text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

To get solutions of a non-linear second order partial differential equation or a system of such equations one may use Bäcklund Transformations (BTs), provided that these equations do have such transformations .A BT consists of a set of first order partial differential equations relating a solution of the given equations to another solution of the given equations ( or to a solution of another set of equations.) A method of getting BTs has been introduced by Clairin ,  and it has been shown that by this method we get all known BTs of the Ernst’s equation  i.e. the transformations of Ehlers  of Neugenbauer  and of Harrison . Also by this method a BT of the Einstein-Maxwell equations has been found .

BTs of Einstein’s equations for the interior of a uniformly rotating, stationary, axisymmetric perfect fluid are not known and this is one of the reasons the number of solutions of these equations is limited. In this work we shall try to find BTs of these equations by Clairin’s method. We use a form of Einstein’s equations which is very convenient for the application of the method . In Sect 2 we apply the method in the general case i.e. in the case in which we don’t impose any specific relation between the pressure $`p`$ and the energy density $`\mu `$ of the fluid i.e. for arbitrary equation of state. We show that in this case the method does not give no-trivial BTs. In Sect. 3 we assume for the fluid an equation of state of the form $`p+3\mu =0`$ and we get non-trivial BTs. The general solution of the system of first order partial differential equations of the BTs is found, and it is shown that this leads to the transformation of Ehlers .

## 2 Bäcklund Transformations in the General Case

We shall give some definitions and briefly state some results of Ref . The metric for stationary axially symmetric space times admitting 2-spaces orthogonal to the Killing vectors $`\stackrel{}{\xi }=_t`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\eta }=_\varphi `$ can be written in the form

$$ds^2=e^{2U}\{e^{2K}(d\rho ^2+dz^2)+F^2d\varphi ^2\}e^{2U}(dt+Ad\varphi )^2$$
(1)
where $`U=U(\rho ,z)`$, $`K=K(\rho ,z)`$, $`F=F(\rho ,z)`$ and $`A=A(\rho ,z)`$. For a perfect fluid source we have the energy-momentum tensor

$$T_{ab}=(\mu +p)u_au_b+pg_{ab}$$
(2)
where $`u_a`$ are the components of the 4-velocity and $`\mu `$ and $`p`$ are the mass density and the pressure of the fluid respectively.

We shall introduce the notation

$`A=\omega \text{}e^{2U}=T\text{}\xi =\rho +iz\text{}\eta =\rho iz`$ (3)
and the potentials $`\varphi `$ and $`E`$ by

$`\omega _\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{F}{T^2}}\varphi _z\text{}\omega _z={\displaystyle \frac{F}{T^2}}\varphi _\rho \text{}E=T+i\varphi `$ (4)
where a letter as an index in a function means differentiation with respect to the corresponding variable e.g. $`\omega _\rho =\frac{\omega }{\rho }`$. Also we put

$`lnF=G\text{}2KG=M`$ (5)
$`\mathrm{\Lambda }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(E+\overline{E})(^2E+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{F}}\stackrel{}{}F\stackrel{}{}E)\stackrel{}{}E\stackrel{}{}E=0`$ (6)
where

$`^2=_{\rho \rho }^2+_{zz}^2\text{}\stackrel{}{}=\widehat{\rho }_\rho +\widehat{z}_z`$ (7)
with $`\widehat{\rho }`$ and $`\widehat{z}`$ unit vectors in the direction of the $`\rho `$ and $`z`$ axis respectively. Then Einstein’s field equations take the form

$`G_{\eta \eta }M_\eta G_\eta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2T^2}}(T_\eta ^2+\varphi _\eta ^2)=0`$ (8)
$`M_{\eta \xi }G_\eta G_\xi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2T^2}}(T_\eta T_\xi +\varphi _\eta \varphi _\xi )=0`$ (9)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}Im\mathrm{\Lambda }=\varphi _{\eta \xi }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(G_\eta \varphi _\xi +G_\xi \varphi _\eta ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}(T_\eta \varphi _\xi +T_\xi \varphi _\eta )=0`$ (10)
$`p=2Te^{GM}(G_{\eta \xi }+G_\eta G_\xi )`$ (11)
$`\mu =3p+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}Re\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (12)
where the expressions $`Im\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`Re\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are the imaginary and the real parts of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ respectively.

We shall try to find BTs in the general case i.e. if we don’t impose any relation between $`p`$ and $`\mu `$. We shall apply the method of Clairin ,  to Eqs (8) - (10). Having found such a transformation we shall use Eqs (11) and (12) to determine $`p^{}`$ and $`\mu ^{}`$ of the new solution.The most general forms of BTs are :

$`G_\eta ^{}=\alpha _0+\alpha _1G_\eta +\alpha _2M_\eta +\alpha _3T_\eta +\alpha _4\varphi _\eta +\alpha _5G_\xi `$
$`+\alpha _6M_\xi +\alpha _7T_\xi +\alpha _8\varphi _\xi `$ (13)
$`M_\eta ^{}=\beta _0+\beta _1G_\eta +\beta _2M_\eta +\beta _3T_\eta +\beta _4\varphi _\eta +\beta _5G_\xi `$
$`+\beta _6M_\xi +\beta _7T_\xi +\beta _8\varphi _\xi `$ (14)
$`T_\eta ^{}=\gamma _0+\gamma _1G_\eta +\gamma _2M_\eta +\gamma _3T_\eta +\gamma _4\varphi _\eta +\gamma _5G_\xi `$
$`+\gamma _6M_\xi +\gamma _7T_\xi +\gamma _8\varphi _\xi `$ (15)
$`\varphi _\eta ^{}=\delta _0+\delta _1G_\eta +\delta _2M_\eta +\delta _3T_\eta +\delta _4\varphi _\eta +\delta _5G_\xi `$
$`+\delta _6M_\xi +\delta _7T_\xi +\delta _8\varphi _\xi `$ (16)
$`G_\xi ^{}=\overline{G_\eta ^{}}\text{}M_\xi ^{}=\overline{M_\eta ^{}}\text{}T_\xi ^{}=\overline{T_\eta ^{}}\text{}\varphi _\xi =\overline{\varphi _\eta ^{}}`$ (17)
where $`R=R(G,M,T,\varphi ,G^{},M^{},T^{},\varphi ^{},\xi ,\eta )`$, $`R=\alpha _0,\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _8,\beta _0,\mathrm{},\delta _8`$. If we substitute the above expressions into Eqs (8)-(10) for the quantities with prime and into the integrability conditions

$$G_{\eta \xi }^{}G_{\xi \eta }^{}=M_{\eta \xi }^{}M_{\xi \eta }^{}=T_{\eta \xi }^{}T_{\xi \eta }^{}=\varphi _{\eta \xi }^{}\varphi _{\xi \eta }^{}=0$$
(18)
the relations we shall get should hold for any solution. Therefore the coefficients of all linearly independent quantities should vanish. Such quantities are : $`G_{\eta \xi }`$, $`M_{\eta \eta }`$, $`M_{\xi \xi }`$, $`T_{\eta \xi }`$, $`T_{\eta \eta }`$, $`T_{\xi \xi }`$, $`\varphi _{\eta \eta }`$, $`\varphi _{\xi \xi }`$, $`S_iS_j`$, $`S_i`$, where $`S`$ = $`G`$, $`M`$, $`T`$, $`\varphi `$, and i, j = $`\xi `$, $`\eta `$.

We get

$`G_{\eta \eta }^{}M_\eta ^{}G_\eta ^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2T^2}}(T_\eta ^2+\varphi _\eta ^2)=\alpha _2M_{\eta \eta }+\alpha _3T_{\eta \eta }`$
$`+\alpha _4\varphi _{\eta \eta }+\alpha _5G_{\xi \eta }+\alpha _7T_{\xi \eta }+\mathrm{}=0`$ (19)
$`G_{\eta \xi }^{}G_{\xi \eta }^{}=(\alpha _1\overline{\alpha _1})G_{\eta \xi }+\alpha _6M_{\xi \xi }+\alpha _8\varphi _{\xi \xi }+\mathrm{}=0`$ (20)
$`M_{\eta \xi }^{}G_\eta ^{}G_\xi ^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2T^2}}(T_\xi ^{}T_\eta ^{}+\varphi _\xi ^{}\varphi _\eta ^{})=\beta _1G_{\eta \xi }+\beta _3T_{\eta \xi }`$
$`+\beta _6M_{\xi \xi }+\beta _7T_{\xi \xi }+\beta _8\varphi _{\xi \xi }+\mathrm{}=0`$ (21)
$`T_{\eta \xi }^{}T_{\xi \eta }^{}=(\gamma _1\overline{\gamma _1})G_{\eta \xi }+(\gamma _3\overline{\gamma _3})T_{\eta \xi }+\gamma _6M_{\xi \xi }`$
$`+\gamma _7T_{\xi \xi }+\gamma _8\varphi _{\xi \xi }+\mathrm{}=0`$ (22)
$`\varphi _{\eta \xi }^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(G_\eta ^{}\varphi _\xi ^{}+G_\xi ^{}\varphi _\eta ^{}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{T^{}}}(T_\xi ^{}\varphi _\eta ^{}+T_\eta ^{}\varphi _\xi ^{})`$
$`=\delta _1G_{\eta \xi }+\delta _3T_{\eta \xi }+\delta _6M_{\xi \xi }+\delta _7T_{\xi \xi }+\delta _8\varphi _{\xi \xi }+\mathrm{}=0`$ (23)
where only some of the linearly independent terms with their coefficients are shown.Therefore we must have

$`\alpha _2=\alpha _3=\alpha _4=\alpha _5=\alpha _6=\alpha _7=\alpha _8=0`$ (24)
$`\overline{\alpha _1}=\alpha _1`$ (25)
$`\beta _1=\beta _3=\beta _6=\beta _7=\beta _8=0`$ (26)
$`\gamma _6=\gamma _7=\gamma _8=0`$ (27)
$`\overline{\gamma _1}=\gamma _1\text{}\overline{\gamma _3}=\gamma _3`$ (28)
$`\delta _1=\delta _3=\delta _6=\delta _7=\delta _8=0`$ (29)
and the BTs become

$`G_\eta ^{}=\alpha _1G_\eta +\alpha _0`$ (30)
$`M_\eta ^{}=\beta _2M_\eta +\beta _4\varphi _\eta +\beta _5G_\xi +\beta _0`$ (31)
$`T_\eta ^{}=\gamma _1G_\eta +\gamma _2M_\eta +\gamma _3T_\eta +\gamma _4\varphi _\eta +\gamma _5G_\xi +\gamma _0`$ (32)
$`\varphi _\eta ^{}=\delta _2M_\eta +\delta _4\varphi _\eta +\delta _5G_\xi +\delta _0`$ (33)
Also using expressions (30)-(33) and the equations which the functions G, M, and $`\varphi `$ satisfy we get :

$`G_{\eta \eta }^{}M_\eta ^{}G_\eta ^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2T^2}}(T_\eta ^2+\varphi _\eta ^2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2T^2}}(\gamma _2^2+\delta _2^2)M_\eta ^2+\mathrm{}=0`$ (34)
$`M_{\eta \xi }^{}M_{\xi \eta }^{}=(\beta _2\overline{\beta _2})G_\eta G_\xi {\displaystyle \frac{\beta _5}{2T^2}}(T_\xi ^2+\varphi _\xi ^2)+\mathrm{}=0`$ (35)
$`T_{\eta \xi }^{}T_{\xi \eta }^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _5}{2T^2}}(T_\xi ^2+\varphi _\xi ^2)+\mathrm{}=0`$ (36)
$`\varphi _{\eta \xi }^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(G_\eta ^{}\varphi _\xi ^{}+G_\xi ^{}\varphi _\eta ^{}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{T^{}}}(T_\xi ^{}\varphi _\eta ^{}+T_\eta ^{}\varphi _\xi ^{})`$
$`=\{\delta _2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T^{}}}(\gamma _5\overline{\delta _5}+\overline{\gamma _5}\delta _5)\}G_\xi G_\eta {\displaystyle \frac{\delta _5}{2T^2}}(T_\xi ^2+\varphi _\xi ^2)+\mathrm{}=0`$ (37)
Therefore we must have

$`\beta _5=\gamma _2=\gamma _5=\delta _2=\delta _5=0`$ (38)
$`\overline{\beta _2}=\beta _2`$ (39)
Thus the BTs become

$`G_\eta ^{}=\alpha _1G_\eta +\alpha _0`$ (40)
$`M_\eta ^{}=\beta _2M_\eta +\beta _4\varphi _\eta +\beta _0`$ (41)
$`T_\eta ^{}=\gamma _1G_\eta +\gamma _3T_\eta +\gamma _4\varphi _\eta +\gamma _0`$ (42)
$`\varphi _\eta ^{}=\delta _4\varphi _\eta +\delta _0`$ (43)
where $`\alpha _1`$, $`\beta _2`$, $`\gamma _1`$ and $`\gamma _3`$ are real functions.

