format: text

text:
# Spontaneous Parity Violation in QCD At Finite Temperature: On the Inapplicability of the Vafa-Witten Theorem

## Abstract

The generalization of the Vafa-Witten theorem ruling out parity violation to QCD at finite temperature is considered. It is shown that this generalization of the theorem rules out Lorentz-invariant parity violating operators from spontaneously acquiring vacuum expectation values. However, it does not rule out Lorentz-noninvariant parity-violating operators from acquiring expectation values. Other situations where the theorem is inapplicable are also discussed.

More than 15 years ago Vafa and Witten constructed a very simple and elegant argument based on functional integrals that QCD cannot spontaneously break parity . This so-called Vafa-Witten theorem has assumed increased importance over the years since the argument appears to be essentially unchanged when generalized to a finite box size in the temporal direction and hence immediately applies to QCD at finite temperature. This is of potential significance in the physics of relativistic heavy ion physics since it implies that the high temperature phase of QCD cannot spontaneously break parity. Thus suggestions that a high temperature parity violating phase might be created in heavy ion collisions are restricted to considerations of metastable phases or phases that occur at finite baryon density. If there was no Vafa-Witten theorem, the possibility of a stable parity violating phase at high temperature would require serious consideration. Proposed signatures in heavy ion collisions for a parity violating phase in QCD are applicable regardless of whether the phase is stable or metastable.

The purpose of the present letter is to clarify the status of the Vafa-Witten theorem for finite temperature. It will be shown that the generalization of the Vafa-Witten theorem to finite temperature is nontrivial and that while the theorem forbids Lorentz invariant purely gluonic parity violating operators from acquiring expectation values, it does not imply that Lorentz-noninvariant parity-violating operators must have vanishing expectation values. Thus spontaneous parity violation at finite temperature has not been ruled out. Additional situations where the theorem does not apply will also be discussed. In particular as noted in ref. , the theorem does not generally apply to operators which contain quark bilinears.

Let us begin with a brief recapitulation of the Vafa-Witten argument. The problem is formulated in terms of a Euclidean space functional integral. The expectation value of an operator, $`𝒪`$ is given by $`𝒪=\frac{1}{V}\frac{\mathrm{log}\left(Z(\lambda )\right)}{\lambda }`$ where $`V`$ is the volume of space-time; $`Z(\lambda )`$, the generating function, is given by

$$Z(\lambda )=d[A]\mathrm{Det}[\overline{)}Dm]e^{S_{\mathrm{YM}}}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle d^4x\lambda 𝒪(x)}}$$
(1)
where $`𝒮_{\mathrm{YM}}`$ is the action for the pure Yang-Mills theory, and the functional determinant is the result of integrating out the quarks.

One key ingredient to the Vafa-Witten proof is that both the functional determinant and $`e^{S_{\mathrm{YM}}}`$ are real and non-negative . The second key ingredient is that the only way to create a parity-violating Lorentz scalar operator out of gluons is by combining gluon fields and covariant derivatives with an odd number of the full anti-symmetric epsilon tensor. An example of such an operator is $`F_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{F}^{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}/2ϵ^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }F_{\mu \nu }F_{\alpha \beta }`$. Such a construction necessarily yields an operator that is purely imaginary when analytically continued from Minkowski space to Euclidean space. Thus, the factor $`e^{{\scriptscriptstyle d^4x\lambda 𝒪(x)}}`$ must be replaced by $`e^{i{\scriptscriptstyle d^4x\lambda 𝒪(x)}}`$ which is a pure phase. Such a phase factor in an integration over a positive definite measure can only reduce the integral from what it would have been had the phase factor been unity; $`Z(\lambda )`$ is maximal for $`\lambda =0`$. The generating function, $`Z(\lambda )`$, can be expressed as $`Z(\lambda )=e^{V(\lambda )}`$ where $`(\lambda )`$ is the energy density for the system including the perturbation $`i\lambda 𝒪`$. Thus $`(\lambda )`$ is a free energy and the fact that $`Z(\lambda )`$ is maximal at $`\lambda =0`$ implies that the free energy is a minimum.

The free energy density near $`\lambda =0`$ is given by $`(\lambda )=(0)+\lambda 𝒪_{\lambda =0}`$. If $`𝒪`$ were to have a non-vanishing vacuum expectation value at $`\lambda =0`$, it can have either sign (since it is odd under parity which by hypothesis is broken) and thus regardless of the sign of $`\lambda `$ the theory can choose a vacuum state for which $`\lambda 𝒪_{\lambda =0}<0`$. This implies that if $`𝒪_{\lambda =0}0`$, then for small $`\lambda `$ there exists a state with lower free energy than for $`\lambda =0`$, in contradiction to the general proof that $`(\lambda )`$ is a global minimum at $`\lambda =0`$. Thus $`𝒪=0`$ for all purely bosonic parity violating operators.

Before proceeding, a few comments should be made. The first is that the identification of $``$ as a free energy is nontrivial. The perturbation added to the system when including the $`\lambda 𝒪`$ term is at the level of the Lagrangian and not the Hamiltonian. Since the operator, $`𝒪`$ contains time derivatives the presence of the $`\lambda 𝒪`$ term alters the definition of the canonical momenta in QCD. For this reason $``$ is not equal to $`+\lambda 𝒪`$ (where $``$ is the canonical QCD Hamiltonian density(with $`\lambda =0`$). Nevertheless $``$ is clearly the appropriate free energy density in the sense that in Minkowski space $`𝒪=\frac{(\lambda )}{\lambda }`$. The fact that the free energy density is not $`+\lambda 𝒪`$ explains why $`(\lambda )`$ is not a maximum at $`\lambda =0`$ in spite of the general result that a linear perturbation to the Hamiltonian for an operator with zero expectation value always lowers the energy.

Reference  was a bit cavalier in its treatment of limits. Symmetries cannot be spontaneously broken for finite systems. Usually one considers a finite but spatially large system (of 3-volume $`V_{\mathrm{space}}`$) and then adds a symmetry-breaking perturbation to the system of strength $`\lambda `$. The system spontaneously breaks provided that an intensive symmetry-breaking operator has a non-vanishing expectation value in the limit $`\lambda 0`$, $`V_{\mathrm{space}}\mathrm{}`$ with the infinite volume limit taken first. Now the Vafa-Witten argument makes use of a small $`\lambda `$ limit i.e. a linear relation in the energy density and the source. However, if the $`\lambda 0`$ and $`V_{\mathrm{space}}\mathrm{}`$ do not commute, it remains conceivable that the linear expression is not valid in the infinite volume limit. For example, one might imagine that for small $`\lambda `$ and large $`V_{\mathrm{space}}`$ that the free energy density is of the following form:

$$(\lambda )=_0+\sqrt{\alpha V_{\mathrm{space}}^\beta +\gamma \lambda ^2}$$
(2)
where $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ are positive constants. Such a form has a minimum at $`\lambda =0`$ for any volume; in the infinite volume limit, however it develops a kink indicating spontaneous symmetry breaking. The possibility of an energy density of the form of Eq. (2) seems to indicate a loophole in the Vafa-Witten proof. However, on physical grounds, one can rule this form out. In typical cases of spontaneous symmetry breaking the form analogous to Eq. (2) (but with a minus sign) emerge as the lowest-lying state when a level crossing occurs at $`\lambda =0`$. (For finite systems, the level crossing is avoided by a small interaction between the two vacua which give rise to the $`\alpha V_{\mathrm{space}}^\beta `$ term in the square root.) While such a situation can easily arise at a relative maximum in $`(\lambda )`$ plainly it cannot at a global minimum since one of the levels has to pass under the other. Thus, this apparent loophole in the Vafa-Witten argument is closed.

Let us consider the generalization of this argument to finite temperature. The functional determinant is simply replaced by a functional determinant over a finite spatial extent, $`\tau `$, which is the inverse temperature, and appropriate boundary conditions are imposed (periodic for gluons, anti-periodic for quarks). The fermion determinant remains manifestly non-negative and hence the Vafa-Witten argument goes through unchanged: no Lorentz invariant parity violating operator can acquire a vacuum expectation value. However, this does not rule at parity violation at finite temperature even for pure gauge theory.

The heat bath has a rest frame and thereby violates Lorentz symmetry. This introduces a 4-vector, the 4-velocity $`u_\mu `$ into the problem. Thus, at finite temperatures, it is possible for Lorentz non-invariant operators to have non-vanishing expectation values. Moreover, unlike the Lorentz-invariant parity-violating operators considered by Vafa and Witten one can easily find Lorentz-noninvariant parity-violating scalar operators which do not pick up a factor of $`i`$ when analytically continuing from Minkowski to Euclidean space. Eamples of such operators include $`\mathrm{tr}[(\stackrel{}{D}\times \stackrel{}{B})\stackrel{}{B}]`$ and $`\mathrm{tr}[(\stackrel{}{D}\times \stackrel{}{E})\stackrel{}{E}]`$ where the trace is over color. The forms for these operators clearly are not manifestly covariant. However, such operators can be expressed covariantly in terms of $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ and the four-velocity of the heat bath. For example in the rest frame of the heat bath, $`\mathrm{tr}[(\stackrel{}{D}\times \stackrel{}{E})\stackrel{}{E}]=ϵ^{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }\mathrm{tr}[D_\alpha F_{\gamma ϵ}F_{\delta \varphi }]u_\beta u^ϵu^\varphi `$. Since these operators are purely real in Euclidean space one cannot show that their inclusion as a source must decrease the generating function. Thus the Vafa-Witten theorem does not apply for such operators and one cannot rule out the possibility that these operators spontaneously acquire expectation values at finite temperature.

Apart from the generalization to finite temperature, the validity of the Vafa-Witten theorem has recently been called into doubt. The basic argument of Vafa and Witten described above is cast in terms of expectation values of purely bosonic parity-violating Lorentz scalar operators. In a footnote, they argue that the analysis generalizes to operators containing quark bilinears. This generalization has been questioned in connection with the so-called Aoki phase of lattice regularized QCD with Wilson fermions at non-zero lattice spacing which breaks both parity and flavor. While the Aoki phase is clearly a lattice artifact, the assumptions used to derive the Vafa-Witten theorem appear to be valid in lattice QCD with Wilson fermions. It is clear that the loophole allowing for the Aoki phase is fairly general. (As will be discussed below, examples can be found where continuum QCD exhibits parity violation.) As discussed in Ref.  this loophole can be traced to the generalization of the theorem to operators including quarks.

Consider the case of parity-violating scalar operators that include fermion bilinears. In the original Vafa-Witten paper, it is argued that when one integrates out the fermions the operator becomes a purely bosonic operator and the previous argument applies. Thus, for example, if $`𝒪=\overline{q}i\gamma _5q`$, then upon integrating out the quarks $`𝒪`$ becomes $`\mathrm{tr}[i\gamma _5S_A(x,x)]`$ where $`S_A`$ is a quark propagator in the presence of the gluon field configuration. This operator is a functional of $`A`$ only.

However, there is clearly something wrong with this argument. There are several counterexamples for which the functional integral measure is strictly nonnegative but parity-violating operators constructed from fermion bilinears have non-vanishing vacuum expectation values. One case is QCD with strictly zero quark masses for two flavors. In this case, the theory has no explicit chiral symmetry breaking. Spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking means, however, that a source of the form $`\lambda \overline{q}i\gamma _5\tau _aq`$ will cause a vacuum expectation value for $`\overline{q}i\gamma _5\tau _aq`$, even in the limit $`\lambda 0`$. A second counterexample is QCD at finite isospin density. If an isospin violating chemical potential term, $`\mu \overline{q}\gamma _0\gamma _5\tau _3q`$ is added to the QCD Lagrangian, then for $`|\mu |>m_\pi `$, the system will acquire an s-wave pion condensate so that $`\overline{q}i\gamma _5\tau _{1,2}q`$ is nonzero. This occurs despite the fact that with a finite chemical potential, the fermion determinant is real and nonnegative . A third example is the Aoki phase mentioned above.

The problem with the extension of the Vafa-Witten theorem to operators containing fermion bilinears has been identified in connection with the Aoki phase. The bosonic operator obtained after integrating out the fermions is either not purely imaginary or is ill defined. More generally, it is easy to see that the addition of sources containing quark bilinears and of strength $`\lambda `$ do not necessarily imply that $`Z(\lambda )`$ is a maximum at $`\lambda =0`$ but is often a minimum. The same considerations invalidate the theorem for the other counterexamples. Consider, for example two-flavor QCD at zero quark mass with a perturbation of the form $`\lambda \overline{q}i\gamma _5\tau _aq`$. Upon integrating out the quarks, the effect on the functional integral of the inclusion such a perturbation is completely contained in the functional determinant. It becomes $`\mathrm{Det}[\overline{)}Di\lambda \gamma _5\tau _a]`$, which may be expressed naturally in terms the eigenvalues of the $`\overline{)}D`$ operator. It is simple to see that if $`\psi _j`$ is an eigenstate of $`\overline{)}D`$ with eigenvalue $`iϵ_j`$ then $`\tau _a\gamma _5\psi _j`$ is also an eigenstate but with eigenvalue of $`ϵ_j`$. From this, it is straightforward to write the functional determinant as

$$\mathrm{Det}[\overline{)}Di\lambda \gamma _5\tau _a]=\underset{j}{}(ϵ_j^2+\lambda ^2)$$
(3)
where the product is evaluated over a single flavor and the effect of two flavors is included in the square. From the form of Eq. (3) it is immediately apparent that $`\mathrm{Det}[\overline{)}Di\lambda \gamma _5\tau _a]`$ has a minimum at $`\lambda =0`$ which in turn implies that $`Z(\lambda )`$ has a minimum at $`\lambda =0`$. The situation for QCD at finite isospin density is analogous. It is not surprising that the inclusion of fermion bilinears gives a $`Z(\lambda `$) with a maximum at $`\lambda =0`$ rather than a minimum. Unlike in the case of purely bosonic operators, perturbations proportional to the parity violating fermion bilinears considered here do not alter the definition of the conjugate momenta. Thus, they act as linear perturbations on the Hamiltonian as well as on the Lagrangian and, hence, by very generally variational arguments always lower the free energy density.

