text:
# A Lax Equation for the Non-Linear Sigma Model

## 1 Introduction:

The non-linear sigma model has been studied from various points of view . In the context of $`1+1`$ dimensional integrable systems, it is one of the most enigmatic models. The equations for the principal chiral model, for example, take the forms

$`_\mu J^{\mu ,a}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`_\mu J_\nu ^a_\nu J_\mu ^af^{abc}J_\mu ^bJ_\nu ^c`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (1)
where $`\mu =0,1`$ and $`J_\mu ^a`$ belongs to a simple Lie algebra, with $`a`$ taking values in the adjoint representation. Explicitly, the two equations can be written as

$`_tJ_0^a`$ $`=`$ $`_xJ_1^a`$
$`_tJ_1^a`$ $`=`$ $`_xJ_0^a+f^{abc}J_0^bJ_1^c`$ (2)
It is well known that the equations (1) can be combined into a single zero curvature condition by introducing a one parameter family of connections that depend on a constant spectral parameter . The zero curvature representation is quite useful and leads directly to the infinite number of conserved non-local charges of the system . While an infinity of conserved charges is a hallmark of integrable systems, these non-local charges are not in involution with respect to the Hamiltonian structure of the system . Rather, they satisfy a Yangian algebra . While classical integrability of the non-linear sigma model is known from alternate arguments  (see  for quantum integrability), a conventional proof of integrability through the existence of an infinite number of conserved charges in involution is lacking so far. Furthermore, it is not known whether the system is bi-Hamiltonian, as is the case with most integrable systems .

There have been various attempts  to construct conserved local charges for the system (1), but a systematic study through a Lax representation is lacking so far. In this letter, we will provide a Lax equation for the non-linear sigma model equations (1). Although the equations (1) cannot be characterized as dispersionless, they share many features common to a dispersionless model . In section 2, we discuss briefly the two component Riemann equation. This is a dispersionless system sharing some properties with the non-linear sigma model. In section 3, drawing from our experience in the Toda lattice , we present a Lax representation for (1). Even though the Lax equation for the system is not that of a dispersionless system, it immediately leads to two infinite sets of local conserved charges, a common feature of dispersionless systems . We point out various properties of these conserved charges that are quite useful in proving the integrability of the system. We also present the two Hamiltonian structures which are compatible and make the system bi-Hamiltonian. In section 4, we construct two recursion operators for the system which connect charges within any given set as well as between the two sets. We also show explicitly that the two sets of charges are in involution with respect to either of the Hamiltonian structures thereby proving the integrability of the system. In section 5, we summarize our results and discuss some other interesting aspects of this system.

## 2 Matrix Riemann equation:

Before discussing the Lax equation for the non-linear sigma model, we will briefly discuss, in this section, the two component Riemann equation. We recall that the Riemann equation

$$u_t=uu_x,$$
(3)
is an integrable dispersionless system  which belongs to the class of equations of hydrodynamic type. Even though the non-linear sigma model is not a dispersionless system, it shares some nice properties with the two component Riemann equation. Let us define a $`2\times 2`$ matrix

$$U=\left(\begin{array}{cc}u& v\\ v& u\end{array}\right)=uI+v\sigma _1,$$
(4)
where $`u,v`$ are the two dynamical variables of the system and $`\sigma _1`$ is the familiar Pauli matrix ($`I`$ denotes the identity matrix.). Then, the generalized two component Riemann equation takes the form

$$U_t=UU_x.$$
(5)
Let us next consider a matrix Lax function of the type

$$L=p^2I+U,$$
(6)
where $`p`$ denotes the momentum in the phase space. Then, from the special structure of $`U`$ in (4), it is clear that

$$[\sigma _1,U]=0,[\sigma _1,L]=0.$$
(7)
As a result, there is an ambiguity in taking the square root of the Lax function, namely,

$$L_1^{\frac{1}{2}}=pI+\frac{1}{2}Up^1\frac{1}{8}U^2p^3+\mathrm{}.$$
(8)
Furthermore, a second square root has the form

$$L_2^{\frac{1}{2}}=\sigma _1L_1^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$
(9)
We note that the square root (either one) of the Lax function commutes with $`\sigma _1`$, as does $`L`$. Both the square roots lead to consistent Lax equations  as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{L}{t_n}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(2n)!!}{(2n+1)!!}}\{(L_1)_1^{\frac{2n+1}{2}},L\},`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{L}{t_n}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(2n)!!}{(2n+1)!!}}\{(L_2)_1^{\frac{2n+1}{2}},L\},`$ (10)
where $`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ and which lead to the hierarchy of Riemann equations of the form

$`U_t`$ $`=`$ $`U^nU_x,`$ (11)
$`U_t`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma _1U^nU_x,`$ (12)
respectively. In the second equation the effect of $`\sigma _1`$, on the right hand side, is to interchange $`uv`$, and eq. (12) can be thought of as the “elastic medium” equations  associated with the hierarchy of Riemann equations (11). It is worth noting here that, although we have written the equations as non-standard equations, the same equations also arise from the standard Lax equations .

The conserved charges of the system can now be easily obtained from the Lax function. In fact, there are two infinite sets of conserved charges which arise as

$`H_n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑xh_n}={\displaystyle \frac{(2n)!!}{(2n1)!!}}\mathrm{Tr}L^{\frac{2n1}{2}}={\displaystyle \frac{(2n)!!}{(2n1)!!}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\mathrm{tr}\mathrm{Res}L^{\frac{2n1}{2}}}={\displaystyle 𝑑x\mathrm{tr}U^n},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{H}_n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑x\stackrel{~}{h}_n}={\displaystyle \frac{(2n)!!}{(2n1)!!}}\mathrm{Tr}\sigma _1L^{\frac{2n1}{2}}={\displaystyle \frac{(2n)!!}{(2n1)!!}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\mathrm{tr}\mathrm{Res}\sigma _1L^{\frac{2n1}{2}}}={\displaystyle 𝑑x\mathrm{tr}\sigma _1U^n},`$
where “tr” denotes the trace over matrix indices, “Res” (Residue) stands for the coefficient of the $`p^1`$ term in the expansion and $`n=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$. (Alternatively, we can think of the two sets of charges as the traces of powers of $`L_1`$ and $`L_2`$ respectively.) Explicitly, the two sets of conserved densities have the closed forms

$`h_n`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\left[\frac{n}{2}\right]}{}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}n\\ 2k\end{array}\right)u^{n2k}v^{2k},`$ (16)
$`\stackrel{~}{h}_n`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\left[\frac{n+1}{2}\right]}{}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}n\\ 2k1\end{array}\right)u^{n2k+1}v^{2k1}.`$ (19)
The conserved quantities are, of course, defined up to overall normalization constants. Rescaling

$$(H_n,\stackrel{~}{H}_n)\frac{1}{n(n1)}(H_n,\stackrel{~}{H}_n),n>1,$$
(20)
we see that the equations (11) and (12) can be written in the Hamiltonian form respectively as

$`U_t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta H_{n+2}}{\delta U}},`$
$`U_t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_{n+2}}{\delta U}}.`$ (21)
The conserved densities of the system are easily seen to satisfy the usual relations for the two component hydrodynamic systems , namely,

$$\frac{^2h_n}{uu}=\frac{^2h_n}{vv},\frac{^2\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{uu}=\frac{^2\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{vv}.$$
(22)
This system of equations is integrable. However, we will not get into the details of this. Our interest has been only to discuss it briefly so that we can bring out the similarities of this system with the non-linear sigma model.

## 3 Lax equation for the non-linear sigma model:

The non-linear sigma model is not exactly a dispersionless system. Consequently, we do not expect a Lax function in the phase space to describe such a system. We find that, like the Toda lattice, the non-linear sigma model does not have a scalar Lax description, but can be given a Lax description much like the Toda lattice  in the following manner.

Let us consider the symmetric $`2\times 2`$ (multiplicative) Lax operator of the form

$`S^{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}J_0^aJ_0^b+J_1^aJ_1^b& J_0^aJ_1^b+J_1^aJ_0^b\\ & \\ J_0^aJ_1^b+J_1^aJ_0^b& J_0^aJ_0^b+J_1^aJ_1^b\end{array}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`(J_0^aJ_0^b+J_1^aJ_1^b)I+(J_0^aJ_1^b+J_1^aJ_0^b)\sigma _1`$
$`=`$ $`L^aL^b,`$ (26)
where

$$L^a=J_0^aI+J_1^a\sigma _1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}J_0^a& J_1^a\\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{}\\ J_1^a& J_0^a\end{array}\right).$$
(27)
Let us also introduce an anti-symmetric $`2\times 2`$ matrix operator

$$U^{ab}=\left(\delta ^{ab}+f^{abc}J_1^c\right)\sigma _1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \delta ^{ab}+f^{abc}J_1^c\\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{}\\ \delta ^{ab}+f^{abc}J_1^c& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(28)
Then, it is easy to check that the Lax equation of the form of the Toda lattice, namely,

$$\frac{S^{ab}}{t}=[S,U]^{ab}\left(S^{ac}U^{cb}U^{ac}S^{cb}\right),$$
(29)
leads to the equations for the non-linear sigma model (1). ($`U^{ab}`$, here, is an operator and should not be confused with the matrix $`U`$ in (4) of the last section, which describes the dynamical variables of the system much like $`S^{ab}`$.) Parenthetically, we would like to remark here that the correspondence with the Toda lattice, however, is not quite complete as the operator $`U^{ab}`$ cannot be obtained as the Fréchet derivative of the equations for the sigma model . Just like the two component Riemann equation of the last section, it is clear that

$$[\sigma _1,L^a]=0,[\sigma _1,S^{ab}]=0,[\sigma _1,U^{ab}]=0,$$
(30)
which defines an analogous symmetry in the non-linear sigma model.

Equation (29) defines the Lax equation for the non-linear sigma model. As in the Toda lattice, it follows that the conserved densities of the system can be obtained as traces of powers of the Lax operator $`S^{ab}`$ . In fact, because of the symmetry (30) in the system, it is trivial to check that there are two infinite sets of local conserved densities in the system, namely,

$$h_n=\frac{1}{4n}\mathrm{Tr}S^n,\stackrel{~}{h}_n=\frac{1}{4n}\mathrm{Tr}\sigma _1S^n.$$
(31)
Here, “Tr” denotes trace over the matrix indices as well as over the internal indices. Using the definition (26) as well as the cyclicity property of the trace, it is easy to see that we can write the conserved densities in the simpler form

$$h_n=\frac{1}{4n}\mathrm{tr}(L^2)^n,\stackrel{~}{h}_n=\frac{1}{4n}\mathrm{tr}\sigma _1(L^2)^n,$$
(32)
where

$$L^2=L^aL^a=(J_0^2+J_1^2)I+2(J_0J_1)\sigma _1,$$
(33)
and “tr” denotes, as before, trace over matrix indices. In (33) the internal indices of the terms inside the parenthesis are summed. The similarity of these with the conserved densities of the two component Riemann equation in (LABEL:charges) is remarkable (we have chosen a particular normalization for simplicity). The first few conserved densities for the non-linear sigma model have the explicit forms,

$`\begin{array}{c}h_1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(J_0^2+J_1^2),\hfill \\ \\ h_2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\left(J_0^2+J_1^2\right)^2+\left(J_0J_1\right)^2,\hfill \\ \\ h_3={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\left(J_0^2+J_1^2\right)^3+2\left(J_0^2+J_1^2\right)\left(J_0J_1\right)^2,\hfill \\ \mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}`$ $`\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{h}_1=(J_0J_1),\hfill \\ \\ \stackrel{~}{h}_2=\left(J_0^2+J_1^2\right)\left(J_0J_1\right),\hfill \\ \\ \stackrel{~}{h}_3=\left(J_0^2+J_1^2\right)^2\left(J_0J_1\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}(J_0J_1)^3.\hfill \\ \mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}`$ (42)
We see that the local conserved densities in (32) do not involve spatial derivatives, much like the conserved densities of dispersionless systems. It is also clear now that the two sets of conserved charges can be mapped into those of the two component Riemann equation (LABEL:charges) or (19) (up to normalization constants) with the identifications

$$u=J_0^2+J_1^2,v=2J_0J_1.$$
(43)
With this mapping, even the equations for the sigma model (1) go over to those of the two component Riemann equation (12) for $`n=0`$. However, such a map is not one to one and, therefore, is not very useful. Nonetheless, it brings out an interesting relation between a dispersionless system and the non-linear sigma model.

