text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The Maxwell Chern Simons theory (M.C.S.T.)  presents the interesting property of being a massive theory, althought being gauge invariant. The mass is provided by the topological Chern-Simons (C.S.) term, which, in turn, has been widely considered both in the abelian and non abelian cases as a pure gauge theory .

The purpose of this letter is to study the geometric representation appropriate for the abelian M.C.S.T. theory, within the spirit of the Loop Representation of Maxwell Theory . Our motivation is mainly to obtain a further insight into the loop and path representations, that could be useful for later developments in more realistic theories, such as Quantum Gravity in the Ashthekar formulation . Within this program, the path representation of the Proca-Stueckelberg theory was studied recently . Also, the Maxwell field coupled to point particles has been quantized in a geometric representation . A common feature of these models, which is also shared by the free Maxwell theory, is that the introduction of loops or open paths (depending on the case) automatically solves the Gauss constraint. As we shall see, this is not the case for the M.C.S.T.. Instead, the Gauss constraint further restricts the path space, leaving the boundary of the paths as the relevant geometric structures, except by the fact that the theory is sensible to the number of times hat the paths wind around their own boundaries. This feature lead to deal with multivalued wave functionals. A similar result was obtained for the Chern Simons field coupled to a scalar field several years ago .

The multivaluedness of wave functions due to topological interactions is the hallmark of anyonic behavior within the context of quantum mechanics . Hence, one could interpret the M.C.S.T. as one of point particles, lying at the boundaries of the paths, and obeying fractional statistics. The statistical parameter results to be related to the mass of the model. Indeed, the mass term can be gauged away by the singular gauge transformation that maps the ordinary wave function into the multivalued one. At last, the geometric approach allows to display the following equivalence: the M.C.S.T. may be mapped into a massles scalar field theory with fractional statistics.

The organization of the paper is as follows. In section 2 we recall some basic results about the M.C.S.T. and its canonical quantization. In section 3 we review the abelian path space, and study the path representation of the quantum M.C.S.T., paying special interest to the geometric resolution of the Gauss constraint. Section 4 is devoted to explore the relation between the M.C.S.T., the massles scalar field theory and the quantum mechanics of non relativistic particles with C.S. interaction. A short discussion is presented in section 5.

## 2 The Model

The M.C.S. lagrange density is given by

$$=\frac{1}{4}F_{\alpha \beta }F^{\alpha \beta }+\frac{k}{4\pi }ϵ^{\alpha \beta \gamma }_\alpha A_\beta A_\gamma $$
(1)
where $`F_{\alpha \beta }=_\alpha A_\beta _\beta A_\alpha `$. We take $`g_{\mu \nu }=diag(1,1,1)`$. The equation of motion

$$_\alpha F^{\alpha \gamma }+\frac{k}{2\pi }ϵ^{\alpha \beta \gamma }_\alpha A_\beta =0$$
(2)
leads to

$$(\mathrm{}+(\frac{k}{2\pi })^2)F_{\alpha \beta }=0$$
(3)
which shows that the M.C.S. gauge field is massive ($`k`$ has units of mass, as can be readily seen from eq.(2). Moreover, it can be shown that the theory posseses a single excitation with mass $`\frac{k}{2\pi }`$ and spin $`1`$ ($`k>0`$) or $`1`$ ($`k<0`$) .

The canonical quantization a la Dirac yields the following results. In the Weyl gauge ($`A_0=0`$) there is a first class constraint generating the time independent gauge transformations

$$_i\mathrm{\Pi }^i(𝐱)+\frac{k}{4\pi }B(𝐱)=0$$
(4)
with $`B=ϵ^{ij}_iA_j`$, and $`\mathrm{\Pi }^i`$ being the canonical momentum satisfying

$$[A_i(𝐱),\mathrm{\Pi }^j(𝐲)]=i\delta _i^j\delta ^2(𝐱𝐲)$$
(5)
The remaining canonical commutators vanish.

Unlike the pure Maxwell case, the momentum $`\mathrm{\Pi }^i`$ does not coincide with the electric field. Indeed

$$E^i=F^{i0}=\mathrm{\Pi }^i\frac{k}{4\pi }ϵ^{ij}A_j$$
(6)
It is easily verified that both $`E^i`$ and $`B`$ are gauge invariant quantities, in contrast with $`\mathrm{\Pi }^i`$ and $`A_i`$. The algebra of the fundamental observables results to be

$$[E^i(𝐱),B(𝐲)]=iϵ^{ij}_j\delta ^2(𝐱𝐲)$$
(7)
$$[E^i(𝐱),E^j(𝐲)]=i\frac{k}{2\pi }ϵ^{ij}\delta ^2(𝐱𝐲)$$
(8)
$$[B(𝐱),B(𝐲)]=0$$
(9)
The Hamiltonian of the theory, on the physical sector, is given by

$$H=d^2x\frac{1}{2}[(E^i)^2+B^2]$$
(10)
which, together with the conserved momentum

$$P^i=d^2xϵ^{ij}E^jB$$
(11)
the angular momentum

$$J=d^2xx^iE^iB$$
(12)
and the generator of Lorentz boosts

$$M^{i0}=\frac{1}{2}d^2x[(E^i)^2+B^2]tP^i$$
(13)
provide a representation of the Poincare Algebra in 2+1 dimensions .

## 3 Path Space Representation

Now we focus on the geometric representation appropriate to the M.C.S.T.. To this end, we recall some basic facts about the path-representation . Given a curve $`\gamma `$ in $`R^n`$, we define its form factor

$$T^i(x,\gamma )=_\gamma \delta ^n(xy)𝑑y^i$$
(14)
which is independent of the parametrization chosen. It should be said that $`\gamma `$ could consists on several disjoint pieces, some of which could be closed. Expression (14) allows to group the curves in equivalence classes: two curves $`\gamma `$ and $`\gamma ^{}`$ are said to be equivalent if $`T^i(\gamma )=T^i(\gamma ^{})`$ . It is a simple matter to show that this is indeed an equivalence relation. The equivalence classes of curves $`[\gamma ]`$ are denominated paths. From now on, we shall not make distinction between a path and any of its representatives.

The usual composition of curves can be lifted to a group product among paths as follows. Given two curves $`\gamma _1`$,$`\gamma _2`$, the form factor of their composition $`T^i(\gamma _1.\gamma _2)`$ does not depend on the representatives, i.e.: $`T^i(\gamma _1^{}.\gamma _2^{})=T^i(\gamma _1.\gamma _2)`$, whenever $`\gamma _1^{}\gamma _1`$ and $`\gamma _2^{}\gamma _2`$. Hence, we define the product of two paths as the class to which the composition of their representative curves belong. Furthermore, the equivalence class of the opposite curve $`\gamma `$ plays the role of the inverse path, while the equivalence class of the null curve amounts to the identity. The group so defined is Abelian, as may be readily seen.

As in the study of the Proca field , we shall use the path derivative $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i(x)`$, which measures the change of a path-dependent functional $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\gamma )`$ when a small open path $`\delta \gamma _x^{x+h}`$ starting at $`x`$ and ending at $`x+h`$ ($`h0`$) is attached to $`\gamma `$ :

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\delta \gamma .\gamma )(1+h^i\mathrm{\Delta }_i(x))\mathrm{\Psi }(\gamma )$$
(15)
Equation (15), defining $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i(x)`$, must be thought to hold up to first order in $`h^i`$. The path derivative is related to the abelian loop derivative $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}(x)`$ of Gambini-Trias  by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}(x)=\frac{}{x^i}\mathrm{\Delta }_j(x)\frac{}{x^j}\mathrm{\Delta }_i(x)$$
(16)
This last object, also known as the area derivative, serves to compute how a path (or loop) dependent functional changes when a small plaquette is attached to it at the point $`x`$.

Using definition (15) it is a trivial matter to show that (we return to 2+1 dimensions)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_i(𝐱)T^j(𝐱^{},\gamma )=\delta _i^j\delta ^2(𝐱𝐱^{})$$
(17)
hence, the canonical algebra (5) is fulfilled if we set

$$A_i(𝐱)\frac{i}{e}\mathrm{\Delta }_i(𝐱)$$
(18)
$$\mathrm{\Pi }^i(𝐱)eT^i(𝐱,\gamma )$$
(19)
which constitutes a realization of the canonical operators onto path dependent wave functionals $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\gamma )`$. In equations (18) and (19) , the constant $`e`$ with units of $`[mass]^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ was introduced to properly adjust the dimensions.

To write down the constraint eq. (4) in the path-representation, we need to calculate:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{x^i}}T^i(𝐱,\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s}{}}(\delta ^2(𝐱\beta _𝐬)\delta ^2(𝐱\alpha _𝐬))`$ (20)
$``$ $`\rho (x,\gamma )`$
where $`\beta _s`$ ($`\alpha _s`$) is the ending (starting) point of the piece s which contributes to the whole path $`\gamma `$ (remember that $`\gamma `$ may consist of several disjoint pieces). Thus, $`\rho (𝐱,\gamma )`$ can be thought as the “form factor” of the boundary of the path. The first class constraint of the theory eq.(4) demands that the physical (i.e., gauge invariant) wave functionals obey

$$\left(\rho (𝐱,\gamma )+\frac{ik}{8\pi e^2}ϵ^{ij}\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}(𝐱)\right)\mathrm{\Psi }(\gamma )=0$$
(21)
It is worth mentioning a mayor difference between the geometric representation of the M.C.S. and the pure Maxwell or Proca theories. In the Maxwell case  , the introduction of loop-dependent functionals automatically solves the gauge constraint. Similarly, the use of path-dependent wave functionals fulfiles gauge invariance in the Proca-Stueckelberg theory . However, this is not the case with the M.C.S.T.. Further restrictions on the path dependence of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\gamma )`$ which are to be dictated by the constraint eq.(21) remain to be considered. To this end, we set, without lose of generality

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\gamma )=exp(i\chi (\gamma ))\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma )$$
(22)
and ask $`\chi (\gamma )`$ to obey

$$ϵ^{ij}\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}(𝐱)\chi (\gamma )=\frac{8\pi e^2}{k}\rho (𝐱,\gamma )$$
(23)
then eq.(21) reduces to

$$ϵ^{ij}\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}(𝐱)\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma )=0$$
(24)
Equation (23) is solved by

$`\chi (\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2e^2}{k}}{\displaystyle d^2x𝑑x^2_i_lln|𝐱𝐱^{}|ϵ^{lk}T^i(𝐱^{},\gamma )T^k(𝐱,\gamma )}`$ (25)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2e^2}{k}}{\displaystyle \underset{s}{}}{\displaystyle _\gamma }𝑑x^kϵ^{lk}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(x\beta _s)^l}{|𝐱\beta _𝐬|^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(x\alpha _s)^l}{|𝐱\alpha _𝐬|^2}}\right]`$
as a careful application of the area derivative shows.

Since

$$\theta =_\gamma 𝑑x^kϵ^{lk}\frac{(x^{}x)^l}{|𝐱^{}𝐱|^2}$$
(26)
is the angle subtended by the path $`\gamma `$ from the point $`𝐱`$, we see that eq. (25) yields

$$\chi (\gamma )=\frac{2e^2}{k}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }$$
(27)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is equal to the sum of the angles subtended by the pieces of the path from their final points $`\beta _s`$ , minus the angles subtended by the same pieces measured from their starting points $`\alpha _s`$. Hence, we see that $`\chi (\gamma )`$ depends on $`\gamma `$ through their boundary, and through the way that the diverse pieces of $`\gamma `$ wind around these boundary points $`\alpha _s^{}s`$ and $`\beta _s^{}s`$.

Equation (24), on the other hand, states that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma )`$ is insensitive to the addition of closed paths, i.e., $`\mathrm{\Phi }(C.\gamma )=\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma )`$ , where $`C`$ is a loop. Thus, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma )`$ only depends on the boundary of the path:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma )=\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha _s;\beta _s)$$
(28)
Summarizing, we have that on the physical sector

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\gamma _\alpha ^\beta )_{Physical}=exp(i\frac{2e^2}{k}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta })\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha _s;\beta _s)$$
(29)
with $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha _s;\beta _s)`$ an arbitrary functional of the boundary of the path.