The Vafa-Witten theorem has also been questioned at a more fundamental level. Azcoiti and Galante recently argued that the Vafa-Witten proof implicitly depends on the existence of a well-defined free-energy density for small external parity violating perturbations, and that this implicit assumption is, in fact, not true in the presence of spontaneous parity violation . As the thermodynamic limit plays a central role in the analysis, the four-volume $`V`$ will be explicitly denoted throughout. The key theoretical tool used in their analysis is the probability distribution function for the operator $`𝒪`$ defined as

$`P(\stackrel{~}{𝒪},V)=`$ (4)
$`Z^1(0,V){\displaystyle d[A]\mathrm{Det}[\overline{)}Dm]e^{S_{\mathrm{YM}}}\delta (\overline{𝒪}(A)\stackrel{~}{𝒪})}`$ (5)
where $`\overline{𝒪}(A)V^1d^4x𝒪`$ and $`Z(\lambda ,V)`$ is the generating function. By construction $`P(\stackrel{~}{𝒪},V)`$ is the probability that a configuration removed at random from the functional integral will have $`\overline{𝒪}(A)=\stackrel{~}{𝒪}`$. The generating functional $`Z(\lambda ,V)`$ may be expressed as an integral over $`P(\stackrel{~}{𝒪},V)`$:

$$Z(\lambda ,V)=Z(0,V)𝑑\stackrel{~}{𝒪}P(\stackrel{~}{𝒪},V)e^{i\lambda V\stackrel{~}{𝒪}}$$
(6)
$`𝒪`$ is an intensive operator; in the thermodynamic limit, the probability distribution function will develop a delta function. If the symmetry is broken, two delta functions will develop; one at positive value and one at negative value. Denoting the expectation value of the operator in the symmetry broken phase as $`a`$, one has

$$\underset{V\mathrm{}}{lim}P(\stackrel{~}{𝒪},V)=\frac{1}{2}\delta (\stackrel{~}{𝒪}a)+\frac{1}{2}\delta (\stackrel{~}{𝒪}+a)$$
(7)
Azcoiti and Galante show that whenever the symmetry is spontaneously broken in the sense of Eq. (7), $`Z(\lambda ,V)`$ passes from positive to negative an infinite number of times as $`\lambda `$ is varied at fixed $`V`$. This in turn implies that $`=\frac{1}{V}\mathrm{log}\left(Z(\lambda ,V)\right)`$ is not well defined since the log has multiple branches.

In Ref.  it was argued that the nonexistence of a well-defined free energy density for the case of spontaneous symmetry breaking invalidates the proof of the Vafa-Witten theorem. The proof implicitly makes use of the existence of a well-defined free energy (for example when writing $`(\lambda )=(0)+\lambda 𝒪_{\lambda =0}`$); the nonexistence of well-defined free energy apparently invalidates the proof of the Vafa-Witten theorem. However, the argument of Ref.  can be turned on its head: since Azcoiti and Galante have shown that spontaneous symmetry breaking in the sense of Eq. (7) implies an ill-defined free energy, the existence of a well-defined free energy is equivalent to proving that there is no symmetry breaking. It may be argued that the assumption of a well-defined free energy is quite innocuous, in which case it trivially follows that such operators cannot spontaneously break parity. Whether this assumption is generically true is a delicate technical question that will not be addressed here. It should be noted, however, that the inapplicability of the Vafa-Witten theorem to Lorentz non-invariant operators at finite temperature, and to operators constructed from quark bilinears discussed above, is independent of the validity of the assumption of a well-defined free energy.

In summary, it has been shown that the Vafa-Witten theorem does not generally rule out parity breaking at finite temperature. Parity violating but Lorentz non-invariant operators are not precluded from spontaneously acquiring expectation values at finite temperatures. Of course, the fact the Vafa-Witten theorem does not forbid parity breaking at finite temperatures does not mean that it is likely to occur. On the whole, one expects that parity breaking at finite temperature to be rather unlikely since generically one expects a high temperature phase to be less ordered than a low temperature phase. However, QCD is in many respects a quite unusual theory and the possibility of parity breaking at finite temperature should be seriously considered.

Discussion with S. Nussinov, M. Stephanov and V. Azcoiti are gratefully acknowledged. This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy via grant DE-FG02-93ER-40762.


text:
# Dynamical SU(3) Linear 𝜎 Model and the mixing of 𝜂'–𝜂 and 𝜎–𝑓₀ mesons

## 1 Introduction

The original tree–level SU(2) spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB) linear $`\sigma `$ model $`(L\sigma M)`$ interaction Lagrangian density is

$$L_{L\sigma M}^{\text{int}}=g\overline{\psi }\left(\sigma +i\gamma _5𝝉𝝅\right)\psi +g^{}\sigma (\sigma ^2+𝝅^2)\frac{\lambda }{4}(\sigma ^2+𝝅^2)^2,$$
(1)
with tree–order chiral limiting (CL) couplings satisfying for $`f_\pi 93\text{MeV}`$

$$g=\frac{m}{f_\pi },g^{}=\frac{m_\sigma ^2}{2f_\pi }=\lambda f_\pi ,$$
(2)
here for quark fields, constituent quark mass $`m`$ and cubic and quartic–meson couplings $`g^{}`$, $`\lambda `$. Although the $`g`$, $`g^{}`$, $`\lambda `$ in (2) are not further specified in tree order, in loop order they are dynamically generated as

$$g=\frac{2\pi }{\sqrt{3}}3.6276,g^{}=2gm2.3\text{GeV},\lambda =\frac{8\pi ^2}{3}26.3.$$
(3)
We take $`m=315\text{MeV}`$, i.e., roughly one third of the nucleon mass $`M_N`$, since this value most consistently satisfies the relations central for the present paper, namely mass shell equal splitting laws (MSESLs) considered below, in Sec. 3. (A dynamical quark mass $`m=\left[\frac{4\pi \alpha _s}{3}\overline{\psi }\psi _{1\text{GeV}}\right]^{1/3}320\text{MeV}`$ used in QCD  would lead to some 3% higher MSESLs value $`4m^2`$, whereas $`m=325\text{MeV}`$, used in Refs. , would lead to some 6% higher value.) While Refs.  recover the original chiral relations of Eqs. (2), the loop–order values in Eqs. (3) depend on relating slowly diverging log–divergent graphs with the more rapidly diverging quadratic–divergent graphs.

In this paper we instead dynamically generate the SU(3) $`L\sigma M`$ using only the log–divergent graphs while replacing the quadratic–divergent graphs with the dynamical SU(3) MSESLs. In Sec. 2 we review the log–divergent gap equations in the CL and show their self–consistency in loop order. Then in Sec. 3 we replace quadratic–divergent mass gap equations with SU(2) and SU(3) MSESLs. In Sec. 4 we show how the SU(3) MSESLs lead to an $`\eta `$$`\eta ^{}`$ nonstrange–strange mixing angle of $`42^0`$, in fact closely agreeing with the phenomenological value . Finally in Sec. 5 we employ this SU(3) $`L\sigma M`$ with nonstrange–strange $`\eta `$, $`\eta ^{}`$ couplings to predict strong interaction decay rates for $`\sigma _{NS}\pi \pi `$, $`a_0\eta \pi `$, $`f_0\pi \pi `$ and $`\eta ^{}\eta \pi \pi `$, all in close agreement with data . We give our conclusions in Sec. 6.

## 2 Self–consistent log divergent gap equations

We begin with the non–perturbative loop–order equation for the pion decay constant $`\delta f_\pi =f_\pi `$ in the soft–pion chiral limit :

$$1=i\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}N_cg^2\frac{\text{ }d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}p}{(p^2m^2)^2},$$
(4)
using the Goldberger–Treiman relation (GTR) $`m=f_\pi g`$ as in (2) with $`\text{ }d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}p=(2\pi )^4d^4p`$, where the quark mass $`m`$ cancels out of this gap Eq. (4). This log–divergent gap equation (LDGE) (4) with $`g315\text{MeV}/90\text{MeV}3.5`$ requires an ultraviolet cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }750\text{MeV}`$, separating the $`\overline{q}q`$ elementary particles $`\pi `$ and $`m_\sigma 650\text{MeV}`$  with $`m_{\pi ,\sigma }<\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ from the bound-state $`\overline{q}q`$ mesons $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<\rho (770)`$, $`\omega (780)`$, $`a_1(1260)`$. This natural separation of $`L\sigma M`$ elementary particles from bound states is a consequence of the $`Z=0`$ compositeness condition  $`g=2\pi /\sqrt{N_c}`$ or $`g=3.6276`$ for $`N_c=3`$ (also dynamically generated in Refs. ).

The self–consistency of loops “shrinking” to trees in the CL and their link to the LDGE are seen for quark triangle and quark box graphs. In the former case the quark triangle representing $`g_{\sigma \pi \pi }^{}`$ is log–divergent with

$$g_{\sigma \pi \pi }^{}=8ig^3N_cm\frac{\text{ }d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}p}{(p^2m^2)^2}=2gm\left[4iN_cg^2\frac{\text{ }d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}p}{(p^2m^2)^2}\right]=2gm,$$
(5)
by virtue of the LDGE (4). Then using the quark–level GTR, Eq. (5) shrinks to the tree level $`g_{\sigma \pi \pi }^{}g^{}=m_\sigma ^2/2f_\pi `$ of (2) provided that $`m_\sigma =2m`$, the Nambu-Jona-Lasino  (NJL) result also dynamically generated in Refs. . Likewise the $`\pi \pi `$ box graph in the CL gives the quartic quark coupling

$$\lambda _{\text{box}}=8iN_cg^4\frac{\text{ }d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}p}{(p^2m^2)^2}=2g^2\left[4iN_cg^2\frac{\text{ }d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}p}{(p^2m^2)^2}\right]=2g^2,$$
(6)
again via the LDGE (4). Then using the GTR, Eq. (6) becomes

$$\lambda _{\text{box}}=2g^2=\frac{2gm}{f_\pi }=\frac{g^{}}{f_\pi }=\lambda _{\text{tree}}$$
(7)
by virtue of the tree–level $`L\sigma M`$ couplings in Eq. (2). So again loops shrink to trees, while recovering the NJL scalar mass $`m_\sigma =2m`$ in this self–consistent fashion .

Next the CL quark bubble plus quark $`\sigma `$ tadpole graphs, although both being quadratically divergent give a vanishing $`m_\pi ^2=0`$ in the CL (as required) provided the couplings satisfy $`g_{\sigma \pi \pi }^{}=m_\sigma ^2/2f_\pi `$, again recovering Eq. (2), but independent of the quadratically divergent scale.

Lastly the pion quark triangle photon graph automatically normalizes the form factor $`F_\pi (q^2=0)=1`$ as expected. Specifically this quark triangle predicts

$$F_\pi (q^2)=i\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}N_cg^2_0^1𝑑x\frac{\text{ }d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}p}{[p^2m^2+x(1x)q^2]^2},$$

recovering $`F_\pi (q^2=0)=1`$ due to the LDGE (4).

## 3 Mass–Shell Equal Splitting Laws

To continue circumventing the dangerous quadratic divergent tadpole graphs, we first invoke the Lee null tadpole sum  characterizing the true (not false SSB) vacuum. Using only dimensional analysis, the vanishing tadpole sum requires  $`N_c(2m)^4=3m_\sigma ^4`$, or $`N_c=3`$ for the SU(2) $`L\sigma M`$ since we already know from Sec. 2 that the NJL relation $`m_\sigma =2m`$ is also valid in the $`L\sigma M`$ in the CL, as is $`g=2\pi /\sqrt{3}`$ .

Away from the CL this NJL condition becomes for $`mM_N/3315\text{MeV}`$,

$$m_\sigma ^2m_\pi ^2=4m^20.397\text{GeV}^2.$$
(8)
In Sec. 4 we will show that $`\eta ^{}`$$`\eta `$ mixing requires a nonstrange–strange (NS–S) mixing angle $`\varphi _P41.84^0`$, which in turn fixes the eta NS mass to be $`m_{NS}=757.9\text{MeV}`$. Then the SU(3) extension of the mass-shell equal splitting law (MSESL) Eq. (8) is for $`m_{a_0}984.8\text{MeV}`$,

$$m_{a_0}^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^20.395\text{GeV}^2,$$
(9)
which we again identify with the NS quark mass factor $`4m^2`$ in Eq. (8).

