text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The whole scientific production related to the Casimir effect has already a quite impressive volume (for reviews see e.g. refs.). This effect describes the energy variation undergone by a quantum system in which the field modes are constrained by specific conditions on a given boundary. The most often studied types of boundary and conditions are those associated to well known problems, e.g., plates, spheres, and vanishing conditions, perfectly conducting conditions, etc.

Our aim in the present paper is to analyze a combination of boundary geometry and conditions which hasn’t attracted the researcher’s attention up to now. We are referring to general homogeneous —or ’Robin’— boundary conditions on infinitely long cylindrical surfaces. Such conditions are an extension of the ones imposed on perfectly conducting boundaries and may, in some geometries, be useful for depicting the presence of interfaces between dielectric media. Robin type of boundary conditions also appear in considerations of the vacuum effects for a confined charged scalar field in external fields  and in quantum gravity . Unlike ’purely-Neumann’ boundary conditions, they can be made conformally invariant. The Casimir energy for cylindrical geometry can be important to the flux tube model of confinement  and for determining the structure of the vacuum state in interacting field theories . The cylindrical problem with perfectly conducting conditions was first considered in ref. (see also refs., ). While the earliest studies have focused on global quantities, such as the total energy and stress on a shell, the local characteristics of the corresponding electromagnetic vacuum are considered in  for the interior and exterior regions of a conducting cylindrical shell, and in  for the region between two coaxial shells (see also ).

In this paper we will study the vacuum expectation values of the energy-momentum tensor for the massive scalar field with general curvature coupling satisfying Robin boundary condition on the surface of a cylindrical shell in arbitrary spatial dimensions. As for other geometries, an important question (see, for instance, ) is the relation between the mode sum energy, as a renormalised sum of the zero-point energies for each normal mode, and the volume integral of the renormalised energy density. We will show that for the geometry under consideration these two quantities are different and will interpret this difference as a result of the additional surface energy contribution (similar considerations for the plane and spherical geometries were made in ).

The paper is organized as follows. Sec. 2 is devoted to the energy density inside a cylindrical shell, from the expectation values of the energy-momentum tensor. Calculations of this nature involve infinite sums. The summation method applied in this case is based on a variant of the generalized Abel-Plana formula  together with an adequate cutoff function. In sec. 3, the integrated energy inside the cylinder is calculated. One finds that, in general, the total vacuum energy differs from the integral of the volumic density. This is explained by the presence of a surface contribution located at the boundary. The part corresponding to the modes propagating in the exterior is considered in sec. 4. Then, it is possible to sum both pieces and obtain a formal expression for the total integrated Casimir energy. In sec. 5 we study the possibilities of performing actual evaluations of this magnitude. Zeta function is proposed as a summation method, and its working is illustrated in the example of $`D=3+1`$ and zero mass. The ensuing ending remarks are included into sec. 6

## 2 Casimir energy density and stress inside a cylindrical shell

We will consider a scalar field $`\phi `$, with curvature coupling $`\xi `$, satisfying a generic Robin boundary condition

$$(A+Bn^i_i)\phi (x)=0$$
(2.1)
on the cylindrical shell with radius $`a`$. Here $`n^i`$ is the normal to the boundary surface, $`_i`$ \- is the covariant derivative operator, $`A`$ and $`B`$ are constants. The results in the following will depend on the ratio of these coefficients only. However, to keep the transition to the Dirichlet and Neumann cases transparent we will use the form (2.1). The corresponding field equation is in form

$$\left(^i_i+\xi R+m^2\right)\phi (x)=0,$$
(2.2)
where $`R`$ \- is the scalar curvature for the background spacetime, $`m`$ \- is the mass for the field quanta. By using this equation, in the case of the flat background the corresponding metric energy-momentum tensor (EMT) may be presented in the form

$$T_{ik}=_i\phi _k\phi +\left[(\xi \frac{1}{4})g_{ik}^l_l\xi _i_k\right]\phi ^2.$$
(2.3)
The vacuum expectation values (v.e.v.’s) for these quantities can be derived by evaluating the mode sum

$$0|T_{ik}(x)|0=\underset{\alpha }{}T_{ik}\{\phi _\alpha (x),\phi _\alpha ^{}(x)\}.$$
(2.4)
Here $`\{\phi _\alpha (x)\}`$ is a complete orthonormal set of positive frequency solutions to the field equation with quantum numbers $`\alpha `$, satisfying the boundary condition (2.1).

In this section we will consider the scalar vacuum inside a cylindrical shell in $`D`$-dimensional spacetime. In accordance with the problem symmetry we will take cylindrical coordinates $`(r,\varphi ,z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)`$, $`N=D3`$. The corresponding eigenfunctions to (2.2) have the form

$`\phi _\alpha (x)`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _\alpha J_n(\gamma r)\mathrm{exp}\left(in\varphi +i\mathrm{𝐤𝐫}_{}i\omega t\right),\omega =\sqrt{\gamma ^2+k^2+m^2},`$ (2.5)
$`\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`(n,\gamma ,𝐤),n=\mathrm{},2,1,0,1,2,\mathrm{},`$ (2.6)
where $`𝐫_{}=(z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)`$ and the coefficients $`\beta _\alpha `$ are determined from the orthonormality condition. The eigenvalues for the quantum number $`\gamma `$ are quantized by the boundary condition (2.1) on the cylinder surface $`r=a`$. From this condition it follows that the possible values of $`\gamma `$ are solutions to the equation

$$\overline{J}_n(\gamma a)=AJ_n(\gamma a)+B\gamma J_n^{}(\gamma a)=0.$$
(2.7)
Here and below we use the notation

$$\overline{f}(z)Af(z)+(B/a)zf^{}(z)$$
(2.8)
for a given function $`f(z)`$. It is well known that for real $`A`$ and $`B`$ the all zeros for $`\overline{J}_n(z)`$ are simple and real. Let $`z=\lambda _{n,l}`$, $`l=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ be the corresponding positive zeros, arranged in ascending order: $`\lambda _{n,l}<\lambda _{n,l+1}`$. Now the possible values for $`\gamma `$ can be expressed as $`\gamma =\lambda _{n,l}/a`$.

From the orthonormality condition

$$𝑑V\phi _\alpha (x)\phi _\alpha ^{}^{}(x)=\frac{1}{2\omega }\delta _{nn^{}}\delta _{ll^{}}\delta (𝐤𝐤^{}),$$
(2.9)
where the integration goes over the region inside a cylinder, one finds for the coefficients $`\beta _\alpha `$

$$\beta _\alpha ^2=\frac{\gamma T_n(\gamma a)}{\omega a(2\pi )^{N+1}},$$
(2.10)
and, following , we have introduced the notation

$$T_n(z)=\frac{z}{(z^2n^2)J_n^2(z)+z^2J_n^2(z)}.$$
(2.11)
Using eigenfunctions (2.5) for the v.e.v. of the two-field product (positive frequency Wightmann function) we have

$`0|\phi (x)\phi (x^{})|0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}\phi _\alpha (x)\phi _\alpha ^{}(x^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^{N+1}a^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{n,l}T_n(\lambda _{n,l})}{\sqrt{\lambda _{n,l}^2/a^2+k^2+m^2}}}\times `$
$`\times `$ $`J_n(\lambda _{n,l}r/a)J_n(\lambda _{n,l}r^{}/a)\mathrm{exp}\left[in(\varphi \varphi ^{})+i𝐤(𝐫_{}𝐫_{}^{})i\omega (tt^{})\right],`$
where

$$\underset{\alpha }{}=d^N𝐤\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}.$$
(2.13)
Substituting this expression into (2.4) for the v.e.v. of the EMT one finds

$$0|T_i^k|0=\mathrm{diag}(\epsilon ,p_1,p_2,p_3,\mathrm{},p_{D1}).$$
(2.14)
Here $`\epsilon `$ is the vacuum energy density, $`p_1`$, $`p_2`$, $`p_3=p_4=\mathrm{}=p_{D1}`$ are effective pressures in the radial, azimuthal and longitudinal directions, respectively (vacuum stresses). These quantities are determined by the relations

$$q(r)=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^{N+1}a^3}\underset{\alpha }{}\frac{\lambda _{n,l}^3T_n(\lambda _{n,l})}{\sqrt{\lambda _{n,l}^2+k^2a^2+m^2a^2}}f_n^{(q)}[J_n(\lambda _{n,l}r/a)],q=\epsilon ,p_i,$$
(2.15)
where, for a given function $`f(z)`$, we have introduced the notations

$`f_n^{(\epsilon )}[f(z)]`$ $`=`$ $`\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{k^2+m^2}{z^2}}r^2\right)f^2(z)\left(2\xi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)\left[f^2(z)+\left({\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}1\right)f^2(z)\right]`$ (2.16)
$`f_n^{(p_1)}[f(z)]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[f^2(z)\left({\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}1\right)f^2(z)\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{2\xi }{z}}f(z)f^{}(z)`$ (2.17)
$`f_n^{(p_2)}[f(z)]`$ $`=`$ $`\left(2\xi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)\left[f^2(z)+\left({\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}1\right)f^2(z)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{2\xi }{z}}f(z)f^{}(z)+{\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}f^2(z)`$ (2.18)
$`f_n^{(p_i)}[f(z)]`$ $`=`$ $`\left(2\xi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)\left[f^2(z)+\left({\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}1\right)f^2(z)\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{k^2r^2}{Nz^2}}f^2(z),i=3,\mathrm{},D1.`$ (2.19)
Integrating over $`𝐤`$ by using the formula

$$\frac{k^sd^N𝐤}{\sqrt{k^2+c^2}}=c^{N+s1}\frac{\pi ^{(N1)/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N/2)}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{N+s1}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{N+s}{2}\right)$$
(2.20)
we can see that

$$p_i=\epsilon ,i=3,\mathrm{},D1.$$
(2.21)
The v.e.v.’s (2.15) are divergent. To make them finite we introduce the cutoff function $`\psi _\mu (\gamma )`$, which decreases with increasing $`\gamma `$ and satisfies the condition $`\psi _\mu 1`$, $`\mu 0`$. To extract the divergent parts we will apply to the corresponding sums over $`l`$ the summation formula

$`{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{T_n(\lambda _{n,l})f(\lambda _{n,l})}{\sqrt{\lambda _{n,l}^2+c^2}}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{f(x)}{\sqrt{x^2+c^2}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^c}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{K}_n(x)}{\overline{I}_n(x)}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{n\pi i}f\left(ix\right)+e^{n\pi i}f(ix)}{\sqrt{c^2x^2}}}+`$ (2.22)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _c^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{K}_n(x)}{\overline{I}_n(x)}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{n\pi i}f\left(ix\right)e^{n\pi i}f(ix)}{\sqrt{x^2c^2}}}.`$
This formula is valid for functions $`f(z)`$ satisfying the conditions

$$\left|f(z)\right|<ϵ(x)e^{c\left|y\right|},z=x+iy,c<2,$$
(2.23)
$$f(z)=o(z^{2\left|n\right|1}),z0,$$
(2.24)
where $`ϵ(x)0`$ for $`x\mathrm{}`$.

