text:
# Plasmon excitations and 1D - 2D dimensional crossover in quantum crossbars

## I Introduction

The behavior of electrons in arrays of $`1D`$ quantum wires was recognized a challenging problem soon after the consistent theory of elementary excitations and correlations in a Luttinger liquid (LL) of interacting electrons in one dimension was formulated (see  for a review). One of fascinating targets is a search for LL features in higher dimensions . Although the Fermi liquid state seems to be rather robust for $`D>1`$, the possible way to retain some $`1D`$ excitation modes in $`2D`$ and even $`3D`$ systems is to consider highly anisotropic objects, in which the electron motion is spatially confined in major part of the real space (e.g., it is confined to separate linear regions by potential relief). One may hope that in this case weak enough interaction does not violate the generic long-wave properties of the LL state. Arrays of interacting quantum wires may be formed in organic materials and in striped phases of doped transition metal oxides. Artificially fabricated structures with controllable configurations of arrays and variable interactions are available now due to recent achievements in nanotechnology (see, e.g., Refs.).

The simplest $`2D`$ ensemble of $`1D`$ nanoobjects is an array of parallel quantum wires. The conventional LL regime in a single $`1D`$ quantum wire is characterised by bosonic fields describing charge and spin modes. We confine our discussion to the charge sector (LL in the spin-gapped phase). The Hamiltonian of an isolated quantum wire may then be represented in a canonical form

$$H=\frac{\mathrm{}v}{2}\underset{L/2}{\overset{L/2}{}}𝑑x\left\{g\pi ^2(x)+\frac{1}{g}(_x\theta ^2(x))\right\}.$$
(1)
Here $`L`$ is the wire length, $`v`$ is the Fermi velocity, $`\theta ,\pi `$ are the conventional canonically conjugated boson fields and $`g`$ is the dimensionless parameter which describes the strength of the interaction within the chain (see, e.g., ). The interwire interaction may transform the LL state existing in isolated quantum wires into various phases of $`2D`$ quantum liquid. The most drastic transformation is caused by the interwire tunneling $`t_{}`$ in arrays of quantum wires with intrawire Coulomb repulsion. This coupling constant rescales towards higher values for strong interaction ($`g<1/2`$), and the electrons in array transform into $`2D`$ Fermi liquid . The reason for this instability is the orthogonality catastrophe, i.e. the infrared divergence in the low-energy excitation spectrum that accompanies the interwire hopping processes.

Unlike interwire tunneling, the density-density or current-current interwire interactions do not modify the low-energy behavior of quantum arrays under certain conditions. In particular, it was shown recently  that an interaction of the type $`W(nn^{})`$, which depends on the distance between the wires $`n`$ and $`n^{}`$ but does not contain current coordinates $`x,x^{},`$ imparts the properties of a sliding phase to 2D array of 1D quantum wires. In this state an additional interwire coupling leaves the fixed-point action invariant under the ”sliding” transformation $`\theta _n\theta _n+\alpha _n`$ and $`\pi _n\pi _n+\alpha _n^{}`$. The contribution of interwire coupling reduces to a renormalization of the parameters $`vv(q_{})`$, $`gg(q_{})`$ in the LL Hamiltonian (1), where $`q_{}`$ is a momentum perpendicular to the chain orientation. Such LL structure can be interpreted as a quantum analog of classical sliding phases of coupled $`XY`$ chains. Recently, it was found  that a hierarchy of quantum Hall states emerges in sliding phases when a quantizing magnetic field is applied to an array.

In the present paper we concentrate on another aspect of the problem of interacting quantum wires. Instead of studying the conditions under which the LL behavior is preserved in spite of interwire interaction, we consider situations where the dimensional crossover from $`1D`$ to $`2D`$ occurs. Dimensional crossover is quite well studied e.g. in thin semiconducting or superconducting films where the film thickness is the control parameter that rules the crossover (see e.g. Ref.. It occurs in strongly anisotropic systems like quasi-one-dimensional organic conductors or layered metals. In the latter cases temperature serves as a control parameter and crossover manifests itself in interlayer transport. In metals the layers appear “isolated” at high temperature, but become connected at low temperatures to manifest $`3D`$ conducting properties. Here we intend to study another type of dimensional crossover, i.e. a geometrical crossover, where the phase variable serves as a control parameter, and the excitations in quantum array demonstrate either $`1D`$ or $`2D`$ behavior in different parts of reciprocal space.

The most promising type of artificial structures where this effect is expected is a periodic $`2D`$ system of $`m`$ crossing arrays of parallel quantum wires. We call it ”quantum crossbars” (QCB). The square grids of this type consisting of $`2`$ arrays were considered in various physical context in early papers . In Refs. the fragility of the LL state against interwire tunneling in the crossing areas of QCB was studied. It was found that a new periodicity imposed by the interwire hopping term results in the appearance of a low-energy cutoff $`\mathrm{\Delta }_l\mathrm{}v/a`$ where $`a`$ is a period of the quantum grid. Below this energy, the system is ”frozen” in its lowest one-electron state. As a result, the LL state remains robust against orthogonality catastrophe, and the Fermi surface conserves its 1D character in the corresponding parts of the $`2D`$ Brilllouin zone (BZ). This cutoff energy tends to zero at the points where the one-electron energies for two perpendicular arrays $`ϵ_{k_1}`$ and $`ϵ_{k_2}`$ become degenerate. As a result, a dimensional crossover from $`1D`$ to $`2D`$ Fermi surface (or from LL to FL behavior) arises around the points $`ϵ_{F_1}=ϵ_{F_2}`$.

We study this dimensional crossover for Bose excitations (plasmons) described by canonical variables $`\theta ,\pi `$ in QCB. In order to unravel the pertinent physics we consider a grid with short-range capacitive inter-wire interaction. This approximation seems natural for $`2D`$ grids of carbon nanotubes , or artificially fabricated bars of quantum wires with grid periods which exceed the lattice spacing of a single wire or the diameter of a nanotube. It will be shown below that this interaction can be made effectively weak. Therefore, QCB retains the $`1D`$ LL character for motion along the wires similarly to the case considered in Ref.. At the same time, the boson mode propagation along some resonant directions is also feasible. This is essentially a $`2D`$ process in the $`2D`$ BZ (or in the elementary cell of the reciprocal lattice).

We start the studies of QCB with a double QCB $`m=2`$ (section II). In the first two subsections II A and II B we introduce basic notions and construct the Hamiltonian of the QCB. The main approximations are discussed in subsection II C. Here we substantiate the used method (separable interaction approximation) and show that interaction between arrays in QCB is weak. The energy spectra for square QCB and tilted QCB are described in detail in two parts II D 1 and II D 2 of subsection II D. Various correlation functions and related experimentally observable quantities (optical absorption, space correlators) are discussed in the last subsection II E. We predict here effect of peculiar “Rabi oscillations” - periodic energy transfer from one of the QCB array to another.

Triple QCB ($`m=3`$) formed by three arrays lying in parallel planes are studied in Section III. Such hexagonal grids may be useful for three-terminal nanoelectronic devices . The plasmon spectra of triple QCB possess some specific features in comparison with double QCB. We introduce the main notions and construct the Hamiltonian of symmetric triple QCB (subsection III A), analyse the peculiarities of the frequency spectrum (subsection III B), and illustrate them by description of triple Rabi oscillations - periodic energy transfer between all three arrays (subsection III C). The results are summarized in Conclusion. All technical details are placed in Appendices A - E.

## II Double QCB

### A Basic notions

Double QCB is a $`2D`$ periodic grid, which is formed by two periodically crossed arrays of $`1D`$ quantum wires. In experimentally realizable setups  these are cross-structures of suspended single-wall carbon nanotubes placed in two parallel planes separated by an inter-plane distance $`d`$. However, some generic properties of QCB may be described in assumption that QCB is a genuine $`2D`$ system. We assume that all wires of $`j`$-th array, $`j=1,2,`$ are identical. They have the same length $`L_j,`$ Fermi velocity $`v_j`$ and Luttinger parameter $`g_j.`$ The arrays are oriented along the unit vectors $`𝐞_{1,2}`$ with an angle $`\phi `$ between them. The periods of a crossbars along these directions are $`a_1`$ and $`a_2,`$ and corresponding basic vectors are $`𝐚_j=a_j𝐞_j`$ (Fig.1).

The interaction between the excitations in different wires is assumed to be concentrated around the crossing points with coordinates $`n_1𝐚_1+n_2𝐚_2(n_1a_1,n_2a_2)`$. The integers $`n_j`$ enumerate the wires within the $`j`$-th array. Such interaction imposes a superperiodicity on the energy spectrum of initially one dimensional quantum wires, and the eigenstates of this superlattice are characterized by a $`2D`$ quasimomentum $`𝐪=q_1𝐠_1+q_2𝐠_2(q_1,q_2)`$. Here $`𝐠_{1,2}`$ are the unit vectors of the reciprocal superlattice satisfying the standard orthogonality relations $`(𝐞_i𝐠_j)=\delta _{ij}`$. The corresponding basic vectors of the reciprocal superlattice have the form $`m_1Q_1𝐠_1+m_2Q_2𝐠_2`$, where $`Q_j=2\pi /a_j`$ and $`m_{1,2}`$ are integers.

However the crossbars kinematics differs from that of a standard 2D periodic system. In conventional $`2D`$ systems, forbidden states in the inverse space arise due to Bragg diffraction in a $`2D`$ periodic potential, whereas the whole plane is allowed for wave propagation in real space, at least until the periodic potential is weak enough. A Brillouin zone is bounded by the Bragg lines. It coincides with a Wigner-Seitz cell of reciprocal lattice. In sharply anisotropic QCB most of the real space is forbidden for electron and plasmon propagation. The Bragg conditions for the wave vectors are modulated by a periodic potential unlike those in conventional $`2D`$ plane. These conditions are essentially one-dimensional. Corresponding BZ is not a Wigner-Seitz cell of a reciprocal lattice but the elementary cell containing a site in its center.

