format: text

text:
# Full reduction of large finite random Ising systems by RSRG.

## I Introduction and outline

Real space renormalization group (RSRG) served as a major tool, over the last thirty years, in the field of critical phenomena. By simplifying calculations near a critical point, the various RSRG techniques, such as using the majority rule bdfn92 , the well known Migdal-Kadanoff (MK) m75 ; k77 , the Casher-Schwartz cs79  and others tmss90 , allow one to penetrate the critical regime to a point at which critical exponents can be extracted. For translational invariant (pure) systems, only a single renormalization step is required to obtain the recursion relations for the parameters of the Hamiltonian, from which critical fixed-points may be derived along with critical exponents. For random systems the recursion relations are position dependent. Therefore, a natural approach is to consider the recursion for the distribution of disorder. Equivalently, recursion relations may be obtained for all the parameters defining the distribution, moments, correlations, etc. Practically, in this approach, the recursion relations are truncated to obtain relations involving only the mean and variance, keeping the random couplings independent sf80 ; kd81 ; ab84 ; aa85 . An alternative approach, suggested first by Berker and Ostlund bo79 , is to consider a given realization of disorder on a finite system. Renormalization is then used to reduce the system to a size where brute force calculation is possible. Thermal averages of certain quantities can thus be obtained for that realization and ensemble average is obtained by repeating the procedure for many realizations and averaging the results. The advantage of the method is that all the moments and correlations generated by renormalization are kept. The disadvantage is that the renormalization leaves in the end a small number of spins and, therefore, only thermal averages of functions of those spins can be evaluated directly. This is good enough to obtain directly the ensemble average of the magnetization dsy93 , because the average magnetization obtained from the surviving spins is exactly the true average magnetization. If, on the other hand, we are interested in averages involving spins that do not survive the renormalization process, things become much more complicated. Take for example the ensemble averaged correlation, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }(r_{ij})}=\overline{\sigma _i\sigma _j}\overline{\sigma _i\sigma _j}`$, where $`\mathrm{}`$ denotes thermal average and $`\overline{\mathrm{}}`$ denotes ensemble average. It can be calculated directly from the remaining spins provided that the vector $`r_{ij}`$ connecting the sites $`i`$ and $`j`$ equals a vector connecting two of the surviving spins or obtained from it by a symmetry operation on the initial lattice. In any other case, a direct calculation is impossible. It is true that quantities like the susceptibility that involves $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}`$’s for all pairs of sites can be calculated indirectly dsy93 ; fbm95 ; fb9697 ; yb97 . Following Dayan et al dsy93 , this requires adding a constant field, $`H`$, to the system, calculating the ensemble average of the magnetization as a function of $`H`$ by the method outlined above and then differentiating with respect to $`H`$ at $`H=0`$. In fact, many interesting quantities may be obtained by adding the appropriate interaction to the Hamiltonian and differentiating ensemble averages with respect to the corresponding coupling constants. The trouble with that approach is that even in the relatively simple case of evaluating the susceptibility, the numerical differentiating is quite problematic. Berker and coworkers fbm95 ; fb9697 ; yb97  were using the chain rule to approximately recover thermodynamic densities of the original system from the renormalized couplings of the reduced system. The main problem here is that the method is limited only to the obtainment of thermal averages of products of spins showing in the Hamiltonian. The purpose of the present article is to show how to calculate various interesting quantities that involve spins that do not survive the renormalization by a direct and effective method.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we describe briefly the Casher Schwartz (CS) renormalization procedure, which is the RSRG that we use here for the numerical demonstration of our method in Sec. IV. Note, however, that the method we present is more general and can be used with any other renormalization scheme. In Sec. III, the elements of our method are mainly considered for the random field Ising system. It is shown how to calculate the average ”connected” spin-spin correlation function, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}}`$ and the average ”disconnected” spin-spin correlations, $`\overline{S_{ij}}=\overline{\sigma _i\sigma _j}`$, from which the average susceptibility, $`\overline{\chi }`$, and the average total energy, $`\overline{E}`$, can be easily obtained. It is further shown how to calculate the average specific heat, $`\overline{C}`$, for an Ising system with random bonds and random fields. Note that the method presented here enables a full evaluation (though approximate) of quantities like $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}}`$ and $`\overline{S_{ij}}`$ that depend on distance. As we shall show later, this follows from two facts: (a) The finite and small number of spins we are left with at the end of the renormalization procedure. (b) The fact that the system is random. (It will be shown how, in principle, this method can be used to calculate by a similar method of a finite system renormalization, such quantities in the pure system. The practicality of the method for the pure system will prove, however, to be questionable.) In the last section, we demonstrate the usefulness of our method by calculating the average susceptibility $`\overline{\chi }`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)}`$ for $`r`$’s lying on a main axis of the lattice, for the random field Ising system. The evaluation of $`\overline{\chi }`$ is used to derive critical exponents that may be compared with the exponents derived by other methods. Note that the values of the exponents depend not only on the numerical application of the method presented here, but also on the specific scheme of renormalization employed.

## II Renormalization

Although our method is general, we will use the CS scheme cs79  for the numerical demonstration of our method and present the results in Sec. IV. Like any other renormalization procedure (such as Migdal-Kadanoff (MK) m75 ; k77  and others tmss90 ), when performed on a regular lattice, recovering the original form of the Hamiltonian is not an exact procedure. Nevertheless, for the translational invariant (pure) Ising system it produces good results cs79 . In most RSRG calculations for random systems, correlations generated by the renormalization are simply ignored. It was suggested, however, many years ago by Harris and Lubensky hl74  that those correlations are important. The CS scheme generates, indeed, such correlations. Schwartz and Fishman sf80 , used the CS scheme to renormalize the mean and variance of the distribution of random bonds. They took into account the generated correlations and found that inclusion of the effect of generated correlations in the the renormalized variance is essential.

The CS renormalization method for the pure Ising system is described in detail in cs79 , while a detailed demonstration of how it can be used, locally, for a random bond system can be found in sf80 . Moreover, our numerical renormalization procedure here, as conducted for the random field Ising model, follows almost exactly the numerical procedure used by Dayan at al dsy93 . Here, therefore, we only describe it in brief. According to the CS scheme, an integration of every other site is performed exactly, but then, all non-nn bonds, generated by the RG transformation, are symmetrically bent onto available nn bonds, many-spin odd interactions may be grouped to form the renormalized field, while many-spin even interactions are simply omitted. Here, though, as in Ref. dsy93 , in order to simplify computer programming, we only keep the renormalized fields, and ignore the many-spin odd interactions as well. The integration of every other site is, relatively, an easy task, even in 3D, since every spin situated on an even site interacts only with neighboring spins situated on odd sites.

We start then with a set of $`N=L^3`$ Ising spins, $`\sigma _i=\pm 1`$, with $`L=2^n`$, situated on a 3D SC lattice. Suppose, now, that the Ising system is not translational invariant and represented by the Hamiltonian

$$=\underset{<i,j>}{}J_{ij}\sigma _i\sigma _j\underset{i}{}h_i\sigma _i,$$
(1)
where $`<i,j>`$ refers to nearest neighbors only. Performing the trace over every other site, each of the erased spins, contributes separately to each of the terms in the new Hamiltonian, generating all possible interactions among its 6 nn’s. We arrive, then, at a new Hamiltonian, containing fields, nn, nnn and multi-spin interaction terms, from 3-spin and up to 6-spin interactions. All the couplings are again local. The result is even further complicated by the fact that the resulting lattice is not an SC but an FCC lattice. As was mentioned above, the multi-spin interactions are simply ignored, while the values of the 3 generated nnn interactions are symmetrically distributed over the 12 nn interactions. To bring the lattice back to its SC form, we still need to integrate over each of the face-centered spins. To do that, we first bend all nn bonds connecting between face-centers, onto nn bonds that lie on the face of the cube and connecting between face-centers and vertices. The extra erasure step can now be easily executed following the CS 2D renormalization scheme. This is a much simpler procedure, which we shell not describe here, but can also be found in Refs. cs79 ; sf80 .

In our study, the above two steps procedure is performed locally and repeated iteratively until the system is brought down to a size of $`2\times 2\times 2`$, for which a trace can be performed exactly.

## III The method

In this section we describe, mainly, how to calculate the ”connected” and ”disconnected” correlation function for the three dimensional random field system. We consider the random field Hamiltonian

$$=J\underset{<i,j>}{}\sigma _i\sigma _j\underset{i}{}h_i\sigma _i.$$
(2)
The $`h_i`$’s are random uncorrelated fields, distributed around zero,

$$\overline{h_i}=0,\overline{h_ih_j}=h^2\delta _{ij},$$
(3)
We assume that the random fields are distributed according to a Gaussian distribution,

$$P\{h\}=\underset{i}{}P_i(h_i)\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}e^{\frac{1}{2h^2}_ih_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}},$$
(4)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(h\sqrt{2\pi })^N`$. We are interested in calculating the average spin-spin correlations and susceptibility of a large, but finite, system, over a large number of realizations of the random field. Consider first

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}\sigma _i\sigma _j\sigma _i\sigma _j.$$
(5)
The susceptibility is related to the spin-spin correlations by

$$\chi =\frac{\beta }{N}\underset{i,j}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}.$$
(6)
The average susceptibility,

$$\overline{\chi }=\beta \underset{j}{}\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}},$$
(7)
is obtained by averaging over a large enough number of realizations. The true average of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}`$ depends, of coarse, only on the radius separating $`i`$ and $`j`$. Namely, translational invariance is restored by averaging. Obviously, since we consider a large system, calculating the above quantities directly involves the impossible task of performing a trace over a large number of spins numerically. We, thus, turn to real space renormalization. By choosing first a specific renormalization scheme (CS, MK, etc.), the rescaling factor, $`b`$, is set. We then choose the linear size of our system, $`L`$, to be $`b`$ to some integer power, $`n2`$, depending on how large we want it to be. The renormalization transformation is then used locally, by performing $`n1`$ repeated iterations, to fully reduce the size of the system to $`b\times b\times b`$. The thermal average of each of the 8 remaining spins can now be calculated exactly by performing the trace using the Hamiltonian of the reduced system. In fact, averaging over large enough number of realizations, we may expect $`\overline{\sigma _i}`$ to be translational invariant and, therefore, to be equal to the average magnetization per spin. In practice, in order to improve our averaging, we will calculate it as follows,

$$\overline{M}\frac{1}{N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\overline{\sigma _i}__N=\frac{1}{8}\underset{i=1}{\overset{8}{}}\overline{\sigma _i}__8.$$
(8)
Although, in principle, calculating thermal averages for the renormalized 8-spin system is a reasonable task, we are now faced with a different problem. The problem is that the reduced system only carries information about the 8 spins that survived the renormalization procedure. While this makes no difference when calculating quantities containing thermal averages of a single spin (such as the average magnetization above), it makes it impossible to calculate directly quantities that contain thermal averages of more than one spin. Such are the average spin-spin correlations, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}}`$, at distances other than $`L/2`$, $`L/\sqrt{2}`$ and $`\sqrt{3}L/2`$ and such is the average susceptibility, which, according to Eq. (7), requires the sum of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}`$ over all distances available in the original system. This is simply because spins that are nn’s in the reduced system are, in fact, $`L/2`$ lattice constants apart in the original system (see Fig. 1). Indeed, as was done by Dayan at al dsy93 , one may calculate the susceptibility by applying a small external field, $`H`$, to the original system and then use the derivative of $`\overline{M}`$ with respect to $`H`$. This method, though, is quite problematic, because it concerns a numerical derivative at $`H=0`$. As was discussed by Dayan at al, $`H`$ must be small enough, so that $`M(H)`$ is linear in $`H`$. This is difficult to achieve, since, below the transition, the size of the region where that linearity exists, shrinks to zero as the size of the system tends to infinity. If, on the other hand, the field is too small, one may encounter numerical problems from round-off errors.