MSESL (9) follows from the empirical $`m_{a_0}^2`$ and from $`m_{\eta _{NS}}^2`$ extracted in a phenomenological way in Sec. 4 (see also Ref. ), but we have yet another way to avoid quadratic divergent amplitudes and evaluate the difference of the $`a_0`$ and $`\eta _{NS}`$ self-energies explicitly. It is encouraging that this explicit calculation below yields results which are reasonably close to MSESL (9), even though we consider only the lowest-order $`L\sigma M`$ self-energy graphs. Also, in counterdistinction to Eq. (9)111In Eq. (9), we plug in $`m_{NS}=757.9\text{MeV}`$ which does contain  the shift due to the gluon anomaly., these graphs do not capture (at least not fully) the effect of the gluon anomaly which influences strongly the masses in the $`\eta \eta ^{}`$ complex.

This other way to avoid quadratic divergent amplitudes is to subtract mass shell bubble (and tadpole) graphs of Fig. 1. Since the quadratic divergent tadpole graphs of Figs. 1 b,d clearly cancel (due to the $`L\sigma M`$ coupling relation $`g_{a_0a_0\sigma }^{}=g_{\eta _{NS}\eta _{NS}\sigma }^{}`$), the remaining quadratically divergent bubble graph difference (Figs. 1 a,c) give the formal result

$`m_{a_0}^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2=8iN_cg^2{\displaystyle _0^1}dx{\displaystyle }\text{}d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}p[{\displaystyle \frac{p^2m_{a_0}^2x(1x)+m^2}{(p^2+m_{a_0}^2x(1x)m^2)^2}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{p^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2x(1x)m^2}{(p^2+m_{\eta _{NS}}^2x(1x)m^2)^2}}].`$ (10)
Here we have combined propagator denominators using Feynman’s trick

$$\frac{1}{ab}=_0^1\frac{dx}{[ax+b(1x)]^2}.$$

In other words, we evaluate the bubble graphs with propagator momentum $`ppqx`$ for mass shell values $`q^2=m_{a_0}^2`$, $`m_{\eta _{NS}}^2`$ for Figs. 1 a, c. Specifically for $`m_{a_0}=984.8\text{MeV}`$ and $`m_{\eta _{NS}}=757.9\text{MeV}`$ and a constituent nonstrange quark mass of $`315\text{MeV}`$, a computer calculation detailed in the Appendix, evaluates Eq. (10) as

$$m_{a_0}^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2=5.83m^2i\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3.83}m^2.$$
(11)
We neglect the negative imaginary part of Eq. (11) (compatible with unitarity) since quarks in the bubble graph of Figs. 1 should be confined. Considering the delicate cancellation due to the mean value $`(6_0^1x(1x)=1)`$ giving in the second denominator in Eq. (10) $`m_{\eta _{NS}}^2x(1x)m^20.035m^2`$, and especially recalling i) that we have used only the lowest order graphs and ii) that it is known that the gluon anomaly shifts $`m_{\eta _{NS}}`$ upwards \[which is taken into account in the result (11) only partially and indirectly, through the mass shell value $`q^2=m_{\eta _{NS}}^2=(757.9\text{MeV})^2`$\] so that the difference (11) is understandably somewhat overestimated, we suggest that the real part of (11) is not far from the numerical values of Eqs. (8) and (9), i.e. ,

$$m_{\sigma _{NS}}^2m_\pi ^2=m_{a_0}^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2=4m^20.397\text{GeV}^2.$$
(12)
Stated another way, combining the partial fraction integrands in Eq. (10), we note that the leading $`p^6`$ terms in the numerator of (10) exactly cancel since they are quadratically divergent terms. Moreover, the log–divergent $`p^4`$ terms in (10) are proportional to $`6(m_{a_0}^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2)x(1x)m^2`$; they cancel using the mean value, resulting in $`m_{a_0}^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2=4m^2`$. Thus again we support the MSESLs of Eq. (12).

## 4 Dynamical $`\eta ^{}`$$`\eta `$ Mixing

Given the MSESL Eq. (12), one may extract the NS eta mass as $`m_{\eta _{NS}}757\text{MeV}`$. Alternatively we may express the eta NS–S mass matrix as

$$\left[\begin{array}{cc}m_{\eta _{NS}}^2& \gamma \\ \gamma & m_{\eta _S}^2\end{array}\right]\begin{array}{c}\\ \varphi _P\end{array}\left[\begin{array}{cc}m_\eta ^2& 0\\ 0& m_\eta ^{}^2\end{array}\right],$$
(13)
where the NS–S pseudoscalar mixing angle $`\varphi _P`$ determines the mixing relations

$$|\eta =\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P|\eta _{\text{NS}}\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P|\eta _\text{S},|\eta ^{}=\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P|\eta _{\text{NS}}+\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P|\eta _\text{S}.$$
(14)
The angle $`\varphi _P`$ is uniquely determined via the trace constraint

$$m_{\eta _{NS}}^2+m_{\eta _S}^2=m_\eta ^2+m_\eta ^{}^21.217\text{GeV}^2,$$
(15)
(because the diagonal masses $`m_\eta `$ and $`m_\eta ^{}`$ are measured ) with off–diagonal hamiltonian matrix elements vanishing $`\eta ^{}|H|\eta =\eta |H|\eta ^{}=0`$, giving

$$m_{\eta _{NS}}^2=\mathrm{cos}^2\varphi _Pm_\eta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi _Pm_\eta ^{}^2,m_{\eta _S}^2=\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi _Pm_\eta ^2+\mathrm{cos}^2\varphi _Pm_\eta ^{}^2.$$
(16)
The two–level quantum mechanical solution of Eqs. (13), (15), (16) is the angle

$$\varphi _P=\mathrm{arctan}\sqrt{\frac{m_{\eta _{NS}}^2m_\eta ^2}{m_\eta ^{}^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2}}=41.84^0,$$
(17)
with masses

$$m_{\eta _{NS}}=757.9\text{MeV},m_{\eta _S}=801.5\text{MeV}.$$
(18)
Not only is the eta NS mass in (18) close to $`757\text{MeV}`$ found via the MSESL Eq. (12), but the mixing angle in (17) is precisely the dynamical angle obtained via nonperturbative QCD. More specifically, Refs.  predict $`\varphi _P`$ as

$$\varphi _P=\mathrm{arctan}\sqrt{\frac{(m_\eta ^{}^22m_K^2+m_\pi ^2)(m_\eta ^2m_\pi ^2)}{(2m_K^2m_\pi ^2m_\eta ^2)(m_\eta ^{}^2m_\pi ^2)}}=41.84^0,$$
(19)
found from the nonperturbative QCD gluon quark annihilation strength

$$\beta =\frac{(m_\eta ^{}^2m_\pi ^2)(m_\eta ^2m_\pi ^2)}{4(m_K^2m_\pi ^2)}0.278\text{GeV}^2$$
(20)
and a constituent quark mass ratio $`X0.78\widehat{m}/m_s`$ obtained from the NS–S QCD mass matrix

$$\left[\begin{array}{cc}m_\pi ^2+2\beta & \sqrt{2}\beta X\\ \sqrt{2}\beta X& 2m_K^2m_\pi ^2+\beta X^2\end{array}\right]\begin{array}{c}\\ \varphi _P\end{array}\left[\begin{array}{cc}m_\eta ^2& 0\\ 0& m_\eta ^{}^2\end{array}\right].$$
(21)
Equations (18), (20), (21) have the solution

$$\mathrm{tan}(2\varphi _P)=2\sqrt{2}\beta X(m_{\eta _S}^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2)^1=9.02\text{or}\varphi _P=41.84^0.$$
(22)
Again we see that $`\varphi _P`$ in (17), (19) and (22) are extremely close in magnitude. Moreover, the dynamical approach to $`\eta `$$`\eta ^{}`$ using the Schwinger–Dyson (SD) and Bethe–Salpeter (BS) integral equations found $`\varphi _P42^0`$ (that is, in terms of the singlet–octet state mixing angle $`\theta _P\varphi _P\mathrm{arctan}\sqrt{2}12.7^0`$) . Its subsequent refinement  also included the effect of the “strangeness attenuation parameter” $`X`$ in the SD–BS mass matrix. The SD–BS estimate was $`X=0.663`$, again close to the constituent quark mass ratio $`\widehat{m}/m_s`$ found there. Fitting the trace constraint (15) then led to $`\beta =0.277`$ GeV2, practically the same as Eq. (20), to $`m_{\eta _{NS}}=757.87`$ MeV and $`m_{\eta _S}=801.45`$ MeV, almost the same as Eq. (18), and to $`\theta _P=13.4^0`$, that is, $`\varphi _P=41.3^0`$, very close to $`\varphi _P`$ in Eq. (22). (These results were for the original parameters of Ref. . Reference  also varied the parameters to check the sensitivity on SD-BS modeling, but the results changed little.) Because of the close link between Eqs. (17), (18), the QCD Eqs. (19), (22) and the SD–BS scheme, we suggest that $`\varphi _P41.84^0`$ is the dynamical $`\eta ^{}`$$`\eta `$ mixing angle in the NS–S quark basis. It corresponds to  the singlet–octet angle $`\theta _P=\varphi _P\mathrm{arctan}\sqrt{2}12.9^0`$. Also note that Ref.  showed there is no contradiction between our approach utilizing one state–mixing angle, and the mixing scheme employing two angles pertaining to the mixing of the decay constants (see Refs. , esp. the second reference for review.) Not only is the difference small in the NS-S basis, but our Ref  also showed that our results are in agreement with what is found in the two–angle scheme .

It is also satisfying that the phenomenological analysis of the NS–S $`\eta ^{}`$$`\eta `$ NS mixing angle extracts  $`\varphi _P=43.2^{}\pm 2.8^{}`$ from $`TPP`$ decays, $`\varphi _P=36.6^{}\pm 1.4^{}`$ from $`VP\gamma `$ and $`PV\gamma `$ decays, $`\varphi _P=41.3^{}\pm 1.3^{}`$ from $`P\gamma \gamma `$ decays and $`\varphi _P=40.2^{}\pm 2.8^{}`$ from $`J/\psi \rho \eta ,\rho \eta ^{}`$ and $`\omega \pi ^0`$ decays. Moreover the recent Refs.  obtain $`\varphi _P=39.3^{}\pm 1.0^{}`$ by global phenomenological fits and $`\varphi _P=42.4^{}`$ as their theoretical prediction, which is all within the region of the dynamical $`\varphi _P`$ angles in Eqs. (17) or (19).

## 5 SU(3) L$`\sigma `$M Strong Decay Rates

We have thus far used the LDGE (4), induced the MSESLs $`m_{\sigma _{NS}}^2m_\pi ^2=m_{a_0}^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2=m_\kappa ^2m_K^2=4m^20.397\text{GeV}^2`$ (for $`\kappa (805820)`$ advocated by, e.g., Delbourgo and Scadron ) and the NS–S mixing angle $`\varphi _P41.84^0`$ all while avoiding quadratic divergent graphs and extending the SU(2) $`L\sigma M`$ to SU(3). In the latter case the cubic meson $`L\sigma M`$ Lagrangian density has the SU(3) form

$$L_{\text{cubic}}^{L\sigma M}=d_{ijk}\left(g_{SPP}^{}S^iP^jP^k+g_{SSS}^{}S^iS^jS^k\right).$$
(23)
Then with $`f_\pi 93\text{MeV}`$ and $`mM_N/3315\text{MeV}`$, the MSESLs above suggest the Lagrangian $`g_{SPP}^{}`$ couplings

$`g_{\sigma _{NS}\pi \pi }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\sigma _{NS}\pi \pi }^2m_\pi ^2}{2f_\pi }}2.13\text{GeV},`$ (24)
$`g_{a_0\eta _{NS}\pi }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_{a_0}^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2}{2f_\pi }}2.13\text{GeV},`$ (25)
$`g_{\kappa K\pi }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_\kappa ^2m_K^2}{2f_\pi }}2.13\text{GeV},`$ (26)
along with $`g_{a_0\eta \pi }^{}=\mathrm{cos}\varphi _Pg_{a_0\eta _{NS}\pi }^{}`$, $`g_{\eta ^{}a_0\pi }^{}=\mathrm{sin}\varphi _Pg_{a_0\eta _{NS}\pi }^{}`$, etc.

