text:
# QCD ON A TRANSVERSE LATTICE

## 1 Introduction

The transverse lattice  is an attempt to combine advantages of the light-front (LF) and lattice formulations of QCD. In this approach to QCD the time and one space direction (say $`x^3`$) are kept continuous, while the two ‘transverse’ directions $`𝐱_{}(x^1,x^2)`$ are discretized. Keeping the time and $`x^3`$ directions continuous has the advantage of preserving manifest boost invariance for boosts in the $`x^3`$ direction. Furthermore, since $`x^\pm =x^0\pm x^3`$ also remain continuous, this formulation still allows a canonical LF Hamiltonian approach. On the other hand, working on a position space lattice in the transverse direction allows one to introduce a gauge invariant cutoff on $``$ momenta — in a similar fashion as is done in Euclidean or Hamiltonian lattice gauge theory.

In summary, the LF formulation has the advantage of utilizing degrees of freedom that are very physical since many high-energy scattering observables (such as deep-inelastic scattering cross sections) have very simple and intuitive interpretations as equal LF-time ($`x^+`$) correlation functions. Using a gauge invariant (position space-) lattice cutoff in the $``$ direction within the Lf framework has the advantage of being able to avoid the notorious $`1/k^+`$ divergences from the gauge field in LF-gauge which plague many other Hamiltonian LF approaches to QCD .

The hybrid treatment (continuous versus discrete) of the long./$``$ directions implies an analogous hybrid treatment of the long. versus $``$ gauge field: the long. gauge field degrees of freedom are the non-compact $`A^\mu `$, while the $``$ gauge degrees of freedom are compact link-fields. Each of these degees of freedom depend on two continuous ($`x^\pm `$) and two discrete ($`𝐧_{}`$) space-time variables, i.e. from a formal point of view the canonical $``$ lattice formulation is equivalent to a large number of coupled $`1+1`$ dimensional gauge theories (the long. gauge fields at each $`𝐧_{}`$) coupled to nonlinear $`\sigma `$ model degrees of freedom (the link fields).

## 2 The color dielectric formulation

For a variety of reasons it is advantageous to work with $``$ gauge degrees of freedom that are general matrix fields rather than $`USU(N_C)`$. First of all, we would like to work at a cutoff scale which is small (in momentum scale) since only then do we have a chance to find low lying hadrons that are simple (i.e. contain only few constituents). If one wants to work on a very coarse lattice, it is useful to imagine introducing smeared or averaged degrees of freedom. Upon averaging over neighboring ‘chains’ of $`SU(N_C)`$ fields one obtains degrees of freedom that while they still transform in the same way as the original $`SU(N_C)`$ degrees of freedom under gauge transformations, they are general matrix degrees of freedom which no longer obey $`U^{}U=1`$ and $`det(U)=1`$. The price that one has to pay for introducing these smeared degrees of freedom are more complicated interactions. The advantage is that low lying hadrons can be described in a Fock expansion (this has been confirmed by calculations of the static quark-antiquark potential  and glueball spectra ).

Another important advantage of this ‘color-dielectric’ approach is that it is much easier to construct a Fock expansion of states out of general linear matrix fields than out of fields that are subject to non-linear $`SU(N_C)`$ constraints.

In the color-dielectric approach the complexity is shifted from the states to the Hamiltonian: In principle, there exists an exact prescription for the transformation from one set of degrees of freedom (here $`U`$’s) to blocked degrees of freedom $`M_{av}_iU_i`$

$$e^{S_{eff.}(M)}=\left[dU\right]e^{S_{can.}(U)}\delta \left(M\underset{av}{}\underset{i}{}U_i\right).$$
(1)
The problem with this prescription is that $`S_{eff.}`$ is not only very difficult to determine directly, but in general also contains arbitrarily complicated interactions.

A much more practical approach towards determining the effective interaction among the link fields nonperturbatively is the use of Lorentz invariance. This strategy has been used in a systematic study of glueball masses in Ref. , where more details can be found regarding the effective interaction. One starts by making the most general ansatz for the effective interaction which is invariant under those symmetries of QCD that are not broken by the $``$ lattice. This still leaves an infinite number of possible terms and for practical reasons, only terms up to fourth order in the fields and only local (in the $``$ direction) terms have been included in the Ref. . The coefficients of the remaining terms are then fitted to maximize Lorentz covariance for physical observables, such as the $`Q\overline{Q}`$ potential (rotational invariance!) and covariance of the glueball dispersion relation. It should be emphasized that these are first principle calculations in the sense that the only phenomenological input parameter is the overall mass scale (which can for example be taken to be the lowest glueball mass or the string tension). The only other input that is used is the requirement of Lorentz invariance.

The numerical results from Refs.  within this approach are very encouraging:

* with only a few parameters, approximate Lorentz invariance could be achieved for relatively large number of glueball dispersion relations simultaneously  as well as for the $`Q\overline{Q}`$ potential
* the glueball spectrum that was obtained numerically on the $``$ lattice for $`N_C\mathrm{}`$ is consistent with Euclidean Monte Carlo lattice gauge theory calculations performed at finite $`N_C`$ and extrapolated to $`N_C\mathrm{}`$ .

For further details on these very interesting results, the reader is referred to Refs.  and references therein.

## 3 Fermions on the $``$ lattice

Encouraged by the very successful calculations within the pure glue sector, we proceeded to conduct numerical studies that include fermions . In this framework, states that have meson quantum numbers consist either of a $`q`$ and a $`\overline{q}`$ on the same transverse site with no link fields required or of a $`q`$ and a $`\overline{q}`$ at an arbitrary $``$ separation with a chain of link fields in the $``$ direction connecting them. Hopping of the quarks in the $``$ direction is accompanied by emission or absorption of link field quanta on the link across which the quarks hop. For each transverse site there is a longitudinal gauge field interaction (very similar to the interaction in $`QCD_{1+1}`$) which couples to $`q`$ and $`\overline{q}`$ on that site as well as to link fields adjacent to that site. In the color dielectric approach the link fields are also subject to the effective interaction discussed above.

Similar to other lattice field theories with fermions, species doubling also occurs for the $``$ lattice action. Of course, one main difference to the Euclidean formulation is that the naive $``$ lattice action for fermions on the $``$ lattice exhibits only $`2^2=4`$ fold species doubling, since only two directions are discretized. Nevertheless, although species doubling is a less extreme phenomenon here, it is a problem that needs to be addressed.

At this point one has several options to proceed. One obvious possibility is to add a Wilson $`r`$-term of the form

$$\delta _r=ar\overline{\psi }_{}^2\psi $$
(2)
to the $``$ lattice action. Obviously, such a term violates chiral symmetry for finite lattice spacing, but this is just a consequence of the well known Nielson-Ninomya theorem, which states that any local and hermitian action for lattice fermions which is chirally symmetric does necessarily exhibit species doubling.

Within the LF framework there seems to be an alternative way to eliminate ‘doublers’: The crucial observation is that it is possible to write down a fermion (kinetic) mass term within this framework which is chirally invariant (but nonlocal)

$$\delta _m=\delta m^2\overline{\psi }\frac{\gamma ^+}{i_{}}\psi .$$
(3)
Since it is possible to write down a chirally invariant mass term, it is also possible to write down a chirally invariant r-term to remove the doublers. 111Of course, it is non-local, which is why this does not contradict the Nielson-Ninomya theorem. In Ref.  we investigated the differences between adding a conventional r-term and such a modified chirally invariant r-term to the $``$ lattice action. The main problem is that in the canonical LF approach, where half the fermion degrees of freedom are eliminated using a constraint equation, the usual chiral transformations become dynamical operations and therefore the meaning of the usual chiral symmetry becomes obscure. For further details on this issue see Ref. .

Both approaches to fermions on the $``$ lattice give rise to two kind of hopping terms for the fermions: one that has the Dirac structure of a vector coupling and which flips the helicity (hereafter referred to as spin-flip hopping) and one which has a scalar Dirac structure and does not flip the helicity (hereafter referred to as r-term). The difference between conventional and modified r-term is how coefficients in the LF Hamiltonian are related to coefficients in the Lagrangian. In the spirit of the color-dielectric approach we regard both coefficients in the Hamiltonian as free parameters.

For numerical reasons, we limited the Fock space to states where $`q`$ and $`\overline{q}`$ are on the same $``$ lattice site (no link field, 2 particle Fock component) and states where $`q`$ and $`\overline{q}`$ are separated by one link (3 particle Fock component), i.e the femtoworm approximation .

## 4 Fit of parameters

The parameters in the Hamiltonian are:

* longitudinal gauge coupling
* $`r`$-term coupling (hopping without spin flip)
* spin-flip coupling (hopping with spin flip)
* kinetic mass (2 particle sector)
* kinetic mass (3 particle sector). The observables that we studied showed little dependence on this parameter, so we kept it fixed at a constituent mass.
* link field mass. Similar to kinetic mass in 3 particle sector. Furthermore, demanding Lorentz invariance in the pure glue sector, one finds a renormalized trajectory. This makes sense since the $``$ lattice scale is unphysical. We keep the link field mass fixed at a value which yields relatively small $``$ lattice spacing.

The observables that we studied, including Lorentz invariance, show rather little sensitivity 222As long as we kept the other parameters floating! to the precise values of the 3-particle sector masses, which we thus keep at a value corresponding to a constituent mass (about half the $`\rho `$ mass). This leaves us with 4 free parameters.

As input parameter, we use the physical value of the $`\rho `$ mass, chiral symmetry in the sense that we demand a small $`\pi `$ mass and the physical string tension. As explained in the appendix, demanding only Lorentz invariance would drive $`G^2/m_\rho ^2`$ to infinity and would thus give rise to string tensions that are inconsistent with phenomenology.

Although the dependence of physical parameters on the input parameters is in general rather complex and non-perturbative, one can understand at a qualitative level how the input parameters influence the relevant physical scales: The physical string tension in the longitudinal direction determines $`G^2`$ in physical units.

Modulo mass renormalization due to the Yukawa couplings, the quark mass in the 2-particle Fock component and the gauge coupling are strongly constrained by fitting the physical string tension (which determines $`G^2`$ and the center of mass of the $`\pi `$-$`\rho `$ system. This leaves us with only the $`r`$-term and the helicity flip hopping term couplings as parameters to vary. As explained in the appendix, the helicity flip term is not only responsible for $`\pi `$-$`\rho `$ splitting within our approximations but also for violations of Lorentz invariance (different $``$ lattice spacings in physical units for different mesons).

Using a value of $`G^2\frac{g^2N_C}{2\pi }0.4`$ $`GeV^2`$ in physical units, as determined from the string tension in Ref.  (which is larger than the one previously used ), we were able to produce the physical $`\pi `$-$`\rho `$ splitting with only a relatively small spin-flip coupling. This allows us to chose the $`r`$-term large enough so that $`r`$-term hopping dominates over spin-flip hopping and therefore violations of Lorentz invariance (as measured by comparing quadratic terms in the dispersion relation of mesons in the $`\pi `$-$`\rho `$ sector) are only on the order of $`20\%`$. The average $``$ lattice spacing (from the dependence of the energy on $`𝐏_{}`$) is found to be $`a_{}0.5fm`$. For the $`\pi `$ wave function, we find a shape that is very close to the asymptotic shape ($`\varphi _{as.}^\pi (x)x(1x)`$).

This is surprising if one consider that the lattice spacing is still relatively large and hence the momentum scale is still very low. We should also point out that the shape of our $`\pi `$ wave function disagrees with the results from Ref.  (the $`\pi `$ wave function obtained in Ref.  is much more flat than ours). Since the Hamiltonian and Fock space truncation in both works are the same, the only real difference are the basis functions used to cast the Hamiltonian into matrix form: we used continuous basis functions, while Ref.  uses DLCQ. However, it is not clear that this difference alone can explain the different shape of $`\pi `$-wave functions.

## Acknowledgments

M.B. would like to thank H.N.-Li and W.-M. Zhang for the invitation to this interesting workshop and S. Dalley for many interesting and clarifying discussions about the $``$ lattice. This work was supported by a grant from DOE (FG03-95ER40965) and through Jefferson Lab by contract DE-AC05-84ER40150 under which the Southeastern Universities Research Association (SURA) operates the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility.

## Appendix: perturbative analysis of $`\pi `$-$`\rho `$ splitting on the $``$ lattice.

In order to gain a qualitative understanding about the interplay between different parameters in the $``$ lattice Hamiltonian, it is instructive to study a simple model, where one treats the admixture of the 3-partice Fock component to the $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$ as a perturbation.

