text:
# Dirac equation in magnetic-solenoid field

## 1 Introduction

The present article is a natural continuation of the works  where solutions of the Schrödinger, Klein-Gordon, and Dirac equations in the superposition of the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) field (the field of an infinitely long and infinitesimally thin solenoid) and a collinear uniform magnetic field were studied. In what follows, we call the latter superposition the magnetic-solenoid field. In particular, in the paper  solutions of the Dirac equation in the magnetic-solenoid field in $`2+1`$ and $`3+1`$ dimensions were studied in detail. Then, in , these solutions were used to calculate various characteristics of the particle radiation in such a field. In fact, the AB effect in synchrotron radiation was investigated. However, a number of important and interesting aspects related to the rigorous treatment of the solutions of the Dirac equation in the magnetic-solenoid field were not considered. One ought to say that in the work  it was pointed out that a critical subspace exists where the Hamiltonian of the problem is not self-adjoint. But the corresponding self-adjoint extensions of the Hamiltonian were not studied. The completeness of the solutions was not considered from this point of view as well.

One has to remark that even for the pure AB field it was not simple to solve the two aforementioned problems. First, the construction of self-adjoint extensions of the nonrelativistic Hamiltonian in the AB field was studied in detail in . In the work  solutions in the regularized AB field were thoroughly considered as well. The need to consider self-adjoint extensions of the Dirac Hamiltonian in the pure AB field in $`2+1`$ dimensions was recognized in . The interaction between the magnetic momentum of a charged particle and the AB field essentially changes the behavior of the wave functions at the magnetic string . It was shown that a one-parameter family of boundary conditions at the origin arises. Self-adjoint extensions of the Dirac Hamiltonian in $`3+1`$ dimensions were found in . The works  present an alternative method of treating the Hamiltonian extension problem in $`2+1`$ and in $`3+1`$ dimensions. It was shown in  that in $`2+1`$ dimensions only two values of the extension parameter correspond to the presence of the point-like magnetic field at the origin. Thus, other values of the parameter correspond to additional contact interactions. One possible boundary condition was obtained in  by a specific regularization of the Dirac delta function, starting from a model in which the continuity of both components of the Dirac spinor is imposed at a finite radius, and then this radius is shrunk to zero. Other extensions in $`2+1`$ and $`3+1`$ dimensions were constructed in the works  by imposing spectral boundary conditions of the Atiyah-Patodi-Singer type  (MIT boundary conditions) at a finite radius, and then the zero-radius limit is taken. In the works  it was shown that, given certain relations between the extension parameters, it is possible to find the most general domain where the Hamiltonian and the helicity operator are self-adjoint. The bound state problem for particles with magnetic moment in the AB potential was considered in detail in the works . The physically motivated boundary conditions for the particle scattering on the AB field and a Coulomb center was studied in .

The study of similar problems in the magnetic-solenoid field is a nontrivial task. Indeed, the presence of the uniform magnetic field changes the energy spectrum of the spinning particle from continuous to discrete. Thus, the boundary conditions that were obtained for a continuous spectrum cannot be automatically used for the discrete spectrum. By analogy with the pure AB field it is important to consider the regularized magnetic-solenoid field (we call the regularized magnetic-solenoid field the superposition of a uniform magnetic field and the regularized AB field). Here one has to study solutions of the Dirac equation in such a field. The latter problem was not solved before, and is of particular interest regardless of the extension problem in the AB field. One ought to say that the Pauli equation in the magnetic-solenoid field was recently studied in .

In the present article we consider the Dirac equation in the general magnetic-solenoid field (the uniform magnetic field and the AB field may have both the same and opposite directions) and in the regularized magnetic-solenoid field. First we construct self-adjoint extensions of the Dirac Hamiltonian using von Neumann’s theory of deficiency indices. We demonstrate how to reduce the $`\left(3+1\right)`$-dimensional problem to the $`\left(2+1\right)`$-dimensional one by a proper choice of the spin operator. We find self-adjoint extensions of the Dirac Hamiltonian in both above dimensions and boundary conditions at the AB solenoid. Then, we study properties of the corresponding solutions and energy spectra. We discuss the spectrum dependence upon the extension parameter. In the regularized magnetic-solenoid field, we find for the first time solutions of the Dirac equation. We study the structure of these solutions and their dependence on the behavior of the magnetic field inside the solenoid. Then we use these solutions to specify boundary conditions for the singular magnetic-solenoid field. To this end, we consider the zero-radius limit of the solenoid. One ought to say that the problem of the Hamiltonian extension in a particular case of the magnetic-solenoid field (both fields have the same directions) was considered in  (scalar case) and in  (spinning case in $`2+1`$ dimensions). However, the $`3+1`$ dimensional spinning problem was not studied as well as the relation of the extensions with the regularized problem.

## 2 Exact solutions

Consider the Dirac equation ($`c=\mathrm{}=1`$) in $`\left(3+1\right)`$ and $`\left(2+1\right)`$ dimensions,

$$i_0\mathrm{\Psi }=H\mathrm{\Psi },H=\gamma ^0\left(𝜸𝐏+M\right).$$
(1)
Here $`\gamma ^\nu =(\gamma ^0,𝜸),𝜸=\left(\gamma ^k\right)`$$`P_k=i_kqA_k,`$ $`k=1,2,`$ for $`2+1`$, and $`k=1,2,3`$, for $`3+1`$,$`\nu =(0,k);q`$ is an algebraic charge, for electrons $`q=e<0`$. As an external electromagnetic field we take the magnetic-solenoid field. The magnetic-solenoid field is a collinear superposition of a constant uniform magnetic field $`B`$ and the Aharonov-Bohm field $`B^{AB}`$ (the AB field is a field of an infinitely long and infinitesimally thin solenoid). The complete Maxwell tensor has the form:

$$F_{\lambda \nu }=\overline{B}\left(\delta _\lambda ^2\delta _\nu ^1\delta _\lambda ^1\delta _\nu ^2\right),\overline{B}=B^{AB}+B.$$

The AB field is singular at $`r=0`$,

$$B^{AB}=\mathrm{\Phi }\delta (x^1)\delta (x^2).$$

The AB field creates the magnetic flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. It is convenient to present this flux as:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\left(l_0+\mu \right)\mathrm{\Phi }_0,\mathrm{\Phi }_0=2\pi /e,$$
(2)
where $`l_0`$ is integer, and $`0\mu <1`$.

If we use the cylindric coordinates $`\phi ,r:x^1=r\mathrm{cos}\phi `$, $`x^2=r\mathrm{sin}\phi `$, then the potentials have the form,

$`A_0=0,eA_1=\left[l_0+\mu +A\left(r\right)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}},eA_2=\left[l_0+\mu +A\left(r\right)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{r}},`$
$`(A_3=0\mathrm{in}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}3}+1),A\left(r\right)=eBr^2/2.`$ (3)
### 2.1 Solutions in 2+1 dimensions

First, we consider the problem in $`2+1`$ dimensions. In $`2+1`$ dimensions there are two non-equivalent representations for $`\gamma `$-matrices:

$$\gamma ^0=\sigma ^3,\gamma ^1=i\sigma ^2,\gamma ^2=i\sigma ^1\zeta ,\zeta =\pm 1,$$

where the ”polarizations” $`\zeta =\pm 1`$ correspond to ”spin up” and ”spin down”, respectively, $`𝝈=\left(\sigma ^i\right)`$ are Pauli matrices. In the stationary case, we may select the following form for the spinors $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x)`$,

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(x)=\mathrm{exp}\left\{i\epsilon x^0\right\}\psi _\epsilon ^{(\zeta )}\left(x_{}\right),\zeta =\pm 1,x_{}=(0,x^1,x^2).$$
(4)
Then the Dirac equation in both representations implies:

$$\left(𝝈𝐏_{}+M\sigma ^3\right)\psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}(x_{})=\epsilon \psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}(x_{}),P_{}=(0,P_1,P_2),$$
(5)
$$\left(\sigma ^1𝝈𝐏_{}\sigma ^1+M\sigma ^3\right)\psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}(x_{})=\epsilon \psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}(x_{}).$$
(6)
We remark that the energy eigenvalues can be positive, $`\epsilon ={}_{+}{}^{}\epsilon >0`$ , or negative, $`\epsilon ={}_{}{}^{}\epsilon <0`$. One can see that

$$\psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}(x_{})=\sigma ^2\psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}(x_{}).$$
(7)
Further, we are going to use the representation defined by $`\zeta =1`$.

As the total angular momentum operator we select $`J=i_\phi +\sigma ^3/2`$ that is the dimensional reduction of the operator $`J^3`$ in $`3+1`$ dimensions. The operator $`J`$ commutes with the Hamiltonian $`H`$. Then the spinors $`\psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}`$ have to satisfy Eq. (5) and the equation

$$J\psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}\left(x_{}\right)=\left(ll_0\frac{1}{2}\right)\psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}\left(x_{}\right),l.$$
(8)
Presenting the spinors $`\psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}`$ in the form

$$\psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}\left(x_{}\right)=g_l(\phi )\psi _l\left(r\right),g_l(\phi )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\mathrm{exp}\left\{i\phi \left(ll_0\frac{1}{2}\left(1+\sigma ^3\right)\right)\right\},$$
(9)
we find that the radial spinor $`\psi _l\left(r\right)`$ obeys the equation

$`h\psi _l(r)=\epsilon \psi _l(r),h=\mathrm{\Pi }+\sigma ^3M,`$ (10)
$`\mathrm{\Pi }=i\left\{_r+{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma ^3}{r}}\left[\mu +l{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(1\sigma ^3\right)+A\left(r\right)\right]\right\}\sigma ^1.`$ (11)
Here $`h`$ is the radial Hamiltonian, $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ defines the action of the spin projection operator on the radial spinor in the subspace with a given $`l`$,

$$𝝈𝐏_{}g_l(\phi )\psi _l\left(r\right)=g_l(\phi )\mathrm{\Pi }\psi _l\left(r\right).$$

It is convenient to present the radial spinor in the following form

$$\psi _l(r)=\left[\sigma ^3\left(\epsilon \mathrm{\Pi }\right)+M\right]u_l(r),$$
(12)
where

$`u_l(r)={\displaystyle \underset{\sigma =\pm 1}{}}c_\sigma u_{l,\sigma }(r),u_{l,\sigma }(r)=\varphi _{l,\sigma }(r)\upsilon _\sigma ,`$
$`\upsilon _1=\left(\begin{array}{c}1\hfill \\ 0\hfill \end{array}\right),\upsilon _1=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\hfill \\ 1\hfill \end{array}\right),`$ (17)
and $`c_\sigma `$ are some constants. It follows from (10) that $`\mathrm{\Pi }^2u=\left(\epsilon ^2M^2\right)u`$, therefore the radial functions $`\varphi _{l,\sigma }(r)`$ satisfy the following equation:

$`\left\{\rho {\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{d\rho ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{\gamma }}\xi \left(\mu +l{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(1\sigma \right)\right)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{\nu ^2}{4\rho }}\right\}\varphi _{l,\sigma }(r)=0,`$ (18)
$`\rho =\gamma r^2/2,\gamma =e\left|B\right|,\xi =\mathrm{sgn}B,\nu =\mu +l\left(1+\sigma \right)/2,\omega =\epsilon ^2M^2.`$
Solutions of the equation (18) were studied in . Taking into account these results, we get:

For any $`l`$, there exist a set of regular111Here we use the terms ”regular”, ”irregular” at $`r=0`$ in the following sense. We call a function to be regular if it behaves as $`r^c`$ at $`r=0`$ with $`c0`$, and irregular if $`c<0`$. We call a spinor to be regular when all its components are regular, and irregular when at least one of its components is irregular. at $`r=0`$ solutions $`\varphi _{l,\sigma }=(\varphi _{m,l,\sigma }`$, $`m=0,1,2,\mathrm{})`$,

$$\varphi _{m,l,\sigma }(r)=I_{m+|\nu |,m}\left(\rho \right).$$
(19)
Here $`I_{n,m}(\rho )`$ are the Laguerre functions that are presented in Appendix A.