Expression (29) is then the solution to the gauge constraint in path space eq.(21). We see that although the introduction of paths does not solve automatically the constraint, it does allow to characterize the physical sector in a geometrically appealing form. To write down the physical observables of the theory in the path space representation, one needs to know how the gauge invariant operators $`B`$ and $`E^i`$ act onto the physical sector of the Hilbert space. One has, after some calculations

$`E^i(𝐱)exp(i\chi (\gamma ))\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha _s;\beta _s)=exp(i\chi (\gamma ))\times `$
$`\times \left[{\displaystyle \frac{e}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{s}{}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(x\beta _s)^i}{(𝐱\beta _𝐬|^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(x\alpha _s)^i}{|𝐱\alpha _𝐬|^2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{ik}{4\pi e}}ϵ^{ij}\mathrm{\Delta }_j(𝐱)\right]\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha _s;\beta _s)`$ (30)
and

$$B(𝐱)exp(i\chi (\gamma ))\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha _s;\beta _s)=\frac{4\pi e}{k}exp(i\chi (\gamma ))\rho (𝐱,(\alpha ;\beta ))\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha _s;\beta _s)$$
(31)
where we have set $`\rho (𝐱,\gamma )=\rho (𝐱,(\alpha ;\beta ))`$ to stress the fact that $`\rho `$ depends on $`\gamma `$ just through its boundary, the set of starting points $`\alpha _s`$ and ending points $`\beta _s`$.

We thus see that the physical sector is invariant under the action of both $`B`$ and $`E^i`$, as expected. It should be remarked that the path derivative $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i(𝐱)`$ acting on $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha _s;\beta _s)`$ is a well defined object, since a boundary dependent function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\gamma )`$ is a special kind of a path-dependent one. From eqs. (29-31) we also see that there is a simple unitary transformation which allows to eliminate the path dependent phase , namely:

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(\gamma )_{Physical}`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}(\gamma )=exp(i\chi (\gamma ))\mathrm{\Psi }(\gamma )_{Physical}=\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ,\beta )`$
$`A_{Physical}`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{A}=exp(i\chi (\gamma ))A_{Physical}exp(i\chi (\gamma ))`$ (32)
where $`A_{Physical}`$ is any gauge invariant operator of the theory. After the unitary transformation is performed, what is left is a dependence on the set of “signed” points $`\alpha _s`$ and $`\beta _s`$, corresponding to the boundary of the missed path. It can be shown that these sets of signed points inherit a group structure due to the paths where they come from. I fact, when a starting and ending points meet at the same place, they anihilate. Therefore we shall refer to them as “points” and “anti-points” respectivelly. It is worth saying that there is a non-abelian version of this group of points, which encodes the kynematics of the Principal Chiral Fields, and that will be discussed elsewhere.

From eqs. (10, 30, 31), and taking into account the unitary transformation eq.(32), we can write down the Schrödinger equation in the geometric representation

$`i{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\mathrm{\Phi }((\alpha _s;\beta _s),t)=`$
$`={\displaystyle }dx^2[[{\displaystyle \frac{e}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{s}{}}({\displaystyle \frac{(x\beta _s)^i}{|𝐱\beta _𝐬|^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(x\alpha _s)^i}{|𝐱\alpha _𝐬|^2}}){\displaystyle \frac{ik}{4\pi e}}ϵ^{ij}\mathrm{\Delta }_j(x)]^2`$
$`+\left({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi e}{k}}\right)^2\rho ^2(x,(\alpha ;\beta ))]\mathrm{\Phi }((\alpha _s;\beta _s),t)`$ (33)
In a similar way, the conserved momentum $`P^i`$, angular momentum $`J`$ and the boosts generators $`M^{0i}`$ can be realized in the geometric representation. It may be seen that the operators $`P^i`$ and $`J`$ act by translating and rotating the argument of the wave functional $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ;\beta )`$ ; for instance

$$(1+u^iP_i)\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ;\beta )=\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha +𝐮;\beta +𝐮)$$
(34)
with $`𝐮`$ being an infinitesimal constant spatial vector. It must be said that both $`P^i`$ and $`J`$ , inasmuch $`H`$ should be properly regularized, since they involve ill defined products of distributions (needless to say that this feature is not a consequence of the geometric representation).

## 4 Relation with the Massles Scalar Field and Nonrelativistic Anyons

The Schrödinger equation (33) resembles the wave equation of a collection of point particles interacting through a Chern-Simons term , in the sense that there appears a “covariant derivative”

$$iD_l(𝐱)i\mathrm{\Delta }_l(𝐱)\frac{4e^2}{k}\underset{s}{}ϵ_{il}\left(\frac{(x\beta _s)^i}{|𝐱\beta _𝐬|^2}\frac{(x\alpha _s)^i}{|𝐱\alpha _𝐬|^2}\right)$$
(35)
which comprises, besides the path-derivative $`\mathrm{\Delta }_j(𝐱)`$ , a term of statistical interaction among the points $`\alpha `$ and antipoints $`\beta `$ , which should play the role of the particles. This observation can be made more precise as follows. Let us consider the singular gauge transformation

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ;\beta )\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}(\alpha ;\beta )exp(i\mathrm{\Lambda }(\alpha ;\beta ))\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ;\beta )$$
(36)
with

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\alpha ;\beta ))`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2e^2}{k}}{\displaystyle d^2xd^2y\rho (𝐱,(\alpha ;\beta ))\theta (𝐱𝐲)\rho (𝐲,(\alpha ;\beta ))}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2e^2}{k}}{\displaystyle \underset{s}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{s^{}}{}}[\theta (\beta _𝐬\beta _s^{})\theta (\beta _s\alpha _s^{})+\theta (\alpha _s\alpha _s^{})\theta (\alpha _s\beta _s^{})]`$
$`\theta (𝐱)`$ being the angle that the vector $`𝐱`$ makes with the positive $`xaxis`$ . With the aid of the expressions

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_i(𝐳)\rho (𝐱,(\alpha ;\beta ))=\frac{}{z^i}\delta ^2(𝐳𝐱)$$
(38)
and

$$\frac{}{x^l}\theta (𝐱)=ϵ_{lk}\frac{x^k}{|𝐱|^2}$$
(39)
it can be seen that

$$iD_j(𝐱)\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ;\beta )=iexp(i\mathrm{\Lambda }(\alpha ;\beta ))\mathrm{\Delta }_j(𝐱)\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}(\alpha ;\beta )$$
(40)
Thus, in the covariant derivative and in the Schrödinger equation, the interaction may be removed at the expense of dealing with redefined wave functionals $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$, which result to be multivalued. In fact, the Schrödinger equation for that multivalued wave functional may be writen as

$`i{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}((\alpha _s;\beta _s),t)=`$
$`={\displaystyle 𝑑x^2\left[(\frac{k}{4\pi e})^2(\mathrm{\Delta }_j(𝐱))^2+(\frac{4\pi e}{k})^2\rho ^2(𝐱,(\alpha ;\beta ))\right]\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}((\alpha _s;\beta _s),t)}`$ (41)
which corresponds to the Schrödinger equation for the massles scalar field theory, with lagrange density

$$_\varphi =\frac{1}{2}_\mu \varphi ^\mu \varphi $$
(42)
in a geometric representation, as we briefly discuss. The associated hamiltonian is

$$H_\varphi =d^2x\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{\Pi }^2+_i\varphi _i\varphi )$$
(43)
with $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ being the canonical momentum

$$[\varphi (𝐱),\mathrm{\Pi }(𝐲)]=i\delta ^2(𝐱𝐲)$$
(44)
If we prescribe the realization

$$_i\varphi (𝐱)i\mathrm{\Delta }_i(𝐱)$$
(45)
$$\mathrm{\Pi }(𝐱)\rho (𝐱,(\alpha ;\beta ))$$
(46)
onto wave functionals $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\varphi (\alpha ;\beta )`$, the commutator (44) is verified, as well as

$$[_i\varphi (𝐱),_j\varphi (𝐲)]=[\mathrm{\Pi }(𝐱),\mathrm{\Pi }(𝐲)]=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}$$
(47)
while the corresponding Schrödinger equation reads

$`i{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\mathrm{\Phi }_\varphi ((\alpha _s;\beta _s),t)=`$
$`={\displaystyle d^2x\left[(\frac{k}{4\pi e})^2\mathrm{\Delta }_j(𝐱)^2+(\frac{4\pi e}{k})^2\rho ^2(𝐱,(\alpha ;\beta ))\right]\mathrm{\Phi }_\varphi ((\alpha _s;\beta _s),t)}`$ (48)
which coincides with eq.(41), as claimed, except by the fact that here the wave functional $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\varphi `$ is single valued. It should be observed that there is no need to realize $`\varphi `$, since only its derivative $`_i\varphi `$ appears in the expressions for the observables of the theory. This reflects the invariance of the model under the shift $`\varphi \varphi +constant`$.

The fact that the path dependence is only manifested through the boundary $`(\alpha ;\beta )`$ of the path $`\gamma `$ , evidences that, indeed, there is a simpler geometry underlying both the M.C.S. and the massles scalar field theories: the appropriate geometric representation is one of sets of “points” and “anti-points” (see comment after eq.(36)). This signed point group is the first member in a list of geometric structures related to gauge theories of $`pforms`$ , to which paths and loops (for the case $`p=1`$) belong.

We are ready to compare the M.C.S. Schrödinger equation in path-space, eq.(41) and its multivalued wavefunction $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ , eq.(36), with what results from the quantization of a collection of $`N`$ non-relativistic particles interacting through a C.S. term  , . The corresponding Schrödinger equation may be writen as

$$i_t\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐫_\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{}𝐫_𝐍,t)=\underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{1}{2m_p}(_𝐩ie_p𝐚_𝐩)^2\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐫_\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{}𝐫_𝐍,t)$$
(49)
with

$$𝐚_𝐩=\frac{1}{k}_𝐩\underset{pq}{\overset{N}{}}e_q\theta _{pq}$$
(50)
while $`\theta _{pq}`$ is the angle that the vector $`𝐱_𝐩𝐱_𝐪`$ makes with the $`xaxis`$.

Equation (49) may be written in the form

$$i_t\mathrm{\Psi }_0(𝐫_\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{}𝐫_𝐍,t)=\underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{1}{2m_p}(_𝐩)^2\mathrm{\Psi }_0(𝐫_\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{}𝐫_𝐍,t)$$
(51)
with

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_0=exp(i\underset{p<q}{}\frac{e_pe_q}{k}\mathrm{\Theta }_{pq})\mathrm{\Psi }$$
(52)
The multivalued function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$, which converts the the multiparticle Schrödinger equation into a “free” equation, presents remarkable coincidences with the functional $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}(\alpha ;\beta )`$ (eqs. (36 , LABEL:eq:definelambda)). In fact, since $`\theta (\beta _s\beta _s^{})=\theta (\beta _s^{}\beta _s)\pm 2\pi `$, equation (LABEL:eq:definelambda) can be writen as:

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\alpha ;\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{k}}{\displaystyle \underset{s^{}<s}{}}[\theta (\beta _𝐬\beta _s^{})\theta (\beta _s\alpha _s^{})+\theta (\alpha _s\alpha _s^{})\theta (\alpha _s\beta _s^{})]+const.`$
In writing eq. (LABEL:eq:lambda) we have omited the undetermined “self-interaction” terms of the type $`\theta (\beta _s\beta _s)=\theta (0)`$. If the charges of the particles in the CS-point-particles theory are restricted by $`|e_p|=e`$, we see that the phase in eq. (52) coincides with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\alpha ;\beta )`$. In both cases, exchange of two “particles” makes the wave function to pick up a phase factor which is a multiple of $`exp(\pm i\frac{e^2\pi }{k})`$, depending on the route followed to exchange the “points” and “anti-points” (or the particles), and on their relative sign.

## 5 Discussion

We have studied the canonical quantization of the M.C.S.T. in a path-representation. The physical sector of the theory, the basic gauge invariant operators, and the Hamiltonian were explicitly calculated in this geometric representation. The resolution (eq.29) of the Gauss constraint (21), provides a non-trivial example of path-space calculation. Also, it shows the adventages of employing this formulation to deal with the geometrical content of the theory, which allows to relate it with the quantum mechanics of point particles with anyonic behavior.

More preciselly, it is shown that the M.C.S.T. is equivalent to the theory of a massles scalar field whose wave functional obeys anyonic boundary conditions. This anyonic behavior is manifested in a simple form within the path-representation framework, since the ends of the paths (“points” and “anti-points”) just play the role of the particles whose exchanges give rise to the non conventional statistical phase factor that reveals the anyonic content of the theory. In other words, it is due to the fact that we are working in a path-representation, instead of a “shape-representation” $`|A_i>`$, that we can make an easy contact with the model of anyonic particles.

