text:
# Odd-symplectic group in first order partial differential equations

## Introduction

Very recently R. Cushman  presented the notion of odd-symplectic group. This notion was formulated in  but differently in ; more recently in . Such group can be defined on vector spaces with odd dimension. Loosely speaking, the odd-symplectic group lies between the standard symplectic group and the contact group. More precisely, it interpolates symplectic groups in different dimensions according to the following exact sequence:

$$\mathrm{}Sp(2n+2,)Sp(2n+1,)Sp(2n,)\mathrm{}$$

Although the definition of the odd-symplectic group is natural, at the moment, there are few examples of applications. The aim of this paper is to show that odd-symplectic transformations rise naturally in the geometric theory of first order PDE and in particular in the study of the characteristics of PDEs of the following form:

(1)
$$h(x,z(x))=0,$$

where $`x^n`$ $`h(.,.)`$ is a smooth function on $`^{2n}`$.
Here is an outline of the paper: in the first section the odd-symplectic group is defined. In the following sections we recall the theory of characteristics for first order PDEs and we show that the characteristic vector field associated to (1) coincides with an infinitesimal generator of an odd-symplectic transformation. We show also that

$$h(x,z(x))=\frac{1}{2}<gz,z>+<v,z>+k$$

with $`g`$ constant $`n\times n`$ symmetric matrix, $`k`$ and $`v^n`$ has a symmetry whose infinitesimal generator is given by an element in the Lie algebra of $`Sp(2n+1,)`$. Finally we show that there is an isomorphism between certain class of first order PDE and the Lie algebra of the odd-symplectic group; moreover we show the connection of the odd-symplectic group with Hamilton-Jacobi theory and the Eikonal equation.

## 1. Odd-symplectic group and contact geometry

Let us consider a symplectic vector space $`(V,\omega )`$, $`dimV=2n+2`$. The symplectic group is:

(2)
$$Sp(V,\omega )\{AGl(V)|A^{}\omega =\omega \}.$$

The odd-symplectic group $`Sp(V,\omega )_{v_0}`$ can be defined as follows: let $`v_0V`$ be a non-zero vector, then:

(3)
$$Sp(V,\omega )_{v_0}\{ASp(V,\omega )|Av_0=v_0\}$$

Sometimes $`Sp(V,\omega )_{v_0}`$ is denoted by $`Sp(2n+1,)`$. This group has been studied in . It turns out that the odd symplectic group arises naturally in contact geometry. Let us follow . Consider a contact manifold $`(,\theta )`$ ($`dim=2n+1`$) where locally, in Darboux coordinates, the contact form $`\theta `$ is:

(4)
$$\theta =dzy_idx^i$$

In  it is shown that one can symplectify $`(,\theta )`$ into $`(𝒩,\omega )=(_+\times M,d(t\theta ))`$ where $`t>0`$ is the coordinate on $`_+`$. Consider a one parameter group of symplectomorphisms $`F_s:𝒩𝒩`$ of the form:

(5)
$$F_s(t,m)=(t,G_s(t,m)).$$

As shown in  the infinitesimal generator of $`F_s`$ at $`t=1,y=0`$ is an element of the algebra $`sp(2n+1,)`$ of $`Sp(2n+1,)`$. If $`X`$ is vector field on $`𝒩`$ such that

(6)
$$L_X(t)=0\text{ and }L_X(d(t\theta ))=0$$

then its flow is a map of the form (5). Since

$$L_X(d(t\theta ))=d(i_X(d(t\theta )))=0$$

we deduce that (6) implies:

(7)
$$L_X(t)=0\text{ and }i_Xd(t\theta )=d\widehat{h}\text{ for some }\widehat{h}:𝒩$$

To see what this means, let us use Darboux coordinates. If we denote

$$X_{\widehat{h}}=\frac{dt}{ds}\frac{}{t}+\frac{dz}{ds}\frac{}{z}+\frac{dx^i}{ds}\frac{}{x^i}+\frac{dy_i}{ds}\frac{}{y_i}$$

then (7) gives:

(8)
$$\{\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{dt}{ds}=0\hfill & & & \\ \frac{dx^i}{ds}=\frac{1}{t}\frac{\widehat{h}}{y_i}\hfill & & & \\ \frac{dy_i}{ds}=\frac{1}{t}\frac{\widehat{h}}{x^i}\hfill & & & \\ \frac{dz}{ds}=\frac{\widehat{h}}{t}+\frac{y_i}{t}\frac{\widehat{h}}{y_i}\hfill & & & \end{array}$$

with the condition:

(9)
$$\frac{\widehat{h}}{z}=0$$

This has the following consequences:

###### Remark 1.1.

Since $`dt/ds=0`$, the flow preserves $`t=const`$. Moreover

$$L_{X_{\widehat{h}}}(\widehat{h})=0,$$

the flow in $``$ associated to the vector field $`X_{\widehat{h}}`$ preserves the (constant) Hamiltonian function $`\widehat{h}`$.

###### Remark 1.2.

For $`t=1`$ and $`\widehat{h}=th(x,y)`$ one recovers the contact vector field defined in , that we call $`X_h^1`$ which is equal to:

(10)
$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{dx^i}{ds}=\frac{h}{y_i}\hfill & & \\ \frac{dy_i}{ds}=\frac{h}{x^i}\hfill & & \\ \frac{dz}{ds}=h+y_i\frac{h}{y_i}\hfill & & \end{array}$$

###### Remark 1.3.

The contactomorphisms generated by vector fields $`X_h^1`$ form a subgroup of the group of contact transformation. In fact, in  V.Arnol’d defined a contact Hamiltonian vector field without requiring that the associated one parameter transformation has the form (5). Arnol’d’s definition leads to a vector field that generates a contact transformation but does not preserve the contact Hamiltonian $`\widehat{h}`$.

###### Remark 1.4.

Consider $`\widehat{h}_u:𝒩`$ such that:

(11)
$$\widehat{h}_u=\frac{1}{2}[<\gamma x,x>+2t<\alpha x,y>+t^2<\beta x,y>]+<v_1,y><v_2,x>\frac{1}{t}kt$$

where $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma `$ are $`n\times n`$ real matrices with $`\beta ^T=\beta `$ and $`\gamma ^T=\gamma `$. One verifies that the vector field $`X_{\widehat{h}_u}`$ at $`t=1`$ is the infinitesimal generator of the one parameter group in $`^{2n+2}`$ $`s\mathrm{exp}su`$ with $`usp(2n+1,)`$, that is,

(12)
$$X_{\widehat{h}_u}|_{t=1}=\frac{d}{ds}|_{s=0,t=1}\mathrm{exp}(su)(t,x,y,z).$$

Here

(13)
$$u=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill \\ v\hfill & A\hfill & 0\hfill \\ k\hfill & Jv\hfill & 0\hfill \end{array}\right),$$

where $`J`$ is the standard symplectic structure in $`^{2n}`$, $`v^{2n}`$, $`k`$ and $`Asp(2n,)`$ such that

(14)
$$JA=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\gamma \hfill & \alpha \hfill \\ \alpha ^T\hfill & \beta \hfill \end{array}\right),$$

Putting $`(x,y)=w`$, a simple computation shows that on level set $`t=1`$:

(15)
$$X_{\widehat{h}_u}|_{t=1}=(v+Aw)^T\frac{}{w}+(k+(Jv)^Tw)\frac{}{z}$$

## 2. Theory of characteristics for first order PDE and odd-symplectic vector fields

In this section we shall follow the presentation of first order PDE given in . Let us consider the case in which the manifold $``$ is the first jet bundle associated to $`^n`$. Locally such space can be modeled by a $`xR^n`$ and a germ of a function in $`x`$ considered up to its gradient. To each $`mJ^1(^n)`$ we associate $`(x,z(x),z)`$ with $`z(.)`$ a germ of a smooth function in $`^n`$.
The manifold $`J^1(R^n)`$ is a contact manifold with contact 1-form

$$\theta =dzy_idx^i$$

which vanishes on any germ $`z(.)`$ such that $`z/x^i=y_i`$. The first jet space is the natural place to study the geometry of first order PDEs. In fact any PDE can be understood as a submanifold of $`J^1(R^n)`$ (see ). Let us suppose that we have a smooth function on $`J^1(R^n)`$:

$$h:J^1(R^n)\text{ with }\frac{h}{z}=0.$$

$`h=0`$ defines a manifold in $`J^1(R^n)`$ which corresponds to the following PDE:

(16)
$$h(x,z(x),z(x))=0$$

To equation (16) we can associate a vector field $`X_c`$ whose integral curves satisfy (10). We pose the natural question whether $`X_c`$ is related to the characteristic vector field, which converts a first order PDE into a system of ordinary differential equations. In order to answer this question we need to recall the theory of characteristics. See  for more details.

### 2.1. Theory of characteristics for first order PDE

Let us assume that we have a first order PDE defined by the level set of $`h:J^1(R^n)`$. In the first jet space $`J^1(^n)`$ we can introduce contact plane $`\mathrm{\Pi }_x`$ at any $`x^n`$ spanned by the vectors $`V`$

(17)
$$i_V\theta =0$$

Equation (17) determines a codimension $`1`$ submanifold $`E^{2n}`$. Its tangent space $`TE^{2n}`$ can be described by the vectors $`V`$ such that:

(18)
$$i_Vdh=0$$

###### Definition 2.1.

The submanifold $`E^{2n}`$ is called non-characteristic, if $`TE^{2n}`$ is transversal to the contact plane $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$.

###### Definition 2.2.

The intersection of vector spaces

$$P_x=T_xE^{2n}\mathrm{\Pi }_x$$

is called characteristic plane at $`x`$. Therefore $`P`$ is defined by all vectors $`V`$ such that

(19)
$$i_V\theta =0\text{ and }i_Vdh=0.$$

We shall consider only the case in which $`E^{2n}`$ is not characteristic. Note that since $`TE^{2n}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ lie in $`J^1(R^n)`$ we have:

$$dimP_x=dimTE_x^{2n}+dim\mathrm{\Pi }_xdimTJ^1(R^n)=2n1$$

The $`2`$-form $`d\theta `$, associated to the contact form $`\theta `$, defines a skew product in $`TJ^1(R^n)`$. This allows us to select a vector in each characteristic plane $`P_x`$ which is skew-orthogonal to $`P`$. The characteristic vector field for (16) is given by $`X_c`$:

1. $`i_{X_c}\theta =0`$, $`X_c`$ is a contact vector field,
2. $`d\theta (X_c,V)=0`$ for all $`VP`$.

In symplectic geometry one can show that the skew-orthogonal complement to a $`k`$ dimensional vector space is a $`2nk`$ vector space. The characteristic plane $`P`$ has dimension $`2n1`$. Therefore the characteristic direction $`X_c`$ is uniquely determined.
For a given $`h:J^1(R^n)`$, in local coordinates the vector field $`X_c`$ has components:

(20)
$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{dx^i}{ds}=\frac{h}{y_i}\hfill & & \\ \frac{dy_i}{ds}=\frac{h}{x^i}y_i\frac{h}{z}\hfill & & \\ \frac{dz}{ds}=y_i\frac{h}{y_i}\hfill & & \end{array}$$

### 2.2. Cauchy Problem

The theory of characteristics is used to solve the Cauchy problem. For an equation

$$h(x,z(x),z(x))=0$$

Cauchy data are: a manifold $`\gamma ^n`$ and the values $`z_{|_\gamma }=\varphi (x)`$. We have seen that the equation $`h=0`$ corresponds to submanifold $`E^{2n}`$ in $`J^1(^n)`$. Cauchy data define a submanifold $`NE^n`$ called the manifold of initial data. It turns out that the Cauchy problem is solvable (locally) if $`N`$ is not characteristic, that is if the projection of the characteristic direction to $`^n`$ is transversal to the tangent plane to $`N`$ (see ). Given a parametrization $`x_\gamma (\lambda )`$ of $`\gamma `$, it is possible to construct the family of initial data:

$$x_0=x_\gamma (\lambda ),z_0=\varphi (x_\gamma (\lambda )),p_0=p_0(\lambda )$$

where $`p_0(\lambda )`$ is such that:

$$h(x_\gamma (\lambda ),\varphi (x_\gamma (\lambda )),p_0(\lambda ))=0$$

which forms the family of initial data for the characteristic vector field (20).