For $`l=0`$ there exist solutions irregular at $`r=0`$. A general irregular solution for $`l=0`$, $`\mu 0`$ reads:

$`\varphi _{\omega ,\sigma }(r)=\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }(\rho )=\rho ^{1/2}W_{\lambda ,\alpha /2}(\rho ),`$
$`\alpha =\mu \left(1+\sigma \right)/2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}\lambda =\omega /\gamma \xi \left[\mu \left(1\sigma \right)/2\right],`$ (20)
where $`W_{\lambda ,\alpha /2}`$ are the Whittaker functions (see  , 9.220.4). The spinors in (10) constructed with the help of the latter functions are square integrable for arbitrary complex $`\lambda `$. The functions $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }`$ were studied in detail in , some important relations for these functions are presented in Appendix A. We see that interpretation of $`\omega `$ as energy is impossible for complex $`\lambda `$. For real $`\lambda `$ there exist a set of solutions (20) which can be expressed in terms of the Laguerre functions with integer indices:

$`\varphi _{m,+1}^{ir}(r)`$ $`=`$ $`I_{m+\mu 1,m}\left(\rho \right),\sigma =+1,m=0,1,2,\mathrm{},`$
$`\varphi _{m,1}^{ir}(r)`$ $`=`$ $`I_{m\mu ,m}\left(\rho \right),\sigma =1,m=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.`$ (21)
All the corresponding solutions $`\psi _l(r)`$ of Eq. (10) are square integrable on the half-line with the measure $`rdr`$. The Laguerre functions in Eqs. (19), (21) are expressed via the Laguerre polynomials.

Eigenvalues $`\omega `$ and the form of spinors depend on $`\mathrm{sgn}B`$. Below we present the results for $`B>0`$. The results for $`B<0`$ can not be obtained trivially from ones for $`B>0`$. We present them in Appendix B. The spectrum of $`\omega `$ corresponding to the functions $`\varphi _{m,l,\sigma }(r)`$ reads

$$\omega =\{\begin{array}{c}2\gamma \left(m+l+\mu \right),l\left(1+\sigma \right)/20\hfill \\ 2\gamma \left(m+\left(1+\sigma \right)/2\right),l\left(1+\sigma \right)/2<0\hfill \end{array},$$
(22)
and the spectrum of $`\omega `$ corresponding to the functions $`\varphi _{m,\sigma }^{ir}(r)`$ reads

$$\omega =\{\begin{array}{c}2\gamma \left(m+\mu \right),\sigma =1\hfill \\ 2\gamma m,\sigma =1\hfill \end{array}.$$
(23)
We demand the spinors $`u_l\left(r\right)`$ to be eigenvector for $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$, such that the functions $`u_{m,l,\pm }`$ have to obey the equation

$$\mathrm{\Pi }u_{m,l,\pm }(r)=\pm \sqrt{\omega }u_{m,l,\pm }(r).$$
(24)
Then we can specify the coefficients in (17).

In the case $`\omega =0`$,

$$u_{0,l}(r)=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\hfill \\ \varphi _{0,l,1}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),l1;u_0^I(r)=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\hfill \\ \varphi _{0,1}^{ir}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),l=0.$$
(25)
That can be easily seen from the relations (116) - (119) for the Laguerre functions $`I_{n,m}(\rho )`$ .

In the case $`\omega 0`$,

$`u_{m,l,\pm }(r)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{m,l,+1}(r)\hfill \\ \pm i\varphi _{m,l,1}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),l1,\omega =2\gamma \left(m+l+\mu \right),`$ (28)
$`u_{m+1,l,\pm }(r)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{m,l,+1}(r)\hfill \\ i\varphi _{m+1,l,1}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),l1,\omega =2\gamma \left(m+1\right),`$ (31)
$`u_{m+1,\pm }^I(r)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{m,0,+1}(r)\hfill \\ i\varphi _{m+1,1}^{ir}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),l=0,\omega =2\gamma \left(m+1\right),`$ (34)
$`u_{m,\pm }^{II}(r)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{m,+1}^{ir}(r)\hfill \\ \pm i\varphi _{m,0,1}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),l=0,\omega =2\gamma \left(m+\mu \right).`$ (37)
For $`\omega 0`$, we construct solutions of the Dirac equation using the spinors $`u`$ corresponding to the positive eigenvalues of the operator $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. These solutions have the form,

$`\psi _{m,l}(r)=N\left[\sigma ^3\left(\epsilon \sqrt{\omega }\right)+M\right]u_{m,l,+}(r),l0,`$
$`\psi _m^{I,II}(r)=N\left[\sigma ^3\left(\epsilon \sqrt{\omega }\right)+M\right]u_{m,+}^{I,II}(r),l=0,`$ (38)
where $`N`$ is a normalization constant. Substituting (38) into (10) we obtain two types of states corresponding to particles $`{}_{+}{}^{}\psi `$ and antiparticles $`{}_{}{}^{}\psi `$ with $`\epsilon ={}_{\pm }{}^{}\epsilon =\pm \sqrt{M^2+\omega }`$, respectively. The particle and antiparticle spectra are symmetric, that is $`|_+\epsilon |=|_{}\epsilon |`$, for given quantum numbers $`m`$, $`l`$.

Consider the case $`\omega =0`$. As it follows from (10), (25) only negative energy solutions (antiparticles) are possible. They coincide with the corresponding spinors $`u`$ up to a normalization constant

$${}_{}{}^{}\psi _{0,l}^{}(r)=Nu_{0,l}(r),l1;_{}\psi _0^I(r)=Nu_0^I(r),l=0.$$
(39)
Thus, only antiparticles have the rest energy level. The particle lowest energy level for $`l0`$ is $`{}_{+}{}^{}\epsilon =\sqrt{M^2+2\gamma }`$.

All the radial spinors $`\psi _{m,l}(r)`$ are orthogonal for different $`m`$. The same is true both for the spinors $`\psi _m^I`$ and $`\psi _m^{II}`$. In the general case, the spinors of the different types are not orthogonal. By the help of Eq. (122) of Appendix A, one can prove this fact and at the same time calculate the normalization factor which has the same form for all types of the spinors,

$$N=\frac{\sqrt{\gamma }}{\sqrt{2\left[\left(\epsilon \sqrt{\omega }\right)^2+M^2\right]}}.$$
(40)
Besides, on the subspace $`l=0`$ there are solutions of Eq. (10) that are expressed via the functions $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }(\rho )`$ (20). We present these solutions as follows,

$`\psi _\omega (r)`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\sigma ^3\left(\epsilon \mathrm{\Pi }\right)+M\right]u_\omega (r),`$
$`u_\omega (r)`$ $`=`$ $`c_1u_{\omega ,+1}(r)+c_1u_{\omega ,1}(r),u_{\omega ,\sigma }(r)=\varphi _{\omega ,\sigma }(r)v_\sigma .`$ (41)
Using the relations (128) for the functions $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }(\rho )`$, we obtain the useful expressions

$$\mathrm{\Pi }u_{\omega ,1}(r)=i\sqrt{2\gamma }u_{\omega ,1}(r),\mathrm{\Pi }u_{\omega ,1}(r)=i\frac{\omega }{\sqrt{2\gamma }}u_{\omega ,+1}(r),$$
(42)
By the help of Eq. (130) from Appendix A, one can see that the spinors $`\psi _\omega (r)`$, $`\psi _\omega ^{}(r)`$, $`\omega \omega ^{}`$ are not orthogonal in the general case.

The fact that on the subspace $`l=0`$ (in what follows we call this subspace the critical subspace, and the subspace $`l0`$ the noncritical subspace) there exist solutions with complex eigenvalues indicates that the radial Hamiltonian is not self-adjoint, at least on this subspace.

### 2.2 Solutions in 3+1 dimensions

To exploit the symmetry of the problem under $`z`$ translations, we use the following representations for $`\gamma `$-matrices (see ),

$$\gamma ^0=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\sigma ^3& 0\\ 0& \sigma ^3\end{array}\right),\gamma ^1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}i\sigma ^2& 0\\ 0& i\sigma ^2\end{array}\right),\gamma ^2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}i\sigma ^1& 0\\ 0& i\sigma ^1\end{array}\right),\gamma ^3=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& I\\ I& 0\end{array}\right).$$

In $`3+1`$ dimensions a complete set of commuting operators can be chosen as follows ($`\gamma ^5=i\gamma ^0\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3`$),

$$H,P^3=i_3,J^3=i_\phi +\mathrm{\Sigma }^3/2,S^3=\gamma ^5\gamma ^3\left(M+\gamma ^3P^3\right)/M.$$
(43)
Then we demand the wave function to be eigenvector for these operators,

$`H\mathrm{\Psi }`$ $`=`$ $`\epsilon \mathrm{\Psi },`$ (44)
$`P^3\mathrm{\Psi }`$ $`=`$ $`p^3\mathrm{\Psi },`$ (45)
$`J^3\mathrm{\Psi }`$ $`=`$ $`j^3\mathrm{\Psi },`$ (46)
$`S^3\mathrm{\Psi }`$ $`=`$ $`s\stackrel{~}{M}/M\mathrm{\Psi }.`$ (47)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{M}=\sqrt{M^2+(p_3)^2}`$, $`p^3`$ is $`z`$-component of the momentum and $`j^3`$ is $`z`$-component of the total angular momentum. Remark that the energy eigenvalues can be positive, $`\epsilon ={}_{+}{}^{}\epsilon >0`$ , or negative, $`\epsilon ={}_{}{}^{}\epsilon <0`$. The eigenvalues $`j^3`$ are half-integer, it is convenient to use the representation: $`j^3=\left(ll_0\frac{1}{2}\right)`$, where $`l=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$ . To specify the spin degree of freedom we select the operator $`S^3`$ which is the $`z`$-component of the polarization pseudovector ,

$$S^0=\frac{1}{2M}\left(H\gamma ^5+\gamma ^5H\right),S^i=\frac{1}{2M}\left(H\mathrm{\Sigma }^i+\mathrm{\Sigma }^iH\right),$$
(48)
eigenvalues of the corresponding spin projections are $`s\stackrel{~}{M}/M`$, $`s=\pm 1`$.

Then in $`3+1`$ dimensions one can separate the spin and coordinate variables and get the following representation for the spinors $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$,

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left\{i\epsilon x^0+ip^3x^3\right\}\mathrm{\Psi }_s(x_{}),`$
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_s(x_{})`$ $`=`$ $`N\left(\begin{array}{c}\left[1+\left(p^3+s\stackrel{~}{M}\right)/M\right]\psi _{\epsilon ,s}(x_{})\\ \left[1+\left(p^3+s\stackrel{~}{M}\right)/M\right]\psi _{\epsilon ,s}(x_{})\end{array}\right).`$ (51)
Here $`\psi _{\epsilon ,s}(x_{})`$ are two-component spinors, $`x_{}=(0,x^1,x^2,0)`$, $`N`$ is a normalization factor.

As a result, the equation (44) is reduced to the equation

$$\left(𝝈𝐏_{}+s\stackrel{~}{M}\sigma ^3\right)\psi _{\epsilon ,s}(x_{})=\epsilon \psi _{\epsilon ,s}(x_{}),P_{}=(0,P_1,P_2,0).$$
(52)
Presenting $`\psi _{\epsilon ,s}\left(x_{}\right)`$ in the form

$$\psi _{\epsilon ,s}\left(x_{}\right)=g_l(\phi )\psi _{l,s}\left(r\right),$$
(53)
where $`g_l\left(\phi \right)`$ is given by Eq. (9), one comes to the radial equation

$$h_s\psi _{l,s}(r)=\epsilon \psi _{l,s}(r),h_s=\mathrm{\Pi }+s\stackrel{~}{M}\sigma ^3,$$
(54)
where $`h_s`$ is the radial Hamiltonian acting on the subspace with the spin quantum number $`s`$, $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is given by Eq. (11). We remark that

$$\psi _{\epsilon ,1}(x_{})=\sigma ^3\psi _{\epsilon ,1}(x_{}).$$
(55)
One can see that at fixed $`s`$ and $`p^3`$, Eq. (52) is similar to Eq. (5) in $`2+1`$ dimensions. Thus, after separation the angular variable with the help of (9), the radial spinor (53), $`\psi _{l,+1}\left(r\right)`$, can be obtained from the radial spinor (9), $`\psi _l\left(r\right)`$, with the substitution $`M`$ by $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$. The same is true for the particular case $`l=0`$. Here the radial spinor $`\psi _{\omega ,+1}\left(r\right)`$, can be obtained from the radial spinor (41), $`\psi _\omega \left(r\right)`$.

Using the results for $`\left(2+1\right)`$-dimensional case, one concludes that in the critical subspace complex eigenvalues of Eq. (44) exist. That means the Hamiltonian in $`3+1`$ dimensions is not self-adjoint.

## 3 Self-adjoint extensions

As well-known , the radial Hamiltonian in the pure AB field requires a self-adjoint extension for the critical subspace $`l=0`$. As a result  one gets a one-parameter family of acceptable boundary conditions. In the case of our interest, the external background is more complicated, it includes besides the AB field a uniform magnetic field. The wave functions and the spectrum in such a background differ in a nontrivial manner from ones in the pure AB field. Thus, the problem of self-adjoint extension of the Dirac Hamiltonian in such a background, which is considered below, is not trivial.

