format: text

text:
# Stress Propagation in Two Dimensional Frictional Granular Matter

## Abstract

The stress profile and reorientation of grains, in response to a point force applied to a preloaded two dimensional granular system, are calculated in the context of a continuum theory that incorporates the texture of the packing. When high friction prevents slip at the inter-grain contacts, an anisotropic packing propagates stress along two peaks which amalgamate into a single peak as the packing is disordered into a less anisotropic structure; this single peak may be wider or narrower than in the isotropic case, depending on the preparation of the packing. At lower frictions, an effective treatment of slipping contacts yields sharpened peaks, and ultimately a singular limit in which stress propagates along straight rays. Recent experiments, as well as aspects of hyperbolic models, are discussed in light of these results.

Descriptions of static granular matter as an isotropic elasto-plastic continuum  do not incorporate effects of granularity essential to reproduce the variety of stress profiles identified experimentally . By contrast, recent discrete models relying on (probabilistic) rules of force transmission among individual grains  require, for a continuum limit in terms of stresses, an additional constraint relating the components of the stress tensor. This closure relation may be interpreted  as a local Janssen approximation  but is otherwise rather ad hoc. Furthermore, it leads to hyperbolic equations for stress propagation , as opposed to the usual elliptic equations of elastic theories.

Reference  offers a possible bridging approach in which a continuum theory is derived systematically from grain-grain interactions, taking into account the texture of the packing and the freedom of grains to reorient with respect to their surrounding medium. In the present Letter, we apply this general framework to calculate the propagation of the stress from a point force applied to a two dimensional granular system. After recalling the main elements of the theory and discussing its general properties in two dimensions, we calculate stress profiles in the presence of a friction large enough to prevent slip at the contacts. We obtain a variety of responses that depend on the type of packing and provide us with a natural interpretation of recent experiments. Finally, we discuss the case of easily sheared contacts, which mimic slipping contacts and induce sharper stress peaks. In the limiting situation, the hyperbolic closure relations used in the literature  emerge from our formulation and constrain the applied point force to propagate along straight rays.

As shown in Ref. , a strain $`\epsilon `$ about a preloaded equilibrium state induces reorientation of the grains, expressed by the linearized rotation matrix $`\delta _{ij}+\mathrm{\Omega }_{ij}`$, and generates incremental stresses

$$\sigma _{ij}=(\epsilon _{ik}\mathrm{\Omega }_{ik})Q_{kj}+P_{ijkl}\epsilon _{kl}.$$
(1)
The fabric tensors

$$Q_{kj}=k_{}D_kD_j\mu 𝑑\alpha ,$$
(2)
$$P_{ijkl}=(k_{}k_{})\frac{D_iD_jD_kD_l}{D^2}\mu 𝑑\alpha ,$$
(3)
encode the texture of the granular packing via the average number of inter-grain contacts $`\mu (\alpha )d\alpha `$ within an angle $`d\alpha `$ about $`\alpha `$, the normal and shear moduli $`k_{}(\alpha )`$ and $`k_{}(\alpha )`$ of these contacts, and the average center-to-center distances $`D(\alpha )`$ traversing them. In two dimensions $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ depends on a single angle $`\omega `$, defined by $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \omega \\ \omega & 0\end{array}\right)`$ and set by the local vanishing of torque to

$$\omega =\frac{(Q_{xx}Q_{yy})\epsilon _{xy}+Q_{xy}(\epsilon _{yy}\epsilon _{xx})}{Q_{xx}+Q_{yy}}=\frac{[Q,\epsilon ]_{xy}}{\mathrm{Tr}(Q)}.$$
(4)
The stress then can be expressed in terms of the strain alone, for example in the matrix form

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\sigma _{xx}\\ \sigma _{yy}\\ \sigma _{xy}\end{array}\right)=M\left(\begin{array}{c}\epsilon _{xx}\\ \epsilon _{yy}\\ 2\epsilon _{xy}\end{array}\right),$$
(5)
where the (symmetric) compliance matrix $`M`$ summarizes the textured stiffness of the medium through the first few Fourier moments of the quantities $`\mu _Q(\alpha )=k_{}(\alpha )D^2(\alpha )\mu (\alpha )`$ and $`\mu _P(\alpha )=\left[k_{}(\alpha )k_{}(\alpha )\right]D^2(\alpha )\mu (\alpha )`$ associated with the two fabric tensors. Defining the Fourier moments by

$`2\pi \mu _Q(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`2\kappa _0+4\kappa _1\mathrm{cos}(2\alpha )+4\kappa _2\mathrm{sin}(2\alpha )+\mathrm{},`$ (6)
$`2\pi \mu _P(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`2\overline{\kappa }_0+4\overline{\kappa }_1\mathrm{cos}(2\alpha )+4\overline{\kappa }_2\mathrm{sin}(2\alpha )`$ (8)
$`+16\overline{\kappa }_3\mathrm{cos}(4\alpha )+16\overline{\kappa }_4\mathrm{sin}(4\alpha )+\mathrm{},`$
we write $`M`$ explicitely, as

$$M=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_0+\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_1+\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_3& \stackrel{~}{\kappa }_3& \stackrel{~}{\kappa }_2+\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_4\\ \stackrel{~}{\kappa }_3& \stackrel{~}{\kappa }_0\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_1+\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_3& \stackrel{~}{\kappa }_2\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_4\\ \stackrel{~}{\kappa }_2+\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_4& \stackrel{~}{\kappa }_2\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_4& \stackrel{~}{\kappa }_3+\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_5\end{array}\right),$$
(9)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_0=\kappa _0+\overline{\kappa }_0`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_1=\kappa _1+\overline{\kappa }_1`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_2=(\kappa _2+\overline{\kappa }_2)/2`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_3=\overline{\kappa }_3\overline{\kappa }_0/4\kappa _2^2/2\kappa _0`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_4=\overline{\kappa }_4+\kappa _1\kappa _2/2\kappa _0`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_5=\kappa _0/2(\kappa _1^2+\kappa _2^2)/2\kappa _0`$. The fore-aft symmetry ($`\alpha \alpha +\pi `$) of the contact distribution forbids dipolar moments, and the anisotropic part of $`M`$ is composed of the quadrupolar moments $`\kappa _1`$, $`\overline{\kappa }_1`$, $`\kappa _2`$, $`\overline{\kappa }_2`$ and octupolar moments $`\overline{\kappa }_3`$, $`\overline{\kappa }_4`$.

Before discussing stress profiles generated by Eq. (5), we comment on the properties of the compliance. The non-negativity of $`\mu _Q`$ and $`\mu _P`$ restricts the allowed domain of the multipolar components; $`\overline{\kappa }_0`$, $`\overline{\kappa }_1`$ and $`\overline{\kappa }_3`$, for example, are bound by $`2(\overline{\kappa }_1/\overline{\kappa }_0)^214\overline{\kappa }_3/\overline{\kappa }_01`$. An intuitive derivation of these (Cauchy-Schwartz) inequalities uses a representation of $`\mu _Q`$ and $`\mu _P`$ as linear combinations of delta functions with non-negative weights. The multipolar components of $`\mu _Q`$ and $`\mu _P`$ then are themselves linear combinations of the multipolar components of the delta functions with the same non-negative weights, hence the former interpolate the latter. For a (fore-aft symmetric) pair of delta functions $`\mu _{\alpha _0}(\alpha )=\delta (\alpha \alpha _0)+\delta (\alpha \alpha _0\pi )`$, $`\overline{\kappa }_0(\mu _{\alpha _0})=1`$, $`\overline{\kappa }_1(\mu _{\alpha _0})=\mathrm{cos}(2\alpha _0)`$, $`\overline{\kappa }_3(\mu _{\alpha _0})=\mathrm{cos}(4\alpha _0)/4`$, and the bound $`2(\overline{\kappa }_1/\overline{\kappa }_0)^214\overline{\kappa }_3/\overline{\kappa }_0`$ is achieved. The choice $`\mu (\alpha )=\mu _{\alpha _0}(\alpha )`$ corresponds to the rather pathological limit of a granular medium made up of an array of independent, parallel columns at an angle $`\alpha _0`$, and lies on the boundary of the allowed domain. This domain is included entirely in the domain of stability of $`M`$, in which stress resists any deformation (with a positive energy cost). As long as friction is high enough to prevent slip at the contacts, the boundaries of the domain of stability and the allowed domain meet only at the columnar systems just mentioned. Finally, the form of $`M`$ in Eq. (9) and the independence of $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_0,\mathrm{},\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_5`$ ensure that, within the allowed domain, the granular material can take on the most general form of anisotropic elasticity.

The equilibrium conditions $`_j\sigma _{ij}=f_i\delta (x)\delta (y)`$, where $`f_i`$ is a point force applied at the origin, are supplemented by the closure equation $`_{xx}\epsilon _{yy}+_{yy}\epsilon _{xx}=2_{xy}\epsilon _{xy}`$. This relation specifies the constraint on a strain tensor that derives from an underlying two-component displacement vector field, and is re-expressed as

$$(_{yy},_{xx},_{xy})M^1\left(\begin{array}{c}\sigma _{xx}\\ \sigma _{yy}\\ \sigma _{xy}\end{array}\right)=0$$
(10)
to close the system of equations governing stresses. A classic and elegant solution makes use of the Airy function $`\varphi `$, defined through its derivatives by $`\delta _{ij}_{\kappa \kappa }\varphi _i_j\varphi =\sigma _{ij}`$ so as to satisfy the equilibrium conditions automatically. Thus one needs to solve only Eq. (10) for $`\varphi `$, respecting the boundary conditions at the origin and at infinity. Taking advantage of the properties of analytic functions on the plane, one can translate this fourth order differential equation for $`\varphi `$ into a fourth order algebraic equation . Its roots determine completely the angular modulation that factors the usual $`1/r`$ dependence of two dimensional elastic stresses. In an orthotropic material (with two perpendicular axes of symmetry), the quartic polynomial in question reduces to a bi-quadratic one , and henceforth we restrict ourselves to this case for the sake of simplicity. Specifically, we choose the $`x`$\- and $`y`$-axes as axes of symmetry, so that $`\kappa _2=\overline{\kappa }_2=\overline{\kappa }_4=0`$.

Following the program just outlined, we calculate the radial stress $`\sigma _{rr}`$ and the reorientation angle $`\omega `$ analytically and plot their angular dependence on Fig. 1 . While observed modulated ( e.g., double-peaked) responses motivate hyperbolic models , it was emphasized recently  that they arise also in anisotropic elastic systems . Accordingly, for a weakly disordered square lattice oriented at $`45^{}`$ from the $`x`$\- and $`y`$ -axes ($`\overline{\kappa }_3<0`$), we find that the point force propagates through the material as a shallow stress double-peak (middle bold curve in Fig. 1(a)). As the packing is further disordered, the two peaks merge into a single peak which ultimately coincides with the isotropic response (thin solid curve). Alternatively, if contacts close to the vertical are slightly favored ($`\kappa _1,\overline{\kappa }_1<0`$) e.g., by gravity, the two peaks amalgamate into a single wide peak (top bold curve). If, however, the preparation of the system favors contacts close to the horizontal ($`\kappa _1,\overline{\kappa }_1>0`$), the two peaks become more pronounced (bottom bold curve) and the stress propagates mostly along two directions. (We note that there is no trivial relation between the latter and possible preferred directions in the packing.)

The plots are symmetric because they correspond to packings statistically symmetric about the vertical (direction of the force). If the material is rotated with respect to the force, one of the two peaks dominates the other; more generally, if the force is not applied along an axis of symmetry (as generically in a non-orthotropic medium), we expect a biased response reminiscent of arching phenomena . This is certainly the case in the left (or right) half of a pile constructed with a point source, where the packing is not symmetric about the vertical . When $`\kappa _10`$, the stress profile is due in part to the reorientation of the grains. Figure 1(b) exhibits the angular dependence of the reorientation angle $`\omega `$ corresponding to the pronounced double-peak in Fig. 1(a); the crosses illustrate the form of the reorientation field and its decay away from the origin. While the reorientation appears to relieve the shear stress along the vertical as expected intuitively, it shows a complicated structure and in particular extrema along non-trivial directions.

