text:
# NMR Relaxation Rate for One-Dimensional Multicomponent Spin-Orbital Systems

## 1 Introduction

Quantum spin systems with orbital degeneracy have attracted considerable attention recently, since it was recognized that the orbital degrees of freedom give rise to a variety of interesting phenomena in correlated electron systems. These hot topics have stimulated theoretical studies on the orbitally degenerate Hubbard model and the related multicomponent spin-orbital models. As a first step to investigate such orbital effects, the one-dimensional (1D) version of the SU(4) spin-orbital model has been studied numerically $`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ and analytically. $`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ Such analyses have been also extended to the SU(2)$`\times `$SU(2) spin-orbital model.$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ However, these studies have been mainly concerned with the phase diagram and/or the static properties, which naturally motivates us to study dynamical quantities for the above models.

The NMR measurement may be a powerful probe to study low-energy spin dynamics in 1D strongly correlated systems, as demonstrated theoretically$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ and experimentally.$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ In this paper, we study the NMR relaxation rate for 1D multicomponent spin-orbital systems. For this purpose, we first give a multicomponent generalization of the formula for the NMR relaxation rate $`1/T_1`$ in terms of the bosonization method. We then evaluate the power-law exponent and the enhancement factor for $`1/T_1`$ by exploiting the integrable SU($`n`$) spin-orbital model. It is discussed how the band splitting affects the relaxation rate. We further study the dynamical spin susceptibility to discuss the crossover behavior in $`1/T_1`$ around the critical point. The effect of the hole-doping on the relaxation rate is also discussed.

This paper is organized as follows. In §2, we obtain a generalized expression for the NMR relaxation rate, and then discuss the the effect of the band splitting on $`1/T_1`$ in §3. We present the results for the dynamical spin susceptibility in §4 to discuss how the crossover behavior emerges when the band splitting is changed. Brief summary is given in §5.

## 2 Relaxation Rate for Spin-Orbital Systems

### 2.1 Bosonization approach

We first derive a generalized expression for the NMR relaxation rate $`1/T_1`$ for 1D multicomponent electron systems. To illustrate the procedure clearly, let us consider the degenerate Hubbard model with the band splitting, which possesses $`N`$-fold orbitals and spins $`\sigma =,`$,

$`H=`$ $``$ $`t{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{L}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}{\displaystyle \underset{n^{^{}}=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(c_{i\sigma n^{^{}}}^{}c_{i+1\sigma n^{^{}}}+h.c.)`$ (1)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{U}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{L}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma \sigma ^{^{}}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{n^{^{}}n^{^{\prime \prime }}}{}}n_{i\sigma n^{^{}}}n_{i\sigma ^{^{}}n^{^{\prime \prime }}}`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}(n_i^{(l)}n_i^{(u)}),`$
where $`c_{i\sigma n^{^{}}}^{}`$ is the creation operator for an electron with the orbital labeled by $`n^{^{}}(=1,2,\mathrm{},N)`$. The band splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which is assumed to be caused either by the crystal-field effect or by the Zeeman effect, gives rise to the energetically separated bands with the dispersion, $`\epsilon (k)=2t\mathrm{cos}ka_0\pm \mathrm{\Delta }`$ where $`a_0`$ is the lattice spacing. We deal with the case that the lower (upper) band is $`p`$-fold ($`q`$-fold) degenerate, for which the factor 2 due to the spin sector is included. The number of electrons is denoted as $`n_i^{(l)}`$ ($`n_i^{(u)}`$) for the lower (upper) band. Note that the system possesses SU($`2N`$) spin-orbital symmetry in the absence of the band splitting.$`^{\text{?, ?)}}`$ For convenience, we use the number $`n=2N`$ and the index $`m=1,2,\mathrm{},n(=2N)`$, which specifies the spin as well as the orbital degrees of freedom on equal footing.

Passing to the continuum limit, we now introduce the right- and left-going fermion fields,$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$

$$c_{im}\sqrt{a_0}\left[\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}k_Fx}\psi _{+m}(x)+\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}k_Fx}\psi _m(x)\right],$$
(2)
where the Fermi momentum, $`k_F`$ represents either $`k_F^{(l)}`$ for the lower band $`(m=1,\mathrm{}p)`$ or $`k_F^{(u)}`$ for the upper band $`(m=p+1,\mathrm{},n)`$. These fermion fields are bosonized in terms of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m`$ and its dual field $`\mathrm{\Theta }_m`$,

$$\psi _{rm}=\frac{\eta _{rm}}{\sqrt{2\pi a_0}}\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}[r\mathrm{\Phi }_m\mathrm{\Theta }_m]),$$
(3)
where the boson fields satisfy the commutation relation, $`[\mathrm{\Phi }_m(x),\mathrm{\Theta }_m^{^{}}(x^{^{}})]=\mathrm{i}(\pi /2)\delta _{mm^{^{}}}\mathrm{sgn}(x^{^{}}x)`$. The anticommutation relation between fermions with different species$`^{\text{?)}}`$ is preserved by Majorana-fermion operator, $`\eta _{rm}`$.

Let us now bosonize the Hubbard interaction. We consider a metallic case, for which the charge, spin and orbital excitations are all massless. In this case, we can neglect both of the backward scattering and the Umklapp scattering around the low-energy fixed point. This simplification reduces the system to an effective multicomponent Tomonaga-Luttinger (TL) model in external fields,

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{2\pi }\left\{v_m\left[_x\mathrm{\Phi }_m(x)\right]^2+v_m\left[_x\mathrm{\Theta }_m(x)\right]^2\right\}}`$ (4)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{a_0U}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{mm^{}}{}}{\displaystyle dx\left[_x\mathrm{\Phi }_m(x)\right]\left[_x\mathrm{\Phi }_m^{}(x)\right]},`$
where $`v_m=v_l`$ for $`m=1,\mathrm{},p`$ and $`v_m=v_u`$ for $`m=p+1,\mathrm{},n`$ are the Fermi velocities of elementary excitations.

Note that the Fermi velocities in the lower and upper bands are different, making the diagonalization of the Hamiltonian (4) a little bit complicated. Nevertheless, we can perform the diagonalization via the canonical transformation following the way done for a two-channel TL model.$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ To this end, we introduce the new boson fields, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_c`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\sigma _m}`$ for the charge, orbital and spin sectors, respectively. For the lower band, the transformation is given by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_m`$ $`=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}}\mathrm{cos}\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{pq}}{p\sqrt{n}}}y\mathrm{sin}\alpha \right]\mathrm{\Phi }_c`$ (5)
$`+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\alpha }{y}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{pq}}{p\sqrt{n}}}\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right]\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{m{}_{}{}^{}=3}{\overset{p+1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{(m{}_{}{}^{}1)(m^{}2)}}}`$
$`\times \left[\theta (m^{}m1)(m^{}2)\delta _{m^{},m+1}\right]\mathrm{\Phi }_{\sigma _{m^{}2}},`$
for $`m=1,2,\mathrm{},p`$, whereas for the upper band,

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_m`$ $`=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}}\mathrm{cos}\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{pq}}{q\sqrt{n}}}y\mathrm{sin}\alpha \right]\mathrm{\Phi }_c`$ (6)
$`+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\alpha }{y}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{pq}}{q\sqrt{n}}}\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right]\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{m^{}=p+2}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{(m^{}p)(m^{}p1)}}}`$
$`\times \left[\theta (m^{}m)(m^{}p1)\delta _{m^{},m}\right]\mathrm{\Phi }_{\sigma _{m^{}2}},`$
for $`m=p+1,\mathrm{},n`$. We thus end up with the effective Hamiltonian in the diagonalized form,

$`H_c={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{2\pi }\left\{\frac{\stackrel{~}{v}_c}{\stackrel{~}{K}_c}\left[_x\mathrm{\Phi }_c(x)\right]^2+\stackrel{~}{v}_c\stackrel{~}{K}_c\left[_x\mathrm{\Theta }_c(x)\right]^2\right\}},`$
$`H_\mathrm{\Delta }={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{2\pi }\left\{\frac{\stackrel{~}{v}_\mathrm{\Delta }}{\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }}\left[_x\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{\Delta }(x)\right]^2+\stackrel{~}{v}_\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }[_x\mathrm{\Theta }_\mathrm{\Delta }(x)]^2\right\}},`$
$`H_{\sigma _\nu }={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}x}{2\pi }\left\{\frac{\stackrel{~}{v}_{\sigma _\nu }}{K_{\sigma _\nu }}\left[_x\mathrm{\Phi }_{\sigma _\nu }(x)\right]^2+\stackrel{~}{v}_{\sigma _\nu }K_{\sigma _\nu }[_x\mathrm{\Theta }_{\sigma _\nu }(x)]^2\right\}},`$
(7)
where $`\stackrel{~}{v}_{\sigma _\nu }=\stackrel{~}{v}_l`$ for $`\nu =1,\mathrm{},p2`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{v}_{\sigma _\nu }=\stackrel{~}{v}_u`$ for $`\nu =p1,\mathrm{},n2`$. The explicit formulae for the parameters introduced in the transformation as well as the TL parameters are listed in the Appendix. Note that $`H_c`$ ($`H_\mathrm{\Delta }`$) describes the Gaussian theory for charge excitations (inter-band excitations), for which the TL parameter $`\stackrel{~}{K}_c`$ ($`\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$) characterizes the U(1) critical line. On the other hand, spin excitations in each band are described by $`H_{\sigma _\nu }`$, which still possess SU($`p`$) (SU($`q`$)) symmetry for the upper (lower) band. This fixes the value $`K_{\sigma _\nu }=1`$.

### 2.2 Expression for $`1/T_1`$ at low temperatures

We now derive the formula for the NMR relaxation rate, $`1/T_1`$. Let us first write down the time-dependent spin-spin correlation function at finite temperatures, $`<S^+(x,t)S^{}(0,0)>`$,

$`<S^+(x,t)S^{}(0,0)>`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\kappa }{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\kappa x}\left(\frac{\beta ^{^{}}}{\stackrel{~}{v}_\mu }\right)^{2x_\mu }}{\left[\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\beta ^{^{}}}{\stackrel{~}{v}_\mu }(x+\stackrel{~}{v}_\mu t)\right]^{2\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu ^+}\left[\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\beta ^{^{}}}{\stackrel{~}{v}_\mu }(x\stackrel{~}{v}_\mu t)\right]^{2\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu ^{}}}},`$
with $`\beta ^{^{}}=\pi k_BT`$, where $`\mu (=c,\mathrm{\Delta },\sigma _\nu )`$ classifies massless modes in eq. (7). The phase factor $`\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\kappa x}`$ comes from the large momentum transfer across the Fermi points, where the momentum $`\kappa (=2k_F^{(l,u)},k_F^{(l)}+k_F^{(u)})`$ specifies such excitations. Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu ^\pm `$ are conformal dimensions which are related to the scaling dimension $`x_\mu `$ as $`x_\mu =\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu ^++\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu ^{}`$. The dynamical spin susceptibility is expressed in terms of the above correlation functions,

$$\chi _{}(k,\omega )=\mathrm{i}dtdx\theta (t)[S^+(x,t),S^{}(0,0)]\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}(\omega tkx)}.$$
(9)
The transverse spin correlation function, $`<S^zS^z>`$, can be expressed in a similar manner. By computing eqs. (LABEL:correlation) and (9) with the use of eqs. (5), (6) and (7), we obtain a generic formula for $`1/T_1`$ at low temperatures,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T_1}}`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{\omega 0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{2k_BT}{\mathrm{}^2\omega }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}k}{2\pi }A_{}^2(k)\mathrm{Im}\chi (k,\omega )}`$ (10)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\kappa }{}}B_\kappa \mathrm{\Gamma }_\kappa (\mathrm{\Delta })T^{\eta _\kappa 1},`$
where

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\kappa (\mathrm{\Delta })=\left[{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{v}_\mu }}\right)^{2x_\mu }\right].`$ (11)
Here $`A_{}`$ is hyperfine form factor and $`B_\kappa `$ is a constant independent of the temperature. The corresponding critical exponents $`\eta _\kappa =2_\mu x_\mu `$ are obtained as,

$`\eta _{2k_F^{(l)}}`$ $`=2{\displaystyle \frac{2}{p}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n}}\left\{\mathrm{cos}\alpha +\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{q}{p}}}y\mathrm{sin}\alpha \right\}^2\stackrel{~}{K}_c`$ (12)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\alpha }{y}}+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{q}{p}}}\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right\}^2\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta },`$
$`\eta _{2k_F^{(u)}}`$ $`=2{\displaystyle \frac{2}{q}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n}}\left\{\mathrm{cos}\alpha \sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{p}{q}}}y\mathrm{sin}\alpha \right\}^2\stackrel{~}{K}_c`$ (13)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\alpha }{y}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{p}{q}}}\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right\}^2\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta },`$
$`\eta _{k_F^{(l)}+k_F^{(u)}}`$ $`=2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{q}}`$ (14)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n}}\left[2\mathrm{cos}\alpha +\left(\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{q}{p}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{p}{q}}}\right)y\mathrm{sin}\alpha \right]^2\stackrel{~}{K}_c`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n}}\left(\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{q}{p}}}+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{p}{q}}}\right)^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\alpha }{y}}\right)^2\stackrel{~}{K}_c^1`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n}}\left[2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\alpha }{y}}+\left(\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{q}{p}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{p}{q}}}\right)\mathrm{cos}\alpha \right]^2\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n}}\left(\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{q}{p}}}+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{p}{q}}}\right)^2(\mathrm{cos}\alpha )^2\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }^1.`$
This completes the derivation of the formula for $`1/T_1`$, which generalizes the results of Sachdev$`^{\text{?)}}`$ to multicomponent cases. It is to be noted here that we have explicitly obtained the enhancement factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\kappa `$ in (10), which has been neglected in ordinary literatures. We shall see that this quantity plays an important role for the NMR relaxation rate in 1D systems, particularly when the system is located around the quantum phase transition point around which the velocities are dramatically renormalized. Some explicit examples are shown in the following section.

