format: text

text:
# Ground state and far-infrared absorption of two-electron rings in a magnetic field

## I Introduction

The possibility of confining a controlled number of electrons in artificial nanostructures at the interface of two semiconductors, achieved in recent years, has attracted much interest. An obvious reason is the potential application of these systems to sub-micron electronics technology but, from the theoretical point of view, much importance is attributed to their character of novel quantum systems in which new physics, as well as analogies with atomic clusters, atoms or nuclei, may be found. The most widely studied systems have been the so-called ’quantum dots’, in which a certain number of electrons form a two-dimensional compact island, modelled by a confinig potential of parabolic type (for small dots) plus the mutual electron-electron interactions. The electronic islands have been also formed in the shape of rings. In fact, mesoscopic rings were produced by Dahl et al. and their magnetoplasmon resonances measured for different ring widths . Subsequent theoretical models, using semiclassical methods  and density functional theory  provided a good interpretation of the measured ring spectra. There also exist approaches based on exact diagonalization methods for very small numbers of electrons which have addressed the so called ’persistent current’  and the optical excitations for very narrow rings (approaching the 1d limit) as well as for dots with a repulsive scatterer center . Besides, a description of the optical properties in two electron rings based on an analytical treatment of the ground state was given by Wendler et al. .

Very recently, Lorke and co-workers reported the fabrication, using self-assembly techniques, of electron rings in the true quantum limit, not affected by random scatterers, containig two electrons . The far-infrared (FIR) spectra as a function of the magnetic field has shown the appearance of electronic excitations peculiar of a ring geometry as well as a magnetic-field induced transition in the ground state angular momentum. The two electron system is the smallest one with electron-electron interaction and its reduced size places it within the reach of essentially exact methods, such as the Hamiltonian diagonalization in a basis of functions mentioned above. In this paper we have followed an alternative although also exact method, based on the solution of the Schrödinger equation by discretizing the coordinate space in a uniform grid of points. The method is therefore free from basis selection and truncation although its limitation lies, obviously, in the number of spatial points. This scheme can also be used to obtain the dynamical properties by solving the time-dependent Schrödinger equation and monitoring the evolution of relevant physical quantities with time. In this work we have addressed the linear response regime, for small amplitude oscillations. However, one of the potentialities of the real-time approach is the study of non-linear (large amplitude) dynamical processes. By finding the exact solution one can easily quantify the effect of the electron-electron interaction as well as check the validity of approximate descriptions, such as density-functional theory. In fact, an analysis of the experiment based on the local spin-density approximation (LSDA) in a symmetry-restricted approach has already been presented in Ref. .

An important input to the theory is the external confining potential acting on the electrons. Since we aim at a direct comparison with experiment, the strategy should be to introduce a reasonable model potential, depending only on a few parameters and explore the exact solution as a function of this parameters. Our approach has been to take the parabola parameter $`\omega _0`$ and ring radius $`R_0`$ as guessed in Ref.  and explore the effect of the central repulsive barrier by solving for a low-, an intermediate- and a high-barrier ring. With these barriers the system changes from a compact dot-like structure to a well developed ring one. We show that the barrier height modifies the ring properties and that the experiments are best explained assuming a mixed sample containing both low- and high-barrier rings.

In recent papers Yannouleas and Landman , as well as Koskinen et al.  have discussed the electronic localization, in the relative frame, known as the formation of Wigner molecules in two electron quantum dots and in rings with 6 electrons, respectively. Both groups have addressed the problem by calculating the low-lying states and discussing their rotor-like structure. This crystallization is in good agreement with the prediction of mean-field (MF) theories like the Hartree-Fock or the Local-Density-Functional approaches. We also comment on the formation of a Wigner molecule in the high-barrier rings by comparing the conditional probability distribution with the LSDA density. In this case, the LSDA predicts a symmetry-broken ground state that nicely agrees with the electronic distribution built from the conditional probability density of the exact solution to the Schrödinger equation.

The structure of the paper is as follows. Section II is devoted to the exact solution for the ground state and Sec. III to the corresponding exact solution for the dynamics. In Sec. IV we discuss the comparison with the mean field approach and the formation of the Wigner molecule. Finally, the conclusions are presented in Sec. V.

## II Ground state

### A Hamiltonian and resolution method

The Hamiltonian of the two-electron system, in a magnetic field, using effective units , is

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,2}{}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\mathrm{i}_i+\gamma 𝐀(𝐫_i)\right)^2+V(𝐫_i)\right]`$ (1)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{|𝐫_1𝐫_2|}}+g^{}m^{}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{2}}𝐁𝐒,`$ (2)
where $`𝐀`$ is the vector potential, $`\gamma =e/c`$ (we assume Gaussian magnetic fields) and $`V(𝐫)`$ is the confining external potential. The electronic positions are restricted to the $`xy`$ plane, i.e., $`𝐫(x,y)`$, and we consider a constant and perpendicular magnetic field $`𝐁=B𝐞_z`$, described in the symmetric gauge with a vector potential $`𝐀(𝐫)B/2(y,x)`$. The last piece is the Zeeman term, depending on the total spin $`𝐒=𝐬_1+𝐬_2`$ the effective gyromagnetic factor $`g^{}`$ and electronic effective mass $`m^{}`$.

The ring external potential is modelled by the following circularly symmetric piecewise function,

$`V(r)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{2}\omega _0^2(rR_0)^2\hfill & \mathrm{if}rR_0\hfill \\ \frac{1}{2}\omega _0^2(rR_0)^2[1+\hfill & \\ c(rR_0)+d(rR_0)^2]\hfill & \mathrm{if}r<R_0\hfill \end{array}.`$ (6)
In this expression $`R_0`$ is the ring radius and $`\omega _0`$ gives the curvature around the minimum at $`R_0`$. Fixing a barrier height $`V_b`$ at the origin determines the parameters $`c`$ and $`d`$, with the additional requirement of smootheness at $`R_0`$ .

Since Hamiltonian (1) depends on spin only through the Zeeman term, the spin part of the wave function is given by the well known singlet and triplet combination of spinors. Our method to obtain the spatial wave function is based on the only assumption that its gradient and Laplacian can be obtained by using finite difference formulas in a spatial grid of uniformly spaced points. Associating a macroindex $`I(x_1,y_1,x_2,y_2)`$ to each point and dicretizing the derivative operators (we use 5 point formulas), the Schrödinger eigenvalue equation transforms into the linear problem

$$H_{IJ}\mathrm{\Psi }_J=E\mathrm{\Psi }_I.$$
(7)
It is worth to mention that the interaction and potential terms are diagonal (local) and only the kinetic contribution gives non diagonal elements. Besides, since the derivatives involve only a finite number of points (we have tipically used 5-point formulas) the Hamiltonian matrix is very sparse. We have solved Eq. (7) for the ground state using the iterative imaginary time-step method . In principle, one can also obtain excited states by introducing the constraint of orthogonalization to the lower eigenvectors, although the computational effort increases very rapidly. A very useful optimization is introduced by considering only symmetric (singlet) or antisymmetric (triplet) wave functions with respect to the exchange of the two particle positions, since this allows to reduce by a factor two the wave function dimension.

The above method has proved to be quite stable and the convergence with the number of points very fast. Typically, we have used from $`N_1`$20 up to $``$50 points for the discretization of a single dimension. Notice that the wave function dimension ($`N_1^4`$) would normally imply that the Hamiltonian matrix ($`N_1^4\times N_1^4`$) exceed the storage capability. This is avoided by fully exploiting the sparseness of the Hamiltonian and not really dimensioning such a big matrix. Analogously, the imaginary-time step method allows us to determine the lower eigenstate of this matrix which would be unfeasible by direct diagonalization methods. We have also checked the convergence with the number of points used to discretize the Laplacian operator, e.g., when going from 5 to 9 point formulas a relative difference less than $`1/10^3`$ in the ground state energy is found.

### B Results

In this subsection we present the results for the ground state of rings having $`R_0=1.4`$ $`a_0^{}`$ and $`\omega _0=1.1`$ $`\mathrm{H}^{}`$. The corresponding physical values are, approximately, 14 nm and 13 meV and are taken as reasonable values from the experiment. Three different barrier heights are considered $`V_b=0.75`$, 3 and 12 H. As shown in Fig. 1 these three values correspond, going from low to high barrier, to decreasing central densities. In what follows the three rings will be referred to as V1, V2 and V3 for increasing barrier height, respectively. While ring V1 has a compact density because of its rather low barrier, V3 has a real ring shape, with a hollow central region.

Figure 2 displays the expectation value of the angular momentum $`L_z`$ as well as the energy of the lowest level for both singlet and triplet states as a function of the magnetic field. At $`B=0`$ the ground state is a singlet and with increasing $`B`$ there is an alternation of triplet and singlet ground states in the three rings. The first singlet-triplet transition occurs approximately at 3, 2 and 1 T for V1, V2 and V3, respectively. The triplet-singlet energy differences remain quite small after the first crossing which hints at possible transitions induced by small non-spin conserving perturbations like spin-orbit interactions or magnetic impurities. We also notice how the ground state increases in steps its angular momentum (in absolute value) as a function of $`B`$. This reflects the exact property that angular momentum is a good quantum number since the Hamiltonian commutes with the $`L_z`$ operator. The angular momentum gain with magnetic field is faster for the higher barrier rings. In fact, for V3 the evolution is markedly linear, already indicating a rotor-like evolution for this ring. This is further discussed in Sec. IV.

### C Non-interacting solution

When neglecting the Coulomb interaction the Hamiltonian (1) separates for each particle and, therefore, a solution built from single-particle (sp) orbitals with radial $`n`$ and angular $`\mathrm{}`$ quantum numbers is adequate. Figure 3 shows the sp eigenvalues for all, low and high barrier, rings. In fact, from the lowest maximum of the capacitance-voltage spectrum Lorke et al. obtained the single-electron ground-state shift with magnetic field. This manifests a change in slope at $`B8`$T that was explained as the transition from $`\mathrm{}=0`$ to $`\mathrm{}=1`$ in a model potential. Of course, this is in agreement with the sp levels for V1, since the low-barrier ring essentially coincides with the model potential used in Ref. . The first crossing for V2 is located around $`4`$T, while as shown in Fig. 3 the high barrier case (V3) has again a change in slope at $`B8`$T, attributed to the $`\mathrm{}=1\mathrm{}=2`$ transition, which may indicate that the experimental sample could contain both low and high barrier rings. This point will be further discussed when presenting the FIR spectra.

The non-interacting ground state with two electrons is obtained by filling the lowest orbitals of the sp scheme, with the constraint of having a singlet or triplet spin. The corresponding plots for the evolution of $`L_z`$ and the ground state energy as a function of magnetic field are displayed in Fig. 4. By comparing it with Fig. 2 we notice the effects of the Coulomb interaction between the two electrons. Obviously, the non-interacting case gives lower ground state energies since the Coulomb repulsion is neglected. Due to the increasing effect of the confining potential the difference is higher for V1 than for V3. Differences in angular momentum are also higher for the low barrier ring. This is indicating that in well developed rings the interaction effects are less important than in more compact structures, in agreement with the findings of Ref.  and with the obvious expectation of a larger $`V_b`$ keeping the electrons more apart from each other than a lower barrier.

We also realize that the triplet solution is unfavoured in the non-interacting case. In V1 the gs has always $`S=0`$, except for $`B=8`$ T for which singlet and triplet are essentially degenerate. A similar thing happens in the other rings, with the difference that the singlet-triplet degeneracy points appear at lower $`B`$’s. These differences with respect to the exact results, in which clearer singlet-triplet oscillations are seen, indicate the importance of the Coulomb interaction for a proper ground state description.

