where

$$u_0(t)\sqrt{t}K_1(\sqrt{t}).$$
(56)
The differential equation Eq. (55) depends on two dimensionless quantities. One is the ratio $`m_\mathrm{g}/M_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ of two masses, while the prefactor $`g^2C__FTp_0r_0/q_0M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2`$ can be interpreted (up to logarithms) as the ratio of the photon formation time to the quark mean free path. It is therefore the average number of scatterings that can contribute coherently to the production of a photon. The relevant quantity for the photon production rate is then given by

$$\mathrm{Re}p_{}\frac{d^2p_{}}{(2\pi )^2}f(p_{})=\frac{4p_0r_0}{\pi q_0}M_{\mathrm{eff}}^2\mathrm{Im}u_1^{}(0).$$
(57)
This differential equation must be supplemented by boundary conditions in order to define uniquely the solution. First, we have

$$u(0)=0,$$
(58)
which can be seen from its definition. Subtracting $`u_0(0)=1`$, this implies

$$u_1(0)=1.$$
(59)
Unfortunately, we do not know the value of $`u_1^{}(0)`$ but instead we know the value of $`u(\mathrm{})`$. Indeed, assuming that $`f(p_{})`$ is regular enough, its Fourier transform is exponentially suppressed at large $`b`$. Therefore, $`u(\mathrm{})=0`$. Since we already have $`u_0(\mathrm{})=0`$, this implies

$$u_1(\mathrm{})=0.$$
(60)
Therefore, the problem can be summarized as follows: we are looking for the (presumably complex) value of $`u_1^{}(0)`$ that takes us from $`u_1(0)=1`$ to $`u_1(\mathrm{})=0`$. The imaginary part of this derivative term is then the coefficient that enters in the photon polarization tensor. Note also that since the term $`u_1^{\prime \prime }`$ and $`u_1`$ come with opposite signs in the combination $`4tu_1^{\prime \prime }u_1`$ in Eq. (55), generic solutions121212The generic solution of $`4tu_1^{\prime \prime }(t)u_1(t)=0`$ is $`u_1(t)=\sqrt{t}(c_1I_1(\sqrt{t})+c_2K_1(\sqrt{t}))`$, where $`I_1`$ is a modified Bessel function of the first kind. are unstable and diverge as $`t+\mathrm{}`$ (they are in fact linear combinations of a function that diverges exponentially and of a function that goes exponentially to zero). It is only for a very specific value of $`u_1^{}(0)`$ that one can make the coefficient of the diverging term zero, and have a solution that satisfies $`u_1(\mathrm{})=0`$. This heuristic argument thereby justifies the uniqueness of the number $`u_1^{}(0)`$ solving the problem.

### 6.4 Numerical solution

#### 6.4.1 General principle

This reformulation of Eqs. (36) and (37) leads to a rather straightforward algorithm for a numerical solution. Differential problems with two-point boundary conditions are usually solved by iterative “shooting” methods , where one tries to make a guess for the missing initial condition (here, $`u_1^{}(0)`$) and then corrects this value based on the discrepancy between the resulting end-point and the expected one.

Things are in fact much simpler for an affine equation, since only two trials, plus the knowledge of a solution of the complete equation, are enough to find the value of $`u_1^{}(0)`$. Indeed, for a differential equation like (55), solutions have generically the following form:

$$u_1(t)=w(t)+\alpha _1w_1(t)+\alpha _2w_2(t),$$
(61)
where $`w(t)`$ is a particular solution of the full equation, and $`w_{1,2}(t)`$ are two independent solutions of the corresponding homogeneous equation (i.e. (55) in which one would set $`u_0`$ to zero). Generically, it is convenient to chose these functions such that:

$`w(0)=0,w^{}(0)=0,`$
$`w_1(0)=1,w_1^{}(0)=0,`$
$`w_2(0)=0,w_2^{}(0)=1.`$ (62)
If these solutions are known (at least numerically), the condition $`u_1(0)=1`$ implies

$$\alpha _1=1.$$
(63)
Then, using $`u_1(+\mathrm{})=0`$, the second coefficient $`\alpha _2`$ is given by

$$\alpha _2=\underset{t+\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{w_1(t)w(t)}{w_2(t)};$$
(64)
and thanks to our choice of initial conditions for $`w,w_1`$ and $`w_2`$, the value of $`u_1^{}(0)`$ that solves the problem is simply given by

$$u_1^{}(0)=\alpha _2.$$
(65)
#### 6.4.2 Realistic algorithm

This algorithm is however not directly applicable in the case of Eq. (55), because the point $`t=0`$ is a singular point of the equation, and cannot be used to set initial conditions. Therefore, we have to chose another point in order to set the initial conditions. Let us call this point $`t_0>0`$, and assume

