text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recombination of D-branes at angles are processes increasing its value recently from both phenomenological and theoretical point of view, related to the presence of tachyonic modes which appear as modes of open strings between the two D-branes. In the brane inflation scenarios, these are some of the promising candidates to explain the mechanism of inflation. In addition, among various string constructions of Standard Model, intersecting brane models are one class of hopeful candidates For a recent review and other references, see e.g. ref.., in some of which it has been proposed that the recombination process occurs as Higgs mechanism (see also ). On the other hand, this system and process can be regarded as a generalized setting of $`D\overline{D}`$ system and its annihilation process, which has been studied thoroughly. In this way, this is one of the most important phenomena to explore at present in string theory.

The behavior of the system after recombination, however, had been almost unexamined until recently. Suppose one consider a recombination of two D-branes at one angle, wrapping around some cycles in a compact space. One might expect that after the recombination, each brane would begin to take a “shorter cut” and then make a damped oscillation around some stable configuration of branes, while radiating RR gauge and gravitational waves (and some others), leading to the stable configuration. However, the case was that only the shape of the recombined branes at the initial stage was merely inferred, though the final (infinitely late time) configuration can be determined in some cases (e.g. see ref.).

Recently, in ref., K. Hashimoto and Nagaoka proposed that a T-dual of super Yang-Mills theory (SYM) can be an adequate framework to describe the process, and in the case of two D-strings at one angle and via classical analysis, they presumed how the shapes of the branes develop at the very initial stageJust after ref., the process is also analyzed via tachyon effective field theory in ref. and very recently, the subsequent work was done by K. Hashimoto and W. Taylor in ref..

Main purpose of this paper is to investigate the process after the recombination via SYM “more rigorously” and to reveal what happens in the process. To be concrete, we will focus on the two points: time-evolution of the D-branes’ shape, and behavior or creations of fundamental strings. The former can be of value in that we describes time-dependent, i.e. dynamical behavior of curved D-branes though for a rather short time-scale (which enables us to discuss e.g. gravitational waves radiated by the branes). The former might also be regarded as a first step toward the understanding of branes’ shapes after the recombination in intersecting brane models as Standard Model, which are responsible for physical quantities after the condensation of Higgs fields. The latter point is what happens in the process itself. What we mean by “more rigorously” is that we set concrete initial conditions and make a quantum-mechanical analysis: These are necessary steps in order to understand precise behavior of the system, because the system, its tachyon sector in particular, is essentially a collection of inverse harmonic oscillators, and its behavior depends crucially on the initial fluctuations of the system, which can only be evaluated appropriately via a quantum analysis, but has not been done at least in this setting.§§§ In the case of inflation and other systems, see ref., and for a non-perturbative analysis, see ref..

The second purpose of this paper is to discuss implications of the above two points (phenomena), for the inflation scenario of the setting that two D-4-branes are approaching each other at one angle as in ref., aiming at the understanding of the whole process of the scenario.

For the above two purposes, we consider two types of initial conditions for branes. As we will discuss later, in order to make a quantum-mechanical analysis, we need the fact that all the modes (except U(1) gauge fields on each of the branes) have positive frequency-squareds at $`t=0`$. So, the first one we consider (denoted as case (I)) is that two D-p-branes have been parallel until $`t=0`$, but are put intersected at one angle $`\theta `$ at the instant $`t=0`$. The second one (the case (II)) is that one of parallel two D-p-branes were rotated by a small angle $`\theta `$ and are approaching each other very slowly. The case (I) is one of the simplest conditions, rather easier to study the process itself. The case (II) is more practical; the case with $`p=4`$ is one of the hopeful setting for the brane inflation scenarios. From a practical viewpoint, the case (I) may seem less realistic, but it may also be able to be regarded as some local or rough approximation to more complicated setting of D-branes.

The outline of this paper is summarized as follows:

We consider two D-p-branes for each initial condition and for each $`p1`$, within the framework of a T-dual of SYM, a low energy effective theory of open strings around the D-branes when distances between the branes are small, as in ref.. Detailed set-ups are given in section 2.

