text:
# Symmetric Pascal matrices modulo p

## 1 Introduction

This paper presents results and conjectures concerning symmetric matrices associated to Pascal’s triangle. We first give a formula for the determinant over $`𝐙`$ of the reduction modulo $`2`$ with values in $`\{0,1\}`$ for such a matrix. We then study the reduction modulo a prime $`p`$ of the characteristic polynomials of these matrices. Our main results imply a formula for the prime $`p=2`$ and a conjectural formula for $`p=3`$.

Consider the symmetric matrix $`P(n)`$ with coefficients

$$p_{i,j}=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i+j}{i}\right),0i,j<n.$$

We call $`P(n)`$ the *symmetric Pascal matrix* of order $`n`$. The entries of $`P(n)`$ satisfy the recurrence

$$p_{i,j}=p_{i1,j}+p_{i,j1}.$$

In  the first author studied the determinant of the general matrix with entries satisfying this recurrence.

An easy computation yields $`P(\mathrm{})=TT^t`$ where $`T`$ is the infinite unipotent lower triangular matrix

$$T=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccc}1& & & & & & & & & \\ 1& 1& & & & & & & & \\ 1& 2& 1& & & & & & & \\ 1& 3& 3& 1& & & & & & \\ \mathrm{}& & & & \mathrm{}& & & & & \end{array}\right)=\text{exp}\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccc}0& & & & & & & & & \\ 1& 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& 2& 0& & & & & & & \\ & 0& 3& 0& & & & & & \\ & & & & \mathrm{}& & & & & \end{array}\right)$$

with coefficients $`t_{i,j}=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i}{j}\right)`$. This shows that $`det(P(n))=1`$ and that $`P(n)`$ is positive definite for all $`n𝐍`$. Hence all zeroes of the characteristic polynomial $`\chi _n(t)=det(tI(n)P(n))`$ (where $`I(n)`$ denotes the identity matrix of size $`n`$) of $`P(n)`$ are positive reals. The inverse $`P(n)^1`$ of $`P(n)`$ is given by

$$P(n)^1=\left(T(n)^t\right)^1T(n)^1$$

and $`T(n)^1`$ has coefficients $`(1)^{i+j}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i}{j}\right),0i,j<n`$. Hence $`T(n)`$ and $`T(n)^1`$ are conjugate, and thus also $`P(n)`$ and $`P(n)^1`$ are conjugate. The characteristic polynomial $`\chi _n(t)`$ therefore satisfies $`\chi _n(t)=(t)^n\chi (1/t)`$ and $`1`$ is always an eigenvalue of $`P(2n+1)`$, cf. . The polynomials $`\chi _n(t)`$, especially their behaviour modulo primes, will be our main object of study. For convenience, we write $`I`$ for $`I(n)`$ whenever the size of the identity matrix is unambiguous.

Define $`\overline{P}(n)_2`$ as the reduction modulo $`2`$ of $`P(n)`$ with values in $`\{0,1\}`$ by setting

$$\overline{p}_{i,j}=\left(\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i+j}{i}\right)(mod2)\right)\{0,1\}.$$

The Thue-Morse sequence $`s_n=\nu _i(mod2)`$ counts the parity of all non-zero digits of a binary integer $`n=\nu _i2^i`$. It can also be defined recursively by $`s_0=0`$, $`s_{2k}=s_k`$ and $`s_{2k+1}=1s_k`$ (cf. for instance ).

###### Theorem 1.1

The determinant (over $`𝐙`$) of $`\overline{P}(n)_2`$ is given by

$$det(\overline{P}(n)_2)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{n1}{}}(1)^{s_k}.$$

A similar result holds for the reduction modulo $`3`$ of $`P(n)`$ with values in $`\{1,0,1\}`$.

In the sequel, we will be interested in the characteristic polynomial $`det(tIP(n))(modp)`$ for $`p`$ a prime number. The next result yields a formula for $`n=p^l`$ and is of crucial importance in the sequel.

###### Proposition 1.2

Given a power $`q=p^l`$ of a prime $`p`$, the matrix $`P(q)`$ has order $`3`$ over $`𝐅_p`$. Its characteristic polynomial $`\chi _q(t)=det(tI(q)P(q))`$ satisfies

$$\chi _q(t)(t^2+t+1)^{\frac{qϵ(q)}{3}}(t1)^{\frac{q+2ϵ(q)}{3}}(modp)$$

where $`ϵ(q)\{1,0,1\}`$ satisfies $`ϵ(q)q(mod3)`$.

In particular, $`P(q)`$ can be diagonalized over $`𝐅_{p^2}`$ except when $`p=3`$. For instance, $`P(3)`$ has a unique Jordan block over $`𝐅_3`$.

This proposition (except for the diagonalization part) admits the following generalization:

###### Theorem 1.3

When $`q=p^l`$ is a power of a prime $`p`$ and $`0kq/2`$ then

$$\chi _{qk}(t)(t^2+t+1)^{(qϵ(q))/3k}(t1)^{(q+2ϵ(q))/3k}det(t^2I+P(k))(modp)$$

where $`ϵ(q)\{1,0,1\}`$ satisfies $`ϵ(q)q(mod3)`$.

Theorem 1.3 completely determines the reduction modulo $`2`$ of $`\chi _n(t)`$ as follows: Define a sequence $`\gamma (0)=0,\gamma (1),\mathrm{}`$ recursively by

$$\gamma (2^lk)=\frac{2^l+2(1)^l}{3}k+2\gamma (k),0k2^{l1}.$$

###### Theorem 1.4

For all $`n𝐍`$

$$\chi _n(t)(t+1)^{\gamma (n)}(t^2+t+1)^{\gamma _2(n)}(mod2)$$

where $`\gamma _2(n)=\frac{1}{2}(n\gamma (n))`$.

It follows immediately that the matrix $`IP(n)^3`$ is nilpotent over $`𝐅_2`$ for all $`n𝐍`$.

The first terms $`\gamma (1),\mathrm{},\gamma (32)`$ and $`\gamma _2(1),\mathrm{},\gamma _2(32)`$ are given by

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccccccccc}& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ n& 1& 2& 3& 4& 5& 6& 7& 8& 9& 10& 11& 12& 13& 14& 15& 16\\ \gamma (n)& 1& 0& 3& 2& 5& 0& 3& 2& 5& 0& 11& 6& 9& 4& 7& 6\\ \gamma _2(n)& 0& 1& 0& 1& 0& 3& 2& 3& 2& 5& 0& 3& 2& 5& 4& 5\\ & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ n& 17& 18& 19& 20& 21& 22& 23& 24& 25& 26& 27& 28& 29& 30& 31& 32\\ \gamma (n)& 9& 4& 15& 10& 21& 0& 11& 6& 9& 4& 15& 10& 13& 8& 11& 10\\ \gamma _2(n)& 4& 7& 2& 5& 0& 11& 6& 9& 8& 11& 6& 9& 8& 11& 10& 11\end{array}$$

The sequence $`\gamma (0),\gamma (1),\mathrm{}`$ has many interesting arithmetic features. In order to describe them, let us introduce the number $`b(n)`$ of “blocks” of adjacent ones in the binary representation of a positive integer $`n`$. For instance $`667=(1010011011)_2`$ and so $`b(667)=4`$. Notice that $`b(2n)=b(n)`$ and $`b(2n+1)=b(n)+1\left(n(mod2)\right)`$ (with $`n(mod2)\{0,1\}`$). This, together with $`b(0)=0`$, defines the sequence $`b(n)`$ recursively.

###### Theorem 1.5

(i) We have

$$\gamma (2^l+k)=\frac{2^l+2(1)^l}{3}k+4\gamma (k)$$

for all $`0k2^{l1}`$.

(ii) We have for all $`n𝐍`$ and $`2^{l2}k2^{l1}`$

$$\gamma (2^lk)=\gamma (k)+2\gamma (2^{l1}k).$$

(iii) We have

$$\gamma (2^l+k)=1+\gamma (2^l+k1)+2\gamma (2^lk)2\gamma (2^l+1k)$$

for $`1k2^l`$.

(iv) We have

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\gamma (2n)\hfill & =& n\gamma (n),\hfill \\ \gamma (2n1)\hfill & =& \gamma (2n)+(4^{b(2n1)}1)/3=n\gamma (n)+(4^{b(2n1)}1)/3,\hfill \\ \gamma (2n+1)\hfill & =& \gamma (2n)+(2^{1+2b(n)}+1)/3=n\gamma (n)+(2^{1+2b(n)}+1)/3.\hfill \end{array}$$

Part (iv) of this Theorem gives an alternative recursive definition of the sequence $`(\gamma (n))`$.