$`w(t_0)=0,w^{}(t_0)=0,`$
$`w_1(t_0)=1,w_1^{}(t_0)=0,`$
$`w_2(t_0)=0,w_2^{}(t_0)=1,`$ (66)
instead of Eqs. (62). From these initial conditions, one must evolve numerically the functions $`w,w_1`$ and $`w_2`$ both forward and backward. Having in mind what has been said at the end of section 6.3, the three functions are going to diverge when $`t+\mathrm{}`$ (unless one has been very unlucky when choosing the initial conditions). The condition $`u_1(+\mathrm{})=0`$ then implies

$$0=1+\alpha _1r_1+\alpha _2r_2,$$
(67)
where $`r_ilim_{t+\mathrm{}}w_i(t)/w(t)`$. This gives a first linear relation between the two coefficients $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$. Then, from the condition $`u_1(0)=1`$, one can obtain

$$\alpha _1=\underset{t0^+}{lim}\frac{w_2(t)r_2(1+w(t))}{r_1w_2(t)r_2w_1(t)}.$$
(68)
At this point, the two coefficients $`\alpha _{1,2}`$ are known, and it is easy to find

$$u_1^{}(0)=\underset{t0^+}{lim}w^{}(t)+\alpha _1w_1^{}(t)+\alpha _2w_2^{}(t).$$
(69)
This last step does not require any additional calculation, since the derivatives of $`w,w_{1,2}`$ are known numerically at this point. In summary, this algorithm reduces the problem of solving the integral equation (37) and then calculating the integral over $`p_{}`$ in Eq. (36) to the numerical solution of a differential equation with three different initial conditions. A numerical analysis of Eq. (36) based along these lines will be presented elsewhere .

## 7 Conclusions

In this paper, we have derived a simple sum rule that enables to perform analytically some of the integrals involved in the thermal 2-loop photon production rate. Several applications of this sum rule have been presented. This sum rule also plays a role in the calculation of the collision integral that appears in the resummation of the ladder diagrams involved in the calculation of the LPM effect.

## Acknowledgments

F.G. would like to thank E. Fraga and A. Peshier for many useful discussions on related issues. H.Z. thanks the LAPTH for hospitality during the summer of 2001, where part of this work has been performed. P. A. thanks C. Gale for the hospitality extended to him at Mc Gill University where part of this work was done.

## Appendix A Asymptotic behavior of $`F(x)`$

### A.1 Large $`x`$ behavior of $`F(x)`$

At large values of the argument $`x`$, the asymptotic value of the function $`F(x)`$ introduced in Eq. (20) is very easy to obtain131313By subtracting more of the Taylor expansion of $`\mathrm{tanh}^1(u)`$, one can go one order further in this asymptotic expansion, and obtain
$$F(x)\underset{x\mathrm{}}{}\frac{\mathrm{ln}(x)}{2x}+\frac{1\mathrm{ln}(2)}{x}+\frac{\mathrm{ln}(x)}{3x^2}+\frac{56\mathrm{ln}(2)}{9x^2}+𝒪\left(\frac{\mathrm{ln}(x)}{x^3}\right).$$
(70) :

$`F(x)`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{tanh}^1(u)}{u^2+ϵ}}\mathrm{with}ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{1}{x1}}1`$ (71)
$`=`$ $`ϵ{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{tanh}^1(u)u}{u^2+ϵ}}+ϵ{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{u}{u^2+ϵ}}`$
$`=`$ $`ϵ\left[1\mathrm{ln}(2)+𝒪(ϵ\mathrm{ln}(1/ϵ))\right]+ϵ\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+ϵ}{ϵ}}\right),`$
i.e.

$`F(x)\underset{x+\mathrm{}}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(x)}{2x}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1\mathrm{ln}(2)}{x}}+𝒪\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(x)}{x^2}}\right).`$ (72)
Let us add that if the variable $`x`$ goes to $`\mathrm{}`$, one can obtain the correct asymptotic behavior by replacing $`x`$ by $`x`$ in the previous expression (in particular $`\mathrm{ln}(x)`$ by $`\mathrm{ln}|x|i\pi `$) while dropping the imaginary part, so that the previous asymptotic formula simply becomes:

$$F(x)\underset{x\mathrm{}}{=}\frac{\mathrm{ln}|x|}{2x}+\frac{1\mathrm{ln}(2)}{x}+𝒪\left(\frac{\mathrm{ln}|x|}{x^2}\right).$$
(73)
### A.2 Small $`x`$ behavior of $`F(x)`$

At small values of $`x`$, determining the expansion of $`F(x)`$ requires a little more work. Denoting $`y1/\sqrt{1x}1+x/2`$, we have

$`F(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{y^2}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑u\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+u}{1u}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{y^2u^2}}`$ (74)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{y}{4}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑u\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+u}{1u}}\right)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{y+u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{yu}}\right].`$
Let us notice first that the term in $`1/(y+u)`$ is finite in the limit $`y1`$. Therefore, since we do not want to go beyond the constant terms, we can simply replace $`y`$ by $`1`$ in this term and get

$$\frac{1}{4}\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑u\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{1+u}{1u}\right)\frac{1}{1+u}=\frac{1}{4}\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑v\frac{\mathrm{ln}(v)}{1+v}=\frac{\pi ^2}{48}.$$
(75)
The other term can be separated in two parts, the first one being