As in hydrodynamic systems, in the case of the non-linear sigma model, it can be shown that any local conserved density, $`Q`$ (without spatial derivatives), must satisfy

$$\frac{^2Q}{J_0^aJ_0^b}=\frac{^2Q}{J_1^aJ_1^b},$$
(44)
which is the analogue of (22). The conserved densities in (32) can be seen to satisfy this. However, from the form of the conserved densities in (32), it can be checked that they satisfy additional relations which can be written collectively as

$`\begin{array}{c}{\displaystyle \frac{^2h_n}{J_0^aJ_0^b}}={\displaystyle \frac{^2h_n}{J_1^aJ_1^b}},\hfill \\ \\ {\displaystyle \frac{^2h_n}{J_0^aJ_1^b}}={\displaystyle \frac{^2h_n}{J_0^bJ_1^a}},\hfill \\ \\ J_0^a{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_0^a}}+J_1^a{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_1^a}}=2nh_n,\hfill \\ \\ J_1^a{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_0^a}}+J_0^a{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_1^a}}=2n\stackrel{~}{h}_n,\hfill \\ \\ f^{abc}\left(J_0^b{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_0^c}}+J_1^b{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_1^c}}\right)=0,\hfill \\ \\ f^{abc}\left(J_0^b{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_1^c}}+J_1^b{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_0^c}}\right)=0,\hfill \end{array}`$ $`\begin{array}{c}{\displaystyle \frac{^2\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_0^aJ_0^b}}={\displaystyle \frac{^2\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_1^aJ_1^b}},\hfill \\ \\ {\displaystyle \frac{^2\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_0^aJ_1^b}}={\displaystyle \frac{^2\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_0^bJ_1^a}},\hfill \\ \\ J_0^a{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_0^a}}+J_1^a{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_1^a}}=2n\stackrel{~}{h}_n,\hfill \\ \\ J_1^a{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_0^a}}+J_0^a{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_1^a}}=2nh_n,\hfill \\ \\ f^{abc}\left(J_0^b{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_0^c}}+J_1^b{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_1^c}}\right)=0,\hfill \\ \\ f^{abc}\left(J_0^b{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_1^c}}+J_1^b{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_0^c}}\right)=0,\hfill \end{array}`$
$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{h_n}{J_0^a}\\ \\ \frac{h_n}{J_1^a}\end{array}\right)=\sigma _1\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_0^a}\\ \\ \frac{\stackrel{~}{h}_n}{J_1^a}\end{array}\right).$$
(46)
These relations are quite useful in proving the complete integrability of the system as well as various other interesting properties, as we will see.

Once the two sets of local conserved charges have been obtained, it is straightforward to show that the non-linear sigma model has two Hamiltonian structures. Defining

$$𝒟_1^{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \delta ^{ab}\\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{}\\ \delta ^{ab}& f^{abc}J_0^c\end{array}\right),𝒟_2^{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\delta ^{ab}& 0\\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{}\\ 0& \delta ^{ab}+f^{abc}J_1^c\end{array}\right).$$
(47)
it is easy to see that the non-linear sigma model equations, (1), can be written in the Hamiltonian form as

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}J_{0,t}^a\\ \\ J_{1,t}^a\end{array}\right)=𝒟_1^{ab}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta H_1}{\delta J_0^b}\\ \\ \frac{\delta H_1}{\delta J_1^b}\end{array}\right)=𝒟_2^{ab}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_1}{\delta J_0^b}\\ \\ \frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_1}{\delta J_1^b}\end{array}\right).$$
(48)
In fact, using the properties in (46), it is easy to show that all the higher order equations in the hierarchy can also be written as

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}J_{0,t}^a\\ \\ J_{1,t}^a\end{array}\right)=𝒟_1^{ab}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta H_n}{\delta J_0^b}\\ \\ \frac{\delta H_n}{\delta J_1^b}\end{array}\right)=𝒟_2^{ab}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_n}{\delta J_0^b}\\ \\ \frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_n}{\delta J_1^b}\end{array}\right).$$
(49)
The anti-symmetry of the Hamiltonian structures in (47) is manifest and it can be seen, using the method of prolongation , that they satisfy Jacobi identity. Therefore, these are genuine Hamiltonian structures of the system. Furthermore, it is also easy to check, using the method of prolongation, that

$$𝒟_1+\xi 𝒟_2$$
(50)
satisfies Jacobi identity, where $`\xi `$ is an arbitrary constant parameter. As a result, the system has two compatible Hamiltonian structures and is truly a bi-Hamiltonian system. However, it is worth noting that, unlike in conventional integrable systems, here the two Hamiltonian structures act on different families of charges to yield the same dynamical equations. Since the criterion of Magri  applies to systems where the bi-Hamiltonian structures act on the same family of conserved charges, it is not a priori clear that the integrability of the system follows from the existence of a bi-Hamiltonian structure. This is a question that we will take up in the next section. We would like to point out here that under the action of $`𝒟_1`$, the conserved charge $`\stackrel{~}{H}_1`$ generates spatial translations, as does $`H_1`$ under the action of $`𝒟_2`$. This is another interesting feature of this system, namely, the “Hamiltonian” and the “momentum” (with respect to a given Hamiltonian structure) seem to be distributed into distinct families of conserved quantities in the non-linear sigma model.

## 4 Complete integrability of the system:

Before proving complete integrability of the non-linear sigma model, let us derive the recursion operators that relate the conserved charges of the two infinite sets. Using the relations in (46), it is straightforward to show that the Lax operator, $`S^{ab}`$, defines a recursion operator for the system. It can be explicitly checked that

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta H_{n+1}}{\delta J_0^a}\\ \\ \frac{\delta H_{n+1}}{\delta J_1^a}\end{array}\right)=S^{ab}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta H_n}{\delta J_0^b}\\ \\ \frac{\delta H_n}{\delta J_1^b}\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_{n+1}}{\delta J_0^a}\\ \\ \frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_{n+1}}{\delta J_1^a}\end{array}\right)=S^{ab}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_n}{\delta J_0^b}\\ \\ \frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_n}{\delta J_1^b}\end{array}\right).$$
(51)
Namely, the charges within each of the two sets are related recursively by the Lax operator, $`S^{ab}`$, itself.

Furthermore, let us define

$$\stackrel{~}{S}^{ab}=\left(𝒟_1^1\right)^{ac}𝒟_2^{cb}=\delta ^{ab}\sigma _1+^1\left(\begin{array}{cc}f^{abc}J_0^c& f^{abc}J_1^c\\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{}\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(52)
Using (46), it is easy to check that the second term on the right hand side of (52) gives zero acting on

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta H_n}{\delta J_0^b}\\ \\ \frac{\delta H_n}{\delta J_1^b}\end{array}\right),\mathrm{or}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_n}{\delta J_0^b}\\ \\ \frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_n}{\delta J_1^b}\end{array}\right).$$
(53)
It follows then that

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_n}{\delta J_0^a}\\ \\ \frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{H}_n}{\delta J_1^a}\end{array}\right)=\stackrel{~}{S}^{ab}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta H_n}{\delta J_0^b}\\ \\ \frac{\delta H_n}{\delta J_1^b}\end{array}\right)=\sigma _1\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\delta H_n}{\delta J_0^a}\\ \\ \frac{\delta H_n}{\delta J_1^a}\end{array}\right).$$
(54)
This is, in fact, already noted (the last relation) in (46). It is worth noting here that the recursion operator, (52), conventionally constructed from the two Hamiltonian structures in an integrable system, in this case relates charges of the two distinct sets. In fact, on the space of the gradients of the Hamiltonian, (53), it is easy to verify that

$$(\stackrel{~}{S})^2=I.$$
(55)
Namely, although the square of this recursion operator is not identity, its effect on the space (53) is that of the identity operator. This is quite important in that it implies that there are only two infinite sets of local conserved charges (without derivatives) associated with the system.

Thus, we see that, in the case of the non-linear sigma model, there exist two recursion operators — $`S^{ab}`$ relates charges within a family whereas $`\stackrel{~}{S}^{ab}`$ relates charges between the two families of conserved charges. By construction $`\stackrel{~}{S}^{ab}`$ is related to the two Hamiltonian structures of the system. One can similarly ask if there is yet another Hamiltonian structure within a given family of charges constructed in the conventional manner as

$$\overline{𝒟}^{ab}=𝒟_1^{ac}S^{cb}.$$
(56)
We have checked that this structure does not satisfy Jacobi identity. (In fact, this structure does not even have the required anti-symmetry property. If it is anti-symmetrized by hand, the new structure does not lead to the correct dynamical equations, in addition to the fact that the Jacobi identity does not hold.) This, therefore, remains an open question.