## III Time integration

The time evolution of the two-electron wave function is given by the time-dependent Schrödinger equation

$$\mathrm{i}\frac{}{t}\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐫_1,𝐫_2;t)=H\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐫_1,𝐫_2;t),$$
(8)
where $`H`$ is the Hamiltonian operator (1). We have solved Eq. (8), in the same spirit as for the ground state, by discretizing the coordinate space in a uniform grid of points. Time is also discretized and the evolution from time $`(n)`$ to $`(n+1)`$ is obtained through the unitary Crank-Nicholson algorithm

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_I^{(n+1)}=\mathrm{\Psi }_I^{(n)}\mathrm{i}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }t}{2}\underset{J}{}H_{IJ}\left(\mathrm{\Psi }_J^{(n)}+\mathrm{\Psi }_J^{(n+1)}\right).$$
(9)
This is an implicit scheme, in which the new $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{(n+1)}`$ may be obtained by iteration. The above algorithm allows to perform the dynamical simulation of Eq. (8) by using a small time step $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$. Of course, the feasibility of this approach to the solution of Eq. (8) relies on the very small number of constituents (two electrons) of the system.

In this paper we discuss the FIR absorption of two-electron rings and therefore our interest will focuss on the dipole states corresponding to small amplitude charge oscillations. The ground state wave function is perturbed by an initial (small) rigid displacement in a certain direction $`\widehat{𝐞}`$, representing the electric field direction, and the dipole moment evolution is then followed in time. The absorption cross section is given by the frequency transform of the dipole signal

$$\sigma (\omega )\frac{\omega }{2\pi }\left|𝑑t\mathrm{\Psi }(t)|D|\mathrm{\Psi }(t)\mathrm{exp}(i\omega t)\right|,$$
(10)
where the dipole operator is $`D=\widehat{𝐞}(𝐫_1+𝐫_2)`$. As a test of the method, developed from previous calculations within mean-field approaches, we have checked that the oscillation frequencies when assuming a pure parabolic potential are given, as a consequence of the generalized Kohn theorem, by the values

$$\omega _\pm =\sqrt{\omega _0^2+\omega _c^2/4}\pm \omega _c/2,$$
(11)
where $`\omega _c=eB/c`$ is the cyclotron frequency.

### A FIR spectra

Figure 5 shows the absorption spectra for singlet and triplet states corresponding to different magnetic fields. The intersection of the baseline for each spectrum with the horizontal axis indicates the magnetic field in each case. Notice that the horizontal scale for each spectrum is arbitrary, and therefore, it is not given by the horizontal axis. The spectra are drawn in linear scale and arbitrary units while the vertical scale gives the energies in meV. Not surprisingly the V1 spectrum is very similar to that of compact dots, with two branches of opposite $`B`$-dispersion which merge at $`B=0`$. This is indeed evident by comparing the spectra with the analytical expressions (11) (dashed lines), where an empirical $`\omega _0`$ value fixed to the lowest $`B=0`$ peak energy has been used. Except for some fragmentation details these two branches are rather similar for both singlet and triplet cases. More importantly, we want to stress that essentially no strength is contained in the energy region $`15\mathrm{meV}<\omega <25\mathrm{meV}`$ for $`B<6`$ T. This fact does not imply that there are no excitations in this region. In fact they can be seen using logarithmic scale, as has been done in the LSDA approach of Ref. . We have sticked however to the linear scale firstly because the real-time approach requires extremely long simulation times in order to extract so low intense frequencies, and secondly we do not think that the experiments can easily identify such low intensity peaks.

The V2 spectrum and, more clearly, the V3 one reflect a behaviour qualitatively different from that of V1. The high energy branch does not merge with the low one for vanishing $`B`$, deviating from the analytical prediction of Eq. (11). This behaviour is well known for quantum rings and is a manifestation of the violation of Kohn’s theorem in these systems . For V2 a global gap $`814`$ meV persists at all magnetic fields for both spins, while in the case of V3 the corresponding gap lies approximately in the region $`717`$ meV. Therefore, this gap constitutes a direct manifestation of the barrier height in the FIR response. The $`B`$-evolution of the spectra is characterized by small jumps in the peak positions for each branch which must be attributed to changes in total angular momentum. Since V3 is the one gaining more angular momentum its spectrum also displays more abundant discontinuities. We also notice that when the ring barrier grows (from V2 to V3) an important amount of strength is placed in the interval 15-25 meV at low magnetic fields. Actually the V3 peak in this region has a strength comparable to the one at low energy $`50\%`$, as found experimentally , while our calculation for V1 as well as the LSDA results of Ref.  yield a much lower ratio.

A comparison with experiment of the calculated spectra reproduces in each single case some of the experimental features but misses others. A plausible explanation is that the sample contains a mixture of high and low barrier rings. In Fig. 6 we display a superposition of the V1 and V3 spectra in comparison with the available experimental points, assuming that the system takes the theoretical ground state at each magnetic field, although as already noticed in many cases the triplet-singlet energy difference is quite small. With this interpretation, the circles are attributed to high barrier rings while the triangles and rombuses would correspond to low-barrier ones. Although the positions of the experimental peaks are not perfectly reproduced (this would involve a further optimization with respect to $`\omega _0`$ and $`R_0`$) the qualitative agreement is good. A richer mixture including intermediate-barrier rings would induce a blurring of the different branches with the introduction of additional (intermediate) peaks, but would also yield the above discussion and comparison with experiment more involved. The crosses in Fig. 6 are not reproduced by any of our ring calculations and, as hinted by the experimental group, they could be due to pure quantum dots in the sample. We also mention that in the experiment  an insufficient signal to noise ratio at low energies does not allow the detection of the lower branch at $`\omega <10\mathrm{meV}`$.

### B Non-interacting spectra

Figure 7 shows the singlet and triplet spectra when the Coulomb interaction is neglected as in subsection II.C. Therefore, they correspond to pure particle-hole transitions in the single-particle level scheme. On a first look they seem quite similar to the spectra of Fig. 5. However, after a second inspection important differences appear. A dramatic one is the softening, i.e., a decrease in energy, of the lowest branch in all three cases. In fact for $`B8`$ T the lowest state has an almost vanishing energy. This fact is explained as the formation of quasi Landau bands, even for such a small system, with the property that single-particle states of the same band are quasi-degenerate and therefore, particle-hole transitions are nearly gapless.

There are also sizeable shifts of peak positions and, in general, a higher fragmentation is present in the single particle picture. This is easy to understand since the collectivity asociated to the Coulomb interaction is absent in the second case, and therefore the description of collective magnetoplasmon states is quite rough. Altogether, the correct qualitative result must be understood as an indication that interaction effects are not overwhelming for the spectrocopic features of a two-electron system.

## IV Mean field theory and broken-symmetry solution

Usually, the exact solution of the many-body Schrödinger equation is not possible and one must content with approximate solutions. In this sense, the mean field aproximation allows in many cases the description of relevant physics. Although in principle the mean field provides an accurate picture for a big enough number of particles, it is interesting to compare it with the exact solution in the present case for two particles. This will provide a strong test of the mean field result, that will allow us to quantify its validity. We remark that for systems confined in an external potential such as atomic or quantum dot electrons the restriction on having a sufficient number of particles in order to develop the mean field is not as strict as in self-bound systems, such as liquid drops or atomic nuclei. This is easy to understand since in confined systems the fixed external potential is already an important contribution to the mean field and, therefore it is not solely based on particle-particle interactions.

Imposing circular symetry the mean field theory has indeed been applied to medium-large quantum dots ($`N20200`$), in the Hartree , Hartree-Fock  and LSDA schemes . Nevertheless when using symmetry-unrestricted approaches, even at the mean field level, it is normally necessary to restrict to smaller sizes ($`N10`$) because of the computational requirements .

### A LSDA ground state

We have applied the LSDA symmetry-unrestricted approach developed by us in Ref.  to the present two-electron rings. Figure 8 summarizes the ground state properties, for both singlet and triplet for V1, V2 and V3. The comparison with the energies for the exact solution (Fig. 2) prove that the the mean field is providing a quantitatively good description of the ground state energy, with relative energy differences around 2%. We notice that the MF description of the triplet is slightly better than that of the singlet. In fact, after the first singlet-triplet crossing the MF fails to reproduce a singlet state more bound than the triplet one. This can be attributed to a more important effect of correlations due to the interaction in the singlet than in the triplet which are only approximately taken into account within LSDA. The overall evolution of the total angular momentum is also well reproduced in MF, especially for the triplet. Quite strikingly, however, the angular momentum of the singlet does not show the step-like evolution peculiar of the exact solution. In fact it is taking in most cases clear non-integer values. This must be attributed to a spontaneous breaking of the rotational symmetry in the frame of the mean field.

The symmetry of the MF solution is more easily appreciated in Fig. 9, that shows the MF ground state density $`\rho =\rho _{}+\rho _{}`$ and magnetization $`m=\rho _{}\rho _{}`$, where $`\rho _{}`$, $`\rho _{}`$ are the two spin densities, for V1 and V3 at $`B=0`$. Both cases correspond to singlet solutions but, while V1 has a circularly symmetric density and vanishing magnetization, V3 is showing a separation of spin up and down densities, leading to an oscillation of the magnetization along the ring perimeter (a spin density wave) as well as of the total density (a charge density wave). This behaviour is in fact common to all singlet states at $`B>0`$ for which $`L_z`$ takes non-integer values. This peculiar states were predicted by Reimann et al.  in narrow rings with a bigger number of electrons, and have been also studied by us in Ref. .

The formation of broken-symmetry solutions within MF approaches is a well known phenomenon in nuclear physics . In this field, it has been shown that the MF is in fact providing the system structure in an intrinsic reference frame, given by proper intrinsic coordinates, while there is degeneracy with respect to the remaining collective coordinates. In a simplifying picture this corresponds to assume a certain structure of the system relative to its mean field, that in turn may be moving thus leading to a restoration of the exact symmetry. In fact, as shown in Fig. 1, when performing an angular average of the MF density for V3 an excellent agreement with the exact result is obtained. As we discuss further in the next subsection, the MF symmetry breaking can be interpreted as an electronic crystallization, i.e., the formation of a Wigner molecule.

### B The Wigner molecule

The symmetry breaking of the MF solution for V3 is pointing an incipient electron localization in the intrinsic frame of this system. The formation of these localized structures has been recently discussed using exact solutions by Yannouleas and Landman for two electron parabolic dots  and, for rings with 6 electrons by Koskinen et al. . These authors have computed the exact excitation spectrum and shown that it adjusts to rotor bands, thus revealing the existence of the electron molecule.

Even when the exact wave function is known it is not a trivial task to notice the existence of a Wigner molecule in the intrinsic frame. It can be hinted by means of intrinsic distribution functions, like the conditional probability density $`\rho (r_2,\theta _{21}|r_1=\xi )`$, which gives the probability of finding an electron at $`(r_2,\theta _{21})`$ when the other one is fixed at $`r_1=\xi `$. Therefore, it provides valuable insight on the intrinsic structure of the two-electron system. In Ref.  Berry reviews the use of the conditional probability density to describe the formation of electron molecules in the doubly excited states of the helium atom. In what follows we show that a similar analysis can be used for the two-electron rings.

