text:
# Shrinkage vs. anti-shrinkage of the diffraction cone in the exclusive vector mesons production

## 1 Introduction

The exclusive production of light and heavy vector mesons in diffractive DIS

$$\gamma ^{()}pVp$$
(1)
is an ideal testing ground  of the color-dipole approach, , and of the $`k_t`$-factorization approach, . The two approaches are linked by the transverse Fourier-Bessel transform from the color dipole size space to the momentum space: the former is based on the color dipole cross section, while the key ingredient in the latter approach is the unintegrated gluon structure function $`(x_g,\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2)`$ of the proton. Recently, the unintegrated gluon density was extracted from the experimental data on $`F_{2p}`$ and presented in a form of simple, ready-to-use parametrizations for $`x_g<0.01`$ and throughout the entire phenomenologically relevant domain of gluon momenta $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }`$, . These fits now allow one to put many of previous qualitative predictions of the color dipole or $`k_t`$-factorization approaches to quantitative grounds. For example, they have already been successfully used in calculation of (virtual) photoproduction of dijets off proton or nuclei . In the vector meson production, these fits have helped understand the DGLAP factorization scale in the case of $`\rho `$ meson production, , confirming the earlier ideas of . It seems now timely to reanalyze another issue that critically depends on the properties of the gluon content of the proton, namely, the shrinkage of the diffraction cone in the vector meson production.

In simple Regge-type models with an approximately linear Pomeron trajectory, the (momentum transfer) $`t`$-dependence of the intercept

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dt}\left(\frac{W}{W_0}\right)^{4[\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}(t)1]},\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}(t)=\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}(0)+\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}t,$$
(2)
forces growth of the slope $`b`$ of the diffraction cone

$$b(W)=b(W_0)+4\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{W}{W_0}\right),$$
(3)
the phenomenon called the shrinkage of the diffraction cone. In QCD, the Regge limit is described by the BFKL equation . However, in the fixed coupling constant regime, the BFKL equation lacks any intrinsic dimensional scale and leads to the fixed value of the intercept. Inclusion of the running coupling constant splits the fixed cut on the $`j`$ plane into an infinite sequence of moving Regge poles , each of them having its own non-zero $`\alpha ^{}`$. Within the color dipole BFKL approach , the value of $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$ was obtained from the solution of color dipole BFKL equation for the slope ; its value was shown to be nonzero  and to depend both on the energy and the size of the color dipole. At very high energies, when the BFKL asymptotics would fully develop and the saturation effects would not yet come into play, the slope of the Pomeron trajectory would tend to a certain constant value independent of the dipole size. This asymptotic value is governed by the gluon screening radius and in , under certain initial conditions, it was estimated to be $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}(asymp.)=0.072`$ GeV-2. At HERA, however, we still reside in the subasymptotic region, and the values of $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$ can be still $`W`$ and $`Q^2`$ dependent.

If we now return to the process (1), we find that the shrinkage of the cone due to the non-zero $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$ is only a part of the truth. Thanks to the factorization properties, the diffraction slope in the vector meson production can be decomposed into the beam, target and exchange contributions. A detailed analysis of each contribution performed in  showed that the $`\gamma V`$ transition (beam) contribution might possess substantial subasymptotic behavior. This energy behavior was expected to be of the anti-shrinkage type, i.e. the corresponding slope contribution was predicted to decrease with energy growth. This partially compensates the shrinkage of the exchange contribution to the slope, and, therefore, leads to the effective rate of the cone shrinkage observed in a vector meson $`V`$ production $`\alpha _{eff}^{}(V)`$ smaller than $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$.

Quantifying this compensation requires the knowledge of the gluon density in the soft region111To be accurate, one should understand the words “soft gluon density” only as “the dipole-proton interaction in the soft region, parametrized in terms of gluon density”.. At the time of publication , it was known rather poorly. Now, thanks to the fits obtained in , we have a much better understanding of how the gluon density behaves in the soft region. Therefore, it is possible now to reanalyze the anti-shrinkage properties of $`\gamma V`$ transition and check whether this compensation effect is important.

This is done in the present work. On the basis of the $`k_t`$-factorization approach, we calculate the differential cross section of the exclusive vector meson production in diffractive DIS. We observe that the compensation effect is very important numerically. As we show below, the input parameter $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}=0.25`$ GeV-2 leads to the effective rate of the cone shrinkage in $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction production $`\alpha _{eff}^{}0.12`$ GeV-2. This reduction implies that much care should be taken when the vector meson production results are interpreted as a direct probe of the properties of the Pomeron.

The structure of this paper is following. In Section 2 we briefly remind the basic formulae of the $`k_t`$-factorization approach to the calculation of the vector meson production in diffractive DIS. By performing the small-$`t`$ expansion of a generic helicity-conserving amplitude, we qualitatively study different contributions to the diffraction slope and discuss the origin of the anti-shrinkage properties of the $`\gamma V`$ transition. We then proceed to numerical results, which are presented in Section 3. These results are discussed in Section 4, and Section 5 contains conclusions of this work.

## 2 The $`k_t`$-factorization predictions for the diffraction slope: a qualitative analysis

### 2.1 The basic amplitude

The basic formulae for the vector meson production within the $`k_t`$-factorization approach are well known (see details in ). We denote the quark and gluon loop transverse momenta and the momentum transfer by $`\stackrel{}{k}`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }`$, and $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$, respectively (here, vector sign denotes transverse vectors). The fraction of the photon lightcone momentum carried by the quark is denoted by $`z`$, while the fractions of the proton light cone momentum carried by the two gluons are $`x_1`$ and $`x_2`$. With this notation, the imaginary part of the amplitude of reaction (1) can be written in a compact form:

$$Im𝒜=s\frac{c_V\sqrt{4\pi \alpha _{em}}}{4\pi ^2}\frac{d^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }}{\stackrel{}{\kappa }^4}\alpha _S(q^2)(x_1,x_2,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_1,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_2)\frac{dzd^2\stackrel{}{k}}{z(1z)}\psi _V^{}(z,\stackrel{}{k})I(\lambda _V,\lambda _\gamma ).$$
(4)
where $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }_{1,2}=\stackrel{}{\kappa }\pm \frac{1}{2}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. The helicity-dependent integrands $`I(\lambda _V,\lambda _\gamma )`$ have form

$`I^S(L,L)`$ $`=`$ $`4QMz^2(1z)^2\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{(12z)^2}{4z(1z)}}{\displaystyle \frac{2m}{M+2m}}\right]\mathrm{\Phi }_2;`$
$`I^S(T,T)`$ $`=`$ $`(\stackrel{}{e}\stackrel{}{V}^{})[m^2\mathrm{\Phi }_2+(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_1)]+(12z)^2(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{V}^{})(\stackrel{}{e}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_1){\displaystyle \frac{M}{M+2m}}`$
$`(\stackrel{}{e}\stackrel{}{k})(\stackrel{}{V}^{}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_1)+{\displaystyle \frac{2m}{M+2m}}(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{e})(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{V}^{})\mathrm{\Phi }_2;`$
$`I^S(L,T)`$ $`=`$ $`2Mz(1z)(12z)(\stackrel{}{e}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_1)\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{(12z)^2}{4z(1z)}}{\displaystyle \frac{2m}{M+2m}}\right]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{Mm}{M+2m}}(12z)(\stackrel{}{e}\stackrel{}{k})\mathrm{\Phi }_2;`$
$`I^S(T,L)`$ $`=`$ $`2Qz(1z)(12z)(\stackrel{}{V}^{}\stackrel{}{k}){\displaystyle \frac{M}{M+2m}}\mathrm{\Phi }_2,`$ (5)
where

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\stackrel{}{r}+\stackrel{}{\kappa })^2+\epsilon ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\kappa })^2+\epsilon ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\stackrel{}{r}+\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}/2)^2+\epsilon ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}/2)^2+\epsilon ^2}};`$
$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{r}+\stackrel{}{\kappa }}{(\stackrel{}{r}+\stackrel{}{\kappa })^2+\epsilon ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\kappa }}{(\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\kappa })^2+\epsilon ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{r}+\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}/2}{(\stackrel{}{r}+\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}/2)^2+\epsilon ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}/2}{(\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}/2)^2+\epsilon ^2}},`$
with $`\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{k}(12z)\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}/2`$ and $`\epsilon ^2=z(1z)Q^2+m_q^2`$. Finally, the strong coupling constant is taken at $`q^2\text{ max}[\epsilon ^2+\stackrel{}{k}^2,\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2]`$.

In the absence of $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\stackrel{}{\kappa }`$ correlations, and for a very asymmetric gluon pair, the off-forward gluon structure function $`(x_1,x_2,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_1,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_2)`$ that enters (4) can be approximately related to the forward gluon density $`(x_g,\stackrel{}{\kappa })`$ via

$$(x_1,x_2x_1,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_1,\stackrel{}{\kappa }_2)(x_g,\stackrel{}{\kappa })\mathrm{exp}(\frac{1}{2}b_{3𝐈𝐏}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2).$$

Here $`x_g0.41x_1`$; the coefficient $`0.41`$ is just a convenient representation of the off-forward to forward gluon structure function relation found in . Numerical parametrizations of the forward unintegrated gluon density $`(x_g,\stackrel{}{\kappa })`$ for any practical values of $`x_g`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2`$ can be found in . The slope $`b_{3𝐈𝐏}`$ contains contributions from the proton impact factor as well as from the Pomeron exchange; experimentally, it can be accessed in the high-mass elastic diffraction.

The vector meson wave function $`\psi _V(z,\stackrel{}{k})`$ describes the projection of the $`q\overline{q}`$ pair onto the physical vector meson. It is normalized so that the forward value of the vector meson formfactor is unity, and the free parameters are chosen to reproduce the experimentally observed value of the vector meson electronic decay width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(Ve^+e^{})`$. In what concerns the shape of the radial wave function, we followed a pragmatic strategy. We took a simple Ansatz for the wave function, namely, the oscillator type wave function and performed all calculations with it. In order to control the level of uncertainty, introduced by the particular choice of the wave function, we redid the calculations with another wave function Ansatz, namely, the Coulomb wave function, and compared the results. Since these two wave functions represent the two extremes (very compact and very broad wave functions that still lead to the same value of the electronic decay width), the difference observed should give a reliable estimate of the uncertainty. This difference is typically given by factor of 1.5 for absolute values of the cross sections, while in the observables that involve ratios of the cross sections (such as slopes, intercepts, etc.) this uncertainty is reduced. Details can be found in .

Note also that when deriving (5), we treated the vector mesons as $`1S`$ wave states and used the pure $`S`$-wave spinorial structure $`𝒮^\mu `$ instead of $`\gamma ^\mu `$, .

### 2.2 The contributions to the diffraction slope

The main feature of the $`|t|\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2`$-dependence of the cross sections is a pronounced forward diffraction cone, which can be, at very small $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2`$, parametrized by a single slope parameter $`b`$ (see Section 3.1 for a detailed discussion on the definition of the slope). Let us understand the various contributions to the slope by studying the small-$`t`$ expansion of a typical amplitude. Due to factorization properties, one can approximately decompose the slope to the target, exchange and the projectile contribution, :

$$b=b_{pp}+b_{𝐈𝐏}+b_{\gamma ^{}V}.$$
(6)
In principle, the presence of the helicity-flip amplitudes represents yet another source of the $`t`$-dependence. Since the single helicity-flip amplitudes are proportional to $`\sqrt{|t|}`$, one can introduce correction to the slope as

$$d\sigma /dt_{nonflip}+d\sigma /dt_{flip}=A(t)+B|t|A(t)e^{b_{flip}|t|}.$$

However, since the helicity-flip amplitudes are small, this correction never exceeds 2% of the value of the slope.

The first term in (6) is an intrinsically soft quantity and is related to the wave function of the proton. It is not calculable within pQCD, but its magnitude can be estimated from the proton charge radius. In our calculations, we introduced the following elastic formfactor to the amplitudes

$$F(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2)=\frac{1}{\left(1+\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\right)^2};\text{with}\mathrm{\Lambda }=1\text{ GeV},$$
(7)
which leads to the proton impact factor contribution to the slope

$$b_{pp}=4\text{ GeV}^2.$$
(8)
The second contribution in (6) arises from the $`t`$-dependence of the Pomeron intercept. In our calculations, it was parametrized as

$$b_{𝐈𝐏}=\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{x_0}{x_g}\right);\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}=0.25\text{ GeV}^2,x_0=3.410^4.$$
(9)
This dependence was ascribed both to hard and soft components of the unintegrated gluon structure function, see ; more sophisticated parametrizations can be put forth as well. This parametrization was obtained by the requirement that we describe well the recent ZEUS data on the shrinkage of $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction . We underline that, due to the compensation effect to be explained in a minute, this $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}=0.25\text{ GeV}^2`$ reduced to $`\alpha _{eff}^{}0.12÷0.13`$ GeV-2 in the differential cross section, in agreement with the experimental data.

