text:
# Anti-self-dual four-manifolds with a parallel real spinor.

## 1 Introduction

Constraints on a (pseudo) Riemannian geometry imposed by the existence of a parallel spinor essentially depend on the properties of the Clifford algebra and the spin group associated with the metric. There has been an interest in such geometries in pure mathematics, because they extend a list of holonomy groups of Riemannian manifolds (where the existence of a parallel spinor implies Ricci flatness). Pseudo Riemannian metrics in various dimensions with a covariantly constant spinor have also attracted a lot of attention in physics, as such spinors play a central role in supersymmetry.

In  Bryant analysed all cases up to six dimensions, together with some higher-dimensional examples of particular interest. In this paper I shall concentrate on the four-dimensional case.

Let $`(,g)`$ be a (pseudo) Riemannian spin four-manifold. Therefore there exist complex two-dimensional vector bundles $`S_\pm `$ (spin-bundles) equipped with parallel symplectic structures $`\epsilon _\pm `$ such that

* $`TS_+S_{}`$ is a canonical bundle isomorphism.
* $`g(v_1w_1,v_2w_2)=\epsilon _+(v_1,v_2)\epsilon _{}(w_1,w_2)`$ for $`v_1,v_2\mathrm{\Gamma }(S_+)`$ and $`w_1,w_2\mathrm{\Gamma }(S_{})`$.

I shall assume that there exists a spinor $`\iota `$ parallel with respect to a Levi-Civita connection $``$ of $`g`$

$$\iota =(p,q)\mathrm{\Gamma }(S_+),\iota =0.$$

There are three possible situations depending on the signature of the metric.

* In the Lorentzian signature $`(+)`$

$$\text{Spin(3, 1)}=SL(2,),\iota =(p,q)\overline{\iota }=(\overline{p},\overline{q})\mathrm{\Gamma }(S_{}),\overline{\iota }=0.$$

Therefore $`l=\iota \overline{\iota }`$ is a parallel null vector. This condition has been extensively studied in general relativity : There exist two real functions $`u,v`$, and one complex function $`\xi `$ such that

$$g=\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v\mathrm{d}\xi \mathrm{d}\overline{\xi }+H(u,\xi ,\overline{\xi })\mathrm{d}u^2.$$

The Ricci flat condition implies that $`H(u,\xi ,\overline{\xi })=\text{Re}(f(u,\xi ))`$ where $`f`$ is holomorphic in $`\xi `$. These solutions are known as p.p waves. Analysis of curvature invariants shows that the function $`H(u,\xi ,\overline{\xi })`$ cannot be eliminated by a coordinate transformation.
* In the Euclidean signature $`(++++)`$

$$\text{Spin(4, 0)}=SU(2)\times \stackrel{~}{SU}(2),\iota =(p,q)\overline{\iota }=(\overline{q},\overline{p})\mathrm{\Gamma }(S_+),\overline{\iota }=0.$$

A spinor and its complex conjugate form a basis of a spin space $`S_+`$. A four-dimensional Riemannian manifold which admits a covariantly constant spinor must therefore be hyper-Kähler. Hyper Kähler four-manifolds have been much studied for the last twenty five years. See  and references therein.
* In the split signature $`(++)`$ (also called ultra-hyperbolic, Kleinian or neutral)

$$\text{Spin(2, 2)}=SL(2,)\times \stackrel{~}{SL}(2,),\iota =(p,q)\overline{\iota }=(\overline{p},\overline{q})\mathrm{\Gamma }(S_+),\overline{\iota }=0,$$

and the representation space of the spin group splits into a direct sum of two real two-dimensional spin spaces $`S_+`$ and $`S_{}`$. The conjugation of spinors is involutive and maps each spin space onto itself, and there exists an invariant notion of real spinors.

One can therefore look for $`(++)`$ metrics with a parallel real spinor (which we choose to be $`\iota \mathrm{\Gamma }(S_+)`$). These metrics do not have to be Ricci-flat. The resulting geometry will be studied in the rest of this paper. The isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}^{2}{}_{+}{}^{}()\text{Sym}^2(S_+)`$ between the bundle of self-dual two-forms and the symmetric tensor product of two spin bundles implies that the real self-dual two-form $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\iota \iota \epsilon _+`$ is covariantly constant and null (i.e. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{\Sigma }=0`$) which motivates the following definition:

###### Definition 1.1

A null-Kähler structure on a four-manifold consists of metric of signature $`(++)`$ and a real spinor field parallel with respect to this inner product. A null-Kähler structure is anti-self-dual (ASD) if the self-dual part of the Weyl spinor vanishes.

The ASD condition on null-Kähler structures is worth studying for at least two reasons: firstly, four-dimensional vacuum metrics in signature $`(++)`$ appeared in describing the bosonic sector of the $`N=2`$ super-string , . Secondly, many integrable systems in dimensions two and three arise (together with their twistor description) as symmetry reductions of anti-self-duality equations on $`(++)`$ background .

The first aspect will be not discussed in the present paper, but I shall reveal some connections with integrable systems in Sections 3 and 5.

In the next Section the ASD null Kähler condition will be related to Einstein-Maxwell equations. In Section 3 ASD null-Kähler condition will be reduced to a single fourth order integrable PDE. Explicit solutions to this equations will provide some examples of ASD null-Kähler structures. The resulting twistor theory will be described in Section 4. The existence of a parallel real spinor will be characterised by a real structure preserving a preferred non-zero section of $`\kappa ^{1/4}`$, where $`\kappa `$ is the canonical line bundle of the twistor space. In Section 5 it will be shown that ASD null Kähler structures with a symmetry which preserves the parallel spinor are locally given by solutions to the dispersionless Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation and its linearisations . Einstein–Weyl structures on the space of trajectories of the symmetry will be characterised by the existence of a parallel weighted null vector. The two-component spinor notation will used in the paper. The spin spaces $`S_{}`$, and $`S_+`$ will be denoted by $`S^A`$ and $`S^A^{}`$ respectively. From now on the parallel real spinor and the corresponding null-Kähler two-form will be denoted by $`\iota ^A^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(S^A^{})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}=\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}^{2}{}_{+}{}^{}()`$. The notation is summarised in the Appendix.

## 2 Null-Kähler metrics in four dimensions

It is well know  that Kähler four-manifolds with vanishing scalar curvature are necessary ASD. This is not true for scalar-flat null-Kähler four-manifolds. Instead one has the following result:

###### Proposition 2.1

Let $`\iota _A^{}`$ be a parallel real spinor on dimensional, ultrahyperbolic manifold. Then the scalar curvature vanishes, the Ricci tensor is null, and the self-dual Weyl spinor is given by

$$C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}=c\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}\iota _C^{}\iota _D^{}$$
(2.1)
for some function $`c`$ such that $`\iota ^A^{}_{AA^{}}c=0`$.

Proof: Vanishing of the scalar curvature follows from the second Ricci identity (7.39). The first identity (7.38) implies that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ABA^{}B^{}}\iota ^B^{}=0`$, so $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ABA^{}B^{}}=F_{AB}\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}`$ for some $`F_{AB}`$. The formula 2.1 is a direct consequence of (7.39) and (7.40) applied to a covariantly constant spinor.

$`\mathrm{}`$

Now I shall show that ASD null-Kähler metrics can be viewed as solutions to Einstein equations with electromagnetic stress-energy tensor. The ASD part of the Maxwell field is given by the Ricci form, and the SD part is given by the null-Kähler form.

###### Proposition 2.2

There is a one-to-one correspondence between ASD metrics with a constant real spinor, and ASD Einstein-Maxwell spaces for which the SD part of Maxwell field is null and covariantly constant.

Proof: Let $`(,g)`$ be an ASD manifold with a covariantly constant spinor $`\iota _A^{}`$. Proposition 2.1 implies that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{ABA^{}B^{}}=F_{AB}\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{},$$
(2.2)
and the spinor Bianchi identities (7.40) yield $`^{AA^{}}F_{AB}=0`$. Therefore

$$F_{ab}=F_{AB}\epsilon _{A^{}B^{}}+\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}\epsilon _{AB}.$$
(2.3)
is a Maxwell field, and the formula (2.2) can be read off as Einstein equations with a Maxwell stress energy tensor

$$T_{ab}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{4}g_{ab}F_{cd}F^{cd}F_{ac}F_{b}^{}{}_{}{}^{c}\right)=F_{AB}\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}.$$

Conversely, consider a Maxwell field $`F_{ab}`$ (2.3) on an ASD background, such that its SD part is null and constant. The Maxwell equations give

$$_A^{}^AF_{AB}=0,_{AA^{}}\iota _B^{}=0,$$

and the Einstein equations with the stress energy tensor $`T_{ab}=F_{AB}\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}`$ yield (2.2).

$`\mathrm{}`$

The following result will be used in Sections 3 and 4

###### Proposition 2.3

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}}=(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}},\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}1^{}},\mathrm{\Sigma }^{1^{}1^{}})`$ be a basis of normalised real SD two-forms on an ASD scalar-flat manifold such that

$$\mathrm{d}(\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}})=\mathrm{d}(o_A^{}\iota _B^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}})=0.$$
(2.4)
Then there exists a covariantly constant real section of $`S_A^{}`$. Conversely, let $`\iota _A^{}`$ be a covariantly constant section of $`S_A^{}`$ on an ASD four manifold. Then it is possible to find another section $`o_A^{}`$, such that $`(o_A^{},\iota _A^{})`$ form a normalised spin frame, and equations (2.4) hold.

Proof: Let $`(o_A^{},\iota _A^{})`$ be a normalised spin basis. The covariant derivatives of the basis can be expressed as

$$_a\iota _B^{}=U_a\iota _B^{}+V_ao_B^{},_ao_B^{}=W_a\iota _B^{}U_ao_B^{}.$$

The first condition in (2.4) can be rewritten as $`_{A}^{}{}_{}{}^{A^{}}(\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{})=0`$, which implies

$$V_a=2U_{AB^{}}\iota ^B^{}\iota _A^{}.$$

The second condition in (2.4) yields $`U_{AA^{}}=\alpha _A\iota _A^{},W_{AA^{}}=\beta _A\iota _A^{}`$ for some $`\alpha _A,\beta _A`$. Therefore

$$_{AA^{}}\iota _B^{}=\alpha _A\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}.$$
(2.5)
Contracting the RHS of the above equation with $`_{}^{A}{}_{C^{}}{}^{}`$, and symmetrising over $`(A^{}B^{})`$ gives $`0`$ because $`g`$ is $`ASD`$ and scalar-flat. As a consequence $`_{}^{A}{}_{(C^{}}{}^{}[\iota _{A^{})}\iota _B^{}\alpha _A]=0`$ which gives $`_{}^{A}{}_{A^{}}{}^{}\alpha _A=0`$. Consider the real spinor $`\widehat{\iota }_A^{}:=\iota _A^{}\text{exp}f`$, where $`\iota ^A^{}_{AA^{}}f=0`$ in order to preserve $`\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}=0`$. Integrability conditions for $`_{AA^{}}f=\alpha _A\iota _A^{}`$ are satisfied, as $`\alpha _A`$ solves the neutrino equation. Therefore we can find $`f`$ for each $`\alpha _A`$, and equation (2.5) implies that $`\widehat{\iota }_A^{}`$ is covariantly constant.
Converse. Now assume $`_{AA^{}}\iota _B^{}=0`$. Consider $`\widehat{o}_A^{}`$ such that $`\widehat{o}_A^{}\iota ^A^{}=1`$. The normalization condition implies $`_{AA^{}}\widehat{o}_B^{}=\gamma _A\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}+\rho _A\widehat{o}_A^{}\iota _B^{}`$ for some $`\gamma _A,\rho _A`$. Contracting with $`_{}^{A}{}_{C^{}}{}^{}`$ and using Ricci identities (7.38) yields $`_{}^{A}{}_{A^{}}{}^{}\rho _A=0`$, and so $`\rho _A=\iota ^A^{}_{AA^{}}\varphi `$. Therefore in the null rotated normalised spin frame $`\iota _A^{},\widehat{o}_A^{}\varphi \iota _A^{}`$ we have $`\rho _A=0`$. Therefore

$$_{A}^{}{}_{}{}^{A^{}}(o_A^{}\iota _B^{}+o_B^{}\iota _A^{})=2W_{A}^{}{}_{}{}^{A^{}}\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}=\rho _A\iota _B^{}=0,$$

and $`\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}1^{}}=0`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

## 3 Anti-Self-Dual null-Kähler condition as an integrable system

I shall now construct a local coordinate system adapted to the parallel spinor, and reduce the ASD null-Kähler condition to a pair of coupled PDEs. Integrability of these PDEs will be established by using the Lax formulation (i.e. showing that they arise as the integrability conditions to an over-determined system of linear equations).

