format: text

text:
# The surface-symmetric Einstein-Vlasov system with cosmological constant

## 1 Introduction

The Einstein-Vlasov system governs the time evolution of a self-gravitating collisionless gas in the context of general relativity. In general two classes of initial data are distinguished. This is the first class : if an isolated body is studied, the data are called asymptotically flat. Spacetimes that possess a compact Cauchy hypersurface are called cosmological spacetimes and data are given on a compact 3-manifold, it is the second class. In this case the whole universe is modelled and the ”particles” in the kinetic description are galaxies or even clusters of galaxies. The following is concerned with the second class.

In , G. Rein obtained cosmological solutions of the Einstein-Vlasov system with surface symmetry written in areal coordinates. In the present paper we consider the same problem when a cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is added to the source terms in the Einstein equations. A motivation for being interested in this kind of generalization is from the point of view of astrophysics. In fact present measurements indicate that in our universe it is the case that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$, . One piece of evidence for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ is the data on supernovae of type Ia, very distant astronomical objects whose distance can be determined precisely. This shows that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, which corresponds mathematically to the fact that the mean curvature tends to a positive constant at late times. We refer to the original paper  for the details of the evidence for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$. Another reason for being interested in the Einstein-Vlasov system with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is that having $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ makes it easier to obtain statements about asymptotic behaviour, as shown by the results of , the results obtained in the present paper on spherical symmetry, and those obtained in  for spatially homogeneous case. Hence from a purely mathematical point of view it is interesting to study the case $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$.

The interesting results of  rely essentially on having suitable theorems on local existence and uniqueness that are provided in the present paper. Furthermore a new result on global existence in the spherically symmetric case which uses these theorems is presented. It reveals a behaviour qualitatively quite different from that with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ for which it is proved in  that no global solution toward the future could exist.

Now let us formulate the Einstein-Vlasov system with cosmological constant. All the particles are assumed to have rest mass, normalized to unity, and to move forward in time so that their number density $`f`$ is a non-negative function supported on the mass shell

$`PM:=\{g_{\alpha \beta }p^\alpha p^\beta =1,p^0>0\},`$
a submanifold of the tangent bundle $`TM`$ of the space-time manifold $`M`$ with metric $`g`$ of signature $`+++`$. We use coordinates $`(t,x^a)`$ with zero shift and corresponding canonical momenta $`p^\alpha `$ ; Greek indices always run from $`0`$ to $`3`$, and Latin ones from $`1`$ to $`3`$. On the mass shell $`PM`$ the variable $`p^0`$ becomes a function of the remaining variables $`(t,x^a,p^b)`$ :

$`p^0=\sqrt{g^{00}}\sqrt{1+g_{ab}p^ap^b}.`$
The Einstein-Vlasov system now reads

$`_tf+{\displaystyle \frac{p^a}{p^0}}_{x^a}f{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^0}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\beta \gamma }^ap^\beta p^\gamma _{p^a}f=0`$
$`G_{\alpha \beta }+\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\alpha \beta }=8\pi T_{\alpha \beta }`$
$`T_{\alpha \beta }={\displaystyle _^3}fp_\alpha p_\beta |g|^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{dp^1dp^2dp^3}{p_0}},`$
where $`p_\alpha =g_{\alpha \beta }p^\beta `$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\beta \gamma }^\alpha `$ are the Christoffel symbols, $`|g|`$ denotes the determinant of the metric $`g`$, $`G_{\alpha \beta }`$ the Einstein tensor, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ the cosmological constant, and $`T_{\alpha \beta }`$ is the energy-momentum tensor.

Here we adopt the definition of spacetimes with surface symmetry, i.e., spherical, plane or hyperbolic symmetry given in . We write the system in areal coordinates, i.e. coordinates are chosen such that $`R=t`$, where $`R`$ is the area radius function on a surface of symmetry. The circumstances under which coordinates of this type exist are discussed in  for the Einstein-Vlasov system with vanishing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and in  for the case with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. In such coordinates the metric takes the form

$$ds^2=e^{2\mu (t,r)}dt^2+e^{2\lambda (t,r)}dr^2+t^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}_k^2\theta d\phi ^2)$$
(1.1)
where

$$\mathrm{sin}_k\theta :=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{sin}\theta \hfill & \text{if }k=1\hfill \\ 1\hfill & \text{if }k=0\hfill \\ \mathrm{sinh}\theta \hfill & \text{if }k=1\hfill \end{array}$$

Here $`t>0`$, the functions $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$ are periodic in $`r`$ with period $`1`$. It has been shown in  and  that due to the symmetry $`f`$ can be written as a function of

$`t,r,w:=e^\lambda p^1`$ $`\text{and}F:=t^4(p^2)^2+t^4\mathrm{sin}_k^2\theta (p^3)^2,\text{with}r,w;F[0,+\mathrm{}[;`$
i.e. $`f=f(t,r,w,F)`$. In these variables we have $`p^0=e^\mu \sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}`$. After calculating the Vlasov equation in these variables, the non-trivial components of the Einstein tensor, and the energy-momentum tensor and denoting by a dot or by prime the derivation of the metric components with respect to $`t`$ or $`r`$ respectively, the complete Einstein-Vlasov system reads as follows :

$$_tf+\frac{e^{\mu \lambda }w}{\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}}_rf(\dot{\lambda }w+e^{\mu \lambda }\mu ^{}\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2})_wf=0$$
(1.2)
$$e^{2\mu }(2t\dot{\lambda }+1)+k\mathrm{\Lambda }t^2=8\pi t^2\rho $$
(1.3)
$$e^{2\mu }(2t\dot{\mu }1)k+\mathrm{\Lambda }t^2=8\pi t^2p$$
(1.4)
$$\mu ^{}=4\pi te^{\lambda +\mu }j$$
(1.5)
$$e^{2\lambda }\left(\mu ^{\prime \prime }+\mu ^{}(\mu ^{}\lambda ^{})\right)e^{2\mu }\left(\ddot{\lambda }+(\dot{\lambda }\dot{\mu })(\dot{\lambda }+\frac{1}{t})\right)+\mathrm{\Lambda }=4\pi q$$
(1.6)
where

$$\rho (t,r):=\frac{\pi }{t^2}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}f(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w=e^{2\mu }T_{00}(t,r)$$
(1.7)
$$p(t,r):=\frac{\pi }{t^2}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{w^2}{\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}}f(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w=e^{2\lambda }T_{11}(t,r)$$
(1.8)
$$j(t,r):=\frac{\pi }{t^2}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}wf(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w=e^{\lambda +\mu }T_{01}(t,r)$$
(1.9)
$$q(t,r):=\frac{\pi }{t^4}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{F}{\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}}f(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w=\frac{2}{t^2}T_{22}(t,r).$$
(1.10)
We study the initial value problem for the Einstein-Vlasov system (1.2)-(1.6) and prescribe initial data at some time $`t=t_0>0`$,

$`f(t_0,r,w,F)=\stackrel{}{f}(r,w,F),\lambda (t_0,r)=\stackrel{}{\lambda }(r),\mu (t_0,r)=\stackrel{}{\mu }(r).`$
The organization of the paper is as follows. In section $`2`$ we give some preliminaries useful to generalize the results obtained in  to our situation and we discuss the constraint equation on the initial data. In section $`3`$ we adapt to our situation the results of  on the local-in-time existence and uniqueness of solutions in both time directions, together with a continuation criterion. In section $`4`$ we prove that, for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$, no solution exists for all $`tt_0`$ by showing that in that case the lapse function $`e^{2\mu }`$ blows up ; next, by using the vacuum solutions we show that in the case $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ and $`k=1`$ the global solution may exist or not for all $`tt_0`$, depending on the choice of the initial data. In section $`5`$ we prove that, under a suitable condition on the initial data, the global existence result together with the asymptotics obtained in  for plane or hyperbolic symmetry can be generalized to the spherically symmetric case. Finally section $`6`$ deals with estimates on the relative sizes of different components of the energy-momentum tensor which can be related to physically interesting statements ; our results hold for the 3 types of symmetry and strengthen some results of .

## 2 Preliminaries

Here are the regularity properties which are required for a solution, the same as in .

###### Definition 2.1

Let $`I]0,\mathrm{}[`$ be an interval
(a) $`fC^1(I\times ^2\times [0,\mathrm{}[)`$ is regular, if $`f(t,r+1,w,F)=f(t,r,w,F)`$ for $`(t,r,w,F)I\times ^2\times [0,\mathrm{}[`$, $`f0`$, and $`\mathrm{supp}f(t,r,.,.)`$ is compact, uniformly in $`r`$ and locally uniformly in $`t`$.
(b) $`\rho `$ (or $`p`$, $`j`$, $`q`$)$`C^1(I\times )`$ is regular, if $`\rho (t,r+1)=\rho (t,r)`$ for $`(t,r)I\times `$
(c) $`\lambda C^1(I\times )`$ is regular, if $`\dot{\lambda }C^1(I\times )`$ and $`\lambda (t,r+1)=\lambda (t,r)`$ for $`(t,r)I\times `$
(d) $`\mu C^1(I\times )`$ is regular, if $`\mu ^{}C^1(I\times )`$ and $`\mu (t,r+1)=\mu (t,r)`$ for $`(t,r)I\times `$.

Such functions are identified with their restrictions to the interval $`[0,1]`$ with respect to $`r`$.

The following result shows how to obtain $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$ from the field equations (1.2) and (1.3) for given $`\rho `$ and $`p`$. This proposition ends with a statement which allows us to drop the additional condition $`\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)<0`$ imposed in  for the case of hyperbolic symmetry.

###### Proposition 2.2

Let $`\rho `$ and $`p`$ : $`I\times `$ be regular, $`I]0,\mathrm{}[`$ an interval with $`t_0I`$, $`\stackrel{}{\lambda },\stackrel{}{\mu }C^1()`$ with $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }(r)=\stackrel{}{\lambda }(r+1)`$, $`\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)=\stackrel{}{\mu }(r+1)`$ for $`r`$, and assume that

$$\frac{t_0(e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)}+k)}{t}k+\frac{8\pi }{t}_t^{t_0}s^2p(s,r)𝑑s+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3t}(t^3t_0^3)>0,(t,r)I\times $$
(2.1)
Then the equations (1.2) and (1.3) have unique, regular solution $`(\lambda ,\mu )`$ on $`I\times `$ with $`\lambda (t_0)=\stackrel{}{\lambda }`$ and $`\mu (t_0)=\stackrel{}{\mu }`$. The solution is given by

$$e^{2\mu (t,r)}=\frac{t_0(e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)}+k)}{t}k+\frac{8\pi }{t}_t^{t_0}s^2p(s,r)𝑑s+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3t}(t^3t_0^3)$$
(2.2)
$$\dot{\lambda }(t,r)=4\pi te^{2\mu (t,r)}\rho (t,r)\frac{1+ke^{2\mu (t,r)}}{2t}+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{2}te^{2\mu (t,r)}$$
(2.3)
$$\lambda (t,r)=\stackrel{}{\lambda }(r)_t^{t_0}\dot{\lambda }(s,r)𝑑s$$
(2.4)
If $`I=]T,t_0]`$ (respectively $`I=[t_0,T[`$) with $`T[0,t_0[`$ (resp. $`T]t_0,\mathrm{}]`$ ) then there exists some $`T^{}[T,t_0[`$ (resp. $`T^{}]t_0,T]`$) such that condition (2.1) holds on $`]T^{},t_0]\times `$ (resp. $`[t_0,T^{}[\times `$). $`T^{}`$ is independent of $`p`$ for $`I=]T,t_0]`$, whereas it depends on $`p`$ for $`I=[t_0,T[`$.