Finally, the third term in (6) originates from the photon to vector meson transition amplitude. This contribution possesses both $`Q^2`$ and energy dependence, which can be understood as follows.

We start with the amplitude $`LL`$ and consider function $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ at large enough values of $`\epsilon ^2`$ so that $`\stackrel{}{k}^2`$ can be safely neglected. Expand it at small $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2`$ and average over all possible directions of $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. The result reads

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_2\frac{2\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2}{\epsilon ^2(\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2+\epsilon ^2)}\frac{\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2}{(\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2+\epsilon ^2)^3}\left[\frac{1}{2}(\epsilon ^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2)+4[z^2+(1z)^2]\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2\left(1+\frac{3\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2}{4\epsilon ^2}+\frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }^4}{4\epsilon ^4}\right)\right].$$
(10)
To the leading log $`Q^2`$, $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2\epsilon ^2`$, and one has

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_2\frac{2\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2}{\epsilon ^4}2(12z)^2\frac{\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2}{\epsilon ^6}\frac{\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2}{2\epsilon ^4}.$$

After performing the relevant integration, one obtains that the amplitude $`LL`$ is proportional to

$$\frac{2}{\overline{Q}_L^4}G(x_g,\overline{Q}_L^2)\frac{2}{\overline{Q}_L^4}G(x_g,\overline{Q}_L^2)\eta _L\frac{\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2}{\overline{Q}_L^2}\frac{\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2}{2\overline{Q}_L^4}\frac{(x_g,\mu ^2)}{\mu ^2}.$$

Here $`G(x_g,\overline{Q}_L^2)`$ is the conventional gluon density, $`\eta _L=(12z)^2_L`$ and $`\mu ^2`$ is an appropriately defined soft scale. The relevant hard scale $`\overline{Q}_L^2`$, which is linked to the scanning radius of the color dipole approach $`r_s^21/\overline{Q}_L^2`$, was investigated in detail in . Thus, one obtains the following contributions to the slope

$$b_{\gamma V}=\frac{2\eta }{\overline{Q}_L^2}+\frac{1}{\mu ^2}\frac{(x_g,\mu ^2)}{G(x_g,\overline{Q}_L^2)}.$$
(11)
The first term in (11) is a perturbative contribution. At $`Q^2=0`$, it should be of the order of several GeV-2, but it quickly falls off with the $`Q^2`$ growth. The second contribution is a predominantly soft quantity, its dependence on $`Q^2`$ is weak.

The $`TT`$ amplitude can be analyzed in a similar way, and the qualitative results of this analysis remain the same as for the longitudinal case. This is why we use the above qualitative results even when discussing the properties of the transverse amplitudes.

### 2.3 The compensation effect: sources of the cone anti-shrikage

The total slope of the diffraction cone is given by the sum of all three contributions, (6). Since the target contribution to the slope is taken constant, the energy behavior of the slope originates only from $`b_{𝐈𝐏}`$ and $`b_{\gamma V}`$.

The exchange contribution to the diffraction slope, $`b_{𝐈𝐏}`$, logarithmically grows with energy and leads to the well-known shrinkage of the diffraction cone. In a simple Regge-type models, the properties of the Pomeron coupling to hadrons are assumed to be energy independent, and this contribution is the only source of the energy dependence of the diffraction cone. In a more elaborate models, such as the $`k_t`$-factorization approach, the beam contribution to the diffraction slope, $`b_{\gamma V}`$, also possesses the energy dependence.

On the basis of the above qualitative analysis, one can identify two dinstinct sources of this energy behavior. First, even within the leading $`\mathrm{log}Q^2`$, the second term in (11) depends on energy. Indeed, both $`(x_g,\mu ^2)`$ and $`G(x_g,\overline{Q}_L^2)`$ rise with energy, but the exponents of their rise are different, see . For $`\overline{Q}_L^2>1`$ GeV2, the integrated glue taken at $`\overline{Q}_L^2`$ rises with energy faster than the differential glue at the soft scale $`\mu ^2`$, and this contribution to the slope will decrease with energy rise. This source of the energy behavior of $`b_{\gamma V}`$ was also discussed in .

The second source of the $`b_{\gamma V}`$ energy behavior appears, if we consider (10) beyond the leading log $`Q^2`$. In this case denominators will contain $`\overline{Q}_L^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2`$ instead of just $`\overline{Q}_L^2`$. Due to specific properties of the unintegrated gluon density, the typical values of $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2`$ grow with energy even at fixed $`\overline{Q}_L^2`$. This is clear from Fig. 1, taken from , where we showed, in a single plot, how the unintegrated gluon density $`(x_g,\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2)`$ changes with energy (or $`1/x_g`$) growth. One sees that the relative weight of the large $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2`$ region increases as we move from $`x_g=10^2`$ to $`x_g=10^4`$. This proves that $`\overline{Q}_L^2+\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2`$ increases — and the contribution (11) to the slope again decreases — with the energy rise. This effect mostly relies on specific, yet unavoidable, properties of the gluon density.

Both sources of the energy behavior of the beam contribution to the slope are of the anti-shrinkage type. They lead to the partial compensation of the diffraction cone shrinkage, and eventually result in $`\alpha _{eff}^{}<\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$.

It is interesting to note that one can, in principle, disentangle these two sources of the compensation effect. What one needs is the study of the $`k_t`$-factorization prediction for the ultrahigh energy behavior of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$. Note that the second contribution to the compensation effect works at full strength only at $`x_g>10^4`$. At smaller $`x_g`$, i.e. at higher energies, the $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }`$-shape of the unintegrated gluon density practically does not change, and the growth of average values of $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2`$ with energy stops. Thus, in this region, the compensation effect should be only due to the first mechanism.

## 3 Numerical results

### 3.1 Definitions of the slope

Before comparing the results of the $`k_t`$-factorization predictions of the diffraction slope with the experimental data, we would like to discuss the definition of the slope itself. The literal definition of the local slope of the diffraction cone as a logarithmic defivative of the differential cross section is

$$b(t)=\frac{d}{d|t|}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{d\sigma }{d|t|}\right).$$
(12)
Since the differential cross section flattens as $`|t|`$ increases, the value of the local slope will decrease with $`|t|`$ growth. In Fig. 2, we show the $`k_t`$-factorization calculation of the local slope for the $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction within the region $`|t|1`$ GeV2.

The values of the diffraction slope obtained in the experiment are often the results of exponential law fits to the measured differential cross section performed within a certain $`t`$ interval. This procedure approximately corresponds to a finite-difference slope defined as

$$b(t_1,t_2)=\frac{1}{|t_2||t_1|}\left(\mathrm{log}\frac{d\sigma }{d|t|}|_{t_1}\mathrm{log}\frac{d\sigma }{d|t|}|_{t_2}\right),$$
(13)
where $`t_1`$ and $`t_2`$ define the region of the experimental fit. When comparing our predictions with such data, we will use precisely this definition of the slope.

In literature, other definitions of the slope can be encountered, such as $`\frac{1}{\sigma }\frac{d\sigma }{dt}|_{t=0}`$ or $`1/|t|`$. If the differential cross section were a pure exponential law, all these definitions would lead to the same values. However, in a realistic situation, the offset among them can reach $`1÷2`$ GeV-2. This should be kept in mind when comparing different results of the slope.

### 3.2 The energy dependence of the slope parameter

We start our analysis with the $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction. The local slope parameter, predicted from the $`k_t`$-factorization approach, has already been shown in Fig. 2 within the region $`|t|1`$ GeV2 for two values of the $`W_{\gamma p}`$. One observes a steady growth of the slope as the energy increases, which leads to the shrinkage of the diffraction cone. Motivated by the Regge-model considerations, this growth is usually described by the following law:

$$b(W)=b(W_0)+4\alpha _{eff}^{}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{W}{W_0}\right).$$
(14)
The quantity $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$, which we will call the rate of the diffraction cone shrinkage, is often assumed to be equal to the slope of the Pomeron trajectory $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$. However, as we argued in the previous section, there are grounds to expect that these two will differ from each other.

The rate of the shrinkage $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ can be analyzed quantitatively on a plot of $`b`$ as a function of energy $`W`$. As can be seen from Fig. 2, the rate of the cone shrinkage is roughly independent of the value of $`|t|`$, therefore one can expect that different definition of the slope will still produce similar $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$. In Fig. 3 we plotted the $`k_t`$-factorization calculations of the energy dependence of the diffraction slope $`b(W)`$ in the $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction. In order to have control on the level of uncertainty introduced by the wave function Ansatz, we calculated $`b(W)`$ for both the oscillator and the Coulomb wave functions.

The same Figure contains also the recent experimental data from ZEUS . Keeping in mind the discussion of the previous subsection, we attempted in our calculations to match the experimental procedure of the diffraction slope evaluation. The $`k_t`$-factorization values of the slopes were calculated according to (13) with $`|t_1|=0.1`$ GeV2 and $`|t_2|=0.7`$ GeV2. As we mentioned above, it is precisely these $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction experimental data that we use to fix the two free parameters of the diffraction slope (9). Therefore the agreement between the curves and the data points is nothing else but just the double-check of the consistency of our calculations.

As can be seen from this Figure, the $`k_t`$-factorization calculations do not predict $`b(W)`$ to be strictly linear function of $`\mathrm{log}(W)`$, as at the low energy end of the plot the curves flatten out. This is a consequence of the fact that the compensation effect discussed above can be well energy dependent (see also next subsection). However, at $`W>70`$ GeV, the approximate linearity is indeed observed. Note also that $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction at low energies, $`W<25`$ GeV, corresponds to $`x_g>0.01`$. This is the very edge of the $`x_g`$ region the gluon density fits were devised for. We prefer to eliminate potential problems with applicability of the gluon density parametrizations and focus on region $`W50`$ GeV. If we now evaluate the shrinkage of the cone between $`W=50`$ GeV and $`W=250`$ GeV, we find the $`k_t`$-factorization values

$$\alpha _{eff}^{}\{\begin{array}{cc}0.127\text{ GeV}^2\hfill & \text{for the oscillator wave function},\hfill \\ 0.121\text{ GeV}^2\hfill & \text{for the Coulomb wave function},\hfill \end{array}$$
(15)
which are, of course, in agreement with the experimentally measured value

$$\alpha _{eff}^{}(\text{exp.})=0.115\pm 0.018(stat.){}_{0.015}{}^{+0.008}(syst.)\text{ GeV}^2.$$
(16)
The key observation here is that the $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ value predicted by the $`k_t`$-factorization is sigfinicantly less than the input parameter $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}=0.25`$ GeV-2.

Another look at how the diffraction cone behaves with the energy growth is given by the energy rise of the differential cross section itself. Introducing the effective intercept for the differential cross section

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dt}|_W=\frac{d\sigma }{dt}|_{W_0}\left(\frac{W}{W_0}\right)^{4[\alpha _{eff}(t)1]},$$
(17)
one can study how this intercept changes with $`t`$. The results of this study, together with ZEUS experimental data , are shown in Fig. 4. Although the experimental data were available down to $`|t|=1.34`$ GeV2, we limited ourselves only to $`|t|<1`$ GeV2 region. Within this region, the $`k_t`$-factorization calculations based on either of the two wave functions are in a qualitative agreement with the data. Besides, one sees that the shape of the vector meson wave function has rather minor effect on the diffraction cone shrinkage, and, in the subsequent plots we will give only results based on the oscillator wave function.

### 3.3 The $`Q^2`$ and $`W`$ behavior of the compensation effect

It is known experimentally, and it follows from our analysis in Section 2 as well, that the values of the diffraction slope $`b`$ are sensitive to the virtuality $`Q^2`$ and to the mass of the vector meson produced $`m_V`$. It is, therefore, interesting to check how the values of $`Q^2`$ and $`m_V`$ will affect the rate of the diffraction cone shrinkage $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$.