To $`0^{th}`$ order, i.e. when the coupling between 2 and 3 particle Fock component is turned off, there is no spin dependence of the interactions and the $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$ are degenerate. Likewise, there is no ‘hopping’ (i.e. $``$ propagation) of mesons and thus energies are independent of $`𝐤_{}`$ giving rise to an infinite $``$ lattice spacing (in physical units).

In the next order we treat the coupling between 2 and 3 particle Fock components as a perturbation (note that interactions which are diagonal in the particle number, such as the confining interaction in the longitudinal direction are still treated non-perturbatively). There are two interactions that mix Fock sectors: hopping due to the $`r`$-term (without helicity flip) and hopping due to the vector coupling (with helicity flip). In order to understand the effect of these two types of hopping, it is very useful to point out that there is no ‘mixing’ between these two hopping terms in the femtoworm approximation, i.e. there is a complete cancellation among the various hopping terms where the 2 to 3 transition is caused by say the $`r`$-term and the subsequent 3 to 2 transition is caused by the $`v`$-term (and the other way round). For $`𝐤_{}=0`$ this follows trivially from the fact that the $``$ lattice Hamiltonian is invariant under rotations around the $`zaxis`$ by multiples of $`\pi /2`$, giving rise to conservation of total angular momentum modulo $`4`$. Since $`J_z=S_z`$ in the 2 particle sector, and $`S_z`$ can only assume the values $`1`$, $`0`$, and $`1`$, $`S_z`$ in the 2 particle sector is conserved. Since ‘mixed’ hopping would change $`S_z`$ by one unit, this means that the sum of all contributions from mixed hopping must add up to zero.

For $`𝐤_{}\mathrm{𝟎}`$ the argument is a little more complicated, since rotations also change the direction of $`𝐤_{}`$. However, both the $``$ lattice Hamiltonian as well as $`𝐤_{}`$ are invariant under the a sequence consisting of a rotation by $`\pi `$ around the $`z`$-axis followed by a $``$ reflection on the $`x`$-axis and then a $``$ reflection on the $`y`$ axis $`P_yP_xR_{180}`$. As a result, $`J_z`$ is conserved modulo $`2`$, which still rules out mixing between the $`r`$-term and the $`v`$-term.

Starting from a basis of ‘t Hooft eigenstates which are plane waves in the $``$ direction and where the $`q\overline{q}`$ in the 2 particle Fock component carry spins $`|`$, $`|`$, $`|`$, and $`|`$ respectively, one thus finds for the energy in second order perturbation theory

$`H=M_0^2`$ $``$ $`M_{1,r}^2\left(\begin{array}{cccc}c_x+c_y& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& c_x+c_y& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& c_x+c_y& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& c_x+c_y\end{array}\right)`$ (8)
$`+`$ $`M_{1,v}^2\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 0& 0& c_yc_x\\ 0& 0& c_x+c_y& 0\\ 0& c_x+c_y& 0& 0\\ c_yc_x& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right).`$ (13)
Here $`M_{1,r}^2`$ and $`M_{1,v}^2`$ are some second order perturbation theory expressions involving matrix elements between 2 and 3 particle states that are eigenstates of the diagonal parts of the Hamiltonian (kinetic + Coulomb), and $`c_i\mathrm{cos}k_i`$.

Several general and important features can be read off from this result. First of all, and most importantly, Eq. (13) Shows that the r-term gives rise to a dispersion relation with the same $``$ speed of light for the $`\pi `$ and the $`\rho `$’s, while the vector interaction breaks that symmetry. This observation already indicates that it may be desirable to keep the $`r`$-term much larger than the spin-flip term. We will elaborate on this point below.

At $`k_x=k_y=0`$, the eigenstates of the above Hamiltonian are the $`\rho _{\pm 1}`$ i.e. $`|`$ and $`|`$, with $`M^2=M_{\pm 1}^2M_0^2M_{1,r}^2`$, the $`|\rho _0|+`$, with $`M^2=M_{\pm 1}^2+M_{1,v}^2`$ and the $`|\pi |`$, with $`M^2=M_{\pm 1}^2M_{1,v}^2`$ For nonzero $``$ momenta, there will in general be mixing among the $`\rho _{+1}`$ and the $`\rho _1`$, but not among the other states since helicity in the 2-particle Fock sector is still conserved modulo 2. Expanding around $`𝐤_{}=0`$, and denoting $`\overline{M}^2M_0^2M_{1,r}^2`$ one finds to $`𝒪(𝐤_{}^2)`$ the following eigenstates and eigenvalues

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\text{state}& M^2(0)& M^2(𝐤_{}^2)M^2(0)\\ & & \\ & & \\ & \overline{M}^2M_{1,v}^2& M_{1,r}^2\frac{k_x^2+k_y^2}{2}+M_{1,v}^2\frac{k_x^2+k_y^2}{2}\\ & & \\ +& \overline{M}^2+M_{1,v}^2& M_{1,r}^2\frac{k_x^2+k_y^2}{2}M_{1,v}^2\frac{k_x^2+k_y^2}{2}\\ & & \\ & \overline{M}^2& M_{1,r}^2\frac{k_x^2+k_y^2}{2}M_{1,v}^2\frac{k_x^2k_y^2}{2}\\ & & \\ +& \overline{M}^2& M_{1,r}^2\frac{k_x^2+k_y^2}{2}+M_{1,v}^2\frac{k_x^2k_y^2}{2}\end{array}.$$
(14)
Eq. (14) illustrates a fundamental dilemma that hampers any attempt to fully restore Lorentz invariance within the femtoworm approximation: $`M_{1,v}^2`$ not only governs the splitting between the $`\pi `$ and the (h=0) $`\rho `$ but is also responsible for violations of Lorentz invariance among the different helicity states: If one determines the $``$ lattice spacing in physical units for each meson separately, by demanding that the $``$ speed of light equals $`1`$, one finds for example

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a_{}^2}}|_\pi `$ $`=`$ $`M_{1,r}^2+M_{1,v}^2`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a_{}^2}}|_{\rho _0}`$ $`=`$ $`M_{1,r}^2M_{1,v}^2`$ (15)
i.e. increasing the $`\pi \rho `$ splitting is typically accompanied by an increase in Lorentz invariance violation

$$\frac{1}{a_{}^2}|_\pi \frac{1}{a_{}^2}|_\rho =M_{\rho _0}^2M_\pi ^2.$$
(16)
For the $`\rho _{\pm 1}`$ the breaking is of a similar scale, plus one also observes an anisotropy in the dispersion relation on the same scale.

Therefore, in order to avoid a large breaking of Lorentz invariance, it will be necessary that

$$M_{r,1}^2M_{\rho _0}^2M_\pi ^2.$$
(17)
If one keeps the $`\pi \rho `$ splitting fixed at its physical value then there are two ways to achieve this condition. One possibility is to simply increase the Yukawa coupling that appears in the $`r`$-term. This increase of the $`r`$-term tends to decrease the $``$ lattice spacing for both $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$’s and in order to achieve satisfactory Lorentz invariance (in the sense of uniform $``$ lattice spacings) one needs to make the lattice spacing smaller than the Compton wavelength of the $`\rho `$ meson. However, one cannot make the $`r`$-term coupling arbitrarily large because at some point there occurs an instability (tachyonic $`M^2`$!). Such instabilities for large coupling are common in the LF formulation of models with Yukawa coupling and might be related to a phase transition (similar to the phase transition in $`\varphi ^4`$ theory that occurs as the coupling is increased).

Fortunately, there exists another possibility to make these matrix elements large, without increasing the Yukawa couplings. This derives from the fact that the hopping interactions are proportional to $`\left(\frac{1}{x}\pm \frac{1}{x^{}}\right)\frac{1}{xx^{}}`$, where $`x`$ ($`x^{}`$) are the momenta of the active quark before(after) the hopping. Because of the singularity as $`x`$, $`x^{}0`$, matrix elements of the hopping terms are greatly enhanced if the unperturbed wave functions are large near $`x=0`$ and $`x=1`$. Since the unperturbed wave functions in the 2 particle Fock component vanish like $`x^\beta `$ near $`x=0`$, where $`\beta \frac{G}{m_q}`$, matrix elements of the hopping interaction become very large when one makes $`\frac{G^2}{m_q^2}`$ very large.

Therefore, the larger one chooses $`\frac{G^2}{m^2}`$, the more one restores Lorentz invariance of the $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$ dispersion relations because one can keep the $`\pi `$-$`\rho `$ splitting fixed while decreasing the coupling of the spin flip interaction. At the same time, keeping the $`r`$-term interaction fixed one increases the dominance of the $`r`$-term contribution in $`\frac{1}{a^2}`$ and thus not only reduces the lattice spacing in physical units, but also obtains dispersion relations for the $`\pi `$ and the $`\rho `$’s that look more and more similar — as demanded by Lorentz invariance. Unfortunately, we are not completely free to pick whatever value of $`\frac{G^2}{m_q^2}`$ we like because $`m_q^2`$ and $`G^2`$ are largely fixed by the center of mass in the $`\pi `$-$`\rho `$ system as well as by fitting the physical string tension in the pure glue sector.

## References


format: text

text:
# DTP-MSU-0020 gr-qc/0101101 Solitons In Non-Abelian Born-Infeld Theory 11footnote 1Contribution to the 9th Marcel Grossmann meeting (MG9), Rome, July 2000

## Abstract

Born-Infeld generalization of the Yang-Mills action suggested by the superstring theory gives rise to modification of previously known as well as to some new classical soliton solutions. Earlier it was shown that within the model with the usual trace over the group generators classical glueballs exist which form an infinite sequence similar to the Bartnik-McKinnon family of the Einstein-Yang-Mills solutions. Here we give the generalization of this result to the ’realistic’ model with the symmetrized trace and show the existence of excited monopoles (in presence of triplet Higgs) which can be regarded as a non-linear superposition of monopoles and sphalerons.

An effective action for two coincident D-branes is given by the non-Abelian $`SU(2)`$ Born-Infeld action (NBI) with some specific prescription for the trace over the gauge group generators. Here we use the symmetrized trace following the Tseytlin’s proposal. We find closed expressions for this action for configurations usually invoked in the search of soliton solutions: monopole purely magnetic spherically symmetric ansatz, its dyon generalization, axially symmetric multimonopole ansatz used, (non-self-dual) instanton ansatz as well as their self-gravitating versions. In the simplest static spherically symmetric monopole case with $`A_\theta =(1w)T_3,A_\phi =\mathrm{sin}\theta (1w)T_3`$ the flat-space action obtained reads

$`L_{NBI}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta ^2}{4\pi }}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1+V^2+K^2𝒜}{\sqrt{1+V^2}}}\right)`$
$`𝒜`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1+V^2}{V^2K^2}}}arctanh\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{V^2K^2}{1+V^2}}},`$ (1)
where

$$V^2=\frac{(1w^2(r))^2}{2\beta ^2r^4},K^2=\frac{w^2(r)}{2\beta ^2r^2},$$
(2)
and $`\beta `$ is the BI critical field. The (triplet) Higgs field was introduced under the standard form. The resulting lagrangian has the following soliton solutions:

1. an infinite sequency of purely Yang-Mills glueballs, half of which are of sphaleronic nature,
2. non-BPS magnetic monopoles,
3. hybrid monopole-glueball solutions.

For all of them the expansion of $`w(r)`$ in the vicinity of the origin reads

$$w=1br^2+O(r^4),$$
(3)
where $`b`$ is a free parameter. At infinity one has

$$w=\pm (1\frac{c}{r})+O(1/r^2)$$
(4)
with some constant $`c`$ for $`1)`$ and $`w=0`$ for $`2),\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3})`$. The boundary conditions for the Higgs are standard. These expansions can be matched for the discrete values of the parameter $`b`$ depending on $`\beta `$. In the purely glueball case one can rescale the radial variable to set $`\beta =1`$ then the first three values of $`b`$ are given in Tab.1.