###### Remark 2.1.

The characteristic vector field (20) does not depend on whether the PDE is given by $`h=0`$ or $`h=c`$ with $`c0`$, but the Cauchy problem does. In fact the value of the level set of $`h`$ is contained in $`p_0`$.

## 3. The main result

We can state:

###### Theorem 3.1.

For all the PDEs represented in $`J^1(R^n)`$ by a smooth function $`h:J^1(R^n)`$ of the form:

$$h(x,z(x))=0,$$

the odd-symplectic Hamiltonian vector field (10) commutes with the characteristic vector field (20). Moreover on $`h=0`$, the two vector fields coincide.

###### Proof.

Consider the function $`h:J^1(^n)`$ as a contact Hamiltonian. Then by inspection one finds that the infinitesimal generator $`X_h^1`$ can be written as follows:

(21)
$$X_h^1=X_ch\frac{}{z}.$$

Since $`h`$ dos not depend on $`z`$, therefore $`X_c(h)=0`$. Also the Lie bracket:

$$[X_c,X_h^1]=[X_c,h\frac{}{z}]=0$$

vanishes.
Now we want to compare $`X_h^1`$ (10) and $`X_c`$ (20). We notice that if $`h:J^1(R^n)`$ does not depend on $`z`$, the first two components are equal. The component $`dz/ds`$ differs because of the term $`h`$ in (10). We have

$$L_{X_h^1}(h)=0$$

that is $`h`$ is preserved by the flow of $`X_h^1`$. Therefore in the manifold $`h=0`$ the vector field $`X_h^1`$ is equal to the characteristic vector field $`X_c`$

### 3.1. First order PDE and $`sp(2n+1,)`$

Let us consider a particular class of first order PDEs in $`^n`$, namely,

(22)
$$c_{ij}\frac{z(x)}{x^i}\frac{z(x)}{x^j}+b_{ij}\frac{z(x)}{x^i}x^j+a_{ij}x^ix^j+e_i\frac{z(x)}{x^i}+f_ix^i=h_0$$

or more compactly:

(23)
$$<Bz(x),z(x)>+<e,z(x)>+<f,x>=h_0$$

Then we have:

###### Proposition 3.1.

For a given first order PDE of the form (23), if

$$B\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}2a\hfill & b\hfill \\ b^T\hfill & 2c\hfill \end{array}\right)$$

(where $`.^T`$ is the transpose) is symmetric, then we can associate $`usp(2n+1,)`$

(24)
$$u=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill \\ v\hfill & A\hfill & 0\hfill \\ h_0\hfill & Jv\hfill & 0\hfill \end{array}\right)$$

where $`k=h_0`$, $`Jv=(e,f)`$ and $`JB=A`$, to the characteristic vector field of (22).
If $`a=b=0`$ and $`v=(v_1,0)`$ in $`B`$ then the characteristic vector field $`X_c`$ associated to (22) commutes $`u`$.

###### Proof.

The proof is essentially based on theorem 3.1 and on remark 1.4. According to theorem 3.1, equation (23) can be interpreted as a contact Hamiltonian $`h(x,y)`$ where $`y=z(x)`$, and the contact vector field on $`h=0`$ is equal to the characteristic vector field. If the conditions on the matrices $`a,b,c`$ are satisfied the PDE (23), on $`J^1(^n)`$ gives rise to a contact Hamiltonian of the form:

$$\widehat{h}(x,y,1)=<w,JAw>+<Jv,w>+h_0,\text{ where }w=(x,y)$$

According to remark 1.4, we can associate to such Hamiltonian an element of $`sp(2n+1,)`$ of the form (24).
Let us consider the Hamiltonian

(25)
$$\widehat{h}_u=<ax,x>+2t<bx,y>+t^2<cx,y>+<v_1,y><v_2,x>\frac{1}{t}h_0t$$

The corresponding infinitesimal generator $`X_{\widehat{h}_u}^1`$ is:

(26)
$$X_{\widehat{h}_u}^1=\xi +Z_{\widehat{h}}\frac{}{z},$$

where

(27)
$$Z_{\widehat{h}}=<v_1,y><v_2,x>+h_0$$

The characteristic vector field $`X_c`$ of (23) is

(28)
$$X_c=\xi +Z_c\frac{}{z},$$

where

(29) $`\xi =2(bx+cy){\displaystyle \frac{}{x}}2(ax+by){\displaystyle \frac{}{y}}`$
(30) $`Z_c=2<bx,y>+2<cy,y>+<v_1,y>`$
Since $`h`$ does not depend on $`z`$, the commutator is given by:

$$[X_{\widehat{h}}^1,X_c]=(\xi (Z_c)\xi (Z_{\widehat{h}}))\frac{}{z}$$

After some algebra one finds:

$`\xi (Z_c)\xi (Z_{\widehat{h}})=4<bx,b^Ty>+2<cy,b^Ty>+<bx,v_2>+<cy,v_2>+`$
(31) $`2<bx,ax>2<bx,by>4<ax,cy>4<by,cy>`$
Last expression is identically zero for every $`(x,y)`$ only for $`a=b=0`$ and $`v_2=0`$. ∎

### 3.2. Hamilton-Jacobi theory

In certain cases in Hamiltonian mechanics the construction of coordinate transformations that allows to integrate explicitly the equations of motion is based on the solution of Hamilton-Jacobi equation. We refer the reader to . Suppose that we have a Hamiltonian system on $`(^{2n},\omega )`$. The Cartan one-form, written in local coordinates, is:

(32)
$$\mathrm{\Theta }=p_idq^iH(p,q,t)dt$$

where $`H:^{2n}\times `$ in the Hamiltonian. $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is an integral invariant for the Hamiltonian flow. Consider the extended phase space $`=^{2n}\times `$ and two set of coordinates:

$$(q,p,t)\text{ and }(x,y,\tau )$$

There are two functions $`K(x,y,\tau )`$ and $`S`$ such that

(33)
$$p_idq^iH(p,q,t)dt=y_idx^iK(x,y,\tau )d\tau +dS$$

The function $`S`$ is called a “generating function” because it allows one to define a canonical transformation.
Equation (33) can be used to find the canonical transformation which realizes $`(q,p,t)(x,y,\tau )`$. This transformation is usually consider in the case $`t=\tau `$. In this case, by means of Legendre transformation one can write (33) as:

(34)
$$p_idq^iH(p,q,t)dt=x^idy_iK(x,y,t)dt+dS(q,y,t).$$

Then one usually chooses $`K=0`$ and obtains:

(35)
$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{S}{y_i}=x_i\hfill & & \\ \frac{S}{q^i}=p_i\hfill & & \\ H(q,\frac{S}{q})+\frac{S}{t}=0\hfill & & \end{array}$$

The third equation of (35) is the Hamilton-Jacobi equation and determines the function $`S`$ which completely describes the canonical transformation $`(q,p,t)(x,y,t)`$. The Hamilton-Jacobi equation is defined in $`J^1(^{n+1})`$ and fulfills the conditions of theorem 3.1.

### 3.3. Eikonal equation

In geometric optics and WKB approximation of quantum mechanics WKB approximation the Eikonal equation is relevant. This is a first order PDE given by:

(36)
$$\frac{1}{2}\delta ^{ij}\frac{S}{x^i}\frac{S}{x^j}N(x)=0$$

$`S`$ represents the wave front and $`N`$ is a function:

$$N(x)=(n(x)/c)^2,$$

where in optics is square ratio of the refraction index $`n(x)`$ to the speed of light $`c`$; where in WKB theory:

$$N(x)=V(x)E,$$

namely, potential minus the in energy.
When in optics we consider a medium with a piece-wise constant refraction index (multilayers), $`N(x)`$ can be easily approximated by piece-wise constant function. In quantum mechanics this happens when the potential is piece-wise constant. In these cases proposition 3.1 can be applied in such layer. For instance if

$$N(x)=n_k^2/c^2\text{ for }x\text{ in the }k\text{-layer}$$

then in $`k^{th}`$-layer we have symmetry generated by

(37)
$$u=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & JA\hfill & 0\hfill \\ n_k^2/c^2\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill \end{array}\right)$$

with

$$G=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \mathrm{𝟏}\hfill \end{array}\right).$$

A similar analysis can be carried out in the case of semi-classical description of system which have piece-wise constant potential e.g. multi-well potential.

## Acknowledgments

I really wish to thank Richard Cushman for his useful suggestions and long discussions we had at the Warwick University Mathematics Institute and his careful reading my manuscript. I want also to thank J.Sniatycki, and L.Bates for the interesting and stimulating discusions.
This paper has been supported by Marie Curie Fellowship (Contract n. HPMFCT-2000-00541) and by M.A.S.I.E. European network.


format: text

text:
# Todd classes of affine cones of Grassmannians

## 1. Introduction

Let $`M`$ and $`N`$ be two modules over a local ring $`A`$ such that $`M_AN`$ has finite length and $`M`$ has finite projective dimension. In \[Se\] Serre defined the intersection multiplicity of $`M`$ and $`N`$ as

$$\chi (M,N)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{dimA}{}}(1)^i\mathrm{}(\mathrm{Tor}_i^A(M,N))$$

where $`\mathrm{}()`$ is the length function. If $`A`$ is a regular local ring, Serre showed that the condition $`\mathrm{}(M_AN)<\mathrm{}`$ implies $`dimM+dimNdimA`$, and posed the following conjectures:

| Vanishing: | If $`dimM+dimN<dimA`$, then $`\chi (M,N)=0`$. |
| --- | --- |
|  |
| Positivity: | If $`dimM+dimN=dimA`$, then $`\chi (M,N)>0`$. |

Serre settled these conjectures affirmatively for regular local rings $`A`$ which are equicharacteristic or unramified of mixed characteristic. The positivity conjecture remains open, though Gabber recently proved that $`\chi (M,N)0`$, see \[Be\]. The vanishing conjecture was proved by Roberts in \[Ro1\] and independently by Gillet and Soulé in \[GS1\]. The theorem of Roberts is as follows:

###### Theorem 1.1 (Roberts).

Let $`A`$ be a homomorphic image of a regular local ring $`S`$ such that $`\tau _{A/S}([A])=[SpecA]_{dimA}`$ (e.g., suppose that $`A`$ is a regular local ring or a complete intersection). If $`M`$ and $`N`$ are finitely generated $`A`$-modules of finite projective dimension such that $`\mathrm{}(M_AN)<\mathrm{}`$ and $`dimM+dimN<dimA`$, then $`\chi (M,N)=0`$.