Let $`S^A^{}=\times ^2`$ be the bundle of complex primed spinors. The natural context for introducing the Lax pair is the geometry of the projective primed spin bundle (also called the correspondence space) $`=(S^A^{})=\times ^1`$. It is coordinatized by $`(x^a,\lambda )`$, where $`x^a`$ denotes the coordinates on $``$ and $`\lambda `$ is the coordinate on $`^1`$ that parametrises the $`\alpha `$-surfaces through $`x`$ in $``$. We relate the fibre coordinates $`\pi ^A^{}`$ on $`S^A^{}`$ to $`\lambda `$ by $`\lambda =\pi _0^{}/\pi _1^{}`$.

Let $`_{AA^{}}`$ be a null tetrad of vector fields for the metric $`g`$ on $``$ and let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AA^{}B^{}C^{}}`$ be the components of the spin connection in the associated spin frame. A horizontal lift of $`_{AA^{}}`$ to $`S_A^{}`$ given by

$$\stackrel{~}{}_{AA^{}}=_{AA^{}}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AA^{}B^{}C^{}}\pi ^B^{}\frac{}{\pi _C^{}}$$

Its horizontality implies $`\stackrel{~}{}_{AA^{}}\pi _B^{}=0`$.

The space $``$ possesses a natural two-dimensional distribution called the twistor distribution, or Lax pair to emphasise the analogy with integrable systems. The Lax pair arises as the image under the projection $`TS^A^{}T`$ of the distribution spanned by $`L_A=\pi ^A^{}\stackrel{~}{}_{AA^{}}`$, and is given by

$$L_0=_{00^{}}\lambda _{01^{}}+l_0_\lambda ,L_0=_{10^{}}\lambda _{11^{}}+l_1_\lambda ,$$
(3.6)
where $`l_A=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AA^{}B^{}C^{}}\pi ^A^{}\pi ^B^{}\pi ^C^{}`$ are cubic polynomials in $`\lambda `$ (note that $`\pi _1^{}=1`$ in these formulae).

###### Theorem 3.1

 The twistor distribution on $`S_A^{}`$ given by (3.6) is integrable if and only if the Weyl curvature of $`g`$ is ASD, i.e. $`C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}=0`$.

We are now ready to reformulate the ASD null-Kähler condition as an integrable system.

###### Theorem 3.2

Real coordinates $`(w,z,x,y)`$ can be chosen such that all ASD null-Kähler metric are locally given by

$$g=\mathrm{d}w\mathrm{d}x+\mathrm{d}z\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{\Theta }_{xx}\mathrm{d}z^2\mathrm{\Theta }_{yy}\mathrm{d}w^2+2\mathrm{\Theta }_{xy}\mathrm{d}w\mathrm{d}z$$
(3.7)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }(w,z,x,y)`$ is a solution to a 4th order PDE $`(`$which we write as a system of two second order PDEs $`)`$:

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{wx}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{zy}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{xx}\mathrm{\Theta }_{yy}\mathrm{\Theta }_{xy}^2=f,$$
(3.8)
$$\mathrm{}f=f_{xw}+f_{yz}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{yy}f_{xx}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{xx}f_{yy}2\mathrm{\Theta }_{xy}f_{xy}=0.$$
(3.9)
Moreover (3.8,3.9) arise as an integrability condition for the linear system $`L_0\mathrm{\Psi }=L_1\mathrm{\Psi }=0`$, where $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }(w,z,x,y,\lambda )`$ and

$`L_0`$ $`=`$ $`(_w\mathrm{\Theta }_{xy}_y+\mathrm{\Theta }_{yy}_x)\lambda _y+f_y_\lambda ,`$
$`L_1`$ $`=`$ $`(_z+\mathrm{\Theta }_{xx}_y\mathrm{\Theta }_{xy}_x)+\lambda _xf_x_\lambda .`$ (3.10)
Proof: Let $`e^{AA^{}}`$ be a tetrad of real independent one-forms. The parallel spinor $`\iota _A^{}`$ enables us to choose coordinates $`w^A=(w,z)`$ such that $`e^{A0^{}}=\iota _A^{}e^{AA^{}}=\mathrm{d}w^A`$. Proposition 2.3 implies that we can choose $`o_A^{}`$ such that $`o_A^{}\iota ^A^{}=1`$, and

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}1^{}}=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon _{AB}o_A^{}\iota _B^{}e^{AA^{}}e^{BB^{}}=o_A^{}e^{AA^{}}\mathrm{d}w_A$$

is a closed two-form. Therefore the Frobenius theorem guarantees the existence of coordinates $`x_A=(x,y)`$ such that $`e_{A}^{}{}_{}{}^{1^{}}=o_A^{}e_{A}^{}{}_{}{}^{A^{}}=\mathrm{d}x_A+\mathrm{\Theta }_{AB}\mathrm{d}w^B`$, where $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{AB}=\mathrm{\Theta }_{AB}(w,z,x,y)`$ is symmetric in $`A`$ and $`B`$. With this choice $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}1^{}}=\mathrm{d}x_A\mathrm{d}w^A`$, and the metric is given by

$$g=\mathrm{d}x_A\mathrm{d}w^A+\mathrm{\Theta }_{AB}\mathrm{d}w^A\mathrm{d}w^B.$$

Calculating the components of the spin connection yields $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AA^{}B^{}C^{}}=A_{AA^{}}\iota _B^{}\iota _C^{}`$. The residual conformal freedom is used to set $`A_{AA^{}}=\beta _A\iota _A^{}`$.

The tetrad of vector fields $`_{AA^{}}`$ dual to $`e^{AA^{}}`$ is

$$_{A1^{}}=\iota ^A^{}_{AA^{}}=\frac{}{x^A},_{A0^{}}=o^A^{}_{AA^{}}=\frac{}{w^A}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{AB}\frac{}{x_B},$$

and the Lax pair (3.6) is

$$L_A=\frac{}{x^A}\lambda \left(\frac{}{w^A}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{AB}\frac{}{x_B}\right)+l_A\frac{}{\lambda },$$

where in the chosen spin frame $`l_A=\beta _A`$ do not depend on $`\lambda `$. Consider the Lie bracket

$$[L_0,L_1]=\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }^{CD}}{w^C}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{AC}\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }^{AD}}{x_C}\beta ^D\lambda \frac{\mathrm{\Theta }^{AD}}{x^A}\right)\frac{}{x^D}+\left(\frac{\beta ^A}{w^A}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{AB}\frac{\beta ^A}{x_B}+\lambda \frac{\beta _A}{x_A}\right)\frac{}{\lambda }.$$

The ASD condition is equivalent to integrability of the distribution $`L_A`$. In fact $`[L_0,L_1]=0`$ because there is no $`/\omega ^A`$ term in the Lie bracket above. We deduce that

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{AB}=\delta _A\delta _B\mathrm{\Theta },\beta _A=\delta _Af,\text{where}\delta _A:=\iota ^A^{}_{AA^{}}=\frac{}{x^A},$$

and $`f=f(w,z,x,y)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }(w,z,x,y)`$ satisfy

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{wx}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{zy}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{xx}\mathrm{\Theta }_{yy}\mathrm{\Theta }_{xy}^2=f+(w,z),\mathrm{}f=0.$$

To obtain (3.8) we absorb $`(w,z)`$ into $`f`$ without changing (3.9).

$`\mathrm{}`$

Remarks

* One-forms $`(e^{00^{}},e^{10^{}})`$ span a differential ideal, and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}=e^{00^{}}e^{10^{}}=\mathrm{d}w\mathrm{d}z`$ is the null-Kähler form (it is covariantly constant with respect to the metric (3.7)). On the other hand $`(e^{01^{}},e^{11^{}})`$ do not span an ideal unless $`f=0`$ in which case $`g`$ is pseudo-hyper-Kähler.
* The components of the Ricci and Weyl curvatures, and the Levi-Civita spinor connection are

$`C_{ABCD}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _A\delta _B\delta _C\delta _D\mathrm{\Theta },C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}=\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}\iota _C^{}\iota _D^{}\mathrm{}f=0,R=0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ABA^{}B^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}\delta _A\delta _Bf,\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB}=\delta _A\delta _B\delta _C\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{d}w^C,\mathrm{\Gamma }_{A^{}B^{}}=\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}\delta _Af\mathrm{d}w^A.`$
The Bianchi identity (7.40) is satisfied as a consequence of equation (3.9). To sum out $`f`$ is a potential for a null Maxwell field (so called Hertz potential), and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is a non-linear potential for a metric.

Potential forms of complexified null Einstein-Maxwell equations were given in  and . It will be instructive to look for a non-trivial overlap between them and the one given above.

### 3.1 Examples

(1) Consider a class of metrics given by $`\mathrm{\Theta }_x=0`$. Equations (3.8,3.9) reduce to

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{yz}=f,f_{yz}=0.$$

The general solution is given by

$$\mathrm{\Theta }=B(w,y)+zA(w,y)dy,f=A(w,y),$$
(3.11)
where $`A(w,y)`$ and $`B(w,y)`$ are arbitrary functions. (In fact there are other terms linear in $`y`$ and depending on arbitrary functions of $`w,z`$. These terms can be gauged away, as they do not change the metric.) We have

$$g=\mathrm{d}w\mathrm{d}x+\mathrm{d}z\mathrm{d}y(zA_y+B_{yy})\mathrm{d}w^2.$$

If $`A_y=0`$ then $`g`$ is pseudo hyper-Kähler.
(2) Consider solutions with $`f=\mathrm{\Theta }_v`$, where $`v`$ is one of $`(w,z,x,y)`$. Equation (3.9) implies

$$\frac{}{v}(\mathrm{\Theta }_{wx}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{zy}+\mathrm{\Theta }_{xx}\mathrm{\Theta }_{yy}\mathrm{\Theta }_{xy}^2)=0,$$

and differentiating equation (3.8) yields $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{vv}=0`$. It is enough to consider two sub-cases : $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{xx}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{ww}=0`$ where the former one can be integrated explicitly

$$g=\mathrm{d}w\mathrm{d}x+\mathrm{d}z\mathrm{d}y(xP_y+z(PP_w+2PP_y)+Q)\mathrm{d}w^2+2P\mathrm{d}w\mathrm{d}z,$$
(3.12)
where $`P(w,y)`$ and $`Q(w,y)`$ are arbitrary functions.
(3)

$`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ $`=`$ $`A\left({\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}\right),`$
$`g`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{d}w\mathrm{d}x+\mathrm{d}z\mathrm{d}y{\displaystyle \frac{1}{y^2}}\left(({\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{y^2}}A^{^{\prime \prime }}+2{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}A^{^{}})\mathrm{d}w^2+A^{^{\prime \prime }}\mathrm{d}z^2+2({\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}A^{^{\prime \prime }}+A^{^{}})\mathrm{d}w\mathrm{d}z\right)`$ (3.13)
where $`A`$ is an arbitrary function, and $`A^{^{}}`$ is its derivative.
(4)

$`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ $`=`$ $`xA(y)+B(y),`$
$`g`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{d}w\mathrm{d}x+\mathrm{d}z\mathrm{d}y(xA_{yy}+B_{yy})\mathrm{d}w^2+2A_y\mathrm{d}w\mathrm{d}z`$ (3.14)
where $`A`$ and $`B`$ are arbitrary functions of one variable.