Indeed, the excitation motion in QCB is one-dimensional in major part of the $`2D`$ plane. The anisotropy in real space imposes restrictions on the possible values of $`2D`$ coordinates $`x_1,x_2`$ ($`𝐫=x_1𝐞_1+x_2𝐞_2`$). At least one of them, e.g., $`x_2`$ ($`x_1`$) should be an integer multiple of the corresponding array period $`a_2`$ ($`a_1`$), so that the vector $`𝐫=(x_1,n_2a_2)`$ ($`𝐫=(n_1a_1,x_2)`$) characterizes the point with the $`1D`$ coordinate $`x_1`$ ($`x_2`$) lying at the $`n_2`$-th ($`n_1`$-th) wire of the first (second) array. As a result, one cannot resort to the standard basis of $`2D`$ plane waves when constructing the eigenstate with a given wave vector $`𝐤`$. Even in non-interacting arrays of quantum wires (empty superlattice) the $`2D`$ basis is formed as a superposition of two sets of $`1D`$ waves. The first of them is a set of $`1D`$ excitations propagating along each wire of the first array characterized by a unit vector $`k_1𝐠_1`$ with a phase shift $`a_2k_2`$ between adjacent wires. The second set is the similar manifold of excitations propagating along the wires of the second array with the wave vector $`k_2𝐠_2`$ and the phase shift $`a_1k_1`$. The dispersion law of these excitations has the form

$$\omega ^0(𝐤)=\omega _1(k_1)+\omega _2(k_2).$$
(2)
The states of equal energy obtained by means of this procedure form straight lines in the $`2D`$ reciprocal space. For example, the Fermi surface of QCB developed from the points $`\pm k_{F1,2}`$ for individual quantum wire consists of two sets of lines $`|k_{1,2}|=k_{F1,2}`$. Respectively, the Fermi sea is not a circle with radius $`k_F`$ like in the case of free $`2D`$ gas, but a cross in the $`k`$ plane bounded by these four lines  (see Fig. 2). Finally, the Bragg conditions read

$`\omega _1(k_1)`$ $``$ $`omega_1(k_1+m_1Q_1)`$
$`+`$ $`\omega _2(k_2)\omega _2(k_2+m_2Q_2)=0.`$
and the lines $`k_1=0`$, $`|k_2|=Q_2/2`$, and $`|k_1|=Q_1/2`$, $`k_2=0,`$ satisfying these conditions, form a $`2D`$ BZ of double QCB.

Due to the inter-wire interaction, the excitations of QCB (see Figs.3,6 below) acquire genuine two-dimensionality characterized by the quasimomentum $`𝐪=(q_1,q_2)`$. However, in case of weak interaction the $`2D`$ waves constructed from the $`1D`$ plane waves in accordance with the above procedure form an appropriate basis for the description of elementary excitations in QCB in close analogy with the nearly free electron approximation in conventional crystalline lattices. It is easily foreknown that a weak inter-wire interaction does not completely destroy the above quasimomentum classification of eigenstates, and the $`2D`$ reconstruction of the spectrum may be described in terms of wave mixing similarly to the standard Bragg diffraction in a weak periodic potential. Moreover, the classification of eigenstates of empty superlattice may be effectively used for the classification of energy bands in a real QCB superlattice where the superperiodicity is imposed by interaction.

Complete kinematics of an empty superchain (wave functions, dispersion laws, relations between quasiparticle second quantization operators) is developed in Appendix A. In terms of these $`1D`$ Bloch functions (see Eqs. (56), (57) of Appendix A) we construct the $`2D`$ basis of Bloch functions for an empty superlattice

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{s,s^{},𝐪}(𝐫)=\psi _{1,s,q_1}(x_1)\psi _{2,s^{},q_2}(x_2).$$
(3)
Here $`s,s^{}=1,2,\mathrm{},`$ are the band numbers, and the $`2D`$ quasimomentum $`𝐪=(q_1,q_2)`$ belongs to the first BZ, $`|q_j|Q_j/2.`$ The corresponding eigenfrequencies are

$$\omega _{ss^{}}(𝐪)=\omega _{1,s}(𝐪)+\omega _{2,s^{}}(𝐪).$$
(4)
Here

$$\omega _{j,s}(𝐪)\omega _{j,s}(q_j),$$

and $`\omega _{j,s}(q_j)`$ is defined by Eqs. (58) below. We will use this basis in the next subsection when constructing the excitation spectrum of QCB within the reduced band scheme.

### B Hamiltonian

When turning to description of interaction in a QCB, one should refer to a real geometry of crossbars, and recollect the important fact that the equilibrium distance between two arrays is finite and large enough to supress direct electron tunneling citeRueckes. We neglect also the elastic and van der-Waals components of intertaction between real nanotubes, because these interactions are not involved in formulation of collective excitations in QCB. Then the full Hamiltonian of the QCB is

$$H=H_1+H_2+H_{int},$$
(5)
where $`H_j`$ describes the $`1D`$ boson field in the $`j`$-th array

$`H_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}v_1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n_2}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{L_1/2}{\overset{L_1/2}{}}}dx_1\{g_1\pi _1^2(x_1,n_2a_2)`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_1}}\left(_{x_1}\theta _1(x_1,n_2a_2)\right)^2\},`$
$`H_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}v_2}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n_1}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{L_2/2}{\overset{L_2/2}{}}}dx_2\{g_2\pi _2^2(n_1a_1,x_2)`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_2}}\left(_{x_2}\theta _2(n_1a_1,x_2)\right)^2\},`$
and $`\theta _j,\pi _j`$ are the conventional canonically conjugated boson fields (see, e.g., Ref.).

The interwire interaction results from a short–range contact capacitive coupling in the crosses of bars,

$`H_{int}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n_1,n_2}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x_1𝑑x_2V(x_1n_1a_1,n_2a_2x_2)}`$
$`\times `$ $`\rho _1(x_1,n_2a_2)\rho _2(n_1a_1,x_2),`$
where the integration is restricted by the area $`L_j/2x_jL_j/2`$. Here $`\rho _i(𝐫)`$ are density operators, and $`V(𝐫_1𝐫_2)`$ is a short-range interwire interaction. Physically, it represents the Coulomb interaction between charge fluctuations

$$e\zeta \left(\frac{x_jn_ja_j}{r_j}\right),\zeta (\xi )=\zeta (\xi ),\zeta (0)=1,$$
(6)
around the crossing point $`(n_1a_1,n_2a_2).`$ The size of the fluctuation on the wire of the $`j`$-th array, is determined by the screening radius $`r_j`$ within the wire. One may neglect the inter-wire tunneling and restrict oneself by the capacitive interaction only, provided the vertical distance between the wires $`d`$ is substantially larger than the screening radiuses $`r_j.`$ Therefore the interaction has the form,

$`V(𝐫)={\displaystyle \frac{V_0}{2}}\mathrm{\Phi }({\displaystyle \frac{x_1}{r_1}},{\displaystyle \frac{x_2}{r_2}}),`$
where the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi _1,\xi _2)`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi _1,\xi _2)=\frac{\zeta _1(\xi _1)\zeta _2(\xi _2)}{\sqrt{1+{\displaystyle \frac{|𝐫_{12}|^2}{d^2}}}},$$
(7)
$$𝐫_{12}=r_1\xi _1𝐞_1r_2\xi _2𝐞_2.$$

It is seen from these equations that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi _1,\xi _2)`$ vanishes for $`|\xi _{1,2}|1`$ and is normalized by condition $`\mathrm{\Phi }(0,0)=1`$. The effective coupling strength is

$$V_0=\frac{2e^2}{d}.$$
(8)
In terms of boson field operators $`\theta _i`$, the interaction is written as

$`H_{int}`$ $`=`$ $`V_0{\displaystyle \underset{n_1,n_2}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x_1𝑑x_2\mathrm{\Phi }(\frac{x_1n_1a_1}{r_1},\frac{n_2a_2x_2}{r_2})}`$
$`\times `$ $`_{x_1}\theta _1(x_1,n_2a_2)_{x_2}\theta _2(n_1a_1,x_2).`$
In the quasimomentum representation (3) the full Hamiltonian (5) acquires the form,

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}vg}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s,𝐪}{}}\pi _{js𝐪}^{}\pi _{js𝐪}+`$ (10)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2vg}}{\displaystyle \underset{jj^{}=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s,s^{},𝐪}{}}W_{jsj^{}s^{}𝐪}\theta _{js𝐪}^{}\theta _{j^{}s^{}𝐪},`$
where $`\sqrt{vg/v_jg_j}\theta _{js𝐪}`$ and $`\sqrt{v_jg_j/vg}\pi _{js𝐪}`$ are the Fourier components of the boson fields $`\theta _j`$ and $`\pi _j`$, and effective velocity and coupling are $`v=\sqrt{v_1v_2}`$, $`g=\sqrt{g_1g_2}`$ respectively.

The matrix elements for interwire coupling are given by:

$`W_{jsj^{}s^{}𝐪}`$ $`=`$ $`\omega _{js}(q_j)\omega _{j^{}s^{}}(q_j^{})\left[\delta _{jj^{}}\delta _{ss^{}}+\varphi _{jsj^{}s^{}𝐪}\left(1\delta _{jj^{}}\right)\right].`$
Here

$$\omega _{js}(q_j)=v_j\left(\left[\frac{s}{2}\right]Q_j+\left(1\right)^{s1}\left|q_j\right|\right),$$
(11)
are eigenfrequencies of the “unperturbed” $`1D`$ mode (see Eq. (58) of Appendix A), pertaining to an array $`j`$, band $`s`$ and quasimomentum $`𝐪=q_j𝐠_j.`$ The coefficients

$`\varphi _{1s2s^{}𝐪}=\varphi (1)^{s+s^{}}\text{sign}(q_1q_2)\mathrm{\Phi }_{1s2s^{}𝐪},`$
$`\varphi ={\displaystyle \frac{gV_0r_0^2}{\mathrm{}va}},r_0=\sqrt{r_1r_2},a=\sqrt{a_1a_2},`$
are proportional to the dimensionless Fourier component of the interaction strengths

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{1s2s^{}𝐪}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑\xi _1𝑑\xi _2\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi _1,\xi _2)e^{i(r_1q_1\xi _1+r_2q_2\xi _2)}}`$
$`\times `$ $`u_{1,s,q_1}^{}(r_1\xi _1)u_{2,s^{},q_2}^{}(r_2\xi _2)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{2s^{}1s𝐪}^{}.`$
The Hamiltonian (10) describes a system of coupled harmonic oscillators, which can be exactly diagonalized with the help of a certain canonical linear transformation (note that it is already diagonal with respect to the quasimomentum $`𝐪`$). The diagonalization procedure is, nevertheless, rather cumbersome due to the mixing of states belonging to different bands and arrays. However, it will be shown below that provided $`dr_{1,2}`$, a separable potential approximation is applicable, that shortens calculations noticeably.

### C Approximations

As it was already mentioned, we consider the rarefied QCB with short range capacitive interaction. In the case of QCB formed by nanotubes, this is a Coulomb interaction screened at a distance of the order of the nanotube radius $`R_0,`$ therefore $`r_0R_0.`$ The minimal radius of a single-wall carbon nanotube is about $`R_0=0.35÷0.4nm`$ (see Ref.). The intertube vertical distance $`d`$ in artificially produced nanotube networks is estimated as $`d2`$nm (see Ref.) Therefore the ratio $`r_0^2/d^20.04`$ is really small and the dimensionless interaction $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi _1,\xi _2)`$ (7) in the main approximation is separable

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi _1,\xi _2)\mathrm{\Phi }_0(\xi _1,\xi _2)=\zeta _1(\xi _1)\zeta _2(\xi _2).$$
(12)
It should be noted that the interaction in this form is an even function of its arguments, and the odd correction to the $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ is of order $`r_0^2/d^2`$, whereas $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ is of order of $`1`$.

