text:
# Hydrostatic equilibrium in a magnetized, warped Galactic disc

## 1 Introduction

Models assuming hydrostatic equilibrium in the Galactic gas layer are often used to describe the global state of the interstellar medium (ISM) (Parker 1966, Badhwar & Stephens 1977, Bloemen 1987, Boulares & Cox 1990, Lockman & Gehman 1991, Kalberla & Kerp 1998). Despite matter outflows in the form of Galactic fountain (Shapiro & Field 1976, Bregman 1980, Habe & Ikeuchi 1980) and chimneys (Norman & Ikeuchi 1989), the assumption of hydrostatic equilibrium appears to be viable when considering the average state of the ISM over large scales or times. Korpi et al. (1999) argue that the warm ISM is on average in a state of equilibrium, although not the hot phase within $`1\mathrm{kpc}`$ from the midplane.

Magnetic fields play an important role in the pressure balance of the ISM (e.g. Parker 1979, Boulares & Cox 1990). Both theory and observations of interstellar magnetic fields assert that magnetic energy density should be comparable to turbulent and thermal energy densities of the gas (e.g. Zweibel & McKee 1995, Beck et al. 1996), with a direct implication for a similar balance in the pressures.

The Galactic magnetic field has two distinct components, the regular field $`B`$ on length scales of the order 1 kpc and the turbulent field $`b`$ with a typical scale of order 100 pc. Galactic dynamo theory predicts that the strength of the regular field depends on magnetic diffusivity, rotational shear, the kinetic energy density of the ISM, etc. (Ruzmaikin, Sokoloff & Shukurov 1988, Ch. VII; Shukurov 1998). The turbulent magnetic field strength probably scales simply with the kinetic energy density of the turbulent gas (Beck et al. 1996, Subramanian 1999). Using the simplest form of this scaling in a model of the hydrostatic support of the ISM in the solar vicinity allows the pressure support from $`B`$ and $`b`$ to be separately quantified. In this paper we discuss implications, for the strength and vertical distribution, of both regular and turbulent magnetic fields, resulting from hydrostatic equilibrium models. The validity of the model is assessed using independent information on the magnetic fields in the ISM.

Descriptions of the state of the interstellar medium tend to concentrate on the situation in the solar vicinity. However, the gas disc is warped in the outer Galaxy (Binney 1992), and the warping implies that there is an additional force involved in the vertical equilibrium balance. In Section 4 we use simple arguments to illustrate some effects of the warp on the vertical gas distribution and to suggest that the vertical gas distribution can have a characteristic asymmetry in the warped disc. Because of the warp, gas densities at $`\pm 0.5\mathrm{kpc}`$ above and below the displaced midplane can differ by a factor of $`1.2`$. An asymmetry of this kind has been observed in the outer Galaxy (Diplas & Savage 1991), but went unnoticed.

## 2 Hydrostatic equilibrium in the solar neighbourhood

### 2.1 A model of hydrostatic support

We assume that, on average, the gas at the solar position is in a state of vertical hydrostatic equilibrium,

$$\frac{P}{z}=\rho g,$$
(1)
where $`P`$ and $`\rho `$ are the total pressure and gas density respectively, $`g`$ is the gravitational acceleration and $`z`$ is the height above the midplane. The assumption is probably weakest when considering the hot, ionized gas which presumably originates in the disc but fills the Galactic halo, and so is involved in systematic vertical motions. However, hydrostatic equilibrium is still a plausible expectation for large areas, of order a few kiloparsecs in size.

The equilibrium model includes several contributions to the total pressure,

$$P=P_\mathrm{g}+P_\mathrm{m}+P_{\mathrm{cr}},$$

with

$$P_\mathrm{g}(z)=\underset{i}{}\rho _iv_{zi}^2+\underset{i}{}n_ikT_i$$

the gas pressure consisting of the turbulent and thermal components (with contributions from individual phases of the ISM labelled with index $`i`$), $`P_\mathrm{m}`$ the magnetic pressure due to the regular, $`B`$, and random, $`b`$, magnetic field components, and Pcr the cosmic ray pressure. Here $`v_{zi}`$ is the vertical component of the rms turbulent velocity in the i’th phase, $`n_i`$ the gas number density, $`T_i`$ the temperature and $`k`$ is Boltzmann’s constant.

We separate the pressure due to the regular and turbulent magnetic fields by assuming that the energy density of the turbulent magnetic field is a multiple of the kinetic energy density of the turbulent gas,

$$P_\mathrm{m}=\frac{B^2+b^2}{8\pi },\frac{b^2}{8\pi }=\frac{1}{2}K\underset{i}{}\rho _iv_i^2,$$
(2)
with $`K`$ a constant and $`v_i^2=3v_{zi}^2`$ is the total turbulent velocity. A value of $`K1`$ is in line with theoretical arguments showing that equipartition should exist between turbulent kinetic energy and magnetic energy densities (Zweibel & McKee 1995, Beck et al. 1996). If the turbulent magnetic field is concentrated into flux ropes and within these ropes energy equipartition also exists (Subramanian 1999), then $`K`$ is the filling factor of the ropes.

By taking $`𝑩`$ to be parallel to the Galactic plane we neglect the contribution of magnetic tension due to the regular field to the support of the ISM (cf. Boulares & Cox 1990). The vertical regular magnetic field is definitely negligible near the midplane away from the disc centre (Ruzmaikin et al. 1988, Beck et al. 1996). The dominance of the horizontal magnetic field is more questionable in the Galactic halo. Significant vertical magnetic fields have been detected in the haloes of only two galaxies with strong star formation (NGC 4631, Hummel et al. 1988, 1991 and M82, Reuter et al. 1994), but the Milky Way hardly belongs to this type. Vertical dust filaments abundant in many galaxies in the disc-halo interface (Sofue 1987) may indicate significant localized vertical magnetic fields there. These can be a result of shearing the horizontal field in the disc by a galactic fountain and/or chimneys (cf. Korpi et al. 1999; see also Elstner et al. 1995). Still, this interpretation is compatible with a predominantly horizontal regular magnetic field in the main parts of both the disc and the halo away from the interface (e.g. in M51 – Berkhuijsen et al. 1997). In the absence of direct observational evidence for the halo of the Milky Way, we refer to numerous theoretical models which invariably indicate the dominance of the horizontal regular magnetic field under a variety of physical setups (e.g. Brandenburg et al. 1992, 1993; Brandenburg, Moss & Shukurov 1995).

The ISM has a multicomponent structure; parameters of the basic phases are given in Table 1. Molecular hydrogen, together with the cold and warm neutral phases make up the bulk of the gaseous disc mass, the other components being the diffuse ionized gas (also known as the Reynolds layer), a neutral halo and ionized halo gas (Ferrière 1998, Kalberla & Kerp 1998). Different phases do not necessarily have a distinct physical nature and the distinction is often merely conventional; for example, neutral and ionized halo components plausibly represent a single physical entity; likewise, the separation of the warm and diffuse ionized phases may simply describe the increase of ionization degree with height. The halo components are present in the disc as the hot phase. The filling factor for them was taken to be that of the hot phase, $`0.3`$ in the midplane, rising to 0.9 at $`z=4\mathrm{kpc}`$ and 1 further up in the halo, in an approximation to Fig. 10 of Ferrière (1995) (see also Rosen & Bregman 1995, Korpi et al. 1999). To allow for helium, nine percent by number of hydrogen atoms has been added to obtain the mass density in each phase, and we assume that the helium is fully ionized in the ionized halo component.

We note that observational estimates of the total random velocity in the diffuse ionized gas yield supersonic values $`20\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (Reynolds 1990a). This can be due to systematic (albeit random) upward motions of the hot gas forming the base of the galactic fountain (cf. Korpi et al. 1999) rather than to genuine turbulent motions; the ram pressure of these motions contributes to the vertical support of the gas and we can include it in the turbulent pressure.

The pressure of cosmic rays is assumed to be equal to that of the total magnetic field, $`P_{\mathrm{cr}}=P_\mathrm{m}`$ where $`P_\mathrm{m}`$ is given by Eq. (2). Altogether, the total pressure is given by

$$P=(3K+1)\underset{i}{}\rho _iv_{zi}^2+\underset{i}{}n_ikT_i+\frac{B^2}{4\pi }.$$
(3)
### 2.2 Observational constraints on magnetic field near the Sun

The vertical distribution of $`B`$ is poorly known, and we derive it in Section 3 from Eqs (1) and (3), and then assess the validity of our results using the following reasonably well established constraints.

First, if equipartition between the energy densities of cosmic rays and magnetic fields is assumed then the total interstellar magnetic field, $`B_{\mathrm{tot}}=\sqrt{B^2+b^2}`$, at $`z=0`$ is estimated from synchrotron intensity as $`B_{\mathrm{tot}}6\mu \mathrm{G}`$ (Beck 2001). With observations of synchrotron polarization showing $`B_0/B_{\mathrm{tot}}0.6`$, as described below, this gives $`B_04\mu \mathrm{G}`$ (Beck 2001); if anisotropic turbulent magnetic fields are present this is an upper limit on $`B_0`$. Observations of Faraday rotation measures from pulsars and extragalactic radio sources yield a midplane value of $`B`$ of $`B_02\mu \mathrm{G}`$ (Rand & Kulkarni 1989, Lyne & Smith 1989, Rand & Lyne 1994, Frick et al. 2001). Note that $`B_0`$ can be significantly larger at a distance of a few kiloparsecs from the Sun because the Sun is located close to a reversal of the large-scale magnetic field (e.g. Beck et al. 1996). Magnetic field strengths obtained from rotation measures can be underestimated if the ISM is in pressure balance, so $`B`$ and $`\rho `$ are anti-correlated (Beck 2001). Therefore we consider models with $`B_0`$ equal to $`4\mu \mathrm{G}`$ and $`2\mu \mathrm{G}`$.

Second, the ratio of the turbulent to regular magnetic field, $`b/B`$, is directly related to the degree of polarization, $`𝒫`$, of the Galactic synchrotron emission via $`𝒫=𝒫_0B^2/(b^2+B^2)`$ with $`𝒫_00.7`$, provided any depolarization effects can be neglected (Burn 1966, Sokoloff et al. 1998). Berkhuijsen (1971) found $`b/B1.2`$ and Philipps et al. (1981) argue that $`b/B`$ cannot be much larger than unity. Observations of the Galactic polarized synchrotron background yield $`1b/B3`$ (Spoelstra 1984). This is corroborated by analyses of Faraday rotation measures of extragalactic radio sources and pulsars which imply $`b/B1.7`$ (Ruzmaikin et al. 1988, Ch. IV and references therein) and $`b/B3`$ (Rand & Kulkarni 1989) (these are upper limits if $`B`$ is underestimated).

Finally the vertical distribution of the total interstellar magnetic field, can be obtained from the distribution of Galactic synchrotron emission (Phillips et al. 1981, Beuermann, Kanbach & Berkhuijsen 1985). The model used by Phillips et al.  requires halo emissivity of about 10 percent of that in the disc, extending to about 10 kpc beyond the midplane. Roughly, emissivity is proportional to the total magnetic field squared or to a higher power if detailed equipartition between magnetic fields and cosmic rays is maintained (Beck et al. 1996, Zweibel & Heiles 1997, Sokoloff et al. 1998). So the total magnetic field, $`B_{\mathrm{tot}}`$, in the halo is expected to be approximately $`1/3`$$`1/2`$ of that in the disc, $`B_{\mathrm{tot}}(\mathrm{halo})/\mathrm{B}_{\mathrm{tot}}(\mathrm{disc})=1/3`$$`1/2`$.