In Fig. 5 we show the $`k_t`$-factorization predictions of the $`Q^2`$ behavior of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}(\rho )`$ and $`\alpha _{eff}^{}(J/\psi )`$. We also show the two ZEUS data points available , both of which correspond to the photoproduction limit. What one sees on both plots is a slight decrease of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ from $`0.13`$ GeV-2 down to $`0.10`$ GeV-2, which takes place at typical $`Q^2m_V^2`$. This rather weak sensitivity of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ to the values of $`Q^2+m_V^2`$ is in accordance with , where, too, the value of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ was found to depend mostly on energy but not on the scanning radius, which is related to the virtuality, or to be more precise, to the hard scale $`\overline{Q}^2`$.

As mentioned in the previous section, the ultrahigh energy behavior of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ can help disentangle the two sources of the compensation effect. If $`\gamma p`$ collision energy grows to high enough values, such that $`x_g<10^4`$ (which corresponds, for $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction, to $`W>300`$ GeV), then the second source of the anti-shrinkage behavior discussed in Sect. 2.3 should get suppressed. As a result, what one probes in this region is only the first contribution to the compensation effect. The overall compensation should, therefore, weaken.

Numerical study shows that at $`W100`$ GeV the effective rate of the diffraction cone shrinkage $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ significantly rises, in accordance with expectations. At $`W=1000`$ GeV and $`W=4000`$ GeV, $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ rises up to $`0.19`$ GeV-2 and $`0.22`$ GeV-2, respectively, which should be compared to (15) at HERA energies. This is, first, in agreement with our expectation that the compensation effect should decrease with energy growth. Second, this results can be treated as an evidence that, at HERA energies, both sources of the anti-shrinkage effect are of comparable importance.

We would like to stress that this analysis is just a self-contained investigation of the energy behavior of the compensation effect, which is the property the $`k_t`$-factorization approach. We do not attempt to predict the energy behavior of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$. Such a prediction might be feasible only with a reliable information on the energy behavior of the input parameter $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$. In our calculations, we used constant value of $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}=0.25`$ GeV-2 for all energies, which might be very inaccurate beyond the HERA energy range.

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 Is this the Pomeron trajectory?

The experimental results presented in Fig. 4 were explicitly interpreted in  as a measurement of the Pomeron trajectory. Here, we argue that this interpretation is, at least, not that straightforward.

The most direct argument comes from the value of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$. The numerical calculations show that the rate of the diffraction cone shrinkage $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ predicted by the $`k_t`$-factorization approach is sigfinicantly less than the input parameter $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$, which quantifies the $`t`$-dependence of the intercept of the underlying Pomeron exchange. Therefore, there exists a mechanism of compensation of the cone shrinkage. The qualitative analysis of Section 2 suggests that the energy decreasing contribution (11) of the $`\gamma V`$ transition to the overall diffraction slope is in charge of this compensation effect. In Sect. 2.3 we pointed out two sources of this anti-shrinkage behavior, and the subsequent analysis gave evidences that both of them were equally important.

In order to make sure that there is no other source for anti-shrinkage but the $`\gamma V`$ transition, we made a double-check and switched off the $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$-dependence of integrands $`I^S(\lambda _V,\lambda _\gamma )`$ in (5). This made $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ jump up to $`0.24`$ GeV-2, which is very close to the input value $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}=0.25`$ GeV-2. This proves that it is precisely the $`\gamma V`$ transition vertex that causes such a strong reduction of the rate of the diffraction cone shrinkage in vector meson production.

Thus, we are led to a conclusion that, first, the experimentally measured values of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ should not be interpreted directly as the slope of the Pomeron trajectory. Second, as we checked, $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$$`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$ relation is rather robust within the $`k_t`$-factorization scheme,

$$\alpha _{eff}^{}\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}0.13\text{ GeV}^2,$$

and the experimental data shown in Fig. 4 might be in fact an evidence that the true value of the slope of the Pomeron trajectory, as measured in the $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction, is around $`0.25`$ GeV-2.

It is interesting to note that this value is close to what is usually believed to be the soft222Ironically, several competing theoretical approaches agree on this, see also . $`\alpha ^{}`$, see . One can also quote a similar value measured in the elastic hadronic interaction at high energies , but, in its own turn, the single Pomeron exchange in these reactions receive sizable absorption corrections  and, therefore, these results should not be interpreted straightforwardly as well. In any case, due to the strong compensation effect, we think that it would be premature to conclude that the measured value of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ in $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction is inconsistent with the soft Pomeron.

### 4.2 Comments on other works

We would like to mention that our approach to $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ is different from approaches of  and . In  the differential cross section of vector meson production was fitted to the experimental data with no attempt to disentangle the real physics that leads to this form of the cross section. An explicity non-linear Pomeron trajectory was introduced, which, in constrast to our predictions, leads to a strong $`t`$-dependence of $`\alpha ^{}`$. Although in this model $`\alpha ^{}(t=0)=0.25`$ GeV-2, it becomes twice smaller at $`|t|=12m_\pi ^20.24`$ GeV2, which allows the authors of  to describe reasonably well the ZEUS data on shrinkage in $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction, . It must be pointed out that this agreement is not surprising, since the fits to the cross section were derived precisely from the $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction data. By the construction of their model, the authors of  directly relate the observed shrinkage in vector mesons photoproduction to the Pomeron properties, $`\alpha _{eff}^{}=\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$. At the end, authors state that they “have reached a deeper understanding of the properties of dipole Pomeron”, however, in the light of the present paper’s results, such statement looks rather questionable.

The authors of  worked in the color dipole formalism and, as can be expected from the early work , they should have observed the compensation effect studied in the present paper. When discussing $`\alpha ^{}`$, they indeed mention a similar effect, but they estimate it to be very inessential numerically, contrary to the claim of our work. The origin of this discrepancy lies in the fact that the authors of  overlooked the main source of the energy dependence of the slope of $`\gamma V`$ transition and took only inessential part into account. Namely, in their phenomenological parametrization of the slope, the authors of  included only the first term in (11) (this is the $`b^2`$ term in the notation of ). The authors of  neither took into account the second term in (11), nor went beyond leading log $`Q^2`$ approximation by accounting for $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }^2`$ in this term, and, as a result, missed the sizable anti-shrinkage effect discussed here. Therefore, the conclusion $`\alpha _{eff}^{}\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$ of  was misleading.

## 5 Conclusions

In this work we investigated, at the quantitative level, the energy behavior of the diffraction cone in the exclusive production of vector mesons. The work was conducted in the $`k_t`$-factorization scheme, closely related to the familiar color dipole formalism, and was based on recent fits to the unintegrated gluon density obtained in . The fact that we do not devise models for the gluon content but instead heavily rely on the high-precision experimental data lends certain credence to the whole calculation.

Confirming the results of early work , we observed that the shrinkage of the diffraction cone, that could be expected from the Pomeron properties, is partially compensated by the anti-shrinkage behavior of the $`\gamma V`$ transition vertex. We pointed out two sources of this compensation effects, both of equal importance, and observed that this reduction of the cone shrinkage is very significant numerically. In order to reproduce the experimentally observed value of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}(J/\psi )0.115`$ GeV-2, we had to take $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}=0.25`$ GeV-2 as an input parameter. This value turned out to be intriguingly close to what is usually believed to be $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$ of the soft Pomeron.

This observation casts doubts on too straightforward interpretations of the experimental data on diffraction cone shrinkage as a direct measurement of the slope of the Pomeron trajectory.

When studying the $`Q^2`$-dependence of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ within the $`k_t`$-factorization approach, we observed some decrease of $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ as we shifted from photoproduction limit to DIS. The exact numerical properties of this decrease depend on the particular choice of the definition of the diffraction slope. This should not be forgotten when one compares the results of the theoretical predictions with the data. We also analyzed the energy behavior of the compensation effect and observed that it weakens with energy growth, which agree with expectations based on the qualitative analysis. Unfortunately, at this stage we cannot predict the energy behavior of the $`\alpha _{eff}^{}`$ beyond the HERA energy range, since such a prediction requires understanding of the energy behavior of the input parameter $`\alpha _{𝐈𝐏}^{}`$.

In any case, the mere presence of the dependence of the compensation effect on kinematics proves that the anti-shrinkage effect is not universal. This, in turn, supports the understanding that the whole underlying picture of the vector meson production (the “real” Pomeron) does not correspond to any simple singularity on $`j`$ plane.

I am thankful to Kolya Nikolaev for many valuable comments and to Igor Akushevich for his help at the early stage of the code development. I also wish to thank Prof. J.Speth for hospitality at the Institut für Kernphysik, Forschungszentrum Jülich. The work was supported by INTAS grants 00-00679 and 00-00366, and RFBR grant 02-02-17884, and grant “Universities of Russia” UR 02.01.005.


format: text

text:
# Supporting random wave models: a quantum mechanical approach

## References


text:
# Properly discontinuous isometric actions on the unit sphere of infinite dimensional Hilbert spaces

## 1. Introduction

A Hilbert manifold $`M`$ is a manifold modeled on a Hilbert space $``$ and equipped with an inner product $`,(p),`$ on each tangent space $`T_pM,`$ depending smoothly on $`p`$ and defining on $`T_pM`$ a norm equivalent to the original norm of $`.`$ In what follows we assume that $`M`$ is complete metric space with respect to the usual distance obtained from Riemannian metric $`.`$ In infinite dimensional geometry most of the local results follow from general arguments analogous to those in the finite dimensional case (see  or ). The investigation of global properties, on the contrary, is harder than the finite dimensional case; for example the Hopf-Rinow Theorem is only generically satisfied on a complete Hilbert manifold (see ). An important application, due to Anderson (), is the extension of the Bonnet Theorem about the estimate of the diameter of complete Hilbert manifolds with sectional curvature $`KK_o>0`$. In finite dimensional geometry the Bonnet Theorem implies also that the fundamental group must be finite, (see ), while in  doesn’t appear any information about the fundamental group. As in the finite dimensional case there is a bijective correspondence between complete Hilbert manifolds, modeled on $``$, with positive constant sectional curvature $`1`$ and groups $`G`$ acting freely, isometrically and properly discontinuously on the unit sphere $`𝐒(\times )`$ in $`\times .`$ We recall that a group $`G`$ acts properly discontinuously on a topological space $`X`$ if it satisfies the following conditions:

1. if $`x,yX,`$ $`yGx,`$ then $`x`$ and $`y`$ have neighborhoods $`U`$ and $`V`$ such that $`gUV=\mathrm{}`$ for every $`gG`$;
2. for any $`xX`$ the set $`G_x:=\{gG:gx=x\}`$ is finite;
3. for any $`xX`$ there exists a neighborhood $`U`$, stable by $`G_x`$, such that $`gUU=\mathrm{}`$ for every $`gGG_x;`$

If $`G_x=e`$ for every $`xG`$ we say that $`G`$ acts freely. Note that condition (1) implies that the quotient space $`X/G`$ is Hausdorff. It is well known that if $`G`$ acts properly discontinuously on $`X`$, then $`X/G`$ is a manifold and the projection $`\pi :XX/G`$ is a covering map.

In this article we study which groups act properly discontinuously on the unit sphere of infinite dimensional Hilbert space and we shall prove that the situation is quite different from finite dimensional case. The main result (Theorem 7) is that any group of the form

$$HG_{p_1^{\alpha _1}}\mathrm{}_{p_m^{\alpha _m}},$$

where $`G`$ is a group without elements of finite order, acts isometrically and properly discontinuously on the unit sphere $`𝐒(l_2(G))`$ of $`l_2(G)`$ if and only if $`p_i`$ are different primes. Moreover, we shall prove that a group $`H`$ acts isometrically and properly discontinuously on the unit sphere of some separable Hilbert space then $`H`$ acts, with the same properties, on the unit sphere of any Hilbert space. (Proposition 4). Some basic references for infinite dimensional geometry are  and .