In a remarkable measurement  of the response of a vertical two dimensional granular system (preloaded by its own weight) to a vertical point force, the stress propagates along two peaks, in an ordered (anisotropic) piling, which merge into a single peak as the piling is disordered, in conformity with our picture. Furthermore, the width of the single peak increases linearly with depth, in accordance with an elastic theory. (The dependence of the widths on depth in the case of a double-peak is not given.) Another experiment  correlates the macroscopic response to the microscopic structure by recording both the stress profile and the angular distribution of contacts $`\mu (\alpha )`$. As expected , $`\mu (\alpha )`$ shows a higher degree of anisotropy in a pile grown with a point source than in a pile grown with an extended source, and different stress profiles are measured: a double-peak for a point source, a single peak for an extended source. In similar experiments on three dimensional piles  the observed stress peak, while scaling linearly in depth, is narrower than expected from isotropic elasticity in an infinite half space . The authors interpret this accentuated response as possibly arising from the experimental boundary conditions —a conjecture left unconfirmed by a more detailed study . Our approach affords a complementary explanation: no matter how one disorders the pile during or after its growth, gravity sets a preferred direction; one then expects to have more near-vertical contacts than near-horizontal ones, and a resulting narrower response (dotted curve in Fig. 1(a)). This interpretation is supported by measurements  showing that a dense packing yields a wider peak than a loose packing. To go from dense to loose, one needs to “open holes” while maintaining stability; thus these holes may decrease the number of near-horizontal contacts relative to the number of near-vertical ones, but not the other way around.

To complete our picture of stress propagation, we discuss the degenerate solutions that arise when slip occurs. As long as a large friction prevents slip, the ratio of shear to normal moduli of the contacts is fixed (for purely compressively preloaded contacts, $`k_{}/k_{}=\left(22\nu \right)/\left(2\nu \right)`$, where $`\nu `$ is the Poisson ratio of the constitutive material of the grains ). At smaller frictions, grains may slip along their contacts, effectively lowering the value of $`k_{}`$ . This renormalization of the shear modulus yields narrower stress peaks, and in the limit $`k_{}/k_{}0`$ singular responses arise in ordered packings. For a simple two dimensional crystal (Bravais lattice) $`\mu _Q(\alpha ),\mu _P(\alpha )_{i=1}^n[\delta (\alpha \alpha _i)+\delta (\alpha \alpha _i\pi )]`$, where steric constraints impose $`n3`$ . The case $`n=1`$ corresponds to the pathological columnar systems mentioned above, while $`n=3`$ yields an isotropic elastic theory since the contact angles differ by multiples of $`\pi /3`$. In the case $`n=2`$, the stress peaks become infinitely narrow and coincide with the lattice directions $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$. Similar ray-like responses have been observed recently in three dimensional crystalline packings . In two dimensions, the situation is easiest to visualize in a square lattice at $`45^{}`$ (Fig. 2); a point force applied vertically is transmitted along two rows of grains without disturbing any other grains. We note that, in general, in the limit $`k_{}/k_{}0`$ only the fabric tensor $`P`$ survives in Eq. (1) and the system becomes equivalent to a collection of fibers highly resistant to compression and extension but easy to shear, as in much studied fiber-reinforced materials . Ordering corresponds to aligning the fibers along a set of given directions; in the case of only two directions there is at least one soft mode, associated with a singular response. In particular, the conformation of Fig. 2 is equivalent to two sets of fibers at right angle, equivalent in turn to an incompressible elastic medium with fibers along a single direction.

Singular solutions of a hyperbolic character occur only at the boundary of the domain of stability of the elastic theory. In the limit $`k_{}/k_{}0`$, this boundary and that of the allowed domain meet not only at the $`n=1`$ columnar systems but also at the $`n=2`$ crystalline packings. For a packing symmetric with respect to the $`x`$ \- and $`y`$-axes ($`\alpha _1=\alpha _2\alpha _0`$), the closure Eq. (10) reduces to

$$(_{xx}c_0^2_{yy})(\sigma _{xx}c_0^2\sigma _{yy})=0,$$
(11)
where $`c_0^2=(\overline{\kappa }_0\overline{\kappa }_1)/(\overline{\kappa }_0/4\overline{\kappa }_3)1=\mathrm{tan}^2\alpha _00`$. If the system is rotated by an angle $`\mathrm{arctan}\left(t\right)`$, the closure equation involves the more general linear combination $`\left(1c_0^2t^2\right)\sigma _{xx}\left(c_0^2t^2\right)\sigma _{yy}2(1+c_0^2)t\sigma _{xy}`$. Since the limit $`k_{}/k_{}0`$ may be viewed also as that of infinitely hard grains (with a thin incompressible elastic coating), it is no surprise that we retrieve the form of the closure equations derived  for the marginal (isostatic) state of a granular packing in which the response may be calculated without knowledge of deformations. In integral form, our closure equation with $`c_0^2=1`$ is identical to the one given in Ref. , while for general $`c_0`$ and $`t`$ it coincides with that of Ref.  and the phenomenological “oriented stress linearity model” of Ref. . In Ref. , an integral form of Eq. (11) is suggested by a discrete probabilistic model and the packing disorder is emulated by adding to $`c_0^2`$ a small increment that fluctuates randomly in space. This uncertainty in the local propagation directions results in a diffusive broadening of the stress rays, proportional to the square root of the depth. Within our approach, by contrast, as soon as disorder in the contact orientation is introduced, the response of a homogeneous system is governed by elastic (elliptic) equations on large scales, yielding a linear broadening of the stress peaks. These remarks help conciliate the square-root broadening observed  in a pile less than ten grains in height with the linear broadening  on larger scales. The situation might be different, however, for heterogeneous media; in a polycrystalline packing, for example, one might expect a diffusive behavior even on macroscopic scales.

It is a pleasure to thank D.S. Fisher and J.R. Rice, as well as J.-P. Bouchaud, P.-G. de Gennes, B.I. Halperin, and T.A. Witten, for inspiring discussions. RdS gratefully acknowledges the support of the Harvard Society of Fellows and the Milton Fund.


text:
# Hard Rescattering Mechanism in High Energy Photodisintegration of the Light Nuclei

## 1 Introduction

The reactions of high energy photodisintegration of light nuclei in which the energy of the incoming photon is equally shared by two outgoing nucleons is unique in a sense that it deposits to the nuclear system a large amount of energy which should be shared at least by two nucleons in the nuclei (see e.g.). When this energy exceeds the typical meson mass (sevearl hundred MeV) one expects that the interaction picture based on a meson exchange currents should break down. In this limit the hard contribution is expected to dominate. As a result one expects that the quark gluon picture of interaction will become a relevant framework for description of the reaction.

The experiments on high energy two-body photodisintegration of the deuteron demonstrated that starting at E$`{}_{\gamma }{}^{}`$ 1 GeV the conventional mesonic picture of nuclear interactions is indeed breaking down. One of the first predictions for $`\gamma dpn`$ reactions within QCD was based on the quark counting rule, which predicted $`d\sigma /dts^{11}`$. This prediction was based on the hypothesis that the Fock state with the minimal number of partonic constituents will dominate in two-body large angle hard collisions. Although successful in describing energy dependences of number of hard processes, this hypothesis does not allow to make calculation of the absolute values of the cross sections. Especially for reactions involving baryons, the calculations within perturbative QCD underestimate the measured cross sections by orders of magnitude see e.g.. This may be an indication that in the accessible range of energies bulk of the interaction is in the domain of the nonperturbative QCD, for which the theoretical methods of calculations are very limited.

## 2 Hard Rescattering Model

Recently we suggested a model in which the absorption of the photon by a quark of one nucleon, followed by a high-momentum transfer (hard) rescattering with a quark from the second nucleon, produces the final two nucleon state of large relative momenta. The typical diagram representing such a scenario is presented in Figure 1. Based on the analysis of these type of diagrams we find that:

* the dominant contribution comes from the soft vertices of $`dNN`$ transition, while quark rescattering proceeds trough hard gluon exchange
* the $`dNN`$ transition can be evaluated based on the conventional deuteron wave function calculated using the realistic nucleon-nucleon potentials.
* the structure of hard interaction for the rescattering part of the reaction is similar to that of hard NN scattering.
* as a result the sum of the multitude of diagrams with incalculable nonperturbative parts of the interaction can be expressed through the experimentally measured amplitude of hard $`NN`$ scattering.

## 3 Kinematics and the Cross Section

We consider the kinematics of sufficiently large energies $`E_\gamma 2GeV`$ and momentum transfer $`t,u2GeV^2`$. These restrictions allow to make a two important approximations: first is that the mass of the intermediate hadronic state produced in the $`\gamma N`$ interaction is in deep inelastic continuum, thus the partonic picture is relevant. The second one is that the quark rescattering is hard and can be factorized from the soft nuclear wave function. We evaluate Feynman diagrams such as Fig. 1, in which quarks are exchanged between nucleons via the exchange of a gluon. All other quark-interactions are included in the partonic wave function of the nucleon, $`\psi _N`$. We use a simplified notation in which only the momenta of the interacting quarks require labeling. The scattering amplitude $`T`$ for photo-disintegration of the deuteron (of four-momentum $`p_d`$ and mass $`M_d`$) into two nucleons of momentum $`p_A`$ and $`p_B`$ is given by:

$`T={\displaystyle \underset{e_q}{}}{\displaystyle }({\displaystyle \frac{\psi _N^{}(x_2^{},p_B,k_2)}{x_2^{}}}\overline{u}(p_Bp_2+k_2)[igT_c^F\gamma ^\nu ]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{u(k_1+q)\overline{u}(k_1+q)}{(k_1+q)^2m_q^2+iϵ}}[ie_qϵ^{}\gamma ^{}]u(k_1){\displaystyle \frac{\psi _N(x_1,p_1,k_1)}{x_1}})`$
$`\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\psi _N^{}(x_1^{},p_A,k_1)}{x_1^{}}}\overline{u}(p_Ap_1+k_1)\left[igT_c^F\gamma _\mu \right]u(k_2){\displaystyle \frac{\psi _N(x_2,p_2,k_2)}{x_2}}\right\}`$
$`G^{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_d(\alpha ,p_{})}{1\alpha }}{\displaystyle \frac{dx_1}{1x_1}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2k_1}{2(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx_2}{1x_2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2k_2}{2(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\alpha }{\alpha }}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2p_{}}{2(2\pi )^3}},`$ (1)
where $`p_1`$ and $`p_2`$ are the momenta of the nucleons in the deuteron, with $`\alpha \frac{p_{1+}}{p_{d+}}`$, $`p_2=p_dp_1`$ and $`p_1=p_2p_{}`$. Each nucleon consists of one active quark of momenta $`k_1`$ and $`k_2`$: $`x_i\frac{k_{i+}}{p_{i+}}=\frac{k_{i+}}{\alpha p_{d+}}`$ ($`i=1,2`$). $`G^{\mu \nu }`$ describes the gluon exchange between interchanged quarks. We use the reference frame where $`p_d=(p_{d0},p_{dz},p_{})(\frac{\sqrt{s^{}}}{2}+\frac{M_d^2}{2\sqrt{s^{}}},\frac{\sqrt{s^{}}}{2}\frac{M_d^2}{2\sqrt{s^{}}},0)`$, with $`s=(q+p_d)^2`$, $`s^{}sM_D^2,`$ and the photon four-momentum is $`q=(\frac{\sqrt{s^{}}}{2},\frac{\sqrt{s^{}}}{2},0)`$.

We first observe that the denominator of the knocked-out quark propagator, when recoil quark-gluon system with mass $`m_R`$ is on mass shell, has a pole at $`\alpha _c\frac{x_1m_R^2+k_1^2}{(1x_1)x_1\stackrel{~}{s}}`$:

$$(k_1+q)^2m_q^2+iϵx_1s^{}(\alpha \alpha _c+iϵ),$$
(2)
where $`\stackrel{~}{s}s^{}(1+\frac{M_d^2}{s^{}})`$. Next we calculate the photon-quark hard scattering vertex and integrate over the $`\alpha `$ using only the pole contribution in Eq.(2). Note that the dominant contribution arises from the soft component of the deuteron when $`\alpha _c=\frac{1}{2}`$, which requires $`k_1^2\frac{(1x_1)x_1\stackrel{~}{s}}{2}`$.

Summing over the struck quark contributions from photon scattering off neutron and proton one can express the scattering amplitudes through the $`pn`$ hard scattering amplitude within the quark interchange mechanism (QIM)-$`A_{pn}^{QIM}(s,l^2)`$ as follows:

$`T{\displaystyle \frac{ie(ϵ^++ϵ^{})(e_u+e_d)}{2\sqrt{s^{}}}}{\displaystyle f(\frac{l^2}{s})A_{pn}^{QIM}(s,l^2)\mathrm{\Psi }_d(\frac{1}{2},p_{})\frac{d^2p_{}}{(2\pi )^2}}.`$ (3)
where $`l=p_pp_1`$, $`ϵ^\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(ϵ_x\pm iϵ_y)`$ and $`e_u`$ and $`e_d`$ are the electric charges of $`u`$ and $`d`$ quarks. The factor $`f(l^2/s)`$ accounts for the difference between the hard propagators in our process and those occurring in wide angle $`pn`$ scattering. Within the Feynman mechanism, the interacting quark carries the whole momentum of the nucleon ($`x_11`$), thus $`f(l^2/s)=1`$. Within the minimal Fock state approximation, $`f(l^2/s)`$ is the scaling function of the $`\theta _{cm}`$ only with $`f(\theta _{cm}=90^0)1`$.

