text:
# References

MIT–CTP–3324

STUPP–02–172

hep-th/0212337

December, 2002

Three-Form Flux with $`𝒩=2`$ Supersymmetry
on AdS5 $`\times `$ S5

Madoka Nishimuraa*** e-mail: madoka@mit.edu and Yoshiaki Taniib e-mail: tanii@post.saitama-u.ac.jp

aCenter for Theoretical Physics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, MA 02139-4307, USA

bPhysics Department, Faculty of Science
Saitama University, Saitama 338-8570, Japan

Abstract
In the context of the AdS/CFT correspondence the general form of a three-form flux perturbation to the AdS5 $`\times `$ S5 solution in the type IIB supergravity which preserves $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry is obtained. The arbitrary holomorphic function appearing in the $`𝒩=1`$ case studied by Graña and Polchinski is restricted to a quadratic function of the coordinates transverse to the D3-branes.

1. Introduction

It was proposed that the type IIB string theory compactified on AdS5 $`\times `$ S5 has a dual description by the $`𝒩=4`$ super Yang-Mills theory in the large $`N`$ limit . This conjecture of the AdS/CFT correspondence has been supported by comparison of spectra, correlation functions and anomalies calculated in both of the supergravity and the Yang-Mills theory. (For a review, see ref. .) The AdS/CFT correspondence was also studied in various other spacetime dimensions. At first the correspondence was studied for theories with high supersymmetries such as $`𝒩=4`$. To apply it to more realistic models one has to consider theories with lower supersymmtries.

One of the ways to obtain the AdS/CFT correspondence for lower supersymmetric cases is to modify supergravity solutions by adding a perturbation. In ref.  a perturbation of the three-form flux was added to the AdS5 $`\times `$ S5, which breaks $`𝒩=4`$ to $`𝒩=1`$. This perturbation corresponds to fermion mass terms of the three $`𝒩=1`$ chiral multiplets in the $`𝒩=4`$ super Yang-Mills theory and polarizes D3 branes into 5-branes . Similar constructions of the AdS/CFT correspondence with lower supersymmetries were discussed in refs. .

The general form of a three-form flux perturbation to the AdS5 $`\times `$ S5 solution which preserves $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetry and satisfies the Bianchi identity and the linearized field equation was obtained in ref. . It contains an arbitrary holomorphic function and an arbitrary harmonic function of the coordinates for the directions transverse to the D3-branes. It was argued that the holomorphic function corresponds to a superpotential in the dual super Yang-Mills theory. When the holomorphic function is quadratic in the transverse coordinates, the three-form flux coincides with that of ref. .

The purpose of the present paper is to obtain the general form of a three-form flux perturbation to the AdS5 $`\times `$ S5 solution which preserves $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry. We use the result of the $`𝒩=1`$ case  and require further that the second supersymmetry is preserved. We find that the arbitrary holomorphic function in the $`𝒩=1`$ case is restricted to a quadratic function of the transverse coordinates. This is a special form of the perturbation studied in ref. , which has one vanishing mass. It would be interesting to study a relation of our result to other works on soft breaking of $`𝒩=4`$ to $`𝒩=2`$ in the Coulomb branch . In order to discuss the corresponding dual field theory and its RG flows we need to find out an exact solution with non-vanishing three-form flux. In addition, it would be also interesting to discuss the brane representations and massive vacua using S-dual transformations.

2. Unperturbed solution

The field content of the type IIB supergravity in ten dimensions  is a metric $`g_{MN}`$, a complex Rarita-Schwinger field $`\psi _M`$, a real fourth-rank antisymmetric tensor field with a self-dual field strength $`F_{MNPQR}`$, a complex second-rank antisymmetric tensor field with a field strength $`G_{MNP}`$, a complex spinor field $`\lambda `$ and a complex scalar filed $`\tau =C+ie^\mathrm{\Phi }`$. We denote ten-dimensional world indices as $`M,N,\mathrm{}=0,1,\mathrm{},9`$ and local Lorentz indices as $`A,B,\mathrm{}=0,1,\mathrm{},9`$. The fermionic fields satisfy chirality conditions $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{10D}\psi _M=\psi _M`$, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{10D}\lambda =\lambda `$, where $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{10D}=\mathrm{\Gamma }^0\mathrm{\Gamma }^1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^9`$ is the ten-dimensional chirality matrix. We choose the ten-dimensional gamma matrices $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^A`$ to have real components.

The field equations of this theory have a solution with the AdS5 $`\times `$ S5 metric

$$g_{MN}dx^Mdx^N=Z^{\frac{1}{2}}\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +Z^{\frac{1}{2}}\delta _{mn}dx^mdx^n,$$
(1)
where $`M=(\mu ,m)`$ ($`\mu =0,1,2,3`$; $`m=4,5,\mathrm{},9`$), $`Z=\frac{R^4}{r^4}`$ and $`r^2=x^mx^n\delta _{mn}`$. The constant $`R`$ is a radius of AdS5 and S5. The fifth-rank field strength has non-vanishing components

$`F_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma m}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa Z^2}}ϵ_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }_mZ,`$
$`F_{mnpqr}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Z^{\frac{1}{2}}}{\kappa }}ϵ_{mnpqrs}^sZ,`$ (2)
where $`\kappa `$ is a coupling constant. This solution represents a supergravity configuration produced by D3-branes located at $`x^m=0`$. More generally, the warp factor $`Z`$ can be an arbitrary function of $`x^m`$ which is harmonic except at points where D3-branes exist. We will consider the general $`Z`$ but assume that the density of D3-branes vanishes for $`r\mathrm{}`$ and therefore $`Z\frac{R^4}{r^4}`$ for $`r\mathrm{}`$.

We are interested in how many supersymmetries are preserved by this solution and by a solution with a perturbation of $`G_{MNP}`$ discussed later. They are found by studying vanishing of local supertransformations of the fermionic fields $`\psi _M`$ and $`\lambda `$. The supertransformations of the fermionic fields  in these backgrounds are

$`\delta \psi _M`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa }}D_Mϵ+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{165!}}iF_{P_1\mathrm{}P_5}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{P_1\mathrm{}P_5}\mathrm{\Gamma }_Mϵ{\displaystyle \frac{1}{96}}G_{NPQ}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_M{}_{}{}^{NPQ}9\delta _M^N\mathrm{\Gamma }^{PQ}\right)ϵ^{},`$
$`\delta \lambda `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24}}G_{MNP}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{MNP}ϵ,`$ (3)
where the transformation parameter $`ϵ`$ is a complex spinor satisfying the chirality condition $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{10D}ϵ=ϵ`$. To study the supertransformations for the above backgrounds it is convenient to represent the ten-dimensional gamma matrices as

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\gamma ^\mu \mathrm{𝟏},`$
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }^m`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\gamma }_{4D}\gamma ^m,`$ (4)
where $`\gamma ^\mu `$ and $`\gamma ^m`$ are the SO(3,1) and SO(6) gamma matrices respectively. The chirality matrices are defined as

$$\overline{\gamma }_{4D}=i\gamma ^0\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3,\overline{\gamma }_{6D}=i\gamma ^4\gamma ^5\gamma ^6\gamma ^7\gamma ^8\gamma ^9,$$
(5)
which are related to the ten-dimensional one as $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{10D}=\overline{\gamma }_{4D}\overline{\gamma }_{6D}`$.

The above solution (1), (2) without a perturbation has 32 supersymmetries . This can be seen as follows. The supertransformation $`\delta \lambda `$ automatically vanishes, while the vanishing of $`\delta \psi _M`$ requires

$$\stackrel{~}{D}_Mϵ=0,$$
(6)
where we have defined

$`\stackrel{~}{D}_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`_\mu {\displaystyle \frac{1}{8Z}}_mZ\gamma _\mu \gamma ^m(1+\overline{\gamma }_{4D}),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{D}_m`$ $`=`$ $`_m{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8Z}}_nZ(\delta _m^n\overline{\gamma }_{4D}\gamma _m{}_{}{}^{n}(1+\overline{\gamma }_{4D})).`$ (7)
For solutions of eq. (6) to exist the integrability condition

$$[\stackrel{~}{D}_M,\stackrel{~}{D}_N]ϵ=0$$
(8)
must be satisfied. Using the expression (7) it is easy to show that eq. (8) is satisfied for an arbitrary $`ϵ`$. Therefore, all of 32 supersymmetries are preserved . From the four-dimensional field theoretical point of view in the AdS/CFT correspondence 16 of them are Poincaré supersymmetries while other 16 are conformal supersymmetries. Thus, we have $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry in four dimensions. More explicitly, the solutions of eq. (6) with the chirality $`\overline{\gamma }_{4D}=1`$ have a form

$$ϵ=Z^{\frac{1}{8}}\eta ,$$
(9)
where $`\eta `$ is an arbitrary constant spinor with the chirality $`\overline{\gamma }_{4D}=1`$. These solutions correspond to Poincaré supersymmetries. The solutions with the chirality $`\overline{\gamma }_{4D}=+1`$ depend on $`x^\mu `$ and correspond to conformal supersymmetries.

3. Three-form flux with $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry

By introducing a perturbation of the three-form flux $`G_{mnp}`$ the $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry of the unperturbed supergravity background is broken to lower $`𝒩`$. In ref.  the conditions on $`G_{mnp}`$ for unbroken $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetry were studied. The supersymmetry parameter is expanded as $`ϵ=ϵ_0+ϵ_1+\mathrm{}`$, where $`ϵ_0`$ is a solution of eq. (6) for the unperturbed background and $`ϵ_1`$ is the first order correction due to the perturbation. Substituting it into eq. (6) $`ϵ_1`$ is determined by $`ϵ_0`$. To proceed it is convenient to define complex coordinates $`z^i`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$) from $`x^m`$

$$z^1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x^4+ix^7),z^2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x^5+ix^8),z^3=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x^6+ix^9).$$
(10)
It was required in ref.  that one of the four Poincaré supersymmetries $`ϵ_0=Z^{\frac{1}{8}}\eta `$, where $`\eta `$ is a constant spinor satisfying

$$\gamma ^{\overline{1}}\eta =\gamma ^{\overline{2}}\eta =\gamma ^{\overline{3}}\eta =0,$$
(11)
is preserved. Here, $`\overline{i}`$ denote indices of $`\overline{z}^i`$, while $`i`$ denote those of $`z^i`$. Using the expression $`\overline{\gamma }_{6D}=(1\gamma ^1\gamma ^{\overline{1}})(1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{\overline{2}})(1\gamma ^3\gamma ^{\overline{3}})`$ it is easy to see that this $`ϵ_0`$ has the chirality $`\overline{\gamma }_{4D}=\overline{\gamma }_{6D}=1`$ appropriate for the Poincaré supersymmetry. Then, this $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetry restricts the form of $`G_{mnp}`$ as

$`G_{ijk}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`G_{ij\overline{k}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\widehat{ϵ}_{\overline{k}}{}_{}{}^{pq}_{}^{2}_p_{[i}\varphi _{j]}_qZ+\widehat{ϵ}_{ij}{}_{}{}^{\overline{l}}_{\overline{k}}^{}_{\overline{l}}\psi ,`$
$`G_{i\overline{j}\overline{k}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\widehat{ϵ}_{\overline{j}\overline{k}}{}_{}{}^{l}(2_i_l\varphi Z\alpha \widehat{ϵ}_{il}{}_{}{}^{\overline{k}}_{\overline{k}}^{}Z4_{[i}\varphi _{l]}Z),`$
$`G_{\overline{i}\overline{j}\overline{k}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\widehat{ϵ}_{\overline{i}\overline{j}\overline{k}}\delta ^{l\overline{l}}_l\varphi _{\overline{l}}Z,`$ (12)
where $`\varphi (z^1,z^2,z^3)`$ is an arbitrary holomorphic function, $`\alpha `$ is an arbitrary constant and $`\psi `$ is an arbitrary harmonic function.***In ref.  the constant $`\alpha `$ is required to vanish by the Bianchi identity. However, we do not agree with this result and leave $`\alpha `$ non-vanishing. In eq. (12) $`\widehat{ϵ}_{ij}^{\overline{k}}`$ and $`\widehat{ϵ}_{\overline{i}\overline{j}}^k`$ are totally antisymmetric in their indices and take constant values $`0`$, $`\pm 1`$ regardless of index positions, and $`^2=2\delta ^{i\overline{i}}_i_{\overline{i}}`$ is the Laplacian. The three-form flux (12) also satisfies the Bianchi identity as well as the linearized field equation.

We shall obtain conditions on $`G_{mnp}`$ for unbroken $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry. We require that in addition to $`ϵ_0=Z^{\frac{1}{8}}\eta `$ the second supersymmetry with the parameter

$$ϵ_0=Z^{\frac{1}{8}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\eta $$
(13)
is also preserved. This $`ϵ_0`$ satisfies

$$\gamma ^1ϵ_0=\gamma ^2ϵ_0=\gamma ^{\overline{3}}ϵ_0=0$$
(14)
and has the chirality $`\overline{\gamma }_{4D}=1`$. Comparing eqs. (11) and (14) it is easy to see that the conditions for the second supersymmetry are obtained from eq. (12) by the replacements

$$1\overline{1},2\overline{2},\alpha \alpha ^{},\varphi (z^1,z^2,z^3)\varphi ^{}(\overline{z}^1,\overline{z}^2,z^3),\psi \psi ^{}$$
(15)
for new $`\alpha ^{}`$, $`\varphi ^{}`$ and $`\psi ^{}`$.