To diagonalize the Hamiltonian (10), one should solve the system of equations of motion for the field operators. Generalized coordinates $`\theta `$ satisfy the equations

$`\left[\omega _{1s}^2(q_1)\omega ^2\right]\theta _{1s𝐪}+\sqrt{\epsilon }\varphi _{1s}(q_1)\omega _{1s}(q_1)`$ (13)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{a}}{\displaystyle \underset{s^{}}{}}\varphi _{2s^{}}(q_2)\omega _{2s^{}}(q_2)\theta _{2s^{}𝐪}=0,`$ (14)
$`s=1,2,\mathrm{},`$ (15)
and the similar equations obtained by permutation $`12`$. Here

$$\varphi _{js}(q)=(1)^s\text{sign}(q)𝑑\xi \zeta _j(\xi )e^{ir_0q\xi }u_{jsq}(r_0\xi ),$$
(16)
Bloch amplitudes $`u_{jsq}(r_0\xi )`$ are defined by Eqs. (57) of Appendix A, and

$$\epsilon =\left(\varphi \frac{a}{r_0}\right)^2=\left(\frac{gV_0r_0}{\mathrm{}v}\right)^2.$$
(17)
Due to separability of the interaction, equations of motion (15) can be solved exactly. Corresponding square eigenfrequencies are determined by the characteristic equation

$$F_{1q_1}(\omega ^2)F_{2q_2}(\omega ^2)=\frac{1}{\epsilon },$$
(18)
where

$$F_{jq}(\omega ^2)=\frac{r_j}{a_j}\underset{s}{}\frac{\varphi _{js}^2(q)\omega _{js}^2(q)}{\omega _{js}^2(q)\omega ^2}.$$
(19)
The function $`F_{jq}(\omega ^2)`$ has a set of poles at $`\omega ^2=\omega _{js}^2(q)`$, $`s=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$ . For squared frequency smaller than all squared initial eigenfrequencies $`\omega _{js}^2(q)`$, i.e. within the interval $`[0,\omega _{j1}^2]`$, this is a positive and growing function. Its minimal value $`F_j`$ on the interval is reached at $`\omega ^2=0,`$ and it does not depend on quasimomentum $`q`$

$$F_{jq}(0)=\frac{r_j}{a_j}\underset{s}{}\varphi _{js}^2(q)=𝑑\xi \zeta _j^2(\xi )F_j$$
(20)
(here Eqs. (19) and (16) are used). If parameter $`\epsilon `$ is smaller than its critical value

$$\epsilon _c=\frac{1}{F_1F_2},$$
(21)
then all solutions $`\omega ^2`$ of the characteristic equation are positive. When $`\epsilon `$ increases, the lowest QCB mode softens and its square frequency vanishes in a whole BZ at $`\epsilon =\epsilon _c`$. For exponential charge density distribution $`\zeta (\xi )=\mathrm{exp}(|\xi |),`$ one obtaines $`\epsilon _c1`$.

In our model the dimensionless interaction $`\epsilon `$ in Eq.(17) can be written as

$$\epsilon =\left(\frac{2R_0}{d}\frac{ge^2}{\mathrm{}v}\right)^2.$$
(22)
For nanotube QCB, the first factor within parentheses is about $`0.35.`$ The second one which is nothing but the corresponding QCB “fine structure” constant, can be estimated as $`0.9`$ (we used the values of $`g=1/3`$ and $`v=8\times 10^7`$cm/sec, see Ref.). Therefore $`\epsilon `$ approximately equals $`0.1,`$ so this parameter is really small. Thus the considered system is stable, its spectrum is described by Eqs.(18), (19) with a *small* parameter $`\epsilon `$.

The general Eq.(18) reduces in infrared limit $`𝐪,\omega 0`$ to an equation describing the spectrum of two coupled sliding phases. i.e. $`1:1`$ arrays in accordance with classification , offered in Ref. . Equation (3.13) of this paper is a long wave limit of our equation (61) derived in Appendix B. Therefore the general analysis of stability of the LL fixed point is appicable in our approach.

### D Spectrum

Due to the smallness of interaction, the systematics of unperturbed levels and states is grossly conserved, at least in the low energy region corresponding to the first few energy bands. This means that perturbed eigenstates could be described by the same quantum numbers (array number, band number and quasimomentum) as the unperturbed ones. Such a description fails in two specific regions of reciprocal space. The first of them is the vicinity of lines $`q_j=nQ_j/2`$ with $`n`$ integer. Indeed, as it follows from the equations of motion (15), around these lines the interband mixing is significant. These lines with $`n=\pm 1`$ include BZ boundaries. Because of this BZ which is, generally speaking, non relevant, and in this subsection we refer mostly to BZ.

The second region is the vicinity of the lines where the resonance conditions are fulfilled

$$\omega _{1s}^2(q_1)=\omega _{2s^{}}^2(q_2).$$
(23)
Here inter-array mixing within the same energy band ($`s=s^{}`$) or between neighboring bands ($`ss^{}`$) is significant. In what follows we will pay attention first of all to these two regions because in the rest of the BZ the initial systematics of the energy spectrum can be successfully used.

Equations (15), (18), describing the wave functions and the dispersion laws are analysed in Appendix B. We describe below some of these dispersion qurves for two types of QCB basing on this analysis.

#### 1 Square QCB

We start with the simplest case of square QCB formed by identical wires. This means that all parameters (wire length, space period, Fermi velocity, LL parameter, screening radius) are the same for both arrays. The corresponding BZ and is also a square (see Fig.3). Resonant lines are the diagonals of BZ.

In the major part of the BZ, for quasimomenta $`𝐪`$ lying far from the diagonals, each eigenstate mostly conserves its initial systematics, i.e. belongs to a given array, and mostly depends on a given quasimomentum component. Corresponding dispersion laws remain linear being slightly modified near the BZ boundaries only. The main change is therefore the renormalization of the plasmon velocity.

In the left part of Fig.4 we displayed dispersion curves corresponding to quasimomenta belonging to a generic $`OA`$ line in BZ. In what follows we use $`(j,s)`$ notations for the unperturbed boson propagating along the $`j`$-th array in the $`s`$-th band. Then the lowest curve in this part of Fig.4 is, in fact, the slightly renormalized dispersion of a $`(2,1)`$ boson. The middle curve describes $`(1,1)`$ boson, and the upper curve is the dispersion of a $`(1,2)`$ boson. The fourth frequency corresponding to a $`(2,2)`$ boson, is far above and is not displayed in the figure. It is seen that the dispersion remains linear along the whole line $`OA`$ except a nearest vicinity of the BZ boundary (point $`A`$ in Fig.3).

Dispersion curves corresponding to quasi momenta lying at the BZ boundary $`q_1=Q/2,`$ $`0q_2Q/2`$ (line $`FC`$ in Fig.3) are displayed in the central part in Fig.4). The characteristic feature of this boundary is the intra-band degeneracy in one of two arrays. Indeed, in zero approximation, two modes $`(1,s),`$ $`s=1,2,`$ propagating along the first array are degenerate with unperturbed frequency $`\omega =0.5.`$ The interaction lifts the degeneracy. This interaction occurs to be repulsive at the BZ boundaries. As a result the lowest of two middle curves in Fig.4 corresponds to $`(1,u)`$ boson, and upper of them describes $`(1,g)`$ boson. Here the indices $`g,u`$ denote a boson parity with respect to the transposition of the band numbers. Note that $`(1,g)`$ boson exactly conserves its unperturbed frequency $`\omega =0.5.`$ The latter fact is related to the square symmetry of the QCB.

Two others curves correspond to almost non pertubed bosons of the second array. The lowest curve describes the dispersion of the $`(2,1)`$ wave. Its counterpart in the second band $`(2,2)`$ is described by the highest curve in the figure. Their dispersion laws are nearly linear, and deviations from linearity are observed only near the corner of the BZ (point $`C`$ in Fig.3).

Consider now dispersion relations of modes with quasi–momenta on the diagonal $`OC`$ of BZ and start with $`𝐪`$ not too close to the BZ corner $`C`$ ($`q_1=q_2=Q/2`$). This diagonal is actually one of the resonance lines. Two modes in the first band coressponding to different arrays are strongly mixed. They mostly have a definite $`j`$-parity with respect to transposition of array numbers $`j=1,2`$. Interaction between these modes occurs to be attractive (repulsive) for $`q_1q_2>0`$ ($`q_1q_2<0`$). Therefore the odd modes $`(u,s),`$ at the BZ diagonal $`OC`$ $`s=1,2,`$ correspond to lower frequencies and the even modes $`(g,s)`$ correspond to higher ones. The corresponding dispersion curves are displayed in the right part of Fig.4.

At the BZ corner $`q_1=q_2=Q/2`$ (point $`C`$ in Fig.3) all four initial modes $`j,s=1,2`$ are degenerate in the lowest approximation. This four-fold degeneracy results from the square symmetry of BZ (the resonant lines are diagonals of the Z). Weak inter-wire interaction partially lifts the degeneracy, however the split modes have a definite $`s`$-parity with respect to transposition of band numbers $`s=1,2`$. The lowest frequency corresponds mostly to $`(g,u)`$ boson, symmetric with respect to transposition of array numbers, but antisymmetric with respect to the transposition of band numbers. The upper curve describes a $`(u,u)`$ boson with odd both $`j`$-parity and $`s`$-parity. The two middle modes with even band parity, $`(g,g)`$ and $`(u,g)`$ bosons, remain degenerate and their frequencies conserve the unperturbed value $`\omega =0.5`$. This also results from the square symmetry of QCB (7).

All these results show that the quantum states of the $`2D`$ QCB conserve the quasi $`1D`$ character of the Luttinger–like liquid in major part of momentum space, and that $`2D`$ effects can be successfully calculated within the framework of perturbation theory. However, bosons with quasimomenta close to the resonant line (diagonal $`OC`$) of the BZ are strongly mixed bare $`1D`$ bosons. These excitations are essentially two-dimensional, and therefore the lines of equal energy in this part of the BZ are modified by the $`2D`$ interaction (see Fig.5). It is clearly seen that deviations from linearity occur only in a small part of the BZ. The crossover from LL to FL behavior around isolated points of the BZ due to a single-particle hybridization (tunneling) for Fermi excitations was noticed in Refs. , where a mesh of horizontal and vertical stripes in superconducting cuprates was studied.