We compute the differential cross section averaging $`|T|^2`$ over the spins of initial photon and deuteron and summing over the spins of the final nucleons. Then we use the observation that the quark interchange topologies are the dominant for fixed angle, $`\theta _{cm}=90^0`$ high momentum transfer (non strange) baryon-baryon scattering. Thus in the region of $`\theta _{cm}90^0`$ we replace $`A_{pn}^{QIN}`$ by the experimental data - $`A_{pn}^{Exp}`$ and obtain111The Eq.(6) in Ref. contains a misprint: $`4`$ in front of Eq.(6) should be $`8`$. Note that the numerical calculations in  are done with the correct factor.:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma ^{\gamma dpn}}{dt}}={\displaystyle \frac{8\alpha }{9}}\pi ^4{\displaystyle \frac{1}{s^{}}}C({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{t}}{s}}){\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma ^{pnpn}(s,\stackrel{~}{t})}{dt}}`$
$`\times \left|{\displaystyle \mathrm{\Psi }_d^{NR}(p_z=0,p_{})\sqrt{m_N}\frac{d^2p_{}}{(2\pi )^2}}\right|^2,`$ (4)
where $`\stackrel{~}{t}=(p_Bp_d/2)^2`$. Here $`\mathrm{\Psi }_d^{NR}`$ is the nonrelativistic deuteron wave function which can be calculated using realistic NN interaction potentials. The function $`C(\frac{\stackrel{~}{t}}{s})f^2(\stackrel{~}{t}/s)1`$ at $`\theta _{cm}90^0`$ and is slowly varying function of $`\theta _{cm}`$.

Within the hard rescattering model we can calculate also the high energy photodisintegration of $`{}_{}{}^{3}He`$ in the specially chosen kinematics, in which the absorbed photon’s energy is equally shared between the two outgoing protons while the final neutron is very slow $`p_n100MeV/c`$. In this case the cross section of the reaction is expressed through the nonrelativistic wave function of the $`{}_{}{}^{3}He`$ and the amplitude of hard $`pp`$ scattering, with small corrections coming from soft $`pn`$ rescattering.

## 4 Comparison with the Data

### 4.1 Energy dependence

One can estimate the energy dependences of the differential cross sections of the $`\gamma dpn`$ and $`\gamma ^3Hepp+n`$ reactions at $`\theta _{cm}=90^0`$ using the experimental data on hard $`pn`$ and $`pp`$ scattering. Figure 2 represents the calculations and the comparison with existing data on deuteron target. Our calculation of $`\gamma dpn`$ has $`25\%`$ accuracy because of the rather large experimental errors in high momentum transfer $`pn`$ scattering cross section. The prediction for $`\gamma ^3Hepp+n`$ cross section (which should be considered preliminary) demonstrates the oscillation which is related to the observed oscillations in high momentum transfer $`pp`$ cross section.

### 4.2 Angular Dependence

As we mentioned above, the hard rescattering mechanism can predict the value of $`C(t/s)1`$ only at $`\theta _{cm}=90^2`$. One expects that this function should be a smooth function of $`\theta _{cm}`$. As a result the angular dependence of photodisintegration reaction should in general reflect the angular dependence of hard $`NN`$ scattering cross section.

In particular it is interesting to observe that the $`pn`$ scattering cross section exhibits a strong angular asymmetry with the cross sections being dominate at forward angles. As Figure 3 demonstrates, within hard rescattering model this feature is reflected also in the angular dependence of $`\gamma dpn`$ cross section. This result is in a qualitative agreement with the preliminary JLab data.

## 5 Polarization Observables

Hard rescattering model allows also to calculate the different polarization observables of the photodisintegration reaction. Writing down explicitly the helicity indexes of interacting particles, for the scattering amplitude of Eq.(3) one obtains:

$`T^{h,m,\eta _2,\eta _1}`$ (5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i(e_u+e_d)}{2\sqrt{s^{}}}}{\displaystyle f(\frac{l^2}{s})<\eta _1,\eta _2|A_{pn}(s,l^2)|h,\lambda _2>\mathrm{\Psi }_d^{m,h,\lambda 2}(\frac{1}{2},p_{})\frac{d^2p_{}}{(2\pi )^2}}.`$
where $`h`$, $`m`$, $`\eta _2`$ and $`\eta _1`$ represent the helicities of incoming photon, target deuteron and two outgoing nucleons respectively. In derivation of Eq.(5) it is assumed additionally that the quark which interacts with the photon carries the total helicity of the parent nucleon. The helicity amplitudes, $`A_{pn}`$ in Eq.(5) can be expressed through the five independent helicity amplitudes:

$`\varphi _1(s,t)=<++|A|++>\varphi _2(s,t)=<++|A|>`$
$`\varphi _3(s,t)=<+|A|+>\varphi _4(s,t)=<+|A|+>`$
$`\varphi _5(s,t)=<++|A|+>`$ (6)
for which the following hierarchy relation can be stated in a model independent way:

$$\varphi _2<\varphi _5<\varphi _1,\varphi _3,\varphi _4$$
(7)
Using the definitions of Eq.(6) one can calculate the different asymmetries in the deuteron photodisintegration reaction. We are particularly interested in the recoil transverse $`P_y`$ and longitudinal $`C_x`$, $`C_y`$ polarizations for which the high energy data are becoming available from Jefferson Lab. Based on Eq.(5) the predictions for these observables are as follows:

$`P_y=2Im\left\{\left[2(\varphi _1(s,\stackrel{~}{t})+\varphi _2(s,\stackrel{~}{t}))+\varphi _3(s,\stackrel{~}{t})\varphi _4(s,\stackrel{~}{t})\right]\varphi _5^{}(s,\stackrel{~}{t})\right\}/F(s,\stackrel{~}{t})`$
$`C_x=+2Re\left\{\left[2(\varphi _1(s,\stackrel{~}{t})\varphi _2(s,\stackrel{~}{t}))+\varphi _3(s,\stackrel{~}{t})+\varphi _4(s,\stackrel{~}{t})\right]\varphi _5^{}(s,\stackrel{~}{t})\right\}/F(s,\stackrel{~}{t})`$
$`C_z=0`$ (8)
where $`F(s,\stackrel{~}{t})=2|\varphi _1(s,\stackrel{~}{t})|^2+2|\varphi _2(s,\stackrel{~}{t})|^2+|\varphi _3(s,\stackrel{~}{t})|^2+4|\varphi _4(s,\stackrel{~}{t})|^2+6|\varphi _5(s,\stackrel{~}{t})|^2`$. In these derivations we neglected by the $`D`$ wave contribution of the deuteron wave function, which is justified on the basis that the nucleon momenta which enter in the deuteron wave function in the integral of Eq.(5) is restricted, $`(300MeV/c)`$.

Based on the relation of Eq.(7) and the fact that for the on-shell amplitude $`\varphi _5=0`$ at $`\theta _{cm}=90^0`$ one can conclude in a rather model independent way that the $`P_y`$ and $`C_x`$ should be small at $`\theta _{cm}=90^0`$ at $`E_\gamma 2GeV`$. This result seems in qualitative agreement with the available data and the planned experiment at Jefferson Lab in $`E_\gamma 2GeV`$ region will allow check these predictions in more detail.

It is interesting to note that the smallness of the polarization observables predicted in the model is not related to the commonly used assumption of the applicability of pQCD and related only to the fact that the considered asymmetries are determined by the small helicity component of $`NN`$ amplitude, $`\varphi _5`$.

## 6 Summary and Outlook

The underlying hypothesis of hard rescattering model is that the dynamics of the photoproduction reaction is determined by the physics of high-momentum transfer contained in the hard scattering NN amplitude. As a result the short-distance aspect of the deuteron wave function is not important, which allows us to use the conventional deuteron wave function in numerical calculations. This hypothesis, if confirmed by additional studies, may suggest the existence of new type of calculable hard nuclear reactions in which the sum of the “infinite” number of quark interactions could be replaced by the hard amplitude of $`NN`$ interaction.

The prediction of the model agrees reasonably well with the existing data on high energy photodisintegration of the deuteron at $`\theta _{cm}=90^0`$. More data, especially with a two energetic proton final state in $`\gamma +^3Hepp`$ (high $`p_t`$) + n $`(p_t0`$) reaction and a more detailed angular distribution would definitely allow to verify this hypothesis. The polarization measurement also will be crucial. It is very important to extend them in the energy region where anomalies are observed in the polarized hard $`pp`$ scattering.


text:
# Study of the Finite Density State based on SU(2) Lattice QCD

## 1 Introduction

Finite density QCD has attracted much attention recently: we are expecting that QCD has a rich structure when we add a density or chemical potential axis in parameter space. The finite temperature deconfinement transition line starts at $`\mu =0`$, which might be a cross-over accompanied by a tri-critical point at finite $`\mu `$. At high $`\mu `$ and relatively low temperature, there would be a new form of matter such as color superconductive phase, or color-flavor locking phase, which are speculated by mainly perturbative calculations .

Non-perturbative study of the finite density QCD by lattice simulations is highly required, but because of the famous difficulty, the direct Monte Carlo simulation of SU(3) system is very difficult. Many approaches have been reported, , and yet, no reliable algorithm is known to investigate color SU(3) QCD at low temperature with large chemical potential. Color-SU(2) is currently the unique model by which we can study these regions non-perturbatively. After the first trial of the calculation, there had been no work during many years. Because of the recent rapid progress of theoretical understanding of the system , however, the calculation has been activated .

In this report, we study the finite density QCD by Wilson fermions. We investigate the phase structure in $`(\kappa ,\mu )`$-plane for Iwasaki improved-gauge action. In order to take account of the fermion determinant, we use an algorithm in which the ratio of the determinant is evaluated explicitly at each Metropolis update process .

## 2 Phase Structure

In Fig.1, we show the average of Polyakov line in $`(\kappa ,\mu )`$-plane at $`\beta =0.7`$. We evaluate also baryon number density, gluon energy density and Polyakov line susceptibility, and especially from the peak of the Polyakov line susceptibility we can determine the confinement/deconfinement phase transition regions. In both bounday conditions111Periodic (anti-periodic) refers the periodic (anti-periodic) boundary condition for quark fields in spatial directions., the behaviors of these quantities are essentially the same .

We study several cases by varying lattice size ($`4^4`$, $`4^3\times 8`$, $`4^3\times 12`$), the boundary conditions and the number of flavor ($`N_f=2,3`$).

Calculations become unstable and break down at large chemical potential regions. In such cases, negative determinant appears for $`N_f=3`$.

## 3 Meson and diquark propagators

We calculate meson and di-quark propagators in pseudo-scalar and vector channels. We find that $`\rho `$ meson mass drops as $`\mu `$ reaches to the critical region. In order to confirm this unexpected result, we calculate both periodic and anti-periodic boundary conditions and several $`\kappa `$’s ($`\kappa =0.150,0.160,0.175`$). In Fig.2 we show $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$ masses as a function of $`\mu `$ for $`\kappa =0.160`$ (periodic boundary condition). Although our statistic is not enough to extrapolate them to the chiral limit, the signal of the anomalous behavior of the vector channel is clearly seen.

At $`\mu =0`$, because of the QCD inequality , the pseudo-scalar channel has the lightest mass, but there is no such a condition for the finite density state. Indeed there are several conjectures in literatures . If our result shown in Fig.2 is not a special feature of the color SU(2) model, this is the first lattice observation of the drop of the vector meson mass which may play an important role in the phenomenological analyses on large low-mass lepton-pair enhancement measured in CERES .

Another possibility is that the vector meson channel is mixed with the vector diquark one, $`\psi ^c\gamma _5\gamma _\mu \psi `$, at high $`\mu `$ and their masses are distorted222We thank Thomas Schaefer for useful discussions on $`\overline{\psi }\gamma _\mu \psi `$/$`\psi ^c\gamma _5\gamma _\mu \psi `$ mixing .. In this case, we can study “meson” and “diquark” mixing in color SU(2) QCD.

## 4 Force between $`qq`$ / $`\overline{q}q`$

In the previous section, we show that the vector meson may have a peculiar behavior at finite density. Above $`\mu _c`$ at low temperature, the condensation of $`qq`$ may occur. We need tools to understand the vacuum structure numerically.

From Polyakov line correlations, color average heavy quark potential is calculated. One can also obtain color singlet ($`V_1`$) and triplet potential ($`V_3`$) for $`q\overline{q}`$ system: $`N_c\times \overline{N_c}=1(N_c^21)`$ . Color symmetric ($`V_s`$) and anti-symmetric ($`V_a`$) potential for $`qq`$ system can be also evaluated: $`N_c\times N_c=\frac{1}{2}N_c(N_c+1)\frac{1}{2}N_c(N_c1)`$. In color SU(2), $`V_1=V_a`$ and $`V_3=V_s`$ even at $`\mu 0`$. Therefore if there would exist difference between $`qq`$ and $`q\overline{q}`$ states, it should originate in Dirac structure.