## 3 The role of magnetic field in the support of the gas layer

The vertical distribution of the interstellar magnetic field is even more difficult to obtain from observations than that of the gas components of the ISM. Therefore we obtain $`B`$ as a function of $`z`$ from a hydrostatic equilibrium model and then compare the result with independent information briefly summarized above. This also allows us to reassess the validity of the equilibrium model itself.

Equation (1), with $`P`$ from Eq. (3), is solved for $`B(z)`$ using different values of $`K`$. We use $`g`$ for the solar vicinity derived by Ferrière (1998) from Kuijken & Gilmore (1989a,b),

$$g=A_1\frac{z}{(z^2+Z_1^2)^{1/2}}+A_2\frac{z}{Z_2},$$
(4)
where $`A_1=4.4\times 10^9\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}^2,A_2=1.7\times 10^9\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}^2,Z_1=0.2\mathrm{kpc}`$ and $`Z_2=1\mathrm{kpc}`$.

### 3.1 Model with $`B_04\mu \mathrm{G}`$

Constraining the midplane regular magnetic field to $`B_04\mu \mathrm{G}`$, as suggested by cosmic ray energy equipartition arguments (Beck 2001), we obtain the vertical distributions of $`B`$ and $`b`$ shown in Figs 1 and 2. The best fit to all three constraints described in section Section 2 is with $`K=0.8`$, in line with theoretical equipartition arguments (Zweibel & McKee 1995, Beck et al. 1996); we obtain $`B_0=4\mu \mathrm{G}`$, $`b/B=1.25`$ at $`z=0`$ and $`B_{\mathrm{tot}}(\mathrm{halo})/B_{\mathrm{tot}}(\mathrm{disc})1/3`$.

Increasing $`K`$ amplifies the contribution of the turbulent magnetic field and cosmic rays to the equilibrium balance, according to Eq. (2). Near the midplane, the strong turbulent pressure (kinetic and magnetic) created by molecular cloud motions is amplified to such an extent that the required strength of the regular magnetic field for hydrostatic equilibrium begins to drop as $`K`$ increases (see the solid and dashed lines in Fig. 1) reaching zero for $`K=1.4`$.

Figure 1 suggests a two-component model of $`B(z)`$, a disc with a scale height of $`h_B1\mathrm{kpc}`$ and a halo extending $`z10\mathrm{kpc}`$ with a roughly constant field strength of $`B1\mu \mathrm{G}`$. The scale height of the diffuse ionized gas (Table 1) is roughly the same as $`h_B`$. This is also in good agreement with Han and Qiao (1994) who have estimated $`h_B1.2\mathrm{kpc}`$ from Faraday rotation measures of extragalactic radio sources. Polarized radio emission, indicating the presence of a regular magnetic field, has been detected high in the haloes of the edge-on spiral galaxies to $`z4\mathrm{kpc}`$ in NGC 891 and to $`z8\mathrm{kpc}`$ in NGC 4631 (Hummel, Beck & Dahlem 1991).

Figure 2 shows a similar two-component structure of the turbulent magnetic field $`b`$; a disc with scale height of $`h_b0.5\mathrm{kpc}`$ and a slowly varying field in an extended halo (with $`b`$ decreasing by a factor of two at $`z7\mathrm{kpc}`$), where $`Bb`$. We note a significant difference between the scale heights of the regular and turbulent magnetic fields, $`h_B/h_b2`$ for the narrower components. This may have important implications for theories of galactic magnetic fields.

### 3.2 Model with $`B_02\mu \mathrm{G}`$

If $`B_0`$ is significantly smaller than $`4\mu \mathrm{G}`$ then the best fit to the constraints described in Section 2 is with $`K=1.6`$ (Figs 3 and 4); we obtain $`B=2.4\mu \mathrm{G}`$ at the midplane (but excluding the molecular gas; see the discussion in Section 3.2.2), $`b/B2.4`$ and $`B_{\mathrm{total}}(\mathrm{halo})/B_{\mathrm{total}}(\mathrm{disc})1/3`$. Realistic variations of the gas parameters do not produce outcomes meeting all three criteria far from $`K=1.6`$, which results in a constraint $`1.5K1.7`$. Using a different representation of $`g`$ for the stellar disc derived by Rohlfs (1977, p.35), with gravity from a spherical dark matter halo added as $`V_{\mathrm{rot}}^2z/R_{}`$, where $`V_{\mathrm{rot}}`$ is the rotation speed of the disc and $`R_{}`$ the solar radius, the range becomes $`1.3K2.4`$. If $`K`$ is beyond this range, then either $`B_0>3\mu \mathrm{G}`$, or $`B_0<1\mu \mathrm{G}`$, or $`b_0/B_0>3`$ must be accepted for the midplane values.

#### 3.2.1 Overpressure above $`z1`$ kpc

A strange feature of Fig. 3, for the better fits at $`K=1.4`$ and $`1.6`$, is the apparent absence, or a strong decrease, of $`B`$ at $`z=1`$$`6\mathrm{kpc}`$. The reason for this is clear from Fig. 5; where we show the total pressure excess over the hydrostatic equilibrium value,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }P=P_z^{\mathrm{}}\rho g𝑑z,$$
(5)
assuming $`B(z)`$ is as in Fig. 3 but not less than $`1\mu \mathrm{G}`$ at any $`z`$. We see that there is more than enough pressure from the gas, turbulent magnetic field and associated cosmic rays to support the weight of the overlying ISM at $`1z6\mathrm{kpc}`$. Any further contribution from the regular magnetic field enhances overpressure in this range of $`z`$.

The excess pressure at $`z=1`$$`4\mathrm{kpc}`$, if real, apparently contributes to driving the Galactic fountain flow. The vertical velocity driven by the overpressure is $`V_z(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }P/\rho )^{1/2}50\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, significantly smaller than the magnetosonic speed ($`100\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ or more) and compatible with what can be expected for galactic fountains. It is notable that a similar systematic outflow of the hot gas occurs in models of multiphase ISM driven by supernovae (Rosen & Bregman 1995, Korpi et al. 1999, Shukurov 1999).

#### 3.2.2 Molecular clouds

An unsatisfactory feature of the distribution shown with the dotted line in Fig. 3 (i.e. for a model including the molecular gas) is the deep minimum of $`B`$ at $`z=0`$. This feature also occurs in the model of Boulares & Cox (1990, their Fig. 2). It is very unlikely that $`B`$ can have such a sharp minimum even if it has a global odd parity in $`z`$, resulting in the constraint $`B_0=B(0)0`$. Apart from increasing $`B_0`$ to $`4\mu \mathrm{G}`$ (Section 3.1), a possible resolution of this difficulty assumes that the coupling between kinetic energy density and turbulent magnetic fields, parameterized by $`K`$, is weaker for the bulk motion of molecular clouds than for other ISM phases. This assumption is physically compelling because the clouds represent the densest, self-gravitating part of the ISM, rather isolated from the other diffuse phases. The minimum in $`B`$ does not occur if $`K0.5`$ for the molecular clouds and $`K1`$ in the other phases. If, otherwise, $`K1`$ for the bulk motion of molecular clouds as well, then either $`B`$ must grow sharply in the range $`|z|<100\mathrm{pc}`$ from a small midplane value, or $`B>3\mu \mathrm{G}`$ at $`z=0`$ (cf. the upper panel of Fig. 3).

A possible interpretation is that the turbulent magnetic field interacts differently with the molecular clouds than with the diffuse phases of the ISM (e.g. because of the fluctuation dynamo action in the diffuse gas – see Sect. 4.1 in Beck et al. 1996 and Subramanian 1999). If the fractional volume swept by the molecular clouds over the correlation time of $`b`$ is significantly less than unity, only a correspondingly small fraction of the magnetic field will be coupled to the clouds. The number of clouds in a correlation volume $`l^3`$ of the turbulent magnetic field is $`N(l/l_c)^3f_c`$, where $`f_c`$ is the volume filling factor of the clouds and $`l_\mathrm{c}`$ is the cloud size. During the correlation time of the magnetic field, $`\tau l/v`$, the clouds moving at a speed $`v_\mathrm{c}8\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (cf. Table 1) sweep the volume $`VNl_\mathrm{c}^2v_\mathrm{c}\tau `$. So the clouds affect magnetic fields within the fractional volume $`V/l^3f_\mathrm{c}v_\mathrm{c}l/(vl_\mathrm{c})`$, where $`v`$ is the r.m.s. turbulent velocity in the ambient medium. With $`f_\mathrm{c}=10^3`$$`10^4`$ (Berkhuijsen 1999 and references therein), $`l/l_\mathrm{c}10`$ and $`v/v_\mathrm{c}2`$, we obtain $`V/l^35\times (10^2`$$`10^3)1`$, so the coupling between molecular clouds and the intercloud magnetic fields is expected to be weak. Molecular clouds move with respect to the surrounding gas, so their connection with the external magnetic field can be lost rapidly. Equipartition can still be maintained within the clouds but may not occur between the bulk motion of the clouds (that provides the average pressure support to the ISM) and the turbulent magnetic field.

The same arguments apply to the regular magnetic field and one might expect a relatively weak dependence of $`B`$ on the parameters of the molecular gas (cf. Beck 1991). We show in Fig. 4 the vertical profile of the turbulent magnetic field $`b`$ calculated from Eq. (2) for a choice of $`K`$ values, where the contribution of molecular clouds to kinetic energy density has been suppressed. With the contribution of molecular gas to $`b`$ suppressed in Eq. (2), the turbulent magnetic field is reduced near $`z=0`$ giving room for a stronger regular magnetic field. The scale height $`h_b`$ is not sensitive to different values of $`K`$.

### 3.3 Equilibrium near the Sun: discussion

The comparative simplicity of the results obtained with $`B_04\mu \mathrm{G}`$, compared to those discussed in Section 3.2 for weaker $`B_0`$, as well as their quantitative and qualitative plausibility leads us to favour the arguments suggesting $`B_04\mu \mathrm{G}`$ in the solar vicinity.

The results of our model with $`B_04\mu \mathrm{G}`$, discussed in Section 3.1, compare reasonably well with the vertical distribution of the magnetic field derived by Kalberla & Kerp (1998, K&K hereafter) using a hydrostatic equilibrium model, shown in their Fig. 5. In particular, K&K predict a regular magnetic field in the halo of $`B1\mu \mathrm{G}`$ at $`z8\mathrm{kpc}`$ as a requirement for hydrostatic equilibrium. However, K&K have a weaker turbulent magnetic field, with $`b_03.5\mu \mathrm{G}`$, that extends to only $`z2\mathrm{kpc}`$ compared to $`z>8\mathrm{kpc}`$ in our model. Polarized radio emission from the haloes of the edge-on spiral galaxies NGC 891 and NGC 4631 is significantly depolarized by turbulent magnetic fields (Hummel et al. 1991) and any large scale fields present in the halo must become tangled by turbulence and Parker and thermal instabilities (Beck et al. 1996), so we expect to see a turbulent component of the magnetic field at all $`z`$.