To evaluate the mode sum over $`l`$ in (2.15) in (2.22) as a function $`f(z)`$ we choose

$$f(z)=z^3f_n^{(q)}[J_n(zr/a)]\psi _\mu (z/a).$$
(2.25)
We will assume a class of cutoff functions for which (2.25) satisfies conditions (2.23) and (2.24) uniformly with respect to cutoff parameter $`\mu `$ (this is the case, for instance, for $`e^{\mu \gamma }`$, $`\mu >0`$). Using the relation $`f_n^{(q)}[J_n(izr/a)]=e^{2n\pi i}f_n^{(q)}[J_n(izr/a)]`$ we see that the subintegrand of the first integral on the right hand side of formula (2.22) is proportional to $`\psi _\mu (iz/a)\psi _\mu (iz/a)`$. Consequently, after removing the cutoff ($`\psi _\mu 1`$) the contribution of the first integral will be zero. Hence, omitting this integral for the v.e.v. we obtain

$`q`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^{N+1}a^3}}{\displaystyle }d^N𝐤{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}dz{\displaystyle \frac{z^3f_n^{(q)}[J_n(zr/a)]\psi _\mu (z/a)}{\sqrt{z^2+k^2a^2+m^2a^2}}}+`$
$`+e^{n\pi i}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _{a\sqrt{k^2+m^2}}^{\mathrm{}}}dz{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{K}_n(z)}{\overline{I}_n(z)}}{\displaystyle \frac{z^3f_n^{(q)}[J_n(izr/a)]\chi _\mu (z/a)}{\sqrt{z^2k^2a^2m^2a^2}}}\},`$
where $`\chi _\mu (y)=[\psi _\mu (iy)+\psi _\mu (iy)]/2`$. The second integral on the right of this formula vanishes in the limit $`a\mathrm{}`$, whereas the first one does not depend on $`a`$. It follows from here that the latter corresponds to the spacetime without boundaries. This can be also seen directly by explicit summation over $`n`$ using the formula $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}J_{n\pm p}^2(z)=1`$. For instance, in the case of the energy density it follows from here that

$$\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}f_n^{(\epsilon )}[J_n(zr)]=1+\frac{k^2+m^2}{z^2}.$$
(2.27)
Using this relation for the term corresponding to the first integral on the right of (2) and removing the cutoff one has

$`\epsilon ^{(0)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(2\pi )^{N+1}}}{\displaystyle d^N𝐤\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z\frac{z^3f_n^{(\epsilon )}[J_n(zr)]\psi _\mu (z/a)}{\sqrt{z^2+k^2+m^2}}}=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(2\pi )^{N+1}}}{\displaystyle d^N𝐤_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz\sqrt{z^2+k^2+m^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^{D1}𝐤}{(2\pi )^{D1}}\sqrt{k^2+m^2}}.`$
Hence summation formula (2.22) allows us to extract the contribution of the unbounded space without specifying the cutoff function. In the remaining part, the integration over $`𝐤`$ can be explicitly done using the formula

$$d^N𝐤_{\sqrt{k^2+m^2}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{k^sg(z)dz}{\sqrt{z^2k^2m^2}}=\frac{\pi ^{N/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N/2)}B(\frac{N+s}{2},\frac{1}{2})_m^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z\left(z^2m^2\right)^{(N+s1)/2}g(z),$$
(2.29)
where $`B(x,y)`$ is the Euler beta function (this formula can be proved by integrating over the angular part of $`d^N𝐤`$ and introducing polar coordinates in the plane $`(x=\sqrt{z^2k^2m^2},k)`$). Removing the cutoff for this part one obtains

$$q_{SUB}=qq^{(0)}=\frac{2^{2D}\pi ^{D/2}}{a^D\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz^3\left(z^2a^2m^2\right)^{D/22}\frac{\overline{K}_n(z)}{\overline{I}_n(z)}F_n^{(q)}[I_n(zr/a)],$$
(2.30)
where $`I_n(z)`$ and $`K_n(z)`$ are the modified Bessel functions, and

$`F_n^{(\epsilon )}[f(z)]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{D2}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{z^2}}r^2\right)f^2(z)+\left(2\xi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)\left[f^2(z)+\left({\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}+1\right)f^2(z)\right]`$ (2.31)
$`F_n^{(p_1)}[f(z)]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}+1\right)f^2(z)f^2(z)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{2\xi }{z}}f(z)f^{}(z)`$ (2.32)
$`F_n^{(p_2)}[f(z)]`$ $`=`$ $`\left(2\xi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)\left[f^2(z)+\left({\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}+1\right)f^2(z)\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{2\xi }{z}}f(z)f^{}(z){\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}f^2(z)`$ (2.33)
$`F_n^{(p_i)}[f(z)]`$ $`=`$ $`F_n^{(\epsilon )}[f(z)],i=3,\mathrm{},D1.`$ (2.34)
In (2.30) $`q^{(0)}`$ are the components of the v.e.v. $`0_M|T_i^k|0_M`$ over the vacuum $`|0_M`$ corresponding to the unbounded $`D`$-dimensional Minkowskian spacetime. It can be seen that v.e.v.’s (2.30) satisfy the continuity equation $`_iT_k^i=0`$, which, for the cylindrical geometry, takes the form

$$\frac{dp_1}{dr}+\frac{1}{r}\left(p_1p_2\right)=0.$$
(2.35)
For $`D=3`$ formulae (2.30) coincide with the corresponding results in  for the spherical case.

Formulae (2.30) can be obtained by another equivalent way, applying a certain second-order differential operator on the regularized Wightmann function and taking the coincidence limit. The calculation of the Wightmann function is of interest for its own sake, as this function determines the response of a particle detector moving through the vacuum under consideration . For this reason here we derive formula for the regularized Wightmann function. To do this we apply summation formula (2.22) to the sum over $`l`$ in (2). It can be shown that the first integral on the right of (2.22) will give the corresponding Wightmann function for $`D`$-dimensional Minkowskian spacetime, and the second integral vanishes. Integrating over $`𝐤`$ with the help of standard integrals, in the term corresponding to the third integral one obtains

$`0|\phi (x)\phi (x^{})|0`$ $`=`$ $`0_M|\phi (x)\phi (x^{})|0_M{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{in(\varphi \varphi ^{})}}{(2\pi )^{D/2}}}{\displaystyle _m^{\mathrm{}}}dzz(z^2m^2)^{D/41}\times `$
$`\times `$ $`I_n(zr)I_n(zr^{}){\displaystyle \frac{\overline{K}_n(z)}{\overline{I}_n(z)}}{\displaystyle \frac{J_{D/22}\left(\sqrt{z^2m^2}\left[(𝐫_{}𝐫_{}^{})^2(tt^{})^2\right]^{1/2}\right)}{\left[(𝐫_{}𝐫_{}^{})^2(tt^{})^2\right]^{D/41}}}.`$
It can be easily seen that for the case of a circle ($`D=3`$) this formula coincides with the corresponding expression for the spherical case derived in .

Let’s consider vacuum densities (2.30) on the cylinder axis, $`r=0`$. Now the only contributions come from the summands with $`n=0,\pm 1`$ and one has

$$q(r=0)=\frac{2^{2D}\pi ^{D/2}}{a^D\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz^3\left(z^2a^2m^2\right)^{D/22}\left\{u_{q0}\frac{\overline{K}_0(z)}{\overline{I}_0(z)}+u_{q1}\frac{\overline{K}_1(z)}{\overline{I}_1(z)}\right\},$$
(2.37)
where

$`u_{\epsilon 0}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1m^2a^2/z^2}{D2}}+2\xi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},u_{\epsilon 1}=2\xi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}`$ (2.38)
$`u_{p_10}`$ $`=`$ $`u_{p_20}=\xi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},u_{p_11}=u_{p_21}=\xi .`$
The results of the corresponding numerical evaluation for the Dirichlet and Neumann minimally and conformally coupled scalars in $`D=4`$ are presented in Fig.1.

In the large mass limit, $`ma1`$, using the asymptotic formulae for the modified Bessel function for large values of argument in the leading order from (2.37) one obtains

$$\epsilon (r=0)2p_1(r=0)\frac{4\xi 1}{2^{D1}\pi ^{D/21}a^D}(am)^{D/2+1}e^{2am}\left(2\delta _{B0}1\right),ma1.$$
(2.39)
The v.e.v.’s (2.30) diverge on the cylinder surface (for a given $`n`$ the $`z`$-integrals diverge as $`(ar)^{1D}`$, $`ra`$). The corresponding asymptotic behaviour can be found using the uniform asymptotic expansions for the modified Bessel functions, and the leading terms have the form

$`\epsilon `$ $``$ $`p_2{\displaystyle \frac{(D1)(\xi \xi _c)\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/2)}{2^{D1}\pi ^{D/2}(ar)^D}}\left(2\delta _{B0}1\right)`$ (2.40)
$`p_1`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\xi \xi _c)\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/2)}{2^{D1}\pi ^{D/2}a(ar)^{D1}}}\left(2\delta _{B0}1\right).`$
Note that these terms are independent of the mass and Robin coefficients. Taking the limit $`a,r\mathrm{}`$, $`ar=\mathrm{const}`$ one obtains the leading terms for the asymptotic behaviour near the single plate considered in ref.. The surface divergences in the renormalized expectation values for the vacuum EMT are well known in quantum field theory. In the case of $`D=3`$ massless fields the corresponding asymptotic series near arbitrary smooth boundary are presented in refs..

## 3 Total Casimir energy inside a cylinder

The unregularized integrated Casimir energy inside a cylindrical shell may be obtained by integrating (2.15) for $`q=\epsilon `$. Using standard formulae for the integrals involving the Bessel functions this energy can be presented in the form

$$E_{\mathrm{in}}^{(\mathrm{vol})}=E_{\mathrm{in}}\left(2\xi \frac{1}{2}\right)\left(\frac{L}{2\pi }\right)^N\frac{1}{a}\underset{\alpha }{}\frac{\lambda _{n,l}^2T_n(\lambda _{n,l})}{\sqrt{\lambda _{n,l}^2+k^2a^2+m^2a^2}}J_n(\lambda _{n,l})J_n^{}(\lambda _{n,l}),$$
(3.1)
where

$$E_{\mathrm{in}}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{L}{2\pi }\right)^N\underset{\alpha }{}\sqrt{\lambda _{n,l}^2/a^2+k^2+m^2}$$
(3.2)
is the total Casimir energy inside a cylinder, evaluated as a sum of the zero-point energies for each normal mode of frequency. As we see, for the general Robin case, (3.1) differs from the total vacuum energy. The reason for this difference is the existence of an additional surface energy contribution to the volume energy, located on the boundary $`r=a0`$:

$$E_{\mathrm{in}}^{(\mathrm{surf})}=\left(2\xi \frac{1}{2}\right)\left(\frac{L}{2\pi }\right)^N\frac{1}{a}\underset{\alpha }{}\frac{\lambda _{n,l}^2T_n(\lambda _{n,l})}{\sqrt{\lambda _{n,l}^2+k^2a^2+m^2a^2}}J_n(\lambda _{n,l})J_n^{}(\lambda _{n,l}).$$
(3.3)
To see this, note that there is a surface energy density contribution to the vacuum energy density :

$$T_{00}^{(\mathrm{surf})}=\left(2\xi \frac{1}{2}\right)\delta (ra+0)\phi n^i_i\phi .$$
(3.4)
The corresponding v.e.v. can be evaluated using eigenfunctions (2.5):

$$0|T_{00}^{(\mathrm{surf})}|0=\delta (ra+0)\frac{2\xi 1/2}{a^2(2\pi )^N}\underset{\alpha }{}\frac{\lambda _{n,l}^2T_n(\lambda _{n,l})}{\sqrt{\lambda _{n,l}^2+k^2a^2+m^2a^2}}J_n(\lambda _{n,l}r/a)J_n^{}(\lambda _{n,l}r/a).$$
(3.5)
The integration of this energy density leads to the expression (3.3) for the total interior surface energy. In (3.5), applying to the sum over $`l`$ formula (2.22), in analogy to (2.30), the subtracted surface energy density can be presented in the form