To proceed further we introduce the notation

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{,G}\mathrm{\Delta }_G+\alpha _1\mathrm{\Delta }_G^{}+\gamma _1\mathrm{\Delta }_T^{}`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{,M}\mathrm{\Delta }_M+\beta _2\mathrm{\Delta }_M^{}`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{,T}\mathrm{\Delta }_T+\gamma _3\mathrm{\Delta }_T^{}`$ (44)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{,\varphi }\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi +\beta _4\mathrm{\Delta }_M^{}+\gamma _4\mathrm{\Delta }_T^{}+\delta _4\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi ^{}`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{,\overline{\varphi }}\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi +\overline{\beta _4}\mathrm{\Delta }_M^{}+\overline{\gamma _4}\mathrm{\Delta }_T^{}+\overline{\delta _4}\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi ^{}`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{,\eta }\mathrm{\Delta }_\eta +\alpha _0\mathrm{\Delta }_G^{}+\beta _0\mathrm{\Delta }_M^{}+\gamma _0\mathrm{\Delta }_T^{}+\delta _0\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi ^{}`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\alpha _1\text{}\alpha _0\text{}\beta _2`$, … $`\delta _0`$.Then using Eqs (40) - (43) we get from the equations the functions $`G^{}\text{}M^{}`$ and $`\varphi ^{}`$ must satisfy and from the integrability conditions a big number of equations. We give some of them. From (8) for the new solution we get :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _1}{T^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _3^2}{T^2}}=0`$ (45)
$`\alpha _{1,\eta }+\alpha _{0,G}\alpha _1\beta _0+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1\gamma _0}{T^2}}=0`$ (46)
$`\alpha _{1,G}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1^2}{2T^2}}=0`$ (47)
$`\gamma _3\gamma _4=0`$ (48)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _1}{T^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _4^2+\delta _4^2}{T^2}}=0`$ (49)
Also from Eq (9) we get :

$`\beta _2\alpha _1^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1^2}{2T^2}}=0`$ (50)
$`\gamma _1\gamma _3=0`$ (51)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _4}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1\overline{\gamma _4}}{2T^2}}=0`$ (52)
$`\alpha _1\overline{\alpha _0}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1\overline{\gamma _0}}{T^2}}=0`$ (53)
$`\beta _{2,\xi }=0`$ (54)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _2}{T^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _3^2}{T^2}}=0`$ (55)
$`\gamma _3\overline{\gamma _0}=0`$ (56)
and from Eq (10) we get :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _4}{T}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _3\overline{\delta _4}}{T^{}}}=0`$ (57)
$`\gamma _3\overline{\delta _0}=0`$ (58)
Eqs (45)-(58) imply that most of the coefficients in the BTs (40)-(43) vanish. To show that we shall consider two cases.

Case 1

$$\gamma _30$$
(59)
Then Eqs (48), (51), (52), (56) and (58) imply

$$\beta _4=\gamma _1=\gamma _4=\gamma _0=\delta _0=0$$
(60)
But if $`\gamma _0=0`$ Eq (53) implies the relation $`\alpha _1\alpha _0=0.`$ However if $`\alpha _1=0`$ (50) gives $`\beta _2=0`$ in which case Eq (55) implies the relation $`\gamma _3=0`$, contrary to Eq (59). Therefore we must take

$$\alpha _0=0$$
(61)
in which case Eq (46) gives $`\alpha _{1,\eta }\alpha _1\beta _0=0`$. From Eqs (25) and (50) we get $`\beta _2=\alpha _1^2`$ : real. Then Eq (54) gives $`\beta _{2,\eta }=0`$ and since $`\beta _{2,\eta }=2\alpha _1\alpha _{1,\eta }`$ we find that $`\alpha _{1,\eta }=0`$ since $`\alpha _10`$. Thus we have

$$\beta _0=0$$
(62)
Therefore we get the BT

$$G_\eta ^{}=\alpha _1G_\eta ,M_\eta ^{}=\beta _2M_\eta ,T_\eta ^{}=\gamma _3T_\eta ,\varphi _\eta ^{}=\delta _4\varphi _\eta $$
(63)
where $`\alpha _1`$, $`\beta _2`$ and $`\gamma _3`$ are real functions. Substituting expressions (63) to equations which $`G^{}`$, $`M^{}`$ and $`\varphi ^{}`$ satisfy and to the integrability conditions and solving the resulting equations we get the trivial relations

$$G^{}=G+c_1\text{}M^{}=M+c_2\text{}T^{}=c_3T\text{}\varphi ^{}=\pm c_3\varphi +c_4$$
(64)
where $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$, $`c_3`$ and $`c_4`$ are arbitrary real constants.

Case 2

$$\gamma _3=0$$
(65)
Then from Eqs (45), (47), (49), (50), (52) and (57) we get

$$\alpha _1=\beta _2=\beta _4=\gamma _1=\gamma _4=\delta _4=0$$
(66)
Therefore we obtain the non-interesting relations

$$G_\eta ^{}=\alpha _0,M_\eta ^{}=\beta _0,T_\eta ^{}=\gamma _0,\varphi _\eta ^{}=\delta _0$$
(67)
Our conclusion is that Clairin’s method, which in the vacuum case gives all known BTs , does not give interesting BTs in the general case.

## 3 Bäcklund Transformations if $`\mu +3p=0`$

If $`\mu +3p=0`$ Eq (12) gives $`Re\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, which combined with (10) gives $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$. Therefore the system of Eqs (8) - (11) in the variables $`G,M,E\text{, and }\overline{E}`$ ( for simplicity we write also $`E+\overline{E}=2T`$ ) takes the form

$`G_{\eta \eta }M_\eta G_\eta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2T^2}}E_\eta \overline{E}_\eta =0`$ (68)
$`M_{\eta \xi }G_\eta G_\xi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4T^2}}(E_\xi \overline{E}_\eta +\overline{E}_\xi E_\eta )=0`$ (69)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}\mathrm{\Lambda }=E_{\eta \xi }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(G_\eta E_\xi +G_\xi E_\eta ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}E_\xi E_\eta =0`$ (70)
$`p=2Te^{GM}(G_{\eta \xi }+G_\eta G_\xi )`$ (71)
We want to find BTs for the system of Eqs (68) - (70) following Clairin’s method. The most general BTs are given by the relations

$`G_\eta ^{}=\zeta _0+\zeta _1G_\eta +\zeta _2M_\eta +\zeta _3E_\eta +\zeta _4\overline{E}_\eta +\zeta _5G_\xi `$
$`+\zeta _6M_\xi +\zeta _7E_\xi +\zeta _8\overline{E}_\xi `$ (72)
$`M_\eta ^{}=\lambda _0+\lambda _1G_\eta +\lambda _2M_\eta +\lambda _3E_\eta +\lambda _4\overline{E}_\eta +\lambda _5G_\xi `$
$`+\lambda _6M_\xi +\lambda _7E_\xi +\lambda _8\overline{E}_\xi `$ (73)
$`E_\eta ^{}=\mu _0+\mu _1G_\eta +\mu _2M_\eta +\mu _3E_\eta +\mu _4\overline{E}_\eta +\mu _5G_\xi `$
$`+\mu _6M_\xi +\mu _7E_\xi +\mu _8\overline{E}_\xi `$ (74)
$`\overline{E^{}}_\eta =\nu _0+\nu _1G_\eta +\nu _2M_\eta +\nu _3E_\eta +\nu _4\overline{E}_\eta +\nu _5G_\xi `$
$`+\nu _6M_\xi +\nu _7E_\xi +\nu _8\overline{E}_\xi `$ (75)
$`G_\xi ^{}=\overline{G_\eta ^{}},M_\xi ^{}=\overline{M_\eta ^{}},E_\xi ^{}=\overline{\overline{E^{}}_\eta },\overline{E^{}}_\xi =\overline{E_\eta ^{}}`$ (76)
while $`p^{}`$ is given by Eq (71) in terms of $`T^{}`$, $`G^{}`$, and $`M^{}`$. Proceeding as in the previous case we find that

$`\zeta _2=\zeta _3=\zeta _4=\zeta _5=\zeta _6=\zeta _7=\zeta _8=0,\overline{\zeta _1}=\zeta _1`$ (77)
$`\kappa _1=\kappa _5=\kappa _6=\kappa _7=\kappa _8=0,\kappa =\lambda ,\mu ,\nu ,`$ (78)
Therefore our BTs are reduced to

$`G_\eta ^{}=\zeta _0+\zeta _1G_\eta ,\overline{\zeta _1}=\zeta _1`$ (79)
$`M_\eta ^{}=\lambda _0+\lambda _2M_\eta +\lambda _3E_\eta +\lambda _4\overline{E}_\eta `$ (80)
$`E_\eta ^{}=\mu _0+\mu _2M_\eta +\mu _3E_\eta +\mu _4\overline{E}_\eta `$ (81)
$`\overline{E^{}}_\eta =\nu _0+\nu _2M_\eta +\nu _3E_\eta +\nu _4\overline{E}_\eta `$ (82)
Then we get

$`G_{\eta \eta }^{}M_\eta ^{}G_\eta ^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2T^2}}E_\eta ^{}\overline{E^{}}_\eta ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2T^2}}\{\mu _2\nu _2M_\eta ^2+(\mu _2\nu _3+\mu _3\nu _2)M_\eta E_\eta `$
$`+(\mu _2\nu _4+\mu _4\nu _2)M_\eta \overline{E}_\eta +\mu _3\nu _3E_\eta ^2+\mu _4\nu _4\overline{E}_\eta ^2\}+\{{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta _1}{2T^2}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _3\nu _4+\mu _4\nu _3}{2T^2}}\}E_\eta \overline{E}_\eta +\{\zeta _{0G}+\zeta _{0G^{}}\zeta _1+\zeta _{1\eta }+\zeta _{1G^{}}\zeta _0+\zeta _{1M^{}}\lambda _0+\zeta _{1E^{}}\mu _0`$
$`+\zeta _{1\overline{E^{}}}\nu _0\lambda _0\zeta _1\}G_\eta +\mathrm{}=0`$ (83)
$`M_{\eta \xi }^{}G_\eta ^{}G_\xi ^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4T^2}}(E_\xi ^{}\overline{E^{}}_\eta +\overline{E^{}}_\xi E_\eta ^{})=(\lambda _2\zeta _1^2)G_\xi G_\eta \zeta _1\overline{\zeta _0}G_\eta `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2T^2}}\{(\mu _3\overline{\mu _0}+\nu _3\overline{\nu _0})E_\eta +(\mu _4\overline{\mu _0}+\nu _4\overline{\nu _0})\overline{E}_\eta \}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _3}{2}}G_\eta E_\xi `$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _4}{2}}G_\eta \overline{E}_\xi +\mathrm{}=0`$ (84)
$`E_{\eta \xi }^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(G_\eta ^{}E_\xi ^{}+G_\xi ^{}E_\eta ^{}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{T^{}}}E_\xi ^{}E_\eta ^{}=\mu _2G_\eta G_\xi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\zeta _1\overline{\nu _0}G_\eta `$
$`+(\mu _{3\xi }+{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\zeta _0}\mu _3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _3\overline{\nu _0}}{T^{}}})E_\eta +(\mu _{4\xi }+{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\zeta _0}\mu _4}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _4\overline{\nu _0}}{T^{}}})\overline{E}_\eta +({\displaystyle \frac{\mu _3}{2}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta _1\overline{\nu _4}}{2}})G_\eta E_\xi +({\displaystyle \frac{\mu _4}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta _1\overline{\nu _3}}{2}})G_\eta \overline{E}_\xi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\zeta _1\overline{\nu _2}G_\eta M_\xi +\mathrm{}=0`$ (85)
$`E_{\xi \eta }^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(G_\eta ^{}E_\xi ^{}+G_\xi ^{}E_\eta ^{}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{T^{}}}E_\xi ^{}E_\eta ^{}=\overline{\nu _2}G_\eta G_\xi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\zeta _1\mu _0G_\xi `$
$`+(\overline{\nu _4}_\eta +{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta _0\overline{\nu _4}}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _0\overline{\nu _4}}{T^{}}})E_\xi +(\overline{\nu }_{3\eta }+{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta _0\overline{\nu _3}}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _0\overline{\nu _3}}{T^{}}})\overline{E}_\xi +({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\nu _4}}{2}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta _1\mu _3}{2}})G_\xi E_\eta +({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\nu _3}}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta _1\mu _4}{2}})G_\xi \overline{E}_\eta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\zeta _1\mu _2G_\xi M_\eta +\mathrm{}=0`$ (86)
We equate to zero the coefficients of the linearly independent terms $`M_\eta ^2`$, $`M_\eta E_\eta `$, $`M_\eta \overline{E_\eta }`$, … and solve the resulting equations. Then we get :

