text:
# The very rich massive post-main-sequence star population of the open cluster Westerlund 1

## 1. Introduction

The highly reddened young open cluster Westerlund 1 (henceforth Wd 1) was reported by Westerlund (1987) to contain a number of both early and late-type supergiants and some other massive transitional objects. Exact determination of its parameters was not possible, but Westerlund (1987) estimated $`d`$$``$ 5 kpc and an extinction $`A_V`$$``$ 11 mag. Recently, radio continuum observations of Wd 1 revealed that a number of cluster members appeared to be associated with very bright radio sources (Clark et al. 1998; Dougherty, Waters & Clark, in preparation). In view of this result, we carried out a spectroscopic survey of the brighter cluster members using the Boller & Chivens spectrograph on the ESO 1.52-m telescope at La Silla Observatory, Chile. Low resolution spectroscopy over the $``$$`\lambda \lambda `$ 6 000 - 11 000Å range was obtained on the nights of June 24 - 26, 2001.

Since the field is very crowded, in addition to the relatively bright objects that were originally targeted, a large number of fainter stars was observed. Inspection of the spectra revealed the presence of a population of faint objects with strong emission lines.

## 2. The Wolf-Rayet population

Despite the low S/N of many of the spectra, due to the faintness of the objects (the apparently brightest WR stars have $`V`$$`>`$ 17), it is immediately possible to identify both nitrogen rich WN (six objects) and carbon rich WC (five objects) stars. The spectra of all these objects are displayed in Figures 1 and 2.

Spectral classification of WR stars can only be approximate, since the main spectral indicators lie on the blue region. For the WC candidates, we use the ratio of the C iii 8 500 Å/C iv 8 856 Å and C ii 9 900 Å/C iii 9 710 Å lines. All candidates appear to be late, with candidates E, F and H likely to be WC9 stars, while candidate C is likely to be WC8. Among the WN stars, the broad-lined candidate A is likely to be WN4-5, with candidates B and J looking WNE and candidates D, G, and I looking WNL (WN6-8).

## 3. The supergiant population

A significant number of the spectra obtained seem to correspond to high-luminosity stars, judging from the intensity of traditional luminosity indicators, such as the O i 7 774 Å line or the Ca ii triplet in the $`I`$-band.

In particular, four stars with A or G spectral types have equivalent widths for O i 7 774Å rather larger than Ia supergiants of similar spectral types, confirming the result of Westerlund (1987). These are stars Wd 1-4, Wd 1-12, Wd 1-16 and Wd 1-265 (following the notation of Westerlund 1987). All four stars are detected as relatively bright radio sources (Dougherty et al. in preparation). At least two other yellow supergiants are of rather high luminosity. From the very approximate classifications that we can derive from our low-resolution spectra, we find that the total number of A-G supergiants approaches the dozen, with several other stars likely to be luminous B-type supergiants. Many of these objects display H$`\alpha `$ in emission.

In addition, there are four objects whose spectra resemble high-luminosity M-type stars. Three of them (Wd 1-20, Wd 1-26 and Wd 1-237) are clearly detected as radio sources. In particular, Wd 1-26 seems to be associated with extended two-lobed radio emission (Clark et al. 1998). The optical spectrum of this object displays several emission lines unexpected in an M-type star.

A second object associated with extended radio emission is Wd 1-9. Its optical spectrum is characterised by a blue continuum with many strong emission lines corresponding to both permitted and forbidden transitions. This object is likely a Luminous Blue Variable.

A second very luminous blue object (Wd 1-243) presents moderately strong emission lines and appears to be surrounded by nebulosity. This object is also a radio source. Extended radio emission to the NW of the cluster (Dougherty et al. in preparation) is associated with some very faint emission-line objects. Other blue stars display strong emission lines and are likely to be different kinds of transitional evolved objects.

## 4. Discussion

We have detected eleven WR stars in Westerlund 1, the largest number of WR stars known in any Galactic cluster, with the possible exception of the Arches cluster (Blum et al. 2001). Moreover, our survey is very incomplete: only about $`25`$% of the stars at the apparent magnitude typical of the WR stars detected have been observed. There is an obvious lack of WR detections in the central region of the cluster (where the most luminous supergiants are located), which strongly suggests that our sample is also affected by observational effects. We can conservatively assume that the actual WR population of Wd 1 is easily twice as large.

Wd 1 appears to be unique among Galactic clusters in both the large number and variety of massive post-main sequence (PMS) objects. Since published determinations of distance and reddening to the cluster are inaccurate and inconsistent (Westerlund 1987; Piatti, Bica & Clariá 1998), and the field is affected by strong and probably variable reddening, we are still unable to provide accurate values for the intrinsic luminosity of members from which good estimates of the cluster age can be derived. Several lines of argument, however, suggest that the cluster is potentially extremely massive.

On one side, the lack of an identifiable MS turnoff in available photometric data prevents us from determining cluster parameters, but at the same time provides us with a clue to the cluster size, suggesting that all observed members down to $`V`$$``$ 18 (in excess of 90) are evolved stars with intrinsic magnitudes in the MV$``$ – 6 to – 10 range.

On the other hand, the large number of transitional objects observed in short-lived phases is suggestive of a very large population from which they are evolving. In particular, the number of yellow hypergiants in Wd 1 appears comparable to that in the rest of the Galaxy. Given the short duration of the hypergiant phase, a population of several hundred O-type stars seems to be suggested.

The presence of a large number of yellow supergiants (and a few very luminous red supergiants) indicates that Wd 1 is slightly older than the very massive Arches Cluster. Assuming that the progenitors of the yellow hypergiants had ZAMS masses of $``$ 40 - 50 M (which can be considered an educated guess), the age of the cluster would be $``$ 4 - 5 Myr, compatible with the presence of a population of WC stars descending from more massive progenitors. The alternative of considering that the progenitors of the yellow supergiants have lower ($``$ 30 M) masses and taking an older age of 8 - 10 Myr in order to consider that the red stars are normal M-type supergiants seems to conflict with the large population of WR stars if we consider that they are mainly single stars. A large population of WR stars at an age of $`8`$ Myr could, however, be possible if most of them are part of binary systems.

With the much extended data set available after our 2002 observing campaign, we expect to be able to provide accurate determinations for the distance and extinction to Wd 1. The lack of radio detections for most WR stars (Dougherty et al. in preparation) suggests that the distance to Wd 1 has to be $`>`$ 2 kpc. It cannot be, however, much larger than the 5 kpc advanced by Westerlund (1987), specially since the results of Piatti et al. (1998) suggest that the interstellar absorption (which has a very important component local to the cluster region) may be higher than estimated by Westerlund (1987). The cluster is then likely to be located in the Crux Arm, at a distance of 4 - 5 kpc.

In any case, with a true distance modulus $`DM`$$`<`$ 14 mag, Wd 1 offers the unrivalled opportunity of observing its whole stellar population using existing instrumentation (at least, in the near-IR). It therefore represents an ideal laboratory for the study of the impact of the presence of a large population of massive stars on its environment and, specifically, on the formation of lower mass stars.

### Acknowledgments.

Based on observations collected at the ESO, La Silla, Chile (ESO 67.D-0211). We thank Sean Dougherty and Rens Waters for access to their data on Wd 1 and many helpful discussions. We would also like to thank many of our colleagues for very informative discussions, in particular Simon Goodwin, Richard Stothers, Paul Crowther, Kees de Jager and Hans Nieuwenhuijzen.

## References

Blum, R.D., Schaerer, D., Pasquali, A., Heydari-Malayeri, M., Conti, P.S., Schmutz, W. 2001, ApJ 122, 1875

Clark, J.S., Fender, R.P., Waters, L.B.F.M., Dougherty, S.M., Koornneef, J., Steele, I.A., van Blokland, A. 1998, MNRAS 299, L43

van der Hucht, K.A. 2001, New Astronomy Reviews 45, 135

Piatti, A.E., Bica, E., Clariá, J.J. 1998, A&AS 127, 423

Westerlund, B.E. 1987, A&AS 70, 311

Discussion

Crowther: Your discovery that Wd1 contains (at least) 11 WR stars plus RSGs and YHGs is truely remarkable. Its low radio flux, together with the fact that MSX mid-infrared images reveal the local environment evacuated around Wd1 surely point to an age loser to 10 Myr than 4 - 5 Myr.

Negueruela: With available data, it is still very difficult to provide much more than a guess for the cluster age. While the presence of several very luminous blue objects seems to favour the lower age, it is true that several lines of argument indicate an age around 10 Myr. We really need to proceed further with our analysis before we can give a more consistant estimate of even decide on the overall co-evality of the cluster.


format: text

text:
# Electromagnetic response of superconductors and optical sum rule.

## I Figure caption.

Fig.1 $`A_h`$ (see text) as a function of $`T^2`$ for two different spectral functions as shown in the inset.


text:
# Trapping photons by a line singularity

## 1 Introduction

The cylindrically symmetric solutions of the Einstein field equations have always been one of the more popular areas of research in general relativity. The static and rotating cylinders, collapsing and expanding cylindrical shells as well as their static counterparts have been studied in the literature. Although such objects are awaiting astrophysical discovery it is important to investigate different types of objects since we do not yet know which type may be realized in the cosmos. Some examples of these solutions are given in  \- . A review of static solutions has been given in .  and  present solutions describing two counter-propogating beams of light confined to a cylindrical region. The energy momentum tensor is nonvanishing inside the cylinder and the solution is smoothly matched to the outside Levi-Civita metric. In this paper we will investigate solutions of the Einstein equations giving static cylindrical thin shells composed of massles particles around a line singularity. We will also present an approximate solution giving static cylindrical thick shell composed of equal amount of oppositely rotating photons along the angular dimension $`\varphi `$ around a line singularity.