$`T_{00}^{(\mathrm{surf})}_{SUB}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(2\xi 1/2\right)\delta (ra+0)}{2^{D2}\pi ^{D/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)a^{D1}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle _{ma}^{\mathrm{}}}dzz^2(z^2m^2a^2)^{D/22}\times `$ (3.6)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\overline{K}_n(z)}{\overline{I}_n(z)}}I_n\left(z{\displaystyle \frac{r}{a}}\right)I_n^{}\left(z{\displaystyle \frac{r}{a}}\right).`$
This leads to the following subtracted surface energy

$$E_{\mathrm{in}}^{(\mathrm{surf})}_{SUB}=\frac{\left(4\xi 1\right)L^{D3}a^{2D}}{2^{D2}\pi ^{D/21}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz^2\left(z^2m^2a^2\right)^{D/22}\frac{\overline{K}_n(z)}{\overline{I}_n(z)}I_n\left(z\right)I_n^{}\left(z\right).$$
(3.7)
We can find the subtracted total volume energy inside a cylinder integrating the energy density (2.30):

$$E_{\mathrm{in}}^{(\mathrm{vol})}_{SUB}=\frac{L^{D3}a^{2D}}{2^{D2}\pi ^{D/21}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz\left(z^2m^2a^2\right)^{D/22}\frac{\overline{K}_n(z)}{\overline{I}_n(z)}F_\mathrm{v}[I_n(z)],$$
(3.8)
where, for a given function $`f(z)`$, we have introduced the notation

$$F_\mathrm{v}[f(z)]=(4\xi 1)zf(z)f^{}(z)\frac{z^2m^2a^2}{D2}\left[f^2(z)\left(1+\frac{n^2}{z^2}\right)f^2(z)\right].$$
(3.9)
The total interior vacuum energy can be obtained as a sum of the surface and volume parts:

$`E_{\mathrm{in}}_{SUB}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L^{D3}a^{2D}}{2^{D1}\pi ^{D/21}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/2)}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle _{ma}^{\mathrm{}}}dzz(z^2m^2a^2)^{D/21}\times `$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{K}_n(z)}{\overline{I}_n(z)}}\left[I_n^2(z)\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}\right)I_n^2(z)\right].`$
As we see, in the total vacuum energy the dependencies on the curvature coupling $`\xi `$ are cancelled out and we obtain $`\xi `$-independent vacuum energy. We could have expected this result, as eigenfrequencies are independent of this parameter. The vacuum force acting from inside per unit surface of the cylinder can be found using the expression (2.30) for the vacuum radial pressure:

$$F_{\mathrm{in}}=p_1_{r=a0}=\frac{2^{2D}\pi ^{D/2}}{a^D\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz^3\left(z^2m^2a^2\right)^{D/22}\frac{\overline{K}_n(z)}{\overline{I}_n(z)}F_n^{(p_1)}[I_n(z)],$$
(3.11)
with notation (2.32). For the massless scalar field and in the case of conformal coupling, $`\xi =\xi _c`$, the vacuum force and volume energy are related by

$$E_{\mathrm{in}}^{(\mathrm{vol})}_{SUB}=\frac{2\pi L^{D3}}{D2}a^2F_{\mathrm{in}}.$$
(3.12)
This relation can be also obtained from the continuity equation (2.35) if we take into account the tracelessness condition for the corresponding energy-momentum tensor.

## 4 Casimir densities outside a cylindrical shell

Firstly, let’s consider v.e.v.’s for the energy-momentum tensor in the region between two coaxial cylindrical layers with radii $`a`$ and $`b`$, $`a<b`$. The corresponding boundary conditions are in form

$$\left(A+B\frac{}{r}\right)\phi (x)=0,r=a,b.$$
(4.1)
The corresponding eigenfunctions can be obtained from (2.5) with the replacement

$$J_n(\gamma r)g_n(\gamma a,\gamma r)=J_n(\gamma r)\overline{Y}_n(\gamma a)Y_n(\gamma r)\overline{J}_n(\gamma a),$$
(4.2)
where $`Y_n(z)`$ is the Neumann function. The functions chosen in this way satisfy the boundary condition on the inner cylinder. From the boundary condition on the shell $`r=b`$ one obtains that the possible values of $`\gamma `$ are solutions to the equation

$$C_n^{ab}(\eta ,\gamma a)\overline{J}_n(\gamma a)\overline{Y}_n(\gamma b)\overline{Y}_n(\gamma a)\overline{J}_n(\gamma b)=0.$$
(4.3)
The corresponding roots will be denoted by $`\gamma a=\sigma _{n,l}`$, $`l=1,2,\mathrm{}`$.

The normalization coefficient is determined from condition (2.9), where now the integration goes over the region between the cylindrical shells, and is equal to

$$\beta _\alpha ^2=\frac{\pi ^2\gamma T_n^{ab}(\gamma a)}{4\omega a(2\pi )^{N+1}}.$$
(4.4)
Here we use the notation

$$T_n^{ab}(z)=z\left\{\frac{\overline{J}_n^2(z)}{\overline{J}_n^2(\eta z)}\left[A^2+B^2(\eta ^2z^2n^2)\right]A^2B^2(z^2n^2)\right\}^1,\eta =\frac{b}{a}.$$
(4.5)
Using the corresponding eigenfunctions it can be seen that the v.e.v.’s for the energy-momentum tensor have the form (2.14), where the components are given by formulae

$$q(r)=\frac{\pi ^2}{4(2\pi )^{N+1}a^3}\underset{\alpha }{}\frac{\sigma _{n,l}^3T_n^{ab}(\sigma _{n,l})}{\sqrt{\sigma _{n,l}^2+k^2a^2+m^2a^2}}f_n^{(q)}[g_n(\sigma _{n,l},\sigma _{n,l}r/a)],q=\epsilon ,p_i,$$
(4.6)
with the functions $`f_n^{(q)}[f(z)]`$ defined as (2.16)-(2.19).

To evaluate the sum over $`l`$ we will apply the summation formula

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}h(\sigma _{n,k})T_n^{ab}(\sigma _{n,k})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{h(x)dx}{\overline{J}_n^2(x)+\overline{Y}_n^2(x)}}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{K}_n(\eta x)}{\overline{K}_n(x)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left[h(xe^{\pi i/2})+h(xe^{\pi i/2})\right]dx}{\overline{K}_n(x)\overline{I}_n(\eta x)\overline{K}_n(\eta x)\overline{I}_n(x)}},`$
where we have assumed that all zeros for the function $`C_n^{ab}(\eta ,z)`$ are real. In case of existence of purely imaginary zeros we have to include additional residue terms on the left of formula (4). Now, by an evaluation similar to (2), one can see that

$`q`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^{D2}a^3}}{\displaystyle }d^N𝐤{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{\overline{J}_n^2(z)+\overline{Y}_n^2(z)}}{\displaystyle \frac{z^3f_n^{(q)}[g_n(z,zr/a)]}{\sqrt{z^2+k^2a^2+m^2a^2}}}+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}{\displaystyle _{a\sqrt{k^2+m^2}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{z^3f_n^{(q)}[g_n(iz,izr/a)]}{\sqrt{z^2k^2a^2m^2a^2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{K}_n(\eta x)/\overline{K}_n(x)dz}{\overline{K}_n(x)\overline{I}_n(\eta x)\overline{K}_n(\eta x)\overline{I}_n(x)}}\}.`$
To obtain v.e.v.’s for the exterior of a single cylindrical shell let’s consider the limit $`b\mathrm{}`$. It can be easily seen that in this limit the second integral on the right of formula (4) tends to zero, whereas the first one is independent from $`b`$. It follows from here that the expressions

$$q=\frac{1}{2(2\pi )^{D2}a^3}d^N𝐤\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dz}{\overline{J}_n^2(z)+\overline{Y}_n^2(z)}\frac{z^3f_n^{(q)}[g_n(z,zr/a)]}{\sqrt{z^2+k^2a^2+m^2a^2}}$$
(4.9)
are v.e.v.’s for the EMT components for the exterior region of a single shell. To regularize this quantities we have to subtract the parts corresponding to the unbounded space. As we saw, the latter can be presented in the form (2). Using the identity

$$\frac{f_n^{(q)}[g_n(z,zr/a)]}{\overline{J}_n^2(z)+\overline{Y}_n^2(z)}f_n^{(q)}[J_n(zr/a)]=\frac{1}{2}\underset{\sigma =1}{\overset{2}{}}\frac{\overline{J}_n(z)}{\overline{H}_n^{(\sigma )}(z)}f_n^{(q)}[H_n^{(\sigma )}(zr/a)]$$
(4.10)
with $`H_n^{(\sigma )}(z)`$, $`\sigma =1,2`$ being the Hankel functions, one obtains

$$q=\frac{1}{4(2\pi )^{D2}a^3}d^N𝐤\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{\sigma =1}{\overset{2}{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z\frac{\overline{J}_n(z)}{\overline{H}_n^{(\sigma )}(z)}\frac{z^3f_n^{(q)}[H_n^{(\sigma )}(zr/a)]}{\sqrt{z^2+k^2a^2+m^2a^2}}.$$
(4.11)
Assuming that the function $`\overline{H}_n^{(1)}(z)`$, ($`\overline{H}_n^{(2)}(z)`$) has no zeros for $`0<\mathrm{arg}z\pi /2`$ ($`\pi /2\mathrm{arg}z<0`$) we can rotate the integration contour for $`z`$ by angle $`\pi /2`$ for $`\sigma =1`$ and by angle $`\pi /2`$ for $`\sigma =2`$. The integrals over $`(0,ia\sqrt{k^2+m^2})`$ and $`(0,ia\sqrt{k^2+m^2})`$ cancel out. Introducing the Bessel modified functions and integrating over $`𝐤`$ with the help of formula (2.29) for the subtracted v.e.v. one obtains

$$q_{SUB}=\frac{2^{2D}\pi ^{D/2}}{a^D\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz^3\left(z^2a^2m^2\right)^{D/22}\frac{\overline{I}_n(z)}{\overline{K}_n(z)}F_n^{(q)}[K_n(zr/a)],$$
(4.12)
where we use notations (2.31)-(2.34). As we see, these quantities can be obtained from the ones for interior region by the replacements $`IK`$, $`KI`$. As for the interior region the v.e.v. (4.12) diverge at cylinder surface. The leading terms of these divergences are determined by the same formulae (2.40) with replacement $`arra`$.

Let’s consider the asymptotic behaviour of v.e.v (4.12) at large distances, $`r\mathrm{}`$, for the massless case. Introducing a new integration variable $`y=zr/a`$, and expanding the subintegral in terms of $`r/a`$, we can see that the leading term of the asymptotic expansion comes from the summand with $`n=0`$:

$$q_{SUB}=\frac{2^{2D}\pi ^{D/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)r^D\mathrm{ln}r/a}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑yy^{D1}F_0^{(q)}[K_0(y)],r\mathrm{}.$$
(4.13)
The integral in this expression can be evaluated using the formula for the integrals containing the square of the McDonald function (see, for instance, ). This leads to the following result

$$\epsilon (D2)p_1\frac{D2}{D1}p_2\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^3(D/2)}{\pi ^{D/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D1)}\frac{\xi \xi _c}{r^D\mathrm{ln}r/a},r\mathrm{}.$$
(4.14)
For a conformally coupled scalar this leading term is zero and $`\epsilon 1/r^{D+2}`$.