Our solution to the problem is obtained by using the identity:

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}}=\frac{1}{\beta h^2}\overline{\sigma _ih_j}.$$
(9)
This identity was used in the past ss85 ; ss86 ; sgn91 ; gaahs9396  but since its proof is very short and simple, we will derive it here again for the sake of completeness of the presentation. Start with the right hand side of Eq. (9).

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta h^2}}\overline{\sigma _ih_j}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \sigma _i\frac{}{h_j}P\{h\}Dh}`$ (10)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _i}{h_j}P\{h\}Dh}.`$
This completes the proof since it is easy to see, using the random field Hamiltonian 2, that

$$\frac{1}{\beta }\frac{\sigma _i}{h_j}=\sigma _i\sigma _j\sigma _i\sigma _j.$$
(11)
Connected spin-spin correlations and susceptibility. To obtain $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{}{r})}`$, the following procedure is used. The thermal average of $`\sigma _i`$ is calculated in a given realization for $`i`$ that is one of the surviving spins. it is, then, multiplied by the value of $`h_j`$ in that realization, where $`j`$ is a site separated by a vector $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ from $`i`$ on the original lattice. The product $`\sigma _ih_j`$ is then averaged over many realizations. Since the true average should depend only on the vector connecting the sites and that up to a symmetry of the lattice, the statistics can be considerably improved by averaging $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{}{r})}`$ as follows,

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{}{r})}=\frac{1}{\beta h^2}\frac{1}{8}\overline{\underset{i=1}{\overset{8}{}}\frac{1}{n_r}\sigma _i\underset{k=1}{\overset{n_r}{}}h_{i_k}},$$
(12)
where $`i_k`$, runs over all equivalent sites around $`i`$, that are at a distance $`r`$ from it. The number of these sites is $`n_r`$. In our numerical study, presented in Sec. IV, we have limited ourselves to correlations in the directions of the principal axes of the lattice, so that $`n_r=6`$ (except, of coarse, for self correlations, where $`r=0`$ and $`n_r=1`$). For the average susceptibility, the statistics is improved by writing

$$\overline{\chi }=\frac{1}{8h^2}\overline{\underset{i=1}{\overset{8}{}}\sigma _i\underset{j}{}h_j}.$$
(13)
In the following we will show how to evaluate ”disconnected” correlation functions. Since, in practice, this involves much heavier computations, we just describe how it should be done, and postpone actual numerical application to future publications.

The ’sites translation’ method for the ”disconnected” spin-spin correlations and the total average energy. The main point in the evaluation of ”disconnected” correlations is that, actually, the method of integrating out many degrees of freedom and remaining with a small number of spins can yield not only $`\sigma _i`$, where $`i`$ is a surviving spin, but indeed all the local magnetizations. Namely, the method enables to calculate $`\sigma _i`$ for all $`i`$ in the original lattice. This can be done by noting that, for a given realization, we can translate the 8 surviving spins. (This can be done, equivalently, by keeping the surviving spins and translating the field configuration.) Therefore, we choose a realization, evaluate the 8 $`\sigma _i`$’s corresponding to the surviving spins, then translate the field configuration by one lattice spacing, thus obtaining the local magnetization of the 8 sites translated from the original set by one lattice spacing in the opposite direction. This is repeated until all the local magnetizations are obtained. As is easily seen, this involves order of $`N`$ repetitions of the original procedure. It is clear now how, by obtaining all the $`\sigma _i`$’s, we can obtain

$$\overline{S_{ij}}=\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}}+\overline{\sigma _i\sigma _j}=\frac{1}{\beta h^2}\overline{\sigma _ih_j}+\overline{\sigma _i\sigma _j}.$$
(14)
This is generally time consuming but not so bad if we are interested, say, in the energy given by

$$\overline{E}=J\underset{<i,j>}{}\overline{\sigma _i\sigma _j}\underset{i}{}\overline{h_i\sigma _i},$$
(15)
for which our method yields the following expression

$$\overline{E}=J\underset{<i,j>}{}\overline{\left(\frac{h_j}{\beta h^2}+\sigma _j\right)\sigma _i}\underset{i}{}\overline{h_i\sigma _i}.$$
(16)
The calculation involves taking the ensemble average of the magnetization multiplied by the field at the same point (which is just $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ii}}`$) and the product $`\sigma _i\sigma _j`$, where $`i`$ and $`j`$ are nearest neighbors. To obtain the same degree of accuracy in $`\overline{S_{ij}}`$ as in $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}}`$, we need for each field configuration, to perform seven renormalization procedures instead of the one needed for calculating $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}}`$. The reason is that we need the original set of surviving spins and the sets obtained from it by the six unit translations in all directions. For other ”disconnected” correlation, the time factor needed to attain the accuracy of the ”connected” correlation is $`n_r+1`$.

Specific heat for systems of random bonds and fields. Next, we show how to obtain the average specific heat for an Ising Hamiltonian with both, random fields and random bonds. The evaluation of the average specific heat, $`\overline{C}=kT^2\left(\overline{^2}\overline{^2}\right)`$, is also made possible by our method. It is given by

$$\overline{C}=\frac{N}{k\beta ^2}\left(\frac{N}{2}\underset{<k,l>}{}\overline{J_{ij}J_{kl}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{(ij)(kl)}}+2\underset{<k,l>}{}\overline{h_iJ_{kl}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{(i)(kl)}}+\underset{j}{}\overline{h_ih_j\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}}\right),$$
(17)
where for $`A`$ and $`B`$, two sets of indices, we define $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB}\sigma _A\sigma _B\sigma _A\sigma _B`$ and $`\sigma _A_{iA}\sigma _i`$. The parenthesis in the subscripts of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are used to describe the sets of spins. Operating on the three terms of Eq. (17) (from the less complicated on the right to the more complicated on the left), basically using integration by parts, we obtain first,

$`\overline{h_ih_j\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{h_i\left(h_j\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}\sigma _i\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}h_i\sigma _i}`$ (18a)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}\overline{h_i\left[{\displaystyle \frac{}{h_j}}\left(h_j\sigma _i\right)\sigma _i\right]}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}\overline{\left({\displaystyle \frac{h_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{h^2}}1\right)h_i\sigma _i}.`$
The next two terms are obtained similarly by following the same steps. The only difference is that, since we assume that the random bonds are distributed around some mean value, $`\mu _J`$, and uncorrelated with a standard deviation $`\mathrm{\Delta }_J`$, as a preliminary step, $`J_{ij}`$ and $`J_{kl}`$ are replaced with $`\mu _J+\delta J_{ij}`$ and $`\mu _J+\delta J_{kl}`$ respectively. These are collected back by the end of the calculation. The results are similar to Eq. (18a) only with the appropriate indices,
$$\overline{h_iJ_{kl}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{(i)(kl)}}=\frac{1}{\beta }\overline{\left(\frac{J_{kl}\delta J_{kl}}{\mathrm{\Delta }_{J}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}1\right)h_i\sigma _i}$$
(18b)
and
$$\overline{J_{ij}J_{kl}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{(ij)(kl)}}=\frac{1}{\beta }\overline{\left(\frac{J_{kl}\delta J_{kl}}{\mathrm{\Delta }_{J}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}1\delta _{ij,kl}\right)J_{ij}\sigma _i\sigma _j}.$$
(18c)
Now, Eq. (18c) is not yet in its final form, since it still contains the term $`\sigma _i\sigma _j`$. We thus first need to use Eq. (14) in order to fix that, and then Substitute Eqs. (18) back into Eq. (17).

It may seem plausible that techniques of the nature described above can be used also for correlations of quantities coupled by position independent coupling constants (that may be even zero). In principle, this is true because we can always add random couplings with a Gaussian distribution, do the calculation and, in the end, take the variance of those couplings to zero. practically, it is unclear whether such a procedure is more effective than taking a numerical derivative, since both imply taking the limit where certain couplings tend to zero. (In the random field problem, with no random bonds, we can either add random bonds with variance that will eventually tend to zero, or take a numerical derivative with respect to $`T`$.)

## IV Numerical results

To demonstrate the usefulness of our method, we present in this section results for the less time consuming quantities. we present calculation of the average susceptibility and derive from it the critical exponents, comparing the results with those of Ref. dsy93 , which uses the same renormalization scheme. We also present, for the first time we believe, a calculation of an $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ dependent correlation. We evaluate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{}{r})`$ as a function of temperature and distance, for $`\stackrel{}{r}`$’s on the principal axes of the lattice. All figures are presented with error bars, although, in some of them, the error bars are too small to be noticed. The errors are the standard deviation calculated from the data.

Using the CS approximation, we choose our input parameters, for calculating the average susceptibility, equal to those used by Dayan at al dsy93 , who also used the CS scheme. We also partially follow their line of analysis for extracting the critical exponents $`\eta `$, $`\gamma `$ and $`\nu `$. This serves as a baseline, with which part of our results may be compered. We, thus, set $`J=1`$ and $`h=1`$ in the Hamiltonian (2) and use $`1/\beta `$ as temperature. We have calculated the susceptibility as a function of temperature for systems of linear sizes $`L=2,4,8,16,32,64`$ and $`128`$, averaging, each, over 10000 realizations of the random field, except for the largest system, for which we had to be satisfied with only 1000 realizations. This is shown in Fig. 2(a) in a $`Log`$-plot. Like Dayan at al, we also have included the mirror image of each random field realization, and that is in order to preserve, in our finite systems, the basic reflection symmetry of the infinite system. As seen in the figure, there is an upwards displacement of the average susceptibility for the largest, $`L=128`$, system. This is probably because the relatively small number of $`N=1000`$ realizations, for that system, is too little to statistically rely on. It may also be that, since the renormalization procedure in an approximation, the large number of renormalization steps generates an error which is too large. It is, therefore, excluded in the following analysis concerning the susceptibility. From Fig. 2(b), we extract the value of $`\eta `$, using the finite size scaling behavior of the susceptibility,

$$\chi (T_c(L))L^{\gamma /\nu },$$
(19)
together with the scaling relation

$$\gamma =(2\eta )\nu .$$
(20)
We thus obtain $`\eta =0.53\pm 0.003`$, where the error is the statistical one and errors generated by the renormalization approximate procedure are, therefore, not taken into account.