Proof : The proof for the first part of the present proposition is the same as that for Proposition 2.4 in . Let us prove the second part :
If $`I=]T,t_0]`$, the function of $`t`$ and $`r`$ defined by the right hand side of (2.2) is bounded from below by

$$h(t,r)=\frac{t_0(e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }}+k)}{t}k+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3t}(t^3t_0^3).$$

Since $`\stackrel{}{\mu }`$ is continuous and periodic in $`r`$, it is bounded, so there exists some $`\beta (t_0)>0`$ such that

$$h(t_0,r)=e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }}>\beta (t_0)>0.$$

Thus the continuity of $`th(t,r)`$ at $`t=t_0`$ implies the existence of some $`T^{}]0,t_0[`$ such that

$$h(t,r)>\frac{\beta (t_0)}{2}>0\text{for every}t]T^{},t_0],$$
(2.5)
i.e. (2.1) holds for $`t]T^{},t_0]`$. Now if $`I=[t_0,T[`$, we proceed as above by setting in this case

$$h(t,r)=\frac{t_0(e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }}+k)}{t}k\frac{8\pi }{t}_{t_0}^ts^2p(s,r)ds+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3t}(t^3t_0^3).\mathrm{}$$

The other preliminary results of  can be generalized with minor changes to the case with non-zero $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. We have :

###### Proposition 2.3

1) For $`\stackrel{}{f}C^1(^2\times [0,+\mathrm{}[)`$ with $`\stackrel{}{f}(r+1,w,F)=\stackrel{}{f}(r,w,F)`$ and given regular $`\lambda `$, $`\mu `$, the Vlasov equation (1.2) has a unique regular solution $`f`$. The solution is given by

$$f(t,r,w,F)=\stackrel{}{f}((R,W)(t_0,t,w,F),F)$$
(2.6)
where $`s(R,W)(s)`$ is the solution of the characteristic system associated to (1.2) such that $`(R,W)(t,t,r,w,F)=(r,w)`$.
2) The subsystem (1.2)-(1.3)-(1.4) is equivalent to the full system (1.2)-(1.6), provided that the initial data satisfy (1.5) at $`t=t_0`$.

We conclude this section with a remark dealing with the solvability of the constraint equation (1.5) for $`t=t_0`$. Note that this result is the same for any value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and completes the results of .

###### Remark 2.4

The constraint equation $`\stackrel{}{\mu }^{}=4\pi t_0e^{\stackrel{}{\lambda }+\stackrel{}{\mu }}\stackrel{}{j}`$ is solvable.

Proof : Indeed this equation is equivalent to

$`(e^\stackrel{}{\mu })^{}=4\pi t_0e^\stackrel{}{\lambda }\stackrel{}{j}={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2}{t_0}}e^\stackrel{}{\lambda }{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}w\stackrel{}{f}(r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w`$
To solve this we need to impose the condition that

$`I(\stackrel{}{f}):={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2}{t_0}}{\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}e^\stackrel{}{\lambda }w\stackrel{}{f}(r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w𝑑r=0`$
since $`e^{\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)}`$is periodic in $`r`$ with period $`1`$. Let us choose $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }`$ freely, and $`\overline{f}`$ a nonnegative function.
Firstly if $`I(\overline{f})=0`$ then it suffices to take $`\stackrel{}{f}=\overline{f}`$.
Next if $`I(\overline{f})>0`$ then we fix $`\mathrm{\Phi }C_c^{\mathrm{}}`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }0`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ does not vanish identically and $`\mathrm{supp}\mathrm{\Phi }\{w<0\}`$, and we set $`\stackrel{}{f}(r,w,F)=\overline{f}(r,w,F)+a\mathrm{\Phi }(r,w,F)`$ where $`a`$ is a positive constant such that

$`I(\stackrel{}{f})`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2}{t_0}}{\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}e^\stackrel{}{\lambda }w\overline{f}(r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w𝑑r`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2a}{t_0}}{\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}e^\stackrel{}{\lambda }w\mathrm{\Phi }(r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w𝑑r`$
$`=0`$
Now if $`I(\overline{f})<0`$ then we proceed in the same way as above but now with
$`\mathrm{supp}\mathrm{\Phi }\{w>0\}`$.
Thus we determine a candidate for $`e^\stackrel{}{\mu }`$ up to an additive constant, having given $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }`$ and $`\overline{f}`$ freely. Choosing a suitable constant ensures that this function is positive and thus of the form $`e^\stackrel{}{\mu }`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 3 Local existence and continuation of solutions

This section provides local existence and uniqueness results with the continuation criteria in both time directions.

###### Theorem 3.1

Let $`\stackrel{}{f}C^1(^2\times [0,\mathrm{}[)`$ with $`\stackrel{}{f}(r+1,w,F)=\stackrel{}{f}(r,w,F)`$ for $`(r,w,F)^2\times [0,\mathrm{}[`$, $`\stackrel{}{f}0`$, and

$`w_0:=sup\{|w|/(r,w,F)\mathrm{supp}\stackrel{}{f}\}<\mathrm{}`$
$`F_0:=sup\{F/(r,w,F)\mathrm{supp}\stackrel{}{f}\}<\mathrm{}`$
Let $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }C^1()`$, $`\stackrel{}{\mu }C^2()`$ with $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }(r)=\stackrel{}{\lambda }(r+1)`$, $`\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)=\stackrel{}{\mu }(r+1)`$ for $`r`$, and

$`\stackrel{}{\mu }^{}(r)=4\pi t_0e^{\stackrel{}{\lambda }+\stackrel{}{\mu }}\stackrel{}{j}(r)={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2}{t_0}}e^{\stackrel{}{\lambda }+\stackrel{}{\mu }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}w\stackrel{}{f}(r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w,r`$
Then there exists a unique, left maximal, regular solution $`(f,\lambda ,\mu )`$ of (1.2)-(1.6) with $`(f,\lambda ,\mu )(t_0)=(\stackrel{}{f},\stackrel{}{\lambda },\stackrel{}{\mu })`$ on a time interval $`]T,t_0]`$ with $`T[0,t_0[`$.

This is the analogue of the first part of theorem 3.1 in

Proof : We just indicate the points of the proof which differ from the proof of theorem 3.1 in .
The iterates are defined in the same way except that now (2.2) is used to define $`\mu _n`$ on the interval $`]T_n,t_0]`$, where

$`T_n:=inf\{t^{}]T_{n1},t_0[/{\displaystyle \frac{t_0(e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)}+k)}{t}}k+{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{t}}{\displaystyle _t^{t_0}}s^2p_n(s,r)ds`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3t}}(t^3t_0^3)>0,r,t[t^{},t_0]\},`$
$`]T_{n1},t_0]`$ being the existence interval of the previous iterates and $`T_0=0`$. By Proposition 2.2, $`T_nT^{}`$ for all $`n`$. So all the iterates are well defined and regular on the fixed time interval $`]T^{},t_0]`$ (this interval has the role played by $`]0.1]`$ in the proof of theorem 3.1 in ). The other steps of the proof remain the same although the presence of the cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ leads to some changes. For instance here the constants $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$ and $`c_3`$ occurring in the estimates are given by :

$`\{\begin{array}{cc}c_1=c_1(\mu (t_0))=\beta (t_0)/2\hfill & \\ c_2=c_2(\stackrel{}{f},F_0,\stackrel{}{\mu },\mathrm{\Lambda }):=\frac{c}{c_1}(1+1/c_1)(1+F_0)^2(1+\stackrel{}{f})(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }t_0^3}{2c_1}+1)\hfill & \\ c_3:=e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }}\stackrel{}{\mu }^{}+\stackrel{}{\lambda }^{}+1+\mathrm{\Lambda }\hfill & \end{array}`$ (3.1)
The constant $`c_1`$ is a lower bound of $`e^{2\mu _n(t,r)}`$ and is independent of $`n`$ by Proposition 2.2. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let us now state the continuation criterion for $`t`$ decreasing.

###### Theorem 3.2

Let $`(\stackrel{}{f},\stackrel{}{\lambda },\stackrel{}{\mu })`$ be initial data as in Theorem 3.1. Assume that $`(f,\lambda ,\mu )`$ is a solution of (1.2)-(1.6) on a left maximal interval of existence $`]T,t_0]`$. If

$`sup\{|w|/(t,r,w,F)\mathrm{supp}f\}<\mathrm{}`$
and

$`sup\{e^{2\mu (t,r)}/r,t]T,t_0]\}<\mathrm{}`$
then $`T=0`$.

This is the analogue of the second part of theorem 3.1 in .
Proof : The argument is the same as in Step 6 in the proof of theorem 3.1 in  except that here, for $`t_1]T,t_0]`$, the constants $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$, $`c_3`$ are defined in the same way as in (3.1), considering this time the data at time $`t=t_1`$ ; and $`c_1(\mu (t_1))\beta ^{}`$ with $`\frac{1}{\beta ^{}}=sup\{e^{2\mu (t,r)}/r,t]T,t_0]\}`$. Thus there exists a constant $`c_2^{}>0`$ such that

$`c_2(f(t_1),F_0,\mu (t_1),\mathrm{\Lambda })/s^2c_2^{}\text{for }t_1]T,t_0]\text{ and }s[T/2,t_0].`$
The other points remain the same having replaced $`t_0`$ by $`t_1`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Next we state the analogue of Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.2 for $`tt_0`$ which generalizes with minor changes Theorem 6.1 and 6.2 in , to the case with non-zero $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

###### Theorem 3.3

Let $`(\stackrel{}{f},\stackrel{}{\lambda },\stackrel{}{\mu })`$ be initial data as in Theorem 3.1. Then there exists a unique, right maximal, regular solution $`(f,\lambda ,\mu )`$ of (1.2)-(1.6) with $`(f,\lambda ,\mu )(t_0)=(\stackrel{}{f},\stackrel{}{\lambda },\stackrel{}{\mu })`$ on a time interval $`[t_0,T[`$ with $`T]t_0,\mathrm{}]`$. If

$`sup\{e^{2\mu (t,r)}/r,t[t_0,T[\}<\mathrm{}`$
then $`T=\mathrm{}`$.

## 4 Particular cases for future global existence

In this section we prove that for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$ no solution exists for all $`tt_0`$ and for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ and $`k=1`$, the solution needs not exist for all $`tt_0`$.

###### Proposition 4.1

1) In the case $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$, no solution exists for all $`tt_0`$.
2) For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ and $`k=1`$, the solution may exist or not for all $`tt_0`$, depending on the choice of $`t_0`$ and of the initial data.

Proof 1) If $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$, then for any solution $`(f,\lambda ,\mu )`$ we have \[see (2.2)\] :

$$e^{2\mu (t,r)}=\frac{t_0(e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)}+k)}{t}k\frac{8\pi }{t}_{t_0}^ts^2p(s,r)𝑑s+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3t}(t^3t_0^3)$$

thus

$$e^{2\mu (t,r)}\frac{t_0(e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)}+k)}{t}k+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3t}(t^3t_0^3)$$
(4.1)
has to hold on the interval of existence $`[t_0,T[`$. Since the right hand side of this estimate tends to $`\mathrm{}`$ as $`t\mathrm{}`$ it follows that $`T<\mathrm{}`$ and
$`e^{2\mu (t)}\mathrm{}`$ as $`tT`$, by Theorem 3.3.
2) For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ and $`k=1`$, consider the vacuum case. The equation (1.4) then becomes :

$$e^{2\mu }(2t\dot{\mu }1)1+\mathrm{\Lambda }t^2=0$$
(4.2)
(4.2) is equivalent to

$$_t(te^{2\mu })=\mathrm{\Lambda }t^21$$

integrating this with respect to $`t`$ over $`[t_0,t]`$ yields

$$e^{2\mu }=t^1(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }t^3}{3}t+C),\text{where}C=t_0e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)}\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }t_0^3}{3}+t_0.$$
(4.3)
The solution can be defined only if $`\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }t^3}{3}t+C>0`$. The variations of the function $`t\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }t^3}{3}t+C`$ allow us to conclude that :
a) for $`t_01/\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, the solution exists on the whole interval $`[t_0,+\mathrm{}[`$ if
$`C\frac{2}{3\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}>0`$ whereas if $`C\frac{2}{3\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}<0`$, the solution exists on some interval $`[t_0,t_1]`$ and on some interval $`[t_2,+\mathrm{}[`$, $`0<t_1<t_2`$ ;
b) for $`t_0>1/\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, the solution exists on $`[t_0,+\mathrm{}[`$ regardless of the sign of $`C\frac{2}{3\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Hence, depending on the choice of $`t_0`$, (4.3) shows that in the case $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ and $`k=1`$ there exists a class of initial data for which global existence fails and there is also a class of data with global existence in the future. In the next section we identify a suitable condition on the initial data useful to prove the latter statement. Note that the result stated for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$ was obtained in  in the case $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, $`k=1`$, by using (4.1) without the term in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

## 5 The spherically symmetric case

Let us prove that choosing the initial time $`t_0`$ to satisfy the condition $`t_0^2>1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is enough to get global existence in the future and the asymptotic behaviour as in the case $`k0`$ obtained in .