Integrating the vacuum energy density over the region outside of a cylindrical shell we obtain the corresponding volume energy:

$$E_{\mathrm{ext}}^{(\mathrm{vol})}_{SUB}=\frac{L^{D3}a^{2D}}{2^{D2}\pi ^{D/21}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz\left(z^2m^2a^2\right)^{D/22}\frac{\overline{I}_n(z)}{\overline{K}_n(z)}F_\mathrm{v}[K_n(z)],$$
(4.15)
where the functional $`F_\mathrm{v}[f(z)]`$ is defined as (3.9). The outside surface energy can be derived using the surface energy density given by the formula (3.4) with the replacement $`a0a+0`$ in the argument of the $`\delta `$-function. This gives

$$E_{\mathrm{ext}}^{(\mathrm{surf})}_{SUB}=\frac{\left(4\xi 1\right)L^Na^{2D}}{2^{D2}\pi ^{D/21}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz^2\left(z^2m^2a^2\right)^{D/22}\frac{\overline{I}_n(z)}{\overline{K}_n(z)}K_n\left(z\right)K_n^{}\left(z\right).$$
(4.16)
Now taking the sum of (4.15) and (4.16) for the total exterior vacuum energy one obtains

$`E_{\mathrm{ext}}_{SUB}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L^{D3}a^{2D}}{2^{D1}\pi ^{D/21}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/2)}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle _{ma}^{\mathrm{}}}dzz(z^2m^2a^2)^{D/21}\times `$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{I}_n(z)}{\overline{K}_n(z)}}\left[K_n^2(z)\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{z^2}}\right)K_n^2(z)\right].`$
As we could have expected, the dependencies on the curvature coupling are cancelled. The expression for the radial projection of the vacuum force acting per unit surface of the cylinder from the outside directly follows from (4.12) with $`q=p_1`$:

$$F_{\mathrm{ext}}=p_1_{r=a+0}=\frac{2^{2D}\pi ^{D/2}}{a^D\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz^3\left(z^2m^2a^2\right)^{D/22}\frac{\overline{I}_n(z)}{\overline{K}_n(z)}F_n^{(p_1)}[K_n(z)],$$
(4.18)
where the function $`F_n^{p_1}`$ is defined as (2.32). Now we turn to the case of a cylindrical shell with zero thickness, assuming that the coefficients in the Robin boundary conditions are the same for the interior and exterior regions. The total vacuum energies end force per unit surface can be obtained summing the corresponding quantities for these regions:

$$E_{SUB}=E_{\mathrm{in}}_{SUB}+E_{\mathrm{ext}}_{SUB},F=F_{\mathrm{in}}+F_{\mathrm{ext}}.$$
(4.19)
Using the expressions for the interior and exterior quantities we have

$`E^{(\mathrm{surf})}_{SUB}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(4\xi 1\right)L^{D3}a^{2D}}{2^{D2}\pi ^{D/21}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle _{ma}^{\mathrm{}}}dzz(z^2m^2a^2)^{D/22}\times `$ (4.20)
$`\times \left[1\beta {\displaystyle \frac{\left(\stackrel{~}{I}_n(z)\stackrel{~}{K}_n(z)\right)^{}}{z\stackrel{~}{I}_n^{}(z)\stackrel{~}{K}_n^{}(z)}}\right],`$
for the surface part of the vacuum energy,

$`E_{SUB}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L^{D3}a^{2D}}{2^{D1}\pi ^{D/21}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/2)}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle _{ma}^{\mathrm{}}}dz{\displaystyle \frac{\left(z^2m^2a^2\right)^{D/21}}{z}}\times `$ (4.21)
$`\times \left[2\beta +(z^2+n^2\beta ^2){\displaystyle \frac{\left(\stackrel{~}{I}_n(z)\stackrel{~}{K}_n(z)\right)^{}}{z\stackrel{~}{I}_n^{}(z)\stackrel{~}{K}_n^{}(z)}}\right],`$
for the total vacuum energy, and

$$\begin{array}{c}F=\frac{2^{1D}\pi ^{D/2}}{a^D\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}dzz(z^2m^2a^2)^{D/22}\times \\ \times \left[2\beta 4\xi +(z^2+n^2\beta ^2+4\xi \beta )\frac{\left(\stackrel{~}{I}_n(z)\stackrel{~}{K}_n(z)\right)^{}}{z\stackrel{~}{I}_n^{}(z)\stackrel{~}{K}_n^{}(z)}\right]\end{array}$$
(4.22)
for the total vacuum force acting per unit surface of the shell. In these formulae we have introduced the notation

$$\stackrel{~}{f}(z)=z^\beta f(z),\beta =A/B$$
(4.23)
for a given function $`f(z)`$. The cases of Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions are obtained taking the limits $`\beta =\mathrm{}`$ and $`\beta =0`$. For the surface energies from (4.20) one obtains

$$E^{(\mathrm{surf})}_{SUB}^{(\mathrm{D})}=E^{(\mathrm{surf})}_{SUB}^{(\mathrm{N})}=\frac{\left(14\xi \right)L^{D3}a^{2D}}{2^{D2}\pi ^{D/21}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/21)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz\left(z^2m^2a^2\right)^{D/22}.$$
(4.24)
For the analytical continuation of the expression on the right we note that

$$\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz\left(z^2m^2a^2\right)^{D/22}=\frac{1}{2}B(D/21,1D/2)(1+2\zeta _R(0))=0,$$
(4.25)
where $`\zeta _R`$ denotes the Riemann zeta function ($`\zeta _R(s)={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}n^s`$). As a result, we conclude that the surface energy is zero for Dirichlet and Neumann scalars. Due to the relation (4.25) we can omit $`n`$-independent terms in the subintegrands of (4.20), (4.22) without changing the values of the sums. We can use this to improve the convergence properties of the corresponding $`z`$-integrals.

Let’s present the total Casimir energy (4.21) in another equivalent form. For this, note that the functions $`f(z)=\stackrel{~}{I}_n(z)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{K}_n(z)`$ satisfy the equation

$$z^2f^{\prime \prime }(z)+(12\beta )zf(z)(z^2+n^2\beta ^2)f(z)=0.$$
(4.26)
Using this, it can be easily seen that

$$2\beta +(z^2+n^2\beta ^2)\frac{\left(\stackrel{~}{I}_n\stackrel{~}{K}_n\right)^{}}{z\stackrel{~}{I}_n^{}\stackrel{~}{K}_n^{}}=z\frac{\left(\stackrel{~}{I}_n^{}\stackrel{~}{K}_n^{}\right)^{}}{\stackrel{~}{I}_n^{}\stackrel{~}{K}_n^{}}+2(1\beta )=z\frac{\left(\overline{I}_n\overline{K}_n\right)^{}}{\overline{I}_n\overline{K}_n}.$$
(4.27)
Thus, we obtain an equivalent representation for the total Casimir energy:

$$E_{\mathrm{SUB}}=\frac{L^{D3}a^{2D}}{2^{D1}\pi ^{D/21}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D/2)}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{ma}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z(z^2m^2a^2)^{D/21}\frac{d}{dz}\mathrm{ln}\left(\overline{I_n}(z)\overline{K_n}(z)\right).$$
(4.28)
This expression is divergent in the given form. A method to extract finite results will be explained below using the case of the $`D=4`$ massless scalar field as an example. The corresponding results for arbitrary dimension and massive case will be presented elsewhere.

## 5 Integrated Casimir energy per unit-length by mode sum

Taking advantage of the usual prescription for evaluating the eigenfrequency sum (see. e.g. ref.), the integrated Casimir energy per unit-length of an infinitely long cylinder is expressed as

$$\epsilon _c=\frac{1}{2}\zeta _{\text{cyl}}(\sigma )|_{\sigma 1},$$
(5.1)
where $`\zeta _{\text{cyl}}(\sigma )`$ is the zeta function for the cylinder eigenfrequencies under the chosen boundary conditions. Note that, in order to simplify the procedure, we have not included the arbitrary mass scale typically used in these problems (in fact, it will not be necessary because the result will be finite). This zeta function can be related to the one for a circle, with the same boundary conditions and radius $`a`$, which we shall call $`\zeta _{\text{circ}}(s)`$, and corresponds to the restriction of the initial problem to a plane perpendicular to the cylinder axis. Because of the cylindrical symmetry, the eigenvalues of the wave operator —including mass— have the form $`(\gamma ^2+k^2+m^2)^{1/2}`$, where the $`\gamma `$’s are the eigenfrequencies of the restricted problem and $`k\text{R}`$. Then, in a spacetime of $`D=N+2+1`$ dimensions,

$$\zeta _{\text{cyl}}(\sigma )=\frac{d^Nk}{(2\pi )^N}\underset{\gamma }{}\left(\gamma ^2+k^2+m^2\right)^{\sigma /2}=\frac{1}{(4\pi )^{N/2}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\sigma N}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\sigma }{2}\right)}\zeta _{\text{circ}}(\sigma N)$$
(5.2)
with

$$\zeta _{\text{circ}}(s)\underset{\gamma }{}(\gamma ^2+m^2)^{s/2}=\underset{n}{}d_n\underset{l}{}(\gamma _{n,l}^2+m^2)^{s/2},\gamma _{n,l}=\frac{\lambda _{n,l}}{a}.$$
(5.3)
In this section we are considering just one cylindrical surface, and these $`\gamma `$’s denote now the zeros of $`\overline{J_n}(\gamma a)\overline{H}_n^{(1)}(\gamma a)`$ (the first factor coming from the interior propagation and the second from the exterior propagation). The $`n`$ index corresponds to angular momentum, $`d_n`$ indicates each degeneracy, and the $`l`$ index labels the different frequencies for a given $`n`$. Expanding (5.3) around $`\sigma =1`$, one distinguishes two possibilities depending on $`N`$:
1. Even $`N`$ ($`N=2p`$)

$$\zeta _{\text{cyl}}(\sigma )=\frac{1}{2^{2p+1}\pi ^{p+1/2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(p\frac{1}{2}\right)\zeta _{\text{circ}}(2p1).$$
(5.4)
2. Odd $`N`$ ($`N=2p+1`$)

$$\begin{array}{c}\zeta _{\text{cyl}}(\sigma )=\frac{(1)^p}{2^{2p}\pi ^{p+1}(p+1)!}\\ \times \left[\frac{\zeta _{\text{circ}}(2p2)}{\sigma +1}\frac{1}{2}(\psi (1/2)\psi (p+2))\zeta _{\text{circ}}(2p2)+\zeta _{\text{circ}}^{}{}_{}{}^{}(2p2)+𝒪(\sigma +1)\right].\end{array}$$
(5.5)
Later on we will focus on $`D=3+1`$ (i.e., $`p=0`$ case). Then, in situations where $`\zeta _{\text{circ}}(2)=0`$, (5.5) reduces to

$$\zeta _{\text{cyl}}(s)=\frac{1}{2\pi }\zeta _{\text{circ}}^{}{}_{}{}^{}(2).$$
(5.6)
Thus, one has to obtain the expansion of $`\zeta _{\text{circ}}(s)`$ up to linear terms in $`(\sigma +1)=(s+2)`$ (in general, $`\sigma +1=s+D2`$). By the Cauchy theorem, we may express the circle zeta function $`\zeta _{\text{circ}}(s)`$ as the following contour integrations

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\zeta _{\text{circ}}(s)\hfill & =\hfill & a^s\underset{n}{}d_n\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C𝑑z(z^2+a^2m^2)^{s/2}\frac{d}{dz}\mathrm{ln}\left(\overline{J_n}(z)\overline{H_n}^{(1)}(z)\right)\hfill \\ & =\hfill & a^s\underset{n}{}d_n\frac{s}{2\pi i}_C𝑑z(z^2+a^2m^2)^{(s+2)/2}z\mathrm{ln}\left(\overline{J_n}(z)\overline{H_n}^{(1)}(z)\right),\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.7)
where $`C`$ is a circuit in the complex $`z`$-plane enclosing all the zeros of $`\overline{J_n}(z)\overline{H_n}^{(1)}(z)`$ (it is understood that in this function we have now set $`a=1`$). In this way, we are already including the contributions associated to internal and external propagation. Formulas (5.7) have the disadvantage of being valid for an $`s`$-domain in which $`\text{Re}s`$ is positive, while we need to reach $`s=(D2)`$. Just in order to study the formal relations between these functions, we take the first form in (5.7) and consider a specific circuit. Let $`C`$ be the contour made of a vertical line along the imaginary axis avoiding —and leaving outside— the cut of the$`(z^2+a^2m^2)^{s/2}`$ function (placed between $`iam`$ and $`+iam`$), and a semicircle of infinite radius to its right. After realizing which parts yield no contribution, one finds

$$\zeta _{\text{circ}}(s)=a^s\underset{n}{}d_n\frac{1}{\pi }\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)_{am}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x(x^2a^2m^2)^{s/2}\frac{d}{dx}\mathrm{ln}\left(\overline{I_n}(x)\overline{K_n}(x)\right).$$
(5.8)
Now, using (5.2), one may formally write the integrated Casimir energy per lateral unit-length as

$$\frac{E_C}{L^{D3}}=\frac{1}{2}\zeta _{\text{cyl}}(1)=\frac{a^{2D}}{2^{D1}\pi ^{(D2)/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{D}{2}\right)}\underset{n}{}d_n_{am}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x(x^2a^2m^2)^{s/2}\frac{d}{dx}\mathrm{ln}\left(\overline{I_n}(x)\overline{K_n}(x)\right).$$
(5.9)
Nevertheless, we have to stress that it is not valid to directly set $`s=(D2)`$ in order to obtain $`E_C/L^{D3}`$. Analytic continuation to the left of the present $`s`$-domain is required first. In the example below, we explain a method for performing this type of process. Note, by the way, that if one ’naively’ sets $`s=(D2)`$ in (5.9), expression (4.28) is recovered.

