text:
# Induced vacuum energy-momentum tensorin the background of a 𝑑-2 - brane in 𝑑+1 - dimensional space-time

## 1 Introduction

Since Casimir’s seminal paper  it has become clear that the effect of external boundary conditions in quantum field theory can be exposed as the emergence of a non-zero vacuum expectation value of the energy-momentum tensor (see, e.g. Refs. ). This may have far reaching consequences; in particular, the vacuum energy-momentum tensor serves as a source of gravitation, and the so-called self-consistent cosmological models of the Universe are proposed, where matter is absent and its role is played by the vacuum quantum effects .

In this respect it seems to be of interest to look for various situations when the vacuum energy-momentum tensor is calculable and finite. Let $`X`$ be the base space manifold of dimension $`d`$ and $`Y`$ be a submanifold of dimension less than $`d`$. The matter field is quantized under certain boundary condition imposed at $`Y`$. In most implications of the Casimir effect, $`Y`$ is chosen to be noncompact disconnected (e.g. two parallel infinite plates, as generically in Ref. ) or closed compact (e.g. box or sphere), see Ref. . In the present paper we choose $`Y`$ to be noncompact connected and possessing dimension $`d2`$, i.e. a $`d2`$ \- brane in $`d`$-dimensional space. If such a brane is filled with the magnetic flux lines, then it can be regarded as a generalization of the Bohm-Aharonov  singular magnetic vortex in $`3`$-dimensional space. If the matter field vanishes at $`Y`$, then the region where the matter field is nonvanishing (out of $`Y`$) does not overlap with the region where the background magnetic field is nonvanishing (inside $`Y`$). Thus there is no effect of the background field on the matter field in the framework of classical theory, and such an effect, if exists, is of purely quantum nature. Conventional Bohm-Aharonov effect pertains to the quantum-mechanical framework . As is clear from the above, our interest will be in the quantum-field-theoretical framework (i.e. vacuum polarization in the background of the brane), which, therefore, may be generally denoted as the Casimir-Bohm-Aharonov effect, see also Ref. .

Throughout the present paper, we restrict ourselves to the case of scalar matter. A peculiarity of this case is that the energy-momentum tensor depends on the coupling ($`\xi `$) of the scalar field to the scalar curvature of space-time even then when space-time is flat. If scalar field is massless, then conformal invariance of the theory is achieved at $`\xi =\xi _c`$, where

$$\xi _c=\frac{d1}{4d};$$
(1.1)
note that $`\xi _c`$ varies from $`0`$ to $`1/4`$ when $`d`$ varies from $`1`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$. Our analysis of vacuum polarization effects in the background of the brane will be carried out for arbitrary values of $`\xi `$; however results will be most impressive in the case of conformal coupling, $`\xi =\xi _c`$. We shall find out components of the induced vacuum energy-momentum tensor as functions of the brane flux, distance from the brane and space dimension. Expressions for components are especially simple in form in the case of massless scalar field, whereas in the massive case they are presented in terms of convergent integrals of the Macdonald functions.

In the next section which is also introductory but more detailed, a general definition of the energy-momentum tensor for the quantized charged scalar field is reviewed and a starting expression for its regularized vacuum expectation value in the background of the brane is given. In Section 3 which is central in the paper, the regularized vacuum tensor components are computed, and in Section 4 the renormalized vacuum tensor components are obtained. Various aspects of the latter result are examined in the following sections: asymptotic behaviour at large and small distances from the brane (Section 5), expressions at fixed values of the brane flux when tensor components have maximal absolute values (Section 6), dependence on the $`\xi `$-parameter (Section 7). Finally, results are summarized in Section 8. Some details in the derivation of results are outlined in Appendices A and B.

## 2 Energy-momentum tensor and its vacuum
expectation value

The energy-momentum tensor for the quantized charged scalar field $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x)`$ is given by expression

$$T^{\mu \nu }=T_{can}^{\mu \nu }+\xi \left(g^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}^\mu ^\nu R^{\mu \nu }\right)[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+,$$
(2.1)
where

$$T_{can}^{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}[^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }^{},^\nu \mathrm{\Psi }]_++\frac{1}{2}[^\nu \mathrm{\Psi }^{},^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }]_+g^{\mu \nu }L,$$
(2.2)
and

$$L=\frac{1}{2}[^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }^{},_\mu \mathrm{\Psi }]_+\frac{1}{2}\left(m^2+\xi R\right)[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+,$$
(2.3)
$`_\mu `$ is the covariant derivative involving both affine and bundle connections,$`\mathrm{}=_\mu ^\mu `$ is the covariant d’alembertian, $`R^{\mu \nu }`$ is the Ricci tensor and $`R=g_{\mu \nu }R^{\mu \nu }`$ is the scalar curvature of space-time, signature of space-time metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ is chosen as $`(+\mathrm{})`$. Canonical tensor (2.2) is obtained by applying Noether’s theorem to lagrangian (2.3), whereas tensor (2.1) is obtained by variating $`L`$ (2.3) over metric tensor $`g_{\mu \nu }`$.

Eq.(2.1) can be rewritten in a form

$$T^{\mu \nu }=\stackrel{~}{T}^{\mu \nu }+\left(\xi 1/4\right)\left(g^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}^\mu ^\nu \right)[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+\xi R^{\mu \nu }[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+,$$
(2.4)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{T}^{\mu \nu }=T_{can}^{\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{4}\left(g^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}^\mu ^\nu \right)[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+$$
(2.5)
is the canonical tensor corresponding to lagrangian $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ which differs from $`L`$(2.3) by a total divergence:

$$\stackrel{~}{L}=L\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{}[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+=\frac{1}{4}[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }]_+\frac{1}{4}[\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+\frac{1}{2}\left(m^2+\xi R\right)[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+.$$
(2.6)
Both $`L`$(2.3) and $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$(2.6) yield the same equations of motion,

$$\left[\mathrm{}+\left(m^2+\xi R\right)\right]\mathrm{\Psi }=0,\left[\mathrm{}+\left(m^2+\xi R\right)\right]\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=0,$$
(2.7)
but $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ is strictly vanishing on the solutions to the equations of motion. In fact, $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ is used as a lagrangian in the path integral approach to quantization, since namely $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ is directly related to the inverse propagator of the quantized scalar field.

If $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a solution to Eq.(2.7), then one gets

$$\stackrel{~}{T}^{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}[^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }^{},^\nu \mathrm{\Psi }]_++\frac{1}{2}[^\nu \mathrm{\Psi }^{},^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }]_+\frac{1}{4}^\mu ^\nu [\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+,$$
(2.8)
and

$$g_{\mu \nu }T^{\mu \nu }=\left(\xi d\frac{d1}{4}\right)\mathrm{}[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_++m^2[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+,$$
(2.9)
where $`d`$ is the dimension of space. Thus, there is a distinctive value of parameter $`\xi `$ ($`\xi =\xi _c`$, see Eq.(1.1)) under which the trace of the energy-momentum tensor becomes proportional to the mass squared,

$$g_{\mu \nu }T^{\mu \nu }|_{\xi =\xi _c}=m^2[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+,$$
(2.10)
and the tracelessness of $`T^{\mu \nu }`$ and conformal invariance are achieved in the massless limit ($`m=0`$).

In the case of a static background $`(_0=_0,g_{00}=1)`$, the operator of the quantized charged scalar field is represented in the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(x^0,\text{x})=\underset{\lambda }{}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2E_\lambda }}\left[e^{iE_\lambda x^0}\psi _\lambda (\text{x})a_\lambda +e^{iE_\lambda x^0}\psi _\lambda (\text{x})b_\lambda ^{}\right].$$
(2.11)
Here, $`a_\lambda ^{}`$ and $`a_\lambda `$ ($`b_\lambda ^{}`$ and $`b_\lambda `$) are the scalar particle (antiparticle) creation and annihilation operators satisfying commutation relation; $`\lambda `$ is the set of parameters (quantum numbers) specifying the state; $`E_\lambda =E_\lambda >0`$ is the energy of the state; symbol $`\underset{\lambda }{}`$ denotes summation over discrete and integration (with a certain measure) over continuous values of $`\lambda `$; wave functions $`\psi _\lambda (\text{x})`$ are the solutions to the stationary equation of motion,

$$\left\{\mathrm{}+[m^2+\xi R(\text{x})]\right\}\psi _\lambda (\text{x})=E_\lambda ^2\psi (\text{x}),$$
(2.12)
$`\mathrm{}=\mathbf{}^2`$ is the covariant laplacian. For components of the vacuum expectation value of the energy-momentum tensor,

$$t^{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{vac}\left|T^{\mu \nu }\right|\mathrm{vac},$$
(2.13)
one gets expressions

$$t^{00}=\underset{\lambda }{}E_\lambda \psi _\lambda ^{}(\text{x})\psi _\lambda (\text{x})(\xi 1/4)\mathrm{}\underset{\lambda }{}E_\lambda ^1\psi _\lambda ^{}(\text{x})\psi _\lambda (\text{x}),$$
(2.14)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{}^{jj}{}_{}{}^{^{}}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{\lambda }{}E_\lambda ^1\left\{\left[^j\psi _\lambda (\text{x})\right]^{}\left[_{}^{j}{}_{}{}^{^{}}\psi _\lambda (\text{x})\right]+\left[_{}^{j}{}_{}{}^{^{}}\psi _\lambda (\text{x})\right]^{}\left[^j\psi _\lambda (\text{x})\right]\right\}+\hfill \\ \hfill +\left\{\frac{1}{4}g_{}^{jj}{}_{}{}^{^{}}(\text{x})\mathrm{}\xi \left[g_{}^{jj}{}_{}{}^{^{}}(\text{x})\mathrm{}+^j_{}^{j}{}_{}{}^{^{}}+R_{}^{jj}{}_{}{}^{^{}}(\text{x})\right]\right\}\underset{\lambda }{}E_\lambda ^1\psi _\lambda ^{}(\text{x})\psi _\lambda (\text{x}),\\ \hfill j,j^{^{}}=\overline{1,d};\end{array}$$
(2.15)
note that the $`t^{0j}`$ components are vanishing, and relations $`R^{00}(\text{x})=0`$ and $`_0[\mathrm{\Psi }^+,\mathrm{\Psi }]_+=0`$ have been taken into account.

However, relations (2.14) and (2.15) can be regarded as purely formal and, strictly speaking, meaningless: they are ill-defined, suffering from ultraviolet divergencies. The well-defined quantities are obtained by inserting an inverse energy in a sufficiently high power

$$t_{reg}^{00}(s)=\underset{\lambda }{}E_\lambda ^{2s}\psi _\lambda ^{}(\text{x})\psi _\lambda (\text{x})(\xi 1/4)\mathrm{}\underset{\lambda }{}E_\lambda ^{2(s+1)}\psi _\lambda ^{}(\text{x})\psi _\lambda (\text{x}),$$
(2.16)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{jj^{^{}}}(s)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{\lambda }{}E_\lambda ^{2(s+1)}\left\{\left[^j\psi _\lambda (\text{x})\right]^{}\left[_{}^{j}{}_{}{}^{^{}}\psi _\lambda (\text{x})\right]+\left[_{}^{j}{}_{}{}^{^{}}\psi _\lambda (\text{x})\right]^{}\left[^j\psi _\lambda (\text{x})\right]\right\}+\hfill \\ \hfill +\left\{\frac{1}{4}g_{}^{jj}{}_{}{}^{^{}}(\text{x})\mathrm{}\xi \left[g_{}^{jj}{}_{}{}^{^{}}(\text{x})\mathrm{}+^j_{}^{j}{}_{}{}^{^{}}+R_{}^{jj}{}_{}{}^{^{}}(\text{x})\right]\right\}\underset{\lambda }{}E_\lambda ^{2(s+1)}\psi _\lambda ^{}(\text{x})\psi _\lambda (\text{x}),\\ \hfill j,j^{^{}}=\overline{1,d}.\end{array}$$
(2.17)
Sums (integrals) are convergent in the case of Re $`s>d/2`$ . Thus, summation (integration) is performed in this case, and then the result is analytically continued to the case of $`s=1/2`$. This way of dealing with ultraviolet divergencies is known as the zeta function regularization procedure .