## 2. Properly discontinuous isometric actions on the infinite dimensional unit sphere of a Hilbert space

Let $`f`$ be a mapping from a set $`G`$ into a real (complex) Banach space $`𝔼`$. We recall, briefly, the idea of unordered summation in terms of convergence of nets. The set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of finite subsets of $`G`$ is directed by the inclusion relation $``$, and we can define a net by the equation

$$\eta :\mathrm{\Lambda }𝔼,\eta (F)=\underset{gF}{}f(g).$$

We say that $`f`$ is summable if the net $`\eta `$ converges to some element, and this is possible if and only if there exists an element $`L_o𝔼`$ with the following property: for every $`ϵ>0`$ there exists $`J(ϵ)\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ such that

$$L_o\underset{gJ}{}f(g)<ϵ,\mathrm{whenever}J(ϵ)J\mathrm{\Lambda }.$$

It is well known, see , that

$$l_2(G)=\{x:G:\underset{gG}{}[x(g)]^2<\mathrm{}\},$$

is a Hilbert space with inner product $`x,y=_{gG}x(g)y(g)`$ and a Hilbert basis is given by the functions $`e_h(g)=\delta _{hg},h,gG`$. When $`G`$ is countable then $`l_2(G)`$ is isometrically isomorphic to $`l_2`$ and any Hilbert space is isometrically isomorphic to $`l_2(D)`$, where $`D`$ is a set with the same cardinality of any Hilbert basis. Generally, we have the following properties:

1. $`N=\{gG:x(g)0\}`$ is countable;
2. $`_{gG}[x(g)]^2=sup\{_{gF}[x(g)]^2:F\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$.

The second property proves that for every bijective map $`\varphi :GG`$, if $`xl_2(G)`$ then $`x\varphi l_2(G)`$ and $`x=x\varphi `$.

Now, we assume that $`G`$ is a group and we will denote by $`R_g`$ the right translation, i.e. $`hhg`$, that is a bijective map. It is easy to prove that the following application

$$\mu :G\times l_2(G)l_2(G)\mu (g,x)=gx=xR_g$$

is an isometric effective action of $`G`$ into $`l_2(G),`$ i.e. if $`gx=x`$ for every $`x`$ then $`g=e,`$ and, in particularly, we have obtained an isometric action on the unit sphere $`𝐒(l_2(G))`$ of $`l_2(G)`$. Summing up we have the following result.

###### Proposition 1.

Any group $`G`$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of the unitary group of the Hilbert space $`l_2(G)`$.

Now we shall prove the first step of our main result.

###### Theorem 2.

If $`G`$ has no elements of finite order, then the action $`\mu `$ on the unit sphere $`𝐒(l_2(G))`$ is properly discontinuous. Moreover $`𝐒(l_2(G))/G`$ has a complete Riemannian metric with constant sectional curvature $`1`$.

Proof:  we will prove the above Theorem in three simples steps.
Step 1: the action is free.

If $`gx=x`$ then $`g^nx=x`$ and we have, for every $`hG`$ and $`n`$, $`x(h)=x(hg^n)`$. The elements $`\{hg^n,n\}`$ are different because $`g`$ has not finite order. Then there exists an element $`hG`$ such that $`x(h)0`$ and we have $`_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}[x(hg^n)]^2=_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}[x(h)]^2=\mathrm{}`$, which is absurd by property 2.
Step 2: if the action is not properly discontinuous, there exists a sequence of different elements $`(g_n)G`$ and $`x𝐒(l_2(G))`$ such that $`g_nxy`$, for some $`y`$.

Since $`G`$ acts isometrically, this is an easy consequence of the definition of properly discontinuous action.
Step 3: there are no sequences $`(g_n)G`$ of different elements and $`x𝐒(l_2(G))`$ such that $`g_nx`$ converges to some $`y𝐒(l_2(G))`$.

Assume that there exists a sequence $`g_nG`$ and $`x𝐒(l_2(G))`$ such that $`g_nxy`$, for some $`yS(L_2(G))`$. Hence for every $`\alpha G`$ we have

$$y(\alpha )=y,e_\alpha =lim_n\mathrm{}g_nx,e_\alpha =lim_n\mathrm{}x(\alpha g_n)$$

and by property 2 we conclude that $`y(\alpha )=0`$, for every $`\alpha G`$, which is a contradiction.

Now, it is well known that $`G`$ induces a metric on the manifold $`𝐒(l_2(G))/G`$ such that it is an Hilbert manifold and the projection $`\pi :𝐒(l_2(G))𝐒(l_2(G))/G`$ is a local isometry and a covering map. Obviously the sectional curvature of $`𝐒(l_2(G))/G`$ is constant and equal to $`1,`$ so to conclude the proof we shall prove that $`𝐒(l_2(G))/G`$ is a complete Hilbert manifold. In the finite dimensional geometry we can prove it easily, because being geodesically complete at some point $`p,`$ i.e. the $`\mathrm{exp}_p`$ being defined on $`T_pM,`$ implies completeness as metric space. Unfortunately, this fact doesn’t hold in infinite dimensional geometry: Atkin, see , gave an example of a complete Hilbert manifold $`M`$, such that the exponential map is not surjective in some point $`pM`$. Take $`q\mathrm{exp}_p(T_pM);`$ clearly $`M\{q\}`$ is already geodesically complete in $`p`$ but it is not complete as metric space. In this case we will use a simple criterion to resolve our problem.

We say that a continuous curve $`c:[a,b)M`$ is convergent if there exists a discrete subset $`D[a,b)`$ such that

* $`c:[a,b)DM`$ is differentiable;
* $`lim_{tb}_a^t\dot{c}(t)𝑑t`$ is finite.

A Hilbert manifold is complete if and only if the trace of any convergent curve is relatively compact.

If $`(M,g)`$ is complete then it is easy to prove that any trace of convergent curve is relatively compact. Vice-versa, we assume that any trace of convergent curve is relatively compact. We shall prove that any Cauchy sequence has a convergent subsequence, which proves that $`M`$ is complete as metric space. Let $`(x_n)`$ be any Cauchy sequence. For any $`ϵ=\frac{1}{2^k}`$ there exists $`n(k)`$ such that $`n,mn(k),d(x_n,x_m)\frac{1}{2^{k+1}}.`$ Note that we shall assume $`n(k+1)n(k)+2`$. Let $`(a_n)`$ be a sequence such that

$$\{\begin{array}{c}a_1=0;\hfill \\ a_n>0,n2;\hfill \\ _1^{\mathrm{}}a_n=1.\hfill \end{array}$$

By definition of distance in a Hilbert manifold, for any $`k`$ there exists a differential curve, $`\gamma _k:[_1^ka_n,_1^{k+1}a_n]M`$, between $`x_{n(k)}`$ and $`x_{n(k+1)}`$ such that

$$L[\gamma _k]d(x_{n(k)},x_{n(k+1)})+\frac{1}{2^{k+1}}\frac{1}{2^k}.$$

We define $`\gamma :[0,1)M,`$ $`\gamma (t)=\gamma _k(t)`$ if $`t[_1^ka_n,_1^{k+1}a_n]`$. It is easy to see that $`\gamma `$ is a convergent curve so $`(x_n)`$ has a convergent subsequence.

Now take a convergent curve $`\gamma ;[a,b]M`$ in $`𝐒(l_2(G))/G.`$ We can lift $`\gamma `$ to a curve $`\overline{\gamma }`$ in $`𝐒(l_2(G))`$ that is a convergent curve because $`\pi `$ is a local isometry. On the other hand $`\gamma ([a,b])\pi (\overline{\overline{\gamma }([a,b])}),`$ then the trace of $`\gamma `$ is relative compact. Q.E.D.

Now, the infinite dimensional sphere is contractible, by Bessega Theorem , so we have proved the following result.

###### Corollary 3.

Let $`G`$ be a group without elements of finite order. Then there exists a complete Hilbert manifold with positive constant sectional curvature with fundamental group $`G`$.

The above result is different from the corresponding one in finite dimensions: by Bonnet Theorem the fundamental group of a complete finite dimensional manifold with constant positive curvature is finite. On the contrary, groups as $``$ and $``$ act properly discontinuously and isometrically on the unit sphere of $`l_2`$.

An interesting fact is that, when the model space is separable, then the cardinality of the fundamental group is at most countable. This is a trivial consequence of the lemma of Sierpinski , which says that every connected locally separable metric space is separable, and of the fact that the cardinality of the fiber of the universal covering map, is the cardinality of the fundamental group. In particular our Theorem is sharp, relative to the cardinality of the fundamental group, in a case of Hilbert manifold modeled on $`l_2.`$

Now, we shall study the case when the group $`G`$ has elements of finite order and we shall investigate what are the necessary conditions for a linear map, with finite order, to have no fixed points except for the origin. In the finite dimensional case, the groups acting properly discontinuously, as isometric groups, on the unit sphere are classified  and the first question is: if a group acts on the finite dimensional sphere, does it act on any infinite dimensional Hilbert space? The following proposition gives a positive answer to this question.

###### Proposition 4.

If $`G`$ acts isometrically and properly discontinuously on the unit sphere of $`^n`$ or $`l_2`$ then $`G`$ acts with the same properties on the unit sphere of any infinite dimensional Hilbert space.

Proof:  first of all we shall prove that if $`G𝐎(𝐧)`$, then it acts on the unit sphere of $`l_2`$ with the same properties. We define

$$T_g:l_2l_2,T_g(\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}x_ie_i)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}g(\underset{j=n(i1)}{\overset{ni1}{}}x_{j+1}e_{j+1}),$$

with the following identification:

$$R^n\stackrel{T_i}{}l_2,(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}x_je_{n(i1)+k1}.$$

Clearly $`T_g`$ is an isometry and it is easy to check that this defines an isometric action on $`𝐒(l_2)`$, that is properly discontinuous since $`G`$ is finite. The general case is analogous. We know that any Hilbert space $``$ is isometrically isomorphic to $`l_2(D)`$, where $`D`$ is a set that has the same cardinality of any Hilbert basis of $``$, and

$$D=\underset{iI}{}D_i,D_iD_j=\mathrm{},\mathrm{if}ij,D_i$$

(see  page 678). Let $`fl_2(D)`$. We define

$$f_i(x)=\{\begin{array}{cc}f(x)\hfill & \mathrm{if}xD_i;\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Now, $`fl_2(D)`$ and by property $`2`$ we have that $`f_il_2(D)`$. Another consequence of property $`2`$, that is easy to check, is that for every $`ϵ>0`$ there exist a $`J(ϵ)\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ such that for every finite set $`JDJ(ϵ)`$ we have $`_{dJ}[f(d)]^2ϵ`$. Let $`ϵ>0`$ and let $`J(ϵ)`$ be above. Let $`I_o:=\{iI:D_iJ(ϵ)\mathrm{}\}`$ and we compute, for every finite set $`II_o`$,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}_{iI}f_if^2\hfill & =& sup\{_{gJ}\left[f_i\left(g\right)f\left(g\right)\right]^2,\mathrm{J}\mathrm{finite}\}\hfill \\ & =& sup\{_{gJJ\left(ϵ\right)}\left[f\left(g\right)\right]^2,\mathrm{J}\mathrm{finite}\}\hfill \\ & & ϵ.\hfill \end{array}$$

Hence $`_{iI}f_i`$ converges to $`f`$ and it is easy to check that $`\alpha f+\beta g=_{iI}\alpha f_i+\beta g_i`$ and $`f=_{iI}f_i^{}`$, where $`f_i^{}=0`$ on the complement of $`D_i`$, so $`f_i=f_i^{}`$. Moreover, for every finite set $`JI`$ we have

$$\begin{array}{ccc}_{iJ}f_i^2\hfill & =& _{iJ}sup\left(_{g_iJ_i}\left[f_i\left(g_i\right)\right]^2\right)J_iD_i\mathrm{finite}\hfill \\ & =& sup\left(_{gJ_i}\left[f\left(g\right)\right]^2\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

so $`_{iI}f_i^2=f^2`$. Now, if we define

$$T_g:l_2(D)l_2(D),T_g(\underset{iI}{}f_i)=\underset{iI}{}gf_i,$$

by the identifications $`l_2\stackrel{T_i}{}l_2(D)`$ as

$$f\{\begin{array}{cc}fs_i(x)\hfill & \text{if}xD_i;\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise,}\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`s_i`$ is a bijective map between $`D_i`$ and $``$ , we have an isometric action that is free. If $`G`$ does not act properly discontinuously, there will be a sequence $`g_n`$ of distinct elements and an element $`x=_{iI}x_i0`$ such that

$$g_nx=\underset{iI}{}g_nx_iy=\underset{iI}{}y_i.$$

Hence $`g_nx_iy_i`$, that is a contradiction. Q.E.D.