### 5.1 Global existence in the future

We write the proof of the analogue of Theorem 2.2 in .

We establish a series of estimates which will result in an upper bound on $`\mu `$ and will therefore prove that $`T=\mathrm{}`$, using theorem 3.3. Similar computations were used in . Unless otherwise specified in what follows constants denoted by $`C`$ will be positive, may depend on the initial data and on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and may change their value from line to line.

Let us suppose that $`t_0^2>1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Firstly, we have, using (2.2) for $`k=1`$ :

$`e^{2\mu (t,r)}`$ $`=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{t_0(e^{2\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)}+1)}{t}}1{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{t}}{\displaystyle _{t_0}^t}s^2p(s,r)𝑑s+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3t}}(t^3t_0^3)\right]^1`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{t}{C+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}t^3}},t[t_0,T[.`$ (5.1)
In this inequality, $`C`$ does not depend on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Let us show that

$$_0^1e^{\mu +\lambda }\rho (t,r)drCt^1,t[t_0,T[.$$
(5.2)
Using (1.7), (1.8), (1.10), a direct computation shows that

$$\frac{d}{dt}_0^1e^{\mu +\lambda }\rho (t,r)𝑑r=\frac{1}{t}_0^1e^{\mu +\lambda }\left[2\rho +q\frac{\rho +p}{2}(1+e^{2\mu }\mathrm{\Lambda }t^2e^{2\mu })\right]𝑑r.$$
(5.3)
(5.3) implies the following, since $`q0`$ :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}{\displaystyle _0^1}e^{\mu +\lambda }\rho (t,r)𝑑r`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{t}}{\displaystyle _0^1}e^{\mu +\lambda }\rho 𝑑r+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle _0^1}e^{\mu +\lambda }{\displaystyle \frac{\rho +p}{2}}𝑑r`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle \frac{(1\mathrm{\Lambda }t^2)e^{2\mu }e^{\mu +\lambda }}{2}}(\rho +p)𝑑r`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle _0^1}e^{\mu +\lambda }\rho 𝑑r,`$
we have used the fact that $`\rho p`$ and $`1\mathrm{\Lambda }t^20`$. Integrating over $`[t_0,t]`$ we obtain by Gronwall’s inequality

$`{\displaystyle _0^1}e^{\mu +\lambda }\rho (t,r)𝑑r`$ $`Ct^1`$
that is (5.2) holds. Using (5.2) and the equation $`\mu ^{}=4\pi te^{\mu +\lambda }j`$ we find

$`\mu (t,r){\displaystyle _0^1}\mu (t,\sigma )𝑑\sigma `$ $`={\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle _\sigma ^r}\mu ^{}(t,\tau )𝑑\tau 𝑑\sigma {\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle _0^1}|\mu ^{}(t,\tau )|𝑑\tau 𝑑\sigma `$
$`4\pi t{\displaystyle _0^1}e^{\mu +\lambda }|j(t,\tau )|𝑑\tau 4\pi t{\displaystyle _0^1}e^{\mu +\lambda }\rho (t,\tau )𝑑\tau `$
$`C,t[t_0,T[,r[0,1].`$ (5.4)
Next we show that

$$e^{\mu (t,r)\lambda (t,r)}Ct^2,t[t_0,T[,r[0,1]$$
(5.5)
To see this, observe that by equations (1.3), (1.4) with $`k=1`$ and (5.1)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}e^{\mu \lambda }`$ $`=e^{\mu \lambda }\left[4\pi te^{2\mu }(p\rho )+{\displaystyle \frac{1+e^{2\mu }}{t}}\mathrm{\Lambda }te^{2\mu }\right]e^{\mu \lambda }\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(1\mathrm{\Lambda }t^2)}{t}}e^{2\mu }\right]`$
$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1\mathrm{\Lambda }t^2}{C+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}t^3}}\right]e^{\mu \lambda }`$
$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }t^2}{C+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}t^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}t^3\right]e^{\mu \lambda }.`$
Integrating this inequality with respect to $`t`$ over $`[t_0,t]`$ yields, by Gronwall’s lemma :

$$e^{\mu \lambda }C\frac{t}{C+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}t^3}Ct^2,$$

i.e. (5.5).

We now estimate the average of $`\mu `$ over the interval $`[0,1]`$ which in combination with (5.1) will yield the desired upper bound on $`\mu `$. We have, using (1.4), (5.1), (5.2), (5.5) and the fact that $`p\rho `$ :

$`{\displaystyle _0^1}\mu (t,r)𝑑r`$ $`={\displaystyle _0^1}\stackrel{}{\mu }(r)𝑑r+{\displaystyle _{t_0}^t}{\displaystyle _0^1}\dot{\mu }(s,r)𝑑r𝑑s`$
$`C+{\displaystyle _{t_0}^t}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2s}}{\displaystyle _0^1}[e^{2\mu }(8\pi s^2p+1\mathrm{\Lambda }s^2)+1]𝑑r𝑑s`$
$`C+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}(t/t_0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{t_0}^t}{\displaystyle \frac{1\mathrm{\Lambda }s^2}{C+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}s^3}}𝑑s+4\pi {\displaystyle _{t_0}^t}s{\displaystyle _0^1}e^{\mu \lambda }e^{\mu +\lambda }\rho 𝑑r𝑑s`$
$`C+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}(t/t_0)+C{\displaystyle _{t_0}^t}s^2𝑑s+C{\displaystyle _{t_0}^t}s^3𝑑s{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{t_0}^t}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }s^2}{C+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}s^3}}𝑑s`$
$`C+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{C+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}s^3}}\right]_{s=t_0}^{s=t}`$
With (5.1) this implies

$$\mu (t,r)C(1+\mathrm{ln}t^2)C,t[t_0,T[,r[0,1]$$
(5.6)
which by Theorem 3.3 implies $`T=\mathrm{}`$. Thus we have proven :

###### Theorem 5.1

For initial data as in Theorem 3.1 with $`t_0^2>1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the solution of the Einstein-Vlasov system with positive cosmological constant and spherical symmetry, written in areal coordinates, exists for all $`t[t_0,\mathrm{}[`$ where $`t`$ denotes the area radius of the surfaces of symmetry of the induced spacetime. The solution satisfies the estimates (5.2), (5.5) and (5.6).

### 5.2 On future asymptotic behaviour

Under the hypothesis $`t_0^2>1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we obtain for the spherically symmetric case analogous results about the asymptotic behaviour at late times, obtained in  for the case of plane or hyperbolic symmetry. We obtain with minor changes in the proofs the analogue of Theorems 3.2 and 3.3 in .

###### Theorem 5.2

Consider initial data with spherical symmetry for the Einstein-Vlasov system with positive cosmological constant satisfying the regularity properties required in Theorem 3.1 with $`t_0^2>1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.
1) If the gradient of $`R`$ is initially past-pointing then there is a corresponding Cauchy development which is future geodesically complete.
2) Consider a solution $`(f,\lambda ,\mu )`$ of the Einstein-Vlasov system with spherical symmetry and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ given in the expanding direction. Then the following properties hold at late times :

$$\dot{\lambda }=t^1\left(1+O(t^2)\right),$$
(5.7)
$$\lambda =\mathrm{ln}t\left[1+O\left((\mathrm{ln}t)^1\right)\right],$$
(5.8)
$$\dot{\mu }=t^1\left(1+O(t^2)\right),$$
(5.9)
$$\mu =\mathrm{ln}t\left[1+O\left((\mathrm{ln}t)^1\right)\right],$$
(5.10)
$$\mu ^{}=O(t^{3+2\epsilon }),$$
(5.11)
with $`\epsilon ]0,2/3[`$ ; and

$$\underset{t+\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{K_1^1(t,r)}{K(t,r)}=\underset{t+\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{K_2^2(t,r)}{K(t,r)}=\underset{t+\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{K_3^3(t,r)}{K(t,r)}=\frac{1}{3},$$

where $`K(t,r)=K_i^i(t,r)`$ is the trace of the second fundamental form $`K_{ij}`$ of the metric. Here $`O`$ stands for Landau’s notation.

## 6 Asymptotics of matter terms

In this section we determine the explicit leading behaviour of the components $`\rho `$, $`p`$, $`j`$ and $`q`$ of the energy-momentum tensor and later on we compare $`\rho `$ to other matter terms. Note that these results hold for the spherical, plane or hyperbolic symmetry. The hypotheses on the data are those required in theorem 3.1.

We first establish the following useful result :

###### Lemma 6.1

For any characteristic $`(r,w,F)`$, for any solution of Einstein-Vlasov system with positive cosmological constant and spherical, plane or hyperbolic symmetry written in areal coordinates, with initial data as in theorem 3.1 and with $`t_0^2>1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the case of spherical symmetry, consider the quantity $`u=tw`$. Then $`u`$ converges to a constant along the characteristics, as $`t`$ tends to infinity.

Proof For a characteristic $`s(r,w,F)(s)`$ of the Vlasov equation (1.2), we have, using the field equations (1.3)-(1.5) and the expressions (1.7), (1.9) of $`\rho `$ and $`j`$ :

$`\dot{w}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2}{t}}e^{2\mu }{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\left(\stackrel{~}{w}\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}w\sqrt{1+\stackrel{~}{w}^2+\stackrel{~}{F}/t^2}\right)f𝑑\stackrel{~}{F}𝑑\stackrel{~}{w}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1+ke^{2\mu }}{2t}}w{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{2}}twe^{2\mu }.`$ (6.1)
Then $`u`$ satisfies an equation of the form $`\dot{u}=au+b`$ with

$$a(t)=\frac{3+(k\mathrm{\Lambda }t^2)e^{2\mu }}{2t}$$

and

$$b(t)=4\pi ^2e^{2\mu }_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\left(\stackrel{~}{w}\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}w\sqrt{1+\stackrel{~}{w}^2+\stackrel{~}{F}/t^2}\right)f𝑑\stackrel{~}{F}𝑑\stackrel{~}{w}$$
(6.2)
It suffices to prove that the functions $`a`$ and $`b`$ are integrable up to $`t=\mathrm{}`$ in order to conclude that $`u`$ does converge to a limit for large $`t`$.

Now (2.2) implies

$`e^{2\mu (t,r)}{\displaystyle \frac{t}{Ckt+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}t^3}},k0`$
Using this inequality for $`k0`$, inequality (5.1) for $`k=1`$ and the fact that $`k\mathrm{\Lambda }t^20`$ for large $`t`$ we obtain :
$`a(t)(\frac{9C}{2\mathrm{\Lambda }}t^1\frac{3k}{2\mathrm{\Lambda }})t^3`$ for $`k0`$ and $`a(t)(\frac{9C}{2\mathrm{\Lambda }}t^1+\frac{3}{2\mathrm{\Lambda }})t^3`$ for $`k=1`$.
Either way, since $`t^1t_0^1`$, $`a(t)`$ is bounded by a constant $`C`$ times by $`t^3`$ and hence is integrable up to $`t=\mathrm{}`$.