#### 2 Tilted QCB

Now we consider the spectrum of a generic double QCB. In this case all parameters (wire length, space period, Fermi velocity, LL parameter, screening radius) depend, generally speaking, on the array index $`j.`$ In what follows we refer to such a QCB as a tilted QCB. Now the resonance condition (23) is fulfilled not at the BZ diagonal but at the resonant polygonal line. Its part $`ODE,`$ lying in the first quarter of the BZ, is displayed in Fig.6 (all figures of this subsection correspond to specific values $`v_2Q_2=1,v_1Q_1=1.4`$).This results in qualitative changes of the spectrum that are related first of all to the appearance of two points $`D`$ and $`E`$ of the three-fold degeneracy for a titled QCB (Fig.6) instead of a single point $`C`$ of four-fold degeneracy for a square QCB (Fig.3).

We start with the resonant line $`ODE`$ (Fig.7). The dispersion curves at its $`OD`$ part and the symmetry properties of the corresponding eigenstates are similar to those at the $`OC`$ resonant line for the square QCB (Fig.3). The only difference is that instead of the four-fold degeneracy at the BZ corner $`C`$ of the square QCB, there is a three-fold degeneracy at the point $`D`$ lying at the BZ boundary. A completely new situation takes place at the $`DE`$ line, where two other modes $`(1,1)`$ and $`(2,2),`$ corresponding to different arrays and different bands, are degenerate. The interaction lifts this degeneracy and the two middle lines in Fig.7 describe even $`(g)`$ and odd $`(u)`$ combinations of these modes. The even mode corresponds to the lowest frequency and the odd mode corresponds to the higher one. At the point $`E`$ one meets another type of a three-fold degeneracy described in more detail in the next paragraph..

Dispersion curves corresponding to quasi momenta lying at the BZ boundary $`q_1=Q_1/2,`$ $`0q_2Q_2/2`$ ($`FC`$ line in Fig.6) and $`q_2=Q_2/2,`$ $`0q_1Q_1/2`$ ($`CF^{}`$ line in Fig.6), are displayed in Fig.8. The lowest and the highest curves in the $`FE`$ part of the latter figure, describe two waves propagating along the second array. They are nearly linear, and deviations from linearity are observed only near the point $`E`$ where the interaction has a resonant character. Two modes propagating along the first array, in zero approximation, are degenerate with an unperturbed frequency $`\omega =0.7.`$ The interaction lifts the degeneracy. The lowest of the two middle curves corresponds to $`(1,u)`$ boson, and the upper of one describes $`(1,g)`$ boson. Note that $`(1,g)`$ boson conserves its unperturbed frequency $`\omega =0.7`$. The latter fact is related to the symmetry $`\zeta _j(\xi )=\zeta _j(\xi )`$ of the separable interaction (6). At the point $`E`$, the two modes propagating along the first array and the mode propagating along the second array in the second band are degenerate. Interactions lifts the degeneracy, and, as a result, the $`(1,u)`$ and $`(2,2)`$ waves are strongly mixed and the eigenmodes are their even (highest frequency) and odd (lowest frequency) combinations, and the $`(1,g)`$ mode (middle level).

There are two separate degeneracies within each array at the corner $`C`$ of a titled QCB BZ. Both of them are related to interband mixing conserving array index. The spectral behavior along the $`CF^{}`$ boundary of the BZ is similar to that considered above but in the vicinity of the point $`D`$ of three-fold degeneracy. Here, two modes propagating along the second array in the separable potential approximation (12) remain degenerate. This degeneracy is lifted only if deviation from separability is accounted for.

The diagonal $`OC`$ of a tilted QCB BZ represents a new type of generic line, that crosses a resonant line (Fig.9). Here the spectrum mostly conserves its initial systematics, i.e. belongs to a given array, and mostly depends on a given quasimomentum component. However, at the crossing point $`B`$, the modes $`(1,1)`$ and $`(2,2),`$ corresponding to both different arrays and bands, become degenerate (two middle dashed lines in Fig.9). Interaction between the wires lifts the degeneracy. The eigenstates of QCB have a definite parity with respect to transposition of these two modes. The lowest and upper of two middle lines corresponds to even ($`g`$) and odd ($`u`$) mode, respectively.

Like in square QCB, bosons with quasimomenta close to the resonant lines are strongly mixed bare $`1D`$ bosons. These excitations are essentially two-dimensional, and therefore lines of equal energy in the vicinity of the resonant lines are modified by the $`2D`$ interaction (see Figs.10,11). Deviations from $`1D`$ behaviour occur only in this small part of the BZ. For $`\omega <0.5v_2Q_2`$ the lines of equal energy within BZ consist of closed line around the BZ center and four open lines (within the extendend bands scheme these lines are certainly closed) around the BZ corners (lines 1, 2, 3 in Fig.10). At the line $`OD`$ in BZ, the modes of QCB are strongly coupled bare bosons propagating along both arrays in the first band.

For $`0.5v_2Q_2<\omega <0.5v_1Q_1`$ (lines 4, 5 in Fig.11) the topology of lines of equal energy is modified. In this case lines of equal energy within the BZ consist of four open lines. The splitting of lines at the direction $`DE`$ corresponds to strong coupling of modes propagating along the first array in the first band with those propagating along the second array in the second band.

### E Correlations and Observables

The structure of the energy spectrum analyzed above predetermines optical and transport properties of QCB. We consider here three types of correlation functions manifesting dimensional crossover in QCB.

#### 1 Optical Absorption

We start with ac conductivity

$$\sigma _{jj^{}}(𝐪,\omega )=\sigma _{jj^{}}^{}(𝐪,\omega )+i\sigma _{jj^{}}^{\prime \prime }(𝐪,\omega ).$$
(24)
The real part $`\sigma _{jj^{}}^{}(𝐪,\omega )`$ determines an optical absorption. The spectral properties of *ac* conductivity are given by a current–current correlator

$$\sigma _{jj^{}}(𝐪,\omega )=\frac{1}{\omega }\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑te^{i\omega t}[J_{j1𝐪}(t),J_{j^{}1𝐪}^{}(0)].$$
(25)
Here $`J_{js𝐪}=\sqrt{2}vg\pi _{js𝐪}`$ is a current operator for the $`j`$-th array (we restrict ourselves to the first band, for the sake of simplicity).

The current-current correlator for non-interacting wires is reduced to the conventional LL expression ,

$`[J_{j1𝐪}(t),J_{j^{}1𝐪}^{}(0)]_0=2ivg\omega _{j1𝐪}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _{j1𝐪}t)\delta _{jj^{}}`$
with metallic-like peak

$$\sigma _{jj^{}}^{}(𝐪,\omega >0)=\pi vg\delta (\omega \omega _{j1𝐪})\delta _{jj^{}}.$$
(26)
For QCB this correlator is calculated in Appendix C. Its analysis leads to the following results.

The longitudinal absorption

$$\sigma _{11}^{}(𝐪,\omega )(1\varphi _{1𝐪}^2)\delta (\omega \stackrel{~}{\omega }_{1𝐪})+\varphi _{1𝐪}^2\delta (\omega \stackrel{~}{\omega }_{2𝐪})$$
(27)
contains well pronounced peak on the modified first array frequency and weak peak at the second array frequency (the parameter $`\varphi _{1𝐪},`$ defined by Eq. (75)of Appendix B, is small). The modified frequencies $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_{1𝐪}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_{2𝐪}`$ coincide with the eigenfrequencies $`\omega _{+1𝐪}`$ and $`\omega _{2𝐪}`$ respectively, if $`\omega _{1𝐪}>\omega _{2𝐪}.`$ In the opposite case the signs $`+,`$ should be changede to the opposite ones.

The transverse absorption component contains two weak peaks

$$\sigma _{12}^{}(𝐪,\omega )\varphi _{1𝐪}\left[\delta (\omega \stackrel{~}{\omega }_{1𝐪})+\delta (\omega \stackrel{~}{\omega }_{2𝐪})\right].$$
(28)
At the resonant line, the results change drastically. Both longitudinal and transverse components of the optical absorption contain two well pronounced peaks corresponding to slightly split modified frequencies

$$\sigma _{11}^{}(𝐪,\omega )\frac{1}{2}\left[\delta (\omega \stackrel{~}{\omega }_{1𝐪})+\delta (\omega \stackrel{~}{\omega }_{2𝐪})\right].$$
(29)
#### 2 Space Perturbation

One of the main effects specific for QCB is the appearance of non-zero transverse momentum–momentum correlation function. In space-time coordinates $`(𝐱,t)`$ its representation reads,

$$G_{12}(𝐱,t)=i[\pi _1(x_1,0;t),\pi _2(0,x_2;0)].$$
(30)
This function describes the momentum response at the point $`(0,x_2)`$ of the second array for time $`t`$ caused by an initial ($`t=0`$) perturbation localized in coordinate space at the point $`(x_1,0)`$ of the first array. Standard calculations similar to those described above, lead to the following expression,

$`G_{12}(𝐱;t)={\displaystyle \frac{V_0r_0^2}{4\pi ^2\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑k_1𝑑k_2\varphi _1(k_1)\varphi _2(k_2)k_1k_2`$
$`\times \mathrm{sin}(k_1x_1)\mathrm{sin}(k_2x_2){\displaystyle \frac{v_2k_2\mathrm{sin}(v_2k_2t)v_1k_1\mathrm{sin}(v_1k_1t)}{v_2^2k_2^2v_1^2k_1^2}},`$
where $`\varphi _j(k)`$ is the form-factor (16) written in the extended BZ. This correlator is shown in Fig.12. It is mostly localized at the line determined by the obvious kinematic condition

$$\frac{|x_1|}{v_1}+\frac{|x_2|}{v_2}=t.$$

The time $`t`$ in the r.h.s. is thea total time of plasmon propagation from the starting point $`(x_1,0)`$ to the final point $`(0,x_2)`$ or vice versa, along any of the shortest ways compatible with a restricted geometry of the $`2D`$ grid. The finiteness of the interaction radius slightly spreads this peak and modifies its profile.

#### 3 Rabi Oscillations

Further manifestation of the 2D character of QCB system is related to the possibility of periodic energy transfer between the two arrays. Consider an initial perturbation which excites a plane wave with amplitude $`\theta _0`$ within the first array in the system of non-interacting arrays,

$`\theta _1(x_1,n_2a_2;t)`$ $`=`$ $`\theta _0\mathrm{sin}(q_1x_1+q_2n_2a_2v_1|q_1|t).`$
If the wave vector $`𝐪,`$ satisfying the condition $`|𝐪|<<Q_{1,2}/2,`$ is not close to the resonant line of the BZ, weak interarray interaction $`\varphi =\epsilon r_0/a`$ slightly changes the $`\theta _1`$ component and leads to the appearance of a small $`\theta _2\varphi `$ component. But for $`𝐪`$ lying on the resonant line ($`v_1|q_1|=v_2|q_2|\omega _𝐪`$), both components within the main approximation have the same order of magnitude,

$`\theta _1(x_1,n_2a_2;t)`$ $`=`$ $`\theta _0\mathrm{cos}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{1𝐪}\omega _𝐪t\right)`$
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{sin}(q_1x_1+q_2n_2a_2\omega _𝐪t),`$
$`\theta _2(n_1a_1,x_2;t)`$ $`=`$ $`\theta _0\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{1𝐪}\omega _𝐪t\right)`$
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{cos}(q_1n_1a_1+q_2x_2\omega _𝐪t).`$
This corresponds to 2D propagation of a plane wave with wave vector $`𝐪,`$ modulated by a “slow” frequency $`\varphi \omega .`$ As a result, beating arises due to periodic energy transfer from one array to another during a long period $`T(\varphi \omega )^1`$ (see Fig.13). These peculiar “Rabi oscillations” may be considered as one of the fingerprints of the physics exposed in QCB systems.