## 2  Properties of the Cylindrically Symmetric Static Spacetime

The general cylindrically symmetric static vacuum spacetime satisfying Einstein’s field equations is given by the Levi-Civita metric , which can be written in the form

$$ds^2=\rho ^{4\sigma }dt^2+\rho ^{4\sigma (2\sigma 1)}(d\rho ^2+P^2dp^2)+Q^2\rho ^{2(12\sigma )}dq^2$$
(1)
where $`t`$ and $`\rho `$ are the time and the radial coordinates with the range $`\mathrm{}<t<\mathrm{},`$ $`0\rho <\mathrm{}`$ and $`\sigma `$, $`P`$ and $`Q`$ are real constants. The behaviour of the metric components determine the nature of the coordinates $`p`$ and $`q`$. Transforming the radius $`\rho `$ into a proper radius $`r`$ by defining

$$dr=\rho ^{2\sigma (2\sigma 1)}d\rho $$
(2)
puts the Levi-Civita metric (1) in the Kasner form

$$ds^2=R^{4\sigma /N}dt^2+dr^2+P^2R^{4\sigma (2\sigma 1)/N}dp^2+Q^2R^{2(12\sigma )/N}dq^2$$
(3)
where

$$\rho =R^{1/N},R=Nr,N=4\sigma ^22\sigma +1.$$
(4)
One of the coordinates $`p`$ and $`q`$ has to be interpreted as the axis of symmetry and the other as the angle about this axis. If we fix the angular coordinate to a finite range then one of the constants $`P`$ and $`Q`$ can be transformed away by a scale transformation depending on the behaviour of the coordinates $`p`$ and $`q`$. This leaves the metric with only two independent parameters. The parameter $`\sigma `$ is related to the energy of the cylindrical source  whereas the surviving one of the parameters $`P`$ and $`Q`$ is related to the topology of spacetime .

It is generally accepted that for small values of the parameter $`\sigma `$ $`(\sigma <\frac{1}{4})`$, this metric corresponds to cylindrically symmetric vacuum spacetime with $`p`$ as $`z`$ coordinate and $`q`$ as angular coordinate. Recently, this limit was extended to the range $`0\sigma <\frac{1}{2}`$ . Finally it was shown in  and  that for $`0\sigma <\mathrm{}`$ the Levi-Civita metric describes the cylindrically symmetric vacuum spacetime provided that at $`\sigma =\frac{1}{2}`$ the coordinates $`p`$ and $`q`$ interchange their roles, that is, for $`\sigma >\frac{1}{2},`$ $`p`$ becomes the angular coordinate and $`q`$ becomes the $`z`$ coordinate. For $`\sigma =\frac{1}{2},`$ neither $`p`$ nor $`q`$ is entitled to be an angular coordinate, and the three coordinates $`(r,p,q)`$ are better visualized as Cartesian coordinates $`x,y`$ and $`z`$ ,. The $`\sigma <0`$ case is isotropic to the $`\sigma >0`$ case.

In this paper we will thus use the cylindrically symmetric vacuum metric in Kasner form. After rescaling the coordinates $`t`$ and $`z`$ and changing the constant in $`g_{\varphi \varphi }`$ to give correct dimensions to the metric components we obtain

$$ds^2=(\frac{r}{r_0})^{2a}dt^2+dr^2+(\frac{r}{r_0})^{2b}dz^2+(\frac{r}{r_0})^{2c}r_0^2\alpha ^2d\varphi ^2,$$
(5)
where $`\alpha ,a,b,c`$ are real constants, $`r`$ is the radial coordinate, $`z`$ is the axis of the line singularity and $`\varphi `$ is the angular coordinate with the range $`0\varphi 2\pi `$. The relation between parameters of the Levi-Civita form of the metric and its equivalent Kasner form is given by

$$a=\frac{2\sigma }{N},b=\frac{2\sigma (12\sigma )}{N},c=\frac{12\sigma }{N},N=4\sigma ^22\sigma +1.$$
(6)
The dependence of $`a,b`$ and $`c`$ on $`\sigma `$ is shown in Figure 1.

This metric is cylindrically symmetric and represents the exterior field of the line singularity at $`r=0`$ . The Einstein tensor for this metric, apart from the trivial solution ($`a=b=c=0`$), gives vacuum solutions of Einstein equations with the constraints

$$a+b+c=a^2+b^2+c^2=1,$$
(7)
so only one of the parameters $`a,b,c`$ is free. Choosing the free parameter as $`b`$ than $`a`$ and $`c`$ are given by

$$a,c=\frac{(1b)\pm \sqrt{(1b)(1+3b)}}{2}$$
(8)
where $`\frac{1}{3}b1.`$ For every value of $`b`$, $`a`$ and $`c`$ can take two values. This is shown in Figure 2. In general, the choice of $`b`$ as free parameter is arbitrary, so $`a,b,c`$ can take values in between ($`\frac{1}{3}a,b,c1`$) but only one of them can be negative at the same time. Note that, the Riemann tensor vanishes only for the case where one of the parameters is equal to one and the others are equal to zero.

The Levi-Civita metric (3) and its Kasner form (5) are equivalent. We thus discuss the relations between $`\sigma `$ and $`a,b,c`$. When $`0<\sigma <\frac{1}{2},`$ $`b<0,c>0`$ and when $`\sigma >\frac{1}{2},`$ $`b>0,c<0`$. Since for $`\sigma `$ positive one always has $`a0,`$ (Figure 1) one concludes that for the Kasner form of the metric (5), for positive $`\sigma `$, the coordinate corresponding to the parameter whose value is negative has the role of $`z`$ coordinate and whose value is positive has the role of angular coordinate of cylindrical coordinates. To avoid confusion, for the rest of the paper, either we should consider only $`0\sigma 1/2`$ which $`b`$ is always negative or we should consider $`0\sigma <\mathrm{}`$ which $`b`$ and $`c`$ change sign at $`\sigma =1/2`$ (Figure 1). We choose latter and unless stated explicitly, we write our expressions for $`b<0`$, but we always have in mind that, for $`b`$ positive we have to replace $`b`$ with $`c`$ in all metrics, expressions and figures without writing them explicitly in our expressions. For negative $`\sigma `$, same change of the roles of the coordinates may occur since for small $`\sigma ,r^{2c}r^2`$ and for large $`\sigma ,r^{2b}r^2`$.

Note that the Levi-Civita metric in Kasner form (5) has another physically relevant parameter $`\alpha `$ whose value is relevant to the topological defects in cylindrical coordinates. For this metric, for $`\sigma `$ vanishing $`a`$ and $`b`$ vanish and $`c`$ becomes unity. On the other hand for $`\sigma =\mathrm{}`$, $`a`$ and $`c`$ vanish and $`b`$ becomes unity. In these cases our metric becomes:

$$ds^2=dt^2+dr^2+dz^2+\alpha ^2r^2d\varphi ^2,$$
(9)
with $`0\varphi 2\pi `$. This metric is flat and locally Minkowskian but globally it has different topology and represents a conical spacetime for $`\alpha 1`$ . For $`\alpha <1`$ this metric gives the exterior field of an infinitely long straight cosmic string lying along the $`z`$ direction. Only $`\alpha =1`$ corresponds to flat and globally Minkowskian spacetime for $`\sigma =0`$ or $`\sigma =\mathrm{}.`$

We now turn to discuss the Newtonian Limit of the cylindrically symmetric static Levi-Civita metric written in Kasner form (5). The Newtonian limit is given by $`a=k1.`$ Using the constraints on $`b`$ $`\&`$ $`c`$ (7)

$$b+c=1k$$
(10)
$$b^2+c^2=1k$$
(11)
there are two limits for $`b`$, $`c`$ in which one of them goes to zero and the other to one. To identify the angular coordinate correctly we have to choose $`b0`$ and $`c1`$. Then

$$(r/r_0)^a=1+k\mathrm{ln}(r/r_0)+O(k^2)$$
(12)
$$(r/r_0)^b=1k\mathrm{ln}(r/r_0)+O(k^2)$$
(13)
$$(r/r_0)^c=r/r_0+O(k^2)$$
(14)
Hence one obtains

$$ds^2=(1+k\mathrm{ln}(r/r_0))^2dt^2+dr^2+(1k\mathrm{ln}(r/r_0))^2dz^2+\alpha ^2r^2d\varphi ^2.$$
(15)
Calculating the Einstein tensor for this metric verifies that it is zero up to order $`k^2.`$ Thus one can identify the Newtonian potential per unit mass as $`V=k`$ $`ln(r/r_0).`$ For positive $`k`$ this corresponds to an attractive force field while for negative $`k`$ this corresponds to a repulsive force field $`\stackrel{}{g},`$

$$\stackrel{}{g}=\stackrel{}{}V=k\frac{\stackrel{}{r}}{r^2}.$$
(16)
A nonrelativistic particle in a circular orbit in this force field has centripetal acceleration

$$\frac{k}{r}=\frac{v^2}{r},$$
(17)
so that the particle moves with constant velocity independent of the radius. It is plausible that this generalizes to light which always moves with constant velocity.