The nonstrange $`\sigma `$ decay rate is predicted as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\sigma _{NS}\pi \pi )=\frac{3}{2}(2g_{\sigma _{NS}\pi \pi }^{})^2\frac{|\stackrel{}{p}|}{8\pi m_{\sigma _{NS}}^2}754\text{MeV},$$
(27)
for $`m_{\sigma _{NS}}650\text{MeV}`$ and $`|\stackrel{}{p}|=294\text{MeV}`$. This rate is compatible with Weinberg’s mended chiral symmetry estimate :

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\sigma _{NS}}\frac{9}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho 676\text{MeV}.$$
(28)
Likewise the SU(3) $`L\sigma M`$ $`a_0\eta \pi `$ decay rate is

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{L\sigma M}(a_0\eta \pi )=\frac{|\stackrel{}{p}|}{8\pi m_{a_0}^2}\left[2g_{a_0\eta _{NS}\pi }^{}\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P\right]^2133\text{MeV}$$
(29)
for $`p=321\text{MeV}`$, $`g_{a_0\eta _{NS}\pi }^{}2.13\text{GeV}`$, $`\varphi _P=41.84^0`$. One may infer a nearby $`a_0`$ rate from the PDG tables . Specifically the rate ratio

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(a_0K\overline{K})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(a_0\eta \pi )}=0.177\pm 0.024$$
(30)
and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(a_0K\overline{K})24.5`$ MeV from Refs. , then suggests $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(a_0\eta \pi )138`$ MeV, near Eq. (29). Also, this predicted $`L\sigma M`$ decay rate (29) is not too distant from the high statistics data

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{a_0\eta \pi }=(95\pm 14)\text{MeV}.$$
(31)
The SU(3) companion $`f_0(980)\pi \pi `$ rate is estimated  to be

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(f_0\pi \pi )(47\text{MeV})(0.781)37\text{MeV}$$
(32)
assuming the small $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(f_0\gamma \gamma )0.56\text{keV}`$ rate in the 1998, 1996 PDG tables combined with the measured branching ratio $`B(f_0\gamma \gamma )1.19\times 10^5`$. On the other hand we must account for scalar $`\sigma `$$`f_0`$ mixing (the analogue of pseudoscalar $`\eta `$$`\eta ^{}`$ mixing). Thus in the NS–S basis we define in parallel with Eq. (14)

$$|\sigma =\mathrm{cos}\varphi _S|\sigma _{\text{NS}}\mathrm{sin}\varphi _S|\sigma _\text{S},|f_0=\mathrm{sin}\varphi _S|\sigma _{\text{NS}}+\mathrm{cos}\varphi _S|\sigma _\text{S},$$
(33)
and estimate $`\varphi _S`$ from the measured decay rate ratio

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(f_0\pi \pi )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(a_0\eta \pi )}\frac{3}{2}\left(\frac{470\text{MeV}}{321\text{MeV}}\right)\left(\frac{\mathrm{sin}\varphi _S}{\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P}\right)^2\frac{37\text{MeV}}{95\text{MeV}}0.39\text{or}|\varphi _S|18.3^0.$$
(34)
Prior theoretical estimates were $`|\varphi _s|16^0,20^0`$  and $`14^0`$ . The DM2 data of 1989  also suggests from $`J/\psi \omega \pi \pi `$ that $`f_0(980)`$ is mostly $`\overline{s}s`$ (not nonstrange), compatible with (34) (and near the $`\varphi `$ (1020) which is known to be almost all $`\overline{s}s`$) .

Lastly we calculate the strong decay rate $`\eta ^{}\eta \pi \pi `$ in the context of the SU(3) $`L\sigma M`$ , with $`a_0,\sigma `$, $`f_0`$ poles contributing as $`\eta ^{}a_0\pi \eta \pi \pi `$ (4 modes), $`\eta ^{}\eta \sigma \eta \pi \pi ,\eta ^{}\eta f_0\eta \pi \pi `$. Although the $`4a_0`$ pole modes should dominate, the well–known $`L\sigma M`$ $`\eta ^{}\eta \pi \pi `$ contact term $`3\lambda `$ \[normalized to the quartic term in the SU(2) Lagrangian Eq. (1)\] has the opposite sign relative to $`a_0`$, $`\sigma `$ and $`f_0`$ poles and “miraculously cancels” them  due to chiral symmetry - assuming one treats the $`a_0`$, $`\sigma `$, $`f_0`$ poles in narrow width approximation. While $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{a_0}/m_{a_0}`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{f_0}/m_{f_0}1/10`$ as needed, the $`\sigma `$ is broad with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\sigma /m_\sigma 1`$.

Then after the chiral cancellation, we must still account for the broad–width $`\sigma `$ inverse propagator as $`sm_\sigma ^2+im_\sigma \mathrm{\Gamma }_\sigma `$ with $`|sm_\sigma ^2|<<|im_\sigma \mathrm{\Gamma }_\sigma |`$. Thus the net $`\eta ^{}\eta \pi ^0\pi ^0L\sigma M`$ amplitude has the magnitude

$$|M_{L\sigma M}^{\text{net}}(\eta ^{}\eta \pi ^0\pi ^0)||\frac{g_{\eta ^{}\eta \sigma }^{}g_{\sigma \pi \pi }^{}}{m_\sigma \mathrm{\Gamma }_\sigma }||\frac{g_{\eta ^{}\eta \sigma }^{}}{2f_\pi }|5.7.$$
(35)
Here we  estimated $`g_{\eta ^{}\eta \sigma }^{}\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P\mathrm{sin}\varphi _Pg_{\sigma \pi \pi }^{}1.06\text{GeV}`$. Then the net SU(3) $`L\sigma M`$ decay rate is predicted to be (folding in the 3–body phase space integral )

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{L\sigma M}(\eta ^{}\eta \pi ^0\pi ^0)=1.06|M_{L\sigma M}^{\text{net}}|^2\text{keV}34.4\text{keV}.$$
(36)
A slight increase of this rate (36) is due to the 10% non–narrow widths of the $`a_0`$ and $`f_0`$ poles. Recent data gives  $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta ^{}\eta \pi ^0\pi ^0)=(42\pm 4)\text{keV}`$. The total decay rate assuming isospin invariance is

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{L\sigma M}(\eta ^{}\eta \pi \pi )`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{L\sigma M}(\eta ^{}\eta \pi ^0\pi ^0)+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{L\sigma M}(\eta ^{}\eta \pi ^{}\pi ^+)`$ (37)
$`=`$ $`3\times (34.4\pm 4)\text{keV}=(103\pm 12)\text{keV},`$
near the total observed rate of $`3\times (42\pm 4)=(126\pm 12)\text{keV}`$. We know of no other dynamical scheme (such as using the original singlet-octet mixing angles ) which recover all the approximately needed SU(3) strong decay rates (27), (29), (36), (37) as found above.

## 6 Conclusion

In this paper we have consistently avoided dealing with quadratic divergent graphs when computing SU(2) and SU(3) linear $`\sigma `$ model $`(L\sigma M)`$ diagrams. Instead in Secs. 2 and 3 we work only with self–consistent log–divergent gap equation integrals Eqs. (4), (10). Sections 3 and 4 extend this pattern from SU(2) to SU(3) dynamical mass-shell equal splitting laws, leading to the off–diagonal eta nonstrange and strange constituent quark masses $`m_{\eta _{NS}}757.9\text{MeV}`$ and $`m_{\eta _S}801.5\text{MeV}`$. Then the dynamical $`\eta ^{}`$$`\eta `$ mixing angle in the NS–S basis is $`\varphi _P41.84^0`$ compatible with nonperturbative QCD and near many phenomenological analysis of this NS–S angle (see, e.g., Refs. ).

Stated another way, the only SU(3)–breaking pattern we allow is characterized by the constituent quark mass GTR ratio  as used in the phenomenological analysis of Refs.  $`m_s/m2f_K/f_\pi 11.44`$ for $`f_K/f_\pi 1.22`$ as measured . Then in Sec. 5 the SU(3) SPP $`L\sigma M`$ couplings (again following the above MSESLs) of Eqs. (8), (9), (11), (12) in turn predict strong interaction $`\sigma _{NS}\pi \pi `$, $`a_0\eta \pi `$, $`f_0\pi \pi `$, $`\eta ^{}\eta \pi \pi `$ decay rates all compatible with data .

Acknowledgments: D. Kl. and D. Ke. acknowledge the support of the Croatian Ministry of Science and Technology under the respective contract numbers 119–222 and 009802. M. D. S. is grateful for partial support from the University of Zagreb and for prior conversations with A. Bramon.

## Appendix: On the bubble graph integral

If the integrand of Eq. (10) is rewritten using the common denominator $`D(x,p^2)`$, as $`f(x,p^2)N(x,p^2)/D(x,p^2)`$, one should note that the $`O(p^6)`$ terms in its numerator $`N(x,p^2)`$ cancel exactly. The numerator is thus a polynomial of degree 2 in $`(p^2)`$: $`N(x,p^2)=c_0(x)+c_1(x)p^2+c_2(x)(p^2)^2.`$ The integrand is therefore conveniently written as the sum

$$f(x,p^2)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{2}{}}f_i(x,p^2)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{2}{}}c_i(x)\frac{(p^2)^i}{D(x,p^2)}.$$
(38)
The four–dimensional integral over $`p`$ is effectively one-dimensional because the integrand depends on $`p^2`$ only. After the Wick rotation, we performed this integration analytically, using the Mathematica program package. The log–divergent integral $`d^4pf_2(x,p^2)`$ depends on our ultraviolet cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=750\text{MeV}`$ required by Eq. (4). After the $`p^2`$–integration, the logarithmic forms

$$l(x)=\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{m^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2(1x)x}{m^2m_{a_0}^2(1x)x}\right)$$
(39)
appear in the integrand, requiring some care. The mild divergences at the points $`x_0=0.115698`$, $`x_1=0.222046`$, $`x_2=0.777954`$, and $`x_3=0.884302`$ correspond to the roots of polynomials $`xm^2m_{\eta _{NS}}^2(1x)x`$ and $`xm^2m_{a_0}^2(1x)x`$. In order to perform the residual $`x`$ integration of the functions $`xd^4pf_i(x,p^2)`$ $`(i=0,1,2)`$, the interval $`[0,1]`$ is divided into five integration regions, $`[0,x_1]`$, $`[x_1,x_2]`$, $`[x_2,x_3]`$, $`[x_3,x_4]`$, and $`[x_4,1]`$. These integrations were numerical, with an adaptive algorithm which can handle the mild, integrable singularities appearing at the edges of the integration regions.


text:
# Contents

## 1 Introduction

Let $`k`$ be a field of characteristics zero. For a sequence $`\underset{¯}{a}=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)`$ of invertible elements of $`k`$ consider the homomorphism

$$K_{}^M(k)/2K_{+n}^M(k)/2$$

in Milnor’s K-theory modulo elements divisible by $`2`$ defined by the multiplication with the symbol corresponding to $`\underset{¯}{a}`$. The goal of this paper is to construct a four-term exact sequence (18) which provides information about the kernel and cokernel of this homomorphism.

The proof of our main theorem (Theorem 3.2) consists of two independent parts. Let $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$ be the norm quadric defined by the sequence $`\underset{¯}{a}`$ (see below). First, we use the techniques of  to establish a four term exact sequence (1) relating the kernel and cokernel of the multiplication by $`\underset{¯}{a}`$ with Milnor’s K-theory of the closed and the generic points of $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$ respectively. This is done in the first section. Then, using elementary geometric arguments, we show that the sequence can be rewritten in its final form (18) which involves only the generic point and the closed points with residue fields of degree $`2`$.

As an application we establish, for fields of characteristics zero, the validity of three conjectures in the theory of quadratic forms - the Milnor conjecture on the structure of the Witt ring, the Khan-Rost-Sujatha conjecture and the J-filtration conjecture. All these results require only the first form of our exact sequence. Using the final form of the sequence we also show that the kernel of multiplication by $`\underset{¯}{a}`$ is generated, as a $`K_{}^M(k)`$-module, by its components of degree $`1`$.

This paper is a natural extension of  and we feel free to refer to the results of  without reproducing them here. Most of the mathematics used in this paper was developed in the spring of 1996 when all three authors were at Harvard. In its present form the paper was written while the authors were members of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. We would like to thank both institutions for their support.

## 2 An exact sequence for $`\mathrm{K}_{}^M/2`$

Let $`\underset{¯}{a}=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)`$ be a sequence of elements of $`k^{}`$. Recall that the n–fold Pfister form $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_n`$ is defined as the tensor product

$$1,a_1\mathrm{}1,a_n$$

where $`1,a_i`$ is the norm form in the quadratic extension $`k(\sqrt{a_i})`$. Denote by $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$ the projective quadric of dimension $`2^{n1}1`$ defined by the form $`q_{\underset{¯}{a}}=a_1,\mathrm{},a_{n1}a_n`$. This quadric is called the small Pfister quadric or the norm quadric associated with the symbol $`\underset{¯}{a}`$. Denote by $`k(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})`$ the function field of $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$ and by $`(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})_0`$ the set of closed points of $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$. The following result is the main theorem of the paper.

###### Theorem 2.1

Let $`k`$ be a field of characteristic zero. Then for any sequence of invertible elements $`(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)`$ the following sequence of abelian groups is exact

$$\underset{x(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})_{(0)}}{}\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k(x))/2\stackrel{\mathrm{Tr}_{\mathrm{k}(\mathrm{x})/\mathrm{k}}}{}\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2\stackrel{\underset{¯}{a}}{}\mathrm{K}_{+n}^M(k)/2\mathrm{K}_{+n}^M(k(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}))/2$$
(1)
The proof goes as follows. We first construct two exact sequences of the form

$$0K\mathrm{K}_{+n}^M(k)/2\mathrm{K}_{+n}^M(k(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}))/2$$
(2)
and

$$\underset{x(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})_{(0)}}{}\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k(x))/2\stackrel{\mathrm{Tr}_{\mathrm{k}(\mathrm{x})/\mathrm{k}}}{}\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2I0$$
(3)
and then construct an isomorphism $`IK`$ such that the composition

$$\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2IK\mathrm{K}_{+n}^M(k)/2$$

is the multiplication by $`\underset{¯}{a}`$.

Our construction of the sequence (2) makes sense for any smooth scheme $`X`$ and we shall do it in this generality. Recall that we denote by $`\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X)`$ the simplicial scheme such that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X)_n=X^{n+1}`$ and faces and degeneracy morphisms are given by partial projections and diagonal embeddings respectively. We will use repeatedly the following lemma which is an immediate corollary of \[12, Proposition 2.7\] and \[12, Corollary 2.13\].