In Fig.3, we plot preliminary data of color singlet potential. The rotational invariance is good by virtue of the renormalization group improved gauge action. The singlet (triplet) potential is attractive (repulsive) and the forces become weaker as $`\mu `$ increases. We fix the gauge in Lorentz gauge for the color-dependent force and gluon propagators discussed in the following.

We study gluon propagators as a tool to investigate the finite density QCD,

$`G_{\mu \nu }(P_0,P_x,P_y,z)=\text{Tr}A_\mu (P_0,P_x,P_y,z)`$
$`\times A_\nu (P_0,P_x,P_y,0).`$ (1)
We set the momenta as $`(P_0,P_x,P_y)=(0,2\pi /N_x,0)`$. The electric and magnetic parts of the propagator, $`G_e=G_{tt}`$ and $`G_m=G_{yy}`$, are expected to behave as, $`G_{e(m)}(z)\mathrm{exp}(E_{e(m)}z).`$ When the system is screened at the finite temperature and/or finite density, the screening effects should appear as $`E_e=\sqrt{(P_x^2+M_e^2)}`$ and $`E_m=\sqrt{(P_x^2+M_m^2)}`$, with $`M_e`$ and $`M_m`$ being electric and magnetic masses of the gluons, respectively. At $`T=0`$ and $`\mu =0`$ the screening is infinite and the propagators vanish at long distance .

We show in Fig.4 a preliminary result for $`G_m(z)`$. As $`\mu `$ increases, the screening becomes weaker, i.e., the system shows the deconfinement feature, but at $`\mu =0.7`$ the propagator at long range seems to drop. It is an urgent future task to confirm the phenomena, because it could be an indication of a new phase at large $`\mu `$.

Acknowledgment This work is partially supported by Grant-in-Aide for Scientific Research by Monbu-Kagaku-sho (No.11440080 and No. 12554008) and ERI of Tokuyama Univ. Simulations were performed on SR8000 at IMC, Hiroshima Univ., SX5 at RCNP, Osaka Univ., SR8000 at KEK and VPP5000 at Science Information Processing Center, Tsukuba Univ.


text:
# Tachyon Dynamics and the Effective Action Approximation

## 1 Introduction

The decay of unstable D-branes is an important and challenging problem in string theory. In order to understand such processes it is important to obtain a reliable description of the dynamics of the tachyons which arise from open strings on unstable D-branes. In the last few years considerable progress has been made starting with Sen’s proposal to identify the closed string vacuum with the tachyon vacuum on unstable D-branes in superstring theory (see  for a review and references). Furthermore, a class of time independent kink solutions corresponding to lower dimensional D-branes was identified with marginal boundary deformations of the open string sigma model . More recently Sen has obtained a family of time dependent tachyon solutions as marginal deformations of the open string sigma model  (see also ). An analysis of the stress tensor obtained from the boundary state for a decaying D-brane  shows that the decay of an unstable D-brane results in a gas with finite energy density but vanishing pressure.

An interesting question is then to what extent these features can be obtained from a first derivative effective action for the tachyon . Typically a tachyon effective action contains an infinite number of higher derivative terms which, unlike the case for massless string modes, cannot be simply neglected. Therefore no truncation to first derivatives can be expected to capture all of the dynamics of the tachyon. Furthermore, even if the full effective action were known, without some kind of simplifying structure it would be near impossible to obtain concrete results.111We note that  recently presented a very interesting analysis of tachyon dynamics in p-adic string theory, where the effective action is known to all orders in derivatives and is amenable to numerical analysis. In addition it is not clear whether an initial value problem can be formulated. However first derivative truncations of the tachyon effective action have been rather sucessful for describing D-branes as static tachyonic solitons -. One may therefore hope that a truncated action could also be useful to describe the dynamics of tachyon condensation.

In  Sen argued that some qualitative features of full tree-level string theory, such as the asymptotic vanishing of the pressure, are indeed reproduced by a Born-Infeld (BI) type action . Unlike the case of massless gauge fields, the BI-type action has not been inferred from on-shell string theory and marginal tachyon profiles do not solve the equations of motion. On the other hand there is a well defined prescription to extract the tachyon effective action from boundary string field theory (BSFT) -, -. Unfortunately this action is known explictly only for constant and linear tachyon profiles and the marginal tachyon profiles are also not solutions of the BSFT effective action. Nevertheless BSFT has been quite sucessful in describing some aspects of tachyon condensation to lower dimensional D-branes . Furthermore it was shown in  that some qualitative features of the tachyon dynamics obtained from the BSFT-action are consistent with conformal field theory results. However, while the various effective actions that have appeared in the literature are remarkably similar for static profiles, they could hardly differ more for time dependent ones. This is illustrated in figure $`1`$ where the kinetic part of the effective action is plotted as a function of $`_\mu T^\mu T`$ for three different proposals (the details will be explained below).

Given this state of affairs, it is of interest establish to what extent these properties are generic in non-linear, first derivative effective actions for the tachyon. In addition we would like to determine the most appropriate behaviour of the effective action for time dependent configurations. The purpose of this paper is establish general properties of suitable first derivative tachyon actions derived under a minimal set of reasonable theoretical assumptions. We find that some observed qualitative phenomena in tachyon condensation are rather generic and are reproduced by a large class of effective actions, although the exact quantitative predictions differ significantly. On the other hand we find that some global properties of marginal tachyon profiles are beyond the scope of first derivative effective actions.

In this context we also analyse a tachyon action proposed earlier  which closely resembles the other effective actions for time independent configurations, but has the advantage that marginal deformations are solutions to the equations of motion. Furthermore, the time-dependent marginal tachyon profiles in  are also exact classical solutions for this action. We find that equation of state obtained from this action is in good quantitative agreement with the exact results of conformal field theory. Finally the potential cosmological relevance of scalar field actions with non-standard kinetic terms has been pointed out in . It is therefore interesting to analyse tachyon effective actions from this point of view. This was done in  for the BI-type action and in  for the BSFT-action. We will see that cosmological implications of our tachyon action are qualitatively similar to these results, although the details are again different.

## 2 Tachyons as Marginal Deformations

Finding the general tachyon solution in string theory would require a detailed knowledge of open superstring field theory. However, using the fact that these solutions correspond to conformally invariant backgrounds for the open string sigma model, a subset of open string tachyon solutions on a non-BPS $`D`$-brane in type II string theory can be obtained as exactly marginal deformations of the boundary conformal field theory. Specifically, as is well known -,

$$T(x^p)=\chi \mathrm{sin}(x^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})\text{and}T(x^p)=\chi \mathrm{cos}(x^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})$$
(2.1)
are exactly marginal deformations of the open string Polyakov action on a non-BPS $`Dp`$-brane. The physical properties of this open string background are encoded in the corresponding boundary state $`|B,+|B,>`$ , where222Our metic convention is $`(,+,\mathrm{},+)`$ and $`\mu ,\nu =0,\mathrm{},p`$ label the non-BPS D$`p`$-brane worldvolume.

$$|B,ϵ>=|B,ϵ>_{x^p,\psi ^p}|B,ϵ>_{x^\mu ,\psi ^\mu }|B,ϵ>_{ghosts},\mu p,ϵ=\pm .$$
(2.2)
Here $`|B>_{x^\mu ,\psi ^\mu }`$ and $`|B>_{ghosts}`$ are the same as for a $`p1`$ brane, while $`|B>_{x^p,\psi ^p}`$ describes the $`x^p`$ dependence of the marginal deformation. In particular, the energy momentum tensor for a marginal kink profile can be obtained by evaluating the matrix element of the boundary state $`|B>`$ with the closed string graviton state $`<g_{\mu \nu }|`$. Concretely we have

$$T_{\mu \nu }(x)=\frac{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_p}{2}\left(A_{\mu \nu }(x)+B(x)\eta _{\mu \nu }\right).$$
(2.3)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_p=\sqrt{2}\tau _p`$ is the tension of a non-BPS $`D`$-brane while $`A_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`B`$ parametrise the level $`(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})`$ part of the boundary state

$$|B>_{(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})}=\underset{k_p}{}((\stackrel{~}{A}_{\mu \nu }(k_p)\psi _{1/2}^\mu \psi _{1/2}^\nu +\stackrel{~}{B}(k_p)(\overline{\beta }_{\frac{1}{2}}\gamma _{\frac{1}{2}}\beta _{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{\gamma }_{\frac{1}{2}}))|\mathrm{\Omega },k>,$$
(2.4)
with

$$|\mathrm{\Omega },k>=(c_0+\overline{c}_0)c_1\overline{c}_1e^{\varphi (0)}e^{\overline{\varphi }(0)}|k>$$
(2.5)
and $`|k>`$ is the closed string Fock vacuum with momentum $`k`$. Using similar arguments as in  we then find, for a $`\mathrm{cos}(x^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ kink,

$`A_{\mu \nu }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`f(x^p)\eta _{\mu \nu },\mu ,\nu p`$
$`A_{pp}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`g(x^p),B(x)=f(x^p),`$ (2.6)
where

$`f(x^p)`$ $`=`$ $`1+2{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left(\mathrm{sin}^2(\chi \pi )\right)^n\mathrm{cos}(n\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\alpha ^{}}}}x^p)`$ (2.7)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1\mathrm{sin}^4(\chi \pi )}{1+2\mathrm{sin}^2(\chi \pi )\mathrm{cos}(\sqrt{\frac{2}{\alpha ^{}}}x^p)+\mathrm{sin}^4(\chi \pi )}},`$
and

$$g(x^p)=22\mathrm{sin}^2(\pi \chi )f(x^p).$$
(2.8)
In particular $`T_{pp}`$ is independent of $`x^p`$ as it should be. For $`\chi `$ close to $`1/2`$ the energy density is peaked about $`x^p=\sqrt{\alpha ^{}}(2n+1)\pi /\sqrt{2}`$.

We note that the boundary state and, in particular all components of the stress tensor are periodic in $`\chi `$ with period $`1`$. This periodicity can also bee seen by analysing the spectrum  or by analysing the cylinder diagram on an orbifold . The origin of this periodicity can be traced to the fact that the vertex operators $`\mathrm{exp}(ix^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}}),\mathrm{exp}(ix^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ and $`ix^p`$ form an $`so(3)`$ current alegbra. Here $`ix^p`$ generates translations along the $`x^p`$ direction. Since the exponential of these operators appears in the path integral, the resulting correlation functions gain a periodic dependence on the coefficient $`\chi `$ due to the compactness of $`so(3)`$.

Time dependent boundary perturbations can be obtained by analytic continuation of the above profile . Concretely, by performing the double Wick rotation $`x^pix^0,x^0ix^p`$ we find that $`T=\chi \mathrm{sinh}(x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ and $`T=\chi \mathrm{cosh}(x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ are, at tree level, exactly marginal, time dependent tachyon profiles. Note that in the $`\mathrm{sinh}(x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ case we must also Wick rotate $`\chi i\chi `$ to obtain a real profile. Therefore we expect that the peridocity observed for $`\chi `$ in the space-like case is now broken. Indeed for space-like marginal deformations we saw that the perodicity in $`\chi `$ came from an $`so(3)`$ current alegbra of the $`x^p`$ free Boson CFT. If we Wick rotate to a time-like free Boson this becomes an $`so(2,1)`$ current algebra, which has only one compact direction. This must correspond to the deformations generated by $`\chi \mathrm{cosh}(x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ since these arise from Wick rotating $`\chi \mathrm{cos}(x^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ which does not require that $`\chi `$ is also Wick rotated. In addition $`ix^0`$ now generates time translations which are no longer periodic.

The stress tensor for the time-like $`\chi \mathrm{cosh}(x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ profiles is again given by (2.3) with

$$A_{00}(x)=22\mathrm{sin}^2(\pi \chi )f(x^0),A_{ij}(x)=f(x^0)\delta _{ij},B(x)=f(x^0),$$
(2.9)
and

$`f(x^0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1\mathrm{sin}^4(\chi \pi )}{1+2\mathrm{sin}^2(\chi \pi )\mathrm{cosh}(\sqrt{\frac{2}{\alpha ^{}}}x^0)+\mathrm{sin}^4(\chi \pi )}}.`$ (2.10)
For time dependent marginal deformations the conserved energy $`E=T_{00}`$ is

$$E=\sqrt{2}\tau _p(1\mathrm{sin}^2(\chi \pi )),$$
(2.11)
while the pressure $`p=T_{ii}`$ vanishes as the tachyon approaches the vacuum configuration. More specifically, as $`x^0\mathrm{}`$,

$$pE\frac{1+\mathrm{sin}^2(\chi \pi )}{\mathrm{sin}^2(\chi \pi )}e^{\sqrt{\frac{2}{\alpha ^{}}}x^0}.$$
(2.12)
If we consider marginal deformations of the form $`\chi \mathrm{sinh}(x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ then we find similar expressions but with $`\mathrm{sin}^2(\chi \pi )`$ replaced by $`\mathrm{sinh}^2(\chi \pi )`$ and $`e^{\pm \sqrt{\frac{2}{\alpha ^{}}}x^0}`$ replaced by $`e^{\pm \sqrt{\frac{2}{\alpha ^{}}}x^0}`$ .