Figure 10 shows the conditional probability density when the first electron is placed at its most probable value for the radial coordinate in both V1 and V3 confining potentials. Since this position is taken as the origin for the angle $`\theta _{21}`$ this implies that the first electron is placed in those graphs at $`(\xi ,0)`$, with $`\xi =1.5`$, 1.8 $`a_0^{}`$ for V1 and V3, respectively. Notice that the two distributions yield a peak for the second electron that lies opposite to the first one, i.e., at $`(\xi ,0)`$. On a first look both functions look rather similar although a closer inspection reveals that the inner hole is more pronounced in the case of V3. This is in agreement with a stronger localization of the second electron in this case. In order to manifest more clearly this result it is helpful to construct the density in the intrinsic frame and compare it with the MF one. To this end we assume that once the most probable relative positions are determined, $`(x,y)=(\xi ,0)`$ and $`(\xi ,0)`$, the intrinsic frame density can approximately be obtained by centering in each position the conditional probability density. This procedure leads to the two lower plots of Fig. 10. Quite interestingly, the V3 result is clearly breaking the circular symmetry and both are in excellent agreement with the mean field densities of Fig. 9.

Although qualitative the preceding discussion supports the interpretation that the MF describes the intrinsic structure of the ring. Consequently, the existence of a high barrier in V3 produces an incipient Wigner molecule. However, it remains as an interesting task for the future to obtain the full set of excited states and discuss its rotor-like character, following Refs.  as well as the analytical expressions of Ref. .

### C Unrestricted time-dependent LSDA (TDLSDA)

Based on the mean-field picture, the TDLSDA allows to describe the collective dipole oscillations. These scheme has been used to describe both spin and density excitations in quantum dots and rings in a symmetry-restricted approach . In Ref.  we described the application of TDLSDA relaxing the constraint of circular symmetry and using a real-time approach similar to that of Sec. III. Within TDLSDA this implies the solution of the time-dependent Kohn-Sham equations, which are the analog of Eq. 8 within the LSDA. We have applied this technique to the present two-electron rings and show the corresponding singlet and triplet spectra for V1, V2 and V3 in Fig. 11.

The TDLSDA provides a rather good description of the rings’ dipole spectra, as compared to the exact ones. We notice that the overall evolution with $`B`$ and the location of the strength is quite well reproduced for each branch. However, finer details of the spectra, such as the fragmentation structures are not reproduced in many cases. Although based on a single-particle picture the unrestricted TDLSDA corrects the lower branch instability found in Fig. 7. This is a manifestation of the interaction effects taken into account by the TDLSDA. From the present results we conclude that, despite the present rings only contain two electrons, the TDLSDA provides a rather sensible picture of the dipole oscillations.

## V Conclusions

In this work we have theoretically analyzed two-electron rings motivated by recent measurements of their FIR absorption. We have found that in order to explain the experimental spectra it is necessary to assume that the sample contained a mixture of rings with different barrier heigths. As expected, high barrier rings are characterized by a clear violation of Kohn’s theorem, showing a sizeable amount of strength at energies $`\omega >15`$ meV for $`B<6`$ T. On the other hand, low barrier rings approximately fulfill Kohn’s theorem, with an effective $`\omega _0`$, and have lower energy excitation branches more similar to the measured ones. A mixture of these two types of rings has been used to explain the main features of the experiment. A more detailed analysis would require including intermediate barrier rings (ideally knowing the actual barrier-height distribution in the sample), for which the spectra lie in between the preceding two extreme situations. Despite the very small number of constituents, these systems possess a rich FIR spectrum with an intrincate $`B`$-dependence.

The evolution of angular momentum and total spin with barrier height and magnetic field has been discussed and contrasted with independent particle predictions. In agreement with previous studies we find that interaction effects become less important for increasingly narrow rings, obviously reflecting a bigger electronic separation than in a compact structure and a corresponding increase in angular momentum.

The comparison with the symmetry-unrestricted LSDA has allowed us to discuss the formation of an incipient Wigner molecule for the V3 case and, in general, has shown the good quality of this approximation. We have proposed a method to obtain the density in the intrinsic reference frame, based on the conditional probability density, that quantitatively agrees with the LSDA result. The FIR absorption in TDLSDA provides a good overall strength distribution and dispersion with magnetic field, although it misses some finer details of the fragmentation patterns.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work has been performed under Grant No. PB98-0124 from DGESeIC, Spain.


text:
# Anti-Grand Unification and the Phase Transitions at the Planck Scale in Gauge Theories

Invited talk on the International Symposium
”Frontiers of Fundamental Physics”,
December 09-13, 2000, Hyderabad, India

The way of the Grand unification of all interactions and the role of supersymmetry in GUTs are the problems of paramount importance in the contemporary elementary particle physics. However, at present time experiment doesn’t indicate any manifestation of the Supersymmetry (see reviews \[1-3\]).

In this connection, the Anti–Grand Unification Theory (AGUT) was developed as a realistic alternative to SUSY GUTs by H.B.Nielsen (Niels Bohr Insitute, Denmark) and his collaborators: D.L.Bennett, C.D.Froggatt, L.V.Laperashvili, I.Picek and Y.Takanishi -. According to the AGUT, the supersymmetry doesn’t come into existence up to the Planck energy scale:

$$\mu _{Pl}=1.210^{19}\text{G}eV.$$
(1)
The SM is based on the group:

$$SMG=SU(3)_cSU(2)_LU(1)_Y.$$
(2)
The AGUT suggests that at the scale $`\mu _G\stackrel{<}{}\mu _{Pl}`$ there exists the more fundamental group G containing $`N_{gen}`$ copies of the Standard Model Group SMG:

$$G=SMG_1SMG_2\mathrm{}SMG_{N_{gen}}(SMG)^{N_{gen}}$$
(3)
where the integer $`N_{gen}`$ designates the number of quark and lepton generations. If $`N_{gen}=3`$, then the fundamental gauge group G is:

$$G=(SMG)^3=SMG_1SMG_2SMG_3,$$
(4)
or the generalized ones:

$$G_f=(SMG)^3U(1)_f,$$
(5)
which is suggested by the fitting of fermion masses existing in the SM (see Refs. -) and

$$G_{ext}=(SMGU(1)_{BL})^3,$$
(6)
which takes into account the see–saw mechanism with the right–handed neutrino ,, also gives the reasonable fitting of the SM fermion masses and describes all neutrino experiments known today.

The group $`G_f`$ contains the following gauge fields: $`3\times 8=24`$ gluons, $`3\times 3=9`$ W-bosons and $`3\times 1+1=4`$ abelian gauge bosons.

At first sight, this $`(SMG)^3\times U(1)_f`$ group with its 37 generators seems to be just one among many possible SM gauge group extensions. However, it is not such an arbitrary choice. There are at least reasonable requirements (postulates) on the gauge group G (or $`G_f`$, or $`G_{ext}`$) which have uniquely to specify this group. It should obey the following postulates (the first two are also valid for SU(5) GUT):

1. G or $`G_f`$ should only contain transformation transforming the known 45 Weyl fermions ( = 3 generations of 15 Weyl particles each) – counted as left handed, say – into each other unitarily, so that G (or $`G_f`$) must be a subgroup of U(45): $`GU(45)`$.

2. No anomalies, neither gauge nor mixed. AGUT assumes that only straightforward anomaly cancellation takes place and forbids the Green-Schwarz type anomaly cancellation .

3. AGUT should NOT UNIFY the irreducible representations under the SM gauge group, called here SMG (see Eq.(2)).

4. G is the maximal group satisfying the above-mentioned postulates.

There are five Higgs fields named $`\varphi _{WS}`$, S, W, T, $`\xi `$ in the extended $`G_f`$–AGUT by Froggatt and Nielsen ,. These fields break the AGUT to the SM what means that their vacuum expectation values (VEV) are active. The field $`\varphi _{WS}`$ corresponds to the Weinberg—Salam theory, $`<S>=1`$, so that we have only three free parameters — three VEVs $`<W>,<T>`$ and $`<\xi >`$ to fit the experiment in the framework of this model. The authors of Refs., used them with aim to find the best fit to conventional experimental data for all fermion masses and mixing angles in the SM (see Table I). The result presented by Table I is encouraging. The fit is given by the $`\chi ^2`$ function (called here $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }^2`$). The lowest value of $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }^2(1.87)`$ gives the following VEVs:

$$<S>=1;<W>=0.179;<T>=0.071;<\xi >=0.099.$$
(7)
The extended Anti–GUT theory by Nielsen and Takanishi ,, which is described by the group of symmetry $`G_{ext}`$ (see Eq.(6)), was suggested with aim to explain the neutrino oscillations. Introducing the right–handed neutrino in the model, the authors replaced the assumption 1 and considered U(48) group instead of U(45), so that $`G_{ext}`$ is a subgroup of U(48): $`G_{ext}U(48)`$. This group ends up having 7 Higgs fields falling into 4 classes according to the order of magnitude of the expectation values:

1) The smallest VEV Higgs field plays role of the SM Weinberg–Salam Higgs field $`\varphi _{WS}`$ having the weak scale value $`<\varphi _{WS}>=246GeV/\sqrt{2}`$.

2)The next smallest VEV Higgs field breaks all families $`U(1)_{(BL)}`$ group, which is broken at the see–saw scale. This VEV is $`<\varphi _{(BL)}>10^{12}`$ GeV. Such a field is absent in the ”old” extended AGUT.

3) The next 4 Higgs fields are W, T, $`\xi `$ and $`\chi `$, which have VEVs of the order of a factor 10 to 50 under the Planck unit. That means that if intermediate propagators have scales given by the Planck scale, as it is assumed in the AGUT in general, then they will give rise to suppression factors of the order 1/10 each time they are needed to cause a transition. The field $`\chi `$ is absent in the ”old” $`G_f`$–AGUT. It was introduced in Refs., for the purpose of the study neutrinos.

4) The last one, with VEV of the same order as the Planck scale, is the Higgs field S. It had VEV $`<S>=1`$ in the ”old” extended AGUT by Froggatt and Nielsen (with $`G_f`$ group of symmetry), but this VEV is not equal to unity in the ”new” extended AGUT. Therefore there is a possibility to observe phenomenological consequences of the field S in the Nielsen–Takanishi model.

Typical fit to the masses and mixing angles for the SM leptons and quarks in the framework of the $`G_{ext}`$–AGUT is given by Table II. The lowest value of $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }^2`$ is $`1.46`$. In contrast to the ”old” extended AGUT, the new results are more encouraging.

The AGUT approach is used in conjuction with the Multiple Point Principle (MPP) proposed by D.L.Bennett and H.B.Nielsen . According to this principle Nature seeks a special point — the Multiple Critical Point (MCP) — which is a point on the phase diagram of the fundamental regulirized gauge theory G (or $`G_f`$, or $`G_{ext}`$), where the vacua of all fields existing in Nature are degenerate having the same vacuum energy density. This is the Multiple Point Principle. Such a phase diagram has axes given by all coupling constants considered in theory. Then all (or just many) numbers of phases meet at the MCP.

In the AGUT at some point $`\mu _G`$ the group G (or $`G_f`$, or $`G_{ext}`$) undergoes spontaneous breakdown to the diagonal subgroup:

$$GG_{diag.subgr.}=\{g,g,g||gSMG\},$$
(8)
which is identified with the usual (lowenergy) group SMG.

Multiple Point Model assumes the existence of MCP at the Planck scale, insofar as gravity may be ”critical” at the Planck scale.

The idea of MPP has its origin from the lattice investigations of gauge theories. In particular, Monte Carlo simulations on lattice of U(1)-, SU(2)- and SU(3)- gauge theories indicate the existence of a triple (critical) point, which is a boundary point of three first order phase transitions. Using the Monte Carlo results on lattice, it is possible to make theoretical calculations of the critical coupling constants and obtain slightly more accurate predictions of the AGUT for the SM fine structure constants.

