text:
# Possible wormholes in a brane world

## I Introduction

Lorentzian wormholes as smooth bridges between different universes, or topological handles between remote parts of a single universe, have gained much attention since Morris, Thorne and Yurtsever discussed the connection between wormholes and time machines thorne ; see vis-book ; vis-hoh97  for reviews. It is well known that a wormhole geometry can only appear as a solution to the Einstein equations if the stress-energy tensor (SET) of matter violates the null energy condition (NEC) at least in a neighborhood of the wormhole throat hoh-vis .

Many versions of exotic matter, able to provide NEC violation and to support wormholes, have been suggested. One class of such sources is represented by so-called ghost fields, i.e., fields with explicitly negative energy density, including scalar-tensor theories of gravity with an anomalous sign of the scalar field kinetic term in the Lagrangian \[5–13\] Another class of static wormholes is obtained with nonminimally coupled scalar fields br73 ; bar-vis99 ; sush-kim02  as a result of conformal continuation vac4 . The latter means that a singularity occurring on a certain surface $`S`$ in the Einstein frame metric, is removed by a conformal mapping to the Jordan frame, and the solution is then continued beyond $`S`$. It has been shown vac4  that a wormhole is a generic result of a conformal continuation if its sufficient conditions are satisfied. In all such cases, however, the two wormhole mouths are located in regions with different signs of the effective gravitational constant. In other words, if one mouth is in a normal gravity region, the other is in an antigravity region vac4 . A related problem is the instability of such wormholes caused by the field behavior near the transition surface $`S`$ stepan .

Wormhole solutions have also been obtained in specific versions of dilaton gravity graf02  and gravity with torsion anch97 . Another approach is to invoke quantum effects, considering wormholes as semiclassical objects \[20–23\] (see also references therein). In all such cases, NEC violation is probably only possible in extremely strong gravity regions, leading to throat radii close to the Planck length. Wormholes thus seem to be an integral part of the hypothetic space-time foam but their practicability at macroscopic scales still remains vague.

In our view, a natural source of wormhole geometry can be found in the framework of the rapidly developing ideas of brane worlds (ransum1 ; ransum2 , for reviews see brane-rev ), inspired by the progress in superstring and M-theory ho-wit . By this concept, the observable world is a kind of domain wall in a multidimensional space (5-dimensional in the simplest case), with large or even infinite extra dimensions. The standard-model fields are confined on the brane while gravity propagates in the surrounding bulk. The gravitational field on the brane itself can be described, at least in models of the type of the second Randall-Sundrum model ransum2 , by the modified 4-dimensional Einstein equations derived by Shiromizu, Maeda and Sasaki maeda99  from 5-dimensional gravity with the aid of the Gauss and Codazzi equations. In vacuum, when matter on the brane is absent and the 4-dimensional cosmological constant is zero (a natural assumption for scales much smaller than the size of the Universe), these equations reduce to

$$G_{\mu \nu }=E_{\mu \nu },$$
(1)
where $`G_{\mu \nu }`$ is the 4-dimensional Einstein tensor corresponding to the brane metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ while $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ is the projection of the 5-dimensional Weyl tensor onto the brane. The traceless tensor $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ connects gravity on the brane with the bulk geometry (and is sometimes called the tidal SET), so that the set of equations (1) is not closed. Due to its geometric origin, $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ does not necessarily satisfy the energy conditions applicable to ordinary matter. Thus, examples are known voll02a  when negative energies on the brane are induced by gravitational waves or black strings in the bulk. Therefore, if the brane world concept is taken seriously, $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ can be the most natural “matter” supporting wormholes.

In this paper we study static, spherically symmetric, asymptotically flat wormhole solutions to the equation $`R=0`$, where $`R`$ is the 4-dimensional scalar curvature. Since $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ has zero trace, $`R=0`$ is an immediate consequence of (1). $`R=0`$ is a single equation connecting two metric functions, $`\gamma (r)`$ and $`f(r)`$, and can be solved with respect to $`f`$ for arbitrary $`\gamma `$. We show that almost any $`\gamma (r)`$ satisfying some minimal requirements (smoothness and compatibility with asymptotic flatness) gives rise to a family of wormhole solutions with the throat radius as a free parameter. Both symmetric and asymmetric wormholes are obtained. We consider some particular examples, and, in addition to new wormhole metrics, reproduce the results of the recent studies where some solutions with $`R=0`$ (though under other motivations) were found \[31–34\]. As a by-product, some black hole solutions and solutions with naked singularities are also obtained. In the brane world framework, there remains a nontrivial problem to be solved: to inscribe the intrinsic brane geometry of the above solutions into the full 5-dimensional picture. Our 4-dimensional wormhole solution can have an arbitrary size of the wormhole throat, but a restriction can quite probably appear from 5-dimensional geometry. Meanwhile, the present class of 4-metrics with zero scalar curvature can be of interest by itself.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. 2 we solve the equation $`R=0`$ and formulate the conditions under which the solution describes a symmetric or asymmetric wormhole; in Sec. 3 we discuss a few particular examples; Sec. 4 contains some observations and concluding remarks.

## II $`R=0`$: the general solution

The general static, spherically symmetric metric in 4 dimensions in the curvature coordinates has the form

$$ds^2=\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma (r)}dt^2\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha (r)}dr^2r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2$$
(2)
where $`d\mathrm{\Omega }^2=d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2`$ is the linear element on a unit sphere111The sign conventions are: the metric signature $`(+)`$; the curvature tensor $`R_{\mu \rho \nu }^\sigma =_\nu \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \rho }^\sigma \mathrm{}`$, so that, e.g., the Ricci scalar $`R>0`$ for de Sitter space-time; and the stress-energy tensor such that $`T_t^t`$ is the energy density. .

The metric (2) gives, according to (1), the following expressions for the components of the effective SET $`E_\mu ^\nu `$, namely, the energy density $`\rho =E_t^t`$, the radial pressure $`p_{\mathrm{rad}}=E_r^r`$ and the lateral pressure $`p_{}=E_\theta ^\theta =E_\varphi ^\varphi `$:

$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }1){\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _r}{r}}\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha };`$ (3)
$`p_{\mathrm{rad}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }1)+{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma _r}{r}}\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha };`$ (4)
$`p_{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }\left(\gamma _{rr}+\gamma _r^2\alpha _r\gamma _r+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _r\alpha _r}{r}}\right),`$ (5)
where the subscript $`r`$ denotes $`d/dr`$. In case $`R=0`$ one evidently has $`2p_{}=\rho p_{\mathrm{rad}}`$.

Let us also write down the Kretschmann scalar for the metric (2):

$`𝒦`$ $`=`$ $`R_{\mu \nu }^{\rho \sigma }R\rho \sigma ^{\mu \nu }=4K_1^2+8K_2^2+8K_3^2+4K_4^2,`$
$`K_1`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }(\gamma _{rr}+\gamma _r^2\alpha _r\gamma _r),K_2=\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _r}{r}},`$
$`K_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }\alpha _r,K_4={\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(1\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }).`$ (6)
The finiteness of $`𝒦`$ is a natural regularity criterion for the geometries to be discussed. Indeed, $`𝒦`$ is a sum of squares of all components $`R_{\mu \nu }^{\epsilon \sigma }`$ of the Riemann tensor for the metric (2), therefore $`𝒦<\mathrm{}`$ is necessary and sufficient for finiteness of all algebraic curvature invariants.

The condition $`R=0`$ which follows from (1) can be written as a linear first-order equation with respect to $`f(r)\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=}r\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }`$:

$$f_r(2+r\gamma _r)+f(2r\gamma _{rr}+2r\gamma _r^2+3\gamma _r)=2,$$
(7)
Its general solution is

$$f(r)=\frac{2\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma +3\mathrm{\Gamma }}}{(2+r\gamma _r)^2}(2+r\gamma _r)\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma 3\mathrm{\Gamma }}𝑑r$$
(8)
where

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)=\frac{\gamma _rdr}{2+r\gamma _r}.$$
(9)
Thus, choosing the form of $`\gamma (r)`$ arbitrarily, we obtain $`f(r)`$ from (8), and, after fixing the integration constant, the metric is known completely at least in the region where $`\mathrm{e}^\gamma `$ and $`\mathrm{e}^\alpha `$ are smooth and nonzero.

Let us now make clear how to choose the function $`\gamma (r)`$ (the so-called redshift function) and the integration constant in Eq. (8) in order to obtain a wormhole solution. We note for reference purposes that in many papers devoted to wormholes, beginning with thorne , the function $`\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }`$ is expressed as $`[1b(r)/r]^1`$ where $`b(r)`$ is the so-called shape function. Our $`f(r)`$ is then equal to $`rb(r)`$.

The coordinate $`r`$, which proves to be convenient for solving Eq. (7), is not an admissible coordinate in the whole space for wormhole solutions since in this case $`r`$ has at least one minimum, and the solution in terms of $`r`$ therefore splits into at least two branches. As an admissible coordinate one can take, e.g., the Gaussian coordinate $`l`$ (proper length along the radial direction) connected with $`r`$ by the relation $`l=\mathrm{e}^\alpha 𝑑r`$, and the metric is rewritten as

$$ds^2=\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma (l)}dt^2dl^2r^2(l)d\mathrm{\Omega }^2.$$
(10)
We seek static, traversable, twice asymptotically flat wormhole solutions. So we require: (i) there should be two flat asymptotics: $`l`$; $`r|l|\mathrm{}`$ and $`\gamma =\mathrm{const}+O(r^1)`$ as $`l\pm \mathrm{}`$; (ii) both functions $`r(l)>0`$ and $`\gamma (l)`$ should be smooth (at least $`C^2`$) in the whole range $`l`$. This guarantees the absence of curvature singularities and horizons (the latter correspond to $`\gamma \mathrm{}`$ which is ruled out). This also means that $`r(l)`$ should have at least one regular minimum, $`r_{\mathrm{min}}>0`$ (throat), at some value of $`l`$. Moreover, returning to functions of $`r`$, we see that at a flat asymptotic $`\mathrm{e}^\alpha 1`$ and $`f(r)r`$.

Suppose, without loss of generality, that a minimum of $`r(l)`$, that is, a wormhole throat, is located at $`l=0`$. Then $`r(0)=r_0>0`$, $`r_l(0)=0`$ and (generically) $`r_{ll}(0)>0`$, where the subscript $`l`$ denotes $`d/dl`$. Near $`l=0`$ one has $`rr_0l^2`$, hence the metric function $`\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha (r)}`$ behaves as $`(rr_0)^1`$, and $`f(r)=r\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }rr_0`$. In other words, a simple zero of $`f(r)`$ is an indicator of a wormhole throat provided $`\gamma (r)`$ is smooth and finite at the same $`r`$.

On the other hand, the derivative $`\gamma _l(0)`$ may be zero (which is always the case if the wormhole is symmetric with respect to the throat) or nonzero. If $`\gamma _l(0)=0`$, we shall have $`\gamma _r(r_0)<\mathrm{}`$. If, on the contrary, $`\gamma _l(0)0`$, then near $`r_0`$ we have $`\gamma _r1/|l|\sqrt{rr_0}`$, so that

$$\gamma (r)\gamma (r_0)+k\sqrt{rr_0},k>0.$$
(11)
We cannot put $`k<0`$ since then we would obtain the expression $`2+r\gamma _r`$ ranging from 2 (at spatial infinity) to $`\mathrm{}`$ at $`r=r_0`$, so that $`2+r\gamma _r`$ would vanish at some $`r>r_0`$ causing a singularity in (8).

We are now ready to single out a class of symmetric wormhole metrics (W1) and a class of potentially asymmetric wormhole metrics (W2) on the basis of the solution (8).

W1. Specify the function $`\gamma (r)`$, smooth in the range $`r_0r<\mathrm{}`$, $`r_0>0`$, in such a way that $`\gamma (\mathrm{})=0`$, $`\gamma _r(r_0)<\mathrm{}`$, and $`2+r\gamma _r>0`$ in the whole range. Fix the integration constant in (8) by performing integration from $`r_0`$ to $`r`$. Then these $`\gamma (r)`$ and $`f(r)`$ determine a wormhole which has a throat at $`r=r_0`$ and is symmetric with respect to it.