Note that the Levi-Civita metric in Kasner form (5) is studied by Israel . He showed that the singularity at the $`r=0`$ represents the field of an infinite rod. He calculated the line energy-momentum tensor density and showed that the source has positive pressures and negative energy density. However the effective gravitational mass per unit length is calculated as $`\frac{1}{2}a`$ in our notation and is positive for positive $`a(or\sigma )`$ and negative for negative $`a`$. His results are in accordance with the Newtonian limit of the metric (5) where when $`a`$ is small and positive the field is attractive while when $`a`$ is small and negative the force field is repulsive.

For general relativity the metric (5) admits helical null geodesics for a certain range of $`\sigma `$ with the angular velocity $`\omega `$ and the pitch velocity $`v`$ (the constant velocity along $`z`$ direction of the particles following a helical path). They are given by

$$\omega ^2=(\frac{ab}{cb})\frac{1}{\alpha ^2r_0^2}(\frac{r}{r_0})^{2(ac)},$$
(18)
$$v^2=(\frac{ca}{cb})(\frac{r}{r_0})^{2(ab)}.$$
(19)
For $`b<0`$ ($`\sigma <1/2`$), since $`|c||b|`$, there exist helical null geodesics only for $`ca`$ ($`0<\sigma 1/4`$) and for $`a=c=2/3`$ ($`\sigma =1/4`$) they become circular . For $`c<0`$, $`b>0`$ ($`\sigma >1/2`$) helical null geodesics, which are circular for $`a=b=2/3`$ ($`\sigma =1`$), exist for $`ba`$ ($`\sigma 1`$)(Figure 1). Motivated by this, in section 2 we will look for solutions of the Einstein equations with an infinitely thin shell at $`r=r_1.`$ On the shell, the only nonvanishing components of the energy momentum tensor satisfy $`T_\mu ^\mu =0`$ so that this shell can be interpreted as radiation trapped in the gravitational field of the line singularity at $`r=0`$. The metric which is Ricci flat for $`0<r<r_1`$ and for $`r>r_1`$ is continuous at $`r=r_1`$ such that $`T_{00}`$ and $`T_{\varphi \varphi },`$ the only nonvanishing components of the energy-momentum tensor have Dirac $`\delta `$-function singularities at $`r=r_1.`$ In section 4 we will present an approximate thick shell solution for the $`T_{00}=T_{\varphi \varphi }`$ case such that the Einstein tensor is finite and nonvanishing for $`r_1<r<r_2.`$ We find that $`T_{00}=T_{\varphi \varphi }`$ only approximately. The other diagonal components of the energy momentum tensor also pick up small values.

## 3 Infinitely thin photonic shells around the line singularity

### 3.1 General case: A thin shell with counter moving photons along a helical path.

There are several methods for calculating the Einstein tensor for thin shell sources but the conditions the metric should satisfy are the same. The metric should be continuous everywhere but its first derivatives may be discontinuous on the shell and these discontinuies give rise to an infinitely thin shell -.

Using the same set of coordinates but different parameters for the exterior and interior metrics we choose two different Levi-Civita metrics in Kasner form (5) for the interior and exterior regions of the infinitely long static thin shell with radius $`r_1`$. These are given by :

$$ds_{}^2=(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2a^{}}dt^2+dr^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2b^{}}dz^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2c^{}}\alpha ^2r_1^2d\varphi ^2(r<r_1)$$
(20)
and

$$ds_+^2=(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2a}dt^2+dr^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2b}dz^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2c}\alpha ^2r_1^2d\varphi ^2(r>r_1).$$
(21)
where the constant parameters $`a,b,c`$ and $`a^{},b^{},c^{}`$ satisfy the relations (7) so these metrics are both Ricci flat. As explained in the introduction we must have $`b`$, $`b^{}<0`$ so that the $`z`$ coordinate is identified correctly.

We can combine (20) and (21) in the form :

$$ds^2=A^2(r)dt^2+dr^2+B^2(r)dz^2+D^2(r)d\varphi ^2$$
(22)
with

$$A(r)=(r/r_1)^a^{}\theta (r_1r)+(r/r_1)^a\theta (rr_1),$$
(23)
$$B(r)=(r/r_1)^b^{}\theta (r_1r)+(r/r_1)^b\theta (rr_1),$$
(24)
and

$$D(r)=[(r/r_1)^c^{}\theta (r_1r)+(r/r_1)^c\theta (rr_1)]r_1\alpha ,$$
(25)
where $`\theta (xx_0)`$ is the Heaviside step function with

$`\theta (xx_0)=0,x<x_0`$
$`\theta (xx_0)=1,xx_0`$ (26)
At $`r=r_1`$ this metric is continuous but its first derivatives with respect to $`r`$ are discontinuous. The nonzero components of the Einstein tensor for the metric (22) are given by

$$G_{00}=(\frac{B_{rr}}{B}+\frac{D_{rr}}{D}+\frac{B_rD_r}{BD})$$
(27)
$$G_{rr}=G_{11}=\frac{A_rB_r}{AB}+\frac{A_rD_r}{AD}+\frac{B_rD_r}{BD}$$
(28)
$$G_{zz}=G_{22}=\frac{A_{rr}}{A}+\frac{D_{rr}}{D}+\frac{A_rD_r}{AD}$$
(29)
$$G_{\varphi \varphi }=G_{33}=\frac{A_{rr}}{A}+\frac{B_{rr}}{B}+\frac{A_rB_r}{AB},$$
(30)
where subscripts denote the partial derivatives. Since the interior and the exterior regions of the shell is vacuum, the only surviving terms are the terms which contain Dirac delta functions which give the energy momentum tensor of the shell.

So for $`b`$, $`(b^{})<0`$ case the nonzero elements of $`G_{\mu \nu }`$ are

$$G_{00}=\frac{bb^{}+cc^{}}{r_1}\delta (rr_1)=\frac{aa^{}}{r_1}\delta (rr_1),$$
(31)
$$G_{22}=\frac{aa^{}+cc^{}}{r_1}\delta (rr_1)=\frac{b^{}b}{r_1}\delta (rr_1),$$
(32)
$$G_{33}=\frac{aa^{}+bb^{}}{r_1}\delta (rr_1)=\frac{c^{}c}{r_1}\delta (rr_1).$$
(33)
For the Einstein equation

$$G_{\mu \nu }=8\pi GT_{\mu \nu }$$
(34)
we can choose the energy momentum tensor of the shell in the form

$$T_{\mu \nu }=diag(\rho ,p_r,p_z,p_\varphi )$$
(35)
where $`\rho `$ is the energy density and $`p_i(i=1,2,3)`$ are the principal pressures . Since we have $`T_0^0=T_{00}`$ and $`T_j^i=T_{ij}(i,j=r,z,\varphi )`$, using (7) one can show that the energy momentum tensor of the shell satisfies the condition $`T_\mu ^\mu =0`$ and this result can be interpreted as an infinitely long thin shell along the $`z`$ direction with radius $`r_1`$ composed of equal amount of oppositely moving photons along a helical direction. This helical motion gives rise to pressures in the $`\varphi `$ and $`z`$ directions with the equation of state $`\rho =p_z+p_\varphi .`$ Thus if one chooses the interior and the exterior metrics of the shell as Levi-Civita metrics in Kasner form (20,21) then the shell is necessarily composed of massles particles.

Energy per unit length of the shell is given by :

$$\mu =\alpha (aa^{}).$$
(36)
For $`(aa^{})>0`$ the shell has positive energy density. Since the interior metric is of Kasner form, we have a line singularity at $`r=0`$. The singularity has positive effective mass density for $`a^{}`$ positive and negative effective mass density for negative $`a^{}`$. The only singularity free metric is flat Minkowski metric and if we take interior metric (20) as Minkowski metric (9) ($`a^{}=b^{}=0,c^{}=1,\alpha =1`$ ) then our results are in accordance with  and . In this case the shell has positive energy density for $`a`$ positive and satisfies all energy conditions for $`|a|>|b|.`$

### 3.2 A thin shell with counter-rotating photons

Now we would like to discuss the case which may be called the photon cylinder with counter-rotating photons. We find a static cylindrical shell at $`r=r_1`$ with $`T_{00}=\rho =p_\varphi =T_{22}`$ with other components of the energy momentum tensor vanishing. For comparison we note that for light in a laser tube and for two counter-propagating beams of light - the equation of state is $`\rho =p_z`$. We take $`G_{22}=0`$ in (32), which gives:

$$b=b^{}.$$
(37)
Taking b as the free parameter , the parameters $`a,c,a^{}`$ and $`c^{}`$ are given by

$$a,c=a^{},c^{}=\chi _{+,}\chi _{}=\frac{(1b)\pm \sqrt{(1b)(1+3b)}}{2}.$$
(38)
For this case to have positive energy density on the shell we need $`aa^{}>0`$. Since $`a>a^{}`$ leads to $`c^{}>c`$ then we have to choose $`a^{}=c=\chi _{}`$ and $`c^{}=a=\chi _+`$. Otherwise the shell dissappears ($`G_{00}=G_{33}=0`$).