In contrast to K&K, who have magnetic pressure in the disc of $`1/3`$ the total gas pressure and no pressure contribution from cosmic rays, we find equality between the gas (turbulent plus thermal) and total magnetic field pressures in the region $`|z|<1\mathrm{kpc}`$. And whereas K&K have pressure equilibrium between gas and magnetic fields in the halo at $`z5\mathrm{kpc}`$ our model only requires $`P_\mathrm{m}0.5P_\mathrm{g}`$. We have assumed equipartition between cosmic ray and magnetic pressures at all $`z`$.

#### 3.3.1 Implications for external galaxies

The observed degree of linear polarization of synchrotron radio emission is given by Burn (1966) as

$$𝒫=𝒫_0\frac{B_{}^2}{B_{}^2+b_{}^2},$$
(6)
where $`B_{}`$ and $`b_{}`$ are, respectively, the regular and turbulent (isotropic) magnetic field components transverse to the line of sight and $`𝒫_070\%`$ is the degree of polarization in a purely regular field. Assuming that $`b_{}^2/B_{}^2b^2/B^2`$ Fig. 6 shows the expected variation in $`𝒫`$ with $`z`$.

An implicit assumption in Fig. 6 is that $`𝒫_0`$ is constant in $`z`$. However, $`𝒫_0=(\gamma +1)/(\gamma +\frac{7}{3})`$ depends on the electron energy spectral index $`\gamma `$. If $`\gamma `$ increases with $`z`$, due to cosmic ray electron energy losses as they travel into the halo, then $`𝒫_0`$ and hence $`𝒫`$ will increase with $`z`$ making the slope at $`z3\mathrm{kpc}`$ in Fig. 6 even steeper, although this effect is only weak.

Observations of polarized radio emission from edge-on galaxies, such as NGC 891 (Hummel et al. 1991, Dumke et al. 1995) and NGC 4631 (Hummel et al. 1991, Golla & Hummel 1994, Dumke et al. 1995) show the degree of polarization rising with $`z`$ from a minimum at $`z=0`$. The observed small $`𝒫`$ at the midplane, e.g. $`𝒫|_{z=0}1\%`$ in NGC 891 (Hummel et al. 1991), can be explained by strong Faraday depolarization by both regular and turbulent fields in the disc. Above $`z2\mathrm{kpc}`$, the steady increase in $`𝒫`$ shown in Fig. 6 is reproduced in the observations, but $`𝒫`$ in Fig. 6 is a factor of two higher than observed in external galaxies at the wavelength $`\lambda =20\mathrm{cm}`$. Faraday depolarization due to both regular and turbulent magnetic fields is expected to be weak in galactic halos where Faraday rotation measure does not exceed $`10\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{m}^2`$ due to low gas density. For example, depolarization by internal Faraday dispersion arising from a turbulent magnetic field $`b2\mu \mathrm{G}`$ with correlation length $`l0.5\mathrm{kpc}`$ (Poezd, Shukurov & Sokoloff 1993), path length through the halo $`L10\mathrm{kpc}`$ and thermal electron density $`n_\mathrm{e}10^3\mathrm{cm}^3`$ can only reduce the degree of polarization by a few percent even at $`\lambda =20\mathrm{cm}`$, $`𝒫=𝒫_0(1e^S)/S0.96𝒫_0`$, where $`S=4\lambda ^4(0.81n_\mathrm{e}b)^2lL`$ (Burn 1966, Sokoloff et al. 1998).

A plausible explanation of the relatively low polarization of synchrotron emission from galactic halos of edge-on galaxies is that $`b_{}^2/B_{}^2`$ is larger ($`6`$) than predicted by our model (2–3) for the Milky Way.

## 4 Hydrostatic equilibrium in the Outer Galaxy

The Galactic gas disc is warped beyond the solar orbit (Binney & Tremaine 1987, Binney 1992). The warp is thought to propagate through the disc in azimuth and the speed of propagation determines whether the ISM at large radii has enough time to reach a state of hydrostatic equilibrium. The period of the warping wave is about $`3\times 10^8\mathrm{yr}`$, assumed to be similar to the disc rotation period at a radius 12 kpc where the warp starts (Binney 1992). This is longer than the sound crossing time over a scale height of $`1\mathrm{kpc}`$ at the sound speed of $`10\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. Thus, hydrostatic equilibrium can be a valid first approximation for the state of the gas at $`R=12`$–18 kpc (see, however, Masset & Tagger 1996, for a discussion of possible deviations from equilibrium).

In this section we argue that the warping can lead to a noticeable asymmetry in the vertical profile of the gas density and confirm this using the vertical H i  distributions in the outer Galaxy obtained by Diplas & Savage (1991).

We describe positions in Galactocentric polar coordinates ($`R,\mathrm{\Theta },z`$), where $`R`$ is distance in the Galactic plane from the Galactic centre, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is the azimuth in the Galactic plane, with the Sun at $`\mathrm{\Theta }=180^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ increasing anti-clockwise viewed from the north Galactic pole; and $`z`$ is vertical distance from the Galactic plane. The galactocentric distance of the Sun is adopted as $`R_{}=10\mathrm{kpc}`$, rather than the currently used $`R_{}=8.5\mathrm{kpc}`$ to avoid the need to rescale the data of Diplas & Savage (1991).

### 4.1 The observed vertical asymmetry in H i density

Data from the northern hemisphere H i survey (Stark et al. 1991) was used by Diplas & Savage (1991) to study the gas morphology in the outer Galaxy. The data show a distinct asymmetry in the vertical distribution of H i across a substantial region of the outer disc. The asymmetry can also be seen, but less distinctly, in maps of the outer Galaxy presented by Burton (1988, Fig. 7.18).

The asymmetry occurs over a sector of the outer Galactic disc in the azimuthal range $`\mathrm{\Theta }=60^{}`$ to $`\mathrm{\Theta }=110^{}`$, visible between $`R=14`$ and $`18\mathrm{kpc}`$. It is notable that the warping is maximum in this region (Diplas & Savage 1991). Unfortunately, the region around $`\mathrm{\Theta }=270^{}`$ where the other crest of the warp is located is not accessible for a northern hemisphere survey.

Diplas & Savage (1991) do not comment directly on the asymmetry, but the data reduction process used can lead to some mis-positioning of gas, especially at lower densities, because of confusion with H i clouds moving with peculiar velocities. (B. Savage, 1998, private communication). Reversing the calculations of Diplas & Savage (1991) in the region of asymmetry shows that the velocity of the H i , $`100<v<40\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, is indeed similar to that of intermediate velocity clouds (Wesselius & Fejes 1973, Kuntz & Danly 1996). However the region ($`35^{}l78^{}`$ and $`8^{}b8^{}`$, where $`l`$ and $`b`$ are Galactic longitude and latitude) is too large to be associated with a single cloud. We proceed with the assumption that the asymmetry is a real feature of the outer Galaxy gas distribution.

The results of Diplas & Savage (1991), for three positions in the outer Galaxy, are illustrated in Fig. 7. The maximum gas density is displaced to positive $`z`$, reflecting the warp of the gas disc. It is also clear that the gas density is asymmetric with respect to the displaced midplane, with a density excess at positive $`z`$.

### 4.2 Asymmetry in the vertical H i density caused by the warp

To model gas equilibrium in a warped disc, we describe the warp locally as being produced by a $`z`$-independent acceleration $`a_0`$, added across all $`z`$ as required to make $`z=0.5\mathrm{kpc}`$ the bottom of the potential well. Since the stellar disc is not significantly warped, we scaled $`g`$ of Eq. (4) to the outer Galaxy (Ferrière 1998) (neglecting edge effects and gravity from the gas since the region of interest is not far from the edge of the stellar disc) and then added a constant acceleration $`a_0=1.5\times 10^9\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}^2`$ at $`R=16\mathrm{kpc}`$. The modulus of the resulting vertical acceleration is shown in Fig. 8. Acceleration of this magnitude displaces the gas density maximum to the observed height at this radius. Thus, the vertical equilibrium equation (1) is replaced by

$$\frac{P}{z}=\rho (g+a_0),$$
(7)
with

$$g=\frac{A_1z}{\sqrt{z^2+Z_1^2}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{RR_{}}{R_1}\right)+A_2\frac{z}{Z_2}\frac{R_{}^2+R_2^2}{R^2+R_2^2},$$
(8)
where $`A_1,A_2,Z_1`$ and $`Z_2`$ are defined after Eq. (4) and $`R_1=4.9\mathrm{kpc},R_2=2.2\mathrm{kpc}`$.

If all of the pressure sources are symmetric with respect to the shifted midplane, the asymmetric force of Eq. (7) should give rise to a larger gas scale height above the shifted midplane at $`0.5\mathrm{kpc}`$, similar to what is observed – see fits in Fig. 7.

To further, investigate the effect of the warp, we use Parker’s (1966) model of hydrostatic equilibrium

$$\rho (z)=\rho _0\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }(z)}{(1+\alpha +\beta )u^2}\right],$$
(9)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the gravitational potential, obtained by integrating Eq. (8) and $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ represent the pressures due to magnetic fields and cosmic rays, respectively, as multiples of the gas pressure. A more detailed analysis as in Section 2 is hardly warranted here because of our limited knowledge of the gas parameters in the outer Galaxy. Assuming $`\alpha =\beta =1`$ and using the asymmetric force of Eq. (7), we fitted Eq. (9) to the observed density distribution using different values of the effective total gas velocity dispersion, $`u`$.

As shown in Fig. 7, the density distributions are reproduced satisfactorily close to the shifted midplane with a single (smaller) velocity dispersion. However, there is additional asymmetry at larger heights which can be accounted for by larger values of $`u`$ at negative $`z`$, at least at $`R=14`$ and $`16\mathrm{kpc}`$. The same effect is found at other positions in the sector of the Galactic disc that is positively warped; at each position a further source of asymmetry is required as a higher order effect at large heights.

To quantify deviations from Eq. (7) with a constant $`a_0`$, we show in Fig. 9 the residual acceleration

$$a_1=\rho ^1\frac{P}{z}ga_0,$$

at $`R=16\mathrm{kpc}`$ both for a uniform velocity dispersion $`u=11.5\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, a mean between the two approximations of Fig. 7, and for $`u=8\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (shown dotted in Fig. 7) above the shifted midplane and $`u=15\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (dashed in Fig. 7) below the midplane. The residual, asymmetric component of the acceleration is $`|a_1|10^9\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}^2`$ or less at $`\mathrm{\Delta }z=\pm 1\mathrm{kpc}`$ from the midplane of the warped disc, so $`|a_1/a_0|<0.7`$.

The former option, illustrated in Fig. 9a, attributes the whole residual asymmetry to a $`z`$-dependent component of the warping force, $`a_1`$, which then must vary at a scale of order 1 kpc, with $`a_1`$ possibly becoming comparable to $`a_0`$ at large heights.