In section 2 and 3 we evaluate time-evolution of typical amplitudes of tachyonic fluctuations in the following way; we consider fluctuations around the D-branes and make mode-expansions of them to examine their spectra. Then, defining typical amplitudes (absolute values) of the fluctuations in terms of VEV’s of their absolute square, we obtain them by using a time-dependent wave function of each mode and focusing on contribution of tachyonic modes. We note that though we use WKB approximation (second order one in fluctuations), it is enough good in the cases until the tachyons blow up, because higher order terms are suppressed by a factor of $`O(g_s)`$, as we will discuss later.

In section 4 we discuss time-evolution of D-brane’s shape after recombination; we show that a seemingly queer behavior of the shape appears and explain why it happens. The information of the shape is obtained from a transverse U(2) scalar field by diagonalizing its VEV’s (i.e. choosing a certain gauge) and looking at its diagonal elements. For case (II), there appears a non-commutativity between VEV’s of scalar fields, which implies their uncertainty relation. We will discuss this point in section 8. We denote this as “physical gauge” because in the gauge direct correspondence holds between d.o.f. of each open string starting from and ending on certain branes and d.o.f. of each U(2) matrix element.

Then, in section 5 we argue that open string pairs (composed of strings with opposite orientations) connecting the two decaying branes are created. Our argument is based on the behavior of the U(2) gauge and scalar fields in the physical gauge; investigation of its non-vanishing energy density, the correspondence of d.o.f. stated above, and charge densities of two U(1) symmetries on the D-branes lead to such conclusion. We also evaluate number density of the open strings and distribution of energy to the open strings, and show that most part of the released energy are used to create the pairs.

In section 6, we discuss creation of closed strings, going out of the framework of SYM: We show that the decaying branes radiate closed strings as gravitational wave, regarding the branes as a collection of massive small objects; its energy flux is evaluated quantitatively. We also discuss the system after some relatively long time, i.e. beyond the reach of SYM; creation of closed strings are strongly suggested after the two branes are separated further.

In section 7, we discuss implications of the above results for a brane inflation scenario, on the efficiency of the reheating and mechanism to create “reheated” gauge fields and fermions.

Finally in section 8 we present summary and discussion; we discuss some points on non-commutative scalar fields appearing in the case (II). In the appendix we give a short review of giving a width of a Gaussian wave function for each mode at arbitrary time.

## 2 Set-ups and preliminaries

In this section we present set-ups and preliminaries for a quantum-mechanical analysis for the case (I) and (II).

First we present our notation and set-ups; in this paper we set $`l_s=1`$ for convenience (and revive it when needed), and set the string coupling $`g_s`$ very small and consider D-p-branes in a 10-dimensional flat target space with a metric $`g_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,..,1)`$ and coordinates $`x_M`$ ($`M=0,..,9`$). The world-volumes are parametrized by $`x_0,x_1,\mathrm{}x_p`$. We compactify space dimensions $`x_p,\mathrm{},x_9`$ on a (10-p)-torus with periods $`L_a`$ for $`a=p,\mathrm{},9`$. We denote $`x_0`$ as $`t`$ and $`x_p`$ as $`x`$ below. The initial condition for the case (I) is the configuration that two D-p-branes have been parallel to each other with a displacement $`y_0`$ until $`t=0`$ but are put intersected at one angle $`\theta `$ at the instant $`t=0`$. The setting is depicted in Fig.1.

The initial condition for the case (II) is the one that one of parallel two D-p-branes were rotated by a small angle $`\theta `$ and are approaching each other with a small relative velocity $`v`$. The simplest setting for each case is represented in Fig.2. We note that $`x`$ is parallel to neither of the branes, but can parametrize a world-space of either branes, though the energy density is $`\sqrt{1+\beta ^2}`$ times larger then the parallel embedding (where $`\beta \mathrm{tan}(\theta /2)`$). Although there are multiple intersecting points in cases of compact dimensions, in this paper we assume that the recombination happens only at the point $`x=0`$ for simplicity.

Let us give a brief review of the process. The configuration represented as (ii) in Fig.1 cannot be distinguished from that of the two branes in which both are bent and touched at $`x_p=x_{p+1}=0`$ since they have the same energy density and flux. The latter is unstable and each brane begins to take a shorter cut to save the energy. This is the recombination process. Their shapes just after that are expected to be like a hyperbola. This instability leads to the existence of a complex tachyon field with a mass-squared

$`m^2=\theta ,`$ (2.1)
appearing as modes of a string connecting the two D-branes, as shown in ref.. We will investigate the behavior of the system using T-dualized versions of U(2) SYM as in ref..