To prove complete integrability of the system, we note that

$$\{H_n,H_m\}_1=𝑑x\left[\frac{h_n}{J_0^a}\left(\frac{h_m}{J_1^a}\right)+\frac{h_n}{J_1^a}\left(\frac{h_m}{J_0^a}f^{abc}J_0^c\frac{h_m}{J_1^b}\right)\right].$$
(57)
From the forms of the conserved charges in (32), it is easy to see that the term on the right hand side involving the structure constant does not contribute. As a result, we have

$`\{H_n,H_m\}_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑x\left[\frac{h_n}{J_0^a}\frac{h_m}{J_1^a}+\frac{h_n}{J_1^a}\frac{h_m}{J_0^a}\right]}`$ (58)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑x\left[F^aJ_{0,x}^a+G^aJ_{1,x}^a\right]},`$
where

$`F^a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_0^b}}{\displaystyle \frac{^2h_m}{J_0^aJ_1^b}}+{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_1^b}}{\displaystyle \frac{^2h_m}{J_0^aJ_0^b}},`$
$`G^a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_0^b}}{\displaystyle \frac{^2h_m}{J_1^aJ_1^b}}+{\displaystyle \frac{h_n}{J_1^b}}{\displaystyle \frac{^2h_m}{J_1^aJ_0^b}}.`$ (59)
It is straightforward now to check, using (46), that

$$\frac{F^a}{J_1^b}\frac{G^a}{J_0^b}=0.$$
(60)
This implies that there exists a function $`X`$ such that

$$F^a=\frac{X}{J_0^a},G^a=\frac{X}{J_1^a},\frac{^2X}{J_0^aJ_1^b}=\frac{^2X}{J_0^bJ_1^a}.$$
(61)
Substituting this into (58), we obtain

$$\{H_n,H_m\}_1=𝑑x\frac{dX}{dx}=0,$$
(62)
with the usual assumptions on the asymptotic fall off of the fields. In a similar manner, it can be shown that

$$\{H_n,\stackrel{~}{H}_m\}_1=0=\{\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\stackrel{~}{H}_m\}_1.$$
(63)
Namely, all the charges are in involution with respect to the first Hamiltonian structure. The involution with respect to the second Hamiltonian structure is also easy to show along similar lines,

$$\{H_n,H_m\}_2=0=\{H_n,\stackrel{~}{H}_m\}_2=\{\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\stackrel{~}{H}_m\}_2.$$
(64)
This proves that the non-linear sigma model is completely integrable.

## 5 Discussions:

In this letter, we have proposed a Lax equation for the non-linear sigma model which directly generates all the conserved local quantities (without any derivative) of the system. There are, in fact, two infinite sets of conserved charges and the similarities of this system with the two component Riemann equation are discussed. We have obtained the two Hamiltonian structures of the system and have shown that they are compatible thereby proving that the system is bi-Hamiltonian. However, unlike conventional integrable systems, here the two Hamiltonian structures act on charges in the different sets to give the same dynamical equations. As a result, integrability of the system does not follow in spite of the fact that it is a bi-Hamiltonian system. We have constructed two recursion operators for the system — one that relates conserved quantities withing any given family and the other that relates the charges between the two families. We have explicitly shown that the two sets of charges are in involution with respect to either of the Hamiltonian structures, thereby proving the integrability of the system. We have also brought out several other interesting features associated with the system.

In the conventional discussion of the non-linear sigma model , there is a standard Hamiltonian structure given by

$$𝒟_{\mathrm{std}}^{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}f^{abc}J_0^c& \delta ^{ab}+f^{abc}J_1^c\\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{}\\ \delta ^{ab}+f^{abc}J_1^c& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(65)
This is manifestly anti-symmetric and can be easily checked to satisfy Jacobi identity. On the other hand, this seems to be quite different from the two Hamiltonian structures that we have obtained in (47). We note that the Hamiltonian structure in (65) acting on $`H_1`$ leads to the non-linear sigma model equations, (1). On the other hand, we note that

$$𝒟_{\mathrm{std}}^{ab}𝒟_1^{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}f^{abc}J_0^c& f^{abc}J_1^c\\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{}\\ f^{abc}J_1^c& f^{abc}J_0^c\end{array}\right).$$
(66)
Using (46), it is easy to see that this difference gives vanishing contribution on the space (53). As a result, on the space (53), the two structures $`𝒟_{\mathrm{std}}^{ab}`$ and $`𝒟_1^{ab}`$ have identical effect. (It is interesting to note that, in spite of this, the two structures, $`𝒟_1^{ab}`$ and $`𝒟_{\mathrm{std}}^{ab}`$ are not compatible.) This feature is completely new, namely, we have two Hamiltonian structures, satisfying Jacobi identity, which give the same equations acting on the same Hamiltonian (normally multi-Hamiltonian structures act on different Hamiltonians). It is not a priori clear, therefore, how one can select between these two structures. The difference in the two Hamiltonian structures lies in their action on the space of charges that are not gauge invariant (which have a free internal index). Namely, we know that the non-linear sigma model has an infinite set of conserved non-local charges, the first of which is, in fact, local and is of the form

$$Q^a=𝑑xJ_0^a.$$
(67)
This charge is, in fact, supposed to generate the global rotations of the system through the action of the Hamiltonian structure of the system. It can be checked that the action of $`𝒟_{\mathrm{std}}^{ab}`$ acting on this leads to the correct rotation while $`𝒟_1^{ab}`$ does not. This may be a reason to choose the conventional Hamiltonian structure over $`𝒟_1^{ab}`$. These are, however, open questions that need further study.

## Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by US DOE grant no. DE-FG-02-91ER40685 as well as by CNPq, Brasil.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

MAXIMAL-ACCELERATION PHASE SPACE RELATIVITY

FROM CLIFFORD ALGEBRAS

Carlos Castro

Center for Theoretical Studies of Physical Systems,

Clark Atlanta University, Atlanta, GA. 30314

August, 2002

Abstract

We present a new physical model that links the maximum speed of light with the minimal Planck scale into a maximal-acceleration Relativity principle in the spacetime tangent bundle and in phase spaces (cotangent bundle). Crucial in order to establish this link is the use of Clifford algebras in phase spaces. The maximal proper-acceleration bound is $`a=c^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in full agreement with the old predictions of Caianiello, the Finslerian geometry point of view of Brandt and more recent results in the literature. We present the reasons why an Extended Scale Relativity based on Clifford spaces is physically more appealing than those based on kappa-deformed Poincare algebras and the inhomogeneous quantum groups operating in quantum Minkowski spacetimes. The main reason being that the Planck scale should not be taken as a deformation parameter to construct quantum algebras but should exist already as the minimum scale in Clifford spaces.

I . Introduction

Relativity in C-spaces (Clifford manifolds)  is a very natural extension of Einstein’s relativity and Nottale’s scale relativity  where the impassible speed of light and the minimum Planck scale are the two universal invariants. An event in C-space is represented by a polyvector, or Clifford-aggregate of lines, areas, volumes. which bear a one-to-one correspondence to the holographic shadows/projections (onto the embedding spacetime coordinate planes) of a nested family of $`p`$-loops (closed $`p`$\- branes of spherical topology) of various dimensionalities: $`p=0`$ represents a point; $`p=1`$ a closed string, $`p=2`$ a closed membrane, etc.

The invariant “line” element associated with a polyparticle is:

$$d\mathrm{\Sigma }^2=dX.dX=d\mathrm{\Omega })^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }^{2D2}(dx_\mu dx^\mu )+\mathrm{\Lambda }^{2D4}(dx_{\mu \nu })(dx^{\mu \nu })+\mathrm{}$$
$`(1.1)`$
the Planck scale appears as a natural quantity in order to match units and combine p-branes ( p-loops ) of different dimensions. The fact that the Planck scale is a minimum was based on the real-valued interval $`dX`$ when $`dX.dX>0`$. The analog of photons in C-space are $`tensionless`$ branes : $`dX.dX=0`$. Scales smaller than $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ yield ” tachyonic ” intervals $`dX.dX<0`$ . Due to the matrix representation of the gamma matrices and the cyclic trace property, it can be easily seen why the line element is invariant under the C- space Lorentz $`group`$ transformations:

$$TraceX^2=Trace[RX^2R^1]=Trace[RR^1X^2]=TraceX^2,$$
$`(1.2)`$
where a finite polydimensional rotation that reshuffles dimensions is characterized by the C-space “rotation” matrix:

$$R=\mathrm{exp}[i(\theta I+\theta ^\mu \gamma _\mu +\theta ^{\mu \nu }\gamma _{\mu \nu }+\mathrm{})].$$
$`(1.3)`$
The parameters $`\theta ,\theta ^\mu ,\theta ^{\mu \nu }`$ are the C-space extension of the Lorentz boost parameters and for this reason the na ve Lorentz transformations of spacetime are modified to be:

$$x^\mu =L_\nu ^\mu [\theta ,\theta ^\mu ,\theta ^{\mu \nu },\mathrm{}]x^\nu .$$
$`(1.4)`$
Due to the presence of all the C-space boost parameters in the modified Lorentz matrix $`L_\nu ^\mu `$ one induces an effective Lorentz transformation with an $`effective`$ boost parameter of the form $`\xi _{eff}=z(\xi )`$ discussed in  in order to ensure that the minimal Planck scale is never surpassed at infinite momentum. For details we refer to .

It was argued in  that the extended Relativity principle in C-space may contain the clues to unravel the physical foundations of string and M-theory since the dynamics in C-spaces encompass in one stroke the dynamics of all p- branes of various dimensionalities. In particular, how to formulate a master action that encodes the collective dynamics of all extended objects.

For further details about these issues we refer to  and all the references therein. Like the derivation of the minimal length/time string/brane uncertainty relations; the logarithmic corrections to the black- hole area-entropy relation; the origins of a higher derivative gravity with torsion; the construction of the p-brane propagator; the role of supersymmetry; the emergence of two times; the reason behind a running Planck constant and the variable fine structure constant; the way to correctly pose the cosmological constant problem as well as other results.

In this letter, we will present another physical that links the maximum speed of light and the minimal Planck scale into a maximal-acceleration principle in the spacetime tangent bundle, and consequently, in the phase space (cotangent bundle). Crucial in order to establish this link is the use of Clifford algebras in phase spaces. The maximal proper acceleration bound is $`a=c^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in full agreement with  and the Finslerian geometry point of view in .

In section II, we show how to derive the Nesterenko action  associated with a sub-maximally accelerated particle in spacetime directly from phase-space Clifford algebras and present a full-fledged C-phase-space generalization of the Nesterenko action associated with the multi-symplectic geometry of a polyparticle.

In III, we present a series of reasons why we believe C-space Relativity is more physically appealing than all the others proposals based on kappa-deformed Poincare algebras and other quantum algebras \[10-13,17\]. We also argue why the theories based on kappa-deformed Poincare algebras may in fact be related to a Moyal star-product deformation of a classical Lorentz algebra whose deformation parameter is precisely the Planck scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=1/\kappa `$.

II. Maximal-Acceleration from Clifford algebras

We will follow closely the procedure described in the book  to construct the phase space Clifford algebra. For simplicity we shall begin with a two– dimensional phase space, with one coordinate and one momentum variable and afterwards we will generalize the construction to higher dimensions.

Let $`e_pe_q`$ be the Clifford basis elements in a two–dimensional phase space obeying the following relations:

$$e_p.e_q\frac{1}{2}(e_qe_p+e_pe_q)=0.e_p.e_p=e_q.e_q=1.$$
$`(2.1)`$
The Clifford product of $`e_p,e_q`$ is by definition the sum of the scalar product and wedge product furnishing the unit $`bivector`$:

$$e_pe_qe_p.e_q+e_pe_q=e_pe_q=j.j^2=e_pe_qe_pe_q=1.$$
$`(2.2)`$
due to the fact that $`e_p,e_q`$ anticommute, eq. ( 2.1).

In this fashion, using Clifford algebras one can justify the origins of complex numbers without introducing them ad-hoc. The imaginary unit $`j`$ is $`e_pe_q`$. For example, a Clifford vector in phase space can be expanded, setting aside for the moment the issue of units, as:

$$Q=qe_q+pe_p.Qe_q=q+pe_pe_q=q+jp=z.e_qQ=q+pe_qe_p=qjp=z^{},$$
$`(2.3)`$
which reminds us of the creation/annhilation operators used in the harmonic oscillator case and in coherent states.