Let $``$ be a Hilbert space and let $`T:`$ be a linear continuous map with finite order $`m,`$ i. e. $`T^m=Id`$ and $`m`$ is the smallest integer with this property. Henceforth, when we say that a liner map has no fixed points, we will mean that the unique fixed point is the origin. If $`T`$ has no fixed point, then it must satisfy the following equation

$$T^{m1}+T^{m2}+\mathrm{}+T+Id=0.$$

If $`m=2`$ then $`T=Id.`$ Hence, if a group $`H`$ acts without fixed point then it has at most one element $`g`$ of order two and $`g`$ has to belong to the center of $`H`$. In particular, groups as $`_2_2`$, the symmetric group $`S_3=<\varphi ,\psi ;\varphi ^2=\psi ^3=1,\varphi \psi =\psi ^2\varphi >`$ and the diedral group $`D_8=<\sigma ,\tau ;\sigma ^4=\tau ^2,\tau \sigma \tau =\sigma ^3>,`$ cannot act without fixed point.

We shall assume that $``$ is a complex Hilbert space. Otherwise we shall consider the complexification $``$ and $`T^{}`$ and, clearly, $`T`$ has fixed points if and only if $`T^{}`$ does. Since $`T^m=Id,`$ the minimal polynomial is well-defined and is given by $`p_T(z)=(z\xi _1)\mathrm{}(z\xi _n),`$ where $`\xi _i`$ are roots of unity. As in the finite dimensional case, we have the following decomposition

$$=_1\mathrm{}_n$$

where

* $`_i=Ker(T\xi _iId)`$;
* $`p_{T|_i}(z)=(z\xi _i)`$.

Moreover, $`x=x_1+\mathrm{}+x_n`$ is a fixed point of $`T^k`$, $`1km`$ if and only if $`T^k(x_i)=x_i`$. This simple remark proves the following result.

###### Proposition 5.

Let $`T:`$ be a linear continuous map with finite order $`m`$. Then $`T,\mathrm{},T^{m1}`$ have no fixed points if and only if

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_m(T)=0$$

where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m(t)`$ is the $`m`$-th cyclotomic polynomial.

Now, let $`T:`$ be a linear continuous map of order $`n`$ and let $`L:`$ be a linear continuous map of order $`m`$. We suppose that $`LT=TL`$ and there exists a prime $`p`$ such that $`p|m`$ and $`p|n`$. Let $`T_1=T^{\frac{n}{p}}`$, $`L_1=L^{\frac{m}{p}}`$. Clearly the order of the last two linear operators is $`p`$, and $`L_1T_1=T_1L_1`$. Relative to $`T_1`$ we have

$$=_1\mathrm{}_l,$$

and $`H_i`$ are $`L_1`$-invariant. In particular, relative to $`L_1`$ we have

$$_1=V_1\mathrm{}V_r.$$

Now it is easy to prove the following simple, but important, result.

###### Proposition 6.

Let $`G`$ be a group that acts on $``$ without fixed points, except the origin, as linear group. Let $`gG`$ be an element of finite order and let $`mC(g)`$ (centralizer of $`g`$) have finite order. Then, either $`g^s=m^k`$, for some $`k,s`$ or $`MDC(o(m),o(g))=1`$.

The above result proves that any group that has a subgroup of the form

$$_n_m$$

with $`MDC(n,m)1`$, does not act, as linear group, without fixed points.

Now, we shall construct explicitly an action of the group

$$_{p_1^{\alpha _1}}\mathrm{}_{p_m^{\alpha _m}}$$

with $`p_1<\mathrm{}<p_m`$ primes. Let $`\xi _1\mathrm{}\xi _m`$ be primitive $`p_i^{\alpha _i}`$-th roots of unity and $`\theta _i=arg(\xi _i)`$. Generally for any $`\theta `$ we define

$$T_\theta :,T_\theta (x,y)=(\mathrm{cos}\left(\theta \right)x\mathrm{sin}\left(\theta \right)y,\mathrm{sin}\left(\theta \right)x+\mathrm{cos}\left(\theta \right)y).$$

It is easy to check that

1. $`T_\theta `$ is a surjective isometry;
2. $`\theta ,\alpha `$, $`T_\theta T_\alpha =T_\alpha T_\theta =T_{\theta +\alpha }`$;
3. $`T_\theta `$ has fixed points if and only if $`\theta =2k\pi `$, with $`k`$.
4. $`_{i=1}^m\xi _i^{s_i}(x+iy)=\pi _1(_{i=1}^mT_{\theta _i}^{s_i}(x,y))+i(\pi _2(_{i=1}^mT_{\theta _i}^{s_i}(x,y)))`$, where $`\pi _1`$ and $`\pi _2`$ are the natural projections.

We shall prove that the operators $`T_{\theta _i}`$ represent $`_{p_1^{\alpha _1}}\mathrm{}_{p_m^{\alpha _m}}`$ as isometry subgroup of $`𝐎()`$. Suppose there exist $`s_1,\mathrm{},s_m`$ such that

$$T_{\theta _i}^{s_i}=\underset{ji}{}T_{\theta _j}^{s_j}.$$

Then by the property 4 we have

$$\xi _i^{s_i}=\underset{ji}{}\xi _j^{s_j}$$

which implies that $`s_1=\mathrm{}=s_m=0`$, because $`p_i`$ are different primes. If

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}T_{\theta _i}^{s_i}$$

has fixed points then we have, by property 4,

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}\xi _i^{s_i}=1$$

that implies, by the same argument as above, $`s_1=\mathrm{}=s_m=0`$. Now we shall prove the principal result.

###### Theorem 7.

Let $`HG_{p_1^{\alpha _1}}\mathrm{}_{p_m^{\alpha _m}}`$ be a group where $`G`$ is a group without elements of finite order. Then $`H`$ acts isometrically and properly discontinuously on the unit sphere $`𝐒(l_2(G))`$ of $`l_2(G)`$ if and only if $`p_i`$ are different primes. Furthermore, $`𝐒(l_2(G))/H`$ has a complete Riemannian metric with constant sectional curvature 1.

Proof:  the forward implication has already been verified in Proposition 6. For the reverse, we shall prove that $`H`$ acts isometrically on the Hilbert space $`l_2(G)l_2(G)`$ that is isometric to $`l_2(G)`$. Any element $`gG`$ acts on $`l_2(G)l_2(G)`$ as $`gg`$, and any $`g`$ acts as in Theorem 2. It is easy to check that this action has the same properties of the action of $`G`$ into $`l_2(G)`$. The elements of finite order, that we will indicated as $`A`$, acts as above. The proof is divided in three steps.

1. $`GA=e`$.
If $`_{i=1}^nT_{\theta _i}^{s_i}=T_\theta =g_o`$, where $`\theta =\theta _1s_1+\mathrm{}+\theta _ms_m`$, then

$$\begin{array}{ccc}g_o(e_e,e_e)\hfill & =& (e_{g_{o}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}},e_{g_{o}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}})\hfill \\ & =& (e_e(\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta ),e_e(\mathrm{cos}\theta +\mathrm{sin}\theta )).\hfill \end{array}$$

Then $`g_o=e`$ and $`\theta =2\pi k`$;
2. $`gG`$ e $`aA`$, $`ag=ga`$.
We shall prove that $`T_\theta `$ commutes with $`g`$, for every $`gG`$ and every $`\theta `$.
$`g(T_\theta ((_{hG}x_he_h,_{hG}y_he_h))=`$
$`g(_{hG}(x_h\mathrm{cos}\theta y_h\mathrm{sin}\theta )e_h,_{hG}x_h\mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\theta )e_h))=`$
$`(_{hG}x_h\mathrm{cos}\theta y_h\mathrm{sin}\theta )e_{hg^1},_{hG}(x_h\mathrm{sin}\theta +\mathrm{cos}\theta )e_{hg^1}))=`$
$`T_\theta ((_{hG}x_he_{hg^1},_{hG}y_he_{hg^1}))=`$
$`T_\theta (g(_{hG}x_he_h,_{hG}y_he_h))).`$
3. $`ag`$ has no fixed points and the action is properly discontinuous.
If

$$ag(\underset{hG}{}x_he_h,\underset{hG}{}y_he_h)=(\underset{hG}{}x_he_h,\underset{hG}{}y_he_h)$$

then

$$\underset{hG}{}(x_h\mathrm{cos}\theta y_h\mathrm{sin}\theta )e_{hg^1}=\underset{hG}{}x_he_h$$

and

$$\underset{hG}{}(x_h\mathrm{cos}\theta +y_h\mathrm{sin}\theta )e_{hg^1}=\underset{hG}{}y_he_h.$$

Hence, for every $`\alpha G`$ we have

$$x_\alpha \mathrm{cos}\theta +y_\alpha \mathrm{cos}\theta =y_{\alpha g^1};(1)$$

$$x_\alpha \mathrm{cos}\theta y_\alpha \mathrm{cos}\theta =x_{\alpha g^1}.(2)$$

Now, there exists an $`\alpha G`$ such that $`x_\alpha 0`$ or $`y_\alpha 0`$. Then, it easy to check by (1) and (2), that for every $`n`$ we have

$$|x_{\alpha g^n}|^2+|y_{\alpha g^n}|^2=|x_\alpha |^2+|y_\alpha |^2.$$

Hence

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|x_{\alpha g^n}|^2+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|y_{\alpha g^n}|^2=\mathrm{}$$

which is a contradiction, because the above series have to converge. If the action is not properly discontinuous there exists a sequence of distinct elements $`g_na_n`$ and an element $`x0`$, such that $`g_na_nx`$ converge to some element. The group $`A`$ is finite, so we shall consider a subsequence such that $`a_{n(k)}=a_o`$. Then we have obtained a contradiction because $`G`$ acts properly discontinuously on the unit sphere. Now, we conclude our proof as in Theorem 1. Q.E.D.

A trivial application of main Theorem and Proposition 4 is the following result that gives a necessary and sufficient conditions when the group $`G`$ is a finitely generated Abelian group.

###### Corollary 8.

Every finitely generated Abelian group $`G`$ acts isometrically and properly discontinuously on the unit sphere of any infinite dimensional Hilbert space if and only if $`G`$ has a torsion of the form

$$_{p_1^{\alpha _1}}\mathrm{}_{p_m^{\alpha _m}},$$

where $`p_i`$ are distinct primes. In particular, there exists a complete Hilbert manifold, possibly modeled on $`l_2`$, with positive constant sectional curvature, whose fundamental group is $`G`$.

Leonardo Biliotti
Dipartimento di Matematica e delle Applicazioni all’Architettura,
Università degli studi di Firenze,
Piazza Ghiberti 27 - Via dell’Agnolo 2r - 50132 Firenze (Italy)
e-mail:biliotti@ime.unicamp.br


text:
# Observation of diffractive orbits in the spectrum of excited NO in a magnetic field

## Abstract

We investigate the experimental spectrum of excited NO molecules in the diamagnetic regime and develop a quantitative semiclassical framework to account for the results. We show the dynamics can be interpreted in terms of classical orbits provided that in addition to the geometric orbits, diffractive effects are appropriately taken into account. We also show how individual orbits can be extracted from the experimental signal and use this procedure to reveal the first experimental manifestation of inelastic diffractive orbits.

Periodic orbit (PO) theory gutzwiller90  has been a very successful quantitative and qualitative tool in the analysis of systems displaying strong quantum fluctuations. In particular, the complex photoabsorption spectrum of excited hydrogen atoms in a static magnetic field was interpreted within closed orbit theory (COT) in terms of periodic orbits *closed* at the nucleus du delos88 . However standard PO theory was shown to be insufficient for systems containing a scatterer smaller or comparable to one de Broglie wavelength, because the PO’s may hit the scatterer, thereby producing *diffractive* orbits vattay . In certain mesoscopic devices diffractive orbits crucially influence the spectrum heller99 , whereas in non-hydrogenic Rydberg atoms in static fields the atomic core acts as a scatterer producing combination orbits dando etal95 . This was experimentally observed in the photoabsorption spectrum of helium, which departs slightly from the hydrogenic case karremans etal 1998 . In the case of Rydberg molecules, core effects are expected to be more important: the reason is that the diffractive scatterer has an internal structure (the quantum states of the molecular core). Indeed, model calculations recently predicted that Rydberg molecules in external fields would display a novel type of diffractive orbit produced by inelastic scattering of the PO’s on the core matzkin etal2002 .

In this work, we address this problem by investigating the experimental spectrum of excited NO molecules in a magnetic field. We show the apparently complex spectrum can be well understood in terms of closed orbits provided molecular core effects are appropriately taken into account; in particular, we shall see COT calculations correctly reproduce the Fourier transform of the experimental spectrum, in a regime in which quantum calculations have yet to be undertaken. We will also demonstrate how individual orbits may be extracted from the experimental results by using a modified Fourier tranform, and use this technique to show the first experimental manifestation of an *inelastic diffractive* orbit in a physical system.