It is amazing, as is already mentioned in Introduction, that the energy-momentum tensor and, consequently, its vacuum expectation value remain to be dependent on parameter $`\xi `$ even in the case of flat space-time ($`R=0`$). If scalar field is quantized in the background of a static magnetic field in flat space-time, then the covariant derivative is defined as

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathbf{}\mathrm{\Psi }=\left(\mathbf{}i\text{V}\right)\mathrm{\Psi },\mathbf{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=\left(\mathbf{}+i\text{V}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\hfill \\ \mathbf{}[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+=\mathbf{}[\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }]_+,\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.18)
and the magnetic field strength takes form

$$B^{j_1\mathrm{}j_{d2}}(\text{x})=\epsilon ^{j_1\mathrm{}j_d}_{j_{d1}}V_{j_d}(\text{x}),$$
(2.19)
where $`\text{V}(\text{x})`$ is the bundle connection (vector potential of the magnetic field), and $`\epsilon ^{j_1\mathrm{}j_d}`$ is the totally antisymmetric tensor, $`\epsilon ^{12\mathrm{}d}=1`$.

In the present paper we consider the bundle curvature (magnetic field strength) to be nonvanishing in the $`d2`$ \- brane (i.e. point in the $`d=2`$ case, line in the $`d=3`$ case, plane in the $`d=4`$ case, and $`d2`$ \- hypersurface in the $`d>4`$ case). Denoting the location of the $`d2`$ \- brane by $`x^1=x^2=0`$, one gets

$$B^{3\mathrm{}d}(\text{x})=2\pi \mathrm{\Phi }\delta (x^1)\delta (x^2),$$
(2.20)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the total flux (in the units of $`2\pi `$) of the bundle curvature; then the bundle connection can be chosen in the form:

$`V^1(\text{x})=\mathrm{\Phi }{\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{\left(x^1\right)^2+\left(x^2\right)^2}},`$ $`V^2(\text{x})=\mathrm{\Phi }{\displaystyle \frac{x^1}{\left(x^1\right)^2+\left(x^2\right)^2}},`$
$`V^j(\text{x})=0,`$ $`j=\overline{3,d}.`$ (2.21)
The complete set of regular solutions to Eq.(2.12) in background (2.20)-(2) is given by functions (see, e.g., Ref )

$$\psi _{kn\text{p}}(\text{x})=(2\pi )^{\frac{1d}{2}}J_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|}(kr)e^{in\phi }e^{i\text{p}\text{x}_{d2}},$$
(2.22)
where

$$0<k<\mathrm{},n,\mathrm{}<p^j<\mathrm{},j=\overline{3,d},$$
(2.23)
$`J_\mu (u)`$ is the Bessel function of order $`\mu `$ , $`r=\sqrt{\left(x^1\right)^2+\left(x^2\right)^2}`$, $`\phi =\mathrm{arctan}(\frac{x^2}{x^1})`$, $`\text{x}_{d2}=(0,0,x^3,\mathrm{}x^d)`$, and $``$ is the set of integers. Since solutions (2.22) correspond to the continuous spectrum $`(E_{kn\text{p}}=\sqrt{\text{p}^2+k^2+m^2}>m)`$, they obey orthonormality condition

$$d^dx\psi _{kn\text{p}}^{}(\text{x})\psi _{k^{^{}}n^{^{}}\text{p}^{^{}}}(\text{x})=\frac{1}{k}\delta (kk^{^{}})\delta _{nn^{^{}}}\delta (\text{p}\text{p}^{^{}}).$$
(2.24)
Taking all the above into account, we get following expressions for the nonvanishing components of the regularized vaccuum expectation value of the energy-momentum tensor:

$$t_{reg}^{00}(s)=\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s)+\left(\frac{1}{4}\xi \right)\mathrm{}_r\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s+1),$$
(2.25)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{rr}(s)=(2\pi )^{1d}d^{d2}p\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑kk\left(\text{p}^2+k^2+m^2\right)^{s1}\underset{n}{}\left[_rJ_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|}(kr)\right]^2\hfill \\ \hfill \left[\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{}_r\frac{\xi }{r}_r\right]\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s+1),\end{array}$$
(2.26)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{\phi \phi }(s)=(2\pi )^{1d}r^4d^{d2}p\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑kk\left(\text{p}^2+k^2+m^2\right)^{s1}\underset{n}{}\left(n\mathrm{\Phi }\right)^2J_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|}^2(kr)\hfill \\ \hfill r^2\left[\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{}_r\xi _r^2\right]\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s+1),\end{array}$$
(2.27)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{jj}(s)=(2\pi )^{1d}d^{d2}p\left(p^j\right)^2\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑kk\left(\text{p}^2+k^2+m^2\right)^{s1}\underset{n}{}J_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|}^2(kr)+\hfill \\ \hfill \left(\frac{1}{4}\xi \right)\mathrm{}_r\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s+1),j=\overline{3,d},\end{array}$$
(2.28)
where $`\mathrm{}_r=_r^2+r^1_r`$ is the transverse radial part of the laplacian and

$$\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s)=(2\pi )^{1d}d^{d2}p\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑kk\left(\text{p}^2+k^2+m^2\right)^s\underset{n}{}J_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|}^2(kr).$$
(2.29)
Defining the fractional part of the flux,

$$F=\mathrm{\Phi }[[\mathrm{\Phi }]],0F<1,$$
(2.30)
where $`[[u]]`$ is the integer part of quantity $`u`$ (i.e. the integer which is less than or equal to $`u`$), one can note that tensor components (2.25)-(2.28) are periodic functions of flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, since they depend only on $`F`$ (being symmetric under $`F1F`$) .

## 3 Regularized vacuum expectation value

Let us start by considering quantity

$$\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{jj}(s)=t_{reg}^{jj}(s)|_{\xi =1/4}.$$
(3.1)
Performing the integration over p, one gets

$$\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{jj}(s)=\frac{1}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1\frac{d}{2})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑kk\left(k^2+m^2\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s1}\mathrm{\Sigma }_0(kr),$$
(3.2)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)`$ is the Euler gamma function and

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_0(kr)=\underset{n}{}J_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|}^2(kr).$$
(3.3)
Using relation (see, e.g., Ref.)

$$\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0.0pt}{}{n}{n1}}{}J_{n+\mu }^2(z)=\mu \underset{0}{\overset{z}{}}\frac{d\tau }{\tau }J_\mu ^2(\tau )\frac{1}{2}J_\mu ^2(z),\mu >0,$$
(3.4)
the summation over $`n`$ in Eq.(3.3) is performed in the case of $`\mathrm{\Phi }n`$ ,

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_0(kr)=\underset{0}{\overset{kr}{}}𝑑\tau \left[J_F(\tau )J_{1+F}(\tau )+J_F(\tau )J_{1F}(\tau )\right],0<F<1.$$
(3.5)
Thus, Eq.(3.2) takes form (after integration by parts):

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{jj}(s)=\frac{r}{2(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s\frac{d}{2})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dk(k^2+m^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \left[J_F(kr)J_{1+F}(kr)+J_F(kr)J_{1F}(kr)\right].\end{array}$$
(3.6)
Using relations

$$\left(k^2+m^2\right)^z=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑yy^{z1}\mathrm{exp}\left[y\left(k^2+m^2\right)\right],\mathrm{Re}z>0,$$
(3.7)
and

$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑ke^{yk^2}J_\mu (kr)J_{\mu 1}(kr)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2r}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{r^2(2y)^1}{}}}𝑑ue^u[I_{\mu 1}(u)I_\mu (u)],\mu >0,`$ (3.8)
where $`I_\mu (u)`$ is the modified Bessel function of order $`\mu `$, we get

$`\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{jj}(s)={\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}}{\displaystyle \frac{m^{d2s}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑ue^u[K_F(u)+K_{1F}(u)]\gamma (s{\displaystyle \frac{d}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{m^2r^2}{2u}}),`$ (3.9)
where

$$K_\mu (u)=\frac{\pi }{2\mathrm{sin}(\mu \pi )}[I_\mu (u)I_\mu (u)]$$

is the Macdonald function of order $`\mu `$ and

$$\gamma (z,w)=\underset{0}{\overset{w}{}}𝑑\tau \tau ^{z1}e^\tau $$

is the incomplete gamma function. Although relation (3.9) has been derived at Re $`s>\frac{d}{2}1`$, it can be continued analytically to the whole complex $`s`$-plane. Introducing complementary function

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(z,w)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)\gamma (z,w)=\underset{w}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑\tau \tau ^{z1}e^\tau ,$$

and decomposing Eq.(3.9) appropriately into a sum of two terms, we get

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{jj}(s)=\frac{m^{d2s}}{2(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{2\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\frac{m^{d2s}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑ue^u[K_F(u)+K_{1F}(u)]\mathrm{\Gamma }(s\frac{d}{2},\frac{m^2r^2}{2u})=\\ \hfill =\frac{m^{d2s}}{2(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\frac{8\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\times \\ \hfill \times \underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\upsilon ^{s\frac{d}{2}1}K_{s\frac{d}{2}}(2mrv),\end{array}$$
(3.10)
where in deriving the last line we have used relations (see, e.g., Ref.)

$$K_\mu (u)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑\tau \tau ^{\mu 1}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{u}{2}(\tau +\tau ^1)\right]$$
(3.11)
and

$$\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\tau }{\tau ^2}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{p}{2\tau }\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }(q,\frac{c\tau }{2})=\left(\frac{p}{4}\right)^{\frac{q2}{2}}c^{\frac{q}{2}}K_q(\sqrt{pc}).$$
(3.12)
In a similar way we get111Note that this quantity was first computed in Ref., where it is called as the zeta function density.