Indeed, by construction, $`f(r)rr_0`$ near $`r_0`$. Introducing the new coordinate $`x`$ by the relation $`r=r_0+x^2`$, we have $`\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }dr^2(rr_0)^1dr^2=4dx^2`$, which leads to a perfectly regular metric whose all coefficients are even functions of $`x`$. Both $`x+\mathrm{}`$ and $`x\mathrm{}`$ are flat asymptotics.

Each $`\gamma (r)`$ chosen as prescribed creates a family of symmetric wormholes with zero scalar curvature. The family is parametrized by the throat radius $`r_0`$, taking arbitrary values in the range where $`\gamma (r)`$ is regular and $`2+r\gamma _r>0`$.

Another procedure is applicable to functions $`\gamma (r)`$ behaving according to Eq. (11).

W2-a. Specify the function $`\gamma (r)`$, smooth in the range $`r_0r<\mathrm{}`$, $`r_0>0`$, such that $`\gamma (\mathrm{})=0`$, $`2+r\gamma _r>0`$ in the whole range, and Eq. (11) holds near $`r_0`$. Then, for proper values of the integration constant in (8), the sphere $`r=r_0`$ is a wormhole throat, and the solution is smoothly continued beyond it.

Indeed, the solution (8) may be rewritten as follows:

$$f(r)=\frac{\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma +3\mathrm{\Gamma }}}{(1+\frac{1}{2}r\gamma _r)^2}\left[_{r_0}^r(1+\frac{1}{2}r\gamma _r)\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma 3\mathrm{\Gamma }}𝑑r+C\right]$$
(12)
Suppose $`C>0`$. Then $`f(r)`$ behaves near $`r_0`$ as $`rr_0=:x^2`$, while $`\gamma =\gamma (r_0)+kx+O(x^2)`$. The metric smoothly behaves at $`r=r_0`$ ($`x=0`$) in terms of the new coordinate $`x`$ and can be continued through this sphere. One cannot, however, guarantee that this continuation will lead to another flat spatial infinity to yield an asymmetic wormhole, since the further behavior of $`\gamma (x)`$ and $`f(x)`$ may lead to a horizon or to a singularity.

If we choose $`C0`$ in (12), we obtain two other situations:

W2-b. If $`C<0`$, then $`f(r_0)<0`$; recalling that $`fr`$ at large $`r`$, we see that $`f(r)=0`$ at some value $`r=r_1>r_0`$, where $`\gamma _r`$ is finite, and we return to the circumstances described as W1, obtaining a symmetric wormhole with $`rr_1`$, and the sphere $`r=r_1`$ is its throat.

W2-c. If $`C=0`$, then near $`r_0`$ we obtain $`f(r)(rr_0)^{3/2}`$, and the metric is regularized at $`r=r_0`$ by another substitution: $`rr_0=\xi ^4`$. As a result, Eq. (11) yields

$$\gamma =\gamma (r_0)+k\xi ^2+\text{further even powers of}\xi ,$$

and we again obtain a symmetric wormhole, but now with a quartic behavior of $`r`$ near its minimum as a function of the admissible coordinate $`\xi `$.

## III Examples

We will present expressions for the metric functions $`\gamma `$ and $`f`$, the effective “tidal” energy density $`\rho `$ and the sum $`\rho +p_{\mathrm{rad}}`$, which characterizes violation of the null energy condition (for static, spherically symmetric systems this condition reduces to $`\rho +p_{\mathrm{rad}}0`$).

We use the time scale of a remote observer at rest and so always assume that $`\mathrm{e}^\gamma 1`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$.

1. The simplest example is obtained for $`\gamma 0`$. Choosing any $`r_0>0`$ and applying the W1 algorithm of Sec. 2, we simply obtain $`f(r)=rr_0`$. This is a symmetric wormhole solution known as the spatial Schwarzschild geometry dadh :

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`dt^2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_0}}\right)^1dr^2r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`dt^24(r_0+x^2)dx^2(r_0+x^2)^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2.`$
The effective SET $`E_\mu ^\nu `$ has the form $`T_\mu ^\nu =diag(0,p_r,p_r/2,p_r/2)`$ with the radial pressure

$$p_r=r_0/r^3.$$
(14)
2. Our next example uses the Schwarzschild form of $`\gamma `$:

$$\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma }=1\frac{2m}{r},m>0.$$
(15)
Choosing any $`r_0>2m`$, we obtain according to the W1 prescription:

$`f(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(r2m)(rr_0)}{r3m/2}},`$ (16)
$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2m}{r}}\right)dt^2{\displaystyle \frac{\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{3m}{2r}}\right)dr^2}{\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2m}{r}}\right)\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{r}}\right)}}r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$ (17)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{x^2+r_02m}{r_0+x^2}}dt^2`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{4(r_0+x^2)(r_0+x^2\frac{3}{2}m)}{x^2+r_02m}}dx^2(x^2+r_0)^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2.`$
This is evidently a symmetric wormhole geometry for any $`r_0>2m0`$, or for any $`r_0>0`$ in case $`m<0`$. The Schwarzschild metric is restored from (LABEL:wh2) in the special case $`r_0=3m/2`$.

The SET components of interest are

$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m(r_0\frac{3}{2}m)}{2r^2(r\frac{3}{2}m)^2}};`$
$`\rho +p_{\mathrm{rad}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(r2m)(r_0\frac{3}{2}m)}{r^2(r\frac{3}{2}m)^2}}.`$ (18)
The metric (LABEL:wh2) was obtained by Casadio, Fabbri and Mazzacurati casad01  in search for new brane-world black holes and by Germani and Maartens maart01  as a possible external metric of a homogeneous star on the brane, but the existence of traversable wormhole solutions for $`r_0>2m`$ (in the present notations) was not mentioned. It was supposed in casad01  that the post-Newtonian parameters of the metric must be close to their Einstein values for experimental reasons and therefore restricted their study to configurations close to Schwarzschild. Then $`r_0`$ must be close to $`3m/2`$. In this case, as in the Schwarzschild metric, $`r=2m`$ is an event horizon, but, according to casad01 , the space-time structure depends on the sign of $`\eta =r_03m/2`$. If $`\eta <0`$, the structure is that of a Schwarzschild black hole, but the curvature singularity is located at $`r=3m/2`$ instead of $`r=0`$. If $`\eta >0`$, the solution describes a nonsingular black hole with a wormhole throat at $`r=r_0`$ inside the horizon, in other words, a non-traversable wormhole casad01 .

We would here remark that, in our view, such hypothetic objects as brane-world black holes or wormholes, not necessarily of astrophysical size, need not necessarily conform to the restrictions on the post-Newtonian parameters obtained from the Solar system and binary pulsar observations, and it therefore makes sense to discuss the full range of parameters which are present in the solutions.

3. Consider the extreme Reissner-Nordström form of $`\gamma (r)`$:

$$\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma }=\left(1\frac{2m}{r}\right)^2,m>0.$$
(19)
The W1 procedure now leads to

$$f(r)=\frac{(rr_0)(rr_1)}{r},r_1\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=}\frac{mr_0}{r_0m};$$
(20)
$`ds^2=\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2m}{r}}\right)^2dt^2{\displaystyle \frac{r^2dr^2}{(rr_0)(rr_1)}}r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$
$`=\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2m}{r_0+x^2}}\right)^2dt^24{\displaystyle \frac{(r_0+x^2)^2dx^2}{r_0r_1+x^2}}(r_0+x^2)d\mathrm{\Omega }^2.`$
where we assume $`r_0>2m`$, so that $`r_1<r_0`$. This is a symmetric wormhole metric. The SET components of interest are

$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{mr_0^2}{r^4(r_0m)}},`$
$`\rho +p_{\mathrm{rad}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(r_02m)^2}{r^2(r2m)(r_0m))}}.`$ (22)
In the solution (20), $`r_0`$ may be regarded as an integration constant, so it is of interest what happens if $`r_02m`$. Evidently, $`r_0=2m`$ leads to the extreme Reissner-Nordström black hole metric (which is well known to possess a zero Ricci scalar, as does the general Reissner-Nordström metric). In case $`2m>r_0>m`$, we have $`r_1>2m`$, and we again obtain a symmetric wormhole, but now $`r`$ ranges from $`r_1`$ to infinity and $`r=r_1`$ is the throat. Actually, $`r_0`$ and $`r_1`$ exchange their roles as compared with the case $`r_0>2m`$. This property was expected due to symmetry between $`r_0`$ and $`r_1`$ in the metric (III).

The value $`r_0=m`$ is meaningless. Lastly, $`r_0<m`$ leads either to $`r_1<0`$ (for $`r_00`$) or to $`0<r_1<2m`$ (for $`r_0<0`$). The solution exists in both cases for $`r>2m`$ only, and $`r=2m`$ turns out to be a naked singularity, as is confirmed by calculating the Kretschmann scalar.

4. Consider an example belonging to class W2 described in the previous section. Namely, let us choose

$`\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma }=\left(1b+b\sqrt{12m/r}\right)^2,`$ (23)
with $`b=\mathrm{const}0`$. The special cases $`b=0`$ and $`b=1`$ nave been already discussed in Examples 1 and 2, respectively. The form (23) of $`\mathrm{e}^{\gamma (r)}`$ has been found dadh ; camera02 ; casad01  by solving the equation $`R=0`$ under the condition that the energy density $`T_0^0`$ is zero, whence it followed that $`\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }=12m/r`$, and, in our notation, $`f(r)=r2m`$. Note that the Schwarzschild mass, found from the large $`r`$ behavior of $`\gamma (r)`$, is equal to $`bm`$ rather than $`m`$.

Knowing that $`f(r)=r2m`$ is a special solution to the inhomogeneous equation (7) with $`\gamma (r)`$ given by (23), we can make easier the integration in (8) by writing the solution as $`f(r)=2rm+f_1(r)`$ where $`f_1`$ is a general solution to the corresponding homogeneous equation. We obtain

$`f(r)=r2m+C{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma +3\mathrm{\Gamma }}}{(2+r\gamma _r)^2}},`$ (24)
where $`C_1=\mathrm{const}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has been defined in (9). The form of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)`$ depends on the constant $`c\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=}2(1b)/b`$ (the case $`b=0`$ is excluded):

$`\mathrm{e}^{3\mathrm{\Gamma }}=`$
$`\{\begin{array}{cc}(1+2cv+3v^2)\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2c}{c^{}}}\mathrm{arctan}{\displaystyle \frac{c+3v}{c^{}}}\right],\hfill & c<\sqrt{3};\hfill \\ (1+\sqrt{3}v)^2\mathrm{exp}\left[2/(1+\sqrt{3}v)\right]\hfill & c=\sqrt{3};\hfill \\ (1+2cv+3v^2)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{c+3v+c^{}}{c+3vc^{}}}\right]^{c/c^{}},\hfill & c>\sqrt{3},\hfill \end{array}`$ (28)
where we have denoted

$$c^{}=\sqrt{|c^23|},v=\sqrt{1\frac{2m}{r}}.$$
(30)
For all three cases in (28), depending on the integration constant $`C_1`$, one can single out the behaviors of classes W2-a, W2-b and W2-c (in their description in Sec. 2 one should substitute $`r_0=2m`$). The critical value of $`C_1`$, corresponding to $`C=0`$ in Eq. (12), is

$$C_{1\mathrm{c}\mathrm{r}}=2m\mathrm{e}^{3\mathrm{\Gamma }}|_{v=0}.$$
(31)
It corresponds to integration in Eq. (8) from $`r_0`$ to $`r`$, and the solution then belongs to class W2-c, a symmetric wormhole with a quartic dependence of $`r`$ on the admissible coordinate $`\xi `$.

The case $`C_1<C_{1\mathrm{c}\mathrm{r}}`$ corresponds to integration in (8) from some $`C_1`$-dependent radius $`r_1>2m`$ to $`r`$, and the solution belongs to type W2-b equivalent to W1: a symmetric wormhole with an arbitrary throat radius $`r_1>2m`$. We will not write down the full cumbersome expressions for the metric for $`C_1C_{1\mathrm{c}\mathrm{r}}`$ since the qualitative properties of the solutions are already clear.

