format: text

text:
# Light-Front Aspects of Chiral Symmetry

## 1 Introduction

Relativistic field theory quantized at the equal light-front time $`x^+`$ $`(x^\pm =z\pm t)`$  is both promising and puzzling. Its primary advantage – a kinematical definition of the physical vacuum (modulo zero modes), seems to be in conflict with rich physical contents of the vacuum in the usual space-like quantization. Also, another fundamental property of theories with fermions, namely chiral symmetry , has not been fully understood in the light-front (LF) framework. For example, non-zero chiral condensates of the Schwinger model have not been obtained within the genuine LF quantum field theory, whose structure differs in many important aspects from the usual space-like theory.

In the present contribution, we will study two aspects of chiral symmetry on the light front: spontaneous symmetry breaking and the axial anomaly. First, we will sketch the relation between the dynamical fermion zero modes and the existence of the Goldsone boson in a simple $`O(2)`$-symmetric sigma model with fermions. The axial anomaly will be analyzed in two and four-dimensional quantum electrodynamics in the Weyl-gauge formulation, using a consistent gauge invariant regularization by splitting in LF space and time variables.

## 2 Goldstone theorem on the light front

Spontaneous symmetry breaking is usually associated with non-invariance of the vacuum state of a given Hamiltonian. If there are also non-invariant (composite) operators $`A`$ with the property $`0|\delta A|00`$, existence of a massless state(s) with the quantum numbers of the conserved current(s), corresponding to the symmetry group, can be proved. Due to the simplicity of the physical LF vacuum in the sector of normal modes, this picture can be realized on the LF explicitly in the Fock representation using a finite-volume formulation. The simplest example is a model without gauge symmetry, namely the $`O(2)`$-symmetric sigma model with periodic massless fermions . Unitary operators $`V(\beta )=\mathrm{exp}\left(i\beta Q_5\right)`$, implementing the axial symmetry of the model, contain a part composed of dynamical fermion zero modes $`b_0,d_0`$, and generate a set of degenerate vacua $`|\beta =\mathrm{exp}[i\beta _s2s[b_0^{}(s)d_0^{}(s)+h.c.]]|0`$, where $`s`$ is the LF helicity. There are two non-invariant operators $`A`$: $`\overline{\psi }\psi =\psi _+^{}\gamma ^0\psi _{}+h.c.`$ and $`\overline{\psi }\gamma ^5\psi =\psi _+^{}\gamma ^0\gamma ^5\psi _{}+h.c.`$, $`AV(\beta )AV^{}(\beta )A`$, and the conserved axial vector current $`j_5^\mu =\psi ^{}\gamma ^0\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5\psi +`$ bosonic part ($`\mu =+,,1,2`$, see Sec.4 for our notation). Thus, the existence of a massless state $`|G=Q_5|0=_s2sb_0^{}(s)d_0^{}(s)|0`$ can be derived in a usual way (see , e.g.).

## 3 Axial anomaly in the massive Schwinger model

The LF Hamiltonian of the massive Schwinger model in the gauge $`A^{}=0`$

$$P^{}=𝑑x^{}\left[\mathrm{\Pi }_{A^+}^2+m\left(\psi _+^{}\gamma ^0\psi _{}+\psi _{}^{}\gamma ^0\psi _+\right)\right]$$
(1)
is expressed in terms of the conjugate momentum $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{A^+}=_+A^+`$ of the $`A^+`$ gauge field component and dynamical (+) and dependent (–) fermi fields $`\psi _\pm `$. We work in the continuum formulation and all fields are taken to be antiperiodic in $`x^{}`$ . The dynamical component $`\psi _+`$ obeys the equation $`2i_+\psi _+=m\gamma ^0\psi _{}`$ and is expanded at $`x^+=0`$ as

$`\psi _+(x^{})={\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dp^+}{4\pi \sqrt{p^+}}}u\left(b(p^+)e^{\frac{i}{2}p^+x^{}}+d^{}(p^+)e^{\frac{i}{2}p^+x^{}}\right),u^{}=(01),`$
$`\{b(p^+),b^{}(p^+)\}=\{d(p^+),d^{}(p^+)\}=4\pi p^+\delta (p^+p^+).`$ (2)
The dependent component $`\psi _{}`$ in (1) satisfies the constraint ($`x=(x^+,x^{})`$)

$$2i_{}\psi _{}(x)=m\gamma ^0\psi _+(x)+e\psi _{}A^+(x),$$
(3)
which is inverted by the antiperiodic Green’s function $`G_a(x^{}y^{};A^+)`$$`=\frac{1}{2}ϵ_a(x^{}y^{})\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{ie}{2}\underset{y^{}}{\overset{x^{}}{}}𝑑z^{}A^+(x^+,z^{})\right]`$, where $`ϵ_a(x^{})`$ is the sign function:

$$\psi _{}(x^+,x^{})=\frac{m}{2i}\gamma ^0𝑑y^{}G_a(x^{}y^{};A^+)\psi _+(x^+,y^{}).$$
(4)
For a successful calculation of the axial anomaly, it is crucial to work with a consistent definition of the fermion currents. On physical grounds, the vector current has to be odd under C-parity . This can be achieved by taking an antisymmetrized product of fermi fields which is equivalent to normal ordering and thus removes the short-distance singularity in the product even if a gauge invariant splitting of the arguments of the field operators  is performed. On the other hand, there is no C-parity restriction in the case of the axial current $`j_5^\mu =\psi ^{}\gamma ^0\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5\psi `$. Its regularized and gauge invariant definition is

$$j_5^\pm (x)=\pm 2\psi _\pm ^{}(x^++\frac{\delta }{2},x^{}+\frac{ϵ^{}}{2})\psi _\pm (x^+\frac{\delta }{2},x^{}\frac{ϵ^{}}{2})e^{\frac{ie}{2}\underset{xϵ/2}{\overset{x+ϵ/2}{}}𝑑y^{}A^+(y^{})}.$$
(5)
The regulators $`ϵ=(ϵ^{},\delta )`$ are set to zero at the end of calculations. Now, using the equation of motion for an appropriate choice of split arguments, we get

$`_+j_5^+(x)=im[\psi _{}^{}(x)\gamma ^0\psi _+(x)h.c.]e^{\frac{ie}{2}ϵ^{}A^+(x)}{\displaystyle \frac{ie}{2}}ϵ^{}_+A^+(x)j_5^+(x).`$ (6)
Naively, it looks like the second term above vanishes. Indeed, using the anticommutator (2), one finds $`j_5^+=:j_5^+:\frac{e}{2\pi }A^+`$ which, however, is not gauge invariant (the second term gets shifted by the residual time-independent gauge transformation). The only way out appears to be the use of a gauge-invariant version of the anticommutator :

$$\{\psi _+(x^{}),\psi _+^{}(y^{})\}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_+\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{ie}{2}\underset{x^{}}{\overset{y^{}}{}}𝑑z^{}A^+(z^{})\right)\delta _a(x^{}y^{}).$$
(7)
and the corresponding change of the anticommutators (2). With this modification, which is analogous to the Schwinger’s current definition, the vector current $`j^\pm (x)=2:\psi _\pm ^{}(x)\psi (x)_\pm :`$ is conserved, $`j_5^+(x)=:j_5^+(x):+\frac{1}{i\pi ϵ^{}}`$ and

$$_+j_5^+(x)=im\left[\psi _{}^{}(x)\gamma ^0\psi _+(x)\psi _+^{}(x)\gamma ^0\psi _{}(x)\right]\frac{e}{2\pi }_+A^+(x).$$
(8)
For the case of the minus (“bad”) component of the vector current, we use the constraint (3) for the appropriate choice of arguments and expand in $`ϵ^{},\delta `$:

$`_{}j_5^{}(x)=im[\psi _{}^{}(x)\gamma ^0\psi _+(x)h.c.]e^{\frac{ieϵ^{}}{2}A^+(x)}+{\displaystyle \frac{ie}{2}}\delta _+A^+(x)j_5^{}(x).`$ (9)
The second term can give a non-zero contribution if the $`j_5^{}`$ current has a singularity $`\delta ^1`$. To investigate this point, we insert $`\psi _{}`$ (4) into the definition of $`j_5^{}`$. The time dependence of the field $`\psi _+^{}(x^++\frac{\delta }{2},x^{})`$ is assumed to be of the free-field form $`\mathrm{exp}\left(\pm \frac{i}{2}\widehat{p}^{}\delta \right)`$, where $`\widehat{p}^{}=\frac{m^2}{p^+}`$. Normal-ordering $`j_5^{}`$ and using the gauge invariant anticommutator (7), we find for the contraction part

$$<j_5^{}(x)>=m^2\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{dp^+}{p^{+2}}e^{\frac{i}{2}p^+x^{}\frac{i}{2}\frac{m^2}{p^+}\delta }=\frac{1}{i\pi \delta },$$
(10)
where the expansion of the modified Bessel function $`K_1(m\sqrt{ϵ^{}\delta })`$ for a small argument has been used. Thus, the mass dependence completely cancels  and the second term in Eq.(9) gives a finite contribution. In this way, the divergence of the axial vector current in the massive LF Schwinger model in the Weyl gauge is

$$_\mu j_5^\mu =_+j_5^++_{}j_5^{}=2im\left[\psi _{}^{}\gamma ^0\psi _+\psi _+^{}\gamma ^0\psi _{}\right]\frac{e}{\pi }_+A^+.$$
(11)
This result includes also the massless case. The anomaly (11) can be written in the usual covariant form $`\frac{e}{2\pi }ϵ^{\mu \nu }F_{\mu \nu }`$ $`(ϵ^+=2,A^{}=0)`$.

## 4 Anomaly of the LF QED(3+1)

The calculation of the axial anomaly in the four-dimensional $`U(1)`$ theory proceeds essentially as in the two-dimensional model. In particular, one has to use a four-dimensional analogue of the “gauge-corrected” anticommutator (7). The obvious difference is the presence of the two perpendicular gauge field components $`A^i(x)`$ (interpreted as a classical background field ) and the spin degree of freedom of the fermi field. The field equations are

$`2i_+\psi _+`$ $`=`$ $`\left(m\gamma ^0i\alpha ^i_i\right)\psi _{}e\alpha ^iA^i\psi _{},`$ (12)
$`2i_{}\psi _{}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(m\gamma ^0i\alpha ^i_i\right)\psi _+e\alpha ^iA^i\psi _++eA^+\psi _{}.`$ (13)
The solution of the constraint (13) is again given by the Green’s function $`G_a(x^{}y^{};A^+)`$: $`\psi _{}(x)=\frac{dy^{}}{4i}G_a(x^{}y^{};A^+)\left[m\gamma ^0i\alpha ^i_ie\alpha ^iA^i(y)\right]\psi _+(y)`$. Our notation is $`\underset{¯}{x}=(x^{},x^{}),y=(x^+,y^{},x^{}),x^{}=x^i,\alpha ^i=\gamma ^0\gamma ^i,i=1,2`$. Let us calculate the divergence of the axial vector current
$`j_5^\mu (x)=\psi ^{}(x^++\frac{\delta }{2},\underset{¯}{x}+\frac{\underset{¯}{ϵ}}{2})\gamma ^0\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5\psi (x^+\frac{\delta }{2},\underset{¯}{x}\frac{\underset{¯}{ϵ}}{2})\mathrm{exp}\left(ie\underset{x+ϵ/2}{\overset{x+ϵ/2}{}}𝑑y_\alpha A^\alpha (y)\right)`$:

$`_\mu j_5^\mu (x)=2im:[\psi _{}^{}(x)\gamma ^0\gamma ^5\psi _+(x)h.c.]:+imC_mim\overline{C}_m+C+\overline{C}`$
$`+C^iA^i(x+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})\overline{C}^iA^i(x{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})ieϵ^\mu \left[_iA_\mu j_5^i(x)+_{}A_\mu (x)j_5^{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{ie}{2}}<j^{}>\left[A^+(x+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})A^+(x{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})\right]`$ (14)
Here, the field equations and normal ordering have been used to isolate the contractions $`C_m=<\psi _+^{}(x+\frac{ϵ}{2})\gamma ^0\gamma ^5\psi _{}(x\frac{ϵ}{2})>,C=<\psi _+^{}(x+\frac{ϵ}{2})\alpha ^i\gamma ^5_i\psi _{}(x\frac{ϵ}{2})>,C^i=ie<\psi _+^{}(x+\frac{ϵ}{2})\alpha ^i\gamma ^5\psi _{}(x\frac{ϵ}{2})>`$, with $`\overline{C}=C^{}(ϵ)`$, etc. They can be evaluated by simple spinor identities. $`C_m`$ vanishes and the remaining contractions lead, due to the splitting in $`x^+`$, to Bessel-type integrals, as for example

$$\frac{d^3\underset{¯}{p}}{k^+p^+}e^{\frac{i}{2}p^+ϵ^{}+ip^{}x^{}\frac{i}{2}\frac{(m^2+p_{}^2)}{p^+}\delta }=\frac{i}{8\pi }\frac{k^+}{\delta }e^{\frac{i}{2}k^+(ϵ^{}+\frac{ϵ_{}^2}{\delta })+\frac{i}{2}\frac{m^2}{k^+}\delta }.$$
(15)
Expanding the gauge potentials in $`\delta `$, one finds finite contributions to the divergence of the axial vector current. From the $`C^iA^i`$ terms, e.g., we get $`e^2/(2\pi ^2)ϵ^{ij}_{}A^j_+A^i`$ $`(ϵ^{ij}=ϵ^{ji})`$ which is a part of the complete result. Indeed, the full abelian anomaly in the covariant form is

$$_\mu j_5^\mu (x)=\frac{e^2}{16\pi ^2}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }F_{\mu \nu }F_{\rho \sigma }.$$
(16)
Its LF form in the $`A^{}=0`$ gauge is $`e^2/(2\pi ^2)ϵ^{ij}\left[_+A^+_iA^j+_+A^i_{}A^j+\frac{1}{2}_+A^i_jA^+\right]`$. The second term coincides with our partial result above. The complete treatment with all technical details will be given elsewhere.


text:
# Dipoles, Twists and Noncommutative Gauge Theory

## 1 Introduction

Gauge theories on a noncommutative $`𝐓^d`$ possess a T-duality that acts on the metric $`G_{ij}`$ and anti-symmetric 2-form $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{ij}`$ -.

In this paper we will explore the action of T-duality on noncommutative field theories with twisted boundary conditions. Suppose we take a scalar field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$ with boundary conditions $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x_1+2\pi n_1,\mathrm{},x_d+2\pi n_d)=e^{i(n_1\alpha _1+\mathrm{}+n_d\alpha _d)}\mathrm{\Phi }(x_1,\mathrm{},x_d)`$, where $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_d)`$ are coordinates on $`𝐓^d`$ with period $`2\pi `$ and $`(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _d)`$ are “twists.” The question is: what happens after T-duality?

We will show that the T-dual of such a theory contains nonlocal fields that behave as constant dipoles, even when the noncommutativity is turned off. The dipole-vector and the twists, $`\alpha _i`$, together form a $`2d`$-dimensional representation of the $`SO(d,d,)`$ T-duality group.

The paper is organized as follows. In section (2) we review the proof of T-duality in noncommutative gauge theories. In section (3) we extend T-duality to act on the twists. We define the dipole theories and show that the twists, $`\alpha _i`$, and the dipole-vectors transform into each other under T-duality. In section (4) we explore the properties of the dipole theories. These have several features that are reminiscent of noncommutative field theories, although these features seem to have a much simpler version in the dipole theories. For example, we can define a modified product of fields, and we describe the analog of the “Seiberg-Witten map”  to local variables. We also show that when compactified on $`𝐒^1`$, the dipole theories reduce to ordinary quiver theories  when the dipole-vector is a rational fraction of the circumference of $`𝐒^1`$.

Before we proceed, let us note that dipoles, in the context of noncommutativity, are also discussed in  and in an upcoming paper .

## 2 Review of T-duality in Noncommutative Gauge Theories

Unlike the commutative theory, noncommutative Yang-Mills theory exhibits the T-duality of string theory. T-duality of non-commutative tori was first investigated in  in the context of compactifications of Matrix theory. In the context of noncommutative geometry, T-duality is implemented as a Morita equivalence between the C\*-algebras that are the noncommutative tori . In this language, vector bundles correspond to projective modules and the Morita equivalence is given by a bimodule which allows us to map modules over one torus to modules over the other . T-duality of noncommutative gauge theories is also reviewed in -.

These considerations are somewhat abstract, however, so we will now give an explicit relation between adjoint fields on non-commutative tori. This will lead to a construction for the transformation of the covariant derivative and the gauge connection.

The theories we work with are $`U(n)`$ gauge theories with $`m`$ units of electric flux. We will show that any such theory is dual to a $`U(\mathrm{gcd}(n,m))`$ theory with no flux and a different noncommutativity parameter. The statement of T-duality is that any pair of T-dual theories correspond to the same zero flux theory. Our presentation of the T-duality of the fields is a slight generalization of the construction in . We will work on $`T^2`$ with noncommutativity parameter $`\theta `$. This means that we work with the algebra of functions on the torus subject to the following relation:

$$[x,y]=2\pi iR^2\theta $$
(1)
where $`(2\pi R)^2`$ is the area of the torus.

We collect some useful facts that follow from this relation and the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula:

$`e^ABe^A`$ $`=`$ $`e^{Ad(A)}B,`$ (2)
$`\mathrm{log}e^Ae^B`$ $`=`$ $`A+B+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[A,B]+\mathrm{},`$ (3)
$`[x,f(x,y)]`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi iR^2\theta _yf(x,y),`$
$`[y,f(x,y)]`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi iR^2\theta _xf(x,y),`$ (4)
From equation (2), we obtain the useful relation

$$e^{ax}f(x,y)e^{ax}=e^{2\pi iaR^2\theta _y}f(x,y)=f(x,y+2\pi iR^2a\theta )$$
(5)
Here and up until the end of section (3), a product indicates the noncommutative $``$-product.

A bundle over the torus with nonzero flux is given by a pair of transition functions such that an adjoint section transforms as:

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(x+2\pi R,y)=\mathrm{\Omega }_1(x,y)\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y)\mathrm{\Omega }_1(x,y)^1`$
$`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y+2\pi R)=\mathrm{\Omega }_2(x,y)\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y)\mathrm{\Omega }_2(x,y)^1`$ (6)
A consistent choice of transition functions is:

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_1=e^{imy/nR}U\mathrm{\Omega }_2=V$$
(7)
where $`U`$ and $`V`$ are matrices satisfying

$$UV=e^{2\pi im/n}VUU^n=V^n=1$$
(8)
Let $`\mathrm{gcd}(m,n)=\nu `$, $`\stackrel{~}{m}=m/\nu `$, and $`\stackrel{~}{n}=n/\nu `$. We define the following $`\stackrel{~}{n}\times \stackrel{~}{n}`$ matrices:

$$u_{kl}=e^{2\pi ikm/n}\delta _{kl}v_{kl}=\delta _{k+1,l}k,l/\stackrel{~}{n}$$
(9)
Our choice for $`U`$ and $`V`$ will be the $`n\times n`$ matrices that have $`\nu `$ copies of $`u`$ and $`v`$ along the diagonal. In the case of $`\nu =1`$, these are the matrices of .

We can now put the field $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ into a standard form. Following , we note

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(x+2\pi R\stackrel{~}{n},y)=\mathrm{\Omega }_1^{\stackrel{~}{n}}\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y)\mathrm{\Omega }_1^{\stackrel{~}{n}}=\mathrm{\Psi }(x+2\pi R\theta \stackrel{~}{m},y)$$
(10)
Therefore, we have the following periodicity conditions:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(x+2\pi R(\stackrel{~}{n}\stackrel{~}{m}\theta ),y)=\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y),\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y+2\pi R\stackrel{~}{n})=\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y)$$
(11)
and we can do a Fourier expansion:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y)=\underset{s,t}{}e^{isx/(\stackrel{~}{n}\stackrel{~}{m}\theta )}e^{ity/\stackrel{~}{n}}\mathrm{\Psi }_{s,t}$$
(12)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{s,t}`$ is a $`n\times n`$ matrix which we treat as a matrix of $`\nu \times \nu `$ blocks. Thus, we have the $`\stackrel{~}{n}\times \stackrel{~}{n}`$ matrix $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{s,t}^{f,g}`$ with $`f,g_\nu `$. We expand this matrix in terms of the $`u`$ and $`v`$ matrices:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{s,t}^{f,g}=\underset{i,j/\stackrel{~}{n}}{}c_{s,t,i,j}^{f,g}v^iu^j$$
(13)
In  it is shown that, once we impose the boundary conditions (2), only one term is nonzero in this sum. Their final result, which does not depend on the presence of our $`f`$ and $`g`$ indices, is the expansion:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{f,g}=\underset{s,t}{}c_{s,t}^{f,g}Z_1^sZ_2^t$$
(14)
where $`a\stackrel{~}{n}b\stackrel{~}{m}=1`$, $`c_{s,t}^{f,g}`$ is the appropriate nonzero element out of $`c_{s,t,i,j}^{f,g}`$ and we have:

$$Z_1=e^{ix/R(\stackrel{~}{n}\stackrel{~}{m}\theta )}v^bZ_2=e^{iy/R\stackrel{~}{n}}u^b$$
(15)
$`Z_1`$ and $`Z_2`$ obey the following relation

$$Z_1Z_2=e^{2\pi i\theta _0}Z_2Z_1$$
(16)
where

$$\theta _0=\frac{a(\theta )+b}{m(\theta )+n}$$
(17)
This relation is exactly the relation formed by $`e^{ix^{}/R^{}}`$ and $`e^{iy^{}/R^{}}`$ where $`[x^{},y^{}]=2\pi iR^2\theta _0`$ (see equation (3)). For now, $`R^{}`$ is arbitrary. The expansion (14) is the Fourier expansion on the noncommutative torus with no units of flux and non-commutativity parameter $`\theta _0`$. A straightforward calculation shows that any two theories related by the following transformation:

$$\theta ^{}=\frac{A(\theta )+B}{C(\theta )+D},\left(\begin{array}{c}n^{}\\ m^{}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}n\\ m\end{array}\right),$$
(18)
with $`ADBC=1`$, result in the same standard form. We will determine the area of the dual torus at the end of this section.

In addition to defining the T-dual of the fields, we will also have kinetic terms in our Lagrangian. Thus, we must define the T-dual of the covariant derivative and the connection. Because of the non-trivial boundary conditions, however, $`A_y`$ does not transform in the adjoint so we cannot simply apply what we have done above. For fields in the adjoint, the covariant derivative is

$$D_\mu \mathrm{\Psi }=_\mu \mathrm{\Psi }+[A,\mathrm{\Psi }]$$
(19)
We wish to make a field for which we can easily define the T-dual. From $`A_y`$, we construct

$$A_y^{}=A_y+\frac{imx}{2\pi R^2(nm\theta )}$$
(20)
This field transforms in the adjoint. With this new field, we can write

$$D_y\mathrm{\Psi }=\frac{n}{nm\theta }_y\mathrm{\Psi }+[A_y^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]$$
(21)
where we have transformed a commutator into a derivative as in (4).

Let us represent the operation of T-duality by $`T()`$. The new parameters will be as in (18). For simplicity, we will work with the case $`\mathrm{gcd}(n,m)=1`$. We define the following operation closely related to T-duality:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\underset{s,t}{}c_{s,t}Z_1^sZ_2^t,T^{}(\mathrm{\Psi })=\underset{s,t}{}c_{s,t}Z_1^sZ_2^t$$
(22)
where the $`Z`$s and $`Z^{}`$s come from the unprimed and primed theories which are dual.