## 3 Tachyon Effective Actions

In the previous section we saw that in principle the physical observables of a marginal tachyon profile are encoded in the boundary state. An interesting question is then to what extent can these properties be reproduced by an effective field theory for the tachyon. A reliable effective action formulation would facilitate more complicated calculations, such as the dynamics in the presence of evolving closed string modes. For example in  Sen showed that for time dependent tachyon solutions in a BI-type action the pressure does indeed vanish asymptotically. However, as we remarked in the introduction, this particular form for the effective action is not derived from string theory and one might therefore question the predictions obtained from it. In view of this we consider in this section the predictions of a rather general class of effective actions.

Typically, the full tachyon effective action will be non-local and thus difficult to handle. In what follows will consider effective actions which involve only first derivatives of the tachyon field. This class of actions includes, in particular, all suggestions which have appeared in the literature so far. For a non-BPS brane it is known that the action and in particular the potential $`V`$ must be an even function of the tachyon field $`T`$. Therefore the most general form for the effective action of a real $`T`$ in $`p+1`$ dimensions that depends on at most first order derivatives and is even in $`T`$ is given by

$`S={\displaystyle d^{p+1}x}{\displaystyle d^{p+1}x\underset{\alpha ,\beta =0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_{\alpha \beta }T^{2\alpha }(_\mu T^\mu T)^\beta }.`$ (3.13)
From Noether’s theorem it folows that for any static, codimension one solution of the equations of motion of an action of the type (3.13) will have the integral of motion

$$T_{pp}=\frac{\delta }{\delta T^{}}T^{}=V_0,$$
(3.14)
where $`V_0`$ is a constant and $`T`$ depends only on $`x^p`$. In addition the energy density $`T_{00}=`$ is trivially conserved. For a time dependent but spatially homogeneous solutions one again finds two conserved quantities but now the conservation of energy leads to a non-trivial condition

$$T_{00}=\frac{\delta }{\delta \dot{T}}\dot{T}+=E_0,$$
(3.15)
where $`E_0`$ is a constant.

The simplest condition one may want to impose is that the effective action reproduces the correct perturbative tachyon mass near $`T=0`$, that is $`(T)^2+\frac{1}{2\alpha ^{}}T^2+\mathrm{}`$. However this also illustrates one problem of trunctating to first derivative actions since integration by parts allows us to write the kinetic term as $`T^2T`$ and it could therefore be modified by higher derivative terms. Indeed several proposals for the effective action do not reproduce the correct tachyon mass.

The next issue that we want to discuss is whether the marginal deformations in the last section can be solutions of a first derivative effective action. As shown in , the requirement that $`T=\chi \mathrm{sin}(x^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ solves the field equations completely determines the general action (3.13) in terms of an arbitrary potential $`V(T)=f(\frac{T^2}{2\alpha ^{}})`$, i.e.

$$=\underset{\gamma =0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{\gamma !}\frac{1}{2\gamma 1}\frac{d^\gamma f(t)}{dt^\gamma }(_\mu T^\mu T)^\gamma ,$$
(3.16)
where $`tT^2/2\alpha ^{}`$. Evaluating the resulting kink equation (3.14) one then finds

$`V_0={\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta T^{}}}T^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\gamma =0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\gamma !}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^\gamma f(t)}{dt^\gamma }}((T^{})^2)^\gamma `$ (3.17)
$`=`$ $`f\left({\displaystyle \frac{T^2}{2\alpha ^{}}}+(T^{})^2\right).`$ (3.18)
Thus, assuming that $`V`$ is nowhere constant, we see that the only regular static solutions are

$$T=\chi \mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{x^px_0}{\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}}}\right),$$
(3.19)
for arbitrary $`x_0`$ and $`\chi `$. In addition it is easy to see that, by taking the limit $`\chi 0`$, this condition also ensures that the correct perturbative mass for the tacyhon is reproduced.

Let us now look at the periodicity properties of the physical observables on marginal profiles. As discussed in section $`2`$ the stress tensor for marginal deformations is periodic in $`\chi `$. For a space-like kink $`T=\chi \mathrm{sin}(x^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$, periodicity of the conserved energy $`T_{00}`$ in $`\chi `$ implies that $``$ is periodic in $`\chi `$ for all values in $`x^p`$. This implies that $`(T,T^{})=F(\frac{T^2}{2\alpha ^{}}+T^2)`$, where $`F`$ is a periodic function. On the other hand periodicity of the conserved momentum $`T_{pp}`$ implies that

$$\frac{\delta }{\delta T^{}}T^{}=2\frac{dF(z)}{dz}T^2F(z)$$
(3.20)
is periodic in $`\chi `$. These two conditions are, however, incompatible. Similar comments apply to the case of time-dependent solutions. Thus, we conclude that while marginal deformations can be solutions of first derivative effective actions, the periodicity in $`\chi `$ of the all observables cannot be reproduced by any first derivative effective action. This problem, which was also observed in , originates in the fact that the string ground state at $`\chi =0`$ is not the same as the string ground state in the new vacuum at $`\chi =1/2`$ due to spectral flow. Therefore to see this periodicity the infinite tower of massive strings modes has to be taken into account. Generally we then expect that while effective actions capture the physics near a given string theory vacuum, global properties are typically beyond such approximations. In particular we then expect that the effective action (3.16) will only be reliable for $`\chi <<1`$.

In superstring theory all of the tachyon effective actions proposed to date take the specific form333Although we note that for the Bosonic string the action does not factorise .

$$=V(T)K(_\mu T^\mu T).$$
(3.21)
Certainly without some kind of simplifying structure even an action which has been truncated to be only first order in derivatives becomes intractable. Therefore in what follows we restrict our attention to these forms for $``$. We note here that an effective action of this form is compatible with T-duality if the transverse scalars and worldvolume vector fields are included as $`=V(T)\sqrt{det(G_{\mu \nu }+_{\mu \nu })}K((G+)^{\mu \nu }_\mu T_\nu T)`$ or in the BI form $`=V(T)\sqrt{det(G_{\mu \nu }+_{\mu \nu }+\kappa _{BI}_\mu T_\nu T)}`$ .

Sen’s conjectures state that the potential is nowhere negative, vanishes in the true open string vacuum and has a maximum value of $`\sqrt{2}\tau _p`$ at $`T=0`$. Furthermore, there should be no perturbative open string excitations about the true vacuum. Although one might think that action of the form (3.21) would ensure this condition, this is not true in general. Assuming that for small $`y`$, $`K(y)1+\kappa _1y+\mathrm{}`$ we check the perturbative excitations around $`V=0`$ by introducing a new tachyon variable.

$$d\phi =\sqrt{V(T)}dT.$$
(3.22)
The effective action now looks like

$$=V(\phi )K\left(\frac{_\mu \phi ^\mu \phi }{V}\right).$$
(3.23)
Note that this changes of variable relates the BI action  to the proposal of . Expanding (3.23) for $`(\phi )^2<<V`$ (i.e. $`(T)^2<<1`$) leads to

$$\kappa _1_\mu \phi ^\mu \phi V(\phi ).$$
(3.24)
The mass-squared of elementary excitations around the tachyon vacuum is then given by

$$M^2=\frac{2}{\kappa _1}\frac{d^2V(\phi )}{d\phi ^2}|_{V=0}=\frac{2}{\kappa _1}\frac{1}{\sqrt{V}}\frac{d^2\sqrt{V}}{dT^2}|_{V=0}.$$
(3.25)
The absence of perturbative excitations implies that this mass is infinite. It is not hard to convince oneself that $`M`$ will be infinite provided that $`V`$ vanishes faster than $`Ve^{aT}`$ if the minimum is at infinite $`T`$, or faster than $`V(TT_0)^2`$ if the minimum is at a finite value of $`T`$. Note that $`Ve^{aT}`$ appears in the effective action of a D-brane in Bosonic string theory. However the effective actions of Bosonic BSFT  do not have the form (3.21) and hence (3.25) does not apply. Indeed one can check that the resulting mass in these cases is infinite. Nevertheless, even if the form (3.21) is assumed, plane-wave excitations for $`\phi `$ are absent due to non-linearities in the kinetic term . It has also been pointed out that the Hamiltonian formalism is in fact better suited for analysing the dynamics in the true vacuum . However this cannot be done here without choosing a specific form for $`K`$.

Another requirement that the effective action should satisfy is that it should reproduce the correct tension for kink solutions which are identified with a BPS D$`(p1)`$-brane. More generally if $`T=uf(x^p)`$ is an off-shell profile then $`u\mathrm{}`$ in the infra-red limit. The worldsheet theory is expected to run to that of $`N`$ BPS D$`(p1)`$-branes and anti-D$`(p1)`$-branes. Here $`N`$ is the number of times $`T`$ interpolates between the vacua as $`u\mathrm{}`$. Since this should be true for all profiles this suggest that at large $`u`$, i.e. at large $`_pT`$, the action becomes topological. This will be the case if $`K\kappa _{\mathrm{}}\sqrt{(T)^2}`$ as $`(T)^2+\mathrm{}`$. Recall that we normalise $`K(0)=1`$ and $`V(0)=\sqrt{2}\tau _p`$ so that $`\kappa _{\mathrm{}}`$ is not arbitrary. In this case the energy for the profile $`T=uf(x^p)`$ is, in the limit $`u\mathrm{}`$,

$$E=\kappa _{\mathrm{}}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x^pV(uf(x^p))u|f^{}(x^p)|=N\kappa _{\mathrm{}}𝑑TV(T).$$
(3.26)
It is not hard to see that this property is indeed shared by all non-linear, first derivative superstring tachyon actions proposed thus far . It was also pointed out in  that a square-root form for time independent configurations is needed to ensure that the fluctuations about a kink background have finite masses. A square-root form also ensures that the effective action for the relative centre of mass coordinates of the D$`(p1)`$-branes has a BI form . In addition, to agree with the interpretation as $`N`$ seperate BPS D$`(p1)`$-branes and anti-D$`(p1)`$-branes this energy should be $`E=2\pi \sqrt{\alpha ^{}}N`$. Hence we find a constraint on the area of the potential between two minima and the large $`(T)^2`$ behaviour of $`K`$. This condition is indeed satisfied by the proposals of .

Lastly we consider the asymptotic form of the pressure for homogenous, time-dependent tachyon approaching the minimum of the potential. We then have for the conserved energy

$$E=T_{00}=2V(T)K^{}\dot{T}^2+V(T)K((T)^2),$$
(3.27)
while the pressure is given by

$$p=T_{ii}=V(T)K((T)^2).$$
(3.28)
Because $`V(T)`$ vanishes at its minimum, energy conservation implies that $`\dot{T}^2`$ necessarily approaches a singular point of $`K^{}`$ or $`K`$ as $`T`$ condenses to $`V=0`$. Now if this singularity is at some finite value of $`\dot{T}`$ then, since $`K^{}`$ will diverge faster than $`K`$, the first term in (3.27) will dominate and the second term will vanish. Therefore $`p`$ must also approach zero at this point. If the singular point of $`K`$ or $`K^{}`$ is at infinity then $`p`$ vanishes unless $`yK^{}(y)`$ and $`K(y)`$ have the same asymptotic behaviour; that is if $`K(y)y^n`$ as $`y=\dot{T}^2\mathrm{}`$. In this latter case, as $`V0`$, $`pE/(2n+1)`$ is non-vanishing. Thus, unless $`K(y)`$ has a power law behaviour for rapidly varying time dependent tachyons, the pressure vanishes as the tachyon condenses. Although whether or not this happens exponentially quickly or not will depend on the choice of $`K`$.

## 4 Tachyon Dynamics

In the previous section we outlined various properties that the effective action for the tachyonic mode of a non-BPS D-brane is expected to have. In particular if we require that the marginal deformations (2.1) are solutions to the equations of motion then the effective action is uniquely determined by a choice of potential $`V(T)`$. As proposed in , to fix this ambiguity we take the exact potential found in boundary string field theory

$$V(T)=\sqrt{2}\tau _pe^{\frac{T^2}{2\alpha ^{}}},$$
(4.29)
where $`\tau _p`$ is the tension of a BPS $`Dp`$-brane. The resulting Lagrangian that we construct then takes the form

$``$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2}\tau _pe^{\frac{T^2}{2\alpha ^{}}}\left[e^{_\mu T^\mu T}+\sqrt{\pi _\mu T^\mu T}\mathrm{erf}\left(\sqrt{_\mu T^\mu T}\right)\right].`$ (4.30)
One can then check that this action satisfies all the properties discussed in the previous section (with the exception of periodicity which we argued could not be captured by any first derivative effective action).