We now require that the expression (12) and that with the replacements (15) are compatible each other. Let us first consider $`G_{123}`$. From the expression (12) we have $`G_{123}=0`$. From the other expression we have $`G_{123}=\frac{1}{6}_3^2\varphi ^{}Z`$, which is obtained from $`G_{\overline{1}\overline{2}3}`$ in eq. (12) by the replacements (15). Thus we obtain a condition

$$G_{123}:_3^2\varphi ^{}=0.$$
(16)
Similarly, we obtain conditions

$`G_{2\overline{2}1}+G_{3\overline{3}1}`$ $`:`$ $`_{\overline{2}}_3\varphi ^{}=0,`$
$`G_{1\overline{1}2}+G_{3\overline{3}2}`$ $`:`$ $`_{\overline{1}}_3\varphi ^{}=0,`$
$`G_{\overline{1}\overline{2}3}`$ $`:`$ $`_3^2\varphi =0,`$
$`G_{\overline{2}2\overline{1}}+G_{3\overline{3}\overline{1}}`$ $`:`$ $`_2_3\varphi =0,`$
$`G_{\overline{1}1\overline{2}}+G_{3\overline{3}\overline{2}}`$ $`:`$ $`_1_3\varphi =0,`$
$`G_{1\overline{2}\overline{3}}`$ $`:`$ $`_1^2\varphi =_{\overline{2}}^2\varphi ^{},`$
$`G_{\overline{1}2\overline{3}}`$ $`:`$ $`_2^2\varphi =_{\overline{1}}^2\varphi ^{}.`$ (17)
The component $`G_{1\overline{1}3}+G_{2\overline{2}3}`$ vanishes in both of the two expressions and gives no condition. These conditions fix the forms of $`\varphi `$ and $`\varphi ^{}`$ as

$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`m_1(z^1)^2+m_2(z^2)^2+2az^1z^2+b_1z^1+b_2z^2+b_3z^3,`$
$`\varphi ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`m_2(\overline{z}^1)^2+m_1(\overline{z}^2)^2+2a^{}\overline{z}^1\overline{z}^2+b_1^{}\overline{z}^1+b_2^{}\overline{z}^2+b_3^{}z^3,`$ (18)
where $`m_1`$, $`m_2`$, $`a`$, $`a^{}`$, $`b_i`$ and $`b_i^{}`$ are arbitrary constants. We further obtain conditions

$`G_{\overline{1}23}`$ $`:`$ $`_{\overline{1}}^2\psi =_2^2\psi ^{},`$
$`G_{1\overline{2}3}`$ $`:`$ $`_{\overline{2}}^2\psi =_1^2\psi ^{},`$
$`G_{31\overline{1}}`$ $`:`$ $`_{\overline{1}}_{\overline{2}}\psi =_1_2\psi ^{},a=a^{}.`$ (19)
By a linear transformation $`z^iU^i{}_{j}{}^{}z_{}^{j}`$ ($`i,j=1,2`$) with a unitary matrix $`U`$ we can set $`a=a^{}=0`$.

So far we have not used a particular form of $`Z`$. We now examine the remaining conditions first by using the asymptotic form $`Z\frac{R^4}{r^4}`$ for $`r\mathrm{}`$ to fix the coefficients in eq. (18) and $`\alpha `$, $`\alpha ^{}`$. We then check that the conditions are satisfied also for $`r<\mathrm{}`$. From the equation for $`G_{1\overline{1}\overline{3}}`$ we obtain

$`G_{1\overline{1}\overline{3}}:`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}_1_2\varphi Z+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\left(\alpha _{\overline{3}}Z+2_1\varphi _2Z2_2\varphi _1Z\right)`$ (20)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}_{\overline{1}}_{\overline{2}}\varphi ^{}Z{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\left(\alpha ^{}_{\overline{3}}Z+2_{\overline{1}}\varphi ^{}_{\overline{2}}Z2_{\overline{2}}\varphi ^{}_{\overline{1}}Z\right).`$
The equation for $`G_{2\overline{2}\overline{3}}`$ gives the same condition. Substituting the asymptotic form $`Z\frac{R^4}{r^4}`$ and eq. (18) into eq. (20) we find $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha `$ and $`b_1=b_2=b_1^{}=b_2^{}=0`$. The remaining conditions become

$`G_{1\overline{1}\overline{2}}`$ $`:`$ $`_1_{\overline{3}}\psi ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(\alpha _{\overline{2}}+2b_3_1)Z,`$
$`G_{3\overline{3}\overline{1}}`$ $`:`$ $`_2_{\overline{3}}\psi ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(\alpha _{\overline{1}}2b_3_2)Z,`$
$`G_{\overline{1}\overline{2}\overline{3}}`$ $`:`$ $`_{\overline{3}}^2\psi ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}b_3_{\overline{3}}Z,`$
$`G_{23\overline{3}}`$ $`:`$ $`_{\overline{1}}_{\overline{3}}\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(\alpha _22b_3^{}_{\overline{1}})Z,`$
$`G_{12\overline{2}}`$ $`:`$ $`_{\overline{2}}_{\overline{3}}\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(\alpha _1+2b_3^{}_{\overline{2}})Z,`$
$`G_{12\overline{3}}`$ $`:`$ $`_{\overline{3}}^2\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}b_3^{}_{\overline{3}}Z.`$ (21)
Comparing the equation obtained by applying $`_{\overline{3}}`$ to the first equation in eq. (21) and that obtained by applying $`_1`$ to the third equation we find $`\alpha =0`$. Then, eq. (21) determines $`\psi `$, $`\psi ^{}`$ as

$`_{\overline{3}}\psi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}b_3^{}Z+f(z^1,z^2,z^3),`$
$`_{\overline{3}}\psi ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}b_3Z+f^{}(\overline{z}^1,\overline{z}^2,z^3),`$ (22)
where $`f`$ and $`f^{}`$ are arbitrary functions of each variables. Substituting eq. (22) into the $`\overline{z}^3`$ derivative of eq. (19) and using the asymptotic form $`Z\frac{R^4}{r^4}`$ we obtain $`b_3=b_3^{}=0`$.

As a result of these analyses at asymptotic region $`r\mathrm{}`$ we obtain

$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`m_1(z^1)^2+m_2(z^2)^2,`$
$`\varphi ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`m_2(\overline{z}^1)^2+m_1(\overline{z}^2)^2.`$ (23)
We have to check that eqs. (19), (20) and (21) are satisfied even for $`r<\mathrm{}`$. Substituting eq. (23) into eq. (21) we find that their right-hand sides vanish. The general solution of these equations are

$`\psi `$ $`=`$ $`f(z^1,z^2,z^3)\overline{z}^3+g(z^1,\overline{z}^1,z^2,\overline{z}^2,z^3),`$
$`\psi ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`f^{}(\overline{z}^1,\overline{z}^2,z^3)\overline{z}^3+g^{}(z^1,\overline{z}^1,z^2,\overline{z}^2,z^3),`$ (24)
where $`f`$, $`f^{}`$, $`g`$ and $`g^{}`$ are arbitrary functions of each variables. The conditions in eq. (19) then require

$$_{\overline{1}}^2g=_2^2g^{},_{\overline{2}}^2g=_1^2g^{},_{\overline{1}}_{\overline{2}}g=_1_2g^{}.$$
(25)
The conditions that $`\psi `$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ in eq. (24) are harmonic are

$`^2g(z^1,\overline{z}^1,z^2,\overline{z}^2,z^3)`$ $`=`$ $`_3f(z^1,z^2,z^3),`$
$`^2g^{}(z^1,\overline{z}^1,z^2,\overline{z}^2,z^3)`$ $`=`$ $`_3f^{}(\overline{z}^1,\overline{z}^2,z^3).`$ (26)
The functions $`f`$ and $`f^{}`$ do not appear in $`G_{mnp}`$ as one can see by substituting eq. (24) into eq. (12). We only need to consider $`g`$ and $`g^{}`$. Eq. (26) means that $`^2g`$ and $`^2g^{}`$ are independent of $`\overline{z}^1,\overline{z}^2`$ and $`z^1,z^2`$ respectively. These conditions are automatically satisfied when $`g`$ and $`g^{}`$ satisfy eq. (25). The functions $`g`$ and $`g^{}`$ need not be harmonic. Finally, we have to consider eq. (20). Substituting eq. (23) into eq. (20) we obtain

$$\left(m_1z^1_2m_2z^2_1+m_2\overline{z}^1_{\overline{2}}m_1\overline{z}^2_{\overline{1}}\right)Z=0.$$
(27)
This means that $`Z`$ is invariant under SO(2) rotation of $`(\sqrt{m_1}z^1,\sqrt{m_2}z^2)`$ and $`(\sqrt{m_2}\overline{z}^1,\sqrt{m_1}\overline{z}^2)`$. Therefore, $`Z`$ must be a function of SO(2) invariant variables $`r^2=2\left(z^1\overline{z}^1+z^2\overline{z}^2\right)`$, $`m_1(z^1)^2+m_2(z^2)^2`$, $`m_2(\overline{z}^1)^2+m_1(\overline{z}^2)^2`$ and $`m_1z^1\overline{z}^2m_2z^2\overline{z}^1`$.

Let us summarize the result. The general form of the three-form flux $`G_{mnp}`$ which preserves the $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry at the first order of the perturbation is given by eq. (12) with $`\alpha =0`$, $`\varphi `$ in eq. (23) and $`\psi `$ replaced by $`g(z^1,\overline{z}^1,z^2,\overline{z}^2,z^3)`$ satisfying eq. (25) for some function $`g^{}(z^1,\overline{z}^1,z^2,\overline{z}^2,z^3)`$. Thus, $`\varphi `$, which is an arbitrary holomorphic function in the $`𝒩=1`$ case , is severely restricted to a quadratic function in the $`𝒩=2`$ case. Such $`𝒩=2`$ preserving perturbation is possible only when the warp factor $`Z`$ satisfies eq. (27).

In our analysis at the first order of the perturbation we did not need the condition $`m_1=m_2`$ to obtain the $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry. At higher orders  we would need the condition $`m_1=m_2`$ since these parameters correspond to masses of two $`𝒩=1`$ chiral multiplets, which should be combined into an $`𝒩=2`$ hypermultiplet. This is indeed the case in the field theory side. To see this let us consider two $`𝒩=1`$ chiral supermultiplets $`(A_1,\psi _1)`$ and $`(A_2,\psi _2)`$, where $`A_1`$, $`A_2`$ are complex scalar fields and $`\psi _1`$, $`\psi _2`$ are Weyl spinor fields, with the action

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^4x[_\mu A_1^{}^\mu A_1_\mu A_2^{}^\mu A_2i\psi _1\sigma ^\mu _\mu \overline{\psi }_1i\psi _2\sigma ^\mu _\mu \overline{\psi }_2`$ (28)
$`m_1^2A_1^{}A_1m_2^2A_2^{}A_2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_1(\psi _1\psi _1+\overline{\psi }_1\overline{\psi }_1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_2(\psi _2\psi _2+\overline{\psi }_2\overline{\psi }_2)].`$
Here we have used the two-component spinor notation in ref. . $`S`$ is invariant under the $`𝒩=1`$ supertransformation

$$\delta A_i=\sqrt{2}ϵ\psi _i,\delta \psi _i=\sqrt{2}i\sigma ^\mu \overline{ϵ}_\mu A_i\sqrt{2}m_iϵA_i^{}(i=1,2).$$
(29)
The exact $`N=2`$ supersymmetry of course requires $`m_1=m_2`$. However, even for $`m_1m_2`$, it is also invariant under the second supertransformation

$`\delta A_1`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2}ϵ\psi _2,\delta \psi _1=\sqrt{2}i\sigma ^\mu \overline{ϵ}_\mu A_2\sqrt{2}m_1ϵA_2^{},`$
$`\delta A_2`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2}ϵ\psi _1,\delta \psi _2=\sqrt{2}i\sigma ^\mu \overline{ϵ}_\mu A_1+\sqrt{2}m_2ϵA_1^{}`$ (30)
at the first order in $`m_1`$, $`m_2`$. Thus, the condition $`m_1=m_2`$ is needed only in quadratic and higher order terms for the $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry.

Acknowledgements

One of the authors (M.N.) would like to thank N. Constable, D.Z. Freedman, A. Hanany, W. Taylor, J. Troost and A. Tsuchiya for helpful discussions, and the Center for Theoretical Physics of MIT for hospitality. This work is supported in part by the Nishina Memorial Foundation and by funds provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (D.O.E.) under cooperative research agreement #DF-FC02-94ER40818.


format: text

text:
# The nonperturbative quark–gluon vertex11footnote 1Presented by J. Skullerud

## 1 Introduction

The quark–gluon vertex plays an important role in the dynamics of QCD. A non-trivial infrared structure of the vertex can affect hadronic observables through the running of the relevant coupling, while at a more fundamental level it is thought crucial to achieve confinement and a sufficient degree of dynamical chiral symmetry breaking. Therefore, a first-principles, nonperturbative determination of the vertex, which the lattice may provide, is highly desirable.

In a previous paper, results for the form factor ($`\lambda _1`$) proportional to the running coupling were presented. Here, we extend this by also studying the two other nonzero form factors at zero gluon momentum. We also study the mass dependence of these form factors.