The analog of the action for a massive particle is obtained by taking the scalar product:

$$dQ.dQ=(dq)^2+(dp)^2S=m\sqrt{dQ.dQ}=m\sqrt{(dq)^2+(dp)^2}.$$
$`(2.4)`$
One may insert now the appropriate length and mass parameters in order to have consistent units:

$$S=m\sqrt{dq)^2+(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{m})^2(dp)^2}.$$
$`(2.5)`$
where we have introduced the Planck scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and the mass $`m`$ of the particle to have consistent units, $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$. The reason will become clear below.

Extending this two-dimensional action to a higher $`2n`$-dimensional phase space requires to have $`e_{p_\mu },e_{q_\mu }`$ for the Clifford basis where $`\mu =1,2,3\mathrm{}n`$. The action in this $`2n`$-dimensional phase space is:

$$S=m\sqrt{dq^\mu dq_\mu )+(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{m})^2(dp^\mu dp_\mu )}=m\tau \sqrt{1+(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{m})^2(dp^\mu /d\tau )(dp_\mu /d\tau }$$
$`(2.6)`$
in units of $`c=1`$, one has the usual infinitesimal proper time displacement $`d\tau ^2=dq^\mu dq_\mu `$.

One can easily recognize that this action (2.6), up to a numerical factor of $`m/a`$, is nothing but the action for a sub-maximally accelerated particle given by Nesterenko . It is sufficient to rewrite: $`dp^\mu /d\tau =md^2x^\mu /d\tau ^2`$ to get from eq. (2.6):

$$S=m\tau \sqrt{1+\mathrm{\Lambda }^2(d^2x^\mu /d\tau ^2(d^2x_\mu /d\tau ^2)}.$$
$`(2.7)`$
Using the postulate that the maximal-proper acceleration is given in a consistent manner with the minimal length principle (in units of $`c=1`$):

$$a=c^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }=1/\mathrm{\Lambda }S=m\tau \sqrt{1+(\frac{1}{a})^2(d^2x^\mu /d\tau ^2(d^2x_\mu /d\tau ^2)},$$
$`(2.`$
which is exactly the action of , up to a numerical factor of $`m/a`$, when the metric signature is $`(+,,,)`$.

The proper acceleration is $`orthogonal`$ to the proper velocity as a result of differentiating the timelike proper velocity squared:

$$V^2=\frac{dx^\mu }{d\tau }\frac{dx_\mu }{d\tau }=1=V^\mu V_\mu >0\frac{dV^\mu }{d\tau }V_\mu =\frac{d^2x^\mu }{d\tau ^2}V_\mu =0,$$
$`(2.9)`$
which means that if the proper velocity is timelike the proper acceleration is spacelike so that:

$$g^2(\tau )(d^2x^\mu /d\tau ^2(d^2x_\mu /d\tau ^2)>0S=m\tau \sqrt{1\frac{g^2}{a^2}}md\omega ,$$
$`(2.10)`$
where we have defined:

$$\omega \sqrt{1\frac{g^2}{a^2}}d\tau .$$
$`(2.11)`$
The dynamics of a submaximally accelerated particle in Minkowski spacetime can be reinterpreted as that of a particle moving in the spacetime $`tangentbundle`$ background whose $`Finslerian`$-like metric is:

$$d\omega ^2=g_{\mu \nu }(x^\mu ,dx^\mu )dx^\mu dx^\nu =(d\tau )^21\frac{g^2}{a^2}).$$
$`(2.12)`$
For uniformly accelerated motion, $`g(\tau )=g=constant`$ the factor:

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{1\frac{g^2}{a^2}}}$$
$`(2.13)`$
plays a similar role as the standard Lorentz time dilation factor in Minkowski spacetime.

The action is real valued if, and only if, $`g^2<a^2`$ in the same way that the action in Minkowski spacetime is real valued if, and only if, $`v^2<c^2`$. This explains why the particle dynamics has a bound on proper- accelerations. Hence, for the particular case of a $`uniformly`$ accelerated particle whose trajectory in Minkowski spacetime is a hyperbola, one has an Extended Relativity of $`uniformly`$ accelerated observers whose proper- acceleration have an upper bound given by $`c^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Rigorously speaking, the spacetime trajectory is obtained by a canonical projection of the spacetime tangent bundle onto spacetime. The invariant time, under the pseudo-complex extension of the Lorentz group , measured in the spacetime tangent bundle is no longer the same as $`\tau `$, but instead, it is given by $`\omega (\tau )`$.

This is similar to what happens in C-spaces, the truly invariant evolution parameter is not $`\tau `$ nor $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, the Stuckelberg parameter , but it is $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ which is the world interval in C-space and that has units of $`length^D`$. The $`group`$ of C-space Lorentz transformations preserve the norms of the Polyvectors and these have units of hypervolumes; hence C-space Lorentz transformations are volume-preserving.

Another approach to obtain the action for a sub-maximally accelerated particle was given by  based on a pseudo-complexification of Minkowski spacetime and the Lorentz group that describes the physics of the spacetime tangent bundle. This picture is not very different form the Finslerian spacetime tangent bundle point of view of Brandt . The invariant group is given by a pseudo-complex extension of the Lorentz group acting on the extended coordinates $`X=ax^\mu +Iv^\mu `$ with $`I^2=1`$ (pseudo- imaginary unit) where both position and velocities are unified on equal footing. The invariant line interval is $`a^2d\omega ^2=(dX)^2`$.

A C-phase-space generalization of these actions (for sub-maximally accelerated particles, maximum tidal forces) follows very naturally by using polyvectors:

$$Y=q^\mu e_{q_\mu }+q^{\mu \nu }e_{q_\mu }e_{q_\nu }+q^{\mu \nu \rho }e_{q_\mu }e_{q_\nu }e_{q_\rho }+\mathrm{}.$$

$$+p^\mu e_{p_\mu }+p^{\mu \nu }e_{p_\mu }e_{p_\nu }+\mathrm{},$$
$`(2.14)`$
where one has to insert suitable powers of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`m`$ in the expansion to match units.

The C-phase-space action reads then:

$$S\sqrt{dY.dY}=\sqrt{dq^\mu dq_\mu +q^{\mu \nu }dq_{\mu \nu }+\mathrm{}+dp^\mu dp_\mu +p^{\mu \nu }dp_{\mu \nu }+\mathrm{}..}.$$
$`(2.15)`$
This action is the C-phase-space extension of the action of Nesterenko and involves quadratic derivatives in C-spaces which from the spacetime perspective are effective higher derivatives theories  where it was shown why the scalar curvature in C-spaces is equivalent to a higher derivative gravity. One should expect a similar behaviour for the extrinsic curvature of a polyparticle motion in C-spaces. This would be the C-space version of the action for rigid particles . Higher derivatives are the hallmark of W-geometry (higher conformal spins).

Born-Infeld s have been connected to maximal-acceleration . Such models admits an straightforwad formulation using the geometric calculus of Clifford algebras. In particular one can rewrite all the nonlinear equations of motion in precise Clifford form . This lead the author to propose the $`nonlinear`$ extension of Dirac’s equation for massless particles due to the fact that spinors are nothing but right/left ideals of the Clifford algebra: i.e., columns, for example, of the Maxwell-Field strength bivector $`F=F_{\mu \nu }\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu `$.

Actions with higher derivatives may exhibit tachyonic behaviour and may contain ghosts. In C-spaces the actions written for the Clifford polyvector variables do not involve higher derivatives than the quadratic ones. For this reason it is very compelling to suggest that well-behaved physical theories in C-spaces may appear from the ordinary spacetime perspective as tachyonic, since quadratic holographic derivatives involving areas, volumes can be translated as higher derivatives in ordinary spacetime variables . Therefore, the question of whether or not tachyons are unphysical depends on which space perspective one is taking. See  for an interesting discussion on this issue from the point of view of the many worlds interpretation of QM.

To sum up, we have now linked the maximal proper acceleration Relativity of the spacetime tangent bundle with the minimal Planck scale Relativity in C-spaces by a simple use of Clifford algebras in phase spaces . We obtained in one stroke the action of Nesterenko compatible with the results of Brandt, Schuller, Caianiello. Moreover, one could naturally generalize these actions by working with the polyvector coordinates associated with a polyparticle in a full-fledged Clifford-phase-space. In this fashion how one will have the starting point for a phase space Relativity theory based on Clifford algebras. Therefore, Extended Scale Relativity in C-spaces admits a natural extension to phase spaces that will allow us to construct connections, curvatures in C-phase spaces in the same way it was achieved for $`curved`$ C- spaces. The scalar curvature in C-spaces was given by sums of products of ordinary curvature with torsion . The Einstein-Hilbert action in C-spaces is a higher derivative gravity with torsion in the ordinary spacetime. It is unnecessary to insert these higher derivative terms by hand since they follow from the geometry of C-spaces. This agrees with the low energy effective string action obtained from non-linear $`\sigma `$ s. Recent results to construct a phase space Relativity appeared in , however these authors are not invoking an extended Relativity principle based on a minimal Planck scale nor a maximal proper acceleration and the use of Clifford algebras.

III. Why C-space Relativity over all the others

There are several physical reasons why we believe that the Extended Scale Relativity in C-spaces based on Clifford algebras is more physically appealing than the construction of relativity theories based on kappa- deformed Poincare algebras. The first reason is based on the fact that quantum group symmetries (algebras) do $`not`$ act on classical spacetimes. Whereas the C-space Lorentz $`group`$ and the Extended Relativity principle $`already`$ operates in a $`classical`$ Clifford space: i.e., the quantization procedure is $`not`$ responsible for the Extended Relativity principle. One can then proceed to $`quantize`$ our physical using quantum deformation of Clifford algebras, in particular, Braided Hopf Quantum Clifford algebras.

The Magueijo-Smolin , a particular class of Doubly Special Relativity, was shown recently to be unphysical . This corresponds to a particular basis of kappa-deformed Poincare algebras. Whether these unphysical results will also affect the outcome in other bases is not clear yet. If so this raises questions about the validity of constructing Relativity theories based on such quantum algebra.

Secondly, there is no reason why the Relativity theory based on kappa- deformed Poincare algebras is more advantageous than the ones based on the inhomogeneous Lorentz quantum groups acting in quantum-Minkowski spacetimes . Evenfurther, it was pointed out by Castellani that kappa-deformed Poincare algebras are $`notbicovariant`$ which is a problem if one wishes to construct physical theories, whereas the quantum algebras used in his $`q`$\- Gravity construction are bicovariant .

If the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=1/\kappa `$ was identified with the deformation parameter one could equally as well relate the $`q`$-deformation parameter of the inhomogeneous Lorentz quantum group to the minimum Planck scale. The classical limit is recovered when $`q1`$ ; $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$.

Furthermore, there exists $`multiparametric`$ quantum deformations of classical algebras and hence one could have assigned physical meanings (like the minimal invariant scale) to each single one of those quantum parameters.