The integer $`n`$ gives the number of zeroes of $`w`$. These values are about an order of magnitude greater than those obtained in the NBI theory with an ordinary trace . Qualitatively solutions remain the same, so the symmetrized action modification relates to the deep core region of glueballs . Recall, that these solutions are unstable for all $`n`$, those with odd $`n`$ can be interpreted as sphalerons. Their mass gives the heights of the potential barriers separating neighboring topological vacua. With growing $`n`$ the masses rapidly converge to the mass of an embedded abelian solution, which can be regarded as the limiting solution for large $`n`$ ( in the weak sense). When gravity is included , these solutions can be related to the Bartnik-McKinnon solutions of the Einstein-Yang-Mills equations in the strong gravity limit.

In the case of monopoles one has three dimensional parameters of which one can be set to unity by rescaling. Choosing as two remaining parameters $`\beta `$ and $`\lambda `$ (the Higgs potential coefficient), one finds monopole solutions for $`\beta >\beta _{cr}`$ with the critical value not very different from that obtained by Schaposnik et al. In addition we have found hybrid monopole-glueball solutions which have the following $`w`$-behavior. Starting with (3), the function $`w`$ crosses zero and becomes negative like in for the $`n=1`$ sphaleron, but then, instead of approaching the vacuum value $`w=1`$ at infinity, it turns back to monopole regime and finally $`w(\mathrm{})=0`$. Similarly, higher $`n`$ solutions exist which approach the same asymptotic value after any number of oscillation around zero ( crossing zero $`n`$ times). These solutions have masses higher that the monopole mass and they are unstable. Again, this is similar to the situation in the usual YM-Higgs theory coupled to gravity.


text:
# The Bell Laboratories 13CO Survey: Longitude-Velocity Maps

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Surveys of carbon monoxide (CO) emission lines are the primary means for gathering information about the distribution and kinematics of molecular material in the Galaxy. The observer, when embarking on a CO survey, must choose the survey parameters with an eye to the astrophysical problem to be attacked, because millimeter-wave telescopes have limitations in observing speed, sensitivity, and resolution. Rapid improvements in technology have allowed ever larger and more finely-detailed surveys, but the current state of the art is not yet able to produce detailed, low-noise maps of every molecular cloud in the Milky Way. Combes (1991) has reviewed sixteen CO surveys and discussed the results. Early surveys, such as Schwartz et al. (1973), Burton and Gordon (1978), and Solomon et al. (1979) determined the large-scale distribution of CO in the Milky Way. The Columbia Mini and Southern Mini surveys (Dame et al. 1987, Bronfman et al. 1988), in particular, measured the CO emissivity of the whole Galaxy and determined its distribution on scales larger than $`50`$ pc. Later surveys have concentrated on molecular cloud properties and the relationship between molecular clouds and galactic structure. The Bell Laboratories 13CO Survey presented here was designed to identify most of the molecular clouds in the first quadrant of the Galaxy and provide some information about their size, shape, and velocity. It differs from previous surveys in the accuracy with which clouds can be identified and the molecular line emissivity parceled out among them. These data will be used to approach the problem of spiral structure and its effect on molecular clouds and star formation.

Several statistical studies (Scoville et al. 1987; Solomon et al. 1987; Sodroski 1991) of the giant molecular clouds (GMCs) identified in survey data have led to significant results on the kinematics of disk structure, locations and extent of spiral arms, and the mass and size spectra of the GMCs. These analyses were based on a simple methodology for recognizing molecular clouds in survey data. In these studies, a molecular cloud is defined as a region in $`(l,b,v)`$ survey space where the 12CO line emission exceeds a particular threshold brightness temperature. The tendency for 12CO lines from different clouds to blend together because of spatial and velocity crowding and optical depth effects has led to the choice of a high value for that threshold. Scientifically important inaccuracies in our quantitative understanding of the distribution of molecular gas may result, especially in crowded regions such as the Molecular Ring. Small clouds may be missed entirely because even their central brightnesses may not exceed the threshold, while large clouds are sometimes spurious blends of objects at different distances. Significant crowding of molecular material occurs throughout the first and fourth quadrants of the galaxy, especially on the locus of tangent points. Along any line of sight toward the inner Galaxy, the point on the line closest to the Galactic Center is the tangent point, and clouds near this point have the largest velocity and the most velocity crowding. Clouds at the tangent point are, however, particularly interesting because they are at an inflection point in the velocity-distance relation and therefore have unambiguously determined distances.

The 12CO line becomes optically thick towards most molecular clouds. The isotopically-substituted 13CO molecule is a more accurate tracer of molecular column density, because its optical depth is a factor of $`50`$ times smaller than that of 12CO. Data obtained in the 13CO (1-0) emission line with a large spatial coverage and a high resolution can be used to quantitatively study the molecular material near young stellar objects (YSOs), since the more optically thin emission traces dense regions where star formation takes place. While the 13CO lines are several times weaker than 12CO, its smaller opacity, relatively high abundance (\[13CO\]/\[H2\] $`10^6`$ in the solar neighborhood—Frerking et al. 1982), and the relatively greater transparency of the atmosphere at 110 GHz make 13CO the species of choice for surveying molecular gas in crowded regions. Surveys conducted in 13CO can be used to separate and catalog clouds better than 12CO surveys.

The primary disadvantage of 13CO surveys is that they are less sensitive to weak CO emission than are 12CO surveys. Weak 12CO emission has been detected in small interstellar clouds (e.g. Magnani, Blitz, and Mundy 1985) and in a thick molecular layer associated with the whole galactic disk (Dame & Thaddeus 1994). Such material has a 13CO / 12CO line intensity ratio which is smaller than that of most molecular material, and the 13CO emission is therefore more likely to be buried in noise. The low noise level of the present survey partially compensates for this effect. In the region covered by the present survey, almost all clouds seen in 12CO surveys are also seen here.

Several 13CO surveys were completed in the 1980s (Liszt et al. 1984; Jacq et al. 1988; Bronfman et al. 1989). These are, however, all one-dimensional—limited to the galactic mid-plane ($`b=0^{}`$). Aside from the Bell Laboratories 13CO survey, systematic two-dimensional 13CO surveys of the galactic plane have been conducted only toward limited regions: Nagoya University’s 13CO map made with their 4m telescope ($`2^{}.7`$ beamwidth) with a spatial sampling of $`8^{}`$ toward the Cygnus region (Dobashi et al. 1994), Taurus (Mizuno et al. 1995), the Cepheus and Cassiopeia region (Yonekura et al. 1997), and most recently, the Antigalactic Center region (Kawamura et al. 1998). There are plans to survey the whole galactic plane with the two Nagoya 4 m telescopes (Nagoya University in Japan and Las Campanas Observatory in Chile), and a significant portion has been completed (Tachihara et al. 1997).

In this paper, we present the results of a 13CO survey covering a third of the galactic plane at a spatial sampling of $`3^{}`$ using the 7 m telescope at Bell Laboratories. The Bell Laboratories 13CO survey was designed to detect and distinguish molecular clouds in the first quadrant larger than about $`10^3`$ solar masses. The survey has enough resolution to locate star-forming regions within large clouds. It does not, however, provide much detail of the internal structure of the clouds. The large longitude coverage allows the study of giant molecular clouds in a galactic context, while the sampling grid size allows some indication of their internal structure. In §2 is a description of the survey parameters, telecope and receiver systems, observing techniques, and reduction procedure. In §3 the data are shown as longitude-velocity color maps, one at each latitude, and the principal characteristics of the survey data are discussed.

## 2 The Survey

### 2.1 Telescope and Receiver System

The data were obtained with the 7 m off-axis Cassegrain radio telescope located at Bell Laboratories, Crawford Hill in Holmdel, New Jersey (Chu et al. 1978) between 1978 and 1992. The beamwidth (FWHM) of the telescope is $`103^{\prime \prime }`$ at the frequency of 13CO $`J=10`$ line (110.20913 GHz). A Schottky-diode receiver system developed by R. A. Linke was used for the early data; after 1982, Superconductor-Insulator-Superconductor (SIS) mixer receivers developed by R.A. Linke and A. A. Stark were used. The superconducting junctions were fabricated by R. E. Miller and A. A. Stark at Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill. Single-sideband (SSB) operation was achieved using a Fabry-Perot filter in reflection which had 11 to 15 dB rejection of the image sideband. The unwanted image sideband transmitted through the Fabry-Perot filter was terminated in a millimeter-wave load with a 28 K radiation temperature. The receiver was located at a non-tilting Nasmyth focus in a housing located on the azimuth structure. The receiver was calibrated by chopping between an ambient temperature load and a liquid nitrogen-cooled load located near the Cassegrain focus. Single sideband receiver temperature of the receiver systems ranged from 76 to 360 K during the years of observation, with typical values around 120 K. Atmospheric sky brightness was measured several times each hour by chopping between the 77 K Cassegrain cold load and the sky. The correction for atmospheric opacity was then calculated using a plane-parallel atmospheric model. Typical SSB atmosphere-corrected system temperatures were $`T_{sys}^{}`$ 600 K. Observations were not made when $`T_{sys}^{}`$ exceeded 1000 K. The 7 m antenna has a main beam efficiency of 89% at 100 GHz; another 5% of the detected power comes from the antenna sidelobes and about 6% comes from the ground pickup. The spectra were obtained with a 256 channel filterbank consisting of filters with a 250 kHz spacing and a 512 channel filterbank consisting of filters with a 1 MHz spacing. The individual filters in these filterbanks have rectangular bandpasses with little overlap between adjacent filters. The frequency domain is therefore slightly undersampled.

### 2.2 Spatial Coverage and Sampling

The range of the survey is ($`l,b`$) = ($`5^{}`$ to $`117^{},1^{}`$ to $`+1^{}`$), comprising about 244 square degrees. Table 1 lists the regions observed and the data sampling within those regions. In Figure 1, the grid spacing and beamsize of the Bell Laboratories 13CO survey is compared with those of other surveys: the Columbia 12CO galactic plane survey and University of Massachusetts-Stony Brook 12CO first quadrant galactic plane survey (UMass-SB) are shown in thin solid-line circles, and Nagoya University 13CO survey and Bell Laboratories 13CO surveys are represented in thick solid-line circles on the $`3^{}`$-grid. A total of 73,000 positions were observed.

### 2.3 Observations

All observations are position-switched data. Each spectrum is a weighted average of observations at its “on” position and two “off ” positions. The Galactic Center data are described by Bally et al. (1987). The data with $`|l|>5^{}`$ were obtained with a multiple-map position switching technique. This means that during the data acquisition, observations of five “on” positions were temporally interspersed with observations of two “off ” positions, and the spectra from all five “on” positions use the exact same “off ” measurements. Each of the two “off ” positions were observed for $`\sqrt{5}/2`$ times longer than the individual “on” positions in order to optimize the noise level and observing speed. The multiple-map technique increases the speed of the observations, but has the undesirable effect that the noise in the five resulting spectra is somewhat correlated: the “on” data for each position (including associated noise) are unique, but the “off ” data (including associated noise) are the same for all five spectra. The five “on” positions are separated by $`0.2^{}`$, so positions with correlated noise have three other grid points with totally different noise between them.

The galactic coordinates of each set of five points are given by

$$l_{\mathrm{o}n}=L+M0.2^{}+\mathrm{\Delta }l,$$

$$b=\mathrm{\Delta }b,$$

where $`0^{}\mathrm{\Delta }l<0.2^{},`$ $`1^{}\mathrm{\Delta }b+1^{}`$ in $`0.05^{}`$ increments, $`M`$ varies from 0 to 4 during the course of a single multiple map position switch, and $`L`$ varies from $`10^{}`$ to $`117^{}`$ in $`1^{}`$ increments during the course of a day’s observations. $`\mathrm{\Delta }l`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }b`$ were fixed for each day’s observations. The galactic coordinates of the reference positions are given by

$$l_{\mathrm{o}ff}=L+0.5^{},$$

$$b_{\mathrm{o}ff}=\pm 3^{}.$$

There are, therefore, only 216 “off ” positions in the survey. These “off ” positions are not necessarily free of emission. The method by which the spectra were corrected for emission in the off or reference position is described in §2.4.

The typical on-source integration time was $`8.3\mathrm{s}`$ for each of the five “on” positions and $`9.3\mathrm{s}`$ for each of the two “off ” positions, for a total position switch cycle of $`60\mathrm{s}`$. This minute-long cycle was repeated 6 to 40 times (depending on the opacity of the sky) so that the root-mean-square noise in each spectrum, after calibration, is 0.1 K in 250 kHz channels. In good weather, it was possible to complete a full set of observed points having particular values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }l`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }b`$ (that is, all the points with $`M`$ and $`L`$ ranging over their full set of allowed values) in one day. In poor weather the galactic plane would set before a full set of points could be obtained, and the undone points would be rescheduled for a later day.