For static configurations this action is in remarkable agreement with the BSFT action

$$=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\tau _pe^{T^2/2\alpha ^{}}4^{(T)^2}(T)^2\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }((T)^2)^2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2(T)^2)}.$$
(4.31)
This is somewhat surprising since the BSFT action is derived by simply assuming a linear tachyon profile. This good agreement can be viewed as a test of the BSFT action for non-trivial space-like kinks, since these are solutions to the equations of motion of (4.30). However, for time-like solutions the two actions differ considerably. In particular, while (4.30) is smooth for all $`(T)^2`$ the BSFT action has poles at negative integer values of $`(T)^2`$. However there is no reason to believe that these poles are physically important since the BSFT action is derived for linear profiles but these are not solutions to the equations of motion. Furthermore, the fact that the action (4.30) and the BSFT action differ substantially for time dependent solutions suggests that, in contrast to space-like marginal profiles, the BSFT effective action cannot be trusted. The action (4.30) also agrees well with the BI form

$$=\sqrt{2}\tau _pe^{T^2/2\alpha ^{}}\sqrt{1+\kappa _{BI}(T)^2},$$
(4.32)
for $`(T)^2>0`$ if we take $`\kappa _{BI}=\pi `$. However again they differ substantially for time dependent profiles where $`(T)^2<0`$ and therefore similar comments apply. In particular the BI form imposes a maximum value of $`|\dot{T}|`$. These three forms for the function $`K`$ are plotted in figure $`1`$.

From the construction of the effective action in the last section it is clear that

$$T(x^0)=A\mathrm{sinh}(\frac{x^0}{\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}}})+B\mathrm{cosh}(\frac{x^0}{\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}}})$$
(4.33)
is an exact solution of the equation of motion. In fact we can say more by analysing the energy momentum tensor for the action (4.30)

$$T_{\mu \nu }=\sqrt{2}\tau _pe^{\frac{T^2}{2\alpha ^{}}}\left[\frac{\sqrt{\pi }}{\sqrt{(T)^2}}_\mu T_\nu T\mathrm{erf}\left(\sqrt{(T)^2}\right)\eta _{\mu \nu }\left(e^{(T)^2}+\sqrt{\pi (T)^2}\mathrm{erf}\left(\sqrt{(T)^2}\right)\right)\right].$$
(4.34)
Let us now consider a homogenous, but otherwise arbitrary, time dependent tachyon configuration. Then the energy takes the simple form

$$E=T_{00}=\sqrt{2}\tau _pe^{\frac{T^2}{2\alpha ^{}}+\dot{T}^2}.$$
(4.35)
Conservation of energy then implies that (4.33) is the only regular solution of the equation of motion. Of course, the same result can be obtained by analytic continuation from (3.17). In particular, as the tachyon rolls to the minimum $`\dot{T}`$ diverges in agreement with the conformal field theory approach. This is in contrast with the BI-type and BSFT actions where $`\dot{T}`$ approaches a constant .

Let us now consider $`T_{ij}`$. From (4.34) we have

$$T_{ij}=\sqrt{2}\delta _{ij}\tau _pe^{\frac{T^2}{2\alpha ^{}}}\left(e^{\dot{T}^2}+i\sqrt{\pi \dot{T}^2}\mathrm{erf}\left(i\sqrt{\dot{T}^2}\right)\right).$$
(4.36)
Now, for large $`y`$,

$$\sqrt{\pi }\mathrm{erf}(iy)ie^{y^2}\left(\frac{1}{y}+\frac{1}{2y^3}+O\left(\frac{1}{y^5}\right)\right),$$
(4.37)
so that

$$T_{ij}\frac{T_{00}}{2\dot{T}^2}\delta _{ij}\text{ for}\dot{T}\mathrm{}.$$
(4.38)
Thus, the action (4.30) predicts that at large times the tachyon condensation produces a gas with non vanishing energy and vanishing pressure. In particular for large $`x^0`$, where $`T\chi e^{x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}}}/2`$,

$$p\frac{2E}{\chi ^2}e^{\sqrt{\frac{2}{\alpha ^{}}}x^0}.$$
(4.39)
This exponential fall-off agrees exactly with the string theory result from the boundary state . Note that this prediction is different from that obtained using the BSFT effective action , where the square of $`x^0`$ appears in the exponential. One can also see that the BI-form $`K=\sqrt{1+\kappa _{BI}(T)^2}`$ with the potential (4.29) predicts that $`(x^0)^2`$ appears in the exponential. In addition for $`\chi <<1`$ we find the same dependence of $`p`$ and $`E`$ on $`\chi `$ as predicted from the boundary state (2.12). On the other hand, in the boundary state approach, the pressure is always negative, whereas here we find that the pressure approaches zero from above (see figure $`2`$). The same phenomenon was also observed in  for the BSFT effective action. Indeed it is clear from (2.12) that the sign of the pressure as $`V0`$ is the opposite of the sign of $`K(\dot{T}^2)`$, which is negative in BSFT and (4.30), but positive for a BI-type action. There one of the speculations was that this difference could be due to the fact that the solution of the BSFT differ from the exact marginal deformations. This possibility can be excluded here as the solutions to our action are precisely the marginal deformations. Although higher derivative terms could lead to corrections in our action as well.

Finally we make some comments on the interpretation of these solutions. For the static solutions $`T=\chi \mathrm{cos}(x^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ the energy density is not spatially homogeneous but is peaked about $`x^p=\sqrt{\alpha ^{}/2}\pi (2n+1)`$ for integer $`n`$, becoming more sharply peaked as $`\chi \mathrm{}`$. However, by construction the action (3.16) is independent of $`\chi `$ and therefore the total energy, evaluated over a single period $`2\pi \sqrt{2\alpha ^{}}`$, is $`4\pi \sqrt{\alpha ^{}}\tau _p`$ for all $`\chi `$. For $`\chi =1/2`$ this represents a configuration of BPS D$`(p1)`$-branes at each odd $`n`$ and anti-D$`(p1)`$ branes at each even $`n`$. The interpretation of other values of $`\chi `$ is less clear, however these are no longer marginal deformations once string loop corrections are considered . Of course, the solutions involving the marginal deformation $`T=\chi \mathrm{sin}(x^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ can be obtained from the previous ones by translation along $`x^p`$.

For time dependent solutions the energy density, $`ϵ`$, is spatially homogeneous. In particular for $`T=\chi \mathrm{cosh}(x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ we have $`ϵ=\sqrt{2}\tau _pe^{\chi ^2/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}}}`$, which is less than the false vacuum energy density, while for $`T=\chi \mathrm{sinh}(x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ the energy density $`ϵ=\sqrt{2}\tau _pe^{\chi ^2/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}}}`$ is greater than the false vacuum energy density. These solutions are no longer related by temporal or spatial translation. Indeed while both solutions start and end in the vacuum as $`t\pm \mathrm{}`$ the $`\mathrm{cosh}(x^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ solutions never pass over the energy barrier at $`T=0`$ whereas the $`\mathrm{sinh}(x^p/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ solutions travel from one vacuum to the other. As we discussed in section 2, in the full string theory there is a periodic dependence on $`\chi `$ for the $`\chi \mathrm{cosh}(x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ solutions but not for the $`\chi \mathrm{sinh}(x^0/\sqrt{2\alpha ^{}})`$ solutions.

## 5 Coupling to Gravity

The relevance of scalar field action with higher than quadratic derivative terms for cosmology has been recognised a while ago , where it was argued that scalar field actions of the form $`S=V(T)K((T)^2)`$ can produce inflationary scenarios (k-inflation) as well as late stage cosmological acceleration (k-essence). It is therefore interesting to analyse our tachyon action from this point of view. Related analysis were carried out in  for the BI-type and BSFT effective actions. We consider a general first derivative effective action of the form (3.21) minimally coupled to gravity

$$=\sqrt{g}\left(\frac{1}{2\kappa ^2}RV(T)K(_\mu T^\mu T)\right).$$
(5.40)
In $`d=p+1`$ dimensions and with $`T`$ assumed to be spatially homogeneous and time dependent the metric then takes the usual FRW form

$$ds^2=dt^2+a(t)^2ds_{d1}^2,$$
(5.41)
where $`ds_{d1}^2`$ is a spatial manifold with constant curvature $`k`$. For simplicity we consider the spatially flat case $`k=0`$. A convenient set of evolution equations is then simply (recall that one of Einstein’s equations is not independent)

$$H^2=\frac{\kappa ^2}{(d1)(d2)}ϵ\text{and}\dot{ϵ}=(d1)H\left(ϵ+p\right),$$
(5.42)
where $`H\frac{\dot{a}}{a}`$ is the Hubble constant and $`ϵ`$ and $`p`$ are the energy density and pressure, respectively. If we now substitute our tachyon action these general formulae become

$`H^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\kappa ^2}{(d1)(d2)}}V(\sqrt{T^22\alpha ^{}\dot{T}^2}),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(V(\sqrt{T^22\alpha ^{}\dot{T}^2})\right)`$ $`=`$ $`(d1)H\left(V(T)K(\dot{T}^2)+V(\sqrt{T^22\alpha ^{}\dot{T}^2})\right).`$
In particular at late times $`\dot{T}>>1`$ and we can approximate $`VKV(\sqrt{T^22\alpha ^{}\dot{T}^2})/2\dot{T}^2`$ so that $`VK<<V(\sqrt{T^22\alpha ^{}\dot{T}^2})`$. Hence we see that $`V(\sqrt{T^22\alpha ^{}\dot{T}^2})=C^2a^{1d}`$ for a constant $`C`$ and therefore

$$a(t)t^{\frac{2}{d1}}.$$
(5.44)
Thus the outcome of this analysis is identical with that obtained in  for the BI action and describes matter dominated expansion.

For intermediate times it is convenient to consider the master equation

$$\dot{ϵ}=\kappa \sqrt{\frac{d1}{d2}}\sqrt{ϵ}\left(ϵ+p\right).$$
(5.45)
From figure $`2`$ we then see that the evolution starts off with an inflationary phase $`p=ϵ`$ and then transforming smoothly into a matter dominated expansion (5.44) for late times. This qualitative behaviour is the same as found in  for the BSFT action.

## 6 Conclusion

In this paper we have discussed the general properties of first derivative tachyon effective actions. For example we showed that the asymptotic vanishing of the pressure for time-dependent tachyon profiles is relatively generic, although the details vary. On the other hand we argued that the periodicity of the stress tensor under marginal deformations cannot be reproduced by any first derivative effective action. We also studied in detail the first derivative effective action that we proposed in  and showed that it reproduces many of the expected features of tachyon dynamics, including several correct quantitative features. However, it seems appropriate to mention the more pessimistic note that one could interpret the large discrepancies among the various proposed effective actions for time dependent tachyons, compared with their striking similarity for static profiles, as an indication that the effective action approach will not be as successful in the time dependent case. Indeed it has recently been observed from the boundary state that time dependent tachyons also couple to massive closed string fields with an exponentially increasing strength , so that the truncation to low level string modes is potentially artificial.

## Acknowledgements

I.S. would like to acknowledge helpful discussions with A. Barvinski and A. Sen. N.D.L. would like to thank H. Liu for discussions and Trinity College Dublin for its hospitality.


text:
# Wigner’s Formulation of Noncommutative Quantum Mechanics

## I. Introduction

The idea of noncommutative structure at small length scales is not new. In 1947, Snyder first considered ”quantized spacetimes.” The idea was that noncommutative spacetimes could introduce an effective cutoff in field theory, in analogy to a lattice. Recently there has been a revival of this idea and many papers have been published . Especially interesting is a model of open strings propagating in a constant B field background. Previous studies show that this model is related to noncommutativity of D-branes , and in the zero slope limit to noncommutative Yang-Mills theory . An intriguing mixing of UV and IR theories has also been found in the perturbative dynamics of noncommutative field theories .
In order to describe field theories defined on noncommutative spacetimes, we are better to follow Wigner’s formulation  in quantum mechanics. Consider a scalar field $`\varphi (x)`$, which is expressed in Fourier integral

$$\varphi (x)=𝑑pD(p)\mathrm{exp}(ipx).$$
(1.1)
We now define a corresponding new function

$$\widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{x})=𝑑pD(p)\mathrm{exp}(ip\widehat{x}),$$
(1.2)
where $`\widehat{x}^\mu `$’s obey noncommutative commutation relations

$$[\widehat{x}^\mu ,\widehat{x}^\nu ]=i\theta ^{\mu \nu }.(\mu ,\nu =1,\mathrm{},n).$$
(1.3)
Here $`\theta ^{\mu \nu }`$ is a noncommutative real antisymmetric parameter. The Wigner representation of $`\widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{x})`$ is defined by

$$\varphi __W(x)=\frac{d^np}{(2\pi )^{n/2}}\text{Tr}[\widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{x})\mathrm{exp}(ip(\widehat{x}x))],$$
(1.4)
where Tr is defined properly in the text, and we find

$$\varphi __W(x)=\varphi (x).$$
(1.5)
The correspondence $`\varphi __W(x)\widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{x})`$ is called Weyl-Wigner-Moyal(WWM) correspondence. A product of two fields $`(\varphi \psi )__W`$ is then given by the Moyal star product

$$(\varphi \psi )__W=\varphi (x)\psi (x)=\varphi (x)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{i}{2}\theta ^{\mu \nu }\underset{\mu }{\overset{}{}}\underset{\nu }{\overset{}{\stackrel{}{}}}\right)\psi (x^{})|_{x=x^{}}.$$
(1.6)
Noncommutative field theories are, therefore, constructed in terms of the Moyal star product based on WWM correspondence.
Contrary to field theories, however, Wigner’s formulation of noncommutative quantum mechanics seems to have so far been not considered enough. Wigner’s theory is another approach to quantum mechanics, in which the density matrix plays an important role. Here, by noncommutativity we mean noncommutativity among coordinates or conjugate momenta or both. This appears sometimes in constrained systems. One of the most simple examples is the system where a charged particle moves in a so strong constant magnetic field that the kinetic energy is neglected . Such a constrained system is familiar in conventional quantum mechanics, but not in Wigner’s formulation . Hence, in the following we would like to consider Wigner’s formulation of noncommutative quantum mechanics. First, in Sec.2 we give a new derivation of path integral formula based on Wigner’s representation. In Sec.3 several noncommutative quantum theories are considered, including the Moyal star product based on the Dirac bracket. The final section is devoted to concluding remarks.