In the SM the usual definition of coupling constants is used:

$$\alpha _1=\frac{5}{3}\frac{\alpha }{\mathrm{cos}^2\mathrm{\Theta }_{\overline{MS}}},\alpha _2=\frac{\alpha }{\mathrm{sin}^2\mathrm{\Theta }_{\overline{MS}}},\alpha _3\alpha _s=\frac{g_s^2}{4\pi },$$
(9)
where $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha _s`$ are the electromagnetic and strong fine structure constants, respectively. All values are defined in the Modified minimal substraction scheme ($`\overline{MS}`$). Using experimentally given parameters and the renormalization group equations (RGE), it is possible to extrapolate the experimental values of three inverse running constants $`\alpha _i^1`$ (here $`i=1,2,3`$ corresponds to U(1), SU(2) and SU(3) groups) from Electroweak scale to the Planck scale. The precision of the LEP data allows to make this extrapolation with small errors. Assuming that the RGEs are contingent not encountering new particles up to $`\mu \stackrel{<}{}\mu _{Pl}`$ and doing the extrapolation with one Higgs doublet under the assumption of a ”desert”, the following result for the inverses $`\alpha _{Y,2,3}^1`$ ($`\alpha _Y\frac{3}{5}\alpha _1`$) was obtained in Ref.:

$$\alpha _Y^1(\mu _{Pl})55.5;\alpha _2^1(\mu _{Pl})49.5;\alpha _3^1(\mu _{Pl})54.$$
(10)
The extrapolation of $`\alpha _i^1(\mu )`$ up to the point $`\mu =\mu _G`$ is shown in Fig.1. The AGUT predicts their values at the scale $`\mu _G10^{18}`$ GeV (which is very close to $`\mu _{MCP}=\mu _{Pl}`$) in terms of the critical couplings $`\alpha _{i,crit}`$ taken from the lattice gauge theory -:

$$\alpha _i(\mu _{Pl})=\frac{\alpha _{i,crit}}{N_{gen}}=\frac{\alpha _{i,crit}}{3}$$
(11)
for i=2,3 and

$$\alpha _1(\mu _{Pl})=\frac{\alpha _{1,crit}}{\frac{1}{2}N_{gen}(N_{gen}+1)}=\frac{\alpha _{1,crit}}{6}$$
(12)
for U(1).

According to the AGUT, at the Planck scale the running constants $`\alpha _1`$ (or $`\alpha _Y\frac{3}{5}\alpha _1`$), $`\alpha _2`$ and $`\alpha _3`$, as chosen by Nature, are just the ones corresponding to the MCP.

There exists a simple explanation of the relations (11) and (12). As it was mentioned above, the group G breaks down at $`\mu =\mu _G`$. It should be said that at the very high energies $`\mu \mu _G\stackrel{<}{}\mu _{Pl}`$ (see Fig.1) each generation has its own gluons, own W’s etc. The breaking makes only linear combination of a certain color combination of gluons which exists below $`\mu =\mu _G`$ and down to the low energies. We can say that the phenomenological gluon is a linear combination (with amplitude $`1/\sqrt{3}`$ for $`N_{gen}=3`$) for each of the AGUT–gluons of the same color combination. This means that coupling constant for the phenomenological gluon has a strength that is $`\sqrt{3}`$ times smaller, if as we effectively assume that three AGUT SU(3) couplings are equal to each other. Then we have the following formula connecting the fine structure constants of G–theory (e.g. AGUT) and low energy surviving diagonal subgroup $`G_{\text{diag.subg.}}(SMG)^3`$ given by Eq.(8):

$$\alpha _{\text{diag},i}^1=\alpha _{\text{1st gen.},i}^1+\alpha _{\text{2nd gen.},i}^1+\alpha _{\text{3rd gen.},i}^1.$$
(13)
Here i = U(1), SU(2), SU(3), and i=3 means that we talk about the gluon couplings. For non–Abelian theories we immediately obtain Eq.(11) from Eq.(13) at the critical point (MCP).

In contrast to non-Abelian theories, in which the gauge invariance forbids the mixed (in generations) terms in the Lagrangian of G–theory, the U(1)–sector of the AGUT contains such mixed terms what explains the difference between the expressions (11) and (12).

Using Monte Carlo results on lattice the AGUT predicts  :

$$\alpha _Y^1(\mu _{MCP})=55\pm 6,\alpha _2^1(\mu _{MCP})=49.5\pm 3,\alpha _3^1(\mu _{MCP})=57\pm 3,$$
(14)
in correspondence with the result (10).

According to Eq.(12), the first values of Eqs.(10) and (13) gives the following estimation for the U(1) fine structure constant at $`\mu =\mu _{MCP}`$:

$$\alpha _{crit}^19.$$
(15)
The Monte Carlo simulations of the lattice U(1) gauge theory gives - :

$$\alpha _{crit}0.20\pm 0.015,\text{or}\alpha _{crit}^15.$$
(16)
However, it is possible to show (see ) that quantum fluctuations encrease the value of $`\alpha _{crit}^1`$ giving the value (15).

The following hypothesis was stated in Refs.,: it is possible that the existence of monopoles at superhigh energies — at a short distance from the Planck energy scale (1) — plays an essential role in the phase transitions at the Planck scale when all fields existing in the SM turn into the new phase, say, (super)string phase. In the previous works ,, the investigation of the phase transition phenomena and, in particular, the calculation of the U(1) critical coupling constant were connected with the existence of artifact monopoles in the lattice gauge theory and also in the Wilson loop action model, which we proposed in Ref.. Now, instead of using the lattice or Wilson loop cut-off, we are going to introduce physically existing monopoles into the theory as fundamental fields.

Developing a version of the local field theory of the Higgs scalar monopoles and electrically charged particles, we consider an Abelian gauge theory in the Zwanziger formalism - and look for a/or rather several phase transitions connected with the monopoles forming a condensate in the vacuum.

The Zwanziger formalism , (see also , and review ) considers two potentials $`A_\mu (x)`$ and $`B_\mu (x)`$ describing one physical photon with two physical degrees of freedom. Now and below we call this theory QEMD (”Quantum ElectroMagnetoDynamics”).

In QEMD the total field system of the gauge, electrically ($`\mathrm{\Psi }`$) and magnetically ($`\mathrm{\Phi }`$) charged fields (with charges $`e`$ and $`g`$, respectively) is described by the partition function which has the following form in the Euclidean space:

$$Z=[DA][DB][D\mathrm{\Phi }][D\mathrm{\Phi }^+][D\mathrm{\Psi }][D\mathrm{\Psi }^+]e^S,$$
(17)
where

$$S=d^4xL(x)=S_{Zw}(A,B)+S_{gf}+S_{(matter)}.$$
(18)
The Zwanziger action $`S_{Zw}(A,B)`$ is given by:

$$S_{Zw}(A,B)=d^4x[\frac{1}{2}(n[A])^2+\frac{1}{2}(n[B])^2+$$

$$+\frac{i}{2}(n[A])(n[B]^{})\frac{i}{2}(n[B])(n[A]^{})],$$
(19)
where we have used the following designations:

$$[AB]_{\mu \nu }=A_\mu B_\nu A_\nu B_\mu ,(n[AB])_\mu =n_\nu (AB)_{\nu \mu },$$

$$G_{\mu \nu }^{}=\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{\mu \nu \lambda \rho }G_{\lambda \rho }.$$
(20)
In Eqs.(19) and(20) the unit vector $`n_\mu `$ represents the fixed direction of the Dirac string in the 4–space.

The action $`S_{(matter)}=d^4xL_{(matter)}(x)`$ describes the electrically and magnetically charged matter fields. $`S_{gf}`$ is the gauge–fixing action (see ).

Let us consider now the Lagrangian $`L_{(matter)}`$ describing the Higgs scalar fields $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$ interacting with gauge fields $`A_\mu (x)`$ and $`B_\mu (x)`$, respectively:

$$L_{(matter)}(x)=\frac{1}{2}|D_\mu \mathrm{\Psi }|^2+\frac{1}{2}|\stackrel{~}{D}_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }|^2U(\mathrm{\Psi },\mathrm{\Phi }),$$
(21)
where

$$D_\mu =_\mu ieA_\mu ,\text{and}\stackrel{~}{D}_\mu =_\mu igB_\mu $$
(22)
are covariant derivatives;

$$U(\mathrm{\Psi },\mathrm{\Phi })=\frac{1}{2}\mu _e^2|\mathrm{\Psi }|^2+\frac{\lambda _e}{4}|\mathrm{\Psi }|^4+\frac{1}{2}\mu _m^2|\mathrm{\Phi }|^2+\frac{\lambda _m}{4}|\mathrm{\Phi }|^4+\lambda _1|\mathrm{\Psi }|^2|\mathrm{\Phi }|^2$$
(23)
is the Higgs potential for the electrically and magnetically charged fields $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. The complex scalar fields:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\psi +i\zeta \text{and}\mathrm{\Phi }=\varphi +i\chi $$
(24)
contain the Higgs $`(\psi ,\varphi )`$ and Goldstone $`(\zeta ,\chi )`$ boson fields.

The Lorentz invariance is lost in the Zwanziger Lagrangian (19) because of depending on a fixed vector $`n_\mu `$, but this invariance regained for the quantized values of coupling constants $`e`$ and $`g`$ obeying the Dirac relation:

$$e_ig_j=2\pi n_{ij},n_{ij}Z.$$
(25)
Considering the electric and magnetic fine structure constants: $`\alpha =\frac{e^2}{4\pi }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\frac{g^2}{4\pi }`$ we have the invariance of the QEMD under the interchange $`\alpha \stackrel{~}{\alpha }.`$

For $`n_{ij}=1`$ from the Dirac relation (25) we have:

$$\alpha \stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\frac{1}{4}.$$
(26)
The effective potential in the Higgs model of electrodynamics for a charged scalar field was calculated in the one-loop approximation for the first time by the authors of Ref. (see also review ). Using this method we can construct the effective potential (also in the one–loop approximation) for the theory described by the partition function (17) with the action $`S`$.

Let us consider now the shifts: $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }_B+\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}(x),\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=\mathrm{\Phi }_B+\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x)`$ with $`\mathrm{\Psi }_B`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_B`$ as background fields and calculate the following expression for the partition function in the one-loop approximation:

$$Z=[DA][DB][D\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}][D\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}^+][D\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}][D\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^+]\times $$

$$\mathrm{exp}\{S(A,B,\mathrm{\Phi }_B,\mathrm{\Psi }_B)d^4x[\frac{\delta S(\mathrm{\Phi })}{\delta \mathrm{\Phi }(x)}|_{\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }_B}\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x)+\frac{\delta S(\mathrm{\Psi })}{\delta \mathrm{\Psi }(x)}|_{\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }_B}\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}(x)+h.c.]\}$$

$$=\mathrm{exp}\{F(\mathrm{\Psi }_B,\mathrm{\Phi }_B,e^2,g^2,\mu _e^2,\mu _m^2,\lambda _e,\lambda _m)\}.$$
(27)
Using the representations (24), we obtain the effective potential:

$$V_{eff}=F(\psi _B,\varphi _B,e^2,g^2,\mu _e^2,\mu _m^2,\lambda _e,\lambda _m)$$
(28)
given by the function $`F`$ of Eq.(27) for the constant background fields:$`\mathrm{\Psi }_B=\psi _B=\text{const},\mathrm{\Phi }_B=\varphi _B=\text{const}`$.

The effective potential (28) has several minima. Their position depends on $`e^2,g^2,\mu _{e,m}^2`$ and $`\lambda _{e,m}`$. If the first local minimum occurs at $`\psi _B=0`$ and $`\varphi _B=0`$, it corresponds to the the Coulomb-like phase in our description.

We are interested in the phase transition from the Coulomb-like phase ”$`\psi _B=\varphi _B=0`$” to the confinement phase ”$`\psi _B=0,\varphi _B=\varphi _00`$”. In this case the one–loop effective potential for monopoles coincides with the expression of the effective potential calculated by authors of Ref. for scalar electrodynamics and extended to the massive theory in Ref..