We may notice that $`q`$ could be written in terms of an upper and lower scale as : $`q=e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }/L}`$. The classical limit $`q=1`$, is obtained when $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ and also when $`L=\mathrm{}`$. This entails that there could be $`two`$ dual quantum gravitational theories with the same classical limit. Castellani has also pointed out that a sort of a “large/small” duality exists in some of these s based on those quantum algebras: there is a symmetry $`q1/q`$ reminiscent of the $`T`$-duality in string theory. One can see that by simply changing the signs of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ or of $`L`$ this is equivalent to replacing $`q`$ for $`1/q`$. This large/small duality is just another manifestation of the ultraviolet/infrared entanglement of QFT defined over Noncommutative spaces (geometries). Nottale postulated that if there is a minimum Planck scale, by duality, there should be an upper impassible invariant scale $`L`$ in Nature. This was his proposal for the resolution of the cosmological constant problem .

These arguments raises the possibility that the Double Special Relativity theories based on the kappa-deformed Poincare algebra \[10-13\] might be obtained by a Moyal deformation quantization procedure in phase spaces where the Moyal deformation parameter is precisely $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=1/\kappa `$.

Vasiliev  has constructed a consistent infinite-component higher spin field theory in Anti de Sitter spaces based on similar star products whose deformation parameter is the inverse size of the Anti de Sitter $`throat`$. The “classical” flat spacetime limit is recovered when $`l\mathrm{}`$ so $`1/l0`$. This is an identical situation in constructing the Poincare algebra from the de Sitter algebra by a Wigner- Inonü contraction, when $`l=\mathrm{}`$ the commutators

$$[P^\mu ,P^\nu ]=\frac{1}{l^2}[J^{5\mu },J^{5\nu }]=0.$$
$`(3.1)`$
It is true that Hopf quantum algebras are richer than a naive Moyal deformation of ordinary algebras. In particular, in order to write down the phase space algebra consistent with the Hopf quantum algebra of spacetime it is necessary to use the Heisenberg-double prescription based on the interplay between the algebraic sector of the Hopf algebra and the $`coalgebraic`$ sector .

Put it simply, one cannot naively use the phase space algebra $`[x,p]`$ in order to generate the kappa-deformed Poincare algebra in the bicrossproduct basis, or the Snyder basis, for example, by na vely writing the boosts- momentum commutator:

$$[N_j,p_k]=[x_0p_jx_jp_0,p_k]=[x_0,p_k]p_j[x_j,p_k]p_0,$$
$`(3.2)`$
due to the fact that the $`deformed`$ boost generator has no longer the same form as in the classical case:

$$N_j^{(\kappa )}=N_j+O(1/\kappa )=x_0p_jx_jp_0+O(1/\kappa ).$$
$`(3.3)`$
This is the reason why one must use the Heisenberg-double prescription in order to extract the phase space commutator algebra from the kappa-deformed boosts-momentum commutators and the remaining ones.

Nevertheless, one alternative is not to $`separate`$ the configuration space from the momentum space but could be by starting to work $`directly`$ in the phase space and writing down the Moyal star product:

$$X(q,p,\kappa )P(q,p,\kappa )=$$

$$\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1/\kappa )^n}{n!}\omega ^{A_1B_1}\omega ^{A_2B_2}\omega ^{A_nB_n}(_{A_1}_{A_2}.._{A_n}X(q,p,\kappa ))(_{B_1}_{B_2}.._{B_n}P(q,p,\kappa )),$$
$`(3.4)`$
using the $`1/\kappa `$ as the $`deformation`$ parameter in order to evaluate the Moyal brackets. The nondegenerate invertible symplectic form $`\omega _{AB}`$, associated with the $`2n`$-dimensional phase space is what defines the standard Poisson brackets:

$$y^Aq^0,q^1,q^2,\mathrm{},q^n;p^0,p^1,p^2,\mathrm{},p^n)\{y^A,y^B\}_{PB}=\omega ^{AB}.$$
$`(3.5)`$
The Moyal bracket with respecto to the $`(q,p)`$ variables is defined in terms of the star product as:

$$\{X,P\}_{MB}\frac{XPPX}{(1/\kappa )}\frac{1}{i}[X,P].$$
$`(3.6)`$
Therefore, the following Moyal bracket must obey:

$$\{N_i,P_j\}_{MB}=\{X_0P_iX_iP_0,P_j\}_{MB}=F_{ij}[q(X,P,\kappa ),p(X,P,\kappa ),\kappa ]=$$

$$\delta _{ij}[\frac{\kappa }{2}(1e^{2P_0/\kappa })+\frac{1}{2\kappa }\stackrel{}{P}^2]\frac{1}{\kappa }P_iP_j,$$
$`(3.7)`$
after re-expressing the bracket back into the $`original`$ $`X,P`$ variables, in order for the Moyal bracket to be $`isomorphic`$ to the commutator $`[\widehat{N}_j,\widehat{P}_k]_\kappa `$ of the kappa-deformed Poincare algebra in the bicrossproduct basis, for example. For this to occur one must find if, and only if, there is a one-to-one and $`invertible`$ analytic map obeying such conditions:

$$X=X(q,p,\kappa )=X_{(n)}q,p)(1/\kappa )^n,$$

$$P=(q,p,\kappa )=P_{(n)}(q,p)(1/\kappa )^n$$
$`(3.`$
and thus $`q=q(X,P,\kappa ),p=p(X,P,\kappa )`$, with the provision that

$$X_{(o)}^\mu =q^\mu ,P_{(o)}^\mu =p^\mu .$$
$`(3.9)`$
It is fairly clear that the $`classical`$ basis of kappa-deformed Poincare is given precisely by $`X=q,P=p`$ so the Moyal bracket algebra collapses to the ordinary Poisson bracket algebra and one recovers the $`undeformed`$ classical Poincare algebra.

It is essential to notice that the map (3. is $`noncanonical`$, i.e., it does $`not`$ preseve the symplectic form ! For this reason, the quantum algebra is not $`unique`$ in so far that the commutators $`change`$ under a $`noncanonical`$ change of basis; i.e., the quantum algebra is $`not`$ invariant under a $`noncanonical`$ basis change of coordinates.

If one wishes to reproduce the kappa-deformed Poincare algebra in the Snyder basis, for example, from the classical algebra, one will require a $`different`$ phase space transformation than before

$$X^{}=X^{}(q,p,\kappa ),P^{}=P^{}(q,p,\kappa ),$$
$`(3.10)`$
to ensure that $`\{N_j,P_k\}_{MB}`$ is isomorphic to the commutator $`[\widehat{N}_j,\widehat{P}_k]`$ in the Snyder basis. Of course, one still has to check that the undeformed sector of the quantum algebra remains $`intact`$. We don’t know if this procedure will reproduce the kappa-deformed Poincare algebra in any basis. Perhaps this is an empty academic exercise because one must be forced to always use the Heisenberg-double prescription, which is deeply ingrained in the algebra and co-algebra sector of the Hopf algebra, in order to read-off the phase space algebra and which does not have a na ve Moyal star product interpretation.

In four dimensions we have the choice of eight functions $`X(q,p,\kappa ),P(q,p,\kappa )`$ to match the kappa-deformed Poincare algebra in a given basis. We must see whether or not one can find indeed eight functions that reproduce all the $`independent`$ commutators of the quantum algebra. Not all commutators are independent due to the constraints imposed by the Jacobi identities. This is not an easy task.

The reason we raise this possibility is because it is plausible that the role of the Planck scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=1/\kappa `$ in kappa-deformed Poincare Relativity might be identical to the $`deformation`$ parameter of the noncommutative Moyal star product construction in phase spaces. This is in sharp distinction to the natural role of the Planck scale in C-space Relativity: it must be there on pure dimensional grounds to combine objects (strings, branes) of different dimensionalities and consistent with the postulated minimum scale principle. To have real valued intervals $`dX.dX>0`$ in C-space requires that the variable scales which encode the magnitudes of the generalized (holographic) velocities cannot be smaller than $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ .

One main advantage of using Clifford algebras versus the kappa-deformed Poincare algebras is that the C-space Lorentz transformations form a $`group`$ in a very natural fashion! Recently it has been argued  that the kappa \- deformed algebra forms a group in the bicrossproduct basis but unfortunately there was a caveat because the infinite series expansion obtained from the Baker-Cambell-Hausdorff formulae might $`not`$ converge. Even if this were the case, it is not true that one has the required group structure in the other infinite bases which is very unphysical since there is no reason why one basis should be more “physical” than the others, i.e., it questions the minimal length Relativity principle based on kappa-deformed Poincare algebras.

In addition, there still remains the serious problem of how to add momenta. The momenta-addition law is $`nonabelian`$ in kappa-deformed Poincare due to the nontrivial nature of the co-product and poses problems for the physics of many-particle systems.The nonabelian addition law contradicts well known experimental facts. In C-space, polyvectors are added in a linear and abelian fashion. Finally, there is no need to add an extra discrete dimension to explain the Snyder noncommutative algebra for the spacetime coordinates  nor to work in six-dimensions in order to derive the algebra of the conformal group $`SO(4,2)`$. All can be explained naturally from the Clifford algebra of the four-dimensional spacetime . These results are also shared by the pseudo-complexified Minkowski spacetime  approach to the maximal acceleration.

Acknowledgements

We are kindly indebted to H. Rosu and L. Perelman for their assistance in preparing the manuscript.

References

1 - C. Castro, “The programs of the Extended Relativity in C-spaces, towards the physical foundations of String theory”, hep-th/0205065. To appear in the proceedings of the NATO advanced workshop on the nature of time, geometry, physics and perception. Tatranska Lomnica, Slovakia, May 2002. Kluwer Academic Publishers; “Noncommutative Quantum Mechanics and Geometry from the quantization of C- spaces”, hep-th/0206181.

2 - L. Nottale, “Fractal Spacetime and Microphysics, towards Scale Relativity”, World Scientific, Singapore, 1992; “La Relativite dans tous ses etats”, Hachette Literature Paris, 1999.

3 - M. Pavsic, “The landscape of Theoretical Physics: A global view from point particles to the brane world and beyond, in search of a unifying principle”, Kluwer Academic Publishers 119, 2001.

4 - E. Caianiello, “Is there a maximal acceleration?”, Lett. Nuovo Cimento 32 (1981) 65.

5 - V. Nesterenko, Class. Quant. Grav. 9 (1992) 1101; Phys. Lett. B 327 (1994) 50; V. Nesterenko, A. Feoli, G. Scarpetta, “Dynamics of relativistic particles with Lagrangians dependent on acceleration”, hep-th/9505064.

6 - H. Brandt, Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 10 (2-3) (1999) 267; Found. Phys. Lett. 2  (1) (1989) and 4 (6) (1991).

7 - M. Pavsic, Phys. Lett. B 205 (198 231; Phys. Lett. B 221 (1989) 264; H. Arodz, A. Sitarz, P. Wegrzyn, Acta Physica Polonica B 20 (1989) 921.

8 - F. Schuller, “Born-Infeld Kinematics and corrections to the Thomas precession”, hep- th/0207047; Ann. Phys. 299 (2002) 174, hep-th/0203079.

