text:
# Centers of Mass and Rotational Kinematics for the Relativistic N-Body Problem in the Rest-Frame Instant Form.

## I Introduction.

In the non-relativistic N-body problem the separation of the absolute translational motion of the center of mass from the relative motions can be easily carried out, due to the Abelian nature of the translation symmetry group. This implies that the associated Noether constants of motion (the conserved total 3-momentum) are in involution, so that the center-of-mass degrees of freedom decouple. Moreover, the fact that the non-relativistic kinetic energy of the relative motions is a quadratic form in the relative velocities allows the introduction of special sets of relative coordinates, the Jacobi normal relative coordinates, that diagonalize the quadratic form and correspond to different patterns of clustering of the centers of mass of the particles. Each set of Jacobi coordinates organizes the N particles into a hierarchy of clusters, in which each cluster of two or more particles has a mass given by an eigenvalue (reduced masses) of the quadratic form; the Jacobi normal coordinates join the centers of mass of cluster pairs.

On the other hand, the non-Abelian nature of the rotation symmetry group, whose associated Noether constants of motion (the conserved total angular momentum) are not in involution, prevents the possibility of a global separation of absolute rotations from the relative motions, so that there is no global definition of absolute vibrations. This has the consequence that an isolated deformable body can undergo rotations by changing its own shape (as shown by the falling cat and the diver). It was just to deal with these problems that the theory of the orientation-shape SO(3) principal bundle  has been developed in the context of molecular physics, emphasizing the gauge nature of a static (i.e. velocity-independent) definition of body frame for a deformable body. As a consequence, both the laboratory and body frame angular velocities as well as the orientational variables of the static body frame become unobservable gauge variables. This approach is associated with a set of point canonical transformations, which allow to define the body frame components of relative motions in a velocity-independent way.

In a previous paper  we showed that a more general class of non-point canonical transformations exists for $`N3`$, which allows to identify a family of canonical spin bases connected to the patterns of the possible clusterings of the spins associated with relative motions (namely the components of the center-of-mass angular momenta). The definition of these spin bases is independent of the use of Jacobi normal relative coordinates, just as the patterns of spin clustering are independent of the patterns of center-of-mass Jacobi clustering.

There exist two basic frames associated to each spin basis: the spin frame and the dynamical body frame. Their construction is guaranteed by the fact that, besides the existence on the relative phase space of a Hamiltonian symmetry left action of SO(3)***We adhere to the definitions used in Ref.; in the mathematical literature our left action is a right action. The generators are the center-of-mass angular momentum, Noether constants of motion. on the relative phase space, it is possible to define as many Hamiltonian non-symmetry right actions of SO(3) The generators are not constants of motion. as the possible patterns of spin clustering. While for N=3 the unique canonical spin basis coincides with a special class of global cross sections of the trivial orientation-shape SO(3) principal bundle, for $`N4`$ the existing spin bases and dynamical body frames turn out to be unrelated to the local cross sections of the static non-trivial orientation-shape SO(3) principal bundle, and evolve in a dynamical way dictated by the equations of motion. Both the orientation variables and the angular velocities become measurable quantities in each canonical spin basis.

In this way we get for each N a finite number of physically well-defined separations between rotational and vibrational degrees of freedom. The unique body frame of rigid bodies is replaced by a discrete number of evolving dynamical body frames and of spin canonical bases, both of which are grounded on patterns of spin couplings, direct analogues of the coupling of quantum angular momenta. These results might be useful in non-relativistic nuclear and molecular physics.

Besides translations and rotations, every isolated non-relativistic system admits the internal energy, the total mass and the Galilei boosts (which amounts essentially to the definition of the center of mass) as constants of the motion. Altogether, there are 11 constants of motion (one of them is a central charge) with which one gets a realization of the kinematical extended Galilei algebra .

The problem we want to tackle is what happens when we replace Galilean spacetime with Minkowski spacetime. Precisely what can be said in this case about the separation of the center of mass from the relative motions (the Abelian translation symmetry) and about the treatment of rotations (the non-Abelian rotational symmetry) already for the simplest system of N free scalar positive-energy particles?

The first immediate issue is how to describe a relativistic scalar particle. Among the various possibilities (see Refs. for a review of the various options) we will choose to start from the manifestly Lorentz covariant approach using Dirac’s first class constraints to identify free particles§§§We shall use $`c=1`$ everywhere and the convention $`\eta ^{\mu \nu }=ϵ(+)`$ for the Minkowski metric (with $`ϵ=\pm 1`$ according to the either particle physics or general relativity convention).

$$p_i^2ϵm_i^20.$$
(1)
The associated Lagrangian description starts from the 4-vector positions $`x_i^\mu (\tau )`$ and the action $`S=𝑑\tau \left(ϵ_im_i\sqrt{ϵ\dot{x}_i^2(\tau )}\right)`$, where $`\tau `$ is a Lorentz scalar mathematical time parameter An affine parameter for the particle timelike worldlines.. Therefore Lorentz covariance implies the use of singular Lagrangians and of the associated Dirac’s theory of constraints for the Hamiltonian description. The time variables $`x_i^o(\tau )`$ are the gauge variables associated to the mass-shell constraints, which have the two topologically disjoint solutions $`p_i^o\pm \sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{p}_i^2}`$. As discussed in Ref. this implies that:

i) a combination of the time variables may be identified with the clock of one arbitrary observer labelling the evolution of the isolated system;

ii) the $`N1`$ relative times are connected with the observer freedom of looking at the N particles either at the same time or with any prescribed delay among them.

The introduction of interactions in this picture without destroying the first class nature of the constraints See Ref. for the models with second class constraints corresponding to gauge fixings of the relative times. is a difficult problem, which gave origin, in the two-particle case, to the DrozVincent-Komar-Todorov model. On the other hand, its extension to N particles was never given in closed form.

When the particle is charged and interacts with a dynamical (non-external) electromagnetic field a problem of covariance reappears. The standard description of a charged scalar particle interacting with the electromagnetic field is based on the action

$$S=ϵm𝑑\tau \sqrt{ϵ\dot{x}^2(\tau )}e𝑑\tau d^4z\delta ^4(zx(\tau ))\dot{x}^\mu (\tau )A_\mu (z)\frac{1}{4}d^4zF^{\mu \nu }(z)F_{\mu \nu }(z).$$
(2)
If we evaluate the canonical momenta of the isolated system charged particle plus electromagnetic field, we find two primary constraints:

$`\chi (\tau )=\left(peA(x(\tau ))\right)^2ϵm^20,`$ (3)
$`\pi ^o(z^o,\stackrel{}{z})0.`$ (4)
One realizes immediately that it is impossible to evaluate the Poisson bracket of the two constraints, because there is no concept of equal time. Also the Dirac Hamiltonian, which should be $`H_D=H_c+\lambda (\tau )\chi (\tau )+d^3z\lambda ^o(z^o,\stackrel{}{z})\pi ^o(z^o,\stackrel{}{z})`$ \**\**\**With $`H_c`$ the canonical Hamiltonian and with $`\lambda (\tau )`$, $`\lambda ^o(z^o,\stackrel{}{z})`$ Dirac’s multipliers., does not make sense for the same reason. This problem is also present at the level of the Euler-Lagrange equations: precisely the formulation of a Cauchy problem for a system of coupled equations some of which are ordinary differential equations in the affine parameter $`\tau `$ along the particle worldline, while the others are partial differential equations depending on Minkowski coordinates $`z^\mu `$. Since the problem is due the absence of a covariant concept of equal time between the field and particle variables, a new formulation of the problem is needed.

In Ref., after a discussion of the many time formalism, a solution of the previous covariance problem was found in a way suggested in the context of a description able to incorporate the gravitational field. There one considers an arbitrary 3+1 splitting of Minkowski spacetime with spacelike hypersurfaces which is equivalent to a congruence of timelike accelerated observers. This is essentially Dirac’s reformulation of classical field theory (suitably extended to particles) on arbitrary spacelike hypersurfaces (equal time surfaces): it is also the classical basis of the Tomonaga-Schwinger formulation of quantum field theory. In this way, for each isolated system (containing any combination of particles, strings and fields) one gets its reformulation as a parametrized Minkowski theory, with the extra bonus of having the theory already prepared to the coupling to gravity in its ADM formulation, but with the price that the functions $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ describing the embedding of the spacelike hypersurface in Minkowski spacetime become additional configuration variables in the action principle. Since the action is invariant under separate $`\tau `$-reparametrizations and space-diffeomorphisms, there are first class constraints ensuring the independence of the description from the choice of the 3+1 splitting: the embedding configuration variables $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ are the gauge variables associated with this kind of general covariance.

Let us remark that, since the intersection of a timelike worldline with a spacelike hypersurface corresponding to a value $`\tau `$ of the time parameter is identified by 3 numbers $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }=\stackrel{}{\eta }(\tau )`$ and not by four, in parametrized Minkowski theories each particle must have a well defined sign of the energy: therefore we cannot simultaneously describe the two topologically disjoint branches of the mass hyperboloid as in the standard manifestly Lorentz-covariant theories. As a consequence, there are no more mass-shell constraints. Each particle with a definite sign of the energy is described by the canonical coordinates $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau )`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\tau )`$ with the derived 4-position of the particles given by $`x_i^\mu (\tau )=z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))`$. The derived 4-momenta $`p_i^\mu (\tau )`$ are $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$-dependent solutions of $`p_i^2ϵm_i^2=0`$ with the chosen sign of the energy.

In Minkowski spacetime, due to the independence of parametrized theories from the 3+1 splitting, we can restrict the foliation to have spacelike hyperplanes as leaves. In particular, for each configuration of the isolated system with timelike 4-momentum, we can restrict to the special foliation whose leaves are the hyperplanes orthogonal to the conserved total 4-momentum (Wigner hyperplanes). This special foliation is intrinsically determined by the configuration of the isolated system only. In this way it is possible to define the Wigner-covariant rest-frame instant form of dynamics for every isolated system whose configurations have well defined and finite Poincaré generators with timelike total 4-momentum ††††††See Ref. for the traditional forms of dynamics. ‡‡‡‡‡‡See Appendix A for a review of parametrized Minkowski theories and of the rest-frame instant form of dynamics..

This formulation provides a clarification of the roles of the various relativistic centers of mass. This is a long standing problem which arose just after the foundation of special relativity in the first decade of the last century. In the next ninty years it became clear that the definition of a relativistic center of mass is highly non-trivial: no definition can enjoy all the properties of the non-relativistic center of mass. See Refs. for a partial bibliography of all the existing attempts and Ref. for reviews.

As shown in Appendix A, in the rest-frame instant form on Wigner hyperplanes only four first class constraints survive and the original configuration variables $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$, $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau )`$ and their conjugate momenta $`\rho _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\tau )`$ are reduced to:

i) a decoupled particle $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$, $`p_s^\mu `$ (the only remnant of the spacelike hypersurface) with a positive mass $`ϵ_s=\sqrt{ϵp_s^2}`$ determined by the first class constraint $`ϵ_sM_{sys}0`$ \**\**\**$`M_{sys}`$ being the invariant mass of the isolated system. and with its rest-frame Lorentz scalar time $`T_s=\frac{\stackrel{~}{x}_sp_s}{ϵ_s}`$ put equal to the mathematical time as the gauge fixing $`T_s\tau 0`$ to the previous constraint. Here, $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ is a non-covariant canonical variable for the external 4-center of mass. After the elimination of $`T_s`$ and $`ϵ_s`$ with the previous pair of second class constraints, one remains with a decoupled free point (point particle clock) of mass $`M_{sys}`$ and canonical 3-coordinates $`\stackrel{}{z}_s=ϵ_s(\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s\frac{\stackrel{}{p}_s}{p_s^o}\stackrel{~}{x}^o)`$, $`\stackrel{}{k}_s=\frac{\stackrel{}{p}_s}{ϵ_s}`$ \*†\*†\*†$`\stackrel{}{z}_s/ϵ_s`$ is the classical analogue of the Newton-Wigner 3-position operator and, like it, is only covariant under the Euclidean subgroup of the Poincaré group only.. The non-covariant canonical $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ must not be confused with the 4-vector $`x_s^\mu (\tau )=z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }=0)`$ identifying the origin of the 3-coordinates $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }`$ inside the Wigner hyperplanes. The worldline $`x_s^\mu (\tau )`$ is arbitrary because it depends on $`x_s^\mu (0)`$ and its 4-velocity $`\dot{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ depends on the Dirac multipliers associated with the 4 first class constraints \*‡\*‡\*‡Therefore this arbitrary worldline may be considered as an arbitrary centroid for the isolated system., as it will be shown in the next Section. The unit timelike 4-vector $`u^\mu (p_s)=p_s^\mu /ϵ_s`$ is orthogonal to the Wigner hyperplanes and describes their orientation in the chosen inertial frame.

ii) the particle canonical variables $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau )`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\tau )`$ They are Wigner spin-1 3-vectors, like the coordinates $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }`$. inside the Wigner hyperplanes. They are restricted by the three first class constraints (the rest-frame conditions) $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+=_{i=1}^N\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i0`$.

Therefore, we need a doubling of the concepts:

1) there is the external viewpoint of an arbitrary inertial Lorentz observer, who describes the Wigner hyperplanes, as leaves of a foliation of Minkowski spacetime, determined by the timelike configurations of the isolated system. A change of inertial observer by means of a Lorentz transformation rotates the Wigner hyperplanes and induces a Wigner rotation of the 3-vectors inside each Wigner hyperplane. Every such hyperplane inherits an induced internal Euclidean structure while an external realization of the Poincaré group induces the internal Euclidean action.

As said above, an arbitrary worldline $`x_s^\mu (\tau )`$ is chosen as origin of the internal 3-coordinates on the Wigner hyperplanes; its velocity $`\dot{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ is determined only after the introduction of four gauge fixings for the four first class constraints (one of them is $`T_s\tau 0`$).

Three external concepts of 4-center of mass can be defined (each one of which there has an internal 3-location inside the Wigner hyperplanes): a) the external non-covariant canonical 4-center of mass (also named center of spin) $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$ (with 3-location $`\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{\sigma }}`$), b) the external non-covariant non-canonical Møller 4-center of energy $`R_s^\mu `$ (with 3-location $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_R`$), c) the external covariant non-canonical Fokker-Pryce 4-center of inertia $`Y_s^\mu `$ (with 3-location $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_Y`$).

Only the canonical non-covariant center of mass $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ is relevant in the Hamiltonian treatment with Dirac constraints, while only the Fokker-Pryce $`Y_s^\mu `$ is a 4-vector by construction

2) there is the internal viewpoint inside the Wigner hyperplanes associated to a unfaithful internal realization of the Poincaré algebra: the internal 3-momentum $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$ vanishes due to the rest-frame conditions. The internal energy and angular momentum are the invariant mass $`M_{sys}`$ and the spin (the angular momentum with respect to $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$) of the isolated system, respectively. Three internal 3-centers of mass: the internal canonical 3-center of mass can be correspondingly defined, the internal Møller 3-center of energy and the internal Fokker-Pryce 3-center of inertia. But, due to the rest-frame conditions, they coincide and become essentially the it gauge variable conjugate to $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$. As a natural gauge fixing for the rest-frame conditions $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$, we can add the vanishing of the internal Lorentz boosts: this is equivalent to locate the internal canonical 3-center of mass $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ in $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }=0`$, i.e. in the origin $`x_s^\mu (\tau )=z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{0})`$. With these gauge fixings and with $`T_s\tau 0`$, the worldline $`x_s^\mu (\tau )`$ becomes uniquely determined except for the arbitrariness in the choice of $`x_s^\mu (0)`$ \[$`u^\mu (p_s)=p_s^\mu /ϵ_s`$\]

$$x_s^\mu (\tau )=x_s^\mu (0)+u^\mu (p_s)T_s,$$
(5)
and coincides with the external covariant non-canonical Fokker-Pryce 4-center of inertia, $`x_s^\mu (\tau )=x_s^\mu (0)+Y_s^\mu `$.

This doubling of concepts replaces the separation of the non-relativistic 3-center of mass due to the Abelian translation symmetry. The non-relativistic conserved 3-momentum is replaced by the external $`\stackrel{}{p}_s=ϵ_s\stackrel{}{k}_s`$, while the internal 3-momentum vanishes, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$, as a definition of rest frame.

In the final gauge we have $`ϵ_sM_{sys}`$, $`T_s\tau `$ and the canonical basis $`\stackrel{}{z}_s`$, $`\stackrel{}{k}_s`$, $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$ restricted by the three pairs of second class constraints $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+=_{i=1}^N\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i0`$, $`\stackrel{}{q}_+0`$, so that 6N canonical variables describe the N particles like in the non-relativistic case. We still need a canonical transformation $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{}{q}_+[0]`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+[0]`$, $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a`$ ($`a=1,..,N1`$) in order to identify a set of relative canonical variables. The final 6N-dimensional canonical basis is $`\stackrel{}{z}_s`$, $`\stackrel{}{k}_s`$, $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a`$. To get this result we need a highly non-linear canonical transformation, which can be obtained by exploiting the Gartenhaus-Schwartz singular transformation .

In the end, we obtain the Hamiltonian for relative motions as a sum of N square roots, each one containing a squared mass and a quadratic form in the relative momenta. This Hamiltonian goes into its non-relativistic counterpart in the limit $`c\mathrm{}`$. This fact has the following implications:

a) if one tries to make the inverse Legendre transformation to find the associated Lagrangian, it turns out that, due to the presence of square roots, the Lagrangian is a hyperelliptic function of $`\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_a`$ already in the free case. A closed form exists only for N=2, $`m_1=m_2=m`$: $`L=ϵm\sqrt{4\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}^2}`$. This exceptional case already shows that the existence of the limiting velocity $`c`$ (i.e. of the light-cone) forbids the traditional linear relation between the spin and the angular velocity.

b) the N quadratic forms in the relative momenta appearing in the relative Hamiltonian cannot be diagonalized simultaneously. In any case, the Hamiltonian is a sum of square roots, so that concepts like reduced masses, Jacobi normal relative coordinates and tensor of inertia cannot be extended to special relativity. As a consequence, the orientation-shape SO(3) principal bundle of Ref. can be defined only by using unspecified relative coordinates.

c) the best way of studying rotational kinematics is by using the canonical spin bases of Ref. with their spin frames and dynamical body frames: they can be build in the same way as in the non-relativistic case starting from the canonical basis $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a`$.

Once these points are understood in the free case, the introduction of mutual action-at-a-distance interactions among the particles can be done without extra complications.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section II we review the rest-frame instant form on the Wigner hyperplane of N positive energy free scalar particles. In Section III we discuss the internal realization of the Poincaré algebra and we define the internal center-of-mass concepts. In Section IV we discuss the external realization of the Poincaré algebra and we define the external center-of-mass concepts. In Section V we construct the canonical relative variables associated with the canonical internal center of mass. In Section VI we analyze the relativistic rotational kinematics of relative motions inside the Wigner hyperplane using the same Hamiltonian methods for the construction of the spin bases of Ref.. Some final comments on open problems are given in the Conclusions.

Appendix A contains a review of parametrized Minkowski theories and of the rest-frame instant form of dynamics. Some notations on spacelike hypersurfaces are listed in Appendix B. The results of Section V are extended to spinning particles in Appendix C. Some formulas for the Euler angles are reported in Appendix D. Finally, the treatment of the 3-body case is explicitly given in Appendix E.

## II The Rest-Frame Instant Form of N Free Scalar Relativistic Particles

Let us consider a system of N free scalar positive-energy particles in the framework of parametrized Minkowski theory (see Appendices A and B).

The configuration variables are a 3-vector $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau )`$ for each particle \[$`x_i^\mu (\tau )=z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))`$\] . One has to choose the sign of the energy of each particle, because there are not mass-shell constraints (like $`ϵp_i^2m_i^20`$) at our disposal, due to the fact that one has only three degrees of freedom for particle, determining the intersection of a timelike trajectory and of the spacelike hypersurface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$. For each choice of the sign of the energy of the N particles, one describes only one of the $`2^N`$ branches of the mass spectrum of the manifestly covariant approach based on the coordinates $`x_i^\mu (\tau )`$, $`p_i^\mu (\tau )`$, i=1,..,N, and on the constraints $`ϵp_i^2m_i^20`$ (in the free case). In this way, one gets a description of relativistic particles with a given sign of the energy with consistent couplings to fields This is true for scalar positive-energy particles . For spinning positive-energy particles one has to add  non-minimally some coupling of the spin to the electric field which would be missed in the projection from the Lorentz covariant theory (with $`2^N`$ branches of the mass spectrum) to the theory describing only the branch, in which all the particles have positive energy. This can be done by performing an approximate Foldy-Wouthuysen transformation of the Lorentz covariant theory in presence of electromagnetic fields, because the electric field is the source of possible crossings of the deformed $`2^N`$ branches (classical counterpart of pair production). The additional spin-electric field coupling is the source of the spin-orbit term in the quantum electron Hamiltonian..

The system of N free scalar and positive energy particles is described by the action

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑\tau d^3\sigma (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}={\displaystyle 𝑑\tau L(\tau )},`$ (8)
$`(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))m_i\sqrt{g_{\tau \tau }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })+2g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )+g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau )},`$
$`L(\tau )={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_i\sqrt{g_{\tau \tau }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))+2g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )+g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau )},`$
where the configuration variables are $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau )`$, i=1,..,N. The action is invariant under separate $`\tau `$\- and $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }`$-reparametrizations.

The canonical momenta are

$`\rho _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}{z_\tau ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))m_i`$ (10)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{z_{\tau \mu }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })+z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\mu }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )}{\sqrt{g_{\tau \tau }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })+2g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )+g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau )}}}=`$
$`=`$ $`[(\rho _\nu l^\nu )l_\mu +(\rho _\nu z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu )\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}\mu }](\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),`$ (11)
$`\kappa _{i\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L(\tau )}{\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )}}=`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`m_i{\displaystyle \frac{g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))+g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau )}{\sqrt{g_{\tau \tau }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))+2g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )+g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )\dot{\eta }_i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau )}}},`$ (17)
$`\{z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),\rho _\nu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}}\}=\eta _\nu ^\mu \delta ^3(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}}),`$
$`\{\eta _i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ),\kappa _{j\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau )\}=\delta _{ij}\delta _{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}.`$
The canonical Hamiltonian $`H_c`$ is zero, the Dirac Hamiltonian is given by Eq.(A4)\[there are no other system-dependent primary constraints\] and Eqs.(A3) become

$`_\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })l_\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))\sqrt{m_i^2\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\kappa _{i\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )\kappa _{i\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau )}`$ (18)
$``$ $`z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\mu }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))\kappa _{i\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}0.`$ (19)
The conserved Poincaré generators are (the suffix “s” denotes the hypersurface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$)

$`p_s^\mu ={\displaystyle d^3\sigma \rho ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })},`$ (20)
$`J_s^{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle d^3\sigma [z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\rho ^\nu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })z^\nu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\rho ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })]}.`$ (21)
After the restriction to spacelike hyperplanes, the Dirac Hamiltonian is reduced to Eq.(A14) with the surviving ten constraints given by

$`\stackrel{~}{}^\mu (\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^3\sigma ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}=p_s^\mu l^\mu {\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2(\tau )}+b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\kappa _{i\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )0,`$ (22)
$`\stackrel{~}{}^{\mu \nu }(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ){\displaystyle d^3\sigma \sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu (\tau ){\displaystyle d^3\sigma \sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}=`$ (23)
$`=`$ $`S_s^{\mu \nu }(\tau )[b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )b_\tau ^\nu b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu (\tau )b_\tau ^\mu ]{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\eta _i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2(\tau )}`$ (24)
$``$ $`[b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^\nu (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^\mu (\tau )]{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\eta _i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )\kappa _i^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau )0.`$ (25)
Here $`S_s^{\mu \nu }`$ is the spin part of the Lorentz generators

$`J_s^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`x_s^\mu p_s^\nu x_s^\nu p_s^\mu +S_s^{\mu \nu },`$ (27)
$`S_s^{\mu \nu }=b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ){\displaystyle d^3\sigma \sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}\rho ^\nu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu (\tau ){\displaystyle d^3\sigma \sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}\rho ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}.`$
On the Wigner hyperplane we have the following constraints and Dirac Hamiltonian

$`\stackrel{~}{}^\mu (\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`p_s^\mu u^\mu (p_s){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s)){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\kappa _{ir}=`$ (28)
$`=`$ $`u^\mu (p_s)[ϵ_s{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}]+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s)){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\kappa _{ir}0,`$ (34)
$`or`$
$`ϵ_sM_{sys}0,M_{sys}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2},`$
$`\stackrel{}{p}_{sys}=\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i0,`$
$`H_D`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda ^\mu (\tau )\stackrel{~}{}_\mu (\tau )=\lambda (\tau )[ϵ_sM_{sys}]\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i,`$ (39)
$`\lambda (\tau )\dot{x}_{s\mu }(\tau )u^\mu (p_s),`$
$`\lambda _r(\tau )\dot{x}_{s\mu }(\tau )ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s)),`$
$`\dot{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda (\tau )u^\mu (p_s),`$ (41)
$`\dot{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^\mu (\tau )=\lambda (\tau )u^\mu (p_s)+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\lambda _r(\tau ).`$ (42)
While the Dirac multiplier $`\lambda (\tau )`$ is determined by the gauge fixing $`T_s\tau 0`$, the 3 Dirac’s multipliers $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )`$ describe the classical zitterbewegung of the origin of the coordinates on the Wigner hyperplane: each gauge-fixing $`\stackrel{}{\chi }(\tau )0`$ to the 3 first class constraints $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$ (defining the internal rest-frame) gives a different determination of the multipliers $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )`$ and therefore identifies a different worldline for the covariant non-canonical origin $`x_s^{(\stackrel{}{\chi })\mu }(\tau )`$ which induces the definition $`\stackrel{}{\chi }`$ of the internal 3-center of mass conjugate to $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$ \*∥\*∥\*∥Naturally each choice $`\stackrel{}{\chi }`$ leads to a different set of relative canonical conjugate variables..

The embedding describing Wigner hyperplanes is $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=x_s^\mu (\tau )+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\sigma ^r`$, with the $`ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))`$ defined in Eqs.(B38).

The various spin tensors and vectors are

$`J_s^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`x_s^\mu p_s^\nu x_s^\nu p_s^\mu +S_s^{\mu \nu }=\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu p_s^\nu \stackrel{~}{x}_s^\nu p_s^\mu +\stackrel{~}{S}_s^{\mu \nu },`$ (43)
$`S_s^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`[u^\mu (p_s)ϵ^\nu (u(p_s))u^\nu (p_s)ϵ^\mu (u(p_s))]\overline{S}_s^{\tau r}+ϵ^\mu (u(p_s))ϵ^\nu (u(p_s))\overline{S}_s^{rs}`$ (45)
$``$ $`\left[ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))u^\nu (p_s)ϵ^\nu (u(p_s))u^\mu (p_s)\right]{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\eta _i^r\sqrt{m_i^2c^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}+`$ (46)
$`+`$ $`\left[ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))ϵ_s^\nu (u(p_s))ϵ_r^\nu (u(p_s))ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\right]{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\eta _i^r\kappa _i^s,`$ (47)
$`\overline{S}_s^{AB}`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_\mu ^A(u(p_s))ϵ_\nu ^B(u(p_s))S_s^{\mu \nu },`$ (50)
$`\overline{S}_s^{rs}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\eta _i^r\kappa _i^s\eta _i^s\kappa _i^r),\overline{S}_s^{\tau r}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\eta _i^r\sqrt{m_i^2c^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{S}_s^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`S_s^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{ϵp_s^2}(p_s^o+\sqrt{ϵp_s^2})}}\left[p_{s\beta }(S_s^{\beta \mu }p_s^\nu S_s^{\beta \nu }p_s^\mu )+\sqrt{p_s^2}(S_s^{o\mu }p_s^\nu S_s^{o\nu }p_s^\mu )\right],`$ (53)
$`\stackrel{~}{S}_s^{ij}=\delta ^{ir}\delta ^{js}\overline{S}_s^{rs},\stackrel{~}{S}_s^{oi}={\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^{ir}\overline{S}_s^{rs}p_s^s}{p_s^o+\sqrt{ϵp_s^2}}},`$
$`\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}={\displaystyle \underset{i+1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{\eta }_+\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+={\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_a.`$ (55)
Let us remark that while $`L_s^{\mu \nu }=x_s^\mu p_s^\nu x_s^\nu p_s^\mu `$ and $`S_s^{\mu \nu }`$ are not constants of the motion due to the classical zitterbewegung, both $`\stackrel{~}{L}_s^{\mu \nu }=\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu p_s^\nu \stackrel{~}{x}_s^\nu p_s^\mu `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{S}_s^{\mu \nu }`$ are conserved.

The only remaining canonical variables describing the Wigner hyperplane in the final Dirac brackets are the non-covariant canonical coordinate $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ and $`p_s^\mu `$. The point with coordinates $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ is the decoupled canonical external 4-center of mass, playing the role of a kinematical external 4-center of mass and of a decoupled observer with his parametrized clock (point particle clock). Its velocity $`\dot{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ is parallel to $`p_s^\mu `$, so that it has no classical zitterbewegung.

The connection between $`x_s^\mu (\tau )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ is given in Eq.(177) in Section IV. Let us remark that the constant $`x_s^\mu (0)`$ \[and $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (0)`$\] is arbitrary, reflecting the arbitrariness in the absolute location of the origin of the internal coordinates on each hyperplane in Minkowski spacetime.