Now about $`b(t)`$, by proposition 3.1 of , the factor of $`4\pi ^2e^{2\mu }`$ in (6.2) is bounded. So $`b(t)`$ will be integrable if $`e^{2\mu }`$ is integrable. But by (5.10) $`e^{2\mu }`$ falls off faster than $`t^2`$ at late times. Thus $`e^{2\mu }`$ is integrable up to $`t=+\mathrm{}`$ and so is $`b(t)`$. This completes the proof of Lemma 6.1. $`\mathrm{}`$

This result allows us to obtain estimates stronger than those in  for the components of the energy-momentum tensor using the same procedure as in proposition 6 of  :

###### Proposition 6.2

Under the same hypotheses as in lemma 6.1, the following properties hold at late times :

$$\rho =O(t^3);p=O(t^5);j=O(t^4);q=O(t^5)$$
(6.3)
$$\frac{p}{\rho }=O(t^2);\frac{j}{\rho }=O(t^1);\frac{q}{\rho }=O(t^2)$$
(6.4)
Proof Lemma 6.1 implies that $`u(t)`$ is uniformly bounded in large time $`t`$. So, using (2.6) and the fact that $`f(t_0,r,w,F)`$ has compact support on $`w`$, there is a constant $`C`$ such that

$$|w|Ct^1\text{and}f(t,r,w,F)=0,\text{if}|w|Ct^1.$$
(6.5)
Now by (1.7) we have

$$\rho (t,r):=\frac{\pi }{t^2}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}f(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w;$$

using (6.5) this implies that

$$\rho (t,r)=\frac{\pi }{t^2}_{|w|Ct^1}_0^{F_0}\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}f(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w;$$

and since $`f(t,r,w,F)`$ is constant along the characteristics we deduce from the latter equation that

$$\rho Ct^3.$$
(6.6)
Next by (1.8) we have

$$p(t,r):=\frac{\pi }{t^2}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{w^2}{\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}}f(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w$$

This implies that

$$p(t,r)\frac{\pi }{t^2}_{|w|Ct^1}_0^{F_0}w^2f(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w;$$

thus

$$pCt^5.$$
(6.7)
By (1.9) we have

$$j(t,r):=\frac{\pi }{t^2}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}wf(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w;$$

thus

$$jCt^4.$$
(6.8)
By (1.10),

$$q(t,r):=\frac{\pi }{t^4}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{F}{\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}}f(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w;$$

this implies that

$$qCt^5,$$
(6.9)
and (6.3) is proved.

Now let us prove (6.4). We have, using $`w^2Ct^2`$ and $`1\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}`$:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{p}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{_{|w|Ct^1}_0^{F_0}w^2f(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w}{_{|w|Ct^1}_0^{F_0}\sqrt{1+w^2+F/t^2}f(t,r,w,F)𝑑F𝑑w}}Ct^2.`$
Similarly we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{j}{\rho }}Ct^1;{\displaystyle \frac{q}{\rho }}Ct^2.\mathrm{}`$
This proposition shows that all other components of the energy-momentum tensor become negligible with respect to $`\rho `$. This has an interpretation that the asymptotics is ”dust-like” (pressure negligible with respect to density) and that ”tilt is asymptotically negligible”.

Acknowledgements : The authors thank A.D. Rendall for helpful comments and suggestions. They acknowledge support by a research grant from the VolkswagenStiftung, Federal Republic of Germany.


text:
# Twisted Alice Loops as Monopoles

## I Introduction

Among the defects created in spontaneous symmetry breakdown are Alice strings.oldAlice ; stringzm ; newAlice  Like monopoles moncolor , Alice strings obstruct the global extension of unbroken symmetries, making them multivalued when parallel transported around the string. This algebraic obstruction causes nonconservation of associated charges, when Aharonov-Bohm scattered around the string; it also induces monopoles, as twisted loops of Alice string. Alice strings arise in both particle physics and condensed matter models, with condensed matter systems offering the most likely prospects for their observation. volbook  We show here that known condensed matter Alice strings form twisted loops with fundamental monopole charge, suggesting a second avenue for their potential observation: Alice strings might be observed, not as strings, but as looplike point defects, when twisted loops comprise the energetically favored solution of fundamental monopole charge.

We recently established in topalice  a topological criterion for Alice behavior, stating when Alice strings must form, and when strings’ Alice features may be deformed away. Consider the symmetry breakdown of Lie group $`GH`$, taking for $`G`$ the simply connected cover of the initial Lie symmetry. A topological string then has homotopy $`\pi _o(H)`$; that is, its flux $`U(2\pi )`$ lies in a disconnected component of the unbroken symmetry group $`H`$. Monopoles have homotopy $`\pi _1(H)`$, describing loops $`h(\alpha )`$ of different winding in $`H`$. Our criterion labels strings with flux $`U(2\pi )`$ topologically Alice if they alter the topological charge of monopoles circumnavigating them:

$$h(\alpha )\stackrel{~}{h}(\alpha )=U(2\pi )h(\alpha )U^1(2\pi )\sim ̸h(\alpha ).$$

This is a topological criterion, corresponding to a nontrivial action of $`\pi _o(H)`$ on $`\pi _1(H)`$, where $`h_o=U(2\pi )\pi _o(H)`$ alters the topological winding of loop $`h(\alpha )\pi _1(H)`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{h}(\alpha )=h_oh(\alpha )h_o^1\sim ̸h(\alpha ).$$
(1)
Using this criterion we constructed a prescription for twisting Alice strings into loops carrying monopole charge. We showed that the twisted Wilson line

$$U(\phi ,\alpha )=h^1(\alpha )U(\phi )h(\alpha )h_o^1,$$
(2)
with $`h(\alpha )`$ and $`h_o`$ as in our criterion above, generates a single-valued twisted Alice loop. $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$ interpolates between the point $`h_o^1`$ at $`\phi =0`$ and the loop $`h^1(\alpha )\stackrel{~}{h}(\alpha )`$ at $`\phi =2\pi `$. The twisted Alice loop thus carries a nontrivial monopole charge $`h^1(\alpha )\stackrel{~}{h}(\alpha )`$ if and only if the Alice string obeys our topological criterion. This monopole charge corresponds to that deposited on the Alice loop in the monopole circumnavigation $`h^1(\alpha )\stackrel{~}{h}^1(\alpha )`$. topalice

Two points are key. First, our topological arguments only indicate that deposited monopole charge can be carried by a twisted Alice loop. Monopole charge is typically not deposited in single fundamental units, leaving open the question of whether twisted Alice loops can carry fundamental monopole charge. Second, we took as twisting function $`h(\alpha )`$ for the twisted Wilson line $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$, the loop in $`H`$ representing a fundamental monopole (call this the fully-twisted Alice loop). We remain free to choose a different twisting function $`h(\alpha )`$ in $`H`$, so long as it renders $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$ singlevalued in the angle $`\alpha `$. Propitious choice of $`h(\alpha )`$, in some models, allows construction of twisted Alice loops with fundamental monopole charge.

We exploit both points here, in examining the monopole charge carried by model twisted Alice loops. We study primarily those models which offer the best condensed matter candidates for Alice strings: the original Alice string of Schwarz, coinciding with the Alice string of liquid crystals and of non-chiral Bose condensates oldAlice ; leonvol ; and the Alice string of 3He-A volmin , arising anew for unconventional spin-triplet superconductors spintrips . In both models we find strings which are topologically Alice. We also find twisted Alice loops supporting fundamental monopole charge, even though monopole charge deposits onto string loops in even increments. Thus, for the Alice strings of interest to condensed matter, even the most fundamental singular point defect, or monopole, can take the form of a twisted Alice loop.

We show, in other models, different outcomes for the topology of Alice strings and their twisted loops. When Alice behavior is nontopological, the fully-twisted Alice loop has trivial monopole charge. However, an Alice loop with different twist $`h(\alpha )`$ may still exist, carrying nontrivial monopole charge. We examine these possibilities in the context of a nontopologically Alice string discussed in stringzm  and topalice . Finally, string loops which are topologically Alice may admit only the full twisting invoked in our topological argument. In this case, twisted Alice strings carry only deposited, and not fundamental, monopole charge. We realize this possibility for a new topological Alice string, formed in the symmetry breakdown $`SU(3)O(2)`$. Here twisted Alice loops support only even deposited monopole charge, and cannot form fundamental monopoles.

Through these models we show that whether twisted Alice loops can support fundamental monopole charge depends closely on the symmetry-breaking pattern. Specifically, it depends on the initial symmetry group $`G`$, through the identification of loops in $`H`$ with monopoles via the exact sequence for $`\pi _2(G/H)`$. When fundamental monopoles correspond to nonminimal-winding loops in $`H`$, alternative choices for the loop twisting $`h(\alpha )`$ exist; and these can induce a twisted Alice loop with fundamental monopole charge. Algebraic commutations in the model may also allow alternative twistings $`h(\alpha )`$, yielding twisted Alice loops with fundamental monopole charge.

## II The Schwarz, or Nematic, Alice String

We start with the simplest example, the canonical Schwarz Alice string, oldAlice  whose symmetry-breaking pattern coincides with Alice strings in nematic liquid crystals and in non-chiral Bose condensates. leonvol

Here $`G`$ is $`SO(3)`$, with Higgs $`\varphi `$ transforming in the adjoint representation. When $`\varphi `$ develops the vev $`\varphi =\mathrm{diag}(1,1,2),`$ $`SO(3)`$ breaks to the residual symmetry $`H=O(2)`$, containing z-rotations $`R_z(\alpha )`$ and the discrete symmetry element $`h_o=R_x(\pi )=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1).`$ Here $`\pi _o(H)=Z_2`$ and $`\pi _1(H)=Z`$ so we have topological strings and monopoles. The canonical Alice string has Wilson line $`U(\phi )=R_x(\phi /2)`$ with $`U(2\pi )=h_o`$. This string is Alice, as $`U(2\pi )`$ fails to commute with the unbroken symmetry generator $`T_z`$; in fact, on parallel transport around the string,

$$T_zU(2\pi )T_zU^1(2\pi )=T_z.$$
(3)
This canonical Alice string meets our topological criterion, of changing topological monopole charge upon circumnavigation. By the exact sequence for $`\pi _2(G/H)`$, topological monopoles are associated with nontrivial loops in $`O(2)`$ which can be unwound in $`SO(3)`$. Since only even winding loops in $`O(2)`$ can be unwound in $`SO(3)`$, the fundamental monopole in this canonical Alice model has a loop in $`O(2)`$ of winding 2.

In applying our topological criterion, we choose $`h_o`$ as our representative of the string, a nontrivial element of $`\pi _o(H)`$, and $`h(\alpha )=R_z(2\alpha )`$ as our representative of the fundamental Alice monopole, a winding 2 element of $`\pi _1(H)`$. This gives

$$\stackrel{~}{h}(\alpha )=h_oh(\alpha )h_o^1=h^1(\alpha ),$$

from equation (3). Note that $`h^1(\alpha )`$ has $`O(2)`$ winding -2, topologically distinct from $`h(\alpha )`$ of $`O(2)`$ winding 2. Thus $`\stackrel{~}{h}(\alpha )\sim ̸h(\alpha )`$ and our topological criterion is fulfilled.

We now construct a monopole as a twisted Alice loop. From Eq. (2), the twisted Wilson line

$$U(\phi ,\alpha )=h^1(\alpha /2)U(\phi )h(\alpha /2)h_o^1$$

generates an Alice loop with single-valued condensate. (We take $`h(\alpha /2)`$ because we need only for $`h`$ to be single-valued in $`\alpha `$, and $`h(\alpha /2)`$, the winding 1 loop in $`O(2)`$, first fulfills that requirement.) $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$ interpolates between $`h_o^1`$ at $`\phi =0`$ and $`h^1(\alpha )`$ at $`\phi =2\pi `$. It is thus the fundamental antimonopole in the model. Note that the inverse twisted Alice loop, with twisted Wilson line $`U^1(\phi ,\alpha )`$, generates the fundamental monopole.

