text:
# Explicit Kundt type 𝐼𝐼 and 𝑁 solutions as gravitational waves in various type 𝐷 and 𝑂 universes

## 1 Introduction

The Kundt class, which is characterized by the geometrical property that it admits a non-expanding and non-twisting null congruence, is a well-known family of solutions to Einstein’s equations. Wolfgang Kundt was the first to introduce, emphasize and investigate this large class  (in the case of vacuum and pure radiation) although some of its important subclasses, in particular the pp -waves  or the Nariai  and Bertotti-Robinson  universe, were discovered and studied previously. Since then a great number of papers have been devoted to the derivation of such spacetimes and an analysis of their properties, see e.g.  for the review. More recent articles which are related to the specific topic of this paper are mentioned below in the appropriate context.

Naturally, most works on exact non-diverging spacetimes investigate particular subclasses of the large Kundt family by restricting attention to a specific algebraic Petrov type and considering special matter contents (vacuum, cosmological constant, pure radiation, null or non-null electromagnetic fields). In many of these subcases, all solutions of the given type were explicitly obtained. On the other hand, at present it is still impossible to find a general solution which describes different Petrov types and matter fields in an explicit form. Even with an assumption of symmetries such solutions could in most cases only be given implicitly, see e.g. .

This contribution focuses on the “gap” which lies between these “extreme” approaches. We present in section 2 a simple explicit metric which contains several arbitrary parameters and functions. For particular choices we recover, in sections 3 and 4 respectively, many Kundt spacetimes with various matter contents which are of the Petrov types $`O`$, $`D`$, and $`N`$, $`II`$. Moreover, the latter solutions can be understood as exact gravitational waves of arbitary profile which propagate in the corresponding “background” universes. All possibilities are discussed below in detail and are interpreted by analyzing the geodesic deviation. The paper also contains an appendix in which we prove that there are no conformally flat Einstein–Maxwell fields with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$.

## 2 General form of the solutions

Throughout the present paper we consider and discuss the following metric

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=2\frac{1}{P^2}\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }2\frac{Q^2}{P^2}\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v+F\mathrm{d}u^2,$$
(1)
with

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`1+\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta },`$
$`Q`$ $`=`$ $`(1+\beta \zeta \overline{\zeta })\epsilon +C\zeta +\overline{C}\overline{\zeta },`$ (2)
$`F`$ $`=`$ $`D{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{P^2}}v^2{\displaystyle \frac{(Q^2)_{,u}}{P^2}}v{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{P}}H,`$
where $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, and $`\epsilon `$ are real constants (without loss of generality we can assume $`\epsilon =0`$ or $`\epsilon =1`$), $`C(u)`$ and $`D(u)`$ are arbitrary functions of the null coordinate $`u`$ ($`C`$ may be complex), and $`H(\zeta ,\overline{\zeta },u)`$ is an arbitrary function of the spatial coordinates $`\zeta `$, $`\overline{\zeta }`$, and of $`u`$. In the natural null tetrad

$`𝐦`$ $`=`$ $`P_{\overline{\zeta }},`$
$`\overline{𝐦}`$ $`=`$ $`P_\zeta ,`$
$`𝐥`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{P^4}{2Q^4}}F_v+{\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{Q^2}}_u,`$ (3)
$`𝐤`$ $`=`$ $`_v,`$
we obtain (using $`\epsilon ^2\epsilon `$) the following form of the only non-vanishing Weyl and Ricci scalars

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{6}\left(D+2\epsilon \beta 2C\overline{C}\right){\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{Q^2}},`$ (4)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_4`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}(PH)_{,\zeta \zeta }{\displaystyle \frac{P^4}{Q^3}},`$ (5)
$`R`$ $`=`$ $`24\alpha 12\epsilon (\alpha +\beta ){\displaystyle \frac{P}{Q}}+2\left(D+2\epsilon \beta 2C\overline{C}\right){\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{Q^2}},`$ (6)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\epsilon (\alpha +\beta ){\displaystyle \frac{P}{Q}}\frac{1}{4}\left(D+2\epsilon \beta 2C\overline{C}\right){\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{Q^2}},`$ (7)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\{[\epsilon (\alpha \beta )(1\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta })+2\alpha (C\zeta +\overline{C}\overline{\zeta })]H+P^2QH_{,\zeta \overline{\zeta }}`$ (8)
$`2\epsilon (\alpha +\beta )v(\dot{C}\zeta +\dot{\overline{C}}\overline{\zeta })\}{\displaystyle \frac{P^3}{Q^4}}.`$
The spin coefficients $`\rho `$, $`\sigma `$ and $`\kappa `$ vanish identically so that the multiple principal null direction $`𝐤`$ is non-expanding, twist-free, shear-free and geodesic. The spacetimes (1), (2) thus belong to the Kundt class and are algebraically special. By a simple transformation $`v=(P^2/Q^2)w`$, these can be put into the Kundt canonical form

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=2\frac{1}{P^2}\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }2\mathrm{d}u\left(\mathrm{d}w+W\mathrm{d}\zeta +\overline{W}\mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }+\mathrm{d}u\right),$$
(9)
where

$`W`$ $`=`$ $`2w{\displaystyle \frac{QP_{,\zeta }PQ_{,\zeta }}{PQ}}2w{\displaystyle \frac{C\epsilon (\alpha \beta )\overline{\zeta }\alpha \overline{C}\overline{\zeta }^2}{PQ}},`$
$``$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}D{\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{Q^2}}w^2{\displaystyle \frac{Q_{,u}}{Q}}w+{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{2P}}H.`$ (10)
It follows from (4) and (5) that, in general, the above spacetimes are of Petrov type $`II`$. In special cases, these degenerate to types $`D`$, $`N`$, or can be conformally flat. It is convenient to introduce the following two functions,

$`D_0`$ $`=`$ $`2\epsilon \beta +2C\overline{C},`$ (11)
$`H_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{A_0+A_1\zeta +\overline{A}_1\overline{\zeta }+A_2\zeta \overline{\zeta }}{1+\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta }}},`$ (12)
where $`A_0`$ and $`A_2`$ are arbitrary real functions and $`A_1`$ is an arbitrary complex function of $`u`$. When the functions $`D`$ and $`H`$ in (2) take these special forms $`D_0`$ and $`H_0`$, the scalars $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_4`$ vanish, respectively. We may thus easily summarize the possible types in the following table 1.

In general, the above spacetimes do not have a constant Ricci curvature $`R`$. They also contain non-uniform pure radiation described by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ plus a non-null matter component $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ (which may be associated to a fluid with anisotropic pressure, see , with the 4-velocity of the fluid $`𝐮=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(𝐤+𝐥)`$, and $`𝐧=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(𝐤𝐥)`$ being the vector responsible for the anisotropy), cf. (6)–(8). In particular cases, a constant scalar $`R`$ may correspond to the cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and the matter components $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ could represent an electromagnetic field. In the latter case, the Maxwell equations (see, e.g. ) for the metric (1), (2) reduce to

$$D\mathrm{\Phi }_1=0,D\mathrm{\Phi }_2\overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_1=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\pi \mathrm{\Phi }_1,\delta \mathrm{\Phi }_1=2\tau \mathrm{\Phi }_1,\delta \mathrm{\Phi }_2\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_1=(\tau 2\beta )\mathrm{\Phi }_2,$$
(13)
since $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=0`$ because $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}\mathrm{\Phi }_i\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_j=0`$ for $`i=0`$, $`j=0,1,2`$. The non-vanishing spin coefficients we need here are given by $`\tau =\overline{\pi }=Q\left(P/Q\right)_{,\overline{\zeta }}`$ and $`\tau 2\beta =\left(Q^2/P^2\right)\left(P^3/Q^2\right)_{,\overline{\zeta }}`$. Moreover, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{12}=0`$ so that either $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ or $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ must vanish. There are thus *only two* decoupled possibilities, and the equations (13) can explicitly be integrated as

$`Case1:`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1(\zeta ,\overline{\zeta })=E_1{\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{Q^2}},\mathrm{\Phi }_2=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},`$ (14)
$`Case2:`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},\mathrm{\Phi }_2(\zeta ,\overline{\zeta },u)=E_2{\displaystyle \frac{P^3}{Q^2}},`$ (15)
where $`E_1(u)`$ and $`E_2(u,\zeta )`$ are complex functions. However, for the purely electromagnetic case there are additional constraints since we have to satisfy the Einstein–Maxwell system. This requires that the Ricci scalar $`R`$ given by (6) is equal to $`4\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and the expressions for $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ given by (7), (8) have to satisfy

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}=|E_1|^2\frac{P^4}{Q^4},\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}=|E_2|^2\frac{P^6}{Q^4},$$
(16)
respectively. In fact, it can be seen that these restrictions rule out the presence of a purely electromagnetic field in general spacetimes of the form (1), (2). Only for some special choices of $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\epsilon `$, $`C`$, $`D`$ and $`H`$ are the Einstein–Maxwell field equations satisfied.

In the next sections we shall describe all the particular possibilities in detail. We start with various backgrounds which may be either conformally flat or of the type $`D`$. Then we shall introduce gravitational waves into all these background spacetimes by considering the corresponding type $`N`$ or $`II`$ solutions.

## 3 The possible backgrounds

### 3.1 Conformally flat spacetimes

The above solutions (1), (2) are conformally flat if and only if $`D=D_0`$ and $`H=H_0`$, in which case $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2=0=\mathrm{\Psi }_4`$. For this choice, the expressions (6)–(8) reduce to

$`R`$ $`=`$ $`24\alpha 12\epsilon (\alpha +\beta ){\displaystyle \frac{P}{Q}},`$ (17)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\epsilon (\alpha +\beta ){\displaystyle \frac{P}{Q}}\alpha \frac{1}{24}R,`$ (18)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\{(\alpha A_0+A_2)Q\epsilon (\alpha +\beta )(A_0+A_1\zeta +\overline{A}_1\overline{\zeta }+A_2\zeta \overline{\zeta })`$ (19)
$`2\epsilon (\alpha +\beta )v(\dot{C}\zeta +\dot{\overline{C}}\overline{\zeta })\}{\displaystyle \frac{P^3}{Q^4}}.`$
In order to obtain only a pure radiation field, one has to set $`\beta =\alpha `$ so that $`R=24\alpha `$, $`\alpha =\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}=\frac{1}{2}(\alpha A_0+A_2)\frac{P^3}{Q^3}.$$
(20)
Consequently, we obtain explicit solutions in the form (1) in which

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta },Q=(1\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta })\epsilon +C\zeta +\overline{C}\overline{\zeta },`$ (21)
$`F`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }\epsilon +2C\overline{C}\right){\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{P^2}}v^2{\displaystyle \frac{(Q^2)_{,u}}{P^2}}v{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{P^2}}\left(A_0+A_1\zeta +\overline{A}_1\overline{\zeta }+A_2\zeta \overline{\zeta }\right),`$
where $`A_i`$ and $`C`$ are arbitrary functions of $`u`$. (Note that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ in the expression (18) vanishes also for $`\epsilon =0`$, which however gives just a subcase of (21).) This complete family of pure radiation, conformally flat spacetimes with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ was mentioned already in . As discussed in  there exist several invariant subclasses of this, namely (conformally flat) pp  and Kundt waves with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, and their generalizations to non-vanishing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. For pp -wave spacetimes ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, $`\epsilon =1`$, $`C=0`$ so that $`P=1=Q`$) or the solution of the Siklos type  ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$, $`\epsilon =1`$, $`C=\sqrt{\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$), one obtains $`D_0=0`$ which implies that $`_v`$ is a Killing vector. In particular, this includes the only conformally flat pure radiation solution of the Einstein–Maxwell equations with $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2(u)=\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}A_2}e^{i\phi (u)}`$ in (15), namely the plane waves introduced by Baldwin, Jeffery  and Brdička  (see the appendix). Another special subclass of (2) arises for $`\epsilon =0`$ and $`C=1`$, in which case $`Q=\zeta +\overline{\zeta }`$. In the canonical coordinates (9) this corresponds to the metric coefficients (10)

$`W`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2w\left(1\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\overline{\zeta }^2\right)}{\left(\zeta +\overline{\zeta }\right)\left(1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }\right)}},`$ (22)
$``$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\left(A_0+A_1\zeta +\overline{A}_1\overline{\zeta }+A_2\zeta \overline{\zeta }\right){\displaystyle \frac{\zeta +\overline{\zeta }}{\left(1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }\right)^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}{\zeta +\overline{\zeta }}}\right)^2w^2.`$
For vanishing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, this exactly reduces to the interesting class of conformally flat pure radiation metrics found by Edgar and Ludwig  and discussed e.g. in .