To estimate the critical temperature, $`T_c`$, of the infinite system together with the critical exponent $`\gamma `$, The logarithm of the average susceptibility of the largest system ($`L=64`$) is plotted verses the logarithm of $`TT_c`$, for temperatures above $`T_c`$ and for different values of $`T_c`$. Acceptable values of $`T_c`$ are such that, by lowering the temperature towards $`T_c`$, the graph enters a linear region until finite size effects become important. We find that $`3.71T_c3.95`$. The two extremes are presented in Figs. 3(a) and 3(c). For critical temperatures above $`T_c=3.95`$ the linear region disappears, while for critical temperatures around $`3.71`$, an opposite curvature begins to appear, as demonstrated by Fig. 3(c) for $`T_c=3.71`$. We consider $`T_c=3.8`$ \[Fig. 3(b)\], for which the largest linear region is obtained, to be the more probable value for the critical temperature. Next, the value of $`\gamma `$ for a given $`T_c`$ is estimated using the critical behavior of the susceptibility,

$$\chi (T)A|TT_c|^\gamma ,$$
(21)
where $`A`$ is some constant. Taking the logarithm of both sides of Eq. (21), for a given $`T_c`$, the resulted straight line is, then, fitted to the linear region by varying $`\gamma `$ and the constant $`A`$. As indicated by Fig. 3, the range of acceptable $`T_c`$’s corresponds to a range of possible values for $`\gamma `$: $`1.9\gamma 2.4`$, which is quite similar to that obtained by Dayan at al dsy93 . Using the scaling relation (20), the resulting values for the critical exponent, $`\nu `$, are roughly: $`1.3\nu 1.65`$. For $`T_c=3.8`$, the corresponding values for $`\gamma `$ and $`\nu `$ are $`\gamma =2.2`$ and $`\nu =1.5`$.

In a search for a more refined estimation of gamma, we turn to the absolute value of the derivative of $`\chi `$ with respect to $`T`$. Here we use the numerical derivative of our data for the average susceptibility, although one should note that it is, probably, better calculated directly from

$$\overline{\frac{\chi }{T}}=\frac{k\beta ^2}{h^2}\overline{[\sigma _i\sigma _i]\underset{j}{}h_j},$$
(22)
following our method and using the ideas presented in Sec. III. Similar to the finite size scaling behavior of $`\chi `$, as given by Eq. (19), its derivative with respect to $`T`$ is expected to behave as

$$\frac{\chi }{T}(T_c(L))L^{(\gamma +1)/\nu }.$$
(23)
Here $`T_c(L)`$ is the temperature of the maximum of the derivative for a given $`L`$ and is, therefore, different from that of the maximum of $`\chi `$, used in Eq. (19). We have calculated, then, $`\overline{\chi /T}`$ as a function of temperature for systems of linear sizes $`L=2,4,8,16,32,64`$, as presented in Fig. 4(a). In Fig. 4(b), we have used a linear fit for the logarithm of the maximum of $`\overline{\chi /T}`$ plotted versus the logarithm of $`L`$, from which we obtain the value of $`(\gamma +1)/\nu `$. That, together with $`\gamma /\nu `$ obtained earlier from the finite size scaling of $`\chi `$ \[Fig. 2(b)\], determine the values of $`\gamma `$ and $`\nu `$. we obtain $`\gamma =2.41\pm 0.07`$ and $`\nu =1.64\pm 0.07`$. Note that together with our previously obtained value of $`\eta =0.53\pm 0.003`$, the scaling relation (20) is satisfied.

As a consistency check, we use the set of $`T_c(L)`$’s of the derivative (as they are better defined than those of the susceptibility itself), together with our estimation of $`\nu =1.64`$, to extract the critical temperature $`T_c`$, directly from the finite size scaling behavior,

$$|T_c(L)T_c|L^{1/\nu }.$$
(24)
In Fig. 5 we use a linear fit for the logarithm of $`T_c(L)T_c`$ plotted versus the logarithm of $`L`$. We obtain $`T_c=3.77`$ and that is by tuning $`T_c`$ to reach a slope that fits the negative inverse value of $`\nu =1.64`$.

Taking all the results above into account, we arrive at our final estimation of, $`\eta =0.53\pm 0.003`$, $`\gamma =2.2\pm 0.3`$, $`\nu =1.5\pm 0.15`$ and $`T_c=3.8\pm 0.1`$. Note that our result for $`\eta `$ satisfies the inequality $`2\eta <d/2`$, by Schwartz and Soffer ss85  and is in good agreement with the results cited in Refs. dsy93 ; c86 ; oh86 ; ry93 ; r95 ; fh9698 ; hy01 . Also, our result for $`\gamma `$ is in good agreement with the results of Refs. dsy93 ; gaahs9396 ; s88 ; ry93 ; fhbh97 , while our result for $`\nu `$ is in good agreement with the results of Refs. bcsy85 ; r95 ; fhbh97 ; hy01 ; mf02 . In Fig. 6 we use these values to obtain a data collapse for the susceptibility, scaled by a factor of $`1/L^{2\eta }`$, when plotted versus $`TT_c`$, scaled by a factor of $`L^{1/\nu }`$. It is presented in a $`log`$-$`log`$ plot. It should be noted, though, that, within the range of values we have obtained for the parameters above, this data collapse picture, is almost insensitive, so that it is impossible to prefer one set of parameters over the other.

We conclude our study of the average susceptibility by presenting it for different values of the strength of the random field (Fig. 7).

We now turn to our evaluation of the average spin-spin correlation function, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$, calculated according to Eq. (12) as discussed in Sec. III. In Fig. 8, we present $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)}`$ for two values of the strength of the random field and for two temperatures. For $`h=1`$, we know that $`T=4.2`$ is above the transition \[Fig. 8(a)\]. We present our full results although it is clear that for $`r>10`$ the values of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)}`$ are dominated by noise and therefore meaningless. For $`h=2`$ at $`T=3.85`$ \[Fig. 8(c)\], we see a similar picture. Again the function decays very fast and already below $`r=10`$, its significance is questionable. It may be expected that increasing the number of realizations considerably, may improve the evaluation of the correlation where it is small. As the temperature is lowered ,for $`h=1`$, to $`T=3.85`$ that is at the transition region \[Fig. 8(b)\], the behavior becomes very noisy and statistically meaningless, but still a trend can be discerned. A similar behavior is observed in \[Fig. 8(d)\], for $`h=2`$ and $`T=1`$. We have chosen to present Figs. 8(b) and 8(d) although, as far as $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)}`$ is concerned, they are not very informative. The reason for doing so is that it is known dsy93 ; wd95 ; ah96 ; wd98 ; ahw98  that self averaging is destroyed below the transition and thus we expect the enhanced noisiness of those figures to indicate approach to the transition. The existence of a trend suggests, though, that we may be still above the transition. Fig. 9 presents $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)}`$ for $`h=1`$ and $`T=3`$ (below the transition). The noisiness is larger than in Figs. 8(b) and 8(d) and no trend as a function of $`r`$ can be observed. The above observations, in addition to information about the zero temperature transition ($`h_c=1.956`$ according to fh9698 , while it is $`h_c=2.28`$ and $`h_c=2.27`$ according to hy01  and mf02  respectively) is consistent with the qualitative phase diagram presented in Fig. 10. The above may suggest an alternative method of identifying the critical temperature by the amount of noise in the data and by loosing the trend as function of $`r`$. This line of investigation is postponed, however, to future work.

## V Summary

We have presented a method for calculating thermodynamic quantities, directly from a fully reduced renormalized random system. Our method works with any renormalization scheme, though it is essential that the random variables are distributed according to a Gaussian distribution. It relies on an exact mathematical transformation, so that the quality of the results obtained by using it, depends solely on the quality of the renormalization approximation and the number of realizations considered. As examples, we have developed explicit expressions for the average ”connected” spin-spin correlations, the average susceptibility, the average spin-spin correlations (”disconnected”), the total average energy and the average specific heat. We have demonstrated our method by calculating the susceptibility and the ”connected” correlation function for the 3D random field Ising system. From the results for the susceptibility, we have calculated the following critical exponents: $`\eta =0.53\pm 0.003`$, $`\gamma =2.2\pm 0.3`$ and $`\nu =1.5\pm 0.15`$ while the critical temperature obtained is $`T_c=3.8\pm 0.1`$ for the case where the variance of the field is $`h=1`$. As for the average ”connected” spin-spin correlation function, we have presented it as a function of the distance between spins. Starting at the high temperature and disordered phase, it shows a sharp decay. Lowering the temperature towards the critical line it decays over longer and longer distances until the behavior becomes very noisy and no trend can be detected.


text:
# Complex Kerr Geometry and Nonstationary Kerr Solutions

## I Introduction

The complex representation of Kerr geometry, initiated by Newman , has been found to be useful in various problems . When considered in the Newman-Penrose formalism , it allows one to get a retarded-time description of the nonstationary Maxwell fields and twisting algebraically special solutions of the linearized Einstein equations. Twisting solutions are represented in this approach as retarded-time fields, which are similar to Lienard-Wiechard fields. However, they are generated by a complex source moving along a complex world line $`x_0(\tau )`$ in complex Minkowski space-time $`CM^4`$. The light cones emanating from the word line of a source usually play a central role in the retarded-time constructions where the fields are defined by the values of a retarded time. In the case of complex world line, the corresponding light cone has to be complex which complicates the retarded-time scheme.

In this paper, we use the Kerr-Schild approach to the complex representation of Kerr geometry, which is based on the Kerr-Schild formalism and the Kerr theorem. This approach has an advantage in this problem since the Kerr-Schild form of metrics, $`g^{\mu \nu }=\eta ^{\mu \nu }2hk^\mu k^\nu `$, contains the auxiliary Minkowski background $`\eta ^{\mu \nu }`$, which attaches an exact meaning to the complex world line $`x_0(\tau )CM^4`$ in the curved Kerr-Schild backgrounds. In addition, the Kerr theorem allows us to get an explicit representation for the metric, the principal null congruence (PNC), formed by vector field $`k^\mu `$, and the location of singularity and also to express them in asymptotically flat Cartesian coordinates.