We have so far treated the model in the continuum limit within a weak coupling approach, so that it is not straightforward to evaluate $`1/T_1`$ as a function of the microscopic model parameters. In the following section we evaluate the renormalized parameters $`\stackrel{~}{v}_\mu `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{K}_\mu `$, by exploiting the solvable model to deduce characteristic behaviors in $`1/T_1`$.

## 3 Exact Critical Properties of $`1/T_1`$

In this section, we exactly evaluate the renormalized parameters $`\stackrel{~}{v}_\mu `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{K}_\mu `$ to discuss critical properties of $`1/T_1`$ for the SU($`n`$) spin-orbital chain with band splitting. Also, the effect of hole-doping is discussed.

### 3.1 Spin-orbital systems

Let us start with the spin-orbital system in a insulating phase. In the limit $`U\mathrm{}`$, the spin-orbital sector in the degenerate Hubbard model (1) is reduced to the SU($`n`$) antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model (each site is occupied by one electron), which is written down in terms of the fermion operators,

$`H_J=J{\displaystyle \underset{i}{\overset{L}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma ,\sigma ^{^{}}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{n^{^{}},n^{^{\prime \prime }}}{\overset{N}{}}}(c_{i\sigma n^{^{}}}^{}c_{i\sigma ^{}n^{^{\prime \prime }}}c_{i+1\sigma ^{^{}}n^{^{\prime \prime }}}^{}c_{i+1\sigma n^{^{}}}n_in_{i+1}),`$
(15)
where only the single occupation of electrons is allowed at each site. The band splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ due to, e.g. a crystalline field, forms two energetically separated bands, which are composed of the $`p`$ lower and $`q`$ upper bands including spin degrees of freedom, $`n=2N=p+q`$.

The exact solution of the model (15) was obtained by Sutherland,$`^{\text{?)}}`$ and its properties have been clarified thus far.$`^{\text{?, ?, ?, ?, ?)}}`$ Following standard procedures, we can evaluate the velocities of elementary excitations and the critical exponents by applying finite-size scaling techniques$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ to the excitation spectrum.$`^{\text{?)}}`$

In the insulating phase, charge excitations are frozen, while spin excitations are still gapless which possess SU($`p`$) (SU($`q`$)) symmetry for the lower (upper) band. By applying the finite-size scaling$`^{\text{?)}}`$ to the excitation spectrum, we obtain the TL parameter as,

$`\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }={\displaystyle \frac{n}{pq}}\xi _{\mathrm{\Delta }(p,q)}^2,\alpha =0,`$ (16)
which generalizes the results of the SU(4) case.$`^{\text{?)}}`$ In the above expression, the dressed charge$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ $`\xi _{\mathrm{\Delta }(p,q)}\xi _{\mathrm{\Delta }(p,q)}(\lambda _p^0)`$, which features the critical line of the TL liquid, is given by the integral equation,

$`\xi _{\mathrm{\Delta }(p,q)}(\lambda _p)=1+{\displaystyle _{\lambda _p^0}^{\lambda _p^0}}G(\lambda _p\lambda _p^{})\xi _{\mathrm{\Delta }(p,q)}(\lambda _p^{})d\lambda _p^{},`$ (17)
where $`G(\lambda )`$ is defined as

$`G(\lambda )=F_{p,p}(\lambda )+F_{q,q}(\lambda ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}x^2\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}k\lambda }dk,`$ (18)
$`F_{\mu ,\nu }(\lambda )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}x{\displaystyle \frac{x^{\mu 1}x^{1\mu }}{x^\nu x^\nu }}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}k\lambda }dk,`$ (19)
with $`x=\mathrm{exp}(|k|/2)`$. Here the cut-off parameters $`\pm \lambda _p^0`$ are determined by minimizing the free energy for a given band splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. $`^{\text{?)}}`$

Having determined the TL parameter $`\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$, it is now straightforward to derive the critical exponents for various correlation functions by exploiting the scaling relations obtained in eqs.(12)-(14). Note that the TL parameter $`\stackrel{~}{K}_c`$ for the charge degree of freedom vanishes in the insulating system. Let us discuss the longitudinal spin susceptibility $`\chi _{}`$, as an example. For excitations with momentum transfer $`2k_F^{(l,u)}`$ within the lower and upper bands, we obtain the exponents $`\eta _{2k_F^{(l,u)}}`$ from (12) and (13),

$`\eta _{2k_F^{(l)}}`$ $`=`$ $`2\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{2q}{np}}\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta },`$ (20)
$`\eta _{2k_F^{(u)}}`$ $`=`$ $`2\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{q}}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{2p}{nq}}\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }.`$ (21)
On the other hand, for the momentum transfer $`k_F^{(l)}\pm k_F^{(l)}`$ we use the relation (14), which yields

$`\eta _{k_F^{(l)}+k_F^{(l)}}=`$ $`\left[2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{q}}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2pq}}\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }^1`$ (22)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n}}\left(\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{q}{p}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{p}{q}}}\right)^2\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }.`$ (23)
The scaling relations (20), (21) and (23), which are the generalizations of the ordinary TL relations to multicomponent cases, characterize critical properties of the degenerate model with band splitting.

We note here that for the relaxation via excitations around the zero momentum transfer, the critical exponent is fixed to the canonical value, resulting in the specific formula for this relaxation channel,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T_1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{v}}\right)^2T,`$ (24)
which holds for any value of the band splitting, although the velocity $`v`$ may be changed according to the splitting. Note that the quantity $`1/v^2`$, which originates from the enhancement factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\kappa `$ in (10), is proportional to the square of the density of states for elementary excitations. Therefore, this expression is regarded as a 1D analogue of the Korringa relation.$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$

Let us now focus on the specific case for which SU($`n`$) multiplet splits into two SU($`n/2`$) bands ($`n=2N`$). Note that the $`n=4`$ case has been intensively studied thus far. $`^{\text{?, ?, ?, ?, ?)}}`$ In Fig. 1 we show the critical exponents as a function of the band splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. In the absence of the band splitting, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$, the TL parameter $`\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is given by $`\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }=1`$, which results in $`\eta _{2k_F}=2(11/n)`$.$`^{\text{?)}}`$ Hence the power-law temperature dependence becomes less singular as the orbital degeneracy is increased. Although the critical exponents vary continuously when $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is increased up to its critical value $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, their values do not change so dramatically to induce the qualitative difference in the temperature dependence except for $`n=2`$ (single orbital case). On the other hand, beyond $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, the upper band becomes massive, being separated from the lower band. Thus for $`\mathrm{\Delta }>\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, the low-energy physics can be described by the SU($`n/2`$) spin model. Correspondingly, the critical exponent shows a discontinuity at $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. For example, $`\eta _{2k_F^{(l)}}`$ abruptly changes from $`2(11/p+1/p^2)`$ to $`2(11/p)`$ for the SU($`n`$) model at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. As claimed by Yamashita and Ueda,$`^{\text{?)}}`$ this discontinuity does not imply that the relaxation rate itself possesses such singularity, but there instead occurs the crossover behavior in $`1/T_1`$. This point is discussed in more detail in the next section.

We now observe how the enhancement factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\kappa `$ in (10) behaves as a function of the band splitting. The computed results for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\kappa `$ are shown in Fig. 2. As $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is increased, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\kappa `$ is increased monotonically and is divergently enhanced near $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. This characteristic behavior is caused by the renormalization of the velocities, which gives rise to the edge singularity in density of states. This may be regarded as a 1D analog of the ”mass enhancement” well known for the Fermi liquid in three dimension. Note that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ as well as $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k_F^{(l)}}`$ within the lower band still has the finite values even for $`\mathrm{\Delta }>\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, whereas the others should vanish after divergently increased at $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. As mentioned before, such a singularity is apparent, and should be replaced by the crossover behavior. We note that the above enhancement factor has been usually neglected to analyze the temperature dependence of $`1/T_1`$, However, when the field-dependence of $`1/T_1`$ is studied at low temperatures, this should be properly taken into account, in particular around the critical point $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$.

### 3.2 Hole-doped systems

We now turn to a hole-doped case. For a metallic system with finite holes, we consider the multicomponent t-J model,

$`H=t{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{L}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}{\displaystyle \underset{n^{^{}}=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(c_{i\sigma n^{^{}}}^{}c_{i+1\sigma n^{^{}}}+h.c.)+H_J.`$ (25)
For the supersymmetric case, $`t=J`$, the exact solution was obtained, $`^{\text{?, ?)}}`$ which will be used here. Though this model is rather special in its appearance, some essential properties for a doped system can be described well, as is shown below.

In Fig. 3, we show the critical exponents for the SU($`n`$) symmetric case without the band-splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ ($`n=2,4,6`$). In this case, the critical exponent $`\eta (=\eta _{2k_F^{(l)}}=\eta _{2k_F^{(u)}}=\eta _{k_F^{(l)}+k_F^{(u)}})`$ is

$`\eta =2{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n}}\stackrel{~}{K}_c,\stackrel{~}{K}_c={\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}\xi _{h(n)}^2,`$ (26)
where the dressed charge $`\xi _{h(n)}\xi _{h(n)}(\lambda _n^0)`$ is given by

$`\xi _{h(n)}(\lambda _n)=1+{\displaystyle _{\lambda _n^0}^{\lambda _n^0}}F_{n,n}(\lambda _n\lambda _n^{})\xi _{\delta (n,n)}(\lambda _n^{})d\lambda _n^{}.`$ (27)
We note that the relation (26) generalizes the TL scaling relation to SU($`n`$) electron systems. The computed results are shown in Fig.3. When the hole concentration is increased ($`\mu `$ is decreased), the critical exponent for the NMR relaxation rate, $`\eta `$, is monotonically increased from $`2(11/n+1/n^2)`$ up to $`2`$ (band bottom), because $`\stackrel{~}{K}_c=1/n1`$ in this case. We are now discussing a rather special solvable model, so that the global feature of the critical exponent should depend on the model. However, characteristic properties close to the insulating phase ($`\mu \mu _c`$) is expected to be rather general because in the small hole-doping region the charge sector is scaled to the strong coupling fixed point (hard-core bosons) irrespective of the bare value of $`J`$.