$`{\displaystyle \frac{y}{4}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(1+u)}{yu}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{y}{4}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(1+u)\mathrm{ln}(2)}{yu}}+{\displaystyle \frac{y}{4}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(2)}{yu}}`$ (76)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dv}{v}}\mathrm{ln}(1v/2)+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(2)}{4}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{x}}\right)`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1/2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dv}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(1v)}{1v}}+{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1/2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dv}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(1v)}{v(1v)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(2)}{4}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{x}}\right)`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}^2(2)}{8}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{48}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(2)}{4}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{x}}\right),`$
up to terms that vanish when $`x0^+`$. Seemingly, the second piece is:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{y}{4}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(1u)}{yu}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{y}{4}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(yu)+\mathrm{ln}(1\frac{y1}{yu})}{yu}}`$ (77)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\mathrm{ln}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{x}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(y1)^p}{p}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{du}{(yu)^{p+1}}}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\mathrm{ln}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{x}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{24}}.`$
Collecting all the bits and pieces, we finally obtain:

$$F(x)\underset{x0^+}{=}\frac{1}{8}\mathrm{ln}^2\left(\frac{4}{x}\right)+\frac{\pi ^2}{24}+𝒪\left(x\mathrm{ln}^2(1/x)\right).$$
(78)
When $`x`$ approaches $`0`$ by negative values, it is sufficient to replace $`x`$ by $`x`$ in the previous formula (i.e. $`\mathrm{ln}(x)`$ by $`\mathrm{ln}|x|i\pi `$) and retain only the real part. Since the logarithm is squared, the $`i\pi `$ modifies the constant term as follows:

$$F(x)\underset{x0^{}}{=}\frac{1}{8}\mathrm{ln}^2\left|\frac{4}{x}\right|\frac{\pi ^2}{12}+𝒪\left(x\mathrm{ln}^2(1/x)\right).$$
(79)
## Appendix B For real photons: $`J_T=J_L`$ if $`M_{\mathrm{}}=m_\mathrm{g}`$

In the production of real photons, one can notice numerically that the coefficients $`J__T`$ and $`J__L`$ are equal if the gluon plasmon mass $`m_\mathrm{g}`$ is equal to the quark asymptotic mass $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$  (for real photons $`M_{\mathrm{eff}}=M_{\mathrm{}}`$). We present here an analytic proof of this statement. When $`M_{\mathrm{}}=m_\mathrm{g}`$ and $`Q^2=0`$, we have:

$`J__L+J__T`$ $`=`$ $`\pi \left[F(4/3)2F(4)\right]`$ (80)
$`=`$ $`\pi \left[3{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{tanh}^1(u)}{u^2+3}}2{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{tanh}^1(u)}{3u^2+1}}\right].`$
Noticing that the function

$$G(x)_0^1𝑑u\frac{\mathrm{tanh}^1(u)}{u^2+x^2}$$
(81)
obeys the differential equation

$$G(x)+xG^{}(x)=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{1+x^2}{4x^2}\right)}{1+x^2},$$
(82)
and solving it, one can prove the following formula

$`x{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{tanh}^1(u)}{u^2+x^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{ln}(2)\mathrm{tan}^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{x}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{1/x}}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(1+u^2)}{1+u^2}}`$ (83)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{ln}(2)\mathrm{tan}^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{x}}\right)+{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{tan}^1(1/x)}}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{cos}(\theta )).`$
Using this intermediate result, it is easy to rewrite $`J__T+J__L`$ as

$$J__T+J__L=\frac{\pi }{\sqrt{3}}\left[3_0^{\pi /6}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{cos}(\theta ))2_0^{\pi /3}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{cos}(\theta ))\frac{\pi \mathrm{ln}(2)}{6}\right].$$
(84)
Making then use of the following relations

$`{\displaystyle _0^{\pi /2}}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{cos}(\theta ))={\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{ln}(2)}{2}},`$
$`{\displaystyle _0^{\pi /3}}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{cos}(\theta ))={\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{ln}(2)}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\pi /6}}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{sin}(\theta )),`$
$`{\displaystyle _0^{\pi /6}}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{cos}(\theta ))={\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{ln}(2)}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\pi /3}}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{sin}(\theta )),`$
$`{\displaystyle _0^{\pi /6}}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{sin}(\theta ))+{\displaystyle _0^{\pi /6}}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{cos}(\theta ))={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\pi /3}}𝑑\theta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{sin}(\theta )){\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{ln}(2)}{6}},`$
it is straightforward to check that

$$J__T+J__L=0$$
(86)
when $`M_{\mathrm{}}=m_\mathrm{g}`$. This is an interesting non trivial (and exact) identity which cannot be obtained by any simple other method, mainly because there is no useful asymptotic formula near the point $`M_{\mathrm{}}=m_\mathrm{g}`$. Even if this identity is purely anecdotical, its derivation illustrates the power of the sum rule obtained in this paper.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Quantum field theories on non-commutative (NC) spaces are usually formulated in terms of star-products of ordinary functions . Non-commutative gauge theories are of interest now as they appear in the superstring theory . So, in the presence of the external background magnetic field, NC coordinates can be introduced naturally . The NC gauge theories can be represented as ordinary gauge theories (effective commutative theories) with the same degrees of freedom, and with the additional deformation parameter $`\theta `$ \[3-5\]. The Seiberg-Witten map between field theory on NC spaces and the corresponding commutative field theory allows us to formulate a Lagrange theory in terms of ordinary fields. The Lagrangian of the corresponding action is expanded as series of ordinary fields and a parameter that characterizes the non-commutativity. This deformation parameter of the non-commutative geometry, $`\theta `$, plays the role of coupling constant of an effective Lagrangian. The parameter that characterizes non-commutativity enters the coordinate commutation relation : $`[\widehat{x}_\mu ,\widehat{x}_\nu ]=i\theta _{\mu \nu }`$.