We use the notation and the decomposition of the vertex given in Ref. The outgoing quark momentum is denoted $`p`$ and the (outgoing) gluon momentum $`q`$. The incoming quark momentum is thus $`k=p+q`$. For $`q=0`$, the vertex can be written

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mu (p,q)=ig\left[\lambda _1(p^2)\gamma _\mu 4\lambda _2(p^2)\overline{)}pp_\mu 2i\lambda _3(p^2)p_\mu \right].$$
(1)
In an abelian theory (QED), the Ward–Takahashi identities mean that these form factors are given uniquely in terms of the fermion propagator $`S^1(p)=i\overline{)}pA(p^2)+B(p^2)`$ by

$$\lambda _1^{\mathrm{QED}}(p^2)=A(p^2)\lambda _2^{\mathrm{QED}}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}p^2}A(p^2)\lambda _3^{\mathrm{QED}}=\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}p^2}B(p^2)$$
(2)
By comparing with these expressions, we can thus get a direct measure of the non-abelian nature of the vertex.

All the results presented here are obtained in the Landau gauge, in the quenched approximation at $`\beta =6.0`$, using the Sheikholeslami–Wohlert fermion action with mean-field improvement coefficients. We have used two quark masses, $`\kappa =0.137`$ and 0.1381, corresponding to a bare quark mass $`m=118`$ and 61 MeV respectively, with about 500 configurations in both cases. For further details about the calculation, we refer to Ref.

## 2 Results

In Figure 1 we show $`\lambda _1`$ at $`q=0`$ for our two quark masses. We see a clear enhancement of the form factor in the infrared, and virtually no dependence on the quark mass beyond the three most infrared points. In the right-hand panel we show the deviation of the non-abelian form factor from the abelian expression in (1). Although much of the infrared enhancement is seen to be present in the abelian case, we also find a definite deviation of 50% for the most infrared points. However, the slight mass dependence in the infrared can be fully accounted for by the abelian behaviour.

In Figure 2, we show the form factors $`p^2\lambda _2`$ and $`\lambda _3`$ as functions of $`p`$, where we have subtracted off the lattice tree-level behaviour to bring them closer to the continuum. At large momenta this procedure implies large cancellations, and our results therefore contain little information beyond $`p3`$ GeV.

The abelian form (1) has been determined by fitting the quark propagator form factors $`Z=1/A`$ and $`M=B/A`$ to functional forms. Our results for $`\lambda _2`$ appear to be quite consistent with the abelian form, except for the most infrared point where finite volume errors may be substantial. For $`\lambda _3`$, our results match the abelian form almost perfectly, indicating that the non-abelian contribution to this form factor may be negligible. In both cases, we find again at most a slight mass dependence.

## 3 Outlook

In addition to the form factors presented here, we are currently studying the chromomagnetic moment form factor ($`\tau _5`$ in the notation of Ref.) at $`q=2p`$. These results will be presented in a forthcoming paper. We are also planning to extend our study to the full kinematical space available. In the longer term, simulations using fermion actions with improved tree-level behaviour, and on larger volumes, will be performed in order to reduce systematic errors.


text:
# Detector resolution effects on hadronic mass moments in 𝐵→𝑋ℓ𝜈

## Appendix A The first three hadronic moments

In this appendix we give the expressions for the first three hadronic moments $`S_n=(s_T\overline{m}_D^2)^n`$ \[note that this definition of $`S_n`$ is slightly different than the one for $`_n`$ in Eq. (2)\]. Since the hadronic moments satisfy $`S_n(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}/m_B)^n`$, the first three moments are non-vanishing to order $`1/m_B^3`$. The decay rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and the first two moments $`S_1`$, $`S_2`$ were calculated in the pole scheme as a function of the lepton energy cut in fls . In bllm  this calculation was repeated in several different mass schemes and explicit expressions were given for the dependence on the lepton energy cut. For completeness, we will repeat these results here and also give the result for the third moment $`S_3`$, which has not been presented in the literature so far. All these results are given in the 1S scheme, and for comparison with earlier works also in the pole scheme. They are written in the form

$`S_n(E_0)`$ $`=`$ $`S_n^{(1)}(E_0)+S_n^{(2)}(E_0)\mathrm{\Lambda }+S_n^{(3)}(E_0)\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+S_n^{(4)}(E_0)\mathrm{\Lambda }^3+S_n^{(5)}(E_0)\lambda _1+S_n^{(6)}(E_0)\lambda _2`$ (22)
$`+S_n^{(7)}(E_0)\lambda _1\mathrm{\Lambda }+S_n^{(8)}(E_0)\lambda _2\mathrm{\Lambda }+S_n^{(9)}(E_0)\rho _1+S_n^{(10)}(E_0)\rho _2+S_n^{(11)}(E_0)𝒯_1`$
$`+S_n^{(12)}(E_0)𝒯_2+S_n^{(13)}(E_0)𝒯_3+S_n^{(14)}(E_0)𝒯_4+S_n^{(15)}(E_0)ϵ+S_n^{(16)}(E_0)ϵ_{\mathrm{BLM}}^2+S_n^{(17)}(E_0)ϵ\mathrm{\Lambda },`$
where $`E_0`$ is the value of the lepton energy cut, and the coefficients $`S_n^{(m)}(E_0)`$ has the appropriate mass dimension. The parameter $`ϵ1`$ and $`ϵ_{\mathrm{BLM}}1`$ denote the order in perturbation theory, for which we have used $`\alpha _s(m_b)=0.22`$ and $`\beta _0=25/3`$. The definition of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ depends on the mass scheme used and is

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{pole}}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{m}_Bm_b^{\mathrm{pole}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _1}{2m_b}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1𝒯_1𝒯_3}{m_b^2}}`$ (23)
$`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{1\mathrm{S}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{{\rm Y}}}{2}}m_b^{1\mathrm{S}}.`$ (24)
The values for the coefficients $`S_n^{(i)}`$ are shown in tables I to VI. The tables do not contain the $`ϵ\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ term for non-zero lepton energy cut $`E_0`$. This is because the radiative corrections to the hadronic energy distribution with a lepton energy cut are not known; for details see Ref. fl . In Appendix B we give analytical expressions required for the $`ϵ\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ term with zero lepton energy cut.

## Appendix B Analytic expressions for perturbative corrections to new partonic moments

The leading perturbative corrections to the hadronic invariant moments arise only from bremsstrahlung contributions, since the virtual contributions are proportional to a $`\delta `$-function which does not contribute to the moments. These bremsstrahlung contributions were calculated in fl  with a cut on the lepton energy. However, virtual diagrams do contribute to perturbative corrections to the terms supressed by powers of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}/m_b`$. Using

$`s_H=m_B^2+2m_Bm_b(\widehat{e}_01)+m_b^2(1+\widehat{s}_02\widehat{e}_0).`$ (25)
the corrections proportional to $`\alpha _s\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}/m_b`$ can be obtained from the perturbative corrections to the partonic invariant mass $`\widehat{s}_0=p_c^2/m_b^2`$ and partonic energy $`\widehat{e}_0=e_c/m_b`$. For the first two hadronic invariant mass moments one needs the partonic moments $`M^{(0,0)}`$, $`M^{(1,0)}`$, $`M^{(2,0)}`$, $`M^{(0,1)}`$, $`M^{(0,2)}`$ and $`M^{(1,1)}`$, where we used the definition of fls

$`M^{(n,m)}={\displaystyle 𝑑\widehat{s}_0𝑑\widehat{e}_0(\widehat{s}_0\widehat{m}_c^2)^ne_0^m\frac{d\mathrm{\Gamma }}{d\widehat{s}_0d\widehat{e}_0}},`$ (26)
with $`\widehat{m}_c=m_c/m_b`$. Perturbative corrections to these partonic moments can be obtained using the results of perturbative  and analytical results were given in fls . Here we give the expressions for the additional moments needed to calculate the third hadronic invariant mass moments. Writing

$`M^{(n,m)}=M_{\mathrm{non}\mathrm{pert}}^{(n,m)}+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}M_{\mathrm{pert}}^{(n,m)}`$ (27)
we find for the perturbative corrections

$`M_{\mathrm{pert}}^{(3,0)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{377}{132300}}{\displaystyle \frac{119}{2700}}\widehat{m}_c^2+{\displaystyle \frac{401}{900}}\widehat{m}_c^4+{\displaystyle \frac{97}{36}}\widehat{m}_c^6{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\widehat{m}_c^8{\displaystyle \frac{491}{900}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}{\displaystyle \frac{5531}{2700}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}{\displaystyle \frac{55747}{132300}}\widehat{m}_c^{14}`$ (28)
$`+\left({\displaystyle \frac{16}{9}}\widehat{m}_c^6+{\displaystyle \frac{29}{9}}\widehat{m}_c^8+{\displaystyle \frac{43}{15}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{5}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}+{\displaystyle \frac{11}{105}}\widehat{m}_c^{14}\right)\mathrm{log}(\widehat{m}_c^2)`$
$`M_{\mathrm{pert}}^{(2,1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1081}{132300}}{\displaystyle \frac{187}{1350}}\widehat{m}_c^2{\displaystyle \frac{463}{600}}\widehat{m}_c^4+{\displaystyle \frac{127}{216}}\widehat{m}_c^6{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\widehat{m}_c^8+{\displaystyle \frac{67}{150}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}{\displaystyle \frac{259}{1800}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}+{\displaystyle \frac{25033}{264600}}\widehat{m}_c^{14}`$ (29)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{7}{12}}\widehat{m}_c^4+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{12}}\widehat{m}_c^6+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{9}}\widehat{m}_c^8+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{15}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}+{\displaystyle \frac{13}{180}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}+{\displaystyle \frac{13}{420}}\widehat{m}_c^{14}\right)\mathrm{log}(\widehat{m}_c^2)`$
$`M_{\mathrm{pert}}^{(1,2)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{7421}{176400}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4079}{10800}}\widehat{m}_c^2{\displaystyle \frac{341}{1200}}\widehat{m}_c^4{\displaystyle \frac{71}{144}}\widehat{m}_c^6+{\displaystyle \frac{17}{48}}\widehat{m}_c^8+{\displaystyle \frac{257}{1200}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}{\displaystyle \frac{131}{1200}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}{\displaystyle \frac{53819}{529200}}\widehat{m}_c^{14}`$ (30)
$`+\left({\displaystyle \frac{4}{15}}\widehat{m}_c^2+{\displaystyle \frac{13}{60}}\widehat{m}_c^4+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\widehat{m}_c^6{\displaystyle \frac{17}{36}}\widehat{m}_c^8+{\displaystyle \frac{17}{60}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{15}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{105}}\widehat{m}_c^{14}\right)\mathrm{log}(\widehat{m}_c^2)`$
$`M_{\mathrm{pert}}^{(0,3)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{289223}{1058400}}+{\displaystyle \frac{762659}{1058400}}\widehat{m}_c^2{\displaystyle \frac{67337}{19600}}\widehat{m}_c^4+{\displaystyle \frac{28364999}{529200}}\widehat{m}_c^6{\displaystyle \frac{57005623}{1058400}}\widehat{m}_c^8+{\displaystyle \frac{139623}{39200}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}{\displaystyle \frac{21613}{58800}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{260423}{529200}}\widehat{m}_c^{14}\pi ^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{28}}+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{60}}\widehat{m}_c^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\widehat{m}_c^4{\displaystyle \frac{127}{36}}\widehat{m}_c^6+{\displaystyle \frac{2176}{105}}\widehat{m}_c^7{\displaystyle \frac{127}{36}}\widehat{m}_c^8+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{60}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{28}}\widehat{m}_c^{14}\right)`$
$`+\mathrm{log}(\widehat{m}_c^2)({\displaystyle \frac{1}{7}}\widehat{m}_c^2{\displaystyle \frac{499}{560}}\widehat{m}_c^4+{\displaystyle \frac{126121}{5040}}\widehat{m}_c^6{\displaystyle \frac{8704}{105}}\mathrm{log}(1+\widehat{m}_c)\widehat{m}_c^7+{\displaystyle \frac{57373}{2520}}\widehat{m}_c^8{\displaystyle \frac{667}{2520}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{257}{25200}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}{\displaystyle \frac{2743}{35280}}\widehat{m}_c^{14})\mathrm{log}(1\widehat{m}_c^2)({\displaystyle \frac{151}{882}}+{\displaystyle \frac{41}{225}}\widehat{m}_c^2{\displaystyle \frac{5}{9}}\widehat{m}_c^4+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\widehat{m}_c^6{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\widehat{m}_c^8+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{9}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}{\displaystyle \frac{41}{225}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{151}{882}}\widehat{m}_c^{14})+\mathrm{Li}_2(\widehat{m}_c){\displaystyle \frac{17408}{105}}\widehat{m}_c^7+\mathrm{Li}_2(\widehat{m}_c^2)({\displaystyle \frac{3}{14}}+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{10}}\widehat{m}_c^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\widehat{m}_c^4{\displaystyle \frac{127}{6}}\widehat{m}_c^6{\displaystyle \frac{4352}{105}}\widehat{m}_c^7{\displaystyle \frac{127}{6}}\widehat{m}_c^8+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{10}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{14}}\widehat{m}_c^{14})+\mathrm{log}(1\widehat{m}_c^2)\mathrm{log}(\widehat{m}_c^2)({\displaystyle \frac{1}{7}}+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{15}}\widehat{m}_c^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\widehat{m}_c^4{\displaystyle \frac{65}{3}}\widehat{m}_c^6+{\displaystyle \frac{4352}{105}}\widehat{m}_c^7{\displaystyle \frac{65}{3}}\widehat{m}_c^8+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}`$
$``$ $`+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{15}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{7}}\widehat{m}_c^{14})+\mathrm{log}^2(\widehat{m}_c^2)({\displaystyle \frac{25}{6}}\widehat{m}_c^6+{\displaystyle \frac{83}{12}}\widehat{m}_c^8{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\widehat{m}_c^{10}{\displaystyle \frac{7}{60}}\widehat{m}_c^{12}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{28}}\widehat{m}_c^{14})`$ (31)


text:
# Five-dimensional Black Hole and Particle Solution with Non-Abelian Gauge Field

## I Introduction

Recent progress in a superstring theory shows that different string theories are connected with each other via dualities, making them to be unified to the M theory in 11 dimensions. This provides us a motivation to study a higher dimensional gravitational theory. String theory also predicts a boundary layer, a brane, on which edges of open strings stand. This suggests a new perspective in cosmology, that is, we are living in a brane world, which is a three-dimensional hypersurface in a higher-dimensional spacetime. In contrast to the already familiar Kaluza-Klein picture in which we live in 4-dimensional spacetime with $`n`$ dimensional compactified “internal space”, our world view appears to be changed completely. Particles in the standard model are expected to be confined to the brane, whereas the gravitons propagate in the entire bulk spacetime.