Case 1

$$\zeta _1=\lambda _2=\lambda _3=\lambda _4=\mu _2=\mu _3=\mu _4=\nu _2=\nu _3=\nu _4=0$$
(87)
Case 2

$`\zeta _0=\lambda _0=\lambda _3=\lambda _4=\mu _0=\mu _2=\mu _4=\nu _0=\nu _2=\nu _3=0`$ (88)
$`\zeta _1=\pm 1,\lambda _2=1,\nu _4=\pm \overline{\mu _3},\mu _{3\xi }=\mu _{3\eta }=0`$ (89)
$`\mu _3\overline{\mu _3}={\displaystyle \frac{T^2}{T^2}}`$ (90)
Case 3

$`\zeta _0=\lambda _0=\lambda _3=\lambda _4=\mu _0=\mu _2=\mu _3=\nu _0=\nu _2=\nu _4=0`$ (91)
$`\zeta _1=\pm 1,\lambda _2=1,\nu _3=\pm \overline{\mu _4},\mu _{4\xi }=\mu _{4\eta }=0`$ (92)
$`\mu _4\overline{\mu _4}={\displaystyle \frac{T^2}{T^2}}`$ (93)
We can further show that the expressions with the minus sign in Eqs (89) and (92) should be dropped. Indeed we get for this sign and Case 2

$$E_{\eta \xi }^{}E_{\xi \eta }^{}=(\mu _3+\mu _{3G})G_\eta E_\xi +\mathrm{}=0$$
(94)
The above implies the relation $`\mu _{3G}\mu _3=0`$, which is not consistent with Eq (90). Similarly we proceed in Case 3 . Therefore we find the following BTs :

Case 1

$$G_\eta ^{}=\zeta _0,M_\eta ^{}=\lambda _0,E_\eta ^{}=\mu _0,\overline{E^{}}_\eta =\nu _0$$
(95)
This case is not interesting.

Case 2

$`G_\eta ^{}=G_\eta ,M_\eta ^{}=M_\eta ,E_\eta ^{}=\mu _3E_\eta ,\overline{E^{}}_\eta =\overline{\mu _3}\overline{E}_\eta `$ (96)
$`\mu _{3\xi }=\mu _{3\eta }=0,\mu _3\overline{\mu _3}={\displaystyle \frac{T^2}{T^2}}`$ (97)
Case 3

$`G_\eta ^{}=G_\eta ,M_\eta ^{}=M_\eta ,E_\eta ^{}=\mu _4\overline{E}_\eta ,\overline{E^{}}_\eta =\overline{\mu _4}E_\eta `$ (98)
$`\mu _{4\xi }=\mu _{4\eta }=0,\mu _4\overline{\mu _4}={\displaystyle \frac{T^2}{T^2}}`$ (99)
We shall consider Cases 2 and 3 only.

We can easily check that the BTs of Eqs (96) - (97) and also the BTs of Eqs (98) - (99) satisfy Eqs (68) and (69). Therefore we shall determine $`\mu _3`$ and $`\mu _4`$ by requiring Eq (70) to be satisfied. Substituting expressions (96) into Eq (70), using Eq (70) to eliminate $`E_{\xi \eta }`$ from the resulting equation and equating to zero the coefficients of the linearly independent terms we get

$`\mu _{3G}=\mu _{3M}=0`$ (100)
$`\mu _{3E}+\mu _3\mu _{3E^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}\mu _3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T^{}}}\mu _3^2=0`$ (101)
$`\mu _{3\overline{E}}+\overline{\mu _3}\mu _{3\overline{E^{}}}=0`$ (102)
If we write

$$\mu _3=\frac{T^{}}{T}v,\mu _4=\frac{T^{}}{T}w$$
(103)
we get from Eqs (97) and (99)

$$v\overline{v}=1,w\overline{w}=1$$
(104)
Substituting expression (103) for $`\mu _3`$ into Eqs (97) and (100) - (102) we get

$`v_\xi =v_\eta =v_G=v_M=0`$ (105)
$`Tv_E+T^{}vv_E^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(vv^2)=0`$ (106)
$`Tv_{\overline{E}}T^{}v\overline{v}_{\overline{E}^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1v)=0`$ (107)
Any complex number $`v`$ satisfying the first of (104) can be written in the form

$$v=\frac{x+i}{xi},x\text{ : real}$$
(108)
Substituting expression (108) into Eqs (105) - (107) we get in real variables

$`x_\xi =x_\eta =x_G=x_M=0`$ (109)
$`Txx_TTx_\varphi +T^{}xx_T^{}+T^{}x_\varphi ^{}+x^2+1=0`$ (110)
$`Tx_T+Txx_\varphi T^{}x_T^{}+T^{}xx_\varphi ^{}=0`$ (111)
$`T(x^2+1)x_T+T^{}(x^21)x_T^{}+2T^{}xx_\varphi ^{}+x(x^2+1)=0`$ (112)
$`T(x^2+1)x_\varphi 2T^{}xx_T^{}+T^{}(x^21)x_\varphi ^{}x^21=0`$ (113)
But multiplying (110) by $`x`$ and adding to it Eq (111) we get Eq (112), while multiplying (111) by $`x`$ and subtracting from it Eq (110) we get Eq (113). Therefore if Eqs (110) and (111) are satisfied Eqs (112) and (113 are also satisfied and can be omitted. Also the integrability condition $`E_{\xi \eta }^{}E_{\eta \xi }^{}=0`$ leads to Eq (102). Therefore the only relations $`x`$ should satisfy are Eqs (109) - (111).

If we start from the BTs of Eqs (98) - (99), write

$$w=\frac{y+i}{yi},y\text{ : real}$$
(114)
and proceed as before we find that $`y`$ must satisfy the relations

$`y_\xi =y_\eta =y_G=y_M=0`$ (115)
$`Tyy_T+Ty_\varphi +T^{}yy_T^{}+T^{}y_\varphi ^{}+y^2+1=0`$ (116)
$`Ty_TTyy_\varphi T^{}y_T^{}+T^{}yy_\varphi ^{}=0`$ (117)
which are obtained from Eqs (109) - (111) if we make the replacement

$$xy,\varphi \varphi $$
(118)
We shall find the common solution of Eqs (110) and (111). To do that we find separately the general solution of (110) and of (111) and then the most general common solution. To solve (110) we find first the solution of the system

$$\frac{dT}{Tx}=\frac{d\varphi }{T}=\frac{dT^{}}{T^{}x}=\frac{d\varphi ^{}}{T^{}}=\frac{dx}{x^2+1}$$
(119)
Solving this system we find that the general solution of (110) is given by

$$H_1\{\frac{T^{}}{T},T\sqrt{x^2+1},Tx\varphi ,T^{}x+\varphi ^{}\}=0$$
(120)
where $`H_1`$ is an arbitrary function of its arguments. Similarly we find that the general solution of (111) is given by

$$H_2\{TT^{},x,Tx\varphi ,T^{}x+\varphi ^{}\}=0$$
(121)
where $`H_2`$ is again an arbitrary function of its arguments. The common solution of (110) and (111) can be expressed by an arbitrary function $`H`$ whose arguments can be constructed from the arguments of $`H_1`$ and also from the arguments of $`H_2`$ and is given by

$$H\{TT^{}(x^2+1),Tx\varphi ,T^{}x+\varphi ^{}\}=0$$
(122)
The above expression gives the general solution of the system in the sense that no arbitrary function of four arguments can express its solution. Indeed the general solution of Eqs (110) and (111) are given by the arbitrary functions

$`H_1^{}\{{\displaystyle \frac{T^{}}{T}},TT^{}(x^2+1),Tx\varphi ,T^{}x+\varphi ^{}\}=0`$ (123)
$`H_2^{}\{TT^{},TT^{}(x^2+1),Tx\varphi ,T^{}x+\varphi ^{}\}=0`$ (124)
The first arguments $`\frac{T^{}}{T}`$ and $`TT^{}`$ of $`H_1^{}`$ and $`H_2^{}`$ cannot be replaced by a common expression which is constructed from the four arguments of $`H_1^{}`$ and independently from the four arguments of $`H_2^{}`$ . We can also say that if this was possible then (110) and (111), which are different equations, would have the same general solution. But this is impossible and the proof is completed.

Using Eq (108) we can eliminate $`x`$ from the arguments of $`H`$. We find

$`Ai(xT\varphi )=E+{\displaystyle \frac{E+\overline{E}}{v1}}`$ (125)
$`Bi(xT^{}+\varphi ^{})=\overline{E^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{E^{}+\overline{E^{}}}{v1}}`$ (126)
$`DTT^{}(x^2+1)(xT\varphi )(xT^{}+\varphi ^{})=E\overline{E^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{E\overline{E^{}}\overline{E}E^{}}{v1}}`$ (127)
and expression (122) becomes

$$H(A,B,D)=H\{E+\frac{E+\overline{E}}{v1},\overline{E^{}}+\frac{E^{}+\overline{E^{}}}{v1},E\overline{E^{}}+\frac{E\overline{E^{}}\overline{E}E^{}}{v1}\}=0$$
(128)
Also the BTs of Eqs (96) - (97) for the variables $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ become

$$E_\alpha ^{}=\frac{E^{}+\overline{E^{}}}{E+\overline{E}}vE_\alpha ,\overline{E^{}}_\alpha =\frac{E^{}+\overline{E^{}}}{E+E^{}}\frac{1}{v}\overline{E}_\alpha ,\alpha =\xi ,\eta $$
(129)
Expressions (129) with $`v`$ given by Eq (128) are the BTs of Case 2.

To solve Eqs (129) we proceed as follows  : We get if we use these equations

$`_\alpha A={\displaystyle \frac{E+E^{}}{(v1)^2}}\{v_\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{v1}{E+\overline{E}}}(vE_\alpha +\overline{E}_\alpha )\}`$ (130)
$`_\alpha B={\displaystyle \frac{E^{}+\overline{E^{}}}{(v1)^2}}\{v_\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{v1}{E+\overline{E}}}(vE_\alpha +\overline{E}_\alpha )\}`$ (131)
$`_\alpha D={\displaystyle \frac{E\overline{E^{}}\overline{E}E^{}}{(v1)^2}}\{v_\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{v1}{E+\overline{E}}}(vE_\alpha +\overline{E}_\alpha )\}`$ (132)
and therefore we have

$`_\alpha H(A,B,D)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(v1)^2}}\{(E+\overline{E})_AH+(E^{}+\overline{E^{}})_BH+(E\overline{E^{}}`$
$`\overline{E}E^{})_DH\}\{v_\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{v1}{E+\overline{E}}}(vE_\alpha +\overline{E}_\alpha )\}`$ (133)
Thus at least one of the following relations should hold

$`(AE)_AH+(B\overline{E^{}})_BH+(DE\overline{E^{}})_DH=0`$ (134)
$`v_\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{v1}{E+\overline{E}}}(vE_\alpha +\overline{E}_\alpha )=0`$ (135)
where in writing (134) we have used Eqs (125) - (127).