It draws attention to rings $`A`$ for which $`\tau _{A/S}([A])=[SpecA]_{dimA}`$, and such rings were named Roberts rings by the first author and studied in \[Ku3\]. Complete intersections, for example, are Roberts rings. Our primary goal in this paper is to determine when affine cones over Grassmann varieties are Roberts rings, and we prove the result:

###### Theorem 1.2.

For $`1dn1`$, let $`A_d(n)`$ denote the affine cone of the Grassmann variety $`G_d(n)`$ under the Plücker embedding. Then $`A_d(n)`$ is a Roberts ring if and only if one of the following conditions is satisfied:

1. $`d=1`$;
2. $`d=n1`$;
3. $`d=2`$ and $`n=4`$;
4. $`d=3`$ and $`n=6`$.

Theorem 1.2 gives plenty of examples of Gorenstein factorial rings which are not Roberts rings. The first examples of Gorenstein rings which are not Roberts rings were discovered by the first author in \[Ku2\] where he computed the Todd classes of certain determinantal rings. A few years later the second author, in collaboration with C. Miller, \[MS\], found a Gorenstein ring which is not a numerically Roberts ring in the sense of \[Ku5\]. (A local ring is a numerically Roberts ring if and only if the Dutta multiplicity coincides with the Euler characteristic for any bounded free complex with homology of finite length. We remark that a Roberts ring is a numerically Roberts ring but the converse is not true, see \[Ku5\].) Recently Roberts and Srinivas, using a localization sequence in $`K`$-theory, established the existence of large families of Gorenstein rings which are not numerically Roberts rings (\[RS\]) and, applying their methods, we know that $`A_d(n)`$ is a Roberts ring if and only if it is a numerically Roberts ring. Therefore Theorem 1.2 gives many examples of Gorenstein factorial rings which are not numerically Roberts rings.

As a corollary of our results, we show in §5 that rings defined by Pfaffian ideals are Roberts rings if and only if they are complete intersections. The first author had earlier established that determinantal rings are Roberts rings if and only if they are complete intersections, \[Ku3, 6.2\]. What is most curious in our theorem above, is that the ring $`A_3(6)`$ is not a complete intersection, yet it is a Roberts ring.

## 2. Background

We first review some notation and results from \[Fu, Ku2, Ku3\] that we use later in our work.

### Roberts rings

Let $`A`$ be a homomorphic image of a regular local ring $`S`$, and $`d=dimA`$. The Chow group of $`A`$ is

$$A_{}(A)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{d}{}}A_i(A),$$

where $`A_i(A)`$ is the free abelian group generated by cycles of the form $`[A/P]`$ for $`PSpecA`$ with $`dimA/P=i`$, considered modulo rational equivalence. Let $`G_0(A)`$ be the Grothendieck group of finitely generated $`A`$-modules. For an abelian group $`M`$, we use $`M_{}`$ to denote the tensor product $`M_{}`$. With this notation, consider the Riemann-Roch map as in \[Fu, Chapter 18\],

$$\tau _{A/S}:G_0(A)_{}A_{}(A)_{}.$$

This is an isomorphism of $``$-vector spaces and it is known that under mild hypotheses (e.g., if $`A`$ is complete, or is essentially of finite type over a field or over $``$) it does not depend on the choice of the regular local ring $`S`$, see \[Ku3, Ro4\]. When $`\tau _{A/S}`$ does not depend on the choice of $`S`$, we denote it simply by $`\tau _A`$. Let $`[A]`$ denote the class of the ring $`A`$ in $`G_0(A)_{}`$. Then $`A`$ is said to be a Roberts ring if

$$\tau _{A/S}([A])A_d(A)_{}$$

for some choice of $`S`$. In other words, if we write

$$\tau _{A/S}([A])=\tau _d+\tau _{d1}+\mathrm{}+\tau _0\text{for}\tau _iA_i(A)_{},$$

then $`A`$ is a Roberts ring if and only if $`\tau _{d1}=\mathrm{}=\tau _0=0`$ for some choice of $`S`$. We summarize some properties of Roberts rings; see \[Ku3\] for the proofs.

###### Theorem 2.1.

Consider a ring $`(A,𝔪)`$ which is a homomorphic image of a regular local ring.

1. If $`(A,𝔪)`$ is a Roberts ring, so are the local rings $`A_𝔭`$ for $`𝔭SpecA`$, and the $`𝔪`$-adic completion $`\widehat{A}`$.
2. Let $`x𝔪`$ be a nonzerodivisor. If $`A`$ is a Roberts ring, so is $`A/xA`$.
3. If $`A`$ is a subring of a regular local ring $`T`$ such that $`T`$ is a module-finite extension of $`A`$, then $`A`$ is a Roberts ring.
4. If $`A`$ is a normal domain with a Noether normalization $`SA`$ such that the extension $`A/S`$ is generically Galois, then $`A`$ is a Roberts ring.

We next record some facts about $`\tau _{A/S}`$.

###### Theorem 2.2.

Let $`A`$ be a local ring of dimension $`d`$ which is a homomorphic image of a regular local ring $`S`$. Let

$$\tau _{A/S}([A])=\tau _d+\tau _{d1}+\mathrm{}+\tau _0\text{for}\tau _iA_i(A)_{}.$$

1. $`\tau _d0`$.
2. If $`A`$ is a complete intersection, then $`\tau _i=0`$ for all $`i<d`$.
3. If $`A`$ is a Cohen-Macaulay ring with canonical module $`\omega _A`$, then

$$\tau _{A/S}([\omega _A])=\tau _d\tau _{d1}+\tau _{d2}\mathrm{}+(1)^d\tau _0.$$
4. If $`A`$ is a Gorenstein ring, then $`\tau _{di}=0`$ for odd integers $`i`$.
5. If $`A`$ is a normal Roberts ring, then it is $``$-Gorenstein. A normal domain $`A`$ of dimension two is a Roberts ring if and only if $`A`$ is a $``$-Gorenstein ring.

### Affine cones of smooth projective varieties

Let $`R=_{n0}R_n`$ be a graded ring over a field $`R_0=K`$ which is generated, as a $`K`$-algebra, by finitely many elements of degree one. Let $`𝔪`$ be the unique homogeneous maximal ideal of $`R`$. Assume that $`X=ProjR`$ is a smooth projective variety of dimension $`t`$. Let

$$A_{}(X)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{t}{}}A_i(X)\text{and}CH(X)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{t}{}}\stackrel{i}{CH}(X)$$

denote the Chow group and the Chow ring of $`X`$ respectively, where

$$\stackrel{i}{CH}(X)=A_{ti}(X)\text{for all}0it.$$

Set $`CH(X)_{}=CH(X)`$. Let $`h=c_1(𝒪_X(1))[X]CH^1(X)_{}`$ be the first Chern class of the invertible sheaf $`𝒪_X(1)`$. One of the main results of \[Ku2\] is the following theorem:

###### Theorem 2.3.

There is an exact sequence of graded modules

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}CH(X)_{}& \stackrel{h}{}& CH(X)_{}& \stackrel{\xi }{}& A_{}(R_𝔪)_{}& & 0,\end{array}$$

where $`\xi `$ is a map satisfying $`\xi ([ProjR/𝔭])=[R_𝔪/𝔭R_𝔪]`$ for each homogeneous prime ideal $`𝔭`$ of $`R`$. Under this map, $`\xi (td(\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{}))=\tau _{R_𝔪}([R_𝔪])`$ where $`td(\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{})`$ is the Todd class of the tangent sheaf $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{}`$ and $`\tau _{R_𝔪}:G_0(R_𝔪)_{}A_{}(R_𝔪)_{}`$ is the Riemann-Roch isomorphism. In particular,

$`A_0(R_𝔪)_{}`$ $`0,`$
$`A_i(R_𝔪)_{}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{CH^{t+1i}(X)_{}}{hCH^{ti}(X)_{}}}\text{for all}1it,\text{and},`$
$`A_{t+1}(R_𝔪)_{}`$ $`\stackrel{0}{CH}(X)_{}.`$
### Dutta multiplicity

Let $`A`$ be a complete local ring of dimension $`d`$ over a perfect field of prime characteristic $`p`$, and let $`G_{}`$ be a bounded complex of free modules with homology of finite length. We denote by $`F^n()`$ the $`n`$ th iteration of the Frobenius functor. The Dutta multiplicity of $`G_{}`$ is the limit

$$\chi _{\mathrm{}}(G_{})=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\chi (F^n(G_{}))}{p^{nd}},$$

studied by S. Dutta in \[Du\]. The Dutta multiplicity behaves, in many ways, better than the usual multiplicity, and Roberts used the Dutta multiplicity in an essential way in his proof of the new intersection theorem in mixed-characteristic, \[Ro2\]. While we do not pursue it here, the Dutta multiplicity can be defined in a characteristic-free way, as was accomplished by the first author in \[Ku1\]. One of the motivating reasons for the study of Roberts rings is that over these rings the Dutta multiplicity of a complex coincides with its Euler characteristic.

By the support of a complex $`G_{}`$, denoted $`Supp(G_{})`$, we mean the union of the supports of its homology modules. We summarize some results from \[Ch, Fu, KR, Ro1, Ro3\] which illustrate the behavior of $`\chi _{\mathrm{}}(G_{})`$.

###### Theorem 2.4.

Let $`G_{}`$ and $`F_{}`$ be bounded complexes of finitely generated free modules over a complete local ring $`A`$ of dimension $`d`$ and characteristic $`p>0`$. Assume furthermore that $`A`$ has a perfect residue class field.

1. If $`Supp(G_{})=\{𝔪\}`$, then $`\chi _{\mathrm{}}(G_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{})=(1)^d\chi _{\mathrm{}}(G_{})`$.
2. If $`Supp(G_{})=\{𝔪\}`$, then $`\chi _{\mathrm{}}(F^n(G_{}))=p^{nd}\chi _{\mathrm{}}(G_{})`$ for all $`n`$.
3. If $`dimSupp(G_{})+dimSupp(F_{})<d`$ and $`Supp(G_{})Supp(F_{})=\{𝔪\}`$, then $`\chi _{\mathrm{}}(G_{}_AF_{})=0`$.
4. If $`dimSupp(G_{})+dimSupp(F_{})d`$ and $`Supp(G_{})Supp(F_{})=\{𝔪\}`$, then $`\chi _{\mathrm{}}(G_{}_AF_{})=(1)^{ddimSupp(G_{})}\chi _{\mathrm{}}(G_{}^{}_AF_{})`$.
5. If $`G_{}`$ has length $`d`$ and $`Supp(G_{})=\{𝔪\}`$ (in particular, $`G_{}`$ is not exact), then $`\chi _{\mathrm{}}(G_{})>0`$.

The assertions (1), (2), (4) and (5) of Theorem 2.4 are not true in general if the Dutta multiplicity $`\chi _{\mathrm{}}`$ is replaced by the usual Euler characteristic $`\chi `$. However if the ring $`A`$ is a Roberts ring, all assertions of Theorem 2.4 are true for the Euler characteristic $`\chi `$ since, in this case, $`\chi _{\mathrm{}}(G_{})=\chi (G_{})`$ for a bounded free complex $`G_{}`$ with $`Supp(G_{})=\{𝔪\}`$.

###### Remark 2.5.

Assume that $`A`$ is a $`d`$-dimensional local ring (not necessary of positive characteristic) which is a homomorphic image of a regular local ring. In this generality, the Dutta multiplicity of complexes with support in $`\{𝔪\}`$ is defined in \[Ku1\].

The statements (1), (3), (4) in Theorem 2.4 hold true in this case. Furthermore, if we replace $`F`$ with the $`p`$ th adams operation $`\psi ^p`$, \[GS2, KR\], statement (2) is also valid for any positive integer $`p`$. If $`A`$ contains a field, then (5) is true, see \[KR\]. However, this is an open problem in the case of mixed-characteristic. The positivity of the Dutta multiplicity is deeply connected to the positivity conjecture of Serre, \[Ku4, Theorem 1.2\].