## 4 Twistor theory of ASD Null-Kähler metrics

All ASD null-Kähler metrics locally arise from solutions to (3.8,3.9). Non-analytic solutions are generic in $`(2,2)`$ signature. However, in order to find a twistor description, in this section I shall restrict myself to real-analytics solutions.

Given an analytic solution to (3.8,3.9) one can obtain the corresponding twistor space by equipping $`\times ^1`$ with an integrable complex structure: The basis of $`[0,1]`$ vectors is $`(L_0,L_1,_{\overline{\lambda }})`$, where $`(L_0,L_1)`$ are given by (3.2). The parallel spinor $`\iota ^A^{}`$ gives rise to the section $`l=\iota ^A^{}\pi _A^{}`$ of $`\kappa ^{1/4}`$. In this section I shall perform this construction (together with its converse) in a coordinate independent way.

###### Definition 4.1

An $`\alpha `$-surface is a totally null two-dimensional surface, such that a two-form orthogonal to its tangent plane is SD.

There are Frobenius integrability conditions for the existence of such $`\alpha `$-surfaces through each point and these are equivalent, by Theorem 3.1 to the vanishing of the self-dual part of the Weyl curvature, $`C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}`$. Thus, given $`C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}=0`$, we can define a twistor space $`𝒫𝒯`$ to be the three complex dimensional manifold of $`\alpha `$-surfaces in $``$.

A tangent space to an $`\alpha `$-surface is spanned by null vectors of the form $`\lambda ^A\pi ^A^{}`$ with $`\pi ^A^{}`$ fixed and $`\lambda ^A`$ arbitrary. As mentioned in the introduction, in the split signature any spinor has an invariant decomposition into its real and imaginary part. A real $`\alpha `$-surface corresponds to both $`\lambda ^A`$ and $`\pi ^A^{}`$ being real.

In general $`\pi ^A^{}=\text{Re}\pi ^A^{}+i\text{Im}\pi ^A^{}`$, and the correspondence space $``$ defined in the last section decomposes into two open sets

$`_+`$ $`=`$ $`\{(x^a,[\pi ^A^{}]);\text{Re}(\pi _A^{})\text{Im}(\pi ^A^{})>0\}=\times D_+,`$
$`_{}`$ $`=`$ $`\{(x^a,[\pi ^A^{}]);\text{Re}(\pi _A^{})\text{Im}(\pi ^A^{})<0\}=\times D_{},`$
where $`D_\pm `$ are two copies of a Poincare disc. These complex submanifolds are separated by a real correspondence space

$$_0=\{(x^a,[\pi ^A^{}]);\text{Re}(\pi _A^{})\text{Im}(\pi ^A^{})=0\}=\times ^1.$$

The vector fields (3.6) together with the complex structure on the $`^1`$ give $``$ a structure of a complex manifold $`𝒫𝒯`$: The integrable sub-bundle of $`T`$ is spanned by $`L_0,L_1,_{\overline{\lambda }}`$. The distribution (3.6) with $`\lambda ^1`$ define a foliation of $`_0`$ with a quotient $`𝒫𝒯_0`$ which leads to a double fibration:

$$\stackrel{p}{}_0\stackrel{q}{}𝒫𝒯_0.$$
(4.15)
The twistor space $`𝒫𝒯`$ is a union of two open subsets $`𝒫𝒯_+=(_+)`$ and $`𝒫𝒯_{}=(_{})`$ separated by a three-dimensional real boundary<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1 In  Woodhouse performed a careful analysis of the twistor correspondence for flat $`(++)`$ metrics, and showed how functions on $`𝒫𝒯_0=^3`$ can be used to construct smooth solutions to the ultra-hyperbolic wave equation. (real twistor space) $`𝒫𝒯_0:=q(_0)`$.

The real structure $`\sigma (x^a)=\overline{x}^a`$ maps $`\alpha `$-surfaces to $`\alpha `$-surfaces, and therefore induces an anti-holomorphic involution $`\sigma :𝒫𝒯𝒫𝒯`$. The fixed points of this involution correspond to real $`\alpha `$-surfaces in $``$. There is an $`^1`$ worth of such $`\alpha `$-surfaces through each point of $``$. The set of fixed points of $`\sigma `$ in $`𝒫𝒯`$ is $`𝒫𝒯_0`$.

Each point $`x`$ determines a sphere $`l_x`$ made up of all the $`\alpha `$-surfaces through $`x`$. The normal bundle of $`l_x`$ in $`𝒫𝒯`$ is $`N=T𝒫𝒯|_{l_x}/Tl_x`$. This is a rank-two vector bundle over $`^1`$, therefore it has to be one of the standard line<sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2 Here $`𝒪(n)`$ denotes the line bundle over $`^1`$ with transition functions $`\lambda ^n`$ from the set $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$ to $`\lambda 0`$ (i.e. Chern class $`n`$). bundles $`𝒪(n)𝒪(m)`$.

###### Lemma 4.2

Let $`p:=\times ^1`$. The holomorphic curves $`l_x:=p^1(x)`$, $`x`$ have normal bundle $`N=𝒪(1)𝒪(1)`$.

Proof. The bundle $`N`$ can be identified with the quotient $`p^{}(T_x)/\{\mathrm{span}L_0,L_1\}`$. In their homogeneous form the operators $`L_A`$ have weight one, so the distribution spanned by them is isomorphic to the bundle $`^2𝒪(1)`$. The definition of the normal bundle as a quotient gives a sequence of sheaves over $`^1`$.

$$0^2𝒪(1)^4N0$$

and we see that $`N=𝒪(1)𝒪(1)`$ , because the last map, in the spinor notation, is given explicitly by $`V^{AA^{}}V^{AA^{}}\pi _A^{}`$ projecting onto $`𝒪(1)𝒪(1)`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

If $``$ is ASD null-Kähler then $`𝒫𝒯`$ has an additional structure:

###### Theorem 4.3

Let $`𝒫𝒯`$ be a three-dimensional complex manifold with

* a four parameter family of rational curves with normal bundle $`𝒪(1)𝒪(1)`$,
* a preferred section of $`\kappa ^{1/4}`$, where $`\kappa `$ is the canonical bundle of $`𝒫𝒯`$,
* an anti-holomorphic involution $`\rho :𝒫𝒯𝒫𝒯`$ fixing a real equator of each rational curve, and leaving the section of $`\kappa ^{1/4}`$ above invariant,

Then the real moduli space $``$ of the $`\rho `$-invariant curves is equipped with a restricted conformal class $`[g]`$ of ASD null-Kähler metric: If $`g[g]`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}`$ is a null-Kähler two-form then $`\widehat{g}=\mathrm{\Omega }^2g[g]`$ for any $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ such that $`\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}=0`$. Conversely, given a real analytic ASD null Kähler metric, there exists a corresponding twistor space with the above structures.

Proof: Let $`g`$ be a real analytic ASD metric with a covariantly constant real spinor $`\iota _A^{}`$. From $`C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}=0`$ it follows that there exist coordinates $`\pi ^A^{}`$ on the fibres of $`S^A^{}`$ such that $`\pi ^A^{}\stackrel{~}{}_{AA^{}}\pi ^B^{}=0.`$ Therefore a parallel section $`\iota _A^{}`$ of $`S_A^{}`$ determines a function $`l=\pi ^A^{}\iota _A^{}`$ constant along the twistor distribution. The line bundle $`\pi ^A^{}\iota _A^{}=0`$ on $`𝒫𝒯`$ is isomorphic to $`\kappa ^{1/4}`$, where $`\kappa =\mathrm{\Omega }^3𝒫𝒯`$ is the canonical bundle.
Converse. The global section $`l`$ of $`\kappa ^{1/4}`$, when pulled back to $`S_A^{}`$ determines a homogeneity degree one function on each fibre of $`S_A^{}`$ and so must, by globality, be given by $`l=\iota ^A^{}\pi _A^{}`$ and since $`l`$ is pulled back from twistor space, it must satisfy $`\pi ^A^{}\stackrel{~}{}_{AA^{}}l=0`$. This implies

$$_{AA^{}}\iota _B^{}=\epsilon _{A^{}B^{}}\alpha _A$$
(4.16)
for some $`\alpha _A`$. Choose a representative in $`[g]`$ with $`R=0`$. Contracting (4.16) with $`_{}^{A}{}_{C^{}}{}^{}`$ and using the spinor Bianchi identity gives

$$_{}^{A}{}_{C^{}}{}^{}_{AA^{}}\iota _B^{}=C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}\iota ^D^{}\frac{1}{12}R\epsilon _{C^{}(B^{}}\iota _{A^{})}=0=\epsilon _{A^{}B^{}}_{}^{A}{}_{C^{}}{}^{}\alpha _A,$$

so $`\alpha _A`$ is a solution to the ASD spin $`1/2`$ equation $`^{AA^{}}\alpha _A=0`$ (so-called neutrino equation). It can be written in terms of a potential

$$\alpha _A=\iota ^A^{}_{AA^{}}\varphi $$
(4.17)
because the integrability conditions $`\iota ^A^{}\iota ^B^{}_{}^{A}{}_{A^{}}{}^{}\alpha _A=\alpha _A\iota ^A^{}_{}^{A}{}_{A^{}}{}^{}\iota ^B^{}`$ are satisfied. Here $`\varphi `$ is a real analytic function which satisfies

$$^a_a\varphi +_a\varphi ^a\varphi =0$$
(4.18)
as a consequence of the neutrino equation. Consider a conformal rescaling

$$\widehat{g}=\mathrm{\Omega }^2g,\widehat{\epsilon }_{A^{}B^{}}=\mathrm{\Omega }\epsilon _{A^{}B^{}},\widehat{\iota }_A^{}=\mathrm{\Omega }\iota _A^{},\widehat{\iota }^A^{}=\iota ^A^{},\widehat{R}=R+\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{\Omega }^1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }.$$

The twistor equation (4.16) is conformally invariant as $`\widehat{}_{A}^{}{}_{}{}^{(A^{}}\widehat{\iota }^{B^{})}=\mathrm{\Omega }^1_{A}^{}{}_{}{}^{(A^{}}\iota ^{B^{})}=0`$. Choose $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{}`$ so that $`\widehat{R}=0`$. Let $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_a=\mathrm{\Omega }^1_a\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Then

$$\widehat{}_{AA^{}}\widehat{\iota }^B^{}=_{AA^{}}\iota ^B^{}+\epsilon _{A^{}}^{}{}_{}{}^{B^{}}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{AB^{}}\iota ^C^{}=\epsilon _{A^{}}^{}{}_{}{}^{B^{}}(\iota ^C^{}_{AC^{}}(\varphi +\text{ln}\mathrm{\Omega }))$$

where we used (4.16) and (4.17). Notice that, as a consequence of (4.18), $`exp(\varphi )\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{}`$ and we can choose $`\text{ln}\mathrm{\Omega }=\varphi `$, and

$$\widehat{}_{AA^{}}\widehat{\iota }^B^{}=0.$$
(4.19)
We can still use the residual gauge freedom and add to $`\varphi `$ and an arbitrary function $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ constant along $`\iota ^A^{}_{AA^{}}`$, which by Frobenius theorem implies $`\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}=0`$. This means (4.19) is invariant under a conformal rescaling by functions constant along the leaves of the congruence defined by $`\widehat{\iota }^A^{}`$. Such conformal transformations do not change $`\widehat{R}=0`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 ASD null Kähler metrics with symmetry

In this section I shall consider ASD null Kähler metrics which admit a Killing vector preserving the parallel spinor. Let us call them ASD null Kähler metrics with symmetry. I shall show that all such metrics are (at least in the real analytic case) locally determined by solutions to a certain integrable equation and its linearisation.