It would be interesting to explore the non-abelian counterpart of the present theory in the corresponding geometric representation. One can suspect that a non abelian “signed-points” representation, which arises when dealing with the Principal Chiral Field, could be the key to carry out this program (see comment after eq.(32)). It would also be interesting to study the Self-Dual (i.e.: massive Chern-Simons) theory  in the path-representation. This model is dual (and henceforth equivalent) to the M.C.S.T. , and probably there exist an underlying geometry supporting this duality that could be made explicit with the aid of an appropriate geometric representation.


format: text

text:
# CLASS of EINSTEIN-MAXWELL DILATONS, AN ANSATZ FOR NEW FAMILIES OF ROTATING SOLUTIONS

## 1 Introduction

Scalar fields as a fundamental interaction in physics are one of the main predictions of the Kaluza-Klein and the Superstring theories. Scalar fields are also a fundamental component of the Brans-Dicke theory and of the inflationary models. Furthermore, in the standard model of Weinberg, Glashow and Salam scalar fields are needed as a primordial component for given mass to the particles. More recently, using an exact solution of the scalar-tensor field equations of gravity, it has been able to show that scalar fields are a very good candidate to be the dark matter in spiral galaxies .However, it is fair to say that there are still some open questions in this issue, which should be solved in order to give a more solid evidence of their presence, and thus establish a proof for the existence of scalar fields in nature.

The possibility of existance of scalar fields together with the spontaneous scalarization in compact stars  implies that astrophysical objects could contain scalar fields inherent in them. In other words, if scalar fields exist, the way it was established in , a compact star will prefer to have one, in order to save energy. Even when these fundamental scalar fields have not been observed, they are one of the main ingredients of modern physics. Of course the question arise, why being them so important in physics have we never seen one? The answer to this question could be because they interact very weakly with matter. It can be shown that many of the theories containing scalar fields are in concordance with measurements in weak gravitational fields . We expect that scalar fields are important in strong gravitational fields like at the origin of the universe or in pulsars or black holes. A great effort has been done in order to detect scalar fields in strong gravitational fields . In some sense, inflation at the origin of the universe could be a proof of such an interaction. Nevertheless, this effort has been done using perturbative methods  or using static exact solutions . The problem with these two approaches is that for the first, perturbative methods are very efficient only in weak fields and for the second, astrophysical objects are in general non-static, thus the approach is not realistic. Even for binary pulsars, perturbative methods have shown a great success because the distance between the pulsars is so that the gravitational field is too strong to be understood with Newtonian mechanics but enough weak to be described by pertubative methods in general relativity . Nevertheless the gravitational interaction is too weak for deciding which theory containing scalar fields could be the right one. It has been possible to discard a series of theories which did not agree with measurements or to bound some parameters of some other theories using perturbative methods or static exact solutions . But the most interesting effects of scalar fields are expected to be very near of a black hole or of a pulsar and are expected to be non-perturbative. If we want to understand scalar fields in a strong regime one way to follow is to find rotating exact solutions of the theory containing scalar fields and comparing them with observations. The problem then is that the field equations are very complicated to be solved in an exact manner. In a past work  we gave a very powerful method for finding exact static solutions of the Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton field equations using harmonic maps, we found classes of solutions with arbitrary electromagnetic fields and gravitational arbitrary multipole momentums. In the present work we want: i) to give the details of the calculations made in ; ii) to complete the schema of that work, and iii) to present a way to derive exact rotating dilatons with arbitrary coupling between the scalar field and the electromagnetic one. In order to do so, let us start from the Lagrangian

$$=\sqrt{g}(R2(\varphi )^2e^{2\alpha \varphi }F^2),$$
(1)
where $`g`$ is the determinant of the metric tensor, $`R`$ is the scalar curvature, $`\varphi `$ the dilaton field and $`F`$ the Maxwell one. The constant $`\alpha `$ is a free parameter which governs the strength of the coupling of the dilaton to the Maxwell field. When $`\alpha =0`$, the action reduces to the Einstein-Maxwell scalar theory. When $`\alpha =1`$, the action is part of the low-energy action of string theory. For $`\alpha =\sqrt{3}`$, the Lagrangian (1) leads to the Kaluza-Klein field equations obtained from the dimensional reduction of the five-dimensional Einstein vacuum equations. However, we will consider this theory for all values of $`\alpha `$.

On the other hand, the harmonic maps ansatz has probed to be an excellent tool for finding exact solutions of systems of non-linear partial differential equations , in particular, this method has been very useful in solving the chiral equations derived from a non-linear $`\sigma `$ model . Einstein equations in vacuum can be reduced to a non-linear $`\sigma `$ model with structural group $`SL(2,R)`$ in the space-time and to a structural group $`SU(1,1)`$ in the potential spaces, $`i.e.`$, in terms of the Ernst potentials. The electro-vacuum case can be also reduced to a non-linear $`\sigma `$ model with structural group $`SU(2,1)`$ in terms of the extended Ernst potentials , . The Kaluza-Klein field equations can be cast into a $`SL(3,R)`$ non-linear $`\sigma `$ model in the space-time as well as in the potential space , . This is possible because the corresponding potential space, defined bellow, is a symmetric Riemannian space only for $`\alpha =0`$ and $`\alpha =\sqrt{3}`$, but this is not the case for the low energy limit in super strings theory, where $`\alpha =1`$. In this work we will extend the techniques of the harmonic maps ansatz , , , even for non-symmetric Riemannian spaces, maintaining $`\alpha `$ as an arbitrary constant. In the present work, the reduction of the field equations to a non-linear $`\sigma `$ model is not needed. All through this work, we will be using the MTW  signs conventions.

We will analyze spacetimes characterized by two Killing vector fields $`X`$ and $`Y`$ and introduce coordinates $`t`$ and $`\phi `$ which are chosen such that $`X=\frac{}{t}`$ and $`Y=\frac{}{\phi }`$. The corresponding line element can then be expressed as

$$ds^2=f(dt\omega d\phi )^2+f^1[e^{2k}(d\rho ^2+dz^2)+\rho ^2d\phi ^2],$$
(2)
where $`f,\omega `$, and $`k`$ are functions of $`\rho `$ and $`z`$ only. The electromagnetic potential has the form $`A_\mu =(A_0,0,0,A_3)`$, and again $`A_0,A_3`$, and the dilatonic field, $`\varphi `$ are functions of $`\rho `$ and $`z`$ only.

The work is composed as follows: In section 2 we introduce the abstract potential space, obtain a Lagrangian whose variation with respect to the potentials reproduce the Field equations. Performing a Legendre transformation we obtain a “Hamiltonian” and finally introduce new functions which greatly simplify the system of equations. In section 3, by means of an ansatz resembling the one of the harmonic maps, we express that system of equations in terms of harmonic parameters, analyzing two cases: where there are two real harmonic parameters and where there is one complex. In section 4 we present several new classes of solutions to the Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton theory. Finally, in section 5 we present our conclusions and mention some possibly future developments.

## 2 Functional space formulation

Trying to solve directly the field equations for the Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton theory for the line element (2) can be a very difficult task. Instead, we will apply the functional geodesic formulation by defining an abstract space whose coordinates are defined by the metric functions and the fields entering in the system. In order to introduce an ansatz resembling the harmonic map ansatz into the functional geodesic formulation (see , and  for an explanation) , we shortly explain the general idea of the harmonic map ansatz method. The field equations of the theory can be written as

$$(\rho \mathrm{\Psi }_{,\varsigma }^A)_{,\overline{\varsigma }}+(\rho \mathrm{\Psi }_{,\overline{\varsigma }}^A)_{,\varsigma }+2\rho \{_{BC}^A\}\mathrm{\Psi }_{,\varsigma }^B\mathrm{\Psi }_{,\overline{\varsigma }}^C=0$$
(3)
where $`\varsigma =\rho +iz`$ and $`\overline{\varsigma }`$ is its complex conjugated. $`\mathrm{\Psi }^A`$ are the potentials of the geodesic formulation and $`\{_{BC}^A\}`$ are the Christoffel symbols of the Riemannian space $`V^A`$ defining the potential space of the theory. Now we look for invariant transformations of the equations (3), $`i.e.`$, transformations of the form $`\mathrm{\Psi }^A=`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }^A(\lambda ^i)`$ that leave the field equations (3) invariant, where $`\lambda ^i`$ are potentials fulfilling the same field equations (3). The potentials $`\lambda ^i`$ define the Riemannian space $`V_p`$. In terms of the potentials $`\lambda ^i`$, the field equations (3) read

$$2\rho [\mathrm{\Psi }_{,ij}^A+\{_{BC}^A\}\mathrm{\Psi }_{,i}^B\mathrm{\Psi }_{,j}^C]\lambda _{,\varsigma }^i\lambda _{,\overline{\varsigma }}^j+\mathrm{\Psi }_{,i}^A[(\rho \lambda _{,\varsigma }^i)_{,\overline{\varsigma }}+(\rho \lambda _{,\overline{\varsigma }}^i)_{,\varsigma }]=0,$$
(4)
where $`,i=/\lambda ^i`$. In terms of the Christoffel symbols of the abstract Riemannian space $`V_p`$, (4) reads

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{,i;j}^A+\{_{BC}^A\}\mathrm{\Psi }_{,i}^B\mathrm{\Psi }_{,j}^C=0$$
(5)
where we have used the field equations for the $`\lambda ^i`$’s and the fact that the $`\lambda ^i`$’s are linear independent.

In what follows we will introduce the functional geodesic formulation for Lagrangian (1). The method is fully explained in . Essentially, the formulation takes advantage of the fact that the introduction of a line element in the Lagrangian for the Einstein-Hilbert action, Eq. (1), and performing the variation, are operations which commute for some cases, in particular for the axisymmetric stationary one. Thus, introducing the operator $`D=(_\rho ,_z)`$, taking out a total divergence term and eliminating the terms with $`Dk`$ by means of a Legendre transformation, we obtain that the original Lagrangian, given by Eq. (1), can be rewritten as:

$$=\frac{\rho }{2f^2}Df^2\frac{f^2}{2\rho }D\omega ^2+\frac{2\rho }{\alpha ^2\kappa ^2}D\kappa ^2+\frac{2f\kappa ^2}{\rho }[(\omega DA_0+DA_3)^2\frac{\rho ^2}{f^2}DA_0^2],$$
(6)
where $`\kappa ^2=e^{2\alpha \varphi }`$.

The Euler-Lagrange equations, obtained directly from extremizing the action for such Lagrangian: $`D(\frac{}{DZ^a})(\frac{}{Z^a})=0`$, with $`Z^a=(f,\omega ,A_0,A_3,\kappa )`$, are:

the Klein-Gordon equation:

$$D^2\kappa +(\frac{D\rho }{\rho }\frac{D\kappa }{\kappa })D\kappa \frac{\alpha ^2\kappa ^3f}{\rho ^2}[(\omega DA_0+DA_3)^2\frac{\rho ^2}{f^2}DA_0^2]=0,$$
(7)
the Maxwell equations:

$`D\left({\displaystyle \frac{f\kappa ^2}{\rho }}(\omega DA_0+DA_3)\right)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`D\left(\kappa ^2[{\displaystyle \frac{f\omega }{\rho }}(\omega DA_0+DA_3){\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{f}}DA_0]\right)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (8)
and the main Einstein’s equations:

$`D^2f+({\displaystyle \frac{D\rho }{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{Df}{f}})Df+{\displaystyle \frac{f^3}{\rho ^2}}D\omega ^2{\displaystyle \frac{2\kappa ^2f^2}{\rho ^2}}[(\omega DA_0+DA_3)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^2}{f^2}}DA_0^2]=0`$ , (9)
$`D^2\omega ({\displaystyle \frac{D\rho }{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{2Df}{f}})D\omega +{\displaystyle \frac{4\kappa ^2}{f}}(\omega DA_0+DA_3)DA_0=0`$ ,
which are equivalent to the usual field equations. Notice that the metric function $`k`$ does not appear, reflecting the fact that it is determined by quadratures in terms of the rest of the functions. The Lagrangian (6) sometimes is viewed as describing the line element in the potential space, and thus the motion equations can be seen as geodesics in that space.