After the separation of the relativistic canonical non-covariant external 4-center of mass $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$, on the Wigner hyperplane the N particles are described by the 6N Wigner spin-1 3-vectors $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau )`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\tau )`$ restricted by the rest-frame condition $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+=_{i=1}^N\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i0`$.

The canonical variables $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$, $`p_s^\mu `$ for the external 4-center of mass, may be replaced by the canonical pairs\***\***\***They make explicit the interpretation of $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$ as a point particle clock.

$`T_s`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{p_s\stackrel{~}{x}_s}{ϵ_s}}={\displaystyle \frac{p_sx_s}{ϵ_s}},`$ (56)
$`ϵ_s`$ $`=`$ $`\pm \sqrt{ϵp_s^2},`$ (57)
$`\stackrel{}{z}_s`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_s(\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_s}{p_s^o}}\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o),`$ (58)
$`\stackrel{}{k}_s`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_s}{ϵ_s}},`$ (59)
with the inverse transformation

$`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{1+\stackrel{}{k}_s^2}(T_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_s\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}}),`$ (60)
$`\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}}+(T_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_s\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}})\stackrel{}{k}_s,`$ (61)
$`p_s^o`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_s\sqrt{1+\stackrel{}{k}_s^2},`$ (62)
$`\stackrel{}{p}_s`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_s\stackrel{}{k}_s.`$ (63)
This non-point canonical transformation in the rest-frame instant form can be summarized as \[$`ϵ_sM_{sys}0`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+=_{i=1}^N\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i0`$\]

$$\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu \hfill & \stackrel{}{\eta }_i\hfill \\ p^\mu _s\hfill & \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}ϵ_s\hfill & \stackrel{}{z}_s\hfill & \stackrel{}{\eta }_i\hfill \\ T_s\hfill & \stackrel{}{k}_s\hfill & \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\hfill \end{array}$$
(64)
The invariant mass $`M_{sys}`$ of the system, which is also the internal energy of the isolated system, replaces the non-relativistic Hamiltonian $`H_{rel}`$ for the relative degrees of freedom, after the addition of the gauge-fixing $`T_s\tau 0`$ \*††\*††\*††Implying $`\lambda (\tau )=ϵ`$ and identifying the time parameter $`\tau `$, that labels the leaves of the foliation with the Lorentz scalar time of the center of mass in the rest frame, $`T_s=p_s\stackrel{~}{x}_s/M_{sys}`$; $`M_{sys}`$ generates the evolution in this time.: this reminds of the frozen Hamilton-Jacobi theory, in which the time evolution can be reintroduced by using the energy generator of the Poincaré group as Hamiltonian \*‡‡\*‡‡\*‡‡See Refs. for a different derivation of this result..

After the gauge fixings $`T_s\tau 0`$, the final Hamiltonian and the embedding of the Wigner hyperplane into Minkowski spacetime become

$`H_D`$ $`=`$ $`M_{sys}\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+,`$ (65)
$`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`x_s^\mu (\tau )+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\sigma ^r=x_s^\mu (0)+u^\mu (p_s)\tau +ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\sigma ^r,`$ (69)
$`with`$
$`\dot{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dx_s^\mu (\tau )}{d\tau }}+\{x_s^\mu (\tau ),H_D\}=u^\mu (p_s)+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\lambda _r(\tau ),`$ (71)
where $`x_s^\mu (0)`$ is an arbitrary point and $`ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))=L^\mu {}_{r}{}^{}(p_s,\stackrel{}{p}_s)`$. This equation visualizes the role of the Dirac multipliers as sources of the classical zittebewegung.

After the gauge fixings $`T_s\tau 0`$, $`\stackrel{}{q}_+0`$, the embedding $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=x_s^\mu (\tau )+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\sigma ^r`$ describing Wigner hyperplanes becomes $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=x_s^\mu (0)+u^\mu (p_s)\tau +ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\sigma ^r`$.

The particles’ worldlines in Minkowski spacetime and the associated momenta are

$`x_i^\mu (\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau ))=x_s^\mu (\tau )+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\eta _i^r(\tau ),`$ (72)
$`p_i^\mu (\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2(\tau )}u^\mu (p_s)+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\kappa _{ir}(\tau )ϵp_i^2=m_i^2.`$ (73)
Inside the Wigner hyperplane three degrees of freedom of the isolated system †\*†\*†\*They describe an internal center-of-mass 3-variable $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_{com}`$ defined inside the Wigner hyperplane and conjugate to $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$; when the $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_{com}`$ are canonical variables they are denoted $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$. become gauge variables. To eliminate the three first class constraints $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$ the natural gauge fixing is $`\stackrel{}{\chi }=\stackrel{}{q}_+0`$ implying $`\lambda _{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )=0`$: in this way the internal 3-center of mass gets located in the origin $`x_s^\mu (\tau )=z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }=0)`$ of the Wigner hyperplane. The determination of $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ for the N particle system will be done with the group theoretical methods of Ref. in the next Section.

The same problem arises when one considers the rest-frame description of fields. A basis with a center of phase has already been found for a real Klein-Gordon field both in the covariant approach and on spacelike hypersurfaces ††††††In this paper there is a first treatment of the topics which will be treated in Sections III and IV. In this case also the internal center of mass has been found, but not yet a canonical basis containing it.

It turns out that the Wigner hyperplane is the natural setting for the study of the Dixon multipoles of extended relativistic systems †‡†‡†‡In a next paper we will study Dixon’s multipoles for the N-body problem . and for defining their canonical relative variables with respect to the center of mass. Also, the Wigner hyperplane with its natural Euclidean metric structure offers a natural solution to the problem of boost for lattice gauge theories and realizes explicitly the Machian view of dynamics according to which only relative motions are relevant.

The external rest-frame instant form realization of the Poincaré generators †§†§†§There are four independent Hamiltonians $`p_s^o`$ and $`J_s^{oi}`$ functions of the system invariant mass $`M_{sys}`$; we give also the expression in the basis $`T_s`$, $`ϵ_s`$, $`\stackrel{}{z}_s`$, $`\stackrel{}{k}_s`$. with non-fixed invariants $`ϵp_s^2=ϵ_s^2M_{sys}^2`$, $`ϵp_s^2\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s^2ϵM_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}^2`$, is obtained from Eq.(55):

$`p_s^\mu ,`$ (74)
$`J_s^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu p_s^\nu \stackrel{~}{x}_s^\nu p_s^\mu +\stackrel{~}{S}_s^{\mu \nu },`$ (75)
$`p_s^o`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{ϵ_s^2+\stackrel{}{p}_s^2}=ϵ_s\sqrt{1+\stackrel{}{k}_s^2}\sqrt{M_{sys}^2+\stackrel{}{p}_s^2}=M_{sys}\sqrt{1+\stackrel{}{k}_s^2},`$ (77)
$`\stackrel{}{p}_s`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_s\stackrel{}{k}_sM_{sys}\stackrel{}{k}_s,`$ (78)
$`J_s^{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^ip_s^j\stackrel{~}{x}_s^jp_s^i+\delta ^{ir}\delta ^{js}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\eta _i^r\kappa _i^s\eta _i^s\kappa _i^r)=z_s^ik_s^jz_s^jk_s^i+\delta ^{ir}\delta ^{js}ϵ^{rsu}\overline{S}_s^u,`$ (79)
$`K_s^i`$ $`=`$ $`J_s^{oi}=\stackrel{~}{x}_s^op_s^i\stackrel{~}{x}_s^i\sqrt{ϵ_s^2+\stackrel{}{p}_s^2}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ_s+\sqrt{ϵ_s^2+\stackrel{}{p}_s^2}}}\delta ^{ir}p_s^s{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\eta _i^r\kappa _i^s\eta _i^s\kappa _i^r)=`$ (80)
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{1+\stackrel{}{k}_s^2}z_s^i{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^{ir}k_s^sϵ^{rsu}\overline{S}_s^u}{1+\sqrt{1+\stackrel{}{k}_s^2}}}\stackrel{~}{x}_s^op_s^i\stackrel{~}{x}_s^i\sqrt{M_{sys}^2+\stackrel{}{p}_s^2}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^{ir}p_s^sϵ^{rsu}\overline{S}_s^u}{M_{sys}+\sqrt{M_{sys}^2+\stackrel{}{p}_s^2}}}.`$ (81)
On the other hand, the internal realization of the Poincaré algebra is built inside the Wigner hyperplane by using the expression of $`\overline{S}_s^{AB}`$ given by Eq.(55) †¶†¶†¶This internal Poincaré algebra realization must not be confused with the previous external one based on $`\stackrel{~}{S}_s^{\mu \nu }`$; $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ and $`W^2`$ are the two non-fixed invariants of this realization.

$`M_{sys}=H_M={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2},`$ (82)
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(0),`$ (83)
$`\stackrel{}{J}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i,J^r=\overline{S}^r={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}ϵ^{ruv}\overline{S}^{uv}\overline{S}_s^r,`$ (84)
$`\stackrel{}{K}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i,K^r=J^{or}=\overline{S}_s^{\tau r},`$ (85)
(86)
$`\mathrm{\Pi }=M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2M_{sys}^2>0,`$ (87)
$`W^2=ϵ(M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2)\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s^2ϵM_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s^2.`$ (88)
The meaning of the constraints $`ϵ_sM_{sys}0`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$ is: i) the constraint $`ϵ_sM_{sys}0`$ is the bridge connecting the external and internal realizations †∥†∥†∥The external spin coincides with the internal angular momentum due to Eqs.(A20).; ii) the constraints $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$, together with $`\stackrel{}{K}0`$ †\**†\**†\**As we shall see in the next Section $`\stackrel{}{K}0`$ is implied by the natural gauge fixing $`\stackrel{}{q}_+0`$., imply a unfaithful internal realization in which the only non-zero generators are the conserved energy and the spin of an isolated system.

For isolated systems the constraint manifold is a stratified manifold with each stratum corresponding to a type of Poincaré orbit. The main stratum (dense in the constraint manifold) corresponds to all configurations of the isolated system belonging to timelike Poincaré orbits with $`ϵp_s^2ϵM_{sys}^2>0`$. As said in Ref., this implies that the center-of-mass coordinates have been adapted to the co-adjoint orbits of the Poincaré group. But this canonical basis does not yet correspond to a typical form of the Poincaré group in its canonical action on the phase space of the isolated system, because the second Poincaré invariant †††††††††The Pauli-Lubanski invariant $`\stackrel{}{W}_s^2=p_s^2\stackrel{}{S}_s^2`$. does not appear among the canonical variables. In Ref. a canonical basis including both Poincaré invariants was found (all the coordinates are adapted to the co-adjoint action of the Poincaré group). As a consequence the new relative variables are adapted to the SO(3) group.

In Ref. a naive internal center-of-mass variable $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+=\frac{1}{N}_{i=1}^N\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$ was introduced and there was the definition of relative variables $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a`$ with the following point canonical transformation

$`\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{}{\eta }_+\hfill & \stackrel{}{\rho }_a\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\hfill & \stackrel{}{\pi }_a\hfill \end{array},a=1,..,N1`$ (93)
$`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_++{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a,`$ (95)
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_++\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\pi }_a,`$ (96)
$`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i,`$ (98)
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i0,`$ (99)
$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i,`$ (100)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i,`$ (105)
$`\{\eta _i^r,\kappa _j^s\}=\delta _{ij}\delta ^{rs},\{\eta _+^r,\kappa _+^s\}=\delta ^{rs},\{\rho _a^r,\pi _b^s\}=\delta _{ab}\delta ^{rs},`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}=0,{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{aj}=\delta _{ij}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}},{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}=\delta _{ab},`$
This is a family of canonical transformations depending on $`\frac{1}{2}(N1)(N2)`$ free parameters (the independent parameters in the $`\gamma _{ai}`$ ).

Let us see whether we can take $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_{sys}=\stackrel{}{\eta }_+`$.

In the gauge†‡‡†‡‡†‡‡It entails $`0\dot{T}_s1=\dot{x}_su(p_s)1=\lambda (\tau )1`$; after going to Dirac brackets we get $`T_s\tau `$ and $`ϵ_s\pm M_{sys}`$.

$$T_s\tau 0,$$
(106)
the Hamiltonian and the rest-frame constraints are

$`H_D`$ $`=`$ $`M_{sys}\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+,`$ (107)
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$ $``$ $`0.`$ (108)
with the invariant mass given by

$`M_{sys}`$ $`=`$ $`H_M=`$ (109)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_++\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\pi }_a]^2}`$ (110)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+N{\displaystyle \underset{a,b}{\overset{1..N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\stackrel{}{\pi }_a\stackrel{}{\pi }_b}.`$ (111)
For the origin of coordinates we get

$$x_s^\mu (T_s)=x_s^\mu (0)+u^\mu (p_s)T_s+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))_0^{T_s}𝑑\tau \lambda _r(\tau ).$$
(112)
The Hamilton equations are \[$`\tau T_s`$\]

$`\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(\tau )`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\tau )}{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2(\tau )}}}\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau ),`$ (113)
$`\dot{\stackrel{}{\kappa }}_i(\tau )`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`0,`$ (114)
$``$ $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\tau )\stackrel{}{=}m_i{\displaystyle \frac{[\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i+\stackrel{}{\lambda }](\tau )}{\sqrt{1(\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(\tau )+\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau ))^2}}},`$ (116)
$`\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2(\tau )}\stackrel{}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{m_i}{\sqrt{1(\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(\tau )+\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau ))^2}}},`$
$``$ $`L_D={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_iH_D={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i+\stackrel{}{\lambda })H_M=`$ (119)
$`={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_i\sqrt{1(\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i+\stackrel{}{\lambda })^2}=`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_i\sqrt{1\left[\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_++\stackrel{}{\lambda }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_a\right]^2}.`$
with Euler-Lagrange equations for $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau )`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )`$

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\tau }}\left[m_i{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(\tau )+\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )}{\sqrt{1(\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(\tau )+\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau ))^2}}}\right]\stackrel{}{=}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},`$ (120)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_i{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(\tau )+\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )}{\sqrt{1(\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(\tau )+\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau ))^2}}}\stackrel{}{=}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}.`$ (121)
If $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )=\dot{\stackrel{}{g}}(\tau )`$, the solutions of the Hamilton and Euler-Lagrange equations are

$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\tau )\stackrel{}{=}\stackrel{}{\beta }_i,with\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\beta }_i=0,`$ (122)
$`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\tau )+\stackrel{}{g}(\tau )\stackrel{}{=}\stackrel{}{\alpha }_i+\tau {\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\beta }_i}{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\beta }_i^2}}},`$ (123)
$`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+(\tau )+\stackrel{}{g}(\tau )\stackrel{}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\alpha }_i+{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\beta }_i}{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\beta }_i^2}}},`$ (124)
$`given\stackrel{}{\eta }_+\stackrel{}{g},`$ (125)
$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\tau )\stackrel{}{=}\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\alpha }_i+\tau \sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\beta }_i}{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\beta }_i^2}}},`$ (126)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a(\tau )\stackrel{}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\beta }_i.`$ (127)
Let us add the gauge fixings $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+0`$: their time constancy imply

$`\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_+`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`\{\stackrel{}{\eta }_+,H_D\}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i}{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}}}\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )0,`$ (128)
$``$ $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i}{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}}}0,`$ (129)
$``$ $`L_D|_{\stackrel{}{\eta }_+=0}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_i\sqrt{1\left[\stackrel{}{\lambda }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_a\right]^2}`$ (131)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_i\sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{ab}{\overset{1..N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_a\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_b}.`$
Therefore $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+0`$ is not the searched natural gauge fixing $`\stackrel{}{q}_+0`$ for the separation of the center-of-mass motion. The origin in this gauge is

$$x_s^{(\stackrel{}{\eta }_+)\mu }(T_s)=x_s^\mu (0)+[u^\mu (p_s)+\frac{1}{N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\kappa _{ir}}{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}}ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))]T_s.$$
(132)
If we go to Dirac brackets with respect to $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+0`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$, we get the following Hamiltonian for the relative variables

$$H_M=M_{sys}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sqrt{m_i^2+N\underset{a,b}{\overset{1..N1}{}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\stackrel{}{\pi }_a\stackrel{}{\pi }_b}.$$
(133)
However, it is practically impossible to get the associated Lagrangian $`L_R(\stackrel{}{\rho }_a,\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_a)`$ for the relative motions.

For $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+=0`$ one gets $`\stackrel{}{g}\stackrel{}{=}\frac{1}{N}_{i=1}^N\stackrel{}{\alpha }_i+\frac{\tau }{N}_{i=1}^N\frac{\stackrel{}{\beta }_i}{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\beta }_i^2}}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\stackrel{}{=}\stackrel{}{\alpha }_i\frac{1}{N}_{k=1}^N\stackrel{}{\alpha }_k+\tau (\frac{\stackrel{}{\beta }_i}{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\beta }_i^2}}\frac{1}{N}_{k=1}^N\frac{\stackrel{}{\beta }_k}{\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\beta }_k^2}})`$.

In Section III we will find the natural canonical internal 3-center-of-mass variable $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ (replacing the naive $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+`$) whose vanishing implies $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )=0`$. It will be seen that, unlike in the non-relativistic theory, $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ is not a linear combination of the $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$’s with coefficients depending on the masses, but it is connected to the Møller internal 3-center of energy, in which the masses are replaced by the particle energies.

## III The Internal Relativistic Center-of-Mass Variables on the Wigner Hyperplane

In this Section we will study the internal center of mass variables, while Section IV will be devoted to the external ones.

In the relativistic case of N free scalar particles with positive energy the Hamiltonian kinetic energy is not a quadratic form in the momenta and the Lagrangian form is unknown. The first problem is to separate the global translations: this is the old problem of the definition of a relativistic center of mass ‡\*‡\*‡\*No definition can retain all the properties of the non-relativistic center of mass.. As we have seen in Sections I and II, the rest-frame instant form of dynamics allows to clarify the problem provided one splits of the concept of relativistic center of mass into an external one (a pseudo-4-vector) and an internal one (a Wigner spin 1 3-vector).

The determination of the internal 3-center of mass can be done using the group theoretical methods of Ref. (see also Ref.): given a realization on the phase space of the ten Poincaré generators one can build three 3-position variables only in terms of them, which are: i) a canonical internal center of mass $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ ‡†‡†‡†Or center of spin: the classical analogue of the Newton-Wigner position operator.; ii) a non-canonical internal Møller center of energy $`\stackrel{}{R}_+`$ ; iii) a non-canonical internal Fokker-Pryce center of inertia $`\stackrel{}{y}_+`$ . On Wigner hyperplanes, due to $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$, we will see that they all coincide: $`\stackrel{}{q}_+\stackrel{}{R}_+\stackrel{}{y}_+`$.

Following Ref. we will determine of $`\stackrel{}{R}_+`$, $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$, $`\stackrel{}{y}_+`$ starting from the internal realization (88) of the Poincaré algebra. We get the following Wigner spin 1 3-vectors:

i) The internal Moller 3-center of energy and the associated spin vector

$`\stackrel{}{R}_+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{M_{sys}}}\stackrel{}{K}={\displaystyle \frac{\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i}{_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}}},`$ (134)
$`\stackrel{}{S}_R`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{J}\stackrel{}{R}_+\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+,`$ (138)
$`\{R_+^r,\kappa _+^s\}=\delta ^{rs},\{R_+^r,M_{sys}\}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _+^r}{M_{sys}}},`$
$`\{R_+^r,R_+^s\}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{M_{sys}^2}}ϵ^{rsu}S_R^u,`$
$`\{S_R^r,S_R^s\}=ϵ^{rsu}(S_R^u{\displaystyle \frac{1}{M_{sys}^2}}\stackrel{}{S}_R\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\kappa _+^u),\{S_R^r,M_{sys}\}=0.`$
Let us notice that with the gauge fixing $`\stackrel{}{R}_+0`$ we have

$`\stackrel{}{R}_+0`$ $``$ $`\dot{\stackrel{}{R}}_+\stackrel{}{=}\{\stackrel{}{R}_+,H_D\}=`$ (139)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}}}\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau ){\displaystyle \frac{\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}}{_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}}}\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )0.`$ (140)
Moreover the internal boost generator of Eq.(88) may be rewritten as $`\stackrel{}{K}=M_{sys}\stackrel{}{R}_+`$, so that $`\stackrel{}{R}_+0`$ implies $`\stackrel{}{K}0`$.

ii) The canonical internal 3-center of mass ‡‡‡‡‡‡It satisfies $`\{q_+^r,q_+^s\}=0`$, $`\{q_+^r,\kappa _+^s\}=\delta ^{rs}`$, $`\{J^r,q_+^s\}=ϵ^{rsu}q_+^u`$, $`I_s\stackrel{}{q}_+=\stackrel{}{q}_+`$, $`I_t^{}\stackrel{}{q}_+=\stackrel{}{q}_+`$. and the associated spin vector

$`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{R}_+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{J}\times \stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}}{\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}(M_{sys}+\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2})}}=`$ (141)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{K}}{\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{J}\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}(M_{sys}+\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2})}}+`$ (142)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{K}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{M_{sys}\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}\left(M_{sys}+\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}\right)}},`$ (144)
$`\stackrel{}{R}_+for\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0;\{\stackrel{}{q}_+,M_{sys}\}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{M_{sys}}},`$
$`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{J}\stackrel{}{q}_+\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+={\displaystyle \frac{M_{sys}\stackrel{}{J}}{\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}}}+`$ (146)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{K}\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{J}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}\left(M_{sys}+\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}\right)}}\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}=\stackrel{}{J},`$ (148)
$`\{\stackrel{}{S}_q,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\}=\{\stackrel{}{S}_q,\stackrel{}{q}_+\}=0,\{S_q^r,S_q^s\}=ϵ^{rsu}S_q^u.`$
Let us remark that the scheme A for the internal realization of the Poincaré group contains the canonical pairs $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$, $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$, $`S_q^3`$, $`arctg\frac{S_q^2}{S_q^1}`$, and the two Casimirs invariants $`|\stackrel{}{S}_q|=\sqrt{W^2/\mathrm{\Pi }^2}`$, $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}`$ (see Eq.(164)).

In terms of the original variables one has

$`\stackrel{}{S}_R`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i{\displaystyle \frac{\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}}}=`$ (149)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\times \left[\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}}{_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\right]\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}=\stackrel{}{J},`$ (150)
$`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{R}_+`$ (151)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\left[\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\frac{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}}{_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+)\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\frac{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}}{_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+)\right]}{\sqrt{(_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2})^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}\left(_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}+\sqrt{(_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2})^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}\right)}}`$ (152)
$``$ $`\stackrel{}{R}_+,`$ (153)
$`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{J}\stackrel{}{q}_+\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$ (154)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\left[\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\frac{\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}}{_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+)\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\right]}{\sqrt{(_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2})^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}\left(_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}+\sqrt{(_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2})^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}\right)}}`$ (155)
$``$ $`\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}=\stackrel{}{J},`$ (156)
$`M_{sys}`$ $`=`$ $`H_M={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2},`$ (159)
$`\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}=\sqrt{({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2})^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}.`$
iii) Besides the internal canonical 3-center of mass $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ and the internal non-canonical Møller 3-center of energy, we can define an internal non-canonical Fokker-Pryce center of inertia $`\stackrel{}{y}_+`$

$`\stackrel{}{y}_+`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{q}_++{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{S}_q\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}(M_{sys}+\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2})}}=\stackrel{}{R}_++{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{S}_q\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{M_{sys}\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}}},`$ (160)
$`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{R}_++{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{S}_q\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{M_{sys}(M_{sys}+\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2})}}={\displaystyle \frac{M_{sys}\stackrel{}{R}_++\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}\stackrel{}{y}_+}{M_{sys}+\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}}},`$ (162)
$`\{y_+^r,y_+^s\}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{M_{sys}\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}}}ϵ^{rsu}\left[S_q^u+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\kappa _+^u}{\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}(M_{sys}+\sqrt{M_{sys}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2})}}\right],`$
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{}{q}_+\stackrel{}{R}_+\stackrel{}{y}_+.`$ (164)
Therefore the gauge fixings $`\stackrel{}{q}_+\stackrel{}{R}_+\stackrel{}{y}_+0`$ imply $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )0`$ and force the three internal collective variables to coincide with the origin of the coordinates, which now becomes

$$x_s^{(\stackrel{}{q}_+)\mu }(T_s)=x_s^\mu (0)+u^\mu (p_s)T_s.$$
(165)
By adding the gauge fixings $`\stackrel{}{\chi }=\stackrel{}{q}_+\stackrel{}{R}_+\stackrel{}{y}_+0`$, it can be shown that the origin $`x_s^{(\mu )}(\tau )`$ becomes simultaneously the Dixon center of mass of an extended object and both the Pirani and Tulczyjew centroids (the Dixon multipoles for the N-body problem on the Wigner hyperplane will be studied in Ref.).

We need now a canonical transformation bringing from the basis $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$, to a new canonical basis $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(0)`$, $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{q,a}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q,a}`$, in which $`\stackrel{}{S}_q=_{a=1}^{N1}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{q,a}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{q,a}`$:

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{}{q}_+\hfill & \stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\hfill & \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill \end{array}$$
(166)
Let us remark that this is not a point transformation: the relativistic internal center of mass $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$, realizing the effective separation of the center of mass from the relative motions in the kinetic energy, is momentum dependent.

The canonical transformation (165) will be studied in Section V by using the method of Gartenhaus-Schwartz as delineated in Ref. (see Refs. for the N=2 case).

Let us finally consider the non-relativistic limit of the Lagrangian of Eq.(119) ‡§‡§‡§Here $`\tau =t`$, with $`t`$ the absolute Newton time; for the sake of simplicity we shall use the same notation for functions of $`\tau `$ and $`t`$; having $`c=1`$ the non-relativistic limit $`c\mathrm{}`$ is done by considering $`velocities<<1`$ and $`momenta<<m`$.

$`L_D`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_i\sqrt{1(\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(\tau )+\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau ))^2}_c\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_i+L_{Dnr},`$ (167)
$`L_{Dnr}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_i}{2}}(\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i+\stackrel{}{\lambda })^2(t),S_{Dnr}={\displaystyle 𝑑tL_{Dnr}(t)},`$ (168)
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\tau )`$ $`_c\mathrm{}`$ $`\stackrel{}{k}_i^{^{}}(t)+O(c^2),`$ (170)
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^{^{}}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L_{Dnr}(t)}{\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(t)}}=m_i(\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i+\stackrel{}{\lambda })(t),`$ (171)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_\lambda (t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L_{Dnr}(t)}{\dot{\stackrel{}{\lambda }}(t)}}=0,`$ (172)
$`H_{c,nr}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_\lambda \dot{\stackrel{}{\lambda }}+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^{^{}}\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_iL_{Dnr}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^{{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}{2m_i}}\stackrel{}{\lambda }\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^{^{}},\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^{^{}}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^{^{}},`$ (174)
$`H_{Dnr}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^{{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}(t)}{2m_i}}\stackrel{}{\lambda }(t)\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^{^{}}(t)+\stackrel{}{\mu }(t)\stackrel{}{\pi }_\lambda (t),`$ (175)
$`\dot{\stackrel{}{\pi }}_\lambda (t)`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^{^{}}0,(nonrelativisticrestframe).`$ (176)
The Lagrangian $`L_{Dnr}`$ has been used in Ref. \[see its Eq.(2.1)\] to describe the relative motions in the non-relativistic rest frame. In the non-relativistic limit $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ tends the the non-relativistic center of mass $`\stackrel{}{q}_{nr}=\frac{_{i=1}^Nm_i\stackrel{}{\eta }_i}{_{i=1}^Nm_i}`$.

In conclusion, the non-relativistic Abelian translation symmetry generating the non-relativistic Noether constants $`\stackrel{}{P}=const.`$ is splitted at the relativistic level into the two following symmetries: i) the external Abelian translation symmetry whose Noether constants of motion are $`\stackrel{}{p}_s=ϵ_s\stackrel{}{k}_sM_{sys}\stackrel{}{k}_s=const.`$ (its conjugate variable is the external 3-center of mass $`\stackrel{}{z}_s`$); ii) the internal Abelian gauge symmetry generating the three first class constraints $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$ (the rest-frame conditions) inside the Wigner hyperplane (its conjugate gauge variable is the internal 3-center of mass $`\stackrel{}{q}_+\stackrel{}{R}_+\stackrel{}{y}_+`$), whose non-relativistic counterpart would be the non-relativistic rest-frame conditions $`\stackrel{}{P}0`$.

## IV The External Center-of-Mass Variables on the Wigner Hyperplane.

Let us study now the localization on the Wigner hyperplane of the external center-of-mass variables. Let us remember that the external canonical non-covariant point of coordinates

$$\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )=(\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o(\tau );\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s(\tau ))=z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{~}{\stackrel{}{\sigma }})=x_s^\mu (\tau )\frac{1}{ϵ_s(p_s^o+ϵ_s)}\left[p_{s\nu }S_s^{\nu \mu }+ϵ_s(S_s^{o\mu }S_s^{o\nu }\frac{p_{s\nu }p_s^\mu }{ϵ_s^2})\right],$$
(177)
lies in the Wigner hyperplane $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=x_s^\mu (\tau )+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\sigma ^r`$ at some 3-position $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }^r`$, like the true coordinate origin $`x_s^\mu (\tau )=z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{0})`$, because $`p_s\stackrel{~}{x}_s=p_sx_s`$, see Ref..