###### Remark 2.6.

The concept of a numerically Roberts ring is defined in \[Ku5\]. It is proved there that a local ring $`A`$ is a numerically Roberts ring if and only if, over the ring $`A`$, the Dutta multiplicity always coincides with the Euler characteristic. Consequently, a Roberts ring is a numerically Roberts ring, but there are many examples of numerically Roberts rings which are not Roberts rings.

However, using a method established in \[RS\], the affine cone $`A_d(n)`$ of a Grassmann variety is a Roberts ring if and only if it is a numerically Roberts ring. A key point here is that for a Grassmann variety $`G=G_d(n)`$, we have $`CH(G)_{}CH_{\mathrm{num}}(G)_{}`$.

## 3. Vector bundles

We review definitions and basic facts on Chern characters etc., \[Fu, 3.2\], that we use later.

Let $`E`$ be a vector bundle on a scheme $`X`$. We use $`c_t(E)`$ to denote its Chern polynomial,

$$c_t(E)=1+c_1(E)t+c_2(E)t^2+c_3(E)t^3+\mathrm{}.$$

For an exact sequence of vector bundles $`0E^{}EE^{\prime \prime }0`$, the Whitney sum formula gives

$$c_t(E)=c_t(E^{})c_t(E^{\prime \prime }).$$

If the vector bundle $`E`$ has rank $`r`$, then $`c_i(E)=0`$ for all $`i>r`$. If its Chern polynomial is factored formally as

$$c_t(E)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}(1+\alpha _it),$$

the $`\alpha _i`$’s are called the Chern roots of $`E`$, and the Chern classes of $`E`$ are elementary symmetric functions of $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r`$. The Chern character of $`E`$ is

$$ch(E)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\mathrm{exp}(\alpha _i)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\underset{n0}{}\frac{\alpha _i^n}{n!}.$$

The first few terms, as can be found in \[Fu, Example 3.2.3\], are

$$\begin{array}{c}ch(E)=r+c_1+\frac{1}{2}(c_1^22c_2)+\frac{1}{6}(c_1^33c_1c_2+3c_3)\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{1}{24}(c_1^44c_1^2c_2+4c_1c_3+2c_2^24c_4)+\mathrm{},\end{array}$$

where $`c_i=c_i(E)`$.

The Chern character of a tensor product of vector bundles is

$$ch(EE^{})=ch(E)ch(E^{}),$$

and for an exact sequence $`0E^{}EE^{\prime \prime }0`$, we have

$$ch(E)=ch(E^{})+ch(E^{\prime \prime }).$$

The Chern classes of the dual bundle $`E^{}`$ are given by

$$c_i(E^{})=(1)^ic_i(E).$$

The Todd class $`td(E)`$ of a vector bundle $`E`$ with Chern roots $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r`$ is

$$td(E)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\frac{\alpha _i}{1\mathrm{exp}(\alpha _i)},$$

and the first few terms of the expansion are

$$\begin{array}{c}td(E)=1+\frac{1}{2}c_1+\frac{1}{12}(c_1^2+c_2)+\frac{1}{24}(c_1c_2)\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{1}{720}(c_1^4+4c_1^2c_2+3c_2^2+c_1c_3c_4)+\mathrm{},\end{array}$$

see \[Fu, Example 3.2.4\].

## 4. Grassmannians

Let $`X=(x_{ij})`$ be an $`n\times d`$ matrix of indeterminates over a field $`K`$, and consider the ring $`R`$ generated, as a $`K`$-algebra, by all the $`d\times d`$ minors of the matrix $`X`$. Then $`R`$ is the homogeneous coordinate ring of the Grassmann variety $`G_d(n)`$ of $`d`$-dimensional subspaces in an $`n`$-dimensional vector space, i.e., $`G_d(n)=ProjR`$. The relations between the minors are quadratic, and are the well-known Plücker relations, see \[HP, Chapter VII, §6\].

Setting $`G=G_d(n)`$ for the notational convenience, we have the universal exact sequence

$$0S𝒪_G^nQ0$$

where $`Q`$ (resp. $`S`$) is the universal rank $`(nd)`$ quotient bundle (resp. universal rank $`d`$ subbundle) on $`G`$, see \[Fu, Chapter 14.6\]. We briefly explain the construction of $`Q`$ and $`S`$. Consider the $`K[x_{ij}]`$-module $`T`$ which is the submodule of the free module $`K[x_{ij}]^n`$ generated by the columns of $`X`$. Let $`N`$ denote the set of elements of $`T`$ which have entries in $`R`$. Then $`N`$ is a graded submodule of $`R^n`$, and $`S`$ is the locally free sheaf corresponding to $`N`$. Similarly, the locally free sheaf $`Q`$ corresponds to the graded $`R`$-module $`R^n/N`$, see \[Ro4, Chapter 10.2\].

By \[Fu, B.5.8\], we have

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{}=Hom(S,Q)=S^{}Q.$$

From the universal exact sequence we also get

$$^n𝒪_G^n𝒪_G^dS^{nd}Q,$$

and so $`^{nd}Q(^dS)^{}^d(S^{})`$. Here, $`^{nd}Q`$ is the very ample invertible sheaf corresponding to the Plücker embedding $`G=G_d(n)^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{d}\right)1}.`$ By \[Fu, Remark 3.2.3 (c)\], $`c_1(^{nd}Q)=c_1(Q)`$ and setting $`h=c_1(Q)`$, Theorem 2.3 gives us the exact sequence

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}CH(G)_{}& \stackrel{h}{}& CH(G)_{}& \stackrel{\xi }{}& A_{}(A)_{}& & 0\end{array}$$

such that

$$\xi (td(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{}))=\tau _A([A])A_{}(A)_{},$$

where $`A=R_𝔪`$. Let $`t=d(nd)`$, which is the dimension of the projective variety $`G`$. Then $`dimA=t+1`$, and suppose

$$\tau _A([A])=\tau _{t+1}+\tau _t+\tau _{t1}+\mathrm{}+\tau _0,$$

where $`\tau _iA_i(A)_{}`$ for each $`i`$. Here, since $`A`$ is essentially of finite type over a field, the Riemann-Roch map $`\tau _{A/S}`$ is independent of the choice of a regular local ring $`S`$. Comparing terms with the expansion of $`td(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})`$, we see that

$`\tau _{t+1}`$ $`=1,`$
$`\tau _t`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}c_1(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})modh\stackrel{0}{CH}(G)_{},`$
$`\tau _{t1}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(c_1(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})^2+c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{}))modh\stackrel{1}{CH}(G)_{},`$
$`\tau _{t2}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{24}}c_1(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})modh\stackrel{2}{CH}(G)_{},`$
$`\tau _{t3}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{720}}(c_1(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})^4+4c_1(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})^2c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})+3c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})^2`$
$`+c_1(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})c_3(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})c_4(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{}))modhCH^3(G)_{},\text{etc.}`$
Recall that $`A`$ is a Roberts ring if and only if $`\tau _i=0`$ for all $`it`$, and we will prove Theorem 1.2 essentially by establishing the vanishing or nonvanishing of $`\tau _i`$’s.

Proof of Theorem 1.2. If $`d=1`$ or $`d=n1`$, the affine cone $`A_d(n)`$ is a regular local ring, and therefore is a Roberts ring. Consequently we may assume $`2dn2`$. In the case $`d=2`$ and $`n=4`$, it is easily seen that there is exactly one Plücker relation, and so $`A_2(4)`$ is a hypersurface, hence a Roberts ring.

In general, the Whitney sum formula, applied to the universal exact sequence

$$0S𝒪_G^nQ0,\text{ gives }c_t(S)c_t(Q)=c_t(𝒪_G^n)=(c_t(𝒪_G))^n=1,$$

which says

$$\begin{array}{c}(1+c_1(S)t+c_2(S)t^2+c_3(S)t^3+c_4(S)t^4+\mathrm{})\hfill \\ \hfill \times (1+c_1(Q)t+c_2(Q)t^2+c_3(Q)t^3+c_4(Q)t^4+\mathrm{})=1.\end{array}$$

Comparing the coefficients, we obtain

$`c_2(S)+c_1(S)c_1(Q)+c_2(Q)=0,\text{ and}`$
$`c_4(S)+c_3(S)c_1(Q)+c_2(S)c_2(Q)+c_1(S)c_3(Q)+c_4(Q)=0.`$
By Lemma 4.1 (1) below, the graded component of $`CH(G)_{}/hCH(G)_{}`$ in degree one is

$$\stackrel{1}{CH}(G)_{}/h\stackrel{0}{CH}(G)_{}=0.$$

In particular, $`c_1(E)0modhCH(G)_{}`$ for any vector bundle $`E`$ on $`G`$. Hence we have $`c_2(S)c_2(Q)`$ and $`c_4(S)c_2(Q)^2c_4(Q)`$, which will be used later. Furthermore, the expansion of $`ch(E)`$ is simplified as

$`ch(E)`$ $`rankE+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(2c_2(E))+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}(3c_3(E))+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24}}(2c_2(E)^24c_4(E))+\mathrm{}`$
$`rankEc_2(E)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}c_3(E)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(c_2(E)^22c_4(E))+\mathrm{}.`$
Recall that $`ch(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})=ch(S^{})ch(Q)`$ since $`\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{}=S^{}Q`$. This equation gives us

$`d(nd)`$ $`c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}c_3(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})^22c_4(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{}))+\mathrm{}`$
$`\left[dc_2(S^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}c_3(S^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(c_2(S^{})^22c_4(S^{}))+\mathrm{}\right]`$
$`\times [ndc_2(Q)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}c_3(Q)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(c_2(Q)^22c_4(Q))+\mathrm{}].()`$
Comparing the components of degree two in equation $`()`$, we see that

$$c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})dc_2(Q)+(nd)c_2(S^{})dc_2(Q)+(nd)c_2(S).$$

Since $`c_2(S)c_2(Q)`$, we have $`c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})(2dn)c_2(Q)`$. Consequently

$`\tau _{t1}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(c_1(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})^2+c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{}))modh\stackrel{1}{CH}(G)_{}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}(2dn)c_2(Q)modh\stackrel{1}{CH}(G)_{}.`$
We need the following lemma to complete the proof of Theorem 1.2:

###### Lemma 4.1.

Let $`G`$ denote the Grassmann manifold $`G_d(n)`$ where $`2dn2`$. Then

1. $`CH^1(G)_{}=hCH^0(G)_{}`$.
2. $`c_2(Q)hCH^1(G)_{}`$.
3. If $`d4`$ and $`n=2d`$, then $`c_2(Q)^2hCH^3(G)_{}`$.
4. If $`d=3`$ and $`n=6`$, then $`hCH^i(G)_{}=CH^{i+1}(G)_{}`$ for $`3i8`$.

We first complete the proof of Theorem 1.2 using this lemma. Recall that we may assume $`2dn2`$. Since

$$\tau _{t1}=\frac{1}{12}(2dn)c_2(Q)modh\stackrel{1}{CH}(G)_{},$$

Lemma 4.1 (2) implies that $`\tau _{t1}`$ is nonzero if $`n2d`$. Consequently $`A_d(n)`$ is not a Roberts ring in this case.