From the fact that $`D\stackrel{~}{D}=0`$ for any analytic function, with $`\stackrel{~}{D}=(_z,_\rho )`$, we conclude from the second Maxwell equation, Eq.(8), that there exits a potential $`\chi `$, such that

$$\stackrel{~}{D}\chi =\frac{2f\kappa ^2}{\rho }(\omega DA_0+DA_3).$$
(10)
And with this potential, the second Einstein’s equation, Eq. (9), can be rewritten as $`D(\frac{f^2}{\rho }D\omega +\psi \stackrel{~}{D}\chi )=0`$, with $`\psi =2A_0`$, so that there exists another potential, $`ϵ`$, defined by

$$\stackrel{~}{D}ϵ=\frac{f^2}{\rho }D\omega +\psi \stackrel{~}{D}\chi .$$
(11)
The use of these potentials $`\chi `$ and $`ϵ`$, will be helpful in the procedure of defining harmonic functions, so we rewrite the field equations in terms of these functions:

$`D^2\kappa +({\displaystyle \frac{D\rho }{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{D\kappa }{\kappa }})D\kappa +{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2\kappa ^3}{4f}}(D\psi ^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa ^4}}D\chi ^2)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`D^2\psi +({\displaystyle \frac{D\rho }{\rho }}+{\displaystyle \frac{2D\kappa }{\kappa }}{\displaystyle \frac{Df}{f}})D\psi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa ^2f}}(Dϵ\psi D\chi )D\chi `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`D^2\chi +({\displaystyle \frac{D\rho }{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{2D\kappa }{\kappa }}{\displaystyle \frac{Df}{f}})D\chi +{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{f}}(Dϵ\psi D\chi )D\psi `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`D^2f+({\displaystyle \frac{D\rho }{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{Df}{f}})Df+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f}}(Dϵ\psi D\chi )^2{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}(D\psi ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa ^4}}D\chi ^2)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`D^2ϵD\psi D\chi \psi D^2\chi +({\displaystyle \frac{D\rho }{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{2Df}{f}})(Dϵ\psi D\chi )`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (12)
where we have used the fact that $`\stackrel{~}{D}A\stackrel{~}{D}B=DADB`$, for any functions $`A,B`$. The equation for $`\chi `$ is obtained from $`D\stackrel{~}{D}A_3=0`$, and the one for $`ϵ`$ is obtained from $`D\stackrel{~}{D}\omega =0`$. Equations (12) are equivalent to equations (3). This new set of field equations can be obtained from the Lagrangian ,

$$=\frac{\rho }{2f^2}[Df^2+(Dϵ\psi D\chi )^2]+\frac{2\rho }{\alpha ^2\kappa ^2}D\kappa ^2\frac{\rho \kappa ^2}{2f}(D\psi ^2+\frac{1}{\kappa ^4}D\chi ^2).$$
(13)
Notice, however, that this new Lagrangian is not obtained if the transformation is made directly on the original Lagrangian, given by Eq.(1) or Eq.(6). This fact implies that the transformations defined by Eq.(10), and Eq.(11) must have a degeneracy. A detailed analysis of this issue is under work and will be published elsewhere.

As mentioned above, this Lagrangian, Eq.(13), can be seen as given by the line element, $`DS^2`$, of a potential space: $`=DS^2=G_{AB}D\mathrm{\Psi }^AD\mathrm{\Psi }^B`$, with $`\mathrm{\Psi }^A=(f,ϵ,\chi ,\psi ,\kappa )`$, so that the equations of motion, Eqs.(12), obtained from variations of this Lagrangian with respect to the “coordinates”, $`\mathrm{\Psi }^A`$, can be thought as “geodesics in such potential space”.

It is important to recall some of the geometric properties of this potential space, $`DS^2`$. It defines a Riemannian space with constant scalar curvature, $`R=(12+\alpha ^2)`$. All the covariant derivatives of the Riemann tensor are proportional to $`\alpha ^23`$, thus the corresponding Riemannian space is symmetric only for the case $`\alpha ^2=3`$ (and for the case $`\alpha =0`$, not treated here). Therefore, for an arbitrary $`\alpha `$, the space is not symmetric and thus the harmonic map ansatz formulation can not be applied.

In this way, we see that in order to reformulate the Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton field equations for arbitrary $`\alpha `$, including the low energy limit of string theory, we cannot use the harmonic map formulation, but we can try instead to mimic that formulation, by means of appropriately chosen ansatz. In this quest, it is necessary to obtain the algebraic structure associated with the potential space. An analysis of the killing vectors, $`\xi ^a`$, implies that there are 8 of them for the space describe by Eq.(13):

$`\xi _1^a`$ $`=`$ $`a_1(0,1,0,0,0),`$
$`\xi _2^a`$ $`=`$ $`a_2(0,0,1,0,0),`$
$`\xi _3^a`$ $`=`$ $`a_3(f,ϵ,{\displaystyle \frac{\chi }{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{\psi }{2}},0),`$
$`\xi _4^a`$ $`=`$ $`a_4(0,\chi ,0,1,0)`$
$`\xi _5^a`$ $`=`$ $`a_5(0,0,\chi ,\psi ,\kappa )`$
$`\xi _6^a`$ $`=`$ $`a_6[(2ϵ\chi \psi )f,ϵ^2f^2+f\psi ^2\kappa ^2,`$
$`f\psi \kappa ^2+ϵ\chi ,\psi ϵ\psi ^2\chi {\displaystyle \frac{f\chi }{\kappa ^2}},{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2\psi \chi \kappa }{2}}],`$
$`\xi _7^a`$ $`=`$ $`a_7[f\chi ,f\psi \kappa ^2+ϵ\chi ,`$
$`f\kappa ^2+(1+\alpha ^2){\displaystyle \frac{\chi ^2}{4}},ϵ+(1\alpha ^2){\displaystyle \frac{\psi \chi }{2}},\alpha ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\chi \kappa }{2}}],`$
$`\xi _8^a`$ $`=`$ $`a_8[f\psi ,(3\alpha ^2){\displaystyle \frac{\chi \psi ^2}{4}},(3\alpha ^2){\displaystyle \frac{\chi \psi }{2}}ϵ,`$ (14)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\kappa ^2}}+(1+\alpha ^2){\displaystyle \frac{\psi ^2}{4}},\alpha ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\psi \kappa }{2}}],`$
where $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_8`$, are arbitrary constants. For $`\alpha ^23`$, only the first 5 killing vectors remain independent. Thus, the algebra associated with the potential space for arbitrary values of $`\alpha `$ is $`SL(3,R)`$ for $`\alpha ^2=3,`$ and a subalgebra of $`SL(3,R)`$, the upper triangle one in the matrix representation, for $`\alpha ^23`$.

The commutation relations, $`[\xi _i^a,\xi _j^b]=\xi _{i}^{a}{}_{;b}{}^{}\xi _{}^{b}{}_{j}{}^{}\xi _{j}^{a}{}_{;b}{}^{}\xi _{}^{b}{}_{j}{}^{}`$ for the first five killing vectors are:

$`[\xi _1,\xi _2]`$ $`=`$ $`0,[\xi _1,\xi _3]=\xi _1,[\xi _1,\xi _4]=0,[\xi _1,\xi _5]=0,`$
$`[\xi _2,\xi _3]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\xi _2,[\xi _2,\xi _4]=\xi _1,[\xi _2,\xi _5]=\xi _2,`$
$`[\xi _3,\xi _4]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\xi _4,[\xi _3,\xi _5]=0,[\xi _4,\xi _5]=\xi _4.`$ (15)
Notice that we have several subalgebras with three vectors, but all of them have at least one of the commutators equal to zero. These results will be used in studying the type of target space that can be chosen in doing a map to a bi-dimensional space.

Finally, as we mentioned, the remaining metric function $`k`$ is determined by quadratures in terms of the other field functions , explicitly:

$`k_\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{4f^2}}[f_{\rho }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}f_{z}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+ϵ_{\rho }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}ϵ_{z}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+(\psi ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\kappa ^2}})(\chi _{\rho }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\chi _{z}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})2\psi (ϵ_\rho \chi _\rho ϵ_z\chi _z)+`$ (17)
$`+f\kappa ^2(\psi _{\rho }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\psi _{z}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})+({\displaystyle \frac{2f}{\alpha \kappa }})^2(\kappa _{\rho }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\kappa _{z}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})],`$
$`k_z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2f^2}}[f_\rho f_z+ϵ_\rho ϵ_z+\kappa ^2f\psi _\rho \psi _z\psi (ϵ_\rho \chi _z+ϵ_z\chi _\rho )+`$ (19)
$`(\psi ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\kappa ^2}})\chi _\rho \chi _z+({\displaystyle \frac{2f}{\alpha \kappa }})^2\kappa _\rho \kappa _z].`$
Continuing with the quest for reformulating the Lagrangian, Eq. (13), notice that we do can perform a Legendre transformation and defining “momenta”, as $`P_a=\frac{}{D\mathrm{\Psi }^a}`$, we can construct a new function which is along the lines of the standard Hamiltonian although in our case, it has not the usual properties of evolution associated with the Hamiltonians. This “Hamiltonian” has the explicit form:

$$=\frac{f^2}{2\rho }(P_{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+P_{ϵ}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})+\frac{\alpha ^2\kappa ^2}{8\rho }P_{\kappa }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\frac{f}{2\rho }[\frac{P_{\psi }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{\kappa ^2}+\kappa ^2(P_\chi +\psi P_ϵ)^2].$$
(20)
The equations of motion are now, $`D\mathrm{\Psi }^a=\frac{}{P_a}`$, and $`DP_a=\frac{}{\mathrm{\Psi }^a}`$, that is:

$`Df`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{\rho }}P_f,`$
$`Dϵ`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{\rho }}[P_ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2\psi }{f}}(P_\chi +\psi P_ϵ)],`$
$`D\psi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\rho \kappa ^2}}P_\psi ,`$
$`D\chi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f\kappa ^2}{\rho }}(P_\chi +\psi P_ϵ),`$
$`D\kappa `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2\kappa ^2}{4\rho }}P_\kappa ,`$
and

$`DP_f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\rho }}(P_{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+P_{ϵ}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\rho }}[{\displaystyle \frac{P_{\psi }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{\kappa ^2}}+\kappa ^2(P_\chi +\psi P_ϵ)^2],`$
$`DP_ϵ`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`DP_\psi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f\kappa ^2}{\rho }}(P_\chi +\psi P_ϵ)P_ϵ,`$
$`DP_\chi `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`DP_\kappa `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\rho \kappa }}[{\displaystyle \frac{P_{\psi }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{\kappa ^2}}\kappa ^2(P_\chi +\psi P_ϵ)^2]{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2\kappa }{4\rho }}P_{\kappa }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}.`$ (21)
Now we can define new functions in order to simplify the form of this last set of equations, and to be able to introduce the harmonic maps:

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f}{2\rho }}(P_fiP_ϵ),`$
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{f}}{2\rho }}[{\displaystyle \frac{P_\psi }{\kappa }}i\kappa (P_\chi +\psi P_ϵ)],`$
$`C`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2\kappa }{4\rho }}P_\kappa ,`$
or in terms of the “velocities”:

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2f}}[Dfi(Dϵ\psi D\chi )],`$
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{f}}}(\kappa D\psi {\displaystyle \frac{i}{\kappa }}D\chi ),`$
$`C`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{D\kappa }{\kappa }}`$
so we can rewrite the equations for the “momenta”, Eq.(21) as the following system:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}D(\rho A)`$ $`=`$ $`A(AA^{})+BB^{},`$
$`D(\rho B)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}B(A3A^{})CB^{},`$
$`D(\rho C)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2}{2}}(B^2+B_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}),`$ (22)
where  denotes complex conjugate. Notice that in this way, we have reduced the system of field equations to a set of three first order differential equations for the three functions $`A,B`$, and $`C`$.