Like in Eqs.(138), (148) and (164) one can build three external 3-variables, the canonical $`\stackrel{}{q}_s`$, the Moller $`\stackrel{}{R}_s`$ and the Fokker-Pryce $`\stackrel{}{Y}_s`$ by using the rest-frame realization of the Poincaré algebra given in Eqs.(81)

$`\stackrel{}{R}_s`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p_s^o}}\stackrel{}{K}_s=(\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_s}{p_s^o}}\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o){\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s}{p_s^o(p_s^o+ϵ_s)}},`$ (178)
$`\stackrel{}{q}_s`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_s}{p_s^o}}\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}}=\stackrel{}{R}_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s}{p_s^o(p_s^o+ϵ_s)}}={\displaystyle \frac{p_s^o\stackrel{}{R}_s+ϵ_s\stackrel{}{Y}_s}{p_s^o+ϵ_s}},`$ (179)
$`\stackrel{}{Y}_s`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{q}_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s}{ϵ_s(p_s^o+ϵ_s)}}=\stackrel{}{R}_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s}{p_s^oϵ_s}},`$ (186)
$`\{R_s^r,R_s^s\}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(p_s^o)^2}}ϵ^{rsu}\mathrm{\Omega }_s^u,\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_s=\stackrel{}{J}_s\stackrel{}{R}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s,`$
$`\{q_s^r,q_s^s\}=0,`$
$`\{Y_s^r,Y_s^s\}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ_sp_s^o}}ϵ^{rsu}\left[\overline{S}_s^u+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\stackrel{}{p}_sp_s^u}{ϵ_s(p_s^o+ϵ_s)}}\right],`$
$`\stackrel{}{p}_s\stackrel{}{q}_s`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{p}_s\stackrel{}{R}_s=\stackrel{}{p}_s\stackrel{}{Y}_s=\stackrel{}{k}_s\stackrel{}{z}_s,`$ (188)
$`\stackrel{}{p}_s=0`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{}{q}_s=\stackrel{}{Y}_s=\stackrel{}{R}_s,`$ (190)
with the same velocity and coinciding in the Lorentz rest frame where $`\stackrel{}{p}_s^\mu =ϵ_s(1;\stackrel{}{0})`$

We can now try to construct the following three external 4-positions (all located on the Wigner hyperplane): i) the external canonical non-covariant 4-center of mass $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$; ii) the external non-canonical and non-covariant Møller 4-center of energy $`R_s^\mu `$; iii) the external covariant non-canonical Fokker-Pryce 4-center of inertia $`Y_s^\mu `$ ‡¶‡¶‡¶When there are the gauge fixings $`\stackrel{}{q}_+0`$ it will be shown that it also coincides with the origin $`x_s^\mu `$..

In Ref. in a one-time framework without constraints and at a fixed time, it is shown that the 3-vector $`\stackrel{}{Y}_s`$ (but not $`\stackrel{}{q}_s`$ and $`\stackrel{}{R}_s`$) satisfies the condition $`\{K_s^r,Y_s^s\}=\frac{1}{c^2}Y_s^r\{Y_s^s,p_s^o\}`$ for being the space component of a 4-vector $`Y_s^\mu `$. In the enlarged canonical treatment including time variables, it is not clear which are the time components to be added to $`\stackrel{}{q}_s`$, $`\stackrel{}{R}_s`$, $`\stackrel{}{Y}_s`$, to rebuild 4-dimensional quantities $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$, $`R_s^\mu `$, $`Y_s^\mu `$, in an arbitrary Lorentz frame $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, in which the origin of the Wigner hyperplane is the 4-vector $`x_s^\mu =(x_s^o;\stackrel{}{x}_s)`$. We have from Eq.(63)

$`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`(\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o(\tau );\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s(\tau ))=x_s^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ_s(p_s^o+ϵ_s)}}\left[p_{s\nu }S_s^{\nu \mu }+ϵ_s(S_s^{o\mu }S_s^{o\nu }{\displaystyle \frac{p_{s\nu }p_s^\mu }{ϵ_s^2}})\right],p_s^\mu ,`$ (191)
$`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{1+\stackrel{}{k}_s^2}(T_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_s\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}})=\sqrt{1+\stackrel{}{k}_s^2}(T_s+\stackrel{}{k}_s\stackrel{}{q}_s)x_s^0,p_s^o=ϵ_s\sqrt{1+\stackrel{}{k}_s^2},`$ (192)
$`\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}}+(T_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_s\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}})\stackrel{}{k}_s=\stackrel{}{q}_s+(T_s+\stackrel{}{k}_s\stackrel{}{q}_s)\stackrel{}{k}_s,\stackrel{}{p}_s=ϵ_s\stackrel{}{k}_s.`$ (193)
for the non-covariant (frame-dependent) canonical 4-center of mass and its conjugate momentum.

Each Wigner hyperplane intersects the worldline of the arbitrary origin 4-vector $`x_s^\mu (\tau )=z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{0})`$ in $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }=0`$, the pseudo worldline of $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )=z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{~}{\stackrel{}{\sigma }})`$ in some $`\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{\sigma }}`$ and the worldline of the Fokker-Pryce 4-vector $`Y_s^\mu (\tau )=z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }_Y)`$ in some $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_Y`$; one also has $`R_s^\mu =z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }_R)`$. Since we have $`T_s=u(p_s)x_s=u(p_s)\stackrel{~}{x}_s\tau `$ on the Wigner hyperplane labelled by $`\tau `$, we require that also $`Y_s^\mu `$, $`R_s^\mu `$ have time components such that they too satisfy $`u(p_s)Y_s=u(p_s)R_s=T_s\tau `$. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$, $`Y_s^\mu `$ and $`R_s^\mu `$ satisfy the following equations consistently with Eqs.(190), (193)

$`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`(\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o;\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}_s)=(\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o;\stackrel{}{q}_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_s}{p_s^o}}\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o)=`$ (194)
$`=`$ $`(\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o;{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}}+(T_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_s\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}})\stackrel{}{k}_s)=x_s^\mu +ϵ_u^\mu (u(p_s))\stackrel{~}{\sigma }^u,`$ (195)
$`Y_s^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`(\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o;\stackrel{}{Y}_s)=`$ (197)
$`=`$ $`(\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o;{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ_s}}[\stackrel{}{z}_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s}{ϵ_s[1+u^o(p_s)]}}]+(T_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_s\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}})\stackrel{}{k}_s)=`$ (198)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu +\eta _r^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s)^r}{ϵ_s[1+u^o(p_s)]}}=`$ (199)
$`=`$ $`x_s^\mu +ϵ_u^\mu (u(p_s))\sigma _Y^u,`$ (200)
$`R_s^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`(\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o;\stackrel{}{R}_s)=`$ (202)
$`=`$ $`(\stackrel{~}{x}_s^o;{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ_s}}[\stackrel{}{z}_s{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s}{ϵ_su^o(p_s)[1+u^o(p_s)]}}]+(T_s+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_s\stackrel{}{z}_s}{ϵ_s}})\stackrel{}{k}_s)=`$ (203)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu \eta _r^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s)^r}{ϵ_su^o(p_s)[1+u^o(p_s)]}}=`$ (204)
$`=`$ $`x_s^\mu +ϵ_u^\mu (u(p_s))\sigma _R^u,`$ (205)
$`T_s`$ $`=`$ $`u(p_s)x_s=u(p_s)\stackrel{~}{x}_s=u(p_s)Y_s=u(p_s)R_s,`$ (207)
$`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }^r`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_{r\mu }(u(p_s))[x_s^\mu \stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu ]={\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_{r\mu }(u(p_s))[u_\nu (p_s)S_s^{\nu \mu }+S_s^{o\mu }]}{[1+u^o(p_s)]}}=`$ (209)
$`=`$ $`\overline{S}_s^{\tau r}+{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{S}_s^{rs}p_s^s}{ϵ_s[1+u^o(p_s)]}}=ϵ_sR_+^r+{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{S}_s^{rs}u^s(p_s)}{1+u^o(p_s)}}`$ (210)
$`\stackrel{\stackrel{}{q}_+0}{}`$ $`ϵ_sq_+^r+{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{S}_s^{rs}u^s(p_s)}{1+u^o(p_s)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{S}_s^{rs}u^s(p_s)}{1+u^o(p_s)}},`$ (211)
$`\sigma _Y^r`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_{r\mu }(u(p_s))[x_s^\mu Y_s^\mu ]=\stackrel{~}{\sigma }^rϵ_{ru}(u(p_s)){\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s)^u}{ϵ_s[1+u^o(p_s)]}}=`$ (212)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }^r+{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{S}_s^{rs}u^s(p_s)}{1+u^o(p_s)}}=ϵ_sR_+^rϵ_sq_+^r\stackrel{\stackrel{}{q}_+0}{}0,`$ (213)
$``$ $`x_s^{(\stackrel{}{q}_+)\mu }(\tau )=Y_s^\mu ,when\stackrel{}{q}_+0,`$ (215)
$`\sigma _R^r`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_{r\mu }(u(p_s))[x_s^\mu R_s^\mu ]=\stackrel{~}{\sigma }^r+ϵ_{ru}(u(p_s)){\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\times \stackrel{}{p}_s)^u}{ϵ_su^o(p_s)[1+u^o(p_s)]}}=`$ (217)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }^r{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{S}_s^{rs}u^s(p_s)}{u^o(p_s)[1+u^o(p_s)]}}=ϵ_sR_+^r+{\displaystyle \frac{[1u^o(p_s)]\overline{S}_s^{rs}u^s(p_s)}{u^o(p_s)[1+u^o(p_s)]}}`$ (218)
$`\stackrel{\stackrel{}{q}_+0}{}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[1u^o(p_s)]\overline{S}_s^{rs}u^s(p_s)}{u^o(p_s)[1+u^o(p_s)]}}.`$ (219)
Therefore, the external Fokker-Pryce non-canonical center of inertia coincides with the origin $`x_s^{(\stackrel{}{q}_+)\mu }(\tau )`$ carrying the internal center of mass.

Let us remember also that the origin $`x_s^\mu (\tau )`$ corresponds to the unique special relativistic center-of-mass-like worldline of Refs..

In each Lorentz frame one has different pseudo-worldlines describing $`R_s^\mu `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$: the 4-canonical center of mass $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$ lies in between $`Y_s^\mu `$ and $`R_s^\mu `$ in every frame. If, in an arbitrary Lorentz frame, we consider the worldline $`Y_s^\mu `$ of the covariant non-canonical Fokker-Pryce 4-center of inertia, the representation in this frame of all the pseudo-worldlines associated with $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$ and $`R_s^\mu `$ fill a worldtube  around $`Y_s^\mu `$ whose invariant radius is $`\rho =\sqrt{ϵW^2}/p^2=|\stackrel{}{S}|/\sqrt{ϵp^2}`$ ($`W^2=ϵp^2\stackrel{}{S}^2`$ is the Pauli-Lubanski Casimir when $`ϵp^2>0`$). This is the classical intrinsic radius of the worldtube, in which the non-covariance effects (the pseudo-worldlines) of the canonical 4-center of mass $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$ are located. See Ref. for a discussion of the properties of the M$`ø`$ller radius. At the quantum level $`\rho `$ becomes the Compton wavelength of the isolated system multiplied its spin eigenvalue $`\sqrt{s(s+1)}`$ , $`\rho \widehat{\rho }=\sqrt{s(s+1)}\mathrm{}/M=\sqrt{s(s+1)}\lambda _M`$ with $`M=\sqrt{ϵp^2}`$ the invariant mass and $`\lambda _M=\mathrm{}/M`$ its Compton wavelength. Therefore, the criticism to classical relativistic physics, based on quantum pair production, concerns the testing of distances where, due to the Lorentz signature of spacetime, one has intrinsic classical covariance problems: it is impossible to localize the canonical 4-center of mass $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$ adapted to the first class constraints of the system (also named Pryce center of mass and having the same covariance of the Newton-Wigner position operator) in a frame independent way.

Let us remember  that $`\rho `$ is also a remnant of the energy conditions of general relativity in flat Minkowski spacetime: since the M$`ø`$ller non-canonical, non-covariant 4-center of energy $`R^\mu `$ has its non-covariance (its pseudo-worldlines) localized inside the same worldtube with radius $`\rho `$ (actually the latter was discovered in this way) , it turns out that for an extended relativistic system with the material radius smaller of its intrinsic radius $`\rho `$ one has: i) its peripheral rotation velocity can exceed the velocity of light; ii) its classical energy density cannot be positive definite everywhere in every frame.

## V The Internal Relative Variables from the Gartenhaus-Schwartz Transformation.

Given $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$, we must now find the canonical basis $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$, $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$ of Eq.(166).

We shall use the classical analog of the Gartenhaus-Schwartz singular transformation  following the scheme used in Ref. to find the center-of-mass subspace of phase space defined by $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+=0`$ ‡∥‡∥‡∥The singular limit $`\alpha \mathrm{}`$ is very similar to a contraction of a Lie algebra.

$`U(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\alpha \{.,\stackrel{}{q}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\}},`$ (220)
$`\stackrel{}{q}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}{_{k=1}^N\sqrt{m_k^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k^2}}}\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{K},\stackrel{}{n}_+={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}},\stackrel{}{K}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i,`$ (221)
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`U(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+=e^\alpha \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+_\alpha \mathrm{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},`$ (223)
$`\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`U(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+=e^\alpha \stackrel{}{q}_+_\alpha \mathrm{}\mathrm{},`$ (225)
$`U(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+=e^\alpha \stackrel{}{q}_+_\alpha \mathrm{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},`$
$``$ $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )=\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{q}_+,\stackrel{}{n}_+(\alpha )=\stackrel{}{n}_+.`$ (227)
Therefore, $`lim_\alpha \mathrm{}U(\alpha )`$ can only be applied to the set of functions on phase space which have vanishing Poisson bracket with $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$, namely to $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$ \[or $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}_{i=1}^N\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$\] and to $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a=\sqrt{N}_{i=1}^N\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$ of Eq.(105).

Since, for finite $`\alpha `$, $`U(\alpha )`$ is a canonical transformation, the Poisson brackets are preserved \[$`\{f(\alpha ),g(\alpha )\}=U(\alpha )\{f,g\}`$\] even in the limit $`\alpha \mathrm{}`$.

Let $`f=f(\stackrel{}{\eta }_i,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i)`$ have zero Poisson bracket with $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$, $`\{f,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\}=0`$, and let be $`f(\alpha )=U(\alpha )f`$. Then, we have

$$\{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+,f(\alpha )\}=e^\alpha \{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha ),f(\alpha )\}=e^\alpha \left(U(\alpha )\{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+,f\}\right)=0.$$
(228)
Moreover, since the Jacobi identity $`\{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+,\{\stackrel{}{q}_+,f\}\}+\{f,\{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+,\stackrel{}{q}_+\}\}+\{\stackrel{}{q}_+,\{f,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\}\}0`$ implies $`\{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+,\{\stackrel{}{q}_+,f\}\}0`$ \[namely also $`\{\stackrel{}{q}_+,f\}`$ has zero Poisson bracket with $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$ if $`\{f,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\}=0`$, so that $`U(\alpha )\{\stackrel{}{q}_+,f\}`$ has a well defined limit for $`\alpha \mathrm{}`$\] one also has

$$\{\stackrel{}{q}_+,f(\alpha )\}=e^\alpha \{\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha ),f(\alpha )\}=e^\alpha \left(U(\alpha )\{\stackrel{}{q}_+,f\}\right)_\alpha \mathrm{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}.$$
(229)
Moreover, we have

$$\frac{df(\alpha )}{d\alpha }=\{f(\alpha ),\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{q}_+\}=\{f(\alpha ),\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )\}.$$
(230)
Therefore, the relative variables $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}_{i=1}^N\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a=\sqrt{N}_{i=1}^N\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$, which commute with $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$ \[see Eq.(105)\], satisfy

$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`U(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\pi }_a_\alpha \mathrm{}\stackrel{}{\pi }_a(\mathrm{})\stackrel{def}{=}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa},`$ (231)
$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`U(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\rho }_a_\alpha \mathrm{}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\mathrm{})\stackrel{def}{=}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa},`$ (232)
with $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$, pairs of canonical variables having zero Poisson bracket with $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$.

In this way one gets the searched canonical transformation (166).

Let us first evaluate $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$ following the scheme of Ref. . From Eq.(230) we get

$$\frac{d\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )}{d\alpha }=\{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha ),\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )\}=\frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}H_i(\alpha ),$$
(233)
with the notations

$`M_{sys}`$ $`=`$ $`H_M={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}H_i,H_M(\alpha )={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}H_i(\alpha )_\alpha \mathrm{}H_M(\mathrm{})\stackrel{def}{=}H_{(rel)},`$ (234)
$`H_i`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2},H_i(\alpha )=\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2(\alpha )}_\alpha \mathrm{}H_i(\mathrm{})\stackrel{def}{=}H_{(rel)i},`$ (235)
$`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ $`=`$ $`H_M^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2H_M^2.`$ (236)
From $`m_i^2=H_i^2(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2(\alpha )`$, we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dH_i(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}H_i(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha ),`$ (237)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dH_i(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}=\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha ){\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}},`$ (238)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dH_M(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dH_i(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}},`$ (239)
$``$ $`\mathrm{\Pi }=H_M^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2=H_M^2(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2(\alpha )_\alpha \mathrm{}H_M^2(\mathrm{})=H_{(rel)}^2,`$ (241)
$`or{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Pi }}{d\alpha }}=0.`$
Let us now introduce $`\theta (\alpha )`$ such that \[$`ch^2\theta (\alpha )sh^2\theta (\alpha )=1`$ also for $`\alpha \mathrm{}`$\]

$`sh\theta (\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|H_M(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|H_M}{\mathrm{\Pi }}}_\alpha \mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}},`$ (242)
$`ch\theta (\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_MH_M(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+||\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}{\mathrm{\Pi }}}_\alpha \mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{H_M}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}},`$ (243)
$`\theta (\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`tanh^1{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}{H_M}}tanh^1{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}{H_M(\alpha )}}_{\alpha 0}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},_\alpha \mathrm{}tanh^1{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}{H_M}}.`$ (245)
Since we have

$$\frac{d\theta (\alpha )}{d\alpha }=\frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}{H_M(\alpha )},\frac{d\stackrel{}{n}_+(\alpha )}{d\alpha }=0\stackrel{}{n}_+(\alpha )=\stackrel{}{n}_+,$$
(246)
we arrive at the coupled equations

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )}{d\theta }}`$ $`=`$ $`H_i(\alpha )\stackrel{}{n}_+,`$ (247)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dH_i(\alpha )}{d\theta }}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )\stackrel{}{n}_+,`$ (248)
whose integration gives

$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i+\left([ch\theta (\alpha )1]\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_ish\theta (\alpha )H_i\right)\stackrel{}{n}_+`$ (249)
$`_\alpha \mathrm{}`$ $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\mathrm{})=\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i+\left[({\displaystyle \frac{H_M}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}1)\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}H_i\right]\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i,`$ (250)
$`H_i(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2(\alpha )}=ch\theta (\alpha )H_ish\theta (\alpha )\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$ (252)
$`_\alpha \mathrm{}`$ $`H_i(\mathrm{})=\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2(\mathrm{})}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}(H_MH_i\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i)H_i,`$ (253)
$``$ $`H_i=\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}=H_i(\alpha )ch\theta (\alpha )+\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )sh\theta (\alpha )=`$ (258)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}[H_i(\mathrm{})H_M+\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\mathrm{})|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|H_i(\mathrm{}),`$
$`with{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}H_i(\mathrm{})=H_M(\mathrm{})=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}\stackrel{def}{=}H_{(rel)},`$
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )+[ch\theta (\alpha )1]\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )\stackrel{}{n}_++sh\theta (\alpha )H_i(\alpha ).`$ (260)
Therefore, we get

$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha ),`$ (261)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$ $`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a(\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\mathrm{})=`$ (263)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{n}_+}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}[(H_M\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\pi }_a|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|H_a]=`$ (264)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_a{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{\sqrt{H_M^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}}}[H_a{\displaystyle \frac{H_M\sqrt{H_M^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}}{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\pi }_a]\stackrel{}{\pi }_a,`$ (265)
$`H_a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}H_i,`$ (267)
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\mathrm{})`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa},`$ (269)
$`H_{(rel)i}`$ $`=`$ $`H_i(\mathrm{})=\sqrt{m_i^2+N{\displaystyle \underset{ab}{\overset{1..N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}},`$ (270)
$`M_{sys}`$ $`=`$ $`H_M={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}H_i=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}H_{(rel)}=H_M(\mathrm{})=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}=`$ (271)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}H_i(\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+N{\displaystyle \underset{ab}{\overset{1..N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}}.`$ (272)
Let us now evaluate $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$.

Let us first remark that the following two quantities are invariant under the canonical transformation $`U(\alpha )`$:

$`I_i^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`H_MH_i\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i=H_M(\alpha )H_i(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha ),`$ (274)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dI_i^{(1)}}{d\alpha }}=0,`$
$`I^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{K}}{H_M}}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|(\stackrel{}{n}_+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\eta }_iH_i}{H_M}})={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{K}(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}},`$ (276)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dI^{(2)}}{d\alpha }}=0,`$
and that we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{H_M(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dJ^{(1)}(\alpha )}{d\alpha }},withJ^{(1)}(\alpha )={\displaystyle \frac{sh\theta (\alpha )}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )||\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}},`$ (277)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )}{H_i^2(\alpha )}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{J}_i^{(2)}(\alpha )}{d\theta (\alpha )}},with\stackrel{}{J}_i^{(2)}(\alpha )={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )sh\theta (\alpha )}{H_iH_i(\alpha )}}+(ch\theta (\alpha )1){\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{n}_+}{H_i}}.`$ (279)
Since we have also

$$n_+^r\frac{}{\kappa _i^r}n_+^s=\frac{n_+^r}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}(\delta ^{rs}n_+^rn_+^s)=0,$$
(280)
we get preliminarly, for $`\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\alpha }}\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`\{\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha ),\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )\}=`$ (281)
$`=`$ $`n_+^r{\displaystyle \frac{}{k_i^r(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{K}(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}{H_M(\alpha )}}=n_+^rn_+^s{\displaystyle \frac{}{k_i^r(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|K^s(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}}.`$ (282)
Then, since

$`n_+^r{\displaystyle \frac{}{k_i^r(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}{H_M(\alpha )}}={\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(1)}}{H_M^2(\alpha )H_i(\alpha )}},`$ (283)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{k_i^r(\alpha )}}K^s(\alpha )={\displaystyle \frac{k_i^r(\alpha )\eta _i^s(\alpha )}{H_i(\alpha )}},`$ (284)
we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\alpha }}\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{I^{(2)}I_i^{(1)}}{H_M(\alpha )H_i(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )}{H_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}{H_M(\alpha )}}=`$ (285)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )}{H_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{dH_i(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(1)}I^{(2)}}{H_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{dJ^{(1)}(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}.`$ (286)
These equations have the solution

$`\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_i}{H_i(\alpha )}}\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(1)}I^{(2)}}{H_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{sh\theta (\alpha )}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )||\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}}=`$ (287)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_i}{H_i(\alpha )}}\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i{\displaystyle \frac{I^{(2)}}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}}(e^\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{H_i}{H_i(\alpha )}}).`$ (288)
For $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$ we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\eta _i^r(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\eta _i^r(\alpha ),\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )\}=n_+^s{\displaystyle \frac{}{k_i^r(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|K^s(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}}=`$ (289)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha ){\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|k_i^r(\alpha )}{H_i(\alpha )H_M(\alpha )}}+`$ (290)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}H_j(\alpha )\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_j(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|k_i^r(\alpha )}{H_i(\alpha )H_M(\alpha )}}n_+^r\right].`$ (291)
By putting Eqs.(288) in Eq.(291) we get the equations determining $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$.

Instead of integrating these equations, let us study the equations for $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )=\sqrt{N}_{i=1}^N\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$, since for interactions depending on $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\stackrel{}{\eta }_j`$ we have $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\eta }_j(\alpha )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}_{a=1}^{N1}(\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{aj})\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )`$. Eqs.(291) and (288) imply

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\rho }_b{\displaystyle \frac{H_iH_j}{H_M}}\gamma _{aj}(\gamma _{bi}\gamma _{bj}){\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_j(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}{H_j^2(\alpha )H_M(\alpha )}},`$ (293)
$``$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )}{d\theta (\alpha )}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\rho }_b{\displaystyle \frac{H_iH_j}{H_M}}\gamma _{aj}(\gamma _{bi}\gamma _{bj}){\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{J}_j^{(2)}(\alpha )}{d\theta (\alpha )}},`$ (294)
whose solution is

$$\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )=\stackrel{}{\rho }_a\underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\rho }_b\frac{H_iH_j}{H_M}\gamma _{aj}(\gamma _{bi}\gamma _{bj})\stackrel{}{J}_j^{(2)}(\alpha ).$$
(295)
Foe $`\alpha \mathrm{}`$ we get

$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$ $`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\mathrm{})=\stackrel{}{\rho }_a`$ (296)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{aj}(\gamma _{bi}\gamma _{bj}){\displaystyle \frac{H_i}{H_M}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_j(\mathrm{})}{H_j(\mathrm{})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}+({\displaystyle \frac{H_M}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}1)\stackrel{}{n}_+\right]\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\rho }_b=`$ (297)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a{\displaystyle \underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{aj}(\gamma _{bi}\gamma _{bj}){\displaystyle \frac{H_i}{H_M}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_j(\mathrm{})}{H_j(\mathrm{})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\rho }_b\stackrel{}{\rho }_a.`$ (298)
One can check that for N=2 and $`\gamma _1=\gamma _2=1/\sqrt{2}`$ one reobtains the results of Ref..

Let us now consider the spin vector $`\stackrel{}{S}_q=\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s\stackrel{}{q}_+\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+=[\stackrel{}{\eta }_+\stackrel{}{q}_+]\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_++_{a=1}^{N1}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_a`$. For arbitrary $`\alpha `$ we have $`\stackrel{}{S}_q(\alpha )=_{a=1}^{N1}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_a(\alpha )+[\stackrel{}{\eta }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )]\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )`$ and, since $`\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )`$ is a scalar, $`\{\stackrel{}{S}_q(\alpha ),\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\}=0`$. Since $`lim_\alpha \mathrm{}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )=0`$, we get

$$\stackrel{}{S}_q(\alpha )_\alpha \mathrm{}\stackrel{}{S}_q=\underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa},$$
(299)
if we can show that $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )_\alpha \mathrm{}finitevalue`$. But, since the boost generator may be written as

$`\stackrel{}{K}(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )H_i(\alpha )=\stackrel{}{\eta }_+(\alpha )H_M(\alpha )+{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )H_a(\alpha ),`$ (301)
$`H_a(\alpha )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}H_i(\alpha ),`$
we get

$`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\underset{a=1}{\overset{N}{}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )H_a(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\times \left(\underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_a(\alpha )\right)}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}+H_M)}}+`$ (302)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\times \left(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\times \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )H_a(\alpha )\right)}{H_M(\alpha )\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}+H_M)}}_\alpha \mathrm{}`$ (304)
$`_\alpha \mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\mathrm{})H_a(\mathrm{})=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\sqrt{m_i^2+N{\displaystyle \underset{ab}{\overset{1..N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}},`$ (306)
$``$
$`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a}{\sqrt{(_{i=1}^N\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2})^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}+`$ (307)
$`+`$ $`(terms_\alpha \mathrm{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},i.e.0dueto\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0),`$ (308)
to be compared with Eq.(159).

In this way we have obtained the canonical transformation (166)

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{}{q}_+\hfill & \stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\hfill & \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill \end{array}$$
(309)
even if it is not known how to get the inverse canonical transformation.

When we add the gauge fixings $`\stackrel{}{q}_+0`$ for $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$ and we go to Dirac brackets, we get

$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a,\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_a,\stackrel{}{S}_q={\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{def}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_a,`$ (310)
$`H_{(rel)}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}=H_M(\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+N{\displaystyle \underset{ab}{\overset{1..N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}}M_{sys}=H_M.`$ (312)
See Appendix C for the case of spinning particles.

## VI Relativistic Rotational Kinematics.

All the results of the previous Sections are needed to get the separation of the internal center-of-mass degrees of freedom in the relativistic theory: this has been accomplished by adding the gauge fixings $`\stackrel{}{q}_+0`$ to the rest-frame constraints $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$ and by going to Dirac brackets. We are left with the relative canonical variables $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_a`$ and the Hamiltonian

$$H_{(rel)}=H_M(\mathrm{})=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sqrt{m_i^2+N\underset{ab}{\overset{1..N1}{}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}}M_{sys},$$
(313)
which replaces to the non-relativistic one $`H_{rel,nr}=\frac{1}{2}_{a,b=1}^{N1}k_{ab}^1[m_i,\gamma _{ai}]\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}`$ of Eq.(2.9) of Ref. for $`c\mathrm{}`$.