Of greater interest are solutions with $`C_1>C_{1\mathrm{c}\mathrm{r}}`$, for which $`r=2m`$ is an asymmetric throat \[class W2-a\]. This is the only class in which the metric continued beyond the throat behaves “individually”, i.e., depends on the specific choice of $`\gamma (r)`$ and $`C_1`$ rather than follows the above general description.

A good coordinate for passing the throat $`r=2m`$, more convenient than the previously used coordinate $`x`$, is $`v`$ defined in (30). We have $`r(v)=2m/(1v^2)`$; the original spatial asymptotic corresponds to $`v=1`$, the throat is located at $`v=0`$, and another spatial asymptotic can be located at $`v=1`$ if the metric avoids singularities on the way to it. Let us find out whether it is the case.

The requirement $`\mathrm{e}^\gamma >0`$ at $`v1`$ leads to $`b<1/2`$, hence $`c>2`$, and we are left with the third line in the expression (28) for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(v)`$. Then the metric coefficient $`g_{vv}`$ is given by

$`g_{vv}={\displaystyle \frac{16m^2}{(1v^2)^2}}`$
$`\times [1+C_1{\displaystyle \frac{1v^2}{6m}}(vv_{})^{3v_{}/c^{}}(vv_+)^{3v_+/c^{}}]^1,`$ (32)
where $`v_\pm `$ are roots of the trinomial $`P(v)=3v^2+2cv+1`$:

$$v_\pm =\frac{1}{3}\left(c\pm \sqrt{c^23}\right)=\frac{1}{3}(c\pm c^{}).$$

For $`c>2`$, we have $`v_{}<1`$ whereas the other root $`v_+`$ lies between 0 and -1. On the other hand, $`3v_+/c^{}`$, i.e., the exponent of the binomial $`(vv_+)`$ in (III), is a number between 0 and 1. Therefore $`g_{vv}`$ is finite at $`v=v_+`$ but has an infinite derivative with respect to $`v`$. Transforming back to $`r`$ (for $`v<0`$, the transformation is $`v=\sqrt{12m/r}`$), we observe that the metric coefficient $`g_{rr}=e^{2\alpha }`$ \[see (2)\] is singular at $`r=r_+=2m/(1v_+)^2`$. More precisely, $`\mathrm{e}^{2\alpha }`$ is finite but contains a term proportional to $`(rr_+)^k`$ where $`0<k<1`$, hence $`\alpha _r(rr_+)^{k1}\mathrm{}`$, and the Kretschman scalar (6) blows up due to the divergence of its constituents $`K_1`$ and $`K_3`$.

We conclude that, under the choice (23) of $`\gamma (r)`$, the class of solutions (W2-a) does not contain wormhole solutions. Having passed the throat at $`r=2m`$ ($`v=0`$), we ultimately arrive at a singularity or maybe a horizon, which is not excluded in case $`b>1/2`$.

An exception is the case $`C_1=0`$, when we return to the solution known from Refs. dadh ; camera02 ; casad01 , which has been described at length in these papers. We will only mention the main points in our notations. The metric in terms of $`v`$ is

$$ds^2=(1b+bv)^2dt^2\frac{16m^2}{(1v^2)^4}dv^2\frac{4m^2}{(1v^2)^2}d\mathrm{\Omega }^2.$$
(33)
In case $`b=1`$ it is another form of the Schwarzschild metric. For $`b>1/2`$ but $`b1`$, the sphere $`v=(b1)/b`$ is a naked singularity, as may be concluded from the fact that $`\gamma _r\mathrm{}`$ while $`\alpha `$ and $`r`$ are finite, hence the quantity $`K_2`$ in (6) blows up. This singularity is located at positive $`v`$, i.e., before reaching the throat $`v=0`$, if $`b>1`$ and at negative $`v`$, beyond the throat, if $`b<1`$. Note that for $`v<0`$ we have in the curvature coordinates $`g_{tt}=\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma }=1bb\sqrt{12m/r}`$.

In case $`b<1/2`$ the metric (33) describes an asymmetric wormhole even having different signs of mass at its two flat asymptotics: the mass is equal to $`bm`$ at $`v=1`$ and to $`bm/(12b)`$ at $`v=1`$.

Lastly, if $`b=1/2`$, then $`v=1`$ is a horizon having an infinite area and zero Hawking temperature, like the previously described cold black holes in scalar-tensor theories of gravity cold . The spatial part of the metric is flat at $`v1`$. Moreover, as is directly verified, the canonical parameter for timelike, spacelike or null geodesics takes an infinite value at at $`v=1`$, which means that this space-time is geodesically complete (as are wormhole space-times), and no further continuation is required.

## IV Concluding remarks

We have seen that the equation $`R=0`$ leads to a great number of wormhole solutions. Symmetric wormhole solutions of class W1 can be obtained from any $`\gamma (r)`$ providing asymptotic flatness; asymmetric wormhole solutions belonging to class W2-a require somewhat more special conditions. As follows from Examples 1-3, wormholes are not always connected with negative (effective) energy densities $`\rho `$; they can appear with $`\rho >0`$, but only with comparatively large negative pressures maintaining violation of the null energy condition. Example 3 shows that, for given $`\gamma (r)`$, sometimes even more wormhole solutions can be obtained than was expected in search for class W1 solutions. Example 4 shows that asymmetric wormholes are more difficult to obtain from the general solution (8) than symmetric ones.

Black-hole solutions can also be obtained from (8) but under more restrictive conditions. Indeed, given a specific function $`\mathrm{e}^{\gamma (r)}`$ increasing from zero at some $`r=r_h`$ to 1 at $`r=\mathrm{}`$, a wormhole solution to $`R=0`$ can be obtained with a throat at any $`r>r_h`$ whereas in a black hole solution the event horizon is fixed at $`r=r_h`$. Positive functions $`\mathrm{e}^{\gamma (r)}`$ lead to numerous wormhole solutions but not black hole ones. Thus, roughly speaking, wormholes as solutions to $`R=0`$ are more numerous than black holes.

All this referred to metrics satisfying the condition $`R=0`$ in 4 dimensions, which admits an interpretation as the brane metric. It has been claimed that “any 4-dimensional space-time with $`R=0`$ gives rise to a 3-brane world without surface stresses embedded in a 5-dimensional space-time” voll02b  since the embedding contains a very significant arbitrariness. Nevertheless, a complete model requires knowledge of the full 5-dimensional space-time. In other words, one should “evolve” the 4-metric into the bulk, using this 4-matric as initial data for the 5-dimensional equations. It is rather a difficult task, as was demonstrated in a study of particular black hole solutions in Refs. chamb01 ; casad02 . There are, however, two favorable circumstances. One is the wealth of wormhole solutions: there is actually an arbitrary function $`\gamma (r)`$ leading to wormholes on the brane, which must in turn lead to a wide choice of suitable bulk functions. The other is the global regularity of wormhole space-times, and one can expect that the bulk incorporating them will also be regular. (It may be recalled that it was the singular nature of black hole solutions that caused some technical difficulties in Ref. chamb01 .) We hope that it will be possible to obtain meaningful complete wormhole models within the brane world concept; the work is in progress.

### Acknowledgment

The work was supported in part by grant No. R01-2000-000-00015-0 from the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation and in part by Asia Pacific Center for Theoretical Physics. KB is grateful to the colleagues from Ewha Womans University, Seoul, for kind hospitality during his stay in October-November 2002.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Despite the lack of direct experimental evidence111The current experimental status of low-energy supersummetry is discussed in . for supersymmetry (SUSY), the concept of symmetry between bosons and fermions has so many attractive features that the supersymmetric extension of the Standard Model is widely considered as a most natural scenario. It protects the electroweak scale from destabilizing divergences, leads to the unification of gauge couplings, accommodates a large top quark mass, provides a natural candidate for dark matter, and decouples from precision measurements. Exact supersymmetry is a fully predictive framework: to each known particle it predicts the existence of its superpartner which differs in the spin quantum number by 1/2, and fixes their couplings without introducing new parameters. Thus the Minimal Supersymmetric extension of the Standard Model (MSSM) encompasses spin 1/2 partners of the gauge and Higgs bosons, called gauginos and higgsinos, and spin 0 companions of leptons and quarks, called sleptons and squarks.

If realized in nature, supersymmetry (SUSY) must be a broken symmetry since until now none of the superpartners have been found. The construction of a viable mechanism of SUSY breaking, however, is a difficult issue. It is impossible to construct a realistic breaking scenario with the particle content of the MSSM . Therefore the origin of SUSY breaking is usually assumed to take place in a “hidden sector” of particles which have no direct couplings to the MSSM particles and the supersymmetry breaking is “mediated” from the hidden to the visible sector. This opens up a variety of possible scenarios of SUSY breaking and its mediation, and in fact many models have been proposed: gravity-mediated, gauge-mediated, anomaly-mediated, gaugino-mediated etc. Each model is characterized by a few parameters (usually defined at a high scale) and leads to different phenomenological consequences.

With all the different SUSY models proposed in the past, the best is to keep an open mind and parameterize the breaking of SUSY by the most general explicit breaking terms in the Lagrangian. The structure of the breaking terms is constrained by the gauge symmetry and the requirement of stabilization against radiative corrections from higher scales. This leads to a set of soft-breaking terms , which include
(i) gaugino mass terms for bino $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$, wino $`\stackrel{~}{W}^j`$ $`[j=`$1–3\] and gluino $`\stackrel{~}{g}^i`$ $`[i=`$1–8\]

$$\frac{1}{2}M_1\overline{\stackrel{~}{B}}\stackrel{~}{B}+\frac{1}{2}M_2\overline{\stackrel{~}{W}}^i\stackrel{~}{W}^i+\frac{1}{2}M_3\overline{\stackrel{~}{g}}^i\stackrel{~}{g}^i,$$
(1)
(ii) trilinear ($`A^i`$) and bilinear ($`B`$) scalar couplings (generation indices are understood)

$$A_uH_2\stackrel{~}{Q}\stackrel{~}{u}^c+A_dH_1\stackrel{~}{Q}\stackrel{~}{d}^c+A_lH_1\stackrel{~}{L}\stackrel{~}{l}^c\mu BH_1H_2$$
(2)
(iii) and squark and slepton mass terms

$$m_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}^2[\stackrel{~}{u}_L^{}\stackrel{~}{u}_L+\stackrel{~}{d}_L^{}\stackrel{~}{d}_L]+m_{\stackrel{~}{u}}^2\stackrel{~}{u}_R^{}\stackrel{~}{u}_R+m_{\stackrel{~}{d}}^2\stackrel{~}{d}_R^{}\stackrel{~}{d}_R+\mathrm{}$$
(3)
where the ellipses stand for the soft mass terms for sleptons and Higgs bosons (tilde denotes the superpartner). The above parameters can be complex with nontrivial CP violating phases . The stability of quantum corrections implies that at least some of the superpartners should be relatively light, with masses around 1 TeV, and thus within the reach of present or next generation of high-energy colliders.

As a consequence of the most general soft-breaking terms, a large number of parameters is introduced. The unconstrained low-energy MSSM has some 100 parameters resulting in a rich spectroscopy of states and complex phenomenology of their interactions. One should realize, that the low-energy parameters are of two distinct categories. The first one includes all the gauge and Yukawa couplings and the higgsino mass parameter $`\mu `$. They are related by exact supersymmetry which is crucial for the cancellation of quadratic divergences. For example, at tree-level the $`qqZ`$, $`\stackrel{~}{q}\stackrel{~}{q}Z`$ gauge and $`q\stackrel{~}{q}\stackrel{~}{Z}`$ Yukawa couplings have to be equal. The relations among these parameters (with calculable radiative corrections) have to be confirmed experimentally; if not – the supersymmetry is excluded. The second category encompasses all soft-supersymmetry breaking parameters: higgsino, gaugino and sfermion masses and mixing, and the trilinear couplings.