For most fields, we have $`T^{}=T`$, but for the connection this is slightly modified. Instead, we have:

$$T(A_y)=T^{}(A_y^{})\frac{im^{}x^{}}{2\pi R^2(n^{}m^{}\theta ^{})},T(A_x)=T^{}(A_x)$$
(23)
These have the correct boundary conditions for the T-dual theory.

We need one more relation because $`[T,]0`$:

$`_\mu \mathrm{\Psi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s,t}{}}c_{s,t}\left\{\begin{array}{c}is/R(nm\theta )\\ it/Rn\end{array}\right\}Z_1^sZ_2^t`$ (26)
$`T(_\mu \mathrm{\Psi })`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s,t}{}}c_{s,t}\left\{\begin{array}{c}is/R(nm\theta )\\ it/Rn\end{array}\right\}Z_1^sZ_2^t`$ (29)
$`_\mu T(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s,t}{}}c_{s,t}\left\{\begin{array}{c}is/R^{}(n^{}m^{}\theta ^{})\\ it/R^{}n^{}\end{array}\right\}Z_1^sZ_2^t`$ (32)
where the top element in the brackets refers to the case $`\mu =x`$ and the bottom to the case $`\mu =y`$.

Therefore

$$T(_\mu \mathrm{\Psi })=\frac{R^{}}{R}\left\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{n^{}m^{}\theta ^{}}{nm\theta }\\ \frac{n^{}}{n}\end{array}\right\}_\mu T(\mathrm{\Psi })$$
(33)
So,

$`T(D_\mu \mathrm{\Psi })`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{\begin{array}{c}1\\ \frac{n}{nm\theta }\end{array}\right\}T(_\mu \mathrm{\Psi })+T([A_\mu ^{},\mathrm{\Psi }])`$ (36)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{R^{}}{R}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n^{}m^{}\theta ^{}}{nm\theta }}\right)\left\{\begin{array}{c}1\\ \frac{n^{}}{n^{}m^{}\theta ^{}}\end{array}\right\}_\mu T(\mathrm{\Psi })+[T(A_\mu ^{}),T(\mathrm{\Psi })]`$ (39)
$`=`$ $`\left\{\begin{array}{c}1\\ \frac{n^{}}{n^{}m^{}\theta ^{}}\end{array}\right\}_\mu T(\mathrm{\Psi })+[T(A_\mu ^{}),T(\mathrm{\Psi })]`$ (42)
$`=`$ $`D_\mu T(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ (43)
where we have set $`R^{}=R(DC\theta )`$ to cancel the factor on the second line. (Note that $`\frac{n^{}m^{}\theta ^{}}{nm\theta }=\frac{1}{DC\theta }`$.) This is consistent with the volume change $`V^{}=V(DC\theta )^2`$ of  and references therein. Note that they use different lettering for the $`SL(2,)`$ matrix which determines the T-duality transformation. The transformation property of $`g_{YM}`$ can be determined from the normalization of the integral, but we will not do so here.

## 3 The T-dual of a Twist

We now examine the effect of T-duality, as presented above, on a field with twisted boundary conditions. We take the field $`\varphi `$ to have boundary conditions:

$`\varphi (x+2\pi R,y)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1(x,y)\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y)\mathrm{\Omega }_1(x,y)^1,`$
$`\varphi (x,y+2\pi R)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{2\pi i\alpha }\mathrm{\Omega }_2(x,y)\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y)\mathrm{\Omega }_2(x,y)^1`$ (44)
We wish to put this in a standard form. We define

$$\varphi ^{}=e^{i\alpha y/R}\varphi $$
(45)
This removes the twist so we can expand this field as before:

$$\varphi ^{}=\underset{s,t}{}c_{s,t}Z_1^sZ_2^t,\varphi =\underset{s,t}{}c_{s,t}e^{i\alpha y/R}Z_1^sZ_2^t$$
(46)
Now, we can tentatively define $`T(\varphi )=e^{i\alpha ^{}y/R^{}}T^{}(\varphi ^{})`$. This is not precisely correct. For one, $`\alpha ^{}`$ is still undetermined. More importantly, there is a new behavior when we take the T-dual of a product. To see this, we introduce:

$$\psi =\underset{u,v}{}d_{u,v}Z_1^uZ_2^v$$
(47)
Then

$`\psi \varphi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s,t,u,v}{}}c_{s,t}d_{u,v}Z_1^uZ_2^ve^{i\alpha y/R}Z_1^sZ_2^t`$ (48)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s,t,u,v}{}}c_{s,t}d_{u,v}e^{2\pi i\theta \alpha u/(nm\theta )}e^{i\alpha y/R}Z_1^sZ_2^tZ_1^uZ_2^v`$
However,

$$T(\psi )T(\varphi )=\underset{s,t,u,v}{}c_{s,t}d_{u,v}e^{2\pi i\theta ^{}\alpha ^{}u/(n^{}m^{}\theta ^{})}e^{i\alpha ^{}y/R^{}}Z_1^uZ_2^vZ_1^sZ_2^t$$
(49)
We can replicate the additional phase by translating one of the fields. Thus,

$$T(\psi \varphi )(x,y)=T(\psi )(x+L,y)T(\varphi )(x,y)$$
(50)
where

$$L=2\pi R^{}\left(\frac{\theta \alpha }{DC\theta }\theta ^{}\alpha ^{}\right)$$
(51)
Because we also have $`T(\varphi \psi )(x,y)=T(\varphi )(x,y)T(\psi )(x,y)`$ instead of the above, we define

$$T(\varphi )=\stackrel{}{E}_Le^{i\alpha ^{}y/R^{}}T^{}(\varphi ^{})$$
(52)
where $`\stackrel{}{E}_L`$ is defined to obey:

$$f(x)\stackrel{}{E}_L=\stackrel{}{E}_Lf(x+L)$$
(53)
We will abuse the notation and use $`T(\varphi )`$ to represent the field without the shift operator which will be explicitly shown in the multiplied fields as in (50).

We can now determine $`\alpha ^{}`$ by examining how the covariant derivative acts on these fields. The first difference with the previous discussion comes from the derivative term:

$$_y\varphi =i\frac{\alpha }{R}\varphi +e^{i\alpha y/R}_y\varphi ^{}$$
(54)
The second difference comes from the reconstruction of the normal form of the covariant derivative from the form (21). Specifically, we have:

$`T([A_y^{},\varphi ])`$ $`=`$ $`T(A_y^{})(x+L)T(\varphi )T(\varphi )T(A_y^{})`$ (55)
$`=`$ $`T(A_y)(x+L)T(\varphi )T(\varphi )T(A_y)+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{im^{}[x^{},T(\varphi )]}{2\pi R^2(n^{}m^{}\theta ^{})}}+{\displaystyle \frac{im^{}LT(\varphi )}{2\pi R^2(n^{}m^{}\theta ^{})}}`$
Our goal is to have the covariant derivative satisfy (36). Expanding that, we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n}{nm\theta }}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{R}}T(\varphi )+e^{i\alpha ^{}y/R^{}}T(_y\varphi ^{})\right)+\left(T(A)(x+L)T(\varphi )T(\varphi )T(A)(x)\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{n^{}}{n^{}m^{}\theta ^{}}}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^{}}{R^{}}}T(\varphi )+e^{i\alpha ^{}y/R^{}}_yT(\varphi ^{})\right)`$
$`+`$ $`\left(T(A)(x+L)T(\varphi )T(\varphi )T(A)(x)\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{im^{}LT(\varphi )}{2\pi R^2(n^{}m^{}\theta ^{})}}.`$
This implies the following condition:

$$\frac{n\alpha }{R(nm\theta )}=\frac{n^{}\alpha ^{}}{R^{}(n^{}m^{}\theta ^{})}+\frac{m^{}L}{2\pi R^2(n^{}m^{}\theta ^{})}$$
(57)
which is equivalent to:

$$n\alpha =n^{}\alpha ^{}+\frac{m^{}L}{2\pi R^{}}$$
(58)
Now we have two equations in two variables that we can solve for $`L`$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$. Solving (58) for $`\alpha ^{}`$, we substitute into (51) giving

$$L=2\pi \alpha R^{}B\alpha ^{}=D\alpha $$
(59)
These remarkably simple answers are suggestive. If we examine the transformation of a field of length $`L`$ and twist $`\alpha `$ into a field of length $`L^{}`$ and twist $`\alpha ^{}`$, equation (58) is modified to

$$n\alpha +\frac{mL}{2\pi R}=n^{}\alpha ^{}+\frac{m^{}L^{}}{2\pi R^{}}$$
(60)
and equation (51) is modified to

$$L^{}+2\pi \theta ^{}\alpha ^{}R^{}=L+2\pi \theta \alpha R$$
(61)
Solving these gives

$$\frac{L^{}}{2\pi R^{}}=\alpha B+A\frac{L}{2\pi R}\alpha ^{}=\alpha D+\frac{L}{2\pi R}C$$
(62)
or, in matrix form

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{L^{}}{2\pi R^{}}\\ \alpha ^{}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{L}{2\pi R}\\ \alpha \end{array}\right).$$
(63)
Note that both $`\frac{L}{2\pi R}`$ and $`\alpha `$ are parameters that run from 0 to 1.

It is not hard to generalize the result for $`𝐓^d`$ with generic twists $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _d`$ and generic lengths $`L_1,\mathrm{},L_d`$. The T-duality group is $`SO(d,d,)`$ and $`(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _d,\frac{L_1}{2\pi R_1},\mathrm{},\frac{L_d}{2\pi R_d})`$ transform as a vector in the representation $`\mathrm{𝟐}𝐝`$. One can intuitively understand this result as follows. The twists, $`\alpha _i`$, can be interpreted as a fractional momentum, $`p_i`$, along the $`i^{th}`$ cycle. In noncommutative geometry, T-duality exchanges momentum and electric flux . As we will see more clearly in the next subsection, the lengths $`L_i`$ can be interpreted as dipole-lengths, and thus $`L_i`$ does correspond to a fractional electric flux.

One might wonder about the zero modes of the dipole-fields. When we compactify a scalar field with generic twisted boundary conditions the zero mode of the field disappears. If we start with a local field with twisted boundary conditions, we have seen that after a T-duality that acts as $`\mathrm{\Theta }1/\mathrm{\Theta }`$ we get a dipole-field with no twist. At first sight it looks as if the dipole-field has a zero mode. However, we have to recall that the T-dual theory has some units of magnetic flux along $`𝐓^2`$. In the presence of magnetic flux, the dipole-field has no zero modes either. To see this, note that the dipole-field is charged under the local gauge groups $`U(1)_{(x_1,x_2)}\times U(1)_{(x_1+L_1,x_2)}`$. If we have $`m`$ units of magnetic flux it is easy to see that the boundary conditions for $`x_2x_2+2\pi R_2`$ include a phase $`e^{\frac{2\pi imL}{R_1}}`$.

## 4 Properties of Dipole Theories

We have seen in the previous section that noncommutative field theories with scalars (or fermions) naturally lead us to study field theories with dipoles. The dipoles are described by a vector $`L^\mu `$, and they can be formulated on a commutative or noncommutative spacetime. In this section we will study these dipole theories. We will see that they have features that resemble those of noncommutative field theories, although they are much simpler.