9 - A. Chernitskii, “Born-Infeld electrodynamics, Clifford numbers and spinor representations”, hep-th/0009121.

10 - J. Lukierski, H. Ruegg, W. Zakrzewski, Ann. Phys. 243  (1995) 90; J. Lukierski , A. Nowicki, H. Ruegg, V. Tolstoy, Phys. Lett. B 264 (1991) 331; J. Lukierski, A. Nowicki : Proceedings of Quantum Group Symposium at Group 21 (July 1996, Goslar), Eds. H. D. Doebner and V.K. Dobrev , Heron Press, Sofia, 1997, p 186, math.QA/9803064, hep-th/9812063; J. Lukierski, A. Nowicki, “Doubly Special Relativity versus kappa-deformed dynamics”, hep-th/0203065.

11 - S. Majid, H. Ruegg, Phys. Lett. B 334 (1994) 348.

12 - G. Amelino-Camelia, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 11 (2002) 35, gr- qc/0012051; Phys. Lett. B 510 (2001) 255; J. Kowalski-Glikman, S. Nowak, “Doubly special relativity theories as different bases of kappa-Poincare”, hep-th/0203040.

13 - N. Bruno, “Group of boosts and rotations in Double Special Relativity”, gr-qc/0207076.

14 - G. Watson, J. Klauder, “Metric and curvature in gravitational phase space”, gr-qc/0112053.

15 - J. Rembielinski, K. Smolinski, “Unphysical predictions of some Doubly Special Relativity theories”, hep-th/0207031.

16 - C. Castro, M. Pavsic, “Higher derivative gravity and torsion from the geometry of C-spaces”, Phys. Lett. B 539 (2002) 133 , hep-th/0110079; “The Clifford algebra of spacetime and the conformal group”, hep-th/0203194.

17 - L. Castellani, “The Lagrangian of q-Poincare Gravity”, Phys. Lett. B 327 (1994) 22, hep-th/940233; “Differential calculus on Iso<sub>q</sub>(N), quantum Poincare algebra and q- gravity”, Commun. Math. Phys. 171 (1995) 383; P. Aschieri, L. Castellani , A. Scarfone, “Quantum orthogonal planes, bicovariant calculus and differential geometry on quantum Minkowski space”, Eur. Phys. J. C7 (1999) 159, q-alg/9709032; A. Dimakis, F. Muller-Hoissen, “Discrete differential geometry”, J. Math. Phys. 40 (1999) 1518.

18 - M. Vasiliev, “Progress in higher spin theories”, hep-th/0104246.


text:
# The Kinematics and Physical Conditions of the Ionized Gas in Markarian 509. II. STIS Echelle Observations.Based on observations made with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope. STScI is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc. under the NASA contract NAS5-26555.

## 1 Introduction

Since the launch of the International Ultraviolet Explorer (IUE), it has been known that the UV spectra of Seyfert 1 galaxies show absorption lines intrinsic to their nuclei (Ulrich 1988). With the advent of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), it is now understood that intrinsic absorption is a common phenomenon, present in more than half of the well-studied Seyfert 1 galaxies (Crenshaw et al. 1999). Among those Seyferts that show absorption, high ionization lines such as N V $`\lambda \lambda `$1238.8, 1242.8 and C IV $`\lambda \lambda `$1548.2, 1550.8 are always present, along with Ly$`\alpha `$, while lower ionization lines, such as Si IV $`\lambda \lambda `$1393.8, 1402.8 and Mg II $`\lambda \lambda `$2796.3, 2803.5, are less common. Typically, the absorption lines are blueshifted (by up to 2100 km s-1) with respect to the systemic velocities of the host galaxies, indicating net radial outflow. Although there are examples of strong UV absorption lines near systemic velocities, some are found in highly inclined host galaxies and, therefore, are most likely formed in gas within the plane of the host galaxy (Crenshaw et al. 2001; Crenshaw et al. 2002). Among the blue-shifted absorbers, the ionic columns are highly variable, which may be the result of changes in response to the ionizing continuum (cf. Krolik & Kriss 1997; Shields & Hamann 1997) or transverse motion (Crenshaw & Kraemer 1999). Variability is suggestive of the proximity of the absorbers to the central active nucleus, since it may result from the high densities, hence short recombination timescales, or high transverse velocities, similar to those inferred for the emission-line gas close to the active nucleus. Based on density constraints, it has been shown that in at least two sources, NGC 4151 and NGC 3516, much of the absorbing gas may lie within a fraction of a parsec from the central source (Kraemer et al. 2001a; Kraemer et al. 2002). Another indication of small radial distances is the low line-of-sight covering factors derived from some UV absorption lines (Kraemer et al. 2002; Gabel et al. 2002). In addition to the UV absorbers, the presence of intrinsic absorption, typically in the form of bound-free edges of O VII and O VIII, has been detected in the X-ray spectra of a similar fraction of Seyfert 1 galaxies (Reynolds 1997; George et al. 1998). Most recently, spectra obtained with the Chandra X-ray Observatory (CXO) have revealed that X-ray absorption lines associated with this material are also blue-shifted (Kaastra et al. 2000; Kaspi et al. 2000, 2001). Although it has been argued that some fraction of the UV absorption arises in the same gas responsible for the X-ray absorption (Mathur, Elvis & Wilkes 1995, 1999; Crenshaw & Kraemer 1999; Kriss et al. 2000; Kraemer et al. 2002), the connection between the X-ray and UV absorption is complex. In fact, there is often a wide range in ionization states in gas which may be at the same radial velocities (Kaspi et al. 2002). Further evidence for this is the co-spatial X-ray and optical line emission seen in the narrow-line regions (NLR) of Mrk 3 (Sako et al. 2000), NGC 1068 (Ogle et al. 2002), and NGC 4151 (Ogle et al. 2000).

Mrk 509 is a highly luminous (L$`_{h\nu >13.6eV}`$ $``$ 1045 erg s-1; see Kriss et al. ; Yaqoob et al. \[2002a\]) Seyfert 1 galaxy. Phillips et al. (1983) determined that the nucleus is surrounded by two distinct components of extended ionized gas: a low ionization component, with a velocities indicative of rotation in the galactic disk, and a high ionization component, with velocities blue-shifted with respect to those in the disk. Phillips et al. suggested that this high ionization component is part of an outflowing shell of gas. If gas is distributed within a bicone centered on the active nucleus, as appears to be the case in other Seyfert galaxies (Crenshaw & Kraemer 2000; Crenshaw at al. 2000; Ruiz et al. 2001), the axis of the outflow must be roughly parallel to our line-of-sight (see Fig. 8 in Phillips et al.). There is extended broad Balmer line emission (FWZI $`>`$ 15,000 km s-1), presumably scattered light from the unresolved broad line region, in an axisymmetrical distribution surrounding the active nucleus (Mediavilla et al. 1998), consistent with the geometry suggested by Phillips et al. (1983). Based on recent X-ray observations of Mrk 509 with XMM-Newton, Pounds et al. (2001) argued that the inclination of the putative accretion disk within the active nucleus is $`<`$ 30o, which also fits with the proposed geometry.

Two kinematic components of intrinsic Ly$`\alpha `$ and C IV absorption, at $``$ $``$420 and $`+`$40 km s-1, were detected by York et al. (1984) in high-dispersion IUE spectra of Mrk 509. In their HST/Faint Object Spectrograph observations $``$ 12 yr later, Crenshaw, Boggess, & Wu (1995) found the same components, as well as N V absorption at these velocities. York et al. (1984) and Crenshaw et al. (1995) suggested that these lines formed in extended regions of ionized gas in the host galaxy. Kriss et al. (2000) obtained a high resolution ($`\lambda `$/$`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda `$ $``$ 15,000) Far Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Explorer (FUSE) spectrum over the wavelength range 915 – 1185 Å on 1999 November 9, 11 that shows intrinsic absorption in the lines of O VI $`\lambda \lambda `$1031.9, 1037.6, C III $`\lambda `$977.0, and the H I Lyman lines, consisting of seven, relatively narrow (FWHM $``$ 63 km s-1), kinematic components which are clustered into two groups, at $``$370 km s-1 and near the systemic velocity. They suggested that the former was associated with the extended, blue-shifted ionized gas observed by Phillips et al. (1983). In addition to the UV absorption, ASCA spectra showed strong evidence for the presence of an X-ray warm absorber (Reynolds 1997; George et al. 1998).

We have obtained simultaneous CXO/High Energy Transmission Grating (HETG) and HST/Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) medium resolution spectra of Mrk 509 on 2001 April 13. We note that there are no previous HST high-resolution ($`\lambda `$/$`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda `$ $``$ 10,000) UV spectra, except for a Goddard High-Resolution Spectrograph (GHRS) observation of the intrinsic L$`\alpha `$ absorption (Crenshaw et al. 1999), which is highly saturated (see section 2.2). The analysis of the X-ray spectra are discussed in Yaqoob et al. (2002a) and Yaqoob et al. (2002b; hereafter Paper I). In Paper I, we describe the details of the ionizing continuum and the physical nature of the X-ray warm absorbing gas, including model predictions of ionic column densities. In the present paper, we present our analysis of the STIS spectra and the results of photoionization modeling of the UV absorbers. The paper is organized as follows: in Section 2 we describe the observations, and give the details of the measurement of the intrinsic lines, in Section 3 we detail the photoionization modeling of the absorbers, in Section 4 we discuss the implications of the result, and Section 5 gives our summary.

## 2 Observations and Data Analysis

### 2.1 New STIS Observations

We obtained STIS echelle spectra of the nucleus of Mrk 509 through a 0$`^{\prime \prime }.`$2 x 0$`^{\prime \prime }.`$2 aperture on 2001 April 13. The details of these observations are listed in Table 1. We reduced the STIS spectra using the IDL software developed at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center for the STIS Instrument Definition Team. The data reduction includes a procedure to remove the background light from each order using a scattered light model devised by Lindler (1998). The individual orders in each echelle spectrum were spliced together in the regions of overlap.

Figure 1 shows portions of the STIS spectra where intrinsic absorption is detected in the UV. The spectra are normalized (as described below) and are plotted as a function of the radial velocity, relative to a systemic redshift of z $`=`$ 0.03440 from the optical emission lines (Crenshaw et al. 1999), since H I 21-cm measurements are not available. We have adopted the numbering of components given by Kriss et al. (2000). Each of their components is present in N V $`\lambda \lambda `$ 1238.8, 1242.2 and C IV $`\lambda `$ 1548.2, 1550.8, and we identify a new component (4) in the blue wing of component 4; the new detection is likely due to the higher spectral resolution of STIS. Although these components are completely saturated and blended together in Ly$`\alpha `$, they are all undoubtedly present, since they are present and resolved in the FUSE spectra of Ly$`\beta `$. We have also detected Si IV $`\lambda \lambda `$ 1393.8, 1402.8 in component 4, but not in any other component. We have not detected lower ionization lines (e.g., Si III $`\lambda `$1206.5, C II $`\lambda `$1334.5, Mg II $`\lambda \lambda `$ 2796.3, 2803.5) in any component in the STIS spectra.