This approach allows us to get a class of the exact nonstationary generalizations of the Kerr solution which are determined by the complex retarded-time construction.

The basic ideas of this approach were published in . In  this retarded-time construction was applied to describe the boosted Kerr solution. However, application of this approach to accelerating twisting sources encounters hard obstacles connected with the problem of a real slice. In this paper we find the way to solve this problem and present the class of exact nonstationary Kerr solutions.

For the non-rotating sources, such solutions were obtained earlier by Kinnersley . The Kinnersley solutions are radiative, and by acceleration of the source they are accompanied by null radiation. This property is present in our solutions also and leads to the necessity of giving an interpretation to the origin of this radiation, which enforces to return to the old problem of the source of the Kerr and Kerr-Newman solutions.

The main peculiarity of the Kerr geometry is the twisting geodesic and shear-free PNC. Such congruences are determined in Minkowski space-time (parametrized by the null Cartesian coordinates $`u,v,\zeta ,\overline{\zeta }`$) by the Kerr theorem  via the solution $`Y(x)`$ of the equation $`F=0`$, where $`F(Y,\lambda _1,\lambda _2)`$ is an arbitrary analytic function of the projective twistor variables

$$Y,\lambda _1=\zeta Yv,\lambda _2=u+Y\overline{\zeta }.$$
(1)
In twistor notations  these variables are defined as follows $`\{1,Y,\lambda _1,\lambda _2\}=Z^\alpha /Z^0`$, where $`Z^\alpha =\{\mu ^A,x^\nu \sigma _{\nu \dot{B}B}\mu ^B\}`$. One sees that $`Y`$ is the ratio of two components of a spinor corresponding to the null direction which is tangent to a null ray of the PNC, while the coordinates $`\{\lambda _1,\lambda _2\}`$ are connected with a shift of this ray from the origin and can be determined by any point $`x^\nu `$ lying on this ray. Therefore, these coordinates fix the position and direction of a null ray in Minkowski space $`M^4`$, in accordance with geometrical meaning of a null twistor, and the scalar function $`Y(x)`$ determines the null congruence as a field of null directions in $`M^4`$. The geometrical meaning of the twistor coordinates is extended to $`CM^4`$, where they fix complex null planes, and the real null rays of congruence belong to the intersection of the complex conjugate null planes.

The retarded-time construction is usually based on the space-time links provided by light cones. When considering the complex retarded-time construction, we set up a link between the generating PNC function $`F`$ and the world line of a complex source. In the problem considered there appears the obstacle that the real light cone does not have intersections with complex world line. In $`CM^4`$ light cones split on the families of ‘left’ and ‘right’ complex null planes, which take over the role of the light cone in the complex retarded-time scheme. Each of the ‘left’ null planes is determined by the fixed values of the coordinates $`\{Y,\lambda _1,\lambda _2\}`$ and represents a geometrical realization of the twistor .

In Sec.II we recollect the basic properties of Kerr geometry and give a nonformal treatment clarifying its complex structure. A consequent treatment based on the Kerr-Schild formalism is started in Sec.III.

In Appendix A we give the basic necessary relations of the Kerr-Schild formalism, and in the Appendix B we give a proof of the Kerr theorem adapted to the Kerr-Schild formalism. During the proof we obtain some relations that are necessary for subsequent treatment of the real slice procedure described in Sec.III. It allows us to integrate the Einstein field equations, which is performed in Sec.IV.

## II Complex structure of Kerr geometry and related retarded-time construction

### A Appel source and main peculiarities of the real and complex Kerr geometry

The Kerr singular ring is one of the most remarkable peculiarities of the Kerr solution. It is a branch line of space on two sheets: ”negative” and ”positive” where the fields change their signs and directions. There exist the Newton and Coulomb analogues of the Kerr solution possessing the Kerr singular ring. This allows one to understand the origin of this ring as well as the complex origin of the Kerr source. The corresponding Coulomb solution was obtained by Appel still in 1887 by a method of complex shift .

A point-like charge $`e`$, placed on the complex z-axis $`(x_0,y_0,z_0)=(0,0,ia)`$, gives the real Appel potential

$$\varphi _a=Ree/\stackrel{~}{r}.$$
(2)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{r}`$ is in fact the Kerr complex radial coordinate $`\stackrel{~}{r}=PZ^1=r+ia\mathrm{cos}\theta `$, where $`r`$ and $`\theta `$ are the oblate spheroidal coordinates. It may be expressed in the usual rectangular Cartesian coordinates $`x,y,z,t`$ as

$$\stackrel{~}{r}=[(xx_0)^2+(yy_0)^2+(zz_0)^2]^{1/2}=[x^2+y^2+(zia)^2]^{1/2}.$$
(3)
The singular line of the solution corresponds to $`r=\mathrm{cos}\theta =0`$, and it is seen that the Appel potential $`\varphi _a`$ is singular at the ring $`z=0,x^2+y^2=a^2`$. It was shown that this ring is a branch line of space-time for two sheets, similar to the properties of the Kerr singular ring. Appel potential describes exactly the e.m. field of the Kerr-Newman solution .

If the Appel source is shifted to a complex point of space $`(x_o,y_o,z_o)(0,0,ia)`$, it can be considered as a mysterious ”particle” propagating along a complex world-line $`x_0^\mu (\tau )`$ in $`CM^4`$ and parametrized by a complex time $`\tau `$. The complex source of the Kerr-Newman solution has just the same origin  and can be described by means of a complex retarded-time construction for the Kerr geometry. *** The objects described by the complex world-lines occupy an intermediate position between particle and string. Like a string they form two-dimensional surfaces or world-sheets in space-time . In many respects this source is similar to the ”mysterious” $`N=2`$ complex string of superstring theory .

The Kerr twisting PNC is the second remarkable structure of the Kerr geometry. It is described by a vector field $`k^\mu `$ which determines the Kerr-Schild ansatz for the metric,

$$g_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }+2hk_\mu k_\nu ,$$
(4)
where $`\eta _{\mu \nu }`$ is an auxiliary Minkowski space-time and

$$h=\frac{mre^2/2}{r^2+a^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta }.$$
(5)
This is a remarkable simple form showing that all the complication of the Kerr solution is included in the form of the field $`k_\mu (x)`$ which is tangent to the Kerr PNC. This form shows also that the metric is singular at $`r=\mathrm{cos}\theta =0`$, which are the focal points of the oblate spheroidal coordinate system.

The field $`k^\mu `$ is null with respect to $`\eta _{\mu \nu }`$ as well as with respect to the metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$. The Kerr singular ring and a part of the Kerr PNC are shown in Fig.1. The Kerr PNC consists of the linear generators of the surfaces $`\theta =const`$. The region shown in Fig.1 $`z<0`$ corresponds to a “negative” sheet of space ($`r<0`$) where we set the null rays to be “in”-going.

Twisting vortex of the null rays propagates through the singular ring $`r=\mathrm{cos}\theta =0`$ and get “out” on the “positive” sheet of space ($`z>0`$). Indeed, the Kerr congruence covers the space-time twice, and this picture shows only the half of the PNC corresponding to $`0>\theta >\pi /2`$. It has to be completed by the part for $`\pi /2>\theta >\pi `$ which is described by another system of the linear generators (having opposite twist). The two PNC directions for each point $`x^\mu M^4`$ correspond to the known twofoldedness of the Kerr geometry and to the algebraically degenerate metrics of type D.

As it is explicitly seen from the expression for $`h`$, the Kerr gravitational field has twovaluedness, $`h(r)h(r)`$, and so also do the other fields on the Kerr background. The oblate coordinate system turns out to be very useful since it also covers the space twice, for $`r>0`$ and $`r<0`$, with the branch line on the Kerr singular ring.

The appearance of the twisting Kerr congruence may be understood as a track of the null planes of the family of complex light cones emanating from the points of the complex world line $`x_0^\mu (\tau )`$  in the retarded-time construction. It is very instructive to consider the following splitting of the complex light cones.

### B Splitting of the complex light cone

The complex light cone $`𝒦`$ with the vertex at some point $`x_0`$, written in spinor form

$$𝒦=\{x:x=x_o^\mu (\tau )+\psi _L^A\sigma _{A\dot{A}}^\mu \stackrel{~}{\psi }_R^{\dot{A}}\}$$
(6)
may be split into two families of null planes: ”left” $`(\psi _L`$ =const; $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_R`$ -variable) and ”right”$`(\stackrel{~}{\psi }_R`$ =const; $`\psi _L`$ -variable). These are the only two-dimensional planes that are wholly contained in the complex null cone. The rays of the principal null congruence of the Kerr geometry are the tracks of these complex null planes (right or left) on the real slice of Minkowski space.

The light cone equation in the Kerr-Schild metric coincides with the corresponding equation in Minkowski space because the null directions $`k^\mu `$ are null in both metrics $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`\eta _{\mu \nu }`$.

In the null Cartesian coordinates

$`2^{\frac{1}{2}}\zeta `$ $`=`$ $`x+iy,2^{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{\zeta }=xiy,`$ (7)
$`2^{\frac{1}{2}}u`$ $`=`$ $`z+t,2^{\frac{1}{2}}v=zt.`$ (8)
the light cone equation has the form $`\zeta \overline{\zeta }+uv=0`$. As usual, in a complex extension to $`CM^4`$ the coordinates $`u,v`$ have to be considered as complex and coordinates $`\zeta `$ and $`\overline{\zeta }`$ as independent. On the real section, in $`M^4`$, coordinates $`u`$ and $`v`$ take the real values and $`\zeta `$ and $`\overline{\zeta }`$ are complex conjugate.

The known splitting of the light cone on the complex null planes has a close connection to spinors and twistors. By introducing the projective spinor parameter $`Y=\psi ^1/\psi ^0`$ the equation of complex light cone with the vertex at point $`x_0`$,

$$(\zeta \zeta _0)(\overline{\zeta }\overline{\zeta }_0)=(uu_0)(vv_0),$$
(9)
splits into two linear equations It is a generalization of the Veblen and Ruse construction  which has been used for the geometrical representation of spinors.

$`\zeta \zeta _0`$ $`=`$ $`Y(vv_0),`$ (10)
$`Y(\overline{\zeta }\overline{\zeta }_0)`$ $`=`$ $`(uu_0),`$ (11)
describing the ”left” complex null planes (the null rays in the real space). Another splitting

$`\stackrel{~}{Y}(\zeta \zeta _0)`$ $`=`$ $`(uu_0),`$ (12)
$`(\overline{\zeta }\overline{\zeta }_0)`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{Y}(vv_0),`$ (13)
gives the ”right” complex null planes.