### 4.1 The modified $``$-product

We can construct a dipole theory by starting with a field theory on a commutative or noncommutative space and modify the $``$-product (or regular product if we are in the special case of a commutative space). To this end we designate a subset of the fields to be “dipole-fields” and define the $`\stackrel{~}{}`$-product as follows. If $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a dipole-field and $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is an ordinary field we set:

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }\stackrel{~}{}\mathrm{\Psi })_{(x)}\mathrm{\Phi }(x)\mathrm{\Psi }(x+L),(\mathrm{\Psi }\stackrel{~}{}\mathrm{\Phi })_{(x)}\mathrm{\Psi }(x)\mathrm{\Phi }(x).$$
(64)
More generally, if $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ is a dipole-field with dipole-vector $`L_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ is a dipole-field with vector $`L_2`$, we set:

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }_1\stackrel{~}{}\mathrm{\Phi }_2)_{(x)}\mathrm{\Phi }_1(x)\mathrm{\Phi }_2(x+L_1),(\mathrm{\Phi }_2\stackrel{~}{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1)_{(x)}\mathrm{\Phi }_2(x)\mathrm{\Phi }_1(x+L_2).$$
(65)
Note that, in order for the $`\stackrel{~}{}`$-product to be associative, the dipole-vector has to be additive. In other words, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ should be defined to have dipole-vector $`L_1+L_2`$.

If there are gauge fields, we define them to have dipole-vector zero. The covariant derivative of a dipole-field becomes:

$$(D_\mu \mathrm{\Phi })_{(x)}_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }+iA_\mu \stackrel{~}{}\mathrm{\Phi }i\mathrm{\Phi }\stackrel{~}{}A_\mu =_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }(x)+iA_\mu (x)\mathrm{\Phi }(x)i\mathrm{\Phi }(x)A_\mu (x+L).$$

### 4.2 Seiberg-Witten map

Seiberg and Witten described a map from the nonlocal noncommutative gauge theory to a local theory with higher derivative interactions .

Can we find a similar map that transforms the nonlocal dipole theories to local theories with higher derivative interactions? The map in this case is very simple. Define:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x_1,\mathrm{},x_d)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x_1,\mathrm{},x_d)Pe^{iL^\mu _0^1A_\mu (x_1+tL_1,\mathrm{},x_d+tL_d)𝑑t}.$$

It is easy to see that if $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ transforms in the adjoint of the local gauge group at $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_d)`$ then $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ transforms in the $`(N,\overline{N})`$ of $`U(N)_x\times U(N)_{x+L}`$. We can also expand:

$`\left(D_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }\right)Pe^{iL^\mu _0^1A_\mu (x_1+tL_1,\mathrm{},x_d+tL_d)𝑑t}`$ $`=`$ $`D_\mu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}+iL^\nu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}F_{\mu \nu }+\mathrm{}`$ (66)
Using this map, we can write the first order, $`O(L)`$, correction to the Lagrangian of a dipole scalar coupled to a gauge field as:

$``$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4g^2}}\text{tr}\{F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }\}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{tr}\{D_\mu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}D^\mu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^{}\}+L^\mu \text{tr}\{J^\nu F_{\mu \nu }\}+O(L)^2,`$
$`J^\nu `$ $``$ $`iD^\nu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^{}\mathrm{\Phi }i\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^{}D^\nu \mathrm{\Phi }.`$
### 4.3 Rational dipoles

If we compactify a field-theory on a noncommutative $`𝐓^2`$, with noncommutativity given by $`\theta ^{ij}=\frac{p}{q}ϵ^{ij}A`$ (where $`A`$ is the area of $`𝐓^2`$ and $`\frac{p}{q}`$ is rational), we can map the theory to a local field theory on a $`𝐓^2`$ of area $`A/q^2`$ and some magnetic flux . This also follows directly from T-duality as in .

Dipole theories have a similar property. If we compactify a theory with dipoles of dipole-vector $`L^\mu `$ on $`𝐒^1`$ of circumference $`kL`$ and such that $`L^\mu `$ is in the direction of $`𝐒^1`$, we can make it into a local theory on $`𝐒^1`$ of radius $`L`$. For example, take a gauge theory with gauge group $`U(N)`$ or $`SU(N)`$ and a dipole scalar field of dipole-vector $`L^\mu `$. After compactification on $`𝐒^1`$ of circumference $`kL`$, we can obtain a local gauge theory on $`𝐒^1`$ of radius $`L`$ and gauge group $`U(N)^k`$ or $`SU(N)^k`$ respectively. The dipole-fields become local fields in the bifundamental representation $`(N_i,\overline{N}_{i+1})`$. Here $`i`$ and $`(i+1)`$ refer to the $`i^{th}`$ and $`(i+1)^{th}`$ $`U(N)`$ or $`SU(N)`$ factors in the chain $`U(N)\times \mathrm{}\times U(N)`$, and if $`i+1=N+1`$ we take $`i+11`$. This theory has a $`_k`$ global symmetry of cyclically rotating the chain. It is generated by $`\sigma `$ defined as taking the $`i^{th}`$ $`U(N)`$ into the $`(i+1)^{th}`$ $`U(N)`$ and taking the $`(N_i,\overline{N}_{i+1})`$ scalar into the $`(N_{i+1},\overline{N}_{i+2})`$ scalar. The dipole-theory on $`𝐒^1`$ of radius $`kL`$ is equivalent to this local quiver theory compactified on $`𝐒^1`$ of radius $`L`$ and with the boundary conditions $`\varphi (x+L)=\sigma \varphi (x)`$, where $`\sigma \varphi `$ denotes the action of $`\sigma `$ on any field $`\varphi `$.

Note that a related limit of quiver theories appears in  in a different context.

Note also that in 3+1D the $`U(N)^k`$ quiver theories have a Landau pole due to the $`U(1)^k`$ factors. Combined with the results of the previous section, this implies that noncommutative $`U(N)`$ gauge theories with matter have a Landau pole, at least for certain twists. In noncommutative Yang-Mills theory, the $`U(1)`$ factor does not decouple . If we set the noncommutativity to zero, the $`SU(N)`$ dipole-theories are well-defined, and they do not have a Landau pole.

### 4.4 S-duality

Consider 3+1D $`𝒩=4`$ $`SU(N)`$ SYM. In terms of $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry, it contains a vector-multiplet and a hypermultiplet. Now let us turn on the dipole-moment for the hypermultiplet. Namely, we replace the product of fields in the hypermultiplet with the dipole product (64) that depends on the vector parameter $`L^\mu `$. What is the S-dual of this theory?

For spatial $`L^\mu `$, the theory can be obtained by starting with a 3+1D $`SU(N)^k`$ quiver-theory compactified on $`𝐒^1`$ of radius $`kL`$ and taking the limit $`k\mathrm{}`$, as explained in subsection (4.3). At first sight, this would suggest that the theory is S-dual to itself, since the $`𝒩=2`$ quiver-theory is believed to be self-dual .

But now we face a puzzle! For small $`L^\mu `$, using the relation (66), we can write the dipole theory as a deformation of $`𝒩=4`$ SYM of the form:

$$+L^\mu 𝒪_\mu +\mathrm{},$$

where $`𝒪_\mu `$ is an operator of dimension 5 whose bosonic part is:

$`𝒪_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{g_{YM}^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\text{tr}\{\mathrm{\Phi }_a^{}D^\nu \mathrm{\Phi }_aF_{\mu \nu }\}+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{g_{YM}^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\text{tr}\{\mathrm{\Phi }D^\nu \mathrm{\Phi }_a[\mathrm{\Phi }^{},\mathrm{\Phi }_a^{}]\}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{g_{YM}^2}}\text{tr}\{(\mathrm{\Phi }_1D^\nu \mathrm{\Phi }_2\mathrm{\Phi }_1D^\nu \mathrm{\Phi }_2)[\mathrm{\Phi }_1^{},\mathrm{\Phi }_2^{}]\}+\text{c.c.}`$
Here, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the complex adjoint scalar of the vector-multiplet and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ are the two scalars of the hypermultiplet.

For $`L^\mu =0`$, $`𝒩=4`$ SYM is self-dual, with

$$\tau \frac{1}{\tau },\tau \frac{4\pi i}{g_{YM}^2}+\frac{\theta }{2\pi }.$$

What happens to the operator $`𝒪_\mu `$ under S-duality? If the dipole theory is self-dual then, by what has been said above, $`𝒪_\mu `$ should be S-dual to itself. But this statement is wrong! In fact, Intriligator has put forward a list of conjectures about S-duals of various chiral primary operators and their superconformal descendants in $`𝒩=4`$ SYM .<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1We are grateful to O. Aharony for reminding us of this reference. The operator $`𝒪_\mu `$ is a descendant of the chiral primary $`𝒪_3^{(IJK)}\text{tr}\{\mathrm{\Phi }^{(I}\mathrm{\Phi }^J\mathrm{\Phi }^{K)}\}`$ where $`I,J,K=1\mathrm{}6`$ and $`(IJK)`$ means symmetrization with respect to those indices. From the appendix of  we see that there are two vector operators of dimension 5 that are descendants of $`𝒪_3`$. They are both in the representation $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟓}`$ of the R-symmetry group which can be seen to be the same representation as $`𝒪`$. (The $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟓}`$ can be generated by anti-symmetric tensors $`M_{IJ}`$.) The two operators are:

$`\delta ^3\overline{\delta }𝒪_3`$ $``$ $`𝒪^+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_{YM}^3}}\text{tr}\{F_{\mu \nu }^+\mathrm{\Phi }^{[I}D^\nu \mathrm{\Phi }^{J]}\}+\mathrm{},`$
$`\overline{\delta }^3\delta 𝒪_3`$ $``$ $`𝒪^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_{YM}^3}}\text{tr}\{F_{\mu \nu }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^{[I}D^\nu \mathrm{\Phi }^{J]}\}+\mathrm{},`$
Here we use the notation of  that $`\delta `$ and $`\overline{\delta }`$ are supersymmetry transformations, $`[IJ]`$ represent anti-symmetrization with respect to the $`I,J`$ indices, $`F_{\mu \nu }^+`$ and $`F_{\mu \nu }^{}`$ stand for the selfdual and anti-selfdual components of the field-strength $`F_{\mu \nu }`$, and $`(\mathrm{})`$ stands for terms that do not involve the field-strength $`F_{\mu \nu }`$. The conjecture of  is that under S-duality:

$$\tau \frac{a\tau +b}{c\tau +d},$$

the operators transform as:

$`𝒪^+`$ $``$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{c\overline{\tau }+d}{c\tau +d}}\right)^{1/4}𝒪^+,`$
$`𝒪^{}`$ $``$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{c\overline{\tau }+d}{c\tau +d}}\right)^{1/4}𝒪^{},`$
The operator we need is:

$$𝒪_\mu =g_{YM}(𝒪_\mu ^++𝒪_\mu ^{}).$$

We see that under S-duality it becomes a totally different operator that contains the magnetic field-strength $`\stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }ϵ_{\mu \nu \sigma \rho }F^{\sigma \rho }`$. Thus, the S-dual deformation operator, $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}_\mu `$, contains time derivatives. It is therefore likely that the S-dual theory, for finite $`L^\mu `$, is nonlocal in time. This would be reminiscent of the nonlocality in time - that develops after S-duality of spatially noncommutative SYM (NCSYM) . It would be interesting to investigate whether the dual theory also contains string-like excitations similar to the duals of NCSYM .

What was the flaw in the argument we presented at the beginning of this subsection? First, there is a factor of $`k`$ between the S-dual coupling constant of the quiver-theory and the coupling constant of $`𝒩=4`$ SYM. If we define $`\tau `$ in terms of the $`𝒩=4`$ SYM variables, then S-duality of the $`SU(N)^k`$ quiver-theory requires:

$$k\tau \frac{1}{k\tau }.$$

If we take the limit $`k\mathrm{}`$ first, we see that this duality replaces any finite $`\tau `$ with an infinitely strong coupling constant $`\tau =0`$ and is therefore not the duality we are seeking. Moreover, it probably does not act locally in the sense that it would not take local operators of the $`𝒩=4`$ theory into local operators. That is, after we unfold the circle of radius $`L/k`$ on which the $`SU(N)^k`$ quiver theory is defined back to a circle of radius $`L`$ the notion of locality changes.