To see such properties for the critical exponents, we now focus on the hole-doped case close to insulator ($`\mu \mu _c`$). In this limiting case, the TL parameters in (12), (13) and (14) are reduced to,

$`\stackrel{~}{K}_\mathrm{\Delta }={\displaystyle \frac{n}{pq}}\xi _{\mathrm{\Delta }(p,q)}^2,\stackrel{~}{K}_c={\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}},\mathrm{cos}\alpha =1,`$
$`y\mathrm{sin}\alpha =\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{p}{q}}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{n}{p}}\xi _{B(p,q)}\right),{\displaystyle \frac{1}{y}}\mathrm{sin}\alpha =0,`$ (28)
where in addition to the dressed charge (16), we have introduced another dressed charge $`\xi _{B(p,q)}\xi _{B(p,q)}(\lambda _n^0)`$ which incorporates the interference between the charge and spin degrees of freedom,

$`\xi _{B(p,q)}(\lambda _n)={\displaystyle _{\lambda _p^0}^{\lambda _p^0}}F_{2,q}(\lambda _n\lambda _p^{})\xi _{B(p,q)}(\lambda _p^{})d\lambda _p^{}.`$ (29)
In Fig. 4, the critical exponents in a metallic system with the small hole concentration are shown as a function of the band splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ ($`n=2,4,6`$). As soon as holes are doped into the insulator, all the exponents are increased (compare Fig.1 with Fig.4), because the charge sector couples with the spin sector, and thus affects the relaxation process via ”gauge interaction” due to Fermi statistics. For the limiting case, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, the critical exponents approach

$`\eta _{2k_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{(l)}}`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{4}{n}}+{\displaystyle \frac{8}{n^2}},`$ (30)
$`\eta _{2k_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{(u)}}`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{4}{n}}+{\displaystyle \frac{16}{n^2}},`$ (31)
$`\eta _{k_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{(l)}+k_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{(u)}}`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{4}{n}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n^2}}.`$ (32)
Beyond this critical band-splitting, the NMR relaxation rate is given by that for the SU($`n/2`$) t-J model without band-splitting. Thus the critical exponent is discontinuously changed to smaller values at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ for any case of $`n`$.

We wish to mention that the coefficient $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\kappa `$ is enhanced for small hole-doping, since the charge velocity $`\stackrel{~}{v}_c`$ in eq.(11) is very small in this region. However, it may not be easy to observe this enhancement due the renormalized charge velocity, because the hole-doping itself increases the value of the exponents, thus having a tendency to hide singular behaviors at low temperatures.

## 4 Dynamical Spin Susceptibility

We have shown that the critical exponents as well as the enhancement factor exhibit singularities around the critical point $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. As already mentioned, such singularities may not be observed in NMR measurements, but should be replaced by the crossover behavior.$`^{\text{?)}}`$ In order to clearly see how the crossover behavior emerges, we discuss the dynamical spin susceptibility $`\mathrm{Im}\chi (k,\omega )`$ in the low frequency regime.

By exploiting the velocities and the TL parameters determined by the exact solution, we have computed $`\mathrm{Im}\chi (k,\omega )`$ at finite temperatures by using the expression (9). To be specific, we restrict ourselves to the SU(4) spin-orbital model with the band splitting.

In Fig. 5, the spectral function $`\mathrm{Im}\chi (k,\omega )/\omega `$ is shown for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ at finite temperatures. For all the momenta shown in Fig. 5 (a), the broad maximum structure is found in the spectral function, indicating the presence of overdamped excitations. This is because we are dealing with the case of higher temperatures in (a), $`\mathrm{}vqk_BT`$ ($`v=\pi /2`$). On the other hand, if the temperature is decreased with $`q`$ being fixed, the sharp peak structure is developed around $`\omega =\mathrm{}vq`$ in the spectral function (see (b) for which $`\mathrm{}vqk_BT`$) which indicates the presence of propagating spinons with the above dispersion relation. These behaviors for the propagating mode are analogous to those observed for the SU(2) spin chain.$`^{\text{?)}}`$ Note that although there are three kinds of massless modes, all the velocities are the same for the SU(4) symmetric case with $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$, so that we can observe only one spinon mode in the spectral function $`\mathrm{Im}\chi (k,\omega )/\omega `$. The integration over $`q`$ in the case of (b) determines the low-temperature power-law behavior of $`1/T_1`$ discussed in the previous section.

We next discuss the case with the finite band splitting close to its critical value $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, where we have encountered the singularities in the NMR relaxation rate. In Fig. 6, we display the spectral function $`\mathrm{Im}\chi (k,\omega )/\omega `$ by choosing two typical values of the temperature. There are three dominant low-energy excitations with different velocities around the momenta $`2k_F^{(u)}`$, $`k_F^{(l)}+k_F^{(u)}(=\pi /2)`$ and $`2k_F^{(l)}`$. At higher temperatures shown in panels (a), (b) and (c), we can see the broadened maximum structure at low frequencies, which is caused by overdamped spin excitations, as mentioned above. When the temperature is lowered, each excitation starts to show different behaviors in the spectral function. We begin with the spectral function for the $`2k_F^{(u)}`$ mode in (d), and the $`k_F^{(l)}+k_F^{(u)}`$ mode in (e). By comparing them with those for the $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ case, we find that the peak structure in the spectral weight is shifted to the extremely low frequency regime, and its peak-position is monotonically increased with the increase of the momentum $`q`$, reflecting the fact that the velocities of these excitations become very small around $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$.

Recall here that the NMR relaxation rate (10) is determined by the integration of the spectral function over the momentum in the limit $`\omega 0`$. In the previous section, we have shown that $`1/T_1`$ is extremely enhanced by the velocity renormalization around $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. However, we should keep in mind the following things. We are now considering the continuum limit of the original lattice model, so that when the system is close to the critical point $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, the energy range where such a treatment may be valid becomes pretty small. For instance, in the above case, the energy range where the dispersion relation $`\omega \mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{v}_uq`$ holds should be in $`k_F^{(u)}qk_F^{(u)}`$ (the cutoff is given by $`k_F^{(u)}0.15`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0.66`$). Therefore the enhancement of $`1/T_1`$ can be seen in the very low frequency regime within the small cutoff parameter. Hence, even if such enhancement is naively expected to be observed at low temperatures, it may be obscured when the temperature is increased beyond the above cutoff energy.

In contrast to the above two modes, the spectral function for the $`2k_F^{(l)}`$ mode in Fig. 6(f) shows quite different behaviors; it develops two peaks of propagating spinons around $`2k_F^{(l)}`$, whose dispersions are given by $`\omega \mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{v}_\mathrm{\Delta }q`$ and $`\omega \mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{v}_lq`$, respectively. When the system is close to the critical point, the interband excitations with the dispersion $`\stackrel{~}{v}_\mathrm{\Delta }q`$ becomes less important. On the other hand, in such cases, the excitation of $`\omega \mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{v}_lq`$ within the lower band becomes more dominant to control the relaxation process. In fact, beyond $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, this excitation completely determines the $`1/T_1`$ at low temperatures.

From the above analyses of the dynamical spin susceptibility, we can see how the enhancement of $`1/T_1`$ in the vicinity of the critical field naturally crossovers to the region where $`1/T_1`$ is dominated by excitations in the lower band, when the energy or the temperature is raised.

## 5 Summary

We have studied the NMR relaxation rate $`1/T_1`$ for 1D multicomponent spin-orbital systems. By generalizing the bosonization approach of Sachdev, we have obtained a generalized formula of $`1/T_1`$ for multicomponent quantum systems with the band splitting. We have then exactly estimated the relaxation rate by using the SU($`n`$) integrable model for the insulating as well as metallic phases. It has been found that the power-law temperature dependence of $`1/T_1`$ becomes less singular as the orbital degeneracy is increased. This is also the case for the finite band splitting, as far as $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is smaller than its critical value $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. We have also pointed out that the relaxation rate may be enhanced around $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ due to the dramatic renormalization of the velocities. This type of the enhancement may be common to 1D quantum systems when the spin/orbital gap is formed or collapsed by external fields. In particular, this effect becomes important to analyze the field-dependence of $`1/T_1`$ at low temperatures. It may be quite interesting to experimentally observe the enhancement in $`1/T_1`$, or the corresponding crossover behavior at very low temperatures in the NMR experiments.

## Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Y. Tsukamoto for valuable discussions. This work was partly supported by a Grant-in-Aid from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan. A. K. and F. T. were supported by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

## Appendix

The parameters for the canonical transformation in (5) and (6) are obtained as,

$`\mathrm{tan}2\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{\delta v}{v_0(y\gamma y^1)}}{\displaystyle \frac{4\sqrt{pq}}{n}},y^2={\displaystyle \frac{K_c^2+\gamma }{\gamma K_\mathrm{\Delta }^2}},`$
$`v_0={\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}(pv_l+qv_u),\delta v={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(v_lv_u),`$
$`\gamma ={\displaystyle \frac{qv_l+pv_u}{pv_l+qv_u}},`$
where $`v_l`$ and $`v_u`$ are the bare velocities, and the TL parameters $`K_c`$ and $`K_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are given by

$`K_c`$ $`=`$ $`\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{2(n1)a_0U}{\pi v_0}}\right)^{1/2},`$
$`K_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ $`=`$ $`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2(n1)a_0U}{\pi v_0}}\right)^{1/2}.`$
The above set of the parameters in the transformation gives the diagonalized Hamiltonian in the text, for which the renormalized velocities, $`\stackrel{~}{v}_{c(\mathrm{\Delta })}`$ and the TL parameters, $`\stackrel{~}{K}_{c(\mathrm{\Delta })}`$ read,

$`\stackrel{~}{v}_{c\mathrm{\Delta }}^2={\displaystyle \frac{4pq}{N^2}}\delta v^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v_0^2[(K_c^2+\gamma ^2K_\mathrm{\Delta }^2)\pm T(\alpha )],`$
$`\stackrel{~}{K}_{c(\mathrm{\Delta })}^2=y^2{\displaystyle \frac{[K_c^2+\gamma ^2K_\mathrm{\Delta }^2+2\gamma ]\pm T(\alpha )}{[K_c^2(1+2\gamma K_\mathrm{\Delta }^2)+\gamma ^2K_\mathrm{\Delta }^2]\pm T(\alpha )}},`$
where $`T(\alpha )=(K_c^2\gamma ^2K_\mathrm{\Delta }^2)\sqrt{1+\mathrm{tan}2\alpha }`$.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

The glueball Regge trajectory from the string - inspired theory
S.V. Talalov

Dept. of Theoretical Physics, University of Togliatti,
13 blvrd Korolyova, Togliatti, 445859, Russia

###

The special case of $`4D`$ string-like theory proposed early is investigated. Regge trajectories in the developed model are non-linear for the small masses and the values of spin and have the different asymptotical slopes $`\alpha _p`$. The value $`\alpha _p`$ just as the form of the trajectory depends from the quantum state of some ”internal“ (relativistic invariant) variables. It is also shown that some trajectories have the asymptotical slope $`\alpha _g0.21Gev^2.`$

## I. Introduction

###

The conventional approaches in a string theory (see, for example, ) lead as is well known to the linear Regge trajectories for free string such that the slope $`\alpha ^{}`$ is in-put parameter in a theory. But the trajectories $`s=\alpha ^{}M^2+c,`$ where the value $`\alpha ^{}0.9Gev^2`$ is the universal constant, describe the spectrum of real particles well but only approximately. Indeed, the linearity means that the width of any resonance is equal to zero; the universality of the slope $`\alpha ^{}`$ is connected with the absence of exotic particles . In the meantime we have the stable evidence on hadronic exotics now . These data give the true information about Regge trajectories with slopes $`\alpha _g0.9Gev^2`$ . As regards the form of the trajectory, the linear dependence gives a good approximation for light-flavoured mesons and baryons only (see, for example ). Therefore we have to modify standard string theory to describe the real (extended) particles. Of couse, such modification must solve in some way the problem of the extra space - time dimensions which is usual for conventional approaches. To solve this problem the various (super)string models have been constructed by many authors both in the physical ($`4D`$) and in the arbitrary (non-critical) dimensions (see, for example, .)111This list can be continued, of couse.. Most of them lead to the linear Regge trajectories too.

Resently new approach was suggested to describe the classical and quantum dynamics of $`4D`$ open spinning string . Proposed theory differs, in our knowledges, from other because it founded on the new conception of ”adjunct phase space“. Generally speaking, we describe the classical dynamics of the string with canonical phase space $``$, fist type constraints $`F_i`$ and some additional conditions $`G_i`$ in terms of another dynamical system with phase space $`^{ad}`$. These phase spaces connected in accordance with diagramm

$$𝐕𝐖^{ad},$$
(1)
where set $`𝐕`$ is the surface of the constraints and additional conditions in the space $``$, set $`𝐖`$ is the surface of some (first type) constraints $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$, $`(i=1,\mathrm{},n<\mathrm{})`$ in the space $`^{ad}`$. The symbol $``$ means the diffeomorfism conserved in the dynamics. From the classical viewpoint, the manifold $`𝐖`$ is equivalent to the manifold $`𝐕,`$ because it contains same information about the physical degrees of the freedom. It should be stressed that $`^{ad}`$ as the Poisson manifolds: there is no any canonical transformation $`^{ad}`$. We fulfill the subsequent quantization of the string theory in terms of the space $`^{ad}.`$ Rigorously speaking, we quantize another dynamical system and select the ”string sector“ which corresponds to the set $`𝐖.`$ Relativistic invariance does not broken in quantum case because special selection of the phase space $`^{ad}`$ which will be quite natural in our opinion. Finally, as a quantum theory we have the operator representation of the classical algebra

$$𝒜_{cl}=𝒫𝒜_{int},$$

where $`𝒫`$ is the Poincaré algebra and $`𝒜_{int}`$ the Poisson brackets algebra of some two-dimensional fields in the ”box“ (there are ”internal“ variables). Thus our approach is a natural generalization of the Wigner’s conception of ”elementary“ particle as the representation of Poincaré algebra. Non-trivial spectrum appears here because existence of constraints depending from the Cazimir functions $`P^2`$ and $`w^2`$. We interpret such quantum theory as the model of extended relativistic particle.