If supersymmetry is detected at a future collider it will be a matter of days to discover all kinetically accessible supersymmetric particles. However, it will be an enormous task to investigate the masses, couplings and quantum numbers of the superpartners and many measurements and considerable ingenuity will be needed to reconstruct a complete low-energy theory. The experimental program to search for and explore SUSY at present and future colliders has to include the following points:
(a) discover supersymmetric particles and measure their quantum numbers to prove
that they are the superpartners of standard particles,
(b) measure their masses, mixing angles and couplings,
(c) determine the low-energy Lagrangian parameters,
(d) verify the relations among them in order to distinguish between various SUSY
breaking models.

It is important to realize that all low-energy SUSY parameters should be measured independently of any theoretical assumptions. In this respect the concept of a high-energy $`e^+e^{}`$ linear collider  is of particular interest since it opens up a possibility of precision measurements of supersymmetric particle properties. An intense activity during last few years on $`e^+e^{}`$ collider physics has convincingly demonstrated the advantages and benefits of such a machine and its complementarity to the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Many studies have shown that the LHC can cover a mass range for SUSY particles up to $``$ 2 TeV, in particular for squarks and gluinos . Early indication of SUSY can be provided by an excess in $`M_{eff}=E_{miss}^T+p_1^T+p_2^T+\mathrm{}`$, an example is shown in Fig.1, where $`E_{miss}^T`$ is due to the stable lightest SUSY particles (LSP) escaping detection, and $`p_i^T`$ are transverse momenta of jets. Sparticles from squark and gluino decays can be accessed if the SUSY decays are distinctive. The problem however is that many different sparticles will be accessed at once with the heavier ones cascading into the lighter which will in turn cascade further leading to a complicated picture. Simulations for the extraction of parameters have been attempted for the LHC and demonstrated that some of them can be extracted with a good precision. Identifying particular decay channels and measuring the endpoints, for example in the dilepton invariant mass as shown in Fig.1, the mass differences of SUSY particles can be determined very precisely. If enough channels are identified and measured, the masses can be determined without any model assumptions. With a large amount of information available from the production of squarks and gluinos and their main decay products, theoretical interpretation can be possible in favorable models.

But if all proposed theoretical models of the SUSY breaking turn out to be wrong, the concurrent running of an $`e^+e^{}`$ LC will be very much welcome. It will provide information complementary to that from the LHC. Thanks to
$``$ clean final state environment,
$``$ tunable energy,
$``$ polarized incoming beams,
$``$ and a possibility of additional modes: $`e^{}e^{}`$, $`e\gamma `$ and $`\gamma \gamma `$
precise determination of masses, couplings, quantum numbers, mixing angles and CP phases will be possible at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders. As I will illustrate with some examples below, this will allow us a model independent reconstruction of the low-energy SUSY parameters to be performed and, hopefully, connect the low-scale phenomenology with the high-scale physics .

## 2 Reconstruction of low-energy SUSY parameters

In contrast to many earlier analyzes, we will not elaborate on global fits but rather we will discuss attempts at “measuring” the fundamental Lagrangian parameters. Generically such attempts are performed in two steps
$`A`$: from the observed quantities: cross sections, asymmetries etc. determine the
physical parameters: the masses, mixing and couplings of sparticles,
$`B`$: from the physical parameters extract the Lagrangian parameters: $`M_i`$, $`\mu `$, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$,
$`A^u`$, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}`$ etc.

To deal with so many parameters, a clear strategy is needed. An attractive possibility would be to
$``$ start with charginos which depend only on $`M_2`$, $`\mu `$, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$,
$``$ add neutralinos which depend in addition on $`M_1`$,
$``$ include sleptons which bring in $`m_{\stackrel{~}{l}}`$, $`A_l`$,
$``$ and finally squarks and gluinos to determine $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$, $`A_q`$ and $`M_3`$
to reconstruct at tree level the basic structure of SUSY Lagrangian. In reality it might be difficult to separate a specific sector (e.g. sleptons enter via t-channel in the chargino production processes), many production channels can simultaneously be open, and SUSY constitutes an important background to SUSY processes. In addition sizable loop corrections will mix all sectors. Precision measurements will require loop corrections to the masses and mixing angles, the finite decay width effects and loop corrections to the production and decay processes to be included for final global analyzes of all data. Some one-loop results are already available: for the current status we refer to .

### 2.1 The chargino sector

The mass matrix of the wino and charged higgsino, after the gauge symmetry breaking, is nondiagonal

$`_C=\left(\begin{array}{cc}M_2& \sqrt{2}m_W\mathrm{cos}\beta \\ \sqrt{2}m_W\mathrm{sin}\beta & |\mu |\mathrm{e}^{i\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu }\end{array}\right)`$ (6)
It can be diagonalized by two unitary matrices acting on left- and right-chiral states

$`U_L=\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_L& s_L^{}\\ s_L& c_L\end{array}\right),U_R=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{e}^{i\gamma _1}& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{e}^{i\gamma _2}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_R& s_R^{}\\ s_R& c_R\end{array}\right)`$ (13)
with $`c_{L,R}=\mathrm{cos}\varphi _{L,R}`$, $`s_{L,R}=\mathrm{e}^{i\beta _{L,R}}\mathrm{sin}\varphi _{L,R}`$, which involve two mixing angles $`\varphi _{L,R}`$ and three CP phases $`\beta _{L,R}`$ and $`\gamma _1\gamma _2`$ The mass eigenstates, called charginos, are mixtures of wino and higgsino with the masses and mixing angles given by

$`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{1,2}^\pm }^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[M_2^2+|\mu |^2+2m_W^2\mathrm{\Delta }_C\right]`$ (14)
$`\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _{L,R}=\left[M_2^2|\mu |^22m_W^2\mathrm{cos}2\beta \right]/\mathrm{\Delta }_C`$ (15)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_C=[(M_2^2|\mu |^2)^2+4m_W^4\mathrm{cos}^22\beta +4m_W^2(M_2^2+|\mu |^2)+8m_W^2M_2|\mu |\mathrm{sin}2\beta \mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu ]^{1/2}`$. Experimentally the chargino masses can be measured very precisely either by threshold scans or in continuum above the threshold . Since the chargino production cross sections are simple binomials of $`\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _{L,R}`$, see Fig.2, the mixing angles can be determined in a model independent way using polarized electron beams .

Based on this high-precision information, the fundamental SUSY parameters can be extracted in analytic form. Inverting eqs.(14,15) one finds to lowest order:

$`M_2`$ $`=`$ $`M_W[\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{\Delta }[\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _R+\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _L]]^{1/2}`$ (16)
$`\left|\mu \right|`$ $`=`$ $`M_W[\mathrm{\Sigma }+\mathrm{\Delta }[\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _R+\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _L]]^{1/2}`$ (17)
$`\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`[\mathrm{\Delta }^2(M_2^2\mu ^2)^24m_W^2(M_2^2+\mu ^2)`$ (18)
$`4m_W^4\mathrm{cos}^22\beta ]/8m_W^2M_2|\mu |\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$
$`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ $`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1+\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _R\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _L)}{1\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _R\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _L)}}\right]^{1/2}`$ (19)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_C/4M_W^2==(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm }^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm }^2)/4M_W^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm }^2+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm }^2)/2M_W^21`$.

If both $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm }`$ and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm }`$ can be measured, the fundamental parameters (16-19) can be extracted unambiguously. However, if $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm `$ happens to be beyond the kinematical reach at an early stage of the LC, it depends on the CP properties of the higgsino sector whether they can be determined or not in the light chargino system alone

(i) If the higgsino sector is CP invariant, $`\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu =\pm 1`$ can be exploited to determine $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm }`$ up to at most a two–fold ambiguity. This ambiguity can be resolved if other observables can be measured, e.g. the mixed–pair $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^0`$ production cross sections.

(ii) In a CP non–invariant theory the parameters in eqs.(1619) remain dependent on the unknown heavy chargino mass $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm }`$. Two trajectories in the plane $`[\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _L,\mathrm{cos}2\varphi _R]`$ are generated (and consequently in the $`\{M_2,\mu ;\mathrm{tan}\beta \}`$ space), parametrized by $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm }`$ and classified by the two possible signs of $`\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu `$. The analysis of the two light neutralino states $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^0`$ can be used to predict the heavy chargino mass $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm }`$ in the MSSM. Therefore we will now discuss

### 2.2 The neutralino sector

The mass matrix of the $`(\stackrel{~}{B},\stackrel{~}{W}^3,\stackrel{~}{H}_1^0,\stackrel{~}{H}_2^0)`$ is symmetric but nondiagonal

$`M_N=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}M_1& 0& m_Zc_\beta s_W& m_Zs_\beta s_W\\ 0& M_2& m_Zc_\beta c_W& m_Zs_\beta c_W\\ m_Zc_\beta s_W& m_Zc_\beta c_W& 0& \mu \\ m_Zs_\beta s_W& m_Zs_\beta c_W& \mu & 0\end{array}\right)`$ (24)
where $`M_1=|M_1|\mathrm{e}^{i\mathrm{\Phi }_1}`$, $`\mu =|\mu |\mathrm{e}^{i\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu }`$. The mass eigenstates, neutralinos, are obtained by the $`4\times 4`$ diagonalization matrix $`N`$, which is parameterized by 6 angles and 10 phases as

$`N`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗀}\{\mathrm{e}^{i\alpha _1},\mathrm{e}^{i\alpha _2},\mathrm{e}^{i\alpha _3},\mathrm{e}^{i\alpha _4}\}𝖱_{34}𝖱_{24}𝖱_{14}𝖱_{23}𝖱_{13}𝖱_{12}`$ (25)
where $`𝖱_{jk}`$ are $`4\times 4`$ matrices describing 2-dim complex rotations in the {jk} plane (of the form analogous to $`U_L`$ in eq.(13) and defined in terms of ($`cos\theta _{jk}`$, $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{jk}\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _{jk}})`$).

The CP is conserved in the neutralino sector if $`\delta _{ij}=0`$ and $`\alpha _i=0`$. The unitarity constraints can conveniently be formulated in terms of unitarity quadrangles built up by
$``$ the links $`N_{ik}N_{jk}^{}`$ connecting two rows $`i`$ and $`j`$
$``$ the links $`N_{ki}N_{kj}^{}`$ connecting two columns $`i`$ and $`j`$.
Unlike in the CKM or MNS cases of quark and lepton mixing, the orientation of all quadrangles is physical .

To resolve the light chargino case in the CP-violating scenario (ii), we note that each neutralino mass satisfies the characteristic equation

$`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_i^0}^8am_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_i^0}^6+bm_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_i^0}^4cm_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_i^0}^2+d=0`$ (26)
where $`a`$, $`b`$, $`c`$ and $`d`$ are binomials of $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{e}M_1`$ and $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{m}M_1`$. Therefore the equation for each $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_i^0}^2`$ has the form

$`(\mathrm{}\mathrm{e}M_1)^2+(\mathrm{}\mathrm{m}M_1)^2+u_i\mathrm{}\mathrm{e}M_1+v_i\mathrm{}\mathrm{m}M_1=w_i`$ (27)
i.e. each neutralino mass defines a circle in the $`\{\mathrm{}\mathrm{e}M_1,\mathrm{}\mathrm{m}M_1\}`$ plane. With two light neutralino masses two crossing points in the ($`\mathrm{}\mathrm{e}M_1`$, $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{m}M_1`$) plane are generated, as seen in the left panel of Fig.3.

Since from the chargino sector $`\{M_2,\mu \mathrm{tan}\beta \}`$ are parameterized by unknown $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm }`$, the crossing points will migrate with $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm }`$, right panel of Fig.3. One can use the measured cross section for $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^0`$ to select a unique solution for $`M_1`$ and predict the heavy chargino mass. If the LC runs concurrently with the LHC, the LHC experiments may be able to verify the predicted value of $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^\pm }`$.

If the machine energy is above the heavy charginos and neutralinos, one can
$``$ study the threshold behavior of non-diagonal neutralino pair production to check
for a clear signal of nontrivial CP phases,
$``$ measure the normal neutralino polarization which provides a unique probe of
$`\alpha _i`$ (Majorana) CP phases,
$``$ exploit the sum rules to verify the closure of the chargino and neutralino sectors,
$``$ analyze the SUSY relations between Yukawa and gauge couplings,
$``$ extract information on sleptons exchanged in the t-channels etc.
For more details, we refer to .