In the latter case, illustrated in Fig. 9b, one supposes that a part of the residual asymmetry is due to an asymmetric pressure in the ISM. We have quantified the residual in terms of velocity dispersions. An obvious candidate for the residual asymmetry can be the regular magnetic field $`B(z)`$. We note that some galactic dynamo models are compatible with strongly asymmetric $`B(z)`$ where $`B(z)`$ vanishes in a layer at a height of about $`1\mathrm{kpc}`$ on one side of the disc. This could happen if regular magnetic fields in the disc and halo have different parities in $`z`$ (Sokoloff & Shukurov 1990, Brandenburg et al. 1992). The range of $`a_1`$ in Fig 9b, $`\mathrm{\Delta }a_1`$, would correspond to an asymmetric component of $`B(z)`$ of order $`\sqrt{\rho \mathrm{\Delta }a_1\mathrm{\Delta }z}1\mu \mathrm{G}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }a_1a_1`$, gas density corresponds to $`0.03\mathrm{cm}^3`$, and $`B`$ has to be smaller above the midplane $`z>0`$.

## 5 Summary

As discussed in Section 3, parameters of a multiphase ISM in the solar vicinity are compatible with a model of hydrostatic equilibrium where approximate equipartition exists between the energy density of the turbulent magnetic field and the turbulent energy density of the gas in its diffuse phases. Models of hydrostatic equilibrium are sensitive to the midplane strength of the regular magnetic field, $`B_0`$.

If $`B_02\mu \mathrm{G}`$, the ISM may be overpressured at $`1z4\mathrm{kpc}`$ (so hydrostatic equilibrium is a poor approximation there), and this can contribute to driving the galactic fountain. The interstellar magnetic field should be coupled more weakly to the molecular clouds than with the other, diffuse gas phases; otherwise, the regular magnetic field strength has a deep, narrow minimum at $`z=0`$.

If $`B_04\mu \mathrm{G}`$ then our model gives two-component vertical profiles of both regular, $`B`$, and turbulent, $`b`$, magnetic fields. The narrower components have scale heights of $`h_B1\mathrm{kpc}`$ for the regular magnetic field, $`h_b0.5\mathrm{kpc}`$ for the turbulent magnetic field. The more extended components have an approximately constant regular magnetic field strength of $`B1\mu \mathrm{G}`$ for $`2z8\mathrm{kpc}`$ and $`b_0/B_0=1.25`$ at $`z=0`$. The vertical dependence of the degree of linear polarization of synchrotron emission expected from the derived $`B(z)`$ and $`b(z)`$, shows a steady increase above $`z2\mathrm{kpc}`$ similar to that observed for external edge-on galaxies.

Models with $`B_04\mu \mathrm{G}`$ seem to be simpler and more attractive than those with $`B_02\mu \mathrm{G}`$. The former are consistent with hydrostatic equilibrium maintained at all heights, whereas the overpressure at $`1z4\mathrm{kpc}`$ in the latter models drives systematic vertical gas flow to the halo at a speed of about $`50\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. This counterintuitive conclusion results from a larger contribution of turbulent magnetic fields and cosmic rays to the total pressure required in the latter models for hydrostatic equilibrium at $`z1\mathrm{kpc}`$. We should emphasize that our results with $`B_02\mu \mathrm{G}`$ are only tentative at $`z1\mathrm{kpc}`$ where our basic assumption of hydrostatic equilibrium does not apply with this value of $`B_0`$.

We have demonstrated in Section 4 that the vertical force acting on the gas in a warped disc should become asymmetric in $`z`$, resulting in asymmetry in the gas distribution. By taking the simplest form for the vertical structure of the warping force as a first approximation and assuming hydrostatic equilibrium can be reached, we calculated the expected vertical gas density distribution. The observed warping is produced by an acceleration of $`a_0=1.5\times 10^9\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}^2`$ at $`R=16\mathrm{kpc}`$. The vertical profiles of neutral hydrogen density in the outer Galaxy (Diplas & Savage 1991) show an asymmetry of the expected form, with the density $`0.5\mathrm{kpc}`$ above the shifted midplane a factor of $`1.2`$ higher than the density $`0.5\mathrm{kpc}`$ below.

## Acknowledgements

We are grateful to A. Brandenburg, W. Dobler, K. Ferrière, M. Tagger and E. Zweibel for helpful discussions and to B. Savage for useful comments on his H i data. The comments of the referee, R. Beck, greatly improved the paper. This work was supported by PPARC and the Nuffield Foundation.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

hep-th/0101150

Čech, Dolbeault and de Rham cohomologies
in Chern-Simons and BF theories ***To appear in proceedings of the XXIII International Colloquium on Group Theoretical Methods in Physics (July 31 - August 5, 2000, Dubna, Russia).

T.A.Ivanovaa and A.D.Popova,b

aBogoliubov Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, JINR, Dubna, Russia
bInstitut für Theoretische Physik, Universität Hannover, Germany

> Abstract. Topological Chern-Simons (CS) and BF theories and their holomorphic analogues are discussed in terms of de Rham and Dolbeault cohomologies. We show that Čech cohomology provides another useful description of the above topological and holomorphic field theories. In particular, all hidden (nonlocal) symmetries of non-Abelian CS and BF theories can be most clearly seen in the Čech approach. We consider multidimensional Manin-Ward integrable systems and describe their connections with holomorphic BF theories. Dressing symmetries of these generic integrable systems are briefly discussed.

1. Introduction

Topological field theories  were intensively studied over the last ten years (see e.g.  and references therein). Among these theories are Chern-Simons  and BF  topological theories describing flat connections $`d_A=d+A`$ on principal bundles $`P`$ over smooth manifolds and $`d_A`$-closed ad$`P`$-valued forms. Holomorphic Chern-Simons \[8-10\] and holomorphic BF  theories describe flat (0,1)-connections $`\overline{}_A=\overline{}+A^{0,1}`$ on bundles $`P`$ over complex manifolds and $`\overline{}_A`$-closed ad$`P`$-valued forms. In Abelian case the above theories give field-theoretic descriptions of de Rham and Dolbeault cohomologies.

After recalling the definitions of de Rham, Dolbeault and Čech complexes , we discuss isomorphisms between the de Rham and Čech cohomologies of real manifolds and the Dolbeault and Čech cohomologies of complex manifolds. These isomorphisms permit one to reduce differential equations of motion of CS and BF theories defined on a manifold $`M`$ to some functional equations defined on open subsets of $`M`$. Transition from the description of CS and BF theories in terms of globally defined differential forms (de Rham or Dolbeault cocycles) to the description in terms of locally defined functions (Čech cocycles) is especially useful in considering moduli spaces of locally constant and holomorphic structures (flat connections and (0,1)-connections, respectively) on bundles . The Čech approach considerably simplifies finding and exploring symmetries of Chern-Simons, BF and self-dual Yang-Mills (SDYM) theories \[16-18\].

We describe a connection between holomorphic BF theories and multidimensional integrable systems introduced by Yu.Manin  and R.Ward  (see \[21-23\] for further developments). These generic integrable systems contain 4D SDYM model and 2D integrable models as special cases . The equivalence of Čech and Dolbeault descriptions of holomorphic bundles permits one to formulate a method of solving the Manin-Ward equations as a cohomological analogue of the method of Birkhoff factorizations and dressing transformations. Moreover, by considering these generic integrable systems, it may be seen how the dressing approach to integrable systems originates from deformation theory of flat and holomorphic bundles. Dressing symmetries of Manin-Ward integrable systems can be obtained from symmetries of CS and BF theories described in .

2. Differential complexes

In this section we recall some definitions  to be used in the following and fix the notation.

2.1. General definitions. A direct sum $`C^{}=\underset{k}{}C^k`$ of vector spaces $`C^k`$ indexed by integers $`k`$ is called a differential complex if there are homomorphisms

$$\mathrm{}C^{k1}\stackrel{\delta }{}C^k\stackrel{\delta }{}C^{k+1}\mathrm{}$$

such that $`\delta ^2=0`$. The homomorphism $`\delta `$ is called a differential operator of the complex $`C^{}`$. Elements $`c^kC^k`$ are called $`k`$-cochains.

Let us consider the space

$$Z^k:=\text{Ker}\delta C^k=\{z^kC^k\text{such that}\delta z^k=0\}.$$
$`(1)`$
Elements $`z^kZ^k`$ are called $`k`$-cocycles and $`Z^k`$ is called the space of $`k`$-cocycles. The space

$$B^k:=\text{Im}\delta C^k=\{b^kC^k\text{such that}b^k=\delta c^{k1}\text{for some}c^{k1}C^{k1}\}$$
$`(2)`$
is called the space of $`k`$-coboundaries and elements $`b^kB^k`$ are called $`k`$-coboundaries. It is clear that $`B^kZ^kC^k,`$ since each $`k`$-coboundary $`b^k`$ is a $`k`$-cocycle: $`\delta b^k=\delta ^2c^{k1}=0`$. Cocycles $`z^k`$ such that $`z^k\delta c^{k1}`$ are called nontrivial $`k`$-cocycles. The space of nontrivial $`k`$-cocycles is parametrized by the quotient space

$$H^k:=Z^k/B^k,$$
$`(3)`$
which is called the $`k`$-th cohomology space of the complex $`C^{}`$.

The cohomology of the differential complex $`C^{}`$ is the direct sum of the quotient spaces $`H^k`$,

$$H^{}=\underset{k}{}H^k.$$
$`(4)`$
De Rham, Dolbeault and Čech complexes are examples of the differential complex.

2.2. De Rham complex. We consider a differentiable (smooth) manifold $`M`$ of real dimension $`n`$, the space $`\mathrm{\Omega }^k(M)`$ of smooth $`k`$-forms on $`M`$ and an exterior derivative $`d:\mathrm{\Omega }^k(M)\mathrm{\Omega }^{k+1}(M)`$, $`d^2=0`$. All that gives us the de Rham complex

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(M)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\mathrm{\Omega }^k(M)$$

on a smooth $`n`$-manifold $`M`$.

A differential form $`\omega `$ on $`M`$ is called closed if $`d\omega =0`$. A differential form $`\tau `$ on $`M`$ is called exact  if $`\tau =d\phi `$ for some form $`\phi `$. Denote by $`Z_d^k(M)`$ the space of closed $`k`$-forms on $`M`$ and by $`B_d^k(M)`$ the space of exact $`k`$-forms on $`M`$, $`B_d^k(M)Z_d^k(M)\mathrm{\Omega }^k(M)`$. In the language of differential complexes, closed and exact $`k`$-forms are called de Rham $`k`$-cocycles and $`k`$-coboundaries, respectively.

The quotient space $`H_d^k(M)=Z_d^k(M)/B_d^k(M)`$ is called the $`k`$-th de Rham cohomology space of $`M`$. The direct sum

$$H_d^{}(M)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}H_d^k(M)$$

is called the de Rham cohomology of $`M`$.

2.3. Dolbeault complex. Consider a complex manifold $`M`$ of complex dimension $`n`$ and the space $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)`$ of smooth $`(p,q)`$-forms on $`M`$. The exterior derivative $`d`$ on complex manifolds is splitted into a direct sum of two differential operators $``$ and $`\overline{}`$ such that $`d=+\overline{},d^2=^2=\overline{}^2=\overline{}+\overline{}=0.`$ These operators act on the space $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)`$ as follows:

$$:\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)\mathrm{\Omega }^{p+1,q}(M),\overline{}:\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q+1}(M),$$

$$d:\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)\mathrm{\Omega }^{p+1,q}(M)\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q+1}(M).$$

Consider a sequence of homomorphisms

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,0}(M)\overline{}\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,1}(M)\overline{}\mathrm{}\overline{}\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,n}(M)0.$$

Since $`\overline{}^2=0`$, the direct sum

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,}(M)=\underset{q=0}{\overset{n}{}}\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)$$

of the spaces $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)`$ is a differential complex, called the Dolbeault complex. A $`(p,q)`$-form $`\phi `$ is called $`\overline{}`$-closed if $`\overline{}\phi =0`$. In the case $`q=0`$ such $`\overline{}`$-closed forms are called holomorphic.