## II. Basic points of a classical theory.

###

As the model of spinning string we consider the following theory. Let the fields $`X_\mu (\xi ^0,\xi ^1)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm ^A(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)`$ interact with two-dimensional gravity $`h_{ij}(\xi ^0,\xi ^1),`$ where $`\xi ^1[0,\pi ]`$ and $`\xi ^0(\mathrm{},\mathrm{}),`$ such that dynamics is defined by the action constructed in accordance with the well-investigated manner :

$$S=\frac{1}{4\pi \alpha ^{}}𝑑\xi ^0𝑑\xi ^1\sqrt{h}\left\{h^{ij}_iX^\mu _jX_\mu i\varrho _0e_I^j(\mathrm{\Gamma }^0)_{AB}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^A\gamma _j^I\mathrm{\Psi }^B\right\}.$$
(2)
The notations are following: $`h=det(h^{ij})`$, the vectors $`e_I^j(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)`$ are the vectors of two-dimensional basis such that the equalities $`h^{ij}=e^{iI}e_I^j`$ take place and the matrices $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu `$ and $`\gamma _i`$ are the Dirac matrices in the four- and two-dimensional space-time respectively. The field $`X_\mu `$ takes the values in Minkowski space-time $`E_{1,3};`$ the fields $`\mathrm{\Psi }^A`$ with components $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm ^A`$ are the spinor fields in two-dimensional space; index $`A`$ is the spinor index in the space $`E_{1,3}`$ such that the fields $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm `$ are the Majorana spinor fields in four-dimensional space-time. The numbers $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm ^A`$ are the complex numbers, thus there are no classical Grassmann variables in our action. The consideration of the spinning string without the Grassmann variables is not new (see, for example, ).

To fix the gauge arbitrariness we demand, as usually, $`e_I^j=\delta _I^j`$ so that $`h_{ij}=\mathrm{diag}(1,1)`$ and the equations of motion can be written in simplest form. For fields $`X`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ we have $`_{}_+X_\mu =0,`$ $`_{}\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm =0;`$ the equations of motion $`\delta S/\delta h^{ij}=0`$ for gravity $`h`$ lead as well-known to the equalities

$$F_\pm (\xi )\left(_\pm X\right)^2\pm \frac{i\varrho _0}{2}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_\pm _\pm \mathrm{\Psi }_\pm =0,$$
(3)
where $`_\pm `$ are derivatives with respect to cone parameters $`\xi _\pm =\xi ^1\pm \xi ^0.`$

We still have the remained gauge freedom

$$\xi _\pm \stackrel{~}{\xi }_\pm =\pm A(\pm \xi _\pm ).$$
(4)
The function $`A(\xi )`$ must satisfy the property $`A(\xi +2\pi )=A(\xi )+2\pi `$ $`(A^{}0)`$ in accordance with the standard boundary conditions for original variables $`X`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$: $`X_\mu ^{}(\xi ^0,0)=X_\mu ^{}(\xi ^0,\pi )=0,`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }_+(\xi ^0,0)=\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\xi ^0,0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_+(\xi ^0,\pi )=ϵ\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\xi ^0,\pi ),`$ where $`ϵ=\pm .`$ Our subsequent studies are founded on two conjectures. Fistly, we restrict the set of all string configurations by requirement

$$\pm \overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_\pm \mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_\pm _\pm X_\mu >0.$$
(5)
Secondly, we introduce the additional conditions to fix all degrees of the gauge freedom (4) excepting one. We suppose that the equalities

$$_\pm \left[\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_\pm \mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_\pm _\pm X_\mu \right]=0.$$
(6)
hold. It is more convenient to integrate eq. (6) so that

$$G_\pm (\xi )\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_\pm \mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_\pm _\pm X_\mu =\pm \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}$$
(7)
for any positive constant $`\kappa .`$ These equalities are equivalent to the original conditions (5) and (6). Note that the conditions (7) are invariant both under Poincaré and under scale transformations of the space-time $`E_{1,3}.`$ Such invariance is first reason of the motivation for the conditions (7). Second reason is to the gauge (7) generalizes naturally the well-known light-cone gauge in a string theory ( this fact is discussed firstly in the work  in connection with geometrical description $`3D`$ spinning string). We define the set $`𝐕`$ as a set of the string configurations which satisfy the constraints (3) and the additional conditions (5) and (6).

The original phase space $``$ has the coordinates $`\dot{X}_\mu _0X_\mu `$, $`X_\mu `$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^{+}{}_{}{}^{A}{}_{\pm }{}^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm ^A.`$ As usually, canonical Poisson bracket structure is following:

$$\{\dot{X}_\mu (\xi ),X_\nu (\eta )\}=4\pi \alpha ^{}g_{\mu \nu }\delta (\xi \eta ),$$

$$\{\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^{A}{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{\pm }{}^{}(\xi ),\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm ^B(\eta )\}=\frac{8\pi i\alpha ^{}}{\varrho _0}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^0)^{AB}\delta (\xi \eta ).$$

Let us define two functions $`F`$ and $`G`$ which will be continious and $`2\pi `$-periodical in accordance with boundary conditions on original string variables:

$$F(\xi )=\{\begin{array}{cc}F_+(\xi ),\hfill & \\ F_{}(\xi ),\hfill & \end{array},G(\xi )=\{\begin{array}{cc}G_+(\xi ),\hfill & \xi [0,\pi )\text{,}\hfill \\ G_{}(\xi ),\hfill & \xi [\pi ,0)\text{,}\hfill \end{array}.$$

In terms of Fourier modes $`F_n`$ and $`G_n`$ of the introdused functions $`F`$ and $`G`$, the set $`𝐕`$ is defined by the equalities

$$F_n=0(n=0,\pm 1,\mathrm{}),G_n=0(n0).$$

In accordance with canonical Poisson bracket structure we have the equalities

$$\{\stackrel{}{𝐹}_n,G_m\}=4\pi i\alpha ^{}(n+m)G_{nm}.$$

Because $`G_0=\kappa ^2/2>0`$ in our theory, the system of ”constraints“

$$F_n=0,(n0),G_n=0(n0)$$
(8)
will be the second type system in Dirac terminology. We can introduce correspondent Dirac brackets and consider the reduced phase space $`_1`$ (defined by the equalities (8)). In this space the set $`𝐕_1`$ will be the surface of single constraint $`F_0=0.`$ It is clear that such constraint generates the transformations (4) such that $`A(\xi )\xi +c,`$ where $`c=const.`$ Obviously, they give the shifts $`\xi ^0\xi ^0+c,`$ which correspond to $`\xi ^0`$-dynamics.

As a next step of our classical theory we consider another dynamical hamiltonian system (”extended particle“). To do it we must define the objects: a phase space $`^{ad}`$, a Poisson brackets $`\{,\}^0`$, a hamiltonian $`h_0`$, and, may be, some constraints $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$. The definitions will be following. The space $`^{ad}`$ has a structure

$$^{ad}=_p\times _b\times _j\times _0,$$

where: $`_p`$ is the algebraic space of the Poincaré algebra with coordinates $`P_\mu `$ and $`M_{\mu \nu }`$; $`_b`$ – the phase space of the complex D’Alembert field $`b(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)`$ which is defined for $`\xi ^1[0,\pi ]`$ and satisfied to the boundary conditions

$$b(\xi ^0,0)=b(\xi ^0,\pi )=0;$$

the space $`_j=_{j_0}\times _U`$ be composed from the space $`_{j_0}`$ which is the phase space of the real D’Alembert field $`j(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)`$ in same ”box“ $`\xi ^1[0,\pi ]`$ and satisfied to the boundary conditions

$$j(\xi ^0,0)=0,j(\xi ^0,\pi )=2\pi j_0^0$$

and from the space $`_U`$. Last one is the phase space of $`SU(2)`$ \- valued WZNW - field $`U(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)`$ defined in the ”box“ $`\xi ^1[0,\pi ]`$ and satisfied to the boundary conditions

$$U(\xi ^0,0)=U(\xi ^0,\pi )=1_2.$$

The space $`_0`$ is some auxiliary (finite - dimensional) space; it is not important here and will be dropped out from subsequent consideration. We use following representations for introduced fields:

$$b(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)=_\xi _{}^{\xi _+}f(\eta )𝑑\eta ,$$

where $`f(\xi )`$ – complex $`2\pi `$ \- periodical function without zero mode;

$$j(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)=_\xi _{}^{\xi _+}j_0(\eta )𝑑\eta ,$$

where $`j_0(\xi )`$ – real $`2\pi `$ \- periodical function such that the zero mode of this function is the constant $`j_0^0`$. The space $`_U`$ is coordinatized by three real functions $`j_a(\xi )`$ $`(a=1,2,3)`$ (see ). $`2\pi `$ \- periodicity of these functions is the consequence of the boudary conditions for the WZNW-field $`U`$. We assume that all coordinates of spaces $`_b`$, $`_j`$ and $`_0`$ are Poincaré - scalars.

Natural Poisson brackets for the coordinates of the phase space $`^{ad}`$ will be following222Because the functions $`f`$ and $`j_a`$ are dimensionles we must use some constant $`S_0`$ which has a dimension of action. For the subsequent calculations $`S_0=\varrho _0^2/\alpha ^{^{}}`$ and $`c=\mathrm{}=1.`$:

$`\{M_{\alpha \beta },M_{\gamma \delta }\}^0`$ $`=g_{\alpha \delta }M_{\beta \gamma }+g_{\beta \gamma }M_{\alpha \delta }g_{\alpha \gamma }M_{\beta \delta }g_{\beta \delta }M_{\alpha \gamma },`$ (9)
$`\{M_{\alpha \beta },P_\gamma \}^0`$ $`=g_{\beta \gamma }P_\alpha g_{\alpha \gamma }P_\beta ,\{P_\alpha ,P_\gamma \}^0=0,`$
$`\{f(\xi ),\overline{f}(\eta )\}^0`$ $`=S_0^1\delta ^{^{}}(\xi \eta ),`$
$`\{j_0(\xi ),j_0(\eta )\}^0`$ $`=2S_0^1\delta ^{^{}}(\xi \eta ),`$
$`\{j_a(\xi ),j_b(\eta )\}^0`$ $`=2S_0^1\left(\delta _{ab}\delta ^{^{}}(\xi \eta )+\epsilon _{abc}j_c(\xi )\delta (\xi \eta )\right).`$
($`a,b,c=1,2,3`$ and $`\delta (\xi )=_n\mathrm{e}^{in\xi }`$ here.) As hamiltonian we postulate the function

$$h_0=\frac{S_0}{2\pi }\left(_0^{2\pi }|f(\xi )|^2𝑑\xi +\frac{1}{4}\underset{a=0}{\overset{3}{}}_0^{2\pi }j_a^2(\xi )𝑑\xi \right),$$

so that the following non-trivial equations of motion hold:

$$\{h_0,j_a\}^0=j_a^{},\{h_0,f\}^0=f^{}.$$
(10)
Main result of the work  is formulated as the following statement.

The equality

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(P^2,w^2;f,j_0,\mathrm{},j_3)=0,$$
(11)
where $`w^2`$ is the square of the pseudo-vector $`w_\mu =(1/2)\epsilon _{\mu \nu \lambda \sigma }M^{\nu \lambda }P^\sigma `$, exists on the phase space $`^{ad}`$ such the surface $`𝐖^{ad}`$, corresponded to ”constraint“ (11) will be diffeomorfical to the surface $`𝐕`$ in the string phase space $``$. Coordinates $`P_\mu `$ and $`M_{\mu \nu }`$ of the space $`^{ad}`$ corresponded any string configuration $`(X_\mu ,\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm )`$ for such diffeomorfism, will coincide with the string energy-momentum and moment calculated for this configuration in accordance with the Noether theorem. Constraint (11) is stable, i.e. the equality

$$\{h_0,\mathrm{\Phi }\}^0=0$$

takes place.