### 2.3  The sfermion sector

The sfermion mass matrix in the $`(\stackrel{~}{f}_L,\stackrel{~}{f}_R)`$ basis is given as

$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}M_{\stackrel{~}{F_L}}^2+m_Z^2\mathrm{cos}2\beta (I_{f_i}Q_f\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W)+m_f^2& m_f(A_f^{}\mu (\mathrm{cot}\beta )^{2I_f})\\ m_f(A_f\mu ^{}(\mathrm{cot}\beta )^{2I_f})& M_{\stackrel{~}{f_R}}^2m_Z^2Q_f\mathrm{cos}2\beta \mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W+m_f^2\end{array}\right)`$ (30)
where $`M_{\stackrel{~}{F_L}}^2`$, $`M_{\stackrel{~}{f_R}}^2`$ and $`A_f`$ are slepton soft SUSY breaking parameters. The mass eigenstates are defined

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{f}_1\\ \stackrel{~}{f_2}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{e}^{i\alpha _f}\mathrm{cos}\theta _f& \mathrm{sin}\theta _f\\ \mathrm{sin}\theta _f& \mathrm{e}^{i\alpha _f}\mathrm{cos}\theta _f\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{f}_L\\ \stackrel{~}{f_R}\end{array}\right)`$
The $`(\stackrel{~}{f}_L,\stackrel{~}{f}_R)`$ mixing is important if $`|m_{\stackrel{~}{f}_L}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{f}_R}^2||a_fm_f|`$. Therefore for the first and second generation sfermions the mixing is usually neglected.

The slepton masses can be measured at a high luminosity $`e^+e^{}`$ collider by scanning the pair production near threshold . Since the expected experimental accuracy is of $`𝒪(100)`$ MeV, it is necessary to incorporate effects beyond leading order in the theoretical predictions . The non-zero widths of the sleptons, which considerably affect the cross-sections near threshold, must be included in a gauge-invariant manner. This can be achieved by shifting the slepton mass into the complex plane, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{l}}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{f}}^2im_{\stackrel{~}{l}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\stackrel{~}{l}}`$. Moreover, for the production of off-shell sleptons the full $`24`$ matrix element, including the decay of the sleptons, must be taken into account as well as the MSSM background and interference contributions. One of the most important radiative corrections near threshold is the Coulomb rescattering correction due to photon exchange between the slowly moving sleptons. Beamstrahlung and ISR also play an important role. The production of smuons and staus proceeds via s-channel gauge-boson exchange, so that the sleptons are produced in a P-wave with a characteristic rise of the excitation curve $`\sigma \beta ^3`$, where $`\beta =\sqrt{14m_{\stackrel{~}{l}}^2/s}`$ is the slepton velocity. Due to the exchange of Majorana neutralinos in the t-channel, selectrons can also be produced in S-wave ($`\sigma \beta `$), namely for $`\stackrel{~}{e}_\mathrm{R}^\pm \stackrel{~}{e}_\mathrm{L}^{}`$ pairs in $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation and $`\stackrel{~}{e}_\mathrm{R}^{}\stackrel{~}{e}_\mathrm{R}^{},\stackrel{~}{e}_\mathrm{L}^{}\stackrel{~}{e}_\mathrm{L}^{}`$ pairs in $`e^{}e^{}`$ scattering.

Expectations for the R-selectron cross-sections at both collider modes are shown in Fig.4 with the background from both the SM and MSSM sources, reduced by appropriate cuts, included . Using five equidistant scan points, four free parameters, the mass, width, normalization and flat background contribution, can be fitted in a model-independent way.

In contrast to the first two generation sfermions, large mixing are expected between the left- and right-chiral components of the third generation sfermions due to the large Yukawa coupling. The mixing effects are thus sensitive to the Higgs parameters $`\mu `$ and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ as well as the trilinear couplings $`A_f`$ . For instance, by examining the polarization of the taus in the decay $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{1,2}^{}\tau _{\mathrm{L},\mathrm{R}}^{}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$, Fig. 5, a recent study within the MSSM  finds that $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ in the range of 30–40 can be determined with an error of about 10%.

Moreover, if $`A_\tau `$ or $`\mu `$ turn out to be complex, the phase of the off-diagonal term $`a_\tau m_\tau =(A_\tau \mu ^{}\mathrm{tan}\beta )m_\tau =|a_\tau m_\tau |\mathrm{e}^{i\mathrm{\Phi }_\tau }`$ modifies $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ properties. Although the best would be to determine the complex parameters by measuring suitable $`CP`$ violating observables, this is not straightforward, because the $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_i`$ are spinless and their main decay modes are two–body decays. However, the $`CP`$ conserving observables also depend on the phases.

For example, the various $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ decay branching ratios depend in a characteristic way on the complex phases . This is illustrated in Fig. 6.

The fit to the simulated experimental data with 2 ab-1 at a collider like TESLA shows that $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{m}A_\tau `$ and $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{e}A_\tau `$ can be determined with an error of order 10%.

Similarly, for the $`\stackrel{~}{t}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{b}`$ sectors, the $`LR`$ mixing can be important. By measuring the production cross sections with polarized beams the squark masses and mixing angles can be determined quite precisely , see Fig.7.

For more details on the sfermion sector, we refer to

## 3 Extrapolating to high-energy scale

Why we need high precision measurements? The Standard Model physics is characterized by energy scales of order 100 GeV. However we expect the origin of supersymmetry breaking at the high scale, near the Planck scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{PL}}10^{19}`$ GeV or the grand unification \[GUT\] scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{GUT}10^{16}`$ GeV. Information on physics near the Planck scale may become available from the well-controlled extrapolation of fundamental parameters measured with high precision at laboratory energies. Although such extrapolations exploiting renormalization group techniques extend over 13 to 16 orders of magnitude, they can be carried out in a stable way in supersymmetric theories . Such a procedure has very successfully been pursued for the three electroweak and strong gauge couplings providing the solid base of the grand unification hypothesis.

This method can be expanded to a large ensemble of the soft SUSY breaking parameters: gaugino and scalar masses, as well as trilinear couplings. Recently this procedure has been applied  to the minimal supergravity (with a naturally high degree of regularity near the grand unification scale) and confronted with the gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking GMSB, see Fig.8.

The basic structure in this approach is assumed to be essentially of desert type, although the existence of intermediate scales is not precluded. An interesting example, the left-right extension of mSUGRA incorporating the seesaw mechanism for the masses of right-handed neutrinos, as well as a string-inspired effective field theory example, can be found in .

This bottom-up approach, formulated by means of the renormalization group, makes use of the low-energy measurements to the maximum extent possible. Therefore high-quality experimental data are necessary in this context, that should become available by future lepton colliders, to reveal the fundamental theory at the high scale.

## 4 Conclusions

Data rules! We need them badly. The LHC will provide plenty of data, however, their theoretical interpretation will be possible in specific models. In this context the $`e^+e^{}`$ linear collider is very much welcome. Overlap of the LC running with the LHC would greatly help to perform critical tests: quantum numbers, masses, couplings etc. We have demonstrated that from the future high-precision data taken at $`e^+e^{}`$ linear colliders, TESLA in particular, and combined with results from LHC, and CLIC later, the low-energy parameters of the supersymmetric model can be determined. Then the bottom-up approach, by evolving the parameters from the low-energy scale to the high scale by means of renormalization group techniques, can be exploited to reconstruct the fundamental supersymmetry parameters at the high scale, GUT or Planck, providing a picture in a region where gravity is linked to particle physics, and superstring theory becomes effective directly.


text:
# Constructing and Deconstructing Group Actions

## 1. Introduction

In 1944 P. A. Smith proved  that if a finite group $`G`$ acts freely on a sphere, then all of its abelian subgroups must be cyclic. This condition is known to be equivalent to the *periodicity* of of the cohomology of $`G`$ with trivial integral coefficients–recall that the cohomology of $`G`$ is said to be periodic if there exists a $`d>0`$ such that $`H^i(G,)H^{i+d}(G,)`$ for all $`i>0`$. These groups are characterized by having generalized quaternion $`2`$–Sylow subgroups and cyclic $`p`$–Sylow subgroups for $`p`$ odd.

In 1957, Milnor  showed that there are restrictions on $`G`$ imposed by the geometry of the action: if $`G`$ acts freely on a sphere $`𝕊^n`$, then every involution in $`G`$ must be central. For example, the symmetric group on three letters $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_3`$ cannot act freely on any sphere, even though it has periodic cohomology. In 1960 Swan  showed that a converse of Smith’s result does hold for homotopy spheres; he proved that if $`G`$ has periodic cohomology then it acts freely on a finite complex $`X𝕊^n`$ for some $`n>0`$. After that there ensued substantial activity on the problem of spherical space forms, which culminated in 1976 with the solution due to Madsen, Thomas and Wall ; namely they proved that a finite group $`G`$ acts freely on some sphere $`𝕊^n`$ if and only if all of its abelian subgroups are cyclic and every element of order 2 in $`G`$ is central. In other words, the combination of Smith’s homological condition and Milnor’s geometric condition were enough to ensure the existence of a free action on a sphere.

Based on the above one can inquire about the analogous situation for groups which do not have periodic cohomology. In particular given such a group, can we construct a free action on a suitably *minimal* product of spheres? In this note we will survey aspects of this problem, and in particular describe recent substantial progress for groups which do not contain $`/p\times /p\times /p`$ as a subgroup.

## 2. Free Actions on a Product of Spheres

We can define the $`p`$–rank of a finite group $`G`$ as $`r_p(G)=max\{r|(/p)^rG\}`$ and its rank as $`r(G)=max\{r_p(G)|p\mathrm{divides}|\mathrm{G}|\}.`$ Smith’s pioneering work can be reformulated as saying that if a finite group $`G`$ acts freely on a finite complex $`X𝕊^n`$, then $`r(G)=1`$. Motivated by this and other evidence, the following rather difficult conjecture emerges:

###### Conjecture 2.1.

If $`G`$ acts freely on $`X=𝕊^{n_1}\times \mathrm{}\times 𝕊^{n_m}`$, then $`r(G)m`$.

This question has been settled in the affirmative for $`m=2`$ by Conner (in the equidimensional case ) and by Heller . Better general results exist for an arbitrary product of equidimensional spheres; we recall a result due to Adem and Browder .

###### Theorem 2.2.

If $`G`$ acts freely on a finite complex $`X(𝕊^n)^k`$, then $`r_p(G)k`$ for $`p`$ an odd prime. If $`p=2`$, then this holds for $`n1,3,7`$.

The homologically trivial case was completely settled by Carlsson , . More recently the result above was extended to the case $`p=2`$ and $`n=1`$ by Yalcin . The other cases remain intriguingly open. A geometrically interesting situation arises when the action of $`G`$ permutes a basis for the homology of the product of spheres. Here we have a stronger bound, expressed in the following result, due to Adem and Benson .

###### Theorem 2.3.

Let $`G`$ be an elementary abelian $`p`$-group of rank $`r`$ acting freely on a finite dimensional CW complex $`X(𝕊^n)^t`$ in such a way that the basis $`u_1,u_2,\mathrm{},u_t`$ of $`H^n(X,𝔽_p)`$ corresponding to the $`t`$ spheres is permuted by $`G`$. Then the number of orbits of $`G`$ on $`\{u_1,\mathrm{},u_t\}`$ is at least $`r`$.

From this we infer that if $`G`$ is an elementary abelian $`p`$ group acting freely on $`X=(𝕊^n)^k`$ and permuting the canonical basis, then $`r(G)dimH_n(X,𝔽_p)^G`$. Note that if $`p=2`$ and $`n1,3,7`$, then every action satisfies this hypothesis (by a Hopf invariant one argument, see ). We should also mention that Conjecture 2.1 follows from a more general conjecture (due to Carlsson, see ) arising from commutative algebra, namely:

###### Conjecture 2.4.

If $`C_{}`$ is a free, finite and connected $`𝔽_pG`$ chain complex, where $`G=(/p)^r`$, then $`_{i=0}^{\mathrm{}}dim_{𝔽_p}H_i(C)2^r.`$

This has been verified in some instances; when $`p=2`$ it is known to hold for $`r_2(G)4`$ (see  and ); this was also settled in the general case of $`1`$–dimensional chain complexes in .