Assume that Eq (134) holds, which means that $`v`$ coming from it satisfies Eqs (110) and (111). Since $`E`$ , $`\overline{E^{}}`$ and $`E\overline{E^{}}`$ cannot be obtained from $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`D`$ this can happen only if $`H`$ is of the form $`H=H(A)`$ or $`H=H(B)`$ or $`H=H(D)`$. But then solving these equations for $`A`$, $`B`$ or $`D`$ we get $`A=ic_1`$, $`B=ic_2`$ or $`D=c_3`$ respectively ($`c_1`$, $`c_2`$ and $`c_3`$ are constants), which give the relations

$$v=\frac{c_1+i\overline{E}}{c_1iE},v=\frac{c_2+iE^{}}{c_2i\overline{E}^{}},v=\frac{c_3\overline{E}E^{}}{c_3E\overline{E}^{}}$$
(136)
Since $`v\overline{v}=1`$ the constants $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$ and $`c_3`$ must be real. However if $`v`$ is given by anyone of (136) and $`E^{}`$ and $`\overline{E}^{}`$ satisfy Eqs (129) the quantity $`v`$ satisfies Eq (135). Therefore Eq (135) is always satisfied which means that we have found the BTs (129) where the pseudopotential  $`v`$ is a solution of Eq (135). In this formalism the pseudopotential was obtained from the arbitrary function $`H`$.

The general solution of Eq (135) is

$$v=\frac{c+i\overline{E}}{ciE}$$
(137)
where c is an arbitrary real constant. Substituting (137) into (129) and solving the resulting relation we get

$$E^{}=\frac{E+ic_1}{ic_2E+c_3}$$
(138)
where $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$ and $`c_3`$ are arbitrary real constants. The above relation is the transformation of Ehlers

To obtain the BTs of Case 3 we have to solve Eqs (115) - (117). The general solution of these equations, which comes from the expression (122) if we make the substitution of Eqs (118), is given by the relation

$$Q\{TT^{}(y^2+1),Ty+\varphi ,T^{}y+\varphi ^{}\}=0$$
(139)
where $`Q`$ is an arbitrary function of its arguments. Proceeding as in the previous case we find that expression (139) becomes

$$Q\{\overline{E}+\frac{E+\overline{E}}{w1},\overline{E}^{}+\frac{E^{}+\overline{E}^{}}{w1},\overline{E}\overline{E}^{}+\frac{\overline{E}\overline{E}^{}EE^{}}{w1}\}=0$$
(140)
Also the BTs of Eqs (98) and (99) can be written in the form

$$_\alpha E^{}=\frac{E^{}+\overline{E}^{}}{E+\overline{E}}w_\alpha \overline{E}\text{}_\alpha \overline{E}^{}=\frac{E^{}+\overline{E}^{}}{E+\overline{E}}\frac{1}{w}_\alpha E,\alpha =\xi ,\eta $$
(141)
The above expressions with $`w`$ given by Eq (140) are the BTs of Case 3.

Proceeding as before we find that

$`w={\displaystyle \frac{c+iE}{ci\overline{E}}}`$ (142)
$`E^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\overline{E}+ic_1}{ic_2\overline{E}+c_3}}`$ (143)
where $`c`$, $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$, $`c_3`$ are arbitrary real constants. The BT (143) is essentially a trivial modification of the BT (138) since if $`E=T+i\varphi `$ is a solution of the system of Eqs (68) - (70) then $`E=Ti\varphi `$ is again a solution of the same system.

To find $`p^{}`$ and $`\mu ^{}`$ of the new solution we have to use the relation $`\mu +3p=0`$ and Eqs (71), (96), (98), (138) and (143). We find for Case 2 :

$$p^{}=\frac{c_1c_2+c_3}{c_2^2}\frac{p}{T^2+(\varphi \frac{c_3}{c_2})^2}\text{}\mu ^{}=\frac{c_1c_2+c_3}{c_2^2}\frac{\mu }{T^2+(\varphi \frac{c_3}{c_2})^2}$$
(144)
while $`p^{}`$ and $`\mu ^{}`$ for Case 3 come from the above expressions if we make the substitution $`\varphi \varphi `$.

The fact that $`G^{}`$, $`M^{}`$ and $`E^{}`$ of Eqs (96) and (138) give a new solution of Eqs (68) - (70) can be seen as follows : Under these transformations Eqs (68) and (69) are invariant, while Eq (70) becomes

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(E^{},G^{})=\frac{c_1c_2+c_3}{c_2^2}(Ei\frac{c_3}{c_2})^3(E+i\frac{c_3}{c_2})^1\mathrm{\Lambda }(E,G)=0$$
(145)
i.e. it is also satisfied. Similarly we find that $`G^{}`$, $`M^{}`$ and $`E^{}`$ of Eqs (98) and (143) give a solution of Eqs (68) - (70).


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

Decay of cosmological constant as Bose condensate evaporation

Irina Dymnikova

Institute of Mathematics and Informatics,

University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn

Zolnierska 14, 10-561 Olsztyn, Poland; e-mail: irina@matman.uwm.edu.pl

Maxim Khlopov

Center for Cosmoparticle Physics ”Cosmion”, 125047, Moscow, Russia; e-mail: mkhlopov@orc.ru

Abstract

We consider the process of decay of symmetric vacuum state as evaporation of a Bose condensate of physical Higgs particles, defined over asymmetric vacuum state. Energy density of their selfinteraction is identified with cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the Einstein equation. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay then provides dynamical realization of spontaneous symmetry breaking. The effective mechanism is found for damping of coherent oscillations of a scalar field, leading to slow evaporation regime as the effective mechanism for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay responsible for inflation without special fine-tuning of the microphysical parameters. This mechanism is able to incorporate reheating, generation of proper primordial fluctuations, and nonzero cosmological constant today. PACS: 04.20.Cv; 97.60.Lf; 98.80.Cq; 98.80.Dr; 04.70.Bw; 04.20.Bw

Any thing which contributes to the stress-energy tensor as $`T_{\mu \nu }=\rho _{vac}g_{\mu \nu }`$, behaves like a cosmological term $`\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\mu \nu }`$ in the Einstein equation. Developments in particles and quantum field theory, as well as confrontation of models with observations in cosmology, compellingly indicate that the cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ ought to be treated as a dynamical quantity (for recent review see $`^{\text{28}}`$). At the very early stage of the Universe evolution huge value of cosmological constant is needed corresponding to $`\rho _{vac}\rho _{GUT}`$, to drive inflation as providing the reason for the expansion of the Universe and its isotropy and large scale homogeneity $`^{\text{17}}`$,$`^{\text{18}}`$,$`^{\text{19}}`$,$`^{\text{10}}`$ ,$`^{\text{23}}`$,$`^{\text{26}}`$. Now cosmological constant is estimated from the variety of observational data at the level $`\rho _{vac}(0.60.8)\rho _{today}`$ $`^\text{1}`$,$`^{\text{27}}`$.

Several mechanisms have been proposed involving and supporting a negative vacuum energy density growing with time to cancel initial pre-existing positive cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. All those mechanisms utilize the basic property of de Sitter space-time - its quantum and semiclassical instabilities $`^{\text{33}}`$,$`^{\text{25}}`$,$`^{\text{15}}`$, $`^\text{8}`$,$`^\text{9}`$,$`^{\text{24}}`$,$`^{\text{20}}`$.

In scalar field dynamics the potential of a scalar field $`V(\varphi )`$ plays the role of an effective cosmological constant in regimes when its derivatives are close to zero. Starting from such a regime as an initial state, field equations typically lead to successive coherent field oscillations $`^{\text{22}}`$,$`^{\text{26}}`$. In the context of inflationary models with effective $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ related to inflaton field in slow rolling regime, the further decay of coherent oscillations involves inflaton interactions with other fields in models of preheating $`^{\text{21}}`$,$`^{\text{32}}`$, $`^\text{5}`$,$`^{\text{35}}`$.

On the other hand, we can treat the classical scalar field as the Bose-Einstein condensate of physical quanta of this field defined over its ground state (true vacuum). In our previous papers $`^{\text{11}}`$,$`^\text{6}`$ it was shown that process of emergence of massive scalar particles in (from) de Sitter vacuum looks like evaporation of a Bose condensate. In our paper $`^{\text{12}}`$ we proposed the model of self-consistent inflation in which the same self-interacting scalar field is responsible for both initial value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and its further decay.

In the case of the Higgs field this approach involves both space-time and particle internal symmetries. In gauge theories mechanisms of spontaneous symmetry breaking imply that unbroken symmetry state is false vacuum state. At the same time this is the highly symmetric state of space-time geometry invariant under de Sitter group. In Ref.$`^{\text{12}}`$ we interpreted this state as Bose-Einstein condensate of physical Higgs particles whose self-interaction energy density corresponds to a scalar field potential in the state with the unbroken symmetry. The process of decay of inflationary vacuum appears then as slow evaporation of a Bose condensate responsible for inflation and further transition to the standard FRW model without special fine-tuning in initial conditions for inflation. Dynamics of the cosmological term is directly related to the hierarchy of particle symmetries breakings, which makes such an approach physically self-consistent $`^{\text{12}}`$.

In the present paper we identify cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ with the energy density of self-interaction of scalar bosons bound in the condensate. We show the existence of the slow evaporation mechanism which seems to be generic for dynamics of Bose condensates. This mechanism for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay produces an effective kinetic damping involving decoherence of coherent scalar field oscillations due to self-interaction and back reaction of decay products.

Let us start with the simplest example of the Higgs field $`\varphi `$

$$V(\varphi )=\frac{\lambda }{4}(\varphi ^2\varphi _0^2)^2$$
$`(1)`$
In the context of particle theories, constant part of the Higgs potential is usually omitted $`^{\text{30}}`$. However, in the cosmological context this term becomes important. In theories with spontaneous symmetry breaking the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs field, which couples to bosons and fermions to give them masses, plays the role of an order parameter. The nonzero vacuum expectation value in the asymmetric vacuum state $`<\varphi >=\varphi _0`$, is interpreted as the development of a condensate of $`\varphi `$ particles, leading to the spontaneous symmetry breaking $`^{\text{22}}`$,$`^{\text{30}}`$.

On the other hand, $`\varphi `$ particles are not physical particles, they are tachionic, with the imaginary mass, that reflects the instability of the symmetric state of the theory. In the asymmetric, physically stable vacuum state (the state with the broken symmetry) physical particles are $`\chi `$ particles, related to $`\varphi `$ particles by $`\varphi =\chi +\varphi _0`$. It is $`\chi `$ particles who acquire the mass by the Higgs mechanism, and whose vacuum state is the true vacuum with zero potential and with zero expectation value, $`<\chi >=0`$. Therefore, in terms of particles $`\chi `$, the true vacuum of theories with spontaneous symmetry breaking, cannot be a condensate, and we would rather have to treat the symmetric vacuum state of a theory as a condensate of $`\chi `$ particles in bound state. Replacing $`\varphi `$ condensate by $`\chi `$ condensate sheds some light on the origin of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, which in $`\varphi `$ condensate picture, where an effective $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is related to the state of zero field $`^{\text{19}}`$, looks mysterious. As we shall see below, in $`\chi `$ condensate picture effective $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is related to nonzero value of the field $`\chi `$ as its energy density in symmetric state.