Applying these relations to (20) and (21) our interior and exterior metrics become

$$ds_{}^2=(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2c}dt^2+dr^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2b}dz^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2a}\alpha ^2r_1^2d\varphi ^2(r<r_1)$$
(39)
and

$$ds_+^2=(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2a}dt^2+dr^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2b}dz^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2c}\alpha ^2r_1^2d\varphi ^2(r>r_1)$$
(40)
and the only nonzero elements of the Einstein tensor are

$$G_{00}=G_{\varphi \varphi }=\frac{c^{}c}{r_1}\delta (rr_1)=\frac{aa^{}}{r_1}\delta (rr_1)=\frac{ac}{r_1}\delta (rr_1).$$
(41)
It is clear that a shell with positive energy requires the condition $`a>c`$ for $`c>0`$. Then our shell has positive energy density only for $`\frac{1}{4}<\sigma <1`$ (see figure(1)) or equivalently $`1/3<b<2/3`$ and $`a>c`$ (see figure 2) for the external metric (21). For interior metric (20) these conditions correspond to $`0<\sigma ^{}<1/4`$ or $`\sigma ^{}>1`$ since $`c^{}=a`$ and $`a^{}=c`$. For these values of $`\sigma `$, one of the quantities $`b`$ and $`c`$ in (1) is negative. In accordance with the interpretation of the $`z`$ coordinate we choose name the negative one as $`b`$ in expressions above (For $`b>0`$ case see Section 2). The energy density of this cylindrical shell has a finite maximum value at $`b=0`$ (Figure 3). This is consistent with other static cylindrical shell solutions . Note that the interior metric (39) always admits helical null geodesics but exterior one (40) does not.

The energy per unit length of this shell is:

$$\mu =\alpha (ac).$$
(42)
As we mentioned before, unless we choose globally Minkowski metric inside the shell , at $`r=0`$ there is a line singularity. When the shell satisfies positive energy condition the singularity at the origin has positive effective mass density. The singularity free configuration for the interior metric is given by $`c=b=0`$, $`a=1`$, $`\alpha =1`$ (9) which describes a cylindrical shell with flat interior.The exterior metric becomes

$$ds^2=(\frac{r}{r_1})^2dt^2+dr^2+dz^2+r_1^2d\varphi ^2.$$
(43)
This metric is the Rindler metric , which represents a uniform gravitational field and it is Riemann flat. The test particles are uniformly accelerated in this field. The gravitational field of a massive plane in Newtonian theory is also uniform. This extreme case happens when energy density of the cylinder becomes maximum (see Figure (3)). One can conclude that for this case the cylinder becomes an infinite plane.

### 3.3 A thin shell with counter moving photons in the $`z`$direction

In this case we find a shell with the equation of state $`\rho =p_z`$. we choose $`c=c^{}`$ in (33) which leads to $`a=b^{}`$and $`a^{}=b`$ then the interior and exterior metrics become:

$$ds_{}^2=(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2b}dt^2+dr^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2a}dz^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2c}\alpha ^2r_1^2d\varphi ^2(r<r_1)$$
(44)
and

$$ds_+^2=(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2a}dt^2+dr^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2b}dz^2+(\frac{r}{r_1})^{2c}\alpha ^2r_1^2d\varphi ^2(r>r_1)$$
(45)
and the only nonzero elements of the Einstein tensor are

$$G_{00}=G_{zz}=\frac{b^{}b}{r_1}\delta (rr_1)=\frac{aa^{}}{r_1}\delta (rr_1)=\frac{ab}{r_1}\delta (rr_1).$$
(46)
To have a positive energy density of the shell we must have $`ab>0.`$ Since when $`a>0`$, $`b(=a^{})<0`$, the shell satisfies all energy conditions. Note that for this solution, unlike the first two cases, the singularity at $`r=0`$ has negative effective mass density according to  when the shell satisfies the positive energy conditions. The energy density is finite (Figure 4). The exterior metric (45) of the physically acceptable shell may admit helical null geodesics but interior metric (44) does not. The energy per unit lenght of the shell is $`\mu =\alpha (ab).`$ If the interior is chosen as Riemann flat ($`a=b=0,c=1`$) then this shell disappears.

## 4 Thick cylindrical shell around the line singularity: An approximate solution

We try to replace the infinitely thin shell solution composed of rotating photons around a line singularity with a solution with a smooth hollow cylindrical material with inner radius $`r_1`$ and outer radius $`r_2`$. around a line singularity. We again choose the metrics of the inside and the outside of the cylinder to be the same as that of our thin shell solution (20), (21) except rescaling the coordinates and adding some constants to satisfy the continuity. In between we use a third metric which may represent the cylindrical material.

$$ds_{}^2=r^{2c}dt^2+dr^2+r^{2b}dz^2+\alpha ^2r^{2a}d\varphi ^2(r<r_1),$$
(47)
$$ds_0^2=e^2(r)dt^2+dr^2+f^2(r)dz^2+\alpha ^2g(r)^2d\varphi ^2(r_1rr_2),$$
(48)
$$ds_+^2=C^2r^{2a}dt^2+dr^2+r^{2b}dz^2+\alpha ^2F^2r^{2c}d\varphi ^2(r_2<r).$$
(49)
We thus want the cylindrical material to be smooth so the metric and its first derivatives should be continuous at $`r=r_1`$ and $`r=r_2.`$ Then we find following boundary conditions:

(53)
(57)
where $`C`$ and $`F`$ are constants to be determined from these boundary conditions. Since we have to match the metric and its first derivative at the boundaries we simply take $`e(r)`$ and $`g(r)`$ to be quadratic functions whose coefficients are determined by the boundary conditions. Since the $`dz^2`$ part of the metric is the same inside and outside we also choose $`f=r^b`$. We use the following ansatz for $`e(r),f(r)`$, and $`g(r)`$ and we replace $`r_1=m`$ and $`r_2=n`$:

$$e(r)=cm^{c1}r+A+\frac{(rm)^2}{(nm)^2}(Can^{a1}(cm^{c1}n+A)+B),$$
(58)
$$f(r)=r^b,$$
(59)
$$g(r)=Fcn^{c1}r+E+\frac{(rn)^2}{(mn)^2}G,$$
(60)
where

$$A=m^c(1c),$$
(61)
$$B=Cn^{a1}(na),$$
(62)
$$C=\frac{cm^{c1}(nm)+2m^c}{an^{a1}(mn)+2n^a},$$
(63)
$$E=Fn^c(1c),$$
(64)
$$G=F(cn^{c1}(mn)+n^c)m^a,$$
(65)
and

$$F=n\frac{2m^a+am^{a1}(nm)}{cn^{c1}(nm)2n^2}.$$
(66)
Next we calculate the nonzero elements of the Einstein tensor between $`m<r<n`$ for $`m=1`$ and $`n=2`$. We refer the reader to the appendix for the explicit expressions. Here we present a series of graphs showing the components of the Einstein tensor as a function of $`r`$ for seven different values of $`b`$ (Figure 4-10). We consider the energy momentum tensor of this thick shell in the form (35). Note that for the thin shell solution we have only $`\rho =p_\varphi 0.`$ For the thick shell case, since we present an approximate solution, the pressure in other directions also contribute to the energy-momentum tensor. We show that their contribution is small compared to the energy density and azimuthal stress. The radial pressure $`p_r`$ should vanish at the boundaries.

Note that for $`1/3<b0.235`$ and $`0.315b1`$ our solution satisfies only the weak energy condition since at some region $`p_\varphi >\rho `$ . For $`0.235<b<0.315`$ all energy conditions are satisfied. As $`b`$ goes from -$`1/3`$ to $`0`$ the energy density increases and reaches a finite maximum value at $`b=0`$. Then as $`b`$ increases to $`1`$ the energy decreases towards zero. Having a maximum finite energy density with $`b`$ is an expected behaviour since previous shell solutions  have this behaviour too. If we accept the dominant energy condition as physically relevant energy condition, because otherwise the local speed of sound can be greater than the speed of light  when $`p_i>\rho ,`$ then our solution is physically acceptable only for $`0.235<b<0.315.`$

## 5 CONCLUSION

In this paper, we investigated static, cylindrically symmetric solutions of Einstein equations for an infinitely thin cylindrical shell around a line singularity with $`T_\mu ^\mu =0`$ on the shell. We presented three cases which correspond to counter-propagating photons along a helical direction, along the circular direction and parallel to the cylinder axis. For the third case we found that the line singularity cannot have positive mass density. The interior and exterior regions of this cylindrically symmetric infinitely long shell are two different Levi-Civita vacuum spacetimes of Kasner form. The existence of circular and helical null geodesics for this metric reinforces our interpretation. Then we presented an approximate solution for the thick shell case with counter rotating photons around a line singularity where the other diagonal stresses also contribute a little to the energy-momentum tensor.

We have choosen the metric interior to the shell in Kasner form (5) which has a line singularity at $`r=0`$  and have shown that the Newtonian limit of this metric corresponds to an attractive force field (16) for positive $`a`$ and repulsive force field for negative $`a`$. This result is consistent with Israel’s analysis of the same metric .