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s)=\frac{m^{d2s}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\upsilon ^{s\frac{d}{2}1}K_{\frac{d}{2}s}(2mrv).\end{array}$$
(3.13)
Then we derive relations

$$\begin{array}{c}r^1_r\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s+1)=\frac{32\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\upsilon ^{1+s\frac{d}{2}}K_{\frac{d}{2}s}(2mrv),\end{array}$$
(3.14)
$$\begin{array}{c}_r^2\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s+1)=\frac{32\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \upsilon ^{1+s\frac{d}{2}}\left[K_{\frac{d}{2}s}(2mrv)2mr\upsilon K_{\frac{d}{2}s+1}(2mr\upsilon )\right].\end{array}$$
(3.15)
Consequently, temporal and longitudinal components of the regularized vacuum energy-momentum tensor, Eqs.(2.25) and (2.28), are given by expressions:

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{00}(s)=\frac{m^{d2s}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}+\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\times \\ \hfill \times \upsilon ^{s\frac{d}{2}1}\left\{[s+(14\xi )\upsilon ^2]K_{\frac{d}{2}s}(2mrv)(14\xi )mr\upsilon ^3K_{\frac{d}{2}s+1}(2mr\upsilon )\right\},\end{array}$$
(3.16)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{jj}(s)=\frac{m^{d2s}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\times \\ \hfill \times \upsilon ^{s\frac{d}{2}1}\left\{\left[\frac{1}{2}+(14\xi )\upsilon ^2\right]K_{\frac{d}{2}s}(2mrv)(14\xi )mr\upsilon ^3K_{\frac{d}{2}s+1}(2mr\upsilon )\right\}.\end{array}$$
(3.17)
Let us turn now to transverse components of the regularized vacuum energy-momentum tensor. Integrating over p in the first lines of Eq.(2.26) and (2.27), we get

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{rr}(s)=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+2\frac{d}{2})}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\left[\mathrm{\Omega }_1(s)m^2\mathrm{\Omega }_1(s+1)\right]\hfill \\ \hfill \left[\frac{1}{4}_r^2\left(\xi \frac{1}{4}\right)r^1_r\right]\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s+1),\end{array}$$
(3.18)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{\phi \phi }(s)=\frac{r^2\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+2\frac{d}{2})}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\left[\mathrm{\Omega }_2(s)m^2\mathrm{\Omega }_2(s+1)\right]\hfill \\ \hfill r^2\left[\frac{1}{4}r^1_r\left(\xi \frac{1}{4}\right)_r^2\right]\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{00}(s+1),\end{array}$$
(3.19)
where

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_a(s)=2\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑kk\left(k^2+m^2\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s1}\mathrm{\Sigma }_a(kr),a=1,2,$$
(3.20)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(kr)=k^2\underset{n}{}\left[_rJ_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|}(kr)\right]^2=\hfill \\ \hfill =\frac{1}{4}\underset{n}{}\left[J_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|+1}(kr)J_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|1}(kr)\right]^2,\end{array}$$
(3.21)
and

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Sigma }_2(kr)=(kr)^2\underset{n}{}\left(n\mathrm{\Phi }\right)^2J_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|}^2(kr)=\hfill \\ \hfill =\frac{1}{4}\underset{n}{}\left[J_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|+1}(kr)+J_{|n\mathrm{\Phi }|1}(kr)\right]^2.\end{array}$$
(3.22)
Using Eq.(3.4) and relation

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0.0pt}{}{n}{n1}}{}J_{n+\mu +1}(z)J_{n+\mu 1}(z)=\frac{1}{2}\mu J_\mu ^2(z)+\frac{1}{2}(1+\mu )J_{1+\mu }^2(z)\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{\mu (1+\mu )}{z}J_\mu (z)J_{1+\mu }(z),\end{array}$$
(3.23)
we get

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_a(kr)=\frac{1}{2}\left[\mathrm{\Sigma }_0(kr)+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_a(kr)\right],a=1,2,$$
(3.24)
where

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_1(kr)=\frac{1}{2}(1+F)\left[J_F^2(kr)J_F^2(kr)\right]+\frac{1}{2}(2F)\left[J_{1+F}^2(kr)J_{1F}^2(kr)\right]\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{F(1F)}{kr}\left[J_F(kr)J_{1+F}(kr)+J_F(kr)J_{1F}(kr)\right],\end{array}$$
(3.25)
$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_2(kr)=\frac{1}{2}(1F)\left[J_F^2(kr)J_F^2(kr)\right]+\frac{1}{2}F\left[J_{1+F}^2(kr)J_{1F}^2(kr)\right]+\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{F(1F)}{kr}\left[J_F(kr)J_{1+F}(kr)+J_F(kr)J_{1F}(kr)\right],\end{array}$$
(3.26)
and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0(kr)`$ is given by Eq.(3.5). Thus, Eq.(3.20) takes form

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_a(s)=\mathrm{\Omega }_0(s)+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_a(s),a=1,2,$$
(3.27)
where

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_0(s)=\frac{r}{2sd}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑k\left(k^2+m^2\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\left[J_F(kr)J_{1+F}(kr)+J_F(kr)J_{1F}(kr)\right],$$
(3.28)
$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_a(s)=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑kk\left(k^2+m^2\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s1}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_a(kr),a=1,2.$$
(3.29)
The integral in Eq.(3.28) has been already encountered during the analysis of $`\stackrel{~}{t}_{reg}^{jj}(s)`$, see Eq.(3.6). Similarly, using relations (3.7), (3.8) and (see Ref.)

$$\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑kke^{yk^2}J_\mu ^2(kr)=\frac{1}{2r^2}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{r^2}{2y}\right)I_\mu \left(\frac{r^2}{2y}\right),\mu >1,$$
(3.30)
we get

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_1(s)=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s+1\frac{d}{2}\right)}\{\frac{1}{4}\left(\frac{r^2}{2}\right)^{s\frac{d}{2}}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\tau \tau ^{\frac{d}{2}s2}\mathrm{exp}(\tau \frac{m^2r^2}{2\tau })\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times [(1+F)K_F(\tau )+(2F)K_{1F}(\tau )]F(1F)r^2m^{d2s2}\times \\ \hfill \times \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}due^u[K_F(u)+K_{1F}(u)]\gamma (1+s\frac{d}{2},\frac{m^2r^2}{2u})\},\end{array}$$
(3.31)
$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_2(s)=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s+1\frac{d}{2}\right)}\{\frac{1}{4}\left(\frac{r^2}{2}\right)^{s\frac{d}{2}}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\tau \tau ^{\frac{d}{2}s2}\mathrm{exp}(\tau \frac{m^2r^2}{2\tau })\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times [(1F)K_F(\tau )+FK_{1F}(\tau )]+F(1F)r^2m^{d2s2}\times \\ \hfill \times \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}due^u[K_F(u)+K_{1F}(u)]\gamma (1+s\frac{d}{2},\frac{m^2r^2}{2u})\}.\end{array}$$
(3.32)
Although relations (3.31) and (3.32) have been derived at Re $`s>\frac{d}{2}1`$, they can be continued analytically to the whole complex $`s`$-plane. Using integration by parts in $`\tau `$-integrals and relations (3.11), (3.12) and

$$\begin{array}{c}e^\tau K_\mu (\tau )=2\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\upsilon \{\frac{\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2\mu 1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]+\hfill \\ \hfill +\mathrm{sinh}[(2\mu 1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\}e^{2\tau \upsilon ^2},\end{array}$$
(3.33)
we get

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_1(s)m^2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_1(s+1)=\hfill \\ \hfill =\frac{4\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }(2+s\frac{d}{2})}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\times \\ \hfill \times \upsilon ^{s\frac{d}{2}}\left[\upsilon K_{\frac{d}{2}s}(2mrv)\frac{1}{2}mr(1+2\upsilon ^2)K_{\frac{d}{2}s+1}(2mr\upsilon )\right],\end{array}$$
(3.34)
$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_2(s)m^2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_2(s+1)=\hfill \\ \hfill =\frac{4\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }(2+s\frac{d}{2})}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\times \\ \hfill \times \upsilon ^{s\frac{d}{2}}\left[\upsilon K_{\frac{d}{2}s}(2mrv)+\frac{1}{2}mr(12\upsilon ^2)K_{\frac{d}{2}s+1}(2mr\upsilon )\right].\end{array}$$
(3.35)
Thus, we obtain following expressions for transverse components of the regularized vacuum energy-momentum tensor, Eqs.(2.26) and (2.27):

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{rr}(s)=\frac{m^{d2s}}{2(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{8\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\times \\ \hfill \times \upsilon ^{s\frac{d}{2}1}(14\xi \upsilon ^2)K_{\frac{d}{2}s}(2mrv),\end{array}$$
(3.36)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{\phi \phi }(s)=\frac{r^2m^{d2s}}{2(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{8\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}r^2\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\times \\ \hfill \times \upsilon ^{s\frac{d}{2}1}(14\xi \upsilon ^2)[K_{\frac{d}{2}s}(2mrv)2mr\upsilon K_{\frac{d}{2}s+1}(2mrv)].\end{array}$$
(3.37)
If, instead of Eq.(3.7), we use relation

$$\left(k^2+m^2\right)^z=\frac{2\mathrm{sin}(z\pi )}{\pi }\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑y\frac{y^{12z}}{k^2+m^2+y^2},0<\mathrm{Re}z<1,$$
(3.38)
then we get components of the regularized vacuum energy-momentum tensor in the following representation (see Appendix A):

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{00}(s)=\frac{m^{d2s}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s\frac{d}{2})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )r^{2sd}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\{\frac{s}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d}{2}s+1)}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dw(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s}K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)+\\ \hfill +\frac{14\xi }{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d}{2}s1)}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dww^3(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s2}[K_F^2(w)+K_{1F}^2(w)]\},\end{array}$$
(3.39)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{jj}(s)=\frac{m^{d2s}}{2(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s\frac{d}{2})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{8\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )r^{2sd}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\{\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d}{2}s+1)}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dw(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s}K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)\\ \hfill \frac{14\xi }{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d}{2}s1)}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dww^3(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s2}[K_F^2(w)+K_{1F}^2(w)]\},\end{array}$$
(3.40)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{rr}(s)=\frac{m^{d2s}}{2(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{8\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )r^{2sd}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\{\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}s+1\right)}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dw(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\times \\ \hfill \times \left\{K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)\frac{w}{2}\left[K_F^2(w)+K_{1F}^2(w)\right]\right\}+\\ \hfill +\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}s1\right)}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dww^2(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s2}\{2[F(1F)2\xi ]K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)+\\ \hfill +w[FK_F^2(w)+(1F)K_{1F}^2(w)]\}\},\end{array}$$
(3.41)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{\phi \phi }(s)=\frac{r^2m^{d2s}}{2(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{8\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )r^{2sd2}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}\{\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}s+1\right)}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dw(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s}\times \\ \hfill \times \left\{K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)\frac{w}{2}\left[K_F^2(w)+K_{1F}^2(w)\right]\right\}\\ \hfill \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}s1\right)}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dww^2(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s2}\{2[F(1F)2\xi ]K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)+\\ \hfill +w[(F4\xi )K_F^2(w)+(1F4\xi )K_{1F}^2(w)]\}\}.\end{array}$$
(3.42)
Whereas expressions (3.16), (3.17), (3.36) and (3.37)are defined on the whole complex s-plane, expressions (3.39) - (3.42) are defined on a half-plane Re $`s<d/21`$.

## 4 Renormalized vacuum expectation value

In the absence of the $`d2`$ \- brane (i.e. at $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$) expressions (3.16), (3.17), (3.36) and (3.37) (or (3.39)-(3.42) take form

$$t_{reg}^{00}(s)|_{F=0}=\frac{m^{d2s}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s\frac{d}{2})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)},$$

$$t_{reg}^{jj}(s)|_{F=0}=t_{reg}^{rr}(s)|_{F=0}=r^2t_{reg}^{\phi \phi }(s)|_{F=0}=\frac{m^{d2s}}{2(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s\frac{d}{2})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+1)}.$$
(4.1)
These quantities are eliminated by the requirement of the normal ordering of the operator product in the case of noninteracting quantized field. For consistency with the noninteracting case, one has to subtract quantities (4.1) from the regularized expressions corresponding to the interaction with the background. Then, taking limit $`s\frac{1}{2}`$, one defines renormalized vacuum energy-momentum tensor:

$$t_{ren}^{\mu \nu }=\underset{s\frac{1}{2}}{lim}[t_{reg}^{\mu \nu }(s)t_{reg}^{\mu \nu }(s)|_{F=0}],$$
(4.2)
which is of physical interest. Its components are given by expressions:

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{00}=t_{ren}^{jj}=\frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+3}{2}}}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \upsilon ^{\frac{d+3}{2}}\left\{[1+2(14\xi )\upsilon ^2]K_{\frac{d+1}{2}}(2mrv)2(14\xi )mr\upsilon ^3K_{\frac{d+3}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )\right\},\end{array}$$
(4.3)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{rr}=\frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+3}{2}}}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \upsilon ^{\frac{d+3}{2}}(14\xi \upsilon ^2)K_{\frac{d+1}{2}}(2mr\upsilon ),\end{array}$$
(4.4)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }=\frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+3}{2}}}\frac{1}{r^2}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \upsilon ^{\frac{d+3}{2}}(14\xi \upsilon ^2)\left\{K_{\frac{d+1}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )2mr\upsilon K_{\frac{d+3}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )\right\},\end{array}$$
(4.5)
or, in the alternative representation,