## III Triple QCB

### A Notions and Hamiltonian

Triple quantum bars is $`2D`$ periodic grid with $`m=3`$, formed by three periodically crossed arrays $`j=1,2,3`$ of $`1D`$ quantum wires. In fact these arrays are placed on three planes parallel to $`XY`$ plane and separated by an inter-plane distances $`d.`$ The upper and the lower arrays correspond to $`j=1,2,`$ while the middle array has number $`j=3.`$ All wires in all arrays are identical. They have the same length $`L,`$ Fermi velocity $`v`$ and Luttinger parameter $`g.`$ The arrays are oriented along the $`2D`$ unit vectors

$$𝐞_1=(\frac{1}{2},\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}),𝐞_2=(1,0),𝐞_3=𝐞_2𝐞_1.$$
(31)
The periods of QCB along these directions are equal, $`a_j=a,`$ so we deal with a regular triangular lattice. In what follows we choose $`𝐚_{1,2}=a𝐞_{1,2}`$ as the basic vectors of a superlattice (see Fig.14).

The wires within the $`j`$-th array are enumerated with the integers $`n_j.`$ Define $`2D`$ coordinates along the $`n_j`$-th wire $`𝐫_j`$ as $`𝐫_j=x_j𝐞_j+n_ja𝐞_3`$ for upper and lower arrays ($`j=1,2`$) and $`𝐫_3=x_3𝐞_3+n_3a𝐞_1`$ for the middle array. Here $`x_j`$ are $`1D`$ continuous coorinates along the wire. The system of three non-interacting arrays is described by the Hamiltonian

$$H_0=H_1+H_2+H_3,$$
(32)
where

$`H_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}v}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n_1}{}}{\displaystyle }dx_1[g\pi _1^2(x_1𝐞_1+n_1a𝐞_3)`$ (34)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g}}\left(_{x_1}\theta _1(x_1𝐞_1+n_1a𝐞_3)\right)^2],`$
$`H_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}v}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n_2}{}}{\displaystyle }dx_2[g\pi _2^2(x_2𝐞_2+n_2a𝐞_3)`$ (36)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g}}\left(_{x_2}\theta _2(x_2𝐞_2+n_2a𝐞_3)\right)^2],`$
$`H_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}v}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n_3}{}}{\displaystyle }dx_3[g\pi _3^2(x_3𝐞_3+n_3a𝐞_1)`$ (38)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g}}\left(_{x_3}\theta _3(x_3𝐞_3+n_3a𝐞_1)\right)^2],`$
and $`\pi _j`$ and $`_{x_j}\theta _j`$ are canonically conjugated fields describing LL within the $`j`$-th array.

Interaction between the excitations in different wires of adjacent arrays $`j,j^{}`$ is concentrated near the crossing points with coordinates $`n_j𝐚_j+n_j^{}𝐚_j^{}`$. It is actually Coulomb interaction screened on a distance $`r_0`$ along each wire which is described by Hamiltonian

$$H_{int}=H_{13}+H_{23},$$
(39)
where

$`{\displaystyle \frac{H_{13}}{V_0}}={\displaystyle \underset{n_1,n_3}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x_1𝑑x_3\mathrm{\Phi }\left(\frac{x_1n_3a}{r_0}𝐞_1\frac{x_3n_1a}{r_0}𝐞_3\right)}`$ (40)
$`\times _{x_1}\theta _1(x_1𝐞_1+n_1a𝐞_3)_{x_3}\theta _3(n_3a𝐞_1+x_3𝐞_3),`$ (41)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{H_{23}}{V_0}}={\displaystyle \underset{n_2,n_3}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x_2𝑑x_3\mathrm{\Phi }\left(\frac{x_2n_3a}{r_0}𝐞_2\frac{x_3n_2a}{r_0}𝐞_3\right)}`$ (42)
$`\times _{x_2}\theta _2(x_2𝐞_2+n_2a𝐞_3)_{x_3}\theta _3(n_3a𝐞_2+x_3𝐞_3).`$ (43)
Here the effective coupling strength $`V_0`$ is defined by Eq.(8), the dimensionless interaction $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is separable

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi _j𝐞_j+\xi _3𝐞_3)=\zeta (\xi _j)\zeta (\xi _3),j=1,2,$$
(44)
and $`\zeta (\xi )`$ is dimensionless charge fluctuation in the $`j`$-th wire (see Eq. (6)).

Such interaction imposes a superperiodicity on the energy spectrum of initially one dimensional quantum wires, and the eigenstates of this superlattice are characterized by a $`2D`$ quasimomentum $`𝐪=q_1𝐠_1+q_2𝐠_2(q_1,q_2)`$. Here $`𝐠_{1,2}`$ are the unit vectors of the reciprocal superlattice satisfying the standard orthogonality relations $`(𝐞_i𝐠_j)=\delta _{ij},j=1,2.`$ The corresponding basic vectors of the reciprocal superlattice have the form $`Q(m_1𝐠_1+m_2𝐠_2`$, where $`Q=2\pi /a`$ and $`m_{1,2}`$ are integers. In Fig.15 elementary cell $`BIJL`$ of the reciprocal lattice is displayed together with the hexagon of the Wigner-Seitz cell that we choose as the BZ of the triple QCB.

To study the energy spectrum and the eigenstates of the total Hamiltonian

$$H=H_0+H_{int},$$
(45)
we define the Fourier components of the field operators

$`\theta _1(x_1𝐞_1+n_1a𝐞_3)=`$ (46)
$`(NL)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \underset{s,𝐪}{}}\theta _{1s𝐪}e^{i(q_1x_1+q_3n_1a)}u_{s,q_1}(x_1),`$ (47)
$`\theta _2(x_2𝐞_2+n_2a𝐞_3)=`$ (48)
$`(NL)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \underset{s,𝐪}{}}\theta _{2s𝐪}e^{i(q_2x_2+q_3n_2a)}u_{s,q_2}(x_2),`$ (49)
$`\theta _3(x_3𝐞_3+n_3a𝐞_1)=`$ (50)
$`(NL)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \underset{s,𝐪}{}}\theta _{3s𝐪}e^{i(q_3x_3+q_1n_3a)}u_{s,q_3}(x_3).`$ (51)
Here

$$𝐪=q_1𝐞_1+q_2𝐞_2,q_3=q_2q_1,$$

and $`N=L/a`$ is the dimensionless length of a wire. In the $`𝐪`$ representation, the Hamiltonians $`H_j`$ (Eqs. (34)-(38)) and $`H_{j3}`$ (Eqs. (41), (43)) can be written as

$`H_j={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}vg}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{s,𝐪}{}}\pi _{js𝐪}^+\pi _{js𝐪}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2vg}}{\displaystyle \underset{s,𝐪}{}}\omega _s^2(q_j)\theta _{js𝐪}^+\theta _{js𝐪},j=1,2,3,`$
$`H_{j3}={\displaystyle \frac{V_0r_0^2}{2vg}}{\displaystyle \underset{s,s^{},𝐪}{}}\varphi _s(q_3)\varphi _s^{}(q_j)\omega _s(q_3)\omega _s^{}(q_j)`$
$`\times [\theta _{3s𝐪}^+\theta _{js^{}𝐪}+h.c.],j=1,2,`$
where

$$\omega _s(q)=v(\left[\frac{s}{2}\right]Q+(1)^{s1}|q|).Q=\frac{2\pi }{a}$$

Thus the total Hamiltonian (45) describes a system of coupled harmonic oscillators, and can be diagonalized exactly like in the case of double QCB.

### B Spectrum

Separability of the interaction (44) allows one to derive analytical equations for the spectrum of the total Hamiltonian (45) (see Appendix D). Here we describe the behavior of the spectrum and the states along some specific lines of the reciprocal space.

The high symmetry of the triple QCB leads to a number of lines where interarray or interband resonant interaction occurs: *all* lines in Fig. 15 posess some resonant properties. These lines may be classified as follows:

On the Bragg lines where one of three array wavenumbers $`q_j`$ is a multiple integer of $`Q/2,`$ there is a strong intraband mixing of modes of the $`j`$-th array. In Fig.15, these lines are the boundaries of the elementary cell of the reciprocal lattice $`IJLB,`$ axes $`q_1`$ and $`q_2`$, lines $`OB`$ and $`EH.`$ In particular, along the lines $`OA`$ ($`q_2=0`$) and $`OB`$ ($`q_3=0`$) two modes corresponding to $`2`$-d and $`3`$-d bands and to the second ($`OA`$) or third ($`OB`$) array are mixed. Along the line $`AB`$ ($`q_1=Q/2`$) the same mixing happens between $`(1,1)`$ and $`(1,2)`$ modes. Moreover, the resonant mixing of different arrays within the same band occurs along the medians $`OA,`$ $`OB,`$ etc.. There are two types of such a resonance. The first of one (e.g. $`OA`$ line) is the resonance between neighboring arrays ($`q_1=q_3`$) and therefore it is of the main order with respect to interaction. The second one (e.g. $`OB`$ line) is the resonance between remote arrays ($`q_1=q_2`$) and is one order smaller.

The second family consists of resonant lines formed by the BZ hexagon boundaries and diagonals. Thus, the diagonal $`OC`$ realizes a first order resonance between the first and the third arrays $`q_1=q_3,`$ and the BZ boundaries $`HD`$ and $`AN`$ correspond to the same resonance up to an umklapp process ($`q_1=q_3Q`$ and $`q_1=q_3+Q`$ respectively). Along the diagonal $`OD`$ and the BZ boundary $`NC`$ a second order resonance takes place with resonance conditions $`q_2=q_1`$ and $`q_2=q_1+Q`$ respectively.