For each $`p`$, the SYM action with $`x_{p+1},\mathrm{},x_9`$ T-dualized takes the form

$`S_{2Dp}=T_p{\displaystyle d^{p+1}x\mathrm{Tr}\{(1+)\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{2}(D_\mu X_i)^2[X_i,X_j]^2\}}`$ (2.2)
where $`T_p=1/g_s`$ is the tension of a D-p-brane. $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ is the field strength of the world-volume U(2) gauge field $`A_\mu `$ for $`\mu =0,1,..,p`$. $`X_i`$ for $`i=p+1,..,9`$ are U(2) adjoint scalar fields corresponding to coordinates $`x_i`$ transverse to the branes. We note that to apply SYM, the relation $`L_{p+1}L_p\theta /2<l_s(=1)`$ should be satisfied, leading to the constraint

$`L_p<{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\theta }}.`$ (2.3)
We discuss dynamical behavior of the system for $`t0`$. The “background” D-p-branes for each case for $`t0`$ are represented by the configuration (VEV’s):

$`\begin{array}{ccc}X_{p+1}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\beta x& 0\\ 0& \beta x\end{array}\right),& X_9=\left(\begin{array}{cc}z/2& 0\\ 0& z/2\end{array}\right),& X_{p+2}=\mathrm{}=X_8=A_\mu =0.\end{array}`$ (2.9)
where $`\beta \mathrm{tan}(\theta /2)`$. For the case (I) ($`z(t)=0`$), this is T-dual to the configuration of two D-(p+1)-brane with a constant field strength $`F_{p,p+1}=\beta `$, as discussed in ref.. Actually, in ref., tachyonic modes around the T-dualized ($`F_{p,p+1}=\beta `$) background were shown to appear in off-diagonal ones of $`A_p`$ and $`A_{p+1}`$ in a certain gauge, which is T-dual to $`X_{p+1}`$ in the present case. However, the connection via T-duality does not of course means that the two systems are physically equivalent. (Actually, as we will show later, T-duality has a non-trivial effect for the system to change of the width of a wave function by a $`\sqrt{2}`$.) Thus, we examine the spectrum from the beginning. For case (II) ($`z(t)0`$), $`z/2`$ is a VEV of an adjoint Higgs field which decreases slowly. U(2) gauge symmetry is spontaneously broken to U(1) $`\times `$ U(1) by the non-trivial VEV’s. Since we set $`g_s`$ and $`\theta `$ very small, the force between the two branes is so weak(and for short distance, see ) that we can regard the velocity as a constant, leading to

$`z=z_0vt.`$ (2.10)
In this case potentially tachyonic modes should appear in the off-diagonal elements of $`A_p`$ and $`X_{p+1}`$ again. In addition, there might be a possibility that tachyonic modes appear in off-diagonal elements of $`A_0`$ and $`X_9`$ because the two D-p-branes approaching with a small velocity is T-dual to a two D-(p+1)-brane system with a constant field strength (though it is electric), and is also considered to be a Wick-rotated version of branes at one angle $`v`$. So, we denote the fluctuations, including those of $`A_0`$ and $`X_9`$, as

$$\begin{array}{ccc}A_\mu =\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& c_\mu ^{}\\ c_\mu & 0\end{array}\right),& X_{p+1}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& d^{}\\ d& 0\end{array}\right),& X_9=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& w^{}\\ w& 0\end{array}\right)\end{array}$$
(2.11)
(and denote in particular, $`c_p`$ as $`c`$), and discuss their spectra below.

The part of the action second order in the fluctuations is

$`S_{2Dp}|_{2\mathrm{n}\mathrm{d}}`$ $`=`$ $`T_p{\displaystyle }d^{p+1}x[_\mu c_\nu ^{}^\mu c^\nu +|_\mu c^\mu |^2_\mu d^{}^\mu d_\mu w^{}^\mu w`$ (2.12)
$`+2i\beta (c^{}dcd^{})2i\beta x(c_\mu ^{}^\mu dc_\mu ^\mu d^{})+iv(c_0^{}wc_0w^{})`$
$`iz(c_\mu ^{}^\mu wc_\mu ^\mu w^{})(4(\beta x)^2+z^2)|c_\mu |^2|2\beta xwzd|^2].`$
We consider such a gauge fixing condition that it is written as $`D_\mu ^{(0)}A^\mu _\mu A^\mu i[A_\mu ^{(0)},A^\mu ]=0`$ in a T-dualized pure Yang-Mills system, which gives