### 3.1 Extensions in 2+1 dimensions

First, we study the $`\left(2+1\right)`$-dimensional case. To this end we use the standard theory of von Neumann deficiency indices . The $`\left(2+1\right)`$-dimensional case was formally considered in . We reproduce calculations for the $`\left(2+1\right)`$-dimensional case in terms of the functions of Sect. 2. We generalize the results of  for arbitrary sign of $`B`$ that allows to determine the non-trivial spectrum dependence on the signs of $`B`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. The $`\left(2+1\right)`$-dimensional case results are necessary in order to extend this result to the $`\left(3+1\right)`$-dimensional case.

The Hamiltonian (1) acts on the space of two-spinors $`\psi \left(x_{}\right)`$. The angular variable can be separated, Eq. (10), that enables us to single out the radial Hamiltonian $`h`$ (10) which acts on the space of two-spinors $`\psi \left(r\right)`$. We start with the choice of the domain of definition of $`h`$, $`𝒟\left(h\right)`$. Let $`𝒟\left(h\right)`$ be the space of absolutely continuous square integrable on the half-line (with the measure $`rdr)`$ and regular at the origin functions. One can make sure that $`h`$ is symmetric on the domain $`𝒟\left(h\right)`$. To determine whether the Hamiltonian is self-adjoint we have to define its deficiency indices, $`n_\pm \left(h\right)=dim\left(𝒟^\pm \right)`$, $`𝒟^\pm =`$Ker$`\left(h^{}iM\right)`$, where $`h^{}`$ is the adjoint of $`h`$. That is we have to find the number of linearly independent solutions of the equations,

$`h^{}\psi ^\pm (r)=\pm iM\psi ^\pm (r),h^{}=\mathrm{\Pi }^{}+\sigma ^3M,`$ (56)
$`\mathrm{\Pi }^{}=i\left\{_r+{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma ^3}{r}}\left[\mu +l{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(1\sigma ^3\right)+A\left(r\right)\right]\right\}\sigma ^1.`$ (57)
Here $`M`$ is introduced by dimensional reasons. For both cases ($`\psi ^\pm \left(r\right)`$ ) there exist only one linear independent square-integrable solution, for $`l=0`$, that reads,

$`\psi ^\pm (r)`$ $`=`$ $`N\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _1(r)\hfill \\ \pm e^{\pm i\pi /4}\frac{\sqrt{\gamma }}{M}\varphi _1(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),B>0,`$ (60)
$`\psi ^\pm (r)`$ $`=`$ $`N\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _1(r)\hfill \\ \pm e^{\pm i\pi /4}\frac{M}{\sqrt{\gamma }}\varphi _1(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),B<0,`$ (63)
where, using (20),

$$\varphi _\sigma (r)=\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }(\rho ),\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}\lambda =2M^2/\gamma \xi \left(\mu \left(1\sigma \right)/2\right),\sigma =\pm 1.$$

Thus, on the non-critical subspace the deficiency indices are $`(0,0)`$, and on the critical subspace the deficiency indices are $`(1,1)`$. Therefore, on the non-critical subspace the radial Hamiltonian is (essentially) self-adjoint, and on the critical subspace the radial Hamiltonian has self-adjoint extensions. Besides, there exist the isometry from $`𝒟^+`$ into $`𝒟^{}`$, $`\psi ^+(r)e^{i\mathrm{\Omega }}\psi ^{}(r),\mathrm{\Omega }`$. According to von Neumann’s theory, the extensions of a closed symmetric operator222We remark, that every symmetric operator has a closure, and the operator and its closure have the same closed extensions . are in one-to-one correspondence with a set of isometries. Thus, self-adjoint extensions of the original operator $`h`$ form the one-parameter family labelled by the parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`h^\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The domain of $`h^\mathrm{\Omega }`$ reads,

$$𝒟\left(h^\mathrm{\Omega }\right)=\{\chi \left(r\right)=\psi \left(r\right)+c\left(\psi ^+\left(r\right)+e^{i\mathrm{\Omega }}\psi ^{}\left(r\right)\right):\psi \left(r\right)𝒟\left(h\right)\},c,$$
(64)
where $`\chi `$ is a two component spinor, $`\chi =(\chi ^1,\chi ^2)`$. The behavior of the functions from $`𝒟\left(h^\mathrm{\Omega }\right)`$ at $`r0`$ is defined by the behavior of $`\chi \left(r\right)`$. Using the behavior (129) of the function $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }(\rho )`$ at small $`\rho `$, we find,

$$\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{\chi ^1\left(r\right)\left(Mr\right)^{1\mu }}{\chi ^2\left(r\right)\left(Mr\right)^\mu }=\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{i2^{1\mu }\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu +M^2/\gamma )}{\left(\mathrm{tan}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2}1\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+M^2/\gamma )}\left(\frac{M^2}{\gamma }\right)^{1\mu },B>0,\\ \frac{i2^{1\mu }\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+M^2/\gamma )}{\left(\mathrm{tan}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2}1\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\mu +M^2/\gamma )}\left(\frac{M^2}{\gamma }\right)^\mu ,B<0\end{array}.$$
(65)
One can verify that the limit $`\gamma 0`$ of the right hand sides of (65) coincides with the corresponding expression obtained in  in the case of pure AB field. For our purposes it is convenient to pass from the parametrization by $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to the parametrization by the angle $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, $`0\mathrm{\Theta }<2\pi `$, such that

$$\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{\chi ^1\left(r\right)\left(Mr\right)^{1\mu }}{\chi ^2\left(r\right)\left(Mr\right)^\mu }=i\mathrm{tan}\left(\frac{\pi }{4}+\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }}{2}\right).$$
(66)
To guarantee the self-adjointness of the Hamiltonian one has to demand the functions of its domain to satisfy Eq. (66).

Thus, the solutions (41) obtained in Sect. 2 must be subjected to the condition (66) at $`r0`$. Then, with the help of (42), (148) and (129), we find

$$\mathrm{tan}\left(\frac{\pi }{4}+\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }}{2}\right)=\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{\left(\epsilon +M\right)}{M}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu \omega /2\gamma )}{2^\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\omega /2\gamma )}\left(\frac{M^2}{\gamma }\right)^{1\mu },B>0\\ \frac{M}{\left(\epsilon M\right)}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\omega /2\gamma )}{2^{\mu 1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\mu \omega /2\gamma )}\left(\frac{M^2}{\gamma }\right)^\mu ,B<0\end{array}.$$
(67)
### 3.2 Extensions in 3+1 dimensions

Now we pass to the $`\left(3+1\right)`$-dimensional case. Usually, the helicity operator $`S_h=𝚺𝐏/|𝐏|`$ is used as the spin operator. It relates to $`t`$-component of polarization pseudovector (48) as, $`S_h=S^0M/\left|𝐏\right|`$. In this case it is necessary to find a common domain for two operators: $`H`$ and $`S_h`$. That is not a trivial problem even in the special case $`p^3=0`$ . Moreover, not for all the extension parameter values of the Hamiltonian there exists a self-adjoint extension of the operator $`S_h`$. This is the principal reason of our choice $`S^3`$ as the spin operator.

In $`\left(3+1\right)`$-dimensional case the Hamiltonian (1) acts on the space of 4-spinors of the form (51). The Hilbert space of 4-spinors (51) can be presented as the direct sum of two orthogonal subspaces with respect to the value of the spin quantum number $`s`$: $`𝒟\left(H\right)=\left\{\mathrm{\Psi }_{+1}\right\}\left\{\mathrm{\Psi }_1\right\}`$. Then we consider the Hamiltonian (1) on each of the subspaces. Using Eqs. (52), (9) allows to single out the radial Hamiltonian $`h_s`$ acting on the subspace with the spin quantum number $`s`$.

We choose the domain of definition of $`h_s`$, $`𝒟\left(h_s\right)`$ as follows. Let $`𝒟\left(h_s\right)`$ be the space of absolutely continuous square integrable on the half-line (with the measure $`rdr)`$ and regular at the origin functions. The radial Hamiltonian $`h_s`$ is symmetric on the domain $`𝒟\left(h_s\right)`$. Now we apply von Neumann’s theory of deficiency indices to each of the subspaces.

To define the deficiency indices of operators $`h_s`$ we have to solve the problem,

$$h_s^{}\psi _s^\pm \left(r\right)=\pm is\stackrel{~}{M}\psi _s^\pm \left(r\right),h_s^{}=\mathrm{\Pi }^{}+s\stackrel{~}{M}\sigma ^3,s=\pm 1,$$
(68)
where $`h_s^{}`$ is the adjoint of $`h_s`$, $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{}`$ is given by (57). One can see that Eq. (68) is similar to Eq. (56). Then, using Eqs. (60) \[or (63)\], (55) one obtains that for $`l=0`$ the solutions read,

$`\psi _s^\pm (r)=N\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{s,+1}(r)\hfill \\ \pm se^{\pm i\pi /4}\frac{\sqrt{\gamma }}{\stackrel{~}{M}}\varphi _{s,1}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),B>0,`$ (71)
$`\psi _s^\pm (r)=N\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{s,+1}(r)\hfill \\ \pm se^{\pm i\pi /4}\frac{\stackrel{~}{M}}{\sqrt{\gamma }}\varphi _{s,1}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),B<0,`$ (74)
$`\varphi _{s,\sigma }(r)=\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }(\rho ),\alpha =\mu \left(1+\sigma \right)/2,`$
$`2\lambda =2\stackrel{~}{M}^2/\gamma \xi \left(\mu \left(1\sigma \right)/2\right),\sigma =\pm 1.`$
whereas for $`l0`$ there exist no square integrable solutions. Therefore, for each subspace $`s=\pm 1`$ on the non-critical subspace the deficiency indices are $`(0,0)`$, and on the critical subspace the deficiency indices are $`(1,1)`$. Thus, on the non-critical subspace the radial Hamiltonian $`h_s`$ is (essentially) self-adjoint, and on the critical subspace it has self-adjoint extensions.

Using the results of $`\left(2+1\right)`$-dimensional case we conclude that on each subspace $`s=\pm 1`$ self-adjoint extensions of the radial Hamiltonian $`h_s`$ form the one-parameter family labelled by the parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$, $`h_s^{\mathrm{\Omega }_s}`$. The domain of $`h_s^{\mathrm{\Omega }_s}`$ on each subspace reads:

$$𝒟\left(h_s^{\mathrm{\Omega }_s}\right)=\{\chi _s\left(r\right)=\psi _s\left(r\right)+c\left(\psi _s^+\left(r\right)+e^{i\mathrm{\Omega }_s}\psi _s^{}\left(r\right)\right):\psi _s\left(r\right)𝒟\left(h_s\right)\},c,$$
(75)
Using the parametrization by the angle $`\mathrm{\Theta }_s`$ similar to (66) we define the condition for the functions from domain $`𝒟\left(h_s^{\mathrm{\Omega }_s}\right)`$ at $`r0`$ as follows

$$\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{\chi _s^1\left(r\right)\left(\stackrel{~}{M}r\right)^{1\mu }}{\chi _s^2\left(r\right)\left(\stackrel{~}{M}r\right)^\mu }=is\mathrm{tan}\left(\frac{\pi }{4}+\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }_s}{2}\right),s=\pm 1.$$
(76)
Therefore, in each subspace$`s=\pm 1`$ solutions $`\psi _{\omega ,s}\left(r\right)`$ on the critical subspace must be subjected to the condition (76) at $`r0`$. Thus, in $`3+1`$ dimensions there exist the two-parameter family of self-adjoint extensions of the Hamiltonian.

### 3.3 Spectra of self-adjoint extensions

Let us study spectra of the self-adjoint extensions $`h^\mathrm{\Omega }`$. To this end we have to solve the transcendental equations (67) for $`\omega `$ considering two branches of $`\epsilon `$, one for particles and another one for antiparticles, $`{}_{\pm }{}^{}\epsilon =\pm \sqrt{M^2+\omega }`$. Introducing the notations

$`\omega `$ $`=`$ $`2\gamma x,x=_\varsigma x=\left({}_{\varsigma }{}^{}\epsilon _{}^{2}M^2\right)/2\gamma ,Q\left(x\right)={\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon }{M}}+1,\varsigma =\pm ,`$
$`\eta `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2^\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\mu )}}\stackrel{~}{\eta }\left(\mu \right),\stackrel{~}{\eta }\left(\mu \right)=\mathrm{tan}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Theta }}{2}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{M^2}}\right)^{1\mu },`$ (77)
we can rewrite Eq. (67) for $`B>0`$ as follows,

$$Q\left({}_{\varsigma }{}^{}x\right)\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu _\varsigma x)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1_\varsigma x)}=\eta .$$
(78)
Having $`\omega `$ for $`B>0,`$ one can obtain $`\omega `$ for $`B<0`$ making the transformation

$$\varsigma \varsigma ,\stackrel{~}{\eta }\left(\mu \right)1/\stackrel{~}{\eta }\left(\mu \right),\mu 1\mu .$$

Therefore, below we consider the case $`B>0`$ only.