In the present paper, we will apply the Dirac’s quantization to the Maxwell theory on non-commutative spaces. The corresponding action in terms of ordinary fields and linear in the deformation parameter has been derived in . The one-loop corrections of the vacuum polarization of photons and BRST-shift symmetry have been considered in . Some physical effects of propagation of photons in such $`\theta `$-deformed Maxwell theory have been investigated in \[10-12\]. The energy-momentum tensor and its trace anomaly have been derived in .

The paper is organized as follows: In Sec. 2 the general Dirac’s procedure of quantization of $`\theta `$-deformed Maxwell theory is considered. The extended Hamiltonian leading to gauge covariant equations of motion is derived. The gauge fixing approach on the basis of Dirac’s brackets is studied in Sec. 3. The wave function and physical observables are considered in Sec. 4. Section 5 is devoted to the discussion.

We use Lorentz-Heaviside units, and set $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$.

## 2 The Canonical Hamiltonian and Equations of Motion

The Maxwell Lagrangian density on NC spaces in terms of ordinary fields in the order of $`𝒪(\theta ^2)`$ is given by

$$=\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }^2+\frac{1}{8}\theta _{\alpha \beta }F_{\alpha \beta }F_{\mu \nu }^2\frac{1}{2}\theta _{\alpha \beta }F_{\mu \alpha }F_{\nu \beta }F_{\mu \nu }+𝒪(\theta ^2),$$
(1)
where the field strength tensor is

$$F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu ,$$
(2)
$`A_\mu =(𝐀,iA_0)`$ is the vector-potential of the electromagnetic field, $`E_i=iF_{i4}`$, $`B_i=ϵ_{ijk}F_{jk}`$ ($`ϵ_{123}=1`$) are the electric field and the magnetic induction field, respectively. The Lagrangian (1) can also be represented as

$$=\frac{1}{2}\left(𝐄^2𝐁^2\right)\left[1+(\theta 𝐁)\right]\left(\theta 𝐄\right)\left(𝐄𝐁\right)+𝒪(\theta ^2),$$
(3)
where $`\theta _i=(1/2)ϵ_{ijk}\theta _{jk}`$, $`\theta _{i4}=0`$. Here we use space-like components of the tensor $`\theta _{\mu \nu }`$ characterizing the non-commutativity because only in this case the field theory possesses unitarity . The terms in Eq. (3) containing the non-commutative parameter $`\theta `$ violate CP - symmetry. Moreover, particles in field theories on NC spaces have the dipole moments violating the CP - symmetry but CPT - symmetry remains unbroken . It was verified that quantum electrodynamics on NC spaces at one-loop level is a renormalizable \[18.8\] and asymptotic free theory .

The Euler-Lagrange equations (field equations) follow from Eq. (1), and are given by

$$\frac{}{t}𝐃\text{rot}𝐇=0,\text{div}𝐃=0,$$
(4)
where $`(\text{rot}𝐇)_i=ϵ_{ijk}_jH_k`$ and $`\text{div}𝐃=_iD_i`$. The displacement ($`𝐃`$) and magnetic ($`𝐇`$) fields are defined as

$$𝐃=𝐄+𝐝,𝐝=(\theta 𝐁)𝐄(\theta 𝐄)𝐁(𝐄𝐁)\theta ,$$

(5)
$$𝐇=𝐁+𝐡,𝐡=(\theta 𝐁)𝐁+(\theta 𝐄)𝐄\frac{1}{2}\left(𝐄^2𝐁^2\right)\theta .$$

The second pair of equations, which is the consequence of Eq. (2), is

$$_\mu \stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }=0,$$
(6)
where the dual tensor being $`\stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }=(1/2)\epsilon _{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }F_{\alpha \beta }`$, $`\epsilon _{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }`$ is an antisymmetric tensor Levy-Civita ($`\epsilon _{1234}=i`$). Eq. (6) takes the form

$$\frac{}{t}𝐁+\text{rot}𝐄=0,\text{div}𝐁=0.$$
(7)
Now we apply Dirac’s procedure  of gauge covariant quantization to the Lagrangian (1) which leads to non-linear field equations. The Lagrangian (1) is gauge invariant with the simple gauge group $`U(1)`$ as well as ordinary electrodynamics. There is here an infinite dimensional phase space because we deal with a field theory. As usual the Lagrangian, $`L`$, and the action, $`S`$, corresponding to the density of Maxwell’s Lagrangian (1) are given by

$$L=d^3x,S=𝑑tL,$$
(8)
where $`x_i`$ (i=1,2,3) are spatial coordinates and $`t`$ is the time. We study the time evolution of fields and come, therefore, to “non-relativistic” formalism although the theory remains Lorentz covariant. The potentials, $`A_\mu `$, in this formalism are “coordinates” and “velocities” are $`_0A_\mu A_\mu /t`$. According to the general formalism , we find from Eq. (1), with the accuracy of $`𝒪(\theta ^2)`$, the following momenta:

$$\pi _i=\frac{}{(_0A_i)}=E_i\left[1+(\theta 𝐁)\right]+\left(\theta 𝐄\right)B_i+\left(𝐄𝐁\right)\theta _i,$$