Most previous studies of atoms in a magnetic field have relied on scaled-energy spectroscopy, in which the field $`B`$ is varied with the Rydberg electron energy $`E`$ so as to keep the scaled energy $`ϵ=E(B/B_0)^{2/3}`$ constant, with $`B_0=2.35\times 10^5`$ T. Then the classical motion is unchanged at each point of the spectrum and each orbit contributes as a peak in the Fourier transformed (FT) spectrum. However, such a scaling law does not hold, albeit approximately, for molecules. We have therefore observed the Rydberg states of NO at a constant magnetic field of 0.93 T, varying the excitation energy of the probe laser. The experiment, carried out in a ”magnetic bottle” time of flight spectrometer, was described elsewhere gauyacq , but in short: a 2-photon highly selective transition with a pump laser brings the molecule from the ground state $`X^2\mathrm{\Pi }_{3/2}`$ (in the vibrational level $`v\mathrm{"}=0`$) into the single rotational Zeeman sublevel $`N=3`$ $`M_S=1/2`$ of the first electronic excited state $`A^2\mathrm{\Sigma }^+,`$ $`v^{}=1`$; $`N`$ is the total angular momentum exclusive of spin and the constant spin number $`M_S`$ will henceforth be disregarded. The sublevels $`M_N=3`$ to $`3`$ (where $`M_N`$ is the projection of $`N`$ on the field axis) were not resolved but their relative population is known. In a second step, the probe laser, linearly polarized parallel to the field axis, excites the molecules to high-lying Rydberg states having also $`v=1`$ (so we can neglect vibrational couplings).

These excited states are further ionized via vibrational autoionization into the ground state of the NO+ core. The resulting spectrum, which lies higher in energy than those previously published in gauyacq  (in which nonperturbative diamagnetic effects could be neglected), is shown in Fig. 1. The FT of the experimental spectrum is shown in Fig 2(a), whereas Fig. 2(b) displays the semiclassical calculations which will be detailed below. Unlike a spectrum taken at constant $`ϵ,`$ we do not expect in the present case to correlate each peak with a single orbit, because the period of an orbit changes with the energy. Before turning to the extraction of individual orbits, we detail the mechanism giving rise to the peaks in the FT spectrum.

Since in the $`A^2\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ state the orbital momentum of the Rydberg electron is a mixture of both $`l=0`$ and $`l=2`$, the probe laser excites to final states having $`l=1,3`$ and $`N=2,3,4`$. Photo-excitation takes place in the molecular frame (in which the Rydberg electron is coupled to the molecular core), but following excitation the electron uncouples from the core and $`N`$ is no longer conserved, although its projection $`M_N`$ is monteiro taylor90 . The molecule is then described as an electron orbiting around the molecular core NO+ in well-defined rotational states $`N^+=1,3`$ or $`5.`$ For each core configuration, the electron’s wavefunction is propagated semiclassically along classical trajectories (see Fig. 3). The energy of the Rydberg electron is obtained from the energy partition

$$E_{N^+}=E_{N^+=1}+B_r\left[N^+(N^++1)2\right]+\frac{m_l}{2}B/B_0,$$
(1)
where $`B_r`$ is the rotational constant of NO+. Disregarding the linear Zeeman shift, we have three main dynamical regimes for the Rydberg electron, each associated with a different rotational core state. Table I gives, for each value of $`N^+`$ the scaled energy ranges corresponding to the experimental spectrum.

At each energy $`E_{N^+},`$ some of the trajectories are turned back by the field and return to the core; those trajectories are the *geometric closed orbits*. Their contribution to the oscillator strength $`f(E)`$ is given by raoult etal2003

$$\underset{N^+}{}𝒬_{N^+}^G\underset{k}{}𝒜_k(E_{N^+})\mathrm{exp}\left[i𝒮_k(E_{N^+})\right].$$
(2)
$`𝒜_k`$ and $`𝒮_k`$ are 3-dimensional quantities respectively linked to the 2-dimensional classical amplitude $`A_k`$ and action $`S_k`$ of the $`k`$th closed orbit GD92  ($`𝒮_k`$ includes the Maslov index $`\mu _k(E_{N^+})`$); those quantities depend on the energy of the Rydberg electron, i.e. on the core state and on the excitation energy. $`𝒬_{N^+}^G`$ is a quantity depending on the dipole transition factor from the $`A^2\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ to the excited states, and on the transformation elements from the coupled to the uncoupled frame; some values are given in Table I.

When the semiclassical wavefunction carried by the geometric closed orbits returns to the core, it diffracts on the scatterer (Fig. 3). This diffraction process, produces newly outgoing trajectories $`q,`$ which eventually return to the core; the resulting diffractive contribution to $`f(E)`$ is given by

$`{\displaystyle \underset{N^+,N^+}{}}𝒬_{N^+,N^+}^D{\displaystyle \underset{k,q}{}}𝒜_k(E_{N^+})𝒜_q(E_{N^+})`$
$`\times \mathrm{exp}i\left[𝒮_k(E_{N^+})+𝒮_q(E_{N^+})\right].`$ (3)
$`𝒬_{N^+,N^+}^D`$ acts as a global diffraction coefficient; unlike diffraction in quantum billiards vattay ; heller99 , $`𝒬_{N^+,N^+}^D`$ does not depend here on the local geometry of the scatterer but solely on the quantum properties of the core (i.e. on the core-induced phase-shifts, known as molecular quantum defects; the value of the 6 independent quantum defects for NO is given in gauyacq ). The matching between the semiclassical waves and the core wavefunction takes place in the stationary phase approximation. The oscillator strength contains both elastic ($`N^+=N^+)`$ and inelastic ($`N^+N^+)`$ diffractive terms. In the one core-scatter approximation, the total contribution to the fluctuations in the oscillator strength is obtained by summing the imaginary parts of Eqs. (2) and (3).

The experimental or semiclassically calculated FT spectra $`\left|(t;\xi )\right|`$ are respectively obtained by Fourier transforming the photoelectron signal or the oscillator strength for which we shall use the same notation $`f(E)`$, hence

$$(t;\xi )=_{E_{\mathrm{min}}}^{E_{\mathrm{max}}}f(E)\mathrm{exp}\left(i\xi (t,E)\right)𝑑E$$
(4)
where $`\xi (t,E)=Et,`$ and we set the energy variable relative to the $`N^+=1`$ ionization threshold as $`E=E_{N^+=1}`$. The semiclassical calculations were undertaken by applying Eqs. (2) and (3). Since at each point $`E_0`$ of the spectrum the orbits and therefore their amplitude and action change, we have determined the classical quantities $`A_k,`$ $`S_k`$, $`\mu _k`$ on an energy grid for the primitive closed orbits and their repetitions, keeping track of bifurcations as the energy increases. We then interpolated those functions so as to obtain classical quantities varying with the energy. This procedure, which is tractable for short orbits provided the scaled energy is not too high, yields a good agreement with the experimental FT spectrum, as seen on Fig. 2(b). The semiclassical calculations allow to single out contributions from the ensemble of geometric or diffractive orbits associated with given core states. Full details will be given elsewhere raoult etal2003 .

Eq. (4) is also at the basis of the extraction of *individual orbits* from the experimental spectrum provided $`\xi (t,E)`$ is appropriately modified so as to counterbalance the varying values of the classical quantites. Indeed in the neighborhood of some energy $`E_0`$ a classical orbit $`k`$ contributes locally as a sinusoidal oscillation of period $`T_k(E_0)`$. But as the energy is varied, the classical motion changes, turning the sinusoidal oscillation into a chirped modulation. It has been shown very recently delos cft2002  that a chirped Fourier Transform (CFT) converts a chirp modulation into a sine oscillation, thus giving a sharp peak in the FT spectrum. A CFT is defined by setting $`\xi (t,E)=t(EE_0)+b(EE_0)^2+c(EE_0)^3+i\mathrm{ln}\alpha (EE_0)`$ in Eq. (4). $`b`$ and $`c`$ are numerical coefficients and $`\alpha `$ is a function, which depend on the orbit to be extracted: to extract an orbit $`k`$ at some energy $`E_0,`$ we Taylor expand the action $`S_k(E)`$. To first order, we have $`_ES(E_0)=T_k(E_0),`$ i.e. the period of the orbit. Therefore by setting $`b=_E^2S_k(E_0)/2`$ and $`c=_E^3S_k(E_0)/6`$ in the CFT exponent $`\xi ,`$ we can expect to effectively linearize the signal around $`E_0`$ so that the CFT yields a peak at $`t=T_k(E_0)`$. The peak can be enhanced by using a function $`\alpha `$ to compensate for the signal amplitude variation; we have used the inverse of our interpolated functions $`A_k(E)`$. As discussed in great details in delos cft2002 , spurious peaks inevitably appear in the CFT spectrum. We proceed in the following manner: using purely classical calculations, we compute on the one hand the CFT of the experimental signal with the relevant parameters $`a,b,`$ and $`\alpha ,`$ and on the other hand we determine the period $`T_k(E_0)`$; the consistency of the procedure is ensured by the appearance of a peak at the computed value $`t=T_k(E_0)`$ when the orbit is succesfully extracted from the signal. An illustration of the extraction procedure is given in Fig. 4. For a fixed energy $`E_0`$ we extract one CO associated with each core state (panels (a)-(c)). Panel (d) shows the extraction of the diffractive CO formed by the combination of the orbits extracted in (b) and (c).

In summary, we have investigated the experimental spectrum of NO in the diamagnetic regime and interpreted the results in terms of geometric and diffractive classical orbits, and we have shown how individual orbits can be extracted from the experimental signal.


text:
# Decay of metastable patterns for the Rosensweig instability: revisiting the dispersion relation

## 1. Introduction

The most well known phenomenon of pattern formation in magnetic fluids is the Rosensweig or normal field instability. This instability can be observed for a horizontal layer of magnetic fluid (MF) with a free surface with air above. Beyond a certain threshold $`B_\mathrm{c}`$ of a vertically applied homogenous magnetic induction, the surface becomes unstable and a stable pattern of peaks develops . That final pattern, resulting from nonlinear interactions, is one possible state towards which the preceding most unstable linear pattern of liquid ridges can develop if a supercritical induction $`B_{\mathrm{sup}}>B_\mathrm{c}`$ is abided . The other possible state results from the decay of the liquid ridges towards the flat surface if the induction is switched from a supercritical to a subcritical value $`B_{\mathrm{sub}}`$ . With these two possible final states, the most unstable linear pattern can be considered as a metastable pattern formed by magnetic liquid ridges.

That ridges were studied in  by means of an experimental set-up in which the magnetic induction was jumplike increased from a start value of $`B_0<B_\mathrm{c}`$ to $`B_{\mathrm{sup}}`$  and after a short time delay jumplike decreased from $`B_{\mathrm{sup}}`$ to $`B_{\mathrm{sub}}`$. The jumplike change of the magnetic induction allows to apply the linear stability theory, where the magnetic induction is assumed to be instantly present. Consequently, the quantitative agreement between measured and calculated data is very good for the wave number of the linearly most unstable ridges  and for the propagation velocity as well as the oscillation frequency during the decay of the ridges . The calculation of the latter two quantities disclosed new features of the dispersion relation which will be revisited and analysed in the next section.

## 2. Analysis of the dispersion relation

A horizontally unbounded layer of an incompressible, nonconducting, and viscous MF of infinite thickness and constant density $`\rho `$ is considered. The MF has a free surface with air above, where the basic state is that of a nondeformed surface. The dispersion relation for small disturbances from the basic state is given by

$$\left(1\frac{i\omega }{2\nu q^2}\right)^2+\frac{1}{4\rho \nu ^2q^4}\left[\rho gq+\sigma q^3\frac{(\mu _r1)^2B^2q^2}{(\mu _r+1)\mu _0\mu _r}\right]=\sqrt{1\frac{i\omega }{\nu q^2}},$$
(1)
where $`g`$ is the gravity acceleration, $`\nu `$ the kinematic viscosity of the MF, $`\sigma `$ its surface tension with air, $`\mu _r`$ its relative permeability, $`B`$ the absolute value of the external magnetic induction, and $`\mu _0`$ the permeability of vacuum. For the dispersion relation (1), the small disturbances were decomposed into normal modes, i.e. they are proportional to $`\mathrm{exp}[i(\omega t𝐪𝐫)]`$. $`𝐫=(x,y)`$ is the planar space vector, $`𝐪=(q_x,q_y)`$ the wave vector, and $`q=|𝐪|`$ denotes the wave number. With $`\omega =\omega _1+i\omega _2`$ the real part of $`i\omega `$, $`\omega _2`$, is called the growth rate and defines whether the disturbances will grow ($`\omega _2>0`$) or decay ($`\omega _2<0`$). The absolute value of the imaginary part of $`i\omega `$, $`|\omega _1|`$, gives the angular frequency of the oscillation if $`\omega _1`$ is different from zero. The critical induction for the onset of the Rosensweig instability at $`\omega =0`$ is $`B_c^2=2\mu _0\mu _r(\mu _r+1)\sqrt{\rho \sigma g}(\mu _r1)^2`$ .