Let us remark that in the Hamiltonian for the relative motions in the rest frame instant form, each square root identifies a $`(N1)\times (N1)`$ matrix $`K_{(i)ab}^1=N\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}=K_{(i)ba}^1`$ ‡\**‡\**‡\**At the non-relativistic level there is only one such matrix at the Hamiltonian level, i.e. $`k_{ab}^1=_{i=1}^N\frac{1}{m_i}K_{(i)ab}^1`$, see Eq.(2.9) of Ref... The existence of relativistic normal Jacobi coordinates would require the simultaneous diagonalization of these N matrices. But this is impossible because

$$[K_{(i)}^1,K_{(j)}^1]_{ab}=G_{(ij)ab}=G_{(ij)ba}=G_{(ji)ab},$$
(314)
with $`G_{(ij)ab}=N[\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bj}\gamma _{aj}\gamma _{bi}]`$. There are $`\frac{1}{2}N(N1)`$ matrices $`G_{ij}`$, each one with $`\frac{1}{2}(N1)(N2)`$ independent elements. Therefore, the conditions $`G_{(ij)ab}=0`$ are $`\frac{1}{4}N(N1)^2(N2)`$ conditions and we have only $`\frac{1}{2}(N1)(N2)`$ free parameters in the $`\gamma _{ai}`$ ‡††‡††‡††For N=3, there are 3 conditions and only 1 parameter; for N=4, 18 conditions and 3 parameters..

Therefore, it is impossible to diagonalize simultaneously the N quadratic forms under the square roots: there are no relativistic normal Jacobi coordinates and no definition of reduced masses and tensors of inertia.

To find the analogue of $`L_{rel,nr}=\frac{1}{2}_{a,b=1}^{N1}k_{ab}[m_i,\gamma _{ai}]\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_a\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_b`$ (Eq.(2.9) of Ref.), we should perform an inverse Legendre transformation. The first half of Hamilton equations gives

$`\dot{\rho }_{qa}^r`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`\{\rho _{qa}^r,H_{(rel)}\}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{N\gamma _{ai}\underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\gamma _{bi}\pi _{qb}^r}{\sqrt{m_i^2+N_{ab}^{1..N1}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}}}},`$ (317)
$``$
$`\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qa}\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qb}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{\overset{1..N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{N\gamma _{ai}\underset{e=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\gamma _{ei}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qe}}{\sqrt{m_i^2+N_{a_1b_1}^{1..N1}\gamma _{a_1i}\gamma _{b_1i}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa_1}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb_1}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{N\gamma _{bj}\underset{f=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\gamma _{fj}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qf}}{\sqrt{m_j^2+N_{a_2b_2}^{1..N1}\gamma _{a_2j}\gamma _{b_2j}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa_2}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb_2}}}}.`$ (319)
To get $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}`$ in terms of $`\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qa}\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qb}`$ we should solve higher order algebraic equations. As already pointed out, this implies that $`L_{rel}(\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa},\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qa})=_{a=1}^{N1}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qa}H`$ is a hyperelliptic function already in the free case. This in turn means that, unlike the non-relativistic case, it is not possible to define either an Euclidean or a Riemannian metric on the space of velocities from the kinetic energy (see Ref.). Therefore we cannot visualize the Lagrangian dynamics as in the non-relativistic case. The form of the canonical momenta

$$\pi _{qa}^r=\frac{L_{rel}}{\dot{\rho }_{qa}^r}=\underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}f_{ab}(\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qc}\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qd})\dot{\rho }_{qb}^r,$$
(321)
can only be given in implicit form.

Moreover, we cannot evaluate the restrictions on the relative velocities $`\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qa}(\tau )`$ resulting from the existence of the limiting light velocity $`c`$ ‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡For the absolute velocities $`\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(\tau )`$ we have $`|\dot{\stackrel{}{\eta }}_i(\tau )|c=1`$..

If we try to follow the non-relativistic pattern of the static orientation-shape bundle approach (see Ref.), we get§\*§\*§\*The first line defines the body frame components $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qa}^r`$ of the vectors $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$ in this approach ($`\theta ^\alpha `$ are Euler angles). The body frame components of the relative velocities are the $`\stackrel{ˇ}{v}_{qa}^r`$ of the second line, while those of the spin and of the angular velocity are $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r`$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^r`$ respectively.

$`\rho _{qa}^r`$ $`=`$ $`R^{rs}(\theta ^\alpha )\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qa}^s(q),`$ (322)
$`\dot{\rho }_{qa}^r`$ $`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`R^{rs}(\theta ^\alpha )\stackrel{ˇ}{v}_{qa}^s,\stackrel{}{v}_{qa}=\stackrel{}{\omega }\times \stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}}{q^\mu }}\dot{q}^\mu ,`$ (323)
$`\dot{\rho }_{qa}^r`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`\{\rho _{qa}^r,H_{rel}\},`$ (325)
$`\pi _{qa}^r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}f_{ab}(\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qc}\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qd})\dot{\rho }_{qb}^r=R^{rs}(\theta ^\alpha )\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }_{qa}^s,`$ (326)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }_{qa}^r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}f_{ab}(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{v}}_{qc}\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{v}}_{qd})\stackrel{ˇ}{v}_{qb}^r,`$ (327)
$`S_q^r`$ $`=`$ $`R^{rs}(\theta ^\alpha )\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s={\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}[\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}]^r,`$ (329)
$`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}=`$ (330)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{ab}{\overset{1\mathrm{}N1}{}}}f_{ab}\left[\left(\stackrel{}{\omega }\times \stackrel{}{\rho }_{qc}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qc}}{q^\mu }}\dot{q}^\mu \right)\left(\stackrel{}{\omega }\times \stackrel{}{\rho }_{qd}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qd}}{q^\mu }}\dot{q}^\mu \right)\right]`$ (332)
$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \left(\stackrel{}{\omega }\times \stackrel{}{\rho }_{qb}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qb}}{q^\mu }}\dot{q}^\mu \right),`$
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{ab}{\overset{1\mathrm{}N1}{}}}f_{ab}\left[\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{(cd)}^{uv}(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^u\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^v+\stackrel{}{\omega }(\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qc}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qd}}{q^\mu }}+\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qd}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qc}}{q^\mu }})\dot{q}^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_c}{q^\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_d}{q^\nu }}\dot{q}^\mu \dot{q}^\nu \right]`$ (334)
$`\left[\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{(ab)}^{rs}(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^s+\stackrel{ˇ}{a}_{(ab)\mu }^r(q)\dot{q}^\mu \right]=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{ab}{\overset{1\mathrm{}N1}{}}}f_{ab}\left[\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{(cd)}^{uv}(q)\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^u+\stackrel{ˇ}{A}_{(cd)\mu }^u(q)\dot{q}^\mu \right)\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^v+\stackrel{ˇ}{A}_{(cd)\nu }^v(q)\dot{q}^\nu \right)\right]`$ (336)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{(ab)}^{rs}(q)\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^s+\stackrel{ˇ}{A}_{(ab)\mu }^s(q)\dot{q}^\mu \right),`$
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{(ab)}^{rs}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qb}\delta ^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qa}^r\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_b^s+\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qb}^r\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qa}^s),`$ (338)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{}^{rs}(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{\omega }},q,m)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{ab}{\overset{1..N1}{}}}f_{ab}(\stackrel{}{v}_{qc}\stackrel{}{v}_{qd})\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{(ab)}^{rs}(q),`$ (339)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{a}_{(ab)\mu }^u(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qb}}{q^\mu }}+\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qb}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}}{q^\mu }}]{}_{}{}^{u}\stackrel{def}{=}\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{(ab)}^{uv}(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{A}_{(ab)\mu }^v(q),`$ (341)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{a}_\mu ^u(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{\omega }},q,m)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{ab}{\overset{1..N1}{}}}f_{ab}(\stackrel{}{v}_{qc}\stackrel{}{v}_{qd})\stackrel{ˇ}{a}_{(ab)\mu }^u(q)=\stackrel{ˇ}{}^{uv}(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{\omega }},q,m)\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_\mu ^v(\stackrel{}{\omega },q,m).`$ (342)
We see that there is no more a linear relation between the body frame spin and angular velocity. By expanding $`f_{ab}(x)`$ in a power series around $`x=0`$, we get that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r`$ is an infinite series with all the powers of the body frame angular velocity. The lowest term is $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_{q(o)}^r=_{a,b}^{N1}f_{ab}(0)\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{(ab)}^{rs}(q)\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^s+\stackrel{ˇ}{A}_{(ab)\mu }^s(q)\dot{q}^\mu \right)`$ with $`f_{ab}(0)`$ playing the role of the non-relativistic $`k_{ab}`$ §†§†§†Recall that its diagonalization defines the Jacobi coordinates and the reduced masses..

Therefore, the tensor of inertia looses a clear identification: only its building blocks $`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{(ab)}^{rs}`$, existing also in the non-relativistic theory, appear in the relativistic construction.

The N=2 case with equal masses $`m_1=m_2=m`$ is the only case in which we can evaluate the relative Lagrangian. We get

$$L_{rel}(\stackrel{}{\rho },\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }})=m\sqrt{4\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}^2}.$$
(343)
Therefore in this case the only existing relative velocity has the bound $`|\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}|2`$.

Let us write $`\stackrel{}{\rho }=\rho \widehat{\rho }`$ with $`\rho =|\stackrel{}{\rho }|`$ and $`\widehat{\rho }=\frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }}{|\stackrel{}{\rho }|}`$. With only one relative variable the three Euler angles $`\theta ^\alpha `$ are redundand: there are only two independent angles, those identifying the position of the unit 3-vector $`\widehat{\rho }`$ on $`S^2`$. We shall use the following parametrization (Euler angles $`\theta ^1=\varphi `$, $`\theta ^2=\theta `$, $`\theta ^3=0`$)

$`\widehat{\rho }^r`$ $`=`$ $`R^{rs}(\theta ,\varphi )\widehat{\rho }_o^s,`$ (345)
$`\widehat{\rho }_o=(0,0,1),(referenceunit\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}3}vector),`$
$`R^{rs}(\theta ,\varphi )`$ $`=`$ $`R_z(\theta )R_y(\varphi )=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}cos\theta cos\varphi & sin\varphi & sin\theta cos\varphi \\ cos\theta sin\varphi & cos\varphi & sin\theta sin\varphi \\ sin\theta & 0& cos\theta \end{array}\right),`$ (352)
$``$
$`\dot{R}^{rs}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{ccc}sin\theta cos\varphi \dot{\theta }& cos\varphi \dot{\varphi }& cos\theta cos\varphi \dot{\theta }sin\theta sin\varphi \dot{\varphi }\\ sin\theta sin\varphi \dot{\theta }+cos\theta cos\varphi \dot{\varphi }& sin\varphi \dot{\varphi }& cos\theta sin\varphi \dot{\theta }+sin\theta cos\varphi \dot{\varphi }\\ cos\theta \dot{\theta }& 0& sin\theta \dot{\theta }\end{array}\right),`$ (357)
$`R^T\dot{R}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& cos\theta \dot{\varphi }& \dot{\theta }\\ cos\theta \dot{\varphi }& 0& sin\theta \dot{\varphi }\\ \dot{\theta }& sin\theta \dot{\varphi }& 0\end{array}\right).`$ (361)
Following the orientation-shape bundle approach, we get the following body frame velocity and angular velocity ($`\rho `$ is the only shape variable in this case)

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{v}^r`$ $`=`$ $`R^{Trs}\dot{\rho }^s=\rho (R^T\dot{R})^{rs}\widehat{\rho }_o^s+\dot{\rho }\widehat{\rho }_o^r=\rho ϵ^{ru3}\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^u+\dot{\rho }\widehat{\rho }_o^r=`$ (362)
$`=`$ $`\rho (\stackrel{}{\omega }\times \widehat{\rho }_o)^r+\dot{\rho }\widehat{\rho }_o^r,`$ (363)
$`\stackrel{}{\omega }`$ $`=`$ $`(\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^1=sin\theta \dot{\varphi },\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^2=\dot{\theta },0),`$ (365)
$`\stackrel{}{v}^2`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )\stackrel{}{\omega }^2+\dot{\rho }^2,`$ (367)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )`$ $`=`$ $`\rho ^2.`$ (369)
The non-relativistic inertia tensor of the dipole $`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{nr}=\mu \rho ^2`$ §‡§‡§‡$`\mu =\frac{m_1m_2}{m_1+m_2}`$ is the reduced mass; see Ref.. is replaced by $`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}=\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{nr}/\mu =\rho ^2`$. The Lagrangian in anholonomic variables become

$$\stackrel{~}{L}(\stackrel{}{\omega },\rho ,\dot{\rho })=m\sqrt{4\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )\stackrel{}{\omega }^2\dot{\rho }^2}.$$
(370)
It is clear that the bound $`|\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}|2`$ put upper bounds on the kinetic energy of both the rotational and vibrational motions.

The canonical momenta are

$`\stackrel{}{S}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{L}}{\stackrel{}{\omega }}}={\displaystyle \frac{m\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )\stackrel{}{\omega }}{\sqrt{4\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )\stackrel{}{\omega }^2\dot{\rho }^2}}},`$ (371)
$`\pi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{L}}{\dot{\rho }}}={\displaystyle \frac{m\dot{\rho }}{\sqrt{4\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )\stackrel{}{\omega }^2\dot{\rho }^2}}}.`$ (372)
The body frame spin is not linear in the body frame angular velocity (only approximately for slow rotations). When $`|\dot{\stackrel{}{\rho }}|`$ varies between $`0`$ and 2 the momenta vary between $`0`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$, namely in phase space there is no bound coming from the limiting light velocity. This shows once more that in special relativity it is convenient to work in the Hamiltonian framework avoiding relative and angular velocities.

Since we have $`\sqrt{4\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )\stackrel{}{\omega }^2\dot{\rho }^2}=\frac{2m}{\sqrt{m^2+\stackrel{ˇ}{I}^1(\rho )\stackrel{}{S}^2+\pi ^2}}`$, the inversion formulas are

$`\stackrel{}{\omega }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{S}}{m\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )}}\sqrt{4\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )\stackrel{}{\omega }^2\dot{\rho }^2}={\displaystyle \frac{2\stackrel{ˇ}{I}^1(\rho )\stackrel{}{S}}{\sqrt{m^2+\stackrel{ˇ}{I}^1(\rho )\stackrel{}{S}^2+\pi ^2}}},`$ (373)
$`\dot{\rho }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{m}}\sqrt{4\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )\stackrel{}{\omega }^2\dot{\rho }^2}={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\sqrt{m^2+\stackrel{ˇ}{I}^1(\rho )\stackrel{}{S}^2+\pi ^2}}}.`$ (374)
On the other hand, the Hamiltonian becomes

$$\stackrel{~}{H}=\pi \dot{\rho }+\stackrel{}{S}\stackrel{}{\omega }\stackrel{~}{L}=2\sqrt{m^2+\stackrel{ˇ}{I}^1(\rho )\stackrel{}{S}^2+\pi ^2}.$$
(375)
Therefore, this special case identifies the following point-canonical transformation followed by a transformation to an anholonomic basis like in the non-relativistic framework

$`\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{}{\rho }\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\pi }_q\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\theta \hfill & \varphi \hfill & \rho \hfill \\ \pi _\theta \hfill & \pi _\varphi \hfill & \pi \hfill \end{array}\stackrel{noncan.}{}\begin{array}{ccc}\theta \hfill & \varphi \hfill & \rho \hfill \\ \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^1\hfill & \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^2\hfill & \pi \hfill \end{array}`$ (382)
$`\rho ^r`$ $`=`$ $`\rho R^{rs}(\theta ,\varphi )\widehat{\rho }_o^s=\rho (sin\theta cos\varphi ,sin\theta sin\varphi ,cos\theta ),`$ (384)
$`\pi _q^r`$ $`=`$ $`R^{rs}(\theta ,\varphi )\stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }_q^s=R^{rs}(\theta ,\varphi ){\displaystyle \frac{m\stackrel{ˇ}{v}^s}{\sqrt{4\stackrel{}{v}^2}}}=R^{rs}(\theta ,\varphi ){\displaystyle \frac{m[\rho \stackrel{}{\omega }\times \widehat{\rho }_o+\dot{\rho }\widehat{\rho }_o]^s}{\sqrt{4\stackrel{ˇ}{I}(\rho )\stackrel{}{\omega }^2\dot{\rho }^2}}}=`$ (386)
$`=`$ $`R^{rs}(\theta ,\varphi )[\rho \stackrel{ˇ}{I}^1(\rho )\stackrel{}{S}\times \widehat{\rho }_o+\pi \widehat{\rho }_o]{}_{}{}^{s}.`$ (387)
In conclusion, due to the absence of a workable Lagrangian approach, we are forced to try to define everything at the Hamiltonian level. In order to get an extension of this results for arbitrary N, we will abandon the static orientation-shape bundle approach and we shall investigate the canonical spin bases as in the non-relativistic case of Ref.. In this approach we have to guess in some way a set of non-point canonical transformations from the canonical variables $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$ to a basis which generalizes the previous result for the N=2 equal mass case.

The non-relativistic non-Abelian rotational symmetry generating the Noether constants of motion $`\stackrel{}{S}=constant`$ is replaced by the internal non-Abelian rotational symmetry generating the constants of motion $`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ inside the Wigner hyperplane with the rest-frame conditions $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$.

## VII Canonical Spin Bases

In this Section we show that the construction of the canonical spin bases with the associated spin frame and evolving dynamical body frames in the relativistic case starting from the relative canonical variables $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$, $`a=1,..,N1`$, is identical to that proposed in Ref. for the non-relativistic case. This happens because the total conserved rest-frame spin is $`\stackrel{}{S}_q=_{a=1}^{N1}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}=_{a=1}^{N1}\stackrel{}{S}_{qa}`$ like in the non-relativistic case and because the construction is based only on the possible spin clusterings which can be obtained from the individual $`\stackrel{}{S}_{qa}`$. Only the Hamiltonian for relative motions is different.

We shall sketch the construction for $`N=2`$, $`N=3`$ and $`N4`$ by referring to Ref. for the relevant calculations.

### A 2-Body Systems.

Let us start from the case N=2, $`i=1,2`$

ηiκiq+ρqκ+πq\begin{minipage}[t]{28.45274pt}
\begin{tabular}[]{|l|}\hline\cr${\vec{\eta}}_{i}$\\
\hline\cr${\vec{\kappa}}_{i}$\\
\hline\cr\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}\ {\longrightarrow\hskip 5.69046pt}\ \begin{minipage}[t]{56.9055pt}
\begin{tabular}[]{|l|l|}\hline\cr${\vec{q}}_{+}$&${\vec{\rho}}_{q}$\\
\hline\cr${\vec{\kappa}}_{+}$&${\vec{\pi}}_{q}$\\
\hline\cr\end{tabular}
\end{minipage} (388)
After the elimination of the internal center-of-mass degrees of freedom with the gauge fixings $`\stackrel{}{q}_+0`$, the rest-frame dynamics of the relative motions is governed by the Hamiltonian

$$H_{(rel)}=\sqrt{m_1^2+\stackrel{}{\pi }_q^2}+\sqrt{m_2^2+\stackrel{}{\pi }_q^2}M_{sys}.$$
(389)
The spin is $`\stackrel{}{S}_q=\stackrel{}{\rho }_q\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_q`$ \[$`S_q=\sqrt{\stackrel{}{S}_q^2}`$\]. Let us define the following decomposition (the notation $`\widehat{R}`$ for the unit vector $`\widehat{\rho }_q`$ is used for comparison with Ref.)

$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_q`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _q\widehat{R},\rho _q=\sqrt{\stackrel{}{\rho }_q^2},\widehat{R}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_q}{\rho _q}}=\widehat{\rho }_q,\widehat{R}^2=1,`$ (390)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_q`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q\widehat{R}{\displaystyle \frac{S_q}{\rho _q}}\widehat{R}\times \widehat{S}_q=\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q\widehat{\rho }_q{\displaystyle \frac{S_q}{\rho _q}}\widehat{\rho }_q\times \widehat{S}_q,`$ (393)
$`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q=\stackrel{}{\pi }_q\widehat{R}=\stackrel{}{\pi }_q\widehat{\rho }_q,\widehat{S}_q={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{S}_q}{S_q}},\widehat{S}_q\widehat{R}=0.`$
The spin frame of $`R^3`$ is given by $`\widehat{S}_q`$, $`\widehat{R}`$, $`\widehat{R}\times \widehat{S}_q`$ with $`\{S_q^i,S_q^j\}=ϵ^{ijk}S_q^k`$, $`\{\widehat{R}^i,\widehat{R}^j\}=0`$, $`\{\widehat{R}^i,S_q^j\}=ϵ^{ijk}\widehat{R}^k`$. The vectors $`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ and $`\widehat{R}`$ are the generators of an E(3) group containing SO(3) as a subgroup.

Let us consider the following canonical transformation adapted to the spin

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{}{\rho }_q\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\pi }_q\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\alpha \hfill & \beta \hfill & \rho _q\hfill \\ S_q\hfill & S^3_q\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\pi }_q\hfill \end{array}$$
(394)
where

$`\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\left(\stackrel{}{\rho }_q\stackrel{}{\pi }_q{\displaystyle \frac{(\rho _q)^2}{\rho _q^3}}\pi _q^3\right),`$ (395)
$`\beta `$ $`=`$ $`tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{S_q^2}{S_q^1}},sin\beta ={\displaystyle \frac{S_q^2}{\sqrt{(S_q)^2(S_q^3)^2}}},cos\beta ={\displaystyle \frac{S_q^1}{\sqrt{(S_q)^2(S_q^3)^2}}}.`$ (397)
We have

$`S_q^1`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{(S_q)^2(S_q^3)^2}cos\beta ,`$ (398)
$`S_q^2`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{(S_q)^2(S_q^3)^2}sin\beta ,`$ (399)
$`S_q^3`$ , (400)
$`\widehat{R}^1`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\rho }_q^1=sin\theta cos\phi =sin\beta sin\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{S_q^3}{S_q}}cos\beta cos\alpha ,`$ (401)
$`\widehat{R}^2`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\rho }_q^2=sin\theta sin\phi =cos\beta sin\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{S_q^3}{S_q}}sin\beta cos\alpha ,`$ (402)
$`\widehat{R}^3`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\rho }_q^3=cos\theta ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\sqrt{(S_q)^2(S_q^3)^2}cos\alpha ,`$ (403)
$`(\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R})^1`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{S}_q^2\widehat{R}^3\widehat{S}_q^3\widehat{R}^2=sin\beta cos\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{S_q^3}{S_q}}cos\beta sin\alpha ,`$ (405)
$`(\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R})^2`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{S}_q^3\widehat{R}^1\widehat{S}_q^1\widehat{R}^3=cos\beta cos\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{S_q^3}{S_q}}sin\beta sin\alpha ,`$ (406)
$`(\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R})^3`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{S}_q^1\widehat{R}^2\widehat{S}_q^2\widehat{R}^1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\sqrt{(S_q)^2(S_q^3)^2}sin\alpha .`$ (407)
Then we have the following inverse canonical transformation

$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_q`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _q\widehat{R}(\alpha ,\beta ,S_q,S_q^3),`$ (408)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_q`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q\widehat{R}(\alpha ,\beta ,S_q,S_q^3){\displaystyle \frac{S_q}{\rho _q}}\widehat{R}(\alpha ,\beta ,S_q,S_q^3)\times \widehat{S}_q(\beta ,S_q,S_q^3),`$ (409)
$``$ $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_q^2=\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q^2+{\displaystyle \frac{S_q^2}{\rho _q^2}},`$ (413)
$`\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}(\alpha )={\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{R}(\alpha )}{\alpha }}=\widehat{R}(\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}),`$
$``$ $`\alpha =tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{(\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R})^3}{[\widehat{S}_q\times (\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R})]^3}}.`$ (415)
From the last line of this equation we see that the angle $`\alpha `$ can be expressed in terms of $`\widehat{S}_q`$ and $`\widehat{R}`$.

The conjugate variables $`\rho _q`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q`$ can be called dynamical shape variables : they describe the vibration of the dipole.

Then the rest-frame Hamiltonian for the relative motion becomes

$`H_{(rel)}`$ $`=`$ $`H_M(\mathrm{})=\sqrt{m_1^2+\stackrel{}{\pi }_q^2}+\sqrt{m_2^2+\stackrel{}{\pi }_q^2}=`$ (416)
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{m_1^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{ˇ}{I}}}(S_q)^2+\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q^2}+\sqrt{m_2^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{ˇ}{I}}}(S_q)^2+\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q^2},`$ (417)
$``$ $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }\stackrel{}{=}{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)}}{S_q}}={\displaystyle \frac{S_q}{\stackrel{ˇ}{I}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{m_1^2+\frac{1}{\stackrel{ˇ}{I}}(S_q)^2+\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q^2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{m_2^2+\frac{1}{\stackrel{ˇ}{I}}(S_q)^2+\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q^2}}}\right),`$ (419)
$`\dot{\rho }_q`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)}}{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q}}=\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{m_1^2+\frac{1}{\stackrel{ˇ}{I}}(S_q)^2+\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q^2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{m_2^2+\frac{1}{\stackrel{ˇ}{I}}(S_q)^2+\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q^2}}}\right),`$ (420)
$`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q|_{\dot{\rho }_q=0}=0,`$ (422)
$`H_{(rel)}^{(S)}`$ $`=`$ $`H_{(rel)}|_{\dot{\rho }_q=0}=\sqrt{m_1^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{ˇ}{I}}}(S_q)^2}+\sqrt{m_2^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{ˇ}{I}}}(S_q)^2},`$ (423)
$`H_{(rel)}^{(S=0)}`$ $`=`$ $`H_{(rel)}|_{S_q=0}=\sqrt{m_1^2+\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q^2}+\sqrt{m_2^2+\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q^2}.`$ (424)
where $`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}=\rho _q^2=\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{nr}/\mu `$ is the non-relativistic baricentric inertia tensor $`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{nr}`$ of the dipole divided by the reduced mass $`\mu =\frac{m_1m_2}{m_1+m_2}`$. The quantities $`H_{(rel)}^{(S)}`$ and $`H_{(rel)}^{(S=0)}`$ are the purely rotational and purely vibrational Hamiltonians, respectively.

For equal masses we get formally the same results of the previous Section but in a different canonical basis, if we make the identifications $`\pi =\stackrel{~}{\pi }_q`$, $`\rho =\rho _q`$ and $`\widehat{R}^r=R^{rs}(\theta ,\varphi )\widehat{\rho }_o^s`$. Only after a non-point transformation $`\alpha `$, $`S_q`$, $`\beta `$, $`S_q^3`$ $``$ $`\theta `$, $`\pi _\theta `$, $`\varphi `$, $`\pi _\varphi `$ \[i.e. from Eq.(407) to Eq.(394)\], Eqs.(426) become Eqs.(387).

### B 3-Body Systems.

In the case N=3 the range of the indices is $`i=1,2,3`$, $`a=1,2`$. The spin is $`\stackrel{}{S}_q=_{a=1}^2\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}=_{a=1}^2\stackrel{}{S}_{qa}`$ after the canonical transformation which separates the internal center of mass

ηiκiq+ρqaκ+πqa\begin{minipage}[t]{28.45274pt}
\begin{tabular}[]{|l|}\hline\cr${\vec{\eta}}_{i}$\\
\hline\cr${\vec{\kappa}}_{i}$\\
\hline\cr\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}\ {\longrightarrow\hskip 5.69046pt}\ \begin{minipage}[t]{56.9055pt}
\begin{tabular}[]{|l|l|}\hline\cr${\vec{q}}_{+}$&${\vec{\rho}}_{qa}$\\
\hline\cr${\vec{\kappa}}_{+}$&${\vec{\pi}}_{qa}$\\
\hline\cr\end{tabular}
\end{minipage} (425)
After the gauge fixings $`\stackrel{}{q}_+0`$, the relative motions in the rest-frame instant form are governed by the Hamiltonian

$$H_{(rel)}=H_M(\mathrm{})=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\sqrt{m_i^2+3\underset{a,b=1}{\overset{2}{}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}}M_{sys}.$$
(426)
We shall assume $`\stackrel{}{S}_q0`$, because the exceptional SO(3) orbit $`S_q=0`$ has to be studied separately. This is done by adding $`S_q0`$ as a first class constraint and studying separately the following three disjoint strata (they have a different number of first class constraints): a) $`\stackrel{}{S}_q0`$, but $`\stackrel{}{S}_{q1}=\stackrel{}{S}_{q2}0`$; b) $`\stackrel{}{S}_{qa}0`$, $`a=1,2`$ (in this case we have $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}k_a\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}0`$).