$`_\mu c^\mu =i(2\beta xd+zw).`$ (2.13)
This is a generalized version of the condition chosen in ref.. Integrating by part some terms and using (2.13), we have

$`S_{2Dp}|_{2\mathrm{n}\mathrm{d}}`$ $`=`$ $`T_p{\displaystyle }d^{p+1}x[c_\nu ^{}\{(_\mu )^2+4(\beta x)^2+z^2\}c_\nu d^{}\{(_\mu )^2+4(\beta x)^2+z^2\}d`$ (2.14)
$`w^{}\{(_\mu )^2+4(\beta x)^2+z^2\}w4i\beta (c^{}dcd^{})2iv(c_0^{}wc_0w^{})].`$
With the redefinition of the fields as

$`\stackrel{~}{c}{\displaystyle \frac{c+id}{\sqrt{2}}},\stackrel{~}{d}{\displaystyle \frac{d+ic}{\sqrt{2}}},`$ (2.15)
the term $`4i\beta (c^{}dcd^{})`$ in (2.14) give rise to their mass terms $`(4\beta )|\stackrel{~}{c}|^2(4\beta )|\stackrel{~}{d}|^2`$.

Here we set $`z(t)=v=0`$ and discuss the case (I) for a while. Let us consider mode expansions of the fields $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ and $`c_{\widehat{\mu }}`$ ($`\widehat{\mu }=0,1,\mathrm{},p1`$) with respect to $`x`$ and $`x_{\overline{\mu }}`$ ($`\overline{\mu }=1,\mathrm{},p1`$) (the latter for D-p-branes with $`p2`$) to examine their spectra. As for $`x_{\overline{\mu }}`$, we use $`u_k(x_{\overline{\mu }})e^{ik_{\overline{\mu }}x^{\overline{\mu }}}`$, free wave functions with a wave vector $`k_{\overline{\mu }}`$. As for $`x`$, the operator for each field is written as

$`[(_x)^2+4(\beta x)^24a\beta ]`$ (2.16)
where $`a=1,1,0`$ for $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ and $`c_{\widehat{\nu }}`$, respectively. If it were not for the periodicity of $`x`$, the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions could be given by $`\stackrel{~}{m}_n^2`$ and $`f_n`$ as

$`\stackrel{~}{m}_n^2`$ $`=`$ $`2\beta (2na)`$ (2.17)
$`f_n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2^nn!}}}({\displaystyle \frac{2\beta }{\pi }})^{1/4}e^{\beta x^2}H_n(\sqrt{2\beta }x)`$ (2.18)
for each non-negative integer $`n`$ where $`H_n`$ are Hermite polynomials; since $`x`$ direction is compactified, exact eigenfunctions are expected to be mathematically complicated, e.g. related to theta functions as in ref.. However, we can see that $`f_n`$ in (2.18) is localized around $`x=0`$ with a width $`\delta 1/\sqrt{2\beta }1/\sqrt{\theta }`$. So, if one consider $`L_p`$ such that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\theta }}}L_p,`$ (2.19)
one can use (2.17) and (2.18) as an approximate set of eigenvalues and eigenfunctions. Then, we can see that the lowest mode of $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ (we denote as $`\stackrel{~}{c}_0`$) is a complex tachyon field with a mass-squared

$`(m_0)^2=2\beta ,`$ (2.20)
which agrees with (2.1) obtained in ref. for a small $`\theta `$, while the lowest modes of $`c_{\overline{\nu }}`$ are massless and the others are massive. We note that the condition (2.19) is compatible with the one (2.3) if $`\theta 1`$. So, we consider such a range of $`L_p`$ throughout this paper. (We set $`\theta 2\beta =10^2`$ and $`L_p=100`$ later.) We also note that the approximate width of $`f_n`$ is larger than the eigenfunction in the T-dualized theory in ref. by a factor $`\sqrt{2}`$, which may be one of non-trivial effects of the T-duality.