The complementary situation in which there is no pure radiation ($`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}=0`$) but only a non-vanishing $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ component of the matter field, requires $`\alpha +\beta 0`$, $`\epsilon =1`$, $`C\gamma =`$const., $`D=D_0=2\beta +2\gamma \overline{\gamma }`$, $`A_2=\beta A_0`$ and $`A_1=\gamma A_0`$, so that $`H=A_0Q/P`$. However, this function $`H(u)`$ can always be removed by the coordinate transformation $`vBv+\dot{B}/D`$, $`uB^1𝑑u`$, for a suitable choice of $`B(u)`$. Without loss of generality we may thus write the solutions of this subclass as the metric (1) in which

$$P=1+\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta },Q=1+\beta \zeta \overline{\zeta }+\gamma \zeta +\overline{\gamma }\overline{\zeta },F=\left(2\gamma \overline{\gamma }2\beta \right)\frac{Q^2}{P^2}v^2.$$
(23)
By performing a simple transformation $`v=r/[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}+(\beta \gamma \overline{\gamma })ur]`$, we can put this into the form

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\frac{2\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }}{P^2}\frac{Q^2}{P^2}\frac{2\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}r}{[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}+(\beta \gamma \overline{\gamma })ur]^2},$$
(24)
in which $`P`$ and $`Q`$ are given by (23). (There is still a coordinate freedom given by $`\zeta (\overline{b}+a\zeta )/(\overline{a}\alpha b\zeta )`$, $`a`$ and $`b`$ being constants, and rescaling of $`u`$ and/or $`r`$, which can be used to modify $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$.) The matter content in these spacetimes is described by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}=\frac{1}{2}(\alpha +\beta )P/Q`$ which, in general, is a function of the spatial coordinate $`\zeta `$. However, it immediately follows from (18) that the (invariant) additional condition $`R=`$const. necessarily implies $`R=0`$, $`\alpha =\beta `$, $`\gamma =0`$, $`P=Q`$. Thus, for a constant $`R`$ we obtain the Bertotti–Robinson universe

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\frac{2\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }}{\left(1+\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta }\right)^2}2\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v2\alpha v^2\mathrm{d}u^2.$$
(25)
This homogeneous space is the unique conformally flat solution of the Einstein–Maxwell equations with a (uniform) non-null electromagnetic field $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1=\sqrt{\alpha }e^{i\phi }`$ in (14) where $`\alpha >0`$ (see the appendix).

Of course, conformally flat spacetimes of the above form exist which combine $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$. For example, one can introduce a pure radiation in the Bertotti–Robinson universe by adding the term $`H_0\mathrm{d}u^2`$ to the metric (25).

Finally, the conformally flat spaces with no matter (Einstein spaces) are given by (21) with the additional constraint $`A_2=\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }A_0`$, see (20). In such a case, the function $`H_0`$ takes the form $`H_0=[(1\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta })A_0+A_1\zeta +\overline{A}_1\overline{\zeta }]/P`$, which can be removed completely by a suitable coordinate transformation . These constant curvature vacuum solutions with $`H=0`$ can then be put into the standard form of Minkowski, de Sitter or anti-de Sitter spacetimes . For example, assuming $`\epsilon =1`$, $`C=0`$, we obtain

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\frac{2\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }}{\left(1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }\right)^2}2\left(\frac{1\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}{1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}\right)^2\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v+\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(\frac{1\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}{1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}\right)^2v^2\mathrm{d}u^2.$$
(26)
For the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ case, this is obviously a flat space. For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$, the parametrization of the (anti-) de Sitter universe represented geometrically as a hyperboloid $`Z_0^2+Z_1^2+Z_2^2+Z_3^2+ϵZ_4^2=3/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ ($`ϵ\mathrm{\Lambda }/|\mathrm{\Lambda }|`$) imbedded in a flat five-dimensional space $`\mathrm{d}s^2=\mathrm{d}Z_0^2+\mathrm{d}Z_1^2+\mathrm{d}Z_2^2+\mathrm{d}Z_3^2+ϵ\mathrm{d}Z_4^2`$ is

$`Z_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}{1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}}\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)^2u^2v+\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }u+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)^1v\right],`$
$`Z_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}{1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}}\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)^2u^2v+\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }u\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)^1v\right],`$
$`Z_2`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta +\overline{\zeta }}{1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}},Z_3=\frac{\text{i}}{\sqrt{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta \overline{\zeta }}{1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}},`$ (27)
$`Z_4`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\frac{1}{3}|\mathrm{\Lambda }|\right)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{1\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}{1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}}\left(1+\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }uv\right).`$
Analogous parameterizations can be found for other (canonical) choices of $`\epsilon `$ and $`C`$.

### 3.2 Type $`D`$ spacetimes

In this case, the vanishing of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_4`$ requires $`H=H_0`$, and the curvature scalars (4)–(8) reduce to

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{6}\left(DD_0\right){\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{Q^2}},`$ (28)
$`R`$ $`=`$ $`24\alpha 12\epsilon (\alpha +\beta ){\displaystyle \frac{P}{Q}}+2\left(DD_0\right){\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{Q^2}},`$ (29)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\epsilon (\alpha +\beta ){\displaystyle \frac{P}{Q}}\frac{1}{4}\left(DD_0\right){\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{Q^2}},`$ (30)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\{(\alpha A_0+A_2)Q\epsilon (\alpha +\beta )(A_0+A_1\zeta +\overline{A}_1\overline{\zeta }+A_2\zeta \overline{\zeta })`$ (31)
$`2\epsilon (\alpha +\beta )v(\dot{C}\zeta +\dot{\overline{C}}\overline{\zeta })\}{\displaystyle \frac{P^3}{Q^4}}.`$
Notice that the $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ component (31) has the same form as in the conformally flat case (19) but the other scalars differ since $`DD_0`$.

A pure radiation field requires $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}=0`$, which implies that $`\alpha =\beta =\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\epsilon =1`$, $`C=0`$, $`D=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and the metric takes the form

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\frac{2\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }}{\left(1+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }\right)^2}2\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v+\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }v^2H_0\right)\mathrm{d}u^2,$$
(32)
the scalars being $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2=\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`R=4\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}=\frac{1}{2}\left(A_2\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }A_0\right)\left(1\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }\right)\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }(A_1\zeta +\overline{A}_1\overline{\zeta }).$$
(33)
When $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$) this solution represents the (anti-)Nariai universe  with pure radiation which can not be an electromagnetic field (see the general theorem in ). However, for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ this becomes the conformally flat electromagnetic plane wave mentioned in the previous section. Note also that the metric (32) is identical to the Kundt canonical form (9) since $`P=Q`$ in the case of pure radiation solutions, and consequently $`v=w`$, $`W=0`$, $`=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }w^2+\frac{1}{2}H_0`$. In particular, it belongs to the invariant subclass defined by $`W_{,w}=0`$, and thus seems to be a counterexample to a conjecture of  that the solutions exhibited there (for which $`W_{,w}0`$) are the only type $`D`$ pure radiation metrics of the Kundt class.

The situation in which there is no pure radiation ($`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}=0`$), but only the $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ component of the matter field, admits two possibilities. If $`\epsilon (\alpha +\beta )0`$ then $`\epsilon =1`$, $`C=\gamma `$, $`A_2=\beta A_0`$, and $`A_1=\gamma A_0`$ so that $`H=A_0Q/P`$. As in the conformally flat case, this function $`H`$ can always be removed by a coordinate transformation. Thus, all the solutions of this subclass can be written as the metric (1) in which

$$P=1+\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta },Q=1+\beta \zeta \overline{\zeta }+\gamma \zeta +\overline{\gamma }\overline{\zeta },F=D(u)\frac{Q^2}{P^2}v^2,$$
(34)
With $`v=r/[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}+U(u)r]`$, where $`U(u)=\frac{1}{2}D(u)𝑑u`$, we put the solution into the form

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\frac{2\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }}{P^2}\frac{Q^2}{P^2}\frac{2\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}r}{[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}+U(u)r]^2},$$
(35)
(For $`D=D_0`$ the metric (34) reduces to the conformally flat spacetime (23), i.e. (35) gives (24).) Looking for the electrovacuum solutions we require $`R=4\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ which implies $`\alpha =\beta `$, $`\gamma =0`$, $`D=2(\mathrm{\Lambda }\alpha )`$, and the scalars are $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2=\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}=\alpha \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. In such a case, the metric (1) simplifies considerably to

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\frac{2\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }}{(1+\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta })^2}2\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v+2(\mathrm{\Lambda }\alpha )v^2\mathrm{d}u^2.$$
(36)
These are well-known electrovacuum spacetimes with the geometry of a direct product of two constant curvature 2-spaces , see also . This is obvious from the form (35) since $`P=Q`$, $`U(u)=\frac{1}{2}Du`$. Of course, for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ we recover the conformally flat solution (25). The second possibility for the case $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}=0`$ is $`\epsilon (\alpha +\beta )=0`$ which implies $`A_2=\alpha A_0`$, i.e. $`H_0=[(1\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta })A_0+A_1\zeta +\overline{A}_1\overline{\zeta }]/P`$. The corresponding scalars are $`R=24\alpha +2(DD_0)P^2/Q^2`$, where $`D_0=2\epsilon \alpha +2C\overline{C}`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2=2\alpha \frac{1}{12}R`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}=3\alpha \frac{1}{8}R`$. For electrovacuum solutions, $`R=4\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ so that $`\alpha =0=\beta `$, $`\epsilon =1`$, $`C=0`$, $`D=2\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$. We thus uniquely obtain the exceptional Plebański–Hacyan universe

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=2\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }2\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v+\left(2\mathrm{\Lambda }v^2A_1\zeta \overline{A}_1\overline{\zeta }\right)\mathrm{d}u^2,$$
(37)
for which $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1=\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }}e^{i\phi }`$ (the function $`A_0`$ can be removed by a coordinate transformation ). When $`A_1=0`$, this reduces to the form (36) of the direct product spacetimes.

Again, type $`D`$ spacetimes which combine $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ can be considered. For example, there exist solutions which represent pure radiation in the electrovacuum universes (36) and (37), see e.g. .

Finally, the type $`D`$ Einstein spaces with no matter are given by (32)-(33) with the constraints $`A_2=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }A_0`$, $`A_1=0`$. In such a case, the function $`H_0=A_0`$ can again be removed by a suitable coordinate transformation. Thus, without loss of generality one obtains

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\frac{2\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }}{\left(1+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }\right)^2}2\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v+\mathrm{\Lambda }v^2\mathrm{d}u^2,$$
(38)
which is the (anti-)Nariai universe , discussed recently in . Obviously, this is also the direct product spacetime (36) for $`\alpha =\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. There is no type $`D`$ vacuum solution of the form (1) for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ since (38) reduces to Minkowski space in such a case.

The main results presented above are summarized in the table 2.

## 4 Exact gravitational waves of arbitrary profile on the above backgrounds

By considering an arbitrary function $`H(\zeta ,\overline{\zeta },u)`$ in the metric (1), (2), different from $`H_0`$ as introduced in (12), the scalar $`\mathrm{\Psi }_4`$ representing gravitational radiation becomes non-vanishing, see (5). As the coordinate $`u`$ plays the role of the retarded time, gravitational waves of arbitrary profiles $`H^wHH_0`$ can thus be introduced into the above spacetimes. When the backgrounds are taken to be conformally flat, exact radiative spacetimes of Petrov type $`N`$ are obtained. For the backgrounds of type $`D`$ one gets explicit gravitational waves of type $`II`$, see table 1. It is obvious from (1) that the wave-fronts $`u=`$const. are *non-expanding* 2-spaces with a *constant curvature* equal to $`2\alpha `$.