Before establishing this result I shall review some facts about Einstein–Weyl (EW) spaces which admit a parallel weighted vector.

### 5.1 3D Einstein–Weyl spaces with a parallel weighted vector

Let $`𝒲`$ be a three-dimensional real manifold with a torsion-free connection $`D`$ and a conformal metric $`[h]`$. We shall call $`𝒲`$ a Weyl space if the null geodesics of $`[h]`$ are also geodesics for $`D`$. This condition is equivalent to

$$Dh=\nu h$$
(5.20)
for some one form $`\nu `$. Here $`h`$ is a representative metric in the conformal class. If we change this representative by $`h\varphi ^2h`$, then $`\nu \nu +2\mathrm{d}\mathrm{ln}\varphi `$. A tensor object $`T`$ which transforms as $`T\varphi ^mT`$ when $`h\varphi ^2h`$ is said to be conformally invariant of weight $`m`$. The covariant derivative of a one-form $`\beta `$ of weight $`m`$ can be expressed in terms of the Levi-Civita connection of $`h`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{D}\beta =\beta \frac{1}{2}(\beta \nu +(1m)\nu \beta h(\nu ,\beta )h).$$
(5.21)
The conformally invariant Einstein–Weyl (EW) condition on $`(𝒲,h,\nu )`$ is

$$W_{(ij)}=\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }h_{ij}.$$

Where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`W_{ij}`$ are the scalar curvature, and the Ricci tensor of the Weyl connection.

Three-dimensional EW structures are related to four-dimensional ASD conformal structures by the Jones-Tod correspondence :

###### Proposition 5.1 ()

Let $`(,\widehat{g})`$ be a ultra-hyperbolic four-manifold with ASD conformal curvature, and a conformal Killing vector $`K`$. The EW structure in indefinite signature on the space $`𝒲`$ of trajectories of $`K`$ is defined by

$$h:=|K|^2\widehat{g}|K|^4𝐊𝐊,\nu :=2|K|^2_{\widehat{g}}(𝐊\mathrm{d}𝐊),$$
(5.22)
where $`|K|^2:=\widehat{g}_{ab}K^aK^b`$, $`𝐊`$ is the one form dual to $`K`$ and $`_{\widehat{g}}`$ is taken with respect to $`\widehat{g}`$. All three-dimensional EW structures arise in this way.

Conversely, let $`(h,\nu )`$ be a three–dimensional EW structure with a signature $`(++)`$ on $`𝒲`$, and let $`(V,\alpha )`$ be a pair consisting of a function of weight $`1`$ and a one-form on $`𝒲`$ which satisfy the generalised monopole equation

$$_h(\mathrm{d}V+(1/2)\nu V)=\mathrm{d}\alpha ,$$
(5.23)
where $`_h`$ is taken with respect to $`h`$. Then

$$g=VhV^1(\mathrm{d}z+\alpha )^2$$
(5.24)
is an ASD metric with an isometry $`K=_z`$.

In  it has been demonstrated that if an EW space admits a parallel weighted vector, the coordinates can be found in which the metric and the one form are given by

$$h=\mathrm{d}y^24\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}t4u\mathrm{d}t^2,\nu =4u_x\mathrm{d}t,u=u(x,y,t)$$
(5.25)
and the EW equations reduce to the dispersionless Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation

$$(u_tuu_x)_x=u_{yy}.$$
(5.26)
If $`u(x,y,t)`$ is a smooth real function of real variables then (5.25) has signature $`(++)`$. It has also been shown that there exists a twistor construction of EW spaces (5.25) given by the following Theorem

###### Theorem 5.2

 There is a one to one correspondence between Einstein-Weyl spaces (5.25) obtained from solutions to the equation $`(\text{5.26})`$ and two-dimensional complex manifolds with

* A three parameter family of rational curves with normal bundle $`𝒪(2)`$.
* A global section $`l`$ of $`\kappa ^{1/4}`$, where $`\kappa `$ is the canonical bundle.
* An anti-holomorphic involution fixing a real slice, leaving a rational curve and the preferred section of $`\kappa ^{1/4}`$ invariant.

### 5.2 Symmetry reduction

Now we are ready to establish the main result of this section.

###### Theorem 5.3

Let $`H=H(x,y,t)`$ and $`W=W(x,y,t)`$ be smooth real-valued functions on an open set $`𝒲^3`$ which satisfy<sup>3</sup><sup>3</sup>3 With definition $`u=H_x`$ the $`x`$ derivative of equation (5.27) becomes the dispersionless Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation (5.26) originally used in . There are some computational advantages in working with the ‘potential‘ form (5.27).

$$H_{yy}H_{xt}+H_xH_{xx}=0,$$
(5.27)
$$W_{yy}W_{xt}+(H_xW_x)_x=0.$$
(5.28)
Then

$$g=W_x(\mathrm{d}y^24\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}t4H_x\mathrm{d}t^2)W_x^1(\mathrm{d}zW_x\mathrm{d}y2W_y\mathrm{d}t)^2$$
(5.29)
is an ASD null Kähler metric on a circle bundle $`𝒲`$. All real analytic ASD null Kähler metrics with symmetry arise from this construction.

Proof. Let $`(h,\nu )`$ be a three–dimensional EW structure given by (5.25) (with $`u=H_x`$) and let $`(V,\alpha )`$ be a pair consisting of a function and a one-form which satisfy the generalised monopole equation (5.23). The ultra-hyperbolic metric

$$g=V(\mathrm{d}y^24\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}t4H_x\mathrm{d}t^2)V^1(\mathrm{d}z+\alpha )^2$$
(5.30)
is therefore ASD. It satisfies $`_Kg=0`$, where $`K=_z`$. Using the relations

$$_h\mathrm{d}t=\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}y,_h\mathrm{d}y=2\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}x,_h\mathrm{d}x=\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}x+2H_x\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}t$$

we verify that equation (5.28) is equivalent to $`\mathrm{d}_h(\mathrm{d}+\nu /2)(W_x)=0`$. Therefore

$$W_{xx}\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}x+(2(H_xW_x)_xW_{tx})\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}t+2W_{xy}\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}x=\mathrm{d}\alpha ,$$

and we deduce that $`V=W_x`$ is a solution to the monopole equation (5.23) on the EW background given by (5.25). We choose a gauge in which $`\alpha =Q\mathrm{d}y+P\mathrm{d}t`$. This yields

$$Q_x=W_{xx},P_x=2W_{xy},P_yQ_t=2(H_xW_x)_xW_{xt},$$
(5.31)
so $`Q=W_x+A(y,t),P=2W_y+B(y,t)`$ and $`\alpha =W_x\mathrm{d}y2W_y\mathrm{d}t+A\mathrm{d}y+B\mathrm{d}t.`$ The integrability conditions $`P_{xy}=P_{yx}`$ are given by (5.28), and $`A_t=B_y`$. Therefore there exists $`C(y,t)`$ such that $`A=C_y,B=C_t`$. We now replace $`z`$ by $`zC`$ and the metric (5.30) becomes (5.29). This proves that (5.29) is ASD. It is also scalar-flat, because, as a consequence of (5.28),

$$R=8(W_{xyy}W_{xxt}+(H_xW_x)_{xx})W_x=0.$$
(5.32)
We now choose the null tetrad

$`e^{00^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`2W_x\mathrm{d}t,e^{10^{}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}z2W_y\mathrm{d}t}{2W_x}},`$
$`e^{01^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{d}z2W_x\mathrm{d}y2W_y\mathrm{d}x+ze^{00^{}},e^{11^{}}=\mathrm{d}x+H_x\mathrm{d}y+ze^{10^{}},`$
such that $`g=2(e^{00^{}}e^{11^{}}e^{10^{}}e^{01^{}})`$. The basis of SD two forms $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}}`$ is given by

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`=\iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}}=e^{00^{}}e^{10^{}}=\mathrm{d}z\mathrm{d}t`$
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}1^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`=\iota _A^{}o_B^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}}=e^{10^{}}e^{01^{}}e^{00^{}}e^{11^{}}=\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}(z^2)+2\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}W+\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}z.`$
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{1^{}1^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`=o_A^{}o_B^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}}=e^{01^{}}e^{11^{}}=2W_x\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}y+2(zW_x+W_y)\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}z`$
$`+(2H_xW_x2zW_y)\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}y+z\mathrm{d}z\mathrm{d}y+(H_x+z^2)\mathrm{d}z\mathrm{d}t.`$
These two-forms satisfy

$$2\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{1^{}1^{}}=\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}1^{}}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}1^{}},\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}=0,\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}1^{}}=0,$$

$$\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{1^{}1^{}}=\mathrm{d}(H_x2W)\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}z+(W_{xt}W_{yy}(H_xW_x)_x)\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}t.$$
(5.33)
Therefore Proposition 2.3 implies that the metric (5.29) admits a constant spinor which is preserved by $`K=_z`$.
Converse : Let $`g`$ be a real analytic ASD metric with a covariantly constant spinor $`\iota _A^{}`$, which is Lie derived along a Killing vector $`K`$. Theorem 4.3 implies that the corresponding twistor space $`𝒫𝒯`$ is equiped with $`l\mathrm{\Gamma }(\kappa ^{1/4})`$ The Killing vector $`K`$ gives rise to a holomorphic vector field on $`𝒫𝒯`$ which preserves $`l`$ . Therefore the minitwistor space $`𝒵`$ (the space of trajectories of $`K`$ in $`𝒫𝒯`$) also admits a preffered real section of the $`1/4`$ power of its canonical bundle. The minitwistor space $`𝒵`$ satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 5.2 and the corresponding EW metric is of the form $`\widehat{g}=\mathrm{\Omega }^2g`$, where $`g`$ is given by (5.29). Both $`\widehat{g}`$ and $`g`$ are scalar flat (this follows from the spinor Ricci identities and from equation (5.32) respectively). As a consequence we deduce that $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }(t)`$. Now we can use the coordinate freedom  to absorb $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in the solution to the equation (5.27).

$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 5.4

Let $`(,g)`$ be an ASD null-Kähler manifold with symmetry. Then the Einstein–Weyl structure induced by (5.22) on the space of orbits of this symmetry is locally of the form (5.25).