Expanding $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ and the other fields such as

$`\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^{p1}𝐤}{(2\pi )^{p1}}\stackrel{~}{c}_{n,k_{\overline{\mu }}}(t)u_k(x_{\overline{\mu }})f_n(x)},`$ (2.21)
we obtain the action

$`S_{2Dp}|_{2\mathrm{n}\mathrm{d}}=T_p{\displaystyle 𝑑t\underset{n,k_{\widehat{\mu }}}{}\{|\frac{d\stackrel{~}{c}_{n,k}}{dt}|^2\omega _{n,k}^{2}|\stackrel{~}{c}_{n,k}|^2+(\stackrel{~}{c}_{n,k}\stackrel{~}{d}_{n,k},c_{\widehat{\nu },n,k})\}}.`$ (2.22)
where $`\omega _{n,k}^{2}`$ for $`t0`$ is given as

$`\omega _{n,k}^{2}=k^2+2\beta (2na)`$ (2.23)
where $`k\sqrt{(k_{\overline{\mu }})^2}`$. (Note that $`a=1,1,0`$ for $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{n,k},\stackrel{~}{d}_{n,k},c_{\widehat{\nu },n,k}`$, respectively.) This looks much like the action of a collection of harmonic oscillators with a mass $`T_p`$, although it includes modes with negative frequency-squareds; we can easily see that the modes $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}`$ with $`0k^22\beta `$ have negative $`\omega ^2`$’s (while all the other modes have non-negative $`\omega ^2`$’s). Thus, they are the tachyonic modes in the case (I) with $`p2`$. For the case of D-strings, there is no d.o.f. of $`k_{\overline{\mu }}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{c}_0`$ is the only (complex) tachyonic mode with $`(\omega _0)^2=2\beta `$ for $`t0`$.

For $`t<0`$, one should set $`2\beta =\theta =0`$ and instead turn on a displacement of the branes $`y_0`$ in $`x_{p+1}`$ direction. $`y_0`$ contribute to the second order action as a mass-squared for each of the off-diagonal fluctuations. Since the direction of $`x_p`$ is compactified, the momentum component $`k_p`$ is discretized as $`k_p=2\pi n_p/L_p`$ for an integer $`n_p`$, and the mode functions is

$`g_{n_p}(x)=e^{ik_px}/\sqrt{L_p}.`$ (2.24)
The modes $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{n_p,k}^{(0)}(c_{n_p,k}^{(0)}+id_{n_p,k}^{(0)})/\sqrt{2}`$, corresponding to $`g_{n_p}(x)`$, have such $`(\omega _{n_p,k}^{(0)})^2`$ as

$`\omega _{n,k}^{(0)2}=(y_0)^2+(k_{\overline{\mu }})^2+(2\pi n_p/L_p)^2`$ (2.25)
(where we attach the index $`(0)`$ to the qualities defined for $`t<0`$).

Let us move on to the case (II) where $`z0`$. As seen in (2.14), $`z^2`$ merely plays a role of a mass-squared for each field. Making mode-expansions of $`\stackrel{~}{c},\stackrel{~}{d}`$, and $`c_{\widehat{\mu }}`$ in terms of $`u_k`$ and $`f_n`$, we have the action (2.22) with frequencies

$`\omega _{n,k}^{{}_{}{}^{}2}=k^2+2\beta (2na)+(z_0vt)^2`$ (2.26)
where $`a=1,1,0`$ for $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{n,k}\stackrel{~}{d}_{n,k},c_{\overline{\nu },n,k}`$, respectively again. As we will discuss later, we need the fact that all the modes have positive frequency-squareds at $`t=0`$, so we set $`z_0=0.5l_s`$, relatively a large value but not to exceed the applicable range of SYM. Since $`z(t)`$ decreases gradually to zero, again (potentially) tachyonic modes are the modes $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}`$ with $`k^22\beta `$ for the case with $`p2`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{c}_0`$ is the only (complex) tachyonic mode for the case of D-strings.

Qualitative behavior of the system in the case (II) is as follows: at $`t=0`$, all the modes have positive $`\omega ^2`$’s, hence have some small fluctuations. As $`z(t)`$ decreases to $`z=\sqrt{2\beta }`$ (which gives $`\omega _{0,0}^{{}_{}{}^{}2}=0`$), $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,0}`$ starts to blow up, and so do the modes $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}`$’s with a small $`|k|`$ one after another when $`z`$ becomes a critical displacement $`z_k^{}`$ which gives $`\omega _{0,k}^{{}_{}{}^{}2}=0`$. The blow-ups together give rise to the tachyon condensation (to cause recombination).