The Higgs field $`\chi `$ in this simple model is described by the Lagrangian $`^{\text{12}}`$

$$=\sqrt{g}\left[\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu \nu }\chi _{;\mu }\chi _{;\nu }\frac{\lambda }{4}(2\varphi _0\chi +\chi ^2)^2\right]$$
$`(2)`$
where we dropped, for simplicity, the indices of internal variables. The potential takes the form

$$V(\chi )=\lambda \varphi _0^2\chi ^2+\lambda \varphi _0\chi ^3+\frac{\lambda }{4}\chi ^4$$
$`(3)`$
In the state with unbroken symmetry $`<\chi >=\varphi _0`$, $`<\chi ^2>=\varphi _0^2`$, $`<\chi ^3>=\varphi _0^3`$, and the energy density of a condensate of $`\chi `$ particles is given by

$$<V(\chi )>=\frac{\lambda }{4}\varphi _0^4$$
$`(4)`$
We see that the constant term, playing the role of the cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the Einstein equation, is identified with the energy density of condensate of $`\chi `$ particles being precisely the energy density of their self-interaction.

The potential (3) describes physical particles $`\chi `$ with masses of Higgs bosons $`m=\sqrt{2\lambda }\varphi _0`$, self-interacting and interacting with condensate. The term $`\lambda \varphi _0\chi ^3`$ corresponds to decay of a condensate via the channel $`\varphi _03\chi `$, and describes evaporation of Higgs bosons from condensate of $`\chi `$ particles. The term $`\lambda \chi ^4/4`$ reproduces the runaway particle production discovered by Myhrvold $`^{\text{25}}`$. The difference from the Myhrvold result is in the origin of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Gravity-mediated decay of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in Myhrvold approach is due to particle creation by gravitational field generated by pre-existing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ not related to created particles. In our approach $`\mathrm{\Lambda }m^2\varphi _0^2`$ is the energy density of self-interaction of the same particles bound within a condensate.

The Hubble parameter $`H`$ during the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ dominated stage is $`H\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. In the context of particle theories with $`\varphi _0m_{Pl}`$, our case corresponds to creation of bosons with $`mH`$. Therefore our mechanism differs from that proposed by Mottola who studied creation of particles by gravitational field via the Hawking quantum evaporation which leads to the exponential suppression of masses $`mH`$ $`^{\text{24}}`$. In the Mottola mechanism light scalar particles with $`m<H`$ are evaporated from de Sitter horizon induced by pre-existing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. In our mechanism Higgs bosons with $`mH`$ are evaporated from the bound state within a condensate into the free states.

Our approach differs also from Parker and Zhang theory of relativistic charged condensate as a source of slow rolling inflation $`^{\text{29}}`$. In our aproach condensate of $`\chi `$ particles is essentially globally neutral, since it corresponds to the state with unbroken symmetry - totally symmetric state in both space-time and internal degrees of freedom $`^{\text{12}}`$. The condensate decays by evaporation, as well as by runaway production of $`\chi `$ particles which corresponds to conversion of energy of initial globally neutral state into thermal energy of $`\chi `$ particles.

Roughly, scenario of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay looks as follows. Within a $`\chi `$ condensate $`\chi `$ particles have four-momenta $`k0`$. Indeed, the Klein-Gordon equation for the potential (3) in the condensate regime ($`\chi =\varphi _0;V^{}(\chi )=0`$) reduces to $`\ddot{\chi }+3H\dot{\chi }+\mathrm{\Gamma }\dot{\chi }=0`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a decay rate. Its solution reads $`\chi =\varphi _0\varphi _0e^{(3H+\mathrm{\Gamma })t}`$. The time-dependent mode decays rapidly for any $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ stabilizing particle state in condensate with zero four-momentum ($`\dot{\chi }0`$). This means that the $`\chi `$ condensate is the classical collective state within which decay of $`\chi `$ particles is impossible. (Their de Broglie wavelength far exceeds the horizon, so that the asymptotic states cannot be defined for the quantum transitions corresponding to decay inside a condensate.) Therefore decay of $`\chi `$ particles occurs in free states which correspond to the coherent field oscillations.

The fluctuations $`\delta =\chi +\varphi _0`$ over the state with unbroken symmetry $`<\chi >=\varphi _0`$ are described by the potential

$$V(\delta )=\frac{\lambda }{4}\varphi _0^4\frac{\lambda }{2}\varphi _0^2\delta ^2+\frac{\lambda }{4}\delta ^4$$
$`(5)`$
which reflects the instability of the state with unbroken symmetry. Wrong sign of the mass term corresponds to the excitation of the growing mode of perturbation $`\delta `$ over the symmetric vacuum state, leading to its decay. The evolution of fluctuations is governed by the Klein-Gordon equation

$$\ddot{\delta }+3H\dot{\delta }\frac{m^2}{2}\delta +\lambda \delta ^3=0$$
$`(6)`$
Let us estimate the characteristic time scale for the linear stage of development of instability, neglecting the $`\delta ^3`$ term and taking into account that in our case ($`\varphi _0m_{Pl}`$)

$$\frac{m}{H}=\sqrt{\frac{3}{\pi }}\frac{m_{Pl}}{\varphi _0}1$$
$`(7)`$
In this approximation the solution to the Eq.(6) is given by

$$\delta (t)=C_1e^{\frac{m}{\sqrt{2}}t}+C_2e^{\frac{m}{\sqrt{2}}t}$$
$`(8)`$
Growing mode of $`\delta (t)`$ corresponds to decay of condensate with characteristic timescale $`\tau m^1`$. To estimate efficiency of decay we introduce the fluctuation density

$$n_\delta =\frac{m}{4}\delta ^2$$
$`(9)`$
Then

$$V(\delta )=\frac{\lambda }{4}\varphi _0^4mn_\delta +\frac{4\lambda n_{\delta }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{m^2}$$
$`(10)`$
The last term can be interpreted as self-interaction of fluctuations with the reaction rate $`4\lambda /m^2`$ leading to effective decoherence of coherent field oscillations. In the minimum of the potential (10) fluctuation density $`n_\varphi =m^3/8\lambda `$ corresponds, by Eq.(9), to $`\delta ^2=\varphi _0^2`$. We see that stationary distribution of fluctuations around $`\delta =\varphi _0`$ looks like a gas of $`\chi `$ particles with masses $`m=\sqrt{2\lambda }\varphi _0`$, evaporated from the state within a condensate into the fluctuations. The potential (10) achieves its minimum $`V(\delta )=0`$, which corresponds to the total decay of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ condensate into decoherent gas of $`\chi `$ particles, in characteristic time $`\tau m^1H^1`$. So, the decay of $`\chi `$ condensate provides the efficient mechanism for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay.

We see, that identifying $`V(\varphi _0)`$ with the energy density of self-interaction of physical particles $`\chi `$ in the bound state of a Bose condensate, we can treat instability of de Sitter vacuum as dynamical realization of symmetry breaking. The process of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay proceeds in this picture as the Bose condensate evaporation. Now let us show that the effective mechanism exists related to this approach which makes the process of evaporation slow enough to guarantee $`e`$folding needed for inflation.

Higgs bosons are generally unstable. Both $`\chi `$ particles and products of their decay interact with Hawking radiation from de Sitter horizon and with each other. This leads not only to decoherence of $`\chi `$ particles but also to appearance of relativistic particles over the condensate with the effective equation of state $`p=\epsilon /3`$. Presence of relativistic gas in thermodynamic equilibrium with condensate facilitates its further decay.

The dynamical role of not exponentially small thermal component in the evolution of an inflaton field has been studied by Berera and Li-Zhi Fang $`^\text{3}`$ and then incorporated into the scenario called warm inflation $`^\text{4}`$. The classical equation of motion for a scalar field $`\phi `$ in the de Sitter universe reads $`^{\text{22}}`$

$$\ddot{\phi }+3H\dot{\phi }+\mathrm{\Gamma }_\phi \dot{\phi }+V^{}(\phi )=0$$

The friction term $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\phi `$ is introduced phenomenologically to describe the decay of the inflaton field $`\phi `$ due to its interaction with thermal component. Berera and Li-Zhi Fang have shown, first, that if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\phi H`$, then thermal component can play essential role in generation of a primordial density fluctuations $`^\text{3}`$. Second, in the regime $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\phi H`$ thermal component becomes dominant in the equation of motion leading to warm inflation $`^\text{4}`$. The question of self-consistency of this regime as governed by thermal components has been addressed in the papers $`^\text{4}`$,$`^{\text{34}}`$,$`^\text{2}`$.

In our case the mechanism leading to this condition which we write as $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\chi H`$ is not related to thermal components. It is related to the effective friction due to interaction of free particles with the ensemble of $`\chi `$ particles bound in condensate with the large occupation number, which damps oscillations and leads to stationary regime of slow evaporation of $`\chi `$ condensate.

Let us show that decoherence of $`\chi `$ particle states and back reaction of their relativistic decay products lead to the effective damping of fluctuations. The kinetic equations can be written in the standard way (see, e.g.$`^{\text{22}}`$). The kinetic equation describing the growth and decay of fluctuations is

$$\frac{dn_\chi }{dt}=mn_\chi \mathrm{\Gamma }n_\chi n_rn_\chi \sigma 3Hn_\chi $$
$`(11)`$
where $`\sigma `$ is the cross-section of the interaction of $`\chi `$ particles with relativistic products of their decay. In the units $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$ the reaction rate in the kinetic equations coincides with $`\sigma `$. The first term in the right hand side describes creation of $`\chi `$ particles, the second - their decay, the third - their interaction with products of decay, and the fourth - their redshifting.

The kinetic equation for products of decay, effectively relativistic matter with the equation of state $`p=\epsilon /3`$, reads

$$\frac{dn_r}{dt}=3Hn_r+n_rn_\chi \sigma +\mathrm{\Gamma }n_\chi $$
$`(12)`$
In the equilibrium

$$mn_\chi \mathrm{\Gamma }n_\chi n_rn_\chi \sigma 3Hn_\chi =0$$

$$3Hn_r+n_rn_\chi \sigma +\mathrm{\Gamma }n_\chi =0$$
$`(13)`$
Decay of $`\chi `$ particles into light species implies $`m\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, which corresponds to applicability of perturbation theory for calculations of decay, and is valid in models with coupling less than the unity. Then, taking into account Eq.(7), we get

$$\rho _r=\frac{m^2}{\sigma };\rho _\chi =\frac{3mH}{\sigma }$$
$`(14)`$
Equilibrium density of relativistic particles $`\rho _r`$ is achieved when the density of evaporated and decayed $`\chi `$ particles

$$\rho _{\chi d}\mathrm{\Gamma }\frac{1}{m}\rho _{vac}=\mathrm{\Gamma }\frac{1}{m}\frac{m^2\varphi _0^2}{8}$$

satisfies the condition

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }\frac{1}{m}\frac{m^2\varphi _0^2}{8}>\frac{m^2}{\sigma }$$

This gives the lower limit on the characteristic width of $`\chi `$ particles decay

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }>\frac{8m}{\varphi _0^2\sigma }$$
$`(15)`$
If this condition is satisfied, the potential evolves not to the value $`V(\delta )=0`$, but to the value $`V_{max}\rho _\chi \rho _r`$, becoming successively more flat. Slow evaporation of $`\chi `$ condensate acts in such a way to flatten the potential near its symmetric state.

We see that back reaction of evaporated particles and products of their decay produces an effective damping of scalar field oscillations which leads to effective flattening of initially nonflat potential and provides mechanism responsible for inflation without fine-tuning of the potential parameters. This is qualitatively similar to effective flattening found around spinoidal line in the Hartree-truncated theory of spinoidal inflation $`^\text{7}`$ (which involves fine-tuning at the slow rolling stage preceeding the spinoidal regime).