Formulated statement means that the inclusions

$$_1𝐕𝐖^{ad}$$
(12)
are fulfilled. We use the redused phase space $`_1`$ instead the phase space $``$ here to demonstrate the connection of the string with the dynamical system ”extended particle“. In our opinion, it clarify suggested theory. Indeed, $`\mathrm{codim}𝐕=1`$ in the space $`_1`$ as $`\mathrm{codim}𝐖=1`$ in the space $`^{ad}`$. Thus we can interpret our approach as such deformation of the phase space $`_1`$ that the physical degrees of the freedom (set $`𝐕`$) are non-deformed.

The ”constraint“ (11) was deduced in the work  in the $`\kappa `$-parametric form:

$`P^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varrho _0}{4\pi \alpha ^{}}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{2}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{\varrho _0}}\right)^l[C_p]_l,`$ (13)
$`w^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\varrho _0^6}{(4\pi \alpha ^{})^4}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{6}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{\varrho _0}}\right)^l[C_w]_l.`$ (14)
The evident expressions for the coefficients $`[C_p]_l`$ and $`[C_w]_l`$ in the polynomials (13) and (14) are defined by the Noether formulae for string energy-momentum and moment. It is important that the coefficients $`[C_p]_l`$ and $`[C_w]_l`$ depend on the functions $`f(\xi )`$ and $`j_a(\xi )`$ only. The equalities (13) and (14) demonstrate the general form of the classical Regge trajectories in our theory. It is clear that the asymptotical dependence $`\sqrt{S^2}P^2`$ takes place for the large values $`P^2`$ and $`S^2=w^2/P^2`$. The exclusion of the parameter $`\kappa `$ from the equalities (13) and (14) gives the closed form (11). The evident expression of the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{})`$ as its domain must be described more detail in general. We will consider reduced case here and prefer the form (13) and (14). Let us note that the continuation of these equalities on the domain $`\kappa 0`$ is quite possible. Although such domain does not correspond any string, it may be interesting too.

## III. Reduction and quantization

###

The variables of the phase space $`^{ad}`$ are complicated functions from the string fields $`X`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi },`$ that is why the correct selection of quantum statistics for any ”internal“ variables $`f`$ and $`j_a`$ is not so obvious here. The following proposition clarifies this question

The equalities $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm ^A(\xi )\mathrm{const}`$ hold if and only if the equalities $`j_a(\xi )0`$ for $`a=0,\mathrm{},3`$ take place.

This statement means that, in spite of the complicated dependence of the variables $`f`$ and $`j_a`$ from the variables $`X_\mu `$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi },`$ the bosonic and fermionic degrees of the freedom are still non-mixed. It is natural to fulfill the quantization of the variable $`f`$ in terms of some bosonic field but the variables $`j_a`$ in terms of the fermionic fields with help of the bosonization procedure . Thus the natural Hilbert space of the quantum states in our theory will be the following:

$$𝐇=\underset{l,i,s}{}\left(𝐇_b𝐇_j𝐇_{\mu _i^2,s}\right),$$

where the spaces $`𝐇_{\mu ^2,s}`$ are the spaces of irreducible representations of Poincaré algebra $`𝒫,`$ corresponded to the eigenvalues $`\mu ^2`$ and $`s(s+1)`$ of the Cazimir operators $`\alpha ^{^{}}P^2`$ and $`S^2;`$ $`𝐇_b`$ – the Fock space of two-dimensional complex bosonic field in the ”box“ and $`𝐇_j`$ – the Fock space of some two-dimensional fermionic field in the ”box“. The corresponding physical states $`\psi _{phys}`$ must being selected with help of the ”Shrödinger equation“

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(P^2,w^2,\mathrm{})\psi _{phys}=0,$$
(15)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$ are the quantum expressions for constraint (11).

Thus the reduction $`j_a(\xi )0`$ corresponds to open $`4D`$ string with additional spinor field which has a constant non-zero components on the world-sheet. We consider in detail the quantum version of the dynamical system ”extended particle“ for such reduction in this work. Let us introduce the following objects.

* bosonic creation and annihilation operators $`𝐛_n^+`$, $`𝐛_n`$ $`(n=\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{})`$ acting in the corresponding Fock space $`𝐇_b`$ such that the canonical commutation relations $`[𝐛_n,𝐛_n^+]=\delta _{mn}`$ hold;
* some sequence of non-negative numbers

$$\{\mu _i^2(s)\}(s=0,1/2,1,3/2,\mathrm{},i=0,1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}).$$

All quantum states in our theory are the vectors of space

$$𝐇=\underset{i,s}{}\left(𝐇_b𝐇_{\mu _i^2(s),s}\right).$$

It should be stressed that we can drop out the summands which correspond to integer or half-integer values of the number $`s`$. Therefore we can construct the models both bosons and fermions which have the additional bosonic internal degrees of the freedom. It is interesting to note that we can include in the definition of the space $`𝐇`$ the summands $`𝐇_b𝐇_{i\mu }`$ which correspond to the irreducible representations of the Poincaré algebra with $`\mu ^2<0`$. This case corresponds to the theory with the tachyon states. In accordance with our definition $`\mu ^20`$ so there are no tachyons in the model.

We find the sequence $`\mu _i^2(s)`$ such that non-zero solutions $`|\psi _{phys}𝐇`$ of the ”Srödinger equaton“ (15) exist and have the finite norm.

Let us define the operator-valued function

$$𝐟(\xi )=\underset{n>0}{}\sqrt{n}\left(𝐛_n\mathrm{e}^{in\xi }+𝐛_n^+\mathrm{e}^{in\xi }\right).$$

It is clear that the equality

$$[𝐟(\xi ),𝐟^+(\eta )]=i\delta ^{^{}}(\xi \eta )$$

takes place.

To construct the quantum theory correctly, we must describe evidently the algebra of the classical dynamical variables (”observables“). By definition the observables will be the functions:

$$𝒟=𝒟[f(\xi );P_\mu ,M_{\mu \nu }]𝒟^m[A_1,A_2,\mathrm{},A_n],$$

where $`𝒟^m`$ some m-th power polynomial of the variables $`A_i`$. Last ones can be the following quantities:

1. the component of the energy-momentum $`P_\mu `$;
2. the component of the moment $`M_{\mu \nu }`$;
3. some integral

$$_0^{2\pi }\mathrm{}_0^{2\pi }\phi (\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _k)f(\xi _1)\mathrm{}f^{^{}}(\xi _i)\mathrm{}f^+(\xi _k)𝑑\xi ,$$

such that the kernel $`\phi C^{\mathrm{}}`$ non-degenerated.

The polynomial coefficients are arbitrary analytical functions from the values $`P^2`$ and $`w^2`$.

The quantization $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ for considered reduced dynamical system will be the correspondence

$$𝒟\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(𝒟)𝒟[\sqrt{\gamma ^{}}𝐟(\xi );𝐏_\mu ,𝐌_{\mu \nu }],$$

where the number $`\gamma ^{}=\alpha ^{^{}}\mathrm{}/\varrho _0^2`$ is the natural dimensionless parameter in our theory and bold-faced symbols $`𝐏_\mu `$ and $`𝐌_{\mu \nu }`$ mean the correspondent operators acting in the spaces $`𝐇_{\mu ^2,s}`$. Ordering rules are following:

1. in the integrals

$$\mathrm{{\rm Y}}\left(f(\xi )\mathrm{}f^{^{}}(\xi )\mathrm{}f^+(\xi )\right)=:𝐟(\xi )\mathrm{}𝐟^{^{}}(\xi )\mathrm{}𝐟^+(\xi ):;$$
2. in the polynomial $`𝒟^m`$

$$\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(A_1\mathrm{}A_k)=\frac{1}{k!}\underset{i_1,\mathrm{},i_k}{}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(A_{i_1})\mathrm{}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(A_{i_k}),$$

where the summands correspond to the rearrangements of the numbers $`1,\mathrm{},k.`$

Thus all observables in our model are well-defined operators in the space $`𝐇`$ (the operator $`𝐛_n`$ has to be defined as $`_{i,s}(𝐛_n1)`$ and so on). The constraint $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$ leads to the equation (15); solutions of this equation define the physical subspace $`𝐇_{phys}𝐇`$.

Note that the different classical forms same constraints can lead to the different operator equations. Indeed, as the general situation we have

$$\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(𝒟_1)\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(𝒟_2)\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(𝒟_1𝒟_2)$$

for arbitrary observables $`𝒟_1`$ and $`𝒟_2`$ so that the constraints $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^2=0`$, for example, lead to the different quantum theories. As the standard situation, we have some (singular) Lagrangian $`(q\mathrm{}\dot{q}\mathrm{})`$ and the natural form of the constraints which are consequence of the definitions $`p_i=/\dot{q}_i`$ for the canonical momenta. In our case we construct the hamiltonian system without lagrangian formalism (in accordance with general Dirac’s ideas); moreover the equality $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$ appears as some external condition. But the existence of the lagrangian scheme for any constraint hamiltonian dynamics is non-trivial problem. Moreover there is no such scheme for the arbitrary constraints . All these arguments mean that we must postulate strongly the form of the constraint (11) before quantization.

Let us introduce the parameter $`\lambda `$ instead the parameter $`\kappa `$ such that

$$\lambda =\frac{\alpha ^{^{}}P}{\kappa }\left(P=\sqrt{P^2}\right).$$

Because $`\kappa 0`$ in our theory such redefinition of the parameter will be correct. Note that the point $`\lambda =0`$ corresponds to the massless particles. As the consequence we have the following $`\lambda `$ \- parametric representation333Let us remind that all evident expressions here are deduced from the general theory constructed in the work . of the constraint $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$:

$`h_0\lambda ^2=0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_1(\lambda |_2,_3,P^2,S^2)S^2\lambda ^6+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\varrho _0^2\lambda ^2P^2`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha ^{^{}}P^3\varrho _0\lambda \left(_3+_3^+\right)+\alpha _{}^{^{}}{}_{}{}^{2}P^4\left(_2^2\lambda ^2+_3_3^+\right)=0,`$ (17)
where the following notations are stated:

$$_2=\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }f(\xi )^\xi \overline{f}(\zeta )𝑑\zeta 𝑑\xi ,_3=\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }|f(\xi )|^2^\xi f(\zeta )𝑑\zeta 𝑑\xi .$$

Symbol $`^\xi f`$ means such antiderivative of the function $`f`$ that has not zero mode in Fourier expansion. Let us note that the Poisson brackets of l.h.s. of the equalities (III. Reduction and quantization) and (17) are vanished strongly that is why such representation of our constraint $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$ will be correct. This form of the constraint $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$ – equalities (III. Reduction and quantization) and (17) – is postulated before the quantization.

Let us introduce the notations

$`𝐡=\gamma _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle f(\xi )^2𝑑\xi }\right)={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}n𝐛_n^+𝐛_n,`$
$`𝐰_2=\gamma _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\overline{f}(\xi ){\displaystyle ^\xi }f(\eta )𝑑\eta 𝑑\xi \right)={\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(n)𝐛_n^+𝐛_n,`$
$`𝐰_3=\gamma _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{3/2}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}f(\xi )^2{\displaystyle ^\xi }f(\eta )𝑑\eta 𝑑\xi \right)=`$
$`=\mathrm{i}{\displaystyle \underset{n,k>0}{}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{n}{k(n+k)}}}[(n+k)(𝐛_{nk}^+𝐛_n𝐛_k𝐛_n^+𝐛_k^+𝐛_{n+k})+`$
$`+n(𝐛_{n+k}^+𝐛_n𝐛_k𝐛_n^+𝐛_k^+𝐛_{nk})].`$
In accordance with the classical expressions (III. Reduction and quantization) and (17), the quantum equations for the physical states vectors $`\psi _{phys}𝐇`$ have the form:

$`\left(\gamma ^{}𝐡\lambda ^2\right)\psi _{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (18)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_1(\lambda |𝐰_2,𝐰_3,P^2,S^2)|\psi _{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (19)
Operator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ must be constructed in accordance with the ordering rules formulated above.