For each value of $`a=1,2`$, we can consider the canonical transformation (407)

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\alpha _a\hfill & \beta _a\hfill & \rho _{qa}\hfill \\ S_{qa}\hfill & S^3_{qa}\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill \end{array}$$
(427)
where

$`\alpha _a`$ $`=`$ $`tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_{qa}}}\left(\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}{\displaystyle \frac{(\rho _{qa})^2}{\rho _{qa}^3}}\pi _{qa}^3\right),`$ (428)
$`\beta _a`$ $`=`$ $`tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{S_{qa}^2}{S_{qa}^1}},sin\beta _a={\displaystyle \frac{S_{qa}^2}{\sqrt{(S_{qa})^2(S_{qa}^3)^2}}},cos\beta _a={\displaystyle \frac{S_{qa}^1}{\sqrt{(S_{qa})^2(S_{qa}^3)^2}}}.`$ (430)
$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _{qa}\widehat{R}_a,\rho _{qa}=\sqrt{\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}^2},\widehat{R}_a={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}}{\rho _{qa}}}=\widehat{\rho }_{qa},\widehat{R}_a^2=1,`$ (431)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{R}_a{\displaystyle \frac{S_{qa}}{\rho _{qa}}}\widehat{R}_a\times \widehat{S}_{qa},\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}=\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{R}_a.`$ (433)
$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _{qa}\widehat{\rho }_{qa}(\alpha _a,\beta _a,S_{qa},S_{qa}^3),`$ (434)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{\rho }_{qa}(\alpha _a,\beta _a,S_{qa},S_{qa}^3){\displaystyle \frac{S_{qa}}{\rho _{qa}}}\widehat{\rho }_{qa}(\alpha _a,\beta _a,S_{qa},S_{qa}^3)\times \widehat{S}_{qa}(\beta _a,S_{qa},S_{qa}^3)=`$ (435)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{R}_a(\alpha _a,\beta _a,S_{qa},S_{qa}^3){\displaystyle \frac{S_{qa}}{\rho _{qa}}}\widehat{R}_a(\alpha _a,\beta _a,S_{qa},S_{qa}^3)\times \widehat{S}_{qa}(\beta _a,S_{qa},S_{qa}^3).`$ (436)
We have now two unit vectors $`\widehat{R}_a`$ and two E(3) realizations generated by $`\stackrel{}{S}_{qa}`$, $`\widehat{R}_a`$ respectively and fixed invariants $`\widehat{R}_a^2=1`$, $`\stackrel{}{S}_{qa}\widehat{R}_a=0`$ (non-irreducible, type 2).

In order to implement a SO(3) Hamiltonian right action in analogy with the rigid body theory, we must construct an orthonormal triad or body frame $`\widehat{N}`$, $`\widehat{\chi }`$, $`\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }`$. The decomposition $`\stackrel{}{S}=\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^1\widehat{\chi }+\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^2\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }+\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^3\widehat{N}\stackrel{def}{=}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^r\widehat{e}_r`$, identifies the SO(3) scalar generators $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^r`$ of the right action provided they satisfy $`\{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^r,\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^s\}=ϵ^{rsu}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^u`$. This latter condition together with the obvious requirement that $`\widehat{N}`$, $`\widehat{\chi }`$, $`\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }`$ be SO(3) vectors \[$`\{\widehat{N}^r,S^s\}=ϵ^{rsu}\widehat{N}^u`$, $`\{\widehat{\chi }^r,S^s\}=ϵ^{rsu}\widehat{\chi }^u`$, $`\{\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }^r,S^s\}=ϵ^{rsu}\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }^u`$\] entails the equations §§§§§§With $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^r=\stackrel{}{S}\widehat{e}_r`$, the conditions $`\{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^r,\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^s\}=ϵ^{rsu}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^u`$ imply the equations $`\stackrel{}{S}\widehat{e}_r\times \widehat{e}_s+S^iS^j\{\widehat{e}_r^i,\widehat{e}_s^j\}=ϵ_{rsu}S^k\widehat{e}_k^u`$, hence the quoted result. $`\{\widehat{N}^r,\widehat{N}^s\}=\{\widehat{N}^r,\widehat{\chi }^s\}=\{\widehat{\chi }^r,\widehat{\chi }^s\}=0`$.

To each solution of these equations is associated a couple of canonical realizations of the E(3) group (type 2, non-irreducible): one with generators $`\stackrel{}{S}`$, $`\stackrel{}{N}`$ and non-fixed invariants $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^3=\stackrel{}{S}\widehat{N}`$ and $`|\stackrel{}{N}|`$; another with generators $`\stackrel{}{S}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\chi }`$ and non-fixed invariants $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^1=\stackrel{}{S}\widehat{\chi }`$ and $`|\stackrel{}{\chi }|`$. These latter contain the relevant information for constructing the angle $`\alpha `$ and the new canonical pair $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^3`$, $`\gamma =tg^1\frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^2}{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^1}`$ of SO(3) scalars. Since $`\{\alpha ,\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^3\}=\{\alpha ,\gamma \}=0`$ must hold, it follows that the vector $`\stackrel{}{N}`$ necessarily belongs to the $`\stackrel{}{S}`$-$`\widehat{R}`$ plane. The three canonical pairs $`S`$, $`\alpha `$, $`S^3`$, $`\beta `$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^3`$, $`\gamma `$ will describe the orientational variables of our Darboux basis, while $`|\stackrel{}{N}|`$ and $`|\stackrel{}{\chi }|`$ will belong to the shape variables. Alternatively, an anholonomic basis can be constructed by replacing the above six variables by $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}^r`$ and three uniquely determined Euler angles $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$.

In the N=3 case it turns out that a solution of the previous equation corresponding to a body frame determined by the 3-body system configuration only, as in the rigid body case, is completely individuated once two orthonormal vectors $`\stackrel{}{N}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\chi }`$, functions of the relative coordinates and independent of the momenta, are found such that $`\stackrel{}{N}`$ lies in the $`\stackrel{}{S}`$ \- $`\widehat{R}`$ plane§¶§¶§¶Let us remark that any pair of orthonormal vectors $`\stackrel{}{N}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\chi }`$ function only of the relative coordinates can be used to build a body frame. This freedom is connected to the possibility of redefining a body frame by using a configuration-dependent arbitrary rotation, which leaves $`\stackrel{}{N}`$ in the $`\stackrel{}{S}`$-$`\widehat{R}`$ plane.. We do not known whether in the case N=3 other solutions of the previous equations exist leading to momentum dependent body frames§∥§∥§∥Anyway, our constructive method necessarily leads to momentum-dependent solutions of the previous equations for $`N4`$ and therefore to momentum-dependent or dynamical body frames. See the following Subsection C..

The simplest choice for the orthonormal vectors $`\stackrel{}{N}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\chi }`$ functions only of the coordinates is

$`\stackrel{}{N}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{R}_1+\widehat{R}_2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{\rho }_{q1}+\widehat{\rho }_{q2}),\widehat{N}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{N}}{|\stackrel{}{N}|}},|\stackrel{}{N}|=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1+\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2}}{2}}},`$ (437)
$`\stackrel{}{\chi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{R}_1\widehat{R}_2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2}),\widehat{\chi }={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\chi }}{|\stackrel{}{\chi }|}},|\stackrel{}{\chi }|=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2}}{2}}}=\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2},`$ (438)
$`\stackrel{}{N}\times \stackrel{}{\chi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\times \widehat{\rho }_{q2},|\stackrel{}{N}\times \stackrel{}{\chi }|=|\stackrel{}{N}||\stackrel{}{\chi }|={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{1(\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2})^2},`$ (442)
$`\stackrel{}{N}\stackrel{}{\chi }=0,\{N^r,N^s\}=\{\chi ^r,\chi ^s\}=\{N^r,\chi ^s\}=0,`$
$`\widehat{R}_1`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\rho }_{q1}=\stackrel{}{N}+\stackrel{}{\chi },\widehat{R}_2=\widehat{\rho }_{q2}=\stackrel{}{N}\stackrel{}{\chi },\widehat{R}_1\stackrel{}{R}_2=\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2}=\stackrel{}{N}^2\stackrel{}{\chi }^2.`$ (444)
Likewise, we have for the spins

$`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{S}_{q1}+\stackrel{}{S}_{q2},`$ (445)
$`\stackrel{}{W}_q`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{S}_{q1}\stackrel{}{S}_{q2},`$ (446)
$`\stackrel{}{S}_{q1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\stackrel{}{S}_q+\stackrel{}{W}_q),\stackrel{}{S}_{q2}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{W}_q),`$ (450)
$`\{W_q^r,W_q^s\}=ϵ^{rsu}S_q^u.`$
We therefore succeeded in constructing an orthonormal triad (the dynamical body frame) and two E(3) realizations (non-irreducible, type 3): one with generators $`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$, $`\stackrel{}{N}`$ and non-fixed invariants $`|\stackrel{}{N}|`$ and $`\stackrel{}{S}\widehat{N}`$, the other with generators $`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\chi }`$ and non-fixed invariants $`|\stackrel{}{\chi }|`$ and $`\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{\chi }`$. As said in Ref. this is equivalent to the determination of the non-conserved generators $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r`$ of a Hamiltonian right action of SO(3): $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1=\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{\chi }=\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{e}_1`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2=\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }=\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{e}_2`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3=\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{N}=\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{e}_3`$.

The realization of the E(3) group with generators $`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$, $`\stackrel{}{N}`$ and non-fixed invariants $`_1=\stackrel{}{N}^2`$, $`_2=\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{N}`$ leads to the final canonical transformation

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{ccccc}\alpha _1\hfill & \beta _1\hfill & \alpha _2\hfill & \beta _2\hfill & \rho _{qa}\hfill \\ S_{q1}\hfill & S^3_{q1}\hfill & S_{q2}\hfill & S^3_{q2}\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{ccccc}\alpha \hfill & \beta \hfill & \gamma \hfill & |\stackrel{}{N}|\hfill & \rho _{qa}\hfill \\ S_q=\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q\hfill & S^3_q\hfill & \stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3=\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{N}\hfill & \xi \hfill & \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill \end{array}$$
(451)
where

$`|\stackrel{}{N}|`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1+\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2}}{2}}},`$ (452)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{N}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\rho }_{q1}+\widehat{\rho }_{q2}}{\sqrt{1+\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2}}}}S_qcos\psi ,`$ (454)
$`cos\psi =\widehat{S}_q\widehat{N}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{S_q}},sin\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2},`$
$`S_q`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q=|{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}|,`$ (455)
$`S_q^3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{2}{}}}(\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa})^3,`$ (456)
$`\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{(\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{N})^3}{[\widehat{S}_q\times (\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{N})]^3}}=`$ (458)
$`=`$ $`tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{[\widehat{S}_q\times (\widehat{\rho }_{q1}+\widehat{\rho }_{q2})]^3}{[\widehat{S}_q\times (\widehat{S}_q\times [\widehat{\rho }_{q1}+\widehat{\rho }_{q2}])]^3}},`$ (459)
$`\beta `$ $`=`$ $`tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{S_q^2}{S_q^1}},`$ (460)
$`\gamma `$ $`=`$ $`tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{S}_q(\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi })}{\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{\chi }}}=tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2}{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1}},`$ (461)
$``$ $`sin\gamma ={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2}{\sqrt{(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}}},cos\gamma ={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1}{\sqrt{(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}}},`$ (462)
$`=`$ $`tg^1{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{\rho }_{q2}\times \widehat{\rho }_{q1}}{\sqrt{1+\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2}}\stackrel{}{S}_q(\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2})}},`$ (463)
$`\xi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{W}_q(\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi })}{|\stackrel{}{\chi }|}}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{W}_q(\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi })}{\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}}`$ (464)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}\underset{a=1}{\overset{2}{}}()^{a+1}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}(\widehat{\rho }_{q2}\times \widehat{\rho }_{q1})}{[1\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2}]\sqrt{1+\widehat{\rho }_{q1}\widehat{\rho }_{q2}}}}.`$ (465)
For N=3 the dynamical shape variables, functions of the relative coordinates $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$ only, are $`|\stackrel{}{N}|`$, $`\widehat{\rho }_{qa}`$, while the conjugate shape momenta are $`\xi `$, $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}`$.

The final array (451) is nothing else than a scheme B of a realization of an E(3) group with generators $`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$, $`\stackrel{}{N}`$ (non-irreducible, type 3). In particular, the two canonical pairs $`S_q^3`$, $`\beta `$, $`S_q`$, $`\alpha `$, constitute the irreducible kernel of the E(3) scheme A, whose invariants are $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3`$, $`|\stackrel{}{N}|`$; $`\gamma `$ and $`\xi `$ are the so-called supplementary variables conjugated to the invariants; finally, the two pairs $`\rho _{qa}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}`$ are so-called inessential variables. Let us remark that $`S_q^3`$, $`\beta `$, $`S_q`$, $`\alpha `$, $`\gamma `$, $`\xi `$, are a local coordinatization of every E(3) coadjoint orbit with $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3=const.`$, $`|\stackrel{}{N}|=const.`$ and fixed values of the inessential variables, present in the 3-body phase space.

We can now reconstruct $`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ and define a new unit vector $`\widehat{R}`$ orthogonal to $`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ by adopting the prescription of Eq.(425) as follows

$`\widehat{S}_q^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\sqrt{(S_q)^2(S_q^3)^2}cos\beta ,`$ (466)
$`\widehat{S}_q^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\sqrt{(S_q)^2(S_q^3)^2}sin\beta ,`$ (467)
$`\widehat{S}_q^3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{S_q^3}{S_q}},`$ (468)
$`\widehat{R}^1`$ $`=`$ $`sin\beta sin\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{S_q^3}{S_q}}cos\beta cos\alpha ,`$ (470)
$`\widehat{R}^2`$ $`=`$ $`cos\beta sin\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{S_q^3}{S_q}}sin\beta cos\alpha ,`$ (471)
$`\widehat{R}^3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\sqrt{(S_q)^2(S_q^3)^2}cos\alpha ,`$ (474)
$`\widehat{R}^2=1,\widehat{R}\stackrel{}{S}_q=0,\{\widehat{R}^r,\widehat{R}^s\}=0,`$
$`(\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R})^1`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{S}_q^2\widehat{R}^3\widehat{S}_q^3\widehat{R}^2=sin\beta cos\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{S_q^3}{S_q}}cos\beta sin\alpha ,`$ (476)
$`(\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R})^2`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{S}_q^3\widehat{R}^1\widehat{S}_q^1\widehat{R}^3=cos\beta cos\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{S_q^3}{S_q}}sin\beta sin\alpha ,`$ (477)
$`(\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R})^3`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{S}_q^1\widehat{R}^2\widehat{S}_q^2\widehat{R}^1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\sqrt{(S_q)^2(S_q^3)^2}sin\alpha ,`$ (478)
The vectors $`\widehat{S}_q`$, $`\widehat{R}`$, $`\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}`$ build up the spin frame for N=3. The angle $`\alpha `$ conjugate to $`S_q`$ is explicitly given by§\**§\**§\** The two expressions of $`\alpha `$ given above are consistent with the fact that $`\widehat{S}_q`$, $`\widehat{R}`$ and $`\widehat{N}`$ are coplanar, so that $`\widehat{R}`$ and $`\widehat{N}`$ differ by a term in $`\widehat{S}_q`$.

$$\alpha =tg^1\frac{(\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{N})^3}{[\widehat{S}_q\times (\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{N})]^3}=tg^1\frac{(\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R})^3}{[\widehat{S}_q\times (\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R})]^3}.$$
(479)
As a consequence of this definition of $`\widehat{R}`$, we get the following expressions for the dynamical body frame $`\widehat{N}`$, $`\widehat{\chi }`$, $`\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }`$ in terms of the final canonical variables

$`\widehat{N}`$ $`=`$ $`cos\psi \widehat{S}_q+sin\psi \widehat{R}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{S_q}}\widehat{S}_q+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}\widehat{R}=`$ (480)
$`=`$ $`\widehat{N}[S_q,\alpha ;S_q^3,\beta ;\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3,\gamma ],`$ (481)
$`\widehat{\chi }`$ $`=`$ $`sin\psi cos\gamma \widehat{S}_qcos\psi cos\gamma \widehat{R}+sin\gamma \widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}=`$ (483)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}cos\gamma \widehat{S}_q{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{S_q}}cos\gamma \widehat{R}+sin\gamma \widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}=`$ (484)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1}{S_q}}\widehat{S}_q{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{S_q}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1\widehat{R}+\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}}{\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}}}=`$ (485)
$`=`$ $`\widehat{\chi }[S_q,\alpha ;S_q^3,\beta ;\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3,\gamma ],`$ (486)
$`\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }`$ $`=`$ $`sin\psi sin\gamma \widehat{S}_qcos\psi sin\gamma \widehat{R}cos\gamma \widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}=`$ (488)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}sin\gamma \widehat{S}_q{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{S_q}}sin\gamma \widehat{R}cos\gamma \widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}=`$ (489)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2}{S_q}}\widehat{S}_q{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{S_q}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1\widehat{R}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}}{\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}}}=`$ (490)
$`=`$ $`(\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi })[S_q,\alpha ;S_q^3,\beta ;\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3,\gamma ],`$ (492)
$``$
$`\widehat{S}_q`$ $`=`$ $`sin\psi cos\gamma \widehat{\chi }+sin\psi sin\gamma \widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }+cos\psi \widehat{N}`$ (493)
$`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}\left[\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1\widehat{\chi }+\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }+\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3\widehat{N}\right],`$ (494)
$`\widehat{R}`$ $`=`$ $`cos\psi cos\gamma \widehat{\chi }cos\psi sin\gamma \widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }+sin\psi \widehat{N},`$ (496)
$`\widehat{R}\times \widehat{S}_q`$ $`=`$ $`sin\gamma \widehat{\chi }+cos\gamma \widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }.`$ (498)
While $`\psi `$ is the angle between $`\widehat{S}_q`$ and $`\widehat{N}`$, $`\gamma `$ is the angle between the plane $`\widehat{N}\widehat{\chi }`$ and the plane $`\widehat{S}_q\widehat{N}`$. As in the case N=2, $`\alpha `$ is the angle between the plane $`\widehat{S}_q\widehat{f}_3`$ and the plane $`\widehat{S}_q\widehat{R}`$, while $`\beta `$ is the angle between the plane $`\widehat{S}_q\widehat{f}_3`$ and the plane $`\widehat{f}_3\widehat{f}_1`$.

Owing to the results of Appendix C of Ref., which allow to reexpress $`S_{qa}=|\stackrel{}{S}_{qa}|`$, $`S_{qa}^3`$, $`\beta _a=tg^1\frac{S_{qa}^2}{S_{qa}^1}`$ and $`\alpha _a=tg^1\frac{(\widehat{S}_{qa}\times \widehat{R}_a)^3}{(\widehat{S}_{qa}\times (\widehat{S}_{qa}\times \widehat{R}_a))^3}`$ in terms of the final variables, we can reconstruct the inverse canonical transformation.

The existence of the spin frame and of the dynamical body frame allows to define two decompositions of the relative variables, which make explicit the inverse canonical transformation. For the relative coordinates we get from Eqs. (444) and Appendix C of I

$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _{qa}\widehat{R}_a=\rho _{qa}[\stackrel{}{N}+()^{a+1}\stackrel{}{\chi }]=\rho _{qa}[|\stackrel{}{N}|\widehat{N}+()^{a+1}\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\widehat{\chi }]=`$ (499)
$`=`$ $`[\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\widehat{S}_q]\widehat{S}_q+[\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\widehat{R}]\widehat{R}+[\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}]\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}=`$ (500)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _{qa}}{S_q}}[(|\stackrel{}{N}|\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3+()^{a+1}\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1)\widehat{S}_q+`$ (501)
$`+`$ $`\left(|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}()^{a+1}\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}}}\right)\widehat{R}`$ (502)
$``$ $`()^{a+1}\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2}{\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}}}\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}]=`$ (503)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}[S_q,\alpha ;S_q^3,\beta ;\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3,\gamma ;\rho _{qa},|\stackrel{}{N}|].`$ (504)
The results of Appendix C of Ref. give the analogous formulas for the relative momenta §††§††§††See Appendix C of Ref. for the expression of the body frame components of $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$.

$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{R}_a+{\displaystyle \frac{S_{qa}}{\rho _{qa}}}\widehat{S}_{qa}\times \widehat{R}_a=\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{\rho }_{qa}+{\displaystyle \frac{S_{qa}}{\rho _{qa}}}\widehat{S}_{qa}\times \widehat{\rho }_a=`$ (505)
$`=`$ $`[\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{N}]\widehat{N}+[\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{\chi }]\widehat{\chi }+[\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }]\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }=`$ (506)
$`=`$ $`[\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{S}_q]\widehat{S}_q+[\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{R}]\widehat{R}+[\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}]\widehat{S}_q\times \widehat{R}=`$ (508)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_q}}[((\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{N})\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3+(\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{\chi })\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1+(\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi })\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2)\widehat{S}_q+`$ (509)
$`+`$ $`((\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{N})\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}[(\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{\chi }+(\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi })]{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}}})\widehat{R}+`$ (510)
$`+`$ $`[(\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{\chi })(\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi })]{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}}}\widehat{R}\times \widehat{S}_q]=`$ (511)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}[S_q,\alpha ;S_q^3,\beta ;\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3,\gamma ;|\stackrel{}{N}|,\xi ;\rho _{qa},\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}].`$ (512)
Finally, the results in Appendix D allow to perform a sequence of a canonical transformation to Euler angles $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ with their conjugate momenta, followed by a transition to the anholonomic basis used in the orientation-shape bundle approach

$`\begin{array}{ccc}\alpha \hfill & \beta \hfill & \gamma \hfill \\ S_q=\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q\hfill & S^3_q\hfill & \stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\beta }\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\gamma }\hfill \\ p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}\hfill & p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}\hfill & p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}\hfill \end{array}\stackrel{noncan.}{}\begin{array}{ccc}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\beta }\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\gamma }\hfill \\ \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^1_q\hfill & \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^2_q\hfill & \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^3_q\hfill \end{array}`$ (519)
$`S_q`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q=\sqrt{(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1)^2+(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2)^2+(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2},`$ (521)
$`S_q^3`$ $`=`$ $`sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1+sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2+cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3,`$ (522)
$`\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`arctg{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}tg\stackrel{~}{\beta }}{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q\frac{p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}}{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_qcos\stackrel{~}{\beta }}}},`$ (523)
$`\gamma `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }arctg{\displaystyle \frac{ctg\stackrel{~}{\beta }p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}\frac{p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}}{sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }}}{p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}}},`$ (524)
$`\beta `$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+arctg{\displaystyle \frac{ctg\stackrel{~}{\beta }p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}\frac{p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}}{sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }}}{p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}},`$ (525)
Here $`p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}`$, $`p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}`$, $`p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}`$ are the functions of $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r`$, given in Eqs.(D35). Eqs.(D35), (525), (498) and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2=\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }`$ lead to the determination of the dynamical orientation variables $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ in terms of $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$. Let us stress that, while in the orientation-shape bundle approach the orientation variables $`\theta ^\alpha `$ are gauge variables, the Euler angles $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ are uniquely determined in terms of the original variables.

In conclusion the complete transition to the anholonomic basis used in the static theory of the orientation-shape bundle is

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\alpha \hfill & \beta \hfill & \gamma \hfill & |\stackrel{}{N}|\hfill & \rho _{qa}\hfill \\ S_q=\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q\hfill & S^3_q\hfill & \stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3\hfill & \xi \hfill & \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill \end{array}\stackrel{noncan.}{}\begin{array}{ccccc}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\beta }\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\gamma }\hfill & |\stackrel{}{N}|\hfill & \rho _{qa}\hfill \\ \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^1_q\hfill & \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^2_q\hfill & \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^3_q\hfill & \xi \hfill & \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill \end{array},$$
(526)
with the 3 pairs of conjugate canonical dynamical shape variables: $`\rho _{qa}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}`$, $`|\stackrel{}{N}|`$, $`\xi `$.

Eqs.(504), (526), (479) and (D24) imply

$`\rho _{qa}^r`$ $`=`$ $`^r{}_{s}{}^{}(\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\beta },\stackrel{~}{\gamma })\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qa}^s(q),with`$ (531)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qa}^1(q)=()^{a+1}\rho _{qa}\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2},\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qa}^2(q)=0,\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qa}^3(q)=\rho _{qa}|\stackrel{}{N}|,`$
$`and`$
$`S_q^r`$ $`=`$ $`^r{}_{s}{}^{}(\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\beta },\stackrel{~}{\gamma })\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s,`$ (533)
so that the final visualization of our sequence of transformations is

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill \end{array}\stackrel{noncan.}{}\begin{array}{cccc}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\beta }\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\gamma }\hfill & q^\mu (\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa})\hfill \\ \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^1_q\hfill & \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^2_q\hfill & \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^3_q\hfill & p_\mu (\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa},\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa})\hfill \end{array}.$$
(534)
Note furthermore that we get $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qa}^2=\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }=0`$ by construction and this entails that using our dynamical body frame is equivalent to a convention (xxzz gauge) about the body frame of the type of xxz and similar gauges quoted in Ref..

Finally, we can give the expression of the Hamiltonian for the relative motions §‡‡§‡‡§‡‡The Hamiltonian in the basis (451) can be obtained with the following replacements $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1=\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}cos\gamma `$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1=\sqrt{(S_q)^2(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}sin\gamma `$. in terms of the anholonomic Darboux basis (525). By using Eqs. (E49) and (E57) we get

$`H_{(rel)}`$ $``$ $`M_{sys}=H_M(\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+3{\displaystyle \underset{a,b=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{bi}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}}=`$ (535)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}(m_i^2+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\stackrel{}{N}^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{2\rho _{q1}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{2\rho _{q2}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}}](\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1)^2+`$ (536)
$`+`$ $`3\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{2\rho _{q1}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{2\rho _{q2}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)}{\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}}\right](\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2)^2+`$ (537)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{2\rho _{q1}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{2\rho _{q2}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}}\right](\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2+`$ (538)
$`+`$ $`3\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\left[\xi ({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{2\rho _{q1}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{2\rho _{q2}^2}})+4\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}}{\rho _{q2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}}{\rho _{q1}}})\right]\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2`$ (539)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}}({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{\rho _{q1}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{\rho _{q2}^2}})\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3+`$ (540)
$`+`$ $`6(\gamma _{1i})^2\left[\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\xi ^2(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}\right]+6(\gamma _{2i})^2\left[\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\xi ^2(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)}{4\rho _{q2}^2}}\right]+`$ (541)
$`+`$ $`12\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}[(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)\xi ({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}}{\rho _{q2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}}{\rho _{q1}}})+`$ (542)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\xi ^2(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)}{4\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}}])^{1/2}=`$ (543)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}H_{(rel)i},`$ (544)
where $`q^\mu =(\rho _{q1},\rho _{q2},|\stackrel{}{N}|)`$, $`p_\mu =(\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1},\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2},\xi )`$ are the dynamical shape variables.

By using the results of Appendix E, Eq(E11), we can put the Hamiltonian in a form reminiscent of the non-relativistic orientation-shape bundle approach ¶\*¶\*¶\*The N=3 non-relativistic Hamiltonian is $`H_{rel}=\frac{1}{2}\left[(\stackrel{ˇ}{}^1(q))^{rs}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s+\stackrel{~}{g}^{\mu \nu }(q)(p_\mu \stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒜}_\mu (q))(p_\nu \stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒜}_\nu (q))\right]`$, with the quantities $`\stackrel{ˇ}{A}_\mu ^r(q)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{g}^{\mu \nu }(q)`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}^{(1rs}(q)`$ evaluated in Appendix E of Ref.. While the purely rotational Hamiltonian (defined by $`\dot{q}^\mu =0`$ implying $`p_\mu =\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒜}_\mu (q)`$) is $`H_{rel}^{(rot)}=\frac{1}{2}(\stackrel{ˇ}{}^1(q))^{rs}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s`$, the purely vibrational Hamiltonian $`H_{rel}^{(vib)}`$ is defined in our approach by the requirement $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^r=0`$. Since $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r|_{\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^s=0}0`$, unlike in the static orientation-shape bundle approach we have $`H_{rel}H_{rel}^{(rot)}+H_{rel}^{(vib)}`$.

$`H_{(rel)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}H_{(rel)i}=`$ (545)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{1rs}(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s+\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)\left(p_\mu \stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{A}}_{i\mu }(q)\right)\left(p_\nu \stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{A}}_{i\nu }(q)\right)}.`$ (546)
A purely rotational (vertical) Hamiltonian is $`H_{(rel)}^{(rot)}=H_{(rel)}|_{\dot{q}=0}=H_{(rel)}|_{p_\mu =\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒞}}_\mu (\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q,q)}`$: since under each square root there is a different gauge potential $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒜}}_{i\mu }(q)`$ we get that under each square root there is the mass term plus a quadratic expression in the body spin but with coefficients depending on the shape variable and on $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q`$ itself, since $`[p_\mu \stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒜}}_{i\mu }(q)]|_{\dot{q}=0}=\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q[\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒞}}_\mu (\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q,q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒜}}_{i\mu }(q)]`$. Therefore, we have

$`H_{(rel)}^{(rot)}`$ $`=`$ $`H_{(rel)}^{(rot)}(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q,q)=`$ (547)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\left[\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{1rs}(q)+\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒞}_\mu ^r(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q,q)\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\mu }^r(q)\right)\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒞}_\nu ^s(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q,q)\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\nu }^s(q)\right)\right]\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s}.`$ (548)
In the non-relativistic limit (where $`p_\mu =\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒜}}_\mu (q)`$ with $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒜}}_\mu (q)`$ the non-relativistic gauge potential) we get

$`H_{(rel)}^{(S)}`$ $`_c\mathrm{}`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_ic^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_i}}(lim_c\mathrm{}[\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{1rs}(q)+`$ (550)
$`+`$ $`\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)(\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒞}_\mu ^r(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q,q)\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\mu }^r(q))(\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒞}_\nu ^s(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q,q)\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\nu }^s(q))]\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s)+O(1/c)=`$ (551)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_ic^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{ˇ}{}^{1rs}(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s+O(1/c),`$ (552)
so that the non-relativistic inverse tensor of inertia is recovered as

$$\stackrel{ˇ}{}^{1rs}(q)=lim_c\mathrm{}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{1}{m_i}\left[\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{1rs}(q)+\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒞}_\mu ^r(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q,q)\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\mu }^r(q)\right)\left(\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒞}_\nu ^s(\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q,q)\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\nu }^s(q)\right)\right]\right).$$
(553)
These results together with

$`H_{(rel)}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}m_i`$ $`_c\mathrm{}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{1rs}(q)}{m_i}}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s+`$ (554)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)}{m_i}}(p_\mu \stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{A}}_{i\mu }(q))(p_\nu \stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{A}}_{i\nu }(q)))=`$ (555)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left((\stackrel{ˇ}{}^1(q))^{rs}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s+\stackrel{~}{g}^{\mu \nu }(q)(p_\mu \stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒜}}_\mu (q))(p_\nu \stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒜}}_\nu (q))\right).`$ (556)
imply that the non-relativistic gauge potential and metric are

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒜}}_\mu (q)`$ $`=`$ $`lim_c\mathrm{}\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒞}}_\mu (\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q,q),`$ (558)
$`\stackrel{~}{g}^{\mu \nu }(q)`$ $`=`$ $`lim_c\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)}{m_i}}.`$ (560)
A purely vibrational Hamiltonian $`H_{(rel)}^{(vib)}`$ can be defined by requiring the vanishing of the (now measurable) body frame components of the angular velocity $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^r=0`$. These conditions transform Eq.(E33) in equations for the determination of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r|_{\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^s=0}`$: if we put their solution into Eq.(546), we get $`H_{(rel)}^{(vib)}`$.