Theorem 1.3 seems to have many generalizations. A first one is given by the following:

###### Conjecture 1.6

For each integer $`k0`$ there exists a monic polynomial $`c_k(t)𝐙[t]`$ of degree $`4k`$ such that $`c_k(t)=t^{4k}c_k(t^1)`$ with the following property: if $`q`$ is a power of a prime $`p`$, and $`0kq/2`$ then

$$\chi _{q+k}(t)(t^2+t+1)^{(qϵ(q))/3k}(t1)^{(q+2ϵ(q))/3k}c_k(t)(modp)$$

where $`ϵ(q)\{1,0,1\}`$ satisfies $`ϵ(q)q(mod3)`$.

The first few of these conjectural polynomials $`c_k(t)`$ are

$`c_0(t)`$ $`=`$ $`1,`$
$`c_1(t)`$ $`=`$ $`t^42t^32t+1,`$
$`c_2(t)`$ $`=`$ $`t^86t^7+4t^64t^5+15t^44t^3+4t^26t+1,`$
$`c_3(t)`$ $`=`$ $`(t^42t^32t+1)(t^816t^7+4t^64t^5+40t^44t^3+4t^216t+1),`$
$`c_4(t)`$ $`=`$ $`t^{16}58t^{15}+288t^{14}240t^{13}+393t^{12}1440t^{11}+836t^{10}902t^9`$
$`+2376t^8902t^7+\mathrm{}58t+1,`$
$`c_5(t)`$ $`=`$ $`c_1(t)(t^{16}196t^{15}+2112t^{14}792t^{13}+1290t^{12}10560t^{11}`$
$`+2768t^{10}2972t^9+17424^82972t^7+\mathrm{}196t+1).`$
For $`p=2`$, it follows from Theorem 1.4 and assertion (ii) in Theorem 1.5 that if $`c_k(t)`$ exists then

$$c_k(t)\left(det(tI+P(k))\right)^4(mod2).$$

Computations suggest:

###### Conjecture 1.7

We have

$$c_k(t)(t+1)^{3k}det(tI+P(k))(mod3).$$

This conjecture, together with Theorem 1.3 yields conjectural recursive formulas for $`p_n(t)=det(tI(n)P(n))(mod3)`$ as follows: Set $`p_0(t)=1(mod3),p_1(t)=1t(mod3)`$. For $`n=3^l\pm k>1`$ with $`0k<\frac{3^l}{2}`$ the characteristic polynomial $`\chi _n(t)(mod3)`$ is then conjecturally given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}(t1)^{3^l3k}det(t^2I+P(k))\hfill & \text{if }n=3^lk,\hfill \\ (t1)^{3^l3k}(t+1)^{3k}det(tI+P(k))\hfill & \text{if }n=3^l+k.\hfill \end{array}$$

In particular, all roots of $`\chi _n(t)`$ modulo $`3`$ should be of multiplicative order a power of $`2`$ in the algebraic closure of $`𝐅_3`$.

We conclude finally by mentioning a last conjectural observation:

###### Conjecture 1.8

Given a prime-power $`q=p^l2(mod3)`$, we have

$$\chi _{(q+1)/3}(t)(t+1)^{(q+1)/3}(modp)$$

and

$$\chi _{(2q1)/3}(t)(t+1)^{(q+1)/3}(t1)^{(q2)/3}(modp).$$

###### Remark 1.9

(i) The matrix $`C=P(\frac{q+1}{3})+I(\frac{q+1}{3})`$ for $`q=p^l2(mod3)`$ a prime-power, appears to have a unique Jordan block of maximal length over $`𝐅_p`$. If so, the rows of $`C^{(q+1)/6}`$ generate a self-dual code over $`𝐅_p`$.

(ii) Given a prime power $`q=p^l2(mod3)`$ as above we set $`n=\frac{2q+2}{3}`$ and $`k=\frac{2q1}{3}`$. We conjecture that the characteristic polynomial of the matrix $`\stackrel{~}{P}_k(n)`$ with coefficients

$$\stackrel{~}{p}_{i,j}=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i+j+2k}{i+k}\right),0i,j<n$$

satisfies $`det(tI\stackrel{~}{P}_k(n))(1+t)^n(modp)`$.

###### Remark 1.10

In \[3, Theorems 32 and 35\] Krattenthaler gives evaluations of determinants related to ours, namely of $`det(\omega I+Q(n))`$ where $`\omega `$ is a sixth root of unity, and $`Q(n)`$ has entries $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2\mu +i+j}{j}\right)`$ $`(0i,j<n)`$.

The sequel of this paper is organized as follows:

Section 2 is devoted to autosimilar matrices. Such matrices generalize the matrix $`\overline{P}(\mathrm{})_2`$ and their properties imply easily Theorem 1.1.

Section 3 contains proofs of Proposition 1.2 and Theorem 1.3.

Section 4 contains proofs of Theorems 1.4 and 1.5.

## 2 Autosimilar matrices

Let $`b1`$ be a natural integer. An infinite matrix $`M`$ with coefficients $`m_{i,j}`$ ($`i,j0`$) is $`b`$-autosimilar if $`m_{0,0}=1`$ and if

$$m_{s,t}=\underset{i}{}m_{\sigma _i,\tau _i}$$

where the indices $`s=\sigma _ib^i,t=\tau _ib^i`$ are written in base $`b`$, that is, $`\sigma _i,\tau _i\{0,\mathrm{},b1\}`$ for all $`i=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$.

We denote by $`M(n)`$ the finite sub-matrix of $`M`$ with coefficients $`m_{i,j},0i,j<n`$. A $`b`$-autosimilar matrix $`M`$ is non-degenerate if the determinants

$$det(M(n))$$

are invertible for $`n=2,\mathrm{},b`$.

###### Theorem 2.1

Let $`b2`$ be an integer and let $`M`$ be a $`b`$-autosimilar matrix which is non-degenerate. One has then a factorization

$$M=LDU$$

where $`L,D,U`$ are $`b`$-autosimilar and where $`L`$ is unipotent lower-triangular, $`D`$ is diagonal and $`U`$ is unipotent upper-triangular.

###### Corollary 2.2

Given a non-degenerate $`b`$-autosimilar matrix $`M`$ one has

$$det(M(n))=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n1}{}}d_{\nu _i}$$

for all $`n=\nu _ib^i`$ with $`d_0=1`$ and

$$d_k=det(M(k+1))/det(M(k))$$

for $`k=1,\mathrm{},b1`$.

###### Remark 2.3

In general, one can compute determinants of arbitrary $`b`$-autosimilar matrices over a field $`K`$ by applying Corollary 2.2 to the $`b`$-autosimilar matrix obtained from a generic perturbation of the form

$$M_t(b)=(1t)M(b)+tP(b)$$

(where $`P(b)`$ is a suitable matrix) and working over the rational function field $`K(t)`$.

Proof of Theorem 2.1. The genericity of $`M`$ implies that

$$M(b)=L(b)D(b)U(b)$$

where $`L(b)`$ and $`U(b)`$ are unipotent upper and lower triangular matrices and the diagonal matrix $`D(b)`$ has entries $`d_{0,0}=1`$ and $`d_{k,k}=det(M(k+1))/det(M(k))`$ for $`k=1,\mathrm{},b1`$. Extending $`L(b)`$, $`D(b)`$ and $`U(b)`$ in the unique possible way to infinite $`b`$-autosimilar matrices $`L`$, $`D`$ and $`U`$ we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}(LDU)_{s,t}\hfill & =\underset{k}{}L_{s,k}D_{k,k}U_{k,t}\hfill \\ & =\underset{k={\scriptscriptstyle \kappa _ib^i}}{}\underset{i}{}L_{\sigma _i,\kappa _i}D_{\kappa _i,\kappa _i}U_{\kappa _i,\tau _i}\hfill \\ & =\underset{i}{}\underset{\kappa _i=0}{\overset{b1}{}}L_{\sigma _i,\kappa _i}D_{\kappa _i,\kappa _i}U_{\kappa _i,\tau _i}\hfill \\ & =\underset{i}{}M_{\sigma _i,\tau _i}=M_{s,t}\hfill \end{array}$$

for all $`s=\sigma _ib^i,t=\tau _ib^i𝐍`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

The identity

$$det(M(n))=det(D(n))$$

implies immediately Corollary 2.2.

### 2.1 Binomial coefficients modulo a prime $`p`$

Let $`p`$ be a prime number. We have then

$$(1+x)^n=(1+x)^{\nu _ip^i}(1+x^{p^i})^{\nu _i}(modp)$$

(using properties of the Frobenius automorphism in characteristic $`p`$). This implies immediately the equality

$$\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{k}\right)=\underset{i}{}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\nu _i}{\kappa _i}\right)$$

allowing (for small primes) an efficient computation of binomial coefficients$`(modp)`$.