The process of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay is governed by the equation

$$\frac{d\rho _{vac}}{dt}=3H(\rho _\chi +\rho _r+\frac{1}{3}\rho _r)=4H\frac{m^2}{\sigma }$$
$`(16)`$
We can estimate the characteristic time of decay for two limiting cases of minimal and maximal cross-section $`\sigma `$. The lower limit on cross-section $`\sigma `$ is $`\sigma =4\pi /m^2`$ which is the hard ball approximation cross-section for scattering of particles of masses $`m/2`$. In this case

$$\frac{d\rho _{vac}}{dt}=\frac{H}{\pi }m^4$$
$`(17)`$
The law for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay

$$\rho _{vac}=\rho _0\left(1\frac{t}{\tau }\right)^2;\tau =\sqrt{\frac{3\pi }{2}}\frac{m_{Pl}\sqrt{\rho _0}}{m^4}=\sqrt{\frac{3\pi }{32\lambda }}\frac{m_{Pl}}{m^2}$$
$`(18)`$
gives the e-folding number

$$H\tau =\frac{\pi }{8}\frac{1}{\lambda }$$
$`(19)`$
and sufficient inflation for reasonable values of coupling $`\lambda `$. The characteristic time for reheating is $`\tau \lambda H^1`$ and the reheat temperature $`T_{RH}\lambda ^{1/4}m`$.

The upper bound for $`\sigma `$ is given by $`\sigma =\pi /H^2`$. In this case

$$\frac{d\rho _{vac}}{dt}=\frac{4}{\pi }H^3m^2;\rho _{vac}=\frac{\rho _0}{(1+t/\tau )^2}$$
$`(20)`$
where

$$\tau =\left(\frac{3^3}{2^{11}\pi }\right)^{1/2}\frac{1}{\lambda ^{3/2}}\left(\frac{m_{Pl}}{\varphi _0}\right)^4\tau _{Pl}$$
$`(21)`$
The e-folding number is then

$$H\tau =\frac{3}{32}\frac{1}{\lambda }\left(\frac{m_{Pl}}{\varphi _0}\right)^2$$
$`(22)`$
and, for the considered case $`\varphi _0m_{Pl}`$, inflation is sufficient for any $`\lambda `$. Reheating temperature is $`T_{RH}\lambda ^{1/4}H`$.

More detailed investigation of dynamics of a vacuum decay needs particular model for calculating $`\sigma `$, but the results will be within the range between the cases of minimal and maximal $`\sigma `$. For example, the picture of evaporation investigated in the Ref.$`^{\text{11}}`$ corresponds to the case of evaporation of Higgs bosons and their reheating to the Hawking temperature $`T_{RH}H`$ $`^{\text{16}}`$. The rate of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay is given in this case by

$$\frac{d\rho _{vac}}{dt}=3Hm(mH)^{3/2}$$
$`(23)`$
Here we considered $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay in the case of vacuum dominance. When radiation density starts to exceed vacuum density at the last stage of evaporation we would have to change the equation (16) taking into account the evolution of Hubble parameter as well as of matter and radiation density, which in the standard FRW cosmology evolves as $`t^2`$. The Eq.(20) reproduces this behaviour starting at the stage of vacuum dominancy for the case of maximum possible cross-section $`\sigma `$. Provided that this behaviour remains dominating at successive stages, this corresponds to the existence of remnant evaporating condensate today with the density comparable to the total density in the Universe which seems to agree with results of recent analysis of observational data $`^\text{1}`$.

The generalization of this approach to the case of arbitrary scalar field potential is straightforward. Any cosmologically reasonable potential must satisfy the condition $`V(\varphi ^2\varphi _0^2)>0`$. True vacuum state $`<\varphi >=\varphi _0`$ is determined as the minimum of the potential $`V=0`$. The physical particles $`\chi =\varphi \varphi _0`$ are defined over the true vacuum state. Their mass is given, as usual, by $`^2V/\varphi ^2`$. Any state with $`V(\chi )>0`$ we can treat as bound state of $`\chi `$ particles trapped inside a Bose condensate. The equilibrium fluctuations density corresponds to deviation of the potential from its initial value at the given point by the quantity $`\rho _\chi +\rho _r`$ (see Eq.(14)). It means that in a characteristic time $`m^1`$ the field is not completely moved to its ground state, but, instead, is stabilized near its initial value having slightly changed by the magnitude $`\rho _\varphi +\rho _rV(\chi )`$.

We see that the decoherence of $`\chi `$ particles and the back reaction of their decay products leads to effective freezing of the field near its initial value. Near this value the potential becomes locally flat, and the energy density of condensate of $`\chi `$ particles starts to play a role of an effective cosmological constant. It realizes the case of chaotic inflation for initially nonflat potential in the case $`mH`$ and $`\varphi _0m_{Pl}`$.

At the first sight, the appearance of slow evaporation regime in our approach seems to lead to the same spectrum of initial density fluctuations as in slow rolling models. However, the origin of fluctuations is different. In our case fluctuations are generated by statistical distribution of evaporated particles, while in the typical slow rolling picture they originate from nonsimultaneous transitions to the ground state. We are currently investigating this problem and we expect ”blue” spectrum of density fluctuations, which seems to be favored by theories of large scale structure formation.

Formally the mechanism presented in this paper is based on rather trivial solution ($`\varphi const`$) of scalar field dynamics, which however appears to have nontrivial consequences leading to kinetic equilibrium regime for slow evaporation of Bose-Einstein condensate. This kind of solution has analogies in experimentally studied Bose-Einstein condensation in atomic physics $`^{\text{31}}`$.

The case of Higgs field considered here is the simple illustration of the proposed mechanism of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay, which seems to be more generic and to work also in non-Abelian gauge models without Higgs mechanism, in which symmetry breaking is induced by nonlinearity of gauge interactions as in technicolor models.

Let us summarize. The kinetics of the Bose condensate evaporation can effectively damp the coherent field oscillations leading to slow evaporation regime for wide range of possible particle interaction parameters. In the cosmological context this provides the effective mechanism for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay responsible for dynamics of symmetry breaking, which can incorporate inflation, reheating, as well as nonzero cosmological constant today. Currently we are working on rigorous justification of the existence of this mechanism in the frame of quantum field theory $`^{\text{13}}`$.

Acknowledgement

We are grateful to Yu. M. Kagan, R. Konoplich, A. Sakharov, A. Sudarikov, and E. Zhizhin for useful discussions. This work was supported by the Polish Committee for Scientific Research through the grant 2P03D.017.11 and partially performed in the frame of Section ”Cosmoparticle physics” of the Russian State Scientific Technical Programme ”Astronomy. Fundamental Space Research”. One of us (M.Kh) expresses his gratitude to UWM (Poland) and IHES (France) for kind hospitality.

References

1. N. A. Bahcall, J. P. Ostriker, S. Perlmutter, P. J. Steinhardt, Science 284, 1481 (1999)
2. M. Bellini, Classical Quantum Gravity 17, 145 (2000)
3. A. Berera and Li-Zhi Fang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 1912 (1995)
4. A. Berera, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3218 (1995); Phys. Rev. D54, 2519 (1996); Phys. Rev. D55, 3346 (1997); A. Berera, M. Gleiser, R. O. Ramos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 264 (1999); W. Lee and Li-Zhi Fang, Phys. Rev. D59, 083503 (1999)
5. D. Boyanovsky, H. J. de Vega, R. Holman, J. F. J. Salgado, in: String theory in curved space times, World Scientific Publishing Company, River Edge, NJ, p. 260 (1998)
6. S. Capozziello, R. De Ritis, I. Dymnikova, C. Rubano, P. Scudellaro, Nuovo Cimento B111, 623 (1996)
7. D. Cormier, R. Holman, Phys. Rev. D60, 041301 (1999)
8. A. D. Dolgov, in: Proceedings of the Nuffield Workshop ”The very early universe”, Eds. G. W. Gibbons, S. W. Hawking, S. T. C. Siklos, Cambridge University Press, p. 449 (1983)
9. A. D. Dolgov, Phys. Rev. D55, 5881 (1997)
10. Dymnikova I.G., Sov. Phys. JETP, 63, 1111 (1986)
11. I.G. Dymnikova and M. Krawczyk, in: Birth of the Universe, ed. F. Occhionero, Springer Verlag (1995); Mod. Phys. Lett. A10, 3069 (1995)
12. I. Dymnikova and M. Khlopov, Gravitation and Cosmology 4, 50 (1998)
13. I. Dymnikova, M. Khlopov, A. Sakharov, to be published (2001).
14. R. Fakir and W. G. Unruh, Phys. Rev. D41, 1792 (1990)
15. L. H. Ford, Phys. Rev. D31, 710 (1985)
16. G. W. Gibbons and S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D15, 2738 (1977)
17. E.B. Gliner, Sov. Phys. Dokl. 15, 559 (1970)
18. E.B. Gliner, I.G. Dymnikova, Sov. Astron. Lett. 1, 93 (1975)
19. A. Guth, Phys. Rev. D23, 389 (1981).
20. W. A. Hiscock, Phys. Lett. 166B, 285 (1986)
21. L. Kofman, A. Linde, A. Starobinski, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 3195 (1994); ibid. 76, 1011 (1996); L. Kofman, in: General relativity and relativistic astrophysics, Amer. Inst. Phys., Melville, NY, p.191 (1999)
22. E. W. Kolb and M. S. Turner, The Early Universe, Addison-Wesley (1990)
23. A. D. Linde, Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology, Harvard Acad. Press, Geneva (1990)
24. E. Mottola, Phys. Rev. D31, 754 (1985)
25. N. P. Myhrvold, Phys. Rev. D28, 2439 (1983)
26. Keith A. Olive, Phys. Rep. 190, 309 (1990)
27. J. P. Ostriker, P. J. Steinhardt, Nature 377, 600 (1995)
28. J. M. Overduin a F. I. Cooperstock, Phys. Rev. D58, 043506 (1998)
29. L. Parker and Yang Zhang, Phys. Rev. D44, 2421 (1991); D47, 416 (1993)
30. C. Quigg, Gauge Theories of the Strong, Weak, and Electromagnetic Interactions, Addison-Wesley Publ. Company (1983)
31. G. Shlyapnikov et al, in Proc. of the EURESCO Conference on Bose-Einstein condensation in Atomic Physics, San Feliu di Guixols, Spain, September 1999
32. Y. Shtanov, J. Trashen, R. Brandenberger, Phys. Rev. D51, 5438 (1995)
33. A. A. Starobinsky, Phys. Lett. 91B, 99 (1980)
34. J. Yokoyama, A. Linde, Phys. Rev. D60, 083509 (1999)
35. I. Zlatev, G. Huey, P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. D57, 2152 (1998)


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Electromagnetic processes constitute a basic tool to investigate the baryon structure since the photon couples to the spin and flavor of the constituent quarks, revealing their spin-flavor correlations inside the baryons. This explains the current experimental effort along this line (MAMI, ELSA, GRAAL) with specific experimental programs in TJNAF .

From a theoretical point of view, most analyses rely on the use of the non-relativistic quark model  in spite of the fact that for the low-lying non-strange resonances the velocity of the quarks inside the baryons may be close to $`c`$. Incorporation of two–body exchange currents does not mean much improvement on the results . On the other hand, attempts to use relativized quark models combined with consistent transition operators have been carried out  and Light-Front and Point–Form studies have also been done  partially solving some of the failures of the non-relativistic approach. However, a complete understanding of the relevant ingredients in the description of electromagnetic processes has not been reached yet.

Our aim in this article is to investigate the role played by some relativistic corrections to the electromagnetic transition operators, specifically those ones related to the coupling of the photon to $`q\overline{q}`$ components of the baryon (mesonic cloud), also underlying the well known Vector–Meson Dominance phenomenology. The need for the explicit contribution of the cloud to describe electromagnetic interactions of baryons was also concluded in , where it was shown on very general grounds that meson exchange in the $`qq`$ potential can not play the role of the $`|qqqq\overline{q}`$ configurations in the baryon. The importance of the explicit consideration of the meson cloud for electromagnetic processes has been recently studied in Ref. .

A main motivation for this study comes from the analysis of strong pionic decay processes where the implementation of the coupling of the pion to $`q\overline{q}`$ baryon components through a $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ operator allows a reasonable description of the decay widths . In comparison to the elementary emission model, the improvement is especially spectacular for the Roper resonance since the decay width for the $`N\pi `$ channel has changed from a few MeV to few hundreds MeV. However, as shown in , the precise value is open to discussion.