In the reciprocal space of the triple QCB there are four different types of crossing points. Two of them include the bases of BZ medians (e.g. points $`A,`$ $`B,`$ $`E`$ and so on). Here one deals with the four-fold degeneracy of the modes corresponding to the first order resonance between the neighboring arrays (e.g. point $`A,`$ $`\omega _{1,s}=\omega _{3,s^{}},`$ $`s,s^{}=1,2`$), or to the second order resonance between remote arrays (like point $`B,`$ $`\omega _{1,s}=\omega _{2,s^{}},`$ $`s,s^{}=1,2`$). One more family consists of crossing points of the BZ diagonals and the lines connecting the bases of its medians (points $`M,`$ $`F,`$ $`G`$ and so on). Here one deals with three types of two-fold degeneracy simultaneously. For example, at the point $`M`$ two separate pairs of modes corresponding to neighboring arrays $`(2,1),`$ $`(3,1),`$ and $`(2,2),`$ $`(3,2),`$ are degenerate, as well as two modes corresponding to the first array, $`(1,1),`$ $`(1,2).`$ Finally the BZ hexagon vertices form the most interesting group of points where the three-fold degeneracy between modes corresponding to all three arrays takes place. The typical example of such a point is the vertex $`C`$ where the resonance condition $`q_1=q_2+Q=q_3=Q/3`$ is satisfied.

Almost all these peculiarities of the triple QCB spectrum can be illustrated in Fig.16 where the dispersion curves along the closed line $`OABO`$ are displayed. We emphasize once more that in the infrared limit $`\omega ,𝐪0`$ triple QCB like double QCB preserves the characteristic LL properties of the initial arrays.

### C Observables

The structure of the energy spectrum analyzed above strongly influences optical and transport properties of the triple QCB. As in the case of double QCB (subsection II E), one expects to observe four peaks of the optical absorption near the points $`A,B,E,H`$ of the four-fold degeneracy. Then, specific features of space correlators like those considered in II E 2 can be observed. But the most pronounced manifestation of a triangular symmetry of the triple QCB are its Rabi oscillations.

Consider the vicinity of the point $`C`$ of three-fold degeneracy mixing all three arrays. Appropriate initial conditions lead (see Appendix E for details) to the following time dependence of the field operators in the coordinate origin in real space

$`\theta _1(0,0;t)`$ $`=`$ $`\theta _0\mathrm{sin}(\omega _0t)\mathrm{cos}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2\epsilon }\varphi ^2}{4}}\omega _0t\right),`$ (52)
$`\theta _2(0,0;t)`$ $`=`$ $`\theta _0\mathrm{cos}(\omega _0t)\mathrm{sin}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2\epsilon }\varphi ^2}{4}}\omega _0t\right),`$ (53)
$`\theta _3(0,0;t)`$ $`=`$ $`\theta _0\mathrm{sin}(\omega _0t)\mathrm{cos}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2\epsilon }\varphi ^2}{2}}\omega _0t\right).`$ (54)
The field operators of all three arrays demonstrate fast oscillations with the resonant frequency $`\omega _0`$ modulated by a slow frequency. It is the same for the two remote arrays, and doubled for the intermediate array. These beatings are synchronized in a sense that zero intensity on the intermediate array always coincides with the same intensity on one of the remote arrays. At these moments all the energy is concentrated solely within one of the remote arrays. These peculiar Rabi oscillations are displayed in Fig.17.

## IV Conclusion

We discussed in this paper the kinematics and dynamics of plasmon spectrum in QCB. These nanostructures may be fabricated from single-wall carbon nanotubes . On the one hand, QCB is promised to become an important component of future molecular electronics . On the other hand, the spectrum of elementary excitations (plasmons) in these grids possesses the features of both 1D and 2D electron liquid. As is shown in Refs.  and confirmed in the present study, the energy spectrum of QCB preserves the characteristic properties of LL at $`|𝐪|,\omega 0,`$. At finite $`𝐪,\omega `$ the density and momentum waves in double and triple QCB may have either $`1D`$ or $`2D`$ character depending on the direction of the wave vector. Due to interarray interaction, unperturbed states, propagating along arrays are always mixed, and transverse components of correlation functions do not vanish. For quasi-momentum lying on the resonant lines of the BZ, such mixing is strong and transverse correlators have the same order of magnitude as the longitudinal ones. Periodic energy transfer betweem arrays (“Rabi oscillations”) is predicted.

The crossover from 1D to 2D regime may be experimentally observed. One of the experimental manifestations, i.e. the crossover from isotropic to anisotropic (spatially nonuniform) conductivity was pointed out in Ref. . The current may be inserted in QCB at a point on an array $`j`$ and extracted from another array $`i`$ at a distance $`r`$. Then a temperature dependent length scale $`l(T)`$ arises, so that for $`rl`$ the resistance is dominated by small $`q`$ and therefore, the current is isotropic. In the opposite limit $`r<l`$ the dependence of the current on the points of injection/extraction may be detected. At $`T=0`$ the length $`l`$ becomes infinite, and current can only be carried along the wires. These effects are in fact manifestations of the LL behavior of the QCB in the infrared limit.

To observe the crossover at finite $`\{\omega ,𝐪\}`$, one should find a way of exciting the corresponding plasmon modes. Then, scanning the $`\omega (q_1,q_2)`$ surfaces, one may in principle detect the crossover from quasi 1D to 2D behavior in accordance with the properties of the energy spectra presented in Sections II and III. Plasmons in QCB may be excited either by means of microwave resonators or by means of interaction with surface plasmons. In the latter case one should prepare the grid on a corresponding semiconductor substrate and measure, e.g., the plasmon loss spectra. The theory of these plasmon losses will be presented in a forthcoming publication.

## Acknowledgements

This research is supported in part by grants from the Israel Science foundations, the DIP German-Israel cooperation program, and the USA-Israel BSF program.

## Appendix A. Empty Superchain

Here we construct eigenfunctions, spectrum, and quasi-particle operators for an “empty superchain” - quantum wire in an infinitely weak periodic potential with period $`a`$. Excitations in an initial wire are described as plane waves $`L^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}(ikx)`$ with wave number $`k=2\pi n/L,`$ with integer $`n,`$ and dispersion law $`\omega (k)=v|k|`$ (the array number is temporarily omitted). The following orthogonality relations are valid

$`{\displaystyle _{L/2}^{L/2}}\psi _k^{}(x)\psi _k^{}(x)𝑑x`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{k,k^{}},`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\psi _k^{}(x)\psi _k(x^{})`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _L(xx^{}),`$
where $`\delta _L`$ stands for periodic delta-function

$$\delta _L(xx^{})\underset{n}{}\delta (xx^{}nL).$$

“Empty superchain” is characterized by a space period $`a`$ and corresponding reciprocal lattice wave number $`Q=2\pi /a.`$ Each excitation in such a superchain is described by its quasi-wavenumber $`q`$ and a band number $`s`$ ($`s=1,2,\mathrm{}`$) that are related to the corresponding wave number $`k`$ by the following relation,

$$k=q+iQx(1)^{s1}\left[\frac{s}{2}\right]\text{ sign }q.$$
(55)
The corresponding wave function $`\psi _{s,q}(x)`$ has the Bloch-type structure,

$$\psi _{s,q}(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{L}}e^{iqx}u_{s,q}(x),$$
(56)
and satisfies the orthogonality relations

$`{\displaystyle _{L/2}^{L/2}}\psi _{s,q}^{}(x)\psi _{s^{},q^{}}(x)𝑑x`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{s,s^{}}\delta _{Q;q,q^{}},`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{s,q}{}}\psi _{s,q}^{}(x)\psi _{s,q}(x^{})`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _L(xx^{}),`$
where

$$\delta _{Q;q,q^{}}=\underset{n}{}\delta _{q+nQ,q^{}}.$$

Within the first BZ, $`Q/2q<Q/2,`$ Bloch amplitude and dispersion law $`\omega _s`$ have the following form

$`u_{s,q}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left\{iQx(1)^{s1}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}\right]\text{ sign }q\right\},`$ (57)
$`\omega _s(q)`$ $`=`$ $`vQ\left(\left[{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}\right]+(1)^{s1}{\displaystyle \frac{|q|}{Q}}\right).`$ (58)
Here square brackets denote an integral part of a number. Taking into account that both Bloch amplitude $`u_{s,q}(x)`$ and dispersion law $`\omega _s(q)`$ are periodic functions of $`q`$ with period $`Q,`$ one obtaines general equations for the Bloch amplitude

$`u_{s,q}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\xi _n}{\xi _n}}`$
$`\times \mathrm{cos}[(2s1)\xi _n]\mathrm{exp}\left(4i\xi _n{\displaystyle \frac{q}{Q}}\right),`$
$`4\xi _n`$ $`=`$ $`Q(xna).`$
and dispersion law $`\omega _s(q)`$

$`(vQ)^1\omega _s(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2s1}{4}}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{2(1)^s}{\pi ^2(2n+1)^2}}\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi (2n+1)q}{Q}}.`$
The relations between quasiparticle operators for a free wire, $`c_k,`$ for momentum $`knQ/2`$ with $`n`$ integer, and those for an empty superchain, $`C_{s,q},`$ for quasimomentum $`q`$ from the first BZ, $`Q/2<q<Q/2,`$ look as

$`c_k=C_{s,q}\text{sign}k,`$
$`s=1+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2|k|}{Q}}\right],q=Q\left(\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{k}{Q}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)`$
$`C_{s,q}=(1)^\nu c_k,`$
$`k=q+(1)^\nu Q\left[{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}\right],\nu =s+1+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2q}{Q}}\right],`$
where curely brackets denote a fractional part of a number. For obtaining these relations we used the folowing expression

$`{\displaystyle _{L/2}^{L/2}}\psi _k^{}(x)\psi _{s,q}(x)𝑑x=\delta _{s,s(q)}\delta _{Q;q,k}\text{sign}k,`$
$`s(q)=1+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2|q|}{Q}}\right],`$
for the transition amplitude $`k|s,q`$. In case when $`k=nQ/2`$ with $`n`$ integer, hybridization of the neighboring bands should be taken into account. This modifies the above relations by the following way

$`c_{nQ/2}=\theta (n)\left[\alpha _nC_{n,q_n}+\beta _nC_{n+1,q_n}\right]`$
$`+\theta (n)\left[\beta _n^{}C_{n,q_n}\alpha _n^{}C_{n+1,q_n}\right],`$
$`q_n=Q\left(\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{n+1}{2}}\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right);`$
$`C_{s,q_s}=\alpha _s^{}c_{sQ/2}+\beta _sc_{sQ/2},`$
$`C_{s+1,q_s}=\beta _s^{}c_{sQ/2}\alpha _sc_{sQ/2},`$
where $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ are hybridization coefficients. Corresponding relations between wave functions follow immediately from these formulas.

To write down any of these formulas for a specific array, one should add the array index $`j`$ to the wave function $`\psi `$, Bloch amplitude $`u`$, coordinate $`x`$, quasimomentum $`q`$, and to the periods $`a`$ and $`Q`$ of the superchain in real and reciprocal space.