This equality shows that the reductions modulo 2 or 3 of the symmetric Pascal triangle $`P`$ with coefficients

$$\overline{p}_{i,j}=\left(\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i+j}{i}\right)(mod2)\right)\{0,1\}$$

respectively

$$\overline{p}_{i,j}=\left(\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i+j}{i}\right)(mod3)\right)\{1,0,1\}$$

are $`2`$ (respectively $`3`$) autosimilar matrices.

For $`p=2`$ we have

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1\end{array}\right)$$

which yields $`d_0=1,d_1=1`$ and Corollary 2.2 implies now Theorem 1.1.

###### Remark 2.4

One can show that the inverse of the integral matrix $`\overline{P}(n)_2`$ considered in Theorem 1.1 has all its coefficients in $`\{1,0,1\}`$ for all $`n`$.

For $`p=3`$ we have

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill \frac{1}{2}& \hfill 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 2& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill \frac{1}{2}\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\end{array}\right)$$

This shows that $`det(\overline{P}(n)_3)`$ (over $`𝐙`$) equals $`(2)^{ab}`$ where $`a`$ and $`b`$ are the number of digits $`1`$ and $`2`$ needed in order to write all natural integers $`<n`$ in base $`3`$.

## 3 Proofs of Proposition 1.2 and Theorem 1.3

Proof of Proposition 1.2 Let $`R`$ be a commutative ring, and let

$$A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)GL(2,R).$$

Then $`A`$ determines a (graded $`R`$-algebra) automorphism $`\varphi _A`$ of $`R[X,Y]`$ via $`\varphi _A(X)=aX+bY`$ and $`\varphi _A(Y)=cX+dY`$, or alternatively

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _A(X)\\ \varphi _A(Y)\end{array}\right)=A\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ Y\end{array}\right).$$

It is easy to see that $`\varphi _A\varphi _B=\varphi _{BA}`$. Each $`\varphi _A`$ restricts to an $`R`$-module automorphism of the homogeneous polynomials $`R[X,Y]_{n1}`$ of degree $`n1`$. Let $`A^{(n)}`$ denote the matrix of this endomorphism with respect to the basis $`X^{n1}`$, $`X^{n2}Y`$, $`X^{n3}Y^2,\mathrm{},Y^{n1}`$, that is

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _A(X^{n1})\\ \varphi _A(X^{n2}Y)\\ \varphi _A(X^{n3}Y^2)\\ \mathrm{}\\ \varphi _A(Y^{n1})\end{array}\right)=A^{(n)}\left(\begin{array}{c}X^{n1}\\ X^{n2}Y\\ X^{n3}Y^2\\ \mathrm{}\\ Y^{n1}\end{array}\right).$$

Then $`A^{(n)}GL(n,R)`$ and $`(AB)^{(n)}=A^{(n)}B^{(n)}`$. (Another way of expressing this is to say that $`A^{(n)}`$ is the $`(n1)`$-th symmetric power of $`A`$.)

Let us specialize to the case $`R=𝐅_p=𝐙/p𝐙`$ and $`n=p^l`$. In this case $`A^{(n)}=I`$ if and only if $`A`$ is a scalar matrix. The matrix

$$A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)$$

yields $`A^{(n)}P(p^l)(modp)`$. Since $`A^3=I`$, the matrix $`A^{(n)}`$ has order $`3`$.

Let us now compute the multiplicities of the three eigenvalues of $`P=P(p)(modp)`$ over $`𝐅_p`$ (the formula for $`P(p^l)`$ is then a straightforward consequence of the fact the $`P(p^l)`$ is the $`l`$fold Kronecker product of $`P(p)`$ with itself).

The easy identity $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2k}{k}\right)=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{(p1)/2}{k}\right)(4)^k(modp)`$ for $`p`$ an odd prime and $`0k(p1)/2`$ shows

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{(p1)/2}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2k}{k}\right)\left(\frac{x}{4}\right)^k(1+x)^{(p1)/2}(modp)$$

and yields $`\text{tr}(P)(3)^{(p1)/2}ϵ(p)(modp)`$ (where $`ϵ(p)\{1,0,1\}`$ satisfies $`ϵ(p)p(mod3)`$) by quadratic reciprocity.

Since the characteristic polynomial for $`P`$ has antisymmetric coefficients ($`\alpha _k=\alpha _{pk}`$) the two eigenvalues $`1`$ of $`P`$ have equal multiplicity $`r`$. Lifting into positive integers $`\frac{p1}{2}`$ the solution of the linear system $`r+(p2r)\text{tr}(P)(modp)`$ yields now the result.

The case $`p=2`$ is easily solved by direct inspection. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 3.1

Recall that we have (with the notations of the above proof) $`P=P(n)=A^{(n)}(modp)`$ for $`n=p^l`$ and introduce $`L=L(n)=B^{(n)}(modp)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{L}=\stackrel{~}{L}(n)=C^{(n)}(modp)`$ where

$$A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),B=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right),C=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right).$$

It is straightforward to check that $`L`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ have coefficients

$$l_{i,j}=(1)^i\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i}{j}\right)(modp)\text{ and }\stackrel{~}{l}_{i,j}=(1)^j\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i}{j}\right)(modp)$$

for $`0i,j<n`$.

Then $`A^3=I`$, but $`(I)^{(n)}`$ is the identity. Hence $`P^3=I`$. Also $`C^2=I`$ and $`CAC=A^1`$. It follows that $`A`$ and $`C`$ generate a dihedral group of order 12, containing $`I`$. Hence $`A^{(n)}=P`$ and $`C^{(n)}=\stackrel{~}{L}`$ generate a dihedral group of order 6.

The group $`G_p`$ generated by $`P`$ and $`L`$ depends on the prime $`p`$ (but not on the power $`l`$ of $`n=p^l`$). It is isomorphic to a subgroup of $`\text{PGL}_2(𝐅_p)`$. For all but finitely many primes $`p`$, $`G_p`$ is isomorphic to $`\text{PSL}_2(𝐅_p)`$ or $`\text{PGL}_2(𝐅_p)`$ according to whether $`1`$ is or is not a square in $`𝐅_p`$. The exceptional primes are $`5`$, $`7`$ and $`29`$ where $`G_p`$ has order $`24`$, $`42`$ and $`120`$ respectively.

Proof of Theorem 1.3 Using Proposition 1.2, we can rewrite the equation to be proved as

$$(t^31)^kdet(tIP(qk))det(tIP(q))det(t^2I+P(k))(modp).$$

Here, and in the sequel, we write $`I`$ for $`I(n)`$ whenever this notation is unambiguous; also we denote the zero matrix of any size by $`O`$.

We now work over the field $`𝐅_p`$. Unless otherwise stated vectors will be row vectors.

It is convenient to define a category $`=_{𝐅_p}`$ as follows. Its objects will be pairs $`(V,\alpha )`$ where $`V`$ is a finite-dimensional vector space over $`𝐅_p`$ and $`\alpha `$ is a vector space endomorphism of $`V`$. A morphism $`\varphi :(V,\alpha )(W,\beta )`$ in $``$ will be a linear map $`\varphi :VW`$ with $`\varphi \alpha =\beta \varphi `$. (In fact $``$ is equivalent to the category of finitely generated torsion modules over the polynomial ring $`𝐅_p[X]`$.) If $`(V,\alpha )`$ is an object of $``$ we define $`\chi (V,\alpha ,t)`$ as the characteristic polynomial of $`\alpha `$ acting on $`V`$, that is, $`\chi (V,\alpha ,t)=det(tIA)`$ where $`A`$ is a matrix representing $`\alpha `$ with respect to some basis of $`V`$. An $`r`$ by $`r`$ matrix $`A`$ defines an object $`((𝐅_p)^r,\alpha )`$, denoted by $`((𝐅_p)^r,A)`$, where $`\alpha `$ is the endomorphism defined by $`A`$.

It is easy to see that $``$ is an abelian category, and that if

$$0(V,\alpha )(X,\gamma )(W,\beta )0$$

is a short exact sequence, then $`\chi (X,\gamma ,t)=\chi (V,\alpha ,t)\chi (W,\beta ,t)`$. This is because there is a basis for $`X`$ with respect to which the matrix of $`\gamma `$ (acting on row vectors from the the right) is

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& O\\ C& B\end{array}\right)$$

where $`A`$ and $`B`$ are matrices representing $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ respectively.