In the brane world cosmological scenario, a higher-dimensional black hole solution plays an important role. Our universe is just a domain wall expanding in the black hole background spacetime. The black hole mass gives a contribution to dark radiation through its tidal force. Hence, a higher-dimensional black hole or a globally regular solution with a cosmological constant is now a very interesting subject. In particular, in the context of the AdS/CFT correspondence or proposed dS/CFT correspondence, since the 5-dimensional Einstein gravity with a cosmological constant gives a description of 4-dimensional conformal field theory in large $`N`$ limit, many authors study such localized objects in 5-dimensions.

However, from a view point of brane cosmology, a black hole solution has a singularity in a bulk spacetime, although it is covered by a horizon. If a string theory or M theory is fundamental, such a singularity should not exist. Then, if we can construct some non-singular object in the bulk spacetime, it might be a manifestation of singularity avoidance immanent in a fundamental theory. In 4-dimensions, Bartnik and McKinnon found a particle-like solution as a globally regular spacetime in a spherically symmetric Einstein-Yang-Mills system with SU(2) gauge group. Soon after, a colored black hole solution with a nontrivial non-Abelian structure was also found. These solutions were also extended to those in the system with a cosmological constant. From stability analysis, it turns out that the solution with zero or positive cosmological constant is unstable, while those with negative cosmological constant is stable. Since a negative cosmological constant is naturally expected in a brane world scenario just as the Randall-Sundrum model, the above fact is very interesting. In this paper, then, we study a nontrivial particle-like solution or black hole solution in 5-dimensions with a cosmological constant.

As for non-Abelian gauge field in a bulk spacetime, although gauge interactions are confined on a brane and Yang-Mills fields are expected to exist only in the brane, if our 5-dimensional spacetime is obtained as an effective theory, it may not be the case. In fact, Lukas, et al.  showed that U(1)-field appears in the effective 5-dimensional bulk spacetime, from dimensional reduction of the Hořava-Witten model. We may find non-Abelian gauge field from some other type dimensional reduction of a unified theory.

There is another interesting point to discuss non-Abelian gauge fields in a bulk. Using a brane structure, new mechanism of spontaneous symmetry breaking of gauge interactions have been proposed. In this picture, the present standard model (SU(3)$`\times `$SU(2)$`\times `$U(1)) is obtained on the brane assuming some higher-symmetric gauge interactions such as SU(5) in the bulk.

Therefore, in this paper, we assume that non-Abelian gauge field appears in 5-dimensional bulk spacetime. In §.II, we first derive the basic equations of a spherically symmetric Einstein-Yang-Mills system in 5-dimensions. With a spherically symmetric ansatz, the gauge potential of SU(2) Yang-Mills field is be decomposed into the “electric” and “magnetic” part, which derivation is given in Appendix A. There is a nontrivial analytic solution in the case with “magnetic” field, which corresponds to a magnetically charged black hole in 4-dimensions. This analytic solution and its property are examined in §.III. We also present non-trivial particle-like and black hole solutions, which correspond to the Bartnik-McKinnon type and colored black hole type solutions in 4-dimensions, in §.IV. We also analyze those stability in §.V. Summary and discussion follow in §.VI.

## II Basic Equation

In order to find a black hole and particle-like solution of the 5-dimensional Einstein-Yang-Mills system, we first write down the basic equations. The action is given by

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{1}{16\pi }}{\displaystyle d^5x\sqrt{g_5}\left[\frac{1}{G_5}(R2\mathrm{\Lambda })\frac{1}{g^2}\mathrm{Tr}𝐅^2\right]},`$ (1)
where $`G_5`$ is a 5-dimensional gravitational constant, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a 5-dimensional cosmological constant, and $`g`$ is a gauge coupling constant. Now we adopt gauge group is SU(2). $`𝐅=F_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu `$ is a field strength of the gauge field, which is described by the vector potential $`𝐀=A_\mu dx^\mu `$ as

$`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu [A_\mu ,A_\nu ].`$ (2)
Defining the 5-dimensional Planck mass by $`m_5=G_5^{1/3}`$ and a fundamental mass scale of the gauge field by $`m_g=g^2`$, we introduce a typical length scale of the present system, which is given by

$`\lambda =\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_g}{m_5^3}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{G_5}{g^2}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$ (3)
We will normalize a scale length by this $`\lambda `$.

We consider a spherically symmetric 5-dimensional spacetime, which metric is given by

$`ds^2=\lambda ^2\left[f(t,r)e^{2\delta (t,r)}dt^2+{\displaystyle \frac{dr^2}{f(t,r)}}+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_3^2\right],`$ (4)
where

$`f(t,r)`$ $`=`$ $`1{\displaystyle \frac{\mu (t,r)}{r^2}}+ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{\mathrm{}^2}},`$ (5)
$`d\mathrm{\Omega }_3^2`$ $`=`$ $`d\psi ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\psi \left(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2\right),`$ (6)
where we set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=6ϵ/(\lambda \mathrm{})^2`$ with $`ϵ=0`$ or $`\pm 1`$, corresponding to the signature of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, i.e. $`ϵ=1,0,`$ and $`1`$ corresponds to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0,\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$, respectively. Note that $`t,r,`$and $`\mu `$ are all dimensionless variables. We shall call $`\mu `$ a ‘mass’ function. $`\mathrm{}`$ denotes the ratio of the length scale of a cosmological constant to $`\lambda `$.

From Appendix A, we find a generic form of a spherically symmetric SU(2) gauge potential. If we take only an “electric” part of the field, the gauge potential is given by Eq. (A44), which yields the basic equations as

$`\mu ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}r^3(A^{}e^\delta )^2,`$ (7)
$`\dot{\mu }=0,`$ (8)
$`\delta ^{}=0,`$ (9)
$`\left[\left(A^{}e^\delta \right)^2\right]^{}=0,`$ (10)
$`\left[\left(A^{}e^\delta \right)^2\right]^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{6}{r}}\left(A^{}e^\delta \right)^2=0,`$ (11)
where a dash and dot denote the partial derivative with respect to $`r`$ and $`t`$ respectively. This equation gives the Reissner-Nordstrom type solution such as

$`\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2Q^2}{3r^2}},`$ (12)
$`\delta `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (13)
$`A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{r^2}}.`$ (14)
This result is same to the case of 4-dimensions.

If the “magnetic” part of the gauge field, which is given by Eq. (A53), appears, we find another basic equations as follows. Using the gauge freedom, we set $`X=0`$, resulting in the gauge potentials as

$`A_t^a`$ $`=`$ $`0,A_r^a=0,`$ (15)
$`A_\psi ^a`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,w),`$ (16)
$`A_\theta ^a`$ $`=`$ $`(w\mathrm{sin}\psi ,\mathrm{cos}\psi ,0),`$ (17)
$`A_\phi ^a`$ $`=`$ $`(\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ,w\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ,\mathrm{cos}\theta ),`$ (18)
where we set $`\varphi =w(r,t)`$. With the above ansatz, we find the Einstein equations and Yang-Mills equation of the present system as

$`\mu ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`2r\left[fw^2+f^1e^{2\delta }\dot{w}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{(1w^2)^2}{r^2}}\right],`$ (19)
$`\dot{\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`4rfw^{}\dot{w},`$ (20)
$`\delta ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r}}[w^2+f^2e^{2\delta }\dot{w}^2],`$ (21)
and

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}(rfe^\delta w^{})^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}e^\delta w(1w^2)=\left(f^1e^\delta \dot{w}\right)^{}.`$ (22)
Eqs. (19)-(22) look very similar to those in the case of the 4-dimensional Einstein-Yang-Mills system. However, a little difference of the power exponent of $`r`$ brings a big difference in the behavior of solutions, as we will see later.

## III Analytic solutions

Now we look for a “magnetic” type static solution of the system (19)-(22). Dropping the time derivative terms, we find the basic equations as

$`\mu ^{}=2r\left[fw^2+{\displaystyle \frac{(1w^2)^2}{r^2}}\right],`$ (23)
$`\delta ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{r}}w^2,`$ (24)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}(rfe^\delta w^{})^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}e^\delta w(1w^2)=0.`$ (25)
The above differential equations (23)-(25) have two analytic solutions. One analytic solution is

$`w=\pm 1,\mu =,\delta =0,`$ (26)
which corresponds to the Schwarzschild or the Schwarzschild-anti de Sitter (or de Sitter) spacetime, which properties are well known.

Another analytic solution is given by

$`w=0,\mu =+2\mathrm{ln}r,\delta =0.`$ (27)
This solution has a nontrivial geometry. In the 4-dimensional spacetime, this type of solution describes the Reissner-Nordstrom type geometry with a magnetic charge. In the 5-dimensional spacetime, $`2\mathrm{ln}r`$ term appear in the mass function $`\mu `$. Although $`\mu `$ diverges, the metric itself approaches that of well-known symmetric spacetime for each $`ϵ`$, i.e. the Minkowski, de Sitter and anti de Sitter one. We first study the properties of this solution in the following subsections.

### A Asymptotic structure

Since the mass function diverges, we have to analyze carefully those asymptotic behaviors. For the case of $`ϵ=0`$, the Riemann curvature is finite except at $`r=0`$ and vanishes at infinity as

$`R_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }R^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }288\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}r}{r^4}}\right)^2.`$ (28)
For the case of $`ϵ=\pm 1`$, the Riemann curvature is also finite everywhere except at $`r=0`$ and converges as

$`R_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }R^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }{\displaystyle \frac{40}{\mathrm{}^4}}`$ (29)
as $`r\mathrm{}`$. This finite value just comes from the Ricci curvature. The metric form approaches

$`f(r)1+ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{\mathrm{}^2}}`$ (30)
as $`r\mathrm{}`$. These spherically symmetric and static spacetimes are singular only at $`r=0`$, and seem to approach a “maximally symmetric spacetime”. Therefore we may recognize it as an localized object in such a “maximally symmetric spacetime”.

However we have to analyze those asymptotic behaviors more carefully. The asymptotically flatness condition is mathematically defined using the conformal transformation. We can also extend this formulation for an asymptotically de Sitter (or anti-de Sitter) spacetime as well as for a higher-dimensional spacetime.

In an asymptotically flat spacetime, we can naturally define a mass of an isolated object, which is called the ADM mass . It is defined by

$`G_5M_{\mathrm{ADM}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{16\pi }}{\displaystyle _{I_0}}𝑑S_i\left[_jh^{ij}\eta ^{ij}_jh_k^k\right]`$ (31)
in 5-dimensional spacetime, where $`\eta _{\mu \nu }`$ is Minkowski metric and $`h_{\mu \nu }=g_{\mu \nu }\eta _{\mu \nu }`$. $`dS_i`$ is an infinitesimal surface element of spacelike infinity $`I_0`$. For the present non-trivial solution with $`ϵ=0`$, we find

$`G_5M_{\mathrm{ADM}}=\underset{r\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{8}}\lambda ^2\left(+2\mathrm{ln}r\right)`$ (32)
which diverges as $`\mathrm{ln}r`$. The coefficient $`3\pi /8`$ appears just because Eq. (19) yields

$`\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{8}}{\displaystyle 𝑑v[T_0^0]}.`$ (33)
For $`ϵ=1`$, if the spacetime is asymptotically de Sitter, we can also introduce a conserved mass, which is called the Abbott-Deser mass defined by . If the spacetime is asymptotically de Sitter, $`M_{\mathrm{AD}}=M_{\mathrm{ADM}}`$, which diverges again as $`\mathrm{ln}r`$.

In a 5-dimensional asymptotically anti-de Sitter spacetime, we can also define a conserved mass associated with a timelike Killing vector $`\stackrel{}{\xi }`$ at the 3-sphere $`C`$ on conformal infinity $``$ as

$`G_5M_\xi [C]:={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^2\mathrm{}}{16\pi }}{\displaystyle _C}_{\mu \nu }\xi ^\mu 𝑑S^\nu ,`$ (34)
where $`_{\mu \nu }`$ is the electric part of Weyl tensor defined by

$`_{\mu \nu }:={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}C_{\mu \rho \nu \sigma }n^\rho n^\sigma .`$ (35)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a conformal factor and $`n_\mu =_\mu \mathrm{\Omega }`$. In the case of Schwarzschild-anti de Sitter spacetime (26), this mass gives $``$. In the non-trivial solution, however, this quantity is calculated on the 3-sphere $`C`$ with a radius $`r`$ as

$`G_5M_\xi [C]={\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{8}}\lambda ^2\left[+2\mathrm{ln}r{\displaystyle \frac{7}{6}}\right].`$ (36)
It diverges as $`\mathrm{ln}r`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$.