In the next section we will focus on the potentially tachyonic modes $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}`$ with $`2\beta v`$, and make a quantum-mechanical analysis using the action (2.22) with the obtained $`\omega ^2`$’s.

We note that one can regard $`c_0`$ and $`w`$ as non-tachyonic fields for the parameter $`2\beta v`$. As for the fields $`c_0`$ and $`w`$, the last term in (2.14) might also seem to produce mass terms of linear combination of $`c_0`$ and $`w`$, in the same way as the case of $`c`$ and $`d`$, with $`2\beta `$, $`c`$,$`d`$ replaced by $`v`$,$`c_0`$, $`w`$, respectively, resulting in a complex tachyonic field. However, the sign of the kinetic term of $`c_0`$ is different from that of $`w`$, and, if one carry out the diagonalization, it results in a non-local action including square roots of differential operators; it is unclear whether $`c_0`$ and $`w`$ include tachyonic modes. Let us consider here the case with $`2\beta v`$. Then, even if there would be tachyon modes composed of $`c_0`$ and $`w`$, the critical distances $`z_{}^{}`$’s of them are much shorter than those of $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$, and it is much before the postulated tachyons of $`c_0`$ and $`w`$ get “awake” that the tachyon modes of $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ condensate and the recombination proceeds. Thus, we consider the parameter region $`2\beta v`$ and deal with $`c_0`$ and $`w`$ as non-tachyonic fields.

## 3 A quantum-mechanical analysis on tachyon condensation

In this section we analyze in detail how the tachyon fields condense, applying quantum mechanics to the action (2.22). We assume that the system is initially at zero temperature, i.e. at the ground state, for simplicity, though the essential point of our argument will not be changed as long as the temperature is low.

One of the two basic ingredients (we will use here) is that in a harmonic oscillator with a positive constant $`\omega ^2`$, the ground state wave function is Gaussian, and its variable $`q`$ has a typical amplitude (absolute value) of fluctuation $`q_{\mathrm{typical}}\sqrt{<q^2>}=1/\sqrt{2m\omega }=\mathrm{\Delta }/\sqrt{2}`$ where $`<A>`$ denotes a VEV of an operator $`A`$, $`m`$ is a mass of $`q`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a width of $`q`$’s wave function. Another basic one is that even if $`\omega ^2`$ is time-dependent and becomes negative afterward, time-evolution of its wave function and hence that of $`q_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ can be deduced within WKB (second order) approximation, by using its propagator or kernel, as in e.g. ref.. Taking these two into account, time-evolution behavior of the typical amplitude of each mode can be evaluated using quantum mechanics, if an initial condition is such that $`\omega ^2`$ of the mode is positive at $`t=0`$ and change into a negative one later: the initial typical value is $`\sqrt{g_s/2\omega (t=0)}`$ since in this case the tension $`T_p=1/g_s`$ corresponds to the mass. Since the wave function at $`t=0`$ is Gaussian, the absolute value of the wave function at any $`t`$ remains to be Gaussian within WKB (second order) approximation, and the system is characterized only by its width $`\mathrm{\Delta }(t)`$, which is equal to a typical value of the variable $`q(t)_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ times $`\sqrt{2}`$. (These are reviewed in the appendix A. See ref. for more detail.) We note that typical amplitudes of the modes with non-negative $`\omega ^2`$’s are suppressed by $`\sqrt{g_s}`$ in their numerators as $`|\stackrel{~}{c}_{n,k}(t)|_{\mathrm{typical}}=\sqrt{g_s/2\omega (t)}(n1)`$. We also note that the WKB approximation is quite good until tachyonic modes blow up because higher order terms are also suppressed by an extra factor of $`O(g_s)`$.

If we define a typical amplitude of fields as $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}\sqrt{<|\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )|^2>}`$, we have to sum $`|\stackrel{~}{c}_{n,k}|_{\mathrm{typical}}^2(f_n)^2|u_{n,k}|^2`$ with respect to $`n`$ and integrate it with respect to $`k_{\overline{\mu }}`$ except for the case of D-strings, but the integral is divergent. However, this is a kind of divergence that appears in a usual quantum field theory and has nothing to do with the blow-up of tachyons. Thus, we ignore the contribution of all the non-tachyonic modes and define the typical amplitude of $`\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )`$ in the case of D-p-branes with $`p2`$ as