Receiver calibration was accomplished by chopping between an ambient temperature load and a load filled with boiling liquid nitrogen. Sky brightness measurements were accomplished by chopping between the liquid-nitrogen load and the sky. These measurements were made at roughly 20 minute intervals. All antenna temperatures quoted here are corrected for atmospheric extinction and for the forward spillover and scattering losses of the antenna ($`\eta _{\mathrm{fss}}`$ = 0.91), and are therefore on the $`T_R^{}`$ brightness temperature scale as defined by Kutner and Ulich (1981). In order to convert to a $`T_{\mathrm{mb}}`$ brightness temperature scale, the data as presented here should be multiplied by $`1.02\pm 0.02`$.

These data were obtained during hundreds of days of observing over the ten-year period. Observations were made by A. A. Stark, R. W. Wilson, J. Bally, M. Pound, G. R. Knapp, and W. D. Langer. Some results of this survey have been presented by Stark (1979, 1983), Stark et al. (1983, 1987, 1988) and Bally et al. (1987, 1988). Advances in computation and the recent availability of powerful data reduction and display packages now permit the full data set to be re-reduced and presented here.

### 2.4 Data Reduction

The raw OBS-format spectra were calibrated and a linear fit to the baseline was removed in the Bell Labs data reduction program COMB. The resulting COMB stacks were written out as 3-dimensional ($`v,l,b`$) FITS format data cubes which can be manipulated with the standard data reduction packages IRAF and AIPS. For the region $`l>5^{}`$, the COMB stacks data were written onto a (partially-filled) $`3^{}`$-grid in ($`l,b`$), and a 0.68 km s-1 (one filter-bank channel width) grid in velocity. The size of the data cube outside the Galactic Center region is ($`v,l,b`$)=(364,2241,41) pixels. Unfilled positions on the $`3^{}`$-grid were filled in by linear interpolation over the nearest four positions using IRAF and SAOimage. We used the FCRAO task package and developed scripts within IRAF to interpolate and reduce the data. A second-order baseline fit was subtracted from the spectra. Bad channels caused by the malfunction of individual filters in the filterbank were identified in the FITS image and fixed by interpolating adjacent good data over the bad pixels.

As described above, the “off ” positions used for the position switch are not necessarily clean of emission. About 2% of the raw spectra were contaminated with negative features resulting from emission in the reference positions. Essentially all of this emission is within the velocity range $`5`$ to 5 km s-1 and almost certainly originates in dark clouds near the Sun. The strongest of these features was less than 0.5 K. Since each “off ” position was used for several hundred “on” positions at the same value of $`L`$, it is likely that at least one “on” position is free of emission at the velocity at which the “off ” is contaminated. The “on” position spectra sharing the same $`L`$ were therefore searched for the biggest negative feature. Data in a small range of velocities around this biggest negative feature were extracted from that spectrum. These extracted data were then taken to represent the emission in the “off ” position, and it was subtracted from all of the “on” positions sharing the same value of $`L`$. About 0.03% of the pixels were modified by this method. A comparison with the UMass-SB 12CO database shows that these recovered pixels do not show a systematically different ratio of 12CO to 13CO .

After removing the effects of the contaminating emissions in the off positions, the database was combined with the Galactic Center survey FITS data cube (Bally et al. 1987). The Galactic Center data were interpolated into a $`3^{}`$ grid and a $`1\text{km s}\text{-1}`$ grid. Thus the final database including the Galactic Center region is ($`v,l,b`$) = (501,2441,41) in pixel units and the velocity range is $`250`$ to $`+250`$ km s-1, longitude is $`5^{}`$ to $`117^{}`$, and latitude is $`1^{}`$ to $`1^{}`$.

A histogram of the number of l, b, and v pixels versus brightness temperature of the 13CO data ($`l>5^{}`$ with 0.68 km s-1 resolution) except the Galactic Center region is shown in Figure 2 in linear and logarithmic scales, and was obtained by binning the data into 0.02 K-wide bins. The brightness temperatures ($`T_R^{}`$) in the plot range from $`2.5`$ to 6 K. A few pixels in the survey are as hot as 17.4 K. Only pixels from the observed ranges of position ($`l>5^{}`$) and velocity listed in Table 1 are included in this histogram.

To gain insight about the true distribution of brightness temperatures if there were no telescope or receiver noise, a parametric model was made of the distribution function. Suppose the true, noise-free distribution of brightness temperatures is a power-law in brightness temperature, $`T`$, plus a delta function at zero temperature:

$$N(T)\mathrm{d}T=N_{\mathrm{total}}[f_z\delta (0\mathrm{K})+(1f_z)(\alpha 1)C^{\alpha 1}(T+C)^\alpha ]\mathrm{d}T,$$

where $`N_{\mathrm{total}}=23,392,017`$ is the total number of pixels in the survey, $`f_z`$ is the fraction of pixels that have no emission, $`C`$ is a parameter of the fit, and $`\alpha `$ is the power law. The observed distribution of brightness temperatures is given by the convolution of this function with a Gaussian representing the noise:

$$N_{\mathrm{obs}}(T)\mathrm{d}T=N(TT^{})\mathrm{d}T\frac{1}{\sigma \sqrt{2\pi }}\mathrm{exp}(T^{}{}_{}{}^{2}/2\sigma ^2)\mathrm{d}T^{},$$

and this function can be used to model the actual distribution of observed brightness temperatures. A $`\chi ^2`$ fit for the parameters of the model yields $`\sigma =0.1065\pm 0.0031`$, $`f_z=0.884\pm 0.015`$, $`C=0.768\mathrm{K}\pm 0.105\mathrm{K}`$, and $`\alpha =4.44_{0.28}^{+0.39}`$. The value $`\sigma 0.11\mathrm{K}`$ can be compared to the 1 $`\sigma `$ typical uncertainty in the UMass-SB Survey of $`0.4\mathrm{K}`$ (Sanders et al. 1986). Figure 3 shows a comparison of this fit with the observed data. The data from Figure 2 have been re-binned into logarithmic intervals. The points at negative brightness temperature have been folded about $`T=0\mathrm{K}`$ to allow both negative and positive brightness temperatures to appear on a logarithmic plot. The fit at negative temperatures shows that the noise in the survey deviates from a pure Gaussian: there is a tail to the distribution where a few pixels trail off to brightness temperatures as low as $`1\mathrm{K}`$, as well as an excess of points near $`T=0\mathrm{K}`$ from spectra having better-than-specified noise. This is to be expected in a large survey where the noise level is not perfectly controlled. The detected points at positive $`T`$ are not fit perfectly by a power law: there are too many pixels at brightness temperatures near $`T2.5\mathrm{K}`$ and too few pixels at brightness temperatures $`T>10\mathrm{K}`$ for any power law to fit. The best-fit power law is surprisingly steep: $`N(T)(T+0.768\mathrm{K})^{4.44}`$. The large value of $`C=0.768\mathrm{K}`$ implies that there is no evidence for extensive low-level emission below the $`0.1\mathrm{K}`$ noise limit of the survey.

## 3 Longitude-Velocity Maps

We present the Bell Laboratories 13CO survey in the form of longitude-velocity maps at latitudes separated by $`0^{}.05`$ (Figure 4). The reduced FITS cubes have been smoothed with a boxcar function to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. The boxcar function was $`6^{}`$ wide in longitude and $`2\text{km s}\text{-1}`$ wide in the velocity direction. The velocity range of the observations is visible in Figure 4 as the width in velocity of the grey dots, which are at the noise level of the survey. The color scale of the maps represents increasing brightness temperature in the order: grey, blue, green, yellow, and red. The color maps were generated using the WIP graphic package.

Like all galactic CO surveys to date, the data in this survey are spatially undersampled, in the sense that the spacing between adjacent beams is more than the half beamwidth required by the Nyquist sampling theorem. As shown in Table 1, some of the Galactic Center Region data are nearly fully sampled, with a $`60^{\prime \prime }`$ grid and a $`103^{\prime \prime }`$ beam; in this region there is only slight aliasing of high spatial frequencies and no sampling error in the total flux. The majority of the data, however, are sampled on a grid whose spacing is two beamwidths or more; these data do not contain information about spatial wavelengths smaller than $`6^{}`$, and there can be substantial error in the total flux of small sections of the survey. The maps will not accurately reproduce small scale structures and may contain artificial structures because of the lack of information. In particular, a small cloud that happened to lie between grid points at the $`6^{}`$ or $`3^{}`$ spacings could be missed entirely. Such a cloud might be as large as $`10^3`$ solar masses if it were 15 kpc distant. We have assumed in making the $`l`$$`v`$ diagrams that the most probable value at the unobserved points is an interpolation from the adjacent points. Since the grid points are arbitrarily chosen to fall at regular intervals in galactic coordinates, they are a “fair sample”, and it is unlikely that there is significant sampling error in the 13CO flux of regions larger than a square degree. Care must be taken when considering small sections of the survey, however, because of the spatial incompleteness: data at grid points actually observed retain all the original information as observed, but the interpolated points could be highly inaccurate.

The velocity range of $`27`$ to 147 km s-1 for the region $`5^{}<l<45^{}`$ is enough to encompass the whole velocity range of molecular gas emission, with the exception of one feature. This elongated feature at ($`l,b,v`$) = ($`8^{},0^{}.5,+147`$ km s-1) in Figure 4 extends beyond the positive velocity limit of this survey. The Columbia survey shows this feature extending to 220 km s-1 (Dame et al. 1987).

The following are some of the principal characteristics of the survey ($`l>5^{}`$).

1. It is found that only $`(1f_z)=`$ 12% of the pixels in ($`v,l,b`$) 3-d space are responsible for the 13CO emission over the region surveyed. This number would be even smaller for a survey which was more extensive in $`b`$, or which had larger velocity coverage. About 39% of the total survey emissivity arises in 3-d pixels having brightness temperature above $`T_R^{}>1`$ K ($`10\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}`$), which is to say:

$$\frac{_{1\mathrm{K}}^{\mathrm{}}N(T)TdT}{_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}N(T)TdT}=0.39.$$