## III The Alice String of 3He-A

A more complicated global symmetry-breaking pattern describes the Alice string expected in 3He-A volmin ; volbook , and more recently predicted in amorphous chiral superconductors with p-wave pairing, such as Sr2RuO4.spintrips

Here $`G`$ is $`SO(3)_L\times SO(3)_S\times U(1)_N`$, describing spatial rotations, spin rotations, and a $`U(1)`$ phase symmetry associated with number conservation of helium atoms. (The U(1) symmetry is approximate, as is independence of spin and orbital rotations due to minimal spin-orbit coupling, but both describe 3He-A well.) The matrix order parameter $`A`$ transforms under symmetry transformations as $`Ae^{2i\theta }R_SAR_L^1,`$ where $`R_S`$ and $`R_L`$ are spin and orbital rotations, respectively.

The order parameter develops the form

$$A_{ij}=\mathrm{\Delta }_A\widehat{d}_i(\widehat{m}_j+i\widehat{n}_j),$$

where $`\widehat{m}`$ and $`\widehat{n}`$ are perpendicular, determining $`\widehat{l}=\widehat{m}\times \widehat{n},`$ the direction of the condensate’s angular momentum vector. This breaks $`G`$ to the residual symmetry $`H=U(1)_{S_{\widehat{d}}}\times U(1)_{L_{\widehat{l}}N/2}\times Z_2,`$ consisting of spin rotations about the $`\widehat{d}`$ axis; spatial rotations about the $`\widehat{l}`$ axis when compensated by a matching $`U(1)_N`$ phase rotation, and the discrete $`Z_2`$ transformation $`h_o`$, with $`h_o:\widehat{d},\widehat{m}+i\widehat{n}\widehat{d},(\widehat{m}+i\widehat{n}).`$

Identifying the defect topology requires care in this setting, as the exact sequences relating $`\pi _2(G/H)`$ and $`\pi _1(G/H)`$, the monopole and string homotopy groups, to $`\pi _1(H)`$ and $`\pi _0(H)`$ are highly nontrivial. Note that $`\pi _2(G/H)=Z`$, corresponding to the loops $`\pi _1(U(1)_{S_{\widehat{d}}})`$, which can be unwound in $`G`$. (Loops of the other $`U(1)`$ factor cannot be unwound in $`G`$, as they contain unshrinkable $`U(1)_N`$ loops.) $`\pi _1(G/H)=Z_4`$, which describes strings of two different origins. First, the Alice strings, called half-quantum vortices, have Wilson lines ending in a disconnected component of $`H`$, getting topological stability from $`\pi _0(H)`$. Second, a $`Z_2`$ winding one vortex, nontrivial in $`SO(3)_L`$ in $`G`$, induces as its image a $`Z_2`$ winding one vortex in $`G/H`$, with topological stability inherited from $`\pi _1(G)`$. These two classes of vortices are not independent: instead winding twice about a half-quantum vortex is equivalent to once around a winding one vortex, and the full string homotopy is $`\pi _1(G/H)=Z_4`$, or windings $`0,\pm 1/2`$, and $`1`$ modulo 2, with Alice strings corresponding to windings $`\pm 1/2`$.

The Volovik-Mineev Alice string, of winding $`\pm 1/2`$, has order parameter $`A_{ij}`$ with $`\widehat{d}=\widehat{x}`$ in spin space, and $`\{\widehat{l},\widehat{m},\widehat{n}\}=\{\widehat{x},\widehat{y},\widehat{z}\}`$ in ordinary space. This is acted on by Wilson line $`U(\phi )=e^{\pm i\phi /2}R_{S_{\widehat{z}}}(\phi /2)`$ to give, asymptotically in $`r`$,

$$A_{ij}(\phi )=\mathrm{\Delta }_Ae^{\pm i\phi /2}(\mathrm{cos}(\phi /2)\widehat{x}_j+\mathrm{sin}(\phi /2)\widehat{y}_j)_S(\widehat{x}_j+i\widehat{y}_j)_L,$$

single-valued in $`\phi `$. Note that $`U(2\pi )=R_{S_{\widehat{z}}}(\pi )`$ lies in the same homotopy class as $`h_o`$. This string is Alice, making unbroken symmetry generator $`T_{S_{\widehat{x}}}`$ double-valued. Physically, this means that a particle flips its spin, and hence its magnetization, on circumnavigating the Alice string.

This long-studied Alice string meets our topological criterion, of changing topological monopole charge upon circumnavigation. By the exact sequence for $`\pi _2(G/H)`$, topological monopoles are associated with nontrivial loops in $`U(1)_{S_{\widehat{x}}}`$ which can be unwound in $`SO(3)_S`$. As in the nematic case, only even winding loops in $`U(1)_{S_{\widehat{x}}}`$ can be unwound in $`SO(3)_S`$. Thus the fundamental monopole in 3He-A corresponds to a loop in $`U(1)_{S_{\widehat{x}}}`$ of winding 2.

In applying our topological criterion, we choose $`U(2\pi )`$ as our representative of the string, a nontrivial element of $`\pi _o(H)`$, and $`h(\alpha )=R_{S_{\widehat{x}}}(2\alpha )`$ as our representative of the fundamental monopole, a winding 2 element of $`\pi _1(U(1)_{S_{\widehat{x}}})`$. This gives

$$\stackrel{~}{h}(\alpha )=h_oh(\alpha )h_o^1=h^1(\alpha ),$$

since $`T_{S_{\widehat{x}}}T_{S_{\widehat{x}}}`$. Note that $`h^1(\alpha )`$ has $`U(1)_{S_{\widehat{x}}}`$ winding -2, topologically distinct from $`h(\alpha )`$ of $`U(1)_{S_{\widehat{x}}}`$ with winding 2. Thus $`\stackrel{~}{h}(\alpha )\sim ̸h(\alpha )`$, meeting our topological criterion.

As in the nematic case, we construct a monopole as a twisted Alice loop. From Eq. (2), the twisted Wilson line

$$U(\phi ,\alpha )=h^1(\alpha /2)U(\phi )h(\alpha /2)h_o^1$$

generates an Alice loop with single-valued condensate. (Again $`h(\alpha /2)`$ appears, the winding 1 loop in $`U(1)_{S_{\widehat{x}}}`$, as our minimal single-valued choice in constructing $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$.) $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$ interpolates between $`h_o^1`$ at $`\phi =0`$ and $`h^1(\alpha )`$ at $`\phi =2\pi `$. It is thus the fundamental antimonopole in the model, which contains monopoles and antimonopoles of even winding in $`U(1)_{S_{\widehat{x}}}`$ only. Note that the inverse twisted Alice loop, with twisted Wilson line $`U^1(\phi ,\alpha )`$, again generates the fundamental monopole.

## IV A Nontopologically Alice string

A nontopologically Alice string arises when a Higgs $`\varphi `$, transforming in the adjoint representation under $`G=SO(6)`$, acquires the vev $`\varphi =\mathrm{diag}(1^3,1^3)`$. As discussed in stringzm , this condensate leaves unbroken an $`SO(3)\times SO(3)`$ subgroup of $`SO(6)`$ and a discrete $`Z_2`$ transformation $`h_1=11_6`$, so $`H=SO(3)\times SO(3)\times Z_2`$. Here $`\pi _o(H)=Z_2`$ and $`\pi _1(H)=Z_2\times Z_2`$, so topological strings and monopoles form, with monopoles and antimonopoles topologically identified. As noted in topalice , strings in this model can have algebraic Alice behavior, for $`U(2\pi )=h_o=\mathrm{diag}(1^2,(1)^4)=R_{12}(\pi )`$, which makes generators $`T_{13}`$ and $`T_{23}`$ of rotations in the $`13`$\- and $`23`$-planes double-valued. Yet that Alice behavior fails our topological criterion. Taking as our nontrivial monopole loop $`h(\alpha )=R_{13}(\alpha )`$, with monopole charge (1,0), we find $`\stackrel{~}{h}(\alpha )=h_oh(\alpha )h_o^1=h^1(\alpha )`$, since $`T_{13}T_{13}`$. Thus the (1,0) monopole transforms into its antimonopole on traversing the string. However, as monopoles and antimonopoles are identified, that transformation is nontopological. This string’s Alice behavior is thus nontopological; it can be deformed away by deforming $`U(2\pi )`$ to the topologically equivalent value $`h_1`$, with no algebraic Alice behavior.

We might still hope to construct a (1,0) monopole as a twisted string loop, taking for our string the algebraic, but nontopologically Alice string $`U(\phi )=R_{34}(\phi /2)R_{56}(\phi /2)`$, with algebraic Alice flux $`U(2\pi )=h_o=R_{12}(\pi )`$ as above. From Eq. (2),the twisted Wilson line

$$U(\phi ,\alpha )=h^1(\alpha )U(\phi )h(\alpha )h_o^1$$

generates an Alice loop with single-valued condensate. $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$ interpolates between $`h_o^1`$ at $`\phi =0`$ and $`h^2(\alpha )`$ at $`\phi =2\pi `$. This is a loop in $`H`$ of winding (2,0); however, winding (2,0) loops are deformable to the identity in $`H`$, so this twisted nontopologically Alice loop fails to carry topological monopole charge.

Recall that, in building singlevalued twisted Alice loops, we required $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$ to be singlevalued in $`\alpha `$; we thus identified $`h(\alpha )`$ as a loop in $`H`$. Strictly, we do not need $`h(\alpha )`$ to be a loop; all we need is

$$h^1(2\pi )U(\phi )h(2\pi )=U(\phi ).$$
(4)
We might still hope to build the fundamental (1,0) monopole as a twisted Alice loop, exploiting this freedom in $`h(\alpha )`$. Were the twisted loop

$$U(\phi ,\alpha )=h^1(\alpha /2)U(\phi )h(\alpha /2)h_o^1$$

single-valued, it would carry fundamental (-1,0) monopole charge, as it interpolates between $`h_o^1`$ at $`\phi =0`$ and the nontrivial (-1,0) antimonopole $`h^1(\alpha )`$ at $`\phi =2\pi `$. However, this twisted loop candidate is not single-valued; it obeys instead $`h^1(2\pi )U(\phi )h(2\pi )=U^1(\phi ).`$ We thus cannot build a fundamental (1,0) monopole as a twisted Alice loop in this model, where Alice behavior is nontopological and monopole charge is $`Z_2\times Z_2`$.

This possibility to construct $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$ single-valued in $`\alpha `$, without forcing $`h(\alpha )`$ to be a loop, always merits investigating. Indeed, in skyrme ; global , one of us constructed what is essentially the fundamental monopole in this model, by exploiting exactly such an accidental algebraic singlevaluedness. That construction (most clearly in section IIIA of global , taking $`F(r),\phi `$ as the spherical coordinates $`\theta ,\phi `$ at spatial infinity),is quite similar to the twisting constructions here. However, it describes a fundamentally point-like defect, and cannot be interpreted as a twisted loop.

## V A Topologically Alice Loop Carrying only Deposited Monopole Charge

We consider a slightly modified canonical Alice string. Take $`G`$ to be $`SU(3)`$, with Higgs $`\varphi `$ transforming according to $`\varphi g\varphi g^T`$ (giving fermions in this model a Majorana mass). When $`\varphi `$ develops the vev $`\varphi =\mathrm{diag}(1,1,2),`$ $`SU(3)`$ breaks to the residual symmetry $`H=O(2)`$, identical to that of the canonical Schwarz Alice string. Again we have $`\pi _o(H)=Z_2`$ and $`\pi _1(H)=Z`$, with topological strings and monopoles. We have the same Alice string as in the canonical case, making the $`O(2)`$ generator $`T_z`$ double-valued. This Alice behavior is again topological, as our topological criterion, that $`\pi _o(H)`$ acts nontrivially on $`\pi _1(H)`$, depends only on the unbroken symmetry group $`H`$.

Where we deviate from the canonical Alice string model is in the identification of twisted Alice loops as monopoles. Here, by the exact sequence for $`\pi _2(G/H)`$, topological monopoles are associated with nontrivial loops in $`O(2)`$ which can be unwound in $`G`$, here $`SU(3)`$. All nontrivial loops in $`O(2)`$ can be unwound in $`SU(3)`$; thus the fundamental monopole in this model has a loop in $`O(2)`$ of winding 1.