We next assume that $`n=2d`$. Since $`c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})(2dn)c_2(Q)`$, we have $`c_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})0`$. Comparing the components of degree four in equation $`()`$, we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}c_4(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{12}}(c_2(Q)^22c_4(Q))+c_2(S^{})c_2(Q)+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{12}}(c_2(S^{})^22c_4(S^{}))`$
$`c_2(S)c_2(Q)+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{12}}(c_2(Q)^22c_4(Q)+c_2(S)^22c_4(S)).`$
Since $`c_2(S)c_2(Q)`$ and $`c_4(S)c_2(Q)^2c_4(Q)`$, we have

$$\frac{1}{6}c_4(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})c_2(Q)^2.$$

Consequently $`c_4(\mathrm{\Omega }_G^{})6c_2(Q)^2`$ and so

$$\tau _{t3}=\frac{1}{120}c_2(Q)^2modh\stackrel{3}{CH}(G)_{}.$$

If $`n=2d`$ and $`d4`$, then $`\tau _{t3}`$ is nonzero by Lemma 4.1 (3). Hence $`A_d(n)`$ is not a Roberts ring in this case.

Suppose that $`n=6`$ and $`d=3`$. Then $`A_3(6)`$ is a Gorenstein ring of dimension $`10`$ and so $`\tau _i=0`$ for odd integers $`i`$. Since $`n=2d`$, we have $`\tau _8=\tau _{t1}=0`$. The equality $`\tau _{9i}=0`$ for $`i3`$ follows from Lemma 4.1 (4). Hence $`A_3(6)`$ is a Roberts ring.

We now record the proof of Lemma 4.1.

###### Proof of Lemma 4.1.

We shall use the notation and results of \[Fu, Chapter 14.5–14.7\] for Schubert cycles. The Chow ring $`CH(G)_{}`$ has a basis over $``$ represented by the set of partitions

$$\lambda =(\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _d)\text{where}nd\lambda _1\mathrm{}\lambda _d0.$$

We denote the cycle corresponding to a partition $`\lambda =(\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _d)`$ by $`\{\lambda \}`$ or $`\{\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _d\}`$. Set $`|\lambda |=\lambda _i`$. Then $`CH^l(G)_{}`$ has a basis consists of the set of cycles $`\{\lambda \}`$ such that $`|\lambda |=l`$. For $`1mnd`$, the classes $`c_m(Q)`$ are called the special Schubert classes and $`\sigma _m=c_m(Q)`$ coincides with the cycle $`\{m,0,\mathrm{},0\}`$. The multiplication by $`\sigma _m`$ is determined by Pieri’s formula:

$$\{\lambda \}\times \sigma _m=\{\mu \}$$

where the sum runs over $`\mu `$ with

$$nd\mu _1\lambda _1\mu _2\lambda _2\mathrm{}\mu _d\lambda _d\text{and}|\mu |=|\lambda |+m.$$

$`(1)`$ The group $`CH^1(G)_{}`$ is a $``$-vector space of dimension one, whose generator, in terms of a Young diagram, is         . Since $`hCH^1(G)_{}`$ corresponds to a very ample divisor, $`h`$ does not vanish. Therefore, $`CH^1(G)_{}=hCH^0(G)_{}`$ is satisfied.

$`(2)`$ The group $`CH^2(G)_{}`$ is a $``$-vector space of dimension two spanned by            and                  . The image $`hCH^1(G)_{}`$ is the $``$-span of

$$\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\times \text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }=\text{        }+\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ },\text{and so}c_2(Q)=\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }h\stackrel{1}{CH}(G)_{}.$$

$`(3)`$ Since $`CH^3(G)_{}`$ is spanned by              ,                     and                          , it follows that $`hCH^3(G)_{}`$ is spanned by $`\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\times \text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }=\text{          }+\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }`$ ,

$$\text{         }\times \text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }=\text{          }+\text{          }+\text{             }\text{and}\text{            }\times \text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }=\text{             }+\text{                }.$$

Then it is easy to see that

$$c_2(Q)^2=\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\times \text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }=\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }+\text{          }+\text{          }$$

is not an element of $`hCH^3(G)_{}`$.

$`(4)`$ If $`d=3`$ and $`n=6`$, then $`hCH^3(G)_{}`$ is spanned by

$$\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\times \text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }=\text{          },\text{         }\times \text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }=\text{          }+\text{          }+\text{             }\text{and}\text{            }\times \text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }=\text{             }$$

which, in this case, generate $`CH^4(G)_{}`$. This shows $`hCH^3(G)_{}=CH^4(G)_{}`$, and the remaining cases may be computed similarly. ∎

###### Remark 4.2.

The ring $`A_3(6)`$ is not a complete intersection. It is a ring of dimension $`10`$, and is the homomorphic image of a regular local ring of dimension $`20`$ (which is the number of $`3\times 3`$ minors of a $`6\times 3`$ matrix) modulo an ideal generated minimally by $`35`$ Plücker relations. The number of minimal generators may be checked using \[HP, Chapter VII, §6\] and eliminating redundant relations, or by a computer algebra package such as Macaulay2.

## 5. Pfaffian ideals

We determine next when the rings $`S/\mathrm{Pf}_m(Y)`$ defined by Pfaffian ideals are Roberts rings.

Let $`Z=(z_{ij})`$ be an $`2m\times 2m`$ anti-symmetric matrix, that is, $`z_{ij}=z_{ji}`$ for $`1i<j2m`$ and $`z_{ii}=0`$ for $`1i2m`$. We call

$$\mathrm{Pf}(Z)=\underset{\sigma }{}sgn(\sigma )z_{\sigma (1)\sigma (2)}z_{\sigma (3)\sigma (4)}\mathrm{}z_{\sigma (2m1)\sigma (2m)}$$

the Pfaffian of $`Z`$, where the sum is taken over permutations of $`\{1,2,\mathrm{},2m\}`$ which satisfy $`\sigma (1)<\sigma (3)<\mathrm{}<\sigma (2m1)`$ and

$$\sigma (1)<\sigma (2),\sigma (3)<\sigma (4),\mathrm{},\sigma (2m1)<\sigma (2m).$$

It is easy to see that $`\mathrm{Pf}(Z)^2=det(Z)`$.

Let $`m`$ and $`n`$ be positive integers such that $`2mn`$, and $`Y=(y_{ij})`$ be the $`n\times n`$ anti-symmetric matrix with variables $`y_{ij}`$ for $`1i<jn`$. For a set of integers such that $`1s_1<\mathrm{}<s_{2m}n`$, we denote by $`\mathrm{Pf}(s_1,\mathrm{},s_{2m})`$ the Pfaffian of the $`2m\times 2m`$ anti-symmetric matrix $`(y_{s_is_j})`$. Let $`K`$ be a field and $`S`$ be the localization of the polynomial ring $`K[y_{ij}1i<jn]`$ at its homogeneous maximal ideal. We denote by $`\mathrm{Pf}_m(Y)`$ the ideal of $`S`$ generated by all the elements $`\mathrm{Pf}(s_1,\mathrm{},s_{2m})`$ for $`1s_1<\mathrm{}<s_{2m}n`$. Set $`B_m(n)=S/\mathrm{Pf}_m(Y)`$. It is well known that $`B_m(n)`$ is a factorial Gorenstein ring and that

$$dimB_m(n)=dimS(n2m+1)(n2m+2)/2.$$

With this notation we have the following theorem:

###### Theorem 5.1.

The following conditions are equivalent:

1. $`B_m(n)`$ is a Roberts ring;
2. $`B_m(n)`$ is a complete intersection;
3. $`n=2m`$ or $`m=1`$.

Proof. The minimal number of generators of the ideal $`\mathrm{Pf}_m(Y)`$ is $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2m}\right)`$, and its height is $`(n2m+1)(n2m+2)/2=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n2m+2}{2}\right)`$. Using these facts, the equivalence of (2) and (3) is easily verified.

In the case $`m=2`$, the ideal $`\mathrm{Pf}_2(Y)`$ is generated by the elements

$$y_{ij}y_{kl}y_{ik}y_{jl}+y_{il}y_{jk},\text{for}1i<j<k<ln.$$

These are precisely the Plücker relations for the Grassmann variety $`G_2(n)`$, and so $`B_2(n)`$ coincides with $`A_2(n)`$. It then follows from Theorem 1.2 that $`B_2(n)`$ is a Roberts ring if and only if $`n=4`$.

Next assume that $`m3`$. If $`n=2m`$, then $`B_m(n)`$ is a complete intersection and, therefore, a Roberts ring. If $`n>2m`$, then a suitable localization of $`B_m(n)`$ gives a Pfaffian ring $`B_{m1}(n2)`$ over a different base field. By induction on $`m`$, we may assume that $`B_{m1}(n2)`$ is not a Roberts ring and it follows from Theorem 2.1 (1) that $`B_m(n)`$ is not a Roberts ring. This completes the proof of the theorem.

###### Remark 5.2.

The ring $`A_d(n)`$ is a Roberts ring if and only if it is a numerically Roberts ring. Consequently $`B_2(n)`$ is a Roberts ring if and only if it is a numerically Roberts ring. However, the authors do not know whether or not the rings $`B_m(n)`$ are numerically Roberts rings in the case $`m3`$.


text:
# U(1) Gauge Theory as Quantum Hydrodynamics

## 1 Introduction

The density phase transformation for bosons is quite well-known to those who work in the fields of superfluidity  and other related areas such as superconductivity and possibly even quantum optics. Jackiw and collaborators have recently introduced some of these ideas independently in the context of relativisitic quarks. Since the subject of bosons is vast, we refer the reader to the review by Ceperley for further references. However a few basic works do deserve mention. First there is the work by Penrose and Onsager on estimating the superfluid fraction in $`He^4`$. Then there is the Hohenberg-Mermin-Wagner theorem that precludes long-range order with a broken continuous symmetry in two dimensions. Finally, there is work by Ceperley using Quantum Monte Carlo.

The main point of this article is to highlight the usefullness of the hydrodynamical approach in tackling gauge theories. We argue that this approach is the natural way in which to study gauge theories. Although by itself none of the results in this article are particularly new, the novel aspect is the manner in which the theory is formulated that renders it susceptible to generalization in future publications to fermions coupled to gauge fields and later on to relativistic gauge theories and finally to nonabelian relativistic gauge theories. Much of this agenda has already been completed by the high energy community recently, specifically, the work of Jackiw and Polychronakos in introducing anticommuting Grassmann variables into a fluid dynamical description will be very relevent to our future work. But our thrust is to compute microscopic correlation functions rather than just develop formalism.

One concrete result in this article is an exact formula for the condensate fraction. Since the condensate fraction depends only on the asymptotic properties of the one-particle Green function, and this is given exactly via bosonization, we may conclude that the derived result for this quantity is therefore, exact. The formula for the condensate fraction may also be derived using other methods, most recently Liu has used the eigenfunctional theory to derive an expression for the same quantity that agrees with the expression derived in this article.

We apply this method to compute the velocity-velocity correlation function and demonstrate the power of this method in accounting for vortices in a gauge invariant manner.