### 5.1 $`m=0`$, $`D=3+1`$ case

In order to obtain the necessary analytic continuation to $`s=2`$, we will follow a different path, which has been explained e.g. in ref. . Its application will be illustrated for the case $`m=0`$, $`D=3+1`$ (therefore $`d_0=1`$ and $`d_n=2`$ for $`n0`$). The mode sum is decomposed into sets of partial waves with a defined angular momentum $`n`$, which, for convenience, will be separately considered. Thus, we employ the notation

$$\zeta _{\text{circ}}(s)=\underset{n}{}d_n\zeta _n(s)=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\zeta _n(s),$$
(5.10)
where, taking the second form in (5.7),

$$\zeta _n(s)=\underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\gamma _{n,l}^s=\frac{s}{2\pi i}_C𝑑zz^{s1}\mathrm{ln}\left(\overline{J_n}(z)\overline{H_n}^{(1)}(z)\right).$$
(5.11)
A first step in the extension of the $`s`$-domain to the left is the study of the asymptotic behaviour of the integrand for $`|z|\mathrm{}`$, given by $`\overline{J_n}(z)\overline{H_n}^{(1)}(z)iz/2f_{\text{as}}(z)`$. In view of this, we subtract from and add to the integrand a term $`z^s\mathrm{ln}f_{\text{as}}(z)`$. This move leaves us with

$$\zeta _n(s)=\frac{s}{2\pi i}\left[_C𝑑zz^s\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\overline{J_n}(z)\overline{H_n}^1(z)}{f_{\text{as}}(z)}\right)+_C𝑑zz^s\mathrm{ln}f_{\text{as}}(z)\right].$$
(5.12)
Taking a contour $`C`$ as described (now, since $`m=0`$, the cut line has reduced to the point $`z=0`$) we must conclude that the second integral vanishes, because its integrand has no singularity in the interior. As for the first integral, there are nonvanishing contributions only from the vertical parts of $`C`$. Parameterizing them adequately, we may write

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \zeta _n(s)& =& a^s\frac{s}{\pi }\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xx^s\mathrm{ln}L_n(x),\hfill \\ \hfill L_n(x)& & \frac{2}{x}\left[\overline{I_n}(x)\overline{K_n}(x)\right].\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.13)
This formula is slightly better than the initial one, as its domain of validity has been shifted to the left: actually, it holds for $`1<\text{Re}s<0`$. However, it is not good enough, as we have not arrived at $`s=2`$ yet. To this end, we shall have to perform even more subtractions. Before going on, we decompose $`\zeta _{\text{circ}}(s)`$ into the contribution from nonzero angular momenta ($`n0`$) and the contribution from zero angular momentum ($`n=0`$):

$$\zeta _{\text{circ}}(s)=\zeta _{\text{circ}}^{n0}(s)+\zeta _{\text{circ}}^{n=0}(s).$$
(5.14)
When $`n0`$ we may perform a rescaling $`xnx`$. Afterwards, summing the internal and external contributions, we find

$$\zeta _n(s)=a^sn^s\frac{s}{\pi }\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xx^{s1}\mathrm{ln}L_n(nx).$$
(5.15)
We shall actually assume $`B=1`$ and take $`A`$ as the only variable. This can be done whenever $`B0`$. Therefore, the only case which cannot be described in this way is $`B=0`$, $`A0`$, i.e., purely Dirichlet conditions, which have already been considered in ref. (formula (34) in that paper). Studying the uniform asymptotic expansions of the involved Bessel functions (for $`B0`$) one realizes that

$$L_n(nx)\frac{(1+x^2)^{1/2}}{x}\left(B^2+\text{next-to-leading terms}\right),\text{for large }nx.$$
(5.16)
This behaviour motivates (for $`B=1`$) the subtraction from and addition to the integrand in eq. (5.15) of a term $`x^{s1}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(1+x^2)^{1/2}}{x}}\right)`$. Using then the result

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xx^{s1}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{(1+x^2)^{1/2}}{x}\right)=\frac{\pi }{2s\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)},$$
(5.17)
one obtains

$$\zeta _n(s)=a^s\left\{n^s\frac{s}{\pi }\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xx^{s1}\mathrm{ln}\left|\frac{x}{(1+x^2)^{1/2}}L_n(nx)\right|+\frac{n^s}{2}\right\}.$$
(5.18)
Hence,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \zeta _{\text{circ}}^{n0}(s)& =& 2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\zeta _n(s)\hfill \\ & =& a^s\left\{2\frac{s}{\pi }\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)\underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}n^s_0^{\mathrm{}}dxx^{s1}\mathrm{ln}\right|\frac{x}{(1+x^2)^{1/2}}L_n(nx)|\hfill \\ & & +\zeta _R(s)\}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.19)
All this comes from a formula valid for $`\text{Re}s`$ between $`1`$ and $`0`$. As already remarked, in order to work at $`s=2`$, further subtractions need to be done to the integral in (5.19). The result of applying such a technique is

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\zeta _{\text{circ}}^{n0}(s)\hfill & =a^s\hfill & \{\frac{s}{\pi }\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)[2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}n^s𝒮_n(N,s)+2\underset{j=1}{\overset{N/2}{}}\zeta _R(s+2j)\underset{k}{}𝒰_{2j,k}\text{B}(\frac{s+k}{2},\frac{s}{2})]\hfill \\ & & +\zeta _R(s)\},\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.20)
where

$$𝒮_n(N,s)=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xx^s\left[\mathrm{ln}\left|\frac{x}{(1+x^2)^{1/2}}L_n(nx)\right|2\underset{j=1}{\overset{N/2}{}}\frac{𝒰_{2j}(t(x))}{n^{2j}}\right].$$
(5.21)
In formula (5.20), the objects called $`𝒰_{2j}(t)`$ are polynomials in $`t`$, where

$$t(x)=\frac{1}{(1+x^2)^{1/2}},$$
(5.22)
which are constructed step by step when obtaining the asymptotic approximation

$$\mathrm{ln}\left|\frac{x}{(1+x^2)^{1/2}}L_n(nx)\right|2\underset{j=1}{\overset{N/2}{}}\frac{𝒰_{2j}(t(x))}{n^{2j}},$$
(5.23)
for large $`nx`$ —in fact, this is like a further elaboration of (5.16)—. Then, the $`𝒰_{2j,k}`$’s are the present coefficients of these polynomials, in other words,

$$𝒰_{2j}(t)=\underset{k}{}𝒰_{2j,k}t^k,$$
(5.24)
where the $`k`$-index range corresponds to the existing coefficients. The whole process for obtaining this type of approximation has already been described in detail in refs. (see also ). By comparison, one may reason that these $`𝒰_{2j}(t)`$’s have to be the same as the even-$`j`$ $`𝒰_j^{I,}(t)`$’s in formula (3.37) of ref. , after the replacement $`\alpha A`$. The $`N`$ variable denotes the order of the subtractions performed in order to remove negative-$`s`$ poles from the initial integral. If $`N`$ is large enough —and in our case this means just $`N2`$— the $`𝒮_n(N,s)`$ integral is finite at $`s=2`$. When $`N`$ is further increased, the value of the numerical integration $`𝒮_n(N,s)`$ gets smaller and smaller while the algebraic $`n`$-sum (easier to evaluate) grows accordingly. In practice, we take $`N=`$8 or 10.

The $`n=0`$ contribution has to be dealt with separately, as a step in the process for $`n0`$ involved rescaling by $`n`$, and cannot be applied now. The same philosophy as in refs.  will now be adopted. We will just perform the necessary subtraction to isolate the $`s=2`$ divergence from the integral, leaving the rest to numerical evaluation. The result is expressed in the form

$$\zeta _{\text{circ}}^{n=0}(s)=a^s\frac{s}{\pi }\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)\left[_0(s)\left(A^2A+3/8\right)\frac{1}{2}\text{B}(\frac{s+2}{2},\frac{s}{2})\right],$$
(5.25)
where the integral

$$_0(s)=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xx^s\left[\mathrm{ln}\left|L_0(x)\right|+\left(A^2A+3/8\right)t^2(x)\right]$$
(5.26)
is, by construction, finite at $`s=2`$. Therefore, $`_0(2)`$ can be calculated numerically for given values of $`A`$ ($`B=1`$).

Thus, the circle zeta function is the sum of (5.20) and (5.25). At $`s=2`$, (5.20) has a nonzero finite value coming from the pole of $`\text{B}(\frac{s+2}{2},\frac{s}{2})`$ multiplied by the zero of $`\frac{s}{\pi }\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)`$ at $`s=2`$. This nonzero value depends also on the involved $`𝒰_{2j,2}`$ coefficient(s) and on $`\zeta _R(s+2j)`$. Now, making a similar reasoning for (5.25), we realize that the $`s=2`$ value of this expression is just $`\frac{1}{a^2}(A^2A+3/8)`$. In fact, algebraic calculation shows that the finite value of (5.20) at $`s=2`$ amounts to the same quantity with opposite sign. Therefore, $`\zeta _{\text{circ}}(2)=0`$, and one can safely apply formula (5.6). In these circumstances, the matter reduces to finding $`\zeta _{\text{circ}}^{}{}_{}{}^{}(2)`$ by expanding the sum of (5.20) and (5.25) around $`s=2`$. Once this has been done, the integrated Casimir energy per unit-length is simply

$$\epsilon _c=\frac{1}{4\pi }\zeta _{\text{circ}}^{}{}_{}{}^{}(2).$$
(5.27)
Results for a given $`A`$-range around $`A=0`$ (purely Neumann) are shown in Fig. 2 below, where we have plotted the numerical values of $`\epsilon _ca^2`$ as a function of $`A`$.

## 6 Final remarks

In the present paper, the vacuum —or zero-point— energy of scalar fields obeying Robin boundary conditions on cylindrical surfaces has been studied. Local quantities have been evaluated starting from vacuum expectation values of energy momentum tensors and applying generalized Abel-Plana summation methods supplemented with a suitable cutoff function. Integrated energies seem to be more easily found from the eigenfrequency sum which determines the Casimir effect. In that case, zeta-function regularization has proven to be an adequate tool. However, both approaches constitute different aspects of one underlying idea. In fact, we have shown that the two methods lead to identical formal expressions —formulas (4.28) and (5.9) at $`s=(D2)`$.