Methods from the cohomology of groups are used to study these problems. To illustrate some of the techniques we will prove a simple yet useful result which can help us approach Conjecture 2.1.111Although this result was known to the author for some time, it should be attributed to , where this method has been explained in full detail. Recall that $`BG`$ denotes the classifying space of a group $`G`$; given any free $`G`$–action $`X`$, there is a classifying map $`X/GBG`$ associated to the action.

###### Proposition 2.5.

Let $`G=(/2)^r`$ act freely on a closed n-manifold $`M`$ such that the classifying map $`\pi _G:M/GBG`$ induces a surjection onto the top non–zero mod 2 cohomology group $`H^n(M/G,𝔽_2)`$. Then the action does not extend to a free action of a larger elementary abelian $`2`$–group.

###### Proof.

Assume then that $`G`$ acts as stated in the theorem, but that the action extends to a free action by an elementary abelian $`2`$–group $`K`$, with $`[K:G]=2`$. Recall that given an index two subgroup there is a Gysin sequence associated to it in equivariant cohomology, which is natural with respect to equivariant maps. Hence we obtain a diagram of Gysin sequences, where we assume coefficients are in $`𝔽_2`$:

Here $`\chi H^1(BK)`$ is the cohomology class associated to the index two subgroup $`GK`$. Choose $`0xH^n(M/K)`$, then as $`H^{n+1}(M/K)=0`$, there exists a class $`0x^{}H^n(M/G)`$ such that $`x=\mathrm{tr}(x^{})`$. Using our hypotheses, we can find an $`\alpha H^n(BG)`$ with $`\mathrm{tr}(\pi _G^{}(\alpha ))=x`$. However by the commutativity of the diagram, we have that this expression is the same as $`\pi _K^{}\mathrm{tr}(\alpha )=0`$, as the transfer map is zero for elementary abelian 2–groups. The result follows. ∎

For example, one can show that the hypotheses of this theorem hold for actions of $`/2\times /2`$ on a product of two spheres (see  for details) and more generally for actions of $`(/2)^r`$ on $`X=(𝕊^n)^r`$ (see ).

From this we derive a conjecture which would imply Conjecture 2.1, namely:

###### Conjecture 2.6.

If $`G=(/2)^r`$ acts freely on $`X=𝕊^{n_1}\times \mathrm{}\times 𝕊^{n_m}`$, then $`\pi _G^{}:H^N(G,𝔽_2)H^N(X/G,𝔽_2)`$ is surjective, where $`N=n_1+\mathrm{}+n_m`$.

###### Remark 2.7.

The case of $`(/2)^r`$ actions on a product of real projective spaces is also of some interest. For free actions, the main result there (see ) is: if $`(/2)^r`$ acts freely on a finite complex $`X(P^n)^m`$, then

$$r\{\begin{array}{ccc}0& n0,2& \text{mod}4\\ m& n1& \text{mod}4\\ 2m& n3& \text{mod}4\end{array}$$

The case of non–free actions is worthy of some attention. For example, we have that if $`(/2)^k`$ acts on $`X=(𝕊^m)^t`$, then there exists an $`xX`$ with $`\mathrm{dimG}_\mathrm{x}\mathrm{k}\mathrm{t}`$ (this follows from the methods used in ). In contrast, actions on real projective spaces behave very differently; for example we have (see ):

###### Proposition 2.8.

There exists an action of $`G=(/2)^{1249}`$ on $`X=(P^{2^{1298}1})^{50}`$, with isotropy subgroups of rank less than or equal to 50.

This example arises from representations for certain class 2 nilpotent groups, introduced by Ol’shanskii .

## 3. Constructing Free Actions

Given the results in the previous section, a natural problem is that of *constructing* free actions on a product of of $`r(G)`$ spheres. In his landmark paper , Swan showed that if $`r(G)=1`$, then $`G`$ in fact acts freely on a finite complex $`X𝕊^n`$. The natural extension of this result leads to a difficult open problem:

###### Conjecture 3.1.

A finite group $`G`$ acts freely on a finite complex $`X`$ which has the homotopy type of a product of $`r(G)`$ spheres.

This conjecture is due to Benson and Carlson. In a purely algebraic context, this was completely settled in . The geometric side of the problem is very difficult, as it amounts to explicitly constructing free group actions on products of spheres.

The most basic examples of spheres with actions of finite groups arise from representation theory. Given a unitary or orthogonal $`G`$–representation $`V`$, the unit vectors $`S(V)`$ are homeomorphic to a sphere. In many cases one can choose representations $`V_1,V_2,\mathrm{},V_r`$ such that $`G`$ acts freely on $`S(V_1)\times \mathrm{}\times S(V_r)`$. However, there are some restrictions, as the following result due to U.Ray () shows.

###### Proposition 3.2.

If $`G`$ is a finite group acting freely on a product of spheres arising from representations, then the only possible non–abelian composition factors of $`G`$ are the alternating groups $`A_5`$ and $`A_6`$.

###### Example 3.3.

Let $`P`$ denote the $`p`$–Sylow subgroup of $`\mathrm{GL}_3(𝔽_\mathrm{p})`$; it is an extra–special group of order $`p^3`$. It is not hard to show that $`P`$ acts freely on a product $`S(V_1)\times S(V_2)\times S(V_3)`$; however more is true (see ): in fact the *minimal* number of representations required for a free action on a product is always three.

###### Example 3.4.

In , it was shown that the alternating group $`A_4`$ cannot act freely on any finite complex $`X𝕊^n\times 𝕊^n`$, for any $`n`$. Hence in particular $`A_4`$ cannot act freely on any $`𝕊^n\times 𝕊^m`$ via a product action, as we could produce a free action on a product of two equidimensional spheres by taking the appropriate joins.

To construct new examples of free group actions we will build on what we know about groups with periodic cohomology. In fact we will consider $`G`$–CW complexes such that the isotropy subgroups all satisfy this condition. The following result appears in .

###### Theorem 3.5.

Let $`X`$ denote a simply–connected finite $`G`$–CW complex such that all of its isotropy subgroups have periodic cohomology. Then there exists a finite complex $`YX\times 𝕊^n`$ with a free $`G`$–action.

This result can be proved directly (see ) by constructing a spherical fibration over successive skeleta in $`X`$. This uses coherence provided by a “universal” periodicity class $`\alpha H^{}(G,)`$ for actions with periodic isotropy; classical spherical space forms and the fact that all obstructions can be killed using fiber joins. This is based on the methods first developed in . The result is also a consequence of a more general theorem in  about spaces with periodic cohomomology. This notion (requiring twisted coefficients) is induced by cup product with a given cohomology class.

From the previous result we see that a clear new strategy emerges for constructing free group actions: to get a free $`G`$–action on $`X\times 𝕊^n`$ for some $`n>0`$, it suffices to build an action of $`G`$ on $`X`$ with periodic isotropy.222These techniques also apply to infinite groups, and they can be used to show (see ) that a discrete group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts freely and properly discontinuously on $`𝕊^n\times ^m`$ for some $`m,n>0`$ if and only if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is countable and has periodic cohomology. We now look more carefully at finite group actions on spheres; given $`X𝕊^N`$ with a $`G`$–action, we have an Euler class $`\alpha H^{N+1}(G,)`$ associated to it.

###### Definition 3.6.

An Euler class $`\alpha H^{N+1}(G,)`$ is said to be effective if $`H^{}(X\times _GEG,)`$ has Krull dimension less than the rank $`r(G)`$.

###### Question 3.7.

Given a finite group $`G`$, does there exist an effective Euler class in $`H^{}(G,)`$?

If we assume $`X`$ to be finite dimensional, then we see that the Euler class $`\alpha `$ is effective if and only if $`X^E=\mathrm{}`$ for all $`EG`$ elementary abelian subgroups of maximal rank.

We now focus on the case of a finite $`p`$–group $`P`$. It follows from known results (see ) that if an effective Euler class exists, then an effective Euler class must arise from a representation sphere $`S(V)`$. Let $`C/p`$ be a central subgroup in $`P`$, and let $`V=\mathrm{Ind}_\mathrm{C}^\mathrm{P}(\chi )`$ where $`\chi `$ is a non–trivial character for $`C`$. Then $`X=S(V)`$ has an action of $`P`$ such that $`C`$ acts freely. Hence $`X^E=\mathrm{}`$ for all $`E`$ elementary abelian subgroups of maximal rank and so we obtain an effective Euler class $`\alpha H^{2[P:C]}(P,)`$. More generally, if the center $`ZP`$ has rank equal to $`z`$, then we can find representations $`V_1,V_2,\mathrm{},V_z`$ of $`P`$ such that $`Z`$ acts freely on the product $`S(V_1)\times \mathrm{}\times S(V_z)`$. Note that the isotropy for the action of $`P`$ will have rank equal to $`r(P)r(Z)`$. This indicates that for any $`p`$–group we can construct at least part of the desired free action on a product of spheres “for free”. This is analogous to the fact that we always have a regular sequence of length $`r(Z)`$ in $`H^{}(P,𝔽_p)`$.

## 4. Rank Two Groups

We now consider groups $`G`$ with $`r(G)=2`$. If $`P`$ is a $`p`$–group of rank equal to two, then we know that it will act on a sphere $`X=S(V)`$ with periodic isotropy. Hence we obtain (see ):

###### Theorem 4.1.

A finite $`p`$–group $`P`$ acts freely on a finite complex $`X𝕊^n\times 𝕊^m`$ if and only if it does not contain a subgroup isomorphic to $`(/p)^3`$.

Of course in particular this establishes Conjecture 3.1 for $`r(P)=2`$. In addition the conjecture has been settled affirmatively for almost all rank 2 simple groups. Indeed, we have

###### Theorem 4.2.

If $`G`$ is a finite simple group with $`r(G)=2`$ other than $`PSL_3(𝔽_p)`$, then it acts freely on a finite complex $`X𝕊^n\times 𝕊^m`$; moreover any such action must be exotic, i.e. it cannot be a product action.

The proof that such an action cannot be a product action is a consequence of the classification of finite simple groups! Indeed, one checks every non–abelian simple group contains a copy of $`A_4`$, and we know that this group cannot act freely via a product action.

###### Example 4.3.

Let $`G=\mathrm{SL}_3(𝔽_2)`$, $`|G|=2^337`$. From the character tables in the *Atlas of Finite Groups* , we note that there exists a $`3`$–dimensional complex representation $`V`$ of $`G`$ such that $`V^E=\{0\}`$ for every $`E=/2\times /2`$ in $`G`$. Hence $`X=S(V)`$ is a $`G`$–space with periodic isotropy, and so, applying our previous results, $`G`$ acts freely on a finite complex $`Y𝕊^5\times 𝕊^m`$ for some $`m`$. However in this case we can proceed more directly as follows. The subgroup $`GU(3)`$ must actually lie in $`SU(3)`$, as it is a simple group. Then if we consider the $`SU(2)`$–fibration $`SU(3)SU(3)/SU(2)=𝕊^5`$, we see that it is $`G`$–equivariant and that the $`G`$–action on the total space is free. Hence our group acts freely on the total space $`E`$ of an $`SU(2)`$–bundle over $`𝕊^5`$, which we can regard as the sphere bundle of a 2-dimensional complex $`G`$–vector bundle $`\tau `$ over $`𝕊^5`$. This corresponds (non-equivariantly) to the non–zero element in $`\pi _4(SU(2))/2`$. Now the sphere bundle $`S(\tau \tau )`$ is a trivial bundle, as any $`𝕊^7`$–bundle over $`𝕊^5`$ splits as a product (see , page 139). Hence $`G=\mathrm{SL}_3(𝔽_2)`$ acts freely and smoothly on the manifold333More generally we have shown that if $`G`$ is any finite subgroup of $`SU(3)`$, then it acts freely and smoothly on $`𝕊^5\times 𝕊^7`$; this is a special case of a result in . $`M=𝕊^5\times 𝕊^7`$.