Set $`k^{}=qk`$. We can partition the Pascal matrices $`P(k^{})`$ and $`P(q)`$ as follows:

$$P(k^{})=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ B^t& C\end{array}\right)\text{and}P(q)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}A& B& D\\ B^t& C& O\\ D^t& O& O\end{array}\right)$$

where $`A=P(k)`$.

Let $`\overline{A}`$ denote the matrix obtained by rotating $`A`$ through $`180^{}`$. Then $`P(q)^2=\overline{P(q)}`$ and $`P(q)^3=I`$. Hence

$$P(q)^2=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}O& O& \overline{D^t}\\ O& \overline{C}& \overline{B^t}\\ \overline{D}& \overline{B}& \overline{A}\end{array}\right).$$

Thus

$$A^2+BB^t+DD^t=O$$

and so

$$P(k^{})^2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}DD^t& O\\ O& \overline{C}\end{array}\right).$$

From $`P(q)^2=\overline{P(q)}`$ it follows that $`AD=\overline{D^t}`$ and from $`\overline{P(q)}P(q)=I`$ it follows that $`\overline{D^t}D^t=I`$. Hence $`ADD^t=I`$ and so

$$P(k^{})^2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A^1& O\\ O& \overline{C}\end{array}\right).$$

Let $`V=(𝐅_p)^q`$ and $`X=(𝐅_p)^{3k}`$. Let

$$Q_1=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}O& I(k)& O\\ O& O& I(k)\\ I(k)& O& O\end{array}\right).$$

Let $`\varphi :XV`$ be the map defined by the matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}I& O& O\\ A& B& D\\ O& O& \overline{D^t}\end{array}\right).$$

Then

$$Q_1\left(\begin{array}{ccc}I& O& O\\ A& B& D\\ O& O& \overline{D^t}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}A& B& D\\ O& O& \overline{D^t}\\ I& O& O\end{array}\right)$$

and

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}I& O& O\\ A& B& D\\ O& O& \overline{D^t}\end{array}\right)P(q)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}I& O& O\\ A& B& D\\ O& O& \overline{D^t}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}A& B& D\\ B^t& C& O\\ D^t& O& O\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}A& B& D\\ O& O& \overline{D^t}\\ I& O& O\end{array}\right)$$

where we have used the formulas $`P(q)^2=\overline{P(q)}`$ and $`\overline{P(q)}P(q)=I`$. Hence $`\varphi `$ is a morphism from $`((𝐅_p)^{3k},Q_1)`$ to $`((𝐅_p)^q,P(q))`$ in $``$.

Let $`W=(𝐅_p)^k^{}`$ and $`Y=(𝐅_p)^{2k}`$. Let

$$Q_2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}O& I(k)\\ A^1& O\end{array}\right).$$

Let $`\psi :YW`$ be the map defined by the matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}I& O\\ A& B\end{array}\right).$$

Then

$$Q_2\left(\begin{array}{cc}I& O\\ A& B\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ A^1& O\end{array}\right)$$

and

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}I& O\\ A& B\end{array}\right)P(k^{})=\left(\begin{array}{cc}I& O\\ A& B\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ B^t& C\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ A^1& O\end{array}\right)$$

where we have used the formula

$$P(k^{})^2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A^1& O\\ O& \overline{C}\end{array}\right).$$

Hence $`\psi `$ is a morphism from $`((𝐅_p)^{2k},Q_2)`$ to $`((𝐅_p)^k^{},P(k^{}))`$ in $``$.

We need to divide into the cases $`kq/3`$ and $`kq/3`$. In the former cases $`\varphi `$ and $`\psi `$ are injective and in the latter case they are surjective. In the former case we consider their cokernels, in the latter case their kernels.

The matrix $`B`$ has size $`k`$ by $`q2k`$. If $`B`$ has rank $`k`$ (which is only possible if $`kq/3`$) then $`\varphi `$ and $`\psi `$ are injective. If $`B`$ has rank $`q2k`$ (which is only possible if $`kq/3`$) then $`\varphi `$ and $`\psi `$ are surjective.

The matrix $`B`$ contains a submatrix

$$\left(\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i+j+k}{i}\right)\right)_{i,j=0}^{r1}$$

where $`r=\mathrm{min}(k,q2k)`$. This submatrix has determinant $`1`$ (consider it as a matrix over $`𝐙`$ and reduce it to a Vandermonde matrix or see for instance ). Thus $`B`$ has rank $`r`$ and indeed $`\varphi `$ and $`\psi `$ are injective for $`kq/3`$ and surjective for $`kq/3`$.

Consider first the case where $`kq/3`$. Let $`(X_1,\theta _1)`$ and $`(X_2,\theta _2)`$ denote the cokernels of $`\varphi :((𝐅_p)^{3k},Q_1)((𝐅_p)^q,P(q))`$ and $`\psi :((𝐅_p)^{2k},Q_2)((𝐅_p)^k^{},P(k^{}))`$ in $``$. Then

$$\chi ((𝐅_p)^q,P(q),t)=\chi ((𝐅_p)^{3k},Q_1,t)\chi (X_1,\theta _1,t)$$

and

$$\chi ((𝐅_p)^k^{},P(k^{}),t)=\chi ((𝐅_p)^{2k},Q_2,t)\chi (X_2,\theta _2,t).$$

It is apparent that

$$\chi ((𝐅_p)^{3k},Q_1,t)=(t^31)^k$$

and

$$\chi ((𝐅_p)^{2k},Q_2,t)=det(t^2I+A^1)=det(t^2I+A)$$

as $`A`$ and $`A^1`$ are similar. Hence

$$det(tIP(q))=(t^31)^k\chi (X_1,\theta _1,t)$$

and

$$det(tIP(k^{}))=det(t^2I+A)\chi (X_2,\theta _2,t).$$

It suffices to prove that $`(X_1,\theta _1)`$ and $`(X_2,\theta _2)`$ are isomorphic in $``$.

As $`\overline{D^t}`$ is nonsingular, it is apparent that $`X_1`$ is isomorphic to $`(𝐅_p)^{q2k}/Y`$ where $`Y`$ is the row space of $`B`$ and that the action of $`\theta _1`$ is induced by that of the matrix $`C`$ on $`(𝐅_p)^{q2k}`$. It is even more apparent that $`X_2`$ is isomorphic to $`(𝐅_p)^{q2k}/Y`$ and that the action of $`\theta _2`$ is induced by $`C`$. Hence $`(X_1,\theta _1)`$ and $`(X_2,\theta _2)`$ are isomorphic in $``$. This completes the argument in the case $`kq/3`$.

Now suppose that $`kq/3`$. Let $`(K_1,\theta _1)`$ and $`(K_2,\theta _2)`$ denote the kernels of $`\varphi :((𝐅_p)^{3k},Q_1)((𝐅_p)^q,P(q))`$ and $`\psi :((𝐅_p)^{2k},Q_2)((𝐅_p)^k^{},P(k^{}))`$ in $``$. Then

$$\chi ((𝐅_p)^q,P(q),t)\chi (K_1,\theta _1,t)=\chi ((𝐅_p)^{3k},Q_1,t)$$

and

$$\chi ((𝐅_p)^k^{},P(k^{}),t)\chi (K_2,\theta _2,t)=\chi ((𝐅_p)^{2k},Q_2,t).$$

Hence

$$\frac{(t^31)^k}{det(tIP(q))}=\chi (K_1,\theta _1,t)$$

and

$$\frac{det(t^2I+A)}{det(tIP(k^{}))}=\chi (K_2,\theta _2,t).$$

It suffices to prove that $`(K_1,\theta _1)`$ and $`(K_2,\theta _2)`$ are isomorphic in $``$.

As $`\overline{D^t}`$ is nonsingular and has inverse $`D^t`$, it is apparent that

$$K_1=\{(uA,u,uDD^t)=(uA,u,uA^1):u(𝐅_p)^k,uB=0\}$$

and we have

$$(uA,u,uA^1)Q_1=(uA^1,uA,u).$$

Also

$$K_2=\{(uA,u):u(𝐅_p)^k,uB=0\}$$

and

$$(uA,u)Q_2=(uA^1,uA).$$

Hence the linear map

$$(uA,u,uA^1)(uA,u)$$

induces an isomorphism between $`(K_1,\theta _1)`$ and $`(K_2,\theta _2)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 Proofs for the prime $`p=2`$

Proof of Theorem 1.4. Set $`n=2^lk`$ and $`q=2^l`$ where $`1k2^{l1}`$.

Theorem 1.3 yields then over $`𝐅_2`$

$$\chi _n(t)=\chi _{qk}(t)=(t^2+t+1)^{(qϵ(q))/3k}(t+1)^{(q+2ϵ(q))/3k}det(tI+P(k))^2$$

since $`xx^2`$ is an automorphism in characteristic $`2`$.