We have obtained an expression for the integrated energy inside the cylinder. In general, the total vacuum energy does not coincide with the integral of the volumic density, because there is a purely superficial contribution, located at the boundary itself, which has to be added to the volumic part. Moreover, the contributions associated to the modes propagating in the exterior of the cylinder has also been considered. In both cases, there is a part coming from the surface (’viewed’ from inside, in the first, and from outside, in the second). The total Casimir energy arises as the sum of all these contributions, and may also be obtained by eigenfrequency summation. As an example, we have chosen the massless case in $`D=3+1`$ dimensions for application of the zeta function method. The result for a given parameter range is shown in fig. 2, which displays the presence of a local minimum near (but not coinciding with) the point where Robin conditions become purely Neumann conditions. This indicates that, in a theoretical space of possible boundary conditions, some linear combinations are energetically privileged.


format: text

text:
# Projectively Invariant Cocycles of Holomorphic Vector Fields on an Open Riemann Surface

## 1 Introduction

The first group of cohomology of the Lie algebra of (formal) vector fields on the circle $`S^1`$ with coefficients in the space $`\mathrm{Hom}(_\lambda ,_\mu ),`$ where $`_\lambda `$ is the space of tensor densities of degree $`\lambda `$ on $`S^1,`$ was first calculated in . This group of cohomology measures all extensions of exact sequences $`0_\mu _\lambda 0`$ of modules. The first group of cohomology of the Lie algebra $`\mathrm{Vect}(S^1)`$ of (smooth) vectors fields on the circle with coefficients in the space of linear differential operators acting from $`\lambda `$densities to $`\mu `$densities, vanishing on the subalgebra $`\mathrm{sl}_2()\mathrm{Vect}(S^1)`$, was calculated in . This group of cohomology appears as an obstruction to the equivariant quantization (see , ). The computation is based on the following observation: any 1-cocycle vanishing on the subalgebra $`\mathrm{sl}_2()`$ is an $`\mathrm{sl}_2()`$invariant operator. The $`\mathrm{sl}_2()`$invariant differential operators acting on tensor densities, which are called “Transvectants”, were classified by Gordan (see ). To find the 1-cocycles generating the group of cohomology means, therefore, to determine which from the Transvectants are 1-cocycles.

In this paper, we study the complex analog of the above group of cohomology on an open Riemann surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ endowed with a flat projective structure.

The aim of this paper is to describe the first group of cohomology

$$H^1(\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),\mathrm{sl}_2();𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu }),$$
(1.1)
of holomorphic vector fields on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with coefficients in the space of linear differential operators acting on tensor densities, vanishing on the Lie algebra $`\mathrm{sl}_2()`$. We give explicit formulæ of 1-cocycles generating the group (1.1). These 1-cocycles are the complex analog of the 1-cocycles given in .

The main tool of this paper is the existence of affine and projective connection on any open Riemann surface (see ). These notions has been recently used in  to compute the second group of cohomology of the Lie algebra $`\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ with coefficients in the space of $`\lambda `$densities.

## 2 Affine and Projective Structure

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be a Riemann surface, and let $`\{U_\alpha ,z_\alpha \}`$ be an atlas of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

A holomorphic affine connection is a family of holomorphic functions $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(z_\alpha )`$ on $`U_\alpha `$ such that for non-empty $`U_\alpha U_\beta ,`$ we have

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(z_\beta )\frac{dz_\beta }{dz_\alpha }=\mathrm{\Gamma }(z_\alpha )+\frac{d^2z_\beta }{dz_\alpha ^2}\frac{dz_\alpha }{dz_\beta }$$

Affine connection exists in any open Riemann surface in contrast with the compact case where affine connection exists only if the genus of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is one (see ).

A holomorphic projective connection is a family of holomorphic functions $`R(z_\alpha )`$ on $`U_\alpha `$ such that for non-empty $`U_\alpha U_\beta ,`$ we have

$$R(z_\beta )\left(\frac{dz_b}{dz_\alpha }\right)^2=R(z_\alpha )+S(z_\beta ,z_\alpha ),$$

where $`S(z_\beta ,z_\alpha )=\left(\frac{d^2z_\beta }{dz_\alpha ^2}\right)^{}\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{d^2z_\beta }{dz_\alpha ^2}\right)^2`$ is the Schwarzian derivative.

Recall that any holomorphic affine connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ defines naturally a holomorphic projective connection given in a local coordinates $`z`$ by

$$R(z)=\frac{d\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)}{dz}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }^2(z).$$
(2.2)
For any projective connection $`R`$ there exits locally an affine connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ satisfying (2.2).

We say that two affine connections are projectively equivalent if they define the same projective connection.

Let us define the notion of projective structure.

A Riemann surface admits a projective structure if there exists an atlas of charts $`\{U_\alpha ,z_\alpha \}`$ such that the coordinate change $`z_\alpha z_\beta ^1`$ are projective transformations.

In this case, the Lie algebra $`\mathrm{sl}_2(),`$ in each chart of the projective structure, is generated by the following vector fields

$$\frac{d}{dz},z\frac{d}{dz},z^2\frac{d}{dz}.$$
(2.3)
There exists a 1-1 correspondence between projective structures and projective connections on an open Riemann surface (cf. ). We use implicitly this correspondence along this paper.

## 3 $`\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$-module Structures on the Space of DifferentialOperators

The modules of linear differential operators on the space of tensor densities on a (real) smooth manifold has been studied in series of recent papers (see ). Note that this space viewed as a module over the Lie algebra of vector fields has already been studied in the classical monograph .

Let us give the definition of the natural two-parameter family of modules over the Lie algebra of holomorphic vector fields on the space of linear differential operators.

### 3.1  Tensor Densities

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be an open Riemann surface. Fix an affine connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on it.

Space of tensor densities on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, noted $`_\lambda `$, is the space of sections of the line bundle $`(T^{}\mathrm{\Sigma })^\lambda `$, where $`\lambda .`$ This bundle is of course trivial, since any (holomorphic) bundle on an open Riemann surface is holomorphically trivial.

Fix a global section $`dz^\lambda `$ on $`_\lambda .`$ Any $`\lambda `$density can be written in the form $`\varphi dz^\lambda .`$ Let us recall the definition of a covariant derivative of tensor densities. Let $``$ be the covariant derivative associated to the affine connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }.`$ If $`\varphi _\lambda ,`$ then $`\varphi \mathrm{\Omega }^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })_\lambda `$ given by the formula

$$\varphi =\frac{d\varphi }{dz}\lambda \mathrm{\Gamma }\varphi .$$

The standard action of $`\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ on $`_\lambda `$ reads as follows (cf. ):

$$L_X^\lambda (\varphi )=X\varphi +\lambda \varphi X,$$

where $`X=X(z){\displaystyle \frac{d}{dz}}\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }).`$

### 3.2 $`\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$Module of Differential Operators

Consider differential operators acting on tensor densities:

$$A:_\lambda _\mu .$$
(3.4)
In local coordinates $`z`$, any operator $`A`$ can be written in the form

$$A=a_k(z)\frac{d^k}{dz^k}+\mathrm{}+a_0(z),$$

where $`a_i`$, for $`i=1,k`$, are holomorphic functions on $`z.`$
A two-parameter family of actions of $`\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ on the space of differential operators is defined by

$$L_X^{\lambda ,\mu }(A)=L_X^\mu AAL_X^\lambda .$$
(3.5)
Denote by $`𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu }(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ the space of operators (3.4) endowed with the defined $`\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$-module structure (3.5).

## 4 Main Result

Assume $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ endowed with a projective structure, this defines locally an action of the Lie group $`\mathrm{SL}_2()`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }.`$

Consider cochains on $`\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ with values in $`𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu },`$ vanishing on the Lie algebra $`\mathrm{sl}_2().`$ One, therefore, obtains the so-called relative cohomology of the Lie algebra $`\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$, namely

$$H^1(\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),\mathrm{sl}_2();𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu }(\mathrm{\Sigma })),$$

(see ).

The purpose of this paper is the following:

###### Theorem 4.1

The first group of cohomology $`H^1(\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),\mathrm{sl}_2();𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu }(\mathrm{\Sigma }))`$ is one-dimensional in the following cases:
(a) $`\mu \lambda =2,\lambda 1/2,`$
(b) $`\mu \lambda =3,\lambda 1,`$
(c) $`\mu \lambda =4,\lambda 1/2,`$
(d) $`(\lambda ,\mu )=(4,1),(0,5)`$.
Otherwise, this cohomology group is trivial.

This Theorem generalizes the result of  in the case of the circle $`S^1.`$

Note that this result does not depend on the choice of the projective structure.

## 5 Construction of the 1-cocycles

In this section, we give explicit formula for the 1-cocycles generating the nontrivial cohomology classes from Theorem 4.1. Given a projective structure on $`\mathrm{\Sigma },`$ we prove that there is a canonical choice of the 1-cocycles vanishing on $`\mathrm{sl}_2().`$

Fix (locally) an affine connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ related to the projective structure. Denote by $`R`$ the projective connection associated to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (see section 2.)

###### Lemma 5.1

The following linear differential operators

$$\begin{array}{ccc}_3& =& R,\hfill \\ _4& =& R\frac{\lambda }{2}R,\hfill \\ _5& =& R^2\frac{2\lambda +1}{2}R+\frac{\lambda (2\lambda +1)}{10}^2R+\frac{\lambda (\lambda +3)}{5}R^2,\hfill \\ _6& =& R^3\frac{3}{2}R^2+\left(\frac{3}{10}^2R+\frac{4}{5}R^2\right),\hfill \\ _6^{}& =& R^3+\frac{9}{2}R^2+\left(\frac{63}{10}^2R+\frac{4}{5}R^2\right)+\frac{14}{5}^3R+\frac{8}{5}RR,\hfill \end{array}$$

are globally defined in $`𝒟_{\lambda ,\lambda +2}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),`$ $`𝒟_{\lambda ,\lambda +3}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),`$ $`𝒟_{\lambda ,\lambda +4}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),`$ $`𝒟_{0,5}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),`$ $`𝒟_{4,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),`$ respectively, and depend only on the projective class of the connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }.`$

Proof. Since the surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is projectively flat, the connection $`R`$ defines a 2-density on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }.`$ Then the operators of the above Lemma are globally defined. Let us prove that the operators depend only on the projective class of the connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }.`$

Let $`_4=R+\alpha R.`$ Denote by $`\stackrel{~}{}_4`$ the operator $`_4`$ written with respect to a connection $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$ which is projectively equivalent to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }.`$ After an easy calculation one has

$$_4=\stackrel{~}{}_4+(2\alpha +\lambda )(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\mathrm{\Gamma })R.$$

Then $`_4=\stackrel{~}{}_4`$ if and only if $`\alpha =\lambda /2.`$ The proof is analogous for the operators $`_5,_6`$ and $`_6^{}.`$

###### Theorem 5.2

(i) For every $`\lambda ,`$ there exist unique (up to constant) 1-cocycles

$$\begin{array}{c}𝒥_3:\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })𝒟_{\lambda ,\lambda +2}\\ 𝒥_4:\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })𝒟_{\lambda ,\lambda +3}\\ 𝒥_5:\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })𝒟_{\lambda ,\lambda +4}\end{array}$$

vanishing on $`\mathrm{sl}_2()`$. They are given by the formulæ:

$$\begin{array}{c}𝒥_3(X)=^3XL_X^{\lambda ,\lambda +2}(_3),\\ \\ 𝒥_4(X)=^3X\frac{\lambda }{2}^4XL_X^{\lambda ,\lambda +3}(_4),\\ \\ 𝒥_5(X)=^3X^2\frac{2\lambda +1}{2}^4X+\frac{\lambda (2\lambda +1)}{10}^5XL_X^{\lambda ,\lambda +4}(_5).\end{array}$$

For $`(\lambda ,\mu )=(0,5),(4,1)`$, respectively, the 1-cocycles vanishing on $`\mathrm{sl}_2()`$ are given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}𝒥_6^0(X)=& ^3X^3\frac{3}{2}^4X^2+\frac{3}{10}^5XL_X^{0,5}(_6),\\ \\ 𝒥_6^4(X)=& ^3X^3+\frac{9}{2}^4X^2+\frac{63}{10}^5X+\frac{14}{5}^6XL_X^{4,1}(_6^{}).\end{array}$$

(ii) The 1-cocycles $`𝒥_3`$, $`𝒥_4`$ and $`𝒥_5`$ are nontrivial for every $`\lambda `$ except $`\lambda =1/2,\lambda =1`$ and $`\lambda =3/2`$, respectively. The 1-cocycles $`𝒥_6^0`$ and $`𝒥_6^4`$ are nontrivial.

(iii) These 1-cocycles are independent on the choice of the projective structure.