It can be observed from (4)–(8) that the function $`H`$ does not appear in the scalars $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$, $`R`$, and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$. In fact, introducing the additional term $`(Q/P)H^w\mathrm{d}u^2`$ in the metric corresponds to a generalised Kerr–Schild transformation (see e.g. ) of the background geometries<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1The authors are grateful to the referee for this observation.. Consequently, the radiative spacetimes (1) of type $`N`$ and $`II`$ have exactly the same values of the Weyl component $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$, the Ricci curvature $`R`$, and the non-null matter component $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ as the corresponding backgrounds described in the previous section (see table 2). The only difference, apart from the introduction of the $`\mathrm{\Psi }_4`$ component, may be in the pure radiation field. Indeed, the component $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$, which is linear in $`H`$, can now be understood as a superposition of the background term $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b`$ given by (19), identical to (31), with the term $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w`$ related to the presence of gravitational radiation,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w=\frac{1}{2}\left\{\left[\epsilon (\alpha \beta )(1\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta })+2\alpha (C\zeta +\overline{C}\overline{\zeta })\right]H^w+P^2QH_{,\zeta \overline{\zeta }}^w\right\}\frac{P^3}{Q^4}.$$
(39)
In general, a gravitational wave ($`\mathrm{\Psi }_40`$) is thus accompanied by the (additional) pure radiation field $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w`$.

However, in special situations when $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w=0`$, the gravitational wave is not related to the above pure radiation. For example when $`P=Q=1+\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta }`$, i.e. for spacetimes (36) which are direct product of two constant curvature 2-spaces (Minkowski, Bertotti–Robinson, (anti-)Nariai, Plebański–Hacyan spaces), the relation $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w=0`$ is satisfied if and only if $`H^w=f(\zeta ,u)+\overline{f}(\overline{\zeta },u)`$. This is just the Einstein equation for purely gravitational waves propagating in Einstein spaces, in which case $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b=0=\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$.

Let us now discuss in some detail the particular subclasses which include gravitational waves.

### 4.1 Type $`N`$ spacetimes

A complete class of non-expanding type $`N`$ vacuum solutions with (possibly) non-vanishing cosmological constant was found by Ozsváth, Robinson and Rózga , and later studied also from a physical point of view . These Einstein spaces represent exact pure gravitational waves which propagate in constant curvature backgrounds, i.e. in Minkowski, de Sitter or anti-de Sitter universe (for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ or $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$, respectively). For example, considering the background $`\mathrm{d}s_b^2`$ given by (26), one obtains radiative solutions of the form

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\mathrm{d}s_b^2\left(\frac{1\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}{1+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta }}\right)H^w\mathrm{d}u^2.$$
(40)
For vanishing cosmological constant we obtain exactly the well-known class of pp -waves . Alternatively, with other forms of constant curvature backgrounds corresponding to different canonical choices of the parameters $`\epsilon `$ and $`C`$ other classes are obtained, namely the specific Kundt spacetimes for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$  or the Siklos family  for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$, see . When $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w=0`$ these are pure gravitational waves, otherwise they are accompanied by a pure radiation component.

Another possibility is to consider the conformally flat pure radiation ($`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b0`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}=0`$) backgrounds $`\mathrm{d}s_b^2`$ of the form (21) and introduce $`H^w`$. Again the pp -waves and gravitational waves in the Edgar–Ludwig type backgrounds (22) with any $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are thus obtained. In fact, these radiative spacetimes are contained in the Ozsváth–Robinson–Rózga family .

On the other hand, considering the conformally flat backgrounds (24) without pure radiation ($`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b=0`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}0`$) gravitational waves (plus possibly pure radiation if $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w0`$) are generated. In particular, one obtains the type $`N`$ solutions representing gravitational radiation in the Bertotti–Robinson electrovacuum universe

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\mathrm{d}s_b^2H^w\mathrm{d}u^2.$$
(41)
where $`\mathrm{d}s_b^2`$ is given by (25).

Of course, gravitational waves in more general conformally flat backgrounds (17)–(19) with $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}0`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b0`$ are also possible.

### 4.2 Type $`II`$ spacetimes

All type $`II`$ solutions of the form (1), (2) which represent exact gravitational waves propagating in backgrounds with the matter field component $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ vanishing can be written in the form (41) where $`\mathrm{d}s_b^2`$ is now the metric (32). These describe gravitational radiation in the (anti-)Nariai (type $`D`$) universe filled with a pure radiation field $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b+\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w`$, where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b`$ is given by (33) and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w`$ by (39), which now reduces to a simple expression $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w=\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }\zeta \overline{\zeta })^3H_{\zeta \overline{\zeta }}^w`$.

As an important special subcase we easily obtain pure gravitational waves of the above form by considering, not only $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}=0`$, but also $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}=0`$, i.e. Einstein spaces of the Petrov type $`II`$ without matter. Obviously, these solutions can explicitly be written as

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\mathrm{d}s_b^2\left[f(\zeta ,u)+\overline{f}(\overline{\zeta },u)\right]\mathrm{d}u^2,$$
(42)
where $`\mathrm{d}s_b^2`$ is the metric (38) of the (anti-)Nariai vacuum universe with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$), and $`f(\zeta ,u)`$ is an arbitrary function (holomorphic in $`\zeta `$) which characterizes the profile of the gravitational wave. Note that the solution (42) of the Einstein vacuum equations with cosmological constant is included in the class of solutions that was investigated from a different point of view by Lewandowski .

The complementary situation in which $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b=0`$, but $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}0`$, corresponds to introducing type $`II`$ waves into the background (35). In particular, considering only the non-null electrovacuum background universes we obtain gravitational waves in the spacetimes $`\mathrm{d}s_b^2`$ which are a direct product of two constant curvature 2-spaces (36). The second possibility for the electrovacuum case $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b=0`$ is the exceptional Plebański–Hacyan background universe (37). In both these cases the radiative metric has the form (42) with the corresponding form of $`\mathrm{d}s_b^2`$.

Again, these gravitational waves are in general accompanied by a pure radiation contribution $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w`$. As particular cases of the type $`II`$ spacetimes without pure radiation, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b=0=\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w`$, we obtain the special electrovacuum solutions with gravitational waves that were found by García and Alvarez . For $`\alpha =\beta =C=0`$, $`\epsilon =1`$, $`D=2\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, this is their special II-$`E_{(+)}`$ solution with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$ which can be written in the form (42) where $`\mathrm{d}s_b^2`$ is the Plebański–Hacyan metric (36). For $`\alpha =\beta =\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`C=0`$, $`\epsilon =1`$, $`D=0`$ we obtain the (non-twisting subclass of) II-$`E_{()}`$ solution with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ in the form (42) where $`\mathrm{d}s_b^2`$ is the other direct product Plebański–Hacyan metric of the form (36). In both cases, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2=\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`R=4\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}=\frac{1}{2}|\mathrm{\Lambda }|`$. Note that all the above mentioned metrics representing pure gravitational waves in electromagnetic universes are in fact specific subcases of a solution presented by Khlebnikov .

Finally, we note that gravitational waves (plus possibly pure radiation $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^w`$) in general type $`D`$ backgrounds (28)–(31) for which both $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^b0`$ are easy to construct.

### 4.3 Electrovacuum solutions

It may be useful to summarize all the possible cases in which the solution of the form (1), (2) represents a spacetime containing an electromagnetic field but no other matter fields. In section 3 we concentrated on the background spaces of type $`O`$ and $`D`$. We now investigate the corresponding situations when gravitational waves are present, i.e. the spacetimes of type $`N`$ or $`II`$, respectively.

We have demonstrated (see also the appendix) that the only conformally flat spacetimes (including $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) which satisfy the Einstein–Maxwell equations are some special pp -waves with a null Maxwell field, and the Bertotti–Robinson universe with a non-null Maxwell field. For type $`N`$ pp -waves, corresponding to $`P=1=Q`$, $`F=H`$ in (1), it is well known  that there is a general combination of electromagnetic and gravitational waves when $`H=2|E_2d\zeta |^2+f(u,\zeta )+\overline{f}(u,\overline{\zeta })`$, where $`E_2(u,\zeta )`$ represents the null Maxwell field (15). On the other hand, one has type $`N`$ gravitational waves propagating in the Bertotti–Robinson electrovacuum universe, with $`P=1+\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta }=Q`$, $`F=2\alpha v^2H`$ in (1), for $`H=f(u,\zeta )+\overline{f}(u,\overline{\zeta })`$, cf. .

For type $`D`$ solutions we may have only a non-null Maxwell field, represented by spacetimes which are the direct product of two constant curvature 2-spaces (36) plus the exceptional Plebański–Hacyan universe (37). Pure type $`II`$ gravitational waves in such type $`D`$ electrovacuum spacetimes arise for $`H=f(u,\zeta )+\overline{f}(u,\overline{\zeta })`$, see .

Finally, we consider vacuum backgrounds and possible electromagnetic waves propagating on these. Conformally flat vacuum spacetimes are just spaces of constant curvature. Electromagnetic waves in the Minkowski spacetime are simply the pp -waves discussed above. Electromagnetic waves in the (anti-)de Sitter space were discussed in , and are necessarily accompanied by gravitational waves (see  for explicit formulae). The only remaining possibility is thus given by waves in vacuum backgrounds of type $`D`$, i.e. in the (anti-)Nariai universe (38). Interestingly, also in this case the Einstein–Maxwell equation (16), (39) for the profile function $`H`$ can be integrated explicitly. Exactly as in the case of pp -waves, this admits the general solution $`H=2|E_2d\zeta |^2+f(u,\zeta )+\overline{f}(u,\overline{\zeta })`$. However, these electromagnetic waves are now necessarily accompanied by a gravitational wave component (see section 3 and ). Such an explicit solution for electromagnetic (plus gravitational) waves in the (anti-)Nariai universe seems to have remained unnoticed in the literature so far (whereas pure gravitational waves were already considered ).

### 4.4 Effects on test particles

In order to analyze the effects of the gravitational and matter fields of the above solutions, it is natural to investigate the specific influence of various components of these fields on the relative motion of free test particles. Such a local characterization of spacetimes, based on the equation of geodesic deviation, was described in the pioneering works by Pirani  and Szekeres . Following the notation introduced in  we set up an orthonormal frame $`\{𝐞_{(a)}\}`$, $`𝐞_{(a)}𝐞_{(b)}=\eta _{(a)(b)}\text{diag}(1,1,1,1)`$, such that the timelike vector $`𝐞_{(0)}`$ coincides at a given event with the four-velocity $`𝐮`$ of a geodesic test observer. By projecting the equation of geodesic deviation onto this frame we obtain

$$\ddot{Z}^{(i)}=R_{(0)(j)(0)}^{(i)}Z^{(j)},$$
(43)
where $`i,j=1,2,3`$. The frame components of the displacement vector $`Z^{(j)}e_\mu ^{(j)}Z^\mu `$ determine directly the distance between close test particles, and $`\ddot{Z}^{(i)}e_\mu ^{(i)}(D^2Z^\mu /d\tau ^2)`$ are their physical relative accelerations. From the standard decomposition of the curvature tensor (see, e.g., Eqs. (3.44)–(3.47) in ), we immediately obtain $`R_{(i)(0)(j)(0)}=C_{(i)(0)(j)(0)}+\frac{1}{2}(\delta _{ij}S_{(0)(0)}S_{(i)(j)})+\frac{1}{12}R\delta _{ij}`$, where $`C_{(i)(0)(j)(0)}`$ are components of the Weyl tensor and $`R`$ and $`S_{(a)(b)}`$ respectively denote the trace and the traceless part of the Ricci tensor. These frame components can conveniently be expressed using the corresponding null complex tetrad

$$𝐦=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(𝐞_{(1)}+\text{i}𝐞_{(2)}\right),𝐥=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(𝐞_{(0)}𝐞_{(3)}\right),𝐤=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(𝐞_{(0)}+𝐞_{(3)}\right).$$
(44)
In the natural tetrad (3), the only non-vanishing scalars are those given by (4)–(8) so that

$`C_{(1)(0)(1)(0)}=\frac{1}{2}e\mathrm{\Psi }_4\mathrm{\Psi }_2,C_{(2)(0)(2)(0)}=\frac{1}{2}e\mathrm{\Psi }_4\mathrm{\Psi }_2,`$
$`C_{(1)(0)(2)(0)}=\frac{1}{2}m\mathrm{\Psi }_4,C_{(3)(0)(3)(0)}=2\mathrm{\Psi }_2,`$ (45)
$`S_{(0)(0)}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}+2\mathrm{\Phi }_{11},S_{(1)(1)}=2\mathrm{\Phi }_{11},`$
$`S_{(3)(3)}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}2\mathrm{\Phi }_{11},S_{(2)(2)}=2\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}.`$
Therefore, the equation of geodesic deviation (43) takes the form

$`\ddot{Z}^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{12}RZ^{(1)}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}Z^{(1)}+𝒞Z^{(1)}𝒜_+Z^{(1)}+𝒜_\times Z^{(2)},`$
$`\ddot{Z}^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{12}RZ^{(2)}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}Z^{(2)}+𝒞Z^{(2)}+𝒜_+Z^{(2)}+𝒜_\times Z^{(1)},`$ (46)
$`\ddot{Z}^{(3)}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{12}RZ^{(3)}2\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}Z^{(3)}2𝒞Z^{(3)},`$
where

$$𝒞=\mathrm{\Psi }_2,𝒜_+=\frac{1}{2}e\mathrm{\Psi }_4,𝒜_\times =\frac{1}{2}m\mathrm{\Psi }_4.$$
(47)
Equations (46) are well suited for physical interpretation. Clearly, the relative motions of nearby test particles depend on:

1. the Ricci scalar $`R`$, which is responsible for overall background isotropic motions (in the case of pure radiation or vacuum spacetimes this is a constant factor proportional to the cosmological constant, $`\frac{1}{12}R=\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) ;
2. the terms describing the matter-content which consist of two different components: the pure radiation field $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ affects the motion only in the transverse plane spanned by the vectors $`𝐞_{(1)},𝐞_{(2)}`$, whereas the non-null field influences only the longitudinal direction $`𝐞_{(3)}`$;
3. the terms which depend on the local free gravitational field. There is a Coulomb component with the amplitude $`𝒞`$ for type $`D`$ and $`II`$ spacetimes, and transverse components with amplitudes given by $`𝒜_+`$ and $`𝒜_\times `$ representing the effect of gravitational waves on the particles in type $`N`$ and $`II`$ spacetimes.