By induction on $`l`$, the only possible irreducible factors of $`det(tI(n)P(n))(mod2)`$ are $`(1+t)`$ and $`(1+t+t^2)`$. The multiplicity $`\mu (n)=\mu (2^lk)`$ of the factor $`(1+t)`$ in this polynomial is hence recursively defined by

$$\mu (n)=\frac{2^l+2(1)^l}{3}k+2\mu (k)$$

and coincides hence with the sequence $`\gamma `$ of Theorem 1.4. The remaining factor of $`det(tI(n)P(n))(mod2)`$ is hence given by $`(1+t+t^2)^{\gamma _2(n)}`$ where $`\gamma _2(n)=\frac{1}{2}(n\gamma (n))`$ and this proves the result. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proof of Theorem 1.5. We have for $`0k2^{l1}`$

$`\gamma (2^l+k)`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma (2^{l+1}(2^lk))`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2^{l+1}2(1)^l}{3}}2^l+k+2\gamma (2^lk)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2^{l+1}2(1)^l}{3}}2^l+k+2{\displaystyle \frac{2^l+2(1)^l}{3}}2k+4\gamma (k)`$
which is assertion (i).

We have for all $`2^{l2}k2^{l1}`$

$`\gamma (2^lk)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2^l+2(1)^l}{3}}k+\gamma (k)+\gamma (2^{l1}(2^{l1}k))`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2^l+2(1)^l}{3}}k+\gamma (k)+{\displaystyle \frac{2^{l1}2(1)^l}{3}}2^{l1}+k+2\gamma (2^{l1}k)`$
$`=`$ $`\gamma (k)+2\gamma (2^{l1}k)`$
which proves assertion (ii).

Similarly, we have for $`1k2^l`$

$`\gamma (2^l+k)\gamma (2^l+k1)`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma (2^{l+1}(2^lk))\gamma (2^{l+1}(2^lk+1))`$
$`=`$ $`1+2\gamma (2^lk)2\gamma (2^lk+1)`$
which proves assertion (iii).

Writing $`2n=2^l2k`$ with $`1k2^{l2}`$ we have, using induction on $`n`$,

$`\gamma (2^l2k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2^l(1)^l}{3}}2k+2\gamma (2k)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2^l(1)^l}{3}}2k+2\left(k\gamma (k)\right)`$
$`=`$ $`\left(2^{l1}k\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{2^{l1}(1)^{l1}}{3}}k+2\gamma (k)\right)`$
$`=`$ $`\left(2^{l1}k\right)\gamma (2^{l1}k)`$
which proves the first equality of assertion (iv) (this equality follows also from the fact that $`P(2n)`$ is the Kronecker product of $`P(n)`$ with $`P(2)`$ over $`𝐅_2`$).

The second identity of assertion (iv) amounts to the equality

$$\gamma (2n1)\gamma (2n)=\frac{4^{b(2n1)}1}{3}.$$

We prove first by induction on $`n`$ that this identity is equivalent to the last identity.

The last identity and induction yield

$`\gamma (2n1)\gamma (2n)`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma (2n1)\gamma (2n2)+\gamma (2n2)\gamma (2n)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2^{1+2b(n1)}+1}{3}}1+\gamma (n)\gamma (n1).`$
We now divide into cases according to the parity of $`n`$.

Suppose first that $`n=2m`$ is even. Then inductively

$$\gamma (n)\gamma (n1)=\gamma (2m)\gamma (2m1)=\frac{4^{b(2m1)1}}{3}=\frac{4^{b(n1)1}}{3}$$

Hence

$$\gamma (2n1)\gamma (2n)=1+\frac{2^{1+2b(n1)}+1}{3}\frac{2^{2b(n1)}1}{3}=\frac{2^{2b(n1)}1}{3}.$$

But

$$2^{2b(n1)}=4^{b(n1)}=4^{b(2n1)}$$

as the binary representation of $`n1`$ ends in $`1`$ and that of $`2n1`$ is obtained by appending $`1`$.

Now suppose that $`n=2m+1`$ is odd. Then

$$\gamma (n)\gamma (n1)=\gamma (2m+1)\gamma (2m)=\frac{2^{1+2b(m)}+1}{3}=\frac{2^{1+2b(2m)}+1}{3}.$$

Hence

$$\gamma (2n1)\gamma (2n)=1+\frac{2^{1+2b(n1)}+1}{3}+\frac{2^{1+2b(n1)}+1}{3}=\frac{2^{2+2b(n1)}1}{3}.$$

But

$$2^{2+2b(n1)}=4^{1+b(n1)}=4^{b(2n1)}$$

as the binary representation of $`n1`$ ends in $`0`$ and that of $`2n1`$ is obtained by appending $`1`$.

This completes the proof of equivalence of the two last identities in assertion (iv).

We prove now the last identity by induction on $`n`$.

The last identity of assertion (iv) is equivalent to

$$\gamma (2n+1)\gamma (2n)=\frac{2^{1+2b(n)}+1}{3}.$$

Writing $`2n+1=2^l+k`$ with $`1k<2^l`$ and applying assertion (iii) and the second identity of assertion (iv) (which holds by induction) we have

$`\gamma (2n+1)\gamma (2n)`$ $`=`$ $`1+2\gamma (2^lk)2\gamma (2^l+1k)`$
$`=`$ $`1+2{\displaystyle \frac{4^{b(2^lk)}1}{3}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2^{1+2b(2^lk)}+1}{3}}`$
Since $`(2^l+k1)+(2^lk)=2^{l+1}1`$ and since $`2^l+k1`$ is even and greater than $`2^lk`$, they have the same number of blocks $`1\mathrm{}1`$ in their binary expansion. This shows $`b(2^lk)=b(2n)=b(n)`$ and establishes the last identity of assertion (iv). $`\mathrm{}`$

The first author wishes to thank J.-P. Allouche, F. Sigrist, U. Vishne and A. Wassermann for interesting comments and remarks.

Roland Bacher, Institut Fourier, UMR 5582, Laboratoire de Mathématiques, BP 74, 38402 St. Martin d’Hères Cedex, France, Roland.Bacher@ujf-grenoble.fr

Robin Chapman, University of Exeter, School of Mathematical Sciences, North Park Road, EX4 4QE Exeter, UK, rjc@maths.ex.ac.uk


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1  Introduction

Interest in diffractive processes is now revived due, in most part, to the discovery of rapidity gaps at HERA, i.e. of processes where diffractive interactions contribute a siseable part of the whole amplitude. The diffraction interaction is defined by the multigluon colorless exchange named pomeron . In the perturbative regime of QCD, it can be considered as a compound system of the two Reggeized gluons  in the approximation where one sums the leading $`ln`$’s in energy, though its nonperturbative structure is basically unknown. Research on the nature of pomeron requires the knowledge of the parameters of purely diffractive processes, such as the total cross section and the phase of the elastic scattering amplitude. These quantities are closely related with the first principles of field theory such as causality, polynomial boundedness, crossing symmetry etc. They are also important for modern nuclear physics at high energies, as these quantities underlie many modern descriptions of nuclear interactions when we study such effects as nuclear shadowing, transparency or broken parity .

The energy dependence of the cross section and of the parameter $`\rho (s)`$ \- the ratio of the real to imaginary part of the scattering amplitude in the high energy domain - is a much discussed question which still remains without a definite answer. Quite many efforts were spent to understand the high-energy hadron scattering from such general principles of relativistic quantum field theory as Lorenz invariance, analyticity, unitarity and crossing symmetry. Analyticity, which arises from the principle of causality, leads to dispersion relations which give the real part of the scattering amplitude at $`t=0`$ as an energy integral involving $`\sigma _{tot}`$ .

The forward dispersion relations for nucleon-nucleon scattering have not been proven, although they were written down a long time ago . Numerous papers have been devoted to calculations of the real parts of the $`pp`$ and $`\overline{p}p`$ forward scattering amplitude, using variety of dispersion relations and different representation for the energy dependence of the imaginary part of the scattering amplitude at $`t=0`$.

The dispersion relations for scattering amplitudes depend on three properties, analyticity in the energy variable, the optical theorem, and polynomial boundedness. The prediction of the dispersion relation is very important for the discovery of new physical phenomena at superhigh energies. For example, in the case of potential scattering by nonlocal potentials the polynomial boundedness can be broken . With some additional assumptions connected with string models , the effect of non-local behavior will decrease the phase, and hence increase $`\rho =ReF/ImF`$. A different behavior can be obtained in the case of extra internal dimension . So, such a remarkable effect ( the deviation of $`\rho (s)`$ from the prediction of the dispersion relation) could be discovered already at the LHC in the TOTEM experiment.