## 6 $`\mathrm{sl}_2()`$invariant operators on $`S^1`$

For almost all $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu ,`$ there exits unique (up to constant) $`\mathrm{sl}_2()`$invariant bilinear differential operators $`J_m^{\lambda ,\mu }:_\lambda _\mu _{\lambda +\mu +m}`$ given by

$$J_m^{\lambda ,\mu }(\varphi ,\psi )=\underset{i+j=m}{}(1)^im!\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2\lambda +m1}{i}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2\mu +m1}{j}\right)\varphi ^{(i)}\psi ^{(j)},$$
(6.6)
called “Transvectants” (see ).

Let us recall the results of .
The first group of cohomology $`H^1(\mathrm{Vect}(S^1),\mathrm{sl}_2();𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu }(S^1))`$ is one-dimensional in the following cases:
(a) $`\mu \lambda =2,\lambda 1/2,`$
(b) $`\mu \lambda =3,\lambda 1,`$
(c) $`\mu \lambda =4,\lambda 1/2,`$
(d) $`(\lambda ,\mu )=(4,1),(0,5).`$
Otherwise, this cohomology group is trivial (see ).

This group of cohomology is generated by the following 1-cocycles which are particular cases of the Transvectants (6.6):

$$\begin{array}{c}J_3(X,\varphi )=X^{\prime \prime \prime }\varphi ,\\ \\ J_4(X,\varphi )=X^{\prime \prime \prime }\varphi ^{}\frac{\lambda }{2}X^{IV}\varphi ,\\ \\ J_5(X,\varphi )=X^{\prime \prime \prime }\varphi ^{\prime \prime }\frac{2\lambda +1}{2}X^{IV}\varphi ^{}+\frac{\lambda (2\lambda +1)}{10}X^V\varphi ,\\ \\ J_6(X,\varphi )=X^{\prime \prime \prime }\varphi ^{\prime \prime \prime }\frac{3}{2}X^{IV}\varphi ^{\prime \prime }+\frac{3}{10}X^V\varphi ^{},\\ \\ J_6^{}(X,\varphi )=X^{\prime \prime \prime }\varphi ^{\prime \prime \prime }+\frac{9}{2}X^{IV}\varphi ^{\prime \prime }+\frac{63}{10}X^V\varphi ^{}+\frac{14}{5}X^{VI}\varphi .\end{array}$$
(6.7)
(see ).

The 1-cocycles given in Theorem 5.2 are the complex analogue of the 1-cocycles (6.7).

## 7 Proof of the main Theorems

In this section, we will prove Theorem 4.1 and Theorem 5.2.

### 7.1 Proof of the Theorem 5.2

To prove that the operators $`𝒥_k`$, for $`k=3,4,5,6,`$ are 1-cocycles one has to check the 1-cocycle relation. It reads as follows

$$𝒥_k[X,Y]L_X^{\lambda ,\lambda +k1}(𝒥_k(Y))+L_Y^{\lambda ,\lambda +k1}(𝒥_k(X))=0,$$
(7.8)
where $`X,Y\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }).`$
Let us verify (7.8) for the operator $`𝒥_3.`$ It is obvious that $`L_X^{\lambda ,\lambda +2}()`$ is a 1-cocycle. It suffices then to verify the relation (7.8) for the $`0`$order operator $`^3X:`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}^3\left([X,Y]\right)\varphi L_X^{\lambda ,\lambda +2}\left(^3Y\varphi \right)+L_Y^{\lambda ,\lambda +2}\left(^3X\varphi \right)=& \left(2X^3Y+X^4Y2Y^3XY^4X\right)\varphi \\ \\ & X\left(^3\varphi \right)\left(\lambda +2\right)X^3Y\varphi \\ \\ & +^3Y\left(X\varphi +\lambda X\varphi \right)+Y\left(^3X\varphi \right)\\ \\ & +\left(\lambda +2\right)Y^3X\varphi ^3X\left(Y\varphi +\lambda Y\varphi \right)\\ \\ =& 0.\end{array}$$

Let us prove that the 1-cocycle $`𝒥_3`$ vanishes on $`\mathrm{sl}_2().`$ Let $`X`$ be one of the vector fields (2.3). After calculation one has $`^3X=2RX+XR.`$ It is easy to see that $`L_X^{\lambda ,\lambda +2}(_3)=2RX+XR.`$ Hence, one obtains $`𝒥_3(X)=0.`$

In the same manner we prove that the operators $`𝒥_k,`$ for $`k=4,5,6,`$ are 1-cocycles vanishing on $`\mathrm{sl}_2().`$ Theorem 5.2 (i) is proven.

Let us prove the non-triviality of the 1-cocycle $`𝒥_3`$ for $`\lambda 1/2.`$ Suppose that the 1-cocycle $`𝒥_3(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ is trivial, then there exists an operator $`A𝒟_{\lambda ,\lambda +2}`$ such that

$$𝒥_3(X)=L_X^{\lambda ,\lambda +2}(A).$$
(7.9)
In a neighborhood of a point $`z`$, one can choice a local coordinates such that the connection $`R=0.`$ In these coordinates, the 1-cocycle $`𝒥_3`$ coincides with the 1-cocyle $`J_3`$ of (6.7). Hence the relation (7.9) implies that the 1-cocycle $`J_3`$ is trivial which is absurd (see section 6).
For $`\lambda =1/2,`$ take $`A=2^2𝒟_{\frac{1}{2},\frac{3}{2}}(\mathrm{\Sigma }).`$ One can easily check that $`𝒥_3(X)=L_X^{1/2,3/2}(A).`$
With the same arguments we prove the non-triviality of the 1-cocyles $`𝒥_k,`$ for $`k=4,5,6.`$ Theorem 5.2 (ii) is proven.

### 7.2 Proof of Theorem 4.1

Let us prove that the dimension of the group of cohomology $`H^1(\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),\mathrm{sl}_2();𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu }(\mathrm{\Sigma }))`$ is bounded by the dimension of the group of cohomology $`H^1(\mathrm{Vect}(S^1),\mathrm{sl}_2();𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu }(S^1)).`$ Let $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ be two 1-cocycles in $`H^1(\mathrm{Hol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),\mathrm{sl}_2();𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu }(\mathrm{\Sigma })).`$ We will prove that $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ are cohomologous. Denote $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{C}^{}`$ the restriction of $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ on a neighborhood of a point of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }.`$ The operators $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{C}^{}`$ define 1-cocycle in $`H^1(\mathrm{Vect}(S^1),\mathrm{sl}_2();𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu }(S^1)).`$ These 1-cocycles are equal (up to constant); since the unique $`\mathrm{sl}_2()`$invariant linear differential operators are given as in (6.7). It follows that the 1-cocyle $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ are cohomologous. Now from the construction of the 1-cocyles given in Theorem (5.2) follows Theorem (4.1).

## 8 Final Remark

The group of cohomology $`H^1(\mathrm{Diff}(S^1),\mathrm{PSL}_2();𝒟_{\lambda ,\mu })`$ is one-dimension, for generic $`\lambda ,`$ generated by the following 1-cocyles

$$\begin{array}{cc}𝒮_\lambda \left(f\right)=& S\left(f\right),\\ \\ 𝒯_\lambda \left(f\right)=& S\left(f\right)\frac{d}{dx}\frac{\lambda }{2}S\left(f\right)^{},\\ \\ 𝒰_\lambda \left(f\right)=& S\left(f\right)\frac{d^2}{dx^2}\frac{2\lambda +1}{2}S\left(f\right)^{}\frac{d}{dx}+\frac{\lambda \left(2\lambda +1\right)}{10}S\left(f\right)^{\prime \prime }\frac{\lambda \left(\lambda +3\right)}{5}S\left(f\right)^2,\\ \\ 𝒱_0\left(f\right)=& S\left(f\right)\frac{d^3}{dx^3}\frac{3}{2}S\left(f\right)^{}\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+\left(\frac{3}{10}S\left(f\right)^{\prime \prime }+\frac{4}{5}S\left(f\right)^2\right)\frac{d}{dx}\\ \\ 𝒱_4=& S\left(f\right)\frac{d^3}{dx^3}+\frac{9}{2}S\left(f\right)^{}\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+\left(\frac{63}{10}S\left(f\right)^{\prime \prime }+\frac{4}{5}S\left(f\right)^2\right)\frac{d}{dx}+\frac{14}{5}S\left(f\right)^{\prime \prime \prime }+\frac{8}{5}S\left(f\right)S\left(f\right)^{},\end{array}$$
(8.10)
where $`S(f)`$ is the Schwarzian derivative (see ). It is a remarkable fact to see that the 1-cocycles (8.10) on the group $`\mathrm{Diff}(S^1)`$ have the same expression (up to change of sign) than the operators of the Lemma 5.1 if one replaces the connection $`R`$ by $`S(f).`$

Since the group of biholomorphic maps on a Riemann surface is finite dimension (see ), this group does not integrate the Lie algebra of holomorphic vector fields. In some sense, the cohomology group (1.1) contains informations coming from the cohomology of the diffeomorphisms of $`S^1`$ and the cohomology of the Lie algebra of vector fields on $`S^1.`$