## 3 The Ansatz

Now we introduce the harmonic maps ansatz. Let $`V_p`$ be a $`p`$ dimensional Riemannian space, and $`\lambda ^i`$ an harmonic parameters in $`V_p`$, $`i.e.`$

$$(\rho \lambda _{,\zeta }^i)_{,\overline{\zeta }}+(\rho \lambda _{,\overline{\zeta }}^i)_{,\zeta }+2\rho \mathrm{\Gamma }_{jk}^i\lambda _{,\zeta }^j\lambda _{,\overline{\zeta }}^k=0,$$
(23)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{jk}^i`$ are the Christoffel symbols on the Riemannian space $`V_p`$. We suppose that all the potentials $`f,ϵ,\mathrm{}`$ depend on the $`\lambda ^i`$’s, $`f=f(\lambda ^i),ϵ=ϵ(\lambda ^i),\mathrm{}`$ etc. (for details see ref.   and ). We want to recall that this work belongs to a program aimed to obtain exact solutions of the field equations derived from the Lagrangian (6) by means of the harmonic maps ansatz (see ) for the case of arbitrary $`\alpha `$. However, as we mentioned, some difficulties appear for arbitrary $`\alpha `$ and we cannot follow the procedures carried out before. First, as was shown above, for $`\alpha =0,\sqrt{3}`$, the isometry group has eight parameters, whereas for arbitrary $`\alpha (0,\sqrt{3}),`$ there exist only five parameters . Second, the isometry group of this Lagrangian is trivial except for $`\alpha =0`$ and $`\alpha =\sqrt{3}`$, in the sense that the invariant transformations of this Lagrangian for arbitrary $`\alpha `$ lead only to gauge transformations. Third, since for arbitrary $`\alpha (0,\sqrt{3})`$ the potential space is not symmetric, it is not possible to obtain a no-linear sigma-model for this system. All these problems prevent us to take the same way as in previous works. Therefore we propose another method for solving the differential equations. Here we will study the 2-dimensional subspace of the $`V_p`$-space. We start with a two dimensional Riemannian spaces $`V_2`$ with constant curvature, parameterizing this Riemannian spaces with two harmonic parameters $`\lambda `$, and $`\tau `$, such that $`\lambda ,\tau \text{I}\text{R}`$. The line element is

$$ds^2=\frac{2(d\lambda ^2+d\tau ^2)}{(1\sigma (\lambda ^2+\tau ^2))^2}=\frac{d\xi d\xi ^{}}{(1\sigma \xi \xi ^{})^2},$$
(24)
where $`\sigma `$ is a real constant proportional to the potential space curvature, and $`\xi =\lambda +i\tau `$, for the case of complex parameters. We know that this is a maximally symmetric space, so it has three killing vectors. If the electromagnetic field vanishes any value for $`\alpha `$ is similar, because there is not interaction between scalar and electromagnetic fields. Then $`\sigma `$ can be set to one as for $`\alpha ^2=0,3`$. But if there is electromagnetic interaction the situation is different. As we showed, the subalgebras for the potential space with arbitrary $`\alpha `$, with three Killing vectors, are such that one of them has to be set to zero, so we conclude that if the electromagnetic field does not vanish the only case of maximally symmetric $`V_2`$ that can be taken is the one with $`\sigma =0`$. In this case, the parameters satisfy the usual Laplace equation: $`D(\rho D\lambda )=0,`$ $`D(\rho D\tau )=0.`$ As in the harmonic maps ansatz case, let us express the functions $`A,B,C`$ in terms of these parameters as follows:

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`a_1(\lambda ,\tau )D\lambda +a_2(\lambda ,\tau )D\tau ,`$
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`b_1(\lambda ,\tau )D\lambda +b_2(\lambda ,\tau )D\tau ,`$
$`C`$ $`=`$ $`c_1(\lambda ,\tau )D\lambda +c_2(\lambda ,\tau )D\tau .`$ (25)
Using the harmonic equations, $`i.e.`$ the Laplace equation, for these parameters in the field equations (22), and recalling the fact that $`(D\lambda )^2,(D\tau )^2`$, and $`D\lambda D\tau `$ are independent functions, from the system of equations for $`A,B,C`$, Eq.(22), we obtain the following set of equations:

$`a_{1}^{}{}_{,\lambda }{}^{}a_1(a_1a_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{})b_1b_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`b_{2}^{}{}_{,\lambda }{}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{b_1}{2}}(a_13a_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{})+c_1b_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`c_{1}^{}{}_{,\lambda }{}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2}{2}}(b_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+b_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (26)
$`a_{2}^{}{}_{,\tau }{}^{}a_2(a_2a_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{})b_2b_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`b_{2}^{}{}_{,\tau }{}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{b_2}{2}}(a_23a_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{})+c_2b_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`c_{2}^{}{}_{,\tau }{}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2}{2}}(b_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+b_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (27)
$`a_{1}^{}{}_{,\tau }{}^{}+a_{2}^{}{}_{,\lambda }{}^{}2a_1a_2+a_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{}a_2+a_1a_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{}b_1b_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{}b_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{}b_2`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`2b_{1}^{}{}_{,\tau }{}^{}+2b_{2}^{}{}_{,\lambda }{}^{}+b_2(a_13a_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{})+b_1(a_23a_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{})+2c_1b_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{}+2c_2b_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`c_{1}^{}{}_{,\tau }{}^{}+c_{2}^{}{}_{,\lambda }{}^{}+\alpha ^2(b_1b_2+b_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{}b_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{})`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (28)
Equations (26, 27, 28) are equivalent to the field equations (4). Taking the original potential also as functions of the harmonic parameters, we can express the functions $`A,B`$, and $`C`$ from Eq.(25) as:

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2f}}[f_{,\lambda }i(ϵ_{,\lambda }\psi \chi _{,\lambda })]D\lambda +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2f}}[f_{,\tau }i(ϵ_{,\tau }\psi \chi _{,\tau })]D\tau ,`$
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{f}}}(\kappa \psi _{,\lambda }{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\kappa }}\chi _{,\lambda })D\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{f}}}(\kappa \psi _{,\tau }{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\kappa }}\chi _{,\tau })D\tau ,`$
$`C`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{,\lambda }}{\kappa }}D\lambda +{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{,\tau }}{\kappa }}D\tau ,`$ (29)
from which, and from Eq.(25), we can make the following identification:

$`a_1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2f}}[f_{,\lambda }i(ϵ_{,\lambda }\psi \chi _{,\lambda })];`$ $`a_2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2f}}[f_{,\tau }i(ϵ_{,\tau }\psi \chi _{,\tau })],`$
$`b_1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{f}}}(\kappa \psi _{,\lambda }{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\kappa }}\chi _{,\lambda });`$ $`b_2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{f}}}(\kappa \psi _{,\tau }{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\kappa }}\chi _{,\tau }),`$
$`c_1={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{,\lambda }}{\kappa }};`$ $`c_2={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{,\tau }}{\kappa }}.`$ (30)
## 4 Classes of solutions

Now we proceed to present some solutions to the Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton system in terms of the harmonic functions $`\lambda `$, $`\tau `$. Taking $`a_1,b_1,c_1`$ as functions of $`\lambda `$ only, and $`a_2,b_2,c_2`$ as functions of $`\tau `$ only, we obtain two sets of equations, one in terms of $`\lambda `$, the other in terms of $`\tau `$, with the equations Eqs.(28), being only constraint equations. We will see three such cases:

### 4.1 First Class

Letting all the functions be complex, we obtain that $`a_2=b_2=c_2=0`$, and

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1+i\sqrt{\gamma ^2\frac{1}{4}}}{2(\lambda +\beta _0)}},`$
$`b_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\gamma }(\sqrt{\gamma \frac{1}{2}}+i\sqrt{\gamma +\frac{1}{2}})}{\alpha (\lambda +\beta _0)}},`$
$`c_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\lambda +\beta _0}},`$ (31)
where $`\beta _0`$ is an arbitrary constant and $`\gamma =\frac{\alpha }{2}\sqrt{\frac{3}{4\alpha ^2}}`$. This solution is valid for $`1<\alpha <2`$. Using Eqs.(30), we obtain that the potentials are given by:

$`f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f_0}{\lambda +\beta _0}},`$
$`ϵ`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_0}{\lambda +\beta _0}}+ϵ_{10}(\lambda +\beta _0)^{(\gamma +\frac{1}{2})},`$
$`\chi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\kappa _0}{\alpha }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{f_0\gamma }{\gamma +\frac{1}{2}}}}[(\lambda +\beta _0)^{(\gamma +\frac{1}{2})}\beta _0^{(\gamma +\frac{1}{2})}],`$
$`\psi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\kappa _0\alpha }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{f_0\gamma }{\gamma \frac{1}{2}}}}[(\lambda +\beta _0)^{\gamma \frac{1}{2}}\beta _0^{\gamma \frac{1}{2}}],`$
$`\kappa `$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _0(\lambda +\beta _0)^\gamma ,`$ (32)
where $`ϵ_0=f_0\sqrt{\frac{\gamma +\frac{1}{2}}{\gamma \frac{1}{2}}}(\frac{4\alpha ^2}{\alpha ^2}\gamma +\frac{1}{2})`$, and . $`ϵ_0=\frac{4f_0\gamma \beta _0^{\gamma \frac{1}{2}}}{\alpha ^2\sqrt{\gamma ^2\frac{1}{4}}}`$ From this potentials, using Eqs.(11, 10), we obtain that

$`\omega _{,\rho }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\gamma ^2\frac{1}{4}}}{f_0}}\rho \lambda _{,z},\omega _{,z}={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\gamma ^2\frac{1}{4}}}{f_0}}\rho \lambda _{,\rho },`$
$`A_{3}^{}{}_{,\rho }{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\gamma f_0}}{\kappa _0\alpha }}(\lambda +\beta _0)^{\gamma \frac{3}{2}}(\omega \sqrt{\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}}\lambda _{,\rho }{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{f_0}}\sqrt{\gamma +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}}(\lambda +\beta _0)\lambda _{,z}),`$
$`A_{3}^{}{}_{,z}{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\gamma f_0}}{\kappa _0\alpha }}(\lambda +\beta _0)^{\gamma \frac{3}{2}}(\omega \sqrt{\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}}\lambda _{,z}+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{f_0}}\sqrt{\gamma +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}}(\lambda +\beta _0)\lambda _{,\rho }).`$ (33)
Finally, from Eq.(19), we obtain that the last metric coefficient, $`k`$, in this case is constant, $`k=k_0`$, and we take $`k_0=0`$. This solution represents a rotating object with scalar and electromagnetic fields which depend on the form of $`\lambda .`$ In this way, we have obtained a family of solutions for the Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton theory in which all the fields are non-trivially involved. Let us give an example. Writing the metric (2) in spherical like coordinates $`\rho =r\mathrm{sin}\theta ,`$ $`z=r\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ , we can choose $`\lambda =M/r`$, which give us the line element of the space-time as ($`f_0=\beta _0=\frac{1}{2}`$):

$$ds^2=\frac{1}{1+\frac{2M}{r}}(dt2\sqrt{\gamma ^2\frac{1}{4}}M\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi )^2+(1+\frac{2M}{r})(dr^2+r^2d\theta ^2+r^2\mathrm{sin}\theta ^2d\varphi ^2),$$
(34)
the scalar field is

$$\phi =\mathrm{ln}(\beta _0+\frac{M}{r})^{\frac{\gamma }{\alpha }}\phi _0,$$
(35)
where $`\phi _0=\mathrm{ln}\kappa _0^\alpha `$, and the electric and magnetic potentials are

$`A_0`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\gamma \frac{1}{2}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{[(1+\frac{2M}{r})^{\gamma \frac{1}{2}}1]}{2^\gamma \kappa _0\alpha }},`$ (36)
$`A_3`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\gamma (\gamma +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})}{\displaystyle \frac{M}{2^{\gamma 1}\kappa _0\alpha }}[(\beta _0+{\displaystyle \frac{2M}{r}})^{\gamma \frac{1}{2}}1]\mathrm{cos}\theta .`$ (37)
Metric (34) contains a mass-like parameter, $`M`$, and is not asymptotically flat, except for $`\gamma ^2=\frac{1}{4}`$. This space-time represents a multipole electromagnetic field copled to a multiple gravitational one. The electric charge is $`q=\sqrt{\gamma \left(\gamma \frac{1}{2}\right)}M/(2^{\gamma 1}\kappa _0\alpha )`$, and magnetic monopole charge $`Q=\sqrt{\gamma \left(\gamma \frac{1}{2}\right)}M\left(\beta _0^{\gamma \frac{1}{2}}1\right)/\left(2^{\gamma 1}\kappa _0\alpha \right)`$. Notice, however that the scalar field is tighted to the gravitational and electromagnetic charges, in the sense that when $`M=0,`$ or $`\gamma =0`$, the scalar field becomes trivial. In order to overcome this problem, we think that more potentials have to be included. Also, this solution has no horizons, and is singular for $`r=0`$. Thus, we consider that this solution is a good one for describing the space time with gravitational, elemctromagnetic and dilatonic fields in a region between $`r>0`$, and $`r=r_0`$ where it has to be matched to an exterior solution. A detailed analysis of these physical properties of this particular exact solution, as well as other solutions belonging to the family of solutions presented in this section is underwork and will be published presently.