###### Lemma 2.2

For any smooth scheme $`X`$ over $`k`$ and any $`pq`$ the homomorphism

$$H^{p,q}(Spec(k),𝐙/2)H^{p,q}(\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X),𝐙/2)$$

defined by the canonical morphism $`\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X)Spec(k)`$, is an isomorphism.

###### Proposition 2.3

For any $`n0`$ there is an exact sequence of the form

$$0H^{n,n1}(\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X),𝐙/2)K_n^M(k)/2K_n^M(k(X))/2$$
(4)
Proof: The computation of motivic cohomology of weight $`1`$ shows that

$$\mathrm{Hom}(𝐙/2,𝐙/2(1))H^{0,1}(Spec(k),𝐙/2)𝐙/2$$

The nontrivial element $`\tau :𝐙/2𝐙/2(1)`$ together with the multiplication morphism $`𝐙(n1)𝐙/2(1)\stackrel{}{}𝐙/2(n)`$ defines a morphism $`\tau :𝐙/2(n1)𝐙/2(n)`$. The Beilinson-Lichtenbaum conjecture implies immediately the following result.

###### Lemma 2.4

The morphism $`\tau `$ extends to a distinguished triangle in $`DM_{}^{eff}`$ of the form

$$𝐙/2(n1)\stackrel{\tau }{}𝐙/2(n)\underset{¯}{H}^{n,n}(𝐙/2)[n],$$
(5)
where $`\underset{¯}{H}^n(𝐙/2(n))`$ is the $`n`$–th cohomology sheaf of the complex $`𝐙/2(n)`$.

Consider the long sequence of morphisms in the triangulated category of motives from the motive of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X)`$ to the distinguished triangle (5). It starts as

$$0H^{n,n1}(\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X),𝐙/2)H^{n,n}(\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X),𝐙/2)H^0(\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X),\underset{¯}{H}^{n,n}(𝐙/2))$$

By Lemma 2.2 there are isomorphisms

$$H^n(\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X),𝐙/2(n))=H^{n,n}(Spec(k),𝐙/2)=K_n^M(k)/2$$

On the other hand, since $`\underset{¯}{H}^{n,n}(𝐙/2)`$ is a homotopy invariant sheaf with transfers, we have an embedding

$$H^0(\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(X),\underset{¯}{H}^{n,n}(𝐙/2))\underset{¯}{H}^{n,n}(𝐙/2)(Spec(k(X)))$$

The right hand side is isomorphic to $`H^{n,n}(Spec(k(X)),𝐙/2)=K_n^M(k(X))/2`$. This completes the proof of the proposition.

Let us now construct the exact sequence (3). Denote the standard simplicial scheme $`\stackrel{ˇ}{C}(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})`$ by $`𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$. Recall that we have a distinguished triangle of the form

$$M(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})(2^{n1}1)[2^n2]\stackrel{\phi }{}M_{\underset{¯}{a}}\stackrel{\psi }{}M(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})\stackrel{\mu ^{}}{}M(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})(2^{n1}1)[2^n1]$$
(6)
where $`M_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$ is a direct summand of the motive of the quadric $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$. Denote the composition

$$M(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})\stackrel{\mu ^{}}{}M(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})(2^{n1}1)[2^n1]\stackrel{pr}{}𝐙/2(2^{n1}1)[2^n1]$$
(7)
by $`\mu H^{2^n1,2^{n1}1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)`$. By Lemma 2.2 we have

$$H^{i,i}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)=H^{i,i}(Spec(k),𝐙/2)=K_i^M(k)/2$$

Therefore, multiplication with $`\mu `$ defines a homomorphism

$$\mathrm{K}_i^M(k)/2\stackrel{\mu }{}H^{i+2^n1,i+2^{n1}1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2).$$

###### Proposition 2.5

The sequence

$$\underset{x(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})_{(0)}}{}\mathrm{K}_i^M(k(x))/2\stackrel{\mathrm{Tr}_{\mathrm{k}(\mathrm{x})/\mathrm{k}}}{}\mathrm{K}_i^M(k)/2\stackrel{\mu }{}H^{i+2^n1,i+2^{n1}1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)0$$
(8)
is exact.

Proof: Let us consider morphisms in the triangulated category of motives from the distinguished triangle (6) to the object $`𝐙/2(i+2^{n1}1)[i+2^n1]`$. By definition, $`M_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$ is a direct summand of the motive of the smooth projective variety $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$ of dimension $`2^{n1}1`$, therefore, the group $`H^{i+2^n1,i+2^{n1}1}(M_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)`$ is trivial by \[12, Corollary 2.3\]. Using this fact, we obtain the following exact sequence:

$$H^{i+2^n2,i+2^{n1}1}(M_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)\stackrel{\phi ^{}}{}H^{i,i}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)\stackrel{\mu _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}{}$$
(9)
$$H^{i+2^n1,i+2^{n1}1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)0$$

By definition (see \[12, p.43\]) the morphism $`\phi `$ is given by the composition

$$M(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})(2^{n1}1)[2^n2]\stackrel{pr}{}𝐙(2^{n1}1)[2^n2]M_{\underset{¯}{a}}$$
(10)
and the composition of the second arrow with the canonical embedding $`M_{\underset{¯}{a}}M(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})`$ is the fundamental cycle map

$$𝐙(2^{n1}1)[2^n2]M(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})$$

which corresponds to the fundamental cycle on $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$ under the isomorphism

$$\mathrm{Hom}(𝐙(2^{n1}1)[2^n2],M(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}))=\mathrm{CH}_{2^{n1}1}(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})𝐙$$

(see \[12, Theorem 4.5\]). On the other hand by Lemma 2.2 the homomorphism

$$H^{i,i}(Spec(k),𝐙/2)H^{i,i}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)$$

defined by the first arrow in (10) is an isomorphism. This implies immediately that the exact sequence (9) defines an exact sequence of the form

$$H^{i+2^n2,i+2^{n1}1}(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)\stackrel{\phi ^{}}{}H^{i,i}(Spec(k),𝐙/2)\stackrel{\mu _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}{}$$
(11)
$$H^{i+2^n1,i+2^{n1}1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)0$$

By \[12, Corollary 2.4\] there is an isomorphism

$$H^{i+2^n2,i+2^{n1}1}(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)H^{2^{n1}1}(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}},\underset{¯}{K}_{i+2^{n1}1}^M/2)$$

The Gersten resolution for the sheaf $`\underset{¯}{K}_m^M/2`$ (see, for example, ) shows that the group $`H^{2^{n1}1}(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}},\underset{¯}{K}_{i+2^{n1}1}^M/2)`$ can be identified with the cokernel of the map:

$$\underset{y(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})_{(1)}}{}\mathrm{K}_{i+1}^M(k(y))/2\stackrel{}{}\underset{x(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})_{(0)}}{}\mathrm{K}_i^M(k(x))/2,$$

and the map $`H^{i+2^n2,i+2^{n1}1}(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)H^{i,i}(Spec(k),𝐙/2)`$ defined by the fundamental cycle corresponds in this description to the map

$$\underset{x(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})_{(0)}}{}\mathrm{K}_i^M(k(x))/2\stackrel{\mathrm{Tr}_{\mathrm{k}(\mathrm{x})/\mathrm{k}}}{}\mathrm{K}_i^M(k)/2=H^{i,i}(Spec(k),𝐙/2)$$

This finishes the proof of Proposition 2.5.

We are going to show now that the map $`\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2\stackrel{\underset{¯}{\alpha }}{}\mathrm{K}_{+n}^M(k)/2`$ glues the exact sequences (4) and (8) in one. Denote by $`^i(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})`$ the direct sum $`_mH^{m+i,m}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)`$. It has a natural structure of a graded module over the ring $`\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2`$ and one can easily see that the sequences (4) and (8) define sequences of $`\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2`$–modules of the form

$`0^1(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}))/2`$ (12)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{x(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})_{(0)}}{}}\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k(x))/2\stackrel{\mathrm{Tr}_{\mathrm{k}(\mathrm{x})/\mathrm{k}}}{}\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2\stackrel{\mu }{}^{2^{n1}}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})0`$ (13)
Consider cohomological operations

$$Q_i:H^,(,𝐙/2)H^{+2^{i+1}1,+2^i1}(,𝐙/2)$$

introduced in \[12, p.32\]. The composition $`Q_{n2}\mathrm{}Q_0`$ defines a homomorphism of graded abelian groups $`d:^1(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})^{2^{n1}}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})`$ and \[12, Theorem 3.17(2)\] together with the fact that $`H^{p,q}(Spec(k),𝐙/2)=0`$ for $`p>q`$ implies that $`d`$ is a homomorphism of $`K_{}^M(k)/2`$-modules. We are going to show that $`d`$ is an isomorphism and that the composition

$$\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2\stackrel{\mu }{}^{2^{n1}}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})\stackrel{d^1}{}^1(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2$$
(14)
is the multiplication with $`\underset{¯}{a}`$.

###### Lemma 2.6

The homomorphism $`d`$ is injective.

Proof: We have to show that the composition of operations

$$Q_{n2}\mathrm{}Q_0:H^{+n,+n1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)H^{+2n1,+2^{n1}1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)$$

is injective. Let $`\stackrel{~}{𝒳}_{\underset{¯}{a}}`$ be the simplicial cone of the morphism $`𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}}Spec(k)`$ which we consider as a pointed simplicial scheme. The long exact sequence of cohomology defined by the cofibration sequence

$$(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})_+Spec(k)_+\stackrel{~}{𝒳}_{\underset{¯}{a}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_s^1((𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})_+)$$
(15)
together with the fact that $`H^{p,q}(Spec(k),𝐙/2)=0`$ for $`p>q`$ shows that for $`p>q+1`$ we have a natural isomorphism $`H^{p,q}(\stackrel{~}{𝒳}_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)=H^{p1,q}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)`$ compatible with the actions of cohomological operations. Therefore, it is sufficient to prove injectivity of the composition $`Q_{n2}\mathrm{}Q_0`$ on motivic cohomology groups of the form $`H^{+n+1,+n1}(\stackrel{~}{𝒳}_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)`$. To show that $`Q_{n2}\mathrm{}Q_0`$ is a monomorphism it is sufficient to check that the operation $`Q_i`$ acts monomorphically on the group

$$H^{+ni+2^{i+1}1,+ni2^i2}(\stackrel{~}{𝒳}_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)$$

for all $`i=0,\mathrm{},n2`$. For any $`in1`$ we have $`ker(Q_i)=Im(Q_i)`$ by \[12, Theorem 3.25\] and \[12, Lemma 4.11\]. Therefore, the kernel of $`Q_i`$ on our group is the image of $`H^{+ni),+ni1}(\stackrel{~}{𝒳}_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)`$. On the other hand, the cofibration sequence (15) together with Lemma 2.2 implies that for $`pq+1`$ we have $`H^{p,q}(\stackrel{~}{𝒳}_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)=0`$ which proves the lemma.

Denote by $`\gamma `$ the element of $`H^{n,n1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)`$ which corresponds to the symbol $`\underset{¯}{a}`$ under the embedding into $`\mathrm{K}_n^M(k)/2`$ (sequence (4)). To prove that $`d`$ is surjective and that the composition (14) is multiplication with $`\underset{¯}{a}`$ we use the following lemma.

###### Lemma 2.7

The composition $`\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2\stackrel{\gamma }{}^1(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})\stackrel{d}{}^{2^{n1}}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}})`$ coincides with the multiplication by $`\mu `$.

Proof: Since our maps are homomorphisms of $`K_{}^M(k)`$-modules it is sufficient to verify that the cohomological operation $`d`$ sends $`\gamma H^{n,n1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)`$ to $`\mu H^{2^n1,2^{n1}1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)`$. By Lemma 2.6 $`d`$ is injective. Therefore, the element $`d(\gamma )`$ iz nonzero. On the other hand, sequence (8) shows that

$$H^{2^n1,2^{n1}1}(𝒳_{\underset{¯}{a}},𝐙/2)\mathrm{K}_0^M(k)/2𝐙/2$$

and $`\mu `$ is a generator of this group. Therefore, $`d(\gamma )=\mu `$.

###### Lemma 2.8

The homomorphism $`d`$ is surjective.

Proof: Follows immediately from Lemma 2.7 and surjectivity of multiplication by $`\mu `$ (Proposition 2.5).

###### Lemma 2.9

The composition (14) is the multiplication with $`\underset{¯}{a}`$.

Proof: Since all the maps in (14) are morphisms of $`K_{}^M(k)`$-modules, it is sufficient to check the condition for the generator $`1\mathrm{K}_0^M(k)/2`$. And the later follows from Lemma 2.7 and the definition of $`\gamma `$.

This finishes the proof of Theorem 2.1.

The following statement, which is easily deduced from the exact sequence (1), is the key to many applications.

Let $`E/k`$ be a field. For any element $`h\mathrm{K}_n^M(k)`$ denote by $`h|_E`$, as usually, the restriction of $`h`$ on $`E`$, i.e. image of $`h`$ under the natural morphism $`\mathrm{K}_n^M(k)\mathrm{K}_n^M(E)`$.