In any case, the “mass” is not finite, which means that “total energy” of the system is not finite. Therefore, strictly speaking, we should not regard it as an isolated object. However, there is no singularity except at $`r=0`$ and the metric form itself approaches either Minkowski or de-Sitter (anti-de Sitter) one. Hence, we call it a “quasi-isolated” object. We remind that we know a similar “isolated” object, i.e. a 4-dimensional self-gravitating global monopole. Its metric is described as

$`ds^2=f(r)dt^2+f(r)^1dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2,`$ (37)
where $`f(r)12m(r)/r1\alpha 2M/r+O(1/r^2)`$. In this case, the mass function $`m(r)`$ diverges as $`M+\alpha r/2+O(1/r)`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$. In fact the ADM mass diverges. Rescaling the time and radial coordinates as $`r(1\alpha )^{1/2}r`$ and $`t(1\alpha )^{1/2}t`$, we can rewrite the metric form as

$`ds^2=f(r)dt^2+f(r)^1dr^2+(1\alpha )r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2,`$ (38)
where $`f(r)=12\stackrel{~}{M}/r`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{M}=M(1\alpha )^{3/2}`$. This spacetime looks asymptotically flat but has a deficit angle $`\alpha `$. Nucamendi and Sudarsky showed that this spacetime is asymptotically simple but not asymptotically empty. They called it a “quasi-asymptotically flat” spacetime and defined a new mass for a spacetime with a deficit angle, which is a generalization of the ADM mass, using the first law of black hole thermodynamics.

In our case, the mass function diverges as $`\mathrm{ln}r`$, which is less divergent than the case with a deficit angle ($`r^2`$ in 5-dimensions). Then we can also call such a spacetime “quasi-asymptotically” flat or “quasi-asymptotically” de Sitter (anti-de Sitter) one.

### B Spacetime structure: horizon and singularity

This solution has a horizon, where

$`f(r)=1{\displaystyle \frac{+2\mathrm{ln}r}{r^2}}+ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{\mathrm{}^2}}=0.`$ (39)
We study those horizons and the singularity separately for each value of $`ϵ`$.

#### 1 $`ϵ=0`$

In this case, if $`>1`$, Eq. (39) has two roots $`r=r_\pm (r_{}<r_+)`$, which correspond to two horizons, $`r_+`$ corresponds to an event horizon, while $`r_{}`$ is an inner horizon. A timelike singularity appears at $`r=0`$. For the case of $`=1`$, two horizons degenerate and a black hole becomes extreme. If $`<1`$ there is no horizon, so a naked singularity appears.

#### 2 $`ϵ=1`$

This case also has two horizons $`r=r_\pm (r_{}<r_+)`$ if $`>_{\mathrm{cr}}`$. $`r_+`$ and $`r_{}`$ are an event horizon and an inner horizon, respectively. The critical mass parameter $`_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ is given by the horizon radius of the extreme case ($`r_{+\mathrm{cr}}`$), i.e.

$`_{\mathrm{cr}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(1+r_{+\mathrm{cr}}^2\right)2\mathrm{ln}r_{+\mathrm{cr}},`$ (40)
where

$`r_{+\mathrm{cr}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2}}\left(1+\sqrt{1+{\displaystyle \frac{8}{\mathrm{}^2}}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$ (41)
$`_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ is always larger than unity and it approaches 1 as $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}`$, which corresponds to the case of $`ϵ=0`$. A timelike singularity appears at $`r=0`$. For the case of $`=_{\mathrm{cr}}`$, the black hole is extreme, and for$`<_{\mathrm{cr}}`$, a horizon disappears.

#### 3 $`ϵ=1`$

If a cosmological constant is positive, we expect a cosmological horizon just as a de Sitter spacetime. In fact, we always find at least one horizon. If $`\mathrm{}>2\sqrt{2}`$, and

$`_{\mathrm{min}}<<_{\mathrm{max}},`$ (42)
where $`_{\mathrm{min}}=g(r_{+\mathrm{cr}})`$ and $`_{\mathrm{max}}=g(r_{\mathrm{cr}})`$ with $`g(r)=r^22\mathrm{ln}rr^4/\mathrm{}^2`$ and

$`r_{\pm \mathrm{cr}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2}}\left(1\pm \sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{8}{\mathrm{}^2}}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}},`$ (43)
we find three horizons, $`r_{}(<r_{\mathrm{cr}})<r_+(<r_{+\mathrm{cr}})<r_c`$. $`r_{}`$, $`r_+`$ and $`r_c`$ are an inner, event, and cosmological horizon, respectively. When $`=_{\mathrm{max}}`$, the inner and event horizons degenerate ($`r_{}=r_+`$), while if $`=_{\mathrm{min}}`$, the event and cosmological horizons coincide ($`r_+=r_c`$). In the limit of $`\mathrm{}2\sqrt{2}`$, $`_{\mathrm{min}}=_{\mathrm{max}}=_{\mathrm{cr}}=3/2\mathrm{ln}20.80685`$, and then three horizons degenerate for $`=_{\mathrm{cr}}`$.

For other cases, we have only one horizon. The singularity at $`r=0`$ becomes naked.

We summarize the type of horizons in Table 1.

|  | $`<1`$ | 0 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| $`ϵ=0`$ | $`=1`$ | D |
|  | $`>1`$ | I, E |
|  | $`<_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ | 0 |
| $`ϵ=1`$ | $`=_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ | D |
|  | $`_{\mathrm{cr}}<`$ | I, E |
|  | $`<_{\mathrm{min}}`$ | I |
|  | $`=_{\mathrm{min}}`$ | I, D |
| $`ϵ=1`$, $`\mathrm{}>2\sqrt{2}`$ | $`_{\mathrm{min}}<<_{\mathrm{max}}`$ | I, E, C |
|  | $`=_{\mathrm{max}}`$ | D, C |
|  | $`>_{\mathrm{max}}`$ | C |
| $`ϵ=1`$, $`\mathrm{}2\sqrt{2}`$ |  | C |

Table 1 : Type of horizons. I, E, C and D denote an inner, event, cosmological and degenerated horizon, respectively. “0” means no horizon. $`_{\mathrm{cr}},_{\mathrm{min}}`$, and $`_{\mathrm{max}}`$ are defined in the text.

### C Thermodynamical properties

Next we shall see thermodynamical properties. The Hawking temperature is easily calculated from a regularity condition at the event horizon. We find

$`T_{BH}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi r_+}}\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r_+^2}}+2ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{r_+^2}{\mathrm{}^2}}\right].`$ (44)
The entropy $`S=A/4`$ is given by

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\pi ^2r_+^3,`$ (45)
because the volume of a unit 3-sphere is $`2\pi ^2`$. Since the solution does not satisfy the asymptotically flat or de Sitter (or anti de Sitter) conditions, we cannot define gravitational mass. However, if we use the first law of thermodynamics just as the case of a global monopole with a deficit angle, we can define thermodynamical mass $`M_T`$ as $`dM_T=TdS+\mathrm{\Phi }dQ`$. We find

$`M_T={\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{8}},`$ (46)
where an integration constant is set to be zero. This result shows that the mass parameter $``$ essentially denotes the thermodynamical mass.

From Eq. (39), the thermodynamical mass is given by the horizon radius as

$`M_T={\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{8}}\left[r_+^2\left(1+ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{r_+^2}{\mathrm{}^2}}\right)2\mathrm{ln}r_+\right].`$ (47)
We depict the $`M_T`$-$`r_+`$ relation in Fig. 1. We find that the horizon radius is smaller than that of the electrically charged Reissner-Nordstrom black hole. We also show the $`M_T`$-$`T_{BH}`$ relation in Fig. 2. From Eqs. (44) and (46), we find

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dT_{BH}}{dM_T}}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3\pi ^2r_+^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{13/r_+^22ϵr_+^2/\mathrm{}^2}{11/r_+^2+2ϵr_+^2/\mathrm{}^2}},`$ (48)
which gives a turning point where a specific heat changes its sign. For the case of $`ϵ=0`$, a specific heat is positive in $`1<r_+<\sqrt{3}`$ but becomes negative for $`r_+>\sqrt{3}`$. (The corresponding critical value for thermodynamical mass is obtained by Eq. (47).) For the case of $`ϵ=1`$, if $`\mathrm{}2\sqrt{6}`$, a specific heat is always positive. If $`\mathrm{}>2\sqrt{6}`$, a specific heat is positive in $`r_{+\mathrm{cr}}<r_+<r_{\mathrm{ch}}`$ and in $`r_+>r_{+\mathrm{ch}}`$, while it is negative in $`r_{\mathrm{ch}}<r_+<r_{+\mathrm{ch}}`$, where

$`r_{\pm \mathrm{ch}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2}}\left(1\pm \sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{24}{\mathrm{}^2}}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$ (49)
For the case of $`ϵ=1`$, a specific heat is positive in $`r_{\mathrm{cr}}<r_+<r_{\mathrm{ch}}`$, while it is negative for $`r_{\mathrm{ch}}<r_+r_{+\mathrm{cr}}`$, where

$`r_{\mathrm{ch}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2}}\left(1+\sqrt{1+{\displaystyle \frac{24}{\mathrm{}^2}}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$ (50)
## IV Numerical solutions

Just as 4-dimensions , we can find non-trivial structure of self-gravitating Yang-Mills field. We obtain those solutions numerically. We discuss two cases; a particle solution and a black hole, separately. Here, we analyze only the case of $`ϵ=0`$ or $`1`$.

### A Particle solution

In the case of a particle solution, we have to impose regularity at the origin $`r=0`$. Since Eqs. (19)-(22) are invariant under the transformation of $`ww`$, we can set $`w(0)>0`$ without loss of generality. Expanding $`\mu `$ and $`w`$ around $`r=0`$, we find those behaviors near the origin as

$`\mu (r)`$ $`=`$ $`4b^2r^4+O(r^5)`$ (51)
$`\delta (r)`$ $`=`$ $`4b^2r^2+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}b^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{4ϵ}{3\mathrm{}^2}}3b8b^2\right)r^4+O(r^5)`$ (52)
$`w(r)`$ $`=`$ $`1+br^2{\displaystyle \frac{b}{6}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4ϵ}{3\mathrm{}^2}}3b8b^2\right)r^4+O(r^5)`$ (53)
with one free parameter $`b`$. Using this boundary condition, we integrate the basic equations by the Runge-Kutta method.

For the case of $`ϵ=0`$, we find the solutions which metrics are regular in whole spacetime and approach to Minkowski as $`r\mathrm{}`$ for $`b_{\mathrm{min}}<b<0`$, where $`b_{\mathrm{min}}0.635607`$. We show the numerical result in Figs. 3 $``$ 5.

The potential function $`w`$ is oscillating between $`\pm 1`$ and the mass function $`\mu `$ is increasing without bound just as a step function. As we show in Appendix B, there is no finite mass particle-like solution. The mass function increases as $`\mathrm{ln}r`$ asymptotically just as the analytic solution (27). The period of oscillations of $`w`$ is the same as that of steps in $`\mu `$ and it is constant in terms of $`\mathrm{ln}r`$. This behaviour is easily understood by solving the basic equations in the asymptotic far region ($`r\mathrm{}`$), which analytic forms are given in Appendix C. We can check that the asymptotic solution is consistent with our numerical solutions. The oscillations of $`w`$ and the periodic steps in $`\mu `$ are caused by infinite number of instantons (see Appendix C).

For the case of $`ϵ=1`$, we also find a regular solution for $`b_{\mathrm{min}}<b<0`$. $`b_{\mathrm{min}}`$ depends on $`\mathrm{}`$, and decreases as $`\mathrm{}`$ decreases. For example, $`b_{\mathrm{min}}0.644036`$ for $`\mathrm{}=10`$, $`b_{\mathrm{min}}1.105002`$ for $`\mathrm{}=1`$. We show the numerical result in Figs. 6 $``$ 8.

In this case, the potential $`w`$ does not oscillate, and converge to some value $`w_{\mathrm{}}`$, then the number of node is finite. The mass function increases monotonically as

$`\mu 2(1w_{\mathrm{}}^2)^2\mathrm{ln}r`$ (54)
as $`r\mathrm{}`$. This behaviour is also understood by solving the asymptotic solution, which is given in Appendix C.

### B Black hole solution

Next we show a non-trivial black hole solution. To find a black hole solution, we have to impose a boundary condition at a horizon $`r_h`$. The horizon is defined by $`f(r_h)=0`$, which gives

$`\mu (r_h)=r_h^2\left(1+ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{r_h^2}{\mathrm{}^2}}\right).`$ (55)
Here we set $`\delta (r_h)=0`$. The proper time of the observer at infinity (i.e. $`\delta (\mathrm{})=0`$) is obtained by transformation $`t^{}=e^{\delta (\mathrm{})}t`$. From Eq. (22), $`w^{}(r_h)`$ has to satisfy

$`w^{}(r_h)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{w_h(1w_h^2)}{r_h\left[1+2ϵr_h^2/\mathrm{}^2(1w_h^2)^2/r_h^2\right]}},`$ (56)
where $`w_h=w(r_h)`$. There is only one free parameter $`w_h`$ for a given value of $`r_h`$. Since Eqs. (19)-(22) are invariant under the transformation of $`ww`$, we can set $`w_h>0`$ without loss of generality.