Possible solutions $`x=x\left(\eta \right)`$ of the equation (78) are functions of the parameter $`\eta `$ (of $`\mu ,`$ $`\gamma /M^2`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$) and are labelled by $`m=0,1,\mathrm{}`$ . One can find the following asymptotic representations for these solutions at $`\left|\eta \right|0`$ ,

$`x_m\left(\eta \right)=m+\mathrm{\Delta }x_m,\mathrm{\Delta }x_m={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\left(\pi \mu \right)\mathrm{\Gamma }(m+1\mu )}{\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }(m)Q\left(m\right)}}\eta ,m=1,2,3,\mathrm{},`$
$`{}_{}{}^{}x_{0}^{}\left(\eta \right)={\displaystyle \frac{\eta M^2}{\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\mu \right)}}.`$ (79)
All $`x_m\left(0\right),m=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ are positive and integer. The asymptotic representation of $`{}_{+}{}^{}x_{0}^{}\left(\eta \right)`$ at $`\left|\eta \right|0`$ is discussed below. The function $`{}_{+}{}^{}x_{0}^{}\left(\eta \right)`$ vanishes at the point $`\eta =2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )`$ and, in the neighborhood of the latter point, has the form

$${}_{+}{}^{}x_{0}^{}\left(\eta \right)=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )\eta /2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )\left(\psi (\mu )\psi (1)\right)}.$$
(80)
Here $`\psi (x)`$ is the logarithmic derivative of the gamma function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(x)`$, and $`\psi (1)0.577`$ is the Euler-Mascheroni constant . At $`\left|\eta \right|\mathrm{}`$ we found the following asymptotic representations,

$`{}_{\varsigma }{}^{}x_{m}^{}\left(\varsigma \eta \right)=m+\mu +\mathrm{\Delta }x_m,m=0,1,2,\mathrm{},\eta \mathrm{},`$
$`{}_{\varsigma }{}^{}x_{m}^{}\left(\varsigma \eta \right)=m1+\mu +\mathrm{\Delta }x_m,m=1,2,3,\mathrm{},\eta \mathrm{},`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }x_m={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\left(\pi \mu \right)\mathrm{\Gamma }(m+\mu )Q\left(m+\mu \right)}{\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }(m+1)\eta }}.`$ (81)
These approximations hold true only for $`\left|\mathrm{\Delta }x_m\right|`$ $`\mu `$, $`\left|x_0\left(\eta \right)\right|\mu `$.

According to  (see there Theorem 8.19, Corollary 1) if $`T_1`$ and $`T_2`$ are two self-adjoint extensions of the same symmetric operator with equal finite defect indices $`(d,d)`$ then any interval $`(a,b)`$ not intersecting the spectrum of $`T_1`$ contains only isolated eigenvalues of the operator $`T_2`$ with total multiplicity at most $`d`$. Let us select the extension $`h^\mathrm{\Omega }`$ at $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\pi /2`$ with the eigenvalues $`{}_{+}{}^{}\epsilon =M\sqrt{1+2\gamma _+x_0\left(\mathrm{}\right)/M^2}`$ and $`{}_{\pm }{}^{}\epsilon =\pm M\sqrt{1+2\gamma _\pm x_m\left(\pm \mathrm{}\right)/M^2}`$, $`m1`$. Then the above theorem implies that if $`(a,b)`$ is an open interval where$`a,b`$ are two subsequent eigenvalues of $`h^\mathrm{\Omega }`$ at $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\pi /2`$, or $`{}_{\pm }{}^{}\epsilon =0`$, then any self-adjoint extension $`h^\mathrm{\Omega }`$ at $`\mathrm{\Theta }\pi /2`$ has at most one eigenvalue in $`(a,b)`$. According to  (see there Chapter VIII Sect. 105 Theorem 3) for any $`\epsilon (a,b)`$ there exist a self-adjoint extension $`h^\mathrm{\Omega }`$ with the eigenvalue $`\epsilon `$. As it follows from (78), (81), on the ranges $`(m1+\mu _\pm x_m\left(\eta \right)m+\mu `$, $`m1)`$, $`(M^2/2\gamma _+x_0\left(\eta \right)\mu )`$ the functions $`{}_{\pm }{}^{}x\left(\eta \right)=\left({}_{\pm }{}^{}\epsilon _{}^{2}M^2\right)/2\gamma `$ are one-valued and continuous. This observation is in complete agreement with the above general Theorems. The functions $`{}_{\pm }{}^{}x_{m}^{}\left(\eta \right)`$ were found numerically in the weak field, $`\gamma /M^21`$, for some first $`m`$’s. The plots of these functions (for $`\mu =0.8`$) see on Figs. 1 and 2.

One can see that $`\delta x_m=x_{m+1}\left(\eta \right)x_m\left(\eta \right)1`$ with increasing $`m`$. It follows from the equation (78) that

$$\delta x_m1=\pi ^1\left\{\mathrm{cot}\left(\pi x_m\right)\mathrm{cot}\left[\pi \left(x_m\mu \right)\right]\right\}^1\left(\frac{1\mu }{x_m}\delta Q\right),m1,$$
(82)
where $`\delta Q=\frac{d}{dx}\mathrm{ln}Q(x)|_{x=x_m}1/x_m`$. The curve $`x_5\left(\eta \right)`$ may give an idea how the functions $`x_m\left(\eta \right)`$ behave at big $`m`$.

Below we discuss some limiting cases.

Consider weak fields $`B`$, for which $`\gamma /M^21`$, and nonrelativistic electron energies, $`x_m\left(\eta \right)\gamma /M^21`$. Here the functions $`{}_{\pm }{}^{}x\left(\eta \right)`$ change significantly in the neighborhood of $`\eta =0`$ only. Beyond the neighborhood of $`\eta =0`$ the functions $`{}_{\pm }{}^{}x\left(\eta \right)`$ take the values close to the corresponding asymptotic values given by (81).

In the ultrarelativistic case, $`x_m\left(\eta \right)\gamma /M^21`$, the behavior of $`x_m\left(\eta \right)`$ qualitatively depends on $`\mu `$. One can distinguish three cases: $`\mu <1/2`$, $`\mu >1/2`$, $`\mu =1/2`$. If $`\mu <1/2`$ then the interval near $`\eta =0`$ on which the functions change significantly diminishes with $`m`$ increasing. If $`\mu >1/2`$ then this interval grows with $`m`$ increasing. For $`\mu =1/2`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}<\left(\frac{1}{4}+\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }}{2\pi }\right)<\frac{1}{2}`$, we get the asymptotic representation,

$${}_{\varsigma }{}^{}x_{m}^{}\left(\eta \right)=m+\varsigma \left(\frac{1}{4}+\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }}{2\pi }\right),m1.$$
(83)
One can see that negative $`{}_{\pm }{}^{}x_{0}^{}\left(\eta \right)`$ exist only for $`\eta >0`$ . That is, in the problem under consideration for $`\pi /2<\mathrm{\Theta }<3\pi /2`$ there exist only one particle state and only one antiparticle state with energies $`\left|\epsilon \right|<M`$. The same situation was observed in the pure AB field case . The minimal admissible negative $`x_0\left(\eta \right)`$ is defined by the condition $`\epsilon =0`$. In strong fields $`B`$, for which $`\gamma /M^21`$, the quantity $`x_0\left(\eta \right)`$ is close to zero. Let $`\mathrm{\Theta }_0`$ correspond to such an extension that admits $`\epsilon =0`$. The value of $`\mathrm{\Theta }_0`$ is defined by the expression

$$\mathrm{tan}\left(\frac{\pi }{4}+\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }_0}{2}\right)=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu +M^2/2\gamma )}{2^\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+M^2/2\gamma )}\left(\frac{M^2}{\gamma }\right)^{1\mu }.$$
(84)
In weak fields, $`\gamma /M^21`$, $`x_0\left(\eta \right)`$ take big absolute values, and the angle $`\mathrm{\Theta }_0`$ is defined by the expression

$$\mathrm{tan}\left(\frac{\pi }{4}+\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }_0}{2}\right)=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\mu )}{2^{2\mu 1}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )},$$
(85)
and does not depend on the magnetic field. It follows from (84) that in the superstrong fields $`B`$, for which $`\gamma /M^21`$, the angle $`\mathrm{\Theta }_0`$ does not depend on the magnetic field as well.

In weak magnetic fields, $`\gamma /M^21`$, and for nonrelativistic energy values, $`x_0\gamma /M^21`$, one can get relations

$`{}_{+}{}^{}x_{0}^{}\left(\eta \right)=\left(2/\eta \right)^{1/\left(1\mu \right)},`$ (86)
$`{}_{}{}^{}x_{0}^{}\left(\eta \right)=\left(\eta M^2/\gamma \right)^{1/\mu }`$ (87)
that are valid when $`\eta `$ is small in (86) and $`\eta M^2/\gamma 1`$ in (87).

Let us consider the particular case $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\pi /2.`$ It follows from (67) that for$`B>0`$, there exists $`{}_{}{}^{}\epsilon =M`$. The energies $`\left|\epsilon \right|>M`$ are defined by poles of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(1x)`$ or of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\mu x)`$ for $`B>0`$ or $`B<0`$, respectively. The spectrum $`\epsilon `$ coincides with one defined by Eqs. (146), (38) for $`\psi ^I`$. Moreover, using the relation (126), we can see that the spinors $`\psi _\omega (r)`$ coincide with $`\psi ^I`$ up to a normalization constant,

$$\psi _\omega \left(r\right)\psi ^I\left(r\right)\mathrm{for}\mathrm{\Theta }=\pi /2.$$
(88)
In the case $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\pi /2`$ we have the following picture: It follows from (67) that for $`B<0`$ there exists $`{}_{+}{}^{}\epsilon =M`$. The energies $`\left|\epsilon \right|>M`$ are defined by poles of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu x)`$ or of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(1x)`$ for $`B>0`$ or $`B<0`$, respectively. The spectrum $`\epsilon `$ coincides with one found by Eqs. (146), (38) for $`\psi ^{II}`$. From (126) it follows that the spinor $`\psi _\omega (r)`$ coincides with $`\psi ^{II}`$ up to a normalization constant,

$$\psi _\omega (r)\psi ^{II}\left(r\right)\mathrm{for}\mathrm{\Theta }=\pi /2.$$
(89)
Using results for $`B<0`$ which are presented in Appendix B one can conclude that the spectrum asymmetry takes place for the spinning particles in the magnetic-solenoid field. There is a relation between the three-dimensional chiral anomaly and fermion zero modes in a uniform magnetic field  (for review see ). One can see the effect also takes place in the AB potential presence.

The spectrum asymmetry is known in 2+1 QED for the uniform magnetic field. In the uniform magnetic field the states with $`\omega =0`$ for $`l0`$ are observed if sgn$`l=\mathrm{sgn}B`$ (for antiparticle if $`B>0`$ and for particle if $`B<0`$). The spectrum changes mirror-like with the change of the magnetic field sign. One can see that for $`l0`$ the spectrum properties in the magnetic-solenoid field is similar to the spectrum properties in the uniform magnetic field. The presence of the AB potential is especially essential for the states with $`l=0`$, when the particle penetrates the solenoid.

Spectra in $`3+1`$ dimensions can be obtained from the results in $`2+1`$ dimensions. Namely, we use the fact that the solutions $`\psi _{\epsilon ,1}(x_{})`$ in $`3+1`$ dimensions are obtained from the solutions $`\psi _\epsilon ^{(1)}(x_{})`$ in $`2+1`$ dimensions. Thus, spectra in $`3+1`$ dimensions can be obtained from the results in $`2+1`$ dimensions with the substitution $`M`$ by $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$, and the relation (55). As a consequence, we obtain an additional interpretation of Figs. 1, 2. In particular, Fig.1 presents energy lowest levels for particles with spin $`s=1`$, and Fig. 2 presents energy lowest levels for particles with spin $`s=1`$.

## 4 Solenoid regularization

One can introduce the AB field as a limiting case of a finite radius solenoid field (the regularized AB field). In this way, one can fix the extension parameters. First, the manner of doing that in the pure AB field was presented by Hagen . Below, we consider the problem in the presence of the uniform magnetic field. To this end we have to study solutions of the Dirac equation (1) in the combination of the regularized AB field and the uniform magnetic field.