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{00}=t_{ren}^{jj}=\frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+3}{2}}}r^{d1}\{\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d+3}{2})}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dw(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{14\xi }{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d1}{2})}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dww^3(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d3}{2}}[K_F^2(w)+K_{1F}^2(w)]\},\end{array}$$
(4.6)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{rr}=\frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+3}{2}}}r^{d1}\{\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d+3}{2})}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dw(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \{K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)\frac{w}{2}[K_F^2(w)+K_{1F}^2]\}+\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d1}{2})}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dww^2(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d3}{2}}\times \\ \hfill \times \{2[F(1F)2\xi ]K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)+w[FK_F^2(w)+(1F)K_{1F}^2(w)]\}\},\end{array}$$
(4.7)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }=\frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+3}{2}}}r^{d3}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \{\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d+3}{2})}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dw(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\{K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)\frac{w}{2}[K_F^2(w)+K_{1F}^2]\}\\ \hfill \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d1}{2})}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dww^2(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d3}{2}}\{2[F(1F)2\xi ]K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)+\\ \hfill +w[(F4\xi )K_F^2(w)+(1F4\xi )K_{1F}^2(w)]\}\}.\end{array}$$
(4.8)
One can verify that relation

$$(_r+r^1)t_{ren}^{rr}rt_{ren}^{\phi \phi }=0,$$
(4.9)
is valid; consequently, the vacuum energy-momentum tensor is conserved:

$$_\mu t_{ren}^{\mu \nu }=0.$$
(4.10)
Taking trace of the tensor, we get

$$\begin{array}{c}g_{\mu \nu }t_{ren}^{\mu \nu }=\frac{32\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+3}{2}}}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\upsilon }{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\upsilon ^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \{(d14\xi d)\upsilon \left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}[K_{\frac{d+1}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )mr\upsilon K_{\frac{d+3}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )]\\ \hfill m^2\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d1}{2}}K_{\frac{d1}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )\}.\end{array}$$
(4.11)
As follows from the last relation, the trace becomes proportional to the mass squared in the case of $`\xi =\xi _c`$ (1.1), which is in accordance with general relation (2.10).

To conclude this Section, we present the vacuum energy-momentum tensor in the Cartesian coordinate frame:

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\begin{array}{ccc}\epsilon & 0& 0\\ 0& P^1& \frac{1}{2}\left(P^1P^2\right)\frac{x^1x^2}{\left(x^1\right)^2\left(x^2\right)^2}\\ 0& \frac{1}{2}\left(P^1P^2\right)\frac{x^1x^2}{\left(x^1\right)^2\left(x^2\right)^2}& P^2\end{array}& \begin{array}{c}\\ \\ \end{array}& 0\\ & & \\ 0& \begin{array}{c}\\ \\ \end{array}& \begin{array}{ccc}P^3& & 0\\ & \mathrm{}& \\ 0& & P^d\end{array}\end{array}\right),$$
(4.12)
where

$$\begin{array}{c}\epsilon =P^j=t_{ren}^{00},j=\overline{3,d},\hfill \\ P^1=\frac{\left(x^1\right)^2}{\left(x^1\right)^2+\left(x^2\right)^2}t_{ren}^{rr}+\left(x^2\right)^2t_{ren}^{\phi \phi },\hfill \\ P^2=\frac{\left(x^2\right)^2}{\left(x^1\right)^2+\left(x^2\right)^2}t_{ren}^{rr}+\left(x^1\right)^2t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }.\hfill \end{array}$$
(4.13)
## 5 Asymptotics at large and small distances from the brane

Components of the vacuum energy-momentum tensor depend on the distance from the brane in the transverse direction. Using representation (4.6)-(4.8), it is straightforward to determine the large distance behaviour of the tensor components:

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{00}=\frac{2\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}e^{2mr}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}(14\xi \hfill \\ \hfill \{\frac{1}{2}(14\xi )[\left(\frac{d+2}{4}\right)^2\frac{5}{16}F(1F)]\}(mr)^1+\mathrm{O}\left[(mr)^2\right]),mr1,\end{array}$$
(5.1)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{rr}=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}e^{2mr}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d1}{2}}r^2(14\xi \hfill \\ \hfill \{\frac{1}{2}(14\xi )[\left(\frac{d}{4}\right)^2+\frac{3}{16}F(1F)]\}(mr)^1+\mathrm{O}\left[(mr)^2\right]),mr1,\end{array}$$
(5.2)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }=\frac{2\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}e^{2mr}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}r^2(14\xi \hfill \\ \hfill \{\frac{1}{2}(14\xi )[\left(\frac{d+2}{4}\right)^2+\frac{3}{16}F(1F)]\}(mr)^1+\mathrm{O}\left[(mr)^2\right]),mr1.\end{array}$$
(5.3)
The small-distance behaviour is given by expressions:

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{00}=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d+1}{2}F\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d1}{2}+F\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}+1\right)}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times [(d1)^24\frac{F(1F)}{d+1}4\xi d(d1)]r^{d1}\{1+\mathrm{O}\left[(mr)^2\right]\},mr1,\end{array}$$
(5.4)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{rr}=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d+1}{2}F\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d1}{2}+F\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}+1\right)}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times [d1+4\frac{F(1F)}{d+1}4\xi d]r^{d1}\{1+\mathrm{O}\left[(mr)^2\right]\},mr1,\end{array}$$
(5.5)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d+1}{2}F\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d1}{2}+F\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}+1\right)}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times d[d1+4\frac{F(1F)}{d+1}4\xi d]r^{d3}\{1+\mathrm{O}\left[(mr)^2\right]\},mr1.\end{array}$$
(5.6)
Evidently, leading terms in the expressions in Eqs.(5.4)-(5.6) yield us the vacuum energy-momentum tensor in the strictly massless case ($`m=0`$). We see that in this case the tensor components are characterized by a simple power dependence on the distance from the brane.

## 6 Half-integer values of the brane flux

As has been already noted, the vacuum energy-momentum tensor is periodic in the value of the brane flux (i.e. depends on its fractional value only), vanishing at its integer values ($`F=0`$) and being symmetric under change $`F1F`$. Moreover, as follows from Eqs.(4.3)-(4.5) (or (4.6)-(4.8)), maximal absolute values of the tensor components are achieved at half-integer values of the brane flux ($`F=\frac{1}{2}`$).

Using representation (4.3) - (4.5) (see, e.g., first line in Eq.(3.10)), we get

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{00}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2m^{d+1}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\{\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\tau \tau ^{\frac{1}{2}}e^\tau \mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d+1}{2},\frac{m^2r^2}{\tau })+\hfill \\ \hfill +2(14\xi )(mr)^{\frac{d}{2}1}[K_{\frac{d}{2}}(2mr)2mrK_{\frac{d}{2}+1}(2mr)]\},\end{array}$$
(6.1)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{rr}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2m^{d+1}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\{\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\tau \tau ^{\frac{1}{2}}e^\tau \mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d+1}{2},\frac{m^2r^2}{\tau })\hfill \\ \hfill 8\xi (mr)^{\frac{d}{2}1}K_{\frac{d}{2}}(2mr)\},\end{array}$$
(6.2)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2r^2m^{d+1}}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\{\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\tau \tau ^{\frac{1}{2}}e^\tau \mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{d+1}{2},\frac{m^2r^2}{\tau })\hfill \\ \hfill 4(14\xi )(mr)^{\frac{d}{2}}K_{\frac{d}{2}+1}(2mr)\}.\end{array}$$
(6.3)
In Appendix B we show that integration in Eqs.(6.1) - (6.3) can be performed in the case of physical values of space dimension $`(d,d2)`$. As a result, quantities (6.1) - (6.3) are expressed in terms of Macdonald function $`K_\mu (u)`$ and modified Struve function $`L_\mu (u)`$ of integer order in the case of even $`d`$, and in terms of the integral exponential function $`E_1(u)`$ (see, e.g., Ref.) and elementary functions in the case of odd $`d`$. In particular, we get

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{00}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{m^3}{3\pi ^2}\{\frac{\pi }{2}\pi mr[K_0(2mr)L_1(2mr)+K_1(2mr)L_0(2mr)]\hfill \\ \hfill (16\xi )(mr)^1K_0(2mr)[1+\frac{1}{2}(\frac{1}{2}6\xi )(mr)^2]K_1(2mr)\},d=2,\end{array}$$
(6.4)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{rr}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{m^3}{3\pi ^2}\{\frac{\pi }{2}\pi mr[K_0(2mr)L_1(2mr)+K_1(2mr)L_0(2mr)]+\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{1}{2}(mr)^1K_0(2mr)[1\frac{1}{2}(16\xi )(mr)^2]K_1(2mr)\},d=2,\end{array}$$
(6.5)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{r^2m^3}{3\pi ^2}\{\frac{\pi }{2}\pi mr[K_0(2mr)L_1(2mr)+K_1(2mr)L_0(2mr)]\hfill \\ \hfill (16\xi )(mr)^1K_0(2mr)[1+(16\xi )(mr)^2]K_1(2mr)\},d=2,\end{array}$$
(6.6)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{00}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{m^4}{(4\pi )^2}\{E_1(2mr)\frac{1}{2}e^{2mr}[(mr)^1+(\frac{7}{2}16\xi )(mr)^2+\hfill \\ \hfill +(\frac{5}{2}16\xi )(mr)^3+\frac{1}{2}(\frac{5}{2}16\xi )(mr)^4]\},d=3,\end{array}$$
(6.7)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{rr}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{m^4}{(4\pi )^2}\{E_1(2mr)\frac{1}{2}e^{2mr}[(mr)^1\frac{1}{2}(mr)^2\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{2}(316\xi )(mr)^3\frac{1}{4}(316\xi )(mr)^4]\},d=3,\end{array}$$
(6.8)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{r^2m^4}{(4\pi )^2}\{E_1(2mr)\frac{1}{2}e^{2mr}[(mr)^1+(\frac{7}{2}16\xi )(mr)^2+\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{3}{2}(316\xi )(mr)^3+\frac{3}{4}(316\xi )(mr)^4]\},d=3.\end{array}$$
(6.9)
Expressions in cases of arbitrary even and odd values of space dimension are given in Appendix B (see Eqs.(B.6) - (B.11)).

## 7 The strong energy condition and its violation

Energy-momentum tensor of the physically reasonable classical matter satisfies the strong energy condition

$$T^{\mu \nu }u_\mu u_\nu \frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu }T^{\mu \nu }0,$$
(7.1)
where $`u_\mu `$ is a time-like vector $`\left(u^\mu u_\mu =1\right)`$. To check, whether the vacuum energy-momentum tensor in the background of the $`d2`$-brane 222In this Section we consider physical values of space dimension: $`d2`$ . satisfies condition (7.1), it is sufficient to analyse three quantities: $`t_{ren}^{00}\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu }t_{ren}^{\mu \nu }`$, $`t_{ren}^{00}+t_{ren}^{rr}`$, $`t_{ren}^{00}+r^2t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }`$.