It can be verified directly that

$$[𝐡,𝐰_2]=[𝐡,𝐰_3]=0,$$

so that

$$[𝐡,\mathrm{\Phi }_1(\lambda |𝐰_2,𝐰_3,P^2,S^2)]=0.$$

The structure of the space $`𝐇`$ means that any special solution of the system (18) - (19) has a form

$$\psi _{phys}=\mu _\varphi ^2,s\varphi ,$$

where $`\mu _\varphi ^2,s𝐇_{\mu ^2,s}`$, $`\varphi 𝐇_b`$ and $`\mu _\varphi ^2=\mu ^2\left(\varphi \right)`$ in general. Such representation for the vector $`\psi _{phys}`$ leads to following spectral tasks in the space $`𝐇_b`$ $`(\lambda ^2=\gamma ^{}N)`$:

$`\left(𝐡N\right)\varphi =0,`$
$`[\mu ^4(N𝐰_2^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(𝐰_3^+𝐰_3+𝐰_3𝐰_3^+))+`$
$`+ϵ\mu ^3\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{N}{4\gamma _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}}}}(𝐰_3+𝐰_3^+)+{\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^2N}{4\gamma _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}}}s(s+1)N^3]|\varphi =0,`$ (21)
$$\mathrm{where}ϵ=\mathrm{sgn}\lambda =\frac{P^0}{|P^0|}.$$

In our case $`P^2>0`$ that is why the value $`ϵ`$ will be additional Cazimir function (for example we must choose $`ϵ=1`$ for string sector $`\kappa >0`$).

The eigenvalues $`N`$ of the spectral task (III. Reduction and quantization) will be integer: $`N=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.`$ Correspondent eigenspaces $`𝐇_N𝐇_f`$ are spanned on the vectors

$$|l_1,\mathrm{},l_m=c_{[l]}\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}𝐛_{l_i}^+0m=1,\mathrm{},N$$

such that $`_{i=1}^m|l_i|=N`$ (the factor $`c_{[l]}`$ – is the normalization factor).

The following decomposition takes place:

$$𝐇_b=\underset{N=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝐇_N,\mathrm{where}𝐇_0=\{c0\}.$$

As regards the equality (III. Reduction and quantization) it must be considered as the spectral task ($`\mu `$ will be spectral parameter) for each value $`s=0,1/2,1,3/2,\mathrm{}`$.

The evident expressions for the operators $`𝐰_2`$ and $`𝐰_3`$ prove that the following inclusions are true:

$$𝐰_2𝐇_N𝐇_N,𝐰_3𝐇_N𝐇_N.$$

This fact means, firstly, that the expression $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1(𝐰_2,𝐰_3,\mathrm{})`$ defines correctly some operator in the each space $`𝐇_N`$ and, secondly, the eigenvectors $`\varphi _\mu `$ of the task (III. Reduction and quantization) must be seached as

$$\varphi _\mu =\varphi _{N,\mu }𝐇_N.$$

It is clear that the number $`d_N=\mathrm{dim}𝐇_N`$ is the finite number so that the operator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1(𝐰_2,𝐰_3,\mathrm{})`$ defines some matrix $`d_N\times d_N`$ in the each space $`𝐇_N`$. Thus the spectral task (III. Reduction and quantization) is reduced to the series of the matrix tasks marked by number $`N=1,2,\mathrm{}.`$

Let $`\{N,l`$; $`l=0,1,\mathrm{},d_N\}`$ denote the set of the vectors $`|l_1,\mathrm{},l_m`$ introduced above and numbered in some way. Then the eigenvalues $`\mu =\mu _l(s;N,\gamma ^{},ϵ)`$ will be the roots of the algebraic equations ($`N=1,2,\mathrm{}`$):

$$det\left[\mu ^4𝐀+ϵ\mu ^3\sqrt{\frac{N}{4\gamma _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}}}𝐁+\left(\frac{\mu ^2N}{4\gamma _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}}s(s+1)N^3\right)1_{d_N}\right]=0,$$
(22)
where $`1_{d_N}`$ is the unit matrix $`d_N\times d_N`$ and the symbols $`𝐀`$ and $`𝐁`$ denote the matrices

$`𝐀`$ $`=`$ $`l^{},N\left(N𝐰_2^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(𝐰_3^+𝐰_3+𝐰_3𝐰_3^+\right)\right)N,l,`$
$`𝐁`$ $`=`$ $`l^{},N\left(𝐰_3+𝐰_3^+\right)N,l.`$
The following statement is true.

For each numbers $`N>0`$, $`s>0`$ equation (22) has the real positive roots, at least in some neighbourhood $`𝒪`$ of the point $`\varrho _0=0`$.

We drop out detail proof here and restrict himself by the concrete examples. Note that the degenerated case of our theory $`\varrho _0=0`$ leads to the quasi-linear (in the plane $`(\mu ^2,s)`$) Regge trajectories

$$s(s+1)=\alpha _k^2\mu ^4,\mu ^20,s=0,1/2,1,3/2,\mathrm{}.$$

Corresponding asymptotics have a different slopes $`\alpha _k`$ and same intersepts $`s=1/2`$. It is interesting that the analogous behaviour – the interseption of the infinitely many trajectories in this point – was founded many years ago in some realistical model of the potential scattering .

Let the symbol $`\mu (s;N,k)`$ denotes $`k`$-th real root of the equation (22) for some fixed numbers $`N`$ and $`s`$. It is clear that the total set of the roots will be enumerable thus we have the sequence $`\mu _i^2(s)`$ which is need for the construction of the total space of quantum states $`𝐇`$. The ”physical“ states $`|\psi _{phys}𝐇_{phys}`$ have a form

$$\psi _{phys}=\underset{n,s}{}c_{n,s}\mu _n^2(s),s\varphi _{(n)},$$

where $`\varphi _0=0,`$ $`\varphi _{(n)}`$ ($`n=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$) – the eigenvector of spectral task (22) which corresponds to the eigenvalue $`\mu _n(s)`$ and the arbitrary constants $`c_{n,s}`$ must be subjected to the condition $`_{n,s}c_{n,s}^2<\mathrm{}.`$

## IV. Examples.

###

1. $`N=0.`$ The equation (III. Reduction and quantization) has a unique solution $`|\varphi =|0.`$ In accordance with definition of the number $`N`$ we have $`\mu =0.`$ Spin $`s0`$ in general. We can include or not include in the definition of the Hilbert space $`𝐇`$ corresponding subspaces $`𝐇_{0,s}`$, $`s0.`$

2. $`N=1.`$ The space $`𝐇_1`$ will be two-dimensional; it is spanned on the vectors $`𝐛_1^+|0`$ and $`𝐛_1^+|0`$. As regards to the equation (III. Reduction and quantization), the operator $`𝐰_2^2`$ will be the unit operator (other operators will be zero). As the consequence we have the equation

$$\mu ^4+\frac{\mu ^2}{4\gamma _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}}=s(s+1).$$

Thus we have the non-linear Regge trajectory in the plane $`(\mu ^2,s)`$. Correspondent asymptotic line is following:

$$s=\mu ^2+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{4\gamma _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}}1\right).$$

The results of the numerical calculations for $`\alpha ^{^{}}=0.9Gev^2`$ and some values of the constant $`\gamma ^{}`$ are represented in the table 1. We can compare these masses with the masses of some neutral mesons with zero isospin.

3. $`N=2.`$ Corresponding subspace $`𝐇_2`$ will be the linear combination of the vectors

$$𝐛_2^+|0,𝐛_1^+𝐛_1^+|0,𝐛_1^+𝐛_1^+|0,𝐛_1^+𝐛_1^+|0,𝐛_2^+|0,$$

so that $`\mathrm{dim}𝐇_2=5.`$ The numerical results of the solution of the equation (22) are represented in the table 2 (the values of the fundamental constants are $`\alpha ^{^{}}=0.9Gev^2`$ and $`\gamma ^{}=15`$):

Thus we have three quasi-linear Regge trajectories in the Plane $`(M^2,s)`$:

$$s\alpha _iM^20.5,i=1,2,3,$$

where $`\alpha _1=1.1\alpha ^{^{}}`$, $`\alpha _2=0.72\alpha ^{^{}}`$ and $`\alpha _3=0.24\alpha ^{^{}}`$. Trajectories corresponded to the index $`i=1,2`$ are quite appropriate for the description of some standard meson states. As regards of the trajectory corresponded to the index $`i=3`$, it has the slope which differs essentialy from the standard one. In our opinion the corresponding states can be interpretted as some glueball states. Indeed, for example, the phenomenology of the scalar and tenzor glueballs was investigated in the work ; it was supposed that the slope for glueball Regge trajectory $`\alpha _{glue}0.2Gev^2.`$) 444The string models of the glueballs are investigated too. So, in the work  the glueballs was considered as some states of the (elliptic) Nambu-Goto string.

It is interesting to see the mass spectrum deformation if we decrease the dimensionless constant $`\gamma ^{}`$ (remember this procedure means increasing the constant $`\varrho _0`$ which is in-put constant for the action (2)). Corresponding results for $`\gamma ^{}=0.44`$ are represented in the table 3.

We can see two effects here: firstly, the trajectories become more non-linear for small values masses and spin and, secondly, some trajectories are splitting. Note that the existence of the mesons which have same quantum numbers and the near-by masses is considered as a problem in some works (see, for example, ).

The operator $`𝐡`$ is the energy for the quantized bosonic field $`b(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)`$. Therefore, the quantum number $`N`$ plays the role of internal energy level. Note that the non-linearity of the Regge trajectories is increased for large $`N`$, just as a calculation difficulties, unfortunately.

## V. Concluding remarks.

###

It is our belief that further studies of suggested theory may well help to guide the constructing of the realistic models of particles. Indeed, the case considered in this work connects the mass and the spin of extended particle with two annulators of the Poisson structure $`\{,\}^0`$ – the Cazimir operators $`P^2`$ and $`w^2`$. In general case of our theory, when the variables $`j_a(\xi )0`$, the Poisson structure $`\{,\}^0`$ has four annulators. Additional annulators here the value $`j_0^0=_0^{2\pi }j_0(\xi )𝑑\xi `$ and the annulator for the current algebra (9) (see ). Last one is the value $`n=(1/\pi )\mathrm{arccos}[\mathrm{Tr}/2]`$, were the matrix $``$ is the monodromy matrix of the auxiliary linear system

$$U^{^{}}(\xi )+\frac{i}{2}\left(\underset{a=1}{\overset{3}{}}j_a(\xi )\sigma _a\right)U(\xi )=0.$$

Note that the standard boundary conditions on the original string variables $`X_\mu `$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm `$ mean that the number $`n`$ will be integer in the classical theory. The quantization of the variables $`j_a`$ must be fulfilled in terms of the massless fermionic fields  by means of the bosonization prosedure . In our opinion we can interpret the value $`j_0^0`$ as some (”generalized“) charge and the value $`n/2`$ as the isotopical spin after quantization. The subsequent works will be devoted to the corresponded models. The author hope, in particular, that the consideration of more general case allows to fix the in-put constants $`\alpha ^{^{}}`$ and $`\varrho _0`$.

We construct the model of the free extended particle here. The interaction of such particles is separate problem. As regards to the possible approaches it must be remembered the old point of view  which means that the Regge trajectories determine the scattering amplitude. Note also the work , where so-called $`q`$-deformed dual string theory was studied; it was shown that the $`q`$-deformation of the amplitude leads to the non-linear (square-root) trajectories.

## VI. Acknowledgements.

###

I am thankful to B. M. Barbashov for useful discussions on a string theory and V. P. Pavlov for valuable advices regarding the hamiltonian description of the model.


text:
# Galactic nuclear activity induced by globular cluster merging

## 1. Introduction

It is well known that the haloes and bulges of galaxies constitute ‘collisionless’ systems, for its 2–body relaxation times are mich longer than their age. Globular clusters (GC), too, are halo objects but they are characterized by a mass $`10^510^6`$ heavier than the stars of the background where they orbit: this implies they do not constitute a collisionless system.

The collective effect of the fluctuating gravitational field produced by light stars along the cluster orbital motion reflects in the well known dynamical friction braking, that has been shown by various authors to be particularly important in triaxial galaxies, where the lack of symmetries in the potential excludes the conservation of any component of the angular momentum. This frictional braking acts on a time scale inversely proportional to the cluster mass and in triaxial galaxies it can be an order of magnitude shorter than in symmetric galaxies. Moreover, for sufficiently massive clusters, the orbital energy is lost in less than 1 Gyr. In addition to the dynamical friction collective effect, on globular clusters acts also a local process: the tidal interaction with the (compact) galactic nucleus. The 2 evolutionary processes compete, in some sense, because dynamical friction tends to concentrate the GCS distribution around the galactic center, while a massive galactic nucleus (a super massive black hole?) may destroy a globular cluster which approaches too much to it, and this corresponds to an erosion of the GC inner galactic population.

The balance of the 2 mechanisms may lead to the explanation of the difference observed between the GCS and the halo-bulge stellar component radial distributions in some galaxies: the globular cluster systems (GCSs) are sistematically less concentrated to the parent galaxy center than bulges. Another important consequence of the evolution of the GCS in a galaxy is the quantity of mass that, in form of stars tidally stripped by the nucleus, can feed the massive central black hole, releasing gravitational energy that can be radiated in form of electromagnetic waves, sustaining a violent nuclear activity. In this brief report we will describe and discuss some relevant aspects of this fascinating scenario, including that concerned with the stellar population of the inner kiloparsec of a galaxy.