Thus, the equations of the”left” null planes (11) can be written in terms of the three parameters

$$Y,\lambda _1=\zeta Yv,\lambda _2=u+Y\overline{\zeta },$$
(14)
as follows:

$$\lambda _1=\lambda _1^0,\lambda _2=\lambda _2^0,$$
(15)
where

$$\lambda _1^0=\zeta _0Yv_0,\lambda _2^0=u_0+Y\overline{\zeta }_0$$
(16)
denote the values of these parameters at the point $`x_0`$. These three parameters are the projective twistor variables and very important for further consideration since the Kerr theorem is formulated in terms of these parameters. The above splitting of the complex light cone equation shows their origin explicitly. Note also that in the terms of the Kerr-Schild null tetrad

$`e^1`$ $`=`$ $`d\zeta Ydv,e^2=d\overline{\zeta }\overline{Y}dv,`$ (17)
$`e^3`$ $`=`$ $`du+\overline{Y}d\zeta +Yd\overline{\zeta }Y\overline{Y}dv,`$ (18)
$`e^4`$ $`=`$ $`dv+he^3,`$ (19)
the projective twistor parameters take the form

$`\lambda _1`$ $`=`$ $`x^\mu e_\mu ^1,`$ (20)
$`\lambda _2`$ $`=`$ $`x^\mu (e_\mu ^3\overline{Y}e_\mu ^1),`$ (21)
and correspondingly

$`\lambda _1^0`$ $`=`$ $`x_0^\mu e_\mu ^1,`$ (22)
$`\lambda _2^0`$ $`=`$ $`x_0^\mu (e_\mu ^3\overline{Y}e_\mu ^1).`$ (23)
The “left” complex null planes of the complex light cone at some point $`x_0`$ can be expressed in terms of the tetrad as follows

$$x_L=x_0(\tau )+\alpha e^1+\beta e^3,$$
(24)
and the null plane equations (15) follow then from Eq.(24) and the tetrad scalar products $`e^{1\mu }e_\mu ^1=e^{1\mu }e_\mu ^3=e^{3\mu }e_\mu ^3=0`$. Similar relations are valid also for the “right” null planes with the replacement $`e^1e^2`$.

The ”left” null planes of the complex light cones form a complex Kerr congruence which generates all the rays of the principal null congruence on the real space. The ray with polar direction $`\theta ,\varphi `$ is the real track of the ”left” plane corresponding to $`Y=\mathrm{exp}i\varphi \mathrm{tan}(\theta /2)`$ and belonging to the cone that is placed at the point $`x_0`$ corresponding to $`\sigma =a\mathrm{cos}(\theta ).`$ The parameter $`\sigma =Im\tau `$ has a meaning only in the range $`a\sigma a`$ where the cones have real slices. Thus, the complex world line $`x_0(t,\sigma )`$ represents a restricted two-dimensional surface or strip, in complex Minkowski space, and is really a world-sheet.It may be considered as a complex open string with a Euclidean parametrization $`\tau =t+i\sigma ,\overline{\tau }=ti\sigma `$, and with end points $`x_0(t,\pm a)`$ .

The Kerr congruence arises as the real slice of the family of the ”left” null planes ($`Y=const.`$) of the complex light cones which vertices lie on the complex world line $`x_0(\tau )`$.

The Kerr theorem can be linked to this retarded-time construction.

## III Kerr theorem and the retarded-time construction

### A The Kerr theorem

Traditional formulation of the Kerr theorem is following.

Any geodesic and shear-free null congruence in Minkowski space is defined by a function $`Y(x)`$ which is a solution of the equation

$$F=0,$$
(25)
where $`F(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,Y)`$ is an arbitrary analytic function of the projective twistor coordinates

$$Y,\lambda _1=\zeta Yv,\lambda _2=u+Y\overline{\zeta }.$$
(26)
The congruence is determined then by the vector field

$$e^3=du+\overline{Y}d\zeta +Yd\overline{\zeta }Y\overline{Y}dv=Pk_\mu dx^\mu $$
(27)
in the null Cartesian coordinates $`u,v,\overline{\zeta },\zeta `$. §§§The field $`k_\mu `$ is a normalized form of $`e_\mu ^3`$ with $`k_\mu Re\dot{x}_0^\mu =1`$.

In the Kerr-Schild backgrounds the Kerr theorem acquires a broader content . It allows one to obtain the position of singular lines, caustics of the PNC, as a solution of the system of equations

$$F=0;dF/dY=0,$$
(28)
and to determine some important parameters of the corresponding solutions:

$$\stackrel{~}{r}=dF/dY,$$
(29)
and

$$P=_{\lambda _1}F\overline{Y}_{\lambda _2}F.$$
(30)
The parameter $`\stackrel{~}{r}`$ characterizes a complex radial distance, and for the stationary Kerr solution it is a typical complex combination $`\stackrel{~}{r}=r+ia\mathrm{cos}\theta `$. The parameter $`P`$ is connected with the boost of source.

The proof of the Kerr theorem in the extended version adapted to the Kerr-Schild formalism is given in the Appendix B. Some basic relations of the Kerr-Schild formalism are given in Appendix A.

Working in $`CM^4`$ one has to consider $`Y`$ and $`\overline{Y}`$ functionally independent, as well as the null coordinates $`\zeta `$ and $`\overline{\zeta }`$. The coordinates $`u,v`$ and congruence turn out to be complex. The corresponding complex null tetrad (123) may be considered as a basis of $`CM^4`$. The Kerr theorem determines in this case only the “left” complex structure - the function $`F(Y)`$. The real congruence appears as an intersection with a complex conjugate “right” structure.

### B Quadratic function F(Y) and interpretation of parameters.

It is instructive to consider first the stationary case. Stationary congruences having Kerr-like singularities contained in a bounded region were considered in papers . It was shown that in this case the function $`F`$ must be at most quadratic in $`Y`$,

$$Fa_0+a_1Y+a_2Y^2+(qY+c)\lambda _1(pY+\overline{q})\lambda _2,$$
(31)
where the coefficients $`c`$ and $`p`$ are real constants and $`a_0,a_1,a_2,q,\overline{q},`$ are complex constants. The Killing vector of the solution is determined as

$$\widehat{K}=c_u+\overline{q}_\zeta +q_{\overline{\zeta }}p_v.$$
(32)
Writing the function F in the form

$$F=AY^2+BY+C,$$
(33)
one can find two solutions of the equation $`F=0`$ for the function $`Y(x)`$

$$Y_{1,2}=(B\pm \mathrm{\Delta })/2A,$$
(34)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=(B^24AC)^{1/2}.`$

On the other hand from (29)

$$\stackrel{~}{r}=F/Y=2AYB,$$
(35)
and consequently

$$\stackrel{~}{r}=PZ^1=\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
(36)
These two roots reflect the known twofoldedness of the Kerr geometry. They correspond to two different directions of congruence on positive and negative sheets of the Kerr space-time. The expression (30) yields

$$P=pY\overline{Y}+\overline{q}\overline{Y}+qY+c.$$
(37)
### C Link to the complex world line of the source.

The stationary and boosted Kerr geometries are described by a straight complex world line with a real 3-velocity $`\stackrel{}{v}`$ in $`CM^4`$:

$$x_0^\mu (\tau )=x_0^\mu (0)+\xi ^\mu \tau ;\xi ^\mu =(1,\stackrel{}{v}).$$
(38)
The gauge of the complex parameter $`\tau `$ is chosen in such a way that $`Re\tau `$ corresponds to the real time $`t`$.

The function $`F`$, quadratic in $`Y`$, can be expressed in this case in the form

$$F(\lambda _1\lambda _1^0)\widehat{K}\lambda _2(\lambda _2\lambda _2^0)\widehat{K}\lambda _1,$$
(39)
where the twistor components $`\lambda _1,\lambda _2`$ with zero indices denote their values on the points of the complex worldline $`x_0(\tau )`$, Eq.(16), and $`\widehat{K}`$ is a Killing vector of the solution

$$\widehat{K}=_\tau x_0^\mu (\tau )_\mu =\xi ^\mu _\mu .$$
(40)
Application of $`\widehat{K}`$ to $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ yields the expressions

$`\widehat{K}\lambda _1`$ $`=`$ $`_\tau x_0^\mu (\tau )e_\mu ^1,`$ (41)
$`\widehat{K}\lambda _2`$ $`=`$ $`_\tau x_0^\mu (e_\mu ^3\overline{Y}e_\mu ^1).`$ (42)
From Eq. (30) one obtains in this case

$$P=\widehat{K}\rho =_\tau x_0^\mu (\tau )e_\mu ^3,$$
(43)
where

$$\rho =\lambda _2+\overline{Y}\lambda _1=x^\mu e_\mu ^3.$$
(44)
Comparing Eqs. (43) and (37) one obtains the correspondence in terms of $`p,c,q,\overline{q}`$,

$$\widehat{K}\lambda _1=pY+\overline{q},\widehat{K}\lambda _2=qY+c,$$
(45)
which allows one to set the relation between the parameters $`p,c,q,\overline{q}`$, and $`\xi ^\mu `$, showing that these parameters are connected with the boost of the source.

The complex initial position of the complex world line $`x_0^\mu (0)`$ in Eq. (38) gives six parameters for the solution, which are connected to the coefficients $`a_0,a_1a_2`$. It can be decomposed as $`\stackrel{}{x}_0(0)=\stackrel{}{c}+i\stackrel{}{d}`$, where $`\stackrel{}{c}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{d}`$ are real 3-vectors with respect to the space O(3)-rotation. The real part $`\stackrel{}{c}`$ defines the initial position of the source, and the imaginary part $`\stackrel{}{d}`$ defines the value and direction of the angular momentum (or the size and orientation of a singular ring).

It can be easily shown that in the rest frame, when $`\stackrel{}{v}=0,\stackrel{}{d}=\stackrel{}{d}_0`$, the singular ring lies in the orthogonal to $`\stackrel{}{d}`$ plane and has a radius $`a=|\stackrel{}{d}_0|`$. The corresponding angular momentum is $`\stackrel{}{J}=m\stackrel{}{d}_0.`$

### D L-projection and complex retarded-time parameter.

In the form (31) all the coefficients are constant while the form (39) has an extra explicit linear dependence on $`\tau `$ via terms $`\lambda _1^0(x_0(\tau ))`$ and $`\lambda _2^0(x_0(\tau ))`$. However, this dependence is really absent. As a consequence of the relations $`\lambda _1^0(x_0(\tau ))=\lambda _1^0(x_0(0))+\tau \widehat{K}\lambda _1,\lambda _2^0(x_0(\tau ))=\lambda _2^0(x_0(0))+\tau \widehat{K}\lambda _2`$, the terms proportional to $`\tau `$ cancel and these forms are equivalent.