On the other hand, the orientation-shape bundle approach privileges the gauge choice $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r=0`$ (special connection C quoted in Ref.) to define a purely vibrational (C-horizontal) Hamiltonian

$$H_{(rel)}^{(S=0)}=H_{(rel)}|_{\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q=0}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)p_\mu p_\nu },$$
(561)
with the non-relativistic limit

$`H_{(rel)}^{(S=0)}`$ $`_c\mathrm{}`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_ic^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)}{m_i}}p_\mu p_\nu +O(1/c)=`$ (562)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}m_ic^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{~}{g}^{\mu \nu }(q)p_\mu p_\nu +O(1/c).`$ (563)
However, we cannot use this definition because our canonical construction is valid only if $`S_q^r0`$.

### C N-Body Systems.

Let us now consider the general case with $`N4`$. Instead of coupling the centers of mass of particle clusters as it is done with Jacobi coordinates (center-of-mass clusters), the canonical spin bases will be obtained by coupling the spins of the 2-body subsystems (relative particles) $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$, $`a=1,..,N1`$, defined in Eqs.(166), in all possible ways (spin clusters from the addition of angular momenta). Let us stress that we can build a spin basis with a pattern of spin clusters which is completely unrelated to a possible pre-existing center-of-mass clustering.

Let us consider the case $`N=4`$ as a prototype of the general construction. We have now three relative variables $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{q1}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{q2}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{q3}`$ and related momenta $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q1}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q2}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q3}`$. In the following formulas we use the convention that the subscripts $`a,b,c`$ mean any permutation of $`1,2,3`$.

As in Ref., we define the following sequence of canonical transformations (we assume $`S_q0`$; $`S_{qA}0`$, $`A=a,b,c`$) corresponding to the spin clustering pattern $`abc(ab)c((ab)c)`$ \[build first the spin cluster $`(ab)`$, then the spin cluster $`((ab)c)`$\]:

$`\begin{array}{ccc}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\hfill & \stackrel{}{\rho }_{qb}\hfill & \stackrel{}{\rho }_{qc}\hfill \\ \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill & \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qb}\hfill & \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qc}\hfill \end{array}`$ (566)
$``$ $`\begin{array}{ccccccccc}\alpha _a\hfill & \beta _a\hfill & \alpha _b\hfill & \beta _b\hfill & \alpha _c\hfill & \beta _c\hfill & \rho _{qa}\hfill & \rho _{qb}\hfill & \rho _{qc}\hfill \\ S_{qa}\hfill & S^3_{qa}\hfill & S_{qb}\hfill & S^3_{qb}\hfill & S_{qc}\hfill & S^3_{qc}\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qb}\hfill & \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qc}\hfill \end{array}`$ (569)
$`\stackrel{\left(ab\right)c}{}`$ $`\begin{array}{ccccccccc}\alpha _{(ab)}& \beta _{(ab)}& \gamma _{(ab)}& \alpha _c& \beta _c& |\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}|& \rho _{qa}& \rho _{qb}& \rho _{qc}\\ S_{q(ab)}& S^3_{q(ab)}& \stackrel{ˇ}{S}_{q(ab)}^3=\stackrel{}{S}_{q(ab)}\widehat{N}_{(ab)}& S_{qc}& S^3_{qc}& \xi _{(ab)}& \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}& \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qb}& \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qc}\end{array}`$ (572)
$``$ $`\begin{array}{ccccccccc}\alpha _{((ab)c)}& \beta _{((ab)c)}& \gamma _{((ab)c)}& |\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}|& \gamma _{(ab)}& |\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}|& \rho _{qa}& \rho _{qb}& \rho _{qc}\\ S_q=\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q& S^3_q& \stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3=\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{N}_{((ab)c)}& \xi _{((ab)c)}& \stackrel{}{S}_{q(ab)}\widehat{N}_{(ab)}& \xi _{(ab)}& \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}& \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qb}& \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qc}\end{array}`$ (575)
$`\stackrel{noncan.}{}`$ $`\begin{array}{ccccccccc}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }& \stackrel{~}{\beta }& \stackrel{~}{\gamma }& |\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}|& \gamma _{(ab)}& |\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}|& \rho _{qa}& \rho _{qb}& \rho _{qc}\\ \stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1& \stackrel{ˇ}{S}^2_q& \stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3& \xi _{((ab)c)}& \mathrm{\Omega }_{(ab)}=\stackrel{}{S}_{q(ab)}\widehat{N}_{(ab)}& \xi _{(ab)}& \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}& \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qb}& \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qc}\end{array}.`$ (578)
See Appendix F of Ref. for the explicit construction of the canonical transformations.

The first non-point canonical transformation is based on the existence of the three unit vectors $`\widehat{R}_A`$, $`A=a,b,c`$, and of three E(3) groups with fixed values ($`\widehat{R}_A^2=1`$, $`\stackrel{}{S}_A\widehat{R}_A=0`$) of their invariants. One uses Eqs.(430), (433) and (436).

In the next canonical transformation the spins of the relative particles $`a`$ and $`b`$ are coupled to form the spin cluster $`(ab)`$, leaving the relative particle $`c`$ as a spectator. We use the definitions $`\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}=\frac{1}{2}(\widehat{R}_a+\widehat{R}_b)`$, $`\stackrel{}{\chi }_{(ab)}=\frac{1}{2}(\widehat{R}_a\widehat{R}_b)`$, $`\stackrel{}{S}_{(ab)}=\stackrel{}{S}_{qa}+\stackrel{}{S}_{qb}`$, $`\stackrel{}{W}_{q(ab)}=\stackrel{}{S}_{qa}\stackrel{}{S}_{qb}`$. We get $`\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}\stackrel{}{\chi }_{(ab)}=0`$, $`\{N_{(ab)}^r,N_{(ab)}^s\}=\{N_{(ab)}^r,\chi _{(ab)}^s\}=\{\chi _{(ab)}^r,\chi _{(ab)}^s\}=0`$ and a new E(3) realization generated by $`\stackrel{}{S}_{(ab)}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}`$, with non-fixed invariants $`|\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}|`$, $`\stackrel{}{S}_{(ab)}\widehat{N}_{(ab)}\stackrel{def}{=}\mathrm{\Omega }_{(ab)}`$. From Eqs.(504) we get

$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}=\rho _{qa}\left[|\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}|\widehat{N}_{(ab)}+\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}^2}\widehat{\chi }_{(ab)}\right],`$ (580)
$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qb}=\rho _{qb}\left[|\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}|\widehat{N}_{(ab)}\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}^2}\widehat{\chi }_{(ab)}\right],`$ (581)
$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qc}=\rho _{qc}\widehat{R}_c.`$ (582)
Eq.(465) defines $`\alpha _{(ab)}`$ and $`\beta _{(ab)}`$, so that Eq.(478) defines a unit vector $`\widehat{R}_{(ab)}`$ with $`\stackrel{}{S}_{(ab)}\widehat{R}_{(ab)}=0`$, $`\{\widehat{R}_{(ab)}^r,\widehat{R}_{(ab)}^s\}=0`$. This unit vector identifies the spin cluster $`(ab)`$ in the same way as the unit vectors $`\widehat{R}_A=\widehat{\stackrel{}{\rho }}_{qA}`$ identify the relative particles $`A`$.

The next step is the coupling of the spin cluster $`(ab)`$ with unit vector $`\widehat{R}_{(ab)}`$ \[described by the canonical variables $`\alpha _{(ab)}`$, $`S_{(ab)}`$, $`\beta _{(ab)}`$ $`S_{(ab)}^3`$\] with the relative particle $`c`$ with unit vector $`\widehat{R}_c`$ and described by $`\alpha _c`$, $`S_{qc}`$, $`\beta _c`$, $`S_{qc}^3`$: this builds the spin cluster $`((ab)c)`$. Again Eq.(444) allows to define $`\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}=\frac{1}{2}(\widehat{R}_{(ab)}+\widehat{R}_c)`$, $`\stackrel{}{\chi }_{((ab)c)}=\frac{1}{2}(\widehat{R}_{(ab)}\widehat{R}_c)`$, $`\stackrel{}{S}_q=\stackrel{}{S}_{q((ab)c)}=\stackrel{}{S}_{q(ab)}+\stackrel{}{S}_{qc}`$, $`\stackrel{}{W}_{q((ab)c)}=\stackrel{}{S}_{q(ab)}\stackrel{}{S}_{qc}`$. Since we have $`\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}\stackrel{}{\chi }_{((ab)c)}=0`$ and $`\{N_{((ab)c)}^r,N_{((ab)c)}^s\}=\{N_{((ab)c)}^r,\chi _{((ab)c)}^s\}=\{\chi _{((ab)c)}^r,\chi _{((ab)c)}^s\}=0`$ due to $`\{\widehat{R}_{(ab)}^r,\widehat{R}_c^s\}=0`$, a new E(3) group generated by $`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ and $`\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}`$ with non-fixed invariants $`|\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}|`$, $`\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}=\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3|\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}|`$ emerges. Eq.(465) defines $`\alpha _{((ab)c)}`$ and $`\beta _{((ab)c)}`$, so that Eq.(478) allows to identify a final unit vector $`\widehat{R}_{((ab)c)}`$ with $`\stackrel{}{S}_q\widehat{R}_{((ab)c)}=0`$ and $`\{\widehat{R}_{((ab)c)}^r,\widehat{R}_{((ab)c)}^s\}=0`$.

In conclusion, when $`S_q0`$, we find both a dynamical body frame $`\widehat{\chi }_{((ab)c)}`$, $`\widehat{N}_{((ab)c)}\times \widehat{\chi }_{((ab)c)}`$, $`\widehat{N}_{((ab)c)}`$, and a spin frame $`\widehat{S}_q`$, $`\widehat{R}_{((ab)c)}`$, $`\widehat{R}_{((ab)c)}\times \widehat{S}_q`$ like in the 3-body case. There is an important difference, however: the orthonormal vectors $`\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\chi }_{((ab)c)}`$ depend on the momenta of the relative particles $`a`$ and $`b`$ through $`\widehat{R}_{(ab)}`$, so that our results do not share any relation with the N=4 non-trivial SO(3) principal bundle of the orientation-shape bundle approach.

The final 6 dynamical shape variables are $`q^\mu =\{|\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}|,\gamma _{(ab)},|\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}|,\rho _{qa},\rho _{qb},\rho _{qc}\}`$. While the last four depend only on the original relative coordinates $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qA}`$, $`A=a,b,c`$, the first two depend also on the original momenta $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qA}`$: therefore they are generalized shape variables. By using Appendix D, we obtain

$$\rho _{qA}^r=^{rs}(\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\beta },\stackrel{~}{\gamma })\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qA}^s(q^\mu ,p_\mu ,\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r),A=a,b,c,$$
(583)
This means that for N=4 the dynamical body frame components $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\rho }_{qA}^r`$ depend also on the dynamical shape momenta and on the dynamical body frame components of the spin. It is clear that this result stands outside the orientation-shape bundle approach completely.

As shown in Appendix F of Ref., starting from the Hamiltonian $`H_{rel((ab)c)}`$ in the final variables, we can define a rotational Hamiltonian $`H_{rel((ab)c)}^{(rot)}`$ (for $`\dot{q}^\mu =0`$, see Eqs.(F18) of Ref.) and a vibrational Hamiltonian $`H_{rel((ab)c)}^{(vib)}`$ (vanishing of the physical dynamical angular velocity $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_{((ab)c)}^r=0`$, see Eqs.(F21) of Ref.), but $`H_{rel((ab)c)}`$ is not the sum of these two Hamiltonians. In the rotational Hamiltonian and in the spin-angular velocity relation we find two inertia-like tensors depending only on the dynamical shape variables.

The price to be paid for the existence of 3 global dynamical body frames for N=4 is a more complicated form of the Hamiltonian kinetic energy. On the other hand, dynamical vibrations and dynamical angular velocity are measurable quantities in each dynamical body frame.

For N=5 we can repeat the previous construction either with the sequence of spin clusterings $`abcd(ab)cd((ab)c)d)(((ab)c)d)`$ or with the sequence $`abcd(ab)(cd)((ab)(cd))`$ \[$`a,b,c,d`$ any permutation of 1,2,3,4\] as said in the Introduction. Each spin cluster $`(\mathrm{})`$ will be identified by the unit vector $`\widehat{R}_{(\mathrm{})}`$, axis of the spin frame of the cluster. All the final dynamical body frames built with this construction will have their axes depending on both the original configurations and momenta.

This construction is trivially generalized to any N: we have only to classify all the possible spin clustering patterns.

Therefore, for $`N4`$ our sequence of canonical and non-canonical transformations leads to the following result to be compared with Eq.(525) of the 3-body case

ρqAπqAnoncan.
~α
~β
~γ
qμ(ρqA,πqA)Sˇ1qSˇ2qSˇ3qpμ(ρqA,πqA).\begin{minipage}[t]{142.26378pt}
\begin{tabular}[]{|l|}\hline\cr${\vec{\rho}}_{qA}$\\
\hline\cr${\vec{\pi}}_{qA}$\\
\hline\cr\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}\ {{\buildrel{non\,\,can.}\over{\longrightarrow}}\hskip 5.69046pt}\ \begin{minipage}[b]{142.26378pt}
\begin{tabular}[]{|lll|l|}\hline\cr$\tilde{\alpha}$&$\tilde{\beta}$&$\tilde{\gamma}$&$q^{\mu}({\vec{\rho}}_{qA},{\vec{\pi}}_{qA})$\\
\hline\cr${\check{S}}^{1}_{q}$&${\check{S}}^{2}_{q}$&${\check{S}}^{3}_{q}$&$p_{\mu}({\vec{\rho}}_{qA},{\vec{\pi}}_{qA}$)\\
\hline\cr\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}. (584)
This state of affairs suggests that for $`N4`$ and with $`S_q0`$, $`S_{qA}0`$, $`A=a,b,c`$, viz. when the standard (3N-3)-dimensional orientation-shape bundle is not trivial, the original (6N-6)-dimensional relative phase space admits the definition of as many dynamical body frames as spin canonical bases ¶†¶†¶†Recall that a different Hamiltonian right SO(3) action on the relative phase space corresponds to each of them., which are globally defined (apart isolated coordinate singularities) for the non-singular N-body configurations with $`\stackrel{}{S}_q0`$ (and with non-zero spin for each spin subcluster).

These dynamical body frames do not correspond to local cross sections of the static non-trivial orientation-shape SO(3) principal bundle and the spin canonical bases do not coincide with the canonical bases associated with the static theory. Therefore, we do not get gauge potentials and all the other quantities evaluated in Appendix E for N=3.

## VIII The case of Interacting Particles.

As shown in Ref. and in its bibliography, the action-at-a-distance interactions inside the Wigner hyperplane may be introduced either under the square roots (scalar and vector potentials) or outside (scalar potential like the Coulomb one) appearing in the free Hamiltonian (111) or (313).

In the rest-frame instant form the most general Hamiltonian with only action-at-a-distance interactions is

$$H=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sqrt{m_i^2+U_i+[\stackrel{}{k}_i\stackrel{}{V}_i]^2}+V,$$
(585)
with $`U=U(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_k,\stackrel{}{\eta }_h\stackrel{}{\eta }_k)`$, $`\stackrel{}{V}_i=\stackrel{}{V}_i(\stackrel{}{k}_{ji},\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\stackrel{}{\eta }_{ji})`$, $`V=V_o(|\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\stackrel{}{\eta }_j|)+V^{^{}}(\stackrel{}{k}_i,\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\stackrel{}{\eta }_j)`$.

In the rest frame the Hamiltonian for the relative motion becomes

$$H_{(rel)}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{~}{U}_i+[\sqrt{n}\underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}\stackrel{~}{\stackrel{}{V}}_i]^2}+\stackrel{~}{V},$$
(586)
with

$`\stackrel{~}{U}_i`$ $`=`$ $`U([\sqrt{n}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{ak}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}(\gamma _{ah}\gamma _{ak})\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}),`$ (587)
$`\stackrel{~}{\stackrel{}{V}}_i`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{V}_i([\sqrt{n}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{aji}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}(\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{aji})\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}),`$ (588)
$`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ $`=`$ $`V_o(|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}(\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{aj})\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}|)+V^{^{}}([\sqrt{n}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}(\gamma _{ai}\gamma _{aj})\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}).`$ (589)
The prices for the existence of 3 possible global dynamical body frames for N=4 are:

i) a more complicated form of the Hamiltonian kinetic energy but with a definition of measurable dynamical vibrations and dynamical angular velocity in each dynamical body frame;

ii) the fact that a potential $`V(\stackrel{}{\eta }_{ij}\stackrel{}{\eta }_{hk}))`$ with $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_{ij}=\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\stackrel{}{\eta }_j`$ becomes dependent also on the shape momenta, since we have

$$V(\stackrel{}{\eta }_{ij}\stackrel{}{\eta }_{hk})=V[\frac{1}{N}\underset{a,b}{\overset{1,..,N1}{}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ai}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{aj})(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{bh}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{bk})\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qb}].$$
(590)
For N=4, due to Eq.(E18), in the pattern $`((ab)c)`$ we have

$$V=\stackrel{~}{V}_{((ab)c)}[\rho _{qa},\rho _{qb},\rho _{qc},|\stackrel{}{N}_{((ab)c)}|,\gamma _{(ab)},|\stackrel{}{N}_{(ab)}|;\xi _{((ab)c)},\mathrm{\Omega }_{(ab)};\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r].$$
(591)
For more general potentials $`V(\stackrel{}{\eta }_{ij}\stackrel{}{\eta }_{hk},\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{\eta }_{hk},\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{\kappa }_j)`$, like the non-relativistic limit of the relativistic Darwin potential of Ref., more complicated expressions are obtained.

## IX Conclusions.

In this paper we have explored the relativistic kinematics of a system of N scalar positive-energy particles. In the framework of the rest-frame instant form of dynamics it is possible to find the relativistic extension of the Abelian translational and non-Abelian rotational symmetries whose associated Noether constants of motion are fundamental for the study of isolated systems. In the relativistic case the rest-frame description on the Wigner hyperplanes allows to clarify all the problems by virtue of a doubling of all the concepts: they can be either external (namely observed by an arbitrary inertial Lorentz frame) or internal (namely observed by an inertial observer at rest inside the Wigner hyperplane). Correspondingly two realizations of the Poincaré algebra are naturally defined.

After a clarification of the possible external and internal definitions of relativistic center of mass, we have shown that it is possible to define a family of canonical transformations for the definition of canonical relative variables. The Hamiltonian in the rest frame can be expressed in terms of these variables. It turns out that, due to the presence of the square roots in the Hamiltonian, the non-relativistic concepts of Jacobi normal relative coordinates, reduced masses and barycentric tensor of inertia cannot be extended to the relativistic formulation.

On the other hand, the rest-frame description with the Wigner hyperplanes allows to use the non-relativistic formalism developed in Ref. for the study of the rotational kinematics, since it it is independent of Jacobi coordinates. Therefore, we can extend the concepts of canonical spin bases, spin frames and dynamical body frames to the relativistic level and we find again that, due to the non-Abelian nature of rotations, a global separation of rotations from vibrations is not possible.

In a future paper we will conclude the study of relativistic kinematics by defining Dixon’s multipoles for the relativistic N-body problem in the rest-frame instant form of dynamics. It will be shown that, in this framework, we can recover concepts like the tensor of inertia by using the quadrupole moment.

The final task should be the extension of all these results to relativistic extended (continua) isolated systems.

## A Parametrized Minkowski Theories.

In this Appendix we review the main aspects of parametrized Minkowski theories and of the canonical reduction of gauge systems, following Refs., where a complete treatment of N scalar charged positive energy particles plus the electromagnetic field is given.

The starting point was Dirac’s reformulation of classical field theory on spacelike hypersurfaces foliating Minkowski spacetime $`M^4`$. The foliation is defined by an embedding $`R\times \mathrm{\Sigma }M^4`$, $`(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$, with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ an abstract 3-surface diffeomorphic to $`R^3`$ In this way one gets a parametrized field theory with a covariant 3+1 splitting of flat spacetime, which is already in a form suited to the transition to general relativity in its ADM canonical formulation.

The price to be paid is that one has to add the embeddings $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ identifying the points of the spacelike hypersurface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ ¶‡¶‡¶‡The only ones carrying Lorentz indices; the scalar parameter $`\tau `$ labels the leaves of the foliation and $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }`$ are curvilinear coordinates on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$. as new configuration variables and then to redefine the fields on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ in such a way they know the whole hypersurface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ of $`\tau `$-simultaneity ¶§¶§¶§For a Klein-Gordon field $`\varphi (x)`$, this new field is $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=\varphi (z(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }))`$: it contains the nonlocal information about the embedding and the associated notion of equal time..

Then one rewrites the Lagrangian of the given isolated system in the form required by the coupling to an external gravitational field, makes the 3+1 splitting of Minkowski spacetime and replaces all the fields of the system by the new fields on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ ¶¶¶¶¶¶These are Lorentz scalars, having only surface indices.. Instead of considering the 4-metric as describing a gravitational field ¶∥¶∥¶∥Namely as an independent field like in metric gravity, where one adds the Hilbert action to the action for the matter fields., here one replaces the 4-metric with the induced metric $`g_{AB}[z]=z_A^\mu \eta _{\mu \nu }z_B^\nu `$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$, a functional of $`z^\mu `$, and considers the embedding coordinates $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ as independent fields. We use the notation $`\sigma ^A=(\tau ,\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}})`$ of Refs.. The $`z_A^\mu (\sigma )=z^\mu (\sigma )/\sigma ^A`$ are flat cotetrad fields on Minkowski spacetime ¶\**¶\**¶\**I.e. $`{}_{}{}^{4}\eta _{}^{\mu \nu }=z_A^\mu {}_{}{}^{4}g_{}^{AB}z_B^\nu `$ with $`{}_{}{}^{4}g_{}^{AB}`$ the inverse of $`{}_{}{}^{4}g_{AB}^{}`$. with the $`z_r^\mu `$’s tangent to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$¶††¶††¶††Note that in metric gravity the $`z_A^\mu z^\mu /\sigma ^A`$ are not cotetrad fields since no holonomic coordinates $`z^\mu (\sigma )`$ exist..

The evolution vector is given by $`z_\tau ^\mu =N_{[z](flat)}l^\mu +N_{[z](flat)}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu `$, where $`l^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ is the normal to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ in $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ and

$`N_{[z](flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{}_{}{}^{4}g_{\tau \tau }^{}{}_{}{}^{3}\gamma _{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}{}_{}{}^{4}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{}}=\sqrt{{}_{}{}^{4}g/{}_{}{}^{3}\gamma },`$ (A1)
$`N_{[z](flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{}{}^{3}g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })N_{[z](flat)}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })={}_{}{}^{4}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^{},`$ (A2)
are the flat lapse and shift functions defined through the metric like in metric gravity (here $`{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{u}}{}_{}{}^{4}g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{u}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{}=\delta _{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}`$); however, in Minkowski spacetime they are functionals of $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ instead of being independent variables. See Appendix B for notations on spacelike hypersurfaces.

From this Lagrangian for the isolated system ¶‡‡¶‡‡¶‡‡See for instance Eq.(19) for the case of N free scalar particles., we have that: i) the possible constraints of the system are Lorentz scalars; ii) four primary first class constraints are added which imply the independence of the description from the choice of the foliation with spacelike hypersufaces:

$$_\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=\rho _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })l_\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })T_{system}^{\tau \tau }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\mu }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })T_{system}^{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })0.$$
(A3)
Here $`T_{system}^{\tau \tau }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$, $`T_{system}^{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$, are the components of the energy-momentum tensor in the holonomic coordinate system on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ corresponding to the energy- and momentum-density of the isolated system. These four constraints satisfy an Abelian Poisson algebra being solved in 4-momenta $`\rho _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ conjugate to the embedding variables $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$: $`\{_\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),_\nu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}})\}=0`$.

We see that the embedding fields $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ are the gauge variables associated with this kind of general covariance.

The Dirac Hamiltonian is

$$H_D=H_{(c)}+d^3\sigma \lambda ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })_\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })+(\text{system-dependent\hspace{0.17em} primary\hspace{0.17em} constraints}),$$
(A4)
with $`\lambda ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ arbitrary Dirac multipliers ∥\*∥\*∥\*$`H_{(c)}`$ is the canonical part: it is either zero or weakly vanishing due to system-dependent secondary constraints.. By using $`{}_{}{}^{4}\eta _{}^{\mu \nu }=[l^\mu l^\nu z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu {}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^\nu ](\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ we can write

$`\lambda _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`[(\lambda _\mu l^\mu )(l_\nu ^\nu )(\lambda _\mu z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu )({}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}\nu }^\nu )](\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\stackrel{def}{=}`$ (A5)
$`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`N_{(flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })(l_\mu ^\mu )(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })N_{(flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })({}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}\nu }^\nu )(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),`$ (A6)
with the (non-holonomic form of the) constraints $`\stackrel{~}{}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=(l_\mu ^\mu )(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })0`$, $`\stackrel{~}{}_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=(z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\mu }^\mu )(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })0`$, satisfying the universal Dirac algebra

$`\{\stackrel{~}{}_r(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),\stackrel{~}{}_s(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}})\}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{}_r(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}}){\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{\sigma },\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}})}{\sigma ^s}}+\stackrel{~}{}_s(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }){\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{\sigma },\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}})}{\sigma ^r}},`$ (A7)
$`\{\stackrel{~}{}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),\stackrel{~}{}_r(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}})\}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }){\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{\sigma },\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}})}{\sigma ^r}},`$ (A8)
$`\{\stackrel{~}{}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),\stackrel{~}{}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}})\}`$ $`=`$ $`[{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{rs}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\stackrel{~}{}_s(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })+`$ (A9)
$`+`$ $`{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{rs}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}})\stackrel{~}{}_s(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}})]{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{\sigma },\stackrel{}{\sigma }^{^{}})}{\sigma ^r}}.`$ (A10)
In this way we have defined new flat lapse and shift functions

$`N_{(flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })l^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),`$ (A11)
$`N_{(flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }).`$ (A12)
which have the same content of the arbitrary Dirac multipliers $`\lambda _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$, namely they multiply primary first class constraints satisfying the Dirac algebra. In Minkowski spacetime they are quite distinct from the previous lapse and shift functions $`N_{[z](flat)}`$, $`N_{[z](flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}`$, defined starting from the metric. Only by using the Hamilton equations $`z_\tau ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\stackrel{}{=}\{z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),H_D\}=\lambda ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ we get $`N_{[z](flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\stackrel{}{=}N_{(flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$, $`N_{[z](flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\stackrel{}{=}N_{(flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$.

Therefore, when we consider arbitrary 3+1 splittings of spacetime with arbitrary spacelike hypersurfaces, the descriptions of metric gravity plus matter and the parametrized Minkowski description of the same matter do not seem to follow the same pattern. The situation changes however if the allowed 3+1 splittings of spacetime in ADM metric gravity are restricted to have the leaves approaching Minkowski spacelike hyperplanes at spatial infinity and if parametrized Minkowski theories are restricted to spacelike hyperplanes.

The restriction of parametrized Minkowski theories to flat hyperplanes in Minkowski spacetime is done by adding the gauge-fixings

$$z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })x_s^\mu (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}0.$$
(A13)
Here $`x_s^\mu (\tau )`$ denotes a point on the hyperplane $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ chosen as an arbitrary origin; the $`b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )`$’s form an orthonormal triad at $`x_s^\mu (\tau )`$ and the $`\tau `$-independent normal to the family of spacelike hyperplanes is $`l^\mu =b_\tau ^\mu =ϵ^\mu {}_{\alpha \beta \gamma }{}^{}b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{1}}^{\alpha }(\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{2}}^\beta (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{3}}^\gamma (\tau )`$. Each hyperplane is described by 10 configuration variables, $`x_s^\mu (\tau )`$ and the 6 independent degrees of freedom contained in the triad $`b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )`$, and by the 10 conjugate momenta: $`p_s^\mu `$ and 6 variables hidden in a spin tensor $`S_s^{\mu \nu }`$. With these 20 canonical variables it is possible to build 10 Poincaré generators $`\overline{p}_s^\mu =p_s^\mu `$, $`\overline{J}_s^{\mu \nu }=x_s^\mu p_s^\nu x_s^\nu p_s^\mu +S_s^{\mu \nu }`$.