Similarly, 16% of the survey emissivity arises in pixels above 2 K, and 3.4% arises in pixels above 4K. These values can be compared with the UMass-SB 12CO survey’s 17.5% above 4 K ($`10\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}`$).
2. A comparison with the UMass-SB survey shows that at any point in the survey, the 13CO emission is related to the 12CO emission. That relationship can be expressed as a monotonic function with scatter (Stark et al. 1983). Even though the 13CO is roughly predictable from the 12CO emission in a statistical sense, features of the clouds are more clearly delineated in 13CO than 12CO. In Figure 5, an example of 12CO and 13CO longitude-velocity maps for the region $`33^{}.5<l<36^{}.5`$ at $`b=0^{}.1`$ is shown. The 12CO map was also taken using the Bell Labs 7 m telescope, but it differs only slightly from the UMass-SB survey data. In the 12CO map, cloud boundaries are not clear, and clumps are not unambiguously delineated. In the 13CO map, clouds are more readily distinguishable. The cloud identification using the 13CO line is much easier than that using the 12CO line since the 13CO lines are more optically thin, so that the cloud boundaries can be determined at a lower threshold brightness temperature.
3. Using the modified cloud identification code within IRAF (Lee et al. 1997), 13CO clouds have been identified and cataloged as a function of threshold brightness temperature. There are 1250 molecular clouds identified with 1 K threshold; 560 clouds with 2 K threshold, and 240 clouds with 3 K. Clouds with the hottest cores (T$`{}_{}{}^{}{}_{R}{}^{}`$(13CO ) $`>`$ 3 K) are restricted to the 6 kpc Molecular Ring ($`l<40^{}`$) and $`l=80^{}`$ region. It is found that the peak brightness temperatures in the Galactic Center ($`|l|<5^{}`$) are not as high as those in the Molecular Ring (see Figure 4, $`b=0^{}.3`$ to $`0^{}.3`$). In addition to cloud identification, cloud core regions can also be located within the cloud complex. A sample spectrum centered on ($`l,b`$) = ($`34^{}.25,0^{}.1`$) is presented in Figure 6. While there are saturated and self-absorbed features in 12CO emission (thin solid line), the 13CO lines show clean, nearly Gaussian, profiles. At the location ($`l,b`$) = ($`34^{}.25,0^{}.1`$) the core region is obvious in 13CO map, while it is not apparent in the 12CO map. Dense core regions can be located using this 13CO survey and then combined with existing 12CO data. The optical depth of 13CO can be estimated for each channel and pixel from the ratio of the 12CO and 13CO brightness assuming LTE. This estimate gives a lower limit to the true optical depth under non-LTE conditions.
4. The 13CO emission toward the 6 kpc Molecular Ring Region has more contrast than does the 12CO emission (Sanders et al. 1986; Clemens et al. 1986). Note in particular that the brightest cores are concentrated in elongated loops corresponding to the spiral arms (see Figure 4, $`20^{}<l<50^{}`$, $`b=0^{}.0`$).
5. Little emission occurs in the outer Galaxy; there are few detections at negative velocities in the range $`20^{}<l<80^{}`$, for all survey latitudes ($`b=1^{}.0`$ to $`1^{}.0`$). The Perseus arm does appear as a distinct feature at $`l>80^{}`$ and negative velocities. In Figure 7, plots of the 13CO integrated intensity are represented for the whole range of velocities observed. Nine latitude slices have been selected for display. The resolution in longitude is $`3^{}`$, and the latitudes are indicated on the upper-left corners of the plots: $`1^{}.0,0^{}.7,0^{}.5,0^{}.25,0^{}.0,0^{}.25,0^{}.5,0^{}.7`$ and $`1^{}.0`$. There are no data in the Galactic Center region $`|l|<5^{}`$ for $`b=1^{}.0,0^{}.7,0^{}.7`$ and $`1^{}.0`$.
6. Much of the gas in the Galactic Center region ($`|l|<6^{}`$) occurs at velocities forbidden to circular orbits and is likely to be in eccentric orbits about the center (Bally et al. 1987, Binney et al. 1991). This gas has large linewidths (see Figure 4, $`b=0^{}.6`$ to $`0^{}.6`$). In addition to these well-known Galactic Center features, there are several clouds outside the Galactic Center with linewidths as large as 20 km s-1 that are confined to a few adjacent grid points. Two examples are seen in Figure 4 at ($`l,b`$) = ($`43^{}.15,0^{}.05`$) and ($`26^{}.65,0^{}.60`$).
7. Spiral structure is readily apparent in the survey from the emission of Giant Molecular Clouds. Within the volume delimited by the range of velocities permitted by galactic rotation, there are large volumes showing these clouds (e.g. Figure 4, $`33^{}<l<35^{}`$, $`0^{}.25<b<0^{}.25`$, $`90\text{km s}\text{-1}<v<120\text{km s}\text{-1}`$) and there are otherwise similar volumes within the interarm regions, which have no Giant Molecular Clouds (e.g. Figure 4, $`35^{}<l<37^{}`$, $`0^{}.25<b<0^{}.25`$, $`85\text{km s}\text{-1}<v<115\text{km s}\text{-1}`$).
8. Small clouds are found at all permitted velocities inwards of the solar circle. This is not the case outside the solar circle. There is a complete absence of detected 13CO emission in the interarm region between the local molecular gas and the Perseus Arm ($`90^{}`$ to $`117^{}`$) at velocities from $`20`$ to $`40`$ km s-1 (see Figure 4 at all values of $`b`$, also Cohen et al. 1980; Heyer et al. 1998). Cohen et al. (1980) argue that this gap does not necessarily mean that molecular gas is non-existent in the interarm region; such gas could be either diffuse, cold or in small clumps that could escape detection. Heyer et al. (1998) showed, however, that not even small clumps are detectable in 12CO in this region, implying a complete absence of molecular material. In an interarm region somewhat closer to the Galactic Center, our survey data show small cloudlets in the interarm region from $`l=60^{}`$ to $`70^{}`$. In the Molecular Ring at $`l25^{}`$, the interarm regions are filled with clouds.

The authors wish to acknowledge the tremendous contribution of the members of the Bell Laboratories Radio Physics Research Group during the ten-year period of these observations: R. W. Wilson, J. Bally, D. Mumma, W. Bent, W. D. Langer, G. R. Knapp, and M. Pound. Special thanks go to Jim Morgan (University of Maryland), who helped solve a problem with WIP. This work was supported in part by Creative Research Fund NZ-01-01-A-31 of Ministry of Science and Technology, Korea, and the Internal Research and Development fund of Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory.

FIGURE CAPTIONS

Figure 1. Beamsizes and spatial sampling grids of major CO galactic plane surveys. 12CO surveys of UMass-SB (beamsize $`45^{\prime \prime }`$) and Columbia survey ($`8.^{}7`$) are represented in solid-line circles, and 13CO surveys of Nagoya University ($`170^{\prime \prime }`$) and Bell Laboratories ($`103^{\prime \prime }`$) are represented as thick solid-line circles on a $`3^{}`$-grid.

Figure 2. Distribution of 13CO brightness temperatures in all channels of the spectra of the whole region surveyed is represented. The logarithmic scale of the histogram is represented in the inset.

Figure 3. Parametric fit to the distribution of brightness temperatures in the Bell Labs 13CO Survey. The abscissa is the log of the absolute value of brightness temperature in survey pixels, in Kelvin. The ordinate is the log of the number of survey pixels having that brightness temperature. The points show the number of pixels in a small range of brightness temperatures divided by the width of that temperature range. The open circles are at negative brightness temperature. Almost all of the negative pixels actually have zero emission and appear at negative brightness temperature because of noise in the survey. Filled circles are at positive brightness temperature. The solid line shows a parametric model of the distribution function.

Figure 4. Longitude-velocity color scale maps at all latitude grid points. The color map represents increasing intensity as grey, blue, green, yellow, and red. The velocity range of the observations is delimited by grey dots representing the noise in the data.

Figure 5. An example of longitude-velocity 13CO and 12CO contour maps at $`l=33^{}.5`$ to $`36^{}.5`$, and $`b=0^{}.1`$. The 12CO contours are multiples of 1.0 K up to a maximum contour of 12 K. The 13CO contours are 0.3, 0.6, 1.0 K, followed by increments of 0.6 K, up to a maximum contour of 6.4 K.

Figure 6. 12CO and 13CO composite spectra centered on and around ($`l,b`$) = ($`34^{}.25,0^{}.1`$). The thin solid line represents 12CO, and the thick solid line represents 13CO .

Figure 7. Plots of the 13CO intensity integrated over the whole range of velocity, plotted against longitude at the indicated latitude, $`1^{}.0,0^{}.7,0^{}.5,0^{}.25,0^{}.0,0^{}.25,0^{}.5,0^{}.7`$ and $`1^{}.0`$. The resolution in longitude is $`3^{}`$.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

D-branes in a background of an NS-NS two form $`B`$-field have been attracting much interest in the development of string theory. The constant magnetic $`B`$-field on the D-brane in particular gives a string theoretical realization of the non-commutative geometry  and the world-volume effective theory on it is described by the non-commutative Yang-Mills theory. One of features of the non-commutative Yang-Mills theory is that a singularity of a moduli space of instantons on non-commutative geometry is naturally resolved  and we do not encounter the problems of the singularity. So the non-commutative geometry is very helpful tool for considering the resolution of the singularity in the moduli space of instantons.

Four dimensional $`k`$ instantons of the gauge group $`U(N)`$ is realized as $`k`$ D0-branes on $`N`$ D4-branes in Type IIA string theory. If we turn on the anti-self dual constant $`B`$-filed, which preserves 1/4 of supersymmetries, the D0-branes are “resolved” and we can not separate the D0-branes and D4-branes as long as preserving supersymmetry. If we divert to D0-brane theory of the gauge group $`U(k)`$ with $`N`$ matter multiplets, moduli space of vacua of the Higgs branch coincides with the moduli space of the instantons and the $`B`$-field corresponds to Fayet-Iliopoulos (FI) parameters of the theory. If the FI parameters are non-zero, the system can not enter the Coulomb branch which is described by the separation of the D0 and D4-branes. Therefore, these two pictures are consistent.

On the other hand, these systems are equivalent by string duality to the other brane configurations which include rotated branes at angles. The configuration of the intersecting brane at angles has been applied to the construction of three dimensional Chern-Simons system on the branes . The relation between the non-commutative nature of the Wilson line operator in Chern-Simons theory and the non-commutative geometry is discussed in . So the branes with the $`B`$-field gives an alternative understanding of dynamics on the intersecting brane at angles.

In this way, the D-brane bound states with the $`B`$-field are very interesting in the context of both brane dynamics and brane world-volume theory. Recently, their systems are discussed from various points of view in . The authors discuss the condition for the $`B`$-fields preserving the supersymmetry. However, some cases of the enhancement of supersymmetry was missed unfortunately. In the D0-D8 system, there are the cases preserving 1/16, 1/8 and 3/16 of supercharges, for instance. In this paper, we classify the suitable supersymmetric configuration of the constant $`B`$-field by using the results of the supersymmetric intersecting brane at angles . We find that the $`B`$-field must satisfy the self-dual condition in the D0-D4 or D0-D8 system. In particular, in the D0-D8 system, the $`B`$-field satisfies the extended “self-dual” conditions given by , which associate with the symmetry $`Spin(7)`$, $`Spin(6)`$ and $`Spin(5)`$. We obtain only a part of the components of the “self-dual” $`B`$-field from the intersecting brane configuration, but the general value of the $`B`$-field, which belongs to a representation of the subgroup $`Spin(7)`$, $`Spin(6)`$ and $`Spin(5)`$ of the eight dimensional rotational group $`SO(8)`$, certainly preserves 1/16, 1/8 and 3/16 of supersymmetries, respectively.

We also discuss in detail the extended ADHM construction of the eight dimensional “self-dual” instantons when the symmetry group is $`Spin(5)Sp(2)`$. If we turn on the constant $`B`$-field on the D8-brane, the coordinates gain the non-commutativity. We consider the extended ADHM equations on the non-commutative geometry provided by the $`B`$-field in various representations of $`Sp(2)`$. We show that the non-commutativity of the coordinates modifies the ADHM equations and one of the modified equations admits a ‘fuzzy sphere’ solution, which is proportional to the generator of the $`SU(2)`$ algebra. This type of the solution is a significant feature on the eight dimensional instantons. This fact means that the moduli space of the eight dimensional instanton possesses a rich structure and its resolution of the singularity is more complicated than the four dimensional case. The application of the non-commutative geometry to the extended ADHM construction is more useful to understand how the singularity is resolved.

This paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we revisit the classification of the residual supersymmetry in the configuration of the intersecting brane at angles. We treat the case of four angles and increase the number of the angles in sequence. The fractions 1/16, 1/8, 3/16 and 1/4 of the supersymmetries appear in the classification. In next section, we relate the configuration of the brane at angles with the D0-D$`p`$ system with the $`B`$-field. We find that the supersymmetric configuration of the $`B`$-field in the D0-D4 or D0-D8 satisfies the self-dual or extended “self-dual” conditions. The fact means that we can expect the general “self-dual” $`B`$-field background on the D8-brane preserves the same supersymmetry as the same as the case of the D0-D4 with the anti-self-dual $`B`$-field. We use these “(anti-)self-dual” $`B`$-field configurations and discuss the resolution of the eight dimensional instantons, which is regarded as the D0-brane on the D8-brane, on the non-commutative geometry in section 4. We find that the “(anti-)self-dual” $`B`$-field modifies the extended ADHM construction of the eight dimensional instantons. We also discuss the solution of the modified ADHM equations. The final section is devoted to discussion and comment.

## 2 Intersecting brane at angles and residual supersymmetry

We start with a configuration of two intersecting M5-branes at angles in M-theory and discuss residual supersymmetries. Supersymmetries of the intersecting M5-branes are completely classified by . We give an account of their work here because of slightly different notations for the later discussion. They discuss the general rotations by five angles, but we consider only the case up to four angles since we would like to obtain the D$`p`$-D$`p^{}`$ system with a $`B`$-field as we will discuss in the next section.

We consider the two intersecting M5-branes whose world-volumes are

$`\mathrm{M5}`$ $`:`$ $`\left(013579\right),`$ (2.1)
$`\mathrm{M5}^{}`$ $`:`$ $`\left(0\left[{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{2}}\right]_{\phi _1}\left[{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{3}{4}}\right]_{\phi _2}\left[{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{5}{6}}\right]_{\phi _3}\left[{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{7}{8}}\right]_{\phi _4}9\right),`$ (2.2)
where the numbers in parentheses represent world-volume directions and the symbol $`\left[\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\mu }{\nu }\right]_\phi `$ means that the brane wold-volume is tilted in $`(x^\mu ,x^\nu )`$-plane by an angle $`\phi `$. The presence of these two M5-branes gives a constraint on a 32 components Killing spinor $`ϵ`$ in 11 dimensions.