### 4.2 Second Class

We take the case where the ansatz is such that $`a_1,a_2,b_1,b_2,c_1,c_2\text{I}\text{R}`$, and that $`a_1,b_1,c_1`$depend only on $`\lambda `$, and $`a_2,b_2,c_2`$ depend only on $`\tau `$. With these conditions the system of equations, Eqs. (26) implies that $`b_1b_2=0`$. Taking $`b_1=0`$, in turn implies that $`a_1=c_1=\mathrm{const}`$, and the final set of equations reduces to the following:

$$a_{2}^{}{}_{,\tau }{}^{}b_2^2=0,b_{2}^{}{}_{,\tau }{}^{}b_2(a_2c_2)=0,c_{2}^{}{}_{,\tau }{}^{}+\alpha ^2b_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=0.$$

Solving for $`a_2`$, we get a Riccati type equation:

$$a_{2}^{}{}_{,\tau \tau }{}^{}(1+\alpha ^2)(a_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})_{,\tau }+2k_0a_{2}^{}{}_{,\tau }{}^{}=0,$$
(38)
with $`k_0`$ an integration constant. We obtain two sets of solutions for $`a_2`$:

$$a_2=\frac{k_1e^{q_1\tau }k_2e^{(q_1+2(1+\alpha ^2))\tau }}{k_1e^{q_1\tau }+k_2e^{(q_1+2(1+\alpha ^2))\tau }}+\frac{k_0}{(1+\alpha ^2)},$$
(39)
and

$$a_2=\frac{1}{(1+\alpha ^2)}(\frac{k_3}{k_3\tau +k_4}+k_0),$$
(40)
which imply

$`b_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{k_1k_2(1+\alpha ^2)}e^{2(q_1+1+\alpha ^2)\tau }}{k_1e^{q_1\tau }+k_2e^{(q_1+2(1+\alpha ^2))\tau }}},`$
$`c_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k_0}{(1+\alpha ^2)}}\alpha ^2{\displaystyle \frac{k_1e^{q_1\tau }k_2e^{(q_1+2(1+\alpha ^2))\tau }}{k_1e^{q_1\tau }+k_2e^{(q_1+2(1+\alpha ^2))\tau }}},`$ (41)
and

$`b_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k_3}{(1+\alpha ^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}(k_3\tau +k_4)}},`$
$`c_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1+\alpha ^2)}}(k_0+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2k_3}{k_3\tau +k_4}}),`$ (42)
where $`k_i,q_i`$ are constants. Performing the integration in equations (30), the following expressions for the potentials are obtained:

$`f`$ $`=`$ $`f_0{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\lambda _0\lambda +\tau _0\tau }}{(m_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+m_2\mathrm{\Sigma }_2)^\gamma }},`$
$`\kappa ^2`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}(m_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+m_2\mathrm{\Sigma }_2)^\beta e^{\lambda _0\lambda +(\tau _0t_1t_2)\tau },`$
$`\psi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+m_4\mathrm{\Sigma }_2}{(m_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+m_2\mathrm{\Sigma }_2)}},`$
$`\chi `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`ϵ`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (43)
and

$`f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f_0e^{\gamma k_1\tau +\lambda _0\lambda }}{(k_3\tau +k_4)^\gamma }},`$
$`\kappa ^2`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}(k_3\tau +k_4)^\beta e^{\gamma k_1\tau +\lambda _0\lambda }`$
$`\psi `$ $`=`$ $`2f_0^{1/2}\kappa _0(1+\alpha ^2)^{1/2}(k_3\tau +k_4),`$
$`\chi `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`ϵ`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (44)
where $`\gamma =\frac{2}{1+\alpha ^2}`$, $`\beta =\alpha ^2\gamma `$, $`f_0,\kappa _0,t_i,\lambda _0,\tau _0,m_i`$ are constants. For the first set of solutions $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i=e^{t_i\tau }`$ and the constants are related by

$$4m_1m_2f_0+\kappa _0^2(1+\alpha ^2)(m_1m_4m_2m_3)^2=0.$$
(45)
And for the second set of solutions $`t_1=t_2`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=\tau ,`$ $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2=1`$, and the constants satisfy the relationship

$$4m_1^2f_0\kappa _0^2(1+\alpha ^2)(m_1m_4m_2m_3)^2=0.$$
(46)
In this way, with the ansatz chosen, we obtained families of solutions for the Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton theory, without magnetic field and without rotation. The generic solutions are in terms of two arbitrary harmonic functions and a large number of constants. The respectively magnetic solutions can be obtained using the invariant trasformations .

$$\varphi \varphi ,F_{\mu \nu }=1/2e^{2\alpha \varphi }ϵ_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }F^{\alpha \beta }$$
(47)
Thus, we can generate particular solutions with very different physical properties. These sets of solutions were presented as a rapid communication in , and it was shown that several interesting known solutions are included, such as the static dilatonic version of the Kastor-Traschen solution , and several generalizations of it; the spherically symmetric dilatonic black hole, ; and solutions with arbitrary magnetic field coupled to the dilaton .

In order to present explicitly some families of solutions, let us now rewrite solutions (32) in a more convenient form. If we perform the following transformation, $`ff/f_0`$, $`\kappa ^2\kappa ^2/\kappa _0^2`$, $`\lambda \lambda _0\lambda +\tau \tau _0`$, $`\tau _0t_1t_2`$, and $`g=m_1e^{t_1\tau }+m_2e^{t_2\tau }`$ in (43), then solution (43) transforms into

$`f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^\lambda }{g^\gamma }},`$
$`\kappa ^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\lambda +\tau _0\tau }}{g^\beta }}`$
$`\psi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(m_3\mathrm{\Sigma }_1+m_4\mathrm{\Sigma }_2)}{g}},`$
$`\chi `$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`ϵ`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (48)
or analogously for solution (44) we perform the transformation $`ff/f_0`$, $`\kappa ^2\kappa ^2/\kappa _0^2`$, $`\lambda \lambda _0\lambda +\gamma k_1\tau `$, $`\psi \psi \kappa _0(1+\alpha ^2)^{1/2}/f_0^{1/2}`$, and $`g=k_3\tau +k_4`$ then solution (44) now reads

$`f={\displaystyle \frac{e^\lambda }{g^\gamma }},`$ $`\kappa ^2=e^\lambda g^\beta ,`$
$`\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{g}},`$ $`\chi =0,ϵ=0.`$ (49)
In these two cases the differential equation for the metric function $`k`$ in (19) can be separated into a gravitational, a scalar and a electromagnetic parts. In order to do so, we substitute (48) and (49) into (19) to obtain the differential equation for $`k`$, thus arriving at

$$k_{,\zeta }=\frac{\rho }{2}[(\lambda _{,\zeta })^2+\frac{1}{\alpha ^2}((\lambda _{,\zeta }\tau _0\tau _{,\zeta })^22q_1q_2\beta (\tau _{,\zeta })^2)],$$
(50)
where $`\zeta =\rho +iz`$. Let us now perform the following separation

$$k=k_g+k_e+k_s,$$
(51)
where we have defined the gravitational part of $`k`$ as

$$k_{g,\zeta }=\frac{\rho }{2}(\lambda _{,\zeta })^2,$$
(52)
the scalar part as

$$k_{s,\zeta }=\frac{\rho }{2\alpha ^2}(\lambda _{,\zeta }\tau _0\tau _{,\zeta })^2,$$
(53)
and the electromagnetic part as

$$k_{e,\zeta }=\frac{\rho }{\alpha ^2}q_1q_2\beta (\tau _{,\zeta })^2,$$
(54)
where now the constants $`a_1,\mathrm{},q_1,q_2,`$and $`\kappa _0,`$satisfy the relationship

$$4a_1^2\kappa _0^2(1+\alpha ^2)(a_1a_4a_2a_3)^2=0.$$
(55)
It is important to note that the electrostatic potential $`\psi `$ is completely determined by the harmonic function $`\tau `$. This means that the electrostatic (magnetostatic) potential is determined only by $`\tau `$, so we can obtain solutions with arbitrary electromagnetic fields writing the corresponding solution of the Laplace equation for $`\tau `$. The corresponding magnetic solution can be obtained using the invariant transformations (47). The most important well-know solutions can be derived from this method. Some examples are given in . New solutions have been derived in ,  .

On the other hand, a star is basically a gravitational monopole together with a magnetic dipole field. Using the invariant transformations (47), we can construct a class of solution with this characteristics. For the gravitational potential we now chose a gravitational monopole, in order to reproduce the most important gravitational features of the star and of the Schwarzschild solution. In order to do so we write the line element (2) in Boyer-Lindquist coordinates $`\rho =\sqrt{r^22mr}\mathrm{sin}\theta ,`$ $`z=(rm)\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ and take $`\lambda =ln(1\frac{2m}{r})`$, the differential equation for $`k_g`$ can be integrated and the spacetime metric reads

$$ds^2=e^{2(k_s+k_e)}g^\gamma \frac{dr^2}{12m/r}+g^\gamma r^2(e^{2(k_s+k_e)}d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2)\frac{(12m/r)}{g^\gamma }dt^2$$
(56)
the scalar and the electromagnetic fields for this solution read

$`\kappa ^2`$ $`=`$ $`e^{2\alpha \varphi }={\displaystyle \frac{e^{2\alpha \varphi _0}}{(12m/r)g^\beta }}`$
$`A_{3,\rho }`$ $`=`$ $`Q\rho \tau _{,z}.,A_{3,z}=Q\rho \tau _{,\rho }`$ (57)
Metric (56), (57) is an static asymptotically flat metric with mass parameter $`m`$, and magnetostatic charge $`Q`$. The scalar parameter depends on the form of $`\tau .`$ Observe that the electromagnetic field is always integrable because $`\tau `$ fulfills the Laplace equation $`D(\rho D\tau )=(\rho \tau _{,z})_{,z}+(\rho \tau _{,\rho })_{,\rho }=0`$. So we can construct solutions representing magnetic monopoles, dipoles, etc. With this form of the metric we can interpret $`g`$ and $`e^{2k_e}`$ as the contribution of the electromagnetic field and $`e^{2k_s}`$ as the contribution of the scalar field to the metric. Asymptotically, the scalar field behaves like $`e^{2\alpha \varphi _0}/g^\beta (1+2m/r+..)`$, where $`g1+O(1/r^n).`$ This means that the scalar field deviate from a constant in orders of $`2m/r`$. For a star like the sun $`2m/r10^6,`$ for a white dwarf $`2m/r10^4`$ and only for a compact star like a neutron star $`2m/r10^1,`$ $`i.e`$, this metric represents the space-time of an object very similar as a magnetized Schwarzschild one. Only for a very compact object both metrics are different. This fact is in agreement with the concept of spontaneous scalarization: if scalar fields exist, compact stars will prefer to posses one in order to save energy, but even when a star posses one, it will very difficult to detect it (see ). We can carry out the follow classification of solution (56), (57):

1. Suppose that $`\tau =0`$, this implies that $`g=1`$ and $`A_3=0`$, so that the metric (56) is

$$ds^2=e^{2k_s}\frac{dr^2}{12m/r}+r^2(e^{2k_s}d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2)(12m/r)dt^2$$
(58)
This metric is almost spherically symmetric and represents a gravitational body (gravitational monopole) with scalar field. The scalar field deforms the spherical symmetry in the factor $`e^{2k_s}d\theta ^2`$. If $`k_s=0`$ we recover the spherical symmetry. This metric has been used as a model for a star , finding that the physical differences between (58) and the Schwarzschild solution are too small to be measured, even for a compact star like a pulsar. This implies that a star like the sun could posses a scalar field and we will not be able to measure it.
2. We now take $`\tau 0`$, $`g=1`$ , but with arbitrary magnetic field $`A_{3.}`$ The metric (56) then reads

$$ds^2=e^{2(k_s+k_e)}\frac{dr^2}{12m/r}+r^2(e^{2(k_s+k_e)}d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2)(12m/r)dt^2$$
(59)
In this case the scalar and the magnetostatic potentials are the ones that deform the spherical symmetry of the metric. If we furthermore make $`k_s+k_e=0`$ and $`\tau =\lambda `$, $`(p+q1)^22pq\beta =0,`$ we recover the spherical symmetry and the metric transforms into the Schwarzschild line element. This metric represents a gravitational body with arbitrary magnetostatic field coupled to a scalar field. The scalar and mass parameters here are proportional.
3. If we choose $`\tau =\lambda `$, metric (56) is spherically symmetric, the constants fulfill the constrain $`(p+q1)^2pq\beta =0`$, and the metric (56) reads

$$ds^2=g^\gamma \frac{dr^2}{12m/r}+g^\gamma r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2)\frac{(12m/r)}{g^\gamma }dt^2$$
(60)
Here is contained the Gibbons- Maeda black hole  by choosing $`\tau `$ to be the harmonic function corresponding to a monopole. The generalized version of solution  for any electromagnetic multipole field is given by this metric.
4. Finally, we choose $`\tau =\lambda `$ and $`p+q=1`$, which implies $`k_s=0`$. The metric (56) is now given by

$$ds^2=e^{2k_e}g^\gamma \frac{dr^2}{12m/r}+g^\gamma r^2(e^{2k_e}d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2)\frac{(12m/r)}{g^\gamma }dt^2$$
(61)
This metric is again almost spherically symmetric, but now it is deformed by the electromagnetic field, the factor $`e^{2k_e}d\theta ^2`$ is the deformation of the spherical symmetry due to the electromagnetic field.