It can be observed that gravitational radiation is present if and only if $`HH_0`$. The corresponding effects are typical for both linearized and exact gravitational waves (cf. e.g. ). There are two polarization modes “+” and “$`\times `$” of a transverse gravitational wave with amplitudes $`𝒜_+`$ and $`𝒜_\times `$. A ring of test particles is deformed into an ellipse in the plane perpendicular to the direction of propagation, the axes of different polarizations being shifted one with respect to the other by $`\frac{\pi }{4}`$. The structure of the equations (46) thus supports our interpretation of the solutions (1) as exact gravitational waves which propagate in various background universes. Notice that the coefficients $`R`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ remain the same as for the corresponding background, whereas the amplitudes $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_4`$ which represent radiation depend on the specific form of the structural function $`H`$.

The above analysis only applies to the reference frame (44) related to the natural null tetrad (3). However, this can easily be generalized to a case in which the orthonormal interpretation frame is adapted to an arbitrary observer passing along a timelike geodesic through the given event. Performing the Lorentz transformation

$`𝐤^{}=A^1𝐤,`$
$`𝐥^{}=A𝐥+B\overline{𝐦}+\overline{B}𝐦+B\overline{B}A^1𝐤,`$ (48)
$`𝐦^{}=𝐦+BA^1𝐤,`$
where $`A=\sqrt{2}(Q^2/P^2)\dot{u}`$, $`B=\sqrt{2}(1/P)\dot{\zeta }`$, we obtain from (3) the null tetrad

$`𝐦^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{P\dot{\zeta }}{Q^2\dot{u}}}_v+P_{\overline{\zeta }},\overline{𝐦}^{}={\displaystyle \frac{P\dot{\overline{\zeta }}}{Q^2\dot{u}}}_v+P_\zeta ,`$
$`𝐥^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\sqrt{2}\dot{v}{\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{\sqrt{2}Q^2\dot{u}}}\right)_v+\sqrt{2}\dot{\zeta }_\zeta +\sqrt{2}\dot{\overline{\zeta }}_{\overline{\zeta }}+\sqrt{2}\dot{u}_u,`$ (49)
$`𝐤^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{\sqrt{2}Q^2\dot{u}}}_v.`$
Obviously, $`𝐞_{(0)}^{}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(𝐥^{}+𝐤^{}\right)=\dot{v}_v+\dot{\zeta }_\zeta +\dot{\overline{\zeta }}_{\overline{\zeta }}+\dot{u}_u`$ represents the local value of the four-velocity of a general geodesic observer (with the dot indicating a differentiation with respect to its proper time) normalized as

$$𝐞_{(0)}^{}𝐞_{(0)}^{}=2\frac{1}{P^2}\dot{\zeta }\dot{\overline{\zeta }}2\frac{Q^2}{P^2}\dot{u}\dot{v}+F\dot{u}^2=1.$$
(50)
After the Lorentz transformation (48), the corresponding (non-vanishing) coefficients take the form

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_2^{}=\mathrm{\Psi }_2,\mathrm{\Psi }_3^{}=3\overline{B}\mathrm{\Psi }_2,\mathrm{\Psi }_4^{}=A^2\mathrm{\Psi }_4+6\overline{B}^2\mathrm{\Psi }_2,`$ (51)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}^{}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{11},\mathrm{\Phi }_{12}^{}=2B\mathrm{\Phi }_{11},\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}^{}=A^2\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}+4B\overline{B}\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}.`$
Therefore, the effect on the amplitudes introduced in (46), (47) is such that the Coulomb components $`𝒞`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}`$ of the fields remain the same, whereas the amplitudes $`𝒜`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ representing gravitational and pure radiation measured by the corresponding observer in the frame $`\{𝐞_{(a)}^{}\}`$ are rescaled by the factor $`A^2`$. Moreover, for geodesics with $`\dot{\zeta }0`$ there are “kinematic” contributions to $`𝒜`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ which involve $`B`$. Additional terms $`\mathrm{\Psi }_3^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{12}^{}`$ proportional to $`B`$ also enter the equation of geodesic deviation (43) in such a case through the contributions

$`C_{(1)(0)(3)(0)}^{}=e\mathrm{\Psi }_3^{},C_{(2)(0)(3)(0)}^{}=m\mathrm{\Psi }_3^{},`$
$`S_{(1)(3)}^{}=2e\mathrm{\Phi }_{12}^{},S_{(2)(3)}^{}=2m\mathrm{\Phi }_{12}^{}.`$ (52)
These are responsible for effects which relate the displacement in the longitudinal direction $`𝐞_{(3)}^{}`$ to acceleration in the transverse directions $`𝐞_{(1)}^{}`$, $`𝐞_{(2)}^{}`$, and vice versa.

Note finally (cf. the general analysis in ) that the interpretation frame (49) is *parallelly transported* along the geodesic if and only if $`(Q/P)_{\overline{\zeta }}=0=(Q/P)_\zeta `$. This condition is equivalent to vanishing of the spin coefficients $`\tau =0=\pi `$, i.e. to the choice $`P=Q=1+\alpha \zeta \overline{\zeta }`$. Therefore, the tetrad is parallelly transported along all timelike geodesics in the spacetimes of the form (36) which are direct product of two constant curvature 2-spaces, in particular in Minkowski, Bertotti–Robinson, (anti-)Nariai, Plebański–Hacyan spaces, and in all the corresponding spacetimes discussed in this section, representing radiation on these backgrounds.

## 5 Concluding remarks

An explicit family (1), (2) of the Kundt non-diverging class has been presented which depends on three constant parameters $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\epsilon `$ and three structural functions $`C(u)`$, $`D(u)`$ and $`H(\zeta ,\overline{\zeta },u)`$. This contains many particular solutions of Petrov types $`O`$, $`D`$, $`N`$ and $`II`$ which, for specific choices of the constants and functions, admit a cosmological constant, electromagnetic field, pure radiation and/or general non-null matter component. Among these are, for example, the conformally flat Minkowski and (anti-)de Sitter Einstein spaces, the Edgar–Ludwig pure radiation solutions or the Bertotti–Robinson electrovacuum universe. The type $`D`$ solutions contain the (anti-)Nariai, Plebański–Hacyan or other direct product electrovacuum spacetimes, and their generalizations (see section 3 and table 2). Moreover, all these $`O`$ and $`D`$ solutions can naturally be understood as “backgrounds” for the corresponding type $`N`$ and $`II`$ radiative spacetimes, respectively. As described in section 4, this is achieved simply by considering an additional term $`(Q/P)H^w\mathrm{d}u^2`$ in the metric, which is proportional to the function $`H^w(\zeta ,\overline{\zeta },u)`$. Since the coordinate $`u`$ is the retarded time, exact gravitational waves of arbitrary profiles which propagate in the corresponding background universes can thus easily be introduced.

In particular, it is straightforward to construct sandwich waves by considering the function of the form $`H^w=h(\zeta ,\overline{\zeta })d(u)`$, where the profile $`d(u)`$ is non-vanishing only on some finite interval representing the wave-zone between two non-radiative background parts in front and behind the wave. Of course, the background need not be flat as in the case of well-known sandwich pp -waves , but can be of any kind summarized in table 2 — the universe in which the sandwich wave propagates can be curved and filled with various matter contents, such as the electromagnetic field and/or pure radiation.

Also, it is possible to construct impulsive limits of such sandwich waves by considering the profile $`d(u)`$ to approach the Dirac delta distribution $`\delta (u)`$. When the background is Minkowski or (anti-)de Sitter universe, non-expanding impulsive gravitational waves in spacetimes of constant curvature are recovered, see e.g.  for a review. Impulsive waves of this type in the Nariai universe have recently been found and studied in , and in all direct product spacetimes (including anti-Nariai and Bertotti–Robinson ) in .

The family of Kundt’s solutions presented in this paper thus represents an interesting generalization of some previously known but “separated” results. Its main advantage is that various particular background and radiative spacetimes are described using a unified, simple and explicit metric form. Of course, most of the special subclasses are well-known. However, we have discussed here all the possible Petrov types and matter contents systematically, identifying some spacetimes which have been overlooked in the literature so far. For example, the type $`D`$ solution (32) representing pure radiation in (anti-)Nariai universe, which seems to be a counterexample to the conjecture proposed in , has been found. In subsection 4.3 we have also presented a new explicit type $`II`$ electrovacuum solution which describes electromagnetic and gravitational waves propagating in the (anti-)Nariai background.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that some of the solutions presented above belong to the recently obtained class of spacetimes for which all of the scalar curvature invariants vanish . They may play an important role since these are exact solutions in string theory to all perturbative orders . In fact, all  type $`N`$ and type $`O`$ spacetimes with vanishing invariants with $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{12}=0`$ are contained in our family of solutions (1), (2).

## Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Professor Hans Stephani for providing us with some recent references related to the topic. The work was supported by the grant GACR-202/02/0735 from the Czech Republic, by Charles University in Prague and by INFN.

## Appendix. Conformally flat Einstein–Maxwell fields with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$

All conformally flat electrovac metrics with a vanishing cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ have been known for a long time . Demanding a spacetime to have a vanishing Weyl tensor and to satisfy the Einstein–Maxwell equations is so a severe restriction that one is left with only two possibilities, according to the algebraic type of the Maxwell field. For a *non-null* Maxwell field one obtains the Bertotti–Robinson  universe. This is given by the metric (25) or, alternatively, in a different coordinate system such that $`\zeta =\sqrt{2}ae^{i\varphi }\mathrm{tan}(\theta /2)`$, $`a^2=1/2\alpha `$,

$`t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{a(vu^2+2ua^2+2va^2)}{vu^2+2ua^22va^22\sqrt{2}avu+2\sqrt{2}a^3}},`$
$`r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2}a^4}{vu^2+2ua^22va^22\sqrt{2}avu+2\sqrt{2}a^3}},`$
it takes form

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\frac{a^2}{r^2}[\mathrm{d}t^2+\mathrm{d}r^2+r^2(\mathrm{d}\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{d}\varphi ^2)],$$
(A1)
which is explicitly conformally flat. Alternatively, for a *null* field the solution is represented by the special pp -wave  discussed in section 3.1

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=2\mathrm{d}\zeta \mathrm{d}\overline{\zeta }2\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}vA_2(u)\zeta \overline{\zeta }\mathrm{d}u^2,$$
(A2)
where $`A_2(u)`$ is an arbitrary (positive) function.