Acknowledgments. It is a pleasure to acknowledge numerous fruitful discussions with Ch. Duval, V. Ovsienko and F. Wagemann. The first author is grateful to the JSPS for the research support, and Prof. Y. Maeda and Keio University for their hospitality.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Direct-production of two hard photons in nucleon-nucleon collisions ($`NN\gamma \gamma `$) at intermediate energies, unlike production of single photons ($`NN`$ bremsstrahlung), belongs to those fundamental processes which are still poorly explored both theoretically and experimentally. However, a study of this process can provide us with new important information on the underlying mechanisms of the $`NN`$ interaction that is complementary to that obtained from investigations of other processes. In particular, the $`NN\gamma \gamma `$ process can be used as a sensitive probe for experimental verification of the possible existence of $`NN`$-decoupled nonstrange dibaryon resonances. These are two-baryon states $`{}_{}{}^{2}B`$ with zero strangeness and exotic quantum numbers, for which the strong decay $`{}_{}{}^{2}BNN`$ is either strictly forbidden by the Pauli principle (for the states with the isospin $`I=1(0)`$ and with an even sum $`L+S+I`$, where $`L`$ is the orbital momentum and $`S`$ is the spin), or is strongly suppressed by the isospin selection rules (for the states with $`I=2`$). Such dibaryon states cannot be simple bound systems of two color-singlet nucleons, and a proof of their existence would have consequences of fundamental significance for the theory of strong interactions. The $`NN`$-decoupled dibaryon states are predicted in a series of $`QCD`$-inspired models. Among the predicted dibaryons, there are those whith masses both below and above the pion production ($`\pi NN`$) threshold. The $`NN`$-decoupled dibaryons with masses below the $`\pi NN`$ threshold are of special interest, since they may decay mainly into the $`NN\gamma `$ state, and consequently, their widths should be very narrow($`1keV`$). Narrow dibaryon states have been searched for in a number of experiments, but none has provided any undoubted evidence for their existence. Most of the past searches, however, were limited to dibaryons coupled to the $`NN`$ channel, and, to our knowledge, only a few ones were dedicated to the $`NN`$-decoupled dibaryons. At the same time, since the latter do not couple to the $`NN`$-channel, then, depending on their production and decay modes, they may have escaped detection up to now and may naturally appear in dedicated experiments.
If the $`NN`$-decoupled dibaryons exist in nature, then the $`NN\gamma \gamma `$ process may proceed, at least partly, through the mechanism that directly involves the radiative excitation $`NN\gamma ^2B`$ and decay $`{}_{}{}^{2}B\gamma NN`$ modes of these states. In $`NN`$ collisions at energies below the $`\pi NN`$ threshold, these production and decay modes of the $`NN`$-decoupled dibaryon resonances with masses $`M_R2m_N+m_\pi `$ would be unique or dominant. The simplest and clear way of revealing them is to measure the photon energy spectrum of the reaction $`NN\gamma \gamma `$. The presence of an $`NN`$-decoupled dibaryon resonance would reveal itself in this energy spectrum as a narrow line associated with the formation of this resonance and a relatively broad peak originating from its three-particle decay. In the center-of-mass system, the position of the narrow line($`E_R`$) is determined by the energy of colliding nucleons ($`W=\sqrt{s}`$) and the mass of this dibaryon resonance as $`E_R=(W^2M_R^2)/2W`$. An essential feature of the two-photon production in $`NN`$ collisions at an energy below the $`\pi NN`$ threshold is that, apart from the resonant mechanism in question, there should only be one more source of photon pairs. This is the double $`NN`$-bremsstrahlung reaction. But this reaction is expected to play a minor role. Indeed, it involves two electromagnetic vertices, so that one may expect that the $`NN\gamma \gamma `$-to-$`NN\gamma `$ cross section ratio should be of the order the fine structure constant $`\alpha `$. However, the cross section for $`NN\gamma `$ is already small (for example, the total $`pp`$-bremsstrahlung cross section at energies of interest is a few $`\mu b`$).
The process $`pppp\gamma \gamma `$ at an energy below the $`\pi NN`$ threshold provides an unique possibility of searching for the $`NN`$-decoupled dibaryon resonances in the mass region $`M_R2m_p+m_\pi `$ with quantum numbers $`I(J^P)=1(1^+,3^+,etc.`$) or those with $`I=2`$ ($`J`$ is the total spin, and $`P`$ is the parity of a dibaryon). The preliminary experimental studies of the reaction $`pp\gamma \gamma X`$ at an incident proton energy of about 200 MeV showed that the photon energy spectrum of this reaction had a peculiar structure ranging from about 20 MeV to about 60 MeV. This structure was interpreted as an indication of the possible existence of an $`NN`$-decoupled dibaryon resonance(later called $`d_1^{}`$) that is produced in the process $`pp\gamma d_1^{}`$ and subsequently decays via the $`d_1^{}pp\gamma `$ channel. Unfortunately, a relatively coarse energy resolution and low statistics did not allow us to distinguish the narrow $`\gamma `$-peak associated with the $`d_1^{}`$ production from the broad $`\gamma `$-peak due to the decay of this resonance and, hence, to determine the resonance mass exactly. To get a rough estimate of the $`d_1^{}`$ mass, we admitted that the expected narrow $`\gamma `$-peak is positioned at the center of the observed structure and thus obtained $`M_R1920`$ MeV. However, if the uncertainty in the position of the narrow $`\gamma `$-peak in the structure is taken into account, the actual $`d_1^{}`$ mass might be considerably different from such a crude estimate. The possible existence of this dibaryon resonance was also probed in the proton-proton bremsstrahlung data taken by the WASA/Promice Collaboration at the CELSIUS accelerator for proton energies of 200 and 310 MeV. However, the trigger used in those experimental studies to select events was designed and optimized for investigating the usual $`pppp\gamma `$ bremsstrahlung. The selected events were those corresponding to two simultaneously detected protons emerging in the forward direction at angles between $`4^0`$ and $`20^0`$ with respect to the beam axis, each of which had a kinetic energy exceeding the present threshold (40 MeV). The analysis of those data resulted only in upper limits on the dibaryon production cross section in the mass range from 1900 to 1960 MeV. Therefore, to clarify the situation with the dibaryon resonance $`d_1^{}`$, we have decided to measure the energy spectrum of the $`pppp\gamma \gamma `$ reaction more carefully.

## 2 Experimental apparatus and event selection

The experiment was performed using the variable energy proton beam from the phasotron at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research(JINR). The schematic layout of the experimental setup is shown in Fig. 1.

The pulsed proton beam (bursts of about 7 ns FWHM separated by 70 ns) with an energy of about 216 MeV and an energy spread of about 1.5% bombarded a liquid hydrogen target ($`T`$). The average beam intensity was on the order of $`3.610^8`$ protons/s and was monitored by an ionization chamber ($`M`$). The liquid hydrogen target was a cylindrical cryogenic vessel with a length of about 5 cm ($`0.35g/cm^2`$) and a diameter of 4.5, cm which had thin entrance and exit windows made from 100 $`\mu m`$ thick mylar foil. Both $`\gamma `$-quanta of the reaction $`pp\gamma \gamma `$ were detected by two $`\gamma `$-ray detectors($`D_1`$ and $`D_2`$) placed in a horizontal plane, symmetrically on either side of the beam at a laboratory angle of $`90^0`$ with respect to the beam direction. The $`\gamma `$-detector $`D_1`$ was an array of seven individual detector modules (see Fig. 1): the central detector module ($`C`$) and six detector modules ($`R_1,R_2,..,R_6`$) surrounding the central detector module. Each detector module was a 15 cm thick $`CsI(Tl)`$ crystal having a hexagonal cross section with an outer diameter of 10 cm. The detector modules $`R_1,R_2,..,R_6`$ (ring) were designed to measure the energy of secondary particles and photons leaving the central detector module $`C`$. Thus, the energy of each photon detected by the detector $`D_1`$ was determined by summing up the energy deposited in the central detector module and the energies deposited in the detector modules of the ring. Besides, the ring was used as an active shielding from cosmic ray muons. The energy resolution of a single $`CsI(Tl)`$ crystal was measured to be about 13% for $`E_\gamma =15.1`$ MeV. The second $`\gamma `$-ray detector $`D_2`$ was a cylindrical $`NaI(Tl)`$ crystal 15 cm in diameter and 10 cm in length. Compared to the detector $`D_1`$, it had a poorer energy resolution for $`\gamma `$-rays with energies $`E_\gamma >10`$ MeV. The detector $`D_2`$ was mainly designed to select $`\gamma \gamma `$ coincidence events. To reject events induced by charged particles, plastic scintillators ($`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$) were put in front of each $`\gamma `$-detector. Both $`\gamma `$-ray detectors were placed in lead houses with walls 10 cm thick which were in turn surrounded by a 5 cm borated parafin shield. The solid angles covered by the detectors $`D_1`$ and $`D_2`$ were 43 msr and 76 msr, respectively. To attenuate prompt particles coming from the target, 15 cm polyethylene bars (PB) were placed in between the target and each $`\gamma `$-detector.
The electronics associated with the $`\gamma `$-detectors and the plastic scintillators provided amplitude and time signals suitable for digitizing by an $`ADC`$ and a $`TDC`$. The data acquisition system was triggered by the time signal from the detector module $`C`$ which started all the $`TDCs`$ and opened the $`ADC`$ gates. In parallel, the time signals from the detector module $`C`$ and the $`\gamma `$-detector $`D_2`$ were sent to a coincidence circuit to select those events which had signals from both the $`\gamma `$-detectors. Events satisfying this criterion were recorded in the event-by-event mode on the hard disk of the computer. A further selection of $`\gamma \gamma `$ coincidence candidate events was done during off-line data processing.

The off-line selection procedure for events associated with the process $`pp\gamma \gamma X`$ included the following main operations: rejection of events induced by charge particles coming from the target, rejection of events induced by cosmic ray muons, selection of events which are caused by proton beam bursts and selection of events associated with $`\gamma \gamma `$ coincidences.

## 3 Results and discussion

The measurements were performed both with the target filled with liquid hydrogen and with the empty one. Data for the full and empty targets were taken in two successive runs for $``$31 h and $``$21 h, respectively. The integrated luminosity of about $`8.5pb^1`$ was accumulated for the measurement with the full target. The resulting number of $`\gamma \gamma `$ coincidence events associated with the $`pp\gamma \gamma X`$ process as a function of the photon energy measured by the detector $`D_1`$ is presented in Fig. 2. As can be seen, the energy spectrum of the reaction $`pp\gamma \gamma X`$ consists of a narrow peak at a photon energy of about 24 MeV and a relatively broad peak in the energy range from about 50 to about 70 MeV. It was found that the statistical significance for the sharp peak as well as for the broad one exceeds 5$`\sigma `$. The width (FWHM) of the narrow peak was found to be about 8 MeV. This width is comparable with that of the energy resolution of the experimental setup. The observed behavior of the photon energy spectrum agrees with a characteristic signature of the sought dibaryon resonance $`d_1^{}`$ that is formed and decays in the radiative process $`pp\gamma d_1^{}pp\gamma \gamma `$. In that case the narrow peak should be attributed to the formation of this dibaryon, while the broad peak should be assigned to its three-particle decay. Using the value for the energy of the narrow peak $`E_R24`$ MeV, we obtained the $`d_1^{}`$ mass $`M_R1956`$ MeV.

Having assumed that the $`pp\gamma d_1^{}pp\gamma \gamma `$ process with the $`d_1^{}`$ mass of 1956 MeV is the only mechanism of the reaction $`pppp\gamma \gamma `$, we calculated the photon energy spectra of this reaction for a proton energy of 216 MeV. It was also assumed that the radiative decay of the $`d_1^{}`$ is a dipole $`E1(M1)`$ transition from the two-baryon resonance state to a $`pp`$-state in the continuum. The calculations were carried out with the help of Monte Carlo simulations which included the geometry and the energy resolution of the actual experimental setup. The photon energy spectra were calculated for two different scenarios of the $`d_1^{}`$ decay. The difference between them was that one of these scenarios took into account the final state interaction ($`FSI`$) of two outgoing protons whereas in the other that interaction was switched off. Each of the scenarios imposed some restrictions on possible quantum numbers of the dibaryon state in question. The scenario including the $`FSI`$ implies that the final $`pp`$-system is in the singlet $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ state and consequently it should take place, in particular, for the isovector $`1^+`$ dibaryon state (the simplest exotic quantum numbers), namely, $`1^+\stackrel{M1}{}0^+`$. At the same time, the scenario in which the $`FSI`$ is switched off, is most likely to occur for the isotensor $`0^+`$ dibaryon state. The spectra calculated for these two decay scenarios and normalized to the total number of $`\gamma \gamma `$ events observed in the present experiment are shown in Fig. 2.

Comparison of these spectra with the experimental spectrum indicates that both the calculated spectra are in reasonable agreement with the experimental one within experimental uncertainties. However, one can see that the energy spectrum for the scenario that can be realized for the isotensor dibaryon($`I=2`$) is more consistent with the experimental spectrum. At the same time, the statistics of the experiment is insufficient to draw any firm conclusions in favor of one of these scenarios, that is, in favor of either $`I=1`$ or $`I=2`$ for the isospin of $`d_1^{}`$. In this connection, we would like to emphasize that the experimental data on the process $`\pi ^{}d\gamma \gamma X`$ can shed some light on the properties of the dibaryon state we have observed. The point is that the $`d_1^{}`$ dibaryon can in principle be excited in this process via the mode $`\pi ^{}d\gamma d_1^{}\gamma \gamma nn`$. However, excitation of the dibaryon $`d_1^{}`$ with isospin $`I=1`$ is allowed by the isospin selection rules, whereas excitation of the isotensor $`(I=2)`$ resonance is expected to be strongly suppressed. Therefore, the preliminary results of the study of the reaction $`\pi ^{}d\gamma \gamma X`$ carried out by the RMC Collaboration at TRIUMF indicating no enhancement of the two-photon yield in the process $`(\pi ^{}d)_{atom}\gamma \gamma nn`$ compared to the usual one-nucleon mechanism $`\pi ^{}p\gamma \gamma n`$ on the proton bound in the deuteron may imply that the $`d_1^{}`$ dibaryon has isospin 2.

## 4 Conclusion

The $`\gamma `$-ray energy spectrum for the $`pp\gamma \gamma X`$ reaction at a proton energy below the pion production threshold has been measured for the first time. The spectrum measured at an energy of about 216 MeV for coincident photons emitted at an angle of $`90^0`$ in the laboratory frame clearly evidences the existence of the $`NN`$-decoupled dibaryon resonance $`d_1^{}`$ with a mass of about 1956 MeV that is formed and decays in the process $`pp\gamma d_1^{}pp\gamma \gamma `$. The data we have obtained, however, are still incomplete, and additional careful studies of the reaction $`pppp\gamma \gamma `$ are needed to get proper parameters (mass, width, spin, etc.) of the observed dibaryon state.