## 2. The globular cluster distribution in a galaxy

The comparative discussion of the radial distributions of the stellar component and of globular clusters in elliptical galaxies has started not much time ago, due to the difficulty of determining in a reliable way the globular cluster distribution of the central galactic regions, even in nearby galaxies. Grillmair et al. (1986) were the first to show how the stellar bulge in M 49 is more concentrated to the center of the galaxy than the GCS one. Much other evidence of such phenomenon was later given (see, for instance, Lauer & Kormendy 1986; Harris 1986; Harris et al. 1991), and now we can say that no case has been found yet where the GCS distribution in a galaxy is more peaked to its center than the surrounding halo-bulge stellar population.

The observational evidence does not have a certain interpretation.

Some claim that the reason of the different profiles is due to a difference in the formation epoch of the 2 halo components: globular clusters formed earlier, when the protogalaxy was more expanded, than the collisionless stellar component.

Some others, starting from the reasonable hypothesis that the various components of the halo population formed almost simultaneously, think that the present difference is due to an evolutionary process. No clear evolutive processes can affect the stellar component as a whole, while the globular cluster distribution in a galaxy can suffer for both the collective effect of dynamical friction induced by stars and for the tidal, quasi impulsive, interaction with a compact nucleus sited in the galactic center. Shortly, dynamical friction is more effective on heavier clusters that are, usually, more tightly bound and so resist better to tidal shocks. As a consequence, the radial distribution of globular clusters in a galaxy should be mass (and density) dependent, provided the time scales of the mentioned effects are short enough in comparison with the age of the system.
We do not go here into details but just mention the work by Pesce, Capuzzo-Dolcetta & Vietri (1992) and Capuzzo-Dolcetta (1993) who quantitatively showed how relevant are the frictional and tidal effects on the evolution of a GCS, particularly in a triaxial galaxy. Probably, the most relevant outcome of these works is that the time scales of the 2 evolutionary processes can be (in dependence on mass and density of clusters, indeed) short enough to be surely relevant for the evolution of GCSs from their initial state.

A straightforward application of the results of Pesce et al. (1992) and Capuzzo-Dolcetta (1993) lead Capuzzo-Dolcetta & Tesseri (1997) to a succesful comparison of the evolved theoretical GCS spatial distributions (at varying some relevant parameters of the model) with the general characteristics of the observed distributions like, for example, the observed larger core radii of the GCS radial distributions with respect to the bulge one. So, the evolution of the GCS in an elliptical galaxy seems a confirmed hypothesis, and, other explaining the mentioned difference in radial profiles, it may have played an important role in the primeval lives of galaxies, supplying a significant amount of matter to the central galactic regions, often sites of violent activity (AGNs).

### 2.1. The comparison between the GCS and stellar bulge radial distributions

In addition to our galaxy, M 31 and M 87 (discussed in Capuzzo-Dolcetta & Vignola 1997) the comparison between the stellar bulge and globular cluster radial distributions has been extended in details to a set of 14 elliptical galaxies observed with the WFPC of the HST by Forbes et al. (1996), Forbes et al. (1998a,b).

The results, presented in Capuzzo-Dolcetta & Tesseri (1999) and Capuzzo-Dolcetta & Donnarumma (2000), show in all the cases a significantly flatter distribution of the GCS.
Assuming that initially the stellar bulge and the GCS had the same profile it is easy to evaluate the number of globular clusters ‘lost ’ in a galaxy as the difference of the surface integrals of the 2 profiles. A proper estimate of the mean value of the globular cluster initial mass brings to a value of the quantity of mass lost to the central galactic region. This was done in the mentioned papers; as a summary of the results, in Table 1 we give the values relative to the set of 17 galaxies studied so far. It is really remarkable the high percentage, 41%, of the initial GCS mass that, according to our estimates, is fallen, in the average, in the inner galactic zones. The quantity of mass lost to the central regions, averaged over the set of 17 galaxies, is $`2.19\times 10^8`$ M, that should have been relevant as a source of fuel for a possible central compact object.

## 3. Nucleus feeding by centrally merged globular clusters

As shown in Capuzzo-Dolcetta (1993) the possible causes of the significant difference observed between the stellar bulge and the GCS distribution in a galaxy are dynamical friction and tidal disruption, this latter induced by a compact galactic nucleus, if present. In that paper a preliminary quantitative discussion of the modes of formation of a supercluster composed by orbitally decayed clusters merged at the galactic center, as well as of debris of tidally shattered ones has been discussed and demonstrated to occur in times acceptably short to give birth to a supermassive object which could release stars to the central black hole in a way to make it a powerful engine of electro–magnetic energy extracted by the gravitational field. A subsequent, still in preparation, paper by Capuzzo-Dolcetta (2001) presents a detailed quantitative model of the evolution of a GCS in a triaxial galaxy leading to a detailed estimate of the time growth of the central compact seed as well as of the luminosity evolution of the resulting AGN. Of course, the model depends on some parameters like, mainly, the initial velocity dispersion of globular clusters, their IMF, their orbital distribution, etc.; these parameters can just partially be fixed a priori. By the way, it is relevant noting that a limitation of the possible values of these parameters is induced by the request that the models give, at the present time, acceptable numbers of observable clusters with the proper observed radial distribution and velocity dispersions, in order to be fully self-consistent.
We do not go here into details of the models, but rather want just to give a qualitative insight to the phenomenology, starting from first principles, that is useful to convince that the overall scenario is realistic at all.
Suppose that around a central galactic black hole (b.h.) of mass $`m_{bh}`$ there is an almost steady distribution of stars with typical mass and radius $`m_{}`$ and $`R_{}`$, and having space density $`\rho _{}`$ and average velocity $`<v_{}>`$, then the rate of mass accretion onto the b.h. is simply $`\dot{m}=\rho _{}\sigma <v_{}>`$. In the mass accretion rate $`\sigma `$ is the ‘capture ’ cross–section given by

$$\sigma =\pi r_d^2\left(1+\frac{\frac{Gm_{bh}}{r_d}}{\frac{1}{2}<v_{}^2>}\right)=\pi r_d^2\left(1+2\frac{r_{inf}}{r_d}\right),$$

where $`r_{inf}`$ is the ‘influence ’ radius of the b.h. and $`r_d`$ is the ‘destruction ’ radius (below this distance from the b.h. the star is tidally destroyed or swallowed) given by

$$r_d=max(r_t,r_S),$$

where $`r_t`$ is the ‘tidal ’ radius and $`r_S`$ the Schwarzschild’s radius of the b.h., respectively. Because the ratio

$$\frac{r_S}{r_t}=\frac{2^{\frac{2}{3}}G}{c^2}\frac{m_{}^{\frac{1}{3}}}{R_{}}m_{bh}^{\frac{2}{3}}$$

is $`1`$ just for massive b.h. ($`m_{bh}m_{bh,crit}1.62\times 10^8`$ M assuming solar values for the cluster star mass and radius) it is clear that the process of b.h. feeding is by mean of tidally disrupted stars until the b.h. mass has grown enough to swallow the surrounding stars whole when entering the event horizon through the Schwarzschild’s radius. In the 2 cases we have (assuming $`<v_{}^2>=<v_{}>^2`$)

$$\dot{m}(M_{}yr^1)=\{\begin{array}{cc}8.2\times 10^{16}m_{bh}^{4/3}m_{}^{1/3}\rho _{}R_{}<v_{}>^1\text{,}\hfill & r_d=r_t\text{,}\hfill \\ 2.8\times 10^{21}m_{bh}^2\rho _{}<v_{}>^1\hfill & r_d=r_S\text{,}\hfill \end{array}$$

respectively ($`m_{}`$, $`m_{bh}`$, $`\rho _{}`$ and $`R_{}`$ are in solar units and $`<v_{}>`$ in km s-1). Let us note that, of course, the efficiency of conversion into radiation is higher in the case when stars are tidally destroyed before falling onto the compact object than when swallowed whole.
On the basis of previous equations, it is possible to draw the plot given in Fig. 1a, where, in function of $`m_{bh}`$, the minimum values of $`\rho _{}<v_{}>^1`$ required to yield an accretion rate of at least 1 M yr-1 are given (1 M yr-1 is the typical value of mass accretion required to sustain an AGN) yielding a separation into a ‘high’ accretion and a ‘low’ accretion density zone.

As an example, the known values of the central b.h. masses in our galaxy, M31 and M 87 ($`2.6\times 10^6`$, $`6.2\times 10^7`$, $`3.6\times 10^9M_{}`$, respectively) imply a stellar density at least $`4\times 10^7`$ M, $`6.3\times 10^5`$ M, $`400`$ M, respectively, to accrete $`1`$ M yr-1 in the hypothesis of $`<v_{}>=10`$ km s-1 (which is, anyway, just a typical value of the mean stellar velocity in a globular cluster). It is remarkable that these density values are not too high to be reached by a stellar system composed by merged globulars, at least in its central region (many galactic globulars have central densities greater than $`10^4`$ M pc-3, and few of them greater than $`10^5`$ M pc-3). It may be interesting noting that in particular situations of very high dense clusters surrounding the compact nucleus, the accretion can occur on the larger space scale given by the $`collisional`$ radius

$$r_{coll}=\frac{Gm_{bh}}{v_e^2}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{m_{bh}}{m_{}}R_{},$$

($`v_e`$ is the escape velocity from star surface) which determines the radius of the sphere centred on the b.h. where star-star physical collisions are disruptive (see e.g. Binney and Tremaine 1998). Actually, it turns out that in normal conditions $`r_{coll}`$ is the largest of the 3 radii ($`r_t`$, $`r_S`$, $`r_{coll}`$), being

$$\frac{r_S}{r_{coll}}=2\frac{r_S}{R_{}}<<1,$$

being $`r_S`$ is the star Schwarzschild radius, and

$$\frac{r_t}{r_{coll}}=2^{4/3}\left(\frac{m_{}}{m_{bh}}\right)^{2/3}1$$

whenever $`m_{bh}/m_{}4`$.
A larger $`r_d`$ corresponds, of course, to a larger $`\sigma `$ and so it $`would`$ allow a huge mass accretion onto the b.h., as given by

$$\dot{m}_{coll}(M_{}yr^1)=3.27\times 10^{16}m_{bh}^2m_{}^1\rho _{}R_{}<v_{}>^1.$$

For the sake of comparison, the line corresponding to this $`physically`$ $`collisional`$ regime is also shown in Fig. 1a.

To conclude, it is a relevant point in favour of the GCS evolutionary picture the existence of a positive correlation (as shown in Figure 1b) among the values of the (possible) mass lost in form of orbitally decayed clusters ($`M_l`$ in Table 1) and those of the central b.h. in the 7 galaxies for which these data are available (the least square straight line fitting the whole data set has a correlation factor $`r^2=0.61`$ and standard error $`=0.56`$). Actually, as remarked in Capuzzo–Dolcetta & Tesseri (1999) a positive correlation is expected because larger black holes are grown during the evolution and they should induce a greater evolution of the GCS.

## 4. Conclusions

I have presented a summary of some results concerning the globular cluster distribution in galaxies as compared with that of the underlying stellar component.

It is known that globular clusters have a less peaked distribution; if this centrally flatter behaviour is interpreted in evolutive terms, it may imply a number of ‘missing ’ clusters that can be estimated in the assumption of an initial cluster distribution equal to that of stars of the halo-bulge. The found number of globular clusters likely lost to the inner galactic region is evaluated to be significant in the galaxies studied so far. This may have had important consequences on the initial life of the galaxy, for it corresponds to a large quantity of mass in form of stars that have been buzzing around the center of the galaxy feeding a compact nucleus therein and allowing it to emit energy at the levels of AGNs. Another consequence of the globular cluster system evolution in a galaxy is the contribution to the inner field, in a way that has not been yet deeply analysed.
Rather than going into details of the model describing the evolution of the coupled globular clusters-central black hole system in an elliptical galaxy (that can be found in other longer papers referred in this report), in this short paper I preferred to give simple evaluations of the densities required by the cluster around the galactic central black hole in order to be able to release it a sufficient quantity of mass to feed it as engine of an AGN.