(9)
$$\pi _0=\frac{}{(_0A_0)}=0.$$

The second equation in (9) gives a primary constraint

$$\phi _1(x)=\pi _0,\phi _1(x)0,$$
(10)
where we use Dirac’s notation  $``$ for equations which hold only weakly, i.e. $`\phi _1(x)`$ can have nonvanishing Poisson brackets with some variables. Eq. (10) is an infinite set of constraints for every space coordinate $`𝐱`$. From Eqs. (9),(5), we come to the equality $`\pi _i=D_i`$, i.e. the momentum and the displacement field equal (with the opposite sign). Then, using the known Poisson bracket $`\{.,.\}`$ between coordinates $`A_i(x)`$ and momentum $`\pi _i`$, we arrive at

$$\{A_i(\text{x},t),D_j(\text{y},t)\}=\delta _{ij}\delta (\text{x}\text{y}).$$
(11)
From Eq. (11) it is easy to find the Poisson bracket between the magnetic induction field $`B_i`$ and the displacement field $`D_j`$:

$$\{B_i(\text{x},t),D_j(\text{y},t)\}=ϵ_{ijk}_k\delta (\text{x}\text{y}).$$
(12)
The same relation holds in the Born-Infeld theory . In the quantized theory we have to make the substitution

$$\{B,D\}i[B,D],$$
(13)
where $`[B,D]=BDDB`$ is the quantum commutator. The density of the Hamiltonian found from the relation $`=\pi _\mu _0A_\mu `$, with the help of Eqs. (3), (9), is given by

$$=\frac{1}{2}\left(𝐄^2+𝐁^2\right)\left[1+(\theta 𝐁)\right]\left(\theta 𝐄\right)\left(𝐄𝐁\right)\pi _m_mA_0.$$
(14)
The primary constraint (10) should be a constant of motion and, therefore, we have the condition

$$_0\pi _0=\{\pi _0,H\}=_m\pi _m=0,$$
(15)
where

$$H=d^3x,$$
(16)
is the Hamiltonian. Eq. (15) guarantees that the primary constraint (10) is conserved. The secondary constraint, found from Eq. (15), is

$$\phi _2(x)=_m\pi _m,\phi _2(x)0.$$
(17)
It should be noted that weak equalities, $``$, are not compatible with the Poisson brackets . Using the equality $`\pi _m=D_m`$, it is easy to see that the secondary constraint (17) is simply the Gauss law (see Eq. (4)). The time evolution of the secondary constraint

$$_0\phi _2=\{\phi _2,H\}0,$$
(18)
shows that there is no additional constraints. The Poisson bracket between primary, $`\phi _1`$, and secondary, $`\phi _2`$, constraints vanishes, $`\{\phi _1,\phi _2\}=0`$. Thus, all constraints here are first class, and there are no second class constrains, as in classical electrodynamics . The primary and secondary constraints can be considered on the same footing . According to the general method , to acquire the total density of Hamiltonian, we add to Eq. (14) Lagrange multiplier terms $`v(x)\pi _0`$, $`u(x)_m\pi _m`$, where $`v(x)`$ and $`u(x)`$ are auxiliary variables which have no physical meaning, and are connected with gauge degrees of freedom. As a result, we arrive at the total density of Hamiltonian of Maxwell’s theory on NC spaces:

$$_T=\frac{1}{2}\left(𝐄^2+𝐁^2\right)\left[1+(\theta 𝐁)\right]\left(\theta 𝐄\right)\left(𝐄𝐁\right)$$

(19)
$$\pi _m_mA_0+v(x)\pi _0+u(x)_m\pi _m.$$

The first class constraints in Eq. (19) generate gauge transformations and Eq. (19) gives the set of Hamiltonians. As the physical space is the constraint surface, we get the energy from the Hamiltonian on the constraint surface. Thus, the density energy, found from Eq. (19), is given by

$$=\frac{1}{2}\left(𝐄^2+𝐁^2\right)\left[1+(\theta 𝐁)\right]\left(\theta 𝐄\right)\left(𝐄𝐁\right).$$
(20)
The same expression, Eq. (20), was obtained in  from another procedure. To obtain equations of motion we have to express the density of Hamiltonian (19) in terms of fields, $`A_\mu `$, and momenta, $`\pi _\mu `$. For this, using Eq. (9), we find, with the accuracy of $`𝒪(\theta ^2)`$, the electric field

$$E_i=\pi _i\left[1(\theta 𝐁)\right]\left(\theta \pi \right)B_i\left(\pi 𝐁\right)\theta _i.$$
(21)
With the help of Eq. (21) and the equality $`D_i=\pi _i`$, the total density of Hamiltonian (19) takes the form

$$_T=\frac{\pi ^2+𝐁^2}{2}+(\theta 𝐁)\frac{𝐁^2\pi ^2}{2}+\left(\theta \pi \right)\left(\pi 𝐁\right)$$