$`\mathrm{M5}`$ $`:`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{013579}ϵ=ϵ,`$ (2.3)
$`\mathrm{M5}^{}`$ $`:`$ $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }_{013579}R^1ϵ=ϵ,`$ (2.4)
where

$$R=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\pi \underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}\phi _i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2i1,2i}\right\}$$
(2.5)
is a rotation matrix in the spinor representation and $`\phi _i`$ are four angles in the range of $`0\phi _i<1`$. If some of components of this spinor survive after these projections, supersymmetries are unbroken.

We rewrite the eq. (2.4) by using $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }_{013579}R^1=R^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{013579}`$ and eq. (2.3) into

$$(R^21)ϵ=0.$$
(2.6)
Introducing the following diagonalized bases of the gamma matrices

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{013579}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{diag}(\mathrm{𝟏}_{16},\mathrm{𝟏}_{16}),`$ (2.7)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1234}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{diag}(\mathrm{𝟏}_8,\mathrm{𝟏}_8,\mathrm{}),`$ (2.8)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1256}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{diag}(\mathrm{𝟏}_4,\mathrm{𝟏}_4,\mathrm{𝟏}_4,\mathrm{𝟏}_4,\mathrm{}),`$ (2.9)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1278}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{diag}(\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{}),`$ (2.10)
where dots mean repeating the first 16 diagonal components and $`\mathrm{𝟏}_n`$ stands for $`n\times n`$ identity matrix, then $`R^21`$ in eq. (2.6) reduces to

$`R^21`$ $`=`$ $`2R\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ (2.11)
$`\times \mathrm{diag}(\mathrm{sin}\pi (\phi _1\phi _2\phi _3\phi _4)\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{sin}\pi (\phi _1\phi _2\phi _3+\phi _4)\mathrm{𝟏}_2,`$
$`\mathrm{sin}\pi (\phi _1\phi _2+\phi _3\phi _4)\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{sin}\pi (\phi _1\phi _2+\phi _3+\phi _4)\mathrm{𝟏}_2,`$
$`\mathrm{sin}\pi (\phi _1+\phi _2\phi _3\phi _4)\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{sin}\pi (\phi _1+\phi _2\phi _3+\phi _4)\mathrm{𝟏}_2,`$
$`\mathrm{sin}\pi (\phi _1+\phi _2+\phi _3\phi _4)\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{sin}\pi (\phi _1+\phi _2+\phi _3+\phi _4)\mathrm{𝟏}_2,\mathrm{}).`$
When we act this operator on the Killing spinor $`ϵ`$, some components of $`ϵ`$ can be non-zero if we choose suitable angles, that is, the supersymmetry remains. We can count the number of supersymmetries of the above M5-brane system as the residual spinor components. To see this, we increase the number of the angles in order setting the others to be zero. Then we classify the possible number of supersymmetries and find the condition for the angles.

We notice that the non-rotated M5-brane necessarily breaks half of the supersymmetries due to the projection of the gamma matrix (2.7). Since the projection of the M5-brane preserves only 16 components of the Killing spinor, it is sufficient to consider the action of (2.11) only on the first 16 components in the following.

One angle

If we set $`\phi _2=\phi _3=\phi _4=0`$, all components in (2.11) do not vanish unless $`\phi _1=0`$, namely, supersymmetry is completely broken in general. In the case of $`\phi _1=0`$, the M5-branes represents nothing but two parallel M5-branes which preserves 1/2 of the supersymmetric charges.

Two angles

We set $`\phi _3=\phi _4=0`$. Some of elements in (2.11) vanish when

$$\phi _1\pm \phi _2𝐙.$$
(2.12)
Here all integer values are not allowed since we restrict the angles to the range of $`0\phi _i<1`$, but we can choose a suitable integer if possible. This notion applies below. For the condition of (2.12), the number of elements being zero in (2.11) is 8 of 16, that is, the system with the condition (2.12) preserves 1/4 supersymmetry.

Three angles

We set $`\phi _4=0`$. The condition for preserving supersymmetry is

$$\phi _1\pm \phi _2\pm \phi _3𝐙.$$
(2.13)
In this case, 4 of first 16 elements are zero in (2.11) and 4 components in 32 of the Killing spinor survive. So we have 1/8 of supersymmetries.

Four angles

In this case, there are the various ways to obtain the supersymmetric configuration in contrast with the above cases. One is the similar condition to the other angles, which is

$$\phi _1\pm \phi _2\pm \phi _3\pm \phi _4𝐙.$$
(2.14)
This preserves 1/16 supersymmetry.

The second is obtained by setting independently

$$\phi _i\pm \phi _j𝐙\mathrm{and}\phi _k\pm \phi _l𝐙.$$
(2.15)
There are 12 conditions in total. For example, if we set $`\phi _1=\phi _2\phi _3=\phi _4`$, 4 of the first 16 elements in (2.11) vanish. So the supersymmetry is enhanced to 1/8 compared with the previous case.

The final condition is particular. We now set all angles to be the same up to a suitable choice of relative signs, that is,

$$\phi _1=\pm \phi _2=\pm \phi _3=\pm \phi _4.$$
(2.16)
If we choose as $`\phi _1=\phi _2=\phi _3=\phi _4`$ for instance, 6 components of the first 16 is zero. So we have 3/16 residual supersymmetries as a result.

## 3 Supersymmetric D-brane bound states with a $`B`$-field

In this section we produce D$`p`$-D$`p^{}`$ bound states, which preserve some supersymmetry, from the M5-brane configuration discussed in section 2 by using the M-theory compactification on $`T^8\times S^1`$.

First we consider the compactification on $`S^1`$ along the $`x^9`$-direction. The M5-brane configuration (2.1) and (2.2) is dual to the intersecting D4-brane at four angles in Type IIA theory. We next would like to take T-dualities along $`x^1`$, $`x^3`$, $`x^5`$ and $`x^7`$-directions on the torus $`T^8`$ which extends along $`x^1,\mathrm{},x^8`$. This T-duality simply maps the M5-brane to the D0-brane, but since the M5-brane is tilted on $`T^8`$ at some angles, this rotated D4-brane generally produces D8-brane with a $`B`$-field on $`T^8`$ (See for example ) and the geometry on $`T^8`$ will be non-commutative. The $`B`$-field is given by

$$B_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}0& b_1& & & \\ b_1& 0& & & \\ & & \mathrm{}& & \\ & & & 0& b_4\\ & & & b_4& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(3.1)
where $`\mu ,\nu =1,\mathrm{},8`$ and $`b_i`$ are related to the four angles by

$$\mathrm{tan}2\pi \phi _i=\frac{1}{b_i},$$
(3.2)
or equivalently,

$$e^{4\pi i\phi _i}=\frac{1+ib_i}{1ib_i}.$$
(3.3)
This D0-D8 bound state preserves the same supersymmetry as the configuration discussed in the previous section since T-duality does not change the number of the supercharges. Of course, we can consider from the beginning the conditions for the Type IIA Killing spinors when the $`B`$-field exists on the D0-D8 bound state, but it just give the same conditions as the intersecting brane case. Moreover, there is no distinction of the twisted boundary condition for the worldsheet theory between the intersecting brane at angles and D-brane with the $`B`$-field. So we can simply apply the supersymmetric classification for the brane at angles to the D-brane bound state with the $`B`$-field by using the translation rule (3.3).

In the classification of the previous section, we set some angles to be zero in the case that the number of the rotated angles is less than four. Since this means that some parts of the worldvolume directions are parallel to M5-brane, T-duality finally makes the D0-D2, D0-D4 and D0-D6 bound states with the $`B`$-field, which correspond to the one angle, two angles and three angles case, respectively.

So we can now classify the supersymmetric condition for the $`B`$-field in sequence.

D0-D2 system

The one angle case corresponds to the D0-D2 bound state with a constant $`B`$-field on the D2. For general value of $`b_1`$, the supersymmetry is completely broken even if D0-D2 system without the $`B`$-field, which corresponds to the case of $`\phi _1=1/4`$ and the others are zero. An exception is D0-D2 in the limit of $`|b_1|\mathrm{}`$, but this is just equivalent to the D0-D0 system.

D0-D4 system

In this case, the supersymmetric condition of the 1/4 supersymmetry for two angles reduces to

$$\left(\frac{1+ib_1}{1ib_1}\right)\left(\frac{1+ib_2}{1ib_2}\right)^{\pm 1}=1.$$
(3.4)
This means that

$$B_{12}=B_{34},$$
(3.5)
that is, the D0-D4 system is supersymmetric if and only if the $`B`$-field is anti-self-dual or self-dual.

D0-D6 system

There are various choices of the 1/8 supersymmetric condition for the three angles depending on the relative signs of the angles. We here only consider the case that the signs are all positive without loss of generality. Then the condition for the $`b_i`$ is

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\left(\frac{1+ib_i}{1ib_i}\right)=1,$$
(3.6)
so we find that

$$B_{12}B_{34}+B_{34}B_{56}+B_{56}B_{12}=1,\mathrm{}.$$
(3.7)
It is not clear what this condition means in the sense of the anti-symmetric two form field.

The D0-D6 bound state without the $`B`$-field corresponds to the intersecting branes at angles of $`\pm \phi _1=\pm \phi _2=\pm \phi _3=\frac{1}{4}`$ and $`\phi _4=0`$. These angles do not satisfy the condition (2.13), so the D0-D6 system can not be supersymmetric if a suitable $`B`$-field does not exist.

D0-D8 system

In this case, there are three patterns depending on the fractions of the residual supersymmetry. First, we choose one of the conditions as $`_{i=1}^4\phi _i=0`$ which preserves the 1/16 supersymmetry, then the condition for $`b_i`$ is

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}\left(\frac{1+ib_i}{1ib_i}\right)=1.$$
(3.8)
From this, we find that

$$\begin{array}{c}B_{12}+B_{34}+B_{56}+B_{78}\hfill \\ =B_{12}B_{34}B_{56}+B_{34}B_{56}B_{78}+B_{56}B_{78}B_{12}+B_{78}B_{12}B_{34},\mathrm{}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.9)
This condition reduces to the simple form in the small $`B`$ limit as

$$B_{12}+B_{34}+B_{56}+B_{78}=0,\mathrm{}.$$
(3.10)
This consists of an extended “self-dual” condition in dimensions greater than four discussed in ,

$$\frac{1}{2}T_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }B^{\rho \sigma }=\lambda B_{\mu \nu },$$
(3.11)
where $`T_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }`$ is a totally antisymmetric tensor and $`\lambda `$ is an eigenvalue. The tensor $`T_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }`$ is not invariant under the 8 dimensional rotational group $`SO(8)`$ but at least must be invariant under subgroups of $`SO(8)`$. The above condition (3.10) breaks $`SO(8)`$ to $`Spin(7)`$ and 28 of $`B_{\mu \nu }`$ decomposes into 21 which corresponds to $`\lambda =1`$ and the tensor is given by

$$T^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }=\eta ^T\gamma ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }\eta ,$$
(3.12)
where $`\gamma ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }`$ is the totally anti-symmetric product of $`SO(8)`$ gamma matrices and $`\eta `$ is a constant unit spinor, which satisfies $`\eta ^T\eta =1`$.

The second condition preserving 1/8 of the supersymmetries is typically $`\phi _1=\phi _2\phi _3=\phi _4`$. This condition contains two sets of the self-dual condition on each four dimensional submanifolds

$$B_{12}=B_{34},B_{56}=B_{78},\mathrm{},$$
(3.13)
in terms of the $`B`$-field. In this case the tensor $`T_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }`$ is a singlet under the subgroup $`(SU(4)\times U(1))/𝐙_2`$ and (3.13) is a part of the “self-dual” condition (3.11) with $`\lambda =1`$. This type of the condition could be also considered as an Hermitian-Einstein condition

$$g^{\alpha \overline{\beta }}B_{\alpha \overline{\beta }}=0,$$
(3.14)
where $`g^{\alpha \overline{\beta }}`$ is a hermitian metric on the $`T^8`$.