Figure 1 shows for the reasons of clarity one solution of the dispersion relation for a supercritical induction $`B_{\mathrm{sup}}=1.05B_c`$ (thick solid line) and for a subcritical induction $`B_{\mathrm{sub}}=0.96B_c`$ (thick dashed line). In the supercritical case one can conclude from $`\mathrm{Re}[\omega ^2(q_\mathrm{m},B_{\mathrm{sup}})]=\omega _{1,\mathrm{m}}^2\omega _{2,\mathrm{m}}^2<0`$ and $`\mathrm{Im}[\omega ^2(q_\mathrm{m},B_{\mathrm{sup}})]=2\omega _{1,\mathrm{m}}\omega _{2,\mathrm{m}}=0`$ that a most unstable linear patterns evolves with the maximal growth rate $`\omega _\mathrm{m}=i\omega _{2,\mathrm{m}}`$ ($`\omega _{2,\mathrm{m}}>0`$) and its corresponding wave number $`q_\mathrm{m}`$ \[thin solid lines in Fig. 1(a)\]. In the subcritical case the relations $`\mathrm{Re}[\omega ^2(q_\mathrm{m},B_{\mathrm{sub}})]>0`$ and $`\mathrm{Im}[\omega ^2(q_\mathrm{m},B_{\mathrm{sub}})]<0`$ \[thin dashed lines in Fig. 1(a)(b)\] do not allow a simple conclusion on the values of $`\omega _1`$ and $`\omega _2`$. Therefore the classical presentation of $`\omega ^2`$ versus $`q`$ chosen for the analysis of inviscid MFs  is only of limited use for the analysis of viscous MFs.

A more meaningful display is the plot of $`\mathrm{Re}(i\omega )`$ and $`\mathrm{Im}(i\omega )`$ versus the subcritical induction for different viscosities (see Fig. 2), where $`q_\mathrm{m}(\nu )`$ of the most unstable linear pattern was determined for $`B_{\mathrm{sup}}=18`$ mT. If the fluid is inviscid (dashed lines in Fig. 2), the pattern oscillates below a certain threshold for the subcritical induction, $`B_{\mathrm{c},0}[q_\mathrm{m}(\nu =0),\omega _2=0]`$ \[see Eq. (5)\]. Above that threshold the pattern can either decay according to the solution $`\mathrm{Re}(i\omega )<0`$ or can develop towards the most unstable linear pattern belonging to $`B_{\mathrm{sub}}>B_c`$ since $`\mathrm{Re}(i\omega )>0`$ is also a solution.

For a viscous fluid (solid lines in Fig. 2) the behaviour is more complex. A first critical induction, $`B_{\mathrm{c},1}`$, occurs, where the set of solutions for the dispersion relation (1) changes from two complex solutions to two negative real solutions. \[The same transition occurs for the damping of gravity-capillary waves as parameters as the aspect ratio and the so called inverse Reynolds number are varied (see Figs. 4–6 and 8,9 in ).\] Both real solutions exist until at a second critical induction, $`B_{\mathrm{c},2}`$, one of them abruptly ends. At a third critical induction, $`B_{\mathrm{c},0}`$, one of the two negative real solutions changes its sign and becomes positive.

To understand this complex behaviour, the dispersion relation (1) in dimensionless units (indicated by a bar) is analysed in the rearranged form

$$\left(1+\frac{i\overline{\omega }}{2\overline{\nu }\overline{q}^2}\right)^2\sqrt{1+\frac{i\overline{\omega }}{\overline{\nu }\overline{q}^2}}=\frac{\overline{q}\overline{q}^3+2\overline{B}^2\overline{q}^2}{4\overline{\nu }^2\overline{q}^4}.$$
(2)
All lengths were scaled with $`[\sigma /(\rho g)]^{1/2}`$, the time with $`\sigma ^{1/4}/(g^{3/4}\rho ^{1/4})`$, the viscosity with $`\sigma ^{3/4}/(g^{1/4}\rho ^{3/4})`$, and the induction with $`B_c`$. Equation (2) reveals that whatever value $`\overline{\omega }`$ has, the left hand side of Eq. (2) has to be real because the right hand side of Eq. (2) is always real since $`(\overline{q},\overline{\nu },\overline{B})`$. That condition together with the mixing of real and complex quantities in Eq. (2) is essential to understand the above described appearance of different sets of solutions. As long as $`B_{\mathrm{sub}}B_{\mathrm{c},1}`$ all solutions of the dispersion relation with $`q=q_m`$ are real, i.e. $`i\omega =\omega _2`$ (see Fig. 2). Using this result it follows from Eq. (2) that there is a value $`\overline{\omega }_2=\overline{\nu }\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}^2`$ beyond which the radicand becomes negative. Since a complex value for the left hand side of Eq. (2) is not allowed, the solution does not exist beyond $`\overline{\omega }_2=\overline{\nu }\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}^2`$. This corresponds to the point in Fig. 2, where one of the solutions suddenly terminates at $`B_{c,2}`$. Therefore the second critical induction yields to

$$\overline{B}_{c,2}[\overline{\nu },\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}(\overline{\nu }),\overline{\omega }_2=\overline{\nu }\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}^2]=\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}}+\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}+\overline{\nu }^2\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}^2\right)}.$$
(3)
The first critical induction is the minimal induction for which real solutions exist, thus

$$\overline{B}_{c,1}[\overline{\nu },\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}(\overline{\nu }),\overline{\omega }_{2,\mathrm{min}}]=\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}}+\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}\right)2\overline{\nu }^2\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}^2\left[\sqrt{1+D}\left(1+\frac{D}{2}\right)^2\right]}$$
(4)
with $`\overline{\omega }_{2,\mathrm{min}}=\overline{\nu }\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}^2D=(\overline{\nu }\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}^2/36)[60+(108+12\sqrt{93})^{2/3}+144(108+12\sqrt{93})^{2/3}]`$. Finally, the third critical induction is defined by $`\overline{\omega }_2=0`$ which leads to

$$\overline{B}_{c,0}[\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}(\overline{\nu }),\overline{\omega }_2=0]=\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}}+\overline{q}_\mathrm{m}\right)}.$$
(5)
At a closer inspection of Eqs. (3-5) one realizes that the three thresholds follow the relation $`\overline{B}_{c,1}\overline{B}_{c,0}\overline{B}_{c,2}`$. Their dependence on the viscosity of the magnetic fluid will be studied in the next section.

## 3. Results and discussion

The behaviour of the three above defined thresholds on the viscosity is studied, where all other material parameters are kept constant. The wave number $`q_\mathrm{m}(\nu )`$ for the most unstable linear pattern is determined for a supercritical induction of $`18`$ mT. Figure 3 shows that for viscous MFs four regions with different sets of solutions for the dispersion relation exist. For small subcritical inductions the set of solutions consists of two complex solutions with negative real parts (symbolised by 2C in Fig. 3) which is followed by two negative real solutions (2R). Passing the threshold $`\overline{B}_{c,0}`$ (solid line), the set of solutions is formed by one positive and one negative real solution (2R+-). Only the former solution lasts at high subcritical inductions (1R+). From Fig. 3 it becomes clear that for low viscous MFs, $`\overline{\nu }0.1`$, only an oscillatory decay can be observed . For high viscous MFs it should be possible to observe an oscillatory (2C) as well as a pure exponential decay (2R) of the pattern. Because for $`\overline{\nu }0.3`$ the two thresholds $`\overline{B}_{c,1}`$ (dashed line) and $`\overline{B}_{c,0}`$ are well separated and the region 2R becomes experimentally accessible.

For a nonmagnetic fluid with the same density and surface tension, a dimensionless viscosity of $`\overline{\nu }0.9`$ is necessary to have a pure exponential decay, i.e. the nonmagnetic fluid has to be considerable more viscous than the magnetic fluid to result in the same behaviour. Another advantage in the use of a MF is that the jumplike increase to $`B_{\mathrm{sup}}`$ is a simple way to prepare just one particular metastable pattern whose decay can be studied.

For inviscid MFs Fig. 3 shows that only two different sets of solutions occur. For subcritical inductions smaller than $`\overline{B}_{c,0}(\overline{\nu }=0)`$ two pure imaginary solutions (2I) exist. Above that threshold two real solutions with different signs (2R+-) are found.

This analysis also leads to a better understanding in the case of a supercritical induction, where regions with different sets of solutions should exist, too. Whereas Fig. 1 shows only one particular solution of the dispersion relation (1) for $`0q1200`$ m-1, the two zooms around $`q=418.3`$ m-1 \[Fig. 4(a)(b)\] and $`q=1027`$ m-1 \[Fig. 4(c)(d)\] present all solutions. In contrast to the material parameters for Fig. 2, now the induction is fixed at $`B_{\mathrm{sup}}=18`$ mT and therefore transitions between different sets of solutions occur at certain wave numbers. The first zoom \[Fig. 4(a)(b)\] displays that for wave numbers below $`q_{\mathrm{c},1}`$ two complex solutions exist. Between $`q_{\mathrm{c},1}`$ and $`q_{\mathrm{c},2}`$ two real solutions exist and beyond $`q_{\mathrm{c},2}`$ only one real solution. In a reverse order the different sets of solutions are appearing in the second zoom \[Fig. 4(c)(d)\]. These features of the dispersion relation have not been realized since only the solution for $`q_\mathrm{m}`$ was of interest in . For that particular wave number the dispersion relation has only one real solution which motivates the plot of one solution (thick solid line) in Fig. 1.

To conclude, in the frame of a linear stability analysis the decay of the metastable pattern of magnetic liquid ridges is studied. There are initiated by a jumplike increase of the magnetic induction to a supercritical value whereas the decay is triggered by a jumplike decrease of the induction. The analysis of the dispersion relation according to such a procedure reveals that depending on the value of the subcritical induction different sets of solutions exist (Fig. 2). The regions for these different sets are separated by the three thresholds (3-5) whose dependence on the viscosity is displayed in Fig. 3. Whereas for low viscous MFs an oscillatory decay of the ridges can be observed , for high viscous MFs a pure exponential decay should be detectable, too.

## Acknowledgements

The author benefited from helpful discussions with H. W. Müller, I. Rehberg, B. Reimann, and R. Richter. This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft under Grant La 1182/2-2 and Ri 1054/1-2.

* Received 13.12.2002


text:
# On the dimension formula for the hyperfunction solutions of some holonomic D-modules

## 1 Introduction

One of the basic results about holonomic D-modules is the constructibility result of Kashiwara , that the holomorphic solution complex

$$𝒮ol():=Rhom_{D_X}(,𝒪_X)$$

of a holonomic D-module $``$ on the complex manifold $`X`$ is a bounded complex analytically constructible complex of sheaves of complex vector spaces with finite dimensional stalks (compare also with \[7, chapter 5\], \[10, thm.4.5.8, p.458\] and \[14, chap.III\]). In particular, the function

$$\chi ():X;x\chi \left(𝒮ol()_x\right)$$
(1)
is well defined and complex analytically constructible. Here $`\chi `$ is the usual Euler characteristic. Moreover, one has by Kashiwara  the following beautiful description of this local index in terms of the characteristic cycle of the holonomic D-module $``$ (see \[7, thm.6.3.1, p.127, cor.6.3.4, p.128\] and \[2, thm.2, p.574\]):

###### Theorem 1.1 ((local index formula)).

Let $`Y_j`$ be finitely many distinct irreducible closed complex analytic subsets of $`X`$ such that the characteristic variety $`char()`$ of $``$ can be estimated by

$$char()\underset{j}{}T_{Y_j}^{}X,\text{with}T_Y^{}X:=cl(T_{Y_{reg}}^{}X)$$
(2)
the closure of the conormal bundle to the regular part $`Y_{reg}`$ of the irreducible complex analytic subset $`YX`$. Then

$$\chi ()(x)=\underset{j}{}(1)^{d_j}m_jEu_{Y_j}(x),$$
(3)
with $`d_j`$ the complex codimension of $`Y_j`$, $`Eu_{Y_j}`$ the famous Euler obstruction of $`Y_j`$ as defined by MacPherson (cf. ) and $`m_j`$ the (generic) multiplicity of $``$ along $`T_{Y_j}^{}X`$.