(22)
$$+v(x)\pi _0+\left(u(x)+A_0\right)_m\pi _m,$$

where $`𝐁=\text{rot}𝐀`$ and fields $`A_i`$ enter the density of Hamiltonian (22) in the form of the $`\text{rot}𝐀`$. We took into account Eq. (16) and an integration by parts to get the term $`A_0_m\pi _m`$ in Eq. (22). As the function $`u(x)`$ is arbitrary, we can make the substitution $`u^{}(x)=u(x)+A_0`$ (see ) in Eq. (22), so that $`u^{}(x)`$ will also be arbitrary, and the component $`A_0`$ is absorbed by the function $`u(x)`$. After this substitution, the $`A_0`$ does not enter the Hamiltonian and its dynamics is not defined by the Hamiltonian. This means that the component $`A_0`$ is not the physical degree of freedom. The same concerns the component $`\pi _0`$, which is zero (see (10)). The role of terms $`v(x)\pi _0+u(x)_m\pi _m`$ in Eq. (22) is to generate gauge transformations of fields which do not affect the physical state of the system.

The total density of Hamiltonian allows us to obtain the time evolution of fields. With the help of the Hamiltonian equations we find

$$_0A_i=\{A_i,H\}=\frac{\delta H}{\delta \pi _i}$$

(23)
$$=\pi _i\left[1(\theta 𝐁)\right]+\left(𝐁\pi \right)\theta _i+\left(\pi \theta \right)B_i_iA_0_iu(x),$$

$$_0\pi _i=\{\pi _i,H\}=\frac{\delta H}{\delta A_i}=_n\left\{\left[(_nA_i)(_iA_n)\right]\left[1+(\theta 𝐁)\right]\right\}$$

(24)
$$+\epsilon _{iab}_b\left[\theta _a\frac{𝐁^2\pi ^2}{2}+\pi _a(\pi \theta )\right],$$

$$_0A_0=\{A_0,H\}=\frac{\delta H}{\delta \pi _0}=v(x),_0\pi _0=\{\pi _0,H\}=\frac{\delta H}{\delta A_0}=_m\pi _m.$$
(25)
Eq. (24) coincides with the first equation in (4) taking into consideration the definition (5), and Eq. (23) is nothing but the gauge covariant form of Eq. (21). The second equation in (4), Gauss’s law, is the secondary constraint in the Hamiltonian formalism. As a particular case at $`v(x)=_0u^{}(x)`$ ($`u^{}(x)=u(x)+A_0`$), we arrive from Eqs. (23), (25) at the relativistic form of ordinary gauge transformations generated by constraints:

$$A_\mu ^{}(x)=A_\mu (x)+_\mu \mathrm{\Lambda }(x),$$
(26)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)=𝑑tu^{}(x)`$. But in general case, there are here two arbitrary functions, $`v(x)`$, $`u(x)`$. Thus, the Hamiltonian equations (23), (24) give the time evolution of physical fields which are gauge-equivalent to some solutions of the Euler-Lagrange equations. In this approach, the first class constraints initiate gauge transformations and realize a gauge algebra representation. Eq. (25) represents the time evolution of non-physical fields. According to Eq. (25) the component $`A_0`$ is arbitrary function connecting with gauge degree of freedom, and $`\pi _0`$, $`_m\pi _m`$ equal zero as constraints.

## 3 The Coulomb Gauge and Quantization of Second-Class Constraints

Let us consider the Coulomb (radiation) gauge constraints using the gauge freedom of the $`\theta `$-deformed Maxwell theory. For classical electrodynamics such a procedure was considered in  (see also , ). It should be noted that the gauge fixing procedure is beyond the Dirac’s approach. The gauge degrees of freedom are present in the Dirac method. So, in this section, we consider gauge fixing approach.

With the help of the gauge freedom, described by two functions, $`v(x)`$, $`u(x)`$, or Eq. (26), we can impose new constraints as follows:

$$\phi _3(x)=A_00,\phi _4(x)=_mA_m0.$$
(27)
The Coulomb gauge (27) does not violate the equations of motion. After fixing two components of vector-potential $`A_\mu `$ in accordance with Eqs. (27), the first class constraints (10), (17) become second class constraints. Indeed, the non-zero Poisson brackets of functions $`\phi _1`$, Eq. (10), $`\phi _2`$, Eq. (17) and $`\phi _3`$, $`\phi _4`$, Eq. (27), are (see )

$$\{\phi _1(\text{x},t),\phi _3(\text{y},t)\}=\delta (\text{x}\text{y}),\{\phi _2(\text{x},t),\phi _4(\text{y},t)\}=\mathrm{\Delta }_x\delta (\text{x}\text{y}),$$
(28)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x^2/(x_m)^2`$. The pairs of “coordinates” $`Q_i`$ and conjugated momenta $`P_i`$ ($`i=1,2`$) are defined as follows (see ):

$$Q_i=(A_0,_mA_m),P_i=(\pi _0,\mathrm{\Delta }_x^1_m\pi _m),$$
(29)
and equations