Parameter $`\tau `$ may be defined for each point $`x`$ of the Kerr space-time and plays the role of a complex retarded-time parameter. Its value for a given point $`x`$ may be defined by L-projection, using the solution $`Y(x)`$ and forming the twistor parameters $`\lambda _1,\lambda _2`$ which fix a left null plane.

$`L`$-projection of the point $`x`$ on the complex world line $`x_0(\tau )`$ is determined by the condition

$$(\lambda _1\lambda _1^0)|_L=0,(\lambda _2\lambda _2^0)|_L=0,$$
(46)
where the sign $`|_L`$ means that the points $`x`$ and $`x_0(\tau )`$ are synchronized by the left null plane (24),

$$xx_0(\tau _L)=\alpha e^1+\beta e^3.$$
(47)
The condition (46) in representation (23) has the form

$$(x^\mu x_0^\mu )e_\mu ^1|_L=0,(x^\mu x_0^\mu )(e_\mu ^3\overline{Y}e_\mu ^1)|_L=0,$$
(48)
which shows that the points $`x^\mu `$ and $`x_0^\mu `$ are connected by the left null plane spanned by the null vectors $`e^1`$ and $`e^3`$.

This left null plane belongs simultaneously to the ”in”-fold of the light cone connected to the point $`x`$ and to the ”out”-fold of the light cone emanating from a point of the complex world line $`x_0`$. The point of intersection of this plane with the complex world-line $`x_0(\tau )`$ gives the value of the ”left” retarded time $`\tau _L`$, which is in fact a complex scalar function on the (complex) space-time $`\tau _L(x)`$.

By using the null plane equation (46) one can express $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of Eq. (36) in the form

$$\mathrm{\Delta }|_L=(uu_0)\dot{v}_0+(\zeta \zeta _0)\dot{\overline{\zeta }_0}+(\overline{\zeta }\overline{\zeta }_0)\dot{\zeta }_0+(vv_0)\dot{u}_0=\frac{1}{2}_\tau (xx_0)^2=\tau _Lt+\stackrel{}{v}\stackrel{}{R},$$
(49)
where

$$\stackrel{}{v}=\dot{\stackrel{}{x}_0},\stackrel{}{R}=\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{x}_0.$$
(50)
It gives a retarded-advanced time equation

$$\tau =t\stackrel{~}{r}+\stackrel{}{v}\stackrel{}{R},$$
(51)
and a simple expression for the solutions $`Y(x)`$:

$$Y_1=[(uu_0)\dot{v}_0+(\zeta \zeta _0)\dot{\overline{\zeta }}_0]/[(vv_0)\dot{\overline{\zeta }}_0(\overline{\zeta }\overline{\zeta }_0)\dot{v}_0],$$
(52)
and

$$Y_2=[(uu_0)\dot{\zeta }_0(\zeta \zeta _0)\dot{u}_0]/[(uu_0)\dot{v}_0+(\zeta \zeta _0)\dot{\overline{\zeta }}_0].$$
(53)
For the stationary Kerr solution $`\stackrel{~}{r}=r+ia\mathrm{cos}\theta `$, and one sees that the second root $`Y_2(x)`$ corresponds to a transfer to the negative sheet of the metric: $`rr;\stackrel{}{R}\stackrel{}{R}`$, with a simultaneous complex conjugation $`iaia`$.

Introducing the corresponding operations,

$$P:rr,\stackrel{}{R}\stackrel{}{R},$$
(54)
$$C:x_0\overline{x}_0,$$
(55)
and also the transfer $`\mathrm{"}out\mathrm{"}\mathrm{"}in\mathrm{"}`$

$$T:t\tau \tau t,$$
(56)
one can see that the roots and corresponding Kerr congruences are CPT-invariant.

### E Nonstationary case. Real slice.

In the nonstationary case, this construction acquires new peculiarities.

i/ The coefficients of function $`F`$ turn out to be complex variables depending on the complex retarded-time parameter;

ii/ $`_\tau x_0^\mu =\xi ^\mu `$ can take complex values, which implies complex values for the function $`P`$ and was an obstacle for obtaining the real solutions in previous investigation ;

iii/ $`K`$ is no longer a Killing vector.

To form the real slice of space-time, we have to consider, along with the “left” complex structure generated by a “left” complex world line $`x_0`$, parameter $`Y`$, and the left null planes, an independent “right” structure with the“right” complex world line $`\overline{x}_0`$, parameter $`\overline{Y}`$, and the right null planes, spanned by $`e^2`$ and $`e^3`$. These structures can be considered as functionally independent in $`CM^4`$, but they have to be complex conjugate on the real slice of space-time.

First, note that for a real point of space-time $`x`$ and for the corresponding real null direction $`e^3`$, the values of the function

$$\rho (x)=x^\mu e_\mu ^3(x)$$
(57)
are real. Next, one can determine the values of $`\rho `$ at the points of the left and right complex world lines $`x_0^\mu `$ and $`\overline{x}_0^\mu `$ by L- and R-projections

$$\rho _L(x_0)=x_0^\mu e_\mu ^3(x)|_L$$
(58)
and

$$\rho _R(\overline{x}_0)=\overline{x}_0^\mu e_\mu ^3(x)|_R.$$
(59)
For the ”right” complex structure, the points $`x`$ and $`\overline{x}_0(\overline{\tau })`$ are to be synchronized by the right null plane $`x\overline{x}_0(\overline{\tau }_R)=\alpha e^2+\beta e^3`$. As a consequence of the conditions $`e^{1\mu }e_\mu ^3=e^{3\mu }e_\mu ^3=0`$, we obtain

$$\rho _L(x_0)=x_0^\mu e_\mu ^3(x)|_L=\rho (x).$$
(60)
So long as the parameter $`\rho (x)`$ is real, the parameter $`\rho _L(x_0)`$ will be real, too. Similarly,

$$\rho _R(\overline{x}_0)=\overline{x}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{\mu }e_\mu ^3(x)|_R=\rho (x),$$
(61)
and consequently,

$$\rho _L(x_0)=\rho (x)=\rho _R(\overline{x}_0).$$
(62)
By using Eqs.(23) and (57) one obtains

$$\rho =\lambda _2+\overline{Y}\lambda _1.$$
(63)
Since the L-projection (46) determines the values of the left retarded-time parameter $`\tau _L=(t_0+i\sigma )|_L`$, the real function $`\rho `$ acquires an extra dependence on the retarded-time parameter $`\tau _L`$. It should be noted that the real and imaginary parts of $`\tau |_L`$ are not independent because of the constraint caused by L-projection.

It means that the real functions $`\rho `$ and $`\rho _0`$ turns out to be functions of the real retarded-time parameter $`t_0=Re\tau _L`$, while $`\lambda _1^0`$ and $`\lambda _2^0`$ can also depend on $`\sigma `$.

These parameters are constant on the left null planes, which yields the relations

$$(\sigma |_L),_2=(\sigma |_L),_4=0,(t_0|_L),_2=(t_0|_L),_4=0.$$
(64)
Similar to the stationary case considered above, we shall restrict function $`F`$ by the expression quadratic in $`Y`$

$$F(\lambda _1\lambda _1^0)K_2(\lambda _2\lambda _2^0)K_1,$$
(65)
where the functions $`K_1`$ and $`K_2`$ are linear in $`Y`$ and depend on the retarded-time $`t_0`$. It has to lead to the form (31) with the coefficients depending on the retarded-time.

Let us assumme that the relation $`F(Y,t_0)=0`$ holds for the retarded-time evolution $`F/t_0|_L=0.`$ It yields

$$\frac{F}{t_0}=K_1_{t_0}\lambda _2^0K_2_{t_0}\lambda _1^0+(\lambda _1\lambda _1^0)_{t_0}K_2(\lambda _2\lambda _2^0)_{t_0}K_1=0.$$
(66)
As a consequence of L-projection the last two terms cancel and one obtains

$$(F/t_0)|_L=(K_1_{t_0}\lambda _2^0K_2_{t_0}\lambda _1^0)|_L=0,$$
(67)
that is provided by

$$K_1(t_0)=_{t_0}\lambda _1^0,K_2(t_0)=_{t_0}\lambda _2^0.$$
(68)
In tetrad representation (23) it takes the form

$$K_1=_{t_0}x_0^\mu e_\mu ^1,K_2=_{t_0}x_0^\mu (e_\mu ^3\overline{Y}e_\mu ^1).$$
(69)
As a consequence of the relation (30), one obtains

$$P=\overline{Y}K_1+K_2,$$
(70)
which yields for the function $`P`$ the real expression

$$P=_{t_0}(x_0^\mu e_\mu ^3)|_L=_{t_0}\rho _L.$$
(71)
It is seen that $`\rho (t_0)=\rho _L(t_0)`$ plays the role of a potential for $`P`$, similarly to some nonstationary solutions presented in .

It seems that the extra dependence of the function $`F`$ on the nonanalytic retarded-time parameters $`t_0`$ contradicts the Kerr theorem; however, the nonanalytic part disappears and analytic dependence on $`Y,l_1,l_2`$ is reconstructed by L-projection. This is explicitly seen for the quadratic form (65) with coefficients given by Eq.(68). Indeed, direct differentiation of this form yields the expression

$$dY=ae^1+be^3+cdt_0,$$
(72)
where $`c=(\lambda _1\lambda _1^0)_{t_0}K_2(\lambda _2\lambda _2^0)_{t_0}K_1`$. By L-projection one has $`c|_L=0`$ and the nonanalytic term $`cdt_0`$ cancels. Therefore, the differential of the function $`Y(x)`$ by L-projection satisfies the geodesic and shear free conditions (133) provided by the Kerr theorem. Note that all the real retarded-time derivatives on the real space-time are nonanalytic and have to involve the conjugate right complex structure. In particular, the expressions (69) acquire the form

$$K_1=e_\mu ^1Re\dot{x}_0^\mu ,K_2=(e_\mu ^3\overline{Y}e_\mu ^1)Re\dot{x}_0^\mu ,$$
(73)
where $`\dot{x}_0^\mu =_{t_0}x_0^\mu .`$

## IV Solution of the field equations

We are now able to obtain a general class of accelerating radiating solutions representing arbitrary nonstationary generalization of the Kerr solution. For simplicity, we shall assume that there is no electromagnetic field. As in the Kinnersley case, the null radiation is described by an incoherent flow of the lightlike particles in $`e^3`$ direction. The solution of the field equations is similar to the treatment given for the Kerr-Schild form of metric in  There are no changes up to Eq. (5.50) of this work.