It has been demonstrated in , and  that the singularity at the $`r=0`$ of the cylindrically symmetric, static metric (5) can represent a superconducting cosmic string. The outside of the infinitely long straight ordinary cosmic string along the $`z`$ direction can be represented by a locally flat Minkowski metric with an angular deficit . In this case there is a boost invariance along the $`z`$ direction and this either corresponds to $`a=b=0`$ and $`c=1`$ or to the case $`a=b=\frac{2}{3},c=\frac{1}{3}`$ which is also labeled as the external field of a static string , . However, considering  and  one realizes that $`c`$ cannot be negative if it represents the parameter related to $`g_{\varphi \varphi }`$ of the metric (5). Thus we exclude this solution from our considerations. For the superconducting straight string case it was shown that the effects due to current are negligible  and the external field can be represented by a metric in Kasner form  at least asymptotically. In this case the boost invariance along the $`z`$ direction is broken by the currents and in general we can take $`ab.`$ The deficit angle is not sensitive to the value of current but decreases when the string is about to switch from the superconducting phase to the ordinary one. Considering these arguments, we can say that the singularity at the $`r=0`$ is consistent with a superconducting cosmic string. For the ordinary cosmic string the Rienmann tensor vanishes but for the superconducting case it does not. The ordinary cosmic string does not have helical null geodesics but the superconducting one has for $`\sigma 1/4`$ or $`1\sigma `$. For $`\sigma =1/4`$ or $`1`$ they become circular.

 investigated a line singularity such that the energy-momentum tensor is given by a Nielsen-Olesen  vortex. They concluded that there is no photon cylinder around their string solution which in our solution corresponds to the $`a=b`$ case where we find that there are no thin or thick shell solutions satisfying the energy conditions.

For $`1/3<b<2/3`$ the thin shell solution with the equation of state $`\rho =p_\varphi `$ is physically relevant since it obeys all energy conditions for this range of $`b`$. For the exterior metric (21) this range is equal to $`1/4<\sigma <1`$. For the thick shell solution the dominant energy condition is satisfied only for $`0.235<b<0.315`$ and for this range of $`b`$ this solution can be physically acceptable. As we change the parameter b form $`1/3`$ to 1 the energy density of this thin shell solution first increases then reaches a finite maximum at $`b=0`$ and then decreases (Figure 3). The energy density of the other two solutions are also finite.

This is the expected behaviour according to the Hoop conjecture since the cylindrical collapse does not produce a horizon due to the fact that the source is not bounded from every direction. It is also interesting that for the maximal energy density case $`b=0`$, the ”cylinder” surrounding the line singularity becomes a flat plane when observed from the outside i.e. the cylindrical shell becomes a cosmic wall.

## Appendix

Here we give the expressions of the nonzero components of the Einstein tensor of the metric (48) for $`r_1=1`$, $`r_2=2`$ for different values of the parameters $`a,b,c`$

$`b=0.3`$, $`a=0.83`$, $`c=0.47`$ (Figure 4)

$`G_{00}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1.8r^2+0.52r0.095}{r^2(r0.044)(r5.6)}}`$
$`G_{rr}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2.8(r+2.1)(r1)(r2)}{r(r0.045)(r5.6)(r^2+3.3r+7)}}`$
$`G_{zz}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4.29.2r+8r^2}{(r^2+3.3r+7.0)(r0.044)(r5.6)}}`$
$`G_{\varphi \varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2.6+0.29r+1.8r^2}{r^2(r^2+3.3r+7.0)}}`$ (67)
$`b=0.23`$, $`a=0.92`$, $`c=0.32`$ (Figure 5)

$`G_{00}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1.8r^2+0.26r0.22}{r^2(r0.17)(r4.6)}}`$
$`G_{rr}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3.1(r+0.85)(r1)(r2)}{r(r0.17)(r4.6)(r^20.32r+4.6)}}`$
$`G_{zz}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8(r1)(r1.5)}{(r0.17)(r4.6)(r^20.32r+4.6)}}`$
$`G_{\varphi \varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{250.34r+35r^2}{(876r+19r^2)r^2}}`$ (68)
$`b=0.1`$, $`a=0.99`$, $`c=0.11`$ (Figure 7)

$`G_{00}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{22+8.7r430r^2}{r^2(200940r+230r^2)}}`$
$`G_{rr}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3.6(r+0.26)(r1)(r2)}{r(r0.25)(r3.9)(r^21.6r+4.1)}}`$
$`G_{zz}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8(r1.4)(r1.5)}{(r0.25)(r3.9)(r^21.6r+4.1)}}`$
$`G_{\varphi \varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{130.47r+55r^2}{r^2(12047r+29r^2)}}`$ (69)
$`b=0`$, $`a=1`$, $`c=0`$ (Figure 8)

$`G_{00}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{14r+r^2}}`$
$`G_{rr}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4(r1)(r2)}{(42r+r^2)(14r+r^2)}}`$
$`G_{zz}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1824r+8r^2}{(42r+r^2)(14r+r^2)}}`$
$`G_{\varphi \varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{4+r^22r}}`$ (70)
$`b=0.5`$, $`a=0.81`$, $`c=0.31`$ (Figure 10)

$`G_{00}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{5.2+120r360r^2}{r^2(131200r+200r^2)}}`$
$`G_{rr}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2.8(r+2.8)(r1)(r2)}{r(r0.011)(r6)(r^2+5.5r+8.5)}}`$
$`G_{zz}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8.2(r+1.3)(r1.5)}{(r0.022)(r6)(r^2+5.5r+8.5)}}`$
$`G_{\varphi \varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1.8r^2+0.52r+3.4}{r^2(r^2+5.5r+8.5)}}`$ (71)
## Acknowlegment

We would like to thank C. Saclioglu for discussions.

## References


text:
# Magnetoroton instabilities and static susceptibilities in higher Landau levels

## Abstract

We present analytical results concerning the magnetoroton instability in higher Landau levels (LL’s) evaluated in the single-mode approximation. The roton gap appears at a finite wave vector, which is approximately independent of the LL index $`n`$, in agreement with numerical calculations in the composite-fermion picture. However, a large maximum in the static susceptibility indicates a charge-density modulation with wave-vectors $`q_0(n)1/\sqrt{2n+1}`$, as expected from Hartree-Fock predictions. We thus obtain a unified description of the leading charge instabilities in all LL’s.

The complex behavior of two-dimensional electrons in a perpendicular magnetic field remains to be fully understood. If the electrons are restricted to one of the two lowest Landau levels (LL’s), the system exhibits the fractional quantum Hall effect (FQHE). This behavior cannot be explained in the framework of the Hartree-Fock approximation (HFA), which predicts a charge-density-wave (CDW) ground state FP  rather than a homogeneous, incompressible liquid of strongly correlated electrons.laughlin  On the other hand, HFA does appear to capture the physical properties in higher LL’s as shown by recent experiments exp  at filling factors $`\nu =9/2,11/2,\mathrm{}`$, which confirm the predictions that the ground state of this system is a unidirectional CDW (“stripes”). FKS

Here we present a method which unifies the physics of electrons in the lowest LL’s with that in higher LL’s. By studying the low-energy collective excitations in the single-mode approximation (SMA), we show that the magnetoroton minimum, which indicates an instability of the incompressible liquid towards Wigner crystallization in the lowest LL’s, GMP ; MG  in fact indicates an incipient CDW instability in higher LL’s. In order to observe this feature, it is not sufficient to evaluate the energy dispersion of the collective excitations, as performed in previous works, MG ; scarola  but one must consider the static susceptibility. As we will show, the dispersion always presents a magnetoroton minimum at a wave vector $`q1`$ (in units of the inverse magnetic length $`l_B`$), essentially independent of the LL index $`n`$. However, the static susceptibility exhibits a maximum at $`q1`$ for the lowest LL’s, a signature of the Wigner crystal (WC) instability, whereas the maxima in higher LL’s arise at $`q_0(n)1/\sqrt{2n+1}`$, a feature predicted in the HFA for the CDW phase. FKS

The FQHE phenomenon at filling factors $`\nu =1/(2s+1)`$, with $`s`$ being an integer, was first explained by Laughlin laughlin  using trial wave functions. These many-body wave functions describe electrons attached to $`2s+1`$ vortices, and this attachment leads to a minimization of the Coulomb energy, which is the only energy scale in the problem. Later, Jain jain  proposed a generalization of the trial wave functions, which describe the FQHE at filling factors $`p/(2ps\pm 1)`$, where the most prominent plateaus are observed experimentally ($`p`$ is an integer). The FQHE is understood as an integer quantum Hall effect of composite fermions (CF’s) subject to a reduced magnetic field and filling $`p`$ CF-LL’s. These new particles are interpreted as electrons bound to $`2s`$ vortices, and the Laughlin states are obtained when the CF’s populate the lowest CF-LL.

If one neglects LL mixing, the underlying Hamiltonian describing the low-energy physics of spin-polarized electrons in any LL $`n`$ is given in terms only of the Coulomb interaction by

$$\widehat{H}_n=\underset{\stackrel{}{q}}{}v(q)\left[F_n(q)\right]^2\overline{\rho }(\stackrel{}{q})\overline{\rho }(\stackrel{}{q}),$$
(1)
where $`v(q)=2\pi e^2/(ϵq)`$ is the Fourier transformation of the Coulomb interaction and $`F_n(q)=L_n(q^2/2)\mathrm{exp}(q^2/4)`$ is the form factor in terms of Laguerre polynomials arising from the electron wave functions in the $`n`$th LL. The operators $`\overline{\rho }(\stackrel{}{q})`$ are the projected Fourier components of the electron density, and obey the commutation relations

$$[\overline{\rho }(\stackrel{}{q}),\overline{\rho }(\stackrel{}{k})]=2i\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{(\stackrel{}{q}\times \stackrel{}{k})_z}{2}\right)\overline{\rho }(\stackrel{}{q}+\stackrel{}{k}).$$

LL mixing in the limit where the cyclotron gap $`\mathrm{}eB/m`$ is large compared to the characteristic Coulomb energy $`e^2/(ϵl_B)`$ may be taken into account in the form of a screened interaction potential $`v(q)=2\pi e^2/ϵ(q)q`$ with the dielectric function $`ϵ(q)`$. AG  This modification is significant only in the vicinity of a characteristic wave vector $`q=2.4/\sqrt{2n+1}`$. In the following we will neglect this screening because it is unimportant in determining the behavior of electrons in higher LL’s. fogler  Note that the Hamiltonian (1) allows one to describe electrons in any LL $`n`$ in terms of electrons in the lowest LL interacting via a modified potential $`v_n(q)=v(q)[F_n(q)]^2`$.