After the restriction to spacelike hyperplanes, the piece $`d^3\sigma \lambda ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })_\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ of the Dirac Hamiltonian is reduced to

$$\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^\mu (\tau )\stackrel{~}{}_\mu (\tau )\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^{\mu \nu }(\tau )\stackrel{~}{}_{\mu \nu }(\tau ),$$
(A14)
because the time constancy of the gauge-fixings $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })x_s^\mu (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}0`$ implies ($`\dot{}`$ means $`d/d\tau `$)

$`\lambda _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_\mu (\tau )+\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{\mu \nu }(\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu \sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}},`$ (A17)
$`with`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^\mu (\tau )=\dot{x}_s^\mu (\tau ),\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^{\mu \nu }(\tau )=\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^{\nu \mu }(\tau )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}{}}[\dot{b}_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu \dot{b}_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu ](\tau ).`$
Since at this stage we have $`z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )`$, we get

$`z_\tau ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $``$ $`N_{[z](flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })l^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })+N_{[z](flat)}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ (A18)
$``$ $`\dot{x}_s^\mu (\tau )+\dot{b}_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}=\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^\mu (\tau )\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^{\mu \nu }(\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\nu }(\tau )\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}.`$ (A19)
Only now we get the coincidence of the two definitions of flat lapse and shift functions independently from the equations of motion, i.e.

$$N_{[z](flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })N_{(flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),N_{[z](flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })N_{(flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }).$$
(A20)
The description on arbitrary foliations with spacelike hyperplanes is independent from the choice of the foliation, due to the remaining 10 first class constraints

$`\stackrel{~}{}^\mu (\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^3\sigma ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}=p_s^\mu p_{sys}^\mu =p_s^\mu `$ (A21)
$``$ $`[totalmomentumofthesysteminsidethehyperplane]^\mu 0,`$ (A22)
$`\stackrel{~}{}^{\mu \nu }(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ){\displaystyle d^3\sigma \sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu (\tau ){\displaystyle d^3\sigma \sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}=S_s^{\mu \nu }S_{sys}^{\mu \nu }=`$ (A24)
$`=`$ $`S_s^{\mu \nu }[intrinsicangularmomentumofthesystem`$ (A26)
$`insidethehyperplane]^{\mu \nu }=S^{\mu \nu }_s`$
$``$ $`(b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )l^\nu b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu (\tau )l^\mu )[boostpartofsystem^{}sangularmomentum]^{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}`$ (A27)
$``$ $`(b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^\nu (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\nu (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^\mu (\tau ))[spinpartofsystem^{}sangularmomentum]^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}0.`$ (A28)
Therefore, on spacelike hyperplanes in Minkowski spacetime we have

$`N_{(flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })l^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ (A30)
$``$ $`N_{(flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=N_{[z](flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=`$ (A33)
$`=\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_\mu (\tau )l^\mu l^\mu \stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{\mu \nu }(\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^\nu (\tau )\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}=\lambda (\tau ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\lambda _{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau )\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}},`$
$`N_{(flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ (A34)
$``$ $`N_{(flat)}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=N_{[z](flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=`$ (A42)
$`=\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_\mu (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau )\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{(\mu )(\nu )}(\tau )b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^\nu (\tau )\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}=\lambda _{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\lambda _{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau )\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}},`$
$`\lambda _A(\tau )=\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_\mu (\tau )b_A^\mu (\tau ),\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_\mu (\tau )=b_\mu ^A(\tau )\lambda _A(\tau ),`$
$`\lambda _{AB}(\tau )=\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{\mu \nu }(\tau )[b_A^\mu b_B^\nu b_A^\nu b_B^\mu ](\tau )=2[\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{\mu \nu }b_A^\mu b_B^\nu ](\tau ),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{\mu \nu }(\tau )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}[b_\mu ^Ab_\nu ^Bb_\mu ^Bb_\nu ^A](\tau )\lambda _{AB}(\tau )=`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[b_\mu ^Ab_\nu ^B\lambda _{AB}](\tau ).`$
This is the main difference of the present approach from the treatment of parametrized Minkowski theories given in standard references: there, no configuration action is defined but only a phase space action, in which people use, wrongly, $`N_{[z](flat)}`$, $`N_{[z](flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}`$ instead of $`N_{(flat)}`$, $`N_{(flat)\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}`$ not only on spacelike hyperplanes but also on arbitrary spacelike hypersurfaces.

At this stage the embedding canonical variables $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$, $`\rho _\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ are reduced to: i) $`x_s^\mu (\tau ),p_s^\mu `$ with $`\{x_s^\mu ,p_s^\nu \}={}_{}{}^{4}\eta _{}^{\mu \nu }`$, parametrizing the arbitrary origin of the coordinates on the family of spacelike hyperplanes. The four constraints $`^\mu (\tau )p_s^\mu p_{sys}^\mu 0`$ mean that $`p_s^\mu `$ is determined by the 4-momentum of the isolated system. ii) $`b_A^\mu (\tau )`$ ∥†∥†∥†With the $`b_r^\mu (\tau )`$’s being three orthogonal spacelike unit vectors generating the fixed $`\tau `$-independent timelike unit normal $`b_\tau ^\mu =l^\mu `$ to the hyperplanes. and $`S_s^{\mu \nu }=S_s^{\nu \mu }`$, with the orthonormality constraints $`b_A^\mu {}_{}{}^{4}\eta _{\mu \nu }^{}b_B^\nu ={}_{}{}^{4}\eta _{AB}^{}`$. The non-vanishing Dirac brackets enforcing the orthonormality constraints  for the $`b_A^\mu `$’s are

$`\{b_A^\rho ,S_s^{\mu \nu }\}`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{}{}^{4}\eta _{}^{\rho \mu }b_A^\nu {}_{}{}^{4}\eta _{}^{\rho \nu }b_A^\mu ,`$ (A43)
$`\{S_s^{\mu \nu },S_s^{\alpha \beta }\}`$ $`=`$ $`C_{\gamma \delta }^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }S_s^{\gamma \delta },`$ (A44)
with $`C_{\gamma \delta }^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }`$ the structure constants of the Lorentz algebra.

Then one has that $`p_s^\mu `$, $`J_s^{\mu \nu }=x_s^\mu p_s^\nu x_s^\nu p_s^\mu +S_s^{\mu \nu }`$, satisfy the algebra of the Poincaré group, with $`S_s^{\mu \nu }`$ playing the role of the spin tensor. The other six constraints $`^{\mu \nu }(\tau )S_s^{\mu \nu }S_{sys}^{\mu \nu }0`$ mean that $`S_s^{\mu \nu }`$ coincides with the spin tensor of the isolated system.

For the velocity of the origin $`x_s^\mu (\tau )`$ we get

$`\dot{x}_s^\mu (\tau )`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`\{x_s^\mu (\tau ),H_D\}=\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_\nu (\tau )\{x_s^\mu (\tau ),^\mu (\tau )\}=`$ (A45)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^\mu (\tau )=[u^\mu (p_s)u^\nu (p_s)ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))ϵ_r^\nu (u(p_s))]\dot{x}_{s\nu }(\tau )=`$ (A46)
$`=`$ $`u^\mu (p_s)\lambda (\tau )+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))\lambda _r(\tau ),`$ (A47)
$`\dot{x}_s^2(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda ^2(\tau )\stackrel{}{\lambda }^2(\tau )>0,\dot{x}_su(p_s)=\lambda (\tau ),`$ (A48)
$`U_s^\mu (\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{x}_s^\mu (\tau )}{\sqrt{ϵ\dot{x}_s^2(\tau )}}}={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda (\tau )u^\mu (p_s)+\lambda _r(\tau )ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s))}{\sqrt{\lambda ^2(\tau )\stackrel{}{\lambda }^2(\tau )}}},`$ (A49)
$``$ $`x_s^\mu (\tau )=x_s^\mu (0)u^\mu (p_s){\displaystyle _0^\tau }𝑑\tau _1\lambda (\tau _1)+ϵ_r^\mu (u(p_s)){\displaystyle _0^\tau }𝑑\tau _1\lambda _r(\tau _1).`$ (A51)
Let us remark that, for each configuration of an isolated system with timelike total 4-momentum there is a privileged family of hyperplanes (the Wigner hyperplanes orthogonal to $`p_s^\mu `$, existing when $`ϵp_s^2>0`$) corresponding to the intrinsic rest-frame of the isolated system. If we choose these hyperplanes with suitable gauge fixings for the constraints $`\stackrel{~}{}^{\mu \nu }(\tau )0`$ , we are left with the four constraints $`^\mu (\tau )0`$, which can be rewritten as

$`ϵ_s`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{ϵp_s^2}[invariantmassoftheisolatedsystemunderinvestigation]=M_{sys};`$ (A52)
$`\stackrel{}{p}_{sys}`$ $`=`$ $`[3momentumoftheisolatedsysteminsidetheWignerhyperplane]0,`$ (A54)
$`H_D`$ $`=`$ $`H_{(c)}+\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^\mu (\tau )\stackrel{~}{}_\mu (\tau )+(systemdependentprimaryconstraints)=`$ (A56)
$`=`$ $`H_{(c)}+\lambda (\tau )[ϵ_sM_{sys}]\stackrel{}{\lambda }(\tau )\stackrel{}{p}_{sys}+`$ (A57)
$`+`$ $`(systemdependentprimaryconstraints).`$ (A58)
There is no more a restriction on $`p_s^\mu `$, because $`u_s^\mu (p_s)=p_s^\mu /\sqrt{ϵp_s^2}`$ gives the orientation of the Wigner hyperplanes containing the isolated system, with respect to an arbitrary given external observer.

In this special gauge, after having gone to Dirac brackets we have $`b_A^\mu L^\mu {}_{A}{}^{}(p_s,\stackrel{}{p}_s)`$ (the standard Wigner boost for timelike Poincaré orbits), $`S_s^{\mu \nu }S_{sys}^{\mu \nu }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{\mu \nu }(\tau )0`$. The origin $`x_s^\mu (\tau )`$ does not belong any more to the canonical basis for these Dirac brackets and is replaced by the non-covariant canonical variable $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu (\tau )=x_s^\mu (\tau )\frac{1}{ϵ_s(p_s^o+ϵ_s)}\left[p_{s\nu }S_s^{\nu \mu }+ϵ_s(S_s^{o\mu }S_s^{o\nu }\frac{p_{s\nu }p_s^\mu }{ϵ_s^2})\right]`$.

In general, we have the problem that in the gauges where $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{\mu \nu }(\tau )`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{AB}(\tau )`$ are different from zero, the foliations with leaves $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ associated to arbitrary 3+1 splittings of Minkowski spacetime are geometrically ill-defined at spatial infinity so that the variational principle describing the isolated system could make sense only for those 3+1 splittings having these part of the Dirac’s multipliers vanishing. The problem is that, since on hyperplanes $`\dot{l}^\mu =0`$ and $`l^\mu b_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\mu }(\tau )=0`$ imply $`l^\mu \dot{b}_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\mu }(\tau )=0`$, Eqs.(A19) implies $`\lambda _{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau )=0`$ (i.e. only three $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{\mu \nu }(\tau )`$ are independent) on spacelike hyperplane, because otherwise Lorentz boosts could generate crossing of the foliation leaves. To avoid incosistencies this suggests to make the reduction from arbitrary spacelike hypersurfaces either directly to the Wigner hyperplanes or to spacelike hypersurfaces approaching Wigner hyperplanes asymptotically ∥‡∥‡∥‡Asymptotically, we must fix the gauge freedom generated by the spin part of Lorentz boosts, see Eq.(A17); how this can be done before the restriction to spacelike hyperplanes has still to be studied..

Till now, therefore, the 3+1 splittings of Minkowski spacetime whose leaves are Wigner hyperplanes are the only ones for which the foliation is well defined at spatial infinity: both the induced proper time interval and shift functions are finite there.

One obtains in this way a new kind of instant form of the dynamics, the Wigner-covariant 1-time rest-frame instant form. For any isolated system all the variables become Wigner covariant except for the external canonical center of mass $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$, which looses even Lorentz covariance. This does not matter, however, since it is a completely decoupled variable. This is the special relativistic generalization of the non-relativistic separation of the center of mass from the relative motion \[$`H=\frac{\stackrel{}{P}^2}{2M}+H_{rel}`$\]. The role of the center of mass is taken by the Wigner hyperplane, identified by a point $`\stackrel{~}{x}^\mu (\tau )`$ and its normal $`p_s^\mu `$.

## B Notations on spacelike hypersurfaces.

Let us first review some preliminary results from Refs. needed in the description of physical systems on spacelike hypersurfaces.

Let $`\{\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau \}`$ be a one-parameter family of spacelike hypersurfaces foliating Minkowski spacetime $`M^4`$ with 4-metric $`\eta _{\mu \nu }=ϵ(+)`$, $`ϵ=\pm `$ ∥§∥§∥§$`ϵ=+1`$ is the particle physics convention; $`ϵ=1`$ the general relativity one. and giving a 3+1 decomposition of it. At fixed $`\tau `$, let $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ be the coordinates of the points on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ in $`M^4`$, $`\{\stackrel{}{\sigma }\}`$ a system of coordinates on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$. If $`\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}=(\sigma ^\tau =\tau ;\stackrel{}{\sigma }=\{\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}\})`$ ∥¶∥¶∥¶The notation $`\stackrel{ˇ}{A}=(\tau ,\stackrel{ˇ}{r})`$ with $`\stackrel{ˇ}{r}=1,2,3`$ will be used; note that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{A}=\tau `$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{A}=\stackrel{ˇ}{r}=1,2,3`$ are Lorentz-scalar indices. and $`_{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}=/\sigma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}`$, one can define the cotetrads

$$z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=_{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),_{\stackrel{ˇ}{B}}z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}^\mu _{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{B}}^\mu =0,$$
(B1)
so that the metric on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ is

$`g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}\stackrel{ˇ}{B}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\eta _{\mu \nu }z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{B}}^\nu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),ϵg_{\tau \tau }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })>0,`$ (B2)
$`g(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=detg_{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}\stackrel{ˇ}{B}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=(detz_{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }))^2,`$ (B3)
$`\gamma (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=detg_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=det{}_{}{}^{3}g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),`$ (B4)
where $`g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}=ϵ{}_{}{}^{3}g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{}`$ with $`{}_{}{}^{3}g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{}`$ having positive signature $`(+++)`$.

If $`\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=ϵ{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}`$ is the inverse of the 3-metric $`g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ \[$`\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{u}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{u}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=\delta _{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}`$\], the inverse $`g^{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}\stackrel{ˇ}{B}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ of $`g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}\stackrel{ˇ}{B}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ \[$`g^{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}\stackrel{ˇ}{C}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{c}\stackrel{ˇ}{b}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=\delta _{\stackrel{ˇ}{B}}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}`$\] is given by

$`g^{\tau \tau }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })={\displaystyle \frac{\gamma (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}{g(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}},`$ (B7)
$`g^{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=[{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{g}}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{u}}\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{u}\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}](\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=ϵ[{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{g}}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{u}}{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{u}\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}](\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),`$
$`g^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })+[{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{g}}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{u}}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{v}}\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{u}\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{v}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}](\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=`$
$`=`$ $`ϵ{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })+[{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{g}}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{u}}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{v}}{}_{}{}^{3}g\stackrel{ˇ}{u}\stackrel{ˇ}{r}{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{v}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}](\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),`$ (B8)
so that $`1=g^{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{C}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{C}\tau }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ is equivalent to

$$\frac{g(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}{\gamma (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}=g_{\tau \tau }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{s}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }).$$
(B9)
We have

$$z_\tau ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=(\sqrt{\frac{g}{\gamma }}l^\mu +g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^\mu )(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),$$
(B10)
and

$`\eta ^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })g^{\stackrel{ˇ}{A}\stackrel{ˇ}{B}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{B}}^\nu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=`$ (B11)
$`=`$ $`(l^\mu l^\nu +z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu \gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^\nu )(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),`$ (B12)
where

$`l^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\gamma }}}ϵ^\mu {}_{\alpha \beta \gamma }{}^{}z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{1}}^{\alpha }z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{2}}^\beta z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{3}}^\gamma )(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),`$ (B14)
$`l^2(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=1,l_\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=0,`$
is the unit (future pointing) normal to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ at $`z^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$.

For the volume element in Minkowski spacetime we have

$`d^4z`$ $`=`$ $`z_\tau ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })d\tau d^3\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mu =d\tau [z_\tau ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })l_\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })]\sqrt{\gamma (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}d^3\sigma =`$ (B15)
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{g(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })}d\tau d^3\sigma .`$ (B16)
Let us remark that, according to the geometric approach of Ref.,one can write

$$z_\tau ^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })=N(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })l^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })+N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma })z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}^\mu (\tau ,\stackrel{}{\sigma }),$$
(B17)
where $`N=\sqrt{g/\gamma }=\sqrt{g_{\tau \tau }\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{s}}}=\sqrt{g_{\tau \tau }+ϵ{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{s}}}`$ and $`N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}=g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{s}}\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}=ϵg_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{s}}{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}`$ are the standard lapse and shift functions $`N_{[z](flat)}`$, $`N_{[z](flat)}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}`$ of Appendix A, so that

$`g_{\tau \tau }`$ $`=`$ $`ϵN^2+g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}=ϵ[N^2{}_{}{}^{3}g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{}N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}],`$ (B18)
$`g_{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}`$ $`=`$ $`g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}=ϵ{}_{}{}^{3}g_{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}^{}N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}},`$ (B19)
$`g^{\tau \tau }`$ $`=`$ $`ϵN^2,`$ (B20)
$`g^{\tau \stackrel{ˇ}{r}}`$ $`=`$ $`ϵN^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}/N^2,`$ (B21)
$`g^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}+ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}}{N^2}}=ϵ[{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}{\displaystyle \frac{N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}}}{N^2}}],`$ (B25)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{z_\tau ^\mu }}=l_\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{N}}+z_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}\mu }\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}}}=l_\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{N}}ϵz_{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}\mu }{}_{}{}^{3}g_{}^{\stackrel{ˇ}{s}\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{N^{\stackrel{ˇ}{r}}}},`$
$`d^4z=N\sqrt{\gamma }d\tau d^3\sigma .`$
The rest frame form of a timelike four-vector $`p^\mu `$ is $`\stackrel{}{p}{}_{}{}^{\mu }=\eta \sqrt{ϵp^2}(1;\stackrel{}{0})=\eta ^{\mu o}\eta \sqrt{ϵp^2}`$, $`\stackrel{}{p}{}_{}{}^{2}=p^2`$, where $`\eta =signp^o`$. The standard Wigner boost transforming $`\stackrel{}{p}^\mu `$ into $`p^\mu `$ is

$`L^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}(p,\stackrel{}{p})`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_\nu ^\mu (u(p))=`$ (B26)
$`=`$ $`\eta _\nu ^\mu +2{\displaystyle \frac{p^\mu \stackrel{}{p}_\nu }{ϵp^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(p^\mu +\stackrel{}{p}^\mu )(p_\nu +\stackrel{}{p}_\nu )}{p\stackrel{}{p}+ϵp^2}}=`$ (B27)
$`=`$ $`\eta _\nu ^\mu +2u^\mu (p)u_\nu (\stackrel{}{p}){\displaystyle \frac{(u^\mu (p)+u^\mu (\stackrel{}{p}))(u_\nu (p)+u_\nu (\stackrel{}{p}))}{1+u^o(p)}},`$ (B28)
$`\nu =0`$ $`ϵ_o^\mu (u(p))=u^\mu (p)=p^\mu /\eta \sqrt{ϵp^2},`$ (B30)
$`\nu =r`$ $`ϵ_r^\mu (u(p))=(u_r(p);\delta _r^i{\displaystyle \frac{u^i(p)u_r(p)}{1+u^o(p)}}).`$ (B31)
The inverse of $`L^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}(p,\stackrel{}{p})`$ is $`L^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}(\stackrel{}{p},p)`$, the standard boost to the rest frame, defined by

$$L^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}(\stackrel{}{p},p)=L_\nu {}_{}{}^{\mu }(p,\stackrel{}{p})=L^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}(p,\stackrel{}{p})|_{\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{p}}.$$
(B32)
Therefore, we can define the following cotetrads and tetrads ∥∥∥∥∥∥The $`ϵ_r^\mu (u(p))`$’s are also called polarization vectors; the indices r, s will be used for A=1,2,3 and $`\overline{o}`$ for $`A=o`$.

$`ϵ_A^\mu (u(p))=L^\mu {}_{A}{}^{}(p,\stackrel{}{p}),`$ (B33)
$`ϵ_\mu ^A(u(p))=L^A{}_{\mu }{}^{}(\stackrel{}{p},p)=\eta ^{AB}\eta _{\mu \nu }ϵ_B^\nu (u(p)),`$ (B34)
(B35)
$`ϵ_\mu ^{\overline{o}}(u(p))=\eta _{\mu \nu }ϵ_o^\nu (u(p))=u_\mu (p),`$ (B36)
$`ϵ_\mu ^r(u(p))=\delta ^{rs}\eta _{\mu \nu }ϵ_r^\nu (u(p))=(\delta ^{rs}u_s(p);\delta _j^r\delta ^{rs}\delta _{jh}{\displaystyle \frac{u^h(p)u_s(p)}{1+u^o(p)}}),`$ (B37)
$`ϵ_o^A(u(p))=u_A(p),`$ (B38)
which satisfy

$`ϵ_\mu ^A(u(p))ϵ_A^\nu (u(p))=\eta _\nu ^\mu ,`$ (B39)
$`ϵ_\mu ^A(u(p))ϵ_B^\mu (u(p))=\eta _B^A,`$ (B40)
$`\eta ^{\mu \nu }=ϵ_A^\mu (u(p))\eta ^{AB}ϵ_B^\nu (u(p))=u^\mu (p)u^\nu (p){\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{3}{}}}ϵ_r^\mu (u(p))ϵ_r^\nu (u(p)),`$ (B41)
$`\eta _{AB}=ϵ_A^\mu (u(p))\eta _{\mu \nu }ϵ_B^\nu (u(p)),`$ (B42)
$`p_\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_\alpha }}ϵ_A^\mu (u(p))=p_\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_\alpha }}ϵ_\mu ^A(u(p))=0.`$ (B43)
The Wigner rotation corresponding to the Lorentz transformation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is

$`R^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}(\mathrm{\Lambda },p)`$ $`=`$ $`[L(\stackrel{}{p},p)\mathrm{\Lambda }^1L(\mathrm{\Lambda }p,\stackrel{}{p})]^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& R^i{}_{j}{}^{}(\mathrm{\Lambda },p)\end{array}\right),`$ (B46)
$`R^i{}_{j}{}^{}(\mathrm{\Lambda },p)`$ $`=`$ $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }^1)^i{}_{j}{}^{}{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{\Lambda }^1)^i{}_{o}{}^{}p_{\beta }^{}(\mathrm{\Lambda }^1)^\beta _j}{p_\rho (\mathrm{\Lambda }^1)^\rho {}_{o}{}^{}+\eta \sqrt{ϵp^2}}}`$ (B48)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{p^i}{p^o+\eta \sqrt{ϵp^2}}}[(\mathrm{\Lambda }^1)^o{}_{j}{}^{}{\displaystyle \frac{((\mathrm{\Lambda }^1)^o{}_{o}{}^{}1)p_\beta (\mathrm{\Lambda }^1)^\beta _j}{p_\rho (\mathrm{\Lambda }^1)^\rho {}_{o}{}^{}+\eta \sqrt{ϵp^2}}}].`$ (B49)
The polarization vectors transform under the Poincaré transformations $`(a,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ in the following way

$$ϵ_r^\mu (u(\mathrm{\Lambda }p))=(R^1)_r{}_{}{}^{s}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}^{\mu }{}_{\nu }{}^{}ϵ_{s}^{\nu }(u(p)).$$
(B50)
## C The Gartenhaus-Schwartz Transformation for Spinning Particles.

In Ref. there is the rest-frame instant form description of a system of N spinning positive-energy particles with the intrinsic spin described by Grassmann variables.

On the Wigner hyperplane the N spinning particles are described by a canonical basis containing the center-of-mass variables $`\stackrel{~}{x}_s^\mu `$, $`p_s^\mu `$, the pairs $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$, $`i=1,..,N`$, of Eq.(105) and three Grassmann variables for each spin, $`\xi _i^rϵ_\mu ^r(u(p_s))\xi _i^\mu `$  satisfying $`\{\xi _i^r,\xi _j^s\}==i\delta ^{rs}\delta _{ij}`$ and having vanishing Poisson bracket with all the other variables.

The rest-frame external realization of the Poincaré algebra is built in analogy to Eq.(81) but with a modified spin tensor $`\stackrel{~}{S}_s^{\mu \nu }`$

$`\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left(\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i+\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }\right),`$ (C1)
$`\overline{S}_{i\xi }^r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}ϵ^{ruv}\xi _i^u\xi _i^v,\{\overline{S}_{i\xi }^r,\overline{S}_{j\xi }^s\}=\delta _{ij}ϵ^{rsu}\overline{S}_{i\xi }^u.`$ (C3)
In absence of interactions Eqs.(42), (55), (105) remain valid.

By using the expression of $`\overline{S}_s^{\mu \nu }`$ on the Wigner hyperplane given in Ref. and the methodology of Ref., the internal realization (88) of the Poincaré algebra becomes

$`H_M`$ $`=`$ $`M_{sys}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}H_i,H_i=\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i^2},`$ (C4)
$`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(0),`$ (C5)
$`\stackrel{}{J}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_s={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left(\stackrel{}{\eta }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i+\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }\right)=\stackrel{}{J}_B+\stackrel{}{J}_S,\stackrel{}{J}_S={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi },`$ (C6)
$`\stackrel{}{K}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\eta }_iH_i+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i}{m_i+H_i}}=\stackrel{}{K}_B+\stackrel{}{K}_s,\stackrel{}{K}_B={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{\eta }_iH_i.`$ (C7)
Following Ref., if we put

$`\stackrel{}{K}`$ $`=`$ $`H_M\stackrel{}{q}_++{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{S}_q\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}+H_M}},\mathrm{\Pi }=H_M^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+^2,`$ (C8)
$`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{J}\stackrel{}{q}_+\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+,`$ (C10)
we get consistently the expression of the internal canonical center of mass $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$ given in Eq.(219), with $`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ the associated spin vector.

As in Section VI, let us apply the Gartenhaus-Schwartz transformation to go from the internal canonical basis $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i`$, $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_i`$ (with $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$) to the center-of-mass basis $`\stackrel{}{q}_+`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+`$, $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{qi}`$ (again with $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+0`$) with $`\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }\stackrel{}{S}_{qi\xi }`$. By using Eqs.(227) and (230) with $`\stackrel{}{K}=\stackrel{}{K}_B+\stackrel{}{K}_S`$ of Eq.(C7), we can find the differential equations for the $`\alpha `$-dependence of the various quantities.

Since $`\{\stackrel{}{\pi }_a,\stackrel{}{K}_S\}=0`$, $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}=lim_\alpha \mathrm{}\stackrel{}{\pi }_a(\alpha )`$ is the same as in the spinless case; the $`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}`$’s are given in Eqs.(272). As in the spinless case $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is an invariant and we have $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}=H_M(\mathrm{})=H_{(rel)}=_{i=1}^NH_i(\mathrm{})`$ with $`H_i(\mathrm{})=(H_MH_i\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i)/\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}`$. Moreover, $`\stackrel{}{n}_+=\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+/|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|`$ is invariant.