###### Theorem 2.10

For any field $`k`$ and any nonzero $`h\mathrm{K}_n^M(k)/2`$ there exist a field $`E/k`$ and a pure symbol $`\alpha =\{a_1,\mathrm{},a_n\}\mathrm{K}_n^M(k)/2`$ such that $`h|_E=\alpha |_E`$ is a nonzero pure symbol of $`\mathrm{K}_n^M(E)/2`$.

Proof: Let $`h=\alpha _1+\mathrm{}+\alpha _l`$, where $`\alpha _i`$ are pure symbols corresponding to sequences $`\underset{¯}{a}_i=(a_{1i},\mathrm{},a_{ni})`$. Let $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}_i}`$ be the norm quadric corresponding to the symbol $`\alpha _i`$. For any $`0<il`$ denote by $`E_i`$ the field $`k(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}_1}\times \mathrm{}\times Q_{\underset{¯}{a}_i})`$. It is clear that $`h|_{E_l}=0`$. Let us fix $`i`$ such that $`h|_{E_{i+1}}=0`$ and $`h|_{E_i}`$ is a nonzero element. Then $`h|_{E_i}`$ belongs to

$$ker(\mathrm{K}_n^M(E_i)/2\mathrm{K}_n^M(E_{i+1})/2)$$

By Theorem 2.1, the kernel is covered by $`K_0^M(E_i)𝐙/2`$ and is generated by $`\alpha _{i+1}|_{E_i}`$. Thus, we have $`\alpha _{i+1}|_{E_i}=h|_{E_i}0`$.

## 3 Reduction to points of degree $`2`$

In this section we prove the following result.

###### Theorem 3.1

Let $`k`$ be a field such that $`char(k)2`$ and $`Q`$ be a smooth quadric over $`k`$. Let $`Q_{(0)}`$ be the set of closed points of $`Q`$ and $`Q_{(0,2)}`$ the subset in $`Q_{(0)}`$ of points $`x`$ such that $`[k_x:k]2`$. Then, for any $`n0`$, the image of the map

$$tr_{k_x/k}:_{xQ_{(0)}}K_n^M(k_x)K_n^M(k)$$
(16)
coincides with the image of the map

$$tr_{k_x/k}:_{xQ_{(0,2)}}K_n^M(k_x)K_n^M(k)$$
(17)
Combining Theorem 2.1 with Theorem 3.1 we get the following result.

###### Theorem 3.2

Let $`k`$ be a field of characteristic zero and $`\underset{¯}{a}=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)`$ a sequence of invertible elements of $`k`$. Then the sequence

$$_{x(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}})_{(0,2)}}K_i^M(k_x)/2K_i^M(k)/2\stackrel{\underset{¯}{a}}{}K_{i+n}^M(k)/2K_{i+n}^M(k(Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}))/2$$
(18)
is exact.

Theorem 3.2 together with the well known result of Bass and Tate (see \[1, Corollary 5.3\]) implies the following.

###### Theorem 3.3

Let $`k`$ be a field of characteristic zero and $`\underset{¯}{a}=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)`$ a sequence of invertible elements of $`k`$ such that the corresponding elements of $`K_n^M(k)/2`$ is not zero. Then the kernel of the homomorphism $`K_{}^M(k)/2\stackrel{\underset{¯}{a}}{}K_{+n}^M(k)/2`$ is generated, as a module over $`K_{}^M(k)`$, by the kernel of the homomorphism $`K_1^M(k)/2K_{1+n}^M(k)/2`$.

Let us start the proof of Theorem 3.1 with the following two lemmas.

###### Lemma 3.4

Let $`E`$ be an extension of $`k`$ of degree $`n`$ and $`V`$ a $`k`$-linear subspace in $`E`$ such that $`2dim(V)>n`$. Then, for any $`n>0`$, $`K_n^M(E)`$ is generated, as an abelian group, by elements of the form $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ where all $`x_i`$’s are in $`V`$.

Proof: It is sufficient to prove the statement for $`n=1`$. Let $`x`$ be an invertible element of $`E`$. Since $`2dim(V)>dim_kE`$ we have $`VxV0`$. Therefore $`x`$ is a quotient of two elements of $`VE^{}`$.

###### Lemma 3.5

Let $`k`$ be an infinite field and $`p`$ a closed separable point in $`𝐏_k^n`$, $`n2`$ of degree $`m`$. Then there exists a rational curve $`C`$ of degree $`m1`$ such that $`pC`$ and $`C`$ is either nonsingular, or has one rational singular point.

Proof: We may assume that $`p`$ lies in $`𝐀^n𝐏^n`$. Then there exists a linear function $`x_1`$ on $`𝐀^n`$ such that the map of the residue fields $`k_{x_1(p)}k_p`$ is an isomorphism. Let $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ be a coordinate system starting with $`x_1`$. Since the restriction of $`x_1`$ to $`p`$ is an isomorphism the inverse gives a collection of regular functions $`\overline{x}_2,\mathrm{},\overline{x}_n`$ on $`x_1(p)𝐀^1`$. Each of this functions has a representative $`f_i`$ in $`k[x_1]`$ of degree at most $`m1`$. The projective closure of the affine curve given by the equations $`x_i=f_i(x_1)`$, $`i=2,\mathrm{},n`$ satisfies the conditions of the lemma.

Let $`Q`$ be any quadric over $`k`$. If $`Q`$ has a rational point (or even a point of odd degree, which is the same by Springer’s theorem, \[3, VII,Theorem 2.3\]), then Theorem 3.1 for $`Q`$ holds for obvious reasons. Therefore we may assume that $`Q`$ has no points of odd degree. It is well known (see e.g. \[11, Th.2.3.8, p.39\]) that any smooth quadric of dimension $`>0`$ over a finite field of odd characteristic has a rational point. Since the statement of the theorem is obvious for $`dim(Q)=0`$ we may assume that $`k`$ is infinite. By the theorem of Springer, for finite extension of odd degree $`E/F`$, the quadric $`Q_F`$ is isotropic if and only if $`Q_E`$ is. Hence, we can assume that $`E/k`$ is separable.

Let $`e`$ be a point on $`Q`$ with the residue field $`E`$. We have to show that the image of the transfer map $`K_n^M(E)K_n^M(k)`$ lies in the image of the map (17). We proceed by induction on $`d`$ where $`2d=[E:k]`$. If $`d=1`$ there is nothing to prove. Assume by induction that for any closed point $`f`$ of $`Q`$ such that $`[k_f:k]<2d`$ the image of the transfer map $`K_n^M(k_f)K_n^M(k)`$ lies in the image of (17).

If $`dim(Q)=0`$ our statement is obvious. Consider the case of a conic $`dim(Q)=1`$. Let $`D`$ be any effective divisor on $`Q`$ of degree $`2d2`$. Denote by $`h^0(D)`$ the linear space $`H^0(Q,𝒪(D))`$ which can be identified with the space of rational functions $`f`$ such that $`D+(f)`$ is effective. Evaluating elements of $`h^0(D)`$ on $`e`$ we get a homomorphism $`h^0(D)E`$ which is injective since $`deg(D)<2d`$. By the Riemann-Roch theorem we have $`dim(h^0(D))=2d1`$ and therefore, by Lemma 3.4, $`K_n^M(E)`$ is generated by elements of the form $`\{f_1(e),\mathrm{},f_n(e)\}`$ where $`f_ih^0(D)`$. Let now $`D^{}`$ be an effective divisor on $`Q`$ of degree $`2`$ (it exists since $`Q`$ is a conic). Using again the Riemann-Roch theorem we see that $`dim(|eD^{}|)>0`$ i.e. that there exists a rational function $`f`$ with a simple pole in $`e`$ and a zero in $`D^{}`$. In particular, the degrees of all the points where $`f`$ has singularities other than $`e`$ is strictly less than $`2d`$. Consider the symbol $`\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_n,f\}K_{n+1}^M(k(Q))`$. Let

$$:K_{n+1}^M(k(Q))_{xQ_{(0)}}K_n^M(k_x)$$

be the residue homomorphism. By its composition with (16) is zero. On the other hand we have

$$(\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_n,f\})=\{f_1(e),\mathrm{},f_n(e)\}+u$$

where $`u`$ is a sum of symbols concentrated in the singular points of $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_n`$ and singular points of $`f`$ other than $`e`$. Therefore, by our construction $`u`$ belongs to $`_{xQ_{(0),<2d}}K_n^M(k_x)`$ and we conclude that $`tr_{E/k}\{f_1(e),\mathrm{},f_n(e)\}`$ lies in the image of (17) by induction.

Let now $`Q`$ be a quadric in $`𝐏^n`$ where $`n3`$. Let $`c`$ be a rational point of $`𝐏^n`$ outside $`Q`$ and $`\pi :Q𝐏^{n1}`$ be the projection with the center in $`c`$. The ramification locus of $`\pi `$ is a quadric on $`𝐏^{n1}`$ which has no rational points.

Assume first that there exists $`c`$ such that the degree of $`\pi (e)`$ is $`d`$. Then, by Lemma 3.5, we can find a (singular) rational curve $`C^{}`$ in $`𝐏^{n1}`$ of degree $`d1`$ which contains $`\pi (e)`$. Consider the curve $`C=\pi ^1(C^{})Q`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{C},\stackrel{~}{C^{}}`$ be the normalizations of $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }:\stackrel{~}{C}\stackrel{~}{C^{}}`$ the morphism corresponding to $`\pi `$. Since $`deg(e)=2d`$ and $`deg(\pi (e))=d`$ the point $`e`$ does not belong to the ramification locus of $`\pi :Q𝐏^{n1}`$. This implies that $`e`$ lifts to a point $`\stackrel{~}{e}`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ of degree $`2d`$ and that $`\stackrel{~}{e}=\stackrel{~}{\pi }^1(\stackrel{~}{\pi }(\stackrel{~}{e}))`$. Since the ramification locus of $`\pi `$ has no rational points the singular point of $`C^{}`$ is unramified. This implies that $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }`$ is ramified in $`2(d1)`$ points and, therefore, $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ is a hyperelliptic curve of genus less or equal to $`d2`$. Let $`D`$ be an effective divisor on $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ of degree $`2d2`$. By the Riemann-Roch theorem we have $`dim(h^0(D))d+1`$. On the other hand, since $`deg(D)<2d`$, the homomorphism $`h^0(D)E`$ defined by evaluation at $`\stackrel{~}{e}`$ is injective. Therefore, by Lemma 3.4 any element in $`K_n^M(E)`$ is of the form $`\{f_1(\stackrel{~}{e}),\mathrm{},f_n(\stackrel{~}{e})\}`$ for $`f_ih^0(D)`$. Let $`D^{}`$ be an effective divisor on $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ of degree $`2`$. By the Riemann-Roch theorem we have $`dim(h^0(\stackrel{~}{e}D^{}))d+1>0`$. Therefore, there exists a rational function $`f`$ with simple pole in $`\stackrel{~}{e}`$ and such that all its other singularities are located in points of degree $`<2d`$. We can conclude now that $`tr_{E/k}\{f_1(\stackrel{~}{e}),\mathrm{},f_n(\stackrel{~}{e})\}`$ belongs to the image of (17) in the same way as we did in the case of $`dim(Q)=1`$.

Consider now the general case - we still assume that $`n3`$ but not that we can find a center of projection $`c`$ such that $`deg(\pi (e))=d`$. Taking a general $`c`$ we may assume that $`deg(\pi (e))=2d`$ and that $`e`$ does not belong to the ramification locus of $`\pi `$. By Lemma 3.5 we can find a rational curve $`C^{}`$ in $`𝐏^{n1}`$ of degree $`2d1`$ which contains $`\pi (e)`$. Consider the curve $`C=\pi ^1(C^{})Q`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{C},\stackrel{~}{C^{}}`$ be the normalizations of $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }:\stackrel{~}{C}\stackrel{~}{C^{}}`$ the morphism corresponding to $`\pi `$. Since the point $`e`$ does not belong to the ramification locus of $`\pi `$ it lifts to a point $`\stackrel{~}{e}`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ of degree $`2d`$. Since the ramification locus of $`\pi `$ does not have rational points and the only singular point of $`C^{}`$ is rational, $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }`$ is ramified in no more than $`2(2d1)`$ points and, therefore, $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ is a hyperelliptic curve of genus $`2d2`$. Let $`D`$ be an effective divisor on $`\stackrel{~}{C}^{}=𝐏^1`$ of degree $`d`$. We have $`dim(h^0(D))=d+1`$ and since $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }(\stackrel{~}{e})`$ has degree $`2d`$ the evaluation at $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }(\stackrel{~}{e})`$ gives an injective homomorphism $`h^0(D)E`$. By Lemma 3.4, we conclude that any element of $`K_n^M(E)`$ is a linear combination of elements of the form $`\{f_1(\stackrel{~}{\pi }(\stackrel{~}{e})),\mathrm{},f_n(\stackrel{~}{\pi }(\stackrel{~}{e}))\}`$ where $`f_i`$ are in $`h^0(D)`$. Let $`D^{}`$ be an effective divisor of degree $`2`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$. By the Riemann-Roch theorem we have $`dim(h^0(\stackrel{~}{e}D^{}))1`$ i.e. there exists a rational function $`f`$ with a simple pole in $`\stackrel{~}{e}`$ and a zero in $`D^{}`$. If $`d>1`$ then all the singular points of $`f`$, but $`\stackrel{~}{e}`$, are of degree $`<2d`$ and by the same reasoning as in the previous two cases we conclude that $`tr_{E/k}(\{f_1(\stackrel{~}{\pi }(\stackrel{~}{e})),\mathrm{},f_n(\stackrel{~}{\pi }(\stackrel{~}{e}))\})`$ is a linear combination of the form

$$\underset{x\stackrel{~}{C}_{(0),<2d}}{}tr_{k_x/k}(u_x)+\underset{i,y(f_i\stackrel{~}{\pi })}{}tr_{k_y/k}(v_{i,y})$$

Summands of the first type are in the image of (17) by the inductive assumption. The fact that summands of the second type are in the image of (17) follows from the case $`deg(\pi (e))=d`$ considered above.