Figure 1 shows that the absorption components are clustered in two groups in radial velocity; components 2 and 4 from the two clusters are the strongest in the high-ionization lines of C IV and N V. None of the components is highly saturated, since the long-wavelength member of each doublet is clearly not as deep as the short-wavelength member (which has twice the oscillator strength) in each case. The saturated Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption covers the same velocity range as these two clusters, and there is no evidence for H I absorption outside of the two clusters. We note that our velocity scale is offset from that of Kriss et al. (2000) by 52 km s-1; they use a systemic redshift of z $`=`$ 0.03457 (cz $`=`$ 10,365 km s-1) from the nuclear \[O III\] emission in Phillips et al. (1993), whereas we use a systemic redshift of z $`=`$ 0.03440 (cz $`=`$ 10,313 km s-1) to be consistent with our earlier measurements (Crenshaw et al. 1995, 1999). We note that components 5 – 7 are not necessarily redshifted with respect to the host galaxy, since there is a tendency for the \[O III\] $`\lambda \lambda `$ 4959, 5007 emission in Seyfert 1 galaxies to be slightly blueshifted with respect to the systemic velocity determined from H I 21-cm emission (Crenshaw et al. 1999).

### 2.2 Measurements and Observational Results

The procedures we used to measure the intrinsic absorption lines follow those of Crenshaw et al. (1999). To determine the shape of the underlying emission, we fit a cubic spline to regions on either side of the absorption, and then normalized the absorption profiles by dividing the observed spectra by the spline fits. We determined the covering factor Clos, which is the fraction of continuum plus emission that is occulted by the absorber in our line of sight, using the technique of Hamann et al. (1997) for doublets. Due to the modest signal-to-noise of the spectra and problems with blending of the components, we can only determine Clos reliably in the cores of the strongest, relatively unblended lines. Thus, we used both C IV and N V doublets to determine Clos for the cores of components 1, 2, 4, and 6. To determine the column densities, we converted each normalized profile to optical depth as a function of radial velocity, and integrated across the profile, as described in Crenshaw et al. (1999). For the components with strong evidence for nonunity covering factors, we determined the true optical depths using the measured Clos values and the formalism of Hamann et al. (1997). For the other components, we assumed Clos $`=`$ 1.

Table 2 gives the measured radial velocity centroids, widths (FWHM), covering factors, and associated one-sigma errors for each kinematic component. These values represent the means and standard deviations determined from the measurements of the individual C IV and N V profiles. For component 4, the Si IV profiles yield a very different width and covering factor compared to the C IV and N V profiles. We take this as an indication that there are two different physical components at this radial velocity, which we call “4 (high)” and “4 (low)”, for high- and low-ionization components, respectively.

The covering factors for components 4 (high) and 6 are consistent with a value of one, although we cannot rule out the possibility that they are slightly lower. Components 1, 2, and 4 (low) all show strong evidence for a nonunity covering factor, whereas the covering factors for the weaker components 3, 4, 5, and 7 cannot be reliably determined. Unocculted emission from the narrow-line region (NLR) in this small aperture cannot explain the nonunity covering factors, since this emission would be centered near zero velocity and would decrease away from line center. The simplest explanation for the partial covering is that the absorbers associated with components 1, 2, and 4 (low) are not occulting the entire continuum source and/or broad-line region (BLR) as seen in projection on the sky.

We list the ionic column densities for each component in Table 3. Components 4 (high) and 4 (low) required special treatment. For component 4 (low), our photoionization models indicate very large columns of C IV and N V (Section 3.2). To see if these columns were consistent with the observed profiles, we simulated the C IV and N V profiles by assuming the same profile and covering factor as those for Si IV (Clos $`=`$ 0.32). The simulated C IV and N V profiles are plotted in Figure 1, and demonstrate that the large columns for component 4 (low) in Table 6 can indeed by hidden in the observed profiles. However, column densities spanning a wide range of values could be hidden, due to the small covering factor of this component, and so we have no observationally determined values for component 4 (low) in Table 3. To determine the column densities for component 4 (high), we assumed that the C IV and N V lines for component 4 (low) were indeed saturated, and therefore form pedestals from which the component 4 (high) optical depths can be measured against.

### 2.3 The Far-UV Light Curve of Mrk 509

To place the STIS observations in context with previous far-UV observations, we have retrieved all of the previous low-resolution spectra of Mrk 509 obtained in the far-UV. Table 4 lists these spectra (i.e., those not listed in Table 1), which were obtained by the IUE, the Hopkins Ultraviolet Telescope (HUT), and HST/FOS. We retrieved the most recently processed versions of these spectra from the Multimission Archive at STScI. We measured their continuum fluxes by averaging the points in a bin centered at 1385 Å (observed frame) with a width of 40 Å. We determined the one-sigma flux errors from the standard deviations of the averages; for the IUE spectra, this technique is known to overestimate the errors (Clavel et al. 1991), and we scaled the errors for these observations by a factor of 0.5 to ensure that observations taken on the same day agreed to within the errors (on average).

Figure 2 shows that the far-UV continuum of Mrk 509 varied dramatically over a span of 23 years. The continuum light curve is clearly undersampled, as evidenced by the large variations over $``$60 days near JD 2,448,200. It can be seen that the STIS observation was obtained when the far-UV continuum was in a low state: Fλ(1385Å) $`=`$ 5.3 ($`\pm `$0.4) x 10-14 ergs s-1 cm-2 Å-1. Interestingly, the simultaneous CXO observations show that Mrk 509 was in an average X-ray state at this time (Yaqoob et al. 2002a). Although the FUSE observation does not contain this wavelength region, we can compare it with our STIS observation by looking at the continuum in the region of overlap. At 1180 Å, the continuum fluxes are 6.0 ($`\pm `$0.7) and 6.2 ($`\pm `$1.0) x 10-14 ergs s-1 cm-2 Å-1 for the FUSE and STIS spectra, respectively, indicating that these spectra were taken in a similar low state. It would be interesting to obtain STIS observations of Mrk 509 in a high state, given strong evidence for absorption variations in response to continuum changes in NGC 4151 (Kraemer et al. 2001a) and NGC 3516 (Kraemer et al. 2002).

## 3 Photoionization Models

### 3.1 Inputs to the Photoionization Models

Photoionization models for this study were generated using the code CLOUDY90 111The X-ray models described in Paper I were generated with the code XSTAR; we found no significant differences in the ionic column densities predicted by the two codes. (Ferland et al. 1998). We have modeled the absorbers as matter-bounded slabs of atomic gas, irradiated by the ionizing continuum radiation emitted by the central source. As per convention, the models are parameterized in terms of the ionization parameter,

$$U=\frac{1}{4\pi r^2n_Hc}_{\nu _0}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{L_\nu }{h\nu }𝑑\nu ,$$
(1)
where $`L_\nu `$ is the frequency dependent luminosity of the ionizing continuum, $`r`$ is the distance between the cloud and the ionizing source and $`h\nu _0`$ = 13.6 eV, and $`n_H`$ is the number density of hydrogen atoms at the illuminated face of the slab (note that, in general, $`r`$ and $`n_H`$ cannot be determined independently in absorption line studies). The models are also parameterized in terms of the total hydrogen column density, NH ($`=`$ N$`_{\mathrm{H}\mathrm{I}}`$ $`+`$ N$`{}_{\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}}{}^{})`$222We use NXM to denote the ionic column density, where “X” is the atomic symbol and “M” is the ionization state.. For the models, we have assumed only thermal broadening, since the absorption lines are quite narrow (see Table 2) and widths greater than thermal (which are $``$ a few km s-1) are likely to be due to the superposition of unresolved kinematic components (note that the resolution of the STIS E140M echelle grating is $``$ 7 km s-1 at 1550 Å). The details of the ionizing continuum and element abundances assumed for these models are given in Paper I. The absorbing gas is assumed to be free of cosmic dust.

### 3.2 Model Results

The “best-fit” values of U and NH (determined by matching the measured values of N$`_{\mathrm{N}\mathrm{V}}`$, N$`_{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{IV}}`$ and N$`_{\mathrm{Si}\mathrm{IV}}`$) for the models are listed in Table 5, and the predicted ionic column densities are given in Table 6. Based on the models, none of the UV absorbers has a sufficient column density to significantly modify the intrinsic continuum at wavelengths above the Lyman limit. Hence, even though several of the components have covering fractions near unity, there will be no strong effects due to the screening of one component by another. For components 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, the models match the observed N$`_{\mathrm{N}\mathrm{V}}`$ and N$`_{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{IV}}`$ to well within the measurement errors. Our predictions for N$`_{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{III}}`$ for these components are in good agreement with Kriss et al. (2000), with the expcetion of a factor of $``$ 8 underprediction for component 1 and a factor of $``$ 2 overprediction for component 3. The latter is likely to the different line widths assumed for this component, while the discrepancy for component 1 may be evidence for a second low ionization component at this velocity (also, see Fig. 2 in Kriss et al. ). The models also underpredict N$`_{\mathrm{H}\mathrm{I}}`$ for components 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7. However, the additional H I columns may arise in the X-ray absorber (see Section 3.3).

For the low ionization fraction of component 4, the model predictions match the measured value for N$`_{\mathrm{Si}\mathrm{IV}}`$ and the upper limits for N$`_{\mathrm{Si}\mathrm{III}}`$ and N$`_{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{II}}`$. As noted in Section 2.2, the model predictions for N$`_{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{IV}}`$ and N$`_{\mathrm{N}\mathrm{V}}`$ for the low ionization component were then used to determine the respective columns from the high ionization gas associated with component 4, which we were then able to model successfully. The large H I column predicted by the low ionization component is in rough agreement with that derived from Ly$`\beta `$ by Kriss et al. (2000), which suggests that the low ionization gas covers the UV continuum source but not the BLR clouds (which contribute a negligible amount of Ly$`\beta `$ emission; see discussion in Gabel et al. ). Although the low ionization model predicts N$`_{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{III}}`$ $``$ 30 times greater than that derived by Kriss et al. (2000), the apparent discrepancy is clearly due to large covering factor assumed by those authors (Clos $`=`$ 0.92), which is appropriate for the high ionization component but not the gas in which the C III line forms.

Our model predictions for the O VI column densities are much larger than those measured by Kriss et al. (2000) for components 1, 3, 4, by factors of 3 – 12, and lower in component 5 by a factor of 4. Of course, this could be the result of variability in these components, but we consider that unlikely, given that the FUSE and HST/STIS observations were obtained at a similar continuum state. Inspection of the FUSE O VI profiles shows that they are highly saturated, and the components could potentially harbor much larger columns than those measured by Kriss et al. To test the compatability of our model predictions with the FUSE observation, we have generated a simulated O VI $`\lambda `$1031.9 profile in the following manner. First, we isolated the optical depth profile of each kinematic component in N V$`\lambda `$1238.8. Then, we scaled each profile so that they would yield the predicted O VI columns from our models. Finally, we combined the optical depths and converted them to normalized flux (as a function of radial velocity) using the covering factors of each component given by Kriss et al. There are two reasons for using the Kriss et al. covering factors, rather than the ones we have determined. First, it is possible for two absorption lines to have different covering factors, even if they come from the same gas, due to different contributions to the underlying emission from the continuum source and BLR (for a demonstration of this effect, see Gabel et al. ). Second, the FUSE aperture (30′′ x 30′′) is much larger than the STIS aperture that we used (0$`^{\prime \prime }.`$2 x 0$`^{\prime \prime }.`$2), and it is possible that more unocculted emission (e.g., from the NLR, a scattering region, or hot stars in the host galaxy) is admitted by the large aperture, which could contribute to the difference in the derived covering factors at low radial velocities, particularly for components 4 (high ionization) and 6.