For the solution with $`w_h>1`$, we find that the curvature diverges at finite distance. Then, we obtain a numerical solution for $`0w_h1`$ for a given $`r_h`$. We show the results in Figs. 9 $``$ 11.

Asymptotic behaviour is similar to that of the particle solution. The potential $`w`$ oscillates infinitely with a constant period in terms of $`\mathrm{ln}r`$. For any solutions with $`0<w_h<1`$, we find that the mass function $`\mu (r)`$ diverges as $`\mathrm{ln}r`$ at large distance.

We also show the case with $`ϵ=1`$ in Figs. 12 $``$ 14.

This also shows the similar asymptotic behaviours to a particle solution with $`ϵ=1`$.

As for the thermodynamical properties, we find the Hawking temperature as

$`T_{\mathrm{BH}}={\displaystyle \frac{e^{\delta (\mathrm{})}}{2\pi r_h}}\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{(1w_h^2)^2}{r_h^2}}+2ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{r_h^2}{\mathrm{}^2}}\right],`$ (57)
where $`\delta (\mathrm{})`$ comes from our coordinate condition, that is, we set $`\delta (r_h)=0`$. Thermodynamical mass $`M_T`$ is found from the first law of black hole thermodynamics , $`d_T=TdS+\mathrm{\Phi }dQ`$. In order to calculate $`M_T`$, fixing $`w_{\mathrm{}}=w(\mathrm{})`$, we solve a black hole solution because a “global charge” is proportional to $`(1w_{\mathrm{}}^2)`$. The result is shown in Fig. 15.

We numerically confirm that the thermodynamical mass $`_T`$ is equal to

$`_T=\underset{r\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{8}}\left[\mu 2(1w^2)^2\mathrm{ln}r\right].`$ (58)
## V Stability

In this section, we analyze stability of the static solutions obtained above. We perturb the metric and potential as

$`\mu (r,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mu _0(r)+\mu _1(r)e^{i\omega t},`$ (59)
$`\delta (r,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _0(r)+\delta _1(r)e^{i\omega t},`$ (60)
$`w(r,t)`$ $`=`$ $`w_0(r)+w_1(r)e^{i\omega t},`$ (61)
where $`\mu _0(r),\delta _0(r),`$ and $`w_0(r)`$ are those of the static solution obtained in previous section. Substituting them into Einstein equations and Yang-Mills equation, we find the perturbation equations as

$`\mu _1^{}`$ $`=`$ $`2r\left[2f_0w_0^{}w_1^{}{\displaystyle \frac{w_0^2}{r^2}}\mu _1{\displaystyle \frac{4(1w_0^2)w_0}{r^2}}w_1\right],`$ (62)
$`\mu _1`$ $`=`$ $`4rf_0w_0^{}w_1,`$ (63)
$`\delta _1^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{r}}w_0^{}w_1^{},`$ (64)
and

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^3}}(rf_0e^{\delta _0}w_0^{})^{}f_0^1\mu _1f_0e^{\delta _0}w_0^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}f_0^1\mu _1+\delta _1\right)^{}`$ (66)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}(rf_0e^{\delta _0}w_1^{})^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}e^{\delta _0}(13w_0^2)w_1=\omega ^2f_0^1e^{\delta _0}w_1,`$
(67)
where $`f_0=1\mu _0(r)/r^2+ϵr^2/\mathrm{}^2`$. Eq. (62) is derived from Eq. (63) by differentiation.

We introduce a tortoise coordinate $`r_{}`$ such that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dr_{}}{dr}}=e^{\delta _0}f_0^1`$ (68)
and define $`\chi =w_1r^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. Then, by substituting Eqs. (62)-(64), Eq. (67) turns to be a single uncoupled equation as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\chi }{dr_{}^2}}+V(r_{})\chi =\omega ^2\chi ,`$ (69)
where

$`V(r_{})`$ $`=`$ $`f_0e^{\delta _0}\{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}e^{\delta _0}(3w_0^21)+{\displaystyle \frac{r^{\frac{1}{2}}}{2}}(r^{\frac{1}{2}}f_0e^{\delta _0})^{}`$ (71)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{r}}\left[f_0e^{\delta _0}w_0^2\right]^{}\}.`$
When $`V(r_{})`$ is positive definite, we can prove its stability as follows: Multiplying Eq. (69) by $`\overline{\chi }`$ and integrating from $`r=r_+(r_{}=\mathrm{})`$ in the case of a black hole solution or $`r=0(r=0)`$ in the case of a particle solution to $`r=\mathrm{}(r_{}=r_{,\mathrm{max}}(<\mathrm{}))`$, Eq. (69) is written as

$`\left[\overline{\chi }{\displaystyle \frac{d\chi }{dr}}\right]_{r=r_+(\mathrm{or}0)}^{r=\mathrm{}}+{\displaystyle \left[\left|\frac{d\chi }{dr}\right|^2+V(r)|\chi |^2\right]𝑑r_{}}`$ (72)
$`=\omega ^2{\displaystyle |\chi |^2𝑑r_{}}.`$ (73)
We assume that $`w_10`$ at infinity ($`r\mathrm{}(rr_{\mathrm{max}})`$). Then, $`\overline{\chi }d\chi /dr0`$. In the case of a black hole, $`\chi `$ must be ingoing at horizon ($`r=r_+(r=\mathrm{})`$). Since the potential $`V`$ vanishes at the horizon, the ingoing wave condition gives $`\chi e^{i\omega r_{}}`$. If we assume that $`\mathrm{Im}\omega <0`$, then $`\overline{\chi }d\chi /dr_{}0`$ at horizon is obtained. Because $`V(r)`$ is positive definite, Eq. (73) implies that eigenvalue $`\omega `$ is real, that is, $`\mathrm{Im}\omega =0`$, which contradicts with the above assumption. Hence, we conclude that $`\mathrm{Im}\omega 0`$, which means that the present system is stable. In the case of a particle solution, we should impose $`w_1=0`$ at the origin ($`r=0(r_{}=0)`$), then we find $`\overline{\chi }d\chi /dr0`$. If $`V(r)`$ is positive definite, Eq. (73) again implies that the eigenvalue $`\omega `$ is real. Hence, in both cases, we obtain that solutions with a positive definite potential $`V(r_{})`$ are stable.

For the analytic solution (27), we find

$`V(r_{})={\displaystyle \frac{f_0}{4r^4}}\left[54+10\mathrm{ln}r9r^2+3ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{r^4}{l^2}}\right].`$ (74)
In the case of $`ϵ=0`$ or $`1`$, $`V(r_{})`$ is negative at large distance $`r`$. While, in the case of $`ϵ=1`$, we see that $`V(r_{})`$ is positive definite for sufficiently large $``$, i.e. for

$`>{\displaystyle \frac{1}{5}}\left(410\mathrm{ln}r_p+9r_p^23{\displaystyle \frac{r_p^4}{\mathrm{}^2}}\right),`$ (75)
where $`r_p=(9\sqrt{81120/\mathrm{}^2})\mathrm{}/12`$ and $`\mathrm{}>\sqrt{40/27}`$.

For the numerical solutions, we also find a positive definite potential $`V(r)`$ only for the case of $`ϵ=1`$. For a particle solution, for example, the positive definite potential is found in the parameter range of $`0.010368<b<0`$ for $`\mathrm{}=10`$, and $`0.654211<b<0`$ for $`\mathrm{}=1`$. We depict some typical potentials in Figs. 16 and 17.

If $`V(r_{})`$ is positive definite, we conclude that the system is stable, however, we cannot predict anything if $`V(r_{})`$ is not positive definite. We have to solve Eqs. (62)-(67) as eigenvalue problem numerically. We leave this as a future work and in this paper, we do not discuss it further.

## VI Summary and Discussion

In this paper we have studied a spherically symmetric Einstein-SU(2)-Yang-Mills system in 5-dimensions. If we consider only “electric part” of Yang-Mills field, we find the 5-dimensional Reissner-Nordstrom black hole solution. As for “magnetic part” of Yang-Mills field, apart from a trivial Schwarzschild (Schwarzschild-de Sitter, or Schwarzschild-anti de Sitter) solution, we find non-trivial analytic solution, which corresponds to a magnetically charged black hole. (It turns out to be just a Reissner-Nordstrom solution in 4-dimensional case). This non-trivial solution shows that a gravitational “mass” is infinite and the spacetime does not satisfy asymptotically flat, de-Sitter, or anti-de Sitter condition, in contrast to the case of 4-dimensions. However, its metric approaches either Minkowski or de-Sitter (or anti-de Sitter) . We also find that there is no singularity expect one at the origin which is covered by a horizon. Hence we call its behaviour at infinity “quasi-asymptotically” flat, de Sitter, or anti-de Sitter and we regard our solution as a localized object. We analyze the spacetime structure and thermodynamical properties. They show that mass parameter $``$ in the solution is regarded as a thermodynamical mass, which satisfies the first law of the black hole thermodynamics.

For the case with zero or negative cosmological constant, we also find numerically a particle-like solutions, which has no singularity, and black hole solutions with non-trivial structures of Yang-Mills field. Although, for both cases, the mass function diverges as $`\mathrm{ln}r`$, they satisfy “quasi-asymptotically” flat or anti-de Sitter conditions. If $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, in contrast to the case of 4-dimension, Yang-Mills field oscillates and has infinite number of nodes. For a negative cosmological constant, Yang-Mills field potential settles to some constant, which is similar to that in 4-dimensional case.

From stability analysis, we find that there is a set of stable solutions if a cosmological constant is negative. This result is very similar to the 4-dimensional case, in which Bartnik-McKinnon solution and a colored black hole is unstable, while those extended to the case with a negative cosmological constant become stable.

Since we find a stable non-singular solution in the 5-dimension, if we apply it to a brane world scenario, we may find some interesting effect on the brane dynamics. We will publish its analysis in a separated paper.

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank Takashi Torii for useful discussions and comments. This work was partially supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research Fund of the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (Nos. 14047216, 14540281) and by the Waseda University Grant for Special Research Projects.

## A Five-dimensional Spherically Symmetric SU(2) Gauge Field

Here we calculate a generic form of spherically symmetric $`SU(2)`$ Yang-Mills field in 5-dimensional spacetime. In the case of four dimensions, Witten gave its generic form , which was called the Witten ansatz and proved by Forgác and Manton . Forgác and Manton presented how to find a generic form of spherically symmetric Yang-Mills field in arbitrary dimensions. We just follow their method.

Suppose we have some symmetry of spacetime generated by a vector $`\stackrel{}{\eta }`$. A tensor field must be invariant under an infinitesimal transformation generated by $`\stackrel{}{\eta }`$, i.e. the Lie derivative of this tensor field with respect to $`\stackrel{}{\eta }`$ must vanish. However, in the case of a gauge field $`A_\mu `$, there is a gauge freedom, by which we can weaken this condition such that there exists an infinitesimal gauge transformation equivalent to a spacetime transformation, that is

$`\mathrm{\pounds }_\stackrel{}{\eta }A_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`D_\mu W_\mu W[A_\mu ,W]`$ (A1)
for some scalar field $`W`$ .

Suppose that a $`D`$-dimensional Riemannian manifold $`M`$ has some spacetime symmetry represented by $`N`$-dimensional isometry group $`S`$. This isometry group is generated by $`N`$ Killing vectors $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}(1nN)`$, which commutation relations is given by

$`[\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(m)},\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}]^\mu =f_{mnp}\xi _{(p)}^\mu ,`$ (A2)
where $`f_{mnp}`$ is a structure constant. We assume that the orbit $`X=\{apM|aS\}`$ for some point $`pM`$ is $`N^{}`$-dimensional submanifold of $`M`$. Then we choose the local coordinate system as

$`x^\mu =(x^i,y^\alpha ),1iDN^{},1\alpha N^{}`$ (A3)
so that a hypersurface of $`x^i=\mathrm{constant}`$ defines the orbit space $`X`$. By Frobenius’ theorem, the above Killing vectors are orthogonal to $`X`$, then $`\xi _{(n)}^\mu =(0,\xi _{(n)}^\alpha )`$ in this coordinate system.