$`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}\{{\displaystyle _{k^22\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{d^{p1}𝐤}{(2\pi )^{p1}}}<|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}(t)|^2>(f_0)^2\}^{1/2}A(t)f_0`$ (3.1)
where $`A(t)`$ is a time-dependent part of $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x)|`$ and $`f_0(x)=(2\beta /\pi )^{1/4}e^{\beta x^2}`$. In the case of D-strings we define

$`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}\sqrt{<|\stackrel{~}{c}_0(t)|^2>}A(t)f_0.`$ (3.2)
In this paper we regard the quantity (3.1) or (3.2) as a VEV of $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x)|`$ due to tachyon condensation. As in ref. and the appendix A, the time-dependent width $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t)`$ of the wave function of $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}(t)`$, which is equal to $`\sqrt{2}|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}(t)|_{\mathrm{typical}}`$, can be written in terms of the initial width $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(0)=\sqrt{g_s/\omega _k(t=0)}`$ and two independent solutions to the equations of motion

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}}{dt^2}}=\omega _{0,k}^2\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}.`$ (3.3)
We denote the solutions as “basis functions” . Below we solve the equation of motion for each case and use the basis functions and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(0)`$ to evaluate $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}`$.

For the case (I) with $`p2`$, we can easily see that the basis functions for $`t0`$ are $`\mathrm{cosh}(Kt)`$ and $`\mathrm{sinh}(Kt)`$ where $`K\sqrt{\omega _{0,k}^2}=\sqrt{2\beta k^2}`$ ($`0`$ for tachyonic modes), and the initial width for $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{n_p,k}^{(0)}`$ ($`t0`$) is $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{n_p,k}^{(0)}(0)=\sqrt{2}|\stackrel{~}{c}_{n_p,k}^{(0)}(t=0)|_{\mathrm{typical}}=\sqrt{g_s/\omega _{n_p,k}^{(0)}}`$ where $`\omega _{n_p,k}^{(0)}`$ is given in (2.25). However, the mode (eigen-) functions (of the operator with respect to $`x`$ arising in the action) change at $`t=0`$ from $`g_{n_p}(x)`$ to $`f_n(x)`$, so we have to “translate” $`|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}^{(0)}(t=0)|_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ into $`|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}(t=0)|_{\mathrm{typical}}`$. (We note that $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}`$ is related only to $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{n_p,k}^{(0)}`$ with the same $`k_{\overline{\mu }}`$ since the system keeps translation symmetry in $`x_{\overline{\mu }}`$ directions even at $`t=0`$.) If we define $`N_{n,n_p}𝑑xf_n^{}g_{n_p}`$, it holds $`g_{n_p}=_nN_{n,n_p}f_n`$ and we have $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{n,k}=_{n_p}N_{n,n_p}c_{n_p,k}^{(0)}`$, and hence

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t=0)^2=2|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}(t=0)|_{\mathrm{typical}}^2={\displaystyle \underset{n_p}{}}|N_{0,n_p}|^2{\displaystyle \frac{g_s}{\omega _{n_p,k}^{(0)}}}.`$ (3.4)
With the $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t=0)^2`$, the typical value is given through (A.6) as

$`|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}|_{\mathrm{typical}}^2={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t)^2}{2}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_k(0)^2}{2}}\mathrm{cosh}^2Kt+{\displaystyle \frac{g_s^2}{2\mathrm{\Delta }_k(0)^2K^2}}\mathrm{sinh}^2Kt,`$ (3.5)
and we can obtain the typical amplitude $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )|`$ as

$`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}^2=(A(t)f_0)^2={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_{p2}}{(2\pi )^{p1}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\sqrt{2\beta }}}k^{p2}𝑑k{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t)^2}{2}}(f_0(x))^2`$ (3.6)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{p2}`$ is the volume of (p-2)-sphere. This is the formula for time-evolution of the typical amplitude of the tachyonic fluctuation for the case (I) with $`p2`$. For $`p=1`$ (D-strings) case, we have

$`|\stackrel{~}{c}_0(x_\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}^2(A(t)f_0)^2={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{k=0}(t)^2}{2}}(f_0)^2`$ (3.7)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t)`$ is given in (3.5).

For all value of $`p`$, order of $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x^\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ in terms of $`g_s`$ is $`𝒪(g_s)`$. In addition, $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x^\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ has x-dependence through the Gaussian function $`f_0(x)`$. This means that the excitation of the tachyon is localized around $`x=0`$ as in ref. though the width is relatively broad such as $`\delta =1/\sqrt{\beta }`$.