Assuming the existence of the first vacuum at $`\varphi _B=0`$ and using from now the designations:$`\mu =\mu _m,\lambda =\lambda _m`$, we have the effective potential in the Higgs monopole model described by the following expression equivalent to that considered in Ref.:

$$V_{eff}(\varphi ^2)=\frac{\mu _{run}^2}{2}\varphi _B^2+\frac{\lambda _{run}}{4}\varphi _B^4+\frac{\mu ^4}{64\pi ^2}\mathrm{log}\frac{(\mu ^2+3\lambda \varphi _B^2)(\mu ^2+\lambda \varphi _B^2)}{\mu ^4},$$
(29)
where

$$\lambda _{run}(\varphi _B^2)=\lambda +\frac{1}{16\pi ^2}[3g^4\mathrm{log}\frac{\varphi _B^2}{M^2}+9\lambda ^2\mathrm{log}\frac{\mu ^2+3\lambda \varphi _B^2}{M^2}+\lambda ^2\mathrm{log}\frac{\mu ^2+\lambda \varphi _B^2}{M^2}],$$
(30)
$$\mu _{run}^2(\varphi _B^2)=\mu ^2+\frac{\lambda \mu ^2}{16\pi ^2}[3\mathrm{log}\frac{\mu ^2+3\lambda \varphi _B^2}{M^2}+\mathrm{log}\frac{\mu ^2+\lambda \varphi _B^2}{M^2}].$$
(31)
Here $`M`$ is the cut–off scale.

As it was shown in Ref., the one–loop effective potential (29) can be improved by the consideration of the renormalization group equation (RGE). According to Refs.-, RGE for the improved one–loop effective potential is given by the following expression:

$$(M^2\frac{}{M^2}+\beta _\lambda \frac{}{\lambda }+\beta _g\frac{}{g}+\beta _{(\mu ^2)}\mu ^2\frac{}{\mu ^2}\gamma \varphi ^2\frac{}{\varphi ^2})V_{eff}(\varphi ^2)=0,$$
(32)
where the function $`\gamma `$ is the anomalous dimension: $`\gamma (\frac{\varphi }{M})=\frac{\varphi }{M}.`$ The $`\gamma `$–expression for monopoles is given by Ref. with replacement $`eg`$:

$$\gamma =\frac{3g_{run}^2}{16\pi ^2}.$$
(33)
RGE (32) leads to a new improved effective potential:

$$V_{eff}(\varphi ^2)=\frac{1}{2}\mu _{run}^2(t)G^2(t)\varphi ^2+\frac{1}{4}\lambda _{run}(t)G^4(t)\varphi ^4,$$
(34)
where

$$G(t)\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{2}_0^tdt^{}\gamma (g_{run}(t^{}),\lambda _{run}(t^{}))]\text{with}t=\mathrm{log}(\varphi ^2/M^2).$$
(35)
Let us write now the one–loop potential (29) as

$$V_{eff}=V_0+V_1,\text{where}V_0=\frac{\mu ^2}{2}\varphi ^2+\frac{\lambda }{4}\varphi ^4,$$
(36)
$$V_1=\frac{1}{64\pi ^2}[3g^4\varphi ^4\mathrm{log}\frac{\varphi ^2}{M^2}+(\mu ^2+3\lambda \varphi ^2)^2\mathrm{log}\frac{\mu ^2+3\lambda \varphi ^2}{M^2}$$

$$+(\mu ^2+\lambda \varphi ^2)^2\mathrm{log}\frac{\mu ^2+\lambda \varphi ^2}{M^2}2\mu ^4\mathrm{log}\frac{\mu ^2}{M^2}].$$
(37)
We can plug this $`V_{eff}`$ into RGE (32) and obtain the following RG–equations (see ):

$$\frac{d\lambda _{run}}{dt}=\frac{1}{16\pi ^2}(3g_{run}^4+10\lambda _{run}^26\lambda _{run}g_{run}^2),$$
(38)
$$\frac{d\mu _{run}^2}{dt}=\frac{\mu _{run}^2}{16\pi ^2}(4\lambda _{run}3g_{run}^2).$$
(39)
The Dirac relation and the RGE for the electric and magnetic fine structure constants $`\alpha `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ were investigated in detail in the recent paper . The following result was obtained.

If we have the electrically and magnetically charged particles existing simultaneously for $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }>\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{(threshold)}`$ and if in some region of $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }`$ their $`\beta `$–functions are computable perturbatively as a power series in $`e^2`$ and $`g^2`$, then the Dirac relation is valid not only for the ”bare” elementary charges $`e_0`$ and $`g_0`$, but also for the renormalized effective charges $`e`$ and $`g`$ (see  and review ), and the following RGEs (obtained in Ref.) take place:

$$\frac{d\mathrm{log}\alpha (p)}{dt}=\frac{d\mathrm{log}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }(p)}{dt}=\beta ^{(e)}(\alpha )\beta ^{(m)}(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }).$$
(40)
These RGEs are in accordance with the Dirac relation (26) and the dual symmetry considered above. By restricting ourselves to the two–loop approximation for $`\beta `$– functions, we have the following equations (40) for scalar particles:

$$\frac{d\mathrm{log}\alpha (p)}{dt}=\frac{d\mathrm{log}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }(p)}{dt}=\frac{\alpha \stackrel{~}{\alpha }}{12\pi }(1+3\frac{\alpha +\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}{4\pi }+\mathrm{}.).$$
(41)
According to Eq.(41), the two–loop contribution is not more than $`30\%`$ if both $`\alpha `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ obey the following requirement:

$$0.25\stackrel{<}{}\alpha ,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\stackrel{<}{}1.$$
(42)
The lattice simulations of compact QED give the behavior of the effective fine structure constant $`\alpha (\beta )`$ ($`\beta =1/e_0^2`$ , and $`e_0`$ is the bare electric charge) in the vicinity of the phase transition point (see Refs.,). The following critical values of the fine structure constant $`\alpha `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ was obtained in Ref.:

$$\alpha _{crit}^{lat}0.20\pm 0.015\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{crit}^{lat}1.25\pm 0.10\text{at}\beta _{crit}1.011.$$
(43)
These values almost coincide with the borders of the requirement (42) given by the perturbation theory for $`\beta `$–functions.

In the one–loop approximation, we have:

$$\frac{dg_{run}^2}{dt}=\frac{g_{run}^4}{48\pi ^2}\frac{1}{12}.$$
(44)
Here the second term describes the influence of the electrically charged fields on the behavior of the monopole charge.

Investigating the phase transition from the Coulomb–like phase ”$`\psi _B=\varphi _B=0`$” to the phase with ”$`\psi _B=0,\varphi _B=\varphi _00`$”, we see that the effective potential (34) has the first and the second minima appearing at $`\varphi =0`$ and $`\varphi =\varphi _0`$, respectively. They are shown in Fig.2 by the curve ”1”. These minima of $`V_{eff}(\varphi ^2)`$ correspond to the different vacua arising in the model.

The conditions for the existence of degenerate vacua are given by the following requirements:

$$V_{eff}(0)=V_{eff}(\varphi _0^2)=0,$$
(45)
$$V_{eff}^{}(\varphi _0^2)\frac{V_{eff}}{\varphi ^2}|_{\varphi =\varphi _0}=0,$$
(46)
$$V_{eff}^{\prime \prime }(\varphi _0^2)\frac{^2V_{eff}}{(\varphi ^2)^2}|_{\varphi =\varphi _0}>0.$$
(47)
From the first equation (45) applied to Eq.(34) we have:

$$\mu _{run}^2=\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{run}(t_0)\varphi _0^2G^2(t_0),\text{where}t_0=\mathrm{log}(\varphi _0^2/M^2).$$
(48)
The joint solution of equations $`V_{eff}(\varphi _0^2)=V_{eff}^{}(\varphi _0^2)=0`$ gives:

$$g_{crit}^4=2\lambda _{run}(\frac{8\pi ^2}{3}+\lambda _{run}).$$
(49)
The curve (49) is represented on the phase diagram $`(\lambda _{run};g_{run}^4)`$ of Fig.3 by the curve ”1” which describes a border between the ”Coulomb–like” phase with $`V_{eff}0`$ and the confinement ones having $`V_{eff}^{min}<0`$.

The next step is the calculation of the second derivative of the effective potential. Let us consider now the case when this second derivative changes its sign giving a maximum of $`V_{eff}`$ instead of the minimum at $`\varphi ^2=\varphi _0^2`$. Such a possibility is shown in Fig.2 by the dashed curve ”2”. Now two additional minima at $`\varphi ^2=\varphi _1^2`$ and $`\varphi ^2=\varphi _2^2`$ appear in our theory. They correspond to two different confinement phases related with the confinement of the electrically charged particles. If these two minima are degenerate, then we have the following requirements:

$$V_{eff}(\varphi _1^2)=V_{eff}(\varphi _2^2)<0,V_{}^{}{}_{eff}{}^{}(\varphi _1^2)=V_{}^{}{}_{eff}{}^{}(\varphi _2^2)=0,$$
(50)
which describe the border between the confinement phases ”conf.1” and ”conf.2” presented in Fig.3 by curve ”3”. This curve ”3” meets the curve ”1” at the triple point A. According to the illustration shown in Fig.3, it is obvious that this triple point A is given by the following requirements:

$$V_{eff}(\varphi _0^2)=V_{eff}^{}(\varphi _0^2)=V_{eff}^{\prime \prime }(\varphi _0^2)=0.$$
(51)
In contrast to the requirements:

$$V_{eff}(\varphi _0^2)=V_{eff}^{}(\varphi _0^2)=0,$$
(52)
producing the curve ”1”, let us consider now the joint solution of the following equations:

$$V_{eff}(\varphi _0^2)=V_{eff}^{\prime \prime }(\varphi _0^2)=0.$$
(53)
The dashed curve ”2” of Fig.3 represents the solution of Eq.(53). This curve is going very close to the maximum of the curve ”1”. It is natural to assume that the position of the triple point A coincides with this maximum and the corresponding deviation can be explained by our approximate calculations. Taking into account such an assumption, let us consider the border between the phase ”conf.1” having the first minimum at nonzero $`\varphi _0`$ with $`V_{eff}^{min}=c_1<0`$ and the phase ”conf.2 ” which reveals two minima with the second minimum being the deeper one and having $`V_{eff}^{min}=c_2<0`$. This border (described by the curve ”3” of Fig.3) was calculated in the vicinity of the triple point A by means of Eqs.(50) with $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ represented as $`\varphi _{1,2}=\varphi _0\pm ϵ`$ with $`ϵ<<\varphi _0`$. The result of such calculations gives the following expression for the curve ”3”:

$$g_{run}^4=\frac{5}{2}(5\lambda _{run}+8\pi ^2)\lambda _{run}+8\pi ^4.$$
(54)
The piece of the curve ”1” to the left of the point A describes the border between the ”Coulomb–like” phase and the phase ”conf.1”. The right piece of the curve ”1” along to the right of the point B separates the ”Coulomb” phase and the phase ”conf.2”. But between the points A and B the phase transition border is going slightly upper the curve ”1”. This deviation is very small and can’t be distinguished on Fig.3.

The numerical solution demonstrates that the triple point A exists in the very neighborhood of the maximum of the curve (49) and its position is approximately given by the following values:

$$\lambda _{(A)}\frac{4\pi ^2}{3}13.4,$$
(55)
$$g_{(A)}^2=g_{crit}^2|_{\text{for}\lambda _{run}=\lambda _{(A)}}\frac{4\sqrt{2}}{3}\pi ^218.6.$$
(56)
The triple point value of the electric and magnetic fine structure constant follow from Eqs.(26) and (56):

$$\alpha _{(A)}=\frac{\pi }{g_{(A)}^2}0.17,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{(A)}=\frac{g_{(A)}^2}{4\pi }1.48.$$
(57)
The obtained result is very close to the Monte Carlo lattice result (43).