In the massless case, using Eqs.(5.4)-(5.6), we get

$$\begin{array}{c}(t_{ren}^{00}\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu }t_{ren}^{\mu \nu })|_{m=0}=\frac{4\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d+1}{2}F\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d1}{2}+F\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}+1\right)}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \left[\frac{1}{2}(d2)(d1)d(\xi _c\xi )+\frac{F(1F)}{d+1}\right]r^{d1},\end{array}$$
(7.2)
$$\begin{array}{c}(t_{ren}^{00}+t_{ren}^{rr})|_{m=0}=\frac{4\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d+1}{2}F\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d1}{2}+F\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}+1\right)}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times d^2(\xi _c\xi )r^{d1},\end{array}$$
(7.3)
$$\begin{array}{c}(t_{ren}^{00}+r^2t_{ren}^{\phi \phi })|_{m=0}=\frac{4\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d+1}{2}F\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d1}{2}+F\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{d}{2}+1\right)}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times [d(\xi _c\xi )+F(1F)]r^{d1},\end{array}$$
(7.4)
where $`\xi _c`$ is given by Eq.(1.1). All quantities (7.2)-(7.4) are simultaneously nonnegative at

$$\begin{array}{c}\xi _c\xi \xi _c+\frac{1}{2}F(1F),d=2,\hfill \\ \xi _c\xi \xi _c+\frac{2F(1F)}{(d2)(d1)d(d+1)},d3,\hfill \end{array}$$
(7.5)
then the strong energy condition is satisfied by the vacuum energy-momentum tensor of the quantized massless scalar matter in the background of the brane. If $`F`$ is infinitesimally close to 0 or to 1, then the condition is satisfied only at $`\xi =\xi _c`$, i.e. when conformal invariance is maintained. Note, that in the conformally invariant case the strong energy condition coincides, as a consequence of the vanishing trace, with the weak energy one .

A similar analysis is carried out for the quantized massive scalar matter, and we find that both the strong and weak energy conditions are violated for all values of $`\xi `$.

The temporal component of the vacuum tensor (i.e. energy density) is positive at $`\xi \frac{1}{4}`$ and negative at $`\xi 0`$.333The vacuum energy density at $`\xi =\frac{1}{4}`$ was considered in Ref. . Transverse components of the vacuum tensor are also of opposite signs at $`\xi \frac{1}{4}`$ and at $`\xi 0`$: the radial one is of the same and the angular one is of the opposite to the sign of the temporal component. The region $`0<\xi <\frac{1}{4}`$ or, more precisely, the vicinity of $`\xi =\xi _c`$ is distinguished as the region where all components change their signs. Transverse components change their signs at a certain value of $`\xi `$ simultaneously for all distances from the brane. In contrast to this, the temporal component is positive at small distances and negative at large distances for a certain, dependent on the value of the brane flux, vicinity of the point $`\xi =\xi _c`$.

This situation is illustrated by Figures 1-3. Here variable $`mr`$ is along $`x`$-axis, and dimensionless products of tensor components at half-integer values of the brane flux, Eqs.(6.4)-(6.9), and appropriate powers of $`r`$ are along $`y`$-axis: $`r^{d+1}t_{ren}^{00}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}`$ is presented by a solid line, $`r^{d+1}t_{ren}^{rr}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}`$ \- by a dotted line, and $`r^{d+3}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}`$ \- by a dashed line. We consider cases of $`\xi =0`$, $`\xi =\xi _c`$, $`\xi =\frac{1}{4}`$, each one at $`d=2`$ and $`d=3`$. We see from Fig.2 that the vacuum energy density at $`\xi =\xi _c`$ has minimum at $`mr1.0(d=2)`$ or $`mr1.2(d=3)`$; the minimal value is $`r^{d+1}t_{ren}^{00}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}0.0018(d=2)`$ or $`r^{d+1}t_{ren}^{00}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}0.0039(d=3)`$.

To conclude this Section, we present general expressions for the vacuum tensor components in the case of conformal coupling:

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{00}|_{\xi =\xi _c}=\frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+3}{2}}}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\upsilon \mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\upsilon ^{\frac{d+3}{2}}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \left\{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}K_{\frac{d+1}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )+\frac{\upsilon ^2}{d\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\left[2mr\upsilon K_{\frac{d1}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )K_{\frac{d+1}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )\right]\right\},\end{array}$$
(7.6)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{rr}|_{\xi =\xi _c}=\frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+3}{2}}}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\upsilon \mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\upsilon ^{\frac{d+3}{2}}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \left(\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}\frac{\upsilon ^2}{d\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\right)K_{\frac{d+1}{2}}(2mr\upsilon ),\end{array}$$
(7.7)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }|_{\xi =\xi _c}=\frac{16\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d+3}{2}}}\frac{1}{r^2}\left(\frac{m}{r}\right)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\upsilon \mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\upsilon ^{\frac{d+3}{2}}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \left(\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}\frac{\upsilon ^2}{d\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}\right)\left[2mr\upsilon K_{\frac{d1}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )+dK_{\frac{d+1}{2}}(2mr\upsilon )\right].\end{array}$$
(7.8)
Vacuum energy density (7.6) has minimum at $`r=r_{min}`$ where $`r_{min}`$ is determined by equation

$$\left(\frac{d}{dr}t_{ren}^{00}|_{\xi =\xi _c}\right)|_{r=r_{min}}=0,$$

or

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\upsilon \mathrm{cosh}[(2F1)\mathrm{arccosh}\upsilon ]\upsilon ^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\{\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}K_{\frac{d+3}{2}}(2mr_{min}\upsilon )+\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{\upsilon ^2}{d\sqrt{\upsilon ^21}}[2mr_{min}\upsilon K_{\frac{d+1}{2}}(2mr_{min}\upsilon )K_{\frac{d+3}{2}}(2mr_{min}\upsilon )]\}=0.\end{array}$$
(7.9)
## 8 Summary

We have shown that the vacuum of the quantized charged scalar field is polarized in the background of a static magnetic $`d2`$ \- brane in flat $`d+1`$ \- dimensional space-time. Vector potential of the brane induces a finite energy-momentum tensor in the vacuum; therefore, this effect may be denoted as the Casimir-Bohm-Aharonov effect. Tensor components depend periodically on the brane flux $`(\mathrm{\Phi })`$, vanishing at its integer values $`(\mathrm{\Phi }=n)`$, and attaining maximal absolute values at its half-integer values $`(\mathrm{\Phi }=n+\frac{1}{2})`$. A remarkable feature is a possibility of analytic continuation in space dimension: representation (4.3)-(4.5) yields holomorphic functions of $`d`$ on the whole complex $`d`$-plane, and representation (4.6)-(4.8) yields holomorphic functions of $`d`$ on a half-plane Re $`d>1`$. The tensor components decrease exponentially at large distances from the brane, see Eqs.(5.1)-(5.3). If the mass of scalar field is zero, then expressions for tensor components are simplified considerably, see Eqs.(5.4)-(5.6).

Strong and weak energy conditions  are usually violated by vacuum polarization effects of quantized fields: in particular, this happens in most cases of the conventional Casimir effect . However, we have found that these conditions are satisfied by the vacuum energy-momentum tensor of conformally invariant $`(\xi =\xi _c)`$ massless scalar field quantized in the background of the $`d2`$ \- brane. Thus, the latter vacuum is somewhat similar to the medium of classical matter.

Although the strong and weak energy conditions are violated for all values of $`\xi `$ in the case of massive scalar field quantized in the background of the brane, the conformal coupling $`(\xi =\xi _c)`$ is distinctive in the massive case also. The vacuum tensor components at $`\xi =\xi _c`$ are given by Eqs.(7.6)-(7.8). Qualitatively, the temporal component (energy density) is positive power divergent at small distances from the brane, decreases with the increase of the distance, passes zero, becomes negative and reaches minimum at $`rm^1`$, then increases and reaches zero asymptotically from below with exponential behaviour. This is distinct from the conventional Casimir effect, which corresponds to the vacuum energy density being space independent constant, either negative or positive . We present also expressions for the vacuum tensor components at half-integer values of the brane flux in the case of physical values of space dimension $`(d=n2)`$, see Eqs.(6.4)-(6.9) and, generally, Eqs.(B.6)-(B.11).

It should be noted that temporal components of the vacuum tensor for the quantized scalar (with $`\xi =\frac{1}{4}`$) and spinor matter in magnetic backgrounds in low-dimensional $`(d=2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3})`$ spaces were considered in Refs. . Since the authors of these works are concerned with the case when the region of nonvanishing background field is of nonvanishing transverse size and is overlapped with the region of nonvanishing quantized matter, their results differ considerably from ours: in particular, the dependence on the flux of the background magnetic field is not periodic. Moreover, in their case in addition to the vacuum energy of quantized matter also the classical energy of magnetic background has to be consistently taken into account, as it is done in Ref.. On the contrary, when the region of nonvanishing background field is impenetrable for quantized matter, then the quantum and classical energies are stored in different non-overlapping parts of space. Certainly our neglect of transverse size of the magnetic brane is an idealization which allowed us to solve the problem analytically. But we believe that this idealization, as in the case of the conventional Bohm-Aharonov effect , grasps some essential features of the more realistic case of the magnetic brane with finite transverse size and the quantized scalar field satisfying the boundary condition on the edge of the brane. In particular, it is almost evident that then the vacuum energy-momentum tensor components will depend periodically on the brane flux and possess large-distance asymptotics which is exponential for $`m>0`$, see Eqs.(5.1)-(5.3), and negative-power-behaved for $`m=0`$, see Eqs.(5.4)-(5.6) with limit $`m0`$ taken first before $`r\mathrm{}`$. A less evident, but still rather plausible conjecture is that tensor components will behave less divergent, as compared to $`(rr_B)^{d3}`$ for the transverse angular and $`(rr_B)^{d1}`$ for all other components, near brane edge $`r=r_B`$. And a really challenging task is to find out whether the vacuum energy density integrated over transverse coordinates will appear to be finite and somehow capable to compensate the classical energy per transverse section of the brane.

An intriguing question is about the underlying physics of the negativeness of the vacuum energy density and the violation of strong and weak energy conditions. Recent examples of low-dimensional (without magnetic background) models  indicate that the negativeness of the vacuum energy density at large distances is related to effectively perfect reflection of quantized matter at small distances; the negativeness might persist self-consistently for the whole, classical plus quantum, energy density. In this respect Ref. is worth mentioning, where the vacuum energy density for the quantized spinor matter in the same background, as in the present paper, but exclusively in the $`d=2`$ case, was considered. As is known, spinor field cannot be made zero at the location of a singular magnetic brane (which is a point in the $`d=2`$ case). The whole set of permissible boundary conditions is parametrized by real quantity $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, and at $`\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }<0`$ a bound state appears in the gap between positive and negative frequency continua . Thus, for sure, perfect reflection at the point of singularity is excluded at $`\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }<0`$. As is shown in Ref., namely at these values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ the vacuum energy density is strictly positive at all distances, whereas, otherwise, its behaviour is similar to that of the vacuum energy density for the quantized scalar matter with $`\xi =\xi _c`$, see, qualitatively, solid curves on Fig.2.

At last, it should be noted that pitfalls of the zeta function regularization procedure (see, e.g., Refs.) do not appear in the case of singular backgrounds . Owing to this circumstance, it is possible to show that the renormalized vacuum energy-momentum tensor in the present paper is independent of the choice of a regularization procedure. In fact, this has been already shown for its temporal component at $`\xi =\frac{1}{4}`$ in Ref.. In a similar way this can be done for other values of $`\xi `$, and for other components. The key point of Ref. is that the heat kernel in the presence of the brane coincides actually with the heat kernel in its absence, and then, basing on this fact, it can be proved that the use of zeta function regularization leads to renormalized quantities which are regularization procedure independent.

## Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Professor A.G. Sitenko for invaluable help and enlightening discussions. The research was supported by INTAS (grant INTAS OPEN 00-00055) and Swiss National Science Foundation (grant SCOPES 2000-2003 7 IP 62607).