### 4.5 Generalization to the $`(2,0)`$ theory

It has been argued in  that there exists a deformation of the $`(2,0)`$ theory that depends on an anti-self-dual 3-form $`\mathrm{\Theta }^{ijk}`$ and, after compactification on a small $`𝐒^1`$, the deformation reduces to 4+1D SYM with noncommutativity parameter $`\mathrm{\Theta }^{ij5}`$.

One way to define this theory is to use a similar construction as in . We start with $`N`$ M2-branes on $`𝐓^3\times ^{2,1}`$. The M2-branes span the directions of $`^{2,1}`$. We include a 3-form C-field flux on $`𝐓^3`$ such that the phase, $`CC_{345}V_{345}`$, is finite. We then let the volume of the $`𝐓^3`$ shrink to zero: $`M_p^3V_{345}0`$. Since M-theory on $`𝐓^3`$ has an $`SL(2,)`$ subgroup of the U-duality group that acts on $`\rho C+iV_{345}`$ as

$$\rho \frac{a\rho +b}{c\rho +d},$$

keeping the shape of $`𝐓^3`$ fixed (see for instance ), the arguments of  seem to carry over. This presumably describes the OM on $`𝐓^3`$ with the same shape and with area $`V`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Theta }^{345}=\mathrm{\Theta }^{012}=CV`$.

From this definition it is obvious that the theory has a U-duality $`SL(2,)`$ group that acts nonlinearly on $`\mathrm{\Theta }^{345}`$. We can ask the same question as before, namely what happens if we compactify with an R-symmetry twist on the scalar fields along the $`5^{th}`$ direction and apply U-duality.

The answer should be a 5+1D theory that depends on an anti-symmetric tensor $`L^{\mu \nu }`$ (in this case only $`L^{34}`$ is expected to be nonzero). Let us take the R-symmetry twist to be such that it breaks half of the supersymmetries. Note that since we break Lorenz invariance explicitly we can end up with a theory with 8 supersymmetries in 5+1D. If we expand in $`L^{\mu \nu }`$, we expect the leading order to be a dimension-8 operator $`𝒪_{\mu \nu }`$.

Let us take the case $`N=1`$ (a single M5-brane), and let us denote the 5 scalar fields of a free tensor multiplet by $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$ ($`I=1\mathrm{}5`$). Let $`\varphi _a`$ ($`a=1,2`$) be the complex fields:

$$\varphi _1\mathrm{\Phi }_2+i\mathrm{\Phi }_3,\varphi _2\mathrm{\Phi }_4+i\mathrm{\Phi }_5.$$

We expect the bosonic part of $`𝒪_{\mu \nu }`$ to be:

$$𝒪_{\mu \nu }=i\underset{a=1}{\overset{2}{}}(\varphi _a^{}^\sigma \varphi ^a^\sigma \varphi _a^{}\varphi ^a)H_{\mu \nu \sigma }.$$

Here $`H_{\mu \nu \sigma }`$ is the 3-form field-strength of the free-tensor multiplet and $`\varphi ^a`$ are the 2 complex scalar fields defined above.

If we turn on, for example, only $`L^{34}`$, then the particles that the fields $`\varphi _a`$ describe seem to be, instead of dipoles, two dimensional surfaces of constant area in the $`34`$ plane. The contour is charged under the field $`H_{\mu \nu \sigma }`$.<sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2 As this work was in progress, we found out about related ideas on the “noncommutative” $`(2,0)`$ theory . In this work, somewhat similar ideas seem to have been reached from a different path. We are grateful to M. Berkooz for discussing his ideas with us. These contours seem to be dynamical. It would be interesting to see if an action can be written for these contours.

## 5 Discussion

Noncommutative field theories have proven to be an exciting nonlocal generalization of ordinary field-theories that provide a testing ground for stringy phenomena. The generalization to the “noncommutative” $`(2,0)`$ theory at rank $`N=1`$ is especially intriguing if it can provide insight into the $`(2,0)`$ theory itself.

It is therefore interesting to discover that there exist simplified versions of these theories. In this paper we have argued that studying noncommutative field theories with twisted boundary conditions naturally leads us to consider dipole theories. As we have demonstrated in section (4), these theories have properties that mimic those of noncommutative field theories, but in a very simplified fashion. It therefore seems worthwhile to study the other nonlocal phenomena of noncommutative gauge theories in the context of dipole theories. Hopefully, the simplified form of dipole theories might shed more light on the nonlocal phenomena. For example:

1. Timelike noncommutativity  appears to require inclusion of stringy degrees of freedom -,. This is in part motivated by the study of strings in critical electric fields . It would be interesting to study dipole theories with timelike dipole-vectors.
2. Theories with lightlike noncommutativity were studied in . It would be interesting to extend the study to lightlike dipole-vectors.
3. The arguments in subsection (4.4) suggest that the S-dual of dipole theories might be nonlocal in time. It would be interesting to verify this and perhaps describe the S-dual theory more explicitly. It might be reminiscent of the NCOS theories .
4. It is very interesting to explore the extensions to the $`(2,0)`$ theories discussed in subsection (4.5). We have suggested that they involve some kind of generalization of dipoles of fixed length to 2D contours bounding a fixed area. Perhaps it would be possible to quantize (first quantization) the degrees of freedom in the boundary of these contours. (See also the related ideas in .)
5. In  various nonlocal theories with the nonlocality being characterized by a vector have been suggested. They were constructed by placing D-branes in backgrounds that carry $`B^{NSNS}`$ field-strength. These backgrounds were obtained by starting with a Taub-NUT space and setting the boundary conditions such that a component of the NSNS $`B`$-field, with one index along the Taub-NUT circle and one index parallel to the D-brane, is a nonzero constant at infinity. It would be interesting to understand the relation between those theories and the dipole theories.
6. In , the T-dual of an R-symmetry twist in the context of little-string theories  was studied. It would be interesting to see if any insight on these mysterious T-dual twists can be gained from the dipole theories.

## Acknowledgments

We are grateful to O. Aharony, M. Berkooz, Govindan Rajesh, M. Gremm and S. Sethi for discussions. This research is supported by NSF grant number PHY-9802498.


text:
# Dynamical Behaviour in the Nonlinear Rheology of Surfactant Solutions

## I Introduction

The amphiphilic nature of surfactant molecules results in their reversible self-assembling to form larger structures like spherical and cylindrical micelles, bilayers and vesicles. These supramolecular assemblies self-organise to form either long-range ordered liquid crystalline phases or short-range ordered isotropic liquid phases. Some examples of ordered phases are the nematic ordering of micellar discs or rods, the smectic A phase formed from the one-dimensional packing of infinite lamellae, cubic phases formed by finite-size spherical micelles and two-dimensional hexagonal crystals formed by infinite cylindrical micelles. In recent years, bicontinuous cubic phases have been observed in which a continuous bilayer or a monolayer forms a periodic, saddle-shaped, minimum energy surface. In isotropic phases, microemulsions and sponge phases can form. Another example is the formation of viscoelastic gels from the entanglement of very long and semiflexible cylindrical micelles with polymerlike behaviour. Interestingly, these micelles break and rejoin, giving rise to the name ’wormlike micelles’. The length distribution depends on the surfactant and the salt concentrations, temperature and the energy of scission of the micelles. The objective of this paper is to discuss our recent results on the nonlinear flow behaviour of such a system formed by the surfactant CTAT (cetyl trimethylammonium tosilate) in water. At very low concentrations, ($`c<0.04`$wt.%) and above the Kraft temperature of 23C, CTAT molecules in water self-assemble to form spherical micelles exhibiting Newtonian flow. Above 0.9wt.%, CTAT forms giant wormlike micelles. The hexagonal phase is seen at a CTAT concentration of above 27wt.% sol1 ; sol2 .

In polymeric melts, stress relaxation occurs primarily by reptation dynamics (curvilinear diffusion of the polymeric chain along the contour of an imaginary tube enclosing the chain), as suggested by de Gennes deg , which defines a relaxation time $`\tau _{rep}`$. In systems of giant wormlike micelles, there is an additional contribution to the stress relaxation from the reversible scission (reversible breakage and recombination) of micelles, which occurs on a time scale $`\tau _b`$. If $`\tau _b<<\tau _{rep}`$, then stress relaxation in wormlike micelles occurs mainly by reversible scission and is described well by the Maxwell model which gives the response function G(t)=G$`{}_{o}{}^{}exp(\frac{t}{\tau _M})`$, where Go is the high frequency plateau modulus and $`\tau _M=(\tau _b\tau _{rep})^{1/2}`$ is the relaxation time. The physical picture of the single relaxation time is a kind of motional narrowing can ; cat .

The reptation reaction model of wormlike micelles, which gives the Maxwell model for the linear viscoelasticity, yields unusual nonlinear rheology observed in some viscoelastic gels (for example cetyl pyridinium chloride/ sodium salicylate) reh ; gran . The flow curve is characterised by a plateau in the shear stress versus shear rate curvereh , while the normal stress is found to increase linearly with shear rate reh ; spe . These features in the flow curve of giant wormlike micellar systems are associated with a flow instability of the shear banding type, where the sheared solution breaks up into bands of high and low viscosities supporting low and high shear rates, respectively spe . Flow birefringence mak  and nuclear magnetic resonance velocity imaging mai  have revealed the existence of banded flow in the shear stress plateau regime. An alternate hypothesis explains the plateau in the shear stress as due to an isotropic-nematic phase transition that occurs due to the application of high shear rates to the sample ber . Experiments on the transient rheology of CPyCl-NaCl after imposition of step shear rates, show overshoots, oscillations and long time sigmoidal kinetics in the shear stress $`\sigma (t)`$ ber . In our system of interest, CTAT 1.9wt.% in water at 25C, we do not observe any overshoots in the stress relaxation on application of shear rates lying in the plateau region of the flow curve. However, we see that at high shear rates, the stress instead of decaying to a steady state, oscillates in time for a long time. We have analysed the time series of the viscoelastic and normal stresses obtained from these experiments and have demonstrated the existence of deterministic, chaotic dynamics in sheared solutions of CTAT. Oscillations in the stress relaxation of CTAT have also been observed by Soltero et al at a concentration of 5wt.% sol3 .

Chaotic time series data have often been observed in experiments on fluid dynamicsott . The Couette-Taylor flow in fluids and the Rayleigh-Benard convection in gases are two examples. Ananthakrishna et al ana  have shown the existence of chaotic dynamics in the jerky flow (Portevin-Le Chatelier effect) of some metal alloys undergoing plastic deformation. These systems also exhibit nonmonotonic flow curves. Deterministic chaos represents the apparently irregular behaviour of dynamical systems that arises from strictly deterministic laws in the absence of any external stochasticity. Chaotic dynamics in physical systems is characterised by an exponentially sensitive dependence on initial conditions, as a result of which long-term predictability of the dynamics of these systems is impossible. Chaotic time series may be characterised by certain invariants, metric and dynamical, such as the various fractal dimensions, the largest Lyapunov exponent and the Kolmogorov entropy. A positive value of the largest Lyapunov exponent is a direct consequence of the sensitivity of the trajectories in phase space to small changes in the initial conditions. The fractal dimensions provide a measurement of the topology of the attractor on which all the trajectories asymptotically converge. Apart from describing the complexity of the attractor, they also provide a measure of the regularity of occurrence of the phase points on its surface abar .

In this paper, we will show the existence of a positive Lyapunov exponent and a finite correlation dimension in the observed time series of the stress relaxation of CTAT on application of step shear rates lying in the plateau region of the flow curve. Further, the magnitudes of the invariants are found to increase monotonically with shear rate, the control parameter in our experiments.