Our techniques reduce the problem of constructing a free action on a product of two spheres to constructing an action on a single sphere with periodic isotropy. Equivalently we can construct an action on a sphere such that the associated Euler class is effective. Although this is a considerable reduction, there are still groups which cannot be handled with this approach. In particular we have a result due to Unlu :

###### Proposition 4.4.

If $`G=PSL_3(𝔽_p)`$ acts on a finite complex $`X𝕊^n`$, then there exists a subgroup $`H/p\times /p`$ in $`G`$ such that $`X^H\mathrm{}`$.

In fact this result has been recently generalized by Grodal and Smith to show that if $`G`$ acts on *any* homotopy sphere $`X`$, then the equivariant cohomology $`H^{}(EG\times _GX,𝔽_p)`$ has Krull Dimension equal to two, hence is not periodic in the sense of  and so there is no hope of constructing a free $`G`$ action on a product of two spheres using the methods above. In particular this gives an example of a group for which Question 3.7 has a negative answer.

Motivated by these considerations and in view of some very special properties of the group cohomology $`H^{}(PSL_3(𝔽_3),𝔽_3)`$, it seems valid to raise the following

###### Question 4.5.

Does $`G=PSL_3(𝔽_3)`$ in fact act freely on a finite complex $`X𝕊^n\times 𝕊^m`$?

Needless to say it would be rather significant if this question had a negative answer.

On the other hand this seems to be a rather special situation, which does not apply for example to odd order groups. Work in progress (joint with Grodal) indicates that every odd order group of rank equal to two will indeed act freely on a finite $`X𝕊^n\times 𝕊^m`$. This requires a detailed analysis of their $`p`$–Sylow subgroups and fusion properties.

## 5. Geometric Actions

So far we have not discussed the more geometric side of contructing group actions. Ideally we would like a group of rank equal to $`r`$ to act freely on an actual product of $`r`$ spheres—by this we mean a manifold homeomorphic to it, or even better, diffeomorphic. Although this has been settled in the rank one case, very little is currently known for higher rank groups. Given our previous results in the homotopy category, a good question to raise would be

###### Question 5.1.

If $`P`$ is a $`p`$–group with $`r(P)=2`$, does it act freely on the manifold $`M=𝕊^n\times 𝕊^m`$ for some $`m,n>0`$?

This problem is rather difficult as it naturally leads into both homotopy–theoretic and surgery related issues. We can however offer a very recent result in this direction (joint work with Davis and Unlu ):

###### Theorem 5.2.

Let $`GU(n)`$ be a faithful unitary representation of $`G`$, such that the induced action of $`G`$ on $`U(n)/U(k)`$ is free. Then, if $`|G|`$ is relatively prime to $`(n1)!`$, the group $`G`$ will act freely on $`M=𝕊^{2n1}\times \mathrm{}\times 𝕊^{2k+1}`$.

###### Corollary 5.3.

Let $`P`$ denote a $`p`$–group with cyclic center and an abelian maximal subgroup. Then $`P`$ acts freely on $`M=𝕊^{2p1}\times \mathrm{}\times 𝕊^{2pr1}`$ where $`r<p`$ is the rank of $`P`$.

###### Example 5.4.

We consider the extra–special $`p`$–group $`P`$ of order $`p^3`$ and exponent $`p`$. Applying the above, it will act freely on $`M=𝕊^{2p1}\times 𝕊^{2p3}`$.

The proof of the theorem above requires an interesting combination of group theory, homotopy theory and surgery theory. The basic strategy is to propagate the free action on the Stiefel manifold to a product of spheres. The corollary follows from the classification of those finite $`p`$–groups which admit a faithful unitary representation in $`U(p)`$ such that the induced action on the complex Stiefel manifold $`U(p)/U(pr)`$ is free.


text:
# Odd triplet superconductivity in superconductor/ferromagnet multilayered structures.

## Abstract

We demonstrate that in multilayered superconductor-ferromagnet structures a non-collinear alignment of the magnetizations of different ferromagnetic layers generates a triplet superconducting condensate which is odd in frequency. This triplet condensate coexists in the superconductors with the conventional singlet one but decays very slowly in the ferromagnet, which should lead to a large Josephson effect between the superconductors separated by the ferromagnet. Depending on the mutual direction of the ferromagnetic moments the Josephson coupling can be both of $`0`$ and $`\pi `$ type.

It is well known that ferromagnetism and superconductivity are antagonistic phenomena; ferromagnetism strongly suppresses superconductivity. This suppression in superconductor/ferromagnet (S/F) layered structures is caused mainly by the exchange interaction. This means in particular that the singlet Cooper pairs cannot penetrate into the F layers over a noticeable length, since the exchange energy is by orders of magnitude larger than the Cooper binding energy. Thus, the singlet pairs are destroyed by the exchange field because the spins of the electrons cannot be antiparallel anymore. This suppression of superconductivity can be reduced in S/F structures if the ferromagnetic layers are ultrathin, but, generally, the destruction of the singlet superconductivity by a homogeneous exchange field can hardly be avoided.

The situation may be different if the spins of the superconducting pairs are parallel to each other. It is clear that such a triplet superconductivity is not sensitive to the exchange field and the coexistence of the superconductivity and ferromagnetism becomes possible. Unfortunately, the triplet pairing is a rather exotic phenomenon and has been observed until now only in superfluid He3 and in a superconducting material Sr2RuO4 . It is expected to be very sensitive to disorder , which makes its observation even more difficult. In order to satisfy fermionic commutation relations the condensate function, even in frequency, should be odd in the momentum of the pair and this is the reason why it is so sensitive to impurities. Another possibility was suggested by Berezinskii long ago . He conjectured that the triplet superconductivity might be possible if the condensate function were even in the momentum but odd in the frequency. Attempts to find conditions for the existence of such an odd superconductivity were done in several works much later  but the results were not encouraging (in Ref.  a singlet pairing odd in frequency and in the momentum was considered).

In this Letter, we demonstrate that the odd triplet superconductivity is not exotic at all and is $`\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{v}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{d}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{e}`$ in multilayered $`S/F`$ structures with conventional superconductors if the directions of the magnetization of the different F-layers are neither parallel nor antiparallel to each other. In this case the triplet condensate (TC) can easily penetrate into the ferromagnetic layers over long distances and result in supercurrents through the ferromagnets. The conditions for the realization of the odd triplet superconductivity do not seem to be problematic from the experimental point of view and we hope that proper measurements will be done in the nearest future.

A generation of a triplet condensate by a non-homogeneous magnetization (domain walls) and its penetration into a ferromagnet has been discussed recently . In the structures considered in these works only changes in the conductivity of the system were analyzed. However, the detection of the triplet component in such structures is a quite difficult task. In contrast, we predict in this Letter a new type of superconductivity (odd triplet) in S/F structures and discuss how to identify it experimentally. To be specific, we consider a $`S/F`$ multilayered structure (Fig. 1) in which the new superconducting state might be observed. In this state, the superconductivity in the $`S`$ regions is caused by the singlet component (SC) and takes place in the plane of the layers, while the transverse superconductivity through the $`F`$ layers is mainly due to the TC. Moreover, the relation between the condensate current $`I_S`$ and a phase difference $`\phi `$ depends in a crucial way on chirality of the magnetic moment $`𝐌`$ in space.

The multilayered $`S/F`$ structure we consider is represented in Fig.1. The (in-plane) magnetizations $`𝐌`$ of the neighboring $`F`$ layers are not parallel to each other and the angle between them is $`2\alpha `$. In order to achieve such a non-collinear alignment one can employ an exchange-biased spin-valve or ferromagnets with strong anisotropy and different easy-axis of magnetization. It will be shown that in such a structure the TC may arise if the thickness of the superconducting layers $`2d_S`$ is less or comparable with the coherence length $`\xi _S=\sqrt{D_S/2\pi T}.`$ The TC penetrates into the F layer over a long distance $`\xi _T=\sqrt{D_F/2\pi T}`$ and ensures a Josephson coupling between the nearest $`S`$ layers. In the case under consideration the relation between the condensate current $`I_S`$ and the phase difference $`\phi `$ has the conventional form $`I_S=I_c\mathrm{sin}`$ $`\phi .`$ However, the sign of the critical current $`I_c`$ depends on the chirality, namely, it is positive if the rotation angle $`2\alpha _i`$ of the magnetization at the $`S_i`$ layer has the same sign for neighboring $`S`$ layers ($`S_i`$ and $`S_{i+1}`$) and it is negative if the signs of the rotation are opposite for neighboring $`S`$ layers ($`\alpha _i\alpha _{i+1}<0`$).

Now, let us explain how these results were obtained. We consider the simplest case of a dirty system for which the Usadel equations can be applied to calculate the condensate function $`f,`$ i.e., we assume that the condition $`\mathrm{\Delta }<J<\tau ^1`$ is fulfilled, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the order parameter in $`S`$ (in the ferromagnet $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$), $`J`$ is the exchange energy and $`\tau `$ is the momentum relaxation time. However, even in this case the problem remains too complicated and we need to make further assumptions. First, we assume that the thickness of the $`F`$ layers $`2d_F`$ exceeds the length $`\xi _T`$. In this case the Josephson coupling is determined by an overlap of exponentially decaying condensate functions induced by the nearest $`S`$ layers. We also assume that the temperature is close to the critical temperature $`T_c^{}`$ of the structure ($`|TT_c^{}|/T_c^{}1`$). In this case the Usadel equation can be linearized and what remains to do is to find the condensate function $`f\left(x\right)`$ by solving the linearized Usadel equation in the $`S`$ and $`F`$ regions. The Usadel equation for the matrix condensate function $`\stackrel{ˇ}{f}`$ takes the form

$$D_S_{xx}^2\stackrel{ˇ}{f}2|\omega |\stackrel{ˇ}{f}=2i\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{,   S layer}$$
(1)
$`D_F_{xx}^2\stackrel{ˇ}{f}2|\omega |\stackrel{ˇ}{f}+iJ\mathrm{sgn}\omega \{[\widehat{\sigma }_3,\stackrel{ˇ}{f}]_+\mathrm{cos}\alpha +`$ (2)
$`+\widehat{\tau }_3[\widehat{\sigma }_2,\stackrel{ˇ}{f}]_{}\mathrm{sin}\alpha \}=0\text{,   F layer}`$ (3)
Here $`D_{S,F}`$ are the diffusion coefficients in the $`S`$ and $`F`$ layers respectively, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=i\widehat{\tau }_2\widehat{\sigma }_3\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\omega =\pi T(2n+1)`$ is the Matsubara frequency, $`J`$ is the exchange energy (strictly speaking, $`𝐉`$ is a vector directed along the magnetization vector $`𝐌`$), $`\widehat{\tau }_i`$ and $`\widehat{\sigma }_i`$ are the Pauli matrices in the Nambu and spin space, respectively. The brackets $`[\mathrm{}]_\pm `$ denote an anti-commutator and a commutator. We assume that the $`𝐌`$ vector lies in the $`(y,z)`$ plane and $`\alpha `$ is the angle between the $`z`$axis and $`𝐌`$. Eqs.(1-3) have to be supplemented by boundary conditions. In the case of a perfect $`S/F`$ interface (the reflection coefficient is very small) they have the form

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{f}(d_S+0)\stackrel{ˇ}{f}(d_S0)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (4)
$`\gamma _x\stackrel{ˇ}{f}(d_S+0)_x\stackrel{ˇ}{f}(d_S0)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (5)
where $`\gamma =\sigma _F/\sigma _S,`$ $`\sigma _{F,S}`$ are the conductivities in the $`F`$ and $`S`$ regions (for simplicity we do not take into account a dependence of the conductivity $`\sigma _F`$ on the spin directions). If the SF interface resistance $`R_b`$ is finite the r.h.s of the first equation equals $`\gamma _b\xi _J_x\stackrel{ˇ}{f}(ds+0)`$, where $`\gamma _b`$ is proportional to $`R_b`$ . For simplicity we set $`\gamma _b=0`$. A generalization of the results for the case of a finite $`\gamma _b`$ does not lead to qualitative changes.