Denote by

$$Z_\overline{}^{p,q}(M):=\text{Ker}\overline{}\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)=\{\omega \mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)\text{such that}\overline{}\omega =0\}$$

the space of $`\overline{}`$-closed $`(p,q)`$-forms, i.e. Dolbeault $`q`$-cocycles in the language of differential complexes, and by

$$B_\overline{}^{p,q}(M):=\text{Im}\overline{}\mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)=\{\tau \mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q}(M)\text{such that}\tau =\overline{}\nu \text{for some}\nu \mathrm{\Omega }^{p,q1}(M)\}$$

the space of $`\overline{}`$-exact $`(p,q)`$-forms, i.e. Dolbeault $`q`$-coboundaries. We also denote by $`^p(M):=Z_\overline{}^{p,0}(M)`$ the space of holomorphic $`(p,0)`$-forms.

The quotient space $`H_\overline{}^{p,q}(M)=Z_\overline{}^{p,q}(M)/B_\overline{}^{p,q}(M)`$ is called the $`(p,q)`$-th Dolbeault cohomology space of $`M`$. The direct sum

$$H_\overline{}^{p,}(M)=\underset{q=0}{\overset{n}{}}H_\overline{}^{p,q}(M)$$

is called the Dolbeault cohomology of $`M`$.

2.4. Čech complex. For any smooth $`n`$-manifold $`M`$ it is possible to choose an open covering $`𝒰=\{U_\alpha \}_{\alpha I}`$ such that each nonempty finite intersection of the open sets $`U_\alpha `$ is diffeomorphic to an open ball in $`^n`$ (or biholomorphic to a Stein manifold for complex $`n`$-manifolds $`M`$). Such a covering will be called a good covering. For a good covering the Poincaré lemma holds on each finite intersection of the open sets $`U_\alpha `$, $`\alpha I`$.

An ordered collection $`U_{\alpha _0},\mathrm{},U_{\alpha _m}`$ of $`m+1`$ open sets from the covering $`𝒰`$ such that $`U_{\alpha _0}\mathrm{}U_{\alpha _m}\mathrm{}`$ is called an $`m`$-simplex. The set $`U_{\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _m}:=U_{\alpha _0}\mathrm{}U_{\alpha _m}`$ is called a support of the $`m`$-simplex $`U_{\alpha _0},\mathrm{},U_{\alpha _m}`$.

Let us consider the space $`𝒮`$ of forms of a particular “type” defined locally on various open sets of a manifold $`M`$. Depending on the structure of $`M`$ (smooth or complex-analytic) this may be the space of smooth $`k`$-forms, holomorphic $`(p,0)`$-forms etc. In other words, we consider various sheaves of forms over $`M`$ .

A Čech $`m`$-cochain $`c^m`$ with values in the space $`𝒮`$ is a collection $`c^m=\{c_{\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _m}\}`$ of elements $`c_{\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _m}`$ from $`𝒮`$ defined on supports $`U_{\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _m}`$ of $`m`$-simplexes $`U_{\alpha _0},\mathrm{},U_{\alpha _m}`$. The space of Čech $`m`$-cochains for the covering $`𝒰`$ with values in $`𝒮`$ will be denoted by $`C^m(𝒰,𝒮)`$.

Let us denote by $`\rho _\alpha `$ the restriction operator acting on elements from $`𝒮`$ as follows: if $`f𝒮`$ is defined on an open set $`U`$ then $`\rho _\alpha f`$ is defined on $`UU_\alpha `$. Now let us consider the map $`\delta :=\{\rho _{[\alpha \mathrm{}]}\}`$,

$$\delta :\{c_{\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _m}\}\{\rho _{[\alpha _0}c_{\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _{m+1}]}\},$$
$`(5)`$
where $`c^m=\{c_{\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _m}\}C^m(𝒰,𝒮),\delta c^m=\{\rho _{[\alpha _0}c_{\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _{m+1}]}\}C^{m+1}(𝒰,𝒮)`$ and $`[\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _{m+1}]`$ means antisymmetrization w.r.t. the indices $`\alpha _0,\mathrm{},\alpha _{m+1}`$. The operator $`\delta `$ is called a coboundary operator.

Since $`\rho _\alpha \rho _\beta =\rho _\beta \rho _\alpha `$, we have $`\delta ^2=0`$. Therefore, one can consider a sequence of homomorphisms

$$C^0(𝒰,𝒮)\stackrel{\delta }{}\mathrm{}\stackrel{\delta }{}C^{m1}(𝒰,𝒮)\stackrel{\delta }{}C^m(𝒰,𝒮)\stackrel{\delta }{}C^{m+1}(𝒰,𝒮)\stackrel{\delta }{}\mathrm{},$$

which gives the Čech complex $`C^{}(𝒰,𝒮)=\underset{m0}{}C^m(𝒰,𝒮).`$ The coboundary operator $`\delta `$ is a “differential” operator of this complex in the terminology of differential complexes.

Denote by

$$Z^m(𝒰,𝒮):=\text{Ker}\delta C^m(𝒰,𝒮)=\{zC^m(𝒰,𝒮):\delta z=0\}$$
$`(6)`$
the space of Čech $`m`$-cocycles, and by

$$B^m(𝒰,𝒮):=\text{Im}\delta C^m(𝒰,𝒮)=\{bC^m(𝒰,𝒮):b=\delta c\text{for some}cC^{m1}(𝒰,𝒮)\}$$
$`(7)`$
the space of Čech $`m`$-coboundaries.

It is evident that $`B^m(𝒰,𝒮)Z^m(𝒰,𝒮)C^m(𝒰,𝒮).`$ Therefore, we can introduce the space $`H^m(𝒰,𝒮)=Z^m(𝒰,𝒮)/B^m(𝒰,𝒮)`$ of nontrivial Čech $`m`$-cocycles, where two distinct elements of $`Z^m(𝒰,𝒮)`$ are regarded as equivalent in $`H^m(𝒰,𝒮)`$ if they differ by a coboundary. We call $`H^m(𝒰,𝒮)`$ the $`m`$-th Čech cohomology space of the covering $`𝒰`$ with coefficients in the space $`𝒮`$.

The direct sum

$$H^{}(𝒰,𝒮)=\underset{m0}{}H^m(𝒰,𝒮)$$

is called the Čech cohomology of $`𝒰`$ with coefficients in $`𝒮`$. The result depends to some extent on the choice of covering $`𝒰`$, but for a good covering this dependence disappear and $`H^m(𝒰,𝒮)H^m(M,𝒮)`$ (for proof see e.g. ).

3. Field-theoretic description of de Rham and Dolbeault cohomologies

3.1. Abelian Chern-Simons and BF theories. Let $`M`$ be an oriented smooth $`n`$-manifold. The field-theoretic description of the de Rham cohomology of $`M`$ can be given by the following action functional :

$$S_{\mathrm{dR}}=_M\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\omega ^{(nk)}d\omega ^{(k1)},$$
$`(8)`$
where $`\omega ^{(s)}\mathrm{\Omega }^s(M)`$ are $`s`$-forms on $`M`$, $`s=0,1,\mathrm{},n`$, and $`\mathrm{}=\left[\frac{n+1}{2}\right]`$ is the integer part of the number $`\frac{n+1}{2}`$.

The Euler-Lagrange equations for this action functional are

$$d\omega ^{(k)}=0,k=0,1,\mathrm{},n1.$$
$`(9)`$
Solutions to these equations are elements from $`Z_d^k(M)`$. Exact forms from $`B_d^k(M)`$ give trivial solutions. Therefore, the space of nontrivial solutions (moduli space) for the field equations (9) is given by the space $`\underset{k=0}{\overset{n1}{}}H_d^k(M)`$.

The “de Rham theory” described by $`S_{\mathrm{dR}}`$ generalizes Abelian Chern-Simons theory defined by the action

$$S_{\mathrm{ACS}}=_MAdA,$$
$`(10)`$
where $`A:=\omega ^{(1)}\mathrm{\Omega }^1(M),dim_{}M=3`$. One can compare $`S_{\mathrm{ACS}}`$ with $`S_{\mathrm{dR}}`$ for $`n=3`$:

$$S_{\mathrm{dR}}=_M(\omega ^{(2)}d\omega ^{(0)}+\omega ^{(1)}d\omega ^{(1)}).$$

The “de Rham theory” (8) generalizes also Abelian topological BF theory with the action functional

$$S_{\mathrm{ABF}}=_MBF,$$
$`(11)`$
where $`B:=\omega ^{(n2)}\mathrm{\Omega }^{n2}(M),F:=d\omega ^{(1)},\omega ^{(1)}\mathrm{\Omega }^1(M)`$.

3.2. Abelian holomorphic BF theory. Now we consider a complex $`n`$-manifold $`M`$. The field-theoretic description of the Dolbeault cohomology of $`M`$ can be given by the following action functional:

$$S_{\mathrm{Dol}}=_M\underset{q=1}{\overset{n}{}}\omega ^{(np,nq)}\overline{}\omega ^{(p,q1)},$$
$`(12)`$
where $`\omega ^{(l,s)}\mathrm{\Omega }^{l,s}(M)`$. The equations of motion are

$$\overline{}\omega ^{(p,q1)}=0,\overline{}\omega ^{(np,nq)}=0,q=1,\mathrm{},n.$$
$`(13)`$
The moduli space of solutions is a vector space $`\underset{q=1}{\overset{n}{}}\left(H_\overline{}^{p,q1}(M)H_\overline{}^{np,nq}(M)\right).`$ The “Dolbeault theory” described by $`S_{\mathrm{Dol}}`$ generalizes Abelian holomorphic BF theory with the action functional

$$S_{\mathrm{AhBF}}=_MB^{n,n2}F^{0,2},$$
$`(14)`$
where $`B^{n,n2}:=\omega ^{(n,n2)}\mathrm{\Omega }^{n,n2}(M)`$, $`F^{0,2}=\overline{}\omega ^{(0,1)}`$, $`\omega ^{(0,1)}\mathrm{\Omega }^{0,1}(M)`$.

3.3. Isomorphisms of cohomologies. For a differentiable $`n`$-manifold, we denote by $`\mathrm{\Omega }^k`$ the space of locally defined $`k`$-forms and by $`\mathrm{\Omega }^0`$ the space of locally constant functions. For a complex $`n`$-manifold, by $`^p`$ we denote the space of locally holomorphic $`(p,0)`$-forms and by $`𝒪=^0`$ the space of locally holomorphic functions. In other words, we consider the sheaf $``$ of locally constant functions and the sheaves $`\mathrm{\Omega }^k`$, $`^p`$ of forms.

Theorem 1. The de Rham cohomology $`H_d^{}(M)`$ and Čech cohomology $`H^{}(M,)`$ of a differentiable $`n`$-manifold $`M`$ are isomorphic.