Note that the condition (3.13) or (3.14) is associated with the invariance under $`SU(4)Spin(6)`$, which is a holonomy of a Calabi-Yau four-fold ($`\mathrm{CY}_4`$). This fact means that the intersecting brane at angles of (2.15) or D0-D8 system with the $`B`$-field of (3.13) is dual to the $`\mathrm{CY}_4`$.

Finally, we consider the case preserving 3/16 supersymmetries in the D0-D8 system. One of the conditions is $`\phi _1=\phi _2=\phi _3=\phi _4`$. The condition is expressed in terms of the $`B`$-field as

$$B_{12}=B_{34}=B_{56}=B_{78},\mathrm{}.$$
(3.15)
This also is a kind of the extended “self-dual” condition which is invariant under the subgroup $`(Sp(2)\times Sp(1))/𝐙_2`$. Under this symmetry, the $`B_{\mu \nu }`$ in the adjoint representation survive as 10 when $`\lambda =1`$ and satisfies the condition (3.15)111Notice that the choice of the coordinates and the normalization of $`\lambda `$ differ from .. The tensor $`T_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }`$ is a singlet of $`Sp(2)Spin(5)`$, which is characteristic symmetry of the D0-D8 system with the B-field of (3.15).

In the construction of the $`B`$-field from the branes at angles, we have obtained only a part of the components of the “self-dual” $`B`$-field, but we can expect that the general “self-dual” $`B`$-field preserves the same supersymmetry since the vev of the $`B`$-field is compatible with the holonomy of the dual manifold of the D-brane bound states with the $`B`$-field. So we treat the components of the $`B`$-field as the general “self-dual” one in the following.

## 4 D0-D8 system with B-field and extended ADHM construction on noncommutative geometry

### 4.1 Noncommutative instanton as D0-D4 with the $`B`$-field

The ADHM construction  is very important tool for finding gauge configurations and analyzing moduli space of instantons. We first briefly review the ADHM construction on four dimensional space and its modification on the noncommutative $`𝐑^4`$. The noncommutativity of $`𝐑^4`$ is realized by introducing a constant magnetic $`B`$-field on the D4-brane. The supersymmetric D0-D4 bound state with the $`B`$-field is regarded as a resolved instanton on the noncommutative $`𝐑^4`$ whose moduli space is non-singular. We in the following concentrate the case of the gauge group $`U(N)`$ with instanton number $`k`$ since it simply relates to the bound state of $`k`$ D0-branes and $`N`$ D$`p`$-branes.

We first consider the instantons on the ordinary commutative space. In the ADHM construction, it is useful to treat four coordinates of $`𝐑^4`$ as a quaternion. Introducing the quaternionic basis $`\sigma _\mu =(i\tau _1,i\tau _2,i\tau _3,\mathrm{𝟏}_2)`$, where $`\tau _i`$ are the Pauli matrices, the coordinates are arrenged into the quaternion variable

$$𝒙=\underset{\mu =1}{\overset{4}{}}\sigma _\mu x^\mu =\left(\begin{array}{cc}z_2& z_1\\ \overline{z}_1& \overline{z}_2\end{array}\right),$$
(4.1)
where we define the complex coordinates as $`z_1=x^2+ix^1`$ and $`z_2=x^4+ix^3`$.

We first define an operator

$$𝒟_z=𝑨+𝑩𝒙,$$
(4.2)
where $`𝑨`$ and $`𝑩`$ are $`(N+2k)\times 2k`$ matrices and the product with $`𝒙`$ is defined in the quaternionic sense as we will see concretely below.

If we can find a solution of the following equations

$$𝒟_z^{}\psi =0,$$
(4.3)
for $`(N+2k)\times N`$ matrix $`\psi `$, which is normalized as $`\psi ^{}\psi =\mathrm{𝟏}_N`$, we obtain the $`U(N)`$ gauge field

$$A_\mu =\psi ^{}_\mu \psi .$$
(4.4)
Using a completeness relation

$$\mathrm{𝟏}_{N+2k}=\psi \psi ^{}+𝒟_z(𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z)^1𝒟_z^{},$$
(4.5)
and assuming that $`𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z`$ are invertible and commute with all quaternions, we have the field strength from the gauge field (4.4)

$`F_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`2\psi ^{}\left(_{[\mu }𝒟_z(𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z)^1_{\nu ]}𝒟_z^{}\right)\psi `$ (4.6)
$`=`$ $`2\psi ^{}𝑩\overline{\eta }_{\mu \nu }(𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z)^1𝑩^{}\psi ,`$
where $`\overline{\eta }_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}(\sigma _\mu \sigma _\nu ^{}\sigma _\nu \sigma _\mu ^{})`$ is a constant self-dual tensor which satisfies $`\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }\overline{\eta }^{\rho \sigma }=\overline{\eta }_{\mu \nu }`$. Therefore, the field strength automatically satisfies the self-dual condition.

The commutativity of $`𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z`$ with quaternions is the crucial condition in order to obtain the self-dual field strength. So all of our tasks finding the self-dual gauge field configuration of instantons amount to solving the commuting conditions for $`𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z`$. From the definition of $`𝒟_z`$, we have

$$𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z=𝑨^{}𝑨+𝑨^{}𝑩𝒙+𝒙^{}𝑩^{}𝑨+𝒙^{}𝑩^{}𝑩𝒙,$$
(4.7)
then we can rewrite into the condition for the components of $`𝑨`$ and $`𝑩`$ with respect to each order in $`𝒙`$ since the commuting condition must satisfy for any $`𝒙`$.

Before rewriting the condition, we notice that there are equivalences between different sets of $`𝑨`$ and $`𝑩`$ as

$$𝑨U𝑨M,𝑩U𝑩M,$$
(4.8)
where $`UU(N+2k)`$ and $`MGL(2k,𝐂)`$. The gauge field is invariant under this transformation. Using this symmetry, we can arrange the matrices $`𝑨`$ and $`𝑩`$ into

$$𝑨=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_2& A_1\\ A_1^{}& A_2^{}\\ I& J\end{array}\right),𝑩=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{𝟏}_k& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{𝟏}_k\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(4.9)
where $`A_i`$ and $`B_i`$ are $`k\times k`$ and $`I`$ and $`J`$ are $`N\times k`$ matrices. Substituting these matrices into (4.7) and requiring the commutativity of $`𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z`$ with quaternions, we obtain the following sets of equations

$`\mu _𝐑`$ $``$ $`[A_2^{},A_2][A_1^{},A_1]+I^{}IJ^{}J=0,`$ (4.10)
$`\mu _𝐂`$ $``$ $`[A_2^{},A_1]+I^{}J=0.`$ (4.11)
These real and complex equations are known as the ADHM equation of instantons. Three degrees of the equations associate with 3 of $`SU(2)Sp(1)`$, which reflects the hyper-Kähler structure of the instanton moduli space. If we find the solutions of the ADHM equations, we can construct the self-dual field strength through $`\psi `$ which satisfies eq. (4.3). Therefore, the moduli space of instantons is described by the hyper-Kähler quotient in the space of the solutions

$$=\left(\mu _𝐑^1(0)\mu _𝐂^1(0)\right)/U(k).$$
(4.12)
This moduli space is singular, but we can resolve the singularity by the modification of the ADHM equations.

Let us next consider the resolution of the ADHM equations by turning on the $`B`$-field. In string theory, if the constant $`B`$-field exists on the D4-brane the coordinates on the D4-brane become non-commutative

$$[x^\mu ,x^\nu ]=i\theta ^{\mu \nu }.$$
(4.13)
$`\theta ^{\mu \nu }`$ are determined by the $`B`$-field as

$$\theta ^{\mu \nu }=2\pi \alpha ^{}\left(\frac{1}{g+2\pi \alpha ^{}B}\right)_A^{\mu \nu },$$
(4.14)
where the subscript $`A`$ means an anti-symmetric part of the matrix.

The $`B`$-field on the D4-brane admits only the self-dual or anti-self-dual one for preserving supersymmetry. However, the self-dual $`B`$-field does not change the ADHM equations of the self-dual instanton. Therefore, the self-dual $`B`$-field is useless for resolving the moduli space (4.12). However, as we will see below, a constant anti-self-dual $`B`$-field deforms the self-dual ADHM equations.

We first introduce the anti-self-dual $`B`$-field having only a non-zero component of

$$B_{12}=B_{34}=\beta _1.$$
(4.15)
This non-zero $`B`$-field gives the non-commutativity on $`𝐑^4`$ in the complex coordinates

$$[z_1,\overline{z}_1]=[z_2,\overline{z}_2]=\frac{\zeta }{2},$$
(4.16)
and others are zero. Here we define $`\frac{\zeta }{4}=\frac{2\pi \alpha ^{}\beta _1}{1+\beta _1^2}`$.

From the commuting condition of the operator $`𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z`$, we find the modification of the first ADHM equation (4.10)

$$\mu _𝐑=\zeta .$$
(4.17)
The second is not changed.

We can also introduce the following non-zero components of the $`B`$-field with keeping the anti-self-dual condition

$$B_{14}=B_{23}=\beta _2,B_{13}=B_{24}=\beta _3.$$
(4.18)
This gives

$$[z_1,\overline{z}_2]=\rho ,$$
(4.19)
where $`\rho =2(\beta _2i\beta _3)/\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1+\beta _1^2+\beta _2^2+\beta _3^2`$. These non-commutative coordinates modify the condition for the ADHM construction of the instantons and we have in addition to (4.17)

$$\mu _𝐂=\rho .$$
(4.20)
As a result, the singularity of the moduli space of instantons on the commutative $`𝐑^4`$ is resolved to a smooth manifold

$$\stackrel{~}{}=\left(\mu _𝐑^1(\zeta )\mu _𝐂^1(\rho )\right)/U(k).$$
(4.21)
Here we see the constant anti-self-dual $`B`$-field modifies the ADHM equations of the self-dual instantons. If we would like to consider the ADHM construction of the anti-self-dual instantons, one may exchange a role of $`\sigma _\mu `$ and $`\sigma _\mu ^{}`$. Then, we have a anti-self-dual tensor $`\eta _{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}(\sigma _\mu ^{}\sigma _\nu \sigma _\nu ^{}\sigma _\mu )`$ in the formula (4.6) instead of $`\overline{\eta }_{\mu \nu }`$. The self-dual $`B`$-field only affects the ADHM equations of the anti-self-dual instantons vice-versa.

### 4.2 Resolution of D0 in D8 by the B-field

We now consider the extended ADHM construction of the eight dimensional “self-dual” instantons with $`Sp(2)`$ symmetry given in , and its modification by the $`B`$-field.

In order to treat the eight dimensional space, we first provide two quaternionic coordinates in which we arrange the eight coordinates as

$$𝒙=\underset{\mu =1}{\overset{8}{}}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_\mu x^\mu =\left(\begin{array}{cc}z_2& z_1\\ \overline{z}_1& \overline{z}_2\end{array}\right),𝒙^{}=\underset{\mu =1}{\overset{8}{}}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_\mu ^{}x^\mu =\left(\begin{array}{cc}z_4& z_3\\ \overline{z}_3& \overline{z}_4\end{array}\right),$$
(4.22)
where we define the eight vector matrices

$`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`(i\tau _1,0,i\tau _2,0,i\tau _3,0,\mathrm{𝟏}_2,0),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_\mu ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`(0,i\tau _1,0,i\tau _2,0,i\tau _3,0,\mathrm{𝟏}_2),`$
and the four complex coordinates $`z_1=x^3+ix^1`$, $`z_2=x^7+ix^5`$, $`z_3=x^4+ix^2`$ and $`z_4=x^8+ix^6`$.

The Dirac-like operator in the ADHM construction extends to

$$𝒟_z=𝑨+\stackrel{}{𝑩}\stackrel{}{𝒙},$$
(4.23)
where $`\stackrel{}{𝑩}=(𝑩,𝑩^{})`$ and $`\stackrel{}{𝒙}=(𝒙,𝒙^{})`$. The matrices $`𝑨`$, $`𝑩`$ and $`𝑩^{}`$ are $`(N+2k)\times 2k`$ similar to the previous case.