The phase diagram drawn in Fig.3 corresponds to the validity of one–loop approximation (with accuracy of deviations not more than $`30\%`$, see Ref.) in the region of parameters:

$$0.17\stackrel{<}{}\alpha ,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\stackrel{<}{}1.5,$$
(58)
It is necessary to note that the RGE for $`\lambda _{run}`$ indicates a slow convergence of the series over $`\lambda `$ (see Ref.) and the one–loop approximation is valid for $`\lambda _{run}`$ up to $`|\lambda |\stackrel{<}{}30`$ with accuracy of deviations $`<10\%`$.

It is obvious that in our case both phases, ”conf.1” and ”conf.2”, have nonzero monopole condensate in the minima of the effective potential, when $`V_{eff}^{min}(\varphi _{1,2}0)<0`$. By this reason, the Abrikosov–Nielsen–Olesen (ANO) electric vortices , may exist in these both phases, which are equivalent in the sense of the ”string” formation. If electric charges are present in a model, they are placed at the ends of the vortices–”strings” and therefore are confined. The phase diagram of Fig.3 demonstrates the existence of the confinement phase for $`\alpha \alpha _{(A)}0.17`$.

The lattice investigations , show that in the confinement phase $`\alpha (\beta )`$ increases when $`\beta =1/e_0^20`$ (here $`e_0`$ is the the bare electric charge) and very slowly approaches to its maximal value: $`\alpha _{max}=\frac{\pi }{12}0.26`$ predicted in Ref. (see also Ref.).

It is worthwhile mentioning that the confinement of monopoles can be discribed by using duality. The Higgs field $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, having the electric charge, is responsible for this confinement. The corresponding confinement phases for monopoles are absent on the phase diagram of Fig.3. They can be described by the phase diagram ($`\lambda _{run}^e;e_{run}^2`$). The overall phase diagram is three-dimensional and is given by $`(\lambda _{run}^m;\lambda _{run}^e;g_{run}^2)`$ ($`e_{run}^2`$ and $`g_{run}^2`$ are related by the Dirac relation).

The result (64) obtained in the framework of the Higgs scalar monopole model gives the following prediction:

$$\alpha _{crit}^1=\alpha _{(A)}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}6,$$
(59)
which is comparable with the MPM result (6).

Although the one–loop approximation for the (improved) effective potential does not give an exact coincidence with the MPM prediction of the critical $`\alpha `$, we see that, in general, the Higgs monopole model is very encouraging for the AGUT–MPM. We have a hope that the two–loop approximation corrections to the Coleman–Weinberg effective potential will lead to the better accuracy in calculation of the phase transition couplings.

The review of all existing results gives:

1)

$$\alpha _{crit}^{lat}0.20\pm 0.015,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{crit}^{lat}1.25\pm 0.10$$
(60)
– in the Compact QED with the Wilson lattice action ;

2)

$$\alpha _{crit}^{lat}0.204\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{crit}^{lat}1.25$$
(61)
– in the model with the Wilson loop action ;

3)

$$\alpha _{crit}0.1836,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{crit}1.36$$
(62)
– in the Compact QED with the Villain lattice action ;

4)

$$\alpha _{crit}=\alpha _{(A)}0.17,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{crit}=\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{(A)}1.48$$
(63)
– in the Higgs scalar monopole model (the present paper).

Hereby we see an additional arguments for our previously hoped (see  and ) ”approximate universality” of the first order phase transition couplings: the fine structure constant (in the continuum) is at the/a multiple point approximately the same one independent of various parameters of the different (lattice, etc.) regularization.

Recent investigations (L.V.Laperashvili, H.B.Nielsen, Bled Workshop, Slovenia, 2000) show that monopoles are confined in the SM up to the Planck scale. But they can exist in the AGUT. Let us assume now the existence of monopoles at superhigh energies $`\mu \mu _{mon}\stackrel{<}{}\mu _{Pl}`$. Then RGEs (40) describing also monopoles can lead to the Unification of all interactions at the Planck scale giving the coincidence of all $`\alpha _{i,crit}`$ at the point $`\mu \mu _{Pl}`$. Such a situation is shown in Fig.1 by dashed curves. These investigations are in progress.

Table I: Best fit to conventional experimental data. All masses are running masses at 1 GeV except the top qurk mass $`M_t`$ which is the pole mass.

$``$

Fitted Experimental

$``$

$`m_u3.6\text{MeV}4\text{MeV}`$

$`m_d7.0\text{MeV}9\text{MeV}`$

$`m_e0.87\text{MeV}0.5\text{MeV}`$

$`m_c1.02\text{GeV}1.4\text{GeV}`$

$`m_s400\text{MeV}200\text{MeV}`$

$`m_\mu 88\text{MeV}105\text{MeV}`$

$`M_t192\text{GeV}180\text{GeV}`$

$`m_b8.3\text{GeV}6.3\text{GeV}`$

$`m_\tau 1.27\text{GeV}1.78\text{GeV}`$

$`V_{us}0.180.22`$

$`V_{cb}0.0180.041`$

$`V_{ub}0.00390.0035`$

$``$

Table II: Best fit to conventional experimental data in the ”new” extended AGUT. All masses are running masses at 1 GeV except the top qurk mass $`M_t`$ which is the pole mass.

$``$

Fitted Experimental

$``$

$`m_u3.1\text{MeV}4\text{MeV}`$

$`m_d6.6\text{MeV}9\text{MeV}`$

$`m_e0.76\text{MeV}0.5\text{MeV}`$

$`m_c1.29\text{GeV}1.4\text{GeV}`$

$`m_s390\text{MeV}200\text{MeV}`$

$`m_\mu 85\text{MeV}105\text{MeV}`$

$`M_t179\text{GeV}180\text{GeV}`$

$`m_b7.8\text{GeV}6.3\text{GeV}`$

$`m_\tau 1.29\text{GeV}1.78\text{GeV}`$

$`V_{us}0.210.22`$

$`V_{cb}0.0230.041`$

$`V_{ub}0.00500.0035`$

$``$


text:
# 𝑟-modes of slowly rotating non-isentropic relativistic stars

## 1 Introduction

Since the discovery of the gravitational radiation driven instability of the $`r`$-modes by Andersson (1998) and Friedman & Morsink (1998), a large number of studies on the properties of $`r`$-modes and inertial modes of rotating stars have been done to prove their possible importance in astrophysics (for a review see, e.g., Friedman & Lockitch 1999; Andersson & Kokkotas 2000). Although early investigations were mainly applied to young hot neutron stars (e.g., Lindblom, Owen, & Morsink 1998; Owen et al. 1998), recently some authors have also discussed possible roles of the $`r`$-mode instability in old and cool neutron stars with a solid crust and a magnetic field, such as those found in low mass X–ray binaries (LMXBs) (e.g., Andersson, Kokkotas, & Stergioulas 1999; Bildsten & Ushomirsky 2000; Rezzolla, Lamb, & Shapiro 2000; Yoshida & Lee 2001).

Although our understandings of $`r`$-modes have been largely improved by recent energetic investigations as mentioned above, most studies concerning $`r`$-modes have been done in the framework of Newtonian gravity. As for $`r`$-modes in the framework of general relativity, Kojima (1998) found possible existence of continuous spectrum for pure $`r`$-mode in relativistic stars. Here throughout this paper we call the rotational mode whose eigenfunctions are composed of only one axial parity component in the non-rotating star limit “pure $`r`$-mode”. Beyer & Kokkotas (1999) generally verified the existence of a continuous spectrum. Kojima’s formalism was developed to that with high order rotational effects by Kojima & Hosonuma (1999; 2000). Very recently, Lockitch, Andersson, & Friedman (2001) have shown that pure $`r`$-modes in a relativistic star can exist only in non-isentropic stars, whose specific entropy distribution of a star is not constant. As for rotation induced modes in isentropic stars, they have shown that modes similar to inertial modes, namely hybrid modes, in a Newtonian rotating star (see, e.g., Lockitch & Friedman 1999; Yoshida & Lee 2000), whose eigenfunctions are composed of both polar and axial parity components, exist in uniform density stars (see also Lockitch 1999).

In the study by Lockitch et al. (2001), they derived the basic equation for the pure $`r`$-mode in relativistic non-isentropic stars. Their equation is the same as that obtained by Kojima (1998). As mentioned by Kojima (1998), this equation has a continuous part of frequency as its solution when the system of equations is that of the singular eigenvalue problem. Kojima (1998) also pointed out that the system of the equation becomes that of the regular eigenvalue problem when the frequency domain is in some range. For such a regular eigenvalue problem, discrete eigenfrequencies may exist for the same equation as well as continuous ones. Lockitch et al. (2001) have studied the relativistic $`r`$-mode characterized by the regular eigenvalue problem. In their study discrete $`r`$-mode solutions for the regular eigenvalue problem in uniform density stars were obtained. It is reasonable to consider that such discrete $`r`$-mode solutions correspond to those of Newtonian $`r`$-mode. However their study was restricted to the case of uniform density stars. As mentioned in the next section, the frequency range for the regular eigenvalue problem is confined to the narrow region and depends on the structure of equilibrium stars. Furthermore, needless to say, relativistic effects on stellar oscillations in a neutron star are not negligible. Thus, it is interesting and important to answer to the question of whether $`r`$-mode solutions for the regular eigenvalue problem exist in all non-isentropic relativistic stars. In this paper, therefore, we study the $`r`$-mode characterized by regular eigenvalue problem for large class of polytropic and non-isentropic relativistic stellar models. The plan of this paper is as follows. We start, in §2, with brief description of our method of solution. In §3, we describe the properties of the $`r`$-mode characterized by the regular eigenvalue problem in both the relativistic and the post-Newtonian stellar models. §4 is devoted for discussions and conclusions. Throughout this paper we will use units in which $`c=G=1`$, where $`c`$ and $`G`$ denote the velocity of light and the gravitational constant, respectively.

## 2 Method of solutions

We consider slowly rotating relativistic stars with a uniform angular velocity $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, where we take account of the first order rotational effect in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The geometry around the equilibrium stars can be described by the following line element (see, e.g. Thorne 1971):

$`ds^2=e^{2\nu (r)}dt^2+e^{2\lambda (r)}dr^2+r^2d\theta ^2+r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^22\omega (r)r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta dtd\phi .`$ (1)
Once an equation of state, $`p=p(ϵ,s)`$ for a perfect fluid is given, we can easily obtain the structure of the slowly rotating stars, where $`p`$, $`ϵ`$, and $`s`$ denote pressure, mass-energy density and specific entropy, respectively. Throughout this paper, the polytropic equation of state is assumed:

$$p=Kϵ^{1+\frac{1}{N}},$$
(2)
where $`N`$ and $`K`$ are constants.