## 2  Different connections between the real and the imaginary part of the scattering amplitude

The optical theorem connects the imaginary part of the forward elastic scattering amplitude with the total cross section. $`\sigma _{tot}(s)=4\pi ImF(s,t=0)`$. The crossing property of the scattering amplitude is used very often to relate the imaginary part to the real part of the scattering amplitude with the substitution $`S\stackrel{~}{S}=Sexp(i\pi /2)`$. In the case of the maximal behavior, the crossing-even and crossing-odd amplitudes at $`t=0`$ are

$`F_+(s,t=0)/is=F_+(0)[ln(se^{i\pi /2}]^2`$
$`F_{}(s,t=0)/is=iF_{}(0)[ln(se^{i\pi /2}]^2`$ (1)
On the other hand the integral dispersion relations give us the most powerful connections between $`\sigma _{tot}`$ and $`\rho `$. Their form depends on the behavior of the crossing-even and crossing-odd parts of the scattering amplitude. In the case where the crossing-even part of the scattering amplitude saturates the Froissart bound, so that the total cross section does not grow faster than a power of $`\mathrm{ln}(s)`$, the dispersion relation requires a single subtraction. If the crossing-odd part of the scattering amplitude does not grow with energy, so that the difference of the total cross section between hadron-hadron and hadron-antihadron scattering falls with energy, the odd dispersion relation needs no subtraction

$`Ref^{even}(E)=ReF^{even}(0)+P{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _m^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑E^{}{\displaystyle \frac{2E^2}{E^{}(E^2E^2)}}Imf^{even}(E^{});`$ (2)
$`Ref^{odd}(E)=P{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _m^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑E^{}{\displaystyle \frac{2E}{(E^2E^2)}}Imf^{odd}(E^{}),`$ (3)
where $`P`$ denotes the principal part of the integrals.

On the basis of the integral dispersion relation, one obtained derivative dispersion relations (first used in the context of Regge theory  and developed in ) which are more suitable for calculation but, of course, have a more narrow region of validity of scattering amplitudes . It is to be noted that in this case we lose the subtraction constant. It means that the derivative dispersion relation can be used only at high energies where this constant is not perceived. The derivative dispersion relations can be written

$`{\displaystyle \frac{R(s)}{s^\alpha }}=tan[{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}(\alpha 1+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dlns}})]{\displaystyle \frac{I(s)}{s^\alpha }},`$ (4)
where the parameter $`\alpha `$ is some arbitrary constant modifying the integral. Usually we choose $`\alpha =1`$ from the sake of simplicity . In  it was shown that if we fit the experimental data, the best value will is $`\alpha =1.25`$. But in this case, the parameter $`\alpha 1`$ will change the relation between the imaginary and the real parts of the scattering amplitude in the whole energy region. So, the predictions of the integral dispersion relations and of the derivative dispersion relation will not coincide. That means that one or the other is false. From the viewpoint of basic principles, which lead to the integral dispersion relation, we have to give prefer once to them. Hence, the equality of both representations at high energies requires that $`\alpha `$ be equal to $`1`$.

## 3  The experimental data and the check of the integral dispersion relations

Now it is a common belief that the experimental data confirm the validity of the dispersion relations. Of course, there is some ambiguity concerning the energy dependence of the total cross sections. Already the fit by Amaldi et al.  and by Amos et al.  has given the tendency for $`\sigma _{tot}(s)`$ and $`\rho (s)`$ energy to increase. Khuri and Kinoshita  have predicted that $`\rho (s)_{pp}`$ should approach zero from positive values. At the time of this prediction, $`\rho (s)_{pp}`$ was known to be a small negative quantity implying, thus, that $`\rho (s)_{pp}`$ should be zero at some energy, reach a maximum, and then tend to zero at still higher energies.

The comparison of the predicted values of the real part of the $`pp`$ scattering amplitude with the experimental ones allows one to conclude that, on the whole, the experimental data agree well with the dispersion relation predictions. However if we take into account the whole set of experimental data, without any exception, we find that the total $`\chi ^2`$ is large and that some experimental data contradict others. Some points of one experiment are situated above the theoretical line and some points of other experiment are below the theoretical curve by more than three statistical errors. Moreover, in , it was noted that experimental data on $`\overline{p}p`$-scattering around $`p_L=5`$ GeV/c disagreed with the analysis based on the dispersion relations .

At low energy, the definition of the subtraction constant is very important. The spin-independent amplitude could be continued into the low-energy region of $`\overline{p}p`$ scattering and into unphysical region. However, because of the lack of the data for the low energy $`\overline{p}p`$ scattering, such a continuation (e.g.. by means of the effective range approximation) cannot be carried out. This is why in the dispersion relation calculations the imaginary part of the amplitude in the unphysical and low-energy region is sometimes decomposed into a series in which the coefficients are determined by comparison of the calculated real parts with the experimentally measured ones.

An alternative way of handling these regions is to replace the continuum of states with a set of bound states at fixed energies. Mathematically, this is equivalent to replacing a cut of an analytic function by a sum of poles (resonances). The values of their residues (coupling constant) are either a priori fixed, or are found by comparing the calculated values of the real part with the experimental data. One should note that the replacement of the cut with the poles is, in itself, an arbitrary procedure. Besides, both the exact number of poles-resonances and the values of their coupling constants are unknown.

Therefore, it seems to us that the apparant agreement of theoretical (i.e. by the dispersion relation) calculations with experimental data on the real parts of the $`pp`$ forward scattering amplitude means only that the parameters in various approximations of unphysical and low-energy region of $`\overline{p}p`$ scattering can be chosen so as to obtain consistency between the theoretical calculations and the experimental data. Really, the dispersion relations for $`pp`$ , $`\overline{p}p`$ forward scattering have been tested at low energy, at best, only quantatively.

## 4  The calculation of $`\rho `$ through different methods

As noted above, we can obtain the value of $`\rho `$ by different methods. The simplest one is to use the crossing symmetry properties of the scattering amplitude and to obtain the $`ReF(s,t)`$ by changing $`𝐒\mathrm{𝐒𝐞𝐱𝐩}(𝐢\pi /\mathrm{𝟐})`$ in all energy dependent parameters of a model, see for example . In that case, the real part of the scattering amplitude is obtained straight a way.

Another way to obtain the $`ReF(s,t)`$ is to use the derivative dispersion relations. The total cross section can be taken in form

$`\sigma _{tot}=Z_{pp}+ALn(s/s_0)+Y_1s^{\eta _1}Y_2s^{\eta _2}.`$ (5)
Hereafter we suppose, beside the special separate cases, that $`s`$ has the coefficient $`s_1^1=1GeV`$. The derivative dispersion relation gives us

$`\rho (s,t)\sigma _{tot}=`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}Aln({\displaystyle \frac{s}{s_0}})Y_1s^{\eta _1}[\mathrm{tan}({\displaystyle \frac{1\eta _1}{2}}\pi ]^1Y_2s^{\eta _2}[\mathrm{cot}({\displaystyle \frac{1\eta _2}{2}}\pi ]^1.`$ (6)
To accurately compare the results of the different calculations, let us examine carefully the calculations with the integral dispersion relation. There were many works on the methods of calculating the dispersion integrals . From recent works, one should note the paper  where it was shown that for the most common parametrizations of the total cross section, the principal value integrals can be calculated in terms of rapidly convergent series. The advantages are not restricted to a reduction of the computer time.

Let us consider, as in , the standard dispersion relations for $`pppp(+)`$ and $`\overline{p}p\overline{p}p()`$

$`\rho (E)_\pm \sigma _\pm (E)={\displaystyle \frac{B}{p}}+{\displaystyle \frac{E}{\pi p}}P{\displaystyle _m^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑E^{}p^{}[{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _\pm (E^{})}{E^{}(E^{}E)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{}(E^{})}{E^{}(E^{}+E)}}],`$ (7)
where $`E`$ and $`p`$ are the energy and the momentum in the laboratory frame, $`m`$ is the proton mass and $`B`$ is a subtraction constant. In terms of the variable $`s=2m(E+m)`$, a parametrization of the cross section can be written in the form (5).