Let the solenoid have a radius $`R`$. We assume that inside the solenoid there is an axially symmetric magnetic field $`B^{in}(r)`$ that creates the flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\left(l_0+\mu \right)\mathrm{\Phi }_0,\mathrm{\Phi }_0=2\pi /e`$. Outside the solenoid ($`r>R`$) the field $`B^{in}(r)`$ vanishes. Thus, $`e_0^RB^{in}\left(r\right)r𝑑r=l_0+\mu `$. The function $`B^{in}(r)`$ is arbitrary but such that integrals in the functions $`\vartheta \left(x\right),b\left(x\right)`$ in (98) are not divergent. We select the potentials of the field $`B^{in}(r)`$ in the form

$$eA_1^{in}=\vartheta \left(x\right)\frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{Rx},eA_2=\vartheta \left(x\right)\frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{Rx},$$
(90)
where

$$\vartheta \left(x\right)=_0^xf\left(x^{}\right)x^{}𝑑x^{},f(x)=R^2eB^{in}(xR),x=r/R.$$

The potentials of the uniform magnetic field are

$$A_0=0,A_1=A\left(r\right)\frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r},A_2=A\left(r\right)\frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{r},A\left(r\right)=Br^2/2.$$
(91)
Outside the solenoid the potentials have the form (3).

Let us analyze solutions of the Dirac equation in the above defined field. To this end we have to solve the equation inside and outside the solenoid and continuously join the corresponding solutions. The former Dirac spinors we are going to call the inside solutions, whereas the latter ones the outside solutions.

First, we study the problem in $`2+1`$ dimensions. We demand the solutions to be square integrable and regular at $`r0`$. By the same manner as in the Sect. 2, we can find that the inside radial spinors $`\psi _{\omega ,l}^{in}(r)`$ ($`rR`$) obey the equation:

$$h^{in}\psi _{\omega ,l}^{in}\left(r\right)=\epsilon \psi _{\omega ,l}^{in}\left(r\right),h^{in}=\mathrm{\Pi }^{in}+\sigma ^3M,$$

where

$$\mathrm{\Pi }^{in}=\frac{i}{R}\left\{_x+\frac{\sigma ^3}{x}\left[ll_0\frac{1}{2}\left(1\sigma ^3\right)+\vartheta \left(x\right)+\xi \rho _Rx^2\right]\right\}\sigma ^1,\rho _R=\gamma R^2/2.$$
(92)
We demand the functions $`\psi _{\omega ,l}^{in}\left(r\right)`$ to be square integrable on the interval $`(0,R)`$. For $`\omega =0`$ ($`\left|\epsilon \right|=M`$) the solutions read,

$`{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{0,l}^{in}(r)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{0,l,1}^{in}(x)\upsilon _1,ll_01,`$
$`{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{0,l}^{in}(r)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{0,l,1}^{in}(x)\upsilon _1,ll_00,`$
$`\varphi _{0,l,\sigma }^{in}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`cx^{|\eta |}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\sigma {\displaystyle _0^x}𝑑\stackrel{~}{x}\stackrel{~}{x}^1\left(\vartheta (\stackrel{~}{x})+\xi \rho _R\stackrel{~}{x}^2\right)\right\},\eta =ll_0\left(1+\sigma \right)/2,`$ (93)
where $`c`$ is an arbitrary constant. For $`\omega 0`$ we present the spinors in the form

$$\psi _{\omega ,l}^{in}\left(r\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\psi _1^{in}(r)\\ \psi _2^{in}(r)\end{array}\right)=\left[\sigma ^3\left(\epsilon \mathrm{\Pi }^{in}\right)+M\right]\left[c_1\varphi _{l,1}^{in}(x)\upsilon _1+ic_1\varphi _{l,1}^{in}(x)\upsilon _1\right],$$

where $`c_\sigma `$ are arbitrary constants. The functions $`\varphi _{l,\sigma }^{in}\left(x\right)`$ satisfy the equation

$$\left[\frac{1}{x}\frac{}{x}x\frac{}{x}\frac{1}{x^2}\left(\eta +\vartheta \left(x\right)+\xi \rho _Rx^2\right)^2+\omega R^2\sigma \left(f\left(x\right)+2\xi \rho _R\right)\right]\varphi _{l,\sigma }^{in}\left(x\right)=0$$
(94)
and must be regular at $`r=0`$ in order to satisfy the square integrability condition for $`\psi _{\omega ,l}^{in}\left(r\right)`$. We are interested in the limiting case $`R0`$. For our purposes it is enough to use the approximation $`\rho _R1`$, $`\omega R^21`$. Dropping terms proportional to $`R^2`$ in (92) and (94), we find that solutions of Eq. (94) have the form

$`\varphi _{l,\sigma }^{in}\left(x\right)=\{\begin{array}{c}cx^{|\eta |}e^{\sigma b(x)},\sigma \eta 0,\\ cx^{|\eta |}e^{\sigma b(x)}_0^x𝑑\stackrel{~}{x}\stackrel{~}{x}^{2|\eta |1}e^{2\sigma b(\stackrel{~}{x})},\sigma \eta <0,\end{array}`$ (97)
$`b(x)={\displaystyle _0^x}𝑑\stackrel{~}{x}\stackrel{~}{x}^1\vartheta (\stackrel{~}{x}).`$ (98)
The outside solutions ($`rR`$) obey the equation

$$h\psi _{\omega ,l}^{out}\left(r\right)=\epsilon \psi _{\omega ,l}^{out}\left(r\right)$$
(99)
and must be square integrable on the interval $`(R,\mathrm{})`$. Here $`h`$ is defined by Eqs. (10), (11). The general form of the outside solutions reads:

$`\psi _{\omega ,l}^{out}\left(r\right)=\left[\sigma ^3\left(\epsilon \mathrm{\Pi }\right)+M\right]\left(c_1\varphi _{l,1}^{out}(r)\upsilon _1+ic_1\varphi _{l,1}^{out}(r)\upsilon _1\right),`$
$`\varphi _{l,\sigma }^{out}\left(r\right)=\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(\rho \right),\alpha =l+\mu \left(1+\sigma \right)/2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}\lambda =\omega /\gamma \xi \left(l+\mu \left(1\sigma \right)/2\right).`$ (100)
The solutions $`\psi _{\omega ,l}^{out}\left(r\right)`$ and $`\psi _{\omega ,l}^{in}\left(r\right)`$ must be joined continuously at $`r=R`$,

$$\psi ^{out}\left(R\right)=\psi ^{in}\left(R\right)$$
(101)
and obey the normalization relation

$`N_{\omega ,l}^{in}+N_{\omega ,l}^{out}=1,`$
$`N_{\omega ,l}^{in}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^R}\left(\psi _{\omega ,l}^{in}(r)\right)^{}\psi _{\omega ,l}^{in}(r)r𝑑r,N_{\omega ,l}^{out}={\displaystyle _R^{\mathrm{}}}\left(\psi _{\omega ,l}^{out}(r)\right)^{}\psi _{\omega ,l}^{out}(r)r𝑑r.`$ (102)
One can treat the AB field as a limiting case of a finite radius solenoid field if

$$\underset{\rho _R0}{lim}N_{\omega ,l}^{in}=0.$$
(103)
The joining condition (101) one can realize using the following conditions for the functions $`\varphi _{l,\sigma }^{in}\left(r\right)`$ and $`\varphi _{l,\sigma }^{out}\left(r\right)`$ at $`r=R`$,

$$\varphi \left(Rϵ\right)=\varphi \left(R+ϵ\right),\frac{d}{dr}\varphi \left(Rϵ\right)=\frac{d}{dr}\varphi \left(R+ϵ\right).$$
(104)
It is convenient to use in (100) the representation (126) for $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(\rho \right)`$. Then, the functions $`\varphi _{l,\sigma }^{out}\left(r\right)`$ read:

$`\varphi _{l,\sigma }^{out}\left(r\right)=a_\sigma I_{n_\sigma ,m_\sigma }\left(\rho \right)+b_\sigma I_{m_\sigma ,n_\sigma }\left(\rho \right),n_\sigma =\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{1\alpha }{2}},m_\sigma =\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{1+\alpha }{2}},`$
$`a_\sigma =K\mathrm{sin}n_\sigma \pi ,b_\sigma =K\mathrm{sin}m_\sigma \pi ,K={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+n_\sigma \right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+m_\sigma \right)}}{\mathrm{sin}\left(n_\sigma m_\sigma \right)\pi }}.`$ (105)
where $`n_\sigma `$, $`m_\sigma `$ are real numbers.

Using (104) one can find the coefficients $`a_\sigma ,b_\sigma `$: for the case $`ll_00`$,

$`a_1=\rho _R^{\left(l+\mu 1\right)/2}c\stackrel{~}{a}_1,b_1=\rho _R^{\left(l+\mu 1\right)/2}c\stackrel{~}{b}_1,`$ (106)
$`a_1=\rho _R^{\left(l+\mu \right)/2+1}c\stackrel{~}{a}_1,b_1=\rho _R^{\left(l+\mu \right)/2}c\stackrel{~}{b}_1,`$ (107)
whereas for the case $`ll_0>0`$,

$`a_1=\rho _R^{\left(l+\mu 1\right)/2}c^{}\stackrel{~}{a}_1^{},b_1=\rho _R^{\left(l+\mu 1\right)/2+1}c^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_1^{},`$ (108)
$`a_1=\rho _R^{\left(l+\mu \right)/2}c^{}\stackrel{~}{a}_1^{},b_1=\rho _R^{\left(l+\mu \right)/2}c^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_1^{},`$ (109)
where the non-vanishing coefficients $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{b}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{a}^{}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{b}^{}`$ are not depending on $`\rho _R`$, the coefficients $`c`$, $`c^{}`$ are normalizing factors which depend on $`\rho _R`$.

Calculating the normalization factors one obtains at $`R0`$, for $`ll_00`$,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`const0,b_1=0,a_1=b_1=0,l1,`$
$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`0,b_1=const0,a_1=b_1=0,l0,`$
whereas for $`ll_0>0`$,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`b_1=0,a_1=const0,b_1=0,l0,`$
$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`b_1=0,a_1=0,b_1=const0,l1.`$
For $`l=0`$ the value of the coefficients is defined by sgn$`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. One can verify that the condition (103) is satisfied.

Thus, one obtains that for any sign of $`B`$ the solutions are expressed via Laguerre polynomials (38). Particularly, for $`l=0`$ we find that the solutions $`\psi _{\omega ,0}^{out}\left(r\right)`$ coincide with either $`\psi _m^I\left(r\right)`$ or $`\psi _m^{II}\left(r\right)`$ accordingly to $`\mathrm{sgn}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right)`$,

$$\psi _{\omega ,0}^{out}\left(r\right)=\{\begin{array}{c}\psi _m^I\left(r\right),\mathrm{sgn}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right)=+1\\ \psi _m^{II}\left(r\right),\mathrm{sgn}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right)=1\end{array}.$$
(110)
In Sect. 3 we have found the relation between the extension parameter values and solution types in the critical subspace $`l=0`$ (88), (89). Now we are in position to refine this relation. Namely, if one introduces the AB field as a field of the finite radius solenoid for a zero-radius limit, then the extension parameter $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is fixed to be $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\mathrm{sgn}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right)\pi /2`$. Besides, this way of the AB field introduction explicitly implies no additional interaction in the solenoid core.

To solve the problem in $`3+1`$ dimensions we use the results in $`2+1`$ dimensions presented above. In the limit $`R0`$ solutions in the critical subspace have the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_s^{out}\left(x_{}\right)=N\left(\begin{array}{c}\left[1+\left(p^3+s\stackrel{~}{M}\right)/M\right]g_0\left(\phi \right)\psi _{\omega ,l}^{out}\left(r\right)\\ \left[1+\left(p^3+s\stackrel{~}{M}\right)/M\right]g_0\left(\phi \right)\psi _{\omega ,l}^{out}\left(r\right)\end{array}\right),$$
(111)
where the functions $`g_0\left(\phi \right)`$, $`\psi _{\omega ,l}^{out}\left(r\right)`$ are defined in (9) and (110), (38), respectively. We specify the values of the extension parameters in $`3+1`$ dimensions as follows,

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{+1}=\mathrm{\Theta }_1=\mathrm{sgn}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right)\pi /2.$$
(112)
## 5 Summary

We have studied in detail solutions of the Dirac equation in the magnetic-solenoid field in $`2+1`$ and $`3+1`$ dimensions. In the general case, solutions in $`2+1`$ and $`3+1`$ dimensions are not related in a simple manner. However, it has been demonstrated that solutions in $`3+1`$ dimensions with special spin quantum numbers can be constructed directly on the base of solutions in $`2+1`$ dimensions. To this end, one has to choose the $`z`$-component of the polarization pseudovector $`S^3`$ as the spin operator in $`3+1`$ dimensions. This is a new result not only for the magnetic-solenoid field background, but for the pure AB field as well. The choice $`S^3`$ as the spin operator was convenient from different points of view. For example, solutions with arbitrary momentum $`p^3`$ are eigenvectors of the operator $`S^3`$. This allows us to separate explicitly spin and coordinate variables in $`3+1`$ dimensions. Thus, in $`3+1`$ dimensions one has to study self-adjoint extensions of the radial Hamiltonian only. Moreover, boundary conditions in such a representation do not violate translation invariance along the natural direction which is the magnetic-solenoid field direction. The self-adjoint extensions of the Dirac Hamiltonian in the magnetic-solenoid field have been constructed using von Neumann’s theory of deficiency indices. A one-parameter family of allowed boundary conditions in $`2+1`$ dimensions and a two-parameter family in $`3+1`$ dimensions have been constructed. By that the complete orthonormal sets of solutions have been found. The energy spectra dependent on the extension parameter $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ have been defined for the different self-adjoint extensions. Besides, for the first time solutions of the Dirac equation in the regularized magnetic-solenoid field have been described in detail. We considered an arbitrary magnetic field distribution inside a finite-radius solenoid. It was shown that the extension parameters $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\mathrm{sgn}(\mathrm{\Phi })\pi /2`$ in $`2+1`$ dimensions and $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{+1}=\mathrm{\Theta }_1=\mathrm{sgn}(\mathrm{\Phi })\pi /2`$ in $`3+1`$ dimensions correspond to the limiting case $`R0`$ of the regularized magnetic-solenoid field.