## Appendix B. Double QCB Spectrum

Here we obtain analytical expressions for dispersion laws and wave functions of QCB. For quasimomenta far from the BZ boundaries, the energy spectrum of the first band can be calculated explicitly. Assuming that $`\omega ^2\omega _{js}^2(q_j)`$, $`s=2,3,4,\mathrm{}`$, we omit $`\omega ^2`$ in all terms in the r.h.s. of Eq. (19) except the first one, $`s=1`$. As a result the secular equation (17) reads

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}\left(\frac{\phi _j^2(q_j)\omega ^2}{\omega _j^2(q_j)\omega ^2}+F_j\right)=\frac{1}{\epsilon },$$
(59)
where

$$\phi _j^2(q)=\frac{r_j}{a_j}\varphi _{j1}^2(q),\omega _j^2(q)=\omega _{j1}^2(q_j).$$

The solutions of this equation have the form: 2

$`\omega _{\nu 1𝐪}^2`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1^2(𝐪)+\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2^2(𝐪)`$ (60)
$`\pm `$ $`\sqrt{\left(\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1^2(𝐪)\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2^2(𝐪)\right)^2+4\epsilon \phi _𝐪^2\omega _1^2(q_1)\omega _2^2(q_2)}.`$ (61)
Here

$$\phi _𝐪=\phi _1(q_1)\phi _2(q_2),$$

$`\nu =+,`$ is the branch number, $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_j(𝐪)`$ is determined as

$$\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1^2(𝐪)=\omega _1^2(q_1)\frac{1\epsilon F_1(F_2\phi _2^2(q_2))}{1\epsilon (F_1\phi _1^2(q_1))(F_2\phi _2^2(q_2))}$$
(62)
for $`j=1.`$ Expression for $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2^2(𝐪)`$ can be obtained by permutation $`12.`$ Parentheses on the r.h.s. of Eq. (62) describe the contributions to $`F_j`$ from higher bands. Therefore $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_j^2(𝐪)`$ is the $`j`$-th array frequency renormalized by the interaction with higher bands. In principle, contribution of higher bands may turn the interaction to be strong. However for specific case of carbon nanotubes, one stays far from the critical value $`\epsilon _c`$ (see estimates at the end of subsection II C). Therefore the interaction with higher bands is weak almost in all the BZ except its boundaries.

The resonance line equation modified by interaction with higher bands is

$$\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1^2(𝐪)=\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2^2(𝐪).$$
(63)
Out of this line the branch number is in fact the array number and the renormalized frequencies are frequencies of a boson propagating along one of the arrays slightly modified by interactions with the complementary array. In case when $`\omega _1(q_1)>\omega _2(q_2),`$ one obtains

$$\omega _{+,1𝐪}^2\omega _1^2(q_1)\left(1\epsilon F_2\phi _1^2(q_1)\right).$$
(64)
In the opposite case one should replace indices $`12,`$ $`+`$.

Consider the frequency correction in the latter equation in more details. The correction term can be approximately estimated as $`\omega _1^2(q_1)S(q_1)`$ with

$$S(q_1)=\epsilon F_2\phi _1^2(q_1)=\epsilon \frac{R_0}{a}\varphi _{11}^2(q_1)𝑑\xi \zeta _2^2(\xi ).$$
(65)
Due to the short-range character of the interaction, the matrix elements $`\varphi _{11}(q_1)1`$ vary slowly with the quasimomentum $`q_1Q_1`$. Therefore, the r.h.s. in Eq.(65) can be roughly estimated as

$$S(q_1)\epsilon \frac{R_0}{a}=0.1\frac{R_0}{a}1.$$
(66)
One should also remember that the energy spectrum of nanotube remains one-dimensional only for frequencies smaller than some $`\omega _m.`$ Therefore, an external cutoff arises at $`s=ak_m`$ where $`k_m\omega _m/v`$. As a results one gets an estimate

$$S(q_1)\epsilon \frac{R_0}{a}k_mR_0.$$
(67)
Hence, one could hope to gain additional power of the small interaction radius. However, for nanotubes, $`k_m`$ is of the order of $`1/R_0`$ (see Refs.) and both estimates coincide. For quasimomenta close to the BZ center, the coefficient $`S(q_1)`$ can be calculated exactly. For exponential form of $`\zeta (\xi )\mathrm{exp}(|\xi |)`$, one obtains instead of the preliminary estimate (66),

$$S(0)=0.14\frac{R_0}{a}.$$

Thus, the correction term in Eq.(64) is really small.

The eigenstates of the system are described by renormalized field operators. Within the first band they have the form

$`\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{11𝐪}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\beta _{1𝐪}\right)\left(u_𝐪\theta _{11𝐪}v_𝐪\theta _{21𝐪}\right)`$ (68)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left(\varphi _{1s𝐪}u_𝐪\theta _{2s𝐪}+\varphi _{2s𝐪}v_𝐪\theta _{1s𝐪}\right),`$ (69)
$`\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{21𝐪}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\beta _{2𝐪}\right)\left(v_𝐪\theta _{11𝐪}+u_𝐪\theta _{21𝐪}\right)`$ (70)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left(\varphi _{1s𝐪}v_𝐪\theta _{2s𝐪}+\varphi _{2s𝐪}u_𝐪\theta _{1s𝐪}\right).`$ (71)
Here the coefficients $`u_𝐪`$ and $`v_𝐪`$ describe mixing between the modes with different array indices, within the first band,

$$u_𝐪=\sqrt{\frac{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪^2+\varphi _{1𝐪}^2}+\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪}{2\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪^2+\varphi _{1𝐪}^2}}},$$
(72)
$$v_𝐪=\sqrt{\frac{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪^2+\varphi _{1𝐪}^2}\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪}{2\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪^2+\varphi _{1𝐪}^2}}},$$
(73)
and

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _{21}^2(q_2)\omega _{11}^2(q_1)}{2}},`$ (74)
$`\varphi _{1𝐪}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\epsilon }\phi _𝐪\omega _{11}(q_1)\omega _{21}(q_2).`$ (75)
The parameters $`\varphi _{1s𝐪}`$, $`\varphi _{2s𝐪},`$ $`s=2,3,\mathrm{},`$ in Eqs. (69), (71) correspond to inter-band mixing

$$\varphi _{1s𝐪}=\sqrt{\epsilon }\frac{r_0}{a}\varphi _{11}(q_1)\varphi _{2s}(q_2)\frac{\omega _{11}(q_1)}{\omega _{2s}(q_2)},$$
(76)
and the coefficients $`\beta _{1𝐪},`$ $`\beta _{2𝐪},`$ take into account corrections from the higher bands

$$\beta _{1𝐪}=\underset{s=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\varphi _{1s𝐪}^2u_𝐪^2+\varphi _{2s𝐪}^2v_𝐪^2\right).$$
(77)
Expressions for $`\varphi _{2s𝐪}`$ and $`\beta _{2𝐪}`$ can be obtained by permutation $`12`$.

Equations (61), (69) and (71) solve the problem of QCB energy spectrum away from the BZ boundaries. However, due to smalness of the interaction, the general expressions (69) and (71) can be simplified. For quasimomenta far from the resonant coupling line, the expressions for the renormalized field operators of the first array look like

$$\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{11𝐪}=\left(1\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{\beta }_{1𝐪}\right)\theta _{11𝐪}+\underset{s=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\varphi _{1s𝐪}\theta _{2s𝐪},$$
(78)
where

$$\varphi _{11𝐪}=\sqrt{\epsilon }\frac{r_0}{a}\varphi _{11}(q_1)\varphi _{21}(q_2)\frac{\omega _{11}(q_1)\omega _{21}(q_2)}{\omega _{21}^2(q_2)\omega _{11}^2(q_1)},$$

and

$$\stackrel{~}{\beta }_{1𝐪}=\underset{s=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\varphi _{1s𝐪}^2.$$
(79)
The corresponding formulas for the second array are obtained by replacing $`1s2s`$.

Another simplification is made for modes with quasi–momenta on the resonance line. Consider for simplicity a square QCB (in this case BZ coincides with the elementary cell of the reciprocal lattice, and the resonance line coincides with the BZ diagonal $`OC`$ in Fig.3) and assume that $`𝐪`$ is not too close to the BZ corner $`C`$. The initial frequencies of modes belonging to the same band coincide,

$$\omega _{1s𝐪}=\omega _{2s𝐪}\omega _{s𝐪}.$$
(80)
Therefore renormalization strongly mixes the initial variables

$`\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{gs𝐪}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\beta _{s𝐪}\right)(\theta _{2s𝐪}+\theta _{1s𝐪})`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s^{}s}{}}(\varphi _{s^{}s𝐪}\theta _{1s^{}𝐪}\varphi _{ss^{}𝐪}\theta _{2s^{}𝐪}),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\theta }_{us𝐪}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\beta _{s𝐪}\right)(\theta _{2s𝐪}\theta _{1s𝐪})`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s^{}s}{}}(\varphi _{s^{}s𝐪}\theta _{1s^{}𝐪}+\varphi _{ss^{}𝐪}\theta _{2s^{}𝐪}),`$
and the corresponding eigenfrequencies are shifted from their bare values

$`\omega _{gs𝐪}^2`$ $``$ $`\omega _{s𝐪}^2\left(1+\varphi _{1s2s𝐪}\right),`$
$`\omega _{us𝐪}^2`$ $``$ $`\omega _{s𝐪}^2\left(1\varphi _{1s2s𝐪}\right).`$
For the first band $`s=1`$ these formulas look like

$$\omega _{\pm ,1𝐪}^2\omega _1^2(q_1)\left(1\pm \sqrt{\epsilon }\phi _𝐪\right).$$
(81)
Note that in the resonance case the splitting of the degenerate modes is of the order of $`\sqrt{\epsilon }`$ that essentially exceeds the shift of eigenfrequencies in the non-resonant case (64).

The interband mixing becomes significant near the BZ boundaries. Not very close to the crossing points of these boundaries with the resonant lines, this mixing is accounted for by a standard way. As a result we find that the interband hybridization gap for the bosons propagating along the first array can be estimated as

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _{12}vQ\epsilon {\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{a}}.`$
Similar gaps exist near the boundary of the BZ for each pair of odd and next even energy bands, as well as for each even and next odd band near the lines $`q_1=0`$ or $`q_2=0`$. The energy gap between the $`s`$-th and $`(s+1)`$-th bands is estimated as

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _{s,s+1}vQ\epsilon {\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{a}}o(s^1).`$
For large enough band number $`s,`$ the interaction is effectively suppressed, $`\varphi _{1s2s^{}}0,`$ and the gaps vanish.

The spectral behavior in the vicinity of the crossing points of a resonance line and the BZ boundary needs more detailed calculations. Nevertheless it can also be analyzed in a similar way. The results of such an alalysis are discussed in subsubsection II D 1.