Remarks:

* Theorem 5.3 is analogous to a result of LeBrun  who constructs all scalar-flat Kähler metrics with symmetry in Euclidean signature from solutions to the $`SU(\mathrm{})`$ Toda equation and its linearisation.
* A class of solutions to the monopole (5.28) can be obtained from vectors tangent to a space of solutions to (5.27) generated by

$$xa(ϵ)x+b(ϵ),ta(ϵ)t+c(ϵ),ya(ϵ)y+e(ϵ),$$

where $`a(0)=a,b(0)=b,c(0)=c,e(0)=e`$. The corresponding linearised solution is given by

$$W(x,y,t)=\frac{\mathrm{d}H}{\mathrm{d}ϵ}|_{ϵ=0}=a(xH_x+yH_y+tH_t)+bH_x+cH_t+eH_y.$$
* If $`H=const`$ then (5.28) reduces to the wave equation in $`2+1`$ dimension, and consequently the metric (5.29) is the $`(++)`$ Gibbons–Hawking solution .
* Note that $`\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{1^{}1^{}}0`$ unless $`W=H_x/2+f(t)`$, in which case

$$\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{1^{}1^{}}=\mathrm{d}(H_{xt}H_xH_{xx}H_{yy})\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}t=0,$$

and we are working in a covariantly constant real spin frame. The metric

$$g=\frac{H_{xx}}{2}(\mathrm{d}y^24\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}t4H_x\mathrm{d}t^2)\frac{2}{H_{xx}}(\mathrm{d}z\frac{H_{xx}\mathrm{d}y}{2}H_{xy}\mathrm{d}t)^2$$
(5.34)
is therefore pseudo hyper-Kähler. In  it was shown that all pseudo hyper-Kähler metrics with a symmetry satisfying $`\mathrm{d}K_+\mathrm{d}K_+=0`$ are locally given by (5.34). Here $`\mathrm{d}K_+`$ is a self-dual part of $`\mathrm{d}K`$.
* If $`W_xH_{xx}/2`$ then (5.29) is not Ricci–flat. This can be verified by a direct calculation. It also follows from more geometric reasoning: The Killing vector $`K=_z`$ acts on SD two-forms by a Lie derivative. One can choose a basis $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}}`$ such that one element of this basis is fixed, and the Killing vector rotates the other two. The components of the SD derivative of $`K`$ are coefficients of these rotations. Therefore $`(\mathrm{d}K)_+=const`$ if $`g`$ is pseudo hyper-Kähler. In our case $`\mathrm{d}K_+=(H_{xx}/W_x)\mathrm{d}z\mathrm{d}t.`$ Therefore $`H_{xx}/W_x`$ must be constant for (5.29) to be Ricci-flat. An example of a non-vacuum metric is given by $`W=H_y/2`$.

### 5.3 Pseudo hyper-Kähler metrics with symmetry

In this subsection I shall assume that an ASD null-Kähler structure $`(,g)`$ admits an additional parallel spinor $`o_A^{}`$ such that $`o_A^{}\iota ^A^{}=1`$. Now there exists a covariantly constant basis of the spin space $`S^A^{}`$, and $`(,g)`$ is pseudo hyper-Kähler. In the split signature we can arrange for one of the complex structures to be real and for the other two to be purely imaginary:

$$I^2=S^2=T^2=1,IST=1,$$

and $`S`$ and $`T`$ determine a pair of transverse null foliations. Now

$$g(X,Y)=g(IX,IY)=g(SX,SY)=g(TX,TY)$$

for any pair of real vectors $`X,Y`$. The endomorphism $`I`$ endows $``$ with the structure of a two-dimensional complex Kähler manifold, as does every other complex structure $`aI+bS+cT`$ parametrised by the points of the hyperboloid $`a^2b^2c^2=1`$. Using the identification between the two-forms, and endomorphisms given by $`g`$ we can write

$$S=\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{1^{}1^{}},I=\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}0^{}}+\mathrm{\Sigma }^{1^{}1^{}},T=\mathrm{\Sigma }^{0^{}1^{}}.$$

Killing vectors on pseudo hyper-Kähler spaces give rise to a homomorphism

$$S^1SO(2,1).$$

Therefore $`K`$ induces an $`S^1`$ action on the hyperboloid. Assume that $`g(K,K)0`$. If the action is trivial, then we are dealing with the $`(++)`$ Gibbons-Hawking ansatz . Otherwise, there always exists a fixed point of the $`S^1`$ action. If the two-form corresponding to this fixed point is non-degenerate, then $`g`$ is given in terms of solutions to the $`SU(\mathrm{})`$ equation . Finally if the fixed point corresponds to a degenerate two-form, then $`g`$ is given by (5.34). Pseudo hyper-Kähler metrics which admit $`K`$ such that $`g(K,K)=0`$, and $`_Kg=_KI=_KS=_KT=0`$ have been found in . Conformal symmetries of pseudo hyper-Kähler metrics with non-null self-dual derivative have been classified in

## 6 Acknowledgements

I am grateful to David Calderbank, Nigel Hitchin, Lionel Mason, Maciej Przanowski, David Robinson and Paul Tod for useful discussions. I would like to thank Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios Avanzados in Mexico, where part of this work was done, for the hospitality. My visit to Mexico was partially supported by grants 32427-E Proyecto de CONACYT and LMS 5619.

## 7 Appendix–spinor notation

Let $``$ be a real four-manifold equipped with a $`(++)`$ metric $`g`$ and compatible volume form $`\nu `$. We use the conventions of Penrose and Rindler . $`a,b,\mathrm{}`$ are four-dimensional vector indices and $`A,B,\mathrm{},A^{},B^{},\mathrm{}`$ are two-dimensional spinor indices. They have ranges $`0,1`$ and $`0^{},1^{}`$ respectively. The tangent space at each point of $``$ is isomorphic to a tensor product of the two real spin spaces

$$T=S^AS^A^{}.$$
(7.35)
This isomorphism is given by

$$V^aV^{AA^{}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}V^0+V^3& V^1+V^2\\ V^1V^2& V^0V^3\end{array}\right).$$

Orthogonal transformations decompose into products of ASD and SD rotations

$$SO(2,2)=(SL(2,)\times \stackrel{~}{SL}(2,))/_2.$$
(7.36)
The Lorentz transformation $`V^a\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}^{a}{}_{b}{}^{}V^b`$ is equivalent to

$$V^{AA^{}}\lambda _{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}V^{BB^{}}\lambda _{}^{A^{}}{}_{B^{}}{}^{},$$

where $`\lambda _{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}`$ and $`\lambda _{}^{A^{}}{}_{B^{}}{}^{}`$ are elements of $`SL(2,)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{SL}(2,)`$.

Spin dyads $`(o^A,\iota ^A)`$ and $`(o^A^{},\iota ^A^{})`$ span $`S^A`$ and $`S^A^{}`$ respectively. The spin spaces $`S^A`$ and $`S^A^{}`$ are equipped with parallel symplectic forms $`\epsilon _{AB}`$ and $`\epsilon _{A^{}B^{}}`$ such that $`\epsilon _{01}=\epsilon _{0^{}1^{}}=1`$. These anti-symmetric objects are used to raise and lower the spinor indices via $`\iota _A=\iota ^B\epsilon _{BA},\iota ^A=\epsilon ^{AB}\iota _B`$. We shall use normalised spin frames so that

$$o^B\iota ^C\iota ^Bo^C=\epsilon ^{BC},o^B^{}\iota ^C^{}\iota ^B^{}o^C^{}=\epsilon ^{B^{}C^{}}.$$

Let $`e^{AA^{}}`$ be a null tetrad of one-forms on $``$ i.e.

$$g=\epsilon _{AB}\epsilon _{A^{}B^{}}e^{AA^{}}e^{BB^{}}=2(e^{00^{}}e^{11^{}}e^{10^{}}e^{01^{}}),$$

and let $`_{AA^{}}`$ be the frame of vector fields dual to $`e^{AA^{}}`$. The orientation is given by fixing the volume form

$$\nu =e^{01^{}}e^{10^{}}e^{11^{}}e^{00^{}}.$$

Apart from orientability $``$ must satisfy some other topological restrictions for $`++`$ metric, and a global spinor fields to exist. We shall not take them into account as we work locally in $``$.

Any two-form $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{ab}`$ can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{ABA^{}B^{}}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{AB}\epsilon _{A^{}B^{}}+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{A^{}B^{}}\epsilon _{AB}$$

where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{AB}`$ are $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{A^{}B^{}}`$ symmetric in their indices since $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{ab}`$ is skew. This is the decomposition of a two-form into its ASD and SD part. The space of SD two forms is therefore isomorphic to a symmetric tensor product of two primed spin spaces.

The local basis $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{AB}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}}`$ of spaces of ASD and SD two-forms are defined by

$$e^{AA^{}}e^{BB^{}}=\epsilon ^{AB}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{A^{}B^{}}+\epsilon ^{A^{}B^{}}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{AB}.$$
(7.37)
The first Cartan structure equations are

$$\mathrm{d}e^{AA^{}}=e^{BA^{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}+e^{AB^{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{A^{}}{}_{B^{}}{}^{},$$

where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{A^{}B^{}}`$ are the $`SL(2,)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{SL}(2,)`$ spin connection one-forms. They are symmetric in their indices, and

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{CC^{}AB}e^{CC^{}},\mathrm{\Gamma }_{A^{}B^{}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{CC^{}A^{}B^{}}e^{CC^{}},\mathrm{\Gamma }_{CC^{}A^{}B^{}}=o_A^{}_{CC^{}}\iota _B^{}\iota _A^{}_{CC^{}}o_B^{}.$$

The curvature of the spin connection

$$R_{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}=\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{A}{}_{C}{}^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{C}{}_{B}{}^{}$$

decomposes as

$$R_{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}=C_{}^{A}{}_{BCD}{}^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{CD}+(1/12)R\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}+\mathrm{\Phi }_{}^{A}{}_{BC^{}D^{}}{}^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{C^{}D^{}},$$

and similarly for $`R_{}^{A^{}}{}_{B^{}}{}^{}`$. Here $`R`$ is the Ricci scalar, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ABA^{}B^{}}`$ is the trace-free part of the Ricci tensor $`R_{ab}`$,

$$2\mathrm{\Phi }_{ABA^{}B^{}}=R_{ab}\frac{1}{4}Rg_{ab},$$

and $`C_{ABCD}`$ is the ASD part of the Weyl tensor

$$C_{abcd}=\epsilon _{A^{}B^{}}\epsilon _{C^{}D^{}}C_{ABCD}+\epsilon _{AB}\epsilon _{CD}C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}.$$

A conformal structure is called ASD iff $`C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}=0`$. Define the operators $`\mathrm{}_{AB}`$ and $`\mathrm{}_{A^{}B^{}}`$ by

$$[_a,_b]=\epsilon _{AB}\mathrm{}_{A^{}B^{}}+\epsilon _{A^{}B^{}}\mathrm{}_{AB}.$$

The spinor Ricci identities are

$$\mathrm{}_{AB}\iota _A^{}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{ABA^{}B^{}}\iota ^B^{}$$
(7.38)
$$\mathrm{}_{A^{}B^{}}\iota _C^{}=[C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}\frac{1}{12}R\epsilon _{D^{}(A^{}}\epsilon _{B^{})C^{}}]\iota ^D^{},$$
(7.39)
(and analogous equations for unprimed spinors). Bianchi identities translate to

$$_{}^{A^{}}{}_{A}{}^{}C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}D^{}}=_{(B^{}}^B\mathrm{\Phi }_{C^{}D^{})AB},^{AA^{}}\mathrm{\Phi }_{ABA^{}B^{}}+\frac{1}{8}_{BB^{}}R=0.$$
(7.40)
Let $`K`$ be a pure Killing vector. Then $`_{(A}^{(A^{}}K_{B)}^{B^{})}=0,^aK_a=0`$. This implies

$$_aK_b=\varphi _{AB}\epsilon _{A^{}B^{}}+\psi _{A^{}B^{}}\epsilon _{AB},$$

where $`\psi _{A^{}B^{}}`$ and $`\varphi _{AB}`$ are symmetric spinors. The well known identity $`_a_bK_c=R_{bcad}K^d`$ implies

$$_{}^{A}{}_{A^{}}{}^{}\psi _{B^{}C^{}}=2C_{A^{}B^{}C^{}}^D^{}K_D^{}^A2K_{}^{B}{}_{(A^{}}{}^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{B^{}C^{})B}^A+\frac{R}{6}\epsilon _{A^{}(B^{}}K_{}^{A}{}_{C^{})}{}^{}\frac{4}{3}\epsilon _{A^{}(B^{}}\mathrm{\Phi }_{C^{})}^{D^{}DA}K_{DD^{}}.$$
(7.41)
Therefore in an ASD vacuum $`\psi _{A^{}B^{}}=const`$. A Lie derivative of a spinor along a Killing vector $`K`$ is given by

$$_K\iota ^A^{}=K^b_b\iota ^A^{}\psi _B^{}^A^{}\iota ^B^{}.$$

Note that if $`\iota _A^{}`$ is covariantly constant, and the Killing vector $`K`$ preserves the $`\iota _A^{}`$ we deduce that $`\psi _{A^{}B^{}}=\psi \iota _A^{}\iota _B^{}`$ for some function $`\psi `$. The identity (7.41) yields

$$_{AA^{}}\psi =\frac{1}{2}F_{AB}K_A^{}^B$$

so $`\psi const`$ unless $`g`$ is hyper-Kähler.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

The plasma-solid transition

V.Celebonovic1 and W.Däppen2

1Institute of Physics, Pregrevica 118,11080 Zemun-Beograd, Yugoslavia

2Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, USC, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1342, USA

Abstract: Using a criterion proposed by Salpeter and standard solid-state physics, we have determined conditions for the occurrence of the plasma-solid transition. Possible astrophysical applications are discussed.