In particular, we have

$$R_{24}=R_{22}=R_{44}=0.$$
(74)
If the electromagnetic field is zero we also have

$$R_{12}=R_{34}=0.$$
(75)
The equation

$$h,_{44}+2(Z+\overline{Z})h,_4+2Z\overline{Z}h=0,$$
(76)
which follows from (75), admits the solutions

$$h=M(Z+\overline{Z})/2,$$
(77)
where $`M`$ is a real function, obeying the conditions $`M,_4=0`$.

Next, the equation

$$R_{23}=0,$$
(78)
acquires the form

$$M,_23Z^1\overline{Z}Y,_3M=0.$$
(79)
The last gravitational field equation $`R_{33}=P_{33}\kappa T_{33}`$ takes the form

$$𝒟M=Z^1\overline{Z}^1P_{33}/2,$$
(80)
where

$$𝒟=_3Z^1Y,_3_1\overline{Z}^1\overline{Y},_3_2,$$
(81)
which corresponds to the null radiation in the form $`\kappa T_{\mu \nu }=P_{33}e_\mu ^3e_\nu ^3`$.

To integrate Eq.(79) we use the relation (142) of corollary 1 and obtain the equation

$$(\mathrm{log}MP^3),_2=0$$
(82)
which has the general solution

$$M=m/P^3,$$
(83)
where

$$m,_4=m,_2=0.$$
(84)
On the real slice functions $`m`$ and $`P`$ depend on the retarded-time $`t_0`$. The action of operator $`𝒟`$ on the variables $`Y,\overline{Y}`$ and $`\rho `$ is

$$𝒟Y=𝒟\overline{Y}=0,𝒟\rho =1.$$
(85)
From these relations and Eq. (71) we have $`𝒟\rho =\rho /t_0𝒟t_0=P𝒟t_0=1`$, which yields

$$𝒟t_0=P^1.$$
(86)
Since $`M`$ is also a function of $`Y,\overline{Y}`$, and $`t_0`$, the last equation (80) takes the form

$$_{t_0}M=PZ^1\overline{Z}^1P_{33}/2.$$
(87)
It is not really a field equation but a definition of the stress-energy tensor $`\kappa T_\mu ^\nu =P_{33}e_\mu ^3e^{3\nu }`$ corresponding to the null radiation. Substituting Eq.(83) one obtains two terms:

$$P_{33}=\frac{1}{P^2|\stackrel{~}{r}|^2}[6m(_{t_0}\mathrm{log}P)+2_{t_0}m].$$
(88)
The first term, proportional to $`_{t_0}\mathrm{log}P`$, is connected with the acceleration. The second term, proportional to $`_{t_0}m`$, describes the loss of mass by radiation corresponding to the Vaidia “shining star” solution .

The resulting metric has the form

$$g_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }+(m/P^3)(Z+\overline{Z})e_\mu ^3e_\nu ^3.$$
(89)
Normalizing $`e^3`$ by introducing $`k^\mu =e^{3\mu }/P`$, one has

$$\dot{x}_0^\mu k_\mu =1,$$
(90)
and using $`\stackrel{~}{r}=PZ^1`$ we simplify the expressions for metric and stress-energy tensor.

Let us summarize the solutions we have obtained. The metric is

$$g_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }+m(\stackrel{~}{r}^1+\overline{\stackrel{~}{r}}^1)k_\mu k_\nu ,$$
(91)
and the radiation is

$$\kappa T_\mu ^\nu =\mathrm{\Phi }k_\mu k^\nu ,$$
(92)
where

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{1}{|\stackrel{~}{r}|^2}[6m(_{t_0}\mathrm{log}P)+2_{t_0}m].$$
(93)
Vector field $`k_\mu `$ is defined by

$$k_\mu dx^\mu =e^3/P=P^1(du+\overline{Y}d\zeta +Yd\overline{\zeta }Y\overline{Y}dv).$$
(94)
Function $`Y(x)`$ is given in terms of the coordinates $`u,v,\zeta ,\overline{\zeta }`$, by equation $`F(Y)=AY^2+BY+C=0`$, where the coefficients $`A,B,C`$ are determined by decomposition of function

$$F(\lambda _1\lambda _1^0)K_2(\lambda _2\lambda _2^0)K_1,$$
(95)
and $`P`$ is given by

$$P(t_0)=K_2+\overline{Y}K_1=e_\mu ^3Re\dot{x}_0^\mu ,$$
(96)
where

$$\lambda _1=\zeta Yv,\lambda _2=u+Y\overline{\zeta },$$
(97)
and

$$\lambda _1^0=\zeta _0Yv_0,\lambda _2^0=u_0+Y\overline{\zeta }_0$$
(98)
are the values of these variables on the complex world line, and

$$K_1=e_\mu ^1Re\dot{x}_0^\mu ,K_2=(e_\mu ^3\overline{Y}e_\mu ^1)Re\dot{x}_0^\mu .$$
(99)
The complex radial coordinate is given by

$$\stackrel{~}{r}=dF/dY=2AYB.$$
(100)
The coefficients $`A,B,C`$, the functions $`K_1`$ and $`K_2`$ and the parameters of the function $`P`$ are determined by a given complex world line $`x_0^\mu (\tau )=\{u_0(\tau ),v_0(\tau ),\zeta _0(\tau ),\overline{\zeta }_0(\tau )\}`$ and have a current dependence on the retarded time $`\tau |_L`$ which is determined by L-projection on the given complex world line as a root of the left null plane equation

$$\lambda _1=\lambda _1^0,\lambda _2=\lambda _2^0.$$
(101)
Solution of these equations has to be performed for all points of space-time in the region of interest. This is a nonlinear problem with many unknown functions. In the general case it needs a large body of numerical computations with subsequent iterative refinement. For the beginning of the iterative process a starting ‘point’ is necessary, which gives an initial approximation. To obtain it the analytical solutions in the local regions of short distances $`|\stackrel{~}{r}||t\tau |<<\dot{x}_0^\mu k_\mu /\ddot{x}_0^\mu k_\mu `$, can be used since all the unknown parameters (for exclusion of radiation) are determined by the first derivative of the complex world line and the nonlinearity caused by acceleration is negligible here. Having at hand the initial field $`Y(x)`$, one can use the following iterative loop scheme of computation:

$$xY(x)\{\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\rho \}\{\tau ,x_0,\lambda _1^0,\lambda _2^0\}\{P,K_1,K_2\}F(Y)\{Y(x),e^3\}cycleloop.$$
(102)
This iterative procedure is needed to refine the data and carry out a progressive extension of the region. The obtained local parameters $`Y,K_1,K_2,\lambda _1^0,\lambda _2^0,A,B,C,F,P,\tau |_L`$ can be immediately extended along the rays of PNC from the short distances to large ones, which allows one to reduce considerably the necessary body of computations.

The following example is instructive since it shows that some of parameters can be determined analytically; however, an essential nonlinearity is retained which demands the numerical computations.

Example

Let us consider circular motion of source in (x,y)-plane with the direction of angular momentum $`\stackrel{}{J}=m\stackrel{}{a}`$ along z-axis. This example is interesting for astrophysical applications and as a model of circular motion of polarized spinning particles in accelerators. For the both cases one can assume $`|a|<|b|`$. The corresponding complex world line will be

$$x_0^\mu (\tau )=(\tau ,b\mathrm{cos}\omega t_0,b\mathrm{sin}\omega t_0,ia),\tau =t_0+i\sigma .$$
(103)
In null coordinates $`u,v,\zeta ,\overline{\zeta }`$ it takes the form

$$x_0(\tau )=2^{1/2}(ia+\tau ,ia\tau ,be^{i\omega t_0},be^{i\omega t_0}),$$
(104)
and we have

$$\dot{x}_0(\tau )=2^{1/2}(1,1,ib\omega e^{i\omega t_0},ib\omega e^{i\omega t_0}).$$
(105)
The expression for $`\rho _0`$ will be

$$\rho _0=2^{1/2}[\tau (1+Y\overline{Y})+b(\overline{Y}e^{i\omega t_0}+Ye^{i\omega t_0})+ia(1Y\overline{Y})].$$
(106)
On the left null plane it has to be real that leads to

$$\sigma |_L=a(1Y\overline{Y})/(1+Y\overline{Y}),$$
(107)
and

$$\rho _0|_L=2^{1/2}[t_0(1+Y\overline{Y})+b(\overline{Y}e^{i\omega t_0}+Ye^{i\omega t_0})],$$
(108)
and yields

$$P=\dot{\rho }_0|_L=2^{1/2}(1+Y\overline{Y})+i2^{1/2}\omega b(\overline{Y}e^{i\omega t_0}Ye^{i\omega t_0}).$$
(109)
One can also obtain

$$\lambda _1^0=2^{1/2}[be^{i\omega t_0}+Y(\tau _Lia)],\lambda _2^0=2^{1/2}[Ybe^{i\omega t_0}+(\tau _L+ia)],$$
(110)
and

$$K_1=2^{1/2}[ib\omega e^{i\omega t_0}+Y],K_2=2^{1/2}[1Yib\omega e^{i\omega t_0}].$$
(111)
Coefficients of the function $`F=AY^2+BY+C`$ take the form

$$A=2^{1/2}\{ib\omega e^{i\omega t_0}[v2^{1/2}(ia\tau _L)][\overline{\zeta }2^{1/2}be^{i\omega t_0}]\},$$
(112)
$$B=2^{1/2}\{ib\omega e^{i\omega t_0}[\zeta 2^{1/2}be^{i\omega t_0}]+ib\omega e^{i\omega t_0}[\overline{\zeta }2^{1/2}be^{i\omega t_0}]+(u+v2^{1/2}ia)\},$$
(113)
$$C=2^{1/2}\{ib\omega e^{i\omega t_0}[u2^{1/2}(ia+\tau _L)]+[\zeta 2^{1/2}be^{i\omega t_0}]\}.$$
(114)
However, since these coefficients depend on the parameter $`\sigma =Im\tau _L`$, which is determined by L-projection as a function of $`Y`$, the equation $`F=0`$ turns out to be nonlinear. The iterative procedure is necessary for its solution. The dependence of $`A,B,C`$ on $`\sigma `$ has the factor $`b\omega `$. The case $`b\omega <<1`$ corresponds to nonrelativistic motion. The dependence on $`\sigma `$ is weak when $`b\omega <<|Y|1`$, but grows when $`b\omega |Y|`$ or $`b\omega |1/Y|`$. Neglecting $`\sigma `$ in the equation $`F=0`$, one can obtain the analytical solution $`Y(x)`$, which can be used as a first approximation. Note also that in the distant zone the role of rotation parameter $`a`$ becomes weak and the simpler Kinnersley solution can be used for correction of the parameters.