## Appendix A

Using Eq.(3.38), we present Eqs.(3.28) and (3.29) in the following form

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Omega }_0(s)=\frac{r\mathrm{sin}\left[\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)\pi \right]}{\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)\pi }\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dyy^{d2s+1}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{dk}{k^2+y^2+m^2}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \left[J_F(kr)J_{1+F}(kr)+J_{1F}(kr)J_F(kr)\right],\end{array}$$
(A.1)
$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_1(s)=\frac{2\mathrm{sin}\left[\left(1+s\frac{d}{2}\right)\pi \right]}{\pi }\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dyy^{d2s1}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{dkk}{k^2+y^2+m^2}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \{\frac{1}{2}(1+F)[J_F^2(kr)J_F^2(kr)]+\frac{1}{2}(2F)[J_{1+F}^2(kr)J_{1F}^2(kr)]\\ \hfill \frac{F(1F)}{kr}[J_F(kr)J_{1+F}(kr)+J_{1F}(kr)J_F(kr)]\},\end{array}$$
(A.2)
$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_2(s)=\frac{2\mathrm{sin}\left[\left(1+s\frac{d}{2}\right)\pi \right]}{\pi }\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dyy^{d2s1}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{dkk}{k^2+y^2+m^2}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \{\frac{1}{2}(1F)[J_F^2(kr)J_F^2(kr)]+\frac{1}{2}F[J_{1+F}^2(kr)J_{1F}^2(kr)]+\\ \hfill +\frac{F(1F)}{kr}[J_F(kr)J_{1+F}(kr)+J_{1F}(kr)J_F(kr)]\}.\end{array}$$
(A.3)
Using relation (see Ref. )

$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑k{\displaystyle \frac{k^{\nu \mu +1}}{k^2+\omega ^2}}J_\mu (kr)J_\nu (kr)=\omega ^{\nu \mu }I_\mu (\omega r)K_\nu (\omega r),1<\nu <\mu +1,`$ (A.4)
we get

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Omega }_0(s)=\frac{r\mathrm{sin}\left[\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)\pi \right]}{\left(s\frac{d}{2}\right)\pi }\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dy\frac{y^{d2s+1}}{\sqrt{m^2+y^2}}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \left[I_F(r\sqrt{m^2+y^2})K_{1F}(r\sqrt{m^2+y^2})+I_{1F}(r\sqrt{m^2+y^2})K_F(r\sqrt{m^2+y^2})\right].\end{array}$$
(A.5)
Introducing integration variable $`w=r\sqrt{m^2+y^2}`$ and using identity

$$I_F(w)K_{1F}(w)+I_{1F}(w)K_F(w)=\frac{1}{w}\frac{2\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )}{\pi }K_F(w)K_{1F}(w),$$

we get

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Omega }_0(s)=\frac{m^{d2s}}{2sd}\frac{4\mathrm{sin}(s\frac{d}{2})\pi }{(2sd)\pi ^2}\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )r^{2sd}\times \hfill \\ \hfill \times \underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dw(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s}K_F(w)K_{1F}(w).\end{array}$$
(A.6)
Although our derivation is valid for a strip $`\frac{d}{2}<`$ Re $`s<\frac{d}{2}+1`$ (see Eq.(3.38)), the result, Eq.(A.6), is analytically continued to half-plane Re $`s<\frac{d}{2}+1`$. Accordingly, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0(s+1)`$ is defined on half-plane Re $`s<\frac{d}{2}`$. Taking relations

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{00}(s)=\frac{2}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}\left[\mathrm{\Omega }_0(s)+\left(\frac{1}{4}\xi \right)\frac{1+s\frac{d}{2}}{s}\mathrm{}_r\mathrm{\Omega }_0(s+1)\right],\hfill \end{array}$$
(A.7)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{reg}^{jj}(s)=\frac{1}{(4\pi )^{\frac{d}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+s\frac{d}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+s)}\left[\mathrm{\Omega }_0(s)\left(\frac{1}{4}\xi \right)2\left(1+s\frac{d}{2}\right)\mathrm{}_r\mathrm{\Omega }_0(s+1)\right],\hfill \end{array}$$
(A.8)
into account, we obtain relations (3.39) and (3.40).

In a similar way as Eq.(A.6), we get relations

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_1(s)=r^2m^{d2s2}F(1F)\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{2\mathrm{sin}(s\frac{d}{2})\pi }{\pi ^2}\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )r^{2sd}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dw(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s1}\times \\ \hfill \times \left[2F(1F)K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)+(1+F)wK_F^2(w)+(2F)wK_{1F}^2(w)\right],\end{array}$$
(A.9)
$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_2(s)=r^2m^{d2s2}F(1F)+\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{2\mathrm{sin}(s\frac{d}{2})\pi }{\pi ^2}\mathrm{sin}(F\pi )r^{2sd}\underset{mr}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}dw(w^2m^2r^2)^{\frac{d}{2}s1}\times \\ \hfill \times \left[2F(1F)K_F(w)K_{1F}(w)(1F)wK_F^2(w)FwK_{1F}^2(w)\right],\end{array}$$
(A.10)
which are analytically continued from strip $`\frac{d}{2}1<`$ Re $`s<\frac{d}{2}`$ to half-plane Re $`s<\frac{d}{2}`$ . Accordingly, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_1(s+1)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_2(s+1)`$ are defined on half-plane Re $`s<\frac{d}{2}1`$ . Thus, we can obtain expression for differences $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_1(s)m^2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_1(s+1)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_2(s)m^2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_2(s+1)`$ which are valid on half-plane Re $`s<\frac{d}{2}1`$ ; note also that contribution of first terms in the right-hand sides of Eqs.(A.9) and (A.10) is cancelled.

Taking relations (3.18) and (3.19) into account, we obtain relations (3.41) and (3.42).

## Appendix B

Using repeatedly the recurrency relations for the incomplete gamma functions, one can get

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(N\frac{1}{2},w)=\frac{(1)^N}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(N+\frac{3}{2}\right)}\left[\pi \mathrm{erfc}\left(\sqrt{w}\right)+e^w\underset{l=0}{\overset{N}{}}(1)^l\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(l+\frac{1}{2}\right)w^{l\frac{1}{2}}\right],$$
(B.1)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(N1,w)=\frac{(1)^N}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2)}\left[E_1(w)+e^w\underset{l=0}{\overset{N}{}}(1)^l\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+1)w^{l1}\right],$$
(B.2)
where

$$\mathrm{erfc}(u)=\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{u}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑\tau e^{\tau ^2}$$

is the complementary error function, and

$$E_1(u)=\underset{u}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d\tau }{\tau }e^\tau $$

is the integral exponential function. Using Eqs.(B.1), (B.2) and relations

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑\tau \tau ^{\frac{1}{2}}e^\tau \mathrm{erfc}\left(\frac{mr}{\sqrt{\tau }}\right)=\hfill \\ \hfill =\sqrt{\pi }\left\{12mr\left[K_0(2mr)L_1(2mr)+K_1(2mr)L_0(2mr)\right]\right\},\end{array}$$
(B.3)
$$\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑\tau \tau ^{\frac{1}{2}}e^\tau E_1\left(\frac{m^2r^2}{\tau }\right)=2\sqrt{\pi }E_1(2mr),$$
(B.4)
we perform integration in Eqs.(6.1) - (6.3). Further, in the case of odd space dimension we use representation of the Macdonald function of half-integer order through a finite sum:

$$K_{l+\frac{1}{2}}(u)=\sqrt{\pi }e^u\underset{n=0}{\overset{l}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+n+1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(ln+1)}(2u)^{n\frac{1}{2}}.$$
(B.5)
Consequently, we get

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{00}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2m^{2N+1}}{(4\pi )^{N+\frac{1}{2}}}\frac{(1)^N}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(N+\frac{3}{2}\right)}\{\frac{\pi }{2}+\pi mr[K_0(2mr)L_1(2mr)+\hfill \\ \hfill +K_1(2mr)L_0(2mr)]+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi }}_{l=0}^{N2}(1)^l\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+\frac{1}{2})(mr)^lK_{l+1}(2mr)\\ \hfill \frac{(1)^N}{\sqrt{\pi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(N\frac{1}{2}\right)\left[1\frac{1}{4}(14\xi )(4N^21)(mr)^2\right](mr)^{N+1}K_N(2mr)+\\ \hfill +\frac{(1)^N}{\sqrt{\pi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+\frac{1}{2})[1(14\xi )(2N+1)](mr)^NK_{N+1}(2mr)\},d=2N,\end{array}$$
(B.6)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{rr}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2m^{2N+1}}{(4\pi )^{N+\frac{1}{2}}}\frac{(1)^N}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(N+\frac{3}{2}\right)}\{\frac{\pi }{2}+\pi mr[K_0(2mr)L_1(2mr)+\hfill \\ \hfill +K_1(2mr)L_0(2mr)]+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi }}_{l=0}^{N2}(1)^l\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+\frac{1}{2})(mr)^lK_{l+1}(2mr)\\ \hfill \frac{(1)^N}{\sqrt{\pi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(N\frac{1}{2}\right)\left[1+\xi (4N^21)(mr)^2\right](mr)^{N+1}K_N(2mr)+\\ \hfill +\frac{(1)^N}{\sqrt{\pi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+\frac{1}{2})(mr)^NK_{N+1}(2mr)\},d=2N,\end{array}$$
(B.7)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2m^{2N+1}}{r^2(4\pi )^{N+\frac{1}{2}}}\frac{(1)^N}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(N+\frac{3}{2}\right)}\{\frac{\pi }{2}+\pi mr[K_0(2mr)L_1(2mr)+\hfill \\ \hfill +K_1(2mr)L_0(2mr)]+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi }}_{l=0}^{N1}(1)^l\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+\frac{1}{2})(mr)^lK_{l+1}(2mr)+\\ \hfill +\frac{(1)^N}{\sqrt{\pi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+\frac{1}{2})[1(14\xi )(2N+1)](mr)^NK_{N+1}(2mr)\},d=2N,\end{array}$$
(B.8)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{00}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2m^{2N+2}}{(4\pi )^{N+1}}\{\frac{(1)^N}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2)}E_1(2mr)+\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{e^{2mr}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2)}\underset{l=0}{\overset{N1}{}}(1)^{Nl}\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+1)\underset{n=0}{\overset{l+1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+n+2)(mr)^{ln1}}{2^{2n+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(ln+2)}+\\ \hfill +(14\xi )e^{2mr}\underset{l=0}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+l+1)(mr)^{Nl2}}{2^{2l+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(Nl+1)}+\\ \hfill +[\frac{1}{N+1}2(14\xi )]e^{2mr}\underset{l=0}{\overset{N+1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+l+2)(mr)^{Nl1}}{2^{2l+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(Nl+2)}\},d=2N+1,\end{array}$$
(B.9)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{rr}|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2m^{2N+2}}{(4\pi )^{N+1}}\{\frac{(1)^N}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2)}E_1(2mr)+\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{e^{2mr}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2)}\underset{l=0}{\overset{N1}{}}(1)^{Nl}\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+1)\underset{n=0}{\overset{l+1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+n+2)(mr)^{ln1}}{2^{2n+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(ln+2)}\\ \hfill 4\xi e^{2mr}\underset{l=0}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+l+1)(mr)^{Nl2}}{2^{2l+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(Nl+1)}+\\ \hfill +\frac{e^{2mr}}{N+1}\underset{l=0}{\overset{N+1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+l+2)(mr)^{Nl1}}{2^{2l+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(Nl+2)}\},d=2N+1,\end{array}$$
(B.10)
$$\begin{array}{c}t_{ren}^{\phi \phi }|_{F=\frac{1}{2}}=\frac{2m^{2N+2}}{r^2(4\pi )^{N+1}}\{\frac{(1)^N}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2)}E_1(2mr)+\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{e^{2mr}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2)}\underset{l=0}{\overset{N1}{}}(1)^{Nl}\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+1)\underset{n=0}{\overset{l+1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+n+2)(mr)^{ln1}}{2^{2n+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(ln+2)}+\\ \hfill +[\frac{1}{N+1}2(14\xi )]e^{2mr}\underset{l=0}{\overset{N+1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+l+2)(mr)^{Nl1}}{2^{2l+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(Nl+2)}\},d=2N+1.\end{array}$$
(B.11)


format: text

text:
# Local Elastic Constants in Thin Films of an FCC Crystal

## I Introduction

Knowledge of the local elastic constants in inhomogeneous systems is of significant theoretical, experimental, and industrial interest. As nanofabrication technologies improve and allow for the design and construction of nanoscopic devices, understanding the mechanical response of materials at nanometer length scales will become increasingly important. In particular, deviations from bulk, continuum behavior may lead to complications in the manufacturing of such devices. For example, in the microelectronics industry, the mechanical collapse of photoresist structures below 100nm may limit the ultimate density of memory storage devices or the performance of microprocessors Tanaka et al. (1993); Cao et al. (2000); Boehme and de Pablo (2002).