## 2 Density Phase Transformation

Consider the action of nonrelativistic spinless bosons. We use units such that $`\mathrm{}=2m=1`$.

$$S_{free}=_0^{i\beta }𝑑t\text{ }d^dx\text{ }\psi ^{}(𝐱)\left(i_t+^2\right)\psi (𝐱)$$
(1)
In the path integral approach, $`\psi (𝐱)`$ is just a complex number that is defined at each point $`𝐱`$. Every complex number can be decomposed into a magnitude and a phase. Using the ideas explained in our earlier work

$$\psi (𝐱)=e^{i\text{ }\mathrm{\Pi }(𝐱)}\text{ }\sqrt{\rho (𝐱)}$$
(2)
From this we may write down the current,

$$𝐉(𝐱)=\rho (𝐱)\text{ }\mathrm{\Pi }(𝐱)$$
(3)
$$S_{free}=_0^{i\beta }𝑑t\text{ }d^dx\text{ }\left[\rho \text{ }_t\text{ }\mathrm{\Pi }\rho (\mathrm{\Pi })^2\frac{(\rho )^2}{4\rho }\right]$$
(4)
In deriving this action we have already used some boundary conditions. From the text by Kadanoff and Baym we learn that the Green functions of bosons obey the KMS (Kubo-Martin-Schwinger) boundary contitions. These boundary conditions translate in the path integral representation to,

$$\psi (𝐱,ti\beta )=e^{\beta \mu }\text{ }\psi (𝐱,t)$$
(5)
This in turn means that the number conserving product is invariant under this discrete time translation. To see this we examine, $`\psi ^{}(𝐱,ti\beta )\psi (𝐱^{^{}},ti\beta )`$. Observe that $`\psi ^{}(𝐱,ti\beta )=[\psi (𝐱,t+i\beta )]^{}=e^{\beta \mu }\text{ }\psi ^{}(𝐱,t)`$ and $`\psi (𝐱^{^{}},ti\beta )=e^{\beta \mu }\text{ }\psi (𝐱^{^{}},t)`$. Thus, $`\psi ^{}(𝐱,ti\beta )\psi (𝐱^{^{}},ti\beta )=\psi ^{}(𝐱,t)\psi (𝐱^{^{}},t)`$. As pointed out in an earlier work the phase variable may be written as a sum of two terms a position independent term which is the conjugate to the total number and a position dependent term that is related to currents and densitites. Thus, $`\mathrm{\Pi }(𝐱)=X_0+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}(𝐱)`$. We have just argued that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}(𝐱)`$ and $`\rho (𝐱)`$ are invariant under the discrete time translation. Thus in order to preserve the KMS boundary condition we must impose $`X_0(ti\beta )=X_0(t)+i\text{ }\beta \mu `$. Therefore we find that the conjugate to the total number makes its presence felt in a very nontrivial manner. The boundary condition that has been used in deriving the action is $`N(i\beta )=N(0)`$ where $`N`$ is the total number of particles.

## 3 Gauge Transformations

Here we examine what sorts of changes are brought about by the imposition of local gauge invariance. Gauge transformations in the usual language is given by,

$$\psi ^{^{}}(𝐱)=e^{i\text{ }e\text{ }\mathrm{\Lambda }}\text{ }\psi (𝐱)$$
(6)
$$A_0^{^{}}=A_0+_t\mathrm{\Lambda }$$
(7)
$$𝐀^{^{}}=𝐀+\mathrm{\Lambda }$$
(8)
In order to find an action invariant under these transformations, we replace derivatives by covariant derivatives(minimal coupling). Thus we have $`_\mu D_\mu =_\mu ie\text{ }A_\mu `$. In the usual language,

$$S=\psi ^{}\left(i_t+e\text{ }A_0+(i\text{ }e\text{ }𝐀)^2\right)\text{ }\psi $$
(9)
Here and henceforth by $``$ we mean $`_0^{i\beta }𝑑t\text{ }d^dx\text{ }`$ Now we rewrite this as a sum of two parts the free term plus the term that couples to the gauge fields and finally the term involving only gauge fields namely, the curvature term.

$$S=S_{free}+S_{int}+S_{gauge}$$
(10)
$$S_{free}=\text{ }\left[\rho \text{ }_t\text{ }\mathrm{\Pi }\rho (\mathrm{\Pi })^2\frac{(\rho )^2}{4\rho }\right]$$
(11)
$$S_{int}=\text{ }\rho \text{ }e\text{ }A_0e^2\text{ }\text{ }\rho \text{ }𝐀^22e\text{ }\text{ }\rho \text{ }\left(𝐀\mathrm{\Pi }\right)$$
(12)
$$S_{gauge}=\frac{1}{4}\text{ }F^2$$
(13)
This action is gauge invariant provided we have

$$\mathrm{\Pi }^{^{}}=\mathrm{\Pi }e\text{ }\mathrm{\Lambda }\text{ };\text{ }\rho ^{^{}}=\rho $$
(14)
## 4 The Jacobian Determinant

In this section we attempt to rewrite the partition function in terms of the density and phase variables. Consider the partition function in the original Bose language.

$$Z=D[\psi ]\text{ }D[\psi ^{}]\text{ }e^{iS[\psi ,\psi ^{}]}$$
(15)
In the density phase variable language we have,

$$Z=D[\rho ]\text{ }D[\mathrm{\Pi }]\text{ }J(\mathrm{\Pi },\rho )\text{ }\text{ }e^{iS[\mathrm{\Pi },\rho ]}$$
(16)
Here $`J(\mathrm{\Pi },\rho )`$ is the appropriate Jacobian determinant that tells us how the measure transforms. Fortunately, this Jacobian is a constant. To see this we write the definition of $`J`$ as,

$$J(\mathrm{\Pi },\rho )=\left|\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{\delta \psi }{\delta \mathrm{\Pi }}& & \frac{\delta \psi }{\delta \rho }& \\ \frac{\delta \psi ^{}}{\delta \mathrm{\Pi }}& & \frac{\delta \psi ^{}}{\delta \rho }& \end{array}\right|\text{ }=\text{ }i$$
(17)
In our next article, we shall see that the density phase variable ansatz (DPVA) for fermions which includes a phase functional that is nonlocal in position space also leads to a Jacobian that is constant. This can be checked using the Mathematica TM software.

## 5  Propagator With Two-Body Forces

Here we compute the free propagator using path integrals in the density phase variable language. This is done to convince ourselves of the basic soundness of the approach. Also we operate in the limit where the mean density is constant and so that we may ignore the density fluctuations in the long-wavelength limit. This will be made precise soon. The main advantage of this approach is the ease with which we may treat interactions. Just to highlight this fact we also include density-density interactions.

$$S_{free}\text{ }\left[\rho \text{ }_t\mathrm{\Pi }\rho _0(\mathrm{\Pi })^2\frac{(\rho )^2}{4\rho _0}\right]$$
(18)
Using the boundary conditions we may write,

$$\rho (𝐱,t)=\frac{1}{V}\underset{𝐪,n}{}e^{i𝐪.𝐱}\rho _{𝐪n}\text{ }e^{z_nt}$$
(19)
$$\mathrm{\Pi }(𝐱,t)=\mu \text{ }t+\underset{𝐪,n}{}e^{i𝐪.𝐱}X_{𝐪n}\text{ }e^{z_nt}$$
(20)
The action then may be written as follows. We have added a two-body potential since we may do so without additional effort.

$$S_{full}=i\text{ }\beta \mu \text{ }\rho _{\mathrm{𝟎},0}+\underset{𝐪,n}{}(i\beta \text{ }z_n)\rho _{𝐪n}X_{𝐪n}$$

$$+i\beta N^0\underset{𝐪,n}{}𝐪^2\text{ }X_{𝐪,n}X_{𝐪,n}+\frac{i\beta }{4N^0}\underset{𝐪,n}{}𝐪^2\text{ }\rho _{𝐪,n}\rho _{𝐪,n}+i\beta \underset{𝐪,n}{}\frac{v_𝐪}{2V}\rho _{𝐪,n}\rho _{𝐪,n}$$
(21)
Here $`z_n=2\pi n/\beta `$. From this we may write down a formal expression for the propagator. We set $`\rho \rho _0`$ in the argument of the square roots.

$$G(𝐱,t)=i\rho _0\text{ }e^{i\mu t}exp\left[\frac{1}{4}\underset{𝐪,n}{}\frac{(2e^{i𝐪.𝐱}e^{z_nt}e^{i𝐪.𝐱}e^{z_nt})}{\beta N^0𝐪^2+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\beta ^2z_n^2}{\frac{\beta 𝐪^2}{2N^0}+\frac{\beta v_𝐪}{V}}}\right]$$
(22)
Here $`\omega _𝐪^2=𝐪^2(𝐪^2+2\rho _0v_𝐪)`$ is the Bogoliubov dispersion. The Matsubara sums may be performed quite easily and we may derive an expression for the equal-time version of the time-ordered propagator,

$$\gamma _0+S^<(𝐱,0)=\frac{1}{4N^0}\underset{𝐪}{}(\frac{(𝐪^2+2\rho _0v_𝐪)^{\frac{1}{2}}}{|𝐪|}1)(1cos(𝐪.𝐱))$$
(23)
where,

$$G^<(𝐱,0)=e^{\gamma _0+S^<(𝐱,0)}\text{ }G_0^<(𝐱,0)$$
(24)
The main reason why the one-particle propagator is interesting is because while the Gaussian approximation leads to just Bogoliubov’s theory as far as the the computation of density-density correlation functions are concerned, the one particle properties are singular in one dimension, just as in the case of fermions in one dimension.

### 5.1 The Condensate Fraction at Zero Momentum

The analysis in the preceeding sections employs a Gaussian approximation which is valid if the density fluctuations are small compared to the mean density. To see this more clearly we write the condition as follows,

$$\sqrt{<\rho _𝐪\rho _𝐪>}N^0$$
(25)
where $`N^0`$ is the total number of particles. The density-density correlation is given by $`<\rho _𝐪\rho _𝐪>=N^0\text{ }S(𝐪)`$. Using the same Gaussian approximation we may deduce that

$$S(𝐪)=\frac{|𝐪|}{(𝐪^2+2\rho _0v_𝐪)^{\frac{1}{2}}}$$
(26)
Thus this scheme is self-consistent (as opposed to self-contradictory) only if,

$$\frac{|𝐪|}{(𝐪^2+2\rho _0v_𝐪)^{\frac{1}{2}}}N^0$$
(27)
If we assume that $`v_𝐪=\lambda |𝐪|^{m+2}`$ we have, the condition( for $`N^01`$ ),

$$(2\rho _0\lambda )\text{ }|𝐪|^m1$$
(28)
It would appear that so long as $`\lambda >0`$ and $`m2`$, this holds for small $`|𝐪|`$. Thus the delta-function potential ( $`m=2`$ ), the Coulomb potential in 2d ( $`m=3`$ ) and 3d ( $`m=4`$ ) all obey the inequality for small $`|𝐪|`$. For large enough $`|𝐪|`$ the left hand side is zero but $`01`$ is not acceptable, hence the Gaussian approximation breaks down for large $`|𝐪|`$. Thus it would appear that the results for the correlation functions are exact in the asymptotic limit. In real space, this is the $`|𝐱|\mathrm{}`$ limit. Let us examine this limit of the one-particle Green function. To this end let us write a formal expression for the momenum distribution as

$$\overline{n}_𝐤=f_0\text{ }N^0\text{ }\delta _{𝐤,0}+f_𝐤$$
(29)
here $`f_𝐤`$ is a continuous function of $`|𝐤|`$ and is of order unity. $`0f_01`$ is the condensate fraction and $`N^0`$ is the total number of particles. The propagator in real space is then given by,

$$<\psi ^{}(𝐱,0)\psi (\mathrm{𝟎},0)>=f_0\text{ }\rho _0+\frac{1}{V}\underset{𝐤}{}cos(𝐤.𝐱)f_𝐤$$
(30)
In the ultra-asymptotic limit $`|𝐱|\mathrm{}`$, the cosine may be set equal to zero and we have just the first term. Thus it would appear that the Gaussian approximation being exact in this limit, yields the exact condensate fraction but not the exact $`f_𝐤`$. This is analogous to the assertion that in the Fermi case, the analogous method yields the exact quasiparticle-residue but not the full momentum distribution and in case the quasiparticle-residue is zero it yields the exact anomalous exponent. Here too when the condensate fraction is zero, we have to instead compute the anomalous exponent. Thus the exact condensate fraction is given by,

$$f_0=exp\left[\frac{1}{4N^0}\underset{𝐪}{}\left(\frac{(𝐪^2+2\rho _0v_𝐪)^{\frac{1}{2}}}{|𝐪|}1\right)\right]$$
(31)
For the delta-function interaction in 1d, the condensate fraction is zero. This could not have been guessed from Bogoliubov’s theory that predicts (rather assumes) that a condensate always exists. In two dimensions, for the gauge potential $`v_q=const./q^2`$, the condensate fraction is zero. We could now evaluate the total energy of the system (per particle) and compare with the results of Lieb and Liniger  who solve their model in 1d or with the results of Schick which is valid in 2d but we do not expect the comparisons to be favorable since for the total energy to come out right we need the exact $`f_𝐤`$ rather than $`f_0`$ which does not contribute at all. Since the Gaussian approximation does not give us this we shall not bother performing this calculation.