We now construct a monopole as a twisted Alice loop. We take $`U(\phi )=R_x(\phi /2)`$, as in the canonical Alice case, and $`h(\alpha )=R_z(\alpha )`$, a loop of winding 1. From Eq. (2), the twisted Wilson line

$$U(\phi ,\alpha )=h^1(\alpha )U(\phi )h(\alpha )h_o^1$$

generates a twisted Alice loop with single-valued condensate. $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$ interpolates between $`h_o^1`$ at $`\phi =0`$ and $`h^2(\alpha )`$ at $`\phi =2\pi `$. This twisted Alice loop carries monopole charge of $`2`$, which while nontrivial is not the fundamental antimonopole in this model. (Similarly, the inverse twisted Alice loop, with Wilson line $`U^1(\phi ,\alpha )`$, carries monopole charge +2).

Again, we might still hope to build a fundamental monopole as a twisted Alice loop, by allowing $`h(\alpha )`$ above to be not a loop, but a curve obeying Eq. (4) This looser constraint still guarantees singlevaluedness in $`\alpha `$ of $`U(\phi ,\alpha )`$. Indeed, were the twisted loop

$$U(\phi ,\alpha )=h^1(\alpha /2)U(\phi )h(\alpha /2)h_o^1$$

single-valued in $`\alpha `$, with $`h(\alpha )=R_z(\alpha )`$ as above, it would carry fundamental antimonopole charge. This is because it interpolates between $`h_o^1`$ at $`\phi =0`$ and the winding $`1`$ loop $`h^1(\alpha )`$ at $`\phi =2\pi `$. However, this twisted loop candidate is not single-valued in $`\alpha `$; it obeys instead $`U(\phi ,2\pi )=R_x^1(\phi )U(\phi ,0).`$ We thus cannot build a fundamental monopole as a twisted Alice loop in this model. Instead twisted Alice loops carry only the monopole charge which topological arguments ensure they must carry: because monopoles scatter into antimonopoles on transiting Alice loops, Alice loops must support deposited monopole charge, which arises in units of 2. Our twisting construction creates twisted Alice loops supporting exactly that deposited charge.

###### Acknowledgements.

Early stages of this work were supported by NSF grant PHY-9631182 and by the University Research Committee of Emory University.


text:
# The Optical afterglow of the not so dark GRB 021211

## 1 Introduction

A long duration burst, GRB 021211 ($``$ H2493), triggered at 11h18m34.s03 UT on 11 December 2002 was detected by the High Energy Transient Explorer (HETE) FREGATE, WXM, and soft $`X`$ray camera (SXC) instruments (Crew et al. 2003). It was also observed by ULYSSES and KONUS (Hurley et al. 2002). The burst had a duration of $``$ 2.3 seconds at higher energies (85 – 400 keV) but a longer duration of about 8.5 seconds at lower energies (5 – 10 keV) band. It had a fluence of about 1 and 2 $`\mu `$erg/cm2 in the energy bands of 7 – 30 keV and 30 – 400 keV respectively. This indicates that GRB 021211 is an “$`X`$ ray rich” burst (Crew et al. 2003). The SXC coordinates of the burst reported by Crew et al. (2003) are $`\alpha =08^\mathrm{h}09^\mathrm{m}00^\mathrm{s},\delta =+06^{}44^{}20^{\prime \prime }`$ (J2000). Within the error circle of SXC, an optical afterglow (OA) of the GRB 021211 was discovered by Fox & Price (2002) at $`\alpha =08^\mathrm{h}08^\mathrm{m}59.^\mathrm{s}883,\delta =+06^{}43^{}37.^{\prime \prime }88`$ (J2000). The source was subsequently also identified in a number of images taken at $``$ 90, 108 and 143 seconds after the burst by robotic optical telescopes. Thus, GRB 021211 joins the group of GRB 990123 (Akerlof et al. 1999) and GRB 021004 (Fox et al. 2003b, Pandey et al. 2003) whose early optical emissions could be observed within few minutes of the trigger of the event. Spectroscopic observations by Della Valle et al. (2003) indicate a redshift value of $`z`$ = 1.004$`\pm `$0.002 for the probable host galaxy of GRB 021211. Fox et al. (2003a) report optical and near-IR observations of the GRB afterglow and find that at optical wavelengths, the GRB 021211 afterglow is significantly fainter than most of the known afterglows at an epoch of $``$ 1 day. The observed fluence in the 30 – 400 keV energy band by Crew et al. (2003) together with the measured redshift $`z`$ = 1.004$`\pm `$0.002 (Della Valle et al. 2003) indicates an isotropic equivalent energy release $`E_{\mathrm{iso},\gamma }6.1\times 10^{51}`$ erg for $`H_0`$ = 65 km/s/Mpc in a $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ = 0.3 and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ = 0.7 cosmological model. With a cosmological $`K`$-correction as in Bloom, Frail & Sari (2001) the estimated isotropic-equivalent energy becomes $`E_{\mathrm{iso},\gamma }1.02\times 10^{52}`$ erg, an order of magnitude lower than the corresponding estimate for GRB 990123 (Bloom, Frail & Kulkarni 2003).

In this paper we present optical observations obtained during the temporal gap of the light curves presented by Della Valle et al. (2003a), Fox et al. (2003a) and Li et al. (2003) using secure photometric calibrations.

## 2 Observations and data reduction

The broad band Johnson $`BV`$ and Cousins $`RI`$ photometric observations of the OA were carried out on 11 December 2002 using the 104-cm Sampurnanand telescope of the State Observatory, Nainital and 2-m Himalayan Chandra Telescope (HCT) of the Indian Astronomical Observatory (IAO), Hanle. At Nainital, one pixel of the 2048 $`\times `$ 2048 pixel2 size CCD chip corresponds to a square of 0.$`^{^{\prime \prime }}`$38 side, and the entire chip covers a field of $`13^{}\times 13^{}`$ on the sky. The gain and read out noise of the CCD camera are 10 $`e^{}/ADU`$ and 5.3 $`e^{}`$ respectively. At Hanle, one pixel corresponds to a square of 0.$`^{^{\prime \prime }}`$3 side, and the entire chip covers a field of $`10^{}\times 10^{}`$ on the sky. It has a read out noise of 4.95 $`e^{}`$ and gain is 1.23 $`e^{}/ADU`$. From Nainital, the CCD $`BVRI`$ observations of the OA field along with Landolt (1992) standard SA 98 region were obtained on 26/27 December 2002 for photometric calibrations during good photometric sky conditions. During the observing run, several twilight flat field and bias frames were also obtained for the CCD calibrations.

ESO MIDAS, NOAO IRAF and DAOPHOT softwares were used to process the CCD frames in a standard way. The photometric calibrations derived using the six standards of the SA 98 region with color $`0.61<(VI)<2.14`$ and brightness $`13.1<V<16.3`$ are:

$`b_{\mathrm{CCD}}=B(0.036\pm 0.01)(BV)+(4.75\pm 0.01)`$
$`v_{\mathrm{CCD}}=V(0.027\pm 0.01)(BV)+(4.30\pm 0.01)`$
$`r_{\mathrm{CCD}}=R(0.004\pm 0.01)(VI)+(4.23\pm 0.02)`$
$`i_{\mathrm{CCD}}=I(0.064\pm 0.01)(VI)+(4.73\pm 0.01)`$

where $`BVRI`$ are standard magnitudes and $`b_{\mathrm{CCD}},v_{\mathrm{CCD}},r_{\mathrm{CCD}}`$ and $`i_{\mathrm{CCD}}`$ represent the instrumental aperture magnitudes normalized for 1 second of exposure time and corrected for atmospheric extinction coefficients determined from the Nainital observations of SA 98 bright stars. The values are 0.27, 0.17, 0.11 and 0.10 mag at the zenith in $`B,V,R`$ and $`I`$ filters respectively on the night of 26/27 December 2002. The errors in the colour coefficients and zero points are obtained by fitting least square linear regressions to the data points. Using the above calibrations, $`BVRI`$ photometric magnitudes of 10 secondary standard stars are determined in the GRB 021211 field and their average values are listed in Table 1. The $`(X,Y)`$ CCD pixels are used to convert coordinates into equatorial coordinates $`\alpha _{2000},\delta _{2000}`$ values using the astrometric positions given by Henden (2002). All the secondary stars have been observed seven times in a filter and have internal photometric accuracy better than 0.01 mag. A comparison of present magnitudes of the secondary stars with those given by Henden (2002) values yields zero-point differences of $`0.04\pm 0.01,0.01\pm 0.02,0.01\pm 0.02`$ and $`0.00\pm 0.02`$ mag in $`V,(BV),(VR)`$ and $`(VI)`$ respectively. Zero point difference is thus significant in $`V`$, however these numbers can be accounted in terms of the errors present in the zero point determination of the two photometries. There is no colour dependence in the photometric differences. These demonstrate that the photometric calibrations used in the present work are secure.

Several short exposures up to a maximum of 30 min were generally given while imaging the OA (see Table 2). In order to improve the signal-to-noise ratio of the OA, the data have been binned in $`2\times 2`$ pixel2 and also several bias corrected and flat-fielded CCD images of OA field are co-added in the same filter, when found necessary. From these images, profile-fitting magnitudes are determined using DAOPHOT software due to the presence of bright star near the OT. The profile magnitudes have been converted to aperture (about 5 arcsec) magnitudes using aperture growth curve determined from well isolated secondary standards. They are differentially calibrated using the secondary standards listed in Table 1 and the values derived in this way are given in Table 2.

## 3 Results

### 3.1 $`R`$ band photometric light curve

In Fig. 1, we plot the temporal evolution of our $`R`$ band GRB 021211 afterglow measurements along with those published by Della Valle et al. (2003a), Fox et al. (2003a), Fruchter et al. (2002), Levan et al. (2002), Li et al. (2003), McLeod et al. (2002), Park et al. (2002) and Wozniak et al. (2002) after correcting for the host galaxy contribution as described in the next paragraph. We also make use of the published photometric measurements which could be converted on the present photometric scales using secondary stars listed in table 1. Fig. 1 also shows the $`R`$ band light curves of GRB 990123 and GRB 021004. Early time observations of GRB 990123 ($`\mathrm{\Delta }t<`$ 7 min) and GRB 021211 ($`\mathrm{\Delta }t<`$ 11min) can be well explained in terms of reverse shock emission, taking into account that GRB 021211 $``$ 4 mag fainter than GRB 990123 as noticed by Li et al. (2003) too. The GRB 021004 early time ($`\mathrm{\Delta }t<`$ 19 min) optical observations show unexpectedly shallower flux decay than that of GRB 990123 and GRB 021211 so reverse shock explanation can be ruled out either for homogeneous or for inhomogeneous environments (Chevalier & Li 2000, Fox et al. 2003b).

The flux decay of the GRB 021211 OA, at times $`>`$ 11 min after the burst can be well characterized by a single power law decay plus a constant flux $`F_{\mathrm{host}}`$, component for the underlying host galaxy and can be written as

$$F(t)=const.\times t^\alpha +F_{\mathrm{host}}$$
(1)
where $`F(t)`$ is total measured flux of the OT at time $`t`$ after the burst and $`\alpha `$ is the temporal flux decay index. We fitted the above function using the least square regression method leaving $`F_{\mathrm{host}}`$ as a free parameter, including the late time VLT $`R`$ band observations (Della Valle et al. 2003a) but excluding the HST points (Fruchter et al. 2002). This yields $`\alpha `$ = 1.11$`\pm `$0.01, $`\chi ^2`$ per DOF = 3.73 with host galaxy $`R`$ = 25.16$`\pm `$0.05 mag, which is consistent with the value given by Della Valle et al. (2003a). The observations presented here follow the fitted light curve well and fill the existing temporal gap in the published data (see Fig 1). The least square linear regression to the host galaxy contribution subtracted data including HST points yields $`\alpha `$ = 1.08$`\pm `$0.01 with $`\chi ^2`$ per DOF = 5.48. The larger values of $`\chi ^2`$ are mainly due to two deviant points (see Fig 1) towards later epoch. As argued by Della Valle et al. (2003a), these deviations most probably arise due to the additional contribution from a supernova component, noticeable in their spectroscopic data.