Introduction

Phase transitions of various kinds have been, and still are, actively contributing to important changes occurring in the world around us. The aim of the present paper is a contribution to the study of the conditions for the occurrence of the so-called “plasma-solid (PS)” transition.

Simple physical reasoning shows that the PS transition must certainly occur in various astrophysical settings, such as in proto-planetary and proto-stellar clouds. On the one hand, it is widely known that the universe contains different kinds of plasmas. On the other hand, it is equally widely known that solid objects also exist in the universe. This implies that there must exist a physical region where a transition between the two regimes takes place.

In our preliminary work on the PS transition $`\left[1\right]`$, we have determined the conditions for its occurrence in two simple idealized systems: a pure Fermi-Dirac and a pure Bose-Einstein gas. The object of the present calculation is again a determination of the conditions for the occurrence of the PS transition, but this time on a more realistic footing. Our starting point is the criterion for the occurrence of the PS transition (although it was not called by that name) proposed by Salpeter $`\left[2\right]`$.

Salpeter’s paper was devoted to a thorough discussion of a zero-tempera- ture plasma. In its third part, he considered a system of positive ions of given charge and mass, rigidly fixed in the nodes of a perfect crystal lattice, and went on to estimate the zero point energy of the ions. He showed that the behavior of such a system can be described by the ratio

$$f=\frac{E_{z,p}}{E_C},$$
(1)
where $`E_{z,p}`$ denotes the zero point energy of the ions and $`E_C`$ is the Coulomb energy. According to the analysis presented in $`\left[2\right]`$, a PS transition occurs for $`f=1`$. Calculations reported in $`\left[2\right]`$ were estimates, and strictly valid only for $`T=0`$ K. Our calculations reported in the following section go beyond those assumptions in at least two aspects: (i) we have not used estimates but exact calculations, and (ii) our results take into account the influence of temperature.

Calculations

Finding a general expression for the energy of a real solid that takes into account most (if not all) of its characteristics is a formidable problem in solid state physics (for example $`\left[3\right],\left[4\right]`$ ). Various approximations to the complete solution exist; one of them is the Debye model of a solid. Within the Debye model, the energy per mole of a solid is given by the following expression $`\left[3\right]`$:

$$E=N\left\{u\left(v\right)+9nk_BT\left[\left(\frac{T}{\theta }\right)^3_0^{\theta /T}\left(\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}\left(\xi \right)1}\right)\xi ^3𝑑\xi \right]\right\},$$
(2)
where $`N`$ denotes the number of elementary cells in a mole of the material, $`n`$ the number of particles per elementary cell, $`u(v)=\frac{U}{N}=`$ the static lattice energy per cell, $`\theta `$ the Debye temperature, $`k_B`$ the Boltzmann constant, and in the following we will use the convention $`k_B=1`$. The second integral in Eq. (2) can be solved as $`\left[5\right]`$

$$I_1=_0^x\frac{t^ndt}{e^t1}=x^n\left[\frac{1}{n}\frac{x}{2\left(n+1\right)}+\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{B_{2k}x^{2k}}{\left(2k+n\right)\left(2k\right)!}\right]$$
(3)
under the condition $`n1,\left|x\right|2\pi `$. Here, the symbol $`B_{2k}`$ denotes Bernoulli’s numbers. It follows from Eq. (2) that the energy per particle of a solid within the Debye model is given by

$$E_p=9T\left(\frac{T}{\theta }\right)^3I$$
(4)
where

$$I=\frac{1}{2}_0^{\theta /T}\xi ^3𝑑\xi +_0^{\theta /T}\frac{\xi ^3d\xi }{e^\xi 1}$$
(5)
Using Eq. (3) in Eq.(5), one finally gets

$$\left(\frac{T}{\theta }\right)^3I=\frac{1}{3}+\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{B_{2k}}{\left(2k+3\right)\left(2k\right)!}\left(\frac{\theta }{T}\right)^{2k},$$
(6)
which implies that

$$E_p=3T\left[1+3\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{B_{2k}}{(2k+3)\left(2k\right)!}\left(\frac{\theta }{T}\right)^{2k}\right]$$
(7)
or, expanding explicitly

$$E_p3T[1+\frac{1}{20}\left(\frac{\theta }{T}\right)^2\frac{1}{1680}\left(\frac{\theta }{T}\right)^4+..].$$
(8)
The energy of a Fermi-Dirac gas of particles of mass $`m`$ and spin $`s`$ enclosed in a volume $`V`$ is given by $`\left[6\right]`$

$$E_e=\frac{gVm^{3/2}}{2^{1/2}\pi ^2\mathrm{}^3}F_{3/2}\left(\beta \mu \right)$$
(9)
All the symbols in this equation have their usual meaning, in particular, $`g=2s+1`$, and $`F_{3/2}\left(\beta \mu \right)`$ is a particular case of a Fermi integral

$$F_k\left(\beta \mu \right)=_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{ϵ^kdϵ}{1+\mathrm{exp}\left[\beta \left(ϵ\mu \right)\right]}.$$
(10)
Eq. (10) can be developed as $`\left[7\right]`$

$`F_k\left(\beta \mu \right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^{k+1}}{k+1}}+`$
$`T{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n!}}{\displaystyle \frac{^n}{\mu ^n}}\left(\mu ^k\right)\left[1\left(1\right)^n\right]\left(12^n\right)T^n\mathrm{\Gamma }\left[n+1\right]\varsigma \left[n+1\right],`$
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\varsigma `$ are the gamma function and Riemann zeta function, respectively.

Expanding to fourth order and inserting the temperature dependence of the chemical potential, one gets the following result for the energy per particle of the electron gas

$$\frac{E_e}{N}=\frac{gm^{3/2}}{\pi ^2\mathrm{}^3}\frac{2^{1/2}}{5}\mu _0^{5/2}\left[1+\frac{5\pi ^2}{12}\left(\frac{T}{\mu _0}\right)^2\frac{\pi ^4}{36}\left(\frac{T}{\mu _0}\right)^4\right]$$
(12)
The chemical potential of the electron gas at $`T=0`$ K is denoted here by $`\mu _0=An^{2/3}`$, with $`A=\left(3\pi ^2\right)^{2/3}\mathrm{}^2/2m`$.

Introducing $`B=(2^{1/2}/5)gm^{3/2}/(\pi ^2\mathrm{}^3)`$ simplifies the notation in Eq. (12).

Discussion

Salpeter’s ratio defined in Eq. (1) can be formed using Eqs. (8) and (12). The result obtained this way can be expressed as follows

$$f\frac{9}{140}\frac{\mu _0^{3/2}}{BT^3}\frac{1680T^4+84\left(T\theta \right)^2\theta ^4}{36\mu _0^4+15\left(\pi \mu _0T\right)^2\left(\pi T\right)^4}$$
(13)
Imposing the condition $`f=1`$ on Eq.(13), it becomes possible to determine the values of the parameters of a PS transition. Solving Eq. (13) for the Debye temperature $`\theta `$, and introducing in the solution the density dependence of the chemical potential at $`T=0`$ K one obtains the following expression

$`\theta `$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\right)^{1/2}[63T^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{A^2n^{4/3}}}(\sqrt{7An^{2/3}}(1107n^2A^3T^4+`$
$`5\sqrt{An^{2/3}}(ABn^{2/3}\pi ^4T^736A^5Bn^{10/3}T^315A^3B\pi ^3n^2T^5))^{1/3}]^{1/2}.`$
This equation links the relevant parameters of a plasma (number density and temperature) with those of the solid (Debye temperature) that can condense from it. We have thus obtained the equation of state of a system undergoing a PS transition. Apart from being interesting from the point of view of pure statistical physics, this result can find astrophysical applications in studies of dust and gas clouds. For recent examples of observational studies of such clouds, see for example $`\left[8\right]`$ $`\left[9\right]`$.

The number density and the temperature of an astrophysical cloud can be determined from observations using the methods of plasma physics, such as the analysis of spectral line broadening, or in some cases, in-situ measurements of interplanetary gas and dust. Once these values are known for a given cloud, the Debye temperature of the solid material that can condense from it is given by Eq. (14). The Debye temperature is a unique characteristics of every solid, which gives hope that the method discussed here could lead to a possibility to determine the chemical composition of a condensing proto-planetary system. Such a determination would of course be only indirect, because after calculating the value of $`\theta `$ from Eq. (14), one would have to rely on an identification of the material (or a mixture of materials) based on the corresponding calculated value.

Consider Eq.(14) in the limiting case $`T0`$$`\mu _00`$. Astronomically, this limit corresponds to an interstellar cloud sufficiently far away from any bright star. Developing Eq. (14) into series in the chemical potential and retaining just the first two terms, one gets the following expression for the Debye temperature

$$\theta =K_1T^{7/6}\mu _0^{1/2}+K_2T^{5/6}\mu _0^{1/2}$$
(15)
The numerical values of the constants in Eq. (15) can be determined by developing Eq. (14) into a series. By doing this, it follows that
$`K_1`$=$`(2/3)^{1/2}5^{1/6}7^{1/4}\pi ^{2/3}B^{1/6}`$ and $`K_2`$=$`3^{3/2}7^{3/4}2^{1/2}\pi ^{2/3}(5B)^{1/6}`$.
Here, the constant $`B`$ is the one defined after Eq. (12). For sufficiently small values of the chemical potential, Eq. (15) can be simplified into

$$\theta =K_1T^{7/6}\mu _0^{1/2}$$
(16)
Inserting the values of all the constants which occur in Eq. (16), one finally arrives at

$$\theta =50.8T^{7/6}n^{1/3}$$
(17)
This expression has two possible applications. It can be used for the calculation of $`\theta `$ if the temperature and the number density of the cloud are known. Typical values of the temperature and density of the molecular clouds in our Galaxy are $`20<T[\mathrm{K}]<60`$ and $`10^3<n(\mathrm{cm}^3)<10^5`$. Inserting in Eq. (17) $`n=2000\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}^3`$ and $`T=43`$ K gives $`\theta =320`$ K, which is nearly the experimentally known value of the Debye temperature of the chemical element magnesium. This result could be interpreted as indication that in a molecular cloud, grains of Mg can condense under these densities and temperatures. In a similar way, the pair of values $`n=10^4\mathrm{cm}^3`$, $`T=120`$ K would lead to $`\theta =628`$ K. Such a value is only slightly higher than the experimental value for the element Si. Note that this last result has a direct significance for the interpretation of observations, because emission from silicate grains has indeed been detected . Turning the argument around, if solid particles are observed in a cloud, and if their chemical composition can be determined, it becomes possible to calculate the Debye temperature from the principles of solid state physics. If, in addition, temperature is known from spectroscopy, one can determine the value of the chemical potential, and finally, the number density of a cloud from Eq. (16). Further work along these lines is in progress and will be discussed elsewhere.
Acknowledgment: One of us (W.D.) was supported in part by the grant AST-9987391 of the National Science Foundation (USA).