Here we consider a more general problem by admitting $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$, i.e. to find all possible conformally flat solutions of the Einstein–Maxwell system

$`R_{ab}\frac{1}{2}Rg_{ab}+\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{ab}=T_{ab}=\frac{1}{2}F_a^c\overline{F}_{bc},`$
$`F_{;b}^{ab}=0,`$ (A3)
where $`F_{ab}`$ denotes the complex self-dual Maxwell tensor. We prove, in fact, that any such solution necessarily requires $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, and thus it reduces to either (A1) or (A2). Note that this was already asserted by Khlebnikov and Shelkovenko  but their result seems to have been somewhat overlooked. Moreover, they did not present an explicit proof. We employ the Newman–Penrose (NP) formalism, and refer to  for the complete set of general equations. Of course, conformal flatness is equivalent to setting all components of the Weyl tensor to zero, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_i=0`$ for $`i=0,1,2,3,4`$, whereas the tracelessness of $`T_{ab}`$ requires $`R=4\mathrm{\Lambda }=\text{constant}`$. We now separately treat the two possible cases of non-null and null Maxwell fields.

### Non-null fields

Given an arbitrary non-null electromagnetic field, a null tetrad $`(𝐦,\overline{𝐦},𝐥,𝐤)`$ can always be chosen in which the Maxwell tensor takes the simple form $`F_{ab}=4\mathrm{\Phi }_1(m_{[a}\overline{m}_{b]}k_{[a}l_{b]})`$. Then, the only non-trivial Ricci scalar is $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{11}\mathrm{\Phi }_1\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_10`$. From the Bianchi identities one obtains that the following spin coefficients vanish,

$$\kappa =\sigma =\lambda =\nu =\rho =\mu =\pi =\tau =0.$$
(A4)
Substituting these into the NP equations, it immediately follows $`R=0`$. Thus, there are no such solutions with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$. Notice also that the Maxwell equations have not been actually used, but only the specific algebraic structure of the energy-momentum tensor.

### Null fields

In this case it is possible to generalize the approach used in . Without loss of generality, we introduce a convenient null tetrad in which an arbitrary null Maxwell field takes the form $`F_{ab}=4\mathrm{\Phi }_2k_{[a}m_{b]}`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}\mathrm{\Phi }_2\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_20`$ is the only scalar. The Bianchi identities now imply

$`\kappa `$ $`=`$ $`\sigma =\rho =0,`$ (A5)
$`D\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ $`=`$ $`2(\epsilon +\overline{\epsilon })\mathrm{\Phi }_{22},`$ (A6)
$`\overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}`$ $`=`$ $`(\overline{\tau }2\overline{\beta }2\alpha )\mathrm{\Phi }_{22}.`$ (A7)
For our purposes, only three of the NP equations turn out to be necessary. Taking (A5) into account, these read

$`\delta \alpha \overline{\delta }\beta `$ $`=`$ $`\alpha \overline{\alpha }+\beta \overline{\beta }2\alpha \beta +\epsilon (\mu \overline{\mu })+R/24,`$ (A8)
$`\delta \tau `$ $`=`$ $`(\tau +\beta \overline{\alpha })\tau ,`$ (A9)
$`\overline{\delta }\tau `$ $`=`$ $`(\overline{\tau }\overline{\beta }+\alpha )\tau +R/12.`$ (A10)
The Maxwell equations simplify to

$`D\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ $`=`$ $`2\epsilon \mathrm{\Phi }_2,`$ (A11)
$`\delta \mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ $`=`$ $`(\tau 2\beta )\mathrm{\Phi }_2.`$ (A12)
From (A7) and (A12), it follows

$$\overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_2=2\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }_2.$$
(A13)
With (A10)–(A13) and (A8), the commutator $`(\overline{\delta }\delta \delta \overline{\delta })=(\overline{\mu }\mu )D(\overline{\alpha }\beta )\overline{\delta }(\overline{\beta }\alpha )\delta `$ applied on $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ gives

$$\tau \overline{\tau }=R/6.$$
(A14)
Since $`\tau \overline{\tau }`$ must thus be a constant, it follows $`\delta (\tau \overline{\tau })=0`$. Recalling (A9) and (A10), this immediately leads to $`0=(2\tau \overline{\tau }+R/12)\tau =R\tau /4`$ and therefore to $`R=0`$, which completes the proof for null electromagnetic fields.

The above results, which generalize the Theorems 32.16 and 32.17 of <sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2Notice that Theorem 32.17 in  by mistake includes not only null electromagnetic fields but also generic pure radiation. This was pointed out in , whereas the complete class of conformally flat pure radiation metrics with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ was given in . to include a cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, can be summarized in the following

###### Theorem.

There are no conformally flat solutions of the Einstein–Maxwell equations (A3) for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$. When $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, the only solutions are given by (A1) and (A2).

Let us emphasize that the Maxwell equations (contrary to the case of non-null field) do play a key role in preventing the existence of conformally flat solutions with a *null* electromagnetic field for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$. Indeed, there exist conformally flat metrics with an arbitrary $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and generic (i.e., non-electromagnetic) pure radiation, as demonstrated in section 3.1. A complete class of these spacetimes was presented in  (see also  for the case $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$). For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, such a general family splits into two invariant sub-classes, namely the Edgar–Ludwig metric  (still not representing electromagnetic fields) and the electromagnetic plane waves (A2).


format: text

text:
# On the Reduction of CP Violation Phases

## Abstract

We describe a method that is used to reduce, significantly, the number of CP violating complex phases in the Yukawa parameters. With this Reduction of Complex Phases (RCP) we obtain only one CP violating complex phase in the case where the neutrinos have an (effective) $`3\times 3`$ Majorana mass matrix. For the See Saw extension of the SM with three righthanded neutrinos, and in connection with CP violation in leptogenis, we reduce the usual 6 complex phases to only 2.

thanks: E-mail: Joaquim.Silva-Marcos@cern.ch

Understanding the origin of CP violation is one of the outstanding problems of particle physics. In many extensions of the Standard Model (SM), e.g. in the See Saw mechanism and leptogenisis theories in neutrino physics   or in supersymmetric theories , one has a large number of complex Yukawa coupling parameters which lead to CP violation . However, a large number of (complex) parameters may also obscure some fundamental structure leading to CP violation. In contrast, a specific choice of parameters used to describe CP violation may play an important and crucial rôle in solving the mechanisms involved.

In this letter, we describe a simple method that can reduce, significantly, the number of CP violating complex phases in the Yukawa parameters, and which can be applied to many extensions of the SM and theories. Here, the Reduction of Complex Phases (RCP) is used to minimize the number of complex phases in neutrino physics. In particular, we reduce (by a factor of 3) the number of CP violating complex phases in the case where the neutrinos have an (effective) $`3\times 3`$ Majorana mass matrix, and in the case of the See Saw extension of the SM with three righthanded neutrinos. We also study briefly some implications of RCP to CP violation invariants relevant for leptogenis.

Reduction of Complex Phases

RCP is based on the following, rather simple, transformation: it is always possible to rotate any pair of complex parameters $`(a+ix,b+iy)`$ with an orthogonal matrix such that one (say the first parameter) becomes real, i.e.

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}a+ix\\ b+iy\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}a^{}\\ b^{}+iy^{}\end{array}\right)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}(\theta )& \mathrm{sin}(\theta )\\ \mathrm{sin}(\theta )& \mathrm{cos}(\theta )\end{array}\right]\left(\begin{array}{c}a+ix\\ b+iy\end{array}\right)$$
(1)
Clearly, the first parameter will have no imaginary part if one chooses $`\mathrm{tan}(\theta )=x/y`$.

Next, we prove that any Hermitian matrix $`H`$ can be written as

$$H=\left(OK_\alpha \widehat{O}\right)^{}DOK_\alpha \widehat{O}$$
(2)
where $`D`$ is a real diagonal matrix, $`O`$, $`\widehat{O}`$ are orthogonal matrices and $`K_\alpha `$ is a diagonal unitary matrix with only one complex phase, $`K_\alpha =\mathrm{diag}[1,1,\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\alpha }]`$. Taking a general Hermitian matrix

$$H=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}r_1\hfill & c_4\hfill & c_6\hfill \\ c_4^{}\hfill & r_2\hfill & c_5\hfill \\ c_6^{}\hfill & c_5^{}\hfill & r_3\hfill \end{array}\right]$$
(3)
where the $`r_i`$ are real and the $`c_i`$ are complex entries and rotating the 2-3 position with and orthogonal matrix $`O_{23}`$, i.e.

$$\begin{array}{c}HH^{}=O_{23}^THO_{23}\end{array}$$
(4)
where

$$O_{23}=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}1\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \mathrm{cos}(\theta _{23})\hfill & \mathrm{sin}(\theta _{23})\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \mathrm{sin}(\theta _{23})\hfill & \mathrm{cos}(\theta _{23})\hfill \end{array}\right]$$

and applying the RCP method described in Eq. (1), one obtains $`c_4c_4^{}=r_4`$ real. Then, by rotating the 1-2 position, we find $`c_6=r_6`$ real, and subsequently by the rotating again the 2-3 position we can even have $`r_6=0`$. Thus, any Hermitian matrix can be written in the following way:

$$\begin{array}{c}H=\widehat{O}^T\left[\begin{array}{ccc}r_1\hfill & r_4\hfill & 0\hfill \\ r_4\hfill & r_2\hfill & r_5e^{i\alpha }\hfill \\ 0\hfill & r_5e^{i\alpha }\hfill & r_3\hfill \end{array}\right]\widehat{O}\end{array}$$
(5)
where $`\widehat{O}`$ is some general (appropriate) orthogonal matrix. Finally, one concludes:

$$\begin{array}{c}H=\widehat{O}^TK_\alpha ^{}\left[\begin{array}{ccc}r_1\hfill & r_4\hfill & 0\hfill \\ r_4\hfill & r_2\hfill & r_5\hfill \\ 0\hfill & r_5\hfill & r_3\hfill \end{array}\right]K_\alpha \widehat{O}=\left(OK_\alpha \widehat{O}\right)^{}DOK_\alpha \widehat{O}\end{array}$$
(6)
where $`O`$ is just another orthogonal matrix, $`D`$ real diagonal and $`K_\alpha =\mathrm{diag}`$ $`[1,1,\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\alpha }]`$. Furthermore, taking into account that any orthogonal matrix results from three rotations $`O=O_{12}O_{23}O_{12}^{}`$, and that any $`O_{12}`$ commutes with $`K_\alpha `$, one finds that the combination $`OK_\alpha \widehat{O}`$ is a product of just 5 different rotations and the diagonal unitary matrix $`K_\alpha `$ with only one complex phase:

$$OK_\alpha \widehat{O}=O_{12}O_{23}O_{12}^{}K_\alpha \widehat{O}_{23}\widehat{O}_{12}$$
(7)
Thus, any Hermitian matrix is a combination of its 3 eigenvalues, 5 rotations and only one complex phase. This gives a total of 9 parameters, which corresponds exactly with the same number of parameters as in the general case for any Hermitian matrix (as in Eq. (3)), where we have 6 real parameters and 3 complex phases.

We shall now apply the reduction of complex phases to several cases and scenarios.