For proof see e.g. .

The de Rham-Čech isomorphism reduces differential equations $`d\omega ^{(k)}=0`$ on $`k`$-forms $`\omega ^{(k)}`$ (de Rham $`k`$-cochains) on a smooth $`n`$-manifold $`M`$ to the functional equations $`\rho _{[\alpha _0}c_{\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _{k+1}]}=0`$ on Čech $`k`$-cochains $`\{c_{\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _k}\}`$ from $`C^k(𝒰,)`$ defined on open subsets $`\{U_{\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _k}\}`$ of $`M`$. So, solutions of topological CS and BF theories can be described in terms of Čech cocycles.

Example 1. Let us consider a de Rham 2-cocycle $`FZ_d^2(M)`$, i.e. a $`d`$-closed 2-form $`F`$ on a smooth $`n`$-manifold $`M`$: $`dF=0`$. For a covering $`𝒰=\{U_\alpha \}_{\alpha I}`$ of $`M`$, we have $`F=\{\rho _\alpha F\}=\{F_\alpha \}`$ and $`dF_\alpha =0`$. By the Poincaré lemma , each closed 2-form locally is exact and therefore on each open set $`U_\alpha `$ there exists a 1-form $`A_\alpha `$ such that $`F_\alpha =dA_\alpha `$.

Let us introduce a collection $`\{b_{\alpha \beta }\}=\{\rho _\alpha A_\beta \rho _\beta A_\alpha \}`$ of 1-forms defined on $`U_\alpha U_\beta `$. It is easy to see that they are closed 1-forms: $`db_{\alpha \beta }=\rho _\alpha F_\beta \rho _\beta F_\alpha =\rho _{[\alpha }\rho _{\beta ]}F=0`$. Again, by the Poincaré lemma, there exist smooth functions $`s_{\alpha \beta }`$ such that $`b_{\alpha \beta }=ds_{\alpha \beta }`$. Using a collection $`\{s_{\alpha \beta }\}`$, we introduce functions $`c_{\alpha \beta \gamma }=\rho _{[\alpha }s_{\beta \gamma ]}`$ defined on $`U_\alpha U_\beta U_\gamma 0`$. One obtains $`dc_{\alpha \beta \gamma }=\rho _{[\alpha }b_{\beta \gamma ]}=\rho _{[\alpha }\rho _\beta A_{\gamma ]}=0`$, i.e. $`c_{\alpha \beta \gamma }`$ are locally constant functions. At the same time we have $`(\delta c)_{\alpha \beta \gamma \sigma }=\rho _{[\alpha }c_{\beta \gamma \sigma ]}=\rho _{[\alpha }\rho _\beta s_{\gamma \sigma ]}=0`$, i.e. $`c=\{c_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\}`$ is a Čech 2-cocycle with values in the space $``$ of locally constant functions. Thus, to the de Rham 2-cocycle $`F=\{F_\alpha \}Z_d^2(M)`$ we have associated a Čech 2-cocycle $`c=\{c_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\}Z^2(𝒰,)`$.

Conversely, for any Čech 2-cocycle $`c=\{c_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\}Z^2(𝒰,)`$ there exist collections $`\{s_{\alpha \beta }\}C^1(𝒰,\mathrm{\Omega }^0)`$ and $`\{A_\alpha \}C^0(𝒰,\mathrm{\Omega }^1)`$ of smooth functions and 1-forms such that

$$c_{\alpha \beta \gamma }=\rho _{[\alpha }s_{\beta \gamma ]}\text{on}U_\alpha U_\beta U_\gamma ,ds_{\alpha \beta }=\rho _{[\alpha }A_{\beta ]}\text{on}U_\alpha U_\beta .$$

If we find local 1-forms $`\{A_\alpha \}`$ from these equations, then a collection $`\{dA_\alpha \}`$ gives a $`d`$-closed 2-form $`F=\{dA_\alpha \}`$ on $`M`$.

Theorem 2. The Dolbeault cohomology $`H_\overline{}^{p,}(M)`$ and Čech cohomology $`H^{}(M,^p)`$ of a complex $`n`$-manifold $`M`$ are isomorphic.

For proof see e.g. .

The Dolbeault-Čech isomorphism reduces differential equations (13) on $`(p,q)`$-forms (Dolbeault $`q`$-cochains) defined on a complex $`n`$-manifold $`M`$ to functional equations (6) on Čech $`q`$-cochains from $`C^q(𝒰,^p)`$ defined on open subsets $`\{U_{\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _q}\}`$ of $`M`$. By using this isomorphism, one obtains another description of solutions of holomorphic CS and BF theories.

Example 2. Let us consider a Dolbeault 1-cocycle $`A^{0,1}Z_\overline{}^{0,1}(M)`$, i.e a smooth $`\overline{}`$-closed (0,1)-form $`A^{0,1}`$ on a complex $`n`$-manifold $`M`$: $`\overline{}A^{0,1}=0`$. Let $`𝒰=\{U_\alpha \}_{\alpha I}`$ be a covering of $`M`$. Then $`A^{0,1}`$ can be represented by a collection $`\{A_\alpha ^{0,1}\}`$ of $`\overline{}`$-closed (0,1)-forms $`A_\alpha ^{0,1}:=\rho _\alpha A^{0,1}`$ on $`U_\alpha `$, $`\alpha I`$. By the Poincaré lemma , on each open set $`U_\alpha `$ there exists a smooth function $`b_\alpha `$ such that $`A_\alpha ^{0,1}=\overline{}b_\alpha `$.

It is easy to see that on each intersection $`U_\alpha U_\beta \mathrm{}`$ we have $`\overline{}(\rho _\alpha b_\beta \rho _\beta b_\alpha )=\rho _\alpha A_\beta ^{0,1}\rho _\beta A_\alpha ^{0,1}=(\rho _\alpha \rho _\beta \rho _\beta \rho _\alpha )A^{0,1}=0`$ since $`\rho _{[\alpha }\rho _{\beta ]}=0`$. So, we obtain a collection $`b=\{b_\alpha \}C^0(𝒰,\mathrm{\Omega }^0)`$ of smooth functions $`b_\alpha `$ defined on $`U_\alpha `$ and a collection $`h=\{h_{\alpha \beta }\}C^1(𝒰,𝒪)`$ of holomorphic functions $`h_{\alpha \beta }:=\rho _\alpha b_\beta \rho _\beta b_\alpha `$ defined on $`U_\alpha U_\beta `$, $`\alpha ,\beta I`$. It is not difficult to see that $`h`$ is a Čech 1-cocycle from $`Z^1(𝒰,𝒪)`$: $`(\delta h)_{\alpha \beta \gamma }=\rho _{[\alpha }h_{\beta \gamma ]}=\rho _{[\alpha }\rho _{[\beta }b_{\gamma ]]}=0`$. Thus, to the Dolbeault 1-cocycle $`A^{0,1}`$ we have associated a Čech 1-cocycle $`h`$.

Conversely, for any Čech 1-cocycle $`h=\{h_{\alpha \beta }\}Z^1(𝒰,𝒪)`$ there exists a collection $`b=\{b_\alpha \}C^0(𝒰,\mathrm{\Omega }^0)`$ of smooth functions $`b_\alpha `$ such that

$$h_{\alpha \beta }=\rho _\alpha b_\beta \rho _\beta b_\alpha $$
$`(15)`$
on $`U_\alpha U_\beta `$. If we find such functions $`\{b_\alpha \}`$ then a collection $`\{\overline{}b_\alpha \}`$ will give us a global $`\overline{}`$-closed (0,1)-form $`A^{0,1}=\{\overline{}b_\alpha \}`$ on $`M`$. So, the isomorphism between $`H_\overline{}^{0,1}(M)`$ and $`H^1(M,𝒪)`$ permits one to reduce differential equations $`\overline{}A^{0,1}=\{\overline{}A_\alpha ^{0,1}\}=0`$ to functional equations (15).

4. Non-Abelian Chern-Simons and BF theories

4.1. Chern-Simons theories. Let $`M`$ be an oriented smooth 3-manifold, $`𝒰=\{U_\alpha \}`$ a good covering of $`M`$, $`G`$ a matrix Lie group, and $`𝒢`$ its Lie algebra. Denote by $`A`$ a connection 1-form on a (topologically trivial) principal $`G`$-bundle $`P`$ over $`M`$. For such bundles $`A`$ is a $`𝒢`$-valued 1-form on $`M`$.

Consider the action functional of non-Abelian topological Chern-Simons theory,

$$S_{\mathrm{CS}}=_M\text{Tr}(AdA+\frac{2}{3}AAA),$$
$`(16)`$
and its field equations

$$F_AdA+AA=0,$$
$`(17)`$
called zero curvature equations. Solutions $`A`$ to eqs.(17) define flat connections on $`P`$, i.e. differential operators $`d_A=d+A`$ such that $`d_A^2=0`$. Analogously, non-Abelian holomorphic Chern-Simons theories are defined on complex 3-manifolds and describe flat (0,1)-connections (holomorphic structures) \[8-10\].

Solutions $`A`$ of eqs.(17) can be considered as de Rham 1-cocycles in the non-Abelian de Rham cohomology. On each open set $`U_\alpha `$ eqs.(17) are solved trivially: $`A=\{A_\alpha \}`$, $`A_\alpha =\psi _\alpha ^1d\psi _\alpha `$, where $`\psi =\{\psi _\alpha \}`$ is a collection of smooth $`G`$-valued functions on $`\{U_\alpha \}`$. To obtain a global solution $`A`$ on $`M`$ from local solutions $`A_\alpha =\psi _\alpha ^1d\psi _\alpha `$, one should solve the differential equations

$$\psi _{\alpha |\beta }^1d\psi _{\alpha |\beta }\psi _{\beta |\alpha }^1d\psi _{\beta |\alpha }=0\text{on each intersection}U_\alpha U_\beta \mathrm{},$$
$`(18)`$
which simply mean that $`\rho _\beta A_\alpha =\rho _\alpha A_\beta `$ on $`U_\alpha U_\beta \mathrm{}`$. Here $`\psi _{\alpha |\beta }:=\rho _\beta \psi _\alpha `$. Equations (18) are equivalent to the equations

$$d(\psi _{\alpha |\beta }\psi _{\beta |\alpha }^1)=0.$$
$`(19)`$
We see that $`c_{\alpha \beta }:=\psi _{\alpha |\beta }\psi _{\beta |\alpha }^1`$ is a (locally) constant $`G`$-valued function defined on $`U_\alpha U_\beta `$.

The collection $`\{c_{\alpha \beta }\}`$ of $`G`$-valued functions is a Čech 1-cocycle in the non-Abelian Čech cohomology , where the cocycle conditions are

$$(\rho _\gamma c_{\alpha \beta })(\rho _\alpha c_{\beta \gamma })(\rho _\beta c_{\gamma \alpha })=1\text{on}U_\alpha U_\beta U_\gamma \mathrm{}.$$
$`(20)`$
Therefore, solutions of eqs.(17) can be obtained by splitting locally constant $`G`$-valued functions $`c_{\alpha \beta }`$ satisfying eqs.(20) into a product of two smooth $`G`$-valued functions $`\psi _\alpha `$ and $`\psi _\beta ^1`$ defined on $`U_\alpha `$ and $`U_\beta `$, respectively. Then, by virtue of the de Rham-Čech correspondence, a collection $`\{\psi _\alpha ^1d\psi _\alpha \}=:A`$ gives a global solution to eqs.(17).