References

$`\left[1\right]`$ V. Celebonovic and W. Däppen: in:Contributed papers of the 20th SPIG Conference, (ed. Z.Lj.Petrovic, M.M.Kuraica, N.Bibic and G.Malovic),p.527, published by the Inst. of Physics, Faculty of Physics and INN. Vinca,
Beograd,Yugoslavia (2000) (preprint available at LANL: astro-ph/0007337).

$`\left[2\right]`$ E.E.Salpeter: Astrophys.J., 134,669 (1961) .

$`\left[3\right]`$ M.Born and K.Huang: Dynamical theory of crystal lattices,
OUP, Oxford (1968) .

$`\left[4\right]`$ A.Davydov: Theorie du Solide, Editions ”Mir”, Moscou (1980) .

$`\left[5\right]`$ M.Abramowitz and I.A.Stegun: Handbook of mathematical functions, Dover Publications Inc., New York (1972).

$`\left[6\right]`$L.D.Landau and E.M.Lifchitz: Statistical Physics,Vol.1, Nauka,
Moscow (1976) (in Russian).

$`\left[7\right]`$ V.Celebonovic: Publ.Astron.Obs.Belgrade,60,16,(1998).
(preprint available at LANL: astro-ph/9802279).

$`\left[8\right]`$ N.E.Jessop and D.Ward-Thompson: Mon.Not.R.astr.Soc. (in press) (preprint available at LANL: astro-ph/0012095).

$`\left[9\right]`$ E.Grun,H.Krueger and M.Landgraf: in:The Heliosphere at Solar Minimum: The Ulysses Perspective, eds. A.Balogh, R.Marsden, E.Smith,Springer Praxis,Heidelberg (in press) (preprint available at LANL: astro-ph/0012226).

$`\left[10\right]`$ D.Cesarsky,A.P.Jones,L.Lequeux,L.Verstrate: Astron.Astrophys.,
358,708 (2000).


text:
# Nuclear matter properties and relativistic mean-field theory

## A

Functions $`F_m(x)`$ and $`f_m(x)`$ defined below are useful in the analytical expressions and numerical calculations of the relativistic mean field theory:

$$F_m(x)_0^x𝑑xx^{2m}\sqrt{1+x^2},m1,$$
(A1)
$$f_m(x)_0^x𝑑x\frac{x^{2m}}{\sqrt{1+x^2}},m1.$$
(A2)
The following formulas can be obtained:

$$F_m(x)=f_m(x)+f_{m+1}(x),$$
(A3)
$$f_{m+1}^{}(x)=x^2f_m^{}(x),$$
(A4)
$$F_{m+1}^{}(x)=x^2F_m^{}(x),$$
(A5)
$$F_m^{}(x)=(1+x^2)f_m^{}(x),$$
(A6)
$$f_m(x)=xF_{m1}^{}(x)(2m1)F_{m1}(x),$$
(A7)
$$f_m(x)=xF_m^{}(x)+2(m+1)F_m(x).$$
(A8)
Some examples of $`F_m(x)`$ and $`f_m(x)`$ are:

$$F_1(x)=\frac{1}{8}[(1+2x^2)x\sqrt{1+x^2}+ln(\sqrt{1+x^2}x)],$$
(A9)
$$f_1(x)=\frac{1}{2}[x\sqrt{1+x^2}+ln(\sqrt{1+x^2}x)],$$
(A10)
$$f_2(x)=\frac{3}{8}\left[\left(1\frac{2}{3}x^2\right)x\sqrt{1+x^2}+ln(\sqrt{1+x^2}x)\right].$$
(A11)
For $`x1`$, we have

$$F_m(x)=\frac{x^{2m+1}}{2m+1}+\frac{x^{2m+3}}{2(2m+3)}\frac{x^{2m+5}}{8(2m+5)}+\mathrm{},$$
(A12)
$$f_m(x)=\frac{x^{2m+1}}{2m+1}\frac{x^{2m+3}}{2(2m+3)}+\frac{3x^{2m+5}}{8(2m+5)}+\mathrm{}.$$
(A13)


text:
# Coherent Control of Multiphoton Transitions with Femtosecond pulse shaping

## I Introduction

Use of optimally shaped pulses to guide the time evolution of a system and thereby control its future is an active field of research in recent years -. Such developments have been spurred by technological breakthroughs permitting arbitrarily amplitude modulated laser pulses with 20-30 fs resolution and pulse energies ranging to almost hundred microjoules–either in the time domain or in the frequency domain. In most practical cases, computer optimizations are used to generate the useful shapes-, since even approximate analytical solutions exist only for very specialized cases-. Such computer simulations have resulted in generating quite complicated theoretical waveforms that can break strong bonds-, localize excitation. Most of these interesting calculations involve intense pulses, which do not operate in the linear response regime. Actual photochemical processes with such intense pulses that operate beyond the linear response region often involve multiphoton effects. Unfortunately, multiphoton interactions typically induce additional complications and have not yet been explored much theoretically for coherent control purposes. In fact, most models for coherent control deal with light-matter interaction at the single-photon level. However, some recent experiments show that they can even simplify quantum interference effects; e.g., how Cs atoms can be made to absorb or not absorb light with non-resonant two-photon excitation with shaped optical pulses. The experimental results have been treated with a perturbation model that works under the resonant condition. However, a more complete theoretical treatment of multiphoton interactions for developing multiphoton coherent control is quite complex and is far from complete. In fact, the lack of such a theoretical basis is also evident from the fact that in the classic demonstration of control of multiphoton ionization process, an experimentally optimized feedback pulse shaping was found to provide the best-desired yield. In the present work, we develop a density matrix approach to multiphoton processes that do not have any lower-order process and demonstrate that can also explain the off-resonance behavior.

We present results, which show that this would be a promising approach. We first apply the approach to the two-photon scenario in a simple two-level system (e.g., any narrow, single-photon transition line that is only multiphoton allowed). We then generalize the results to the case where only one N-photon (N$``$2, which is multiphoton) transition is possible and none of the (N-1) photon transition can exist. Under these conditions, we show that most of the waveforms produce the same results as the single photon case. With care, therefore, we predict that it will be possible to extend some of the single photon coherent control ideas to develop multiphoton coherent control. We explore the various frequency-swept pulses into the multiphoton domain, which have been previously shown to be successful in inducing robust inversions under single-photon adiabatic conditions. We also investigate the case of phase modulated overlapped Gaussian pulses for two-photon transition (in the spirit of a “dark” pulse of Meshulach and Silberberg, which they defined as “a single burst of optical field” that does not produce any net population transfer). We show that the two-photon dark pulses, which are a result of smoothly varying phase modulation, can be explained by invoking the well-established concept of single photon adiabatic rapid passage (ARP) to the multiphoton framework. In fact, the ARP explanation allows us to generalize the results to the N-photon case and show that such dark pulses are a result of the Stark shifting of the resonant Nth photon transition. The extension of the concept of ARP into the multiphoton domain has very important consequences in generating inherent robust processes.

## II Formalism

The simplest model describing a molecular system is an isolated two-level system or ensemble without relaxation or inhomogeneities. This simple model often turns out to be a very practical model for most systems interacting with the femtosecond laser pulses as the magnitude of the relaxation processes are immensely large as compared to the femtosecond interaction time. Let us consider a linearly polarized pulse is being applied to the $`|`$1$`>`$$``$$`|`$2$`>`$ transition, where $`|`$1$`>`$ and $`|`$2$`>`$ represent the ground and excited eigenlevels, respectively, of the field-free Hamiltonian. In case of single photon interactions (Fig. 1a), the total laboratory-frame Hamiltonian for such two-level system under the effect of an applied laser field, $`E\left(t\right)=\epsilon \left(t\right)e^{i\left[\omega \left(t\right)t+\varphi \left(t\right)\right]}=\epsilon \left(t\right)e^{i\left[\omega +\dot{\varphi }\left(t\right)\right]t}`$ can be written as:

$$H=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}E_1& V_{12}& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ V_{21}& E_2& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}\mathrm{}\omega _1& \mu .E& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \mu .E^{}& \mathrm{}\omega _2& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right)=\mathrm{}\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}\frac{\omega _R}{2}& \frac{\mu .\epsilon }{\mathrm{}}e^{i\left(\omega t+\varphi \right)}& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \frac{\mu .\epsilon ^{}}{\mathrm{}}e^{i\left(\omega t+\varphi \right)}& \frac{\omega _R}{2}& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right)$$
(1)
where $`\omega _R=\omega _2\omega _1`$ is resonance frequency, V12 and V21 are the negative interaction potentials and $`h\omega _1,h\omega _2`$ are the energies of ground (E1) and excited state (E2) respectively, and $`\mu `$ is the transition dipole moment of the $`|`$1$`>`$$``$$`|`$2$`>`$ transition. In analogy to this single photon interaction as given in Eqn. (1), the interaction potential under the effect of an applied laser field, in two-photon absorption case (Fig. 1b) can be written as:

$$V\left(t\right)=\mu _{1m}\epsilon \left(t\right)e^{i\left(\omega t+\varphi \left(t\right)\right)}|1m\left|\mu _{m2}\epsilon \left(t\right)e^{i\left(\omega t+\varphi \left(t\right)\right)}\right|m2|+c.c.$$
(2)
where m is the virtual state. Let us, for simplicity, take the transition dipole moment between the ground state to the virtual sate to be equal to the transition dipole moment between the virtual state and excited state $`\left(\mu _{1m}=\mu _{m2}=\mu \right)`$. In fact, we have verified in our simulations that the trend of the results is preserved even when we relax this simplification. In any event, for developing the initial model, the above said simplification allows us to take $`\mu `$ as a common factor and we can rewrite Eqn. (2) as:

$$V\left(t\right)=\left(\mu \epsilon \left(t\right)\right)^2e^{2i\left(\omega t+\varphi \left(t\right)\right)}|12|+c.c.$$
(3)
since for normalized states, $`<m|m>=1`$. Using similar arguments for the N-photon case (Fig. 1c), the interaction potential can be written as:

$$V\left(t\right)=\left(\mu \epsilon \left(t\right)\right)^Ne^{iN\left(\omega t+\varphi \left(t\right)\right)}|12|+c.c.$$
(4)
Thus, the total laboratory-frame N-photon Hamiltonian will be:

$$H=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}\mathrm{}\omega _1& (\mu .E)^N& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ (\mu .E^{})^N& \mathrm{}\omega _2& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right)=\mathrm{}\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}\frac{\omega _R}{2}& \frac{(\mu .\epsilon )^N}{\mathrm{}}e^{iN\left(\omega t+\varphi \right)}& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \frac{(\mu .\epsilon ^{})^N}{\mathrm{}}e^{iN\left(\omega t+\varphi \right)}& \frac{\omega _R}{2}& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right)$$
(5)
The virtual levels for the two-photon (or N-photon) case can exist anywhere within the bandwidth $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega `$ of the applied laser pulse (Fig. 1) and the individual virtual state dynamics is of no consequence.