1 - Majorana neutrinos

Consider the case where we have (only) 3 lefthanded Majorana type neutrinos with some Majorana mass matrix. This may also be an effective Majorana mass matrix. Without loss of generality, one can find a weak-basis where the the Majorana neutrino mass matrix is real and diagonal while the charged lepton mass matrix $`M_e`$ is Hermitic. Then, applying RCP in this weak-basis, one obtains

$$\begin{array}{ccc}M_\nu =D_\nu \mathrm{diag}[\mathrm{m}_{\nu _1},\mathrm{m}_{\nu _2},\mathrm{m}_{\nu _3}]& ;& M_e=U^{}DU\end{array}$$
(8)
where $`U=OK\widehat{O}`$, the combination described in Eq. (7), is a unitary matrix with only one complex phase and five angle rotations:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}U=O_{12}O_{23}O_{12}^{}K_\alpha \widehat{O}_{23}\widehat{O}_{12}& ;& K_\alpha =\mathrm{diag}[1,1,\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\alpha }]\end{array}$$
(9)
$`U`$ corresponds, of course, to the neutrino mixing matrix which, for the case of Majorana neutrinos, will have $`3+1+2=6`$ physical parameters: 3 angles, one CP violating phase of the CKM-type and 2 CP violating complex phases of the Majorana type. In order to find these, we write $`U`$ also in the following combination:

$$U=K_oVK_M$$
(10)
where $`K_o=\mathrm{diag}[\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\varphi _1},\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\varphi _2},\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\varphi _3}]`$, $`K_M=\mathrm{diag}[1,\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\alpha _\mathrm{M}},\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\beta _\mathrm{M}}]`$ and $`V`$ is a (CKM-type) unitary matrix where the first line and row are real. As can be seen, by substituting this combination for $`U`$ in $`M_e`$ of Eq. (8), the diagonal unitary matrix $`K_o`$ is unphysical and does not contribute to $`M_e`$. The two physical unitary matrices are $`V`$ and $`K_M`$. The matrix $`K_M=\mathrm{diag}[1,\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\alpha _\mathrm{M}},\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\beta _\mathrm{M}},]`$ contains the two Majorana type CP violating complex phases $`(\alpha _M,\beta _M)`$, and $`V`$ contains the CKM-type CP violating phase $`\delta _{KM}`$. All 3 phases $`(\alpha _M,\beta _M,\delta _{KM})`$ are functions of the initial 5 angles $`(\theta _{12},\theta _{23},\theta _{12}^{},\widehat{\theta }_{23},\widehat{\theta }_{12})`$ contained in $`O_{12}`$, $`O_{23}`$, $`O_{12}^{}`$, $`\widehat{O}_{23}`$, $`\widehat{O}_{12}`$, and the unique complex phase $`\alpha `$ contained in $`K_\alpha `$. However, comparing the two formulas for $`U`$ in Eq. (9) and Eq. (10), it is quite clear that all CP violation, be it of the CKM-type or the Majorana type, is controlled by the one single complex phase $`\alpha `$ and that $`(\alpha _M,\beta _M,\delta _{KM})=0`$ if $`\alpha =0`$. Furthermore111All angles and phases are given mod $`\pi `$., $`\delta _{KM}=0`$ if $`\theta _{23}=0`$ or $`\widehat{\theta }_{23}=0`$. In this case, the matrix $`K`$ commutes with the remaining matrices $`O_{12}`$, $`O_{12}^{}`$ or $`\widehat{O}_{12}`$. For the Majorana type CP violating phases, we obtain $`(\alpha _M,\beta _M)=0`$ if $`\theta _{23}=0`$ or if $`\theta _{12}=0`$. We find also $`(\alpha _M,\beta _M)=(0,\alpha )`$ if $`\widehat{\theta }_{23}=0`$ (for $`\theta _{12}`$ and $`\theta _{23}0`$). Explicitly, one has

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{tan}(\delta _{KM})=\mathrm{sin}(\alpha )\mathrm{sin}(\theta _{23})\mathrm{sin}(\widehat{\theta }_{23})A_1\hfill \\ \mathrm{tan}(\alpha _M)=\mathrm{sin}(\alpha )\mathrm{sin}(\theta _{12})\mathrm{sin}(\theta _{23})\mathrm{sin}(\widehat{\theta }_{23})A_2\hfill \\ \mathrm{tan}(\beta _M)=\mathrm{tan}(\alpha )\mathrm{sin}(\theta _{12})\mathrm{sin}(\theta _{23})A_3\hfill \end{array}$$
(11)
where $`A_1`$, $`A_2`$ and $`A_3`$ are functions of sinuses and cosinuses of $`(\alpha `$, $`\theta _{12}`$, $`\theta _{23}`$, $`\theta _{12}^{}`$, $`\widehat{\theta }_{23}`$, $`\widehat{\theta }_{12})`$; $`A_1`$ is well defined if $`\alpha `$ or $`\theta _{23}`$ or $`\widehat{\theta }_{23}`$ are zero, $`A_2`$ is also well defined if $`\alpha `$ or $`\theta _{12}`$ or $`\theta _{23}`$ or $`\widehat{\theta }_{23}`$ are zero, and the same applies to $`A_3`$ if $`\alpha `$ or $`\theta _{12}`$ or $`\theta _{23}`$ are zero, furthermore, $`A_3=1/\mathrm{sin}(\theta _{12})\mathrm{sin}(\theta _{23})`$ if $`\widehat{\theta }_{23}=0`$ (for $`\theta _{12}`$ and $`\theta _{23}0`$). A special case occurs for $`\delta _{KM}`$ when $`(\theta _{12},\theta _{12}^{})=0`$. It can be readily verified from Eq. (9) that, in this case, $`U_{13}=0`$ and that $`A_1=0`$; thus, $`\delta _{KM}=0`$.

2 - See Saw

Let us now consider the see saw scenario with 3 lefthanded and 3 right- handed neutrinos, and where the neutrinos have only a Dirac mass matrix $`M_D`$ and a righthanded Majorana mass matrix $`M_R`$. As argued in Ref. , one can always find a weak-basis where the righthanded Majorana neutrino mass matrix and charged lepton mass matrix are diagonal and real, while the Dirac neutrino mass matrix $`M_D`$ has 6 complex phases, i.e.

$$\begin{array}{ccc}M_\nu =\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& M_D\\ M_D^T& D_R\end{array}\right)& ;& M_e=D_e\end{array}$$
(12)
where $`D_R\mathrm{diag}[\mathrm{M}_1,\mathrm{M}_2,\mathrm{M}_3]=`$ $`M_R`$, $`D_e\mathrm{diag}[\mathrm{m}_\mathrm{e},\mathrm{m}_\mu ,\mathrm{m}_\tau ]`$and the $`(M_D)_{i1}`$ are real. Thus, we have a total of 3+3+9+6=21 parameters.

Next, we apply RCP to the see saw mechanism. To do this, one must first consider a different weak-basis from the one in Eq. (12). Transforming (only) the lefthanded neutrinos with a unitary matrix $`U`$:

$$\nu _{L_i}U_{ij}\nu _{L_j}$$
(13)
and keeping the charged lepton mass matrix Hermitic, Eq. (12) becomes

$$\begin{array}{ccc}M_\nu =\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& U^TM_D\\ M_D^TU& D_R\end{array}\right)& ;& M_e=U^{}D_eU\end{array}$$
(14)
This structure for the neutrinos as well as for the charged leptons has the same physical content as the one in Eq. (12). However, we may now choose $`U`$ such that the new Dirac neutrino mass matrix $`U^TM_D`$ is also Hermitic222This is clear. Every matrix $`M_D`$ can be diagonalized by a biunitary transformation: $`WM_DV=D`$. Thus, $`M_D=W^{}DV^{}`$ and we find that by multiplying $`M_D`$ on the left by a suitable unitary matrix $`(VW)M_D=VDV^{}`$, we obtain an Hermitic matrix.. Thus, there exists a weak-basis where both the Dirac neutrino and charged lepton mass matrices $`M_D`$ and $`M_e`$ are Hermitic, while the (righthanded) Majorana neutrino mass matrix $`M_R=D_R`$ is diagonal.

We are now ready to apply the reduction of complex phases, and may conclude, as in Eq. (2), that there is a weakbasis where

$$\begin{array}{c}M_D=\left(O_DK_D\widehat{O}_D\right)^{}DO_DK_D\widehat{O}_D\hfill \\ M_e=\left(O_eK_e\widehat{O}_e\right)^{}D_eO_eK_e\widehat{O}_e\hfill \\ M_R=D_R\hfill \end{array}$$

where the $`O`$’s are orthogonal, the $`D`$’s are real and diagonal and the $`K`$’s are unitary diagonal matrices with, each, only one complex phase. By transforming again the lefthanded neutrinos, as in Eqs. (13, 14), one can even find a weak-basis where $`M_D`$ is somewhat simplified:

$$\begin{array}{c}M_D=DO_DK_D\widehat{O}_D\hfill \\ M_e=\left(O_eK_e\widehat{O}_e\right)^{}D_eO_eK_e\widehat{O}_e\hfill \\ M_R=D_R\hfill \end{array}$$
(15)
and where the $`O_e`$’s and $`K_e`$’s have been redefined.

Thus, we find, in addition to the result obtained in , a weak-basis where the total number of complex phases in the see saw model is (not 6) but only 2. However, it must be kept in mind that the total number of parameters is still the same as in , i.e. 3 masses, 5 angles and 1 phase in $`M_D`$ and $`M_e`$, and 3 masses in $`M_R`$: $`2\times (3+5+1)+3=21`$.

With respect to CP violation, it is clear that all weak-basis invariants measuring CP violation, dependent on the lepton mass matrices, will be zero if both complex phases $`\alpha _D,\alpha _e`$ in $`K_D`$ and $`K_e`$ are zero. E.g.

$$\begin{array}{c}I_\nu =Tr[M_D^{}M_D,M_R^{}M_R]^3=0if\alpha _D=0\hfill \\ I_{e\nu }=Tr[M_D^{}M_D^T,M_eM_e^{}]^3=0if\alpha _e=0\hfill \end{array}$$
(16)
Of course, $`(I_\nu ,I_{e\nu })=0`$ does not imply that only $`(\alpha _D,\alpha _e)=0`$ . To study under which conditions $`(I_\nu ,I_{e\nu })=0`$, it is useful to write $`O_DK_D\widehat{O}_D`$ in $`M_D`$ and $`O_eK_e\widehat{O}_e`$ in $`M_e`$ as in Eq. (7):

$$\begin{array}{c}O_DK_D\widehat{O}_D=O_{12}^DO_{23}^DO_{12}^DK_D\widehat{O}_{23}^D\widehat{O}_{12}^D\hfill \\ O_eK_e\widehat{O}_e=O_{12}^eO_{23}^eO_{12}^eK_e\widehat{O}_{23}^e\widehat{O}_{12}^e\hfill \end{array}$$
(17)
Clearly, as explained in the previous paragraph we find also

$$\begin{array}{c}I_\nu =0if\alpha _D=0or\theta _{23}^D=0or\widehat{\theta }_{23}^D=0or(\theta _{12}^D,\theta _{12}^D)=0\hfill \\ I_{e\nu }=0if\alpha _e=0or\theta _{23}^e=0or\widehat{\theta }_{23}^e=0or(\theta _{12}^e,\theta _{12}^e)=0\hfill \end{array}$$
(18)
3 - Leptogenisis

Next we consider, as in Ref. , another class of weak-basis invariants which measure CP-violation and are also relevant for leptogenisis:

$$\begin{array}{c}I_1=ImTr[h_DH_RM_R^{}h_D^{}M_R]\hfill \\ I_2=ImTr[h_DH_R^2M_R^{}h_D^{}M_R]\hfill \\ I_3=ImTr[h_DH_R^2M_R^{}h_D^{}M_RH_R]\hfill \end{array}$$
(19)
where $`h_D=M_D^{}M_D`$ and $`H_R=M_R^{}M_R`$. Using the parametrization defined in Eqs. (15, 17), one obtains the following relations for these weak-basis invariants

$$I_i=\mathrm{sin}(\alpha _D)\mathrm{sin}(\theta _{23}^D)B_i$$
(20)
where the $`B_i`$ are polynomials in sinuses and cosinuses of $`\theta _{ij}^D`$, $`\theta _{12}^D`$, $`\widehat{\theta }_{ij}^D`$ and $`\alpha _D`$ and the eigenvalues of $`M_D`$ and $`M_R`$. Clearly, $`I_i=0`$ if $`\alpha _D=0`$or$`\theta _{23}^D=0`$.

4 - CP violation and low energy effective theory.