4.2. Topological BF theories. A generalization of (topological) Chern-Simons theories to arbitrary dimensions is given by (topological) BF theories . The action functional for non-Abelian topological BF theory has the following form:

$$S_{\mathrm{BF}}=_M\text{Tr}(BF_A),$$
$`(21)`$
where $`M`$ is an oriented smooth $`n`$-manifold, $`F_A`$ is the curvature of a connection 1-form $`A`$ on a topologically trivial principal $`G`$-bundle $`P`$ over $`M`$, and $`B`$ is a $`𝒢`$-valued $`(n2)`$-form on $`M`$. The variation of the action (21) w.r.t. $`B`$ gives eqs.(17), and the variation of this action w.r.t. $`A`$ gives the equations

$$d_AB=dB+ABBA=0.$$
$`(22)`$
Thus, topological BF theories describe flat connections $`d_A`$ on a bundle $`P`$ over $`M`$ and $`𝒢`$-valued $`d_A`$-closed $`(n2)`$-forms $`B`$ on $`M`$.

Constructing solutions of the field equations of topological CS and BF theories in terms of deformation theory of locally constant (flat) bundles is discussed in . Differential equations (17) are equivalent to functional equations (20) which are solved by $`c_{\alpha \beta }=\psi _{\alpha |\beta }\psi _{\beta |\alpha }^1`$ for some smooth $`G`$-valued functions $`\{\psi _\alpha \}`$, and for a flat connection $`A=\{\psi _\alpha ^1d\psi _\alpha \}`$ eqs.(22) can be easily reduced to equations $`d(\psi B\psi ^1)=0`$ from standard de Rham cohomology. Symmetries of CS and BF topological theories can be described in terms of Čech 1-cocycles with values in the sheaf of locally constant maps of the space $`M`$ into the Lie group $`G`$. For more details see .

4.3. Holomorphic BF theories. Let $`M`$ be a complex $`n`$-dimensional manifold, $`G`$ a complex matrix Lie group, $`𝒢`$ its Lie algebra, $`P`$ a topologically trivial principal $`G`$-bundle over $`M`$, $`A`$ a connection 1-form on $`P`$, and $`F_A=dA+AA`$ its curvature. Consider holomorphic BF theories  with the action functional

$$S_{\mathrm{hBF}}=_M\text{Tr}(B^{n,n2}F_A^{0,2}),$$
$`(23)`$
where $`B^{n,n2}`$ is a $`𝒢`$-valued $`(n,n2)`$-form on $`M`$ and $`F_A^{0,2}`$ is the (0,2)-component of the curvature tensor $`F_A=F_A^{2,0}+F_A^{1,1}+F_A^{0,2}`$. The field equations for the action (23) are

$$\overline{}A^{0,1}+A^{0,1}A^{0,1}=0,\overline{}B^{n,n2}+A^{0,1}B^{n,n2}B^{n,n2}A^{0,1}=0,$$
$`(24)`$
where $`A^{0,1}`$ is the (0,1)-component of a connection 1-form $`A=A^{1,0}+A^{0,1}`$ on $`P`$. If a representation of $`G`$ in the complex vector space $`^r`$ is given, we can associate with $`P`$ the complex vector bundle $`E=P\times _G^r`$ and use vector bundles in the description of BF theories.

It follows from eqs.(24) that models (23) describe flat (0,1)-connections $`\overline{}_A=\overline{}+A^{0,1}`$ on $`G`$-bundles over complex $`n`$-manifolds $`M`$ and $`\overline{}_A`$-closed $`𝒢`$-valued $`(n,n2)`$-forms $`B^{n,n2}`$ on $`M`$. A procedure of constructing solutions to eqs.(24) and mapping solutions into one another (dressing transformations) are discussed in . This cohomological method of solving eqs.(24) is based on the equivalence of Čech and Dolbeault descriptions of holomorphic bundles and is a generalization to arbitrary dimensions of the dressing approach (Riemann-Hilbert problems) to solving integrable equations in two dimensions.

5. Manin-Ward integrable systems

5.1. Double fibrations. Let us consider complex manifolds $`X`$ and $`Z`$ with a correspondence between them defined by a double fibration

$$\begin{array}{c}Y\\ {}_{}{}^{\eta }^\rho \\ ZX\end{array},$$
$`(25)`$
where $`Y`$ is a complex submanifold in the direct product $`Z\times X`$, and projections $`\eta `$ and $`\rho `$ are surjective holomorphic maps. We assume that the fibres of $`\eta `$ are connected and simply connected complex manifolds, and the fibres of $`\rho `$ are supposed to be compact.

The double fibration (25) appears in the Kodaira relative deformation theory of compact submanifolds of complex manifolds . Points of $`X`$ describe a family of complex submanifolds $`\eta (\rho ^1(x))`$ of $`Z`$, and points of $`Z`$ describe a family of submanifolds $`\rho (\eta ^1(z))`$ of $`X`$. Note that Kodaira’s double fibrations are used in reparametrization-invariant geometric quantization of bosonic string theory (see  and references therein).

5.2. Integrable distributions. Under some mild topological conditions on the embeddings $`\eta (\rho ^1(x))Z`$ the manifold $`X`$ comes equipped with a family of torsion-free affine connections which are integrable on submanifolds $`\rho (\eta ^1(z))`$ of $`X`$ . We assume that these conditions are satisfied and $`X`$ has such a connection.

The manifold $`Y`$ has two integrable transversal distributions: the distribution $`𝒱_\eta ^{1,0}`$ of holomorphic vertical vector fields in the fibration $`\eta :YZ`$ and the distribution $`𝒱_\rho ^{1,0}`$ of holomorphic vertical vector fields in the fibration $`\rho :YX`$.

Let $`_\eta ^1`$ denotes the space of holomorphic (1,0)-forms dual to the holomorphic vectors from the distribution $`𝒱_\eta ^{1,0}`$. Since we have a projection $`^1_\eta ^1`$, we can introduce a relative exterior derivative $`_\eta `$ as the composition $`𝒪\stackrel{}{}^1_\eta ^1`$, where $`^1`$ and $`𝒪`$ are the sheaves of holomorphic (1,0)-forms and holomorphic functions on $`Y`$, respectively.

5.3. Integrable systems. Let us consider the double fibration (25), a topologically trivial holomorphic rank $`r`$ vector bundle $`E`$ over $`Z`$, the pulled-back bundle $`\stackrel{~}{E}\eta ^{}E`$ over $`Y`$ and the direct image bundle $`\widehat{E}\rho _{}\eta ^{}E`$ over $`X`$. In local holomorphic trivializations, the bundle $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ is defined by holomorphic transition functions constant along the fibres of $`\eta `$ (i.e. annihilated by $`\overline{}`$ and $`_\eta `$). So, $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ is equipped with the holomorphic structure $`\overline{}`$ and a flat relative holomorphic (1,0)-connection $`_\eta `$: $`\overline{}^2=0`$, $`_\eta ^2=0`$ and $`_\eta \overline{}+\overline{}_\eta =0`$.

Suppose that the bundle $`E`$ is holomorphically trivial on each submanifold $`\eta (\rho ^1(x))`$ of $`Z`$, which is equivalent to saying that the bundle $`\stackrel{~}{E}=\eta ^{}E`$ is holomorphically trivial on each submanifold $`\rho ^1(x)`$ of $`Y`$, $`xX`$. Such bundles are called X-trivial holomorphic bundles . Yu.Manin  and R.Ward  have shown that there is a one-to-one correspondence between $`X`$-trivial holomorphic vector bundles $`E`$ on $`Z`$ and vector bundles $`\widehat{E}=\rho _{}\eta ^{}E`$ on $`X`$ with a differential operator $`D:\widehat{E}\rho _{}_\eta ^1\widehat{E}`$ flat on each submanifold $`\rho (\eta ^1(z))`$ of $`X`$, i.e. $`D^2|_{\rho (\eta ^1(z))}=0`$ for all $`zZ`$. The operator $`D`$ is constructed from differential operators on $`X`$ and the equations $`D^2|_{\rho (\eta ^1(z))}=0`$ yield a system of nonlinear integrable differential equations on $`X`$ \[19-23\].

5.4. Dressing symmetries. Let us consider an $`X`$-trivial holomorphic rank $`r`$ vector bundle $`EZ`$ and the pulled-back bundle $`\stackrel{~}{E}=\eta ^{}EY`$ with the flat relative (1,0)-connection $`_\eta `$. There is a one-to-one correspondence between Manin-Ward integrable systems on $`X`$ and the bundles $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$. These bundles are locally constant (flat) along the fibres of $`\eta :YZ`$ and holomorphically trivial along the fibres of $`\rho :YX`$. Therefore, maps of solutions of the Manin-Ward integrable equations into one another (dressing symmetries) can be described by combining results on symmetries of flat  and holomorphic  bundles. Namely, consider a covering $`𝒰=\{U_\alpha \}`$ of $`Y`$ and holomorphic transition functions $`\{f_{\alpha \beta }\}`$ in the topologically trivial vector bundle $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ satisfying $`_\eta f_{\alpha \beta }=0`$. Let $``$ be the sheaf of holomorphic $`gl(r,)`$-valued functions on $`Y`$ and $`_\eta `$ its subsheaf of functions annihilated by $`_\eta `$. We consider the Lie algebra $`C^1(𝒰,_\eta )`$ of Čech 1-cochains with values in $`_\eta `$ and define its action on the transition functions $`\{f_{\alpha \beta }\}`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ by the formula

$$\delta _\theta f_{\alpha \beta }=\theta _{\alpha \beta }f_{\alpha \beta }f_{\alpha \beta }\theta _{\beta \alpha },$$

where $`\{\theta _{\alpha \beta }\}C^1(𝒰,_\eta )`$. Following  one can show that this action generates infinitesimal deformations of the bundle $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ on $`Y`$ preserving the condition of $`X`$-triviality and therefore descends to symmetries of Manin-Ward integrable systems on $`X`$. The algebra $`C^1(𝒰,_\eta )`$ of collections $`\{\theta _{\alpha \beta }\}`$ with pointwise commutators generalizes affine Lie algebras generated by algebra-valued holomorphic Čech 1-cochains on the Riemann sphere $`P^1`$.

5.5. Dolbeault description. Manin-Ward integrable systems can be described in terms of holomorphic BF theories on $`Y`$. For this, let us consider smooth local trivializations of the bundle $`\stackrel{~}{E}Y`$ such that transition functions of $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ become equal to unity on any intersection of charts. This is possible since $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ is equivalent to a product bundle. For a fixed covering $`𝒰=\{U_\alpha \}_{\alpha I}`$ of the manifold $`Y`$ and transition functions $`f=\{f_{\alpha \beta }\}`$, the change of trivialization for $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ from holomorphic to smooth is described by a collection $`\psi =\{\psi _\alpha \}`$ of smooth $`GL(r,)`$-valued functions $`\psi _\alpha `$ on $`U_\alpha `$ such that $`f_{\alpha \beta }=\psi _\alpha \psi _\beta ^1`$.