In analogy to the single photon case, there are two different ways to transform the elements of the above laboratory frame N-photon Hamiltonian (Eqn. (5)) into a rotating frame of reference. Any time-dependent transformation function T can be applied on both sides of the Schrodinger equation as follows:

$$\begin{array}{c}T\left(i\mathrm{}\frac{}{t}\mathrm{\Psi }=H\mathrm{\Psi }\right)\hfill \\ i\mathrm{}\frac{}{t}\left(T\mathrm{\Psi }\right)i\mathrm{}\frac{T}{t}\left(T^1T\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=TH\left(T^1T\right)\mathrm{\Psi }\hfill \\ i\mathrm{}\frac{}{t}\left(T\mathrm{\Psi }\right)=\left[THT^1+i\mathrm{}\frac{T}{t}T^1\right]\left(T\mathrm{\Psi }\right)\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
which results the following transformation equation:

$$H^{Transformed}=THT^1+i\mathrm{}T^1\frac{T}{t}$$
(7)
The usual frame of reference would be to rotate at N$`\omega `$. This is the phase-modulated (PM) frame of reference, which can be derived from the Hamiltonian H of Eqn. (5) by the transformation:

$$T^{PM}=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}e^{iN\frac{\omega t}{2}}& 0& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ 0& e^{iN\frac{\omega t}{2}}& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right)$$
(8)
Using of Eqn. (7), the transformed Hamiltonian in the PM frame is:

$$H^{PM}=\mathrm{}\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}\mathrm{\Delta }& \frac{\mu \left(\epsilon \left(t\right)\right)^N}{\mathrm{}}e^{iN\varphi }& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \frac{\mu \left(\epsilon ^{}\left(t\right)\right)^N}{\mathrm{}}e^{iN\varphi }& 0& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right)$$
(9)
under the assumption that the transient dipole moment of the individual intermediate virtual states in the multiphon ladder all add up constructively to the final state transition dipole moment and can be approximated to a constant ($`\mu `$) over the N-photon electric field interaction. This approximation is particularly valid for the case of multiphoton interaction with femtosecond pulses where no intermediate virtual level dynamics can be observed. Thus, we define multiphoton Rabi Frequency, as the complex conjugate pairs: $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$(t)=$`\mu `$.($`\epsilon `$(t))N/$`\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$(t)=$`\mu `$.($`\epsilon ^{}`$(t))N/$`\mathrm{}`$, and the time-independent multiphoton detuning as: $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\omega _RN\omega `$ (Fig. 1c). However, in order to investigate the off-resonance behavior of continuously modulated pulses, in the single photon case, it is useful to perform an alternate rotating-frame transformation to a frequency modulated (FM) frame with the transformation function:

$$T^{FM}=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}e^{iN\frac{\omega t+\varphi }{2}}& 0& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ 0& e^{iN\frac{\omega t+\varphi }{2}}& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right)$$
(10)
to transform the N-photon laboratory Hamiltonian in Eqn. (5) to the FM frame as:

$$H^{FM}=\mathrm{}\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}\mathrm{\Delta }+N\dot{\varphi }\left(t\right)& \frac{\mu .\left(\epsilon \left(t\right)\right)^N}{\mathrm{}}& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \frac{\mu .\left(\epsilon \left(t\right)\right)^N}{\mathrm{}}& 0& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right)=\mathrm{}\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}\mathrm{\Delta }+N\dot{\varphi }\left(t\right)& \mathrm{\Omega }& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \mathrm{\Omega }^{}& 0& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right)$$
(11)
The time derivative of the phase function $`\dot{\varphi }\left(t\right)`$, i.e., frequency modulation, appears as an additional resonance offset over and above the time-independent detuning $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, while the direction of the field in the orthogonal plane remains fixed. The time evolution of the unrelaxed two-level system can then be evaluated by integrating the Liouville equation:

$$\frac{d\rho \left(t\right)}{dt}=\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}[\rho \left(t\right),H^{FM}\left(t\right)]$$
(12)
where $`\rho `$(t) is a 2$`\times `$2 density matrix whose diagonal elements represent populations in the ground and excited states and off-diagonal elements represent coherent superposition of states. This approach has been very successful in solving many single-photon inversion processes for arbitrarily shaped amplitude and frequency modulated pulses,. We have just extended the same arguments to the multiphoton case.

The simulations are performed with a laser pulse that either has (a) a Gaussian intensity profile or (b) a hyperbolic secant intensity profile which have the following respective forms:

$$\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}\left(a\right)I\left(t\right)=I_0exp\left[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}ln2\left(t/\tau \right)^2\right]& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ implies\epsilon \left(t\right)=\epsilon _0exp\left[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}ln2\left(t/\tau \right)^2\right]& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \left(b\right)I\left(t\right)=I_0sech^2\left[\left\{2ln\left(2+\sqrt{3}\right)\right\}\left(t/\tau \right)\right]& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ implies\epsilon \left(t\right)=\epsilon _0sech\left[\left\{2ln\left(2+\sqrt{3}\right)\right\}\left(t/\tau \right)\right]& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}$$
(13)
where $`\tau `$ is the full width at half maximum, and I(t) is the pulse intensity. This is because most of the commercially available pulsed laser sources have these intrinsic laser parameters. We choose a range of frequency sweeps, such as (c) the linear frequency sweep for the Gaussian amplitude, (d) the hyperbolic tangent sweep for the hyperbolic secant amplitude, and they have the following respective forms:

$$\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}\left(c\right)\dot{\varphi }\left(t\right)=bt& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \left(d\right)\dot{\varphi }\left(t\right)=b\left\{2ln\left(2+\sqrt{3}\right)\right\}tanh\left[\left\{2ln\left(2+\sqrt{3}\right)\right\}\left(t/\tau \right)\right]& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}$$
(14)
where b is a constant. Such pulses have been shown to invert population through ARP in single photon case and so we choose to use these particular shapes for the multiphoton case.

We also use the shaped overlapping Gaussian pulses for a two-photon transition similar to the ones used by Meshulach and Silberberg. In their case the frequency sweep is given by:

$$\dot{\varphi }\left(t\right)=\{\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}btt_0& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ bt<t_0& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}$$
(15)
where t0 is the midpoint of the pulse. This pulse does not satisfy the ARP condition and is quite susceptible to the changes in the pulse amplitude profile and our results show this in the next section. However, if we instead use smoothly varying linear frequency sweeps, either changing monotonically as in Eqn. (14c), or linearly approaching and going away from resonance as given by:

$$\dot{\varphi }\left(t\right)=bt,\text{ where }\text{b}\text{ changes sign at }\text{t}_0$$
(16)
These pulses satisfy the ARP conditions as explained in the next section. Dark pulses given by Eqn (16) are thus quite insensitive to the changes in the pulse amplitude profile. We also extend our calculations to the N-photon case in a simple two-level type of system that supports only an Nth photon transition and show how the phase switches effect the population cycling. These generalizations would become evident when we examine the results based on the ARP extended to multiphoton case.

## III Results & Discussion

The population evaluation in a simple two level system without relaxation for one photon absorption (N=1) is shown in Fig. 2 for the pulse shapes given by Eqns. (13) and (14). Excitation exactly on resonance creates a complete population inversion when the pulse area (the time integral of the Rabi frequency) equals $`\pi `$. However, the population oscillates between the ground and excited state as sine function with respect to the Rabi frequency. These oscillations are not desirable in most cases involving real atoms or molecules. They are washed out by inhomogeneous broadening, the transverse Gaussian profile of the laser, and (in the molecular case) different values of $`\mu .\epsilon `$. For a single-photon case, as discussed in Ref. , frequency modulated pulses can instead produce adiabatic inversion, which avoids these complications. A linearly frequency swept (chirped) laser pulse can be generated by sweeping from far above resonance to far below resonance (blue to red sweeps), or alternatively from far below resonance to far above resonance (red to blue sweeps). When the frequency sweep is sufficiently slow such that the irradiated system can evolve with the applied sweep, the transitions are “adiabatic”. If this adiabatic process is faster than the characteristic relaxation time of the system, a smooth population inversion occurs with the evolution of the pulse, which is the well-known ARP.

Let us now extend the effect of such laser pulses (given by Eqns. (13) and (14)) to a two-photon (N=2) case as derived in our Hamiltonian of Eqn. (11). Fig. 3 shows the plots of the upper state population ($`\rho _{22}`$) as a function of applied Rabi frequency and detuning for two photon absorption case in the absence of one photon absorption. We find that the results are qualitatively the same as the one-photon absorption. In fact, our simulations show that for such a simple case of a two-level system, where only an Nth photon transition is possible, we can extend our single-photon results to the N-photon case. The difference lies in the Rabi frequency scaling. Thus, for this simple case as defined here, we are able to invoke the concept of ARP for multiphoton interaction.

We next use the overlapping Gaussian pulses (when the overlap is complete it collapses into a single Gaussian) with different phase relationships. Our simulation shows that for shaped overlapping Gaussian pulses the excited sate population depends on the form of the frequency sweep. In figure 4a, for the shaped pulse without sweep the population of excited state oscillates symmetrically. For a simple monotonically increasing or decreasing sweep around resonance, it behaves like a Guassian pulse with linear sweep (Fig. 4b). These results essentially confirm another important implication of the adiabatic principle: that the exact amplitude of the pulse is not very important under the adiabatic limit. Again, for this simple case, we are able to invoke the concept of ARP for multiphoton interaction to explain the inversion.

The phase modulated overlapped Gaussian pulses are of interest since Meshulach and Silberberg had experimentally switched the phase of the second pulse with respect to the first pulse and demonstrated two-photon excited state population modulation. However, the phase switch in their pulse shapes was abrupt as given by Eqn. (15), and thus did not satisfy the ARP condition. As a result the population transfer with such pulses are very heavily dependent on the actual shape of the pulse. Figs. 5 shows that the upper state population for two photon absorption in the absence of one photon absorption is heavily dependent on the nature of the phase step, the intensity and the extent of overlap of the pulses. At some particular phase switch, there is no excited-state population, and they called it the dark pulse. We show that it is indeed true for a specific overlapped amplitude profile and intensity for a given phase switching position. These dark pulses, however, are sensitive to the exact nature of the amplitude profile and intensity.

If instead we choose a smoothly varying linear frequency sweeping to the two-photon resonance and then away from resonance, as given by Eqn. (16), the results are quite robust to the exact nature of the amplitude profile and intensity (Fig. 6). At detuning zero and for small values of Rabi frequency, we have some population in excited state. However, when the intensity of applied pulse increases, the excited state population returns to zero. In other words, we are sending shaped pulse into the two-level system but finally there is no excited-state population. Curiously enough, for such pulses, the population is asymmetric about detuning from resonance. In fact, Fig. 6 clearly shows that the population transfer occurs at some non-zero detuning values at higher Rabi frequencies when it does not have any excitation at resonance and behaves as a dark pulse. This result can be understood by examining the evolution of the dressed states- with time (Fig. 7). When the effect of the pulse cannot be felt by the system at very early or and at very late times with respect to the presence of the pulse, each dressed state essentially corresponds to the single bare state ($`|\alpha |1`$ and $`|\beta |2`$). It is only during the pulse that the dressed states change in composition and evolve as a linear combination of the two bare states. The proximity of these dressed states during the pulse essentially determines the population exchange. The higher Rabi frequencies cause a stark shift in the dressed states so that at resonance there is no population exchange. Under such stark shifted condition, resonance occurs at some specific non-zero detuning value where Rabi oscillations are seen in Fig. 6. These results are completely general for a simple case of a two-level system, where only an Nth photon transition is possible. The phase change of the overlapping Gaussian pulses essentially provide an additional parameter to control the population evolution of a simple two-level type of system that supports only an Nth photon transition.

## IV Conclusions

In this paper, we have explored the effects of ultrafast shaped pulses for two-level systems that do not have a single photon resonance by developing a multiphoton density-matrix approach. We took advantage of the fact that dynamics of the intermediate virtual states are absent in the femtosecond timescales, and demonstrated that many multiphoton results can be surprising similar to the well-known single photon results. When we extend the ARP to the multiphoton condition, robust population inversion and dark pulses become possible that are insensitive to the exact profile of the applied electric field. We have shown, therefore, that it is possible to extend the single photon coherent control ideas to develop femtosecond multiphoton coherent control.