In nanoscopic structures, interfaces are likely to play a major role in apparent deviations from bulk, continuum behavior Fryer et al. (2001). The interface could either weaken or reinforce the overall mechanical behavior of the structure, depending on the nature of interactions between adjacent domains and the size of the structure. Understanding how mechanical properties vary near interfaces or free surfaces would provide insights into such phenomena.

Knowledge of interfacial behavior is crucial for understanding the adhesion of thin polymer films, where the inter-diffusion of the polymers and the molecular mobility near the film boundaries play a significant role Torres et al. (2000). Properties such as adhesion, dewetting, and surface melting in thin films are likely to be controlled by processes that occur within the first few nanometers of the interface. It would therefore be beneficial to have the ability to measure (computationally or experimentally) physical properties with molecular spatial resolution.

A microscopic definition for local elastic constants has been proposed in the literature Lutsko (1988); van der Eerden et al. (1990). Implementation of that formalism requires that layer-averaged local elastic constants be determined. For inhomogeneous systems, the results from averaging over a particular layer depend strongly on the size and position of that layer. This is particularly true in an interfacial region or near a free surface, where material properties can change significantly over short distances.

In this work, we are interested in the local elastic constants and surface melting of thin crystalline films. Specifically, we present a formalism in which the local elastic constants are calculated at precise planes in the system, as opposed to small volumes or slabs. In the bulk, the calculated local elastic constants are verified by averaging over the entire system and comparing the results to the bulk value. The local elastic constants in the film are verified by comparing the local stress profiles that arise from uniaxial strain and those calculated directly from the elastic constants.

## II Theory

In a homogeneous material, applying a homogeneous strain necessarily results in a homogeneous stress. The stress is given by

$$\sigma _{ij}=C_{ijkl}ϵ_{lk},$$
(1)
where $`C_{ijkl}`$ is the bulk elasticity tensor, and where the indices represent the cartesian coordinates in three dimensions.

When a homogeneous strain is applied to an inhomogeneous system, the resulting stress is also inhomogeneous. The local stress is then given by

$$\sigma _{ij}(𝐫)=C_{ijkl}(𝐫)ϵ_{lk},$$
(2)
where $`C_{ijkl}(𝐫)`$ is the local elasticity tensor. The relationship between the local and bulk elasticity tensors can be written as

$$C_{ijkl}=\frac{1}{V}_VC_{ijkl}(𝐫)𝑑𝐫,$$
(3)
where $`V`$ is the volume of the system.

The bulk elasticity tensor can be expressed in terms of the fluctuations of stress according to Ray (1982)

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill C_{ijkl}& =2\rho k_BT\left[\delta _{il}\delta _{jk}+\delta _{ik}\delta _{jl}\right]\hfill \\ & \frac{V}{k_BT}\left[P_{ij}P_{kl}P_{ij}P_{kl}\right]+B_{ijkl},\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
where $`\rho `$ is the density, $`\delta _{ij}`$ is the Kronecker delta, $`P_{ij}`$ is the pressure tensor and $`B_{ijkl}`$ is the so-called Born term. The pressure tensor is given by

$$P_{ij}=\frac{1}{V}\left[\underset{a}{}p_{a_i}p_{a_j}/m_a\underset{a<b}{}r_{ab}^1u_{ab}^{}r_{ab_i}r_{ab_j}\right].$$
(5)
The potential energy between interaction sites $`a`$ and $`b`$ is denoted by $`u_{ab}`$, $`r_{ab}`$ is the distance between them, $`p_a`$ and $`m_a`$ are the momentum and mass of site $`a`$ respectively, and the prime indicates a derivative with respect to $`r_{ab}`$. The Born term is related to the first and second derivatives of the potential energy of interaction by

$$B_{ijkl}=\frac{1}{V}\underset{a<b}{}\left[\frac{u_{ab}^{\prime \prime }}{r_{ab}^2}\frac{u_{ab}^{}}{r_{ab}^3}\right]r_{ab_i}r_{ab_j}r_{ab_k}r_{ab_l}.$$
(6)
In this work we focus on the elastic properties of thin films having a planar symmetry; the films are assumed inhomogeneous only in the direction perpendicular to the film, i.e. $`z`$. Equation (4) must therefore be modified to calculate the elasticity tensor at precise planes within the system, without need for bins or small volumes. To this end, we use the method of planes (MOP) Todd et al. (1995) and obtain an expression for the local elasticity tensor.

The first term in Eqn. (4) is the ideal gas contribution to the elasticity tensor. The kinetic energy is homogeneously distributed, even in inhomogeneous systems, and the temperature is independent of $`z`$. However, the density can vary in the $`z`$ direction. The density profile, $`\rho (z)`$, could be calculated by dividing the system into many small bins and counting the average number of particles per unit volume in the bins. The density would then explicitly depend on the size of the bins used. Alternatively, one can use the fact that for a free standing film the total normal pressure, $`P_{zz}=\rho (z)k_BT+P_{zz}^u(z)`$, is constant throughout the system Varnik et al. (2000). In vacuum, we then have for the density profile

$$\rho (z)=\frac{P_{zz}^u(z)}{k_BT},$$
(7)
where $`P_{zz}^u(z)`$ is the configurational contribution to the local pressure tensor. The local pressure tensor is the sum of ideal and configurational terms, and can be calculated according to Irving and Kirkwood (1950); Varnik et al. (2000)

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill P_{ij}(z)=& \rho (z)k_BT\frac{1}{A}\underset{a<b}{}\frac{r_{ab_i}r_{ab_j}}{r_{ab}}u^{}(r_{ab})\hfill \\ & \times \frac{1}{|z_{ab}|}\mathrm{\Theta }\left(\frac{zz_a}{z_{ab}}\right)\mathrm{\Theta }\left(\frac{z_bz}{z_{ab}}\right),\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
where $`A`$ is the cross-sectional area of the film and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is the Heaviside step function. The first term in Eqn. (4) can then be written for inhomogeneous systems as

$$C_{ijkl}^{id}(z)=2\rho (z)k_BT\left[\delta _{il}\delta _{jk}+\delta _{ik}\delta _{jl}\right].$$
(9)
The second term in Eqn. (4) arises from bulk stress fluctuations; it accounts for the non-zero temperature contribution to the elastic constants. We are interested in relating the local stress, $`\sigma (z)`$, to a bulk homogeneous strain. Therefore, instead of including the bulk-stress bulk-stress correlation, we use the correlation between the local-stress and the average bulk stress. The second term can then be written as

$$C_{ijkl}^{fluc}(z)=\frac{V}{k_BT}\left[P_{ij}(z)P_{kl}P_{ij}(z)P_{kl}\right].$$
(10)
Note that the volume $`V`$ in Eqn. (10) cancels that in Eqn. (5) and there also is no explicit volume dependence in the MOP expression for $`P_{ij}(z)`$.

The Born term, Eqn. (4), can be calculated at planes using the MOP in the same way the local stress is determined, i.e. Eqn. (8). We have for the Born term in inhomogeneous systems

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill B_{ijkl}(z)& =\frac{1}{A}\underset{a<b}{}[\frac{u_{ab}^{\prime \prime }}{r_{ab}^2}\frac{u_{ab}^{}}{r_{ab}^3}]\frac{1}{|z_{ab}|}\mathrm{\Theta }\left(\frac{zz_a}{z_{ab}}\right)\hfill \\ & \times \mathrm{\Theta }\left(\frac{z_bz}{z_{ab}}\right)r_{ab_i}r_{ab_j}r_{ab_k}r_{ab_l}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(11)
As before, this expression does not depend on the volume of the system or the (arbitrary) size of a bin.

The final expression for the local elasticity tensor in inhomogeneous systems with planar symmetry is given by

$$C_{ijkl}(z)=C_{ijkl}^{id}(z)+C_{ijkl}^{fluc}(z)+B_{ijkl}(z).$$
(12)
We emphasize again that this expression for $`C_{ijkl}(z)`$ is valid for inhomogeneous systems and is an average only over a cross section (a plane) of the system, not a discrete volume. It therefore relates the local stress (at $`z`$) to a homogeneous strain. Also note that Lutsko et al. Lutsko (1988) have presented a derivation for the local elasticity tensor, but they averaged over a sub-volume in order to facilitate the computations. It can be seen that by integrating over the entire system, one recovers the bulk elasticity tensor, Eqn. (4). We also note that this expression does not require the use of any dynamic variables but only requires ensemble averages taken from system configurations. It therefore is useful in either molecular dynamics or Monte Carlo (MC) simulations.

We note that other valid definitions of the local stress tensor have been presented Tsai (1979); Rowlinson and Widom (1982); Harasima (1958) and discussed extensively in the literature Varnik et al. (2000); Hafskjold and Ikeshoji (2002). These definitions would in principle lead to different expressions for the local elasticity tensor. Regardless of the definition, one should expect to recover the bulk elasticity tensor after averaging over the entire system. The definition used in this work is that of Irving and Kirkwood Irving and Kirkwood (1950). This definition was chosen here because it has been shown to be a physically valid stress tensor Hafskjold and Ikeshoji (2002) and it can be used in MC simulations.

## III Simulations

To demonstrate the calculation of the local elasticity tensor, we employ the widely used nearest-neighbor Lennard-Jones (NNLJ) fcc crystal model Parrinello and Rahman (1981); Fay and Ray (1992); Sprik et al. (1984); Cowley (1983); Li and Johnson (1992); Ray et al. (1985). In what follows, all results will be reported in dimensionless Lennard-Jones units.

A bulk system consisting of 1000 particles with periodic boundary conditions in all three dimensions was investigated first. This system was simulated in the NVT ensemble at a temperature of $`T=0.3`$ using a simple MC method. The density was chosen such that the average bulk pressure is zero. The center of mass of one atomic layer was held fixed at $`z=0`$. The average bulk elastic constants for this system have been calculated previously and are listed in Table 1. Reported elastic constants, stresses and strains are represented using Voigt notation Nye (1984). For bulk fcc systems, there are three groups of non-zero, independent elements of the elastic constant matrix

$$C=\left[\begin{array}{cccccc}C_{11}& C_{21}& C_{21}& 0& 0& 0\\ C_{21}& C_{11}& C_{21}& 0& 0& 0\\ C_{21}& C_{21}& C_{11}& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& C_{44}& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& C_{44}& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& C_{44}\end{array}\right].$$
(13)
Second, we also consider a free standing film of 450 particles. The free surfaces correspond to the $`(001)`$ face of the fcc crystal. This system was also simulated in the canonical ensemble using a conventional MC method. In this case the cross sectional area was held constant with the same dimensions as the bulk system. The film had nine atomic layers parallel to the free surfaces. The temperature was the same as in the bulk, i.e. $`T=0.3`$. The center of mass of the film was held fixed at $`z=0`$. For an fcc film with free surfaces normal to the $`z`$-axis, there are six groups of non-zero, independent elements of the elastic constant matrix

$$C=\left[\begin{array}{cccccc}C_{11}& C_{21}& C_{31}& 0& 0& 0\\ C_{21}& C_{11}& C_{31}& 0& 0& 0\\ C_{31}& C_{31}& C_{33}& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& C_{44}& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& C_{44}& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& C_{66}\end{array}\right].$$
(14)
Local properties of the film and the bulk system were calculated from Eqn. (12) at planes of constant $`z`$, with each plane being separated by a distance of $`0.02`$ in both the thin film and bulk systems. The average elastic constants were also calculated in the bulk system from Eqn. (4).