## 6 Acknowledgments

D.M.G. thanks CNPq and FAPESP for permanent support. A.A.S. thanks FAPESP for support. S.P.G. acknowledges the support of CAPES and FAPESP, grant 02/11321-8. S.P.G. and A.A.S. thank the Department of Physics of Universidade Federal de Sergipe (Brazil) for hospitality. We thank Prof. I.V. Tyutin for useful discussions.

## A Appendix

1.The Laguerre function $`I_{n,m}(x)`$ is defined by the relation

$$I_{n,m}(x)=\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+n\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+m\right)}}\frac{\mathrm{exp}\left(x/2\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+nm\right)}x^{\left(nm\right)/2}\mathrm{\Phi }(m,nm+1;x).$$
(113)
Here $`\mathrm{\Phi }(a,b;x)`$ is the confluent hypergeometric function in a standard definition (see , 9.210). Let $`m`$ be a non-negative integer number; then the Laguerre function is related to Laguerre polynomials $`L_m^\alpha (x)`$ (, 8.970, 8.972.1) by the equation

$`I_{m+\alpha ,m}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{m!}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(m+\alpha +1\right)}}}e^{x/2}x^{\alpha /2}L_m^\alpha (x),`$ (114)
$`L_m^\alpha (x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m!}}e^xx^\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{d^m}{dx^m}}e^xx^{m+\alpha }.`$ (115)
Using well-known properties of the confluent hypergeometric function ( , 9.212; 9.213; 9.216), one can easily get the following relations for the Laguerre functions

$`2\sqrt{x(n+1)}I_{n+1,m}(x)=(nm+x)I_{n,m}(x)2xI_{n,m}^{}(x),`$ (116)
$`2\sqrt{x(m+1)}I_{n,m+1}(x)=(nmx)I_{n,m}(x)+2xI_{n,m}^{}(x),`$ (117)
$`2\sqrt{xn}I_{n1,m}(x)=(nm+x)I_{n,m}(x)+2xI_{n,m}^{}(x),`$ (118)
$`2\sqrt{xm}I_{n,m1}(x)=(nmx)I_{n,m}(x)2xI_{n,m}^{}(x).`$ (119)
Using properties of the confluent hypergeometric function, one can get a representation

$$I_{n,m}(x)=\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+n)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+m)}}\frac{\mathrm{exp}\left(x/2\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+nm)}x^{\frac{nm}{2}}\mathrm{\Phi }(1+n,1+nm;x),$$
(120)
and a relation (, 9.214)

$$I_{n,m}(x)=(1)^{nm}I_{m,n}(x),nm\mathrm{integer}.$$
(121)
The functions $`I_{\alpha +m,m}(x)`$ obey the orthonormality relation

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}I_{\alpha +n,n}\left(x\right)I_{\alpha +m,m}\left(x\right)𝑑x=\delta _{m,n},$$
(122)
which follows from the corresponding properties of the Laguerre polynomials ( , 7.414.3). The set of the Laguerre functions

$$I_{\alpha +m,m}(x),m=0,1,2\mathrm{},\alpha >1$$

is complete in the space of square integrable functions on the half-line ($`x0`$),

$$\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}I_{\alpha +m,m}(x)I_{\alpha +m,m}(y)=\delta \left(xy\right).$$
(123)
2. The function $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }(x)`$ is even with respect to index $`\alpha `$,

$$\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)=\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right).$$
(124)
It can be expressed via the confluent hypergeometric functions

$`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)=e^{\frac{x}{2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\alpha \right)x^{\frac{\alpha }{2}}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{1\alpha }{2}\lambda \right)}}\mathrm{\Phi }({\displaystyle \frac{1+\alpha }{2}}\lambda ,1+\alpha ;x)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\alpha \right)x^{\frac{\alpha }{2}}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{1+\alpha }{2}\lambda \right)}}\mathrm{\Phi }({\displaystyle \frac{1\alpha }{2}}\lambda ,1\alpha ;x)],`$ (125)
or, using (113), via the Laguerre functions

$`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+n\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+m\right)}}{\mathrm{sin}\left(nm\right)\pi }}\left(\mathrm{sin}n\pi I_{n,m}\left(x\right)\mathrm{sin}m\pi I_{m,n}\left(x\right)\right),`$
$`\alpha =nm,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\lambda =1+n+m,n=\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{1\alpha }{2}},m=\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{1+\alpha }{2}}.`$ (126)
There are the following relations of the functions $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)`$,

$`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{x}\psi _{\lambda \frac{1}{2},\alpha 1}\left(x\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1+\alpha 2\lambda }{2}}\psi _{\lambda 1,\alpha }\left(x\right),`$
$`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{x}\psi _{\lambda \frac{1}{2},\alpha +1}\left(x\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1\alpha 2\lambda }{2}}\psi _{\lambda 1,\alpha }\left(x\right),`$
$`2x\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }^{}\left(x\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(2\lambda 1x\right)\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(2\lambda 1\alpha \right)\left(2\lambda 1+\alpha \right)\psi _{\lambda 1,\alpha }\left(x\right),`$
$`2x\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }^{}\left(x\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\alpha x\right)\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)+\left(2\lambda 1\alpha \right)\sqrt{x}\psi _{\lambda \frac{1}{2},\alpha +1}\left(x\right)`$ (127)
$`=`$ $`\left(x2\lambda 1\right)\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }2\psi _{\lambda +1,\alpha }.`$
As a consequence of these properties we get

$`A_\alpha \psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)={\displaystyle \frac{2\lambda 1+\alpha }{2}}\psi _{\lambda \frac{1}{2},\alpha 1}\left(x\right),A_\alpha ^+\psi _{\lambda \frac{1}{2},\alpha 1}\left(x\right)=\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right),`$
$`A_\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{x+\alpha }{2\sqrt{x}}}+\sqrt{x}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}},A_\alpha ^+={\displaystyle \frac{x+\alpha 1}{2\sqrt{x}}}\sqrt{x}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}.`$ (128)
Using well-known asymptotics of the Whittaker function (, 9.227), we have

$$\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)x^{\lambda \frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{x}{2}},x\mathrm{};\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(|\alpha |\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{1+|\alpha |}{2}\lambda \right)}x^{\frac{|\alpha |}{2}},\alpha 0,x0.$$
(129)
The function $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)`$ is correctly defined and infinitely differentiable for $`0<x<\mathrm{}`$ and for any complex $`\lambda ,\alpha .`$ In this respect one can mention that the Laguerre function are not defined for negative integer $`n,m.`$ In particular cases, when one of the numbers $`n,m`$ is non-negative and integer, the function $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)`$ coincides (up to a constant factor) with the Laguerre function.

According to (129), the functions $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)`$ are square integrable on the interval $`0x<\mathrm{}`$ whenever $`|\alpha |<1`$. It is not true for $`|\alpha |1.`$ The corresponding integrals at $`\alpha 0`$ can be calculated as following (, 7.611),

$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)\psi _{\lambda ^{},\alpha }\left(x\right)dx={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\left(\lambda ^{}\lambda \right)\mathrm{sin}\alpha \pi }}\{\left[\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+\alpha 2\lambda ^{}}{2}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{1\alpha 2\lambda }{2}}\right)\right]^1`$
$`\left[\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{1\alpha 2\lambda ^{}}{2}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+\alpha 2\lambda }{2}}\right)\right]^1\},|\alpha |<1,`$ (130)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}|\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)|^2𝑑x={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\mathrm{sin}\alpha \pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\psi \left(\frac{1+\alpha 2\lambda }{2}\right)\psi \left(\frac{1\alpha 2\lambda }{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{1+\alpha 2\lambda }{2}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{1\alpha 2\lambda }{2}\right)}},|\alpha |<1,`$ (131)
Here $`\psi (x)`$ is the logarithmic derivative of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-function ( , 8.360). In the general case, the functions $`\psi _{\lambda ,\alpha }\left(x\right)`$and $`\psi _{\lambda ^{},\alpha }(x),`$ $`\lambda ^{}\lambda ,`$ are not orthogonal, as it follows from (130).

## B Appendix

Below we present modifications of some above formulas for the case $`B<0`$.

1. The spectrum of $`\omega `$ corresponding to the functions $`\varphi _{m,l,\sigma }(r)`$ is

$$\omega =\{\begin{array}{c}2\gamma \left(ml+1\mu \right),l\left(1+\sigma \right)/2<0\hfill \\ 2\gamma \left(m+\left(1\sigma \right)/2\right),l\left(1+\sigma \right)/20\hfill \end{array},$$
(132)
and the spectrum of $`\omega `$ corresponding to the functions $`\varphi _{m,\sigma }^{ir}(r)`$ is

$$\omega =\{\begin{array}{c}2\gamma \left(m+1\mu \right),\sigma =1\hfill \\ 2\gamma m,\sigma =1\hfill \end{array}.$$
(133)
These expressions are modifications of Eqs. (22), (23) for the case $`B<0`$.

2. Consider the spinors $`u_l\left(r\right)`$ satisfying (24). In the case $`\omega =0`$ they read

$$u_{0,l}(r)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{0,l,1}(r)\hfill \\ 0\hfill \end{array}\right),l1;u_0^{II}(r)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{0,1}^{ir}(r)\hfill \\ 0\hfill \end{array}\right),l=0.$$
(134)
In the case $`\omega 0`$ they are

$`u_{m,l,\pm }(r)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{m,l,1}(r)\hfill \\ i\varphi _{m,l,1}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),l1,\omega =2\gamma \left(ml+1\mu \right),`$ (137)
$`u_{m+1,l,\pm }(r)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{m+1,l,1}(r)\hfill \\ \pm i\varphi _{m,l,1}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),l1,\omega =2\gamma \left(m+1\right),`$ (140)
$`u_{m+1,\pm }^{II}(r)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{m+1,1}^{ir}(r)\hfill \\ \pm i\varphi _{m,0,1}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),l=0,\omega =2\gamma \left(m+1\right),`$ (143)
$`u_{m,\pm }^I(r)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _{m,0,1}(r)\hfill \\ i\varphi _{m,1}^{ir}(r)\hfill \end{array}\right),l=0,\omega =2\gamma \left(m+1\mu \right).`$ (146)
These expressions are modifications of Eqs. (25), (37) for the case $`B<0`$.

3. In the case $`\omega =0`$ only positive energy solutions (particles) of Eq. (10) are possible. They coincide with the corresponding spinors $`u`$ up to a normalization constant:

$${}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{0,l}^{}(r)=Nu_{0,l}(r),l1;_+\psi _0^{II}(r)=Nu_0^{II}(r),l=0.$$
(147)
Thus, particles have the rest energy level, and the antiparticle states spectrum begins from $`{}_{}{}^{}\epsilon =\sqrt{M^2+2\gamma }`$.

4. Relations for the irregular spinors $`u_{\omega ,\sigma }(r)`$, similar to ones (42), for the case $`B<0`$ have the form

$$\mathrm{\Pi }u_{\omega ,1}(r)=i\sqrt{2\gamma }u_{\omega ,1}(r),\mathrm{\Pi }u_{\omega ,1}(r)=i\frac{\omega }{\sqrt{2\gamma }}u_{\omega ,1}(r).$$
(148)


format: text

text:
# Circles and Clifford Algebras

## 1 Introduction

By a circle in a Euclidean space we mean an honest Euclidean circle, or a straight line, or a point. For the sake of brevity, by a vector line we always mean a line passing though the origin (i.e. a 1-dimensional vector subspace).