## II Experimental Details

CTAT (purchased from Sigma Chemicals, India) samples were prepared by dissolving 1.9wt.% of powdered CTAT in distilled and deionised water. The samples were kept in an incubator at a temperature of 60C for a week, and frequently shaken to facilitate homogenisation. The samples were then kept at the experimental temperature (25C) for two days. The rheological properties of the CTAT thus prepared and equilibrated were measured using a Rheolyst AR-1000N ( T. A. Instruments, U. K.) stress-controlled rheometer with temperature control and software for shear rate control. The rheometer was also equipped with four strain gauge transducers at a distance of $`R`$ from the centre of the plate for the measurement of the normal force $`F_z`$. $`F_z`$ is related to the first normal stress difference Z by Z = $`\frac{2F_z}{\pi R^2}`$ mac . All the measurements reported in this paper were performed using a cone-and-plate geometry mac  of diameter 4cm and cone angle 159”. In each flow experiment, the rheometer can collect upto a maximum of 1500 data points, with a time gap of 1s or more between acquisition of successive data points. Sample history effects were found to be important in CTAT and hence all experiments have been done on fresh samples from the same batch. Most of the experiments were performed at 25C and a few at 35C.

## III Results

Fig. 1 shows the frequency response measurements at (a) 25C and (b) 35C. The linear regime was first ascertained by imposing stresses between 0.005 Pa to 2 Pa, oscillating at a frequency of 0.1 Hz, and finding the window of the applied stress values over which the elastic modulus G$`{}_{}{}^{}(\omega )`$ and the viscous modulus G$`{}_{}{}^{\prime \prime }(\omega )`$ are constant. From this measurement, the oscillatory stress for the frequency response measurements at both the temperatures has been chosen to be 0.6 Pa.

In Figs. 1(a) and 1(b), the solid circles and the hollow squares represent G$`{}_{}{}^{}(\omega )`$ and G$`{}_{}{}^{\prime \prime }(\omega )`$, respectively. The dominant relaxation time, estimated from the angular frequency at which G$`{}_{}{}^{}(\omega )`$ and G$`{}_{}{}^{\prime \prime }(\omega )`$ are equal, is found to be 17s (1s) at 25C (35C). The solid (G$`{}_{}{}^{}(\omega )`$) and dashed lines (G$`{}_{}{}^{\prime \prime }(\omega )`$) are the corresponding fits to the Maxwell model, given by $`G^{}(\omega )=\frac{G_o(\omega \tau _M)^2}{1+(\omega \tau _M)^2}`$ and $`G^{\prime \prime }(\omega )=\frac{G_o\omega \tau _M}{1+(\omega \tau _M)^2}`$. As mentioned before, for viscoelastic gels of wormlike micelles formed by the CTAC-NaSal,CPyCl-NaSal and CPySal-NaSal systems can ; gran , the Maxwell model works very well. However, for CTAT at 25C, the fit of the data to the Maxwell model is rather poor. Interestingly, the fit is reasonably good for experiments done at 35C. This may be due to the fact that the motional narrowing condition, $`\tau _b<<\tau _{rep}`$, is not satisfied at low temperatures.

Fig 2 shows the viscoelastic stress and normal stress measurements when the stress was increased from 10 mPa to 4.7 Pa after allowing a time $`\tau _M`$ between acquisition of consecutive data points, and measuring the corresponding shear rate. These measurements give the metastable branches of the flow curve at 25C (Fig. 2(a)) and 35C (Fig. 2(c)). Figs. 2(b) and 2(d) show the measured normal stresses as a function of increasing shear rate at both the temperatures. At 25C, the viscoelastic stress (2(a)) shows a crossover to a plateau, while the normal stress increases quadratically (2(b)) with increase in shear rate. The presence of a plateau in the viscoelastic stress at high shear rates is a signature of a mechanical instability, possibly of the shear banding type gran ; spe . We have ruled out the possibility of an isotropic-nematic phase transition on account of the very low volume fractions of CTAT used in our experiments. At 35C, the viscoelastic stress does not show a plateau region and the normal stress is roughly zero, which implies the absence of instability in sheared solutions of wormlike micelles at higher temperatures por .

We have studied in great detail the relaxation of the viscoelastic stress on application of step shear rates lying in the plateau region of the flow curve. Fig. 3 (a)-(d) show the stress relaxation measured for 1500 seconds, after subjecting the sample to step shear rates of 30, 60, 90 and 150s-1 (Figs. 3 (a)-(d)) at 25C. The stress decays initially for t$``$100 seconds (not shown in Fig. 3), and then oscillates in time. This time-dependent behaviour of the stress becomes more pronounced at higher shear rates. Fig. 3(e) show the stress relaxation at 35C on application of a step shear rate $`\dot{\gamma }`$ $`=`$ 150s-1. The oscillations seen at 25C at $`\dot{\gamma }`$=150s-1 are found to disappear completely at 35C, leading us to ascertain that the time-dependent oscillations observed in the stress at 25C are a direct consequence of the mechanical instability in the system. The first normal stress difference Z, which is measured simultaneously with the viscoelastic stress $`\sigma `$ at $`\dot{\gamma }`$=150s-1 also shows oscillations, as shown in Fig.3(f). In what follows, we describe how we have analysed the time-dependent data in $`\sigma `$ and Z to establish the presence of chaotic dynamics in the sheared CTAT solution. The time series analysis has been performed by using the method of state space construction by embedding time delay vectors ruel . Suppose {$`\sigma _j=\sigma (j\mathrm{\Delta }`$ t), j=1,1500} denotes the time series in stress $`\sigma `$ on application of a step shear rate. $`\mathrm{\Delta }t=`$ 1s is the time elapsed between collection of data points. In this method, we construst m-dimensional L-delay vectors given by {$`\stackrel{}{X}_i=(\sigma _i,\sigma _{i+L},\sigma _{i+2L},\mathrm{}.,\sigma _{i+(m1)L}`$)}. {$`\stackrel{}{X}_i`$:i=1,2,…,N-(m-1)L} defines a trajectory in m-dimensional space due to the presence of a dynamics F$`(\stackrel{}{X}_i):\stackrel{}{X}_i\stackrel{}{X}_{i+1}`$. In doing so, it is crucial to choose the optimal embedding dimension $`m_o`$ and the optimal delay time $`L_o`$ properlytak . We have done this by analysing the local exponential divergence plots and the plots of $`\gamma `$ = $`<ln(\stackrel{}{X}_{i+k}\stackrel{}{X}_{j+k}/\stackrel{}{X}_i\stackrel{}{X}_j)>`$ versus L for the trajectories obtained by embedding the time series in m dimensions. Here $`<..>`$ denotes averaging over all $`(i,j)`$ pairs. Embedding the trajectories in higher dimensions leads to a reduction in the number of false neighbours as at m $`<m_o`$, we are not looking at the real dynamics, but at its projection. At m$`>m_o`$, the number of false neighbours is zero. The left panel of Fig 4 shows the local exponential divergence plots for $`\dot{\gamma }`$=150s-1, where the abscissa is ln($`\stackrel{}{X}_i\stackrel{}{X}_j`$) and the ordinate is ln($`\stackrel{}{X}_{i+k}\stackrel{}{X}_{j+k}/\stackrel{}{X}_i\stackrel{}{X}_j`$) for (L,m), where L= 1 and 5 and m=3 to 6. $`\stackrel{}{X}_i\stackrel{}{X}_j`$ is the distance between the $`i`$th and $`j`$ th trajectories in m-dimensional space and is chosen to be smaller than a prescribed small distance r. $`\stackrel{}{X}_{i+k}\stackrel{}{X}_{j+k}`$ is the Euclidian distance between $`\stackrel{}{X}_i`$ and $`\stackrel{}{X}_j`$ after k iterations of the dynamics F. For our analyses, we have chosen $`r^{}`$ to be equal to 4% of the maximum value of $`\stackrel{}{X}_i\stackrel{}{X}_j`$. In all our calculations, k has been determined from the value of t at which the autocorrelation function $`C_L(t)`$ of the time series in $`\sigma `$ or Z falls to 1/e of its peak value. The plots are found to get increasingly compact at L=5 as m increases and there is no significant change as we go from m=5 to m=6. Hence we conclude that the optimal embedding dimension $`m_{}`$ for our time series in $`\sigma (t)`$ at $`\dot{\gamma }=`$ 150s-1 is 5.

After obtaining a value of m from the local exponential divergence plots, we have plotted $`\gamma `$ versus L (right panel, Fig. 4) for m = 3 to 6. As m increases, $`\gamma `$ is found to decrease, and there is no significant change in the $`\gamma `$ versus L plot on changing m from m=$`m_{}`$ (=5) to $`m_{+1}`$ (=6). We see that $`\gamma `$ has a minimum at L = 5 for m = 5 and hence we have chosen the optimal delay time $`L_o`$ to be 5 and the optimal embedding dimension $`m_o`$ to be 5 for $`\dot{\gamma }`$=150s-1.

We have calculated the correlation dimensions $`\nu `$ of the attractors in state space on which the trajectories asymptotically lie by computing the correlation integral in m-dimensional space $`C(R)=\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{lim}{N\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{N^2}_{i,j=1}^NH(R\stackrel{}{X}_i\stackrel{}{X}_j)`$ gra  for m=2 to 6. In the expression for C(R), H(x) is the Heaviside function and $`\stackrel{}{X}_i\stackrel{}{X}_j`$ is the distance between the pair of points ($`i`$,$`j`$) in the m-dimensional embedding space. The sum in the above expression gives the number of pairs of trajectories separated by a distance less than R. For small R’s, C(R) is known to scale as $`C(R)R^\nu `$, where the correlation dimension $`\nu `$ gives useful information about the local structure of the attractor gra . The plot of C(R) versus R has a constant slope over a given range of R, which does not change on increasing m from m to m∘+1 and is denoted by $`\nu `$. If $`\nu <`$ m, then the signal exhibits deterministic chaos. Fig. 5 shows the calculation of the correlation dimensions for the time series in viscoelastic stress $`\sigma `$ and normal stress Z at $`\dot{\gamma }`$=150s-1. The slope of the C(R) versus R plot in the plateau region is found to saturate at m=5 in both cases yielding correlation dimensions $`\nu `$ of 2.9 and 3, respectively (Figs. 5(a)-(b)). The satisfaction of the condition $`\nu <`$m, and the value of $`\nu >`$2 points to the existence of deterministic chaotic dynamics gra  in the stress relaxation of CTAT. We have also calculated the correlation dimensions of the attractors corresponding to the dynamics of stress relaxation at 60s-1 and 90s-1. The calculated values of $`\nu `$ in the two cases are 2.4 and 2.7 respectively, indicating the presence of chaotic dynamics at these shear rates. Fig 6(a) shows the calculated values of correlation dimensions $`\nu `$ as a function of the shear rate. $`\nu `$ is found to increase monotonically with the control parameter (shear rate in our case), similar to that observed in the weakly turbulent Couette-Taylor flow exhibited by orange oilswin , where the Rayleigh number was the control parameter.

A chaotic time series is characterised by a positive Lyapunov exponent, which describes the divergence of neighbouring trajectories in state space ott . We have calculated the largest Lyapunov exponents for the time series of the viscoelastic stresses at 60s-1, 90s-1 and 150s-1 and the normal stress at 150s-1 (Fig 7) using the method proposed by Gao and Zheng gao . This method requires the calculation of $`\gamma (k)`$ as a function of k, with $`\stackrel{}{X}_i\stackrel{}{X}_jr^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{X}_i`$ and $`\stackrel{}{X}_j`$ chosen such that $`|ji|\omega `$, where $`\omega =(m1)L`$, to exclude tangential motion. A linear fit of $`\gamma (k)`$ versus k yields a positive slope S and nearly zero intercept, from which the Lyapunov exponent $`\lambda `$ has been extracted by using $`\lambda =S/\mathrm{\Delta }tln2`$. $`\lambda `$ is found to increase monotonically with shear rate as shown in Figure 6(b).