### 5.2 Anomalous Exponents

In case the condensate fraction is zero, we have the bosonic analog of the Luttinger liquid or the Lieb-Liniger liquid. Here we have to instead compute the anomalous exponents which are also given exactly in the Gaussian approximation. Interestingly we may address the question whether the condensate is destroyed in more than one dimension also. In passing we note that the main purpose of this article is to hint at the usefullness of this approach in studying fermions coupled to gauge fields. There we have to polar decompose Grassmann variables \- an exercise which is still in its infancy, although considerbale inroads have been made by the author. For a delta-function interaction in 1d it is well-known that there is no condensation and instead we have to compute the anomalous exponent of the propagator. It is clear from the preceeding sections that we may write,

$$\gamma _0+S^<(x,0)\frac{1}{4\pi \rho _0}_0^{\mathrm{}}dq\text{ }\frac{(2v_0\rho _0)^{\frac{1}{2}}}{|q|}(1cos(q.x))\gamma Ln(|x|)$$
(32)
where $`\gamma =(2v_0\rho _0)^{\frac{1}{2}}/(4\pi \rho _0)`$ is the anomalous exponent. The interesting question is whether we can have the destruction of the condensate in two or three dimensions for realistic potentials ? This would be the bosonic analog of the question ‘Does Fermi liquid theory break down in two or three dimensions ?’ In two dimensions, for the interaction $`v_q=const./q^2`$ (gauge potential) the condensate fraction is zero. It would appear that for realistic Fourier transformable potentials in three dimensions we have Bose condensation but not in less than three dimensions. We have derived an exact formula for the condensate fraction that is valid for functional forms of the interaction that are Fourier transformable and are subject to the constraint mentioned previously namely that the long-wavelength limit is exactly given by the Gaussian approximation.

## 6 Correlation Functions With Gauge Fields

When one is performing the path integral with gauge fields, one must be careful about preserving gauge symmetry. This is the crucial aspect that may be elegantly treated in the present approach. The usual method for treating such constraints in the context of path integrals is the well-known Faddeev-Popov method . However we are able to treat gauge symmetry in all its generality without ever having to fix the gauge at any time. Thus the path integral is to be performed such that the following

$$e\text{ }A_0^{^{}}+_t\mathrm{\Pi }^{^{}}=e\text{ }A_0+_t\mathrm{\Pi }$$
(33)
$$e\text{ }𝐀^{^{}}+\mathrm{\Pi }^{^{}}=e\text{ }𝐀+\mathrm{\Pi }$$
(34)
constraints are obeyed. We may therefore simply solve for the gauge fields straight away in terms of the conjugate variables. Define an arbitrary gauge constant $`C`$. This is constant in the sense that changes in the phase of the field cancel out the changes in the vector potential. However, in the end we will have to integrate over this variable as well. It will be shown that in the case when $`e=0`$ we recover the noninteracting propagator.

$$C_0=e\text{ }A_0+_t\mathrm{\Pi }$$
(35)
$$𝐂=e\text{ }𝐀+\mathrm{\Pi }$$
(36)
In the noninteracting limit ($`e0`$), $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{^{}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ differ at most by a trivial constant and hence the vector $`𝐂`$ is irrotational. This observation will be made use of later. The action now may be recast in terms of the gauge constant and the density and phase variables. The field tensor is then simply given by, $`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu C_\nu _\nu C_\mu `$. Thus the total action simply reads,

$$S=\frac{(\rho )^2}{4\rho }+\rho \text{ }C_0\rho \text{ }𝐂^2\frac{1}{4e^2}F^2$$
(37)
We may see by examining Eq.( 37) that in the limit $`e0`$, the field tensor has to be zero for the partition function to be nonvanishing, thus in this limit we must have $`C_\mu =_\mu \mathrm{\Pi }`$ for some scalar $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ so that $`F_{\mu \nu }0`$. This then gives us the action functional of the free theory as it should.

The next question that is worth answering is the following. How should the current operator be defined when there are gauge fields ? In particular is the current operator gauge invariant ? The density surely is gauge invariant. If we would like to treat currents and densities as part of a canonical set of variables then we better have a definition that is gauge invariant. The definition $`𝐉=\rho \mathrm{\Pi }`$ is not gauge invariant. Indeed, it changes by additive amounts everytime a gauge transformation is performed. In order to remedy this we redefine the current to be $`𝐉=\rho \text{ }𝐂`$. As we have seen, in the noninteracting limit, this reduces to the form already shown, since there $`𝐂=\mathrm{\Pi }`$. In general however, it does not. Now we would like an expression for the field operator also in terms of $`C`$. Using the DPVA in terms of currents and densities we may write,

$$\psi (𝐱)=e^{iX_0+i^𝐱𝑑𝐥\frac{𝐉}{\rho }}\sqrt{\rho (𝐱)}$$
(38)
Using the formula for the current in terms of the gauge constant we may write,

$$\psi (𝐱,t)=e^{iX_0(t)i^𝐱𝑑𝐥𝐂(𝐱^{^{}},t)}\sqrt{\rho (𝐱,t)}$$
(39)
Computing the propagator of the interacting theory then means evaluating the following path integral.

$$G(𝐱,t)=\frac{i}{Z}D[C]D[\rho ]\text{ }e^{i\text{ }S}\text{ }\psi (𝐱,t)\psi ^{}(\mathrm{𝟎},0)$$
(40)
and

$$Z=D[C]D[\rho ]\text{ }e^{i\text{ }S}\text{ }$$
(41)
where $`S`$ is given as in Eq.( 37). The integration over the gauge constant $`C`$ may be justified as follows. In the original path integral we had to integrate over $`\psi `$, $`\psi ^{}`$ and the four $`A^\mu `$ ’s. Thus we had six variables in all, except that the gauge constraint meant that one of the variables, say the phase of the field depended on the gauge fields thus the number of independent variables reduced to five. In the definition Eq.( 41) we have a similar situation - integrating over the four components of the gauge constant plus the density $`\rho `$ makes five variables as it should. The action of the free gauge field is given by,

$$S_{guage}=\frac{1}{2e^2}(_0𝐂C_0)^2+\frac{v_l^2}{2e^2}𝐂\text{ }^2𝐂+\frac{v_l^2}{2e^2}(𝐂)^2$$
(42)
A word regarding units is appropriate. We have set $`\mathrm{}=2m=1`$. The presence of gauge fields implies that there is a further dimensionful parameter namely the speed of light which we denote by $`v_l`$. If we set $`v_l=1`$ then all quantities are dimensionless. This is undesirable. Henece we retain the speed of light as it is. The various quantites in this work now have the following dimensions. $`[\rho _{𝐤n}]=1`$ but $`[\rho (𝐱,t)]=[V]^1`$ ; $`[𝐂(𝐱,t)]=[𝐂_{𝐤n}]=[𝐤]=[]=[v_l]`$ ; $`𝐤^2=[Energy]=[_0]`$ ; $`\beta =[Energy]^1`$ and finally $`[e^2/V]=[Energy]^2`$. Using the decomposition into the various modes we may write,

$$S=\frac{i\beta }{4N^0}\underset{𝐤}{}𝐤^2\text{ }\rho _{𝐤,n}\rho _{𝐤,n}+(i\beta )\underset{𝐤,n}{}\rho _{𝐤,n}C_{𝐤,n}^0+(i\beta N^0)\underset{𝐤,n}{}𝐂_{𝐤,n}𝐂_{𝐤,n}$$

$$+(i\beta )\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤,n}{}z_n^2𝐂_{𝐤,n}𝐂_{𝐤,n}(i\beta )\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤,n}{}(2iz_n\text{ }𝐤)𝐂_{𝐤,n}C_{𝐤,n}^0(i\beta )\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤}{}𝐤^2C_{𝐤,n}^0C_{𝐤,n}^0$$

$$+(i\beta )\text{ }v_l^2\text{ }\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤,n}{}𝐤^2\text{ }𝐂_{𝐤,n}𝐂_{𝐤,n}(i\beta )\text{ }v_l^2\text{ }\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤,n}{}(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤,n})(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤,n})$$
(43)
After integrating out the $`C^0`$ we have,

$$S=\frac{i\beta }{4N^0}\underset{𝐤n}{}\left(𝐤^2+\frac{2\rho _0e^2}{𝐤^2}\right)\rho _{𝐤,n}\rho _{𝐤,n}+(i\beta )\underset{𝐤,n}{}\frac{iz_n}{𝐤^2}\rho _{𝐤n}(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤n})$$

$$+(i\beta )\underset{𝐤n}{}\left(N^0+v_l^2\frac{V}{2e^2}𝐤^2\right)𝐂_{𝐤,n}𝐂_{𝐤,n}(i\beta )v_l^2\text{ }\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤n}{}(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤n})\text{ }(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤,n})$$

$$+(i\beta )\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤n}{}z_n^2\text{ }𝐂_{𝐤n}𝐂_{𝐤,n}(i\beta )\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤n}{}\frac{z_n^2}{𝐤^2}\text{ }(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤n})(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤,n})$$
(44)
Observe that in the limit $`e0`$, we must have $`𝐂_{𝐤,n}=𝐤\text{ }X_{𝐤,n}`$ for the partition function to be nonvanishing. Thus we recover the noninteracting theory in this limit. Now we would like to compute two quantities. One is the dynamical density-density correlation function. Here we would like to see radiation corrections to corresponding spectral function. However, it is not present at the Gaussian level at which we are presently operating. Thus we shall be content at reproducing results equivalent to Bogoliubov theory. This is a novel way of recovering the Bogoliubov spectrum by introducing gauge fields and using the path integral formalism. The other quantity of interest is the circulation of the gauge constant. This quantity is zero in the nonintearcting case since the vector $`𝐂`$ may be expressed as the gradient of a scalar. In fact we may see from the expression of the current that the velocity of the fluid is simply given by $`𝐯=𝐂`$. This is irrotational in the absence of gauge fields. In general however this is not the case. The circulation of the velocity around a closed loop $`P`$ is given by, $`V(P,t)=_P𝑑𝐥𝐂(𝐱,t)`$. Physically, the quantity $`V(P,t)`$ is a measure of the strength of vortices in the system. The average $`<V(P,t)>=0`$ is trivially zero. Thus we have to examine the fluctuation $`<V^2(P,t)>^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. First the density-density correlation function. In order to evaluate this we must first perform the integral : $`D[𝐂]\text{ }e^{iS}`$. Again here we may use the usual procedure of translating the integration variable by a constant amount and we obtain the following effective action.

$$S=\frac{i\beta }{4N^0}\underset{𝐤,n}{}\left(𝐤^2+\frac{z_n^2+2e^2\rho _0}{𝐤^2}\right)\rho _{𝐤,n}\rho _{𝐤,n}$$
(45)
From this we may immediately deduce the static structure factor as

$$S(𝐤)=\frac{𝐤^2}{\omega _𝐤}$$
(46)
where the Bogoliubov dispersion $`\omega _𝐤`$ is given by the positive real solution to,

$$𝐤^2+\frac{(iz)^2+2e^2\rho _0}{𝐤^2}=0$$
(47)
In other words,

$$\omega _𝐤=|𝐤|\sqrt{𝐤^2+2\rho _0v_𝐤}$$
(48)
where $`v_𝐤=e^2/𝐤^2`$. Therefore as is well-known, independent of the dimensionality of space, the interaction in the presence of gauge fields is forced to be of the form $`1/𝐤^2`$. In three space dimensions, this corresponds to Coulomb interaction. This is a necessary consistency check.