In calculating the principal value of the dispersion integral, we face two difficulties. One is the singularity of the integral at the point $`E^{}=E`$ and the other is the infinity of the upper bound of the integral which is especially important in the case of a total cross section growing with energy. It is possible to solve both problems if the integral is divided in three parts. Let us cut the integral at the singularity point and select the last part which contains the tail of the integral

$`{\displaystyle _m^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑E^{}p^{}[{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _\pm (E^{})}{E^{}(E^{}E)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{}(E^{})}{E^{}(E^{}+E)}}]=I_1+I_2+I_3,`$ (8)
where

$`I_1={\displaystyle _m^{Eϵ}}𝑑E^{}p^{}[{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _\pm (E^{})}{E^{}(E^{}E)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{}(E^{})}{E^{}(E^{}+E)}}],`$ (9)
$`I_2={\displaystyle _{E+ϵ}^{kE}}𝑑E^{}p^{}[{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _\pm (E^{})}{E^{}(E^{}E)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{}(E^{})}{E^{}(E^{}+E)}}],`$ (10)
$`I_3={\displaystyle _{kE}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑E^{}p^{}[{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _\pm (E^{})}{E^{}(E^{}E)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{}(E^{})}{E^{}(E^{}+E)}}].`$ (11)
Here $`k`$ is a number, for example, $`k=10`$. The third integral can easily be calculated analytically in some of the most important cases, for example, if we take the nonfalling part of the total cross section in the form,

$`\sigma _{tot}(s)^{as}=Z+Aln^n(s/s_0).`$ (12)
Here we take for simplicity $`s_0=1`$ and $`n=1`$ or $`=2`$. The other cases are slightly more complicated, but do not lead to any principal difficulty.

Let us take $`k=10`$. For the constant term the integral is

$`{\displaystyle _{kE}^{\mathrm{}}}`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{2ZE}{E^{}(E^2E^2)}}]dE^{}=2ZE[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2kE}}(ln(1+a)ln(1a)`$ (13)
$`+ln({\displaystyle \frac{1}{E}})ln({\displaystyle \frac{1}{E}}))]=2.00671Z/k=0.200671Z.`$
For the $`n=1`$ the growing term is

$`{\displaystyle _{kE}^{\mathrm{}}}[{\displaystyle \frac{2EAlnE^{}}{E^{}(E^2E^2)}}]𝑑E^{}=A[0.662285+0.20067lnE].`$ (14)
In the case of maximal, allowed by analyticity, growth of the total cross section, $`I_3`$ is given by

$`{\displaystyle _{kE}^{\mathrm{}}}[{\displaystyle \frac{2EAln^2E^{}}{E^{}(E^2E^2)}}]𝑑E^{}={\displaystyle \frac{A}{12}}[28.6337+lnE(15.8948+2.40805lnE)].`$ (15)
As a result, we can compare our computer calculations with our analytical calculation to find a suitable upper bound of the dispersion integral for computer calculation. Such a comparison is shown in Figs. 1 and 2 where the line is the analytical calculations, and the box and triangles represent computer calculations. It is clear that both calculations coincide with high accuracy in all energy region.

Now return to the first two integrals. The numerical calculations show that, after removing the tail of the whole integral, the sum of the integrals $`I_1`$ and $`I_2`$ very fastly tends to its limit and cancels out the divergent parts. Usually, a precision of 1 % is sufficient. As a result, we can easily control the accuracy of our calculations. The calculations of $`\rho (s)`$ by the dispersion relation are shown in Fig.1 for the case $`\sigma _{tot}(s)ln(s)`$ and in Fig.2 for the case $`\sigma _{tot}(s)ln^2(s)`$.

The calculations by the derivative dispersion relation are shown in these figures also. At high energies, both calculations coincide and give the same predictions. If we choose the corresponding value of the subtracting constant $`B`$, both calculations coincide with high accuracy at low energy too. The calculation using crossing-symmetry also coincides with both calculations in the high energy region and can coincide with the integral dispersion relations if we choose the corresponding size of the subtraction constant. But it will differ from the subtraction constant required for the derivative dispersion relations.

So, we can conclude that the descriptions at low and high energy of $`\rho (s)`$ are practically independent of each other in the case of the integral dispersion relation. The subtracting constant practically unties these two regions. So, the good description of the data of $`\rho `$ cannot give valuable information about the validity of our basic principle and weakly impacts on our prediction about the behavior of the total cross section and the parameter $`\rho (s)`$ at high energies.

## 5  The experimental data on $`\rho `$

Let us now consider very shortly the procedure of extracting parameters of the hadronic scattering amplitude from the experimental data $`dN/dt`$. In fact, in experiment we measure $`dN/dt`$, as a result of which “experimental” data such as $`\sigma _{tot}`$, $`B`$-slope and $`\rho `$ are extracted from $`dN/dt`$ with some model assumptions. Some assumptions are also needed to extrapolate the measured quantities to $`t=0`$. Most important in this case is the determination of the normalization of the experimental data. Contributions from the electromagnetic and hadronic interactions exist in the hadron interaction at small angles. We can calculate the Coulomb amplitude with the required accuracy . The contribution of the Coulomb-hadron interference term in $`dN/dt`$ depends on the parameters of the hadronic amplitudes and the Coulomb-hadron phase also depends on these parameters. After the normalization of the $`dN/dt`$ data we obtain the differential elastic cross section.

The analysis of the elastic scattering data makes several assumptions. Very often one assumes that the real and imaginary parts of the nuclear amplitude have the same $`t`$ exponential dependence; the cross-odd part of the scattering amplitude either has the same behavior of momentum transfer as the cross even part, or it is neglected; the contributions of the spin-flip amplitudes are neglected. Note that the value of $`\rho `$ is heavily correlated with the normalization of $`d\sigma /dt`$. Its magnitude weakly impacts on the determination of $`\sigma _{tot}`$ only in the case where the normalization is known exactly.

There is no experiment which measures the magnitudes of these parameters separately. Sometimes, to reduce experimental errors, the magnitude of some quantities is taken from another experiment. As a result, we can obtain a contradiction between the basic parameters for one energy (for example, if we calculate the imaginary part of the scattering amplitude, we can obtain a nonexponential behavior). It can lead to some errors in the analysis based on the dispersion relations.

For example, let us take one experiment (there are others which are very similar) which was carried out at $`\sqrt{s}=16.÷27.4`$ GeV by the JINR-FNAL Collaboration . To analyze $`dN/dt`$ in this experiment, the energy dependence of $`\sigma _{tot}`$ and $`B`$ were taken in an analytical form supported by the data of other experiments. But the new fit of the $`dN/dt`$ data with all free parameters gives values of $`\rho `$ which are systematically above the original values . Such a conclusion was obtained early in .

It means that the theoretical line obtained by the dispersion relation will be higher than in the existing descriptions and close to a simple description with the use of only the crossing symmetric properties of the scattering amplitude (see, Figs.1,2). But it does not change essentially our prediction for high energies, only the value of the subtraction constant will be changed.

## 6 Conclusions

The magnitudes of $`\sigma _{tot}`$, $`\rho `$ and slope - $`B`$ have to be determined in one experiment and determinations of their magnitudes depend on each other. The procedure of extrapolation of the imaginary part of the scattering amplitude is significant for determining $`\sigma _{tot}`$. There can also exist some additional hypotheses which lead to a deviation of differential cross section at very small momentum transfer. For example, the analysis of experimental data shows a possible manifestation of the hadron spin-flip amplitudes at high energies. The research into spin effects will be a crucial stone for different models and will help us understand the interaction and structure of particles, especially at large distances. All this raises the question about the measurement of spin effects in elastic hadron scattering at small angles at future accelerators. Especially, we would like to note the programs at RHIC where the polarizations of both collider beams will be constructed. Additional information on polarization data will help us only if we know sufficiently well the beam polarizations. So, the normalisations of $`dN/dt`$ and $`A_N`$ are most important for the determination of the magnitudes of these values. New methods of extracting the magnitudes of these quantities are required.

Acknowledgments. I would like to express my sincere thanks to the organizers for the kind invitation and the financial support; and to J.-R. Cudell and V. Ezhela for fruitful discussions.


text:
# 1 Introduction

Behaviour of Magnetic Tubes in Neutron Star’s Interior
$`R.S.Singh^1`$, $`B.K.Sinha^2`$ and $`N.K.Lohani^3`$
$`1._{DepartmentofMathematics,P.G.College,Ghazipur(U.P.),India}`$
$`2._{DepartmentofMathematics,S.C.College,Ballia(U.P.),India}`$
$`3._{DepartmentofPhysics,M.B.Govt.P.G.College,Haldwani,Nainital263141,India}`$

Abstract. It is found from Maxwell’s equations that the magnetic field lines are good analogues of relativistic strings. It is shown that the super-conducting current in the neutron star’s interior causes local rotation of magnetic flux tubes carrying quantized flux.