An additional simulation of the thin film was performed in which a homogeneous, tensile, uniaxial strain was applied in the $`x`$-direction, $`ϵ_1=0.01005`$. The strain is defined as Love (1927)

$$ϵ_1=\frac{1}{2}\left[\left(\frac{L_x}{L_x^0}\right)^21\right],$$
(15)
where $`L_x`$ is the length of the simulation cell in the $`x`$-direction, and $`L_x^0`$ is its original length. Since the strain is homogeneous, it is known that the average strain in a plane of atoms parallel to the free surface is equal to the applied strain Kluge et al. (1990). The resulting stress profiles were then calculated using Eqn. (8). The stress profiles were also calculated directly from the elastic constants using Eqn. (2).

## IV Results

The local elastic constant profiles for $`C_{11}^b(z)`$ and $`C_{21}^b(z)`$ in the bulk system are shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 respectively. The density profile, $`\rho _b(z)`$, is also shown in these figures. Each peak in the profile at $`C_{11}^b175`$ and $`C_{21}^b150`$ corresponds to the center of mass of each atomic layer. Each minimum at $`C_{11}^b22.5`$ and $`C_{21}^b0`$ corresponds to the midpoint between each atomic layer. The local elastic constant profile for $`C_{44}^b`$ is similar to $`C_{21}^b`$ and is not shown.

The average bulk elastic constants can be calculated from the local constants using

$$C_{ij}^b=\frac{1}{Z}_ZC_{ij}^b(z)𝑑z,$$
(16)
where $`Z`$ is the width of the system. In this example, we set $`Z`$ to the width of eight atomic layers in the bulk. The average bulk elastic constants calculated from Eqn. (16) are given in Table 1. The bulk elastic constants from Eqn. (4) and the literature values Gusev et al. (1996) are also given in Table 1. All three values for each elastic constant agree well with one another.

The local elastic constant profiles for $`C_{11}^f(z)`$ and $`C_{21}^f(z)`$ in the thin film are shown in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, respectively. The density profile, $`\rho _f(z)`$, is also shown in these figures. The peaks corresponding to the atomic layers in the center of the film ($`z=0`$) have approximately the same maximum values as in the bulk system, i.e. $`C_{ij}^f(0)C_{ij}^b(0)`$. However, the minimum values between each layer near the center of the film are less than in the bulk. Interestingly, $`C_{21}^f(z)`$ exhibits negative values between each layer. The meaning of these negative values is discussed below.

The peak values of the elastic constants decrease from the center of the film as the free surfaces are approached. The profiles also become broader near the free surfaces. The decrease of the local elastic constants is an indication of the enhanced atomic mobility at the surfaces.

In order to investigate the effect of film thickness, a film consisting of 17 atomic layers was also simulated. Figure 5 shows the local elastic constant profile for $`C_{11}^f(z)`$ in the film with $`17`$ layers. The effect of the free surface is limited to the first two atomic layers for both this system and that shown in Fig. 3. The elastic constant profiles for both film thicknesses are consistent with one another.

The local stress profiles are shown in Fig. 6 for $`\sigma _1(z)`$ and in Fig. 7 for $`\sigma _2(z)`$ after a homogeneous uniaxial strain was applied. The local stress profiles in the film were calculated from Eqn. (2) using the local elasticity tensor measured at zero strain. The local stress profiles were also calculated in the strained film as

$$\sigma _i(z)=\left[P_i(z)|_{ϵ=ϵ_1}P_i(z)|_{ϵ=0}\right],$$
(17)
where we used Eqn. (8) for $`P_i(z)`$. The results are shown in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7. The fact that the two methods for calculating the local stress profiles give the same result is reassuring and demonstrates that the response to the applied strain is linear. For $`\sigma _2(z)`$, we find that the tensile (positive) uniaxial strain in $`x`$-direction causes a negative stress in the region between the atomic layers (Fig. 7). This is directly related to the negative elastic constants seen in $`C_{21}^f(z)`$.

## V Surface Melting

In order to study the melting behavior of a thin crystalline film, we adopt the model for argon used by Eerden et al. v.d. Eerden et al. (1992). As before, we study the (001) surface of the crystal. The interaction is described by the truncated LJ potential given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill u_{ab}=& 4.569ϵ\left[\left(\frac{r_{ab}}{\sigma }\right)^{12}\left(\frac{r_{ab}}{\sigma }\right)^6\right]\hfill \\ & \times \mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{0.25\sigma }{r_{ab}2.5\sigma }\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(18)
Eerden et al. report the bulk elastic properties for this system.

Consistent with Eerden et al., we have 32 atoms in each layer of the crystal and use films consisting of 16 layers. The elastic constants are calculated at planes in the top half of the film separated by a distance of $`dz=0.02`$. At each temperature, the lateral dimensions of the simulation cell were taken from the average size of a bulk simulation cell at zero pressure. The surface of the film was aligned perpendicular to the $`z`$-axis and the center of mass was fixed at $`z=0`$.

Analogous to the definition of the average lateral shear modulus for a slab between $`z`$ and $`z^{}`$ ($`\mu ^\sigma [z,z^{}]`$) by Eerden et al., we define the local lateral shear modulus at a plane $`z`$ as

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mu _\text{i}^\sigma (z)=& \frac{1}{8}\underset{\alpha =x,y}{}\underset{\beta =x,y}{}[C_{\alpha \beta \beta \alpha }(z)\hfill \\ & +C_{\alpha \beta \alpha \beta }(z)C_{\alpha \alpha \beta \beta }(z)].\hfill \end{array}$$
(19)
Note that this definition is a projected (onto the $`xy`$-plane) version of the usual shear modulus for an isotropic solid van der Eerden et al. (1990). Since we are interested in the melting behavior of an anisotropic solid, another useful definition of the local lateral shear modulus is

$$\mu _\text{a}^\sigma (z)=C_{66}(z).$$
(20)
As the crystal nears its melting point it becomes less anisotropic and we expect $`\mu _\text{a}^\sigma `$ to approach $`\mu _\text{i}^\sigma `$. The melting point is defined here as the temperature at which $`\mu _\text{a}^\sigma `$ and $`\mu _\text{i}^\sigma `$ vanish.

The shear moduli as a function of position in the film are shown in Fig. 8 at four different temperatures. The density profiles at these temperatures are shown in Fig. 9. The density profile has units of $`\sigma ^3`$ and its integral over the entire system, $`A_z\rho (z)𝑑z`$, gives the total number of particles in the film. In the following discussion, we will refer to the layers starting with the surface layer as layer-1, layer-2, etc.

The behavior at the lowest temperature (Fig. 8a.), $`T=0.4`$, is similar to that of the NNLJ film, having bulk behavior in the center of the film and decreasing moduli in the layers near the surface. The difference between $`\mu _\text{i}^\sigma `$ and $`\mu _\text{a}^\sigma `$ reflects the fact that the crystal is anisotropic, even in the layer nearest to the surface, layer-1. This is also evident in the density profile (Fig. 9a.) where all the atomic layers of the crystal are separated by regions of empty space. At temperatures above $`T=0.4`$, isolated atoms have sufficient energy to escape layer-1 and occupy positions outside the film (layer-0). This additional layer can be seen as the very small peak centered at $`z=6.82`$. The additional layer, however, has a zero shear modulus.

At $`T=0.5`$, the shear moduli (Fig. 8b.) of each layer have decreased from those at $`T=0.4`$, indicating a softening of the crystal. The difference between $`\mu _\text{i}^\sigma `$ and $`\mu _\text{a}^\sigma `$ has decreased considerably in layer-1, indicating nearly isotropic behavior near the melting temperature. The number of atoms which escape from layer-1 has increased, indicated by the larger peak or shoulder in the density profile (Fig. 9b.) at $`z=6.82`$.

In Fig. 8c. and Fig. 9c. ($`T=0.575`$), the behavior of the layers near the surface has changed significantly. Both $`\mu _\text{i}^\sigma `$ and $`\mu _\text{a}^\sigma `$ are essentially zero (indicating isotropy and melting) at layer-1 even though the density profile exhibits some remaining structure in that region. Between layer-1 and layer-2 and between layer-2 and layer-3, the density is non-zero yet the shear modulus is zero. A small amount of argon exists as a fluid between these layers. Layer-0 contains even more atoms at this temperature and shows a flat density shoulder which decays to zero, indicating a loss of structure at the film-vacuum interface. At temperatures just below $`T=0.575`$ and above, the delineation of layer thickness becomes ambiguous and the use of a layer-averaged shear modulus becomes questionable. The method of planes proposed here eliminates that ambiguity.

At $`T=0.6`$, the shear modulus of the entire film is zero and the density profile is flat. The film is a liquid throughout and has none of the structure originally present in the crystalline film at lower temperatures.

An average shear modulus for the surface layer can be defined by integrating the profiles in Fig. 8. The average shear modulus is given by

$$\overline{\mu }^\sigma =\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }z}_{z_{\text{min}}}^{z_{\text{max}}}\mu ^\sigma (z)𝑑z.$$
(21)
A layer thickness $`\mathrm{\Delta }z`$ must first be defined in order to perform the integration. We arbitrarily choose $`\mathrm{\Delta }z`$ for the surface layer to be the distance between the peaks in the density profile of layer-1 and layer-2 at each temperature. In Eqn. (21), $`z_{\text{min}}`$ is the location of the minimum density between layer-1 and layer-2 and $`z_{\text{max}}=z_{\text{min}}+\mathrm{\Delta }z`$.

The results for $`\overline{\mu }_\text{i}^\sigma `$ and $`\overline{\mu }_\text{a}^\sigma `$ of the surface layer are shown in Fig. 10 for temperatures up to $`T=0.575`$. Both shear moduli decrease sharply with increasing temperature and vanish at $`T=0.575`$, indicating melting of the surface layer. This is in agreement with the literature value of $`T=0.576`$. The bulk melting temperature is $`T_b=0.601`$ v.d. Eerden et al. (1992).

## VI Conclusion

A formalism for calculation of the local elastic constants in inhomogeneous systems based on the method of planes has been presented. Unlike previous work, this formalism does not require the partitioning of the system into a set of finite volumes or “slabs” over which average elastic constants are calculated. As an example application of the technique, Monte Carlo simulations of the nearest-neighbor Lennard-Jones fcc crystal in the bulk and in thin film geometries have been presented.

The local atomic structure of the crystals was evident in the local elastic constants calculated at precise planes. In the thin film, the elastic constants are decreased from the corresponding bulk values, especially near the free surfaces. This decrease near a free surface is expected to give rise to apparent deviations from bulk continuum behavior in thin films and nanoscopic structures.

The melting behavior of argon in a thin film was also investigated within the context of this formalism. Results show how the shear modulus profile of the surface layer of atoms vanishes below the melting temperature of the core of the film. Below the melting temperature of the film, the free surface allows sufficient thermal motion for the surface atoms to reach an isotropic liquid state prior to the bulk of the film.