Our simulated O VI profile is shown in Figure 3. Comparison with Figure 2 in Kriss et al. (2000) shows that it provides a very good match to the observed O VI $`\lambda `$1031.9 profile. There is a small discrepancy in that the flux between components 5 and 6 is a little high in the simulated profile, but that could be due to a slight underestimate of the N V optical depth in the wings of these components. We conclude that a direct comparison of model and observed O VI column densities is not feasible, due to heavy saturation of the absorption components, but that the O VI column densities from our models are at least consistent with the observed O VI profile.

### 3.3 The Nature of the UV Absorbers

Based on our model predictions, the components of UV absorption in Mrk 509 have smaller column densities and are, on average, in a lower state of ionization than the strongest components in the Seyfert 1 galaxies NGC 5548 (log U $`=`$ $``$0.62, NH $`=`$ 2.0 x 1020 cm-2; Crenshaw et al. 2002, in preparation), NGC 3783 (log U $`=`$ $``$0.19, NH $`=`$ 1.5 x 1021 cm-2; Kraemer et al. 2001b), and NGC 3516 (log U $`=`$ $``$0.72, NH $`=`$ 1.4 x 1021 cm-2; Kraemer et al. 2002). Interestingly, they are similar in column density and FWHM to the weak, narrow components detected in NGC 4151, which we had determined were at least tens of pcs from the central source (Kraemer et al. 2001a). The combination of high and low ionization absorbers within a single kinematic component (component 4) has been seen in NGC 3783 (Kraemer et al. 2001b; Gabel et al. 2002) and NGC 3516 (Kraemer et al. 2002). If these components are at the same radial distance, there must be density inhomogeneities within the absorbing gas, with the lower ionization absorption occuring in denser gas. The fact that the low ionization component has a lower covering factor than the high ionization component is also evidence for different densities, since the denser component is likely more compact.

Since, summed over the eight model kinematic components, the total NOVII is $`=`$ 3.2 x 1016 cm-2, or about 10% of the total observed O VII column, none of the UV absorbers can be identified with the X-ray absorbing gas described in Paper I. This is contrary to the suggestion by Kriss et al. (2000) that, based on the large O VI column, component 5 must strongly contribute to the X-ray absorption. However, as discussed in Section 3.2, the O VI column predicted by our models is consistent with the FUSE spectrum. Also, a model with physical parameters determined by Kriss et al. (2000) for this component (log U $`=`$ $``$0.43, NH $`=`$ 5.0 x 1020 cm-2) predicts a N V column of $``$ 1015 cm-2, which is clearly inconsistent with the STIS spectrum. The discrepancy may result from the difficulty in deriving accurate lower limits to column densities from such heavily saturated lines.

Models of the X-ray absorber (Paper I) predict detectable C IV and N V column densities of 1.2 x 1013 cm-2 and 8.5 x 1013 cm-2, respectively. However, as discussed above, our models of the UV components, which assume a single physical component for each (except for component 4), do not predict substantial X-ray absorption. Thus, the UV columns associated with the X-ray absorber are likely to be “hidden” in one or more of the UV components. If the X-ray absorber is coincident with only one UV component, the C IV column could be hidden in any kinematic component, but the N V column could only be hidden in components 1, 2, 4, or 4. Alternatively, the C IV and N V columns from the X-ray absorber could be spread out amongst some or all of the kinematic components. Thus, it is clear that the X-ray absorption occurs within the velocity ranges covered by the two clusters of UV absorption, since otherwise we would have uniquely detected its UV columns. The velocity coverage of the X-ray absorption in the CXO spectrum is consistent with this conclusion (Paper I). The Ly$`\alpha `$ profile in Figure 1 is also consistent with the conclusion that the X-ray absorption must fall in the velocity ranges covered by the UV absorbers, since we expect a substantial H I column from the X-ray absorber (1.4 x 1015 cm-2, see Paper I), and yet we see no H I absorption in the Ly$`\alpha `$ profile (Figure 1) that is outside of the two clusters of UV absorption. Based on the FUSE spectra, Kriss et al. (2000) derived a total N$`_{\mathrm{H}\mathrm{I}}`$ $``$ 4.7 x 1015 cm-2 (excluding component 4, in which the Ly$`\beta `$ line may form principally in the low ionization component). The UV models predict a total N$`_{\mathrm{H}\mathrm{I}}`$ $`=`$ 1.6 x 1015 cm-2 (excluding components 4 and 4), which leaves 3.1 x 1015 cm-2 unaccounted for. This is roughly consistent with the X-ray model prediction, and further evidence for additional gas at the same velocities of a number of the UV components. It is interesting that there is also strong evidence for a wide range in ionization state at the same velocities in the intrinsic UV and X-ray absorbers in the Seyfert 1 galaxy NGC 3783 (Kaspi et al. 2002).

## 4 Discussion

In general, intrinsic UV (Crenshaw et al. 1999) and X-ray (Kaspi et al. 2000, 2001; Kaastra et al. 2000) absorption lines detected in Seyfert 1 galaxies are blue-shifted, indicative of radial outflow. However, in the case of Mrk 509, the clustering of component velocities near systemic and the presence of red-shifted gas (although this is somewhat uncertain; see Section 2.1) differ from the more obvious cases of radial outflow discussed by Crenshaw et al. (1999). Kriss et al. (2000) suggested that this may be the result of the absorbers at radial distances of $``$ 300 pc, co-located with the low ionization gas detected by Phillips et al. (1983) and moving primarily transversely to our line-of-sight. Indeed, it has been suggested that UV absorption lines form in disk-driven winds (e.g., Proga, Stone, & Kallman 2000). If this is the case, the low velocities we observe in Mrk 509 require a viewing angle roughly orthogonal to the direction of the flow, similar to the geometry suggested by Kriss et al. (2000). This scenario is consistent with the evidence that the accretion disk in Mrk 509 is viewed roughly face-on (Pounds et al. 2001). If the widths of the UV absorption lines detected in Seyfert 1s are the result of superposition of multiple kinematic components, viewing an outflow stream from this vantage point might help explain the narrowness of the lines seen in Mrk 509. Nevertheless, there are some problems with this hypothesis. Since Mrk 509 is a high luminosity Seyfert 1, disk-wind models predict that the outflow will be more confined to the disk than in lower luminosity AGN (Konigl & Kartje 1994; Murray et al. 1995). The axisymmetric distribution of the reflected broad Balmer line emission in Mrk 509 can be interpreted as evidence for an obscuring torus or wind that covers only a small solid angle (Mediavilla et al. 1998), which is consistent with a “flattened” wind. However, most of the UV components have covering factors near unity, which may be difficult to achieve with a flattened wind viewed against a roughly face-on disk, depending on the location of the continuum source relative to the base of the wind. Specifically, the “launch-pad” of the wind must be interior to the UV continuum source.

Alternatively, it is possible that the observed velocities of the UV absorbers are close to their true radial velocities. In this case, the absorbers may not be part of a disk-driven flow and are, instead, gas that has been elevated off the disk and, therefore, may be more likely to occult the continuum and BLR when the disk is viewed face-on. Although disk-wind models include such a component, both the X-ray and UV absorbers detected in Mrk 509 are too neutral to be the “hitch-hiker” gas proposed by Murray et al. (1995) to shield the disk-driven winds or the highly-ionized gas in the inner part of the wind modeled by Proga et al. (2000), since, in both cases, these components may have ionization parameters $``$ 10. Krolik & Kriss (1995) proposed that UV absorbers are high density knots embedded in a thermally expanding, highly ionized wind, which would provide a natural explanation for the kinematic association of the UV and X-ray absorbers. However, this model predicts radial velocities similar to the disk-driven winds ($`>`$ several hundred km s-1), hence would still require a special geometry to explain the low radial velocities and large values of Clos. A simpler scenario would have the absorbers at large radial distances, e.g. 100’s of pcs as suggested by Kriss et al. (2000). As noted in Section 3.3, similar UV absorbers were found at large distances in NGC 4151 (Kraemer et al. 2001a). Furthermore, studies of the narrow-line region kinematics indicate a strong drop in radial velocities in emission-line gas at distances $`>`$ few hundred pcs (Crenshaw & Kraemer 2000; Crenshaw et al. 2000; Ruiz et al. 2001), so it is not necessarily surprising that the absorbers within the NLR would have similar kinematics. However, better determination of the radial distances of these absorbers requires constraints on the gas density, which can only be achieved via variability studies.

## 5 Summary

We have used UV medium resolution echelle spectra obtained with HST/STIS and X-ray spectra obtained with CXO/HETG to study the physical conditions in the intrinsic absorbers in the Seyfert 1 galaxy Mrk 509. The analysis of the X-ray warm absorber is given in Paper I, while here we describe the nature of the UV absorbers. We have determined the following:

1. We have detected 8 separate kinematic components in Ly$`\alpha `$, C IV, and N V, seven of which were previously detected in a FUSE spectrum. Component 4 also shows the presence of Si IV. We derived a Clos $``$ 0.32 from the Si IV lines, as opposed to $``$ 0.98 from the high ionization lines, which we interpret as evidence for two separate physical components at this velocity, similar to that observed in NGC 3783 (Kraemer et al. 2001b) and NGC 3516 (Kraemer et al. 2002).

2. Contrary to the analysis in Kriss et al. (2000), none of the UV absorbers possesses a sufficiently high column density or ionization parameter to be identified with the X-ray warm absorber. However, based on the warm absorber models presented in Paper I, it is likely that highly ionized gas is kinematically associated with one or more of the UV components.

3. There is evidence suggesting that accretion disk in Mrk 509 is viewed roughly face-on. Although disk-wind models would predict low velocities for the UV absorbers with this geometry, it is clear that they cannot account for the large covering factors derived for several of the components. Alternatively, the properties of the absorbers may be consistent with outflow perpendicular to the surface of a disk. Furthermore, it is plausible that the absorbers lie within the NLR of Mrk 509, at significant radial distances from the central source, and hence a part of a different population of intrinsic absorbers than that detected in several other Seyfert 1 galaxies. The UV continuum is currently in a low-state, while the X-ray contimuum flux is near its historical average (Yaqoob et al. 2002a); therefore spectra taken as the source brightens (over a timeframe of several yrs) will provide a means to constrain the densities and, thus, the radial distances of the absorbers.

Support for proposal 8877 was provided by NASA through a grant from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS 5-26555. Some of the data presented in this paper were obtained from the Multimission Archive at the Space Telescope Science Institute (MAST). Support for MAST for non-HST data is provided by the NASA Office of Space Science via grant NAG5-7584 and by other grants and contracts. We would like to thank Jose Ruiz for useful discussions. We thank an anonymous referee for their comments.