Note that $`Eu_Y=1_Y`$, if $`YX`$ is a closed complex analytic submanifold. So a very special case of the local index formula is given as in \[7, ex. on p.129\] by the

###### Example 1.1.

Suppose all $`Y_j`$ in the estimate (2) are closed connected complex analytic submanifolds of $`X`$. Then

$$\chi ()(x)=\underset{j}{}(1)^{d_j}m_j1_{Y_j}(x),$$
(4)
with $`d_j`$ the complex codimension of $`Y_j`$ and $`m_j`$ the (generic) multiplicity of $``$ along $`T_{Y_j}^{}X`$.

Let us now consider the case that $`X`$ is the complexification of the real analytic manifold $`M`$, with $`i:MX`$ the closed inclusion. Assume $`M`$ is purely n-dimensional. Then the sheaf complex

$$R\mathrm{\Gamma }_M(𝒪_X)[n]Ri_{}i^!(𝒪_X)[n]$$

is concentrated in degree zero, with

$$_M:=h^0\left(i^!(𝒪_X)[n]\right)or_M$$

the sheaf of Sato’s hyperfunctions on $`M`$, and $`or_M`$ the orientation sheaf of $`M`$.

Then the hyperfunction solution complex

$$Rhom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},_M)i^!𝒮ol()or_M[n]$$
(5)
of a holonomic D-module $``$ on $`X`$ is subanalytically constructible on $`M`$ with finite dimensional stalks (compare \[7, thm.5.1.7, p.115\]). So it is natural to ask for a corresponding index formula like (3) or (4).

###### Remark 1.1.

The same constructibility result is true for the solutions

$$Rhom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},𝒜_M)i^{}𝒮ol()$$

in the sheaf $`𝒜_M=i^{}𝒪_X`$ of real analytic functions on $`M`$. If $``$ is a regular holonomic D-module on $`X`$, then one also has isomorphisms (see \[8, cor.8.3, cor.8.5, p.360\] or \[1, p.326\]):

$$Rhom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},_M)Rhom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},𝒟b_M)$$

and

$$Rhom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},𝒜_M)Rhom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},𝒞_M^{\mathrm{}}),$$

with $`𝒟b_M`$ (or $`𝒞_M^{\mathrm{}}`$) the sheaf of distributions (or smooth functions) on $`M`$.

The following counterpart of (4) is the main result of this note:

###### Theorem 1.2 ((local dimension formula)).

Let $`M_j`$ be finitely many distinct closed real analytic submanifolds of $`M`$ such that the characteristic variety $`char()`$ of the holonomic D-module $``$ on $`X`$ can be estimated by

$$char()\underset{j}{}T_{Y_j}^{}X,$$
(6)
with $`Y_jX`$ the complexification of $`M_j`$. Assume the $`Y_j`$ are irreducible (i.e. connected), with $`Y_jM=M_j`$. Then one has for $`xM`$:

$$dim_C\left(hom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},_M)_x\right)=\underset{j}{}m_j1_{M_j}(x),$$
(7)
with $`m_j`$ the (generic) multiplicity of $``$ along $`T_{Y_j}^{}X`$.

This is indeed a counterpart of (4). The estimate (6) implies by a theorem of Lebeau  (compare also with \[3, thm.2.1, rem., p.531\] and \[3, ex.(1), p.533\]) the vanishing result

$$xt_{i^{}D_X}^k(i^{},_M)_x=0\text{for all }k1$$
(8)
so that

$$dim_C\left(hom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},_M)_x\right)=\chi \left(Rhom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},_M)_x\right).$$
(9)
Theorem 1.2 answers affirmatively a question asked (or better, discussed) in \[17, rem.3.5\] at the end of a recent paper of Takeuchi , where he proves the dimension formula (7) under the special assumption, that in suitable local coordinates $`(M,x)(^n,0)`$ the $`M_j`$ are linear subspaces (passing through $`x=0`$).

Note that this special case already covers (locally) the one-dimensional case $`(X,M,x)(,,0)`$, with $``$ a holonomic D-module such that

$$char()T_{\{x\}}^{}XT_X^{}X.$$

In this case one gets back a classical result of Kashiwara \[4, thm.4.2.7, p.69\] (cf. \[7, cor.3.2.36(b), p.88-89\]) and Komatsu :

$$dim_C\left(hom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},_M)_x\right)=d+d^{},$$

with $`d`$ or $`d^{}`$ the multiplicity of $``$ along $`T_{\{x\}}^{}X`$ or $`T_X^{}X`$.

Let $`j:X\backslash MM`$ be the open inclusion of the complement of $`M`$ in $`X`$. Then the proof given in \[17, sec.3\] is based on the distinguished triangle

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}Ri_{}i^!𝒮ol()[n]& & 𝒮ol()[n]& & Rj_{}j^{}𝒮ol()[n]& \stackrel{[1]}{}& .\end{array}$$
(10)
Moreover, he uses the micro-local theory of the characteristic cycles $`CC()`$ for subanalytically constructible complexes of sheaves (as in ), in particular a deep result of Schmid-Vilonen  about a description of

$$CC(Rj_{}j^{}𝒮ol())\text{in terms of}CC(𝒮ol()).$$

In the next section we explain our simple proof of theorem 1.2, which doesn’t make use of this sophisticated micro-local theory of characteristic cycles. Instead of this, we use the observation that the calculation of

$$\chi ((i^!)_x)\text{for}=𝒮ol()$$

can be done in terms of subanalytically constructible functions, i.e. the functor $`i^!`$ induces a corresponding (unique) $``$-linear transformation for the abelian groups $`CF()`$ of subanalytically constructible functions such that the following diagram commutes (compare \[10, sec.9.7\] and \[16, sec.2.3\]):

$$\begin{array}{ccc}K_0(X)& \stackrel{i^!}{}& K_0(M)\\ \chi _X& & \chi _M& & \\ CF(X)& \stackrel{i^!}{}& CF(M).\end{array}$$
(11)
Here $`K_0()`$ is the Grothendieck group of subanalytically constructible (complexes of) sheaves with finite dimensional stalks, with $`\chi _\mathrm{?}`$ induced by taking stalkwise the Euler characteristic.

Then the calculation of

$$\chi ((i^!𝒮ol()or_M[n])_x)=(1)^ni^!\left(\chi _X(𝒮ol())\right)(x)$$
(12)
becomes an easy exercise by the local index theorem and example 1.1, since the $`M_j`$ and therefore also the $`Y_j`$ are closed submanifolds!

If we allow in the estimate (6) also singular subspaces, then we get at least the following weak parity version of the local index theorem:

###### Theorem 1.3 ((local index formula for hyperfunctions)).

Let $`M_j`$
be finitely many distinct real analytic subspaces of $`M`$ such that the characteristic variety $`char()`$ of the holonomic D-module $``$ on $`X`$ can be estimated as in (6), with $`Y_jX`$ the complexification of $`M_j`$. Assume the $`Y_j`$ are irreducible, with $`Y_jM=M_j`$. Then one has for $`xM`$:

$$\chi \left(Rhom_{i^{}D_X}(i^{},_M)_x\right)\underset{j}{}m_jEu_{Y_j}(x)\text{mod }2,$$
(13)
with $`Eu_{Y_j}`$ the Euler obstruction of $`Y_j`$ and $`m_j`$ the (generic) multiplicity of $``$ along $`T_{Y_j}^{}X`$.

## 2 Constructible functions

In this final section we give the proof of theorem 1.2 and 1.3 in terms of constructible functions. Let us start with the proof of theorem 1.2.

By the estimate (6) and example 1.1 we get

$$\chi _X(𝒮ol())=\underset{j}{}(1)^{d_j}m_j1_{Y_j},$$

with $`d_j`$ the complex codimension of $`Y_j`$ and $`m_j`$ the (generic) multiplicity of $``$ along $`T_{Y_j}^{}X`$. By linearity of $`i^!`$ on the level of constructible functions one also has

$$i^!\left(\chi _X(𝒮ol())\right)=\underset{j}{}(1)^{d_j}m_ji^!(1_{Y_j}).$$

Then the dimension formula (7) follows from (5), (9), (12) and the simple formula

$$i^!(1_{Y_j})=(1)^{(nd_j)}1_{M_j}.$$
(14)
The formula (14) corresponds by the commutative diagram (11) to the base change formula

$$i^!(Rk_{}_{Y_j})Rk_{}^{}i^!_{Y_j}$$

for the cartesian diagram of inclusions

$$\begin{array}{ccc}M& \stackrel{i}{}& X\\ k^{}& & k& & \\ M_j& \stackrel{i^{}}{}& Y_j.\end{array}$$

Note that $`i^!_{Y_j}_{M_j}[(nd_j)]`$ locally on $`M_j`$, since $`M_j`$ is a closed submanifold of $`Y_j`$ of real codimension equal to the complex dimension $`nd_j`$ of $`Y_j`$.

For the proof of the parity formula (13) in theorem 1.3 it is enough to show

$$\chi \left(i^{}Rj_{}j^{}𝒮ol()_x\right)0\text{mod }2\text{ for all }xM\text{.}$$
(15)
Use the local index formula (3) and the distinguished triangle (10). But this follows from the fact that the constructible function

$$\chi _X(𝒮ol())mod\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}$$

is invariant under the complex conjugation acting on the complexification $`X`$ of $`M`$ (with fixed point set $`M`$).

More precisely, by \[16, lem.1.1.1, p.27\] one gets the description:

$$\chi \left(i^{}Rj_{}j^{}𝒮ol()_x\right)=\chi \left(R\mathrm{\Gamma }(M_{f,x},𝒮ol())\right),$$

with

$$M_{f,x}:=\{x\delta ,f=w\}\text{for}0<w<<\delta <<1$$

(i.e. for $`w,\delta `$ small, with $`w`$ also small compared to $`\delta `$) a local right Milnor fiber of the function $`f`$ at $`x`$, defined in local coordinates

$$(X,M,x)(^n,^n,0)\text{by}z=(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n)f(z):=\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}im(z_k)^2.$$

Here $`im()`$ is the imaginary part, with the complex conjugation acting on $`(^n,^n,0)`$ in the usual way. This conjugation leaves the compact semi-analytic set $`M_{f,x}`$ invariant without any fixed point! But the Euler characteristic

$$\chi \left(R\mathrm{\Gamma }(M_{f,x},𝒮ol())\right)\text{mod }2$$

can be calculated in terms of $`_2`$-valued constructible functions:

$$\chi \left(R\mathrm{\Gamma }(M_{f,x},𝒮ol())\right)(c\pi )_{}\alpha \text{mod }2\text{,}$$

with

$$\alpha :=\chi _{M_{f,x}}(𝒮ol()|M_{f,x})\text{mod }2CF(M_{f,x},_2),$$

$$\pi :M_{f,x}M_{f,x}/conj.\text{the quotient and}c:M_{f,x}/conj.\{pt\}$$

a constant map. Here $`(c\pi )_{}`$ is induced by $`R(c\pi )_{}`$ similarly as in (11) by the commutative diagram (compare \[10, sec.9.7\] and \[16, sec.2.3\]):

$$\begin{array}{ccc}K_0(M_{f,x})& \stackrel{R(c\pi )_{}}{}& K_0(\{pt\})\\ \chi _{M_{f,x}}& & \chi _{\left\{pt\right\}}& & \\ CF(M_{f,x})& \stackrel{(c\pi )_{}}{}& CF(\{pt\})\\ mod\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}& & mod\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}& & \\ CF(M_{f,x},_2)& \stackrel{(c\pi )_{}}{}& CF(\{pt\},_2)_2,\end{array}$$
(16)
with $`CF(,_2)`$ the corresponding abelian group of $`_2`$-valued subanalytically constructible functions.

Then $`(c\pi )_{}=c_{}\pi _{}`$ by functoriality. But $`\pi _{}(\alpha )0`$, since $`\alpha `$ is invariant under the conjugation $`conj.`$, with $`\pi :M_{f,x}M_{f,x}/conj.`$ an unramified covering of degree two. Of course, here it is important to work with $`_2`$-valued constructible functions.