## 4 Some applications

### 4.1 Milnor’s Conjecture on quadratic forms.

As the first corollary of Theorem 2.10 we get Milnor’s Conjecture on quadratic forms.

As usually, we denote by $`W(k)`$ the Witt ring of quadratic forms over $`k`$, and by $`IW(k)`$ the ideal of even-dimensional forms. The filtration $`W(k)II^2\mathrm{}I^n\mathrm{}`$ by the powers of $`I`$ is called the $`I`$-filtration on $`W`$. We denote the associated graded ring by $`\mathrm{Gr}_I^{}^{}(W(k))`$. Consider the map

$$\mathrm{K}_1^M(k)/2=k^{}/(k^{})^2\stackrel{\phi _1}{}\mathrm{Gr}_I^{}^1(W(k))$$

which sends $`\{a\}`$ to $`1,a`$. Since $`(1,a+1,b1,ab)I^2`$ it is a group-homomorphism and one can easily see that it is an isomorphism. For any $`ak^{}\backslash 1`$, the form $`a,1a`$ is hyperbolic and, therefore, the isomorphism $`\phi _1`$ can be extended to a ring homomorphism $`\phi :\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2\mathrm{Gr}_I^{}^{}(W(k))`$. Since $`\mathrm{Gr}_I^{}^{}(W(k))`$ is generated by the first-degree component $`\phi `$ is surjective. The Milnor Conjecture on quadratic forms states that $`\phi `$ is an isomorphism i.e. that it is injective. It was proven in degree 2 by J.Milnor , in degree 3 by M.Rost  and A.Merkurjev-A.Suslin , and in degree 4 by M.Rost. Moreover, R.Elman and T.Y.Lam  proved that the map $`\phi `$ is injective on pure symbols.

###### Theorem 4.1

Let $`k`$ be a field of characteristic zero. Then, the natural map $`\phi :\mathrm{K}_{}^M(k)/2\mathrm{Gr}_I^{}^{}(W(k))`$ is an isomorphism.

Proof: We already know that $`\phi `$ is surjective. Let $`h0`$ be an element of $`\mathrm{K}_n^M(k)/2`$. By Theorem 2.10 there exists a field extension $`E/k`$ such that $`h|_E`$ is a nonzero pure symbol. By a result of R.Elman and T.Y.Lam () the map $`\phi `$ is injective on pure symbols. Hence $`\phi (h|_E)`$ is a nonzero element of $`\mathrm{Gr}_I^{}^n(W(E))`$. Since the morphism $`\phi `$ is compatible with field extensions, the element $`\phi (h)\mathrm{Gr}_I^{}^n(W(k))`$ is also nonzero. Therefore, $`\phi `$ is injective.

### 4.2 Kahn-Rost-Sujatha Conjecture

In  B.Kahn, M.Rost and R.Sujatha proved that for any quadric $`Q`$ of dimension $`m`$ the $`ker(\mathrm{K}_i^M(k)/2\mathrm{K}_i^M(k(Q)))`$ is trivial for any $`i<log_2(m+2)`$, if $`i4`$ (actually, in  authors worked with $`H_{et}^i(k,𝐙/2)`$ instead of $`\mathrm{K}_i^M(k)/2`$, but because of  we can use $`\mathrm{K}_i^M(k)/2`$ here). The authors also conjectured <sup>4</sup><sup>4</sup>4only in the original version of the paper (among other things) that the same is true without the restriction $`i4`$. The following result proves this conjecture.

###### Theorem 4.2

Let $`Q`$ be an $`m`$-dimensional quadric over a field $`k`$ of characteristic zero. Then $`ker(\mathrm{K}_i^M(k)/2\mathrm{K}_i^M(k(Q))/2)`$ is trivial for any $`i<log_2(m+2)`$.

Proof: Denote by $`q`$ a quadratic form which defines the quadric $`Q`$. Assume that $`h`$ is a nonzero element of $`ker(\mathrm{K}_i^M(k)/2\mathrm{K}_i^M(k(Q))/2)`$. Using Theorem 2.10 we can find an extension $`E/k`$ such that $`h|_E`$ is a nonzero pure symbol of the form $`\underset{¯}{a}=\{a_1,\mathrm{},a_n\}`$. Then, since $`h|_{E(Q)}=0`$, the corresponding Pfister quadric $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}/E`$ becomes hyperbolic over $`E(Q)`$. Since $`Q_{\underset{¯}{a}}|_{E(Q)}`$ is hyperbolic the form $`tq|_E`$ is isomorphic to a subform of the Pfister form $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_n`$ for some coefficient $`tE^{}`$ by \[11, ch.4, Theorem 5.4\]. In particular, $`m+2=dim(Q)+2=dim(q)2^i`$. Therefore, we have $`ilog_2(m+2)`$.

### 4.3 $`J`$– filtration conjecture.

Together with the $`I`$– filtration on $`W(k)`$ we can consider the following so-called $`J`$– filtration. Let $`xW(k)`$ be an element, $`q`$ an anisotropic quadratic form which represents $`x`$ and $`Q`$ the corresponding projective quadric. Since $`Q`$ has a point over the field $`k(Q)`$, we have a decomposition of the form

$$q|_{k(Q)}=q_1\underset{i_1(q)}{\underset{}{𝐇\mathrm{}𝐇}},$$

where $`q_1`$ is an anisotropic form over $`k(Q)`$, and $`𝐇`$ is the elementary hyperbolic form. The number $`i_1(q)`$ is called the first higher Witt index of $`q`$. In the same way we can decompose $`q_1|_{k(Q)(Q_1)}`$ etc. obtaining a sequence of quadratic forms $`q,q_1,\mathrm{},q_{s1}`$, where each $`q_i`$ is an anisotropic form defined over $`k(Q)\mathrm{}(Q_{i1})`$, and

$$q_{s1}|_{k(Q)\mathrm{}(Q_{s1})}=\underset{i_s(q)}{\underset{}{𝐇\mathrm{}𝐇}}$$

is a hyperbolic form. By \[4, Theorem 5.8\] (see also \[11, ch 4.,Theorem 5.4\]), any quadratic form $`q^{}`$ over a field $`E`$, such that $`q^{}|_{E(Q^{})}`$ is hyperbolic, is proportional to some Pfister form. This implies that the form $`q_{s1}`$ is proportional to an n–fold Pfister form $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_n`$, where $`\{a_1,\mathrm{},a_n\}\mathrm{K}_n^M(k(Q)\mathrm{}(Q_{s2}))/2`$. This procedure defines for any element $`xW(k)`$ a natural number $`n`$ which we will call the degree of $`x`$.

Let us define $`J_n(W(k))`$ as the subset of $`W(k)`$ consisting of all elements of degree $`n`$. It can be easily checked that $`I^nJ_n`$. It was conjectured in \[4, Question 6.7\] and in  that the $`J_{}`$ coincides with the $`I^{}`$. The following theorem proves this conjecture.

###### Theorem 4.3

$`J_n=I^n`$.

Proof: Let $`x`$ be an element of $`J_n(W(k))`$ which is represented by a quadratic form $`q`$. As above we have a sequence of quadrics $`Q,Q_1,\mathrm{},Q_{s1}`$ such that $`q|_{k(Q)(Q_1)\mathrm{}(Q_{s1})}`$ is hyperbolic. This means that $`x`$ goes to $`0`$ under the natural map from $`W(k)`$ to $`W(k(Q)(Q_1)\mathrm{}(Q_{s1}))`$.

All quadrics $`Q,Q_1,\mathrm{},Q_{s1}`$ have dimensions $`2^n2>2^{n1}2`$. By Theorem 4.2, for any $`0in1`$, the kernel $`ker(\mathrm{K}_i^M(k)/2\mathrm{K}_i^M(k(Q)\mathrm{}(Q_{s1})))`$ is trivial. Therefore, applying the Milnor conjecture (Theorem 4.1), we conclude that the map

$$\mathrm{Gr}_I^{}^i(W(k))\mathrm{Gr}_I^{}^i(W(k(Q)\mathrm{}(Q_{s1})))$$

is a monomorphism for all $`0in1`$. Therefore the map

$$W(k)/I^n(W(k))W(k(Q)\mathrm{}(Q_{s1}))/I^n(W(k(Q)\mathrm{}(Q_{s1})))$$

is a monomorphism as well. Therefore, $`x`$ belongs to $`I^n(W(k))`$.


text:
# *

## 1 Introduction

Given the specialist nature of this meeting, I shall concentrate on the most recent results in our study of Lyman break galaxies (LBGs), rather than give a broad perspective of the high redshift galaxy population; up to date reviews of this subject can be found in the articles by Dickinson (2000), Ferguson et al. (2000), and Pettini (2000). As we shall see, the work I am about to describe uses ‘deep’ observations of LBGs which push the capabilities of present instrumentation to its limits.

Since the commissioning of the high resolution, near infrared spectrographs on the VLT (ISAAC) and Keck (NIRSPEC) telescopes in mid-1999, we have been engaged in an extensive programme to record the rest-frame optical spectra of the brightest Lyman break galaxies with the aim of complementing and extending the information provided by their rest-frame UV spectra on which most of our knowledge of these objects rests at the moment. Apart from the surprises often associated with opening a new wavelength window, there are several obvious scientific motivations.

The luminosity of the Balmer lines, primarily H$`\alpha `$ and H$`\beta `$, gives a measure of the star formation rate which is directly comparable to the values deduced in local surveys. Furthermore, since the optical emission lines and the far-UV continuum do not respond to dust extinction to the same degree, the relative luminosity of a galaxy in these two tracers of star formation could in principle be used as a reddening indicator. When integrated over an entire galaxy, the widths of the nebular lines should reflect the velocity dispersion of the H II regions within the overall gravitational potential so that a kinematical mass may be deduced. This is not possible in the UV, because the interstellar absorption lines are sensitive to small amounts of gas accelerated to high velocities by energetic events such as supernova explosions and bulk outflows, while the stellar absorption lines from OB stars are intrinsically broad. Finally, there are well established chemical abundance diagnostics based on the relative strengths of nebular emission lines, primarily \[O II\], \[O III\] and H$`\beta `$. Abundance measurements are much more difficult in the UV where the more easily observed interstellar lines are generally saturated so that their equivalent widths depend mostly on the velocity dispersion of the gas and only to a lesser extent on the column density of the absorbing ions.

With the large sample of Lyman break galaxies now available (nearly 1000 spectroscopically confirmed objects), it is possible to isolate redshifts which place the transitions of interest in gaps between the strong OH lines which dominate the near-IR sky; here the background is sufficiently dark for faint extragalactic work to become possible. Figure 1 shows an example of the quality of spectra which can be secured with a 2-3 hour integration with NIRSPEC or ISAAC.

Together with observations from the literature, our survey consists of 19 LBGs drawn from the bright end of the luminosity function, from $`L^{}`$ to $`4L^{}`$. Overall we find that galaxies observed are very uniform in their near-IR properties. The spectra are dominated by the emission lines, and the continuum is detected in only two objects, one of which—West MMD11—has an unusually red optical-to-infrared color with ($`K_{\mathrm{AB}}`$) $`=2.72`$ . In all cases \[O III\] is stronger than H$`\beta `$ and \[O II\]. The line widths span a relatively small range, with values of the one dimensional velocity dispersion $`\sigma `$ between 50 and 115 km s-1.

## 2 Star Formation Rates and Dust Extinction

The star formation rates deduced from the luminosity of the H$`\beta `$ emission line agree within a factor of $`2`$ with the values implied by the continuum luminosity at 1500 Å before any corrections for dust extinction are applied (see Figure 2).

There is no trend in the present sample for the former to be larger than the latter, as may have been expected from the shape of all reddening curves which rise from the optical to the UV. Evidently, any such differential extinction must be small compared with the uncertainties in calibrating these two different measures of the SFR (Kennicutt 1998; Charlot & Longhetti 2001). This conclusion is in agreement with the results of similar recent studies of UV-selected star-forming galaxies at $`z\stackrel{<}{}1`$ (e.g. Flores et al. 1999; Sullivan et al. 2000; Bell & Kennicutt 2001) and contradicts the commonly held view that the Balmer lines are more reliable star formation indicators than the UV continuum—from our sample one would obtain essentially the same star formation rate density using either method.