Our problem is as follows: describe all smooth (or continuous) maps from an open subset of an affine space $`^m`$ (or a projective space $`\mathrm{P}^m`$) to a Euclidean space $`^n`$ (or a sphere $`S^n`$) that take germs of straight lines to germs of circles (for short: take lines to circles). Originally, this problem came from nomography and was stated for diffeomorphisms between open subsets of $`^2`$ by G. S. Khovanskii . Nomography deals with graphical representations of functions. Nomograms using a compass are more accurate than those using a ruler. Thus the above problem arises. The original 2-dimensional problem was solved by A. Khovanskii in . He proved that, up to a projective transformation in the space of pre-image and a Möbius transformation in the space of image, there are only 3 smooth one-to-one maps taking lines to circles. They correspond to the 3 classical geometries — Euclidean, spherical and hyperbolic. The Euclidean map is just the identity. The spherical map is the composition of a central projection to a sphere and a stereographic projection back to the plane. The hyperbolic map is the same with a hyperboloid instead of a sphere. This is the map between 2 models of hyperbolic geometry: the Klein model and the Poincaré unit disk model.

In a unified way all the maps from Khovanskii’s theorem may be described as follows. To get a map from an open subset of the plane to a sphere taking all lines to circles, one has to embed this subset projectively to the 3-dimensional space and then project it to a sphere from some point (possibly infinite). If we project from inside of the sphere, then we get the spherical case. If the center of projection lies on the sphere, then we have the Euclidean case. Finally, projecting from outside of the sphere, we get the hyperbolic case.

F. Izadi in his PhD thesis  carried over the results of Khovanskii to the 3-dimensional case.

But in dimension 4 all this is wrong! There are more maps taking lines to circles. For example, identify $`^4`$ with $`^2`$ and consider a complex projective transformation. It takes complex lines to complex lines, and on each complex line it acts as a Möbius transformation. Note that every real line belongs to a unique complex line. Thus any real line goes to a circle.

There is a large class of maps from an open subset of $`^4`$ to $`^4`$ that take lines to circles. Let $`A`$ and $`B`$ be 2 affine maps from $`^4`$ to $`^4`$. Identify $`^4`$ with the algebra $``$ of quaternions. Consider the maps $`xA(x)B(x)^1`$ and $`xB(x)^1A(x)`$. Here the multiplication and the inversion are in the sense of quaternions. We call these maps fractional quaternionic transformations. They take lines to circles. Note that fractional quaternionic transformations are not necessarily fractional linear: $`A`$ and $`B`$ are affine over reals, not over quaternions. In  it is proved that diffeomorphisms between open regions in $`^4`$ taking lines to circles are either fractional quaternionic transformations or projections from a hyperplane in $`^5`$ to a sphere.

In , the following “micro-local” theorem is proved. Consider a germ of diffeomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }:(^4,0)(^4,0)`$ that takes germs of vector lines to germs of circles. Then the images of all vector lines are the same circles as for some fractional quaternionic transformation preserving 0. This describes so called rectifiable pencils of circles (sets of circles passing through some point and obtained from straight lines via some local diffeomorphism). In dimensions 2 and 3, the situation is much simpler: any sufficiently large rectifiable pencil of circles has some other common point of intersection, i.e., it is obtained from a pencil of lines by some Möbius transformation .

In this paper, we study the multidimensional case. There is a general construction of smooth maps from $`\mathrm{P}^m`$ to $`S^n`$ that take all lines to circles, the Hopf maps. The most systematic construction of Hopf maps is based on representations of Clifford algebras $`\mathrm{Cliff}(r)`$ generated over $``$ by $`r`$ anti-commuting imaginary units. With any representation $`\varphi `$ of $`\mathrm{Cliff}(r)`$ in $`^n`$ we associate a map from an open subset of $`^{r+n+1}`$ to $`^n`$. Namely, $`^{r+1}`$ is embedded into $`\mathrm{Cliff}(r)`$ as the subspace spanned by all generators and 1. A map $`F_\varphi `$ from $`(^{r+1}0)\times ^n`$ to $`^n`$ sends a pair $`(\alpha ,x)`$ to $`\varphi (\alpha )^1(x)`$. This map takes lines to circles. Projectivizing the space of preimage and compactifying the space of image we obtain a map from $`\mathrm{P}^{n+r}`$ to $`S^n`$ with the same property. This is the Hopf map associated with $`\varphi `$.

We will prove the following “micro-local” theorem. Consider a germ of a smooth map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:(^r\times ^n,0)(^n,0)`$ that takes germs of vector lines to germs of circles. Assume that $`^n`$ is linearly embedded into $`^{r+n}`$ so that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the identity on $`^n`$. Assume also that the images of lines not lying in $`^n`$ do not degenerate to lines. Then the image of each vector line is the same circle as for some map $`F_\varphi `$ or its restriction to a hyperplane.

The maps $`F_\varphi :^m^n`$ give many examples of rectifiable pencils of circles. It is enough to compose $`F_\varphi `$ with a generic affine embedding of $`^n`$ to $`^m`$ to get a local diffeomorphism sending lines to circles.

Let us return to dimension 4. The algebra $`\mathrm{Cliff}(3)`$ is isomorphic to $``$. Thus it has 2 representations in $`^4=`$. This gives 2 maps from $`^8`$ to $`^4`$ taking all lines to circles. The corresponding maps from $`S^7`$ to $`S^4`$ are classical Hopf fibrations. Note that all circles are the images of lines under these maps. All fractional quaternionic transformations can be obtained from these maps as described above.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we recall some basic facts about Clifford algebras and their representations. Section 3 contains the necessary information about the Hopf maps. Then we formulate the micro-local theorem in Section 4. Section 5 establishes a connection between this theorem and the Hurwitz–Radon theorem about sums of squares. Finally, in Section 6 we conclude the proof of the micro-local theorem and give a description of Clifford algebras representations as linear spaces of complex multiplications.

I am grateful to A. Khovanskii for useful discussions and to the referee for useful comments.

## 2 Clifford algebras

Let $`V`$ be a real vector space equipped with a symmetric bilinear form $`Q`$. The Clifford algebra $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V,Q)`$ is the associative algebra with a unit generated by all vectors from $`V`$ subject to relations $`vw+wv=Q(v,w)`$ for all $`v,wV`$. If $`V`$ has dimension $`r`$ and $`Q`$ is negative definite, then the algebra $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V,Q)`$ is denoted by $`\mathrm{Cliff}(r)`$. In other words, $`\mathrm{Cliff}(r)`$ is generated by $`r`$ anti-commuting imaginary units $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_r`$:

$$e_i^2=1,e_ie_j+e_je_i=0(ij).$$

We will be always dealing with Clifford algebras of type $`\mathrm{Cliff}(r)`$. For a Euclidean space $`V`$ with the Euclidean form $`q`$ we denote the algebra $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V,q)`$ by $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V)`$. A Clifford algebra is a direct generalization of the skew-field of quaternions $`=\mathrm{Cliff}(2)`$.

The following table gives the Clifford algebras $`\mathrm{Cliff}(r)`$ for $`r<8`$.

| $`r`$ | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`\mathrm{Cliff}(r)`$ | $``$ | $``$ | $``$ | $``$ | $`[2]`$ | $`[4]`$ | $`[8]`$ | $`[8][8]`$ |

Here $`𝔸[r]`$ ($`𝔸=,`$ or $``$) denotes the algebra of $`r\times r`$-matrices over $`𝔸`$. The other Clifford algebras are computed by the Bott periodicity

$$\mathrm{Cliff}(r+8)=\mathrm{Cliff}(r)[16].$$

This table was first obtained by E. Cartan , see also . All real finite-dimensional representations of Clifford algebras read from the table since a matrix algebra $`𝔸[r]`$ has a unique irreducible representation, namely, $`𝔸^r`$, and all representations are completely reducible.

Example 1. The algebra $`\mathrm{Cliff}(3)`$ is isomorphic to $``$. In this presentation, $`e_1=(i,i)`$, $`e_2=(j,j)`$ and $`e_3=(k,k)`$.

Example 2. The algebra $`\mathrm{Cliff}(7)`$ acts on $`^8=^2`$. Let us describe the action of the space generated by 1 and $`e_i`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{},7`$). The latter is also identified with $`^2`$. For any quaternion $`a`$ denote by $`L_a`$ the operator of left multiplication by $`a`$ in $``$ and by $`R_a`$ the operator of right multiplication. A pair $`(a,b)^2`$ acts as

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}L_a& R_{\overline{b}}\\ R_b& L_{\overline{a}}\end{array}\right).$$

If we interchange the left and right multiplications, then we obtain another representation of $`\mathrm{Cliff}(7)`$ in $`^8`$.

Consider a Euclidean vector space $`V`$. Denote by $`\widehat{V}`$ the space $`V1`$, which lies in $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V)`$ and is generated by $`V`$ and $`1`$. Let us say that a linear representation of $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V)`$ in $`^n`$ is compatible with the Euclidean metric (or with Euclidean inner product) if any vector from $`\widehat{V}`$ acts conformally, i.e. multiplies all distances by the same factor. This condition does not truncate the set of possible representations, it only imposes a restriction on a choice of Euclidean metric on $`^n`$.

###### Proposition 2.1

For any linear representation of $`\mathrm{Cliff}(r)`$ in $`^n`$ there exists a Euclidean metric on $`^n`$ such that the representation is compatible with it.

This fact is well-known but we sketch a proof here. Consider the Dirac group consisting of all products of generators $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_r`$. Obviously, the Dirac group is finite. Therefore, it has an invariant Euclidean metric. In particular, all elements $`e_i`$ act as orthogonal operators with respect to this metric. A direct computation now shows that all linear combinations of 1 and the generators act conformally. $`\mathrm{}`$

A representation of a Clifford algebra in a Euclidean space is always assumed to be compatible with the Euclidean inner product.

Linear representations of the algebras $`=\mathrm{Cliff}(1)`$ and $`=\mathrm{Cliff}(2)`$ in $`^n`$ are called complex and quaternionic structures on $`^n`$, respectively. The image of $`i`$ under a representation of $``$ is also called a complex structure. This may be any linear operator $`I`$ such that $`I^2=1`$. By a complex (quaternionic) structure on a Euclidean space we always mean a complex (quaternionic) structure compatible with the Euclidean metric. For a complex structure $`I`$ this means that $`I`$ is orthogonal and skew-symmetric. For a quaternionic structure, from the compatibility it follows that all quaternions act conformally, not only linear combinations of $`1,i`$ and $`j`$.

## 3 Hopf maps

We need the following very simple (and well-known) lemma:

###### Lemma 3.1

Consider the following fractional linear map from $`𝔸`$ to $`𝔸^k`$ (where $`𝔸`$ is $``$ or $``$):

$$F:x(xc+d)^1(xa+b).$$

Here $`x,c,d𝔸`$ and $`a,b𝔸^k`$. Assume that the target space is equipped with a Euclidean metric compatible with the complex or quaternionic structure. Then $`F`$ takes all real lines to circles.

Proof. We have $`F(x)=A+(xc+d)^1B`$ where $`A=c^1a`$ and $`B=bdc^1a`$. Therefore, the image of $`𝔸`$ lies on the left line $`\{A+uB|u𝔸\}`$. The coordinate $`u`$ on this line is linear and conformal. The map $`xu=(xc+d)^1`$ is a Möbius transformation. Hence any real line goes to a circle. $`\mathrm{}`$

Here is the main construction. Let $`V`$ be a Euclidean space and $`\varphi `$ a representation of $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V)`$ in $`^n`$. Recall that $`\widehat{V}=V1\mathrm{Cliff}(r)`$. The following theorem is a partial case of a more general fact, see e.g. .

###### Theorem 3.2

Consider the map $`F_\varphi :(\widehat{V}0)\times ^n^n`$ given by $`(\alpha ,x)\varphi ^1(\alpha )x`$. This map takes all lines to circles.

Proof. Consider a line $`L`$ in $`\widehat{V}\times ^n`$. If it passes through 0, then its image is empty or is a single point. Suppose now that $`L`$ does not contain the origin. The projection of $`L`$ to $`\widehat{V}`$ generates a subalgebra in $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V)`$, which is isomorphic either to $``$ or to $``$.

In the first case, $`L`$ lies in $`\times ^n`$. The action of $``$ defines a complex structure on $`^n`$. Thus $`^n`$ gets identified with $`^{n/2}`$. Let $`t`$ be a linear parameter on $`L`$. Then the image of $`L`$ in $`^n`$ is given by $`\alpha (t)^1x(t)`$ where $`x(t)`$ is a vector from $`^n`$ and $`\alpha (t)`$ is a complex number, both depending affinely on $`t`$. Now from Lemma 3.1 it follows that the image of $`L`$ is a circle.