Transfer to the Kinnersley solutions.

For the twist-free, nonrotating Kinnersley’s case the world line is real, $`Imx_0=0`$, and the radial distances $`\stackrel{~}{r}=\overline{\stackrel{~}{r}}=r`$ and the ‘right’ and ‘left’ retarded-time parameters coincide $`\tau _L=\tau _R=t_0`$. The retarded-time equation following from Eq.(51) can be represented in the form

$$\stackrel{~}{r}=(tt_0)+\stackrel{}{v}\stackrel{}{R}=(x^\mu x_0^\mu )\dot{x}_{0\mu }.$$
(115)
It turns out to be real, and in the terms of the Kinnersley parameters $`\sigma ^\mu =x^\mu x_0^\mu `$ it yields the relation

$$\stackrel{~}{r}=r=\sigma ^\mu \dot{x}_{0\mu }.$$
(116)
On the other hand, the real null vectors $`\sigma ^\mu =x^\mu x_0^\mu `$ are proportional to $`e^{3\mu }`$, and taking into account Eq.(96) we have $`r=\sigma ^\mu \dot{x}_{0\mu }=\beta e^{3\mu }\dot{x}_{0\mu }=\beta P`$, which yields $`\beta =r/P`$ and $`\sigma ^\mu =re^{3\mu }/P=rk^\mu `$. This relation shows that our PNC field $`k^\mu `$ coincides with the Kinnersley definition of the PNC, $`k^\mu =\sigma ^\mu /r`$, in terms of which

$$_{t_0}\mathrm{log}P=\dot{P}/P=\ddot{x}_0^\mu k_\mu ,$$
(117)
and the metric (91) and radiation (92), (93) take the Kinnersley form

$$g_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }+\frac{2m(t_0)}{r}(\sigma _\mu /r)(\sigma _\nu /r),$$
(118)
$$\kappa T_\mu ^\nu =\mathrm{\Phi }k_\mu k^\nu ,\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{1}{r^2}[6m(\ddot{x}_0^\mu k_\mu )+2\dot{m}].$$
(119)
## V Conclusion

The complex retarded-time construction considered permits us to obtain a class of nonstationary rotating solutions generated by a complex source moving along an arbitrary given complex world line.

These solutions represent a natural generalization of the Kinnersley class of solutions to the rotating case. The Kerr-Schild approach allows one to get exact expressions for the metric, coordinate system, the PNC, and the positions of singularity for arbitrary motion of a rotating source.

The solutions obtained represent a natural generalization of the black hole solutions, and if $`m^2<e^2+a^2`$ they have horizons. However, since the solutions are radiative, the usual black-hole interpretation can meet objections, and an additional treatment of this case is necessary, which we intend to do elsewhere. The solutions can find application for modelling the behavior of spinning astrophysical objects by acceleration and relativistic boosts. They are also interesting for investigation of the relativistic gravitational fields by particle scattering in ultrarelativistic regimes .

By $`a^2+e^2>m^2`$ the horizons disappear and there is a naked singular ring. This case has attracted attention as a model of a spinning particle . In  the Kerr singular ring was considered as a closed relativistic string forming the source of spinning particle . The nonstationary Kerr solutions presented allows one to describe excitations of this string. In this case, the “negative” sheet of the Kerr space has to be considered as a sheet of advanced fields belonging to the field of vacuum fluctuations, and thus the e.m. radiation must belong to the zero point field. The outgoing vortex of the null radiation appears as a result of the resonance of the vacuum field on this relativistic string. In this case, the energy-momentum tensor has to be regularized on the classical level by the known procedure

$$T_{reg}^{\mu \nu }=:T^{\mu \nu }:T^{\mu \nu }<0|T^{\mu \nu }|0>,$$
(120)
which has to satisfy the condition $`_\mu T_{reg}^{\mu \nu }=0`$. It corresponds exactly to a subtraction of this radiation, leading to $`T_{reg}^{\mu \nu }=0`$ . On the quantum level this procedure is equivalent to the postulate on the absence of radiation for oscillating strings. This stringy interpretation of the Kerr source will be considered elsewhere.

The class of solutions presented can easily be generalized to the Kerr-Newman solution and to the sources radiating electrical charges.

Some other known generalizations of the Kerr solution, such as the Kerr-Sen solution to low energy string theory , the solution to broken $`N=2`$ supergravity , and regular rotating particlelike objects built on the base of Kerr-Newman solution , retain the form and the geodesic and shear-free properties of the Kerr PNC. This means that the Kerr theorem is also valid for these solutions, and that they can also be generalized to the nonstationary radiating case.

## Appendix A: Basic relations of the Kerr-Schild formalism

Following the notations of Ref., the Kerr-Schild null tetrad $`e^a=e_\mu ^adx^\mu `$ is determined by the relations

$`e^1`$ $`=`$ $`d\zeta Ydv,e^2=d\overline{\zeta }\overline{Y}dv,`$ (121)
$`e^3`$ $`=`$ $`du+\overline{Y}d\zeta +Yd\overline{\zeta }Y\overline{Y}dv,`$ (122)
$`e^4`$ $`=`$ $`dv+he^3,`$ (123)
and

$$g_{ab}=e_a^\mu e_{b\mu }=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 1& 0& 0\\ 1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(124)
The vectors $`e^3,e^4`$ are real, and $`e^1,e^2`$ are complex conjugate.

The Ricci rotation coefficients are given by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{bc}^a=e_{\mu ;\nu }^ae_b^\mu e_c^\nu .$$
(125)
The PNC have the $`e^3`$ direction as tangent. It will be geodesic if and only if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{424}=0`$ and shear free if and only if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{422}=0`$. The corresponding complex conjugate terms are $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{414}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{411}=0`$.

The inverse (dual) tetrad has the form

$`_1`$ $`=`$ $`_\zeta \overline{Y}_u,`$ (126)
$`_2`$ $`=`$ $`_{\overline{\zeta }}Y_u,`$ (127)
$`_3`$ $`=`$ $`_uh_4,`$ (128)
$`_4`$ $`=`$ $`_v+Y_\zeta +\overline{Y}_{\overline{\zeta }}Y\overline{Y}_u,`$ (129)
where $`_a,_ae_a^\mu ,_\mu `$.

The parameter $`Z=Y,_1=\rho +i\omega `$ is a complex expansion of the congruence, $`\rho =expansion`$ and $`\omega =rotation`$. $`Z`$ is connected to the complex radial distance $`\stackrel{~}{r}`$ by the relation

$$\stackrel{~}{r}=PZ^1.$$
(130)
It was shown in  that the connection forms in Kerr-Schild metrics are

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{42}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{42a}e^a=dYhY,_4e^4.$$
(131)
The congruence $`e^3`$ is geodesic if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{424}=Y,_4(1h)=0,`$ and is shear free if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{422}=Y,_2=0.`$ Thus, the function $`Y(x)`$ with the conditions

$$Y,_2=Y,_4=0$$
(132)
defines a shear-free and geodesic congruence.

## Appendix B: Proof of the Kerr Theorem and two corollaries.

The proof given bellow of the Kerr theorem follows to the general scheme sketched in .

Proof. The differential of the function $`Y`$ in the case of $`Y,_2=Y,_4=0`$ has the form

$$dY=Y,_ae^a=Y,_1e^1+Y,_3e^3.$$
(133)
As the first step we work out the form of $`Y,_3`$. By using relations (129) and their commutators we find

$$Z,_2=(Z\overline{Z})Y,_3.$$
(134)
Straightforward differentiation of $`Y,_3`$ gives the equation

$$Y,_{32}=(Y,_3)^2,$$
(135)
and by using Eqs.(134) and (135) we obtain the equation

$$(Z^1Y,_3),_2=\overline{Z}(Z^1Y,_3)^2.$$
(136)
This is a first-order differential equation for the function $`Z^1Y,_3`$. Its general solution can be obtained by the substitution $`x=Z(Y,_3)^1`$ and has the form

$$Y,_3=Z(\varphi \overline{Y})^1,$$
(137)
where $`\varphi `$ is an arbitrary solution of the equation $`\varphi ,_2=0`$. Analogously, by using the relation $`Y,_{34}=ZY,_3`$ one gets $`\varphi ,_4=0`$; therefore $`\varphi `$ may be an arbitrary function satisfying

$$\varphi ,_2=\varphi ,_4=0.$$
(138)
One can also mention that the three projective twistor coordinates $`\lambda _1=\zeta Yv,\lambda _2=u+Y\overline{\zeta },`$ and $`Y`$ satisfy similar relations $`(.),_2=(.),_4=0`$. Since the surface $`\varphi =const`$ forms a sub-manifolds of $`CM^4`$ that has the complex dimension 3, an arbitrary function $`\varphi `$ satisfying Eq.(138) may be presented as function of three projective twistor coordinates $`\varphi =\varphi (Y,\lambda _1,\lambda _2)`$. Now we can substitute $`Y,_3`$ in Eq.(133), which implies

$$Z^1(\overline{Y}\varphi )dY=\varphi (d\zeta Ydv)+(du+Yd\overline{\zeta }).$$
(139)
If an arbitrary analytic function $`F(Y,\lambda _1,\lambda _2)`$ is given, then differentiating the equation $`F(Y,\lambda _1,\lambda _2)=0`$ and comparing the result with Eq.(139), we find that

$$PZ^1=dF/dY,P=_{\lambda _1}F\overline{Y}_{\lambda _2}F,$$
(140)
where the function $`P`$ can also be defined as

$$P=(\varphi \overline{Y})_{\lambda _2}F.$$
(141)
Corollary 1. The following useful relations are valid:

$$\overline{Z}Z^1Y,_3=(\mathrm{log}P),_2,P,_4=0.$$
(142)
Proof. So long as $`_2_{\lambda _2}F=0`$, one sees that

$$(\mathrm{log}P),_2=\overline{Z}(\varphi \overline{Y})^1;$$
(143)
then Eq.(137) leads to first equality of Eq.(142). The relation $`P,_4=0`$ follows from Eq.(140) and the properties of the twistor components $`Y,_4=(\lambda _1),_4=(\lambda _2),_4=0`$.

Corollary 2. Singular region of the congruence, where the complex divergence $`Z`$ blows up, is defined by the system of equations (28).

## Acknowledgments

We are thankful to G. Alekseev and M. Demianski for very useful discussions.