## Appendix C. ac conductivity

For interacting wires, where $`\varphi _{js}(q_j)0,`$ the correlator (25) may be easily calculated after diagonalization of the Hamiltonian (10) by means of the transformations (69) and (71). As a result, one has:

$`[J_{11𝐪}(t),J_{11𝐪}^{}(0)]=`$
$`2ivg\left(u_𝐪^2\omega _{+,1𝐪}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _{+,1𝐪}t)+v_𝐪^2\omega _{,1𝐪}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _{,1𝐪}t)\right),`$
$`[J_{11𝐪}(t),J_{21𝐪}^{}(0)]=2ivgu_𝐪v_𝐪`$
$`\times \left(\omega _{,1𝐪}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _{,1𝐪}t)\omega _{+,1𝐪}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _{+,1𝐪}t)\right),`$
where $`u_𝐪`$ and $`v_𝐪`$ are defined in Eqs.(72), (73). Then, for the optical absorption $`\sigma ^{}`$ one obtains

$`\sigma _{11}^{}(𝐪,\omega )=\pi vg\left[u_𝐪^2\delta \left(\omega \stackrel{~}{\omega }_{+,1𝐪}\right)+v_𝐪^2\delta \left(\omega \stackrel{~}{\omega }_{,1𝐪}\right)\right]`$ (82)
$$\sigma _{12}^{}(𝐪,\omega )=\pi vgu_𝐪v_𝐪\left[\delta \left(\omega \stackrel{~}{\omega }_{,1𝐪}\right)\delta \left(\omega \stackrel{~}{\omega }_{+,1𝐪}\right)\right].$$
(83)
For quasimomentum $`𝐪`$ away from the resonant coupling line, $`u_𝐪^21`$ and $`v_𝐪^2\varphi _𝐪^2`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪>0`$ ($`v_𝐪^21`$ and $`u_𝐪^2\varphi _𝐪^2`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪<0`$). Then the longitudinal optical absorption (82) (i.e. the absorption within a given set of wires) has its main peak at the frequency $`\omega _{+,1𝐪}v|q_1|`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪>0`$ (or $`\omega _{,1𝐪}v|q_1|`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪<0`$), corresponding to the first band of the pertinent array, and an additional weak peak at the frequency $`\omega _{,1𝐪}v|q_2|`$, corresponding to the first band of a complementary array. It contains also a set of weak peaks at frequencies $`\omega _{2,s𝐪}[s/2]vQ`$ ($`s=2,3,\mathrm{}`$) corresponding to the contribution from higher bands of the complementary array (in Eq.(82) these peaks are omitted). At the same time, a second observable becomes relevant, namely, the transverse optical absorption (83). It is proportional to the (small) interaction strength and has two peaks at frequencies $`\omega _{+,1𝐪}`$ and $`\omega _{,1𝐪}`$ in the first bands of both sets of wires.

If the quasimomentum $`𝐪`$ belongs to the resonant coupling line $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐪=0`$, then $`u_𝐪^2=v_𝐪^2=1/2`$. In this case the longitudinal optical absorption (82) has a split double peak at frequencies $`\omega _{+,1𝐪}`$ and $`\omega _{,1𝐪}`$, instead of a single main peak. The transverse optical absorption (83), similarly to the non-resonant case (83), has a split double peak at frequencies $`\omega _{+,1𝐪}`$ and $`\omega _{,1𝐪}`$, but its amlitude is now of the order of unity. For $`\left|𝐪\right|0`$ Eq.(82) reduces to that for an array of noninteracting wires (26), and the transverse optical conductivity (83) vanishes.

The imaginary part of the ac conductivity $`\sigma _{jj^{}}^{\prime \prime }(𝐪,\omega )`$ is calculated within the same approach. Its longitudinal component equals

$`\sigma _{11}^{\prime \prime }(𝐪,\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{2vg}{\omega }}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{u_𝐪^2\omega _{+,1𝐪}^2}{\omega _{+,1𝐪}^2\omega ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{v_𝐪^2\omega _{,1𝐪}^2}{\omega _{,1𝐪}^2\omega ^2}}\right].`$
Beside the standard pole at zero frequency, the imaginary part has poles at the resonance frequencies $`\omega _{+,1𝐪}`$, $`\omega _{,1𝐪}`$, and an additional series of high band satellites (omitted here). For quasimomenta far from the resonant lines, only the first pole is well pronounced while amplitude of the second one as well as amplitudes of all other sattelites is small. At the resonant lines, amplitudes of both poles mentioned above are equal. The corresponding expression for $`\sigma _{22}^{}(𝐪,\omega )`$ can be obtained by replacement $`12`$.

The transverse component of the imaginary part of the ac conductivity has the form:

$`\sigma _{12}^{}(𝐪,\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{2vg}{\omega }}u_𝐪v_𝐪\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _{,1𝐪}^2}{\omega ^2\omega _{,1𝐪}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _{+,1𝐪}^2}{\omega ^2\omega _{+,1𝐪}^2}}\right].`$
It always contains two poles and vanishes for noninteracting wires. For quasimomenta far from the resonance lines the transverse component is small while at these lines its amplitude is of the order of unity.

## Appendix D. Triple QCB Spectrum

To diagonalize the Hamiltonian(45), we write down equations of motion

$`\left[\omega _s^2(q_j)\omega ^2\right]\theta _{js𝐪}`$ (84)
$`+\sqrt{\epsilon }\varphi _s(q_j)\omega _s(q_j){\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{a}}{\displaystyle \underset{s^{}}{}}\varphi _s^{}(q_3)\omega _s^{}(q_3)\theta _{3s^{}𝐪}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (85)
$`\left[\omega _s^2(q_3)\omega ^2\right]\theta _{3s𝐪}`$ (86)
$`+\sqrt{\epsilon }\varphi _s(q_3)\omega _s(q_3){\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{a}}{\displaystyle \underset{j,s^{}}{}}\varphi _s^{}(q_j)\omega _s^{}(q_j)\theta _{js^{}𝐪}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (87)
Here $`j=1,2`$, and $`\epsilon `$ is defined by Eq.(22). The solutions of the set of equations (85) - (87) have the form:

$`\theta _{js𝐪}`$ $`=`$ $`A_j{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi _s(q_j)\omega _s(q_j)}{\omega _s^2(q_j)\omega ^2}}.j=1,2,3,`$ (88)
Substituting this equation into Eqs.(85) and (87), we have three equations for constants $`A_j`$:

$`A_1+A_3\sqrt{\epsilon }F_{q_3}(\omega ^2)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`A_2+A_3\sqrt{\epsilon }F_{q_3}(\omega ^2)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`A_3+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1,2}{}}A_j\sqrt{\epsilon }F_{q_j}(\omega ^2)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
where

$$F_q(\omega ^2)=\frac{r_0}{a}\underset{s}{}\frac{\varphi _s^2(q)\omega _s^2(q)}{\omega _s^2(q)\omega ^2}.$$
(89)
Dispersion relations can be obtained from the solvability condition for this set of equations

$$\epsilon F_{q_3}(\omega ^2)\left(F_{q_1}(\omega ^2)+F_{q_2}(\omega ^2)\right)=1.$$
(90)
The function $`F_{q_s}(\omega ^2)`$ has a set of poles at $`\omega ^2=\omega _s^2(q)`$, $`s=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$ . For $`\omega ^2<\omega _s^2(q)`$, i.e. within the interval $`[0,\omega _1^2(q)]`$, $`F_{q_s}(\omega ^2)`$ is positive increasing function. Its minimal value $`F`$ on the interval is reached at $`\omega ^2=0`$ and does not depend on quasi-momentum $`q`$

$$F_q(0)=\frac{r_0}{a}\underset{s}{}\varphi _s^2(q)=𝑑\xi \zeta _j^2(\xi )F.$$
(91)
If the parameter $`\epsilon \eta ^2`$ is smaller than the critical value

$$\epsilon _c=\frac{1}{2F^2},$$
(92)
then all solutions $`\omega ^2`$ of the characteristic equation are positive. When $`\epsilon `$ increases, the lowest QCB mode softens and its square frequency vanishes in whole BZ at $`\epsilon =\epsilon _c`$. For exponential model $`\zeta (\xi )=\mathrm{exp}(|\xi |),`$ one obtains $`\epsilon _c1`$.

## Appendix E. Triple Rabi Oscillations

The point $`C(Q/3,2Q/3)`$ of the BZ is the point of three-fold degeneracy,

$$q_1=q_3=q_2+Q=\frac{Q}{3},$$

$$\omega _{11}(Q/3)=\omega _{21}(2Q/3)=\omega _{31}(Q/3)\omega _0.$$

Equations of motion at this point in the resonance approximation read

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dt^2}}+\omega _0^2\right]\theta _1+\sqrt{\epsilon }\varphi ^2\omega _0^2\theta _3=0,`$
$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dt^2}}+\omega _0^2\right]\theta _2+\sqrt{\epsilon }\varphi ^2\omega _0^2\theta _3=0,`$
$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dt^2}}+\omega _0^2\right]\theta _3+\sqrt{\epsilon }\varphi ^2\omega _0^2\left(\theta _1+\theta _2\right)=0,`$
where $`\theta _j\theta _{j𝐪}.`$ General solution of this system looks as

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}\theta _1(t)\\ \theta _2(t)\\ \theta _3(t)\end{array}\right)=\theta _0\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 1\\ 0\end{array}\right)e^{i\omega _0t}+`$
$`\theta _+\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 1\\ \sqrt{2}\end{array}\right)e^{i\omega _+t}+\theta _{}\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 1\\ \sqrt{2}\end{array}\right)e^{i\omega _{}t},`$
where one of the eigenfrequencies coincides with $`\omega _0,`$ while the two others are

$$\omega _\pm =\sqrt{1\pm \sqrt{2}\varphi ^2},$$
(95)
and $`\theta _{0,\pm }`$ are the corresponding amplitudes.

Choosing initial conditions

$`\theta _1(0)=i\theta _0,\dot{\theta }_1(0)=\omega _0\theta _0,`$
$`\theta _2(0)=0,\dot{\theta }_2(0)=0,`$
$`\theta _3(0)=0,\dot{\theta }_3(0)=0,`$
we obtain for the field amplitudes at the coordinate origin

$`\theta _1(0,0;t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _0}{4}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _0}{\omega _+}}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _+t)+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _0}{\omega _{}}}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _{}t)\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _0}{2}}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _0t),`$
$`\theta _2(0,0;t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _0}{4}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _0}{\omega _+}}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _+t)+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _0}{\omega _{}}}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _{}t)\right]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _0}{2}}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _0t),`$
$`\theta _3(0,0;t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _0}{2\sqrt{2}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _0}{\omega _+}}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _+t){\displaystyle \frac{\omega _0}{\omega _{}}}\mathrm{sin}(\omega _{}t)\right].`$
In the limiting case $`\epsilon 1`$ these formulas coincide with Eqs.(54) in subsection III.C.