After smooth mapping $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ onto the direct product bundle $`Y\times ^r`$, the holomorphic structure $`\overline{}`$ and the flat relative connection $`_\eta `$ become a holomorphic structure $`^{0,1}=\overline{}+A^{0,1}=\overline{}+\psi ^1\overline{}\psi `$ and a flat relative (1,0)-connection $`_\eta ^{1,0}=_\eta +A_\eta ^{1,0}=_\eta +\psi ^1_\eta \psi `$ such that

$$(^{0,1})^2=\overline{}A^{0,1}+A^{0,1}A^{0,1}=0,_\eta A^{0,1}+\overline{}A_\eta ^{1,0}+A^{0,1}A_\eta ^{1,0}+A_\eta ^{1,0}A^{0,1}=0,$$
$`(26a)`$
$$(_\eta ^{1,0})^2=_\eta A_\eta ^{1,0}+A_\eta ^{1,0}A_\eta ^{1,0}=0.$$
$`(26b)`$
Equations (26a,b) mean that the bundle $`\stackrel{~}{E}Y\times ^r`$ is holomorphic and its restrictions to the fibres $`\eta ^1(z)`$ of the projection $`\eta :YZ`$ are locally constant (flat) bundles for any $`zZ`$. Functions $`\psi _\alpha GL(r,)`$ defining these bundles can be chosen to be holomorphic in complex coordinates on $`U_\alpha \eta ^1(z)`$ for any $`zZ`$, and therefore we obtain $`A_\eta ^{0,1}=0`$.

Recall that the bundle $`\stackrel{~}{E}Y`$ is $`X`$-trivial. Up to a gauge transformation this is equivalent to the equations

$$A_\rho ^{0,1}=0,$$
$`(26c)`$
where $`A_\rho ^{0,1}`$ is the component of $`A^{0,1}`$ along the distribution $`𝒱_\rho ^{0,1}`$ of antiholomorphic vertical vector fields in the fibration $`\rho :YX`$. In other words, $`GL(r,)`$-valued functions $`\psi _\alpha `$ from a collection $`\psi =\{\psi _\alpha \}`$ and $`A_\eta ^{1,0}=\psi ^1_\eta \psi `$ can be chosen to be holomorphic in complex coordinates on $`U_\alpha \rho ^1(x),xX`$. Equations (26) give the Dolbeault description of $`X`$-trivial holomorphic bundles $`\stackrel{~}{E}=\eta ^{}EY`$.

A restriction of the flat relative (1,0)-connection $`_\eta ^{1,0}`$ to $`\rho ^1(x)Y`$ is a differential operator with values in a holomorphic vector bundle over $`\rho ^1(x)`$. It can be expanded in global holomorphic sections of this bundle and projected to $`X`$. Then we obtain an operator $`D\rho _{}_\eta ^{1,0}`$ defining Manin-Ward integrable equations on $`X`$. These equations arise as the compatibility conditions $`(_\eta ^{1,0})^2=0`$ (equivalent to $`D^2|_{\rho (\eta ^1(z))}=0`$) for the linear system of equations

$$_\eta ^{1,0}\phi =0,$$
$`(27)`$
where $`\phi `$ is a section of the bundle $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ on $`Y`$, depending on $`xX`$ and $`\lambda \rho ^1(x)`$. Parameters $`\lambda `$ are called spectral parameters. For more details see \[19-24\].

5.6. Ward’s example . Here $`X`$ is an open subset of the complex vector space $`^{k(m+1)}`$, $`Y=X\times P^m`$ and $`Z`$ is an open subset of the complex projective space $`P^{m(k+1)}`$ (see the diagram (25)). The space $`Y`$ is a $`P^m`$-bundle over $`X`$ with the canonical holomorphic projection $`\rho :YX`$. Let $`\lambda ^j`$ ($`j=0,\mathrm{},m`$) be homogeneous coordinates on $`P^m`$ and $`x^{aj}`$ ($`a=1,\mathrm{},k`$) complex coordinates on $`X^{k(m+1)}`$. Then the integrable distribution $`𝒱_\eta ^{1,0}`$ on $`Y`$ is spanned by the vector fields $`V_a=\lambda ^j_{aj}`$, $`_{aj}:=/x^{aj}`$. The space $`Z`$ is the quotient of $`Y`$ by the flows of the vector fields $`V_a`$, $`dim_{}Z=m(k+1)`$. For each fixed $`\lambda =\{\lambda ^j\}P^m`$, the vectors $`V_1(\lambda ),\mathrm{},V_k(\lambda )`$ span a complex $`k`$-plane $`\alpha (\lambda )`$ in $`X`$.

There is a one-to-one correspondence between $`X`$-trivial holomorphic vector bundles $`E`$ over $`Z`$ and bundles $`\widehat{E}=\rho _{}\eta ^{}E`$ over $`X`$ with a connection $`D=dx^{aj}D_{aj}=dx^{aj}(_{aj}+A_{aj})`$ flat on each complex $`k`$-plane $`\alpha (\lambda )`$, $`\lambda P^m`$. Here $`A_{aj}(x)`$ are matrix-valued functions on $`X`$ (components of a connection 1-form on $`\widehat{E}`$). The operator $`_\eta ^{1,0}`$ is defined by the differential operators $`_a^{1,0}:=\lambda ^jD_{aj}`$ and the linear system of equations is $`_a^{1,0}\phi `$=0, where $`\phi (x,\lambda )`$ is a section of the bundle $`\eta ^{}EY`$. The compatibility conditions of this linear system are polynomials in $`\lambda ^j`$ :

$$\lambda ^j\lambda ^l[_{aj}+A_{aj},_{bl}+A_{bl}]=0.$$

After equating each coefficient of these polynomials to zero we obtain a set of nonlinear differential equations on the matrix-valued functions $`A_{aj}(x)`$ on $`X`$.

5.7. Supersymmetric Yang-Mills. It is not difficult to introduce supersymmetric generalizations of Manin-Ward integrable systems . One of the most interesting examples of such integrable models is the supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory in ten dimensions . For supersymmetric Yang-Mills model on complexified $`d=10`$ space-time, the space $`X`$ is a region in the superspace $`^{10|16}`$ (10 bosonic and 16 fermionic coordinates), $`Y`$ is a complex supermanifold of dimension $`18|16`$ and $`Z`$ is a complex supermanifold of dimension $`17|8`$ (see  for more details and references). Importance of this model is connected with the fact that it appears in the low-energy limit of superstrings. The Čech approach and advocated cohomological methods may be helpful in describing moduli spaces and symmetries of $`d=10`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills and superstring theories.

Acknowledgements

This work is supported in part by the grant RFBR-99-01-01076 and the Heisenberg-Landau Program. T.A.I. is grateful to the Institut für Theoretische Physik der Universität Hannover for hospitality and support during the final stage of the work.

References

* E.Witten, Commun.Math.Phys. 117 (1988) 353.
* D.Birmingham, M.Blau, M.Rakowski and G.Thompson, Phys.Rep. 209 (1991) 129; B.Dubrovin, Lect.Notes in Math. 1620 (1996) 120.
* J.M.F.Labastida, Chern-Simons gauge theory: ten years after, hep-th/9905057; A.S.Cattaneo and C.A.Rossi, Higher-dimensional BF theories in the
Batalin-Vilkovisky formalism: the BV action and generalized Wilson loops,
math.qa/0010172.
* A.S.Schwarz, Lett.Math.Phys. 2 (1978) 247; Commun.Math.Phys. 67 (1979) 1.
* E.Witten, Commun.Math.Phys. 121 (1989) 351.
* G.T.Horowitz, Commun.Math.Phys. 125 (1989) 417.
* M.Blau and G.Thompson, Ann.Phys. 205 (1991) 130.
* E.Witten, In: The Floer memorial volume, Progr. Math. 133 (Birkhäuser, Boston, 1995) p.637 \[hep-th/9207094\].
* M.Bershadsky, S.Cecotti, H.Ooguri and C.Vafa, Commun.Math.Phys. 165 (1994) 311 \[hep-th/9309140\].
* A.D.Popov, Nucl.Phys. B550 (1999) 585 \[hep-th/9806239\].
* A.D.Popov, Phys.Lett. B473 (2000) 65 \[hep-th/9909135\].
* R.Bott and L.W.Tu, Differential forms in algebraic topology (Springer, Berlin, 1982).
* P.Griffiths and J.Harris, Principles of algebraic geometry (Wiley, New York, 1978).
* J.Frenkel, Bull.Soc.Math.France 85 (1957) 135; P.Dedecker, Canad.J.Math. 12 (1960) 231; A.L.Oniščik, Trudi Mosk.Mat.Obsch. 17 (1967) 45.
* A.Levin and M.Olshanetsky, Commun.Math.Phys. 188 (1997) 449
\[alg-geom/9605005\].
* T.A.Ivanova and A.D.Popov, J.Nonlin.Math.Phys. 7 (2000) 480 \[hep-th/9908177\].
* T.A.Ivanova and A.D.Popov, J.Math.Phys. 41 (2000) 2604 \[hep-th/0002120\].
* A.D.Popov, Rev.Math.Phys. 11 (1999) 1091 \[hep-th/9803183\]; T.A.Ivanova, In: Moduli spaces in mathematics and physics (Hindawi Publ. Corporation, 1999) p.77 \[math-ph/9902015\].
* Yu.I.Manin, Gauge field theory and complex geometry (Springer, Berlin, 1988)
\[Russian: Nauka, Moscow, 1984\].
* R.S.Ward, Nucl.Phys. B236 (1984) 381.
* M.M.Kapranov and Yu.I.Manin, Russian Math.Surveys, 41:5 (1986) 85.
* R.J.Baston and M.E.Eastwood, The Penrose transform: Its interaction with representation theory (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989).
* L.J.Mason and N.M.J.Woodhouse, Integrability, self-duality, and twistor theory (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996).
* R.S.Ward, Phil.Trans.R.Soc.Lond. A315 (1985) 451, Lect.Notes in Phys. 280 (1987) 106; L.J.Mason and G.A.J.Sparling, Phys.Lett. A137 (1989) 29; A.L.Carey, K.C.Hannabuss, L.J.Mason and M.A.Singer, Commun.Math.Phys. 154 (1993) 25; T.A.Ivanova and A.D.Popov, Theor.Math.Phys. 102 (1995) 280, Phys.Lett. A205 (1995) 158 \[hep-th/9508129\].
* K.Kodaira, Ann.Math. 75 (1962) 146.
* A.D.Popov, Theor.Math.Phys. 83 (1990) 608; Sov.J.Nucl.Phys. 53 (1991) 876; A.D.Popov and A.G.Sergeev, In: Algebraic geometry and its applications (Vieweg, Wiesbaden, 1994) p.136.
* S.A.Merkulov, Proc.Amer.Math.Soc. 124 (1996) 1499;
S.Merkulov and L.Schwachhöfer, Ann.Math. 150 (1999) 77.
* R.Bryant, Asterisque 266 (2000) 351 \[math.dg/9910059\].
* E.Witten, Nucl.Phys. B266 (1986) 245.
* E.Abdalla, M.Forger and M.Jacques, Nucl.Phys. B307 (1988) 198.
* J.-L.Gervais and M.V.Saveliev, Nucl.Phys. B554 (1999) 183 \[hep-th/9811108\].