To describe the collective excitations of electrons in the FQHE regime, Girvin et al. GMP  used the SMA, in which the excited state is given by

$$|\psi _\stackrel{}{q}^{2s+1}=\overline{\rho }(\stackrel{}{q})|\mathrm{\Omega }_{2s+1}.$$

The energy dispersion of the excitations is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{2s+1}(q)=\frac{\psi _\stackrel{}{q}^{2s+1}|\widehat{H}E_0^{2s+1}|\psi _\stackrel{}{q}^{2s+1}}{\psi _\stackrel{}{q}^{2s+1}|\psi _\stackrel{}{q}^{2s+1}},$$

where $`E_0^{2s+1}`$ is the energy of the Laughlin state $`|\mathrm{\Omega }_{2s+1}`$. This energy remains finite at any wave vector, as expected for an incompressible ground state, but has a minimum at a nonzero value of the wave vector. This magnetoroton minimum is interpreted as the precursor of a WC instability because it matches the reciprocal-lattice vector of the WC. The WC is expected to be the true ground state at very low filling factors $`\nu `$, where the average distance between electrons exceeds the spatial extent $`ll_B`$ of the single-particle wave functions. With increasing $`s`$, the gap at the magnetoroton minimum decreases, indicating that the WC becomes energetically more favorable. But in the SMA the gap never vanishes, so one would expect the Laughlin state to be the true ground state even at very low filling factors (large $`s`$). However, Kamilla and Jain KJ  have shown that the SMA overestimates the gap at the magnetoroton minimum and fails at larger wave vectors. They compare the SMA to a description of the collective excitations as magnetoexcitons of CF’s. The excited state is given by KWJ

$$|\psi _\stackrel{}{q}^{\mathrm{CF}\mathrm{exc}}=𝒫\rho _\stackrel{}{q}^{pp+1}|\mathrm{\Omega }_{p,s},$$

where $`|\mathrm{\Omega }_{p,s}`$ is the CF ground state, in which CF’s containing $`2s`$ vortices populate $`p`$ CF-LL’s, and $`\rho _\stackrel{}{q}^{pp+1}`$ creates a particle-hole pair of wave vector $`\stackrel{}{q}`$, with the particle situated in the ($`p+1`$)th CF-LL and the hole in the $`p`$th. $`𝒫`$ is the projection operator to the lowest LL. Even if it is not evident how to relate the phononlike excitations introduced in the SMA to the CF magneto-excitons, the two have been shown to coincide in the limit $`q0`$. KWJ  In the CF picture one finds that for $`\nu =1/9`$ and lower filling factors the collective excitations at the magnetoroton minimum have a lower energy than the Laughlin state. This indicates that the WC is the true ground state of the system in the dilute limit. KJ

The question of whether the FQHE states in higher LL’s become unstable towards a CDW was discussed by Scarola et al. scarola  using similar arguments as for the WC instability. The authors found that the CF’s with two vortices (2CF’s) are unstable for $`n2`$, because the CF excitons have a lower energy. However, the instability is still found at wave vectors of order 1, and not at the characteristic wave-vectors $`q_0(n)1/\sqrt{2n+1}`$ as expected for the CDW. Their second remarkable result was that excitons of CF’s with 4 or 6 vortices (4CF’s or 6CF’s) show a finite gap at all wave vectors for the LL’s $`n=2`$ and $`n=3`$. This supports the conjecture that the FQHE could be found in ultrahigh mobility samples around $`\overline{\nu }=1/4`$ or $`\overline{\nu }=1/6`$ in higher LL’s, where $`\overline{\nu }`$ now denotes the filling factor of the last LL. morf

Here, we present analytical results for the SMA in higher LL’s. Studies for $`n=1`$ were first performed numerically by MacDonald and Girvin. MG  The phononlike collective excitations in a higher LL are described by the wave function

$$|\psi _{n,\stackrel{}{q}}^{2s+1}=F_n(q)\overline{\rho }(\stackrel{}{q})|\mathrm{\Omega }_{2s+1},$$

where we have made use of the projection scheme presented above. One finds for the energy dispersion

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{2s+1}^{(n)}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{}{k}}{}}v(k)\left[F_n(k)\right]^2\mathrm{sin}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{}{q}\times \stackrel{}{k})_z}{2}}\right)`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{e^{|\stackrel{}{q}+\stackrel{}{k}|^2/2}\overline{s_{2s+1}(\stackrel{}{q}+\stackrel{}{k})}e^{k^2/2}\overline{s_{2s+1}(\stackrel{}{k})}}{e^{q^2/2}\overline{s_{2s+1}(\stackrel{}{q})}}},`$
where $`\overline{s_{2s+1}(\stackrel{}{q})}`$ is the projected static structure factor of the ($`2s+1`$)-Laughlin state. The structure factor is the Fourier transformation of the pair distribution function, which may be calculated using Monte Carlo integration. GMP  The latter may be expressed as the series girvin

$`g_{2s+1}(r)`$ $`=`$ $`1e^{r^2/2}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{(2m+1)!}}c_{2m+1}^{2s+1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{4}}\right)^{2m+1}e^{r^2/4},`$
which leads to the formula

$`\overline{s_{2s+1}(q)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2s}{2s+1}}e^{q^2/2}+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{2s+1}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}c_{2m+1}^{2s+1}L_{2m+1}(q^2)e^{q^2}`$
for the projected static structure factor. In contrast to Ref. 5, where the expansion coefficients $`c_{2m+1}^{2s+1}`$ were obtained by a fit to the Monte Carlo results, here we use the following sum rules as determining equations for the coefficients,

$`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}c_{2m+1}^{2s+1}={\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}},`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(2m+2)c_{2m+1}^{2s+1}={\displaystyle \frac{s}{4}},`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(2m+3)(2m+2)c_{2m+1}^{2s+1}={\displaystyle \frac{s^2}{2}},`$
$`c_{2m+1}^{2s+1}=1\mathrm{for}m<s.`$
Coefficients with an index $`mM=3+s`$, which is the maximal index one can determine in this procedure, are set to zero. The first three sum rules are due to charge neutrality, perfect screening, and a compressibility sum rule, respectively. The last condition is given by the repulsion of the electrons at short distances, where $`g(r)r^{2(2s+1)}`$. girvin  The results obtained in the lowest LL for pair distribution function, projected structure factor, and energy dispersion (see curves in crosses in Fig. 1) are in good agreement with Monte Carlo calculations.

In higher LL’s (see Fig. 1), we obtain the following results: for $`\overline{\nu }=1/3`$ ($`s=1`$), the gap at the roton minimum is largest in the lowest LL ($`n=0`$), $`n=1`$ and $`n=2`$ determine an intermediate region (not shown) where the SMA breaks down, and for $`n3`$, the roton gap decreases continuously. At $`\overline{\nu }=1/5`$ ($`s=2`$), the roton gap increases from $`n=0`$ to $`n=1`$, the intermediate region is found at $`n=3`$ and $`n=4`$, and for $`n5`$, we observe the decrease of the gap. The same qualitative behavior is found for $`\overline{\nu }=1/7`$ ($`s=3`$) with a maximal roton gap in the $`n=3`$ LL, the breakdown of the SMA at $`n=4`$ and $`n=5`$, and the final decrease for $`n6`$ (figure not shown). For $`\overline{\nu }=1/5`$ and $`\overline{\nu }=1/7`$, the roton gap first increases with increasing $`n`$ \[see the $`n=0`$ and $`n=1`$ curves in Fig. 1(b)\] due to the fact that the system is further away from the WC regime. The WC transition appears at $`\overline{\nu }_{WC}(n)1/(2n+1)`$ because the average distance between electrons must be considerably larger than the size of the wave functions, which scales as $`\sqrt{2n+1}`$ in higher LL’s. Therefore, the WC instability indicated by the roton gap is less pronounced.

For $`\overline{\nu }=1/5`$, we find a second minimum in the dispersion relations at $`q2.5`$, see Fig. 1(b). This minimum is already present in the lowest LL. MacDo  However, the SMA is known to be less reliable at larger wave vectors, and for this reason no results were shown in Ref. 5 at $`q>2.0`$ for $`\overline{\nu }=1/5`$. The second minimum also arises in numerical calculations within the CF picture, which is more accurate in the large-$`q`$ limit. KJ

Note that we do not find the signature of a CDW state in the dispersion relation of the collective excitations, because the magnetoroton minimum occurs at wave-vectors $`q1`$, independent of the LL. This is in agreement with the results found in the CF picture. scarola  The fact that we obtain the most stable $`\overline{\nu }=1/7`$ FQHE state in the $`n=3`$ LL, and not for $`n=2`$, scarola  is probably due to the proximity to the intermediate region in which the SMA becomes less reliable. Breakdown of the SMA in the intermediate region is expected to be due to a numerical effect, the origin of which is as follows: the gap at $`q=0`$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{2s+1}^{(n)}(q=0)\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_{2m+1}^{2s+1}I_{2m+1}^n$$
(2)
may be calculated analytically using the integrals

$`I_k^n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}dq\{k(k1)L_{k2}(q^2)+k(q^22k)L_{k1}(q^2)`$
$`+`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{q^4}{4}}(k+1)q^2+k(k+1)]L_k(q^2)\left\}\right[F_n(q)]^2e^{\frac{q^2}{2}}.`$
Inspection of $`I_{2m+1}^n`$ as a function of $`m`$ reveals that the integrals are initially negative, and decrease until a minimum is reached around $`nm`$. $`I_{2m+1}^n`$ then jumps to large positive values before decreasing again towards zero. It is therefore in the region $`nm`$ that the gap at $`q=0`$ \[Eq. (2)\] is most sensitive to approximations made in determining the coefficients $`c_{2m+1}^{2s+1}`$, either numerically or in the present approach. Because we have set $`c_{2m+1}^{2s+1}=0`$ for $`m>M`$, it is in the intermediate region defined by $`nM`$ that the results of the SMA become unreliable even in the small-$`q`$ limit.