### 4.3 Third Class

Now let us study the case when the electromagnetic field vanishes. Here it is convenient to take the harmonic parameter complex. Choosing the simple ansatz $`a_2=b_1=b_2=c_1=c_2=0,`$ $`\sigma =1`$, using Eq.(24) with the complex parameter $`\xi `$, and repeating the procedure, we obtain that the system of equations Eqs. (26), (27) and (28) takes the form

$`a_{1}^{}{}_{,\xi }{}^{}a_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{2\xi ^{}a_1}{1\xi \xi ^{}}}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`a_{1}^{}{}_{,\xi ^{}}{}^{}+a_1a_1^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
with solution

$$a_1=\frac{1+\xi ^{}}{(1+\xi )(\xi \xi ^{}1)}.$$
(62)
Performing the integration to obtain the potential functions, one finally gets

$`f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\xi \xi ^{}1}{(1+\xi )(1+\xi ^{})}},`$
$`ϵ`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{\xi \xi ^{}}{(1+\xi )(1+\xi ^{})}},`$ (63)
which we identify with the Ernst solution, that is, we have obtained the Tomimatsu-Sato family of solutions, including of course Kerr as a particular case .

### 4.4 Fourth Class

Finally, we obtain some stationary solutions using this method. The most simple ansatz to solve equations (26), (27) and (28) is supposing that all the functions $`a_1,a_2,\mathrm{}`$ etc. are constants, the differential equations become then algebraic equations which can be easily solved. For this case we take the ansatz

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`ip,a_2=0,`$
$`b_1`$ $`=`$ $`p(1i),b_2=0,`$
$`d_1`$ $`=`$ $`2p,c_2=0,`$ (64)
where $`p`$ is and arbitrary constant. Integrating the potentials for this case we obtain

$`f`$ $`=`$ $`1,`$
$`\kappa ^2`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}e^{4p\lambda },`$
$`\psi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^{2p\lambda }}{\kappa _0}}+\psi _0,`$
$`\chi `$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _0e^{2p\lambda }+\chi _0,`$
$`ϵ`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _0\psi _0e^{2p\lambda }.`$ (65)
Substituting in the metric (2) and in the equation for the function $`k`$, (19), the metric can be integrated to obtain

$$ds^2=(dt\omega d\phi )^2+[e^{2k}(d\rho ^2+dz^2)+\rho ^2d\phi ^2],$$
(66)
where $`\omega `$ and the function $`k`$ can be integrated from the differential equations:

$`\omega _{,\rho }`$ $`=`$ $`2p\rho \lambda _{,z}\omega _{,z}=2p\rho \lambda _{,\rho }`$
$`k_{,\zeta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{p^2(3\alpha ^2+4)}{\alpha ^2}}\rho (\lambda _{,\zeta })^2`$ (67)
The integrability conditions for $`\omega `$ and $`k`$ are guaranteed because $`\lambda `$ fulfills the Laplace equation. Metric (67) represents a rotating degenerated object (the gravitational potential $`f=1`$), with electromagnetic and scalar potentials, where the coupling constant $`\alpha `$ between scalar and electromagnetic fields remains arbitrary. The particular multipole development depends on the harmonic function $`\lambda `$. As an example, if $`\lambda =\mathrm{cos}\theta /r`$, the solution represents a pure magnetic monopole with a multipole electrostatic field, without gravitational one. In this case $`\omega =2p\mathrm{sin}^2\theta /r`$, and the magnetic field is proportional to it. This represents thus a magnetic dipole, with an exponentially decaying scalar field.

## 5 Conclusions

We have presented a detailed description of the functional space formulation, joined with the harmonic maps one, in such a way that starting with the Einstein-Hilbert action for the stationary axisymmetric space-time, we obtained an effective Lagrangian for the field variables, by means of a Legendre transformation obtained a “Hamiltonian” and with a canonical transformation reduce the system of dynamical equations to three first order coupled differential equations for three unknowns, $`A,B,C`$, two complex and one real. The harmonic maps ansatz enabled us to reduce the system of five second order partial differential equations (12) for the Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton system with two Killing vectors to a system of five (two complex and one real) first order ordinary differential equations (22). Using the harmonic maps ansatz , we rewrote that system of equations in such a way that, for different ansatz, it allows to generate large classes of solutions to the Einstein-Maxwell theory non minimally coupled to a dilatonic field. In this way, we consider that we have described a robust formulation which allows us to generate large classes of solutions, placing us on the right track, we think, to obtain exact solutions for astrophysical important cases, like the one describing a compact charged rotating object surrounded by a scalar field which could be useful for solving the dark matter problem at a galactic level. Actually, in , we have worked out this idea and the scalar field does is a good candidate for the dark matter in the galactic halo of spiral galaxies. We have presented several particular cases which include most of the well known solutions, as well as new ones, where we have explicitly presented the form of the fields and of the charges, for particular choices of the potentials. Also, the formulation described in the present work is not only a technique to generate exact solutions, but also it has several other possible directions worth studying, for instance, from the effective Lagrangian (6) an off-shell Lagrangian for the non-linear $`\sigma `$-model for some families of solutions can be obtained . It has not been possible to make this analogy for cases with different values of $`\alpha `$, due to the fact that for them the potential space is not symmetric. Finally we think that the “Hamiltonian” obtained in the present formulation, is worth to study further within the gravity quantization endeavor.

## 6 Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by DGAPA-UNAM, project IN121298, and by CONACYT, Mexico, project 3697-E. TM thanks the hospitality from the relativity group in Jena, Germany, and the DAAD support while this work was partially done.


text:
# Generalized quantum XOR-gate for quantum teleportation and state purification in arbitrary dimensional Hilbert spaces

## Abstract

A generalization of the quantum XOR-gate is presented which operates in arbitrary dimensional Hilbert spaces. Together with one-particle Fourier transforms this gate is capable of performing a variety of tasks which are important for quantum information processing in arbitrary dimensional Hilbert spaces. Among these tasks are the preparation of Bell states, quantum teleportation and quantum state purification. A physical realization of this generalized XOR-gate is proposed which is based on non-linear optical elements.

In quantum information processing the quantum XOR-gate  plays a fundamental role. In this 2-qubit gate, the first qubit controls the target qubit: if the control is in state $`|0>`$, the target is left unchanged, but if the control qubit is in state $`|1>`$ the target’s basis states are flipped. Together with one-qubit operations it forms a universal set of quantum gates allowing the implementation of arbitrary unitary operations acting on qubits . It has been demonstrated that it can be used for many practical tasks of quantum information processing with qubits, such as quantum state swapping , entangling quantum states , performing Bell measurements , dense coding  and teleportation . Furthermore, in combination with selective measurements it can be used for implementing non-linear quantum transformations of quantum states which may be used for optimal state identification and for state purification .

For many practical tasks of quantum information processing it is desirable to extend the basic notion of such a quantum XOR-operation to higher dimensional Hilbert spaces. Indeed, most of the physical systems that have been proposed to hold qubits, such as multilevel atoms or ions  and multipath-interferometers , could equally well encode larger alphabeths. However, there is a considerable degree of freedom involved in such a generalization. Not all such generalizations of the basic quantum XOR-gate of qubits acquire a similar fundamental significance in connection with the universality of quantum operations in higher dimensional Hilbert spaces. A proper generalization is thus a useful tool as it allows one to unify various quantum operations which are of current interest for quantum information processing, such as entangling quantum states, performing Bell measurements, teleportation and purifying quantum states.

In this letter a generalized XOR-gate is proposed which acts on two arbitrary dimensional quantum systems and which inherits all the significant properties of the basic XOR-gate for qubits. In particular we demonstrate that this generalized quantum XOR-gate may be used to entangle two quantum systems with one another, to teleport an unknown quantum state, and to implement non-linear quantum transformations for state purification. A possible physical realization of this quantum gate is proposed which is based on non-linear optical elements.

Let us start by summarizing characteristic properties of the XOR-gate as they are known for qubit systems. For qubits the action of the quantum XOR-gate onto a chosen set of basis states $`\left\{|i\right\}`$ with $`i\{0,1\}`$ of the Hilbert space of each qubit is defined by

$$XOR_{12}|i_1|j_2=|i_1|ij_2.$$
(1)
This transformation has the following characteristic properties: (i) it is unitary and thus reversible, (ii) it is hermitian and (iii) $`ij=0`$ if and only if $`i=j`$. The first (second) index denotes the state of the control (target) qubit and $``$ denotes addition modulo(2).

Let us now consider the problem of generalizing the quantum XOR-gate to higher dimensional Hilbert spaces. The desired generalized quantum XOR-gate (GXOR-gate) should act on two $`D`$ -dimensional quantum systems. In analogy with qubits we will call these two systems qudits. The basis states $`|i`$ of each qudit are labeled by elements in the ring $`𝖹_D`$ which we denote by the numbers $`i=0,\mathrm{},D1`$ with the usual rules for addition and multiplication modulo(D). In principle, the GXOR-gate could be defined in a straightforward way by using Eq.(1) and by performing $`ij`$ modulo(D), i. e.

$$GXOR_{12}|i_1|j_2=|i_1|ij_2.$$
(2)
However, with this GXOR-gate one cannot purify quantum states with the help of non-linear quantum transformations as $`ii`$ in $`𝖹_D`$ for $`D>2`$. Moreover, the GXOR-gate defined in (2) is unitary but not hermitian for $`D>2`$. Therefore it is no longer its own inverse. Thus, the inverse GXOR-gate has to be obtained from the GXOR-gate of Eq.(2) by iteration, i.e. $`GXOR_{12}^1=(GXOR_{12})^{D1}=GXOR_{12}^{}GXOR_{12}`$. All these inconvenient properties of this preliminary definition (2) can be removed by the alternative definition

$$GXOR_{12}|i_1|j_2=|i_1|ij_2.$$
(3)
In Eq.(3) $`ij`$ denotes the difference $`ij`$ modulo (D). In the special case of qubits the definition of Eq.(3) reduces to Eq.(1) as $`ijijmodulo(2)`$. Furthermore, this definition preserves all the properties of Eq.(1) also for arbitrary values of $`D`$, namely it is unitary, hermitian and $`ij=0modulo(D)`$ if and only if $`i=j`$.

The GXOR-gate of Eq.(3) admits a natural extension to control and target systems with continuous spectra. In this case the basis states $`|i`$ are replaced by the basis states $`\left\{|x\right\}`$ with the continuous variable $`x𝐑`$. These new basis states are assumed to satisfy the orthogonality condition $`x|y=\delta \left(xy\right)`$. Furthermore, as the dimension $`D`$ tends to infinity the modulo operation entering Eq.(3) can be omitted. Thus, for continuous variables the action of the GXOR-gate becomes

$$GXOR_{12}|x_1|y_2=|x_1|xy_2.$$
(4)
Let us note that this definition for the case of continuous variables is different from the generalized XOR-gate proposed in Ref. . This latter gate is not hermitian whereas the GXOR-gate of Eq.(4) is both unitary and hermitian. The GXOR-gate of Eq. (4) can be represented in terms of a translation and a space inversion, namely

$$GXOR_{12}|x_1|y_2=\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_2e^{(i\widehat{P}_y^{(2)}\widehat{x}^{(1)})}|x_1|y_2.$$
(5)
Thereby $`\widehat{P}_y^{(2)}`$ denotes the canonical momentum operator which is conjugate to the position operator $`\widehat{y}^{(2)}`$ acting on quantum system 2 and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_2`$ is the corresponding operator of space inversion.