Our parametrization is useful to study all kinds of conditions under which CP-violation related to leptogenis will occur. E.g., it can be verified that the invariants $`I_i0`$, (i.e. CP-violation will still occur) even when all forms CP-violation are absent in the approximate effective low energy theory with an effective neutrino mass matrix

$$m_{eff}=M_DM_R^1M_D^T$$
(21)
Thus, the two effective low energy Majorana phases and CKM-type phase, resulting from an (appropriate) effective neutrino mass matrix and the charged leptons mass matrix, can be zero, while the (total) high energy theory violates CP. In order to see this, take, in the parametrization of Eqs. (15, 17) for $`M_D`$ and $`M_e`$, all 1-2 angles zero. This will guarantee a zero CKM-type phase, for the effective low energy theory. In addition, for this simple case, we construct a class of matrices (resulting in $`I_i0`$ but) with no CP violation Majorana phases for the approximate effective low energy theory. This class depends on two parameters $`\theta `$, $`\alpha `$:

$$\begin{array}{c}M_D=DF^TK_\beta \hfill \\ M_e=K_\alpha F^TD_eFK_\alpha ^{}\hfill \\ M_R=D_R\hfill \end{array};F=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}1\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\hfill & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\hfill & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\hfill \end{array}\right]$$
(22)
where $`D=m\mathrm{diag}[\lambda ,\mathrm{sin}(\theta ),\mathrm{cos}(\theta )]`$, $`D_R=M\mathrm{diag}[\mu ,\mathrm{b}^+,\mathrm{b}^{}]`$, with $`b^\pm =(1\pm \mathrm{sin}(2\theta )\mathrm{cos}(\alpha ))`$ and $`\lambda `$, $`\mu `$, $`m`$, $`M`$ real. $`K_\alpha =\mathrm{diag}[1,1,\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\alpha }]`$, $`K_\beta =\mathrm{diag}[1,1,\mathrm{ie}^{\mathrm{i}\beta }]`$ with $`\mathrm{tan}(\beta )=\mathrm{tan}(2\theta )\mathrm{sin}(\alpha )`$. $`D_e`$ may be any real diagonal matrix. For this specific choice of parametrization for the neutrino Dirac, Majorana and charged lepton mass matrices and in a weak-basis where the charged lepton mass matrix is diagonal, the low energy effective neutrino mass matrix has the special form,

$$m_{eff}=\widehat{M}_DD_R^1\widehat{M}_D^T=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}r& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& c\\ 0& c& c^{}\end{array}\right]$$
(23)
where $`\widehat{M}_D=FK_\alpha DF^TK_\beta `$ and where $`r`$ is real and the $`c`$’s are complex. As a result (note that $`(m_{eff})_{22}=0`$) all the phases in the $`c`$’s are irrelevant and can be absorbed through (or into) the righthanded charged lepton fields. Thus, not only the CKM-type phase but also the Majorana phases are zero and there is no form of CP-violation in the low energy theory. However, for $`M_D^{}M_D`$ we obtain

$$M_D^{}M_D=\frac{m^2}{2}\left[\begin{array}{ccc}2\lambda ^2\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & 1\hfill & \mathrm{cos}(2\theta )e^{i\beta }\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \mathrm{cos}(2\theta )e^{i\beta }\hfill & 1\hfill \end{array}\right]$$
(24)
where, remember, $`\mathrm{tan}(\beta )=\mathrm{tan}(2\theta )\mathrm{sin}(\alpha )`$. Therefore, in contrast with the approximate effective low energy theory, CP-violation does indeed occur for the (total) high energy theory and the CP violation leptogenisis invariants $`I_i`$, computed with Eq. (19), are different from zero:

$$\begin{array}{c}I_1=\frac{m^4M^4}{2}\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2(2\theta )\mathrm{cos}^2(\alpha )1}{\mathrm{tan}^2(2\theta )\mathrm{sin}^2(\alpha )+1}\mathrm{sin}(2\theta )\mathrm{sin}(4\theta )\mathrm{sin}(2\alpha )\hfill \\ \\ I_2=m^4M^6\frac{\mathrm{sin}^4(2\theta )\mathrm{cos}^4(\alpha )1}{\mathrm{tan}^2(2\theta )\mathrm{sin}^2(\alpha )+1}\mathrm{sin}(2\theta )\mathrm{sin}(4\theta )\mathrm{sin}(2\alpha )\hfill \\ \\ I_3=\frac{m^4M^8}{2}\frac{\left(\mathrm{sin}^2(2\theta )\mathrm{cos}^2(\alpha )1\right)}{\mathrm{tan}^2(2\theta )\mathrm{sin}^2(\alpha )+1}^3\mathrm{sin}(2\theta )\mathrm{sin}(4\theta )\mathrm{sin}(2\alpha )\hfill \end{array}$$
(25)
Conclusions

Using RCP we reduce, significantly, the number of CP violating complex phases in the Yukawa parameters in two important cases. In the case of an (effective) $`3\times 3`$ Majorana neutrino mass matrix, we obtain only one complex CP violating phase, in contrast with the general structure, where there is one CKM-type and 2 Majorana type complex phases. For the See Saw extension of the SM with three righthanded neutrinos, and in connection with CP violation in leptogenis, we reduce the usual 6 complex phases to only 2. We also show that RCP is usefull in the analys of some specific scenarios. In particular, we give an example where, in the case of the see saw mechanism, the (total) high energy theory violates CP even when all forms CP-violation are absent in the approximate effective low energy theory.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recently, Dijkgraaf and Vafa  proposed a general prescription for computing effective glueball superpotentials via planar diagrams of matrix theories. Several tests have been achieved for this conjecture  for the fields in adjoint representations. A recent paper  proved a correspondence for matter fields in the adjoint representation. A natural extension of the construction is to the theories with fields in the fundamental representations. The gauge theory effective potential for glueball superfield $`S`$ is given by

$$W_{DV}(S,\mathrm{\Lambda },\lambda _a)=N_cS(\mathrm{log}(S/\mathrm{\Lambda }^3)+1)+N_c\frac{_{\chi =2}(S,\lambda _a)}{S}+_{\chi =1}(S,\lambda _a).$$
(1.1)
where $`_{\chi =2}`$ is the contribution from adjoint fields and $`_{\chi =1}(S,\lambda _a)`$ is the contribution from the fields in the fundamental representations. The programm was successfully used to compare matrix model results with known superpotentials of meson fields -.

The advantage the matrix theory should be that we can prove some basic hypothesis or conjectures which cannot be provided by the standard field theoretical methods. In fact, a derivation of the non-renormalization theorem was performed in .

One of the biggest problems is the inclusion of the baryonic fields. Matrix theory may be useful to get insights for the baryons. This problem was treated in a recent papers . The paper  showed that the first order calculation in the perturbative technique agrees with the field theoretical result. In , they showed that for $`SU(2)`$ gauge fields with $`2`$ flavor models, we can obtain superpotential for baryonic fields. In this model, the baryons can be expressed by bilinear fields and the matrix integration can be performed. However, for $`SU(N)`$, $`N>2`$, the baryons are composed of more than trilinear fields so that we cannot easily perform the matrix integrations.

In this paper, we consider the theories with $`SU(N)`$ gauge fields with $`N`$ flavour. The quantum moduli space is conjectured to be parametrized by meson fields and baryons by

$`\mathrm{det}MB\stackrel{~}{B}=\mathrm{\Lambda }^{2N}.`$ (1.2)
Our aim of this paper is the derivation of this constraint from the matrix model. Since baryonic perturbation is complicated, we will use the mean-field method to estimate the superpotential, which is related to the free energy of the matrix model. It will turn out that the self-consistency equation for the mean field depends on $`N`$. We will therefore assume a planar limit of the equation. With this assumption, we will show that we can get a potential which almost agrees with the expected results. Before doing this, we will first treat the field theoretical result which should be compared to the matrix theory result.

## 2 Effective Superpotentials for $`N_c=N_f`$

We will first argue how to obtain effective superpotential from the field theory. We consider $`SU(N)`$ gauge theories with $`N`$ quark flavors $`Q_a^i`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^a`$. We diagonalize the mass matrix and consider the tree level superpotential

$`W_{\mathrm{tree}}(Q,\stackrel{~}{Q})=m_i\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i+bdetQ+\stackrel{~}{b}det\stackrel{~}{Q},`$ (2.1)
which can be written in terms of meson operators and baryon operators

$`M_i^j=Q_i^a\stackrel{~}{Q}_a^j,B=detQ,\stackrel{~}{B}=det\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ (2.2)
as

$`W_{\mathrm{tree}}(X_i,B,\stackrel{~}{B})=m_iX_i+bB+\stackrel{~}{b}\stackrel{~}{B},`$ (2.3)
where we have defined $`X_i=M_i^i`$. In order to obtain the non perturbative part of the effective superpotential, we start with the Veneziano-Yankielowicz superpotential .

$`W=NSS\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{S^N}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^{3N}}}.`$ (2.4)
For $`N`$-flavour, we assume the matching relation $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^{3N}=m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_N\mathrm{\Lambda }^{2N}`$. When we integrated in $`X_i`$ fields as $`X_i=_{m_i}W`$, we get the following superpotential

$`W=S\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{2N}}{X_1X_2\mathrm{}X_N}}+m_iX^i,`$ (2.5)
which can be promoted to

$`W=S\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{2N}}{\mathrm{det}M}}+m_iX^i`$ (2.6)
If we include the baryon fields, it is natural to expect that the effective potential is given by

$`W=S\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{2N}}{B\stackrel{~}{B}+\mathrm{det}M}}+bB+\stackrel{~}{b}\stackrel{~}{B}+m_iX^i.`$ (2.7)
The equation $`_SW=0`$ implies the constraint

$`\mathrm{det}MB\stackrel{~}{B}=\mathrm{\Lambda }^{2N},`$ (2.8)
which is a desired result . We assume that this potential is exact although the proof of the non-renormalization theorem of baryoionic perturbation may be very subtle.

To compare this result with the superpotential from the matrix models, we are going to integrated out the fields $`B,\stackrel{~}{B}`$ and $`M_i^j`$. Let us first denote

$`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{det}MB\stackrel{~}{B}`$ (2.9)
The equation $`_BW=0,_{\stackrel{~}{B}}W=0`$ implies

$`B={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{~}{b}}{S}},\stackrel{~}{B}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }b}{S}}.`$ (2.10)
The variation with respect to $`M_i^j`$ leads to

$`M_i^j`$ $`=`$ $`0,(ij)`$
$`m_iX_i`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{S}}m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_N)^{\frac{1}{N1}}.`$ (2.11)
From these relations, we find that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ satisfies an equation

$`\mathrm{\Delta }=X_1X_2\mathrm{}X_NB\stackrel{~}{B}=({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{S}})^{\frac{N}{N1}}({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{S}})^2b\stackrel{~}{b}.`$ (2.12)
when $`b=0`$, this equation has a solution $`\mathrm{\Delta }=S^N/m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_N`$. Therefore, we define a new variable by $`\mathrm{\Delta }=S^N/m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_N\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. Then the equation for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ is given by

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=(1+\alpha \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})^{N1},`$ (2.13)
where $`\alpha `$ is defined as

$`\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{S^{N2}b\stackrel{~}{b}}{m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_N}}.`$ (2.14)
Substituting these variables in (2.7), we find that the effective superpotential can be written in the form

$`W=NS(1\mathrm{ln}S/\mathrm{\Lambda }^3)+,`$ (2.15)
where $``$ is

$`=S\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_N}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^N}}S\mathrm{ln}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}+(N2)\alpha S\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}.`$ (2.16)
This is the final form of the superpotential which we want to compare in the next section. Note also that the superpotential (2.16) agrees with the one obtained in ref  although the derivation seems different.

## 3 Mean-field Approximation for Matrix Model

### 3.1 Mean Field Approach

Before discussing the model for baryonic perturbation, we will apply the mean-field method to the known models. The aim of doing this is to get a support for the validity of the mean-field method. The tree level superpotential we treat here is obtained by the deformation from $`N=2`$ SQCD theory with fundamental flavors $`Q_i^a`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^a`$ by adding a mass $`M`$ for the adjoint scalar $`\mathrm{\Phi }_a^b`$ in $`N=2`$ vector multiplet

$`W_{\mathrm{tree}}(\mathrm{\Phi },Q,\stackrel{~}{Q})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}M\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^2+g\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^a\mathrm{\Phi }_a^bQ_b^i+m\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i,`$ (3.1)
where we have set the mass of the fundamental flavors to be $`m_1=m_2=\mathrm{}=m_{N_f}=m`$ for simplicity. We consider the following free energy

$`e^{\frac{N}{S}}=({\displaystyle \frac{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}{S}})^{N_f}{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Phi }𝑑Q𝑑\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{\frac{N}{S}W_{\mathrm{tree}}(\mathrm{\Phi },Q,\stackrel{~}{Q})}},`$ (3.2)
Since the integral for the adjoint fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }_a^b`$ is Gaussian, we can integrate out the fields and obtain

$`e^{\frac{N}{S}}=({\displaystyle \frac{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}{S}})^{N_f}{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Phi }𝑑Q𝑑\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{\frac{N}{S}[m\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i\frac{g^2}{2M}\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^j\stackrel{~}{Q}_j^bQ_b^i]}},`$ (3.3)
We re-scale the variables as

$`Q_i^a({\displaystyle \frac{N}{S}}m)^{1/2}Q_i^a,\stackrel{~}{Q}_a^i({\displaystyle \frac{N}{S}}m)^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{Q}_a^i,`$ (3.4)
to get