We consider oscillation modes in rotating relativistic stars such that the eigenfunctions are stationary and are composed of only one axial parity component in the limit $`\mathrm{\Omega }0`$. Subclass of those modes should be a relativistic counterpart of $`r`$-modes, which are able to oscillate in all slowly rotating Newtonian fluid stars. According to Lockitch et al. (2001), such modes are allowed to exist only if the star has non-isentropic structures. Therefore, we assume stars to be non-isentropic, although the effects due to deviation from isentropic structure on oscillation modes do not appear in the first order in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. According to the formalism by Lockitch et al. (2001) (see, also, Kojima 1998), let us write down the pulsation equation for relativistic $`r`$-modes with accuracy up to the first order in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The metric perturbation $`\delta g_{\alpha \beta }`$ and the Eulerian changes of the fluid velocity $`\delta u^\alpha `$ that do not vanish in the limit $`\mathrm{\Omega }0`$ are given as

$$(\delta g_{t\theta },\delta g_{t\phi })=ih_{0,l}(r)(\frac{_\phi Y_{lm}(\theta ,\phi )}{\mathrm{sin}\theta },\mathrm{sin}\theta _\theta Y_{lm}(\theta ,\phi ))e^{i\sigma t},$$
(3)
$$(\delta u^\theta ,\delta u^\phi )=\frac{iU_l(r)}{r^2}(\frac{_\phi Y_{lm}(\theta ,\phi )}{\mathrm{sin}\theta },\frac{_\theta Y_{lm}(\theta ,\phi )}{\mathrm{sin}\theta })e^{i\sigma t},$$
(4)
where $`Y_{lm}(\theta ,\phi )`$ are usual spherical harmonic functions, and $`\sigma `$ denotes oscillation frequency measured in the inertial frame. All other perturbed quantities become higher order in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Note that this form of eigenfunctions is the same as that for zero-frequency modes in a spherical non-isentropic star, because $`r`$-modes become zero-frequency ones in the limit $`\mathrm{\Omega }0`$.(Thorne & Campolattaro 1967) The metric perturbation $`h_{0,l}`$ obeys a second order ordinary differential equation,

$`D_{lm}(r;\overline{\sigma })\left[e^{\nu \lambda }{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}\left(e^{\nu \lambda }{\displaystyle \frac{dh_{0,l}}{dr}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{l(l+1)}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2+2e^{2\lambda }}{r^2}}+8\pi (p+ϵ)\right)h_{0,l}\right]`$ (5)
$`+`$ $`16\pi (p+ϵ)h_{0,l}=0,`$
where

$$D_{lm}(r;\overline{\sigma })1\frac{2m\overline{\omega }}{l(l+1)\overline{\sigma }},$$
(6)
Here, we have introduced the effective rotation angular velocity of fluid,

$$\overline{\omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }\omega ,$$
(7)
and the corotating oscillation frequency,

$$\overline{\sigma }=\sigma +m\mathrm{\Omega }.$$
(8)
The velocity perturbation of fluids $`U_l`$ is determined from the function $`h_{0,l}`$ through the following algebraic relation,

$$\left[1\frac{2m\overline{\omega }}{l(l+1)\overline{\sigma }}\right]U_l+h_{0,l}=0.$$
(9)
Equations (5) and (9) are our basic equations, which were derived by Kojima (1998) in his early work. Note that equations (5) and (9) lose the meaning for the $`l=0`$ case, because there are no axial modes with $`l=0`$.

Because equations (5) are second order ordinary differential equations, two boundary conditions are required to determine solutions uniquely. For physically acceptable solutions, the function $`h_{0,l}`$ must vanish both at the center and at the spatial infinity. Thus, boundary conditions are given as

$`r{\displaystyle \frac{dh_{0,l}}{dr}}`$ $``$ $`(l+1)h_{0,l}=0\mathrm{as}r0,`$ (10)
$`r{\displaystyle \frac{dh_{0,l}}{dr}}`$ $`+`$ $`lh_{0,l}=0\mathrm{as}r\mathrm{}.`$ (11)
When those boundary conditions are imposed, our basic equations are solved as an eigenvalue problem with an eigenvalue $`\overline{\sigma }`$. As shown by Kojima (1998), when $`D_{lm}(r;\overline{\sigma })=0`$ is satisfied inside the star the system of our basic equations becomes a singular eigenvalue problem, because the function $`D_{lm}(r;\overline{\sigma })`$ is proportional to the coefficient of the second derivative of function $`h_{0,l}`$. On the other hand, we can treat the equation as a regular eigenvalue problem if $`D_{lm}(r;\overline{\sigma })=0`$ is not satisfied inside the star, because the last term of equation (5) vanishes outside the star as well as the function $`D_{lm}(r;\overline{\sigma })`$. Due to this singular property of the basic equation, Kojima also concluded continuous spectrum may exist in relativistic rotating stars. Beyer & Kokkotas (1999) gave a mathematically rigorous proof for the existence of a continuous part within the spectrum. Recently Lockitch et al. (2001) have showed that the equality $`D_{lm}(r;\overline{\sigma })=0`$ must be satisfied at some spatial point for the equations to have non-trivial solutions $`h_{0,l}`$. Because $`\overline{\omega }`$ is a monotonically increasing positive function of $`r`$, according to the considerations of Lockitch et al. (2001), in order for the equation (5) to be treated as a regular eigenvalue problem an frequency $`\overline{\sigma }`$ must be in a region,

$$\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(R)}{l(l+1)}<\overline{\sigma }\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(\mathrm{})}{l(l+1)}=\frac{2m\mathrm{\Omega }}{l(l+1)},$$
(12)
where $`R`$ is stellar radius in the coordinate (1). Note that $`\frac{2m\mathrm{\Omega }}{l(l+1)}`$ is well-known Newtonian $`r`$-mode frequency. On the other hand, when $`\overline{\sigma }`$ satisfies an inequality,

$$\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(0)}{l(l+1)}\overline{\sigma }\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(R)}{l(l+1)},$$
(13)
we must treat equation (5) as singular eigenvalue problem. Note that since $`\overline{\omega }`$ becomes $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in Newtonian limit, we can easily see from inequalities (12) and (13) that frequency in a range for existing non-trivial solution of equation (5) is getting closer to Newtonian $`r`$-mode frequency, $`\frac{2m\mathrm{\Omega }}{l(l+1)}`$, as $`M/R0`$. Lockitch et al. (2001) also found numerically discrete $`r`$-mode solutions with frequencies in range (12) in uniform density relativistic stars. In this paper we will extend the study on the discrete $`r`$-mode solutions by Lockitch et al. (2001) to those for polytropic equation of states.

Next let us consider a post-Newtonian approximation of relativistic $`r`$-mode oscillation, by using a similar method to that of Lockitch et al. (2001). In this approximation, physical quantities of an equilibrium state can be written as

$$ϵ=\frac{ϵ_0\mathrm{\Theta }^N(r)}{R^2}\frac{2M}{R}+O\left(\left(\frac{2M}{R}\right)^2\right),$$
(14)
$$p=\frac{p_0\mathrm{\Theta }^{N+1}(r)}{R^2}\left(\frac{2M}{R}\right)^2+O\left(\left(\frac{2M}{R}\right)^3\right),$$
(15)
$$e^\nu =1+O\left(\frac{2M}{R}\right),$$
(16)
$$e^\lambda =1+O\left(\frac{2M}{R}\right),$$
(17)
$$\overline{\omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }\left(1\omega _0(r)\frac{2M}{R}\right)+O\left(\left(\frac{2M}{R}\right)^2\right),$$
(18)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is a Newtonian Lane-Emden function (see, e.g., Kippenhahn & Weigert 1990) and $`M`$ denotes total mass of stars. Here $`ϵ_0`$ and $`p_0`$ are constants determined from a solution of Lane-Emden equation. Function $`\omega _0`$ is given as solution of a differential equation,

$$\frac{d^2\omega _0(r)}{dr^2}+\frac{4}{r}\frac{d\omega _0(r)}{dr}+16\pi \frac{ϵ_0}{R^2}\mathrm{\Theta }^N=0,$$
(19)
under the following boundary conditions:

$$\frac{d\omega _0(0)}{dr}=0,\omega _0(R)+\frac{R}{3}\frac{d\omega _0(R)}{dr}=0.$$
(20)
In the Newtonian limit, $`\frac{2M}{R}0`$, eigensolutions of equation (5) should become those of $`r`$-mode oscillations in Newtonian stars. Therefore, eigenvalue $`\overline{\sigma }`$ and eigenfunction can be expanded in power series of $`\frac{2M}{R}`$ as

$$\overline{\sigma }=\frac{2m\mathrm{\Omega }}{l(l+1)}\left[1+\kappa _1(\frac{2M}{R})+O\left(\left(\frac{2M}{R}\right)^2\right)\right],$$
(21)
$$h_{0,l}=h_{0,l}^{(0)}\left(\frac{2M}{R}\right)+O\left(\left(\frac{2M}{R}\right)^2\right),$$
(22)
and

$$U_l=U_l^{(0)}+O\left(\left(\frac{2M}{R}\right)\right).$$
(23)
Substituting equations (14)-(18) and (21) into an equation (5), we obtain basic equations for $`r`$-mode oscillations in the post-Newtonian order as follows:

$$(\kappa _1+\omega _0)\left[\frac{d^2h_{0,l}^{(0)}(r)}{dr^2}\frac{l(l+1)}{r^2}h_{0,l}^{(0)}(r)\right]+16\pi \frac{ϵ_0}{R^2}\mathrm{\Theta }^Nh_{0,l}^{(0)}(r)=0,$$
(24)
and

$$U_l^{(0)}=\frac{h_{0,l}^{(0)}}{\kappa _1+\omega _0}.$$
(25)
These equations have the same properties as those of relativistic equations (5). Boundary conditions required for physically acceptable solutions are given as follows:

$$r\frac{dh_{0,l}^{(0)}}{dr}(l+1)h_{0,l}^{(0)}=0\mathrm{as}r0,$$
(26)
and

$$r\frac{dh_{0,l}^{(0)}}{dr}+lh_{0,l}^{(0)}=0\mathrm{at}r=R.$$
(27)
From inequalities (12) and (13), frequency range for regular and singular eigenvalue problem in the post-Newtonian order equation are given as

$$\omega _0(R)<\kappa _10,$$
(28)
and

$$\omega _0(0)\kappa _1\omega _0(R),$$
(29)
respectively.

Because our basic equation for both relativistic and post-Newtonian $`r`$-modes become second order linear ordinary differential equations with two boundary conditions, those are numerically solved as an eigenvalue problem, by using a Henyey type relaxation method (e.g., Unno et al. 1989).

## 3 Numerical results

### 3.1 Relativistic study

As mentioned in the last section we should distinguish two cases in treating equation (5). One is a regular eigenvalue problem. The other is a singular eigenvalue problem. In this study we consider only $`r`$-mode solutions of a regular eigenvalue problem, because discrete eigenfrequency may be obtained. Furthermore such discrete modes are considered to correspond to Newtonian $`r`$-modes, because such modes have the well-defined regular eigenfunctions. Therefore we restrict our attention to eigenfrequency in the range (12). For simplicity, henceforth, we will naively call a $`r`$-mode solution of a regular eigenvalue problem a discrete $`r`$-mode unless we give a notice. As mentioned in Beyer & Kokkotas (1999) we cannot exclude the possibility that isolated eigenvalues may exist within a frequency range for a singular eigenvalue problem. Thus note that such an isolated eigenvalue does not belong to “discrete $`r`$-mode” according to the terminology of this paper.