Because the isometry group is $`N`$-dimensional Lie group, we can define right and left invariant vectors ($`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}^R`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}^L`$) as

$`\mathrm{\pounds }_{\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}^R}s=sJ^{(n)},\mathrm{\pounds }_{\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}^L}s=J^{(n)}s`$ (A4)
for any $`sS`$, where $`J^{(n)}`$ is the generator of Lie group $`S`$ associated by the Killing vector $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}`$. Then both $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}^R`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}^L`$ have same commutation relations as those of $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}`$. We also define those covariant vector fields $`\xi _{(n)\widehat{\alpha }}^R,\xi _{(n)\widehat{\alpha }}^L`$ by

$`\xi _{(m)\widehat{\alpha }}^R\xi _{(n)}^{R\widehat{\alpha }}=\delta _{mn},\xi _{(m)\widehat{\alpha }}^L\xi _{(n)}^{L\widehat{\alpha }}=\delta _{mn}.`$ (A5)
For a fixed point $`qX`$, $`R=\{aS|aq=q\}S`$ is an invariant subgroup of $`S`$ with dimension $`NN^{}`$, and the quotient group $`S/R`$ is diffeomorphic to $`X`$. So we can adopt the same coordinates $`y^\alpha `$ in $`X`$ for the coset $`RsS/R`$. We take that the other coordinate components are expressed by $`y^\omega (1\omega NN^{})`$, which correspond to those of the isotropy group $`R`$. If we fix the origin $`s_0(y^\alpha )Rs(y^\alpha )`$ for each coset in smooth way, then any element s of $`S`$ is written uniquely with coordinates $`y^{\widehat{\alpha }}=(y^\omega ,y^\alpha )`$, as

$`s(y^{\widehat{\alpha }})=r(y^\omega )s_0(y^\alpha )`$ (A6)
for some $`rR`$. In this coordinate, right invariant vector $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}^R`$ is expressed with Killing vector $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(n)}`$ as

$`\xi _{(n)}^{R\widehat{\alpha }}=(\xi _{(n)}^{R\omega },\xi _{(n)}^\alpha ).`$ (A7)
By the above definition, we find a generic form of gauge potential $`A_\mu (x^\mu )`$ with a gauge symmetry $`G`$ and a spacetime symmetry $`S`$ as

$`A_i(x^i,y^\alpha )=A_i(x^i),A_\alpha (x^i,y^\alpha )=\mathrm{\Phi }_n(x^i)\xi _{(n)\alpha }^L(y^\alpha )|_{y^\omega =y_0^\omega },`$ (A8)
where $`A_i(x^i)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n(x^i)`$ satisfy the conditions

$`f_{mnp}\mathrm{\Phi }_p+[\mathrm{\Phi }_m,\mathrm{\Phi }_n]`$ $`=`$ $`0(^{}m,^{}n>N^{}),`$ (A9)
$`_i\mathrm{\Phi }_n[A_i,\mathrm{\Phi }_n]`$ $`=`$ $`0(^{}i,^{}n>N^{}),`$ (A10)
and $`y^\omega =y_0^\omega `$ is a coordinate component of a unit element of the isotropy group $`R`$. Incidentally, $`W_n`$ in Eq. (A1) are obtained as

$`W_n(x^i,y^\alpha )=\mathrm{\Phi }_m(x^i)\xi _{(n)}^{R\omega }(y^\alpha )\xi _{(m)\omega }^L(y^\alpha )|_{y^\omega =y_0^\omega }.`$ (A11)
Applying this formalism the 5-dimensional spherically symmetric SU(2) gauge field, we obtain a generic form of the gauge potential $`A_\mu (x^\mu )`$. We assume the isometric group is SO(4). In this coordinate system (4), the orbit $`X`$ is given as $`t,r=\mathrm{constant}`$, and then $`x^\mu `$ is divided into $`x^i=(t,r)`$ and $`y^\alpha =(\psi ,\theta ,\phi )`$.

The Killing vectors are given as

$`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,\mathrm{cos}\theta ,\mathrm{cot}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ,0),`$ (A12)
$`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi ,\mathrm{cot}\psi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi ,{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\psi \mathrm{sin}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}),`$ (A13)
$`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(3)}`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi ,\mathrm{cot}\psi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi ,{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\psi \mathrm{cos}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}),`$ (A14)
$`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(4)}`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,0,\mathrm{cos}\phi ,\mathrm{cot}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi ),`$ (A15)
$`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(5)}`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,0,\mathrm{sin}\phi ,\mathrm{cot}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi ),`$ (A16)
$`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{(6)}`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,0,0,1),`$ (A17)
and the structure constants $`f_{mnp}`$ are found to be

$`f_{124}=1,f_{135}=1,f_{236}=1,f_{456}=1,`$ (A18)
with totally antisymmetrized other components.

Next we adopt the local coordinate system which satisfies Eq. (A6) in SO(4). It is given as 4-dimensional Euler angle $`(\alpha ,\beta ,\chi ,\psi ,\theta ,\phi )`$ as

$`s(\alpha ,\beta ,\chi ,\psi ,\theta ,\phi )`$ $`=`$ $`r(\alpha ,\beta ,\chi )s_0(\psi ,\theta ,\phi )`$ (A19)
$`=`$ $`R_{xy}(\alpha )R_{yz}(\beta )R_{xy}(\chi )R_{zu}(\psi )R_{yz}(\theta )R_{xy}(\phi ),`$ (A20)
where $`R_{pq}`$ denotes a rotation matrix of the $`pq`$-plane. Note that $`R_{xy}(\alpha )R_{yz}(\beta )R_{xy}(\chi )`$ describes any element of an isotropy group $`R`$.

In this coordinate system, the right invariant vector $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_n^R`$ and the covariant left invariant vector $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_n^L`$ are

$`\xi _{(1)}^{R\widehat{\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{sin}\theta }{\mathrm{sin}\beta \mathrm{sin}\psi }},{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{sin}\theta }{\mathrm{sin}\psi }},{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\beta \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{sin}\theta }{\mathrm{sin}\psi }},\mathrm{cos}\theta ,\mathrm{cot}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ,0),`$ (A21)
$`\xi _{(2)}^{R\widehat{\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{sin}\phi +\mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\beta \mathrm{sin}\psi }},{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{sin}\phi \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\psi }},`$ (A23)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\beta \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi +(\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{cot}\theta +\mathrm{cot}\beta \mathrm{cos}\chi )\mathrm{sin}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\psi }},\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi ,\mathrm{cot}\psi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi ,{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\psi \mathrm{sin}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}),`$
$`\xi _{(3)}^{R\widehat{\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{cos}\phi \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\beta \mathrm{sin}\psi }},{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{cos}\phi +\mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\psi }},`$ (A25)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\beta \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi (\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{cot}\theta +\mathrm{cot}\beta \mathrm{cos}\chi )\mathrm{cos}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\psi }},\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi ,\mathrm{cot}\psi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi ,{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\psi \mathrm{cos}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}),`$
$`\xi _{(4)}^{R\widehat{\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }},0,\mathrm{cos}\phi ,\mathrm{cot}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi ),`$ (A26)
$`\xi _{(5)}^{R\widehat{\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }},0,\mathrm{sin}\phi ,\mathrm{cot}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi ),`$ (A27)
$`\xi _{(6)}^{R\widehat{\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,0,0,0,1),`$ (A29)
$`\mathrm{and}`$
$`\xi _{(1)\widehat{\alpha }}^L`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,0,\mathrm{cos}\beta ,\mathrm{sin}\beta \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{sin}\psi ,\mathrm{sin}\beta \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ),`$ (A30)
$`\xi _{(2)\widehat{\alpha }}^L`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,0,\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta ,\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{sin}\psi +\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{sin}\psi ,`$ (A32)
$`\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ),`$
$`\xi _{(3)\widehat{\alpha }}^L`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,0,\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta ,\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{sin}\psi ,`$ (A34)
$`\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ),`$
$`\xi _{(4)\widehat{\alpha }}^L`$ $`=`$ $`(0,\mathrm{cos}\alpha ,\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta ,0,\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{cos}\psi ,`$ (A36)
$`\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta \mathrm{cos}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ),`$
$`\xi _{(5)\widehat{\alpha }}^L`$ $`=`$ $`(0,\mathrm{sin}\alpha ,\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta ,0,\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{cos}\psi ,`$ (A38)
$`\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\beta \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ),`$
$`\xi _{(6)\widehat{\alpha }}^L`$ $`=`$ $`(1,0,\mathrm{cos}\beta ,0,\mathrm{sin}\beta \mathrm{sin}\chi \mathrm{cos}\psi ,\mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\beta \mathrm{cos}\chi \mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta ).`$ (A39)
The equations (A10) are given as

$`f_{mnp}\mathrm{\Phi }_p^a+\epsilon ^{abc}\mathrm{\Phi }_m^b\mathrm{\Phi }_n^c`$ $`=`$ $`0\text{ }(a=1,2,3,m=1,\mathrm{},6,n=4,5,6),`$ (A40)
$`_i\mathrm{\Phi }_n^a\epsilon ^{abc}A_i^b\mathrm{\Phi }_n^c`$ $`=`$ $`0\text{ }(a=1,2,3,i=t,r,n=4,5,6).`$ (A41)
This set of equations has two types of solutions; one is the “electric” type and the other is the “magnetic” one. The former type is given by

$`A_t^a=(0,0,A_t),A_r^a=(0,0,A_r),\mathrm{and}\mathrm{\Phi }_m^a=0,`$ (A42)
leading to the potential form as

$`𝐀=\tau _3(A_tdt+A_rdr),`$ (A43)
Using a gauge freedom, we can set $`A_r=0`$. The “electric” type of potential is now given by

$`𝐀=\tau _3A(t,r)dt.`$ (A44)
While the latter type solution is given by

$`\begin{array}{ccccccccc}A_t^a\hfill & =\hfill & (0,0,\dot{X}),\hfill & A_r^a\hfill & =\hfill & (0,0,X^{}),\hfill & & & \\ \mathrm{\Phi }_1^a\hfill & =\hfill & (0,0,\varphi ),\hfill & \mathrm{\Phi }_2^a\hfill & =\hfill & \pm (\varphi \mathrm{cos}X,\varphi \mathrm{sin}X,0),\hfill & \mathrm{\Phi }_3^a\hfill & =\hfill & (\varphi \mathrm{sin}X,\varphi \mathrm{cos}X,0),\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Phi }_4^a\hfill & =\hfill & \pm (\mathrm{sin}X,\mathrm{cos}X,0),\hfill & \mathrm{\Phi }_5^a\hfill & =\hfill & (\mathrm{cos}X,\mathrm{sin}X,0),\hfill & \mathrm{\Phi }_6^a\hfill & =\hfill & (0,0,\pm 1).\hfill \end{array}`$ (A48)
We then obtain a general form of $`A_\mu ^a`$ as

$`𝐀`$ $`=`$ $`\tau _3(\dot{X}dt+X^{}dr+\varphi d\psi +\mathrm{cos}\theta d\phi )+\mathrm{cos}\psi \left[(\tau _1\mathrm{sin}X\tau _2\mathrm{cos}X)d\theta (\tau _1\mathrm{cos}X+\tau _2\mathrm{sin}X)\mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi \right]`$ (A50)
$`+\varphi \mathrm{sin}\psi \left[(\tau _1\mathrm{cos}X+\tau _2\mathrm{sin}X)d\theta +(\tau _1\mathrm{sin}X\tau _2\mathrm{cos}X)\mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi \right].`$
$`X`$ is not a dynamical variable but it is regarded as a gauge variable. In fact, the field strength $`F_{\mu \nu }^a`$ is given by

$`𝐅`$ $`=`$ $`\tau _3\left[\dot{\varphi }dtd\psi +\varphi ^{}drd\psi (1\varphi ^2)(\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta )(\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi )\right]`$ (A53)
$`+(\tau _1\mathrm{cos}X+\tau _2\mathrm{sin}X)\left[\dot{\varphi }dt(\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta )+\varphi ^{}dr(\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta )+(1\varphi ^2)d\psi (\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi )\right]`$
$`+(\tau _1\mathrm{sin}X\tau _2\mathrm{cos}X)\left[\dot{\varphi }dt(\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi )+\varphi ^{}dr(\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi )(1\varphi ^2)d\psi (\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta )\right].`$
Rotating the $`\tau _1`$-$`\tau _2`$ plane of the interior space by $`X`$, the variable $`X`$ is eliminated. If we choose $`X=0`$, we find

$`𝐀`$ $`=`$ $`\tau _3(\varphi d\psi +\mathrm{cos}\theta d\phi )\mathrm{cos}\psi \left[\tau _2d\theta +\tau _1\mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi \right]+\varphi \mathrm{sin}\psi \left[\tau _1d\theta \tau _2\mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi \right]`$ (A54)
$`𝐅`$ $`=`$ $`\tau _3\left[\dot{\varphi }dtd\psi +\varphi ^{}drd\psi (1\varphi ^2)(\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta )(\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi )\right]`$ (A57)
$`+\tau _1\left[\dot{\varphi }dt(\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta )+\varphi ^{}dr(\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta )+(1\varphi ^2)d\psi (\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi )\right]`$
$`\tau _2\left[\dot{\varphi }dt(\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi )+\varphi ^{}dr(\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\phi )(1\varphi ^2)d\psi (\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta )\right].`$
## B Non-existence of finite mass object ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$)

Here we show that there is no particle-like solution with finite mass if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$ ($`ϵ=0`$ or 1).

Introducing new variable

$`z=2\mathrm{ln}r`$ (B1)
we rewrite the basic equations (23) and (25) with Eq. (24) as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mu }{dz}}=4f\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}\right)^2+\left(1w^2\right)^2`$ (B2)
$`f{\displaystyle \frac{d^2w}{dz^2}}+\left[e^z\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{\mathrm{}^2}}e^ze^z(1w^2)^2\right]{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}`$ (B3)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}w(1w^2)=0`$ (B4)
with

$`f=1e^z\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{\mathrm{}^2}}e^z,`$ (B5)
where the function $`\delta `$ is eliminated.

If we turn off gravity, that is, if we consider the Yang-Mills field equation in the Minkowski space, we have one basic equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2w}{dz^2}}e^z(1w^2)^2{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}w(1w^2)=0.`$ (B6)
This is easily integrated as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\left(1w^2\right)^2=E_0,`$ (B7)
where $`E_0`$ is an integration constant. Integrating this equation with the boundary condition $`w\pm 1`$ as $`z\mathrm{}`$ ($`r0`$) and $`z\mathrm{}`$ ($`r\mathrm{}`$), which implies $`E_0=0`$, we obtain the solution for $`w`$ as

$`w=\pm \mathrm{tanh}{\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}}.`$ (B8)
This is exactly the same as the Yang-Mills instanton solution in 4-dimensional Euclidean spacetime. If we regard

$`U(z)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\left(1w^2\right)^2`$ (B9)
as a potential, Eq. (B7) just denotes the energy conservation. The instanton corresponds to zero energy solution, in which $`w`$ varies from $`\pm 1`$ to $`1`$ as $`z=\mathrm{}\mathrm{}`$.