$$\{Q_i(\text{x},t),P_j(\text{y},t)\}=\delta _{ij}\delta (\text{x}\text{y}),$$
(30)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }_x^1=\frac{1}{4\pi |\text{x}|},\mathrm{\Delta }_x\frac{1}{4\pi |\text{x}|}=\delta (\text{x}),$$
(31)
hold. Pairs of canonical variables $`Q_i,P_i`$, Eq. (29), do not describe a true physical degrees of freedom. Therefore, in the quantum theory these operators must be eliminated. Defining the matrix of Poisson brackets as

$$C_{ij}=\{\phi _i(\text{x},t),\phi _j(\text{y},t)\},$$
(32)
so that the inverse matrix $`C_{ij}^1`$ exists , we may introduce the Dirac bracket , :

$$\{A(\text{x},t),B(\text{y},t)\}^{}=\{A(\text{x},t),B(\text{y},t)\}$$

(33)
$$d^3zd^3w\{A(\text{x},t),\phi _\alpha (\text{z},t)\}C_{\alpha \beta }^1(z,w)\{\phi _\beta (\text{w},t),B(\text{y},t)\}.$$

The inverse matrix $`C_{ij}^1`$ obeys the equation

$$d^3zC_{\alpha \gamma }(x,z)C_{\gamma \beta }^1(z,y)=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta (\text{x}\text{y}),$$
(34)
and is given by

$$C_{\alpha \beta }^1(x,y)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 0& \delta (\text{x}\text{y})& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& \frac{1}{4\pi |\text{x}\text{y}|}\\ \delta (\text{x}\text{y})& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& \frac{1}{4\pi |\text{x}\text{y}|}& 0& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(35)
Using the definition of Dirac’s bracket (33) and Eq. (35), and imposing the boundary condition that the fields vanish at infinity, we arrive at the same expression for the Dirac brackets as in classical electrodynamics (see ):

$$\{\pi _0(\text{x},t),A_0(\text{y},t)\}^{}=\{\pi _0(\text{x},t),A_i(\text{y},t)\}^{}=\{\pi _i(\text{x},t),A_0(\text{y},t)\}^{}=0,$$
(36)
$$\{\pi _i(\text{x},t),A_j(\text{y},t)\}^{}=\delta _{ij}\delta (\text{x}\text{y})+\frac{^2}{x_iy_j}\frac{1}{4\pi |\text{x}\text{y}|}(i,j=1,2,3),$$
(37)
$$\{\pi _\mu (\text{x},t),\pi _\nu (\text{y},t)\}^{}=\{A_\mu (\text{x},t),A_\nu (\text{y},t)\}^{}=0(\mu ,\nu =1,2,3,4).$$
(38)
Using the well-known Fourier transformation of the Coulomb potential

$$\frac{d^3x}{4\pi |\text{x}|}e^{i\text{k}\text{x}}=\frac{1}{|\text{k}|^2},$$
(39)
Eq, (37) takes the form

$$\{\pi _i(\text{k}),A_j(\text{q})\}^{}=(2\pi )^3\delta (\text{k+q})\left(\delta _{ij}\frac{k_ik_j}{\text{k}^2}\right).$$
(40)
So, the projection operator in the right side of Eq. (40):

$$\mathrm{\Pi }=(\mathrm{\Pi }_{ij})=\left(\delta _{ij}\frac{k_ik_j}{\text{k}^2}\right)$$

with the properties $`\mathrm{\Pi }^2=\mathrm{\Pi }`$, $`\mathrm{\Pi }\text{k}=0`$, extracts the physical transverse components of vectors.

According to the definition (33), the Dirac bracket of any operator $`A`$ with a second class constraint, $`\phi _\alpha `$, vanishes, $`\{A,\phi _\alpha \}^{}=0`$. Therefore, following the prescription , we can set all second class constraints strongly to zero. As a result, only two transverse components of the vector potential $`A_\mu `$ and momentum $`\pi _\mu `$ are physical independent variables. Thus, pairs of operators (29) are absent in the reduced physical phase space. Then the physical Hamiltonian of fully constrained $`\theta `$-deformed Maxwell’s theory becomes

$$H^{ph}=d^3x=d^3x\left\{\frac{1}{2}\left(𝐄^2+𝐁^2\right)\left[1+(\theta 𝐁)\right]\left(\theta 𝐄\right)\left(𝐄𝐁\right)\right\}.$$
(41)
Equations of motion obtained from Eq. (41) are given by

$$\{𝐀,H^{ph}\}^{}=_0𝐀$$

(42)
$$=\pi \left[1(\theta 𝐁)\right]+\left(𝐁\pi \right)\theta +\left(\pi \theta \right)𝐁,$$

$$\{\pi ,H^{ph}\}^{}=_0\pi $$

(43)
$$=\text{rot}\left\{𝐁\left[1+(\theta 𝐁)\right]+\theta \frac{𝐁^2\pi ^2}{2}+\pi (\pi \theta )\right\}.$$

In the quantum theory, with the presents of second class constraints, we have to replace Dirac’s bracket by the quantum commutator according to the prescription $`\{.,.\}^{}i[.,.]`$. Only transverse components of the vector potential $`A_\mu `$ are physical degrees of freedom, and they remain in the theory.