## 1 Introduction

It is widely accepted that neutron star’s interior is mostly neutrons with a small admixture of protons and an equal number of electrons . The electrons form a highly degenerate relativistic plasma which is in the normal state . The magnetic flux that threads the interior is generated by the electron currents (i.e., the normal conduction currents). As the temperature of neutron star’s interior drops below the critical temperature $`𝐓_c`$, protons form a type II super-conductor in which the magnetic field is organized into an array of quantized magnetic flux tubes . The super-conducting electron revolve around these tubes and generate superconducting currents. Since protons are super-conducting, the diffusion time scale for the magnetic field is lengthened and hence the field in the interior can be thought of as frozen-in on a macroscopic scale. Lagrangian description of the frozen-in magnetic field leads to the action associated with Nambu-Goto strings . This result gives us impetus to investigate the string behaviour of magnetic field lines. In this short note we derive string equations of motion from Maxwell’s equations and prove that the quantized magnetic flux tubes in the super-conducting region are locally rotating tubes.

## 2 String Behaviour of Magnetic Field Lines

We consider a highly conducting fluid with 4-velocity $`𝐮^a`$ which satisfies the normalization condition $`𝐮^a`$ $`𝐮_a`$ = -1. The electro-magnetic field inside the fluid evolves in accordance with Maxwell’s equations .

$$𝐇_{[ab;c]}=0or𝐇_{;b}^{ab}=0,$$
(1)
$$𝐇_{;b}^{ab}=𝐉^a,$$
(2)
where semi-colon (;) indicates covariant derivative and asterisk (\*) denotes dualization of 2-form. $`𝐉^a`$ is the electric current 4-vector which is expressible as

$$𝐉^a=\mathrm{𝐪𝐮}^a+\mathbf{ȷ}_{(n)}^a+\mathbf{ȷ}_{(s)}^a,$$
(3)
where $`𝐪`$ is the proper electric charge density. $`ȷ_{(n)}^a`$ and $`ȷ_{(s)}^a`$ denote, respectively, the normal conduction current and the super-conducting current. In the limit of infinite electrical conductivity, the electric field $`𝐄_a`$ measured by an observer comoving with the fluid vanishes, i.e. $`𝐄_a`$ = $`𝐇_{ab}`$ $`𝐮^b`$ = 0. This is the frozen-in condition of the magnetic field . Alternatively, one may write

$$𝐇^{ab}=\eta _{B_cu_d}^{abcd}𝐇^{ab}=2𝐮^{[a}𝐁^{b]},$$
(4)
where the magnetic induction vector $`𝐁_a`$ satisfies the constitutive relation $`𝐁_a`$ = $`\mu `$ $`𝐇_a`$. The permeability $`\mu `$ is assumed to be constant. $`𝐇_a`$ denotes the magnetic field. It is evident from (4) that $`𝐇^{ab}`$ $`𝐇_{ab}^{}`$ = 0. This is well-known magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) condition. It is apparent from (4) that $`𝐇^{ab}`$ is the skew-symmetric product of a pair of linearly independent vectors ( $`𝐮^a,𝐁^a`$ ). The vectors ( $`𝐮^a`$, $`𝐁^a`$ ) span a 2-dimensional vector space which is usually referred to as a blade of the bivector $`𝐇^{ab}`$ . Because of MHD condition $`𝐇^{ab}`$ is a simple bivector of second rank. Since $`𝐮^a`$ is timelike and $`𝐁^a`$ is spacelike, the simple bivector $`𝐇^{ab}`$ is timelike. Such a simple timelike bivector $`𝐇^{ab}`$ has been called a ”magnetic blade” . Since the contraction of (1) with $`𝐇_{ca}`$ yields the necessary and sufficient frobenius condition  for $`𝐇^{ab}`$ to be 2-surface forming, there exists a family of timelike 2-surfaces spanned by the fluid flow lines and the magnetic field lines . Thus the magnetic blades mesh together to form a well-defined family of timelike 2-surfaces which we denote byM. From now on, we shall call each M a ”magnetic world sheet”. As is known that a string is a spacelike curve and it traces out a timelike world sheet when it is in motion . Because of the frozen-in magnetic field, the fluid particles once locked to a magnetic field line will remain so throughout the motion and hence each ”magnetic world sheet” M can be thought of as a string. Following Carter , we introduce a unit time-like bivector associated with M as

$$ϵ^{ab}=2𝐮^{[a}𝐧^{b]}$$
(5)
with the properties that

$$ϵ^{ab}ϵ_{ab}=2,𝐮^a𝐧_a=0,$$
(6)
where $`𝐧^a`$ denotes the unit spacelike vector field whose integral curves represent the magnetic field lines. A straight forward but simple calculation gives

$$ϵ_{ca}^{}ϵ_{;b}^{ab}=𝐊_c,$$
(7)
where $`ϵ_{ca}^{}`$ is the dual of $`ϵ_{ca}`$ and $`𝐊_c`$ is given by

$$𝐊_c=𝐧_c^{}𝐮_c^{}+𝐧_c𝐮_a^{}𝐧^a+𝐮_c𝐧_a^{}𝐮^a$$
(8)
Here an overhead circumflex $`()`$ and dot ($``$) are, respectively, used to indicate the directional derivatives along the unit vector field $`𝐧^a`$ and the fluid 4-velocity $`𝐮^a`$. We call $`𝐊_c`$ the extrinsic curvature vector of the ”magnetic world sheet” M in the terminology of Carter and Langlois . Setting $`𝐇^{ab}`$ = - $`𝐇ϵ^{ab}`$ and substituting it into (2), we find that

$$𝐇_{,b}ϵ^{ab}+𝐇ϵ_{;b}^{ab}=𝐉^a,$$
(9)
Contracting (9) with $`ϵ_{ca}^{}`$ and using (7), we get

$$\mathrm{𝐇𝐊}_c+𝐙_c=𝐇_{,b}\widehat{\gamma }_{c,}^b,$$
(10)
where

$$𝐙_c=ϵ_{ca}^{}(ȷ_{(n)}^a+ȷ_{(s)}^a),\widehat{\gamma }_c^b=\delta _c^b+𝐮^b𝐮_c𝐧^b𝐧_c$$
(11)
It is interesting to note that (10) bears a striking resemblance with that of the equation of motion for a global cosmic string in an axion field background . $`𝐙_c`$ represents the Lorentz force per unit length of a magnetic tube acting on each individual magnetic tube. This force isinterpretale as a magnetic analogue of Joukowski force (or Magnus force) that has been recognized in the context of vortex tube . The magnetic field intensity $`𝐇`$ acts as a tension in the string interpretation of the magnetic field lines.

## 3 Tie-up with the Rotation of Magnetic Field Lines and Superconducting Currents

In this section we confine our attention to seek a relation between supercurrent and rotation of thin magnetic tube trapped in the type II superconducting regions of protons under the flux freezing condition. Due to lack of space we omit discussions related to supercurrents which can be found in Ahmedov . Substituting the second relation of (4) into (2) and inverting the resulting equation with the help of (1), we find that

$$\eta _{H_bH_{c;d}}^{abcd}=2\eta _{H_bu_c}^{abcd}\sigma _{de}𝐇^e(𝐇_bȷ_{(s)}^b)𝐮^a,$$
(12)
where $`\sigma _{de}`$de denotes the shear of the fluid. Setting $`𝐇_a`$ = $`\mathrm{𝐇𝐧}_a`$ and applying Greenberg’s theory of spacelike congruence  for the congruence of magnetic field lines, we arrive at

$$\eta _{H_bH_{c;d}}^{abcd}=2H^2𝐑^a+2\eta _{H_bu_c}^{abcd}\sigma _{de}𝐇^e,$$
(13)
where $`𝐑^a`$ denotes the rotation of the congruence of magnetic field lines that generates a magnetic tube. It follows from (12) and (13) that

$$𝐑^a=\left[\frac{𝐇_bȷ_{(s)}^b}{2𝐇^2}\right]𝐮^a$$
(14)
which leads to

$$𝐑^2=\left[\frac{𝐇_bȷ_{(s)}^b}{2𝐇^2}\right]^2,𝐑^2=𝐑^a𝐑_a$$
(15)
It is evident from (15) that the superconducting current causes localrotation of a magnetic tube. This implies that the magnetic flux tubes carryin quantized flux are locally rotating thin tubes in type II superconductor. This local rotation remains operative as long as the induced magnetic field strength (due to the normal conduction currents) is above the lower critical field but below the upper critical field (i.e. $`𝐇_{c1}`$ $``$ $`𝐇`$ $``$ $`𝐇_{c2}`$ ).

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thanks Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Pune for providing facility where this work was carried out We acknowledge the co-operation of S.C.College, Ballia and M.B.Govt. P.G. College, Haldwani, authority.