Some may want to evaluate the propagator. For this we have to evaluate the correlation function $`<𝐂^i(𝐱,t)𝐂^j(\mathrm{𝟎},0)>`$. There is a more interesting reason to study this, namely to compute the vortex strength. We have found that even though at the Gaussian level the density-density correlation is unremarkable, the velocity-velocity correlation function does exhibit some new physics. To see this we note that integrating out the velocity variable means replacing $`𝐂_{𝐤n}𝐂_{𝐤n}+𝐤\mathrm{\Lambda }_{𝐤n}`$ for an appropriate $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. This makes all the terms involving the speed of light and most other terms drop out and we are led to Eq.( 45). However if we integrate out the density first and retain the velocity as it is then we find that the final action is no longer so simple. In particular, it will involve both longitudinal and transverse terms, the latter being responsible for vortices as we shall see. If we integrate out the $`\rho `$ first we are led to the following effective action. Here we have also introduced a source for velocity.

$$S_0=i\beta N^0\underset{𝐤n}{}\frac{(iz_n/𝐤^2)^2}{\left(𝐤^2+2\rho ^0e^2/𝐤^2\right)}(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤n})(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤,n})+\underset{𝐤n}{}𝐀_{𝐤n}𝐂_{𝐤n}$$

$$+(i\beta )\underset{𝐤n}{}\left(N^0+v_l^2\frac{V}{2e^2}𝐤^2\right)𝐂_{𝐤,n}𝐂_{𝐤,n}(i\beta )v_l^2\text{ }\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤n}{}(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤n})\text{ }(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤,n})$$

$$+(i\beta )\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤n}{}z_n^2\text{ }𝐂_{𝐤n}𝐂_{𝐤,n}(i\beta )\frac{V}{2e^2}\underset{𝐤n}{}\frac{z_n^2}{𝐤^2}\text{ }(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤n})(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤,n})$$
(49)
It can bee seen from Eq.( 49) that in the limit $`v_l\mathrm{}`$, the partition function is nonvanishing only if $`𝐤^2𝐂_{𝐤n}𝐂_{𝐤,n}=(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤n})(𝐤𝐂_{𝐤,n})`$. In other words, only if $`𝐂_{𝐤n}=𝐤\mathrm{\Lambda }_{𝐤n}`$. This is the same as saying that the velocity is the gradient of some scalar $`𝐯=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Thus in this limit there are no vortices. Vortices arise as a result of a finite speed of light, in other words due to radiation corrections. Now we evaluate the partition function $`\stackrel{~}{Z}([𝐀])=Z([𝐀])/Z([\mathrm{𝟎}])`$ where $`Z([𝐀])=D[𝐂]\text{ }e^{iS_0}`$. After some tedious algebra we arrive at,

$$\stackrel{~}{Z}(𝐀)=exp\left[\frac{1}{2}\underset{𝐤n}{}f(𝐤,n)(𝐤𝐀_{𝐤,n})(𝐤𝐀_{𝐤,n})\frac{1}{2}\underset{𝐤n}{}g(𝐤,n)𝐀_{𝐤,n}𝐀_{𝐤,n}\right]$$
(50)
where,

$$f(𝐤,n)=(2\beta N^0)^1\left[\frac{(iz_n/𝐤^2)^2}{𝐤^2+2\rho ^0e^2/𝐤^2}+\frac{1}{2\rho ^0e^2}(v_l^2+\frac{z_n^2}{𝐤^2})\right]$$

$$\times \left(1+\frac{1}{2\rho ^0e^2}(v_l^2𝐤^2+z_n^2)\right)^1\left(1+\frac{z_n^2/𝐤^2}{𝐤^2+2\rho ^0e^2/𝐤^2}\right)^1$$
(51)
$$g(𝐤,n)=(2\beta N^0)^1\left(1+\frac{1}{2\rho ^0e^2}(v_l^2𝐤^2+z_n^2)\right)^1$$
(52)
We may deduce a formula for the time ordered velocity-velocity correlation function,

$$T\text{ }𝐂^i(𝐱^{^{}},t^{^{}})\text{ }𝐂^j(𝐱,t)=\left[_𝐱^{^{}}^i_𝐱^j\text{ }F(𝐱^{^{}}𝐱,t^{^{}}t)+H(𝐱^{^{}}𝐱,t^{^{}}t)\text{ }\delta _{i,j}\right]$$
(53)
$$F(𝐱^{^{}},t^{^{}})=\underset{𝐤,n}{}f(𝐤,n)\text{ }e^{i𝐤.𝐱^{^{}}}e^{z_nt^{^{}}}\text{ };\text{ }H(𝐱^{^{}},t^{^{}})=\underset{𝐤,n}{}g(𝐤,n)\text{ }e^{i𝐤.𝐱^{^{}}}e^{z_nt^{^{}}}$$
(54)
The $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\sigma `$ below are defined in the appendix.

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(tt^{^{}};P,P^{^{}})=i\text{ }_{𝐥^{^{}}P^{^{}}}_{𝐥P}\text{ }𝑑𝐥^{^{}}𝑑𝐥\text{ }H(𝐱^{^{}}𝐱,t^{^{}}t)$$
(55)
Also we may write for the propensity to create vortices(defined in the appendix),

$$\sigma (P,P^{^{}})=\frac{e^2}{4\pi v_l^2}\text{ }_{𝐥^{^{}}P^{^{}}}_{𝐥P}\text{ }𝑑𝐥^{^{}}𝑑𝐥\text{ }\frac{e^{\lambda |𝐱^{^{}}𝐱|}}{|𝐱^{^{}}𝐱|}$$
(56)
where $`\lambda =(2\rho ^0e^2/v_l^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. This quantity looks finite. Hence there is no vortex instability in the Gaussian approximation. Let now compute the vortex strength as defined earlier.

$$V^2(P,t)=_{𝐥^{^{}}P}_{𝐥P}\text{ }𝑑𝐥^{^{}}𝑑𝐥\text{ }H(𝐱^{^{}}𝐱,0)$$
(57)
$$H(𝐱^{^{}}𝐱,0)=\frac{e^2}{2V}\underset{𝐤}{}\frac{e^{i𝐤.(𝐱^{^{}}𝐱)}}{\omega _l(𝐤)}\text{ }coth(\frac{\beta \omega _l(𝐤)}{2})$$
(58)
where $`\omega _l(𝐤)=(2\rho ^0e^2+v_l^2𝐤^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. This dispersion shows that the photons have acquired mass by coupling to matter. An explicit evaluation of this and further analysis is possible and will not be done here since our interest is merely to highlight the usefulness of these ideas. However some intutive justification of the above formulas is in order. First the vortex strength and suceptibility are zero for a noninteracting system. This is hardly surprising since the velocity operator of free bosons is irrotational in our formalism. The author has tried to prove this independently using the second quantization formalism but has been unsuccesful in proving it rigorously. It appears that the only obstruction to this conclusion at least at the formal mathematical level, is the lack of self-adjointness of the canonical conjugate to the total number of bosons  . In the high density limit this is not a problem. Thus as far as the asymptotics are concerned, our approach provides reliable answers. In other words, the expression for the velocity-velocity correlation function is valid in the large seperation $`|𝐱𝐱^{^{}}|\mathrm{}`$ limit. However the main message is that the vortices are due to the finiteness of the speed of light. That is, even in an interacting system, there are no vortices if we include only the longitudinal density-density interactions. Coupling to transverse radiation fields is needed to generate vortices. This may be understood by realizing that in order to create vortices we have to supply angular momentum. Photons being spin-1 particles, possess the angular momentum that the charged bosons use to generate vortices.

## 7 Conclusions

We have written down formulas for the one-particle Green function of a homogeneous Bose system that is exact in the asymptotic limit. From the exact asymptotic form we may extract an exact formula for the condensate fraction and if it is zero an exact formula for the anomalous exponent. We have also computed the vortex strength and shown that radiation corrections are responsible for the vortices. No other quantity is given exactly in the formalism outlined. The total energy per particle, roton minimum and other important physical attributes will have to involve going beyond the Gaussian approximation. Nevertheless, the agenda in the immediate future is to apply these ideas to fermions and then write down a theory of neutral matter with nuclei and electrons treated on an equal footing.

## 8 Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Prof. G. Baskaran and Prof. G. Menon for their input and useful suggestions. Prof. G. Menon has provided many of the references to well-known literature on Bose systems.

## 9  Appendix

In this section, we derive a Kubo-like formula that relates the propensity for vortices emerging ( an analog of d.c. conductivity ) with microscopic velocity-velocity correlation functions. Let us write down the following formula for the vortex strength with a source for vortices in the interaction representation. As defined in the main text, the vorex strength may be written as follows.

$$V(P,t)=_P𝑑𝐥\text{ }\text{ }𝐂(𝐱,t)$$
(59)
$$V(P,t)=\frac{T\text{ }S\text{ }\widehat{V}(P,t)}{T\text{ }S}$$
(60)
$$S=exp\left[i_0^{i\beta }𝑑t^{^{}}\text{ }\underset{P^{^{}}}{}\widehat{V}(P^{^{}},t^{^{}})W(P^{^{}},t^{^{}})\right]$$
(61)
Here $`W(P,t)`$ is a whirlpool source for the vortex $`V(P,t)`$. From linear response theory, we may expect that for weak sources the vortex strength is proportional to the convolution of the source with a linear response coefficient.

$$V(P,t)=\underset{P^{^{}}}{}_0^{i\beta }𝑑t^{^{}}\mathrm{\Sigma }(tt^{^{}};P,P^{^{}})W(P^{^{}},t^{^{}})$$
(62)
From this we see that,

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(tt^{^{}};P,P^{^{}})=\left(\frac{\delta }{\delta W(P^{^{}},t^{^{}})}V(P,t)\right)_{W0}$$
(63)
$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(tt^{^{}};P,P^{^{}})=i\text{ }T\text{ }\widehat{V}(P^{^{}},t^{^{}})\widehat{V}(P,t)$$
(64)
If the whirlpool source is time-independent, we may write,

$$V(P)=\underset{P^{^{}}}{}\sigma (P,P^{^{}})W(P^{^{}})$$
(65)
$$\sigma (P,P^{^{}})=_0^{i\beta }𝑑t^{^{}}\mathrm{\Sigma }(tt^{^{}};P,P^{^{}})$$
(66)
If $`\sigma (P,P^{^{}})=\mathrm{}`$ then it signals instability to vortices, namely arbitrarily weak pertubations can lead to vortices. Thus we have,

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(tt^{^{}};P,P^{^{}})=i\text{ }_P^{^{}}𝑑𝐥_i^{^{}}\text{ }\text{ }_P𝑑𝐥_j\text{ }T\text{ }𝐂^i(𝐱^{^{}},t^{^{}})𝐂^j(𝐱,t)$$
(67)