The value of flux decay $`\alpha `$ agrees fairly well with that determined by Fox et al. (2003a) and Li et al. (2003). The very fast flux decay, within a day after the burst, of the GRB 021211 OA can be compared with those of GRB 000630 (Fynbo et al. 2001), GRB 020124 (Berger et al. 2002) and GRB 020322 (Burud et al. 2002) afterglowsi, which had similar temporal flux decay slopes and were detected at $``$ 23 mag in the $`R`$ passband, one day after the burst.

### 3.2 Spectral energy distribution

Fig. 2 shows the GRB 021211 afterglow optical to near-IR spectrum at three epochs: $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ = 0.13, 0.35 and 0.86 day using the present $`BVR`$ optical data and the published $`BRJK_s`$ observations by Fox et al. (2003a) and Bersier et al. (2003). The epochs are selected according to the widest possible wavelength coverage. Where necessary, measurements are interpolated at a given wavelength. We used the reddening map provided by Schlegel, Finkbeiner & Davis (1998) for estimating Galactic interstellar extinction towards the burst and found a small value of $`E(BV)=0.028`$ mag. We used the standard Galactic extinction reddening curve given by Mathis (1990) in converting apparent magnitudes into fluxes and used the effective wavelengths and normalizations by Fukugita et al. (1995) and Bessell & Brett (1988), for $`BVR`$ and Epchtein et al. (1994) for $`J`$ and $`K_s`$. We corrected the data for Galactic extinction only as the intrinsic extinction contribution from the host galaxy is unknown. We describe the spectrum by a single power law: $`F_\nu \nu ^\beta `$, where $`F_\nu `$ is the flux at frequency $`\nu `$ and $`\beta `$ is the spectral index. The values of $`\beta `$ at 0.13, 0.35 and 0.86 days after the burst are $`0.66\pm `$0.34, $`0.61\pm `$0.09 and 0.53$`\pm `$0.15 respectively. The corresponding values of $`(BR)`$ are 1.2$`\pm `$0.2, 0.8$`\pm `$ 0.2 and 0.8$`\pm `$0.2 mag respectively. Whereas the $`(BK_s)`$ values are 3.4$`\pm `$0.3 and 3.2$`\pm `$0.3 at $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ = 0.13 and 0.35 day respectively. These values indicate that the spectral slope of GRB 021211 OA has not changed within a day after the burst and has a mean value of 0.6$`\pm `$0.2.

## 4 Discussions and Conclusions

$`BVRI`$ optical observations of the GRB 021211 OA around 0.28 day after the burst are presented. The optical light curve of GRB 021211 OA (Fig.1) at times $`>`$ 11 min after the burst can be well explained in terms of a single power law with the underlying host galaxy of $`R=25.16\pm 0.05`$ mag. GRB 011211 optical afterglow is intrinsically faint when compared with those of GRB 990123 and GRB 021004. It was detected only due to prompt, early follow up. Otherwise it would have been classified as a “dark GRB” as it was fainter than $`R`$ = 23 mag, $``$ 1 day after the burst and, in general, the usual follow-up observations do not go that deep. It thus appears that GRB 021211 is the first example of an “optically dim” burst for which early time (less than a few minutes after the burst) observations are available. It is thus likely that many optically “dark GRBs” could just be “optically dim” afterglows with the reason behind their non-detection being not only due to the high redshift and extinction due to host galaxy but also due to the OA being much fainter than those observed to date (Crew et al. 2003). So, GRB 021211 is an example to indicate that a fraction of the otherwise so-called “dark GRBs” are “not so dark”. Deeper and faster follow-up observations are required to detect them.

Our fitted $`R`$ band values of temporal flux decay $`\alpha `$ and derived optical-near IR spectral slope $`\beta `$ can be well understood in terms of simple spherical adiabatic case for the homogeneous medium (Sari, Piran, & Narayan 1998) in which for $`\nu <\nu _c`$, $`\alpha =3\beta /2=3(p1)/4`$. The observed spectral slope $`\beta `$ = 0.6$`\pm `$0.2 thus yields $`\alpha `$ = 0.9$`\pm `$0.3 , consistent with the observed value of $`\alpha `$ = 1.1$`\pm `$0.01 and the electron energy distribution index $`p=2.2\pm 0.4`$. These values indicate that the cooling frequency $`\nu _c`$ lies above the optical band.

Acknowledgments This research has made use of data obtained through the High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center Online Service, provided by the NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center. S. B. Pandey is thankful to R. K. S. Yadav and J. C. Pandey for help during observations. We are also thankful to anonymous referee for the useful comments.


text:
# Supersymmetric manipulation of quasienergy states. Application to the Berry phase

## Abstract

Time-dependent supersymmetry allows one to delete quasienergy levels for time-periodic Hamiltonians and to create new ones. We illustrate this by examining an exactly solvable model related to the simple harmonic oscillator with a time-varying frequency. For an interesting nonharmonic example we present the change of the Berry phase due to a supersymmetry transformation.

One may say without exaggeration that non-relativistic quantum mechanics is essential to understanding the basic laws of nature. Thus, the Schrödinger equation is one of the most fundamental constructs of modern natural science and over the past century, as evidenced by a vast literature, great progress has been made in developing various consequences of the time-independent Schrödinger equation describing stationary processes. Key recent advances concern the manipulation of bound states Zakhariev . In the real world, however, nearly everything changes with time, and stationary processes are exceptional (perhaps even impossible), but there is ample evidence for believing that there will soon be similar advances in the study of non-stationary processes and the consequences of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation. The end of the last century saw some progress in this area: an extensive investigation into the properties of time periodic Hamiltonians, their dynamical invariants MMK  and symmetries Alon , dynamical pulsed coherent states GV , Floquet quanta Mielnik  and application in optics WSG . An area that is now attracting interest is calculating the Berry, or geometric, phase for time dependent Hamiltonians, although so far the only system treated in detail is the, exactly solvable, harmonic oscillator with time dependent mass and/or frequency GeChild .

It has long been known how to construct new exactly solvable time-independent Hamiltonians from an initial one by means of the Darboux, or supersymmetry, transformation (see e.g. books ; BSRev ), and the procedure has recently been generalized to include time dependence BSRev ; BSPLA . Although stationary state energies do not exist for a time-dependent Hamiltonian, if the time dependence is periodic, quasienergies play a similar role Zeldovich ; Per . In this letter, based on the simple harmonic oscillator model, having a time-periodic frequency, we show that this analogy is much deeper than previously recognized and that it can be extended to the level of supersymmetry. In particular, we show that processes such as the creation and annihilation of quasienergies may be effected easily by time-dependent supersymmetry (or Darboux) transformations. This also opens the door for performing more complex operations on quasienergy states by applying integral transformations which are essentially inverses to the differential supersymmetry transformations BSRev , Zakhariev ; books .

Since exact eigenstates are known for these new time-dependent Hamiltonians their remarkable properties, such as the the Berry phase, can be investigated in detail. We demonstrate here that the Berry phase, for systems generated from our model harmonic oscillator Hamiltonian, simply acquires an additive correction under a Darboux transformation.

We begin with the Schrödinger equation for the Hamiltonian

$$h_0=_x^2+\omega ^2(t)x^2,\omega (t+T)=\omega (t)$$
(1)
where $`_x/_x`$ and appropriate units have been chosen. A complete set of solutions normalized to unity on the real line is LR  Man

$$\psi _n(x,t)=\left(\overline{\epsilon }/\epsilon \right)^{n/2+1/4}\mathrm{exp}\left(i\dot{\gamma }z^2\right)f_n(x,t)$$
(2)
where

$$f_n(x,t)=N_n\gamma ^{1/4}H_n(z)e^{z^2/2},z(x,t)=x/\sqrt{8\gamma (t)},$$
(3)
Here $`N_n=(2^{n+1}n!\sqrt{2\pi })^{1/2}`$, $`\gamma =\epsilon \overline{\epsilon }`$, $`H_n(z)`$ is a Hermite polynomial and $`\epsilon (t)`$, $`\overline{\epsilon }(t)`$ are two linearly independent solutions of the classical equation of motion for the harmonic oscillator

$$\ddot{\epsilon }(t)+4\omega ^2(t)\epsilon (t)=0.$$
(4)
A dot over a symbol represents the derivative with respect to time and we choose these solutions so that their Wronskian $`\dot{ϵ}(t)\overline{ϵ}(t)ϵ(t)\dot{\overline{ϵ}}(t)=\frac{i}{2}`$. In general, the solutions of (4) are of three types: (i) both $`\epsilon `$ and $`\overline{\epsilon }`$ are stable, (ii) they are both unstable, (iii) one is stable the other is unstable. It is known Per  that only in the first case the functions (2) have the property

$$\psi _n(x,t+T)=e^{iE_nT}\psi _n(x,t),$$
(5)
where $`E_n=(n+\frac{1}{2})\delta `$ is called the quasienergy Zeldovich  and $`\delta `$ is defined by the equation

$$\epsilon (t+T)=\epsilon (t)e^{i\delta T}.$$
(6)
According to Floquet’s theorem a (complex) solution $`\epsilon (t)`$ to equation (4) satisfying (6) can always be found in case (i). We choose the complex conjugate of $`\epsilon `$ to be the second, linearly independent, solution to (4). Here and below a bar over a quantity denotes its complex conjugate and we note that $`\gamma (t)`$ is real. It is clear from (4) that quasienergies $`E_n`$ are defined modulo $`2\pi `$ and if they are comensurable with $`\frac{2\pi }{T}`$, the functions $`\psi _n`$ are periodic.

A further useful property of the functions (2) is that there exist ladder operators

$$a=\epsilon _xi\dot{\epsilon }x/2,a^+=\overline{\epsilon }_x+i\dot{\overline{\epsilon }}x/2$$
(7)
such that

$$a\psi _n=\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2}\psi _{n1},a^+\psi _n=\frac{\sqrt{n+1}}{2}\psi _{n+1}.$$
(8)
These functions are eigenfunctions of the symmetry operator $`g=(aa^++a^+a)/2`$, $`g\psi _n=g_n\psi _n`$ with $`g_n=\frac{1}{8}(2n+1)`$.

Next we shall apply the approach presented in BSPLA  for constructing new exactly solvable time-dependent Hamiltonians having the same quasienergy spectrum, with the possible exception of a few levels, as a given one. The procedure is simply the time-dependent generalization of the usual supersymmetry construction books . A new hamiltonian $`h_1`$ is defined by means of a nodeless solution $`u(x,t)`$, called the transformation function, to the initial Schrödinger equation, $`i_tu(x,t)=h_0u(x,t)`$, subject to the additional condition $`_x^3\left(\mathrm{ln}u/\overline{u}\right)=0`$, which guarantees that $`h_1`$ has the form

$$h_1=h_0_x^2\mathrm{ln}|u(x,t)|^2.$$
(9)
Solutions of the corresponding Schrödinger equation are obtained by applying the differential operator

$$L=L_1(t)[_x+\mathrm{ln}u(x,t)/x]$$
(10)
to $`\psi _n`$:

$$\phi _n(x,t)=M_n^{1/2}L\psi _n(x,t)$$
(11)
where the time-independent factor $`M_n^{1/2}`$ guarantees that the functions (11) are normalized to unity. The operator $`L`$ is defined in terms of the same function $`u(x,t)`$ as in (9) and

$$L_1\left(t\right)=\mathrm{exp}\left[2Im\left(_x^2\mathrm{ln}u\right)dt\right].$$
(12)
The operator $`L^+=L_1(t)[_x+\mathrm{ln}\overline{u}(x,t)/x]`$, adjoint to $`L`$, realizes the transformation in the opposite direction, from solutions of the Schrödinger equation with Hamiltonian $`h_1`$ to those of the Hamiltonian $`h_0`$. Thus, the superposition $`L^+L`$ is a symmetry operator for the initial Schrödinger equation and the function $`u(x,t)`$ is an eigenfunction of this operator: $`L^+Lu(x,t)=g_uu(x,t)`$. The normalization factor in (11) is equal to its mean value $`M_n=\psi _n|L^+L|\psi _n`$.