## IV Conclusions

The existence of a finite correlation dimension $`\nu `$ and a positive Lyapunov exponent $`\lambda `$ indicates the existence of deterministic chaos in the dynamics of stress relaxation in CTAT . This occurs only when the shear rates are high enough and lie in the plateau region of the flow curve. Since the volume fraction of CTAT in our experiment is very small, we rule out the possibility of an isotropic-nematic phase transition as the cause of the observed instabilities. We conclude that the chaotic dynamics is a natural consequence of the mechanical instability. The calculations described above predict an optimal embedding dimension $`m_o`$ of 5 for the description of the dynamics of the system. We have previously established the presence of chaotic dynamics in the stress relaxation in CTAT 1.35wt.%, when the sample was subjected to step shear rates lying in the plateau region of the flow curveran . However, at concentrations higher than 2.5wt.%, it is difficult to obtain a sufficiently long time series, as the large normal stresses that develop in the sample sol2 ; spe  cause its expulsion from the rheometer.

In order to theoretically model the dynamical aspects of the observed phenomenon in viscoelastic gels, we need to set up space and time-dependent, coupled, nonlinear differential equations in at least 5 dynamical variables. One possible choice could be the Johnson-Segalman (J-S) equation joh  which is the solution of the Navier-Stokes equation coupled to the continuity equation for isothermal, incompressible and viscoelastic fluids. The viscoelastic nature of the polymer is accounted for by writing the total stress as the sum of a Newtonian part and a deformation history-dependent viscoelastic part. This model yields a non monotonic flow curve and oscillations in the start-up stress in polymeric systemsmal . This model, however, has not been analysed to predict the chaotic time-dependence of the stresses that is seen in our experiments. We believe that the flow-concentration coupling and the dynamics of the mechanical interfaces between shear bands need to be incorporated in the J-S model. Further, the reversible breakdown and recombination of micelles also need to be considered. A model constructed by incorporating these additional features, which takes into account the nonlinear coupling between the relevant dynamical variables like shear and normal stress, shear rate and concentration profiles is likely to exhibit the chaotic behaviour that we observe.

## V Acknowledgements

The authors thank Dr. Geetha Basappa for her participation in the initial part of the project and Dr. V. Kumaran, Dr. P. R. Nott and Dr. S. Ramaswamy for the use of the rheometer. AKS thanks the Board of Research in Nuclear Sciences and RB thanks CSIR, India for financial support


text:
# Acknowledgments

## Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to S. Dubnićka, S.B. Gerasimov, V.A. Meshcheryakov, V.N. Pervushin, M.K. Volkov and V.L. Yudichev for useful discussions and interest in this work.

This work has been supported by the Grant Program of Plenipotentiary of Slovak Republic at JINR. Yu.S. and M.N. were supported in part by the Slovak Scientific Grant Agency, Grant VEGA No. 2/7175/20; and D.K., by Grant VEGA No. 2/5085/99.

Figure Captions

Fig.1: Uniformization plane for the $`\pi \pi `$-scattering amplitude.
Fig.2: The energy dependence of the ($`|S_{12}|`$) obtained on the basis of a simultaneous analysis of the experimental data on the coupled processes $`\pi \pi \pi \pi ,K\overline{K}`$ in the channel with $`I^GJ^{PC}=0^+0^{++}`$. The data on the process $`\pi \pi K\overline{K}`$ are taken from Ref..
Fig.3: The same as in Fig.2 but for the phase shift ($`\delta _{12}`$).


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The phenomenology of the expanding universe appears to be converging on a set of fundamental parameters that includes a non-zero homogeneous energy density $`ϵ_{vac}2\times 10^{123}M_P^4`$ (see  and refs. therein). Furthermore, large redshift supernova observations suggest that the cosmological scale factor is accelerating at present . Given the well-known difficulties in explaining why the cosmological constant should be zero (see, e.g., ), it appears to be even harder to understand a finite number that represents such a tiny fraction of the natural scale set by the Planck mass $`M_P=1.22\times 10^{19}`$ GeV. The scale discrepancies introduced into physics by this large mass have triggered many attempts and speculations to interpret the Planck mass as a dynamical scale , to understand a possible time evolution of the cosmological constant , or to have the dynamics of a scalar field adjusting the cosmological constant to zero . Quintessence as homogeneous dark energy of an evolving scalar field is partially successful in explaining a small present-day value of the homogeneous energy density . It can lead to a cosmology consistent with observation .

In this paper, we discuss the naturalness of different realizations of the quintessence scenario from the perspective of the scalar field lagrangian

$$(\phi )=\frac{1}{2}(\phi )^2k^2(\phi )+\mathrm{exp}[\phi ].$$
(1)
Here and in what follows all quantities are measured in units of the reduced Planck mass $`\overline{M}_P`$, i.e., we set $`\overline{M}_P^2M_P^2/(8\pi )(8\pi G_N)^1=1`$. The lagrangian of Eq. (1) contains a simple exponential potential $`V=\mathrm{exp}[\phi ]`$ and a non-standard kinetic term with $`k(\phi )>0`$. If one wishes, the kinetic term can be brought to the canonical form by a change of variables. Introducing the field

$$\chi =K(\phi )\text{with}k(\phi )=\frac{K(\phi )}{\phi }$$
(2)
one obtains

$$(\chi )=\frac{1}{2}(\chi )^2+\mathrm{exp}[K^1(\chi )].$$
(3)
Nevertheless, the important question whether a given quintessence model can be considered as natural from a field theory perspective can be discussed particularly simply in terms of the lagrangian of Eq. (1).

We restrict our discussions to potentials that are monotonic in $`\chi `$. (Otherwise, the value of the potential at the minimum must be of the order of today’s cosmological constant, with $`V_{min}10^{120}`$. Cosmologies of this type are discussed in .) All monotonic potentials can be rescaled to the ansatz Eq. (1). An initial value of $`\phi `$ in the vicinity of zero corresponds then to an initial scalar potential energy density of order one. We consider this as a natural starting point for cosmology in the Planck era. As a condition for naturalness we postulate that no extremely small parameter should be present in the Planck era. This means, in particular, that $`k(0)`$ should be of order one. Furthermore, this forbids a tuning to many decimal places of parameters appearing in $`k(\phi )`$ or the initial conditions. For natural quintessence all characteristic mass scales are given by $`\overline{M}_P`$ in the Planck era. The appearance of small mass scales during later stages of the cosmological evolution is then a pure consequence of the age of the universe (and the fact that $`V(\phi )`$ can be arbitrarily close to zero). In addition, we find cosmologies where the late time behaviour is independent of the detailed initial conditions particularly attractive. For such tracker solutions  no detailed understanding of the dynamics in the Planck era is needed. One of our main findings is the existence of viable cosmological solutions with high present-day acceleration which are based on functions $`k(\phi )`$ that always remain $`𝒪(1)`$.

Non-canonical kinetic terms have been considered in cosmology before. For example, they were used in models of inflation  and as tool for the adjustment of the cosmological constant , most recently in the context of quintessence . A non-canonical kinetic term appears in supergravity theories  and was also used in  to relate the present-day cosmic acceleration to the onset of matter domination at $`a10^4`$. In the context of higher dimensional unification the identification of $`\mathrm{ln}\phi `$ with the volume of internal space or some appropriate dilaton-type field generically leads to a non-canonical kinetic term .

It is convenient to analyse the cosmological evolution using the scale factor $`a`$ instead of time as the independent variable. In this case, the evolution of matter and radiation energy density is known explicitly and one only has to solve the set of the two differential equations for the homogeneous dark energy density $`\rho _\phi `$ and the cosmon field $`\phi `$

$$\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\rho _\phi }{d\mathrm{ln}a}=3(1+w_\phi ),\frac{d\phi }{d\mathrm{ln}a}=\sqrt{6\mathrm{\Omega }_T/k^2(\phi )},$$
(4)
with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_T=T/(3H^2)`$ the fraction of kinetic field energy and $`w_\phi =p_\phi /\rho _\phi `$. Here the cosmon kinetic energy is denoted by $`T=\dot{\phi }^2k^2(\phi )/2`$ whereas $`p_\phi =TV`$ and $`\rho _\phi =T+V`$ specify the equation-of-state of quintessence. Thus, more explicitly, the cosmology is governed by four equations for the different components of the energy density $`\rho _m,\rho _r,\rho _\phi `$ and $`\phi `$

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{ln}\rho _m}{d\mathrm{ln}a}}=3(1+w_m),`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{ln}\rho _r}{d\mathrm{ln}a}}=3(1+w_r),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{ln}\rho _\phi }{d\mathrm{ln}a}}=6\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{V(\phi )}{\rho _\phi }}\right),`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\phi }{d\mathrm{ln}a}}=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{6(\rho _\phi V(\phi ))}{k^2(\phi )(\rho _m+\rho _r+\rho _\phi )}}},`$
where $`w_m=0`$ and $`w_r=1/3`$ for matter and radiation respectively.

For our exponential potential $`V=\mathrm{exp}[\phi ]`$, the last equation can be rewritten as

$$\frac{d\mathrm{ln}V}{d\mathrm{ln}a}=\sqrt{\frac{6(\rho _\phi V)}{k^2(\mathrm{ln}V)(\rho _m+\rho _r+\rho _\phi )}}.$$
(6)
We note that today’s value of $`\rho _\phi `$ plays the role of $`ϵ_{vac}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi =\rho _\phi /(3H^2)`$. For a rough orientation, today’s value of $`\phi `$ must be $`\phi _0276`$ for all solutions where the present potential energy is of the order of $`ϵ_{vac}`$.

The simplest case, $`k(\phi )=k=`$ const., corresponds to the original quintessence model  with a potential term $`\mathrm{exp}[\chi /k]`$. If $`k^2<1/n_b`$ (with $`n_b=3(1+w_b)`$ and $`b=r`$ for radiation and $`b=m`$ for matter), then the scalar field energy $`\rho _\phi `$ follows the evolution of the background component $`\rho _b`$ in a well-known manner. In this case, one finds a constant dark energy fraction

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi =n_bk^2.$$
(7)
This attractor solution can be easily established from Eqs. (LABEL:fe) and (6) by noting the constancy of $`\rho _\phi /\rho _b`$ and $`V/\rho _b`$. For $`k^2>1/n_b`$ the cosmological attractor is a scalar dominated universe  with $`H=2k^2t^1,w_\phi =1/(3k^2)1`$.

If a solution obeying (approximately) Eq. (7) is valid during nucleosynthesis, the “right tuning of the clock” requires $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi \stackrel{<}{}0.2`$ . Another constraint arises from structure formation since solutions with large constant $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi `$ slow down the growth of density fluctuations . This is described by the simple relation

$$\delta _ca^{1ϵ/2}\text{with}ϵ=\frac{5}{2}\left(1\sqrt{1\frac{24}{25}\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi }\right),$$
(8)
where $`\delta _c`$ is the density contrast of cold dark matter. The formation of galaxies also requires $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi \stackrel{<}{}0.2`$ for a sufficiently long time after the onset of matter domination 111 Our bound is very conservative. A more realistic limit is probably given by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi \stackrel{<}{}0.1\mathrm{}0.15`$.. For building quintessence models, this constraint is the most stringent one because it requires a recent increase of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi `$ that is relatively rapid on a cosmological scale.

It has been emphasized early  that there is actually no reason why $`k(\phi )`$ should be exactly constant and that interesting cosmologies may arise from variable $`k(\phi )`$. In particular, one may imagine an effective transition from small $`k`$ (small $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi `$) in the early universe (nucleosynthesis etc.) to large $`k`$ ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi 1`$) today .