We compute frequencies of a discrete $`r`$-mode for several polytropic stellar models. In present study, only the fundamental $`r`$-modes, whose eigenfunction $`U_l`$ has no node in radial direction except at stellar center, are obtained. This is consistent with that in Newtonian case, where overtone $`r`$-modes appear as high order effects in angular velocity $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (see, e.g. Provost, Berthomieu & Rocca 1981, Saio 1982). In Figure 1, scaled eigenfrequencies $`\kappa \overline{\sigma }/\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of discrete $`r`$-modes are given as functions of $`M/R`$ for modes with $`m=l`$. Note that for modes associated with $`l`$, we can directly obtain an eigenfrequency of a mode with any value of $`m`$ from that with $`m=l`$. Therefore only results for modes associated with $`m=l`$ will be shown throughout this paper. Eigenfrequencies for stars with four different polytropic indices, $`N=0`$, $`0.5`$, $`0.75`$, and $`1`$, are shown in panels in Figure 1, respectively. In each panel, frequency curves for the modes with $`l=2`$, $`3`$, and $`4`$ are depicted along a relativistic factor $`M/R`$. From the figure it is found that frequencies $`\kappa `$ monotonically decrease as a relativistic factor $`M/R`$ increases. This behavior is caused by dragging of inertial frame due to the stellar rotation. We find that some frequency curves in Figure 1 are terminated at some value of $`M/R`$ beyond which equilibrium states can still exist. Here, the maximum values of $`M/R`$ for polytropic equilibrium stars having $`N=0`$, $`0.5`$, $`0.75`$, and $`1.0`$ are given by $`4/9`$, $`0.385`$, $`0.349`$, and $`0.312`$, respectively. It is also found that length of those curves tend to be short as either a polytrope index $`N`$ or an angular quantum number $`l`$ increases. As a matter of fact, we are not able to obtain eigenfrequencies beyond them by using our numerical method.

In order to trace the cause that missing frequencies in Figure 1 cannot be obtained, let us see behavior of values of $`\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(R)}{l(l+1)\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ as a function of $`M/R`$. The value of $`\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(R)}{l(l+1)\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ gives a lower bound of the eigenfrequency $`\kappa `$ allowed for the regular eigenvalue problem of a $`r`$-mode in the considered star. Therefore an eigenfrequency $`\kappa `$ for the regular eigenvalue problem must be larger than $`\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(R)}{l(l+1)\mathrm{\Omega }}`$. In Figure 2, values of $`\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(R)}{l(l+1)\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ and $`\kappa `$ for $`l=m=2`$ $`r`$-mode of $`N=0.75`$ polytropic stars are given as function of $`M/R`$. In this figure it is found that the curve of $`\kappa `$ approaches that of $`\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(R)}{l(l+1)\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ twice, that is, near the Newtonian limit, and near the terminal point of the frequency curve. The former is clear because the frequency range (12) shrinks to the point of the Newtonian r-mode frequency. The latter is considered to be the cause of our problem. From the figure it is found that frequency $`\kappa `$ of $`r`$-mode solutions for the regular eigenvalue problem becomes the same value as that of $`\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(R)}{l(l+1)\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ at some critical value of $`M/R`$, say $`(M/R)_{crit}`$, within the numerical accuracy. In other words, $`\kappa `$ nearly becomes the frequency for the singular eigenvalue problem as the value of $`M/R`$ becomes $`(M/R)_{crit}`$. Thus we can not obtain those missing modes. Behaviors of $`\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(R)}{l(l+1)\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ and $`\kappa `$ as functions of $`M/R`$ for other cases except for the $`N=0`$ case are similar to those in Figure 2. As for the $`N=0`$ case, the curve of $`\kappa `$ does not closely approach that of $`\frac{2m\overline{\omega }(R)}{l(l+1)\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ even when the value of $`M/R`$ is nearly $`4/9`$. From those facts and continuity of physical quantities we can expect that disappearance of $`r`$-mode solutions with frequency in a range (12) is not due to numerical artifact. Thus it is reasonable to claim that $`r`$-mode solutions for regular eigenvalue problem disappear in stars having a values of $`M/R`$ larger than $`(M/R)_{crit}`$.

Critical values of $`M/R`$ are shown as functions of polytropic index $`N`$ in Figure 3. Curves of critical values $`(M/R)_{crit}`$ for modes with $`l=2`$, $`3`$, and $`4`$ are given in the figure. Note that values of $`(M/R)_{crit}`$ shown here are numerically approximated ones. These only give lower limit of accurate values of $`(M/R)_{crit}`$. In Figure 3, stars whose parameters are in regions under curves of $`(M/R)_{crit}`$ have discrete $`r`$-mode spectrum. Results of our numerical analysis also suggest that for the $`N=0`$ case the critical value of $`M/R`$ is nearly equal to $`4/9`$. Indeed, discrete $`r`$-mode solutions with frequency in a range (12) may exist in all uniform density stars independently of the value of $`M/R`$. This is consistent with the result by Lockitch et al. (2001). The figure also suggests that even in nearly Newtonian stars, whose value of relativistic factor $`M/R`$ is sufficiently small, $`r`$-mode solutions of a regular eigenvalue problem disappear if a value of $`N`$ is over some critical value, say $`N_{crit}`$. For such nearly Newtonian stars, however, our numerical method tends to lose an accuracy. In the next subsection, to avoid this numerical difficulty, we will study $`r`$-mode oscillations of nearly Newtonian stars by using post-Newtonian formalism.

### 3.2 Post-Newtonian study

In post-Newtonian analysis of $`r`$-modes, the post-Newtonian correction $`\kappa _1`$ for the eigenfrequency is employed as the eigenvalue instead of a scaled eigenfrequency $`\kappa `$. The value of $`\kappa _1`$ does not depend on a relativistic factor $`M/R`$ by definition (21), but both on polytropic index $`N`$ and on angular eigenvalue $`l`$. In similar way to the case of the relativistic study we consider only the case that our basic equations become the regular eigenvalue problem. Thus we restrict eigensolutions to those with frequency in a range (28). In Figure 4 the post-Newtonian correction $`\kappa _1`$ are plotted against polytropic index $`N`$ for three different eigenmodes associated with $`l=2`$, $`3`$ and $`4`$. Our numerical results of $`\kappa _1`$ for a $`N=0`$ polytropic model are in good agreement with those by Lockitch et al. (2001). We also cannot obtain $`r`$-mode solutions for the regular eigenvalue problem in stars beyond some limits of polytropic index $`N`$, as shown in the figure. Thus as in the relativistic case, examining behaviors of values of $`\omega _0(R)`$ appearing in the frequency inequality (28) as a function of $`N`$, we confirm that disappearance of $`r`$-mode solutions with frequency in a range (28) is not due to numerical artifact. The values of $`\omega _0(R)`$ are shown as function of $`N`$ in Figure 4. It is found that all frequency curves for $`\kappa _1`$ in Figure 4 nearly intersect with the curve for $`\omega _0(R)`$ at some values of $`N`$, namely $`N=N_{crit}`$. In the same way as the relativistic study, thus, we can conclude that the absence of the post-Newtonian $`r`$-mode solutions for the regular eigenvalue problem in stars having $`N>N_{crit}`$ is not due to numerical artifact. From this we expect that $`r`$-mode solutions with a frequency in a range (28) disappear if a star has polytrope index $`N`$ larger than a critical value $`N_{crit}`$. Values of $`N_{crit}`$ obtained from numerical analysis are shown in Figure 4 near the terminal points of $`\kappa _1`$ curves. Our numerical results of $`N_{crit}`$ in the post-Newtonian order are consistent with those in relativistic analysis. (compare with Figure 3) From the figure, for instance, we can expect that the $`r`$-mode solution with $`l=2`$ for regular eigenvalue problem disappears in polytope having $`N>1.18`$ even in the post-Newtonian order.

## 4 Discussion and Conclusion

In this paper, we have investigated the properties of $`r`$-modes characterized by regular eigenvalue problem in a slowly rotating relativistic polytrope. Our numerical results suggest that discrete $`r`$-mode solutions with frequency in a range (12) disappear for some polytropic models. Although we do not have mathematically rigorous proof for this suggestion, from numerical results and continuity of physical quantities we can make conjectures on the relativistic $`r`$-mode as follows: the $`r`$-mode associated with $`l=m=2`$, which is considered to be the most important for gravitational radiation driven instability, do not exist as a solution for regular eigenvalue problem for polytropes having $`N>1.18`$ even in the post-Newtonian order. As for a $`N=1`$ polytropic model, which is employed as a typical neutron star model, discrete $`r`$-mode solutions with frequency in a range (12) do not exist for stars whose relativistic factor $`M/R`$ is larger than about $`0.1`$. If those conjectures are true, most of typical neutron stars do not have discrete $`r`$-mode solution with frequency in a range (12), because a typical relativistic factor for a neutron star is considered to be about $`0.1`$$`0.2`$. This means that in actual neutron stars $`r`$-mode characterized by regular eigenvalue problem cannot play any important role, if relativistic $`r`$-mode oscillations are governed by equation (5). If this is the case, we must study the pure $`r`$-mode with frequency in a range (13) to have clear understanding of relativistic $`r`$-mode in neutron stars. According to previous studies, continuous part of spectrum and singular eigenfunctions appear for such a frequency range, although we cannot exclude the possibility that isolated eigenvalues may exist within the frequency range.

In this study, we employ the formalism developed by Lockitch et al. (2001) to investigate $`r`$-modes in relativistic polytropes. Although their formalism is correct, the system of equation (5) as regular eigenvalue problem leads to some unnatural numerical results. For instance, $`l=2`$ $`r`$-mode solutions of regular eigenvalue problem in $`N=1`$ polytropes having $`M/R>0.1`$ disappear due to general relativistic effect, although $`r`$-mode solutions for regular eigenvalue problem in Newtonian stars exist for all slowly rotating polytropic stars with constant angular velocity. Lockitch et al. (2001) claimed that $`r`$-mode solutions with frequency in a range (12) are counterpart of Newtonian $`r`$-modes, because they considered that the true relativistic analogue to a Newtonian $`r`$-mode should be a distinct mode with a well-defined eigenfunction. In fact, such a $`r`$-mode solution may exist in all $`N=0`$ polytrope, as shown numerically in Lockitch et al. (2001) and this study. However, for some $`N0`$ polytropes we numerically found that $`r`$-mode solutions with frequency in a range (12) do not appear when $`M/R>(M/R)_{crit}`$ or $`N>N_{crit}`$. We think that this is actual behavior of the mode due to the influence of the effective differential rotation caused by general relativity. The reason of this is considered as follows: In modal analysis in Newtonian rotating stars, sufficient differential rotation of an equilibrium star can give a corotation point, where corotation frequency $`\overline{\sigma }`$ vanishes. Because of existence of this corotation point the system may become singular eigenvalue problem. (see, e.g. Karino, Yoshida & Eriguchi 2000) On the other hand, our results show that disappearance of discrete r-mode occurs in large values of the relativistic factor or the polytropic index of the equilibrium star. In such equilibrium stars, as a matter of fact, differential rotation effect in relativistic rotating stars becomes strong.

However we cannot exclude the possibility that pure $`r`$-modes in a relativistic rotating star with the non-zero rotation frequency are not simply governed by equation (5), because strictly speaking the equation (5) only determines zero frequency modes in a spherical non-rotating star. In other worlds, in equation (5) the gravitational radiation reaction is not taken into account at all, although the gravitational radiation must be emitted from $`r`$-mode oscillations in rotating stars with non-zero rotation velocity. As strongly suggested by Lockitch et al. (2001) (see, also Beyer & Kokkotas 1999), when the eigenfrequency becomes complex number, which expresses the damping of the oscillation due to the energy dissipation such as the gravitational radiation emission, the existence of the continuous part of spectrum in the eigenfrequency of equation (5) might be avoided. If this is true, there is a possibility for a distinct mode solution with a well-defined eigenfunction from singular solutions with frequency in a range (13) to be picked up by the information due to the gravitational radiation reaction effect. Such distinct modes may make a continuous sequence that starts with $`r`$-mode solutions with frequency in a range (12). We think this one of the most plausible scenarios, although this is still speculation. In order to have clear understanding of the $`r`$-mode in relativistic stars, the further progress of investigations of the rotational mode is needed.

The author would like to thank Prof. B. F. Schutz for his hospitality at the Albert Einstein Institute, where a part of this work was done. He is grateful to Prof. T. Futamase and Dr. S’i Yoshida for useful comments and careful reading of the manuscript. He also would like to thank Drs. H. R. Beyer and U. Lee for valuable comments.