The quaternionic case is completely analogous. $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark. The construction given above may be improved. Note that under the map $`F_\varphi `$ proportional vectors have the same image. Therefore, there is a map from the projectivization of $`\widehat{V}\times ^n`$ to the sphere $`S^n`$, which is obtained from $`^n`$ by a one-point compactification. This map takes projective lines to circles. The projectivization of $`0\times ^n`$ goes to infinity. This is a Hopf map. The Hopf construction gives the following maps:

$$\mathrm{P}^3S^2,\mathrm{P}^7S^4,\mathrm{P}^7S^6,\mathrm{P}^{15}S^8,\mathrm{}$$

## 4 Micro-local theorem

Fix a Euclidean metric on $`^n`$. We will be assuming that $`n2`$. The inner product of two vectors $`x,y^n`$ is denoted by $`(x,y)`$. Suppose that $`^n`$ is linearly embedded into $`^{r+n}`$. Let us say that a germ of smooth map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:(^{r+n},0)(^n,0)`$ is a local projection if $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the identity on $`^n`$.

###### Theorem 4.1

Consider a local projection $`\mathrm{\Phi }:(^{r+n},0)(^n,0)`$ that takes vector lines to circles. Assume that the images of lines not belonging to $`^n`$ do not degenerate to lines. Then there is a Euclidean space $`V`$, a representation $`\varphi `$ of $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V)`$ in $`^n`$ and an embedding of $`^{r+n}`$ into $`V\times ^n`$ identical on $`^n`$ such that the map

$$F:V\times ^n^n,(\alpha ,x)\varphi (1\alpha )^1x$$

takes germs of all vector lines to the same circles as $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ does.

Theorem 4.1 gives a geometric description of representations of Clifford algebras in terms of circles.

Remark. The maps $`F`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ do not need to be the same on $`^{r+n}`$. For instance, the map $`yF(\nu (y)y)`$, where $`\nu `$ is an arbitrary smooth function on $`^{r+n}`$, takes any vector line to the same circle as $`F`$ does. To make this map satisfy the conditions of Theorem 4.1 we should take a function $`\nu `$, which is identically equal to 1 on $`^n`$.

The map $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ from Theorem 4.1 has the form

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ,x)=x+\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,x)+\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha )+\mathrm{},$$

where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is some bilinear map $`^r\times ^n^n`$, the form $`\mathrm{\Delta }:^r^n`$ is quadratic on $`^r`$, and dots denote higher order terms.

###### Lemma 4.2

The form $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ vanishes for all $`\alpha `$. For any fixed $`\alpha `$ the quadratic forms $`(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and $`(x,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ are divisible by $`(x,x)`$.

This lemma is an immediate generalization of Proposition 1.3 from , and it can be proved in the same way. We will sketch here another proof assuming for simplicity that the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is analytic; see  for details.

Proof. Extend the Euclidean form $`(,)`$ to $`^n`$ by bilinearity. A complex circle in $`^n`$ is by definition the intersection of a sphere

$$\{x^n|(xa,xa)=R^2\},a^n,R$$

with a 2-dimensional complex plane. A complex circle is an irreducible second degree curve, or a pair of lines (possibly coincident), or a plane. Obviously, any honest real circle belongs to a unique complex circle.

The germ $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ at $`0`$ extends to the germ of an analytic map from $`(^{r+n},0)`$ to $`(^n,0)`$. Under restriction to any real vector line, the function $`(\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Phi })`$ and all components of the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ span no more than a 2-dimensional space. This condition is equivalent to the fact that the image of the line lies in a circle. On the other hand, it is expressed by a system of algebraic equations on the Taylor coefficients of the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. Therefore, the same condition is satisfied under restriction to any complex line. Thus, the image of the germ of any complex vector line at 0 lies in a complex circle or in a line.

Denote by $`𝒩`$ the isotropic cone $`\{(x,x)=0\}`$ in $`^n`$. Consider a line $`L`$ in $`^{r+n}`$ spanned by a vector $`(\alpha ,x)`$ such that $`x𝒩`$ but $`x0`$. The image of $`L`$ lies in the complex circle $`C`$ and is tangent to $`x`$ at 0. We claim that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(L)`$ lies entirely in the cone $`𝒩`$. If $`C`$ is a line or a pair of lines, then $`\mathrm{\Phi }(L)`$ lies in a line, spanned by $`x`$ (the algebraic curve $`\mathrm{\Phi }(L)`$ cannot jump from one line to another). In particular, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(L)`$ lies in $`𝒩`$.

If $`C`$ is a plane or an irreducible second degree curve, then it lies entirely in $`𝒩`$. Indeed, consider a plane containing the circle $`C`$. If this plane does not lie in the cone $`𝒩`$, then it intersects $`𝒩`$ in a pair of lines, possibly coincident. The circle $`C`$ is tangent to one of these lines at the origin and is asymptotic to both (i.e. intersects them at infinity), since the set of infinite points in the projective closure of any complex sphere is the same as that of $`𝒩`$. But a second degree curve can not be tangent to a line at the origin and, at the same time, intersect the same line at infinity, unless the curve coincides with this line.

Thus for $`x0`$ the linear span of the vectors $`x`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ,x)`$ lies entirely in $`𝒩`$. In other words,

$$(x,x)=(x,\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ,x))=(\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ,x),\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ,x))=0$$

for any vector $`x𝒩`$. Therefore, the functions $`(x,\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ,x))`$ and $`(\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ,x),\mathrm{\Phi }(\alpha ,x))`$ are divisible by $`(x,x)`$ in the ring of formal power series. Confining ourselves to the consideration of second order terms only, we obtain the statement of the lemma. $`\mathrm{}`$

Note that the bilinear map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ contains all information about circles in the image of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. Indeed, to define a circle it is enough to know its “velocity” and “acceleration” at 0 with respect to some parameter, provided that the velocity is nonzero. Therefore, if $`x0`$, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,x)`$ uniquely determines the circle that is the image of the line spanned by $`(\alpha ,x)`$. The subspace $`x=0`$ goes to the origin under $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, as it is seen from the proof of Lemma 4.2. This is not difficult to prove even without the analyticity assumption, with the help of the implicit function theorem. Thus $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ determines the images of all vector lines under $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$.

Theorem 4.1 now reduces to a description of the form $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

## 5 Connection with the Hurwitz–Radon theorem

We are going to explore the properties of the bilinear map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:^r\times ^n^n`$ introduced in the previous section. Recall that $`^n`$ is equipped with a Euclidean metric. Up to now, $`^r`$ was only a vector space. But we will introduce a Euclidean metric on it as well. Fix an element $`\alpha ^r`$. It gives rise to a linear map $`A:^n^n`$ given by $`A(x)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,x)`$. By Lemma 4.2 this map is conformal. This means that the product of $`A`$ with its conjugate is the multiplication by a real number $`q(\alpha )`$. This number is nonzero, since for $`x0`$ the image of the line spanned by $`(\alpha ,x)`$, is an honest circle, in particular, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,x)0`$. It is readily seen that $`q`$ is a positive definite quadratic form on $`^r`$. Thus $`^r`$ may be regarded as a Euclidean space.

Now denote by $`||`$ the Euclidean norms in both $`^r`$ and $`^n`$. Then we have

$$|\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,x)|=|\alpha ||x|.$$

Hurwitz  and Radon  described all relations of this form. In terms of Clifford algebras representations their result can be formulated as follows .

###### Theorem 5.1

Let $`f:^{k+1}\times ^n^n`$ be a bilinear map such that $`|f(\alpha ,x)|=|\alpha ||x|`$ for all $`\alpha ^{k+1}`$ and $`x^n`$. Then there is a representation $`\varphi `$ of the Clifford algebra $`\mathrm{Cliff}(k)`$ in $`^n`$ such that

$$f(\alpha ,x)=\varphi (\alpha _0+\alpha _1e_1+\mathrm{}+\alpha _ke_k)A_0(x)$$

where $`A_0`$ is an orthogonal transformation and $`\alpha _0,\mathrm{},\alpha _k`$ are coordinates of $`\alpha `$ in some orthonormal basis.

In particular, this theorem is applicable to our bilinear map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Theorem 5.1 has a degree of freedom: an arbitrary orthogonal transformation in the preimage. Our additional restriction on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ kills this degree of freedom.

Some interesting generalizations of Theorem 5.1, and the general Hurwitz problem are discussed in .

## 6 Complex multiplications and Clifford algebras

In this section, we establish a connection between the bilinear map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and a representation of some Clifford algebra. This connection is in the spirit of Theorem 5.1, and we use similar arguments.

Fix a Euclidean metric $`(,)`$ on $`^n`$. A linear operator $`A:^n^n`$ is called a complex multiplication if either $`A`$ is the multiplication by a real number, or there exists a complex structure $`I`$ on $`^n`$ compatible with $`(,)`$ such that $`A`$ is the multiplication by a complex number with respect to $`I`$.

Here is a characterization of all complex multiplications in real terms.

###### Proposition 6.1

A linear operator $`A:^n^n`$ is a complex multiplication if and only if both quadratic forms $`(x,Ax)`$ and $`(Ax,Ax)`$ are divisible by $`(x,x)`$.

Proof. Any complex structure compatible with the Euclidean metric is represented by an operator $`I`$, which is orthogonal and skew-symmetric at the same time. In other words, the equalities $`(Ix,Ix)=(x,x)`$ and $`(Ix,x)=0`$ hold for each $`x^n`$. The second equality follows from the first equality and the relation $`I^2=1`$. If $`A=a+bI`$ for some complex structure $`I`$, then, as it is readily seen, $`(x,Ax)=a(x,x)`$ and $`(Ax,Ax)=(a^2+b^2)(x,x)`$.

Assume now that $`(x,Ax)=p(x,x)`$ and $`(Ax,Ax)=q(x,x)`$ for some real numbers $`p`$ and $`q`$. From the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality $`(Ax,Ax)(x,x)(x,Ax)^2`$ it follows that $`qp^2`$. If $`q=p^2`$, then $`A`$ is everywhere proportional to $`x`$. Since $`(x,Ax)=p(x,x)`$, the coefficient of proportionality equals to $`p`$. Thus $`A`$ is the multiplication by $`p`$. If $`q>p^2`$, then $`A=p+\sqrt{q^2p^2}I`$ for some linear operator $`I`$. From the restrictions on $`A`$ it follows that $`I`$ is both orthogonal and skew-symmetric. The orthogonality means that $`I^{}I=1`$ where $`I^{}`$ is the conjugate operator to $`I`$. The skew-symmetry says that $`I^{}=I`$. Hence $`I^2=1`$, i.e. $`I`$ is a complex structure, and $`A`$ is a complex multiplication. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:^r\times ^n^n`$ be the bilinear map introduced in Section 4. Identify $`^r`$ with a space of complex multiplications: a vector $`\alpha ^r`$ gets identified with the operator $`x\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,x)`$, which is a complex multiplication by Lemma 4.2 and Proposition 6.1. Denote by $`\widehat{V}`$ the linear span of $`^r`$ and the identity transformation. There is a Euclidean form on $`\widehat{V}`$. Namely, for each complex multiplication $`A`$ put $`q(A)=(A(x),A(x))/(x,x)`$, which is independent of $`x`$. Clearly, $`q`$ is a positive definite quadratic form.

###### Proposition 6.2

Let $`V`$ be the orthogonal complement to $`1`$ in $`\widehat{V}`$ with respect to $`q`$. Then there exists a representation $`\varphi `$ of $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V)`$ in $`^n`$ such that for any $`\alpha ^r`$ and $`x^n`$ we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,x)=\varphi (\alpha )(x)`$ under the natural embedding of $`\widehat{V}`$ into $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V)`$.

Proof. Denote by $`q(,)`$ the polarization of the quadratic form $`q()`$. By definition, for any $`A\widehat{V}`$ and $`x^n`$ we have $`(Ax,Ax)=q(A)(x,x)`$. Therefore, any 2 elements $`A,B\widehat{V}`$ satisfy the relation $`(Ax,By)+(Bx,Ay)=2q(A,B)(x,y)`$ identically with respect to $`x,y^n`$. In other words, $`A^{}B+B^{}A=2q(A,B)`$.

Choose an orthonormal basis in $`\widehat{V}`$ containing 1. Denote the other elements of this basis by $`I_1,\mathrm{},I_r`$. We have

$$I_j+I_j^{}=2q(1,I_j)=0,I_j^2=I_j^{}I_j=q(I_j)=1,$$

$$I_jI_k+I_kI_j=(I_j^{}I_k+I_k^{}I_j)=q(I_j,I_k)=0.$$

Thus the operators $`I_1,\mathrm{},I_r`$ give rise to a representation of $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proof of Theorem 4.1. By Proposition 6.2, the bilinear map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ sends $`(\alpha ,x)`$ to $`\varphi (\alpha )(x)`$ for some embedding of $`^r`$ into $`\widehat{V}`$ and some representation $`\varphi `$ of $`\mathrm{Cliff}(V)`$ in $`^n`$. Thus the 2-jet of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ at 0 is the same as that of $`F:(\alpha ,x)\varphi (1\alpha )^1x`$. But the circles in the image are determined by the 2-jet only. Hence the images of all vector lines under the maps $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`F`$ are the same. $`\mathrm{}`$

Keywords: line, circle, Clifford algebra, Hopf map.