Among the functions (2) only $`\psi _0`$ is nodeless and suitable for using as a transformation function; it produces only a shift of the Hamiltonian by an $`x`$-independent value. This is simply a manifestation of the well-known shape-invariance property books  in the time-dependent case. Any other function $`u_k(x,t)=\psi _k(x,t)`$, $`k>0`$ taken as the transformation function will produce a potential with $`k`$ poles corresponding to the zeros of $`\psi _k(x,t)`$ which clearly has no physical meaning if the variable $`x`$ runs over the whole real line. The transformed Hamiltonian $`h_1`$ can be taken as the initial one for the next transformation step and if this is realized with the transformation function $`\stackrel{~}{u}_{k+1}(x,t)=Lu_{k+1}(x,t)`$ all the poles are removed and the resulting Hamiltonian $`h_2^{(k)}=h_0A_2^{(k)}(x,t)`$ is physically admissible. For the potential difference one gets

$$A_2^{(k)}(x,t)=\frac{1}{4\gamma }\left[\frac{J_k^{\prime \prime }(z)}{J_k(z)}\left(\frac{J_k^{}(z)}{J_k(z)}\right)^22\right].$$
(13)
Here

$$J_k\left(z\right)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}\frac{k!}{2^jj!}H_j^2\left(z\right)$$

and for the first three of these functions one has the simple expressions:

$$J_0\left(z\right)=1,J_1\left(z\right)=2z^2+1,J_2\left(z\right)=4z^4+3.$$

The Hamiltonian $`h_2`$ has the same system of quasienergies as $`h_0`$ except for those corresponding to $`n=k`$ and $`n=k+1`$ which are now deleted. We can repeat this process without any restrictions and get a Hamiltonian having an initial quasienergy spectrum with any number of lacunae composed of two adjacent levels. The potential $`V_2^{(k)}=\omega ^2(t)x^2A_2^{(k)}`$ looks like a harmonic oscillator potential, at the bottom of which there are $`k`$ additional minima. The behavior of the $`k=2`$ case, which is typical, is sketched in Fig. 1 together with the harmonic oscillator potential.

The opposite process, the creation of new quasienergy levels, is also possible. For this purpose we need unphysical solutions of the initial Schrödinger equation, which do not belong to the Hilbert space and have growing asymptotic behavior as $`|x|\mathrm{}`$ at any fixed moment of time. It is not difficult to see that the functions

$$u_k(x,t)=\gamma ^{1/4}\left(ϵ/\overline{ϵ}\right)^{k/2+1/4}H_k\left(iz\right)e^{(2i\dot{\gamma }+1/2)z^2}$$
(14)
have this property. For any even value $`k=2l`$ these are nodeless and suitable for using as transformation functions. They produce the new Hamiltonians $`h_1^{(2l)}=_x^2+V_1^{(2l)}(x,t)`$, $`l=0,1,\mathrm{}`$ with potentials

$$V_1^{(2l)}(x,t)=\omega ^2(t)x^2A_1^{(2l)}(x,t),L_1(t)=\sqrt{\gamma (t)},$$
(15)
where

$$A_1^{(2l)}=\frac{1}{4\gamma }[1+4l(2l1)\frac{q_{2l2(z)}}{q_{2l(z)}}8l^2\left(\frac{q_{2l1}(z)}{q_{2l}(z)}\right)^2],$$
(16)
and $`q_k(z)=(i)^k2^{k/2}H_k(iz)`$. Using the recursion relation for Hermite polynomials one finds

$$q_0(z)=1,q_1(z)=\sqrt{2}z,q_{k+1}(z)=\sqrt{2}zq_k(z)+kq_{k1}(z).$$

The fact that a new quasienergy level is created by this process follows from the property that the function $`v=1/(L_1\overline{u}_k)`$ is a square integrable solution of the transformed Schrödinger equation. It is easy to see that it corresponds to the quasienergy $`E=\delta (k+\frac{1}{2})`$, which, in general, is different from all the other quasienergies $`E_n=\delta (n+\frac{1}{2})`$, $`n=0,1,\mathrm{}`$. The case $`k=0`$ reproduces the harmonic oscillator Hamiltonian shifted by an $`x`$-independent quantity. The first nontrivial case corresponds to $`k=2`$. We display a typical potential, $`V_1^{(2)}(x,t)`$, in Fig. 2.

After applying the operator (10) to the functions (2) one gets solutions of the transformed equation corresponding to the quasienergies $`E_n`$. For the case $`k=2`$ they can easily be expressed in terms of $`\psi _n(x,t)`$:

$$\begin{array}{c}\phi _n(x,t)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{n+3}}[\sqrt{n+1}(ϵ/\overline{ϵ})^{1/2}\psi _{n+1}(x,t)\hfill \\ +\frac{\sqrt{2}z}{z^2+1/2}\psi _n(x,t)].\hfill \end{array}$$
(17)
The normalization factor here is calculated by noting that the symmetry operator $`L^+L`$ is simply the shifted $`g`$ operator, $`L^+L=g+5/8`$.

We now turn to the transformation of the Berry phase and consider for simplicity the first nontrivial case $`k=2`$. In these calculations we are using the standard approach (see e.g. AA ). The phase change of a solution of the Schrödinger equation $`\psi (x,t)`$ during time $`T`$ is given in terms of the mean energy value

$$\chi =_0^T\psi |i\dot{\psi }𝑑t$$
(18)
and the Berry phase $`\beta `$ is obtained from this overall phase change, to be extracted from (2) for the harmonic oscillator potential and from (17) for transformed potentials, by subtracting the dynamical component.

For the functions in (2) one gets

$$\psi _n|i\dot{\psi }_n=\frac{i}{4}(2n+1)\frac{d}{dt}\mathrm{ln}(\overline{ϵ}/ϵ)\frac{1}{8}\psi _n|x^2|\psi _n\frac{d^2}{dt^2}\mathrm{ln}\gamma $$
(19)
where the mean value of the square coordinate is $`\psi _n|x^2|\psi _n=4\gamma (2n+1)`$.

The structure of the functions $`\phi _n(x,t)`$ is similar to those in (2) and therefore the average energy is given by (19) with the replacement $`\psi _n\phi _n`$. To calculate the mean value of the square coordinate for the functions (17) we use the property $`L^+L=g+5/8`$ and the fact that the functions (2) are eigenfunctions for $`g`$ to get

$$\phi _n|x^2|\phi _n=\psi _n|x^2|\psi _n+\frac{4\sqrt{\gamma }}{\sqrt{n+3}}\psi _n|x|\phi _n.$$

The first integral here is standard and the second has the expression $`\psi _n|x|\phi _n=\sqrt{\gamma }[n+3I_n(\frac{1}{2})],`$ where

$$I_n(a)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{H_n^2(x)}{x^2+a}e^{x^2}𝑑x$$

which obeys the recursion relation

$$I_n(a)=2I_{n1}(a)+4(n1)^2I_{n2}(a)4aI_{n1}^{}(a),$$

which follows directly from that for the Hermite polynomials. The initial values are $`I_0(a)=\frac{\pi }{\sqrt{a}}e^a\text{erfc}\sqrt{a}`$ and $`I_1(a)=4\sqrt{\pi }4aI_0(a)`$. Therefore, the mean energy in the states (17) is given by

$$\phi _n|i\dot{\phi }_n=\psi _n|i\dot{\psi }_n\left(1\frac{I_n(\frac{1}{2})}{n+3}\right)\gamma \frac{d^2}{dt^2}\mathrm{ln}\gamma .$$
(20)
After being integrated over a period $`T`$ the first term in (19) gives us the overall phase change both for the initial states and for the transformed ones (see (20)); the Berry phase is determined only by the second term. Thus, the Berry phases $`\beta _n^0`$ for all states $`\psi _n(x,t)`$ are determined by the Berry phase for the ground state: $`\beta _n^0=(2n+1)\beta _0^0`$,

$$\beta _0^0=\frac{1}{2}_0^T\gamma \frac{d^2}{dt^2}\mathrm{ln}\gamma dt=\frac{1}{2}_0^T\frac{\dot{\gamma }^2}{\gamma }𝑑t.$$

For the transformed Berry phase from (20) one gets $`\beta _n^1=\beta _n^0+2[1\frac{I_n(1/2)}{n+3}]\beta _0^0`$. Hence, once the quantity $`\beta _0^0`$ is known, we can easily calculate the Berry phase both for the harmonic oscillator and for the Hamiltonian $`h_1^{(2)}`$.

As a numerical illustration we have chosen a model for which analytic solutions of equation (4) are available: $`\omega (t)=\sqrt{\omega _0^2\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}(t+\omega _i)}`$. Here $`\omega _0`$ is a parameter of the model along with the real ($`\omega _r=T`$) and imaginary ($`\omega _i`$) periods of the Weierstrass $`\mathrm{}`$ function. If we eliminate the parameter $`\omega _0`$ in favor of $`d`$ given by $`\mathrm{}(d)=4\omega _0^2`$, the solutions of the equation (4) have the form WitVat

$$\epsilon (t)=\frac{\sigma (t+\omega _i+d)}{\sigma (t+\omega _i)}e^{t\zeta (d)}.$$

Here $`\sigma `$ and $`\zeta `$ are (non-elliptic) Weierstrass functions. Figures 1 and 2 are plotted with $`\omega _r=i\omega _i=2`$ and $`\omega _00.5978`$. We have found also the value $`\beta _0^0=0.0149`$.

We make one further comment concerning the time-dependent supersymmetry underlying our approach. The transformation operators are related to eigenfunctions (not necessarily “physical”) of the symmetry operator $`g=\frac{1}{2}(a^+a+aa^+)`$, $`gu_k=g_uu_k`$, $`g_u=5/8`$, which accounts for the factorization $`L^+L=gg_u`$. When the order of transformation operators is interchanged, one gets a symmetry operator for the transformed Schrödinger equation $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$, $`LL^+=\stackrel{~}{g}g_u`$. The operators $`g`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ are supersymmetric partners from which a matrix operator $`𝒢=\text{diag}(g,\stackrel{~}{g})`$ can be constructed. It acts in the space spanned by the basis vectors $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n^{(1)}=(\psi _n,0)^t`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n^{(2)}=(0,\phi _n)^t`$ where the superscript “$`t`$” stands for transposition and the functions $`\psi _n`$ and $`\phi _n`$ are given in (2) and (17) respectively. So, just as in the usual supersymmetric approach, one has a two-fold degenerate spectrum except for the ground state level which is non-degenerate. This means that we have constructed here a model with unbroken supersymmetry. Finally we note that supercharge operators, closing superalgebra, can be constructed as usual with the help of the transformation operators $`L`$ and $`L^+`$.

In summary, in this note we have constructed, in principle, an infinite number of time-periodic Hamiltonians having almost unlimited complexity, for which the Berry phase can be determined explicitly and have illustrated the procedure for a Hamiltonian whose time dependence is given by the square root of an elliptic function. This vastly extends the set of previously known cases, all based on the simple Harmonic oscillator. We feel that this opens the way for a systematic investigation of the Berry phase for one dimensional quantum systems.

This work has been partially supported by the European FEDER and by the Spanish MCYT (Grant BFM2002-03773), MECD (Grant SAB2000-0240) and Junta de Castilla y León (VA085/02). MLG thanks the Universidad de Valladolid for hospitality and support and the NSF(USA) for partial support (Grant DMR-0121146).


text:
# 1 Diagrams corresponding to the O(αₛ) penguin contractions in the correlation function (). Only the diagrams contributing to the sum rule are shown. The square denotes the four-quark operator 𝒪̃₂ᶜ.

## Acknowledgment

We are grateful to M. Beneke and M. Shifman for useful discussions. This work is supported by the DFG Forschergruppe ”Quantenfeldtheorie, Computeralgebra und Monte Carlo Simulationen”, and by the German Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF). B.M. would like to acknowledge hospitality of the theory group of Universität Würzburg and partial support by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation and the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of Croatia under the contract 0098002.