## References

Binney, J., Tremaine, S. 1998, Galactic Dynamics, (Princeton:Princeton Univ. Press)

Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R. 1993, ApJ, 415, 616

Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R. 2001, in preparation

Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R., Vignola, L. 1997, A&A, 327, 130

Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R., Tesseri, A. 1997, MNRAS, 292, 808

Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R., Tesseri, A. 1999, MNRAS, 308, 961

Forbes D.A., Franx, M., Illingworth, G.D., Carollo, C.M. 1996, ApJ, 467, 126

Forbes D.A., Elson, R.A., Grillmair C.J., Willinger G.M., Brodie J. 1998a, MNRAS,, 293, 325

Forbes D.A., Elson, R.A., Grillmair C.J.,Rabban M., Willinger G.M., Brodie J. 1998b, MNRAS,, 295, 240

Grillmair, C., Pritchet, C., van den Bergh, S. 1986, AJ, 91, 1328

Harris, W.E. 1986, AJ, 91, 822

Harris, W.E., Allwright, J.W.B., Pritchet, C.J., van den Bergh, S. 1991, ApjS, 76, 115

Lauer, T.R. & Kormendy, J. 1986, ApJ, 303, L1

Pesce, E., Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R., Vietri, E. 1992, MNRAS, 254, 466


text:
# Introduction

## Introduction

It is becoming still more obvious that the solution of several problems of cosmology and astrophysics depends on the ability to localize gravitational energy. In this area three main streams of opinions can be identified: 1) gravitational energy is localizable but a corresponding ”magic” formula for its density is to be found; 2) gravitational energy is nonlocalizable in principle; 3) gravitational energy does not exist at all since the gravitational field is a pure geometric phenomenon.

One of the approaches to the localization of gravitational energy is based on a presumption that space-time may have more than four dimensions. Kaluza-Klein theories  seem to be the first to have proposed a solution within this approach. The corresponding D-dimensional metric has the form

$$ds^2=g_{\mu \nu }\left(x^\mu \right)dx^\mu dx^\nu \gamma _{ab}\left(x^a\right)dx^adx^b$$
(1)
where $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ is the metric of four-dimensional world while $`\gamma _{ab}`$ is the metric associated with $`\text{D}4`$ compact extra dimensions.

During 80’s the theory of superstrings was developed, a number of dimensions in it reaching 10. An interesting solution comes from six-dimensional space model, where the gravity is localized on a four-dimensional singular string-like defect . A six-dimensional metric satisfying 4D Poincaré invariance is as follows

$$ds^2=\sigma \left(\rho \right)g_{\mu r}dx^\mu dx^\nu d\rho ^2\gamma \left(\rho \right)d\theta ^2$$
(2)
For two extraspatial dimensions the polar coordinates $`\rho ,\theta `$ were introduced. A different approach dealing with gravitational energy-momentum density in teleparallel gravity has led to a true space-time and gauge tensor transforming covariantly under global Lorentz transformation .

Attempts to localize the gravitational energy in a classic four-dimensional space-time face the problem of scalar curvature that, using Schwarzschild metric, is of zero value outside a body. The way out may lie in application of a different metric consistent with a new model of the Universe, the model of Expansive Nondecelerative Universe (ENU) .

The present paper is devoted to the solution of Einstein pseudotensor and, in turn, to localization and quantification of the density of gravitational field energy in four-dimensional space-time.

## Background of the ENU model

The model of Expansive Nondecelerative Universe  differs from more frequently used inflation models in the following features:

a) Schwarzschild metric is replaced by Vaidya metric,

b) the Universe permanently expands by the velocity of light $`c`$,

c) simultaneous creation of matter and the equivalent amount of gravitational energy (which is, however, negative and thus the total value of mass-energy is constant and equal zero) occurs. Statements b) and c) can be expressed as follows

$$a=c.t_c=\frac{2G.m_U}{c^2}$$
(3)
$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=0$$
(4)
$$k=0$$
(5)
where $`a`$ is the gauge factor, $`m_U`$ is the Universe mass, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the cosmological member, $`k`$ is the curvature index, and $`t_c`$ is the cosmological time. Introducing dimensionless conform time, equation (3) can be expressed as

$$c.dt=a.d\eta $$
(6)
from which

$$a=\frac{da}{d\eta }$$
(7)
Friedmann equations can be then written in the form

$$\frac{d}{d\eta }(\frac{1}{a}.\frac{da}{d\eta })=\frac{4\pi .G}{3c^4}a^2(\epsilon +3p)$$
(8)
$$(\frac{1}{a}.\frac{da}{d\eta })^2=\frac{8\pi .G}{3c^4}a^2\epsilon k$$
(9)
where $`\epsilon `$ is the energy density and $`p`$ is the pressure. Based on (8) and (9) it follows

$$\epsilon =\frac{3c^4}{8\pi .G.a^2}$$
(10)
$$p=\frac{\epsilon }{3}$$
(11)
Equations (10) and (11) represent the matter creation and the negative value of gravitational energy, respectively. It can be evidenced that in the ENU it holds

$$\frac{dm}{dt}=\frac{dm_U}{dt}=\frac{m_U}{t_c}=\frac{c^3}{2G}$$
(12)
and

$$m_U=\frac{a.c^2}{2G}$$
(13)
One of the corner-stones of the ENU lies in a nonstatic nature of space-time, understood here as a time change in the Universe mass, $`dm_U/dt`$ (12). Solutions of some astrophysical problems have taken this nature into account (e.g. its importance for treatment of the problem of naked singularities  or radiating stars  was clearly manifested. A contribution of the ENU is in the fact that instead of a general expression of $`dm_U/dt`$ it offers its value as

$$\frac{dm}{dt}=\frac{m}{t_c}$$
(14)
Based on (14) it is obvious that metric with varying Newton potential, in which the scalar curvature is of nonzero value also outside of body, should be applied. The first to solve this problem was Vaidya dealing with radiant stars.

The density of gravitational energy $`\epsilon _g`$ is in the first approximation expressed by Tolman equation

$$\epsilon _g=\frac{R.c^4}{8\pi .G}$$
(15)
where $`R`$ is the scalar curvature. Using Vaidya metric and applying relation (14) we obtain

$$R=\frac{6G}{c^3.r^2}.\frac{dm}{dt}=\frac{3r_g}{a.r^2}$$
(16)
where $`r_g`$is the gravitational radius of a body with the mass $`m.`$ Relations (15) and (16) lead to the following expression for the density of gravitational field energy

$$\epsilon _g=\frac{3m.c^2}{4\pi .a.r^2}$$
(17)
The total amount of gravitational energy emitted by a body in time unit (gravitational output $`P_g`$) is given by

$$P_g=\frac{d}{dt}\frac{c^4.R}{8\pi .G}𝑑V=\frac{m.c^2}{t_c}$$
(18)
In the ENU, the wavefunction of the Universe is formulated  as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_g=e^{i(t_{Pc}.t_c)^{1/2}.t}$$
(19)
where $`t_{Pc}`$ is the Planck time. For the energy of gravitational quantumit follows  from (19)

$$\left|E_g\right|=k.T=\left(\frac{\mathrm{}^3.c^5}{t_c^2.G}\right)^{1/4}$$
(20)
where $`T`$ is the Universe temperature. Relation (20) documents that the density of gravitational energy and that of radiation energy were identical during the entire radiation era, i.e. the Universe had to be in thermodynamic equilibrium up to the end of the radiation era.

## Energy-Momentum in ENU

In the Vaidya metric  the line element is formulated in the form

$$ds^2=\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }^2}{f_{\left(m\right)}^2}(1\frac{2\mathrm{\Psi }}{r}).c^2.dt^2(1\frac{2\mathrm{\Psi }}{r})^1dr^2r^2(d\theta ^2+sin^2\theta .d\phi ^2)$$
(21)
where

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\frac{G.m}{c^2}$$
(22)
It follows from (14) and (22) in the ENU

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=\frac{d\mathrm{\Psi }}{c.dt}=\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{a}$$
(23)
$`f_{\left(m\right)}`$ is an arbitrary function. In order it has a nonzero value, it must hold in the ENU

$$f_{\left(m\right)}=\mathrm{\Psi }\left[\frac{d}{dr}\left(1\frac{2\mathrm{\Psi }}{r}\right)\right]=\frac{2\mathrm{\Psi }^2}{r^2}$$
(24)
Gravitational influence can be realized in the ENU only when the absolute value of gravitational energy density will exceed the critical energy density. Thus, if (10) and (17) are equal, then

$$R_{ef}=(R_g.a)^{1/2}=(2\mathrm{\Psi }.a)^{1/2}$$
(25)
where $`R_{ef}`$ is the effective gravitational range of a body with the gravitational radius $`R_g.`$ Vaidya metric is applicable in the ENU if

$$r<R_{ef}$$
(26)
It follows from (21) that scope of Vaidya metric applicability is determined by relation

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=f_{\left(m\right)}$$
(27)
Based on (23), (24) and (27) it holds

$$A=\frac{c^4}{4\pi .G}$$
(28)
Equation (28) represents the condition of changing Vaidya metric to Schwarzschild metric in which the scalar curvature becomes of zero value which prevents to localize gravitational energy. This conclusion conforms with the ENU model.

The energy-momentum complex of Einstein pseudotensor adopts the form

$$\theta _i^k=\frac{1}{16\pi }\left[\frac{g_{in}}{\sqrt{g}}\{g(g^{kn}.g^{lm}g^{ln}.g^{km})\},_m\right]_{,_l}$$
(29)
Vaidya metric (21) in Cartesian Kerr-Schild coordinates was solved by Virbhadra  who found the following components of Einstein pseudotensor (in the Virbhadra’s notation, geometrized units in which the speed of light and Newtonial gravitational constant are taken $`c=G=1`$). For the sake of simplicity, we use a simplified notation where:

$$A=\frac{c^4}{4\pi .G}$$
(30)
$$\alpha =\frac{1}{r^3}$$
(31)
$$\beta =\frac{\alpha }{r}$$
(32)
Then the pseudotensor components are as follows:

$$\begin{array}{c}\theta _0^0=\frac{A.\mathrm{\Psi }^{}}{r^2}\hfill \end{array}$$
(33)
$$\theta _1^0=\theta _0^1=Ax\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(34)
$$\theta _2^0=\theta _0^2=Ay\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(35)
$$\theta _3^0=\theta _0^3=Az\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(36)
$$\theta _1^1=A\beta x^2\mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(37)
$$\theta _2^2=A\beta y^2\mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(38)
$$\theta _3^3=A\beta z^2\mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(39)
$$\theta _1^2=\theta _2^1=A\beta xy\mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(40)
$$\theta _2^3=\theta _3^2=A\beta yz\mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(41)
$$\theta _3^1=\theta _1^3=A\beta xz\mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(42)
Our calculations stemming from the ENU provide the same components as the above found by Virbhadra. In case of weak gravitational fields, Tolman equation allows to localize the density of gravitational field energy precisely (17). It is obvious that Einstein pseudotensor is compatible with Tolman equation and the ENU model.

Virbhadra has manifested  general applicability of Vaidya metric. The present work is aimed to provide evidence on the applicability of Vaidya metric in solving the problems of cosmology. It seems to be obvious that further progress in the field of gravitational energy localization depends of the ability to formulate a true tensor including the changes in the Universe mass.

## Acknowledgement

The authors are indebted to Professor K.S. Virbhadra for reprints of his papers and valuable suggestions.

## References

1. T. Appelquist, A. Chodos, P.G. Freund (Eds.), Modern Kaluza-Klein Theories, Addison-Wesley, Reading MA, 1987

2. T. Gherghetta, M. Shaposhnikov, Phys. Rev. Lett., 85 (2000) 240

3. V.C. de Andrade, L.C.T. Guillen, J.G. Pereira, Phys. Chem. Lett., 84 (2000) 4533

4. V. Skalský, M. Súkeník, Astrophys. Space Sci., 178 (1991) 169

5. A.N. Monin, Cosmology, Hydrodynamics and Turbulence: A. A. Friedmann and Extension of his Scientific Heritage, Moscow (1989), p. 103 (in Russian)

6. 6. V. Skalský, M. Súkeník, Astrophys. Space Sci., 181 (1991) 153

7. K.S. Virbhadra, Phys. Rev., D60 (1999) 104041

8. K.S. Virbhadra, Pramana - J. Phys., 38 (1992) 31

9. P.C. Vaidya, Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., A33 (1951) 264

10. R.C. Tolman, Relativity, Thermodynamics and Cosmology, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1934

11. J. Šima, M. Súkeník, General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology, Preprint gr-qc/9903090; gr-qc/0011060

12. M. Súkeník, J. Šima, J. Vanko, Acta Phys. Slov. (in press)

13. I.L. Rozental, Adv. Math. Phys. Astronomy, 31 (1986) 241 (in Czech)