The condensate matrix function $`\stackrel{ˇ}{f}`$ has following form

$$\stackrel{ˇ}{f}\left(x\right)=i\left(\widehat{f}_1\left(x\right)\widehat{\tau }_1+\widehat{f}_2\left(x\right)\widehat{\tau }_2\right),$$
(6)
where $`\widehat{f}_{1,2}`$ are matrices in the spin space. In the $`F`$ layers they can be written as

$`\widehat{f}_1`$ $`=`$ $`B_1\left(x\right)\widehat{\sigma }_1+B_2\left(x\right)\widehat{\sigma }_2,`$ (7)
$`\widehat{f}_2`$ $`=`$ $`B_0\left(x\right)+B_3\left(x\right)\widehat{\sigma }_3.`$ (8)
In the $`S`$ layers the functions $`\widehat{f}_{1,2}`$ have the same form, but the coefficients $`B`$ should be replaced by $`A`$. The functions $`B_i\left(x\right)`$ have the form: $`B_i(x)b_i\mathrm{exp}(\kappa (xd_S)).`$ Substituting these expressions for $`B_i(x)`$ into Eqs. (1-3) one obtains a set of algebraic equations that determine the eigenvalues $`\kappa `$. In the $`S`$ region all condensate components (SC and TC) are decoupled and there is only one solution for $`\kappa `$: $`\kappa ^2=2|\omega |/D_S.`$ In the $`F`$ region the SC and TC are coupled by the exchange interaction (if $`\alpha `$ is not zero) and there are three eigenvalues for $`\kappa .`$ Two of them are equal to $`\kappa _\pm =\kappa _J(1\pm i)`$, and determine a fast decay of the condensate in the $`F`$ layers ( dashed line in Fig. 2), here $`\kappa _J=\sqrt{J/D_F}`$ . This result demonstrates the well known short-range penetration of the superconducting condensate into the ferromagnet (see for example the review article ). However, the third solution for $`\kappa `$ is completely different and is given by $`\kappa _\omega =\sqrt{2|\omega |/D_F}`$. Thus, we see that the huge exchange energy $`J`$ entering the solution for $`\kappa _\pm `$ is replaced by a small energy $`\omega `$ of the order of $`T`$. At large distances it is the solution with $`\kappa _\omega `$ that determines the penetration of the superconducting condensate into the $`F`$ regions (see Fig. 2). It corresponds to the triplet component and, as it has been discussed in the introduction, there is no wonder that the exchange field does not influence it.

Having determined the solutions for $`\kappa `$, we can write the solutions for $`B_i\left(x\right)`$. For example, the coefficient $`B_1(x)`$ may be written at $`x>d_S`$ in the form

$$B_1(x)=\underset{i}{}b_{1i}\mathrm{exp}\left[\kappa _i(xd_S)\right],$$
(9)
where $`b_{1i}=b_{1\omega },b_{1\pm }`$ and $`\kappa _i=\kappa _{1\omega },\kappa _{1\pm }`$. The coefficients $`b_{1\pm }`$ are related to the coefficients $`b_{3\pm }`$ that determine the magnitude of the SC by $`b_{1\pm }=\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{sgn}\omega b_{3\pm }`$.

What remains to be done is to determine the coefficients $`a_i,b_i`$ using the boundary conditions (4) for an arbitrary angle $`\alpha .`$ In a general case the expressions for the coefficients are cumbersome, and for clarity we present here only results for small $`\alpha .`$ In zero order in $`\alpha `$ only coefficients in the function $`\widehat{f}_2`$ differ from zero. For example, for $`b_{3\pm }`$ we obtain

$$b_{3\pm }=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2i|\omega |}\frac{1}{1+\gamma \kappa _\pm /(\kappa _S\mathrm{tanh}\theta _S)}$$
(10)
where $`\kappa _S=\sqrt{2|\omega |/D_S},`$ $`\theta _S=`$ $`\kappa _Sd_S.`$ This solution corresponds to those obtained earlier (see  and references therein) where the case of a parallel or antiparallel magnetization alignment was analyzed. It is valid in the limiting cases $`\theta _S<<1`$ and $`\theta _S>>1`$ ( if $`T`$ is close to the critical temperature $`T_c^{}`$).

If the magnetization vectors in the neighboring $`F`$ layers are inclined with respect to each other by an angle $`2\alpha ,`$ the situation changes qualitatively. First, the function $`\widehat{f}_1`$ that describes the TC is no longer zero because the terms proportional to $`b_{1\pm }`$ in the expression for $`B_1(x)`$ (Eq. (9)) are related to $`b_{3\pm }`$, and hence they are finite in the main approximation. Secondly, in order to fulfill the matching conditions (4), one has to take into account the first long-range term in Eq.(9). Using the boundary conditions, we obtain for the coefficient $`b_{1\omega }`$ the following expression

$$b_{1\omega }=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\omega }\mathrm{sin}\alpha \frac{\kappa _J\mathrm{tanh}\theta _s}{\mathrm{cosh}^2\theta _s|\gamma \kappa _+/\kappa _s+\mathrm{tanh}\theta _s|^2(\kappa _\omega \mathrm{tanh}\theta _s+\kappa _s/\gamma )}.$$
(11)
Contrary to the SC determined by the solution $`B_3(x)`$ and $`A_3(x)`$, the TC is an odd function of $`x`$. This is seen from Eqs. (9), (11) and the fact the $`\alpha `$ has different sign at $`x>d_S`$ and $`x<d_S`$. According to the boundary conditions (4) (continuity of the condensate function and current conservation), the TC induced in the F layer penetrates into the superconductor. The corresponding solution in the S layer has the form: $`A_1(x)=a_1\mathrm{sinh}(\kappa _Sx)`$. In the limit $`T<<J`$, the TC penetrates into the $`F`$ layer over the length of the order $`1/\kappa _T=\sqrt{D_F/2\pi T}`$ which is much greater than the SC penetration length $`1/\kappa _\pm `$. One can see from Eq. (11) that the amplitude $`b_{1\omega }`$ of the long-range TC is an odd function of the Matsubara frequency $`\omega `$ and is symmetric in the momentum space as in the case of the TC which arises in a ferromagnet with a non-homogeneous $`M`$ near a S/F interface . This new type of the condensate, odd in $`\omega `$ and even in the momenta $`p`$, has been proposed by Berezinksii  in order to explain the pairing mechanism in He3 (it was proven later that the condensate in He3 is in fact even in $`\omega `$ and odd in $`p`$). The solution we present here corresponds to this hypothetical pairing, which means that we have found a concrete realization of the idea. It follows from the geometry of the structure we consider that the odd triplet superconductivity we found exists in the transverse direction.

It is seen from Eqs. (10) and (11) that the amplitudes of the SC and TC at the S/F interface are comparable if $`\xi _J<<\xi _T`$ and $`\alpha `$ and $`\theta _S`$ are of the order of $`1`$. If the latter condition is not satisfied (that is, the thickness of the $`S`$ layer $`2d_S`$ is large in comparison with $`\xi _S)`$, the TC decays exponentially in $`S`$ and its amplitude is small. Therefore we calculate the Josephson current between the neighboring $`S`$ ($`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$) layers in the case $`\theta _S1`$ and assuming that the condition $`\xi _J<<\xi _T<2d_F`$ is fulfilled. Then, the Josephson current is due to the overlap of the TC induced near each $`S/F`$ interface. In this case the TC in $`F`$ is described by the expression

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{f}_{trip}(x)=i\widehat{\tau }_1\widehat{\sigma }_1b_{1\omega }\mathrm{exp}(\kappa _\omega (xd_S))+`$ (12)
$`+\stackrel{ˇ}{S}i\widehat{\tau }_1\widehat{\sigma }_1\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^+\stackrel{~}{b}_{1\omega }\mathrm{exp}(\kappa _\omega (xd_S2d_F))`$ (13)
Here, the matrix of a gauge transformation $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}=\mathrm{cos}(\phi /2)+i\widehat{\tau }_3\mathrm{sin}(\phi /2)`$ allows us to take into account the phase difference $`\phi `$ between the neighboring $`S`$ layers (we assume that the phase of the $`S_1`$ layer is zero). The coefficients have different signs ($`b_{1\omega }=\stackrel{~}{b}_{1\omega }`$) if the magnetization $`M`$ at both $`S`$ layers rotates in the same direction, and $`b_{1\omega }=\stackrel{~}{b}_{1\omega }`$ in the opposite case (different signs of chiralities). The condensate current $`I_S`$ between $`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$ is given by the formula

$$I_S=(L_yL_z)\sigma _F(\pi iT/4e)Tr(\widehat{\tau }_3\widehat{\sigma }_o)\underset{\omega }{}\stackrel{ˇ}{f}_x\stackrel{ˇ}{f}$$
(14)
From Eqs.(13-14), we get $`I_S=I_c\mathrm{sin}\phi `$, where

$$I_c=(2\pi T/eR_F)2d_F\underset{\omega }{}\kappa _\omega b_{1\omega }\stackrel{~}{b}_{1\omega }\mathrm{exp}(2d_F\kappa _\omega )$$
(15)
and $`R_F=2d_F/((L_yL_z)\sigma _F)`$ is the resistance of the $`F`$ layer in the normal state. Substituting Eq.(11) into Eq.(15), we find for the critical current in the limit $`\theta _s1`$

$$eR_FI_c=\frac{4T}{\pi }\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{T}\right)^2\frac{(\kappa _Jd_S)^2(d_F\kappa _T)e^{2d_F\kappa _T}\mathrm{sin}\alpha _1\mathrm{sin}\alpha _2}{|\kappa _{So}d_S+\gamma \kappa _J(1+i)/\kappa _{So}|^4(\kappa _Td_S+1/\gamma )^2}$$
(16)
where $`\kappa _{So}=\sqrt{2\pi T/D_S}`$.

If the magnetization vector at each $`S`$ layer rotates in the same direction ($`\alpha _1=\alpha _2`$), then the critical Josephson current $`I_c`$ is positive (0-contact). If $`𝐌`$ rotates at $`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$ in opposite directions ($`\alpha _1=\alpha _2`$), then the critical current $`I_c`$ is negative ($`\pi `$contact). In the latter case a phase difference $`\pi `$ is established between neighboring $`S`$ layers in a multilayered $`S/F`$ structure. We would like to note that the mechanism of the $`\pi `$contact considered here is completely different from that suggested in Ref. and observed in Ref.. In our case, the negative critical current is caused by the TC, but not by the SC as in Ref. , and, in addition, is realized only if the chiralities at the $`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$ are different. The possibility of switching between the $`0`$ and $`\pi `$-states by changing the angle $`\alpha `$ may find applications in superconducting devices.

The effect described above exists for all temperatures below the critical temperature $`T_c^{}`$ which is determined from the self-consistency equation. In the main approximation in the small angle $`\alpha `$ it agrees with that obtained in Refs., for the case of the parallel orientation of the magnetization. A correction to $`T_c^{}`$ due to a small misalignment of the magnetizations in neighboring $`F`$ layers, i.e. due to the TC, is proportional to $`\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha `$, but we are not interested in this correction here. We note that the critical temperature $`T_c^{}`$ for the case of arbitrary $`\alpha `$ was analyzed in Ref.. However, the form of the condensate function presented in that work is not correct because the authors started from an equation different from Eq. (3 ) (instead of the commutator, they wrote the product $`J\widehat{\stackrel{}{\sigma }}\widehat{f}`$ ). As a result, the long range triplet component was completely lost.

In conclusion, we have predicted a new type of superconductivity. It was demonstrated that in superconductor-ferromagnet structures a non-collinear alignment of the exchange fields in the ferromagnetic layers generates a triplet component of the superconducting condensate and this component is odd in the frequency. The odd triplet condensate penetrates into the ferromagnet over long distances and is not sensitive to impurities. In the structure we suggest, a Josephson effect between superconductors separated by the ferromagnet is possible and the critical current can be measured. The Josephson contact can be both of $`0`$ and $`\pi `$-type depending on the arrangement of the magnetic moments. We hope that the effects considered in this paper will be observed experimentally in the nearest future.

We would like to thank SFB 491 and GIF for financial support.