However, the essential aspect of this work is that even if one does not find any signature of the CDW in analyzing the position of the magnetoroton minimum, it can in fact be seen in the static susceptibility calculated in the SMA,

$$\chi _{2s+1}^n(q)=2\frac{s_{2s+1}^n(q)}{\mathrm{\Delta }^n(q)}=2\frac{\overline{s_{2s+1}(q)}[L_n(q^2/2)]^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }^n(q)},$$

where $`s_{2s+1}^n(q)`$ is the static structure factor projected to the LL $`n`$. Girvin et al. GMP  have already emphasized that the maximum arising in the static susceptibility also indicates the WC instability in the lowest LL. Because in higher LL’s the expression for $`\chi _{2s+1}^n(q)`$ is essentially the same as for the lowest LL multiplied by the Laguerre polynomials of the form factor, the position of the maximum now scales as $`q_0(n)1/\sqrt{2n+1}`$ as expected for a CDW instability (see arrows in Fig. 2).

Note that this interpretation of the CDW in higher LL’s as arising from the overlap between wave functions described by the form factor $`F_n(q)`$ is in agreement with the ground-state calculations in the HFA. FKS  At the wave vectors where the Laguerre polynomials have nodes, the repulsive Hartree potential vanishes and only the attractive exchange interaction remains finite. This gives rise to an effective attraction between electrons in the topmost LL at the wave-vector $`q_0(n)`$ of the CDW.

In conclusion, we have found a tendency of the FQHE states described by Laughlin’s wave functions to form a CDW in higher LL’s. The analytical calculations were performed within the SMA. The tendency toward CDW formation cannot be observed if one investigates the magnetoroton gap in the dispersion of phononlike collective excitations, but becomes apparent only in the static susceptibility, which exhibits maxima at the expected CDW wave-vectors $`q_0(n)1/\sqrt{2n+1}`$. Our results thus confirm the prediction of CDW formation in higher LL’s in the framework of FKS  HFA and provide a unified description for the WC and CDW instabilities of all LL’s.

We would like to acknowledge fruitful discussions with D. Baeriswyl, A. Caldeira, J. Jain, P. Lederer, A. MacDonald, R. Morf, D. Pfannkuche, and M. Rosenau da Costa. We further thank B. Normand for a careful reading of the manuscript. This work was supported by the Swiss National Foundation for Scientific Research under grant No. 620-62868.00.


text:
# Ultralocality on the lattice

PACS: 11.15.Ha, 11.15.Tk, 02.60.Jh

Abstract

It is shown that the nonlocal Dirac operator yielded by a lattice model that preserves chiral symmetry and uniqueness of fields, approaches to an ultralocal and invariant under translations operator when the size of the lattice tends to zero.

The Nielsen-Ninomiya theorem  has been challenging the construction of quiral field theories on the lattice during two decades. The use of Dirac operators $`D`$ satisfying the Ginsparg-Wilson relation

$$\gamma _5D+D\gamma _5=aD\gamma _5D,$$

is a prospective approach to get chiral fermions with no doublers \[chiral symmetry remains broken by a term $`O(a)`$\] that avoids a contradiction with the Nielsen-Ninomiya theorem and yields an exact symmetry of the fermion action . However, these operators cannot be ultralocal but may be local  (when the interaction range of the operator is bounded by some finite lattice distance the operator is termed ultralocal, if it is exponentially bounded, the operator is termed local).
In spite that the locality of the Dirac operator is in general a desired property, nonlocal operators have been used to circumvent the restrictions of the Nielsen-Ninomiya theorem (see for example  and references there in) and they may have zero modes satisfying the Atiyah-Singer index theorem . This fact strengthen the use of nonlocal operators as an approach to follow in lattice QCD.
Recently, a lattice scheme where the fermion doubling and the chiral symmetry breaking are absent has been presented in -. Such a scheme yields a nonlocal Dirac operator, but due to some properties of the differentiation matrices used to construct it, the quantum algebras and some operational relations maintain their canonical forms on the lattice when the number of nodes tends to infinity (or the size of the lattice tends to zero) -. The aim of this letter is to show that such nonlocal differentiation matrices and therefore the Dirac operator constructed with them, approach ultralocal operators (the nonlocality tends to disappear) when the size of the lattice tends to zero. This fact represents another building stone in our lattice model since the chiral symmetry is exactly preserved with no doublers and (asymptotically) gauge invariance.
Differentiation matrices. These matrices, arising naturally in the linear interpolation problem of functions, yield exact values for the derivative of polynomial functions at certain points selected as lattice sites. Due to this, they have been used to solve some boundary value problems (see - and references there in). The class of functions on which the differential operator to be discretized acts on, determines the kind of differentiation matrix to be used. Thus, to get a discrete form of an operator acting on functions that fall off rapidly to zero at large distances, we can use the skew-symmetric differentiation matrix

$$(D_x)_{jk}=\{\begin{array}{cc}0,\hfill & i=j\text{,}\hfill \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{}\\ \frac{(1)^{j+k}}{x_jx_k},\hfill & ij\text{,}\hfill \end{array}$$
(1)
constructed with the $`N`$ zeros $`x_j`$ of the Hermite polynomial $`H_N(x)`$ as lattice points111Equation (1) gives a simplified expression for $`D_x`$., whereas to get a discrete form of an operator acting on periodic functions , the differentiation matrix

$$(D_t)_{jk}=\{\begin{array}{cc}0,\hfill & j=k\text{,}\hfill \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{}\\ \frac{(1)^{j+k}}{2\mathrm{sin}\frac{(t_jt_k)}{2}},\hfill & jk\text{,}\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
should be used. In this case the lattice points are chosen to be the $`N`$ equidistant points222The same result is obtained for the set of points $`t_j=\frac{\pi }{N}(2jN1)`$.

$$t_j=\pi +2\pi j/N,j=1,2,\mathrm{},N.$$
(3)
Since the fields are expected to fall off rapidly to zero at large distances or one may assume periodic boundary conditions on the fields imposed by the lattice, we can use differentiation matrices of the type (1) or (2), or a combination of them, to construct a discretized formulation of classical field theory in $`3+1`$ variables where the fields are unique (no doublers), the chiral symmetry is not broken when $`m=0`$ and the gauge invariance is recovered in the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$. Some of these properties have been shown previously - for the differentiation matrix (1).
In this letter we analyze the ultralocality property of these differentiation schemes used to construct the Dirac operator. In addition, we show the absence of the fermion doubling in the formulation with derivative of the type (2).
First of all, let us show the relationship between the differentiation matrices $`D_x`$ and $`D_t`$. Let $`j`$ and $`k`$ be a pair of distinct and fixed integers. Since the $`n`$th zero of the Hermite polynomial $`H_N(x)`$ can be approximated by

$$x_n=\frac{(2nN1)\pi }{2\sqrt{2N}}$$
(4)
when $`n`$ is fixed and $`N`$ is large enough, we have that

$$(D_x)_{jk}=2\sqrt{2/N}(D_t)_{jk}=(1)^{j+k}=\frac{\sqrt{2N}}{\pi }\frac{(1)^{j+k}}{jk}.$$

This relation does not become a matrix equation between $`D_x`$ and $`D_t`$ since (4) is valid only for fixed $`n`$ when $`N\mathrm{}`$ and therefore, $`\mathrm{sin}(t_jt_k)/2`$ can not be approximated by $`(t_jt_k)/2`$ for elements close to the border of $`D_t`$. Thus, if $`N`$ is large enough,

$$D_x=2\sqrt{2/N}D_t+O,$$
(5)
where $`O`$ is a border matrix whose nonzero elements depend on $`N`$. By a $`N\times N`$ border matrix we mean a matrix $`M`$ whose elements $`M_{jk}`$ lying between $`n<j,kNn`$ are all of them zero for certain $`n<<N`$.
Clearly, $`D_t`$ is a Toeplitz matrix  and fulfills the requirements of translational invariance on the periodic lattice (3), whereas $`D_x`$ becomes a Toeplitz matrix (except for a border matrix) only for $`N`$ large enough. Both of them are nonlocal matrices for a finite $`N`$ since $`|\mathrm{csc}(x)|>1/|x|>\mathrm{exp}(|x|)`$ in the corresponding ranges. However, we can use the Toeplitz property to show that both $`D_x`$ and $`D_t`$ approach ultralocal matrices almost everywhere when $`N\mathrm{}`$. By almost everywhere we mean except for border matrices. Such border matrices circumvent the no-go theorem given in  and allow us to have an ultralocal Dirac operator almost everywhere with the properties given above. To show this, we will use the matrix $`D_t`$ which has a stronger nonlocality.
Ultralocality of $`D_t`$. Since matrix $`D_t`$ is a skew-symmetric Toeplitz matrix, it can be written as

$$D_t=\underset{n=1}{\overset{N1}{}}d_n(A^nB^n),$$
(6)
where

$$d_n=\frac{(1)^{n+1}}{2\mathrm{sin}(n\pi /N)}$$
(7)
and $`A`$ and $`B`$ are the backward shift and forward shift matrices respectively, i.e,

$$A_{jk}=\delta _{j,k1},B_{jk}=\delta _{j1,k}.$$

These matrices satisfy the useful relations

$$ABA=A,BAB=B,$$
(8)
which can be used to show that

$$A^{2m}B^{2m}=(AB)\underset{n=0}{\overset{m1}{}}(A^{2n+1}+B^{2n+1})[A,B]\left(I+\underset{n=1}{\overset{m1}{}}(A^{2n}+B^{2n})\right)$$

and

$$A^{2m+1}B^{2m+1}=(AB)\left(I+\underset{n=1}{\overset{m}{}}(A^{2n}+B^{2n})\right)[A,B]\underset{n=0}{\overset{m1}{}}(A^{2n+1}+B^{2n+1}).$$