When we include the effect of gravity, whether we still have such a non-trivial structure or not ? This is our question. In this appendix, we will show that there is no self-gravitating non-trivial solution with a finite mass energy. To discuss it, we introduce the energy function $`E`$ by

$`E={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}f\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\left(1w^2\right)^2.`$ (B10)
The basic equations (B2) and (B4) are described as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dE}{dz}}=4e^z\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}\right)^2\left[E+{\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{8}}+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{8\mathrm{}^2}}e^{2z}\right]`$ (B11)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mu }{dz}}=8E+2\left(1w^2\right)^2.`$ (B12)
Since we are interested in a particle-like solution, which must be regular at the origin, we can expand the functions $`\mu `$ and $`w`$ as

$`\mu =\mu _1e^z+\mu _2e^{2z}+\mu _3e^{3z}+\mathrm{}`$ (B13)
$`w=1+w_1e^z+w_2e^{2z}+w_3e^{3z}+\mathrm{},`$ (B14)
as $`z\mathrm{}(r0)`$. Inserting this form into Eqs. (B2) and (B4), we find the expansion coefficients as

$`\mu _1=0\mu _2=4w_1^2\mu _3={\displaystyle \frac{4ϵ}{\mathrm{}^2}}w_1^2+{\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}w_1^3(1+w_1)`$ (B15)
$`w_2={\displaystyle \frac{2ϵ}{3\mathrm{}^2}}w_1+{\displaystyle \frac{w_1^2}{6}}(3+8w_1)`$ (B16)
$`w_3={\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^2}{2\mathrm{}^4}}w_1{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{8\mathrm{}^2}}w_1^2(5+24w_1)`$ (B17)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{w_1^3}{4}}(1+8w_1)(1+2w_1)`$ (B18)
where $`w_1`$is a free parameter.

Putting those relations in Eqs. (B10) and (B14), we find

$`E={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}w_1^2e^{3z}\left({\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{\mathrm{}^2}}+4w_1^2\right)`$ (B19)
$`\mu =4w_1^2e^{2z}.`$ (B20)
For $`ϵ=0`$ or 1, $`E0`$ and $`\mu +0`$ as $`z\mathrm{}`$. The r.h.s. of Eq. (B12) is positive definite because

$`8E+2\left(1w^2\right)^2=4f\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}\right)^2+\left(1w^2\right)^2,`$ (B21)
and $`f>0`$ should be imposed for a particle-like solution. Hence, the mass function $`\mu `$ is also positive definite.

Next, we analyze the behavior of the solution near infinity ($`z\mathrm{}`$) . If the mass function does not diverge, we can expand $`\mu `$ and $`w`$ as

$`\mu =_0+_1e^z+_2e^{2z}+_3e^{3z}+\mathrm{}`$ (B22)
$`w=1+𝒲_1e^z+𝒲_2e^{2z}+𝒲_3e^{3z}+\mathrm{},`$ (B23)
as $`z\mathrm{}`$.

From the basic equations, we find the relations between the expansion coefficients as

$`_1=0,_2=4𝒲_1^2`$ (B24)
$`_3={\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}𝒲_1^2(4𝒲_13_0)`$ (B25)
$`𝒲_2={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}_0𝒲_1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}𝒲_1^2`$ (B26)
$`𝒲_3={\displaystyle \frac{𝒲_1}{8}}\left(4_0^25_0𝒲_1+2𝒲_1^2\right)`$ (B27)
for $`ϵ=0`$ , and

$`_1=4{\displaystyle \frac{𝒲_1^2}{\mathrm{}^2}}_2={\displaystyle \frac{8}{\mathrm{}^2}}𝒲_1𝒲_2`$ (B28)
$`_3={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}𝒲_1^2\left(4_03𝒲_1\right)𝒲_2=0`$ (B29)
$`𝒲_3={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{12}}𝒲_1\left(4_03𝒲_1\right)`$ (B30)
for $`ϵ=1`$. Here, $`_0`$ and $`𝒲_1`$ are free parameters.

Using those relations, the energy function $`E`$ near infinity is evaluated as

$`E={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}e^{3z}𝒲_1^2+\mathrm{}+0`$ (B31)
for $`ϵ=0`$

$`E={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mathrm{}^2}}e^z𝒲_1^2+\mathrm{}+0`$ (B32)
for $`ϵ=1`$.

Since $`E0`$ near the origin while $`E+0`$ at infinity, if the solution is regular everywhere, $`E`$ must vanishes at some finite point ($`z_0`$) and $`dE/dz0`$ there. On the other hand, Eq. (B11) yields $`dE/dz0`$ since $`E(z_0)=0`$ and $`\mu (z_0)>0`$. As a result, we have $`dE/dz(z_0)=0`$. Using Eq. (B11), we then find $`dw/dz(z_0)=0`$. $`E(z_0)=0`$ with this equation implies $`w(z_0)=\pm 1`$. Solving the basic equations (B2) and (B4) with the above initial values at $`z_0`$ ($`w(z_0)=\pm 1,dw/dz(z_0)=0,\mu (z_0)=`$ positive and finite), we find a trivial solution ($`w(z)=\pm 1,\mu (z)=`$ a positive constant). We conclude that there is no non-trivial particle-like solution with a finite mass for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$.

## C Asymptotic solution ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$)

We present the asymptotic solution of the present system with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$. As we proved for a particle-like solution in the previous appendix and numerically solved for more generic case, the mass function $`\mu `$ seems to diverge. Here we solve the basic equations with some ansatz and find the analytic solution in the asymptotically far region.

First, we consider the case of $`ϵ=0`$. As our ansatz, we adopt

$`\mu _Lz,`$ (C1)
which is suggested from numerical solutions and also confirmed from the following result. The basic equation for the Yang-Mills field is now written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2w}{dz^2}}+e^z\mu {\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}w(1w^2)`$ (C2)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2w}{dz^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}w(1w^2)=0,`$ (C3)
as $`z\mathrm{}`$. We can integrate this equation as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\left(1w^2\right)^2=E_0,`$ (C4)
where $`E_0`$ is an integration constant and denotes the asymptotic value of the energy. $`E_0`$ must be negative, otherwise $`w`$ diverges as $`z\mathrm{}`$.

Rewriting Eq. (C4), we find

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{8E_0+\left(1w^2\right)^2}`$ (C5)
$`=`$ $`\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{\left(w_{}^2w^2\right)^2\left(w_+^2w^2\right)^2},`$ (C6)
where

$`w_\pm =\sqrt{1\pm 2\sqrt{2E_0}},`$ (C7)
which is integrated as

$`w=\pm w_{}\mathrm{sn}({\displaystyle \frac{w_+}{2}}z,k),`$ (C8)
where $`k=w_{}/w_+`$. $`w`$ is oscillating in a potential $`U(z)=\frac{1}{8}\left(1w^2\right)^2`$ with a negative energy $`E_0`$.

In order to check out ansatz, we also solve the mass function with the above solution of $`w`$. The mass function $`\mu `$ is obtained by integration of Eq. (B12), that is

$`\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑z\left(8E_0+2(1w^2)^2\right)}`$ (C9)
$`=`$ $`\mu _0z+4w_+w_{}^2{\displaystyle ^{w_+z/2}}dx[(1k^2)\mathrm{cn}^2(x,k)`$ (C11)
$`+k^2\mathrm{cn}^4(x,k)],`$
where $`\mu _0=8E_0+2(1w_{}^2)^2=8E_0=(1w_{}^2)^2`$. The integration of the functions $`\mathrm{cn}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{cn}^4`$ is evaluated by the elliptic functions as:

$`{\displaystyle }dx\mathrm{cn}^2(x,k)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2}}[(1k^2)x`$ (C12)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{E(\mathrm{sin}^1(\mathrm{sn}(x,k)),k)\times (1k^2\mathrm{sn}^2(x,k))}{\mathrm{dn}^2(x,k)}}]`$ (C13)
$`{\displaystyle }dx\mathrm{cn}^4(x,k)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3k^2}}[(1k^2)x`$ (C14)
$`+\mathrm{cn}(x,k)\mathrm{dn}(x,k)\mathrm{sn}(x,k)]+[{\displaystyle \frac{2(2k^21)}{3k^4}}((1k^2)x`$ (C15)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{E(\mathrm{sin}^1(\mathrm{sn}(x,k)),k)\times (1k^2\mathrm{sn}^2(x,k))}{\mathrm{dn}^2(x,k)}})]`$ (C16)
There functions increase with oscillations as $`z\mathrm{}`$. When we take an average of those functions over the period of oscillation, the averaged values are linearly increasing as our ansatz (C1).

Dividing those functions into two parts (linear functions and oscillating functions), we find

$`\mu =_Lz+{\displaystyle \frac{8\sqrt{2}k^2}{(1+k^2)^{3/2}}}D\mu ({\displaystyle \frac{w_+}{2}}z,k),`$ (C17)
where

$`_L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1+k^2)^2}}[(1k^2)^2`$ (C19)
$`+8k^2\{(1k^2)C_2+k^2C_4\}]`$
$`D\mu (x,k)`$ $`=`$ $`(1k^2){\displaystyle 𝑑x\left[\mathrm{cn}^2(x,k)C_2\right]}`$ (C21)
$`+k^2{\displaystyle 𝑑x\left[\mathrm{cn}^4(x,k)C_4\right]}`$
$`C_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{K(k)}}{\displaystyle _0^{K(k)}}𝑑x\mathrm{cn}^2(x,k)`$ (C22)
$`C_4`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{K(k)}}{\displaystyle _0^{K(k)}}𝑑x\mathrm{cn}^4(x,k)`$ (C23)
The energy $`E_0`$ and the amplitude $`w_{}`$ are found to be

$`E_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1k^2}{1+k^2}}\right)^2`$ (C24)
$`w_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}k}{\sqrt{1+k^2}}}.`$ (C25)
with $`k(0k1)`$.

The asymptotic solution is then given as

$`w`$ $`=`$ $`\pm w_{}\mathrm{sn}({\displaystyle \frac{w_+}{2}}z,k)`$ (C26)
$`\mu `$ $`=`$ $`_Lz+{\displaystyle \frac{8\sqrt{2}k^2}{(1+k^2)^{3/2}}}D\mu ({\displaystyle \frac{w_+}{2}}z,k),`$ (C27)
$`D\mu `$ is a periodic function with a constant period, which in $`z`$-coordinate is

$`\mathrm{\Delta }z={\displaystyle \frac{8}{w_+}}K(k)={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{w_+}}F({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},1,k^2),`$ (C28)
where

$`w_+={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{1+k^2}}}`$ (C29)
Note that if we take a limit of $`k1`$, $`E_00`$, we recover the instanton solution, that is, $`w`$ is oscillating between $`\pm 1`$. The width of one instanton ($`w\pm 11`$ ) is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }z/2`$, which diverges in this limit. However this oscillation is repeated infinitely when a gravitational effect is included, that is infinite number of instantons appear in the present system. This is why the mass function diverges.

For the case of $`ϵ=1(\mathrm{\Lambda }<0)`$, since $`f\mathrm{}^2`$, the equation for $`w`$ is now

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2w}{dz^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2}}e^zw(1w^2)`$ (C30)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2w}{dz^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}=0.`$ (C31)
Integrating this equation, we obtain that

$`\left|{\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}\right|e^z,`$ (C32)
which gives the asymptotic behaviors of $`w`$ as

$`w=𝒲_0+𝒲_1e^z+\mathrm{}.`$ (C33)
The equation for $`\mu `$ is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mu }{dz}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\mathrm{}^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}\right)^2+(1w^2)^2`$ (C34)
$``$ $`(1𝒲_0^2)^2`$ (C36)
$`+4𝒲_1\left[{\displaystyle \frac{𝒲_1}{\mathrm{}^2}}𝒲_0(1𝒲_0^2)\right]e^z+\mathrm{}`$
and then $`\mu `$ is given by

$`\mu =_Lz+_0+_1e^z+\mathrm{},`$ (C37)
where

$`_L`$ $`=`$ $`(1𝒲_0^2)^2`$ (C38)
$`_1`$ $`=`$ $`4𝒲_1\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}^2}}𝒲_1𝒲_0(1𝒲_0^2)\right]`$ (C39)
The energy function $`E`$ is evaluated as

$`E`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mathrm{}^2}}e^z\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}(1w^2)^2`$ (C40)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}(1𝒲_0^2)^2(=E_0).`$ (C41)
Since the damping rate of the energy is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dE}{dz}}`$ $`=`$ $`4e^z\left({\displaystyle \frac{dw}{dz}}\right)\left[E+{\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{8}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\mathrm{}^2}}e^{2z}\right]`$ (C42)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mathrm{}^2}}𝒲_1^2e^z,`$ (C43)
the energy damping ceases very soon. As a result, the energy of the system approaches some finite value ($`E_0`$). This is because the potential term drops exponentially while the adiabatic damping term remains. The solution does not oscillate because the potential term becomes ineffective quickly.