## II. Path integral in Wigner’s formulation

We consider a transition amplitude

$$q_i,t_i|q_{i1},t_{i1}=q_i|\widehat{U}(t_i,t_{i1})|q_{i1}$$
(2.1)
with

$$\widehat{U}(t_i,t_{i1})=\mathrm{exp}\{i\widehat{H}(t_it_{i1})\},$$
(2.2)
where $`t_it_{i1}=ϵ`$ is an infinitesimal time-interval and $`\widehat{H}=\widehat{H}(\widehat{x},\widehat{p})`$ is a Hamiltonian operator, which is hermitian but not always written in Weyl-ordered forms.111For example, the Weyl-ordered form of $`p^2q^2`$ is given by $`(p^2q^2+pq^2p+qp^2q+q^2p^2)/4`$. The form of $`(p^2q^2+q^2p^2)/2`$ is hermitian but not of the Weyl-ordered form. Here we have a commutation relation $`[\widehat{x},\widehat{p}]=i`$ between one-dimensional coordinate $`\widehat{x}`$ and its canonical momentum $`\widehat{p}`$. In the following, quantities with the hat stand for operators, while those without the hat are c-numbers.
Our new method is based on Wigner’s representation of Eq.(2.2), which is defined as

$$U__W(t_i,t_{i1})=\frac{1}{2\pi }𝑑\mathrm{}_i𝑑\xi _i\mathrm{exp}\{i(\xi _ix_i+\mathrm{}_ip_i)\}\text{Tr}[\widehat{U}(t_i,t_{i1})\mathrm{exp}i(\xi _i\widehat{x}+\mathrm{}_i\widehat{p})].$$
(2.3)
By using a formula

$$\mathrm{exp}i(\xi _i\widehat{x}+\mathrm{}_i\widehat{p})=\mathrm{exp}(i\frac{\mathrm{}_i\widehat{p}}{2})\mathrm{exp}(i\xi _i\widehat{x})\mathrm{exp}(i\frac{\mathrm{}_i\widehat{p}}{2}),$$
(2.4)
the right-hand side of Eq.(2.3) is reduced to

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{}_i𝑑\xi _ie^{i(\xi _ix_i+\mathrm{}_ip_i)}𝑑X𝑑X_1X|\widehat{U}|X_1X_1|e^{i\frac{\mathrm{}_i\widehat{p}}{2}}e^{i\xi _i\widehat{x}}e^{i\frac{\mathrm{}_i\widehat{p}}{2}}|X}`$
$`={\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{}_ie^{i\mathrm{}_ip_i}x_i+\frac{\mathrm{}_i}{2}|\widehat{U}|x_i\frac{\mathrm{}_i}{2}},`$ (2.5)
where we use the relation $`\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{\Delta }_i\widehat{p})|X=|X\mathrm{\Delta }_1/2`$. If we set

$$x_i+\frac{\mathrm{}_i}{2}=q_i,x_i\frac{\mathrm{}_i}{2}=q_{i1}$$
(2.6)
or

$$x_i=\frac{q_i+q_{i1}}{2},\mathrm{}_i=q_iq_{i1}$$
(2.7)
and substitute Eq.(2.2) into the last equation of (II.), we have

$$U__W(t_i,t_{i1})=𝑑\mathrm{}_i\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{}_ip_i)q_i,t_i|q_{i1},t_{i1}.$$
(2.8)
On the other hand, one may substitute $`\widehat{U}(t_i,t_{i1})1iϵ\widehat{H}(\widehat{x},\widehat{p})`$, ($`ϵ=t_it_{i1}`$) into Eq.(2.3), i.e.,

$$U__W(t_i,t_{i1})\frac{1}{2\pi }𝑑\mathrm{}_i𝑑\xi _i\mathrm{exp}\{i(\xi _ix_i+\mathrm{}_ip_i)\}\text{Tr}[\{1iϵ\widehat{H}(\widehat{x},\widehat{p})\}\mathrm{exp}i(\xi _i\widehat{x}+\mathrm{}_i\widehat{p})].$$
(2.9)
By using a formula

$$\text{Tr}[\mathrm{exp}i(\xi _i\widehat{x}+\mathrm{}_i\widehat{p})]=2\pi \delta (\xi _i)\delta (\mathrm{}_i),$$
(2.10)
Eq.(2.9) is reduced to

$`U__W(t_i,t_{i1})`$ $``$ $`1iϵH__W(x_i,p_i)`$ (2.11)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}(iϵH__W(x_i,p_i)),`$
where $`H__W(x_i,p_i)`$ is the Wigner representation of $`\widehat{H}(\widehat{x},\widehat{p})`$ defined by

$`H__W(x_i,p_i)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{}_i𝑑\xi _i\mathrm{exp}\{i(\xi _ix_i+\mathrm{}_ip_i)\}\text{Tr}[\widehat{H}\mathrm{exp}i(\xi _i\widehat{x}+\mathrm{}_i\widehat{p})]}`$ (2.12)
$`=`$ $`H__W({\displaystyle \frac{q_i+q_{i1}}{2}},p_i).`$
Here we have substituted the first equation in (2.7), i.e., $`x_i`$ is the middle point of $`q_i`$ and $`q_{i1}`$. From the inverse Fourier transform of Eq.(2.8) with (2.11) we get

$$q_i,t_i|q_{i1},t_{i1}=\frac{1}{2\pi }𝑑p_i\mathrm{exp}i\{\mathrm{}_ip_iϵH__W(\frac{q_i+q_{i+1}}{2},p_i)\}.$$
(2.13)
This formula is familiar in the conventional path integral formulation, if $`\mathrm{}_i=q_iq_{i1}`$, $`ϵ=t_it_{i1}`$ are substituted into Eq.(2.13).
The transition amplitude between finite time-intervals $`t^{}`$ and $`t`$ is then given by

$`q^{},t^{}|q,t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle q^{},t^{}|q_n,t_n𝑑q_nq_n,t_n|q_{n1},t_{n1}𝑑q_{n1}\mathrm{}𝑑q_1q_1,t_1|q,t}`$ (2.14)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}dq_i(t_i)\underset{j=1}{\overset{n+1}{}}\frac{dp_i}{2\pi }\mathrm{exp}\underset{l=1}{\overset{n+1}{}}i[(q_lq_{l1})p_l(t_lt_{l1})H__W(\frac{q_l+q_{l1}}{2},p_l)]}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle [\frac{dqdp}{2\pi }]\mathrm{exp}i_t^t^{}𝑑\tau [\dot{q}pH__W(q,p)]}.`$
This coincides with the conventional path integral formula. However, we should note that the Wigner Hamiltonian $`H__W(q,p)`$ does not always coincide with the classical Hamiltonian $`H_{cl}(q,p)`$ which is simply replaced $`\widehat{x}`$, $`\widehat{p}`$ with c-numbers $`q`$, $`p`$ in $`\widehat{H}(\widehat{q},\widehat{p})`$. Of course, $`H__W(q,p)`$ coincides with $`H_{cl}(q,p)`$ when $`\widehat{H}`$ is written in Weyl-ordered.
Our derivation is based on Wigner’s representation of the time developing operator (2.2). It is nothing but the Fourier component of transition amplitude (2.1), as is seen from Eq.(2.8). Contrary to ours, the conventional derivation is based on the direct calculation of the transition amplitude (2.1) itself. Since both functions are related with each other through the Fourier integral, both derivations are essentially the same.

## III. Noncommutative quantum mechanics

### III.1 Simple examples with constraints

The Wigner formulation is considered in noncommutative quantum mechanics. Let us first consider a simple example: A particle moves on a two-dimensional plane. Its coordinates $`\widehat{x}_1`$, $`\widehat{x}_2`$ and their conjugate momenta $`\widehat{p}_1`$, $`\widehat{p}_2`$ obey noncommutative commutation relations

$`[\widehat{x}_i,\widehat{x}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`iϵ_{ij},`$
$`[\widehat{x}_i,\widehat{p}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`i\delta _{ij},(i,j=1,2)`$
$`[\widehat{p}_i,\widehat{p}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`iϵ_{ij}.`$ (3.1)
An actual example that leads to such relations is given in Ref.. The other cases will be considered later. Here we have neglected a discussion of the intermediary procedure of Dirac quantization for constrained systems, since it is irrelevant to our present purpose.
Now, whenever we have the commutation relations (III.1), we always obtain constraints

$$\omega _i=\widehat{p}_iϵ_{ij}\widehat{x}_j=0,(i,j=1,2).$$
(3.2)
because $`\omega _i`$’s are commutable with all of $`\widehat{x}_i`$ and $`\widehat{p}_i`$, hence such quantities are nothing but c-number constants, which are set to be zeros. Let us then eliminate $`\widehat{p}_i`$ from Eqs.(III.1) and (3.2). We are left with a single commutation relation

$$[\widehat{x}_1,\widehat{x}_2]=i.$$
(3.3)
The Hamiltonian operator $`H(\widehat{x}_1,\widehat{x}_2)`$ is now a function of $`\widehat{x}_1`$ and $`\widehat{x}_2`$, and $`\widehat{x}_2`$ plays a role of $`\widehat{p}_1`$. The conventional Wigner formulation is, therefore, valid for noncommutative variables $`\widehat{x}_1`$ and $`\widehat{x}_2`$. The path integral formula (2.14) is also true, if $`q`$ and $`p`$ are replaced with $`x_1`$ and $`x_2`$, respectively. The Wigner function of density matrix $`\widehat{\rho }`$ is defined by

$$\rho __W(\stackrel{}{x})=\frac{1}{2\pi }\text{Tr}[\widehat{\rho }\widehat{F}(\stackrel{}{x})],$$
(3.4)
where $`\stackrel{}{x}=(x_1,x_2)`$ , and

$$\widehat{F}(\stackrel{}{x})=\frac{d^2\xi }{2\pi }\mathrm{exp}\{i\stackrel{}{\xi }(\widehat{\stackrel{}{x}}\stackrel{}{x})\}.$$
(3.5)
The trace of \[ \] can be calculated, for example, by using eigenstates $`|x_1`$ of $`\widehat{x_1}`$ , as $`𝑑x_1^{}x_1^{}|[]|x_1^{}`$. From this definition Eq.(3.4) is reduced to

$$\rho __W(\stackrel{}{x})=\frac{d\xi _2}{2\pi }x_1+\frac{\xi _2}{2}|\widehat{\rho }|x_1\frac{\xi _2}{2}\mathrm{exp}(i\xi _2x_2).$$
(3.6)
The Wigner representation of dynamical variable $`\widehat{A}`$ is also defined by

$$A__W(\stackrel{}{x})=\text{Tr}[\widehat{A}\widehat{F}(\stackrel{}{x})].$$
(3.7)
The expectation value of $`\widehat{A}`$ is represented as

$$\widehat{A}=\text{Tr}[\widehat{\rho }\widehat{A}]=d^2x\rho _W(\stackrel{}{x})A_W(\stackrel{}{x}).$$
(3.8)
A product of dynamical variables $`(AB)__W`$ is seen to be given by the Moyal star product:

$`(AB)__W`$ $`=`$ $`A__W(\stackrel{}{x})B__W(\stackrel{}{x})`$ (3.9)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}ϵ_{ij}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\xi _i}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\zeta _j}}\right)A__W(\stackrel{}{x}+\stackrel{}{\xi })B__W(\stackrel{}{x}+\stackrel{}{\zeta })|_{\stackrel{}{\xi }=\stackrel{}{\zeta }=0}.`$
This is a typical example of Wigner’s formulation of noncommutative quantum mechanics. We have used the constraints to eliminate $`\widehat{p}`$’s, and then reduced the remaining coordinates $`\widehat{x}`$’s to the canonical form. Wigner’s formulation together with the path integral formula is valid for these coordinates.