By proceeding in the same way for the electromagnetic transition operator a first simplified model for the photo and electroproduction amplitudes of $`N(1440)`$ was presented in . These results suggest that the explicit contribution of the baryon mesonic cloud (taken implicitly into account in the baryon spectrum through the effective parameters and/or interactions of the potential) is an essential ingredient for the description of transition processes from a non-relativistic quark model scheme.

Here we apply the same ideas to construct a more complete and consistent model to deal with electromagnetic processes that we shall test by evaluating the nucleon form factors. We put the emphasis in the construction of an effective transition operator to be sandwiched between effective quark–core wave functions as the ones provided by spectroscopic models. In particular we shall center in a model previously used to fit the baryon and meson spectrum  and to predict strong pionic decay widths , though our treatment can be applied to any other quark–core model of the baryon structure.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we discuss the direct quark–photon coupling through the elementary emission model that we shall apply to the calculation of nucleon form factors. In section 3 we study dynamical relativistic corrections induced by $`q\overline{q}`$ pairs in the baryonic medium. A $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ model will be used in order to implement the relevant $`qqqq\overline{q}`$ baryon components. From the consideration of resonant and non-resonant diagrams we are driven in section 4 to develop a gauge invariant model. Results are presented and discussed in section 5.

## 2 The elementary emission model (EEM)

In the EEM the baryon transition process $`BB^{}\gamma `$ is described by assuming that the photon is emitted by a constituent quark of the baryon (Fig. 1a). The relevant matrix element between quark states is written as:

$$q(\stackrel{}{p}^{})\gamma (\stackrel{}{q},\lambda )|H_{qq\gamma }|q(\stackrel{}{p})=\frac{e_q}{(2\pi )^{3/2}}\frac{1}{(2\omega _\gamma )^{1/2}}\delta ^{(3)}(\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{p}^{}\stackrel{}{q})O_{qq\gamma }^{\text{EEM}}(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{p}^{},\lambda ),$$
(1)
where $`e_q`$ is the quark charge, $`\lambda `$ is the state of polarization of the photon, $`\omega `$ ($`\stackrel{}{q}`$) its energy (three-momentum) and $`\stackrel{}{p}`$ ($`\stackrel{}{p}^{}`$) is the three-momentum of the initial (final) quark. By considering the usual electromagnetic current for point–like fermions the single–quark transition operator $`O_{qq\gamma }^{\text{EEM}}`$ reads:

$$O_{qq\gamma }^{\text{EEM}}(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{p}^{},\lambda )=\left(\frac{m}{E_p}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{m}{E_p^{}}\right)^{1/2}\overline{u}(\stackrel{}{p}^{})\gamma _\mu u(\stackrel{}{p})ϵ_\lambda ^\mu (\stackrel{}{q}),$$
(2)
where $`ϵ_\lambda ^\mu (\stackrel{}{q})`$ is the photon polarization four–vector, $`E_p`$ ($`E_p^{}`$) the on-shell energy of the initial and final quarks ($`E_p=\sqrt{m^2+\stackrel{}{p}^2}`$), and $`m`$ the mass of the quarks which is assumed to be the same for all of them.

From (2) the conventional way to derive a non-relativistic transition operator is to proceed to a $`(p/m)`$ expansion keeping terms up to the first order . Nevertheless for light baryons in a quark model this procedure is under suspicion since the quarks move inside the core with relativistic velocities and then $`p/m`$ can be even bigger than 1. On the other hand a more reasonable expansion in terms of the relativistic velocity $`(p/E)`$ may be slowly convergent since the value of $`p/E`$ is usually pretty close to 1. Thus it seems more appropriate to consider the whole relativistic operator Eq. (2) in spite of the fact that it is to be sandwiched between $`3q`$ baryon wave functions obtained with a non-relativistic quark model. To this respect we assume that once fitted the spectroscopy, the non-relativistic $`3q`$ wave function may emulate the relativistic one when relativistic normalization and kinematical factors are considered .

The baryonic matrix elements for a process $`BB^{}\gamma `$ are easily computed from the single–quark matrix element Eq. (1)

$`B^{}\gamma (\stackrel{}{q},\lambda )|H|B`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{(2\pi )^{3/2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\omega )^{1/2}}}\delta ^{(3)}(\stackrel{}{P}\stackrel{}{P}^{}\stackrel{}{q})`$ (3)
$`{\displaystyle 𝑑\stackrel{}{p}_{\xi _1}𝑑\stackrel{}{p}_{\xi _2}\mathrm{\Psi }_B^{}^{}(\stackrel{}{p}_{\xi _1},\stackrel{}{p}_{\xi _2}+\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\stackrel{}{q})}`$
$`𝒪_{qq\gamma }(\stackrel{}{p}_3,\stackrel{}{p}_3^{},\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi }_B(\stackrel{}{p}_{\xi _1},\stackrel{}{p}_{\xi _2}),`$
where $`\stackrel{}{P}`$ ($`\stackrel{}{P}^{}`$) is the three-momentum of the initial (final) baryon and $`\stackrel{}{p}_{\xi _1}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{p}_{\xi _2}`$ are the conjugate momenta of the Jacobi coordinates $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_1`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_2`$. $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ stands for the wave function of the baryons and the single–quark transition operator has been particularized for the quark 3.

All the dependence on a specific quark model for the baryons is contained in the baryon wave functions. Hereforth we shall make use of a spectroscopic potential model, very much detailed elsewhere , which contains, aside from a linear confinement, the ’minimal’ one gluon exchange–like terms. The explicit expression for the quark–quark potential is

$`V_\text{I}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i<j}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{r_{ij}}{a^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{r_{ij}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{m_im_j}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}(r_{ij}/r_0)}{r_0^2r_{ij}}}\stackrel{}{\sigma }_i\stackrel{}{\sigma }_jD\right],`$ (4)
with $`a^2=1.063`$ GeV-1 fm, $`\kappa =0.52`$, $`r_0=0.4545`$ fm and the quark mass is set to $`m=0.337`$ GeV. This potential provides very good results for the spectroscopy of low–lying baryons (ground states) as well as mesons. Concerning the excited states the energies are reasonably predicted with the exception of the Roper resonances.

To evaluate the electromagnetic form factor we have to consider the elastic $`eN`$ scattering process. We take the Breit frame where $`\omega =0`$, $`\stackrel{}{q}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}}=Q^2`$. We shall calculate the $`NN\gamma `$ amplitude from (3) and extract the form factors from the corresponding expression at the nucleonic level that reads:

$`N\gamma (\stackrel{}{q},\lambda )|H_{NN\gamma }|N`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3e}{(2\pi )^{3/2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\omega _\gamma )^{1/2}}}\delta ^{(3)}(\stackrel{}{P}_B\stackrel{}{P}_B^{}\stackrel{}{q})`$ (5)
$`\chi _N^{}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{G_E(Q^2)}{\sqrt{1+\frac{Q^2}{4M^2}}}}ϵ_\lambda ^0(\stackrel{}{q})i{\displaystyle \frac{G_M(Q^2)}{2M\sqrt{1+\frac{Q^2}{4M^2}}}}(\stackrel{}{q}\times \stackrel{}{\sigma }_N)\stackrel{}{ϵ}_\lambda ^{}(\stackrel{}{q})\right]\chi _N,`$
where $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_N`$ is the spin operator acting on the nucleon spinors $`\chi _N`$, $`\chi _N^{}`$.

Results for the electric and magnetic form factors are shown in Fig. 2 (dashed lines) as compared to the conventional first-order $`(p/m)`$ expansion (dash–dotted line) and to data. A look at the figures shows significant discrepancies between the two calculations even for low $`Q^2`$ values.

Regarding the electric form factor the slope of $`G_E(Q^2)`$ at the origin $`Q^20`$, is related to the square mean charge radius of the nucleon. The $`(p/m)`$-expansion neglects contributions to the radius coming from higher orders. These contributions (Darwin-Foldy term) are present when the whole operator is used giving rise to a bigger charge radius as compared to the $`(p/m)`$ value. Nonetheless in both cases it is still too small ( 0.238 fm2 and 0.327 fm2) as compared to data ($`r_p^2_{\text{Exp.}}=0.74\pm 0.02`$ fm2 ). This is a direct consequence of the reduced size of the nucleon wave function which seems to be an inevitable feature of any $`3q`$ model able to reasonably fit the spectrum.

Concerning the magnetic form factor, the magnetic moments calculated with (2) are a 30 % smaller than the ones obtained with the $`(p/m)`$ expansion. The reason for this reduction is the presence, for $`Q^2=0`$, of the energy factor $`1/(2E_3)`$ in the vector part of the quark current instead of the mass factor $`1/(2m)`$. On the other hand the $`Q^2`$ dependence of this factor makes the magnetic form factor go faster to zero when increasing $`Q^2`$ as compared to the $`(p/m)`$ case.

It is then clear the insufficiency of the EEM mechanism when combined with a spectroscopic quark model to explain the data, even if some relativistic kinematic corrections are included as in Eq. (2).

## 3 Dynamical relativistic corrections

Leaving aside for the moment kinematical corrections, we pay attention to dynamical relativistic corrections associated to the presence of quark-antiquark pairs in the baryonic medium. We certainly expect these corrections, that to some extent represent the effects of the mesonic cloud of the nucleon, to give sizeable contributions to the radius and to the magnetic moments as suggested by other approaches such as the relativistic chiral bag model.

Following the ideas developed in a previous paper  to treat strong pionic decays of baryons, we shall use the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ quark pair creation as a way to generate the extra $`q\overline{q}`$ pair in the baryonic medium. The $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ operator written in a relativistic form reads:

$`H_{{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta {\displaystyle }d\stackrel{}{p}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{E_p}}\right){\displaystyle \underset{s,\tau ,s^{},\tau ^{}}{}}\{\overline{u}_{s,\tau }(\stackrel{}{p})v_{s^{},\tau ^{}}(\stackrel{}{p})b_{s,\tau }(\stackrel{}{p})d_{s^{},\tau ^{}}^{}(\stackrel{}{p})`$ (6)
$`+\overline{v}_{s,\tau }(\stackrel{}{p})u_{s^{},\tau ^{}}(\stackrel{}{p})d_{s,\tau }(\stackrel{}{p})b_{s^{},\tau ^{}}^{}(\stackrel{}{p})\},`$
where $`u`$, $`v`$ stand for Dirac four–spinors and $`b`$, $`d`$ are the usual annihilation quark and antiquark operators. $`\beta `$ is an effective strength parameter that controls the pair formation in the hadronic medium. From Eq. (6) it is easy to check by keeping terms up to $`(\stackrel{}{p}/m)`$ order that one can recover the conventional non–relativistic $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ Hamiltonian .

In this scenario, two contributions can be considered. First the recombined quark-antiquark pair propagates in a resonant state which must be a vector meson in order to have the photon quantum numbers (Fig. 1.b). At low momentum transfer ($`Q^2`$ 2-3 GeV2) we can restrict ourselves to the $`\rho `$ and $`\omega `$ mesons. On the other hand, there is no reason to think that this resonant contribution saturates the $`|qqqq\overline{q}`$ component and there could be non-resonant propagation of the quark-antiquark pair as well (Fig. 1c).

1. Resonant Diagrams. The resonant amplitude is written from Fig. 1b. by considering the two possible time orderings corresponding respectively to the vector meson propagating forward and backward in time.

For the electromagnetic vector meson-photon vertex we assume a self–gauge invariant coupling $`f_VF^{\mu \nu }V_{\mu \nu }`$ that guarantees that each time–ordered diagram is gauge invariant separately.