$`e^{\frac{N}{S}}=({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{m}})^{NN_f}{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Phi }𝑑Q𝑑\stackrel{~}{Q}e^W},`$ (3.5)
where

$`W=\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i{\displaystyle \frac{\beta S}{2N}}\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^j\stackrel{~}{Q}_j^bQ_b^i,\beta ={\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{mM^2}}.`$ (3.6)
We will write the correlation function $`<\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_b^j>`$ as

$`<\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_b^j>=\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\delta _i^j\delta _b^a,`$ (3.7)
Then the above tree level potential$`W`$ can be written in the form

$`W=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i\beta S\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i+NN_f{\displaystyle \frac{\beta S}{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$ (3.8)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta S}{2N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}}\{{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^j\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\delta _i^j)][{\displaystyle \underset{b=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\stackrel{~}{Q}_j^bQ_b^i\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\delta _j^i)]\}.`$
As a mean field theory, we neglect the contribution of the last term. Namely, we consider the following free energy:

$`e^{\frac{N}{S}}=({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{m}})^{NN_f}{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Phi }𝑑Q𝑑\stackrel{~}{Q}e^{[\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i\beta S\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i+NN_f\frac{\beta S}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }^2]}},`$ (3.9)
We can compute the correlation function $`<\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_b^j>=\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\delta _i^j\delta _b^a`$ and get a consistency equation for $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\beta S\mathrm{\Delta }^{}}}=\mathrm{\Delta }^{}.`$ (3.10)
This equation can be easily solved by

$`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1\sqrt{14\beta S}}{2\beta S}}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{1+\sqrt{14\beta S}}}.`$ (3.11)
Performing the Gaussian integral in (3.9), we get a free energy

$``$ $`=`$ $`N_fS[\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{m}}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta S}{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }^2)]`$ (3.12)
$`=`$ $`N_fS[\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{m}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\beta S}}(1\sqrt{14\beta S})+\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{1+\sqrt{14\beta S}}{2}}]`$
which is exactly the result obtained by summing up the ladder diagrams.

In general, we may have $`N`$ dependence in the self-consistency equation (3.10). Then, we should take the planar limit where $`N`$ dependence disappears. Then we expect that the result reflects the contribution from the planar diagrams.

### 3.2 Effective Superpotential for Baryons from Matrix Theory

Let us apply the mean-field technique to the baryonic perturbation. We consider the free energy

$`e^{\frac{N}{S}}=({\displaystyle \frac{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}{S}})^N{\displaystyle \underset{i,a=1}{\overset{N}{}}dQ_i^ad\stackrel{~}{Q}_a^ie^{\frac{N}{S}W_{tree}(Q,\stackrel{~}{Q})}},`$ (3.13)
which is in our case,

$`e^{\frac{N}{S}}`$ (3.14)
$`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}{S}})^N{\displaystyle \underset{i,a=1}{\overset{N}{}}dQ_i^ad\stackrel{~}{Q}_a^ie^{\frac{N}{S}(m_i\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i+bϵ^{a_1a_2\mathrm{}a_N}Q_{a_1}^1Q_{a_2}^2\mathrm{}Q_{a_N}^N+\stackrel{~}{b}ϵ_{b_1b_2\mathrm{}b_N}\stackrel{~}{Q}_1^{b_1}\stackrel{~}{Q}_2^{b_2}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{Q}_N^{b_N})}},`$
The superpotential can be derived by the free energy $``$ as

$`W=NS(1\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{S}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^3}})+.`$ (3.15)
The first term of the superpotential is the Veneziano-Yankielowicz superpotential which can be obtained either from the volume of the gauge groups  or Gaussian integral measures . We will first re-scale the variables

$`Q_i^a({\displaystyle \frac{N}{S}}m_i)^{1/2}Q_i^a,\stackrel{~}{Q}_a^i({\displaystyle \frac{N}{S}}m_i)^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{Q}_a^i.`$ (3.16)
Then the matrix integral can be written as

$`e^{\frac{N}{S}}`$ (3.17)
$`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^N}{m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_n}})^N{\displaystyle \underset{i,a=1}{\overset{N}{}}dQ_i^ad\stackrel{~}{Q}_a^ie^W}.`$
where

$`W=\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i`$
$`[({\displaystyle \frac{S}{N}})^{N2}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_n}}]^{1/2}(bϵ^{a_1a_2\mathrm{}a_N}Q_{a_1}^1Q_{a_2}^2\mathrm{}Q_{a_N}^N+\stackrel{~}{b}ϵ_{b_1b_2\mathrm{}b_N}\stackrel{~}{Q}_1^{b_1}\stackrel{~}{Q}_2^{b_2}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{Q}_N^{b_N})`$ (3.18)
Integrating out the fields $`Q_a^N`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_N^a`$, we get

$`e^{\frac{N}{S}}=({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^N}{m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_n}})^N{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\underset{a=1}{\overset{N}{}}dQ_i^ad\stackrel{~}{Q}_a^ie^{\stackrel{~}{W}}}`$ (3.19)
where $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ is given by

$`\stackrel{~}{W}=\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{N^{N2}}}ϵ^{a_1a_2\mathrm{}a_N}ϵ_{b_1b_2\mathrm{}a_N}Q_{a_1}^1Q_{a_2}^2\mathrm{}Q_{a_{N1}}^{N1}\stackrel{~}{Q}_1^{b_1}\stackrel{~}{Q}_2^{b_2}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{Q}_{N1}^{b_{N1}},`$ (3.20)
and the parameter $`\alpha `$ is defined in (2.14). To estimate the free energy, we apply the mean-field approximation. We put the correlation functions $`<ϵ^{aa_1a_2\mathrm{}a_{N1}a_N}ϵ_{b_1b_2\mathrm{}b_{N1}a_n}_{ki}^{N1}Q_{a_i}^k\stackrel{~}{Q}_k^{b_i}>`$ in the form

$`<ϵ^{aa_1a_2\mathrm{}a_{N1}a_N}ϵ_{b_1b_2\mathrm{}b_{N1}a_n}{\displaystyle \underset{ki}{\overset{N1}{}}}Q_{a_i}^k\stackrel{~}{Q}_k^{b_i}>=(N1)N^{N2}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\delta _{a_i}^{b_i}.`$ (3.21)
Then we can rewrite $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ as

$`\stackrel{~}{W}=\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i+\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{}\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^aQ_a^i\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{}<Q_a^i\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^a>`$ (3.22)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ϵ^{a_1a_2\mathrm{}a_N}ϵ_{b_1b_2\mathrm{}a_N}}{(N1)N^{N2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{ki}{\overset{N1}{}}}Q_{a_i}^k\stackrel{~}{Q}_k^{b_i}<Q_{a_i}^i\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^{b_i}>`$
$`+`$ $`\alpha {\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}({\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{a_1a_2\mathrm{}a_N}ϵ_{b_1b_2\mathrm{}a_N}}{(N1)N^{N2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{ki}{\overset{N1}{}}}Q_{a_i}^k\stackrel{~}{Q}_k^{b_i}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\delta _{b_i}^{a_i})(Q_{a_i}^i\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^{b_i}<Q_{a_i}^i\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^{b_i}>)`$
As a mean field evaluation, we neglect the contribution of the last term of equation (3.22). We also omit the contribution of the term

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ϵ^{a_1a_2\mathrm{}a_N}ϵ_{b_1b_2\mathrm{}a_N}}{(N1)N^{N2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{ki}{\overset{N1}{}}}Q_{a_i}^k\stackrel{~}{Q}_k^{b_i}<Q_{a_i}^i\stackrel{~}{Q}_i^{b_i}>.`$ (3.23)
Note that the omitting of this term is not completely valid for $`N=2`$ and $`N=3`$. For $`N=2`$, this term is a constant and should be included in the free energy. This case, the integral in (3.19) can be performed without any approximation. We can easily see that the resulting expression of free energy agrees with the field theoretical results(2.16) for $`N=2`$. For $`N=3`$, (3.23) is bilinear in fields and we should prepare more generic ansatz for the correlator

$`<ϵ^{aa_1a_2\mathrm{}a_{N1}a_N}ϵ_{b_1b_2\mathrm{}b_{N1}a_n}{\displaystyle \underset{ki}{\overset{N1}{}}}Q_{a_i}^k{\displaystyle \underset{kj}{}}\stackrel{~}{Q}_k^{b_i}>=(N1)N^{N2}\mathrm{\Delta }_{a_i,j}^{b_j,i},`$ (3.24)
to get a proper consistency equation. This ansatz is generic, and we should use for generic value of $`N`$. However, the solution of the self-consistency equation seems very difficult to be solved. We therefore, assume $`N>3`$ for later calculation and negrect these terms. Then we find that the remaining integrations are just Gaussian integrals so that we can get a self-consistent equation for $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ via the equation (3.21).

The gap equation of this model can be easily obtained as

$`(N1)!({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{}}})^{N2}=(N1)N^{N2}\mathrm{\Delta }^{},`$ (3.25)
which can be written as

$`(12/N)(13/N)\mathrm{}(1(N1)/N)({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{}}})^{N2}=\mathrm{\Delta }^{}.`$ (3.26)
If we can take a very ”naive” planar limit, we obtain the gap equation

$`({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{}}})^{N2}=\mathrm{\Delta }^{}.`$ (3.27)
We should admit that this ”planar” limit is too subtle. This may be originated from a simple ansatz for the correlation functions (3.21). As a diagrammatic calculation, we should select only a small part of the diagrams to get this form of correlation functions. Therefore, we should use more generic ansatz (3.24) to perform a more rigorous analysis. However, the gap equation becomes very complicated. A partial evidence of the appearance of the gap equation (3.27) is the following. Instead of considering the more general ansatz, we enhance the number of diagrams we should correct by changing the correlation functions. Namely, we enhance the number by changing the equation as

$`N<{\displaystyle \underset{ki}{\overset{N1}{}}}({\displaystyle \underset{a_j}{}}Q_{a_j}^k\stackrel{~}{Q}_k^{a_j})>=(N1)N^{N2}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\delta _{a_i}^{b_i}.`$ (3.28)
Since the correlation function can $`<Q_i^a\stackrel{~}{Q}_b^j>`$ can be given by

$`<Q_i^a\stackrel{~}{Q}_b^j>={\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{ij}\delta _{ab}}{1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{}}},`$ (3.29)
we get a ”gap equation” in the form

$`({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{}}})^{N2}=(11/N)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ (3.30)
As a ”planar” equation, this equation leads to (3.27).

In this paper, we assume the ”planar” gap equation is given by (3.27). The reason we insist on the appearance of the gap equation will be given bellow. When we change variables to $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{}}}=1+\alpha \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }},`$ (3.31)
we can easily find that equation (3.27) leads to

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=(1+\alpha \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})^{N1},`$ (3.32)
which is exactly the equation (2.13). This strongly suggests that the exact planer limit of the gap equation is given by (3.27).

Let us evaluate the free energy within our approximation. Performing the Gaussian integrations, we can evaluate the free energy as

$`=S\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_N}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^N}}+S(N1)\mathrm{ln}(1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{})+\alpha S(N1)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{}}}.`$ (3.33)
We rewrite the free energy in terms of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ by the identification (3.31) to obtain

$`=S\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_N}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^N}}S\mathrm{ln}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}+\alpha S(N1)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}.`$ (3.34)
This is the final form of the free energy which should be compared to the field theoretical result(2.16):

$`=S\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_N}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^N}}S\mathrm{ln}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}+\alpha S(N2)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}.`$ (3.35)
The difference of the last term may be related to our subtle planar limit.

## 4 Discussions

We have discussed a method to obtain the effective superpotential for baryons and mesons by using the mean-field approximation. We have derived a result which is almost identicat to the field theoretical result. However, we have assumed ”planar limit” of the self-consistency equation for the derivation. We could not prove the conjecture since we have used a simple ansatz for the correlation functions. We should use more rigorous ansatz to get an improved result. It seems interesting that the resulting expression from the field theory is of the form which may be fully obtained by the mean-field method. Our result may indicates the existence of some simple derivation of the superpotential for baryonic fields.

Another Interesting application of the mean-field method is for the gauge theories with $`N_f>N_c`$. In this case, the most interesting aspect is the appearance of Seiberg duality which has been treated in the framework of the matrix models in  However, the baryonic degree of freedom will be required for the complete derivation of the duality. Mean-field approach may be useful to get the duality map of the fields identification.