### III.2 Extension to higher dimensions

Let us extend the above $`2`$-dimensional space to the $`2N`$-dimensional space. Noncommutative commutation relations are given as

$`[\widehat{x}_i,\widehat{x}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`i\theta _{ij},`$
$`[\widehat{x}_i,\widehat{p}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`ig_{ij},(i,j=1,\mathrm{},2N)`$
$`[\widehat{p}_i,\widehat{p}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`i(g\theta ^1g)_{ij},`$ (3.10)
where $`\theta _{ij}`$ ($`g_{ij}`$)is an antisymmetric (symmetric) regular matrix with real c-numbers. Such an example is given in Ref.. From (III.2) we find constraints

$$\omega _i=\widehat{p}_i+(g\theta ^1)_{il}\widehat{x}_l=0,(i,l=1,\mathrm{},2N).$$
(3.11)
Eliminating $`\widehat{p}_i`$ $`(i=1,\mathrm{},2N)`$ from Eqs.(III.2) and (3.11), we are left with

$$[\widehat{x}_i,\widehat{x}_j]=i\theta _{ij},(i,j=1,\mathrm{},2N)$$
(3.12)
Let us take the canonical form for $`\theta _{ij}`$ , i.e.,

$$\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}L_1& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& 0\\ 0& L_3& 0& \mathrm{}& 0\\ 0& 0& L_5& & 0\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& L_{2N1}\end{array}\right),L_{2n1}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \stackrel{~}{\theta }_{2n1,2n}\\ \stackrel{~}{\theta }_{2n1,2n}& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(3.13)
so that only non-zero components of Eq.(3.12) are expressed as

$$[\widehat{z}_{2n1},\widehat{z}_{2n}]=i\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{2n1,2n},(n=1,\mathrm{},N)$$
(3.14)
where $`\widehat{z}^{}`$s are the correspondent canonical variables. Hereafter we normalize $`\widehat{z}^{}`$s in such a way that $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{2n1,2n}=\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{2n,2n1}=1`$ holds. This means that dynamical variables with odd (even) numbers are commutable with each other, whereas $`\widehat{z}_{2n}`$ plays a role of the conjugate momentum of $`\widehat{z}_{2n1}`$. It may be convenient to introduce new notations such as

$$\widehat{z}_{2n1}\widehat{Q}_n,\widehat{z}_{2n}\widehat{P}_n,(n=1,\mathrm{},N).$$
(3.15)
They obey canonical commutation relations

$$[\widehat{Q}_m,\widehat{P}_n]=i\delta _{mn},[\widehat{Q}_m,\widehat{Q}_n]=[\widehat{P}_m,\widehat{P}_n]=0,(m,n=1,\mathrm{}N).$$
(3.16)
The conventional Wigner formulation is, therefore, valid in the $`2N`$-dimensional phase space $`(\stackrel{}{Q},\stackrel{}{P})`$. The path integral formula (2.14) also can be extended to the same phase space by replacing $`q`$ and $`p`$ with $`\stackrel{}{Q}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{P}`$, respectively.
The odd dimensional case can be always reduced to the even dimensional case, because the odd dimensional matrix $`\theta _{ij}`$ is necessary to have at least one zero eigenvalue.

### III.3 Cases without constraints

Let us consider noncommutative commutation relations of the type

$`[\widehat{x}_i,\widehat{x}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`i\theta _{ij},`$
$`[\widehat{x}_i,\widehat{p}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`ig_{ij},(i,j=1,\mathrm{},N)`$
$`[\widehat{p}_i,\widehat{p}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (3.17)
where $`\theta _{ij}`$ is the same defined in Eq.(III.2), while $`g_{ij}`$ is a regular constant real matrix which is not always symmetric. Here, there are no constraints among variables. However, Eq.(III.3) can be always rewritten in following forms. Define $`\widehat{q}_i`$ by

$$\widehat{q}_i=\widehat{x}_i+\frac{1}{2}(\theta g^1)_{ij}\widehat{p}_j,$$
(3.18)
so that we have

$`[\widehat{q}_i,\widehat{q}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`[\widehat{q}_i,\widehat{p}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`ig_{ij},(i,j=1,\mathrm{},N)`$
$`[\widehat{p}_i,\widehat{p}_j]`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (3.19)
After $`g_{ij}`$ is transformed into a diagonal form and then the corresponding variables are rescaled, Eq.(III.3) become conventional canonical forms like Eq.(3.16). Hence, in this case we find nothing new.

### III.4 Constraints unsolved

In previous subsections we obtain Wigner’s formulation for constrained systems, by solving constraints to eliminate redundant canonical variables. In this subsection we consider the same problem without eliminating redundant variables.
Let us denote canonical variables on the $`2N`$ dimensional phase space $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as $`(q_i,p_i)`$, ($`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$). We are enough to consider only the second class constraints

$$\omega _\alpha (q,p)0,\alpha =1,\mathrm{},2M(<2N).$$
(3.20)
By definition of the second class the Poisson bracket for them is a regular matrix

$$C_{\alpha ,\beta }\{\omega _\alpha ,\omega _\beta \}_P,detC_{\alpha ,\beta }0.$$
(3.21)
If we can solve the constraints, we obtain the ($`2N2M`$) dimensional reduced phase space $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, which is parametrized by canonical variables $`(q_I^{},p_I^{})`$, ($`I=1,\mathrm{},NM`$). The original variables $`(q_i,p_i)`$, ($`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$) are equivalent to variables $`(q_I^{},p_I^{},\omega _\alpha )`$, ($`I=1,\mathrm{},NM;\alpha =1,\mathrm{},2M`$).
We assume the existence of quantum system on the reduced phase space $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, and denote its Hilbert space as $`H^{}`$ and any operator as $`\widehat{A}^{}`$. The Wigner representation of $`\widehat{A}^{}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is given by

$$A__W^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})=\text{Tr}^{}[A^{}F^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})],$$
(3.22)
where

$$\widehat{F}^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})=\frac{d\stackrel{}{\xi }^{}d\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}^{}}{(2\pi )^{NM}}\mathrm{exp}\{i[\stackrel{}{\xi }^{}(\stackrel{}{\widehat{q}}^{}\stackrel{}{q}^{})+\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}^{}(\stackrel{}{\widehat{p}}^{}\stackrel{}{p}^{})]\}.$$
(3.23)
The expectation value of $`\widehat{A}^{}`$ is defined as

$$\widehat{A}^{}=\text{Tr}^{}[\widehat{A}^{}\widehat{\rho }^{}],$$
(3.24)
where $`\widehat{\rho }^{}`$ is a density operator and its Wigner’s function is

$$\rho __W^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})=(2\pi )^{MN}\text{Tr}^{}[\widehat{\rho }^{}\widehat{F}^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})].$$
(3.25)
From Eqs.(3.22)-(3.25) we have

$$\widehat{A}^{}=𝑑\stackrel{}{q}^{}𝑑\stackrel{}{p}^{}A__W^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})\rho __W^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})$$
(3.26)
Our task is to rewrite the expectation value (3.26) in terms of the original phase space variables $`(q_i,p_i)`$, ($`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$). This is easily obtained by Faddeev-Popov’s method as

$`\widehat{A}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑\stackrel{}{q}^{}𝑑\stackrel{}{p}^{}𝑑\stackrel{}{\omega }\delta ^{(2M)}(\stackrel{}{\omega })A__W^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})\rho __W^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})}`$ (3.27)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑\stackrel{}{q}^{}𝑑\stackrel{}{p}^{}𝑑\stackrel{}{\omega }\delta ^{(2M)}(\stackrel{}{\omega })A__W(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{},\omega _\alpha )\rho __W(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{},\omega _\alpha )}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑\stackrel{}{q}𝑑\stackrel{}{p}𝑑\stackrel{}{\omega }\delta ^{(2M)}(\stackrel{}{\omega })\left[det(C_{\alpha \beta })\right]^{1/2}A__W(\stackrel{}{q},\stackrel{}{p})\rho __W(\stackrel{}{q},\stackrel{}{p})},`$
where $`A__W`$($`\rho __W`$) is an arbitrary extension of $`A__W^{}`$($`\rho __W^{}`$) onto $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, which is weakly equivalent to $`A__W^{}`$($`\rho __W^{}`$), so that $`A__W\delta ^{(2M)}(\stackrel{}{\omega })=A__W^{}\delta ^{(2M)}(\stackrel{}{\omega })`$. Though this extension is arbitrary, the expectation value (3.27) is unique. This method is well known to be extensively useful in path integral formula in constrained system, and is trivially working well also in Wigner’s formulation.
Finally let us consider a product of operators $`\widehat{A}`$ and $`\widehat{B}`$. The Wigner representation of $`\widehat{A}\widehat{B}`$ is given by the Moyal star product based on the Poisson bracket on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$:

$`(AB)__W^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})`$ $`=`$ $`A__W(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})B__W(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})`$
$`=`$ $`A__W(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{I=1}{\overset{NM}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{q_I^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{p_I^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{p_I^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{q_I^{}}}\right)\right]B__W^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{}).`$
Classically, the Poisson bracket on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is extended to the Dirac bracket on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Hence, it is natural to expect that the Moyal star product based on the Dirac bracket on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ will appear in Eq.(III.4) when it is extended onto $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, that is,

$`(AB)_{_{DW}}(z)`$ $``$ $`A__W(z)__DB__W(z)`$ (3.29)
$`=`$ $`A__W(z)\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\{z_\mu ,z_\nu \}__D{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{z_\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{z_\nu }}\right]B__W(z)`$
where we use the condensed notation $`(z_\mu )=(q_1,p_1,\mathrm{},q__N,p__N)\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.
In fact, the Eq.(III.4) becomes

$`A__W^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})B__W^{}(\stackrel{}{q}^{},\stackrel{}{p}^{})A__W(z^{})\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\{z_\rho ^{},z_\sigma ^{}\}__D{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{z_\rho ^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{z_\sigma ^{}}}\right]B__W(z^{}),`$
where $`z^{}=(q_I^{},p_I^{},\omega _\alpha 0)`$, ($`I=1,\mathrm{},NM`$; $`\alpha =1,\mathrm{},2M`$), since the Poisson bracket on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ can be replaced by the Dirac bracket $`\{z_\rho ^{},z_\sigma ^{}\}__D`$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. When the constraints are linear functions of $`z`$, as previous sections, we have

the r.h.s of (III.4) $`=`$ $`A__W(z^{})\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\{z_\rho ^{},z_\sigma ^{}\}__D{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{z_\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{z_\mu }{z_\rho ^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{z_\nu }{z_\sigma ^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{z_\nu }}\right]B__W(z^{})`$ (3.31)
$``$ $`A__W(z)\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\{z_\rho ,z_\sigma \}__D{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{z_\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{}}{z_\nu }}\right]B__W(z)`$
$`=`$ $`A__W(z)__DB__W(z).`$
This shows that the Moyal star product based on the Dirac bracket on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is weakly equivalent to the Moyal star product based on the Poisson bracket on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$.

## IV. Concluding remarks

Our derivation of path integral formula is based on $`U_W(t_i,t_{i1})`$, which is Wigner’s representation of the time developing operator $`\widehat{U}(t_i,t_{i1})=\mathrm{exp}\{i\widehat{H}(t_it_{i1})\}`$. Contrary to ours, the conventional derivation is based on the direct calculation of transition amplitude $`q_i,t_i|q_{i1},t_{i1}=q_i|\widehat{U}((t_i,t_{i1})|q_{i1}`$ itself. In this sense our derivation is alternatively new. However, since both functions are related with each other through the Fourier integral, as is seen from Eq.(2.8), both derivations are essentially the same.
We have then considered Wigner’s formulation of noncommutative quantum mechanics. Noncommutativity among coordinates $`\widehat{x}`$’s and also momenta $`\widehat{p}`$’s appears often in constrained systems. First we have used constraints to eliminate $`\widehat{p}`$’s, and then transformed remaining coordinates to canonical forms. Wigner’s formulation including the path integral formula has been shown to be applicable for these canonical forms. Secondly we have considered constraints without eliminating the redundant variables. For expectation values of dynamical variables the Fadeev-Popov method has been useful to give unique definitions for them. Finally we have proposed the Moyal star product based on the Dirac bracket for constrained systems.

## Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Reijiro Kubo for his critical comments. After completion of this work we drew our attention to similar works of Ref..