For the strong quark-antiquark vector meson vertex $`q|H_{{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}}|qV`$ we use the previously defined $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ model, where the vector meson state is written in its relativistic form:

$`|V(\stackrel{}{q}_V,ϵ_V)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{s,\tau ,s^{},\tau ^{}}{}}{\displaystyle d^3p_qd^3p_{\overline{q}}\mathrm{\Phi }\left(\frac{\stackrel{}{p}_q\stackrel{}{p}_{\overline{q}}}{2}\right)\delta (\stackrel{}{p}_q+\stackrel{}{p}_{\overline{q}}\stackrel{}{q}_V)}`$ (7)
$`\overline{u}_{s,\tau }(\stackrel{}{p}_q)\gamma _\mu 𝒪_\tau v_{s^{},\tau ^{}}(\stackrel{}{p}_{\overline{q}})ϵ_V^\mu (\stackrel{}{q}_V)b_{s,\tau }^{\text{}}(\stackrel{}{p}_q)d_{s^{},\tau ^{}}^{\text{}}(\stackrel{}{p}_{\overline{q}})|0,`$
where $`𝒪_\tau `$ fixes the isospin wave function of the meson state ( $`𝒪_\tau =\stackrel{}{\tau }(1)`$ for an isovector (isoscalar) meson). For the internal wave function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ we have taken a Gaussian form $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\stackrel{}{k})=(R_V/\sqrt{\pi })^{3/2}\mathrm{exp}(k^2R_V^2/2)`$ whose parameter $`R_V`$ is fixed to the leptonic decay width of the $`\rho `$ meson. Additional checks with a Coulombian wave function shows that results are little sensitive (less than 5 %) to the choice of the functional form of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. Moreover, in the following we will assume for the sake of simplicity the SU(3) relationship $`f_\omega =3f_\rho `$ and take for the $`\rho `$ and $`\omega `$ an averaged mass $`m_V=(m_\rho +m_\omega )/2`$. The resulting single–quark transition operator in the Breit frame ($`\omega =0`$) is:

$`O_{qq\gamma }^\text{V}(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{p}^{},\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`e_q{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{f_V}}{\displaystyle \frac{E_V^{1/2}}{(2)^{3/2}}}\mathrm{\Phi }_V^{}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\stackrel{}{p}+\stackrel{}{p}^{})){\displaystyle \frac{1}{Q^2+m_V^2}}`$
$`\times `$ $`\{ϵ_\lambda ^0(\stackrel{}{q})(E_V{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{E_p+E_p^{}}})({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{p}}{E_p}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{p}^{}\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{q}}{E_p^{}}})`$
$``$ $`\stackrel{}{ϵ}_\lambda ^{}(\stackrel{}{q})[{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{p}^{}}{E_p^{}}}(Q^2\stackrel{}{\sigma }(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{q})\stackrel{}{q})+(Q^2\stackrel{}{\sigma }(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{q})\stackrel{}{q}){\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{p}}{E_p}}]\text{}\}.`$
2. Non–resonant diagrams. By proceeding in the same manner one can evaluate the matrix element of the single–quark transition operator for the non-resonant propagation of the quark-antiquark pair. However, a difficulty immediately arises since this operator, by its own, does not give rise to a conserved current. In order to see how gauge invariance can be recovered it is necessary to understand the underlying physics in the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ operator.

## 4 Gauge invariant current

Let us assume that the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ operator is generated by some residual interaction between quarks and gluons inside the baryon. This residual interaction may be very complex and its detailed description would tantamount to unveil the structure of the hadronic vacuum. Nonetheless, we shall show in a simplified model that the generation of the pair from the vacuum (i.e. the use of the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ operator) must be accompanied by a mass renormalization. This mass renormalization directly connected to the strength $`\beta `$ allows one to restore gauge invariance.

The simplest modelization one can do of the residual interaction is through the coupling of the quarks to a scalar mean field $`B(x)`$:

$$=g\overline{q}(x)B(x)q(x),$$
(9)
where $`g`$ is some unknown coupling constant. Four types of diagrams come from Eq. (9). Two of them correspond to the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ $`q\overline{q}`$ creation and annihilation under the identification $`\beta =gB(x)`$. The other two diagrams give rise to a mass renormalization for quark and antiquark which can be written as $`m=m_0+gB(0)`$. In general the renormalized mass $`m`$ may be a very complicated function of $`m_0`$ and $`g`$, but since we are interested in transition operators up to order $`\beta `$, it can be reduced to the linear relationship quoted above. The important fact is that the use of the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ model leads consistently to a mass renormalization.

Now we are in conditions to understand how gauge invariance can be recovered. The renormalization of the mass breaks the conservation of the current associated to the EEM. Indeed, the mass that appears in Eq. (2) has to be interpreted as a bare mass $`m_0`$ and as a consequence the current associated to the EEM is not conserved anymore. The breaking term is of the order $`(E_pE_{0p})`$, where $`E_{0p}=\sqrt{m_0^2+\stackrel{}{p}^2}`$ is the energy corresponding to the unrenormalized mass. However, the operators have to be written eventually in terms of the physical mass $`m`$ and therefore one has to replace $`m_0`$ by their value in terms of the physical mass. When doing so, the terms that break gauge invariance in the EEM current and in the non-resonant sector cancel each other under the requirement:

$$m=m_0+\beta /2.$$
(10)
The resulting final single–quark transition operator, which respects gauge invariance, is written as a sum of three terms:

$$O_{qq\gamma }(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{p}^{},\lambda )=O_{qq\gamma }^{\text{EEM}}(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{p}^{},\lambda )+O_{qq\gamma }^\text{V}(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{p}^{},\lambda )+O_{qq\gamma }^{\text{NR-EEM}}(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{p}^{},\lambda ),$$
(11)
where $`O_{qq\gamma }^{\text{EEM}}`$ and $`O_{qq\gamma }^\text{V}`$ are given by Eqs. (2) and (LABEL:oqqvfull) respectively being $`m`$ the physical mass and

$`O_{qq\gamma }^{\text{NR-EEM}}(\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{p}^{},\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`e_q{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{8\sqrt{E_pE_p^{}(E_p+m)(E_p^{}+m)}}}\stackrel{}{ϵ}_\lambda ^{}(\stackrel{}{q})`$
$`\times `$ $`[i(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\times \stackrel{}{p}^{})({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}^2}{E_p^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{p}^{}}{E_p^{}^2}})i(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\times \stackrel{}{p})({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}^2}{E_p^{}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{p}^{}}{E_p^2}})`$
$``$ $`i\stackrel{}{\sigma }(\stackrel{}{p}^{}\times \stackrel{}{p})({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}}{E_p^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}^{}}{E_p^{}^2}})+i(\stackrel{}{p}\times \stackrel{}{p}^{})({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{p}^{}}{E_p^{}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{p}}{E_p^2}})\text{}].`$
## 5 Results and discussion

The nucleon form factors obtained from our final gauge invariant operator are shown in Fig. 2 (solid lines). The value of the only free parameter $`\beta `$ has been chosen so that the magnetic moment of the proton is fitted to its experimental value. The neutron magnetic moment is also well reproduced, $`\mu _n=1.89`$.

As a general result we can say that in all cases the model represents an important improvement with respect to the EEM predictions (dashed lines). A comparison between the two sets of curves gives a quantitative idea of the contribution of the $`|qqqq\overline{q}`$ components to the electromagnetic structure of the nucleon.

The magnetic form factors are precisely reproduced up to $`Q^2=1.2`$ GeV2 (notice the $`Q^4`$ in the scale). The main (positive) contributions comes from the EEM, which gives up to 60 % at $`Q^2=0`$ (see Fig. 3). The non-resonant contribution (NR-EEM) is also positive and it is very relevant at low $`Q^2`$. In particular it gives almost a 40 % of the magnetic moment of the proton $`\mu _p`$. Finally, the resonant operator contribution is negative and vanishes at $`Q^2=0`$, i.e. it gives no contribution to the magnetic moments. As expected on general grounds, the contribution of these mesonic components is important only around the mass pole, though its absolute value in this model is still small as compared to the non-resonant propagation.

Concerning the electric form factor, results differ from data and follow the same trend in the whole range of $`Q^2`$ examined. The predicted charge square mean radii ($`r_p^2=0.48`$ fm2 and $`r_n^2=0.06`$ fm2) are still small as compared to data ($`r_p^2=0.74\pm 0.02`$ fm2  and $`r_n^2=0.1215\pm 0.0016`$ fm2 ). It is remarkable that the resonant diagram accounts for 30 % of $`r_p^2`$ whereas the EEM diagram, that includes Darwin-Foldy terms and other higher corrections gives $`0.32`$ fm2. The lack of some contributions to the square mean radius is manifest through the slope of the curves at $`Q^2`$ which determines the difference with data at higher $`Q^2`$. As can be seen from Eq. (LABEL:oqqnonres), the non-resonant term does not take part in the electric transitions since their time–like component vanishes. Regarding the small value of the neutron charge radius, it should be realized that in our case we have used SU(6) relations ($`m_\rho =m_\omega `$, $`f_\omega =3f_\rho `$) so that the diagonal contributions of the SU(6) symmetric component of the wave function (98.5 % ) vanishes. The breaking of the former relations (coupling to $`2\pi `$ in one case, to $`3\pi `$ in the other for instance) could significantly change the charge radius of the neutron with very small effects on the other form factors.

The effective constant $`\beta `$ parametrizes, in the simplest way, the creation of $`q\overline{q}`$ pairs in the hadronic medium. Its effectiveness reflects gluon exchange interactions, maybe mostly related to the confinement potential and other non-perturbative effects. With respect to its particular value, and to ensure the consistency of the whole scheme, strong processes such as pionic decays of resonances, and photo and electroproduction of resonances should be described within the same model and with the same value of $`\beta `$ . Therefore not much can be said about the reasonable value of $`\beta `$ until this medium term program is carried out.

Our results can be compared with those of Ref. , where exchange currents and quark form factors contributions to the charge radii are evaluated. The effects of exchange currents are partially taken into account in the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ model through the effective value of $`\beta `$. However, $`\rho `$ and $`\omega `$ propagation diagrams in our model incorporate quark–antiquark interactions and would thus be related to quark form factors rather than to exchange currents.

Finally, some comments are in order about the kinematical relativistic corrections, which have been also the subject of recent interest . Undoubtedly these corrections are important and affect the predicted values of the form factors by introducing new $`Q^2`$ dependences which can also contribute to the square charge radius. For example, the authors of Ref. obtain a value for $`r_n^2`$ close to the experimental number. Nonetheless we do no think that they could play, in an effective way, the role of the dynamical mechanisms described here: in particular concerning the contributions of the $`\rho `$ and $`\omega `$ mesons to the nucleon form factors. As a matter of fact one could use a simple counting of the normalization and boost factors when employing relativistic wave functions instead of non–relativistic ones  without invoking the detailed dynamics at all.

In summary we have developed a consistent model to treat some relativistic dynamical corrections to the nucleon form factors. The model operator includes the effect of $`|qqqq\overline{q}`$ baryon components generated through a $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ mechanism. Gauge invariance is ensured through the mass renormalization associated to such a mechanism. The only free parameter in the model is $`\beta `$, the strength of the creation of pairs in the hadronic medium, which is fitted to the magnetic moment of the proton. The results obtained seem to confirm our initial expectations about the consideration of $`q\overline{q}`$ contributions as an essential physical ingredient in the description of electromagnetic transition processes.

This work has been supported in part by the EC-IHP Network ESOP, contract HPRN-CT-2000-00130 and the DGESIC (Spain) under contract PB97-1401-C02-01.

Figure captions

Figure 1 (a) Elementary emission model: the photon is emitted by one of the constituent quarks. (b) Resonant propagation of a $`q\overline{q}`$ pair relevant for electromagnetic interactions. (c) Non-resonant propagation of a $`q\overline{q}`$ pair. In (b,c) the creation of the extra $`q\overline{q}`$ pair is described by the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ model (crosses).

Figure 2 Nucleon electromagnetic form factors calculated with the operator (11) (solid line). Dashed lines show the contribution of the EEM, Eq. (2) and dash–dotted lines correspond to the case where only the lowest order in $`(p/m)`$ is retained in Eq. (2). For experimental data see .

Figure 3 Relative contributions of the terms in Eq. (11) to the total value of $`G_M^p/\mu _p`$ (solid line). The short–dashed line corresponds to the EEM term, the long–dashed line to the V term and the dash–dotted line to the NR-EEM contribution.

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.