Here, $`I`$ stands for the $`N\times N`$ identity matrix. Thus, (6) can be rewritten in the useful form

$$D_t=(AB)\mathrm{\Delta }[A,B]\mathrm{\Sigma },$$
(9)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ are the symmetric matrices

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=s_1I+\underset{n=1}{\overset{N2}{}}s_{n+1}(A^n+B^n),\mathrm{\Sigma }=s_2I+\underset{n=1}{\overset{N3}{}}s_{n+2}(A^n+B^n),$$
(10)
and

$$s_{2m+1}=\underset{n=m}{\overset{[N/2]1}{}}d_{2n+1},s_{2m}=\underset{n=m}{\overset{[(N1)/2]}{}}d_{2n}.$$
(11)
Here, $`[x]`$ stands for the greatest integer less or equal to $`x`$. Additionally to (8), $`A`$ and $`B`$ satisfy

$$([A,B])_{jk}=\{\begin{array}{cc}1,\hfill & j=k=1\text{,}\hfill \\ 1,\hfill & j=k=N\text{,}\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & \text{otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Therefore, the product

$$O_1=[A,B]\mathrm{\Sigma }$$

appearing in (9) becomes a border matrix. For $`N`$ great enough, the sums (11) appearing in (10) can be approximated by

$$s_n=(1)^{n+1}\frac{N}{4\pi }\mathrm{log}[\frac{Nϵ_n}{\pi }\mathrm{cot}(\frac{n\pi }{2N})],n=1,2,\mathrm{},N1,$$

where

$$ϵ_n=\{\begin{array}{cc}1,\hfill & N+n\text{ even,}\hfill \\ 2,\hfill & N+n\text{ odd.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Since $`D_t=(AB)\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (except for the border matrix $`O_1`$), the interaction range of $`D_t`$ is essentially the one of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which is measured by $`|s_{|jk+1|}|`$. If we put $`x=n\pi /N`$, $`|s_n|`$ can be rewritten as

$$|s_n||s(x)|=\frac{N}{4\pi }\left|\mathrm{log}\left|\frac{Nϵ_n}{\pi }\mathrm{cot}(x/2)\right|\right|,x(0,\pi ).$$

Note that $`s(x)`$ is an antisymmetric function in $`(0,\pi )`$ with respect to $`\pi /2`$ and that the absolute values of $`s_1s(0)`$ and $`s_{N1}s(\pi )`$ grow as $`(N/4\pi )\mathrm{log}(2ϵ_nN^2/\pi ^2)`$. Thus, for $`x`$ other than $`0`$ or $`\pi `$,

$$\frac{s(x)}{s(0)}0,N\mathrm{}.$$
(12)
This is the behavior of an unnormalized Dirac’s delta. Thus, $`s(x)C_N[\delta (x)+\delta (x\pi )]`$. To get the constant of normalization the measure $`\delta x=\pi /N`$ has to be taken into account. For convenience, we integrate from $`\pi /2`$ to $`\pi /2`$ to obtain

$$\left[\frac{N^2}{4\pi }\mathrm{log}(\frac{Nϵ_n}{\pi })\right]^1_{\pi /2}^{\pi /2}s(x)𝑑x1.$$
(13)
Eqs. (12) and (13) show that the asymptotic behavior of $`s(x)`$, $`x(\pi /2,\pi /2)`$, is that of the Dirac delta multiplied by a growing numerical factor. Therefore, except for the measure,

$$|\mathrm{\Delta }(xy)|\frac{N}{4\pi }\mathrm{log}(\frac{Nϵ_n}{\pi })\left[\delta (xy)+\delta (|xy|\pi )\right],N\mathrm{}.$$
(14)
Since $`s(\pi )`$ corresponds to the elements of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ located on the band defined by $`s_{N1}`$, the second delta of the right-hand of (14) yields another border matrix. Let us denote by $`O_2`$ such a matrix. Then, we have from (9) that $`D_t`$ approaches an ultralocal matrix as $`N\mathrm{}`$ except for the sum of the border matrices $`O_1`$ and $`O_2`$. If $`D_t`$ is applied to a vector formed with the values of a function $`f(x)`$, the matrix-vector multiplication changes into an integration in the asymptotic limit whenever the measure is taken into account. Therefore, the action of $`D_t`$ on such a vector is mainly given by

$$\underset{y}{}D_t(xy)f(y)[f(x+a)f(xa)]/2a,a0,$$
(15)
where

$$a^1=\frac{N^2}{4\pi }\mathrm{log}(\frac{Nϵ_n}{\pi }).$$

This is an expected result since $`D_t`$ is an exact differentiation matrix for certain subclasses of periodic functions . Due to (5), the differentiation matrix $`D_x`$ also satisfies a relation like (15).
Uniqueness of the free fermionic fields. Next, we show that the use of the differentiation matrix (2) avoids the doubling fermion problem on a lattice. Let us consider a four-dimensional regular lattice with $`N^4`$ points whose support are in the interval $`L<x_n^\mu L`$ \[substitute $`\pi `$ by $`L`$ in (3)\]. We assume functional periodicity in the fermion fields as trigonometric polynomials. The (continuum) Euclidean free Lagrangian reads

$$=\overline{\psi }(x)\left(\gamma _\mu _\mu +m\right)\psi (x).$$

We make the substitution

$$_\mu \psi (x)\left[D_\mu \psi \right]_n=\underset{l_\mu =1}{\overset{Nn_\mu }{}}d_{l_\mu }\psi _{n+l_\mu }\underset{l_\mu =1}{\overset{n_\mu 1}{}}d_{l_\mu }\psi _{nl_\mu },$$
(16)
where we have used (6) and (7), and $`\mu =1,2,3,4`$. Thus the discretized action is

$$S=\underset{n,\mu }{}\left[\underset{l_\mu =1}{\overset{Nn_\mu }{}}d_{l_\mu }\overline{\psi }_n\gamma _\mu \psi _{n+l_\mu }\underset{l_\mu =1}{\overset{n_\mu 1}{}}d_{l_\mu }\overline{\psi }_n\gamma _\mu \psi _{nl_\mu }+m\overline{\psi }_n\psi _n\right].$$

At first glance this is a rather nonlocal action, since the field at each lattice point couples with the field evaluated at the reminder points along each axis. Nevertheless, due to the fact that $`[D_\mu \psi ]_n`$ is the exact partial derivative along the direction $`\mu `$ at the point $`n`$ (see ), the action can be easily diagonalized by taking the discrete Fourier transform in the field

$$\psi _n=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N^4}}\underset{k}{}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_ke^{ikx_n},$$

and in its derivative

$$[D_\mu \psi ]_n=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N^4}}\underset{k}{}ik_\mu \stackrel{~}{\psi }_ke^{ikx_n},$$
(17)
here $`k_\mu =\pi l_\mu /L`$, with $`l_\mu `$ being an integer restricted to values in the range $`(N1)/2<l_\mu (N1)/2`$ ($`N`$ is assumed to be an odd number). Thus the maximum momentum allowed is $`|k_{\mathrm{max}}|=\pi /2\mathrm{\Delta }`$, with $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the length between two successive points. It is clear that the values of $`k`$ become to be with no restriction in the limit when $`N`$ goes to infinity and sum in (17) must be replaced by an integral in the corresponding Brillouin zone. In fact, in this limit the derivative in Eq. (16) tends to the exact continuum value, and the continuum theory is recovered. The Fourier transform of the action can be written as

$$S=\underset{k,\mu }{}\overline{\stackrel{~}{\psi }}_k\left(i\gamma _\mu k_\mu +m\right)\stackrel{~}{\psi }_k,$$

which yields to the dispersion relation

$$S(k)=\gamma _\mu k_\mu +m.$$
(18)
It is clear that no doublers appear since the values of $`k`$ are proportional to an integer. Moreover in the limit in which the spacing $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ tends to zero (18) gives the exact energy values.
Other desired properties, as gauge invariance and chiral symmetry, also have support on this scheme. They can be shown as in Ref. . Let us emphasize that the exact chiral symmetry is preserved explicitly in our scheme as it happens with the so-called SLAC derivative , which is defined through an equation like (17). In that context, matrix (2) is an explicit realization of such a derivative with a number of properties given in .