For the spin variables $`\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }`$ we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\overline{S}_{i\xi }^r(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\overline{S}_{i\xi }^r(\alpha ),\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\}=\{{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{K}(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}},\overline{S}_{i\xi }^r\}=`$ (C11)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _+^s(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}}\{K_S^s(\alpha ),\overline{S}_{i\xi }^r(\alpha )\}={\displaystyle \frac{[\left(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )\right)\times \stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )]^r}{H_M(\alpha )(m_i+H_i(\alpha ))}},`$ (C12)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )}{d\theta (\alpha )}}={\displaystyle \frac{\left(\stackrel{}{n}_+\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )\right)\times \stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )}{m_i+H_i(\alpha )}}.`$ (C14)
This equation coincides with Eq.(3.10) of Ref.. By using Eq.(3.11) of Ref., its integration provides Thomas precession of the spin variable $`\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }`$ about an axis $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+`$ in the instantaneous center-of-mass frame:

$`\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`cos\gamma (\alpha )\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }+[1cos\gamma (\alpha )](\stackrel{}{v}_i\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi })\stackrel{}{v}_isin\gamma (\alpha )\stackrel{}{v}_i\times \stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi },`$ (C15)
$`\stackrel{}{v}_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+|}},`$ (C17)
$`tg{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma (\alpha )}{2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1cos\gamma (\alpha )}{sin\gamma (\alpha )}}={\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+|}{(m_i+H_i)ctgh\frac{\theta (\alpha )}{2}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{n}_+}}`$ (C19)
$`_\alpha \mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}{(m_i+H_i)(H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}}0,[tg{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma (\mathrm{})}{2}}={\displaystyle \frac{H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}}],`$
$`sin\gamma (\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{(m_i+H_i)ctgh\frac{\theta (\alpha )}{2}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{n}_+}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+|^2+[(m_i+H_i)ctgh\frac{\theta (\alpha )}{2}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{n}_+]^2}}|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+|,`$ (C20)
$`cos\gamma (\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`12{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+|^2}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+|^2+[(m_i+H_i)ctgh\frac{\theta (\alpha )}{2}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{n}_+]^2}}.`$ (C21)
Therefore, we obtain

$`\stackrel{}{S}_{qi\xi }`$ $`=`$ $`lim_\alpha \mathrm{}\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )=\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|^2}{(m_i+H_i)(m_i+H_i(\mathrm{}))(H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}\right]\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }+`$ (C22)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{(m_i+H_i)(m_i+H_i(\mathrm{}))(H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}`$ (C23)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(m_i+H_i)(H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{(m_i+H_i)(m_i+H_i(\mathrm{}))(H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+)\times \stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }.`$ (C24)
For the Grassmann variables $`\stackrel{}{\xi }_i`$, we get the same differential equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\xi _i^r(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\xi _i^r(\alpha ),\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\}={\displaystyle \frac{[\left(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )\right)\times \stackrel{}{\xi }_i]^r}{H_M(\alpha )(m_i+H_i(\alpha ))}},`$ (C25)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{\xi }_i(\alpha )}{d\theta (\alpha )}}={\displaystyle \frac{\left(\stackrel{}{n}_+\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )\right)\times \stackrel{}{\xi }_i(\alpha )}{m_i+H_i(\alpha )}},`$ (C28)
$``$
$`\stackrel{}{\xi }_{qi}`$ $`=`$ $`lim_\alpha \mathrm{}\stackrel{}{\xi }_i(\alpha )=\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|^2}{(m_i+H_i)(m_i+H_i(\mathrm{}))(H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}\right]\stackrel{}{\xi }_i+`$ (C29)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+\stackrel{}{\xi }_i\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{(m_i+H_i)(m_i+H_i(\mathrm{}))(H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}`$ (C30)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(m_i+H_i)(H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+}{(m_i+H_i)(m_i+H_i(\mathrm{}))(H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_+)\times \stackrel{}{\xi }_i\stackrel{}{\xi }_i.`$ (C31)
Let us remark that, now, as one can easily check, besides the invariants $`I_i^{(1)}`$ and $`I^{(2)}`$ of Eqs. (276) of the spinless case (we have $`I^{(2)}=I_B^{(2)}+I_S^{(2)}`$ since $`\stackrel{}{K}=\stackrel{}{K}_B+\stackrel{}{K}_S`$) there are also the following invariants

$`I_i^{(3)}`$ $`=`$ $`(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+)\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi },`$ (C32)
$`I^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`I_B^{(2)}+I_S^{(2)},I_S^{(2)}={\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}{H_M}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(3)}}{m_i+H_i}}.`$ (C34)
Let us now consider the position vectors. Like in the spinless case the preliminary calculations for Eq.(286), now give

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\alpha }}\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )}{H_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{dH_i(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(1)}I^{(2)}}{H_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{dJ^{(1)}(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}`$ (C35)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{H_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{dH_i(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(3)}}{(m_i+H_i(\alpha ))^2}}.`$ (C36)
These equations have the solution

$`\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_i}{H_i(\alpha )}}\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i{\displaystyle \frac{I^{(2)}}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}}(e^\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{H_i}{H_i(\alpha )}})+`$ (C37)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(3)}}{H_i(\alpha )}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_i+H_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_i+H_i}}\right).`$ (C38)
For $`\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$ we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha ),\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )\stackrel{}{q}_+(\alpha )\}=n_+^s{\displaystyle \frac{}{\stackrel{}{k}_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|K^s(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}}=`$ (C39)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha ){\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{k}_i(\alpha )}{H_i(\alpha )H_M(\alpha )}}+`$ (C40)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}H_j(\alpha )\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_j(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{k}_i(\alpha )}{H_i(\alpha )H_M(\alpha )}}\stackrel{}{n}_+\right]+`$ (C41)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{n}_+\left(\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )\right)|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )H_i(\alpha )(m_i+H_i(\alpha ))^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{n}_+\times \stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )(m_i+H_i(\alpha ))}}=`$ (C42)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_i|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )}{H_i^2(\alpha )H_M(\alpha )}}\left[\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i+{\displaystyle \frac{I^{(2)}}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{K}(\alpha )\stackrel{}{n}_+}{H_M(\alpha )}}+`$ (C43)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}{H_i(\alpha )H_M(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{n}_+\left(\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )\right)}{(m_i+H_i(\alpha ))^2}}+`$ (C44)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(3)}}{H_i(\alpha )}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_i+H_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_i+H_i}}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{n}_+\times \stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )(m_i+H_i(\alpha ))}}.`$ (C45)
The equations for $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )=\sqrt{N}_{i=1}^N\gamma _{ai}\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )`$ are \[see Eq.(3.21) of Ref.\]

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{\rho }^a(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )}{d\alpha }}=`$ (C46)
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}{\displaystyle \frac{H_i|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )}{H_i^2(\alpha )}}(\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\eta }_i+{\displaystyle \frac{I^{(2)}}{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}})+`$ (C47)
$`+`$ $`\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )}{H_i(\alpha )}}[{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}{H_M(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{n}_+\left(\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )\right)}{(m_i+H_i(\alpha ))^2}}+`$ (C48)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(3)}|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|}{H_iH_M(\alpha )}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_i+H_i(\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_i+H_i}})]+`$ (C49)
$`+`$ $`\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{ai}{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+(\alpha )|\stackrel{}{n}_+\times \stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )}{H_M(\alpha )(m_i+H_i(\alpha ))}}.`$ (C50)
By using the results contained in Ref. this equation can be integrated with the final result

$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_a{\displaystyle \underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{aj}(\gamma _{bi}\gamma _{bj}){\displaystyle \frac{H_iH_j}{H_M}}\stackrel{}{J}_j^{(2)}(\alpha )\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\rho }_b+`$ (C51)
$`+`$ $`\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(3)}}{H_M(m_i+H_i)}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{aj}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_j(\alpha )}{H_j(\alpha )}}sh\theta (\alpha )+`$ (C52)
$`+`$ $`\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{ai}}{(m_i+H_i(\alpha ))(m_i+H_i)}}[{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(3)}(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i|\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i|\stackrel{}{n}_+sh\theta (\alpha )}{H_i(\alpha )}}+`$ (C53)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(3)}[H_iH_i(\alpha )]\stackrel{}{n}_+}{H_i(\alpha )}}+[ch\theta (\alpha )1]\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+`$ (C54)
$``$ $`sh\theta (\alpha ){\displaystyle \frac{(m_i+H_i)[ch\theta (\alpha )+1]\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{k}_ish\theta (\alpha )}{ch\theta (\alpha )+1}}].`$ (C55)
Then we get

$`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$ $`=`$ $`lim_\alpha \mathrm{}\stackrel{}{\rho }_a(\alpha )=\stackrel{}{\rho }_a`$ (C56)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{b=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\gamma _{aj}(\gamma _{bi}\gamma _{bj}){\displaystyle \frac{H_i}{H_M}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_j(\mathrm{})}{H_j(\mathrm{})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}+({\displaystyle \frac{H_M}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}1)\stackrel{}{n}_+\right]\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\rho }_b+`$ (C57)
$`+`$ $`\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(3)}}{H_M(m_i+H_i)}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\gamma _{aj}{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_j(\mathrm{})}{H_j(\mathrm{})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}+`$ (C58)
$`+`$ $`\sqrt{N}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{ai}}{(m_i+H_i)(m_i+H_i(\mathrm{}))}}[{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|I_i^{(3)}}{H_i(\mathrm{})\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}(\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\stackrel{}{n}_+)+`$ (C59)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{I_i^{(3)}(H_iH_i(\mathrm{}))}{H_i(\mathrm{})}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(H_M\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i\times \stackrel{}{n}_+`$ (C60)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(m_i+H_i)(H_M+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }})|\stackrel{}{\kappa }_+|\stackrel{}{n}_+\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i}{H_M\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }}}}\stackrel{}{n}_+\times \stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }]\stackrel{}{\rho }_a.`$ (C61)
In the same way as in the spinless case we obtain

$`\stackrel{}{J}_S(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left[\stackrel{}{\eta }_i(\alpha )\times \stackrel{}{\kappa }_i(\alpha )+\stackrel{}{\overline{S}}_{i\xi }(\alpha )\right]`$ (C64)
$`_\alpha \mathrm{}\stackrel{}{S}_q={\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}\times \stackrel{}{\pi }_{qa}+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{}{S}_{qi\xi }.`$
## D Euler Angles.

Let us denote by $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ the Euler angles chosen as orientation variables $`\theta ^\alpha `$.

Let $`\widehat{f}_1=\widehat{i}`$, $`\widehat{f}_2=\widehat{j}`$, $`\widehat{f}_3=\widehat{k}`$ be the unit 3-vectors along the axes of the space frame and $`\widehat{e}_1=\widehat{\chi }`$, $`\widehat{e}_2=\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }`$, $`\widehat{e}_3=\widehat{N}`$, the unit 3-vectors along the axes of a body frame. Then we have

$`\stackrel{}{S}_q`$ $`=`$ $`S_q^r\widehat{f}_r=R^{rs}(\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\beta },\stackrel{~}{\gamma })\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s\widehat{f}_r=\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s\widehat{e}_s,`$ (D2)
$`\widehat{e}_s=(R^T)^{sr}(\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\beta },\stackrel{~}{\gamma })\widehat{f}_r=_s{}_{}{}^{r}(\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\beta },\stackrel{~}{\gamma })\widehat{f}_r.`$
There are two main conventions for the definition of the Euler angles $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$.

A) The y-convention (see Refs. (Appendix B) and ): i) perform a first rotation of an angle $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ around $`\widehat{f}_3`$ \[$`\widehat{f}_1\widehat{e}_1^{^{}}=cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\widehat{f}_1+sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\widehat{f}_2`$, $`\widehat{f}_2\widehat{e}_2^{^{}}=sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\widehat{f}_1+cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\widehat{f}_2`$, $`\widehat{f}_3\widehat{e}_3^{^{}}=\widehat{f}_3`$\]; ii) perform a second rotation of an angle $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ around $`\widehat{e}_2^{^{}}`$ \[$`\widehat{e}_1^{^{}}\widehat{e}_1^\mathrm{"}=cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }\widehat{e}_1^{^{}}sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }\widehat{e}_3^{^{}}`$, $`\widehat{e}_2^{^{}}\widehat{e}_2^\mathrm{"}=\widehat{e}_2^{^{}}`$, $`\widehat{e}_3^{^{}}\widehat{e}_3^\mathrm{"}=sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }\widehat{e}_1^{^{}}+cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }\widehat{e}_3^{^{}}`$\]; iii) perform a third rotation of an angle $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ around $`\widehat{e}_3^\mathrm{"}`$ \[$`\widehat{e}_1^\mathrm{"}\widehat{e}_1=cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\widehat{e}_1^\mathrm{"}+sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\widehat{e}_2^\mathrm{"}`$, $`\widehat{e}_2^\mathrm{"}\widehat{e}_2=sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\widehat{e}_1^\mathrm{"}+cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\widehat{e}_2^\mathrm{"}`$\]. In this way one gets

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}\widehat{\chi }\\ \widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi }\\ \widehat{N}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\widehat{e}_1\\ \widehat{e}_2\\ \widehat{e}_3\end{array}\right)=(\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\beta },\stackrel{~}{\gamma })\left(\begin{array}{c}\widehat{f}_1\\ \widehat{f}_2\\ \widehat{f}_3\end{array}\right),`$ (D14)
$`_r{}_{}{}^{s}(\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\beta },\stackrel{~}{\gamma })=R^{Trs}(\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\beta },\stackrel{~}{\gamma })=`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{ccc}cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }& cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }& cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }\\ (sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }& sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }& sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }\\ sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }& sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }& cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }\end{array}\right),`$ (D20)
$`with`$
$`tg\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{N}^2}{\widehat{N}^1}},`$ (D22)
$`cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{N}^3,`$ (D23)
$`tg\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\chi }^3}{(\widehat{N}\times \widehat{\chi })^3}}.`$ (D24)
Since $`\widehat{N}`$ and $`\widehat{\chi }`$ are functions of $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{qa}`$ only, see Eq.(444), it follows $`\{\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\beta }\}=\{\stackrel{~}{\beta },\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\}=\{\stackrel{~}{\gamma },\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\}=0`$.

B) The x-convention (see Refs.,  (in the text) and ): the Euler angles $`\theta `$, $`\phi `$ and $`\psi `$ are: i) $`\theta =\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$; ii) $`cos\phi =sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$, $`sin\phi =cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$; iii) $`cos\psi =sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$, $`sin\psi =cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$.

We use the y-convention. Following Ref., let us introduce the canonical momenta $`p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}`$, $`p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}`$, $`p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}`$ conjugated to $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$: $`\{\stackrel{~}{\alpha },p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}\}=\{\stackrel{~}{\beta },p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}\}=\{\stackrel{~}{\gamma },p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}\}=1`$ (note that this Darboux chart does not exist globally). Then, the results of Ref. imply

$`S_q^1`$ $`=`$ $`sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}{sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }}}p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }ctg\stackrel{~}{\beta }p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }},`$ (D25)
$`S_q^2`$ $`=`$ $`cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}{sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }}}p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }ctg\stackrel{~}{\beta }p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }},`$ (D26)
$`S_q^3`$ $`=`$ $`p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }},`$ (D27)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1`$ $`=`$ $`sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}{sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }}}p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}+cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }ctg\stackrel{~}{\beta }p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }},`$ (D29)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2`$ $`=`$ $`cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}{sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }}}p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }ctg\stackrel{~}{\beta }p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }},`$ (D30)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3`$ $`=`$ $`p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }},`$ (D32)
$``$
$`p_{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`S_q^3=sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1+sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2+cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3,`$ (D33)
$`p_{\stackrel{~}{\beta }}`$ $`=`$ $`sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }S_q^1+cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }S_q^2=sin\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1cos\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2,`$ (D34)
$`p_{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3=cos\stackrel{~}{\alpha }sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }S_q^1+sin\stackrel{~}{\alpha }sin\stackrel{~}{\beta }S_q^2+cos\stackrel{~}{\beta }S_q^3.`$ (D35)
## E The 3-Body Case.

Let us try to rewrite the 3-body Hamiltonian (544) in a form reminiscent of the non-relativistic Eq.(3.31) of Ref., since this is the form used in the static orientation-shape bundle approach. We shall use the notation $`q^\mu `$ for the 3 generalized shape variables ($`\rho _{qa}`$, $`|\stackrel{}{N}|`$), and $`p_\mu `$ for the conjugate momenta ($`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{qa}`$, $`\xi `$).

In the non-relativistic orientation-shape bundle approach one adopts the condition $`\stackrel{}{S}_q=0`$∥\**∥\**∥\**It corresponds to the choice of a special connection C on the SO(3) principal bundle determined by the Euclidean metric in the non-relativistic kinetic energy. for the definition of C-horizontal (corresponding to a gauge convention on the definition of vibrations); on the other hand, the intrinsic concept of vertical (corresponding to pure rotational motion) is defined by the condition of vanishing shape velocities $`\dot{q}^\mu =0`$. If one would naively follow the non-relativistic formulation, the following decomposition of the set $`(\stackrel{}{S}_q,p_\mu )`$ into a vertical $`()_v`$ part and a C-horizontal $`()_{Ch}`$ part

$`(\stackrel{}{S}_q,p_\mu )`$ $`=`$ $`(\stackrel{}{S}_q,p_\mu |_{\dot{q}=0}\stackrel{def}{=}\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒞}_\mu (\stackrel{}{S}_q,q,m_i,\gamma _{ai}))_v+`$ (E1)
$`+`$ $`(\stackrel{}{0},p_\mu |_{\stackrel{}{S}_q=0}\stackrel{def}{=}p_\mu \stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒞}_\mu (\stackrel{}{S}_q,q,m_i,\gamma _{ai}))_{Ch},`$ (E2)
would be expected. This separation would identify the gauge potential $`\stackrel{}{𝒞}_\mu (\stackrel{}{S}_q,q,m_i,\gamma _{ai})`$, which could also be spin-dependent.

But in the relativistic case, since $`H_{(rel)}=_{i=1}^3H_{(rel)i}`$ with each term being a square root, the shape velocities $`\dot{q}^\mu `$, evaluated by means of the first half of Hamilton equations, have to be written as the sum of 3 terms $`\dot{q}_i^\mu `$, $`i=1,2,3,`$

$`\dot{q}^\mu `$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)}}{p_\mu }}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)i}^2}{p_\mu }}\stackrel{def}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\dot{q}_i^\mu ,\dot{q}_i^\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)i}^2}{p_\mu }},`$ (E3)
$`\dot{\rho }_{q1}`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)}}{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}}}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)i}^2}{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}}}\stackrel{def}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\dot{\rho }_{q1i},`$ (E5)
$`\dot{\rho }_{q2}`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)}}{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}}}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)i}^2}{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}}}\stackrel{def}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\dot{\rho }_{q2i},`$ (E6)
$`\dot{|\stackrel{}{N}|}`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)}}{\xi }}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)i}^2}{\xi }}\stackrel{def}{=}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\dot{|\stackrel{}{N}|}_i.`$ (E7)
Therefore, the presence of the 3 square roots $`H_{(rel)i}`$ ∥††∥††∥††Remnants of the positive energy branch of the mass-shell conditions $`p_i^2=m_i^2`$, which are characteristic of Lorentz signature.with $`H_{(rel)}=_{i=1}^3H_{(rel)i}`$ allows to introduce 3 concepts of $`i`$-vertical \[$`\dot{q}_i^\mu =0`$\]. As a consequence, now 3 concepts of $`Chi`$-horizontal (one for each particle) can be introduced, each one defining a decomposition of the type:

$`(\stackrel{}{S}_q,p_\mu )|_i`$ $`=`$ $`(\stackrel{}{S}_q,p_\mu |_{\dot{q}_i=0}\stackrel{def}{=}\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒜}_{i\mu }(q))_{vi}+`$ (E8)
$`+`$ $`(\stackrel{}{0},p_\mu |_{\stackrel{}{S}_q=0}\stackrel{def}{=}p_\mu \stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒜}_{i\mu }(q))_{Chi}`$ (E9)
This implies the presence of 3 different particle gauge potentials $`\stackrel{}{𝒜}_{i\mu }(q)`$ (one for each particle) to be contrasted with the global but spin-dependent gauge potential $`\stackrel{}{𝒞}_\mu (\stackrel{}{S}_q,q,m_i,\gamma _{ai})`$ appearing in the vertical component of the momenta still given by the first part of Eq.(E2).

Therefore in the dynamical body frame approach we could introduce 3 concepts of i-dynamical vibrations: since, as we shall see, even the angular velocity has the form $`\stackrel{}{\omega }=_{i=1}^3\stackrel{}{\omega }_i`$, we could require to have $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_i^r=0`$ separately.

On the other hand, since in this approach the angular velocity is a measurable quantity, the global dynamical vibrations are defined by the requirement $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^r=0`$.

This suggests to write the Hamiltonian for relative motions in the form

$`H_{(rel)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}H_{(rel)i}=`$ (E10)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\sqrt{m_i^2+\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{1rs}(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s+\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)\left(p_\mu \stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{A}_{i\mu }(q)\right)\left(p_\nu \stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{A}_{i\nu }(q)\right)},`$ (E11)
with Eq.(LABEL:VII31) giving its purely rotational content.

It is clear that the generalized shape coordinates are not normal coordinates for the Hamiltonian. Now there are 3 inverse metrics $`\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)`$. There is no concept of inertia tensor and of reduced masses. Instead, there are 3 mass-independent particle tensors $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{1rs}(q)`$ replacing the inverse of the non-relativistic inertia tensor $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}^{1rs}(q,m)`$ of Eq.(F18) of Ref..

Let us see how it is possible to find $`\stackrel{}{𝒞}(\stackrel{}{S}_q,q,m_i,\gamma _{ai})`$, $`\stackrel{}{𝒜}_{i\mu }(q)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{1rs}(q)`$ starting from our choice of variables.

The 3 equations (E7) can be inverted to get $`p_\mu `$ in terms of $`q^\mu `$, $`\dot{q}^\mu `$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r`$, $`m_i`$, $`\gamma _{ai}`$: this is as difficult as finding the Lagrangian for the relative motion. Then, by definition we have $`\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒞}_\mu (\stackrel{}{S}_q,q)=p_\mu |_{\dot{q}=0}`$, namely

$`\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒞}_{q1}(\stackrel{}{S}_q,q,m_i,\gamma _{ai})`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}|_{\dot{q}=0},`$ (E12)
$`\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒞}_{q2}(\stackrel{}{S}_q,q,m_i,\gamma _{ai})`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}|_{\dot{q}=0},`$ (E13)
$`\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒞}_\xi (\stackrel{}{S}_q,q,m_i,\gamma _{ai})`$ $`=`$ $`\xi |_{\dot{q}=0}.`$ (E14)
From Eqs.(E7) we have the following form for the components $`\dot{q}_i^\mu `$

$`\dot{\rho }_{q1i}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}[2(\gamma _{1i})^2\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}+2\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}[(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}+|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2){\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2\xi }{\rho _{q2}}}],`$ (E15)
$`\dot{\rho }_{q2i}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}[2(\gamma _{2i})^2\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}+2\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}[(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2){\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2+\xi }{\rho _{q2}}}],`$ (E16)
$`\dot{|\stackrel{}{N}|}_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}[(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{2\rho _{q1}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{2\rho _{q2}^2}})\xi 2\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}}{\rho _{q2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}}{\rho _{q1}}})+`$ (E17)
$`+`$ $`2\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{4\rho _{q2}^2}})\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2].`$ (E18)
Since $`\dot{q}_i^\mu =0`$ implies $`\frac{H_{(rel)i}^2}{p_\mu }=0`$, we get $`\stackrel{}{S}_q\stackrel{}{𝒜}_{i\mu }(q)=p_\mu |_{\dot{q}_i=0}`$. Then, from these equations we can find $`\stackrel{}{𝒜}_{i\mu }(q)`$. Using the shape variables of our canonical basis we find

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\mu }^1(q)`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\mu }^3(q)=0,`$ (E19)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\xi }^2(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[\frac{\stackrel{}{N}^2(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)}{1(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)^2}\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}](\frac{\gamma _{1i}^2}{\rho _{q1}^2}\frac{\gamma _{2i}^2}{\rho _{q2}^2})}{\frac{1}{4}(\frac{\gamma _{1i}^2}{\rho _{q1}^2}+\frac{\gamma _{2i}^2}{\rho _{q2}^2})+\frac{(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{2\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}\frac{\stackrel{}{N}^2}{1(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)^2}(\frac{\gamma _{1i}^2}{\rho _{q1}^2}+\frac{\gamma _{2i}^2}{\rho _{q2}^2}\frac{2(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}})}},`$ (E21)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\rho _1}^2(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)}{\gamma _{1i}[1(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)]}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{2i}}{\rho _{q2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\gamma _{1i}}{\rho _{q1}}}+({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{2i}}{\rho _{q2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\gamma _{1i}}{\rho _{q1}}})\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\xi }^2(q)\right],`$ (E22)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\rho _2}^2(q)`$ $`=`$ $`+{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)}{\gamma _{2i}[1(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)]}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}}{\rho _{q1}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\gamma _{2i}}{\rho _{q2}}}+({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}}{\rho _{q1}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\gamma _{2i}}{\rho _{q2}}})\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\xi }^2(q)\right].`$ (E23)
The term in $`H_{(rel)i}`$ quadratic in the $`p_\mu ^{}s`$ identifies the $`\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)`$ so that

$$\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\gamma _{1i}^2\hfill & (2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}\hfill & \frac{|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)}{\rho _{q2}}\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}\hfill \\ (2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}\hfill & \gamma _{2i}^2\hfill & \frac{|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)}{\rho _{q1}}\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}\hfill \\ \frac{|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)}{\rho _{q2}}\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}\hfill & \frac{|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)}{\rho _{q1}}\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}\hfill & \frac{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}{2}(\frac{\gamma _{1i}^2}{\rho _{q1}^2}+\frac{\gamma _{2i}^2}{\rho _{q2}^2})+\frac{(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{2\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}\hfill \end{array}\right).$$
(E24)
The body frame angular velocity results

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }^r`$ $`\stackrel{}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)}}{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r}}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}{\displaystyle \frac{H_{(rel)i}^2}{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^r}}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_i^r,`$ (E25)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_i^r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{H_{(rel)i}}}\left[\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{1rs}(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\mu }^r(q)\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)\left(p_\nu \stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{𝒜}}_{i\nu }(q)\right)\right],`$ (E26)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_i^1|_{\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q=0}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\stackrel{}{N}^2}}({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{4\rho _{q2}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{2\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}})\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1`$ (E27)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}}({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{4\rho _{q2}^2}})\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3],`$ (E28)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_i^2|_{\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q=0}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}[2({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{4\rho _{q2}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)}{2\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}})\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2+`$ (E29)
$`+`$ $`\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}[2({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{4\rho _{q2}^2}})\xi +2\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}}{\rho _{q2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}}{\rho _{q1}}})]],`$ (E30)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_i^3|_{\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q=0}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}}({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{4\rho _{q2}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{2\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}})\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3`$ (E31)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{4\rho _{q2}^2}}\right)\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1,`$ (E32)
$`or`$ $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_i^r|_{\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q=0}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H_{(rel)i}}}|_{\stackrel{ˇ}{\stackrel{}{S}}_q=0}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\mu }^r(q)\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)p_\nu .`$ (E33)
This allows to determine the functions $`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{1rs}(q)`$ once $`\stackrel{}{𝒜}_{i\mu }(q)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)`$ are known. From the equalities

$`H_{(rel)i}\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_i^1=\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{11s}(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s,`$ (E34)
$`H_{(rel)i}\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_i^2=\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{12s}(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\mu }^2(q)\stackrel{~}{v}_i^{\mu \nu }(q)\left(p_\nu \stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\nu }^2(q)\right),`$ (E35)
$`H_{(rel)i}\stackrel{ˇ}{\omega }_i^3=\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{13s}(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^s,`$ (E36)
we find the following non-zero components

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{111}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{}{N}^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{4\rho _{q2}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{2\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}}\right),`$ (E37)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{113}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{4\rho _{q2}^2}}\right),`$ (E38)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{122}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}^2}{\rho _{q1}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{2i}^2}{\rho _{q2}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}}\right]`$ (E39)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{|\stackrel{}{N}|(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}}\left(\rho _{q1}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\rho _1}^2(q)\rho _{q2}\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\rho _2}^2(q)\right){\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}^2}{\rho _{q1}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{2i}^2}{\rho _{q2}^2}}\right)\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒜}_{i\xi }^2(q),`$ (E40)
$`\stackrel{ˇ}{𝒯}_i^{133}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{1i})^2}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _{2i})^2}{4\rho _{q2}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{2i}}{2\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}}\right).`$ (E41)
Finally, let us recall the following results of Appendix C of Ref.

$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q1}^2`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}[\xi ^2(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)+(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{}{N}^2}}(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1)^2+`$ (E42)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}+2(\xi \sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}})],`$ (E43)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q2}^2`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\rho _{q2}^2}}[\xi ^2(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)+(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{}{N}^2}}(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1)^2+`$ (E44)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}2(\xi \sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}})],`$ (E45)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q1}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q2}`$ $`=`$ $`(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}+`$ (E46)
$`+`$ $`|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}}{\rho _{q2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}}{\rho _{q1}}}\right)\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}}{\rho _{q2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}}{\rho _{q1}}}\right)\xi \sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\right]+`$ (E47)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}}[(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{}{N}^2}}(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1)^2{\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}+`$ (E48)
$`+`$ $`(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\xi ^2],`$ (E49)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q1}^2`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\rho _{q1}^2}}[\xi ^2(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)+(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{}{N}^2}}(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1)^2+`$ (E50)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}+2(\xi \sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}})],`$ (E51)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q2}^2`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\rho _{q2}^2}}[\xi ^2(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)+(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{}{N}^2}}(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1)^2+`$ (E52)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}2(\xi \sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3}{|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}})],`$ (E53)
$`\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q1}\stackrel{}{\pi }_{q2}`$ $`=`$ $`(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}+`$ (E54)
$`+`$ $`|\stackrel{}{N}|\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}}{\rho _{q2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}}{\rho _{q1}}}\right)\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q1}}{\rho _{q2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\pi }_{q2}}{\rho _{q1}}}\right)\xi \sqrt{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}\right]+`$ (E55)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\rho _{q1}\rho _{q2}}}[(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^2)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{}{N}^2}}(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^1)^2{\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{ˇ}{S}_q^3)^2}{1\stackrel{}{N}^2}}+`$ (E56)
$`+`$ $`\xi ^2(1\stackrel{}{N}^2)(2\stackrel{}{N}^21)].`$ (E57)