## 3 Oxygen Abundance

In five cases (four new ones and one previously published) we attempted to deduce values of the abundance of oxygen by applying the familiar $`R_{23}`$ (\[O II\] + \[O III\]/H$`\beta `$) method which has been extensively used in local H II regions. We found that generally there remains a significant uncertainty, by up to 1 dex, in the value of (O/H) because of the double-valued nature of the $`R_{23}`$ calibrator. Thus, in the galaxies observed oxygen could be as abundant as in the interstellar medium near the Sun, or as low as $`1/10`$ solar. While this degeneracy can in principle be resolved by measuring the \[N II\]/H$`\alpha `$ ratio (and in the one case where this has proved possible—Teplitz et al. 2000—values of (O/H) near the upper end of the range are indicated), this option is not normally available for galaxies at $`z3`$ because the relevant lines are redshifted beyond the $`K`$-band.

Even so, it is still possible to draw some interesting conclusions. First, LBGs are definitely more metal-rich than damped Ly$`\alpha `$ systems at the same epoch, which typically have metallicities $`Z1/30Z_{}`$. This conclusion is consistent with the view that DLAs are drawn preferentially from the faint end of the galaxy luminosity function and are not the most actively star forming galaxies, as indicated by essentially all attempts up to now to detect them via direct imaging. Second, LBGs do not conform to today’s metallicity-luminosity relation and are overluminous for their oxygen abundance (see Figure 3). This is probably an indication that they have relatively low mass-to-light ratios, as also suggested by their kinematical masses; an additional possibility is that the whole (O/H) vs. $`M_\mathrm{B}`$ correlation shifts to lower metallicities at high $`z`$, when galaxies were younger.

## 4 Kinematical Masses

If the emission line widths reflect the relative motions of H II regions within the gravitational potential of the galaxies, the implied masses are of the order of $`10^{10}M_{}`$ within half-light radii of $`2.5`$ kpc. This is likely to be a lower limit to the total masses of the galaxies as would be obtained, for example, if we could trace their rotation curves. A more serious uncertainty, however, is the real origin of the velocity dispersions we measure.

We do not see any correlation between $`\sigma `$ and galaxy luminosity in either our limited sample (see Figure 4) nor in an on-going study by some of us of a much larger sample of galaxies at $`z1`$ which span five magnitudes in luminosity and yet show very similar line widths to those found here. In two cases we have found hints of ordered motions in spatially resolved profiles of the \[O III\] lines, but attempts to use high resolution images to clarify whether they are indicative of rotating disks proved to be inconclusive.

## 5 Galactic Superwinds

In all the galaxies observed we find evidence for bulk motions of several hundred km s-1 from the velocities of the interstellar absorption lines—which are systematically blueshifted—and Ly$`\alpha `$ emission—which is always redshifted—relative to the nebular emission lines (see Figure 5).

We interpret this effect as indicative of galaxy-wide outflows which appear to be a common characteristic of galaxies with large rates of star formation per unit area at high, as well as low, redshifts (e.g. Heckman 2000). Such ‘superwinds’ involve comparable amounts of matter as is being turned into stars (the mass outflow rate is of the same order as the star formation rate) and about 10% of the total kinetic energy delivered by the starburst (Pettini et al. 2000). Furthermore, they have a number of important astrophysical consequences. They provide self-regulation to the star formation process (Efstathiou 2000); can distribute the products of stellar nucleosynthesis over large volumes (the outflow speeds often exceed the escape velocities—Ferrara et al. 2000); may account for some of the ‘missing’ metals at high redshift (Pettini 1999; Pagel 2000); and may also allow Lyman continuum photons to leak from the galaxies into the intergalactic medium, easing the problem of how the universe came to be reionized.

## 6 The Contribution of Galaxies to the Ionising Background

Three of us (Steidel et al. 2001) have recently addressed this last point quantitatively by adding together the spectra of 29 Lyman break galaxies at a mean redshift $`z=3.40\pm 0.09`$ which places the Lyman continuum region at wavelengths accessible to LRIS. The composite spectrum, reproduced in Figure 6, shows a positive signal at the $`4.8\sigma `$ level between rest-frame wavelengths 880 and 910 Å.

After allowance for the opacity of the intergalactic medium, even this weak signal implies a surprisingly large escape fraction—the emergent flux density below the Lyman limit is 20% of that at 1500 Å, which has been well quantified by extensive surveys. This may well be an upper limit to the value appropriate to the whole population because the galaxies which contributed to the composite spectrum in Figure 6 are drawn from the bluest quartile of our full sample and may thus the most ‘leaky’ objects among a spread of properties. On the other hand, the ubiquitous presence of superwinds in Lyman break galaxies suggests that their interstellar media may commonly develop large cavities which can provide a route for the Lyman continuum photons to escape from the regions of star formation into the IGM.

If the escape fraction (as defined above) of 20% applies generally, the contribution of galaxies to the metagalactic radiation field at $`z3.5`$ is $`J_\nu 1.2\pm 0.3\times 10^{21}`$ ergs s-1 cm-2 Hz-1 sr-1. This value is close to most estimates of $`J_\nu `$ based on the proximity effect in the Ly$`\alpha `$ forest, and exceeds the contribution from QSOs by about a factor of 5. Presumably, the balance between galaxies and QSOs as the providers of Lyman continuum photons shifts further in favour of the former as we move to even higher redshifts (Steidel et al. 1999; Fan et al. 2001), making it quite plausible that stars, rather than AGNs, were responsible for the end of the ‘dark ages’.

This conclusion, if supported by data soon to be secured with the new UV-sensitive arm of LRIS, bodes well for the ‘Very Deep Fields’ which are the goal of the Advanced Camera for Surveys on HST and eventually the NGST .

Max Pettini would like to express his gratitude to the organisers of this enjoyable and timely meeting.

## Index


text:
# On the Coulomb Sturmian matrix elements of relativistic Coulomb Green’s operators

## I Introduction

In quantum mechanics the knowledge of the Green’s operator is equivalent to the complete knowledge of the system. So, having an analytic basis representation for the Green’s operator can tremendously simplify the actual calculations. If we know the Green’s operator only of the asymptotic part of the Hamiltonian we can treat the remaining terms as perturbations and approximate them by finite matrices.

In a recent publication, Ref. , we have proposed a method for calculating matrix representation of Green’s operators. If, in some basis representation, the Hamiltonian possesses an infinite symmetric tridiagonal (Jacobi) matrix structure the corresponding Green’s operator can be given in terms of continued fractions. In Ref. , this theorem were exemplified with the Green’s operator of the non-relativistic Coulomb and harmonic oscillator Hamiltonian, and, in Ref. , an exactly solvable non-relativistic potential problem were considered which provides a smooth transition between the Coulomb and the harmonic oscillator problems.

The aim of this paper is to extend this result for relativistic Coulomb Green’s operators, i.e., for the Coulomb Green’s operator of the Klein-Gordon and of the second order Dirac equations. This later is equivalent to the conventional Dirac equation and seems to have several advantages. For details see Ref.  and references therein. The Coulomb Sturmian matrix elements of the second order Dirac equation has already been obtained by Hostler  via evaluating complicated contour integrals. Our derivation, however, is much simpler, it relies only on the Jacobi-matrix structure of the Hamiltonian, and the result obtained is also better suited for numerical calculations. In Ref.  the result appears in terms of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and hypergeometric functions, while our procedure results in an easily computable and analytically continuable continued fraction.

## II Matrix elements of relativistic Coulomb–Green’s operators

The radial Klein-Gordon and second order Dirac equations for Coulomb interaction are given by

$$H_u|\xi ^u=0,$$
(1)
where

$$H_u=\left(\frac{E}{\mathrm{}c}\right)^2\mu ^2+\frac{2\alpha Z}{\mathrm{}c}\frac{E}{r}+\frac{d^2}{dr^2}\frac{u\left(u+1\right)}{r^2}.$$
(2)
Here $`\mu =mc/\mathrm{}`$, $`\alpha =\text{e}^2/\mathrm{}c`$, $`m`$ is the mass and $`Z`$ denotes the charge. For the Klein-Gordon case $`u`$ is given by

$$u=\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{1}{4}+l(l+1)(Z\alpha )^2},$$
(3)
and in the case of the second order Dirac equation for the different spin states we have

$$u_\pm =\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\left(j+\frac{1}{2}\right)^2(Z\alpha )^2}.$$
(4)
The relativistic Coulomb Green’s operator is defined as the inverse of the Hamiltonian $`H_u`$:

$$H_uG_u=G_uH_u=\mathrm{𝟏}_u,$$
(5)
where $`\mathrm{𝟏}_u`$ denote the unit operator of the radial Hilbert space $`_u`$.

In complete analogy with the non-relativistic case we can define the relativistic Coulomb Sturmian functions as solutions of the Sturm-Liouville problem

$$\left(\frac{d^2}{dr^2}+\eta ^2+\frac{u\left(u+1\right)}{r^2}\frac{2\eta (n+u+1)}{r}\right)S_{n;\eta }^u(r)=0,$$
(6)
where $`\eta `$ is a real parameter and $`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$ is the radial quantum number. In coordinate space representation they take the form,

$$r|nu;\eta =\left[\frac{n!}{\left(n+2u+1\right)!}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(2\eta r\right)^{u+1}e^{\eta r}L_n^{2u+1}(2\eta r),$$
(7)
where $`L`$ is a Laguerre-polinom. The Coulomb Sturmian functions, together with their biorthogonal partner $`r\stackrel{~}{|nu;\eta }=1/rr|nu;\eta `$, form a basis: i.e., they are orthogonal,

$$\stackrel{~}{nu;\eta }|mu;\eta =nu;\eta \stackrel{~}{|mu;\eta }=\delta _{nm},$$
(8)
and form a complete set in $`_u`$

$$\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|nu;\eta \stackrel{~}{nu;\eta |}=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|nu;\eta \stackrel{~}{nu;\eta |}=\mathrm{𝟏}_u.$$
(9)
A straightforward calculation yields:

$$\begin{array}{c}nu;\eta |mu;\eta =\frac{1}{2\eta }[\delta _{nm}(2u+2n+2)\delta _{nm1}\sqrt{(n+1)\left(n+2u+2\right)}\hfill \\ \delta _{nm+1}\sqrt{n\left(2u+n+1\right)}].\hfill \end{array}$$
(10)
Utilizing this relation and considering Eq. (6) we can easily calculate the Coulomb Sturmian matrix elements of $`H_u`$,

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{¯}{H}_{nm}:=nu;\eta \left|H_u\right|mu;\eta =\hfill \\ +\delta _{nm}\left(\frac{2\alpha zE}{\mathrm{}c}2(u+n+1)\eta +2(u+n+1)\frac{(E/\mathrm{}c)^2\mu ^2+\eta ^2}{2\eta }\right)\hfill \\ \delta _{nm1}\left(\frac{(E/\mathrm{}c)^2\mu ^2+\eta ^2}{2\eta }\sqrt{(n+1)(n+2u+2)}\right)\hfill \\ \delta _{nm+1}\left(\frac{(E/\mathrm{}c)^2\mu ^2+\eta ^2}{2\eta }\sqrt{n(n+2u+1)}\right),\hfill \end{array}$$
(11)
which happens to possess a Jacobi-matrix structure. So, the theorem of Ref.  is readily applicable here.

Let us consider the $`\mathrm{}\times \mathrm{}`$ Green’s matrix

$$\left(\underset{¯}{G}_u\right)_{nm}\stackrel{~}{nu;\eta |}G_u\stackrel{~}{|mu;\eta },$$
(12)
and let us denote its rank-$`N`$ leading principal submatrix by $`\underset{¯}{G}_u^{(N)}`$. Then, according to Ref. ,

$$(\underset{¯}{G}_u^{(N)})_{ij}^1=\underset{¯}{H}_{ij}+\delta _{jN}\delta _{iN}\underset{¯}{H}_{iN+1},$$
(13)
where $``$ is a continued fraction

$$=K_{i=N}^{\mathrm{}}\left(\frac{a_i}{b_i}\right)=\frac{a_{1+N}}{b_{1+N}}\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{+}\frac{a_{2+N}}{b_{2+N}}\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{+\mathrm{}+}\frac{a_{n+N}}{b_{n+N}}\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{+\mathrm{}},$$
(14)
whose coefficients are related to the Jacobi matrix

$$a_i=\frac{\underset{¯}{H}_{ii1}}{\underset{¯}{H}_{ii+1}},b_i=\frac{\underset{¯}{H}_{ii}}{\underset{¯}{H}_{ii+1}}.$$
(15)
This continued fraction convergent for bound-state energies, but, by using the method presented in Ref. , can be continued analytically to the whole complex energy plane. Simple matrix inversion gives now the desired Green’s matrix.

In Table I we demonstrate the numerical accuracy of method by evaluating the ground and some highly excited sates of relativistic hydrogen-like atoms, which, in fact, correspond to the poles of the Dirac Coulomb Green’s matrix. In particular, the zeros of the determinant of (13) were located. It should be noted that irrespective of the rank $`N`$ the zeros should provide the exact Dirac results. In Table I we have taken $`2\times 2`$ matrices. Indeed, the results of this method, $`E_{\text{cf}}`$, agree with the exact one in all cases, practically up to the machine accuracy, allowing thus to study the fine structure splitting.

## III Summary

In this short note we have presented a practical and easy-to-apply procedure for calculating the Coulomb Sturmian matrix elements of the Coulomb Green’s operator of the Klein-Gordon and of the second order Dirac equations. The method is relied only on the Jacobi-matrix structure of the corresponding Hamiltonians and results in a continued fraction which can be continued analytically to the whole complex energy plane.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work has been supported by the OTKA contracts No. T17298 and T026233.