With the help of the GXOR-gate of Eq.(3) a variety of quantum operations can be implemented which are of central interest for quantum information processing. As a first application let us consider the preparation of a basis of entangled states from separable ones. If $`|l|m`$ with $`l,m,=0,\mathrm{},D1`$ denotes an orthonormal basis of separable states an associated basis of entangled two-particle states is given by

$`|\psi _{lm}=GXOR_{12}[(F|l)_1|m_2].`$ (6)
Thereby $`F`$ denotes the discrete Fourier transformation, i.e. $`F|l=(1/\sqrt{D})_{k=0}^{D1}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{x}\mathrm{p}(i2\pi lk/D)|k`$. For qubits this unitary quantum transformation leads to the well known basis of four Bell states. In the simplest higher dimensional case of $`D=3`$, for example, the first few states of this entangled generalized Bell basis are given by

$`|\psi _{00}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}}[|00+|11+|22],`$ (7)
$`|\psi _{10}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}}[|00+e^{i2\pi /3}|11+e^{i2\pi /3}|22],`$ (8)
$`|\psi _{20}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}}[|00+e^{i2\pi /3}|11+e^{i2\pi /3}|22],`$ (9)
$`|\psi _{01}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}}[|02+|10+|21],\mathrm{}`$ (10)
As the GXOR-gate is hermitian it can also be used to disentangle this basis of generalized Bell states again by inverting Eq.(6). This basic disentanglement property is of practical significance as it enables one to reduce Bell measurements to measurements of separable states. Examples where these latter types of measurements are of central interest are dense coding  and quantum teleportation schemes .

The basis of entangled Bell states resulting from Eq.(6) can be used for teleporting an arbitrary D-dimensional quantum state from A (Alice) to B (Bob). For this purpose let us assume that A and B share an entangled pair of particles prepared in state $`|\psi _{lm}`$ as defined by Eq.(6). If A wants to teleport an unknown quantum state $`|\chi =_{n=0}^{D1}\alpha _n|n`$ to B she has to perform a Bell measurement which yields one of the entangled basis states of Eq.(6) as an output state (compare with Fig. (1)). Conditioned on the measurement result of Alice, Bob has to perform an appropriate unitary transformation onto his particle which prepares this latter particle in state $`|\chi `$. This arbitrary dimensional teleportation scheme rests on the identity

$`|\chi |\psi _{jk}_{23}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{l,m=0}{\overset{D1}{}}}|\psi _{lm}_{12}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{i2\pi jm/D}}{D}}U_{lm}|\chi ,`$ (11)
$`U_{lm}|n`$ $`=`$ $`e^{i2\pi n(lj)/D}|nkm.`$ (12)
This basic relation for teleportation for an arbitrary dimensional state $`|\chi `$ can be derived in a straightforward way from Eqs. (3) and (6). The classical communication requires $`2\mathrm{log}_2(D)`$ bits, which is the minimum necessary in all quantum teleportation schemes.

Together with filtering measurements acting on a target quantum system $`t`$ the GXOR-gate of Eq. (3) can be used to implement non-linear transformations of quantum states of a control system $`c`$. This can be demonstrated most easily by considering the case of two qudits which are prepared in the quantum states $`\sigma ^t`$ and $`\sigma ^c`$ initially. Let us perform the quantum operation

$`T(\sigma ^c,\sigma ^t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{A\left(\sigma ^c\sigma ^t\right)A^{}}{Tr[A\left(\sigma ^c\sigma ^t\right)A^{}]}}`$ (13)
on these two qudits with

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`(\mathrm{𝟏}_𝐜P_{})GXOR_{ct}.`$ (14)
Thereby $`\mathrm{𝟏}_𝐜`$ denotes the identity operator acting in the Hilbert space of the control system and $`P_{}=|0_{tt}0|`$ is the projector onto state $`|0_t`$ of the target qudit. With the decomposition

$`\sigma ^c={\displaystyle \underset{ij}{\overset{D1}{}}}\sigma _{ij}^c|i_{cc}j|,`$ (15)
$`\sigma ^t={\displaystyle \underset{ij}{\overset{D1}{}}}\sigma _{ij}^t|i_{tt}j|`$ (16)
Eqs. (13) and (14) may be rewritten in the form

$$T(\sigma ^c,\sigma ^t)=\frac{_{ijkl}^{D1}\sigma _{ij}^c\sigma _{kl}^t|i_{cc}j|P_{}|ik_{tt}jl|P_{}}{_{ikl}^{D1}\sigma _{ii}^c\sigma _{kl}^t0|ik_{tt}il|0}.$$
(17)
Assuming that both control and target qudit are prepared in the same state initially, i.e. $`\sigma ^c\sigma ^t`$, and using the basic property $`ij=0\mathrm{𝑚𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑙𝑜}(D)`$ if and only if $`i=j`$ of the GXOR-gate of Eq.(3) it turns out that Eq.(13) is equivalent to the relations

$`T(\sigma ^c,\sigma ^t`$ $``$ $`\sigma ^c)=\sigma _{output}^cP_{},`$ (18)
$`\sigma _{output}^c`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{ij}^{D1}\left(\sigma _{ij}^c\right)^2|i_{cc}j|}{_i^{D1}\left(\sigma _{ii}^c\right)^2}}.`$ (19)
As a result of the quantum operation (13) the combined system formed by the control and the target qudit forms a factorizable state with the target qudit being in state $`|00|`$. According to Eq.(19) the density matrix elements of $`\sigma ^c`$ with respect to the computational basis $`|i`$ $`(i=0,\mathrm{},D1)`$ have been squared. This final state is prepared with probability $`p_c=_i^{D1}(\sigma _{ii}^c)^2`$. From Eq. (19) it is easy to verify that the quantum operation (13) has the following basic properties: (i) it maps density matrices onto density matrices, (ii) it is not injective and non-linear, (iii) there are states invariant under the transformation, and (iv) it maps pure states onto pure states. It is also possible to extended the quantum operation of Eq. (13) to cases in which there is more than one control system and in which both the control and the target systems are composite quantum systems each of which consists of M qudits. In this case $`\sigma ^c`$ describes a general $`M`$-qudit state of the form

$$\sigma ^c=\underset{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}{}\sigma _{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}^c|𝐢_{cc}𝐣|,$$
(20)
with $`𝐢=(i_1,\mathrm{},i_M)`$ and $`𝐣=(j_1,\mathrm{},j_M)`$. In Eq.(13) the operator $`A`$ has to be replaced by

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`(\mathrm{𝟏}_𝐜P_{})\mathrm{\Pi }_{j=1}^M\mathrm{\Pi }_{i=1}^NGXOR_{ct_i}^{(j)}`$ (21)
with the projection operators $`P_{}=\mathrm{\Pi }_{i=1}^NP_{t_i}`$ and $`P_{t_i}=|\mathrm{𝟎}_{t_it_i}\mathrm{𝟎}|`$ onto state $`|\mathrm{𝟎}_{t_i}`$ of the $`M`$-qudit target system $`t_i`$. Thereby the GXOR-gate $`GXOR_{ct_i}^{(j)}`$ operates on the $`j`$-th qudit of the control and of the $`i`$-th target system. The resulting final state of the control system is given by

$$\sigma _{output}^c=\frac{_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}(\sigma _{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}^c)^{1+N}|𝐢_{cc}𝐣|}{_𝐢(\sigma _{\mathrm{𝐢𝐢}}^c)^{1+N}}.$$
(22)
and is prepared with probability $`p_c=_𝐢(\sigma _{\mathrm{𝐢𝐢}}^c)^{1+N}`$.

In general, also the non-linear quantum transformation of Eq. (22) has invariant states. This suggests to use this non-linear quantum transformation for the purification of quantum states of a two-qudit system. For the special case of a control system consisting of two-qubits such a purification scheme has already been proposed previously . In order to discuss an analogous purification scheme in arbitrary dimensional Hilbert spaces we start from the observation that for $`M=2`$ the entangled basis state $`|\psi _{00}`$ of Eq.(6) is a fixed point of the non-linear two-particle quantum map of Eq.(22). Thus this map may be used to purify quantum states towards the entangled state $`|\psi _{00}`$. In order to exemplify the convergence properties of this purification process let us assume that initially we start from a Werner state of the form

$$\sigma ^c=\lambda |\psi _{00}\psi _{00}|+(1\lambda )\mathrm{𝟏}/D^2.$$
(23)
This state may result from a physical situation where two spatially separated parties, say A(lice) and B(ob), want to share the entangled basis state $`|\psi _{00}`$ but with a probability of $`(1\lambda )`$ the transmission of this entangled pair leads to unwanted noise represented by the chaotic state $`\mathrm{𝟏}/D^2`$. This quantum state $`\sigma ^c`$ is non-separable if and only if $`\lambda >\lambda _D=(1+D)^1`$  so that a purification scheme based on Eq.(22) can succeed only for these values of $`\lambda `$. In order to maximize the range of convergence of a purification scheme based on Eq.(22) let us introduce an additional unitary twirling transformation  of the form $`U_AU_B^{}`$ which is performed by parties A and B locally after each iteration of the non-linear quantum map (22). Thus, at each step of the purification process the mapping

$$\sigma ^cU_AU_B^{}\frac{_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}(\sigma _{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}^c)^2|𝐢_{cc}𝐣|}{_𝐢(\sigma _{\mathrm{𝐢𝐢}}^c)^2}U_A^{}U_B^{}$$
(24)
is performed. Thereby the local unitary transformation redistributes all states. The only state which is left invariant by this redistribution procedure is the entangled state $`|\psi _{00}`$. In principle, the local unitary transformation $`U`$ can be chosen arbitrarily. However, numerical simulations indicate that the region of convergence of the purification process can be improved considerably by choosing two different types of local unitary twirling transformations which are used alternatively. As an example, let us choose for $`U`$ alternatively a discrete Fourier transform involving all $`D`$ states $`|0,\mathrm{}|D1`$ and a discrete Fourier transform involving the $`D1`$ states $`|0,\mathrm{}|D2`$ only. Numerical simulations which we have performed for dimensions $`2D20`$ demonstrate clearly that the purification procedure involving these two local unitary transformations is capable of purifying all non-separable Werner states of the form of Eq.(23). Thus, it is expected that this maximal range of convergence of this purification scheme also applies to all higher dimensional Hilbert spaces.

Let us finally discuss a possible physical realization of the GXOR-gate defined by Eq.(3) which is based on non-linear optical elements. For this purpose we assume that the two quantum systems which are going to be entangled are two modes of the radiation field. The basis states $`|i_1`$ $`(i=0,\mathrm{},D1)`$ of the first quantum system are formed by $`n`$-photon states of mode one with $`0nD1`$. The basis states of the second quantum system $`|k_2`$ $`(k=0,\mathrm{},D1)`$ are formed by Fourier transformed $`n`$-photon states of this latter mode, i.e. $`|k_2=1/\sqrt{D}_{n=0}^{D1}\mathrm{exp}(i2\pi kn/D)|n_2`$. Let us further assume that the dynamics of these two modes of the electromagnetic field are governed by the Kerr-effect . Thus, in the interaction picture their Hamiltonian is given by $`H=\mathrm{}\chi a_1^{}a_1a_2^{}a_2`$ with the creation and annihilation operators $`a_{1,2}^{}`$ and $`a_{1,2}`$ of modes $`1`$ and $`2`$, respectively. For the sake of simplicity the nonlinear susceptibility $`\chi `$ is assumed to be real-valued and positive. Preparing intitially both quantum systems in state $`|i_1|k_2`$ after an interaction time of magnitude $`t=2\pi /(D\chi )`$ this two-mode system ends up in state $`|\psi _{12}=|i_1|ki_2`$. Applying to this latter state a time reversal transformation which may be implemented by the process of phase conjugation  we finally arrive at the desired state $`|i_1|ik_2`$. Thus this combination of a Kerr-interaction with a time reversal transformation is capable of realizing the GXOR-gate of Eq. (3).

In summary, a generalized quantum XOR-gate has been proposed which acts on two quantum systems in arbitrary dimensional Hilbert spaces. This quantum gate is unitary and hermitian and preserves characteristic properties of the basic quantum XOR-gate acting on qubits. It has been demonstrated that together with one-particle Fourier-transformations this GXOR-gate is capable of performing various important elementary tasks of quantum information processing in arbitrary dimensional Hilbert spaces, such as the preparation of entangled basis states (the so-called Bell states), quantum teleportation and quantum state purification. Physically this proposed quantum gate can be implemented optically, for example, with the help of the Kerr-effect and with the help of phase conjugation. These applications demonstrate the usefulness of the presented GXOR-gate as a basic and unifying concept for several problems of quantum information processing in arbitrary dimensional Hilbert spaces.

This work is supported by the DFG (SPP ‘Quanteninformationsverarbeitung’), by the ESF programme on ‘Quantum Information Theory and Quantum Computation’ and by the European IST-1999-11053 EQUIP project. A.D. acknowledges support by the DAAD. I.J is supported by the A. von Humboldt foundation and by the Ministry of Education of the Czech Republic. We are grateful to Steve Barnett for stimulating discussions.