## 2 Leaping kinetic term

A particularly simple case of a $`\phi `$ dependent kinetic coefficient $`k(\phi )`$ is obtained if $`k`$ suddenly changes from a small number $`k<0.22`$ (consistent with nucleosynthesis and structure formation bounds) to a number above the critical value $`1/\sqrt{n_b}`$. Consider, for example, the function

$$k(\phi )=k_{min}+\text{tanh}(\phi \phi _1)+1(\text{with}k_{min}=0.1,\phi _1=276.6),$$
(9)
that gives rise to the cosmological evolution of Fig. 2. This model, which completely avoids the explicit use of very large or very small parameters, realizes all the desired features of quintessence. The homogeneous dark energy density tracks below the background component in the early universe ($`k=0.1`$) and then suddenly comes to dominate the evolution when $`k`$ rises to a value $`k=2.1`$ approximately today. With a tuning on the percent level (the value of $`\phi _1`$ has to be appropriately adjusted) realistic present-day values of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi `$ and $`w_\phi `$ can be realized. In the above example, one finds $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi ,0}=0.70`$ and $`w_{\phi ,0}=0.80`$. Note that, due to the extended tracking period, the late cosmology is completely insensitive to the initial conditions. In the example of Fig. 2, the evolution starts at the Planck epoch with a total energy density $`\rho _{tot}=1.0`$, $`\phi =2.0`$ and $`\dot{\phi }=0`$ (corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi =0.14)`$. We have checked explicitly other initial conditions, e.g., with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi `$ near one.

The present day value $`w_\phi `$ can be forced to be even closer to $`1`$ if the leap of $`k(\phi )`$ is made sharper or the final value of $`k`$ is made higher by a simple generalization of Eq. (9). Thus, all scenarios between a smoothly rising quintessence contribution and a suddenly emerging cosmological constant can be realized.

As a limiting case of the sudden increase of $`k(\phi )`$, one can consider models where $`k(\phi )`$ has a singularity at a certain value of $`\phi `$. For example, the function

$$k(\phi )=k_{min}+(\phi \phi _1)^2(\text{with}k_{min}=0.1,\phi _1=277.5),$$
(10)
leads to a cosmology very similar to the one displayed in Fig. 2. Note, however, that the potential, when rewritten in terms of $`\chi =K(\phi )`$, approaches a constant non-zero value at $`\chi \mathrm{}`$. Thus, one could argue that a cosmological constant has, after all, been introduced in a hidden way. Nevertheless, the lagrangian with non-canonical kinetic term may open up new perspectives on the problem of sudden cosmic acceleration. In particular, it appears possible that the sudden rise of the kinetic coefficient is the result of some transition in the cosmic evolution which has a natural reason to occur in the present epoch.

## 3 Runaway quintessence

A somewhat different realization of a cosmology with late-time acceleration is obtained if the early history of the universe includes a prolonged period with small $`k`$. To illustrate this, consider the particularly simple function

$$k(\phi )=k_{min}+b(\text{tanh}(\phi \phi _1)\text{tanh}(\phi \phi _2)+1)$$
(11)
$$(\text{with}k_{min}=0.15,b=0.25,\phi _1=50.0,\phi _2=254.8),$$

which leads to the cosmological evolution of Fig. 3. As $`\phi `$ increases, the coefficient $`k(\phi )`$ (cf. the almost piecewise constant curve in Fig. 3) changes from the large initial value 0.65 to a smaller intermediate value 0.15 and back to the large value.

During the initial period with large $`k`$, the universe inflates and the background energy density (i.e. radiation) becomes very small. When $`k`$ drops, $`\phi `$ accelerates and its kinetic energy dominates the universe ($`w_\phi =1`$). Since kinetic energy density decays faster than the background component, the universe becomes radiation dominated after a certain time, from which point on the value of $`\phi `$ remains essentially frozen. At this time $`V(\phi )`$ has already become very small and the cosmic evolution (including nucleosynthesis and structure formation) proceeds in the conventional way. However, at a certain moment (which is chosen to be approximately now by a moderate tuning of the parameters in Eq. (11)) the potential $`V(\phi )`$ becomes relevant again. Since in the meantime $`k`$ has returned to its large value, a new scalar dominated epoch starts.

In the example of Fig. 3, the evolution begins at $`\rho _{tot}=1.0`$, $`\phi =2.0`$ and $`\dot{\phi }=0`$. These initial conditions lead to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi ,0}=0.5`$ and $`w_{\phi ,0}=0.76`$ today. Note that, in this example, no extended period of tracking exists. Therefore today’s cosmological parameters depend on the initial conditions. However, no extreme tuning of the lagrangian parameters or the initial conditions is required. Complete independence of initial conditions could be realized by introducing a period of tracking before the sequence of events illustrated in Fig. 3.

The same qualitative scenario can also be realized without any abrupt changes of $`k`$. For example, the function

$$k(\phi )=k_{min}+\left(\frac{\phi \phi _1}{\phi _2}\right)^2(\text{with}k_{min}=0.1,\phi _1=152.4,\phi _2=170.0)$$
(12)
(cf. the parabola in Fig. 3) gives rise to a cosmological evolution that is very similar to the one of Fig. 3, if the same initial conditions at the Planck epoch are used. The essential qualitative feature of $`k(\phi )`$ is its small value during an intermediate period, so that $`\phi `$ can run away to the large values that correspond to a tiny $`V(\phi )`$.

## 4 Smoothly changing kinetic terms

In Sect. 2, late time acceleration was achieved by a relatively sudden change of the kinetic term. In Sect. 3, it was realized by an essentially frozen dark energy contribution which suddenly becomes the dominant component. Even though the latter does not require abrupt changes of the kinetic term, the whole cosmic evolution is far from smooth. In this section, we want to explore whether an interesting cosmology can be realized with a smooth function $`k(\phi )`$ and a smooth, tracking evolution of $`\phi `$.

An obvious problem arises from the necessity to produce enough structure in our universe. Assuming the approximate validity of the relation Eq. (7) during structure formation, one needs a value $`k<0.26`$ to fulfil the condition $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi <0.2`$. By contrast, we need $`k>0.41`$ today to have, say, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi >0.5`$. Thus, while $`\mathrm{log}_{10}a`$ grows by about 3 units or less (which is a small fraction of its whole evolution from $`\mathrm{log}_{10}a30`$ to $`\mathrm{log}_{10}a=0)`$, a significant change of $`k`$ has to occur. An even stronger rise of $`k`$ is necessary to account for an appreciable acceleration of the expansion today.

Within the approximate validity of Eq. (7) (with $`kk(\phi )`$) one has

$$\frac{dk(\phi )}{d\phi }=\frac{1}{3\sqrt{3}}\frac{d\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi }}{d\mathrm{ln}a}\stackrel{>}{}0.007.$$
(13)
Here the bound relates to the time of structure formation and corresponds to the change of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi `$ from 0.2 to 0.5 mentioned before. Together with the value $`\phi 250`$ and $`k=0.26`$ (at the borderline allowed for structure formation) this makes it obvious that this increase cannot be achieved by a linear rise of $`k`$ with $`\phi `$. Cosmologies saturating the bound Eq. (13) will not lead to an accelerating universe today.

Let us next consider an exponential form of $`k(\phi )`$,

$$k(\phi )=\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{(\phi \phi _1)}{\alpha }\right],$$
(14)
which allows for a strong growth of $`k(\phi )`$ during the cosmic evolution. The phenomenology arising from this functional form is, in fact, well known  because the corresponding canonical lagrangian possesses a simple power-law potential:

$$V(\chi )=A\chi ^\alpha ,A=\alpha ^\alpha \mathrm{exp}[\phi _1].$$
(15)
If $`\alpha `$ is large, $`k`$ varies smoothly and $`\phi `$ follows the growth of $`\mathrm{ln}a`$ : $`\mathrm{\Delta }\phi \mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{ln}a)`$. Thus, if $`k`$ changed by, say, a factor of two between $`\mathrm{log}_{10}a=3`$ and today, one may roughly expect that it has changed by a factor of $`2^{10}1000`$ since the Planck epoch. This violates our naturalness assumption. Smaller values of $`\alpha `$ exacerbate this dilemma. Only for $`\alpha \stackrel{<}{}6`$ acceleration can be realized . In this case $`A`$ is a very small parameter when expressed in units of the Planck mass. In our language this situation is highly unnatural222Even in the case of small $`\alpha `$ no extremely small numbers appear directly in Eq. (14). The smallness of $`k(\phi )`$ at the initial point $`\phi 0`$ arises from the exponential factor $`\mathrm{exp}[\frac{\phi _1}{\alpha }]`$. This seems, however, to be only an optical improvement. because the initial value of $`k(\phi )`$ is very small, i.e., $`k(0)10^{20}`$ for $`\alpha =6`$.

Let us briefly mention a further interesting aspect of the model with exponential kinetic coefficient (or, equivalently, the power law potential for $`\chi `$). With an initial condition $`\phi \phi _1`$, the potential energy $`V(\phi )`$ is far above the tracking value at the beginning of the evolution (in  this is justified by an equipartition requirement). Therefore, initially $`\phi `$ runs to very large values (and correspondingly small $`V(\phi )`$) as in our runaway-scenario of Sect. 3. If $`\alpha `$ is very small, the age of the universe is insufficient for $`\phi `$ to return to tracking. Thus, the effect of the potential energy in late cosmology is similar to a cosmological constant: $`\phi `$ is almost constant and $`V(\phi )`$ very suddenly becomes the dominant component. This last possibility, which is quite attractive phenomenologically, suffers, however, from an “unnatural” tiny parameter in the lagrangian and a tuning of the initial conditions. In our opinion, the runaway scenario of Sect. 3 represents a viable alternative with similar characteristics for late cosmology.

Let us finally note that replacing the exponential form of Eq. (14) by a different function, e.g., $`k\phi ^\beta `$, does not solve the problem. Unless the present era is effectively singled out as in Sect. 2, a rapidly growing $`k(\phi )`$ implies an unnatural situation in the Planck era while a relatively flat $`k(\phi )`$ fails to produce acceleration today.

## 5 Conclusions

We have formulated a condition for a natural quintessence scenario: in the Planck era no extremely small parameter should appear neither in the effective action nor in the initial conditions. We have presented examples that realize this scenario and are consistent with present cosmological observations of a large fraction in homogeneous energy density and acceleration in the scale factor. Translating to a standard kinetic term our examples correspond to a relatively mild modification of exponential potentials. Some other popular quintessence scenarios, like the ones based on power law potentials with moderate powers, do not obey our naturalness criterion.

Despite the consistency of these scenarios with present day observations, we feel that two issues are not yet understood in a completely satisfactory way. The first one concerns the value of the potential for $`\phi \mathrm{}`$. A modification of the potential into $`e^\phi +\lambda `$ would introduce an asymptotic cosmological constant. A tiny value of $`\lambda `$ is consistent with cosmological observations but incompatible with our naturalness criterion. We mention two proposals to answer the question why $`\lambda `$ is precisely zero in the quintessence context. One invokes the dilatation anomaly  and the other is based on a dynamical tuning mechanism  (see also ).

The second issue concerns the particular role of the present epoch. In all realistic scenarios we have found, the present time is characterized by a relatively sharp transition to a scalar dominated universe. Our era is singled out by this transition. The question “why now” is much less dramatic than for a cosmological constant: within quintessence the parameters in $`k(\phi )`$ have to be tuned on the percent level in contrast to $`10^{120}`$ for the cosmological constant. Nevertheless, a natural explanation of the special role of “today” would be very welcome. We can imagine two solutions to this puzzle. Either the present phenomenological constraints weaken such that smaller values of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\phi `$ and $`|w_\phi |`$ are allowed. Or some particularities of the present epoch may affect the dynamics. Some proposals are based on the change of the effective equation of state of the clustering dark matter at the end of radiation domination . Another possibility is the coupling of the cosmon to clustering dark matter  that would be ineffective during radiation domination.

In this context it is worthwhile to recall that the cosmon field $`\phi `$ represents the average value of a fluctuating scalar field in a nonequilibrium, inhomogeneous universe. Thus, the potential $`V(\phi )`$ and the kinetic coefficient $`k(\phi )`$ are, in principle, themselves time-dependent dynamical quantities. Their time evolution is described by the time-dependent effective action of nonequilibrium field theory  that accounts for the nonequilibrium values of higher correlation functions. The present epoch is characterized by the onset of strong nonlinearities in the density fluctuations and therefore large higher correlation functions. Could this be the origin of the effective dynamics discussed in this work?