## 4 Wave Function, Observables and Quantization of First-Class Constraints

We do not imply here the gauge conditions, described in the previous section, and we follow the direct Dirac method. The gauge degrees of freedom present as operators in a bigger linear space and constraints are operators which act on Dirac’s space. One needs to extract the physical sub-space by imposing conditions.

Let us consider the problem of constructing physical states in the Hilbert space and observables. In quantized theory, the dynamical variables $`\widehat{A}_i`$ and $`\widehat{\pi }_i=\widehat{D}_i`$ obey here the commutation relation (see (11)):

$$[\widehat{A}_i(\text{x},t),\widehat{D}_j(\text{y},t)]=i\delta _{ij}\delta (\text{x}\text{y}).$$
(44)
The wave function $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ satisfies the Schrödinger equation

$$i\frac{d|\mathrm{\Psi }}{dt}=H|\mathrm{\Psi },$$
(45)
where $`H`$ is the Hamiltonian (16) with the density (19). In accordance with  the wave function (the state) must obey the following equations

$$\widehat{D}_0|\mathrm{\Psi }=0,_m\widehat{D}_m|\mathrm{\Psi }=0,$$
(46)
i.e., the physical state remains unchanged, and as a result, it is invariant under the gauge transformations. In the coordinate representation the operators of the “coordinate” $`\widehat{A}_i`$ and the momentum $`\widehat{\pi }_i=\widehat{D}_i`$ are given by

$$\widehat{A}_i\mathrm{\Psi }[A]=A_i\mathrm{\Psi }[A],\widehat{D}_\mu (x)\mathrm{\Psi }[A]=i\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Psi }[A]}{\delta A_\mu (x)},$$
(47)
where $`\mathrm{\Psi }[A]`$ is the wave functional (the vector of the state). In this representation Eqs. (46) take the form

$$\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Psi }[A]}{\delta A_0(x)}=0,_i\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Psi }[A]}{\delta A_i(x)}=0.$$
(48)
Thus, constraints are restrictions on the state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Both equations (46) (or (48)) are compatible if $`[\widehat{D}_0,_m\widehat{D}_m]=0`$; this is the case. So, constraints do not change the physical states $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ being gauge invariant quantities, and are the generators of the gauge symmetry. The method of gauge fixing, described in the previous section, leads to the reduced phase space, and is equivalent to the Dirac approach.

The fields E, B, D,, H are invariants of the gauge transformations and are observables (measurable quantities). As usual, real observables are represented by the Hermitian operators and must not depend on $`A_0`$.

To have normalized states and a physical interpretation to the theory, one needs to construct a scalar product of wave functions (functionals). Obviously, this product is given by the functional integral. Then, however, we should take into account the gauge degrees of freedom, and insert a gauge condition. As a result, we arrive at the necessity to introduce ghosts. Such a procedure is beyond the Dirac approach. The second way is to use the Fock basis ignoring the wave functionals. The problem of constructing the vacuum state and the scalar product on the physical state space may be realized, with the help of the Fock representation, in the same manner as in the case of classical electrodynamics (see ). This procedure may involve, however, the introducing negative norm states which should not appear in the physical spectrum.

## 5 Conclusion

We have considered quantization of the Maxwell theory on non-commutative spaces taking into consideration first class constraints as well as introducing second class constraints and the Dirac bracket. The procedure of Dirac’s quantization here, on the basis of first class constraints and the Poisson bracket, is similar to the quantization of classical electrodynamics because the gauge group is the same: $`U(1)`$. The difference is that field equations are nonlinear in the case of the $`\theta `$-deformed Maxwell theory, and, as a result, the quantization of a theory is more complicated. Dirac’s method of quantization has an advantage compared to the reduced phase space approach (see ) that it does not violate the Lorentz invariance and locality in space.

The quantization of Maxwell’s theory on non-commutative spaces within BRST-scheme, by the inclusion of the ghosts, was performed in .

Let me now mention some interesting phenomenon impacting on NC quantum electrodynamics (NCQED). NC theory can be verified at high energy using $`e^+e^{}`$ and hadronic collisions and low energy precision experiments for measurements of anomalous magnetic (AM) and electric dipole (ED) moments, as well as other CP-violating effects . So, $`e^+e^{}`$, $`e\gamma `$, and $`\gamma \gamma `$ cross sections within the NCQED framework depend on $`\theta _{\mu \nu }`$ . In particular, for Möller and Bhabha scattering, cross sections depend on $`\theta _{ij}`$ (when i,j=1,2,3) and $`\theta _{0j}`$, respectively. Note the Aharonov-Bohm effect for high energy electrons might also influence the boundary on $`\theta `$ .

There are constraints on $`\theta `$ parameters when splitting levels of energy in positronium and the Lamb shift . Electron ED moments and muon AM moments give the boundary of $`\theta <10^4`$ TeV<sup>-1</sup> , and $`\theta <m_\mu ^1`$ , respectively. In the electroweak sector, the CP violation provides the NC effect $`\theta <1`$ TeV<sup>-1</sup> .

NC geometry contributes some effects in cosmology  because in the early universe, at temperatures above $`\theta ^{1/2}`$ NC effects were important. That may explain the detection of high energy photons in the cosmos  and a global structure after the universe had expanded.