The construction of instantons is also similar to the four dimensional case. Finding the solution of the equation (4.3) at first and using the relation

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mu _\mu \stackrel{}{𝒙}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_\mu & \\ \stackrel{~}{\sigma }_\mu ^{}& \end{array}\right),$$
(4.24)
then we find the “self-dual” field strength

$`F_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`2\psi ^{}\left(_{[\mu }𝒟_z(𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z)^1_{\nu ]}𝒟_z^{}\right)\psi `$ (4.25)
$`=`$ $`2\psi ^{}\stackrel{}{𝑩}\overline{N}_{\mu \nu }(𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z)^1\stackrel{}{𝑩}^{}\psi ,`$
where $`\overline{N}_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mu \mathrm{\Sigma }_\nu ^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_\nu \mathrm{\Sigma }_\mu ^{})`$ is a “self-dual” tensor which satisfies $`\frac{1}{2}T_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }\overline{N}^{\rho \sigma }=\lambda \overline{N}_{\mu \nu }`$ with $`\lambda =1`$.

Here we require the condition that $`𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z`$ should commute with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mu `$. This is a necessary condition to obtain the “self-dual” gauge configurations on the eight dimensions.

In this construction, there are equivalences between different sets of $`𝑨`$, $`𝑩`$ and $`𝑩^{}`$ as like as (4.8). Using this symmetry, we can rearranged $`𝑨`$ and $`𝑩`$ as in (4.9) and $`𝑩^{}`$ as222Precisely speaking, the degrees of freedom of the relative coordinate choices in $`𝒙`$ and $`𝒙^{}`$ still remain, but we have fixed them for later convenience.

$$𝑩^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}B_2& B_1\\ B_1^{}& B_2^{}\\ K& L\end{array}\right).$$
(4.26)
In this representation of matrices, the commuting condition of $`𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z`$ gives the following sets of equations

$`\mu _𝐑^1`$ $``$ $`[A_2^{},A_2][A_1^{},A_1]+I^{}IJ^{}J=0,`$ (4.27)
$`\mu _𝐂^1`$ $``$ $`[A_2^{},A_1]+I^{}J=0,`$ (4.28)
$`\mu _𝐂^2`$ $``$ $`[A_2^{},B_2][B_1^{},A_1]+I^{}KL^{}J=0,`$ (4.29)
$`\mu _{𝐂}^{2}{}_{}{}^{}`$ $``$ $`[A_2^{},B_1]+[B_2^{},A_1]+I^{}L+K^{}J=0,`$ (4.30)
$`\mu _𝐑^3`$ $``$ $`[B_2^{},B_2][B_1^{},B_1]+K^{}KL^{}L=0,`$ (4.31)
$`\mu _𝐂^3`$ $``$ $`[B_2^{},B_1]+K^{}L=0.`$ (4.32)
There are two real and four complex equations, which relate to the adjoint representation 10 of $`Sp(2)`$. So we expect that the moduli space of the eight dimensional instantons considering now has a structure of $`Sp(2)`$ holonomy. An example of the manifold with $`Sp(2)`$ holonomy is known as the toric hyper-Kähler manifold  and a relation between the ’t Hooft type solution of the above extended ADHM equations and the manifold with $`Sp(2)`$ holonomy is discussed in .

We next consider the effect of the $`B`$-field on the ADHM construction in eight dimensions. In our considering case, the tensor $`T^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }`$ in the “(anti-)self-dual” condition is invariant under the subgroup $`(Sp(1)\times Sp(2))/𝐙_2`$ of $`SO(8)`$. Under this symmetry, 28 of anti-symmetric two form $`B`$ in eight dimensions decomposes into 10, 3 and 15, which satisfy the “(anti-)self-dual” condition (3.11) with $`\lambda =1,\frac{5}{3},\frac{1}{3}`$, respectively. Therefore, there are one “self-dual” and two “anti-self-dual” $`B`$-field, which are compatible with $`Sp(2)`$ symmetry, and we may have the modification of the extended ADHM equations by these $`B`$-fields.

First, we consider the case that the $`B`$-field is 10 with $`\lambda =1`$. We obtain the following commutation relations of the complex coordinates from the non-zero components of the $`B`$-field

$`[z_1,\overline{z}_1]=[z_2,\overline{z}_2]={\displaystyle \frac{\zeta _1}{2}},[z_3,\overline{z}_3]=[z_4,\overline{z}_4]={\displaystyle \frac{\zeta _2}{2}},`$
$`[z_1,z_2]=\rho _1,[z_1,\overline{z}_3]=[z_2,\overline{z}_4]=\rho _2,`$
$`[z_1,z_4]=[z_2,z_3]=\rho _3,[z_3,z_4]=\rho _4,`$
and the others are zero, where $`\zeta _i𝐑`$ and $`\rho _i𝐂`$ are parameters which are determined by the components of the $`B`$-field. The extended ADHM equations in this background are modified while the $`B`$-field is “self-dual” in contrast with the four dimensional case. In fact, if we require the commuting condition of $`𝒟_z^{}𝒟_z`$, the first equation (4.27) becomes

$$\mu _𝐑^1=\overline{\rho }_2B_2+\rho _2B_2^{}\overline{\rho }_3B_1+\rho _3B_1^{},$$
(4.33)
that is, linear terms in $`B`$ add to the quadratic ADHM equation. However, unfortunately, the solution of the above equation is not so interesting. The l.h.s and r.h.s of (4.33) must be independently zero since the l.h.s is hermitian but r.h.s is not. If we choose as $`B_2=\rho _2H_2`$ and $`B_1=\rho _3H_1`$, where $`H_i`$ are hermitian matrices, the equation (4.33) is satisfied. Therefore, the moduli space of the eight dimensional instantons almost is not modified and we can not avoid the singularity. The “self-dual” $`B`$-field is not useful for the resolution of the “self-dual” instanton moduli space, consequently.

The next case is 3 with $`\lambda =\frac{5}{3}`$. If we define $`N_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mu ^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_\nu \mathrm{\Sigma }_\nu ^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mu )`$, this satisfies the “anti-self-dual” condition with $`\lambda =\frac{5}{3}`$. From the three independent components of the $`B`$-field, we find the non-commutativity of the complex coordinates

$`[z_1,\overline{z}_1]=[z_2,\overline{z}_2]=[z_3,\overline{z}_3]=[z_4,\overline{z}_4]={\displaystyle \frac{\zeta }{2}},`$
$`[z_1,\overline{z}_2]=[z_3,\overline{z}_4]=\rho ,`$
and the other commutation relations are zero. These commutation relations modify the extended ADHM equations as

$`\mu _𝐑^1`$ $`=`$ $`\zeta \left(\mathrm{𝟏}_k+\mathrm{\Xi }\right),`$ (4.34)
$`\mu _𝐂^1`$ $`=`$ $`\rho \left(\mathrm{𝟏}_k+\mathrm{\Xi }\right),`$ (4.35)
where $`\mathrm{\Xi }=\frac{1}{2}\left(\{B_2^{},B_2\}+\{B_1^{},B_1\}+K^{}K+L^{}L\right)`$. This is very similar to the four dimensional instanton except for the existence of $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$. In particular, the first two equations are the same as the resolved ordinary ADHM equation when $`B_1=B_2=0`$ and $`K=L=0`$, namely the moduli space of the eight dimensional instanton includes the resolved four dimensional instanton moduli space.

Finally, we consider most interesting case which has a rich structure. The $`B`$-field of 15 obeys the “anti-self-dual” condition with $`\lambda =\frac{1}{3}`$ and has 15 independent components. The 15 components are arranged into one real parameter $`\zeta `$ and seven complex parameters $`\rho _i`$ and we have the following commutation relations

$`[z_1,\overline{z}_1]=[z_2,\overline{z}_2]=[z_3,\overline{z}_3]=[z_4,\overline{z}_4]={\displaystyle \frac{\zeta }{2}},`$
$`[z_1,\overline{z}_2]=[z_3,\overline{z}_4]=\rho _1,[z_1,\overline{z}_3]=[z_2,\overline{z}_4]=\rho _2,`$
$`[z_1,z_4]=[z_2,z_3]=\rho _3,[z_2,\overline{z}_3]=\rho _4,[z_1,\overline{z}_4]=\rho _5,`$
$`[z_2,z_4]=\rho _6,[z_1,z_3]=\rho _7.`$
These commutation relations gives the modification of the ADHM equations

$`\mu _𝐑^1`$ $`=`$ $`\zeta (\mathrm{𝟏}_k\mathrm{\Xi })+\overline{\rho }_2B_2+\rho _2B_2^{}\overline{\rho }_3B_1\rho _3B_1^{},`$ (4.36)
$`\mu _𝐂^1`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _1(\mathrm{𝟏}_k\mathrm{\Xi })\overline{\rho }_4B_2+\rho _5B_2^{}+\overline{\rho }_6B_1\rho _7B_1^{}.`$ (4.37)
In this case we have linear terms in $`B_i`$ again. However, in contrast with the previous case, there are non-trivial solutions proportional to $`k`$ dimensional representation of $`SU(2)`$ algebra, $`T_\pm =T_1\pm iT_2`$ and $`T_3`$. Actually, if we tune the parameters to $`\zeta =\rho _1=0`$ and $`\rho _2=\rho _3=2\rho _4=2\rho _5=2\rho _6=2\rho _7=m`$, then we find a solution

$`A_2=mT_{},A_1=mT_{},B_2=mT_3,B_1=mT_3,`$
$`I=m\lambda _1,J=m\lambda _2,K=m\lambda _3,L=m\lambda _4,`$
where $`\lambda _i`$ are $`N\times k`$ matrices which satisfy that $`\lambda _1^{}\lambda _4=\lambda _2^{}\lambda _3=T_3`$, $`\lambda _1^{}\lambda _1=\lambda _2^{}\lambda _2`$, $`\lambda _3^{}\lambda _3=\lambda _4^{}\lambda _4`$ and the other $`\lambda _i^{}\lambda _j(ij)`$ are zero. For example, when $`N=4`$ and $`k=2`$ if we choose $`\lambda _1=i\mathrm{\Sigma }_5`$, $`\lambda _2=i\mathrm{\Sigma }_6`$, $`\lambda _3=\mathrm{\Sigma }_8`$ and $`\lambda _4=\mathrm{\Sigma }_7`$, all equations are satisfied. The existence of these solutions means that the moduli space of the eight dimensional instantons is divided into disconnected pieces every representation of $`SU(2)`$.

From a point of view of the D0-brane world-volume theory, the matrices $`A_i`$ and $`B_i`$ correspond to the adjoint vector multiplets of the gauge group $`U(k)`$, and $`I,J,K,L`$ are $`N`$ matter multiplets. The ADHM equations discussed above are flat conditions which describe the moduli space of vacua in D0-brane world-volume theory. If we add the $`B`$-field background, the flat conditions are changed. One of the modifications appears as the FI terms as like as the ordinary supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory of D0-D4 system. However, the linear term in $`B_i`$ means the mass term in the system. So the $`B`$-field also provides mass of the vector multiplets. Similar modifications of the flat direction appear in the context of supersymmetric Chern-Simons theory , the dielectric effect of the branes  and the $`𝒩=1^{}`$ theory . Presumably, the brane realization of these systems may relate to the D0-D8 with the $`B`$-field by the string dualities.

## 5 Discussion and Comment

In this paper, we discussed the supersymmetric configuration of the D0-D$`p`$ system with the $`B`$-field. We obtain the supersymmetric system by using the T-dualities from the intersecting branes at four angles. In the classification of the supersymmetric intersecting M5-branes at angles , we can maximally rotate the brane by up to five angles. The rotation by five angles includes 1/32, 3/32 and 5/32 supersymmetric cases in addition to what we have discussed. However, if we naively apply the dimensional reduction and the T-dualities to these configurations in M-theory, we obtain a bound state of D0 and $`p`$ D8-brane with a $`B`$-field and $`q`$ rotated NS5-branes at angles, where $`p`$ and $`q`$ are co-prime integers determined by the fifth angle. This system also preservers the same supersymmetries as the intersecting branes, but the fractions of the supersymmetry sound strange in a sense of the D-brane bound states with the $`B`$-field. To understand this system we may need more knowledge about the brane dynamics near the NS5-brane .

The brane systems with the $`B`$-field is considered as a dual to the other brane configurations. The low energy effective theories on these branes are described by non-commutative Yang-Mills theory, Chern-Simons theory, ordinary Yang-Mills theory with non-zero FI parameters, etc. The dynamics of these theories are closely related with each other by dualities in string theory. The careful analyses of the D-brane bound states with the $`B`$-field and their duals will shed light on the problems of various field theories.

## Acknowledgments

I would like to thank T. Yokono and Y. Michishita for useful discussions and comments. This work is supported in part by JSPS Research Fellowships for Young Scientists.