A rough behavior of $`A(t)`$ can be read from the factor $`e^{\sqrt{2\beta k^2}t}e^{\sqrt{2\beta }t}`$ in (3.6) or (3.5). This can be inferred from the classical solution to the equation of motion, and a typical time scale is defined as $`T^{(I)}1/\sqrt{2\beta }`$. The formula for $`A(t)`$ is a bit complicated, but if we set $`L_p=100l_s`$, we have $`_{n_p=2}^2|N_{n,n_p}|^20.9987`$, so it suffices to have the terms with $`n_p=0,\pm 1,\pm 2`$ in (3.4). If we set $`y_0=0.5l_s`$, relatively a large value, we can approximate $`\omega _{n_p,k}y_0`$ for the $`n_p`$’s, and hence $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t=0)^2g_s/y_0`$. So, we have

$`|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}|_{\mathrm{typical}}^2{\displaystyle \frac{g_sy_0}{2}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\beta k^2}}\mathrm{sinh}^2\sqrt{2\beta k^2}t+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(y_0)^2}}\mathrm{cosh}^2\sqrt{2\beta k^2}t\}.`$ (3.8)
Since $`y_02\beta `$ now, the first term in (3.8) is dominant. The time-dependence of $`A(t)`$’s for $`p=1,2,4`$ is plotted in Fig.3, for a specific value of the angle $`\theta 2\beta =0.01`$ and $`g_s=0.01`$, which we set on the basis of the brane phenomenology (e.g. refs.).

We can read a tendency from (3.6) or Fig.3 that the blow-up is more delayed for the case with a larger value of $`p`$. This fact can be explained as follows: the tachyonic modes with less momentum tend to blow up more rapidly, but there are larger number of tachyonic modes for larger momentum. That is, except for the case of D-strings, for larger value of $`p`$, the most “active” tachyonic mode which has $`k=0`$ is more smeared in some region of $`k`$ and the start of the blow up becomes slower.

Next we derive $`A(t)`$ for the case (II). The frequency-squared for $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}`$ is

$`\omega _{0,k}(t)^2=(z_0vt)^2+k_{\stackrel{~}{\mu }}^22\beta .`$ (3.9)
We note that each $`\omega _{0,k}^{2}`$ is positive at $`t=0`$ for $`z_0=0.5l_s`$. The behavior of the system in terms of its wave function is as follows: As $`z(t)`$ decreases gradually, so does each $`\omega _{0,k}^{2}`$ and the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(t,\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k})`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}`$ spreads little by little. At $`t=t_0(z_0\sqrt{2\beta })/v`$, $`\omega _{0,0}^{2}`$ (with the lowest momentum $`k=0`$) becomes zero and then negative, i.e. tachyonic, and the corresponding wave function begins to spread radically, resulting in the blow-up of the mode. After that, the modes with lower $`k`$ are also getting tachyonic and their wave functions also start to spread one after another, leading to the tachyon condensation.

To obtain $`A(t)`$ in this case, we have only to find two solutions to (3.3) with (3.9) and substitute it for (A.6). However, its exact solutions is a bit difficult to deal with, so we find some approximate solutions: Let us define $`t_{}(k)(z_0\sqrt{2\beta k^2})/v`$ which gives $`\omega _{0,k}(t_{})=0`$, and rewrite the $`\omega _{0,k}^2`$ using $`t_{}`$ as

$`\omega _{0,k}(t)^2=\alpha _k(tt_{})+v^2(tt_{})^2`$ (3.10)
where we denote the coefficient $`\alpha _k\sqrt{8v^2\beta ^{}}`$ and $`\beta ^{}\beta k^2/2`$. If $`t`$ approaches $`t_{}`$, the second term quadratic in $`tt_{}`$ of (3.10) becomes so small as to be neglected compared to the first term. (We denote the time as $`t=t_1`$.) Thus, for $`t>t_1`$, two Airy functions can be used as basis functions. On the other hand, taking a closer look will let one notice that (3.3) with (3.10) has the same form as the Schrodinger equation in one dimension with relatively slowly-changing potential (if we replace $`t`$ by $`x`$). So, when $`\omega _{0,k}(t)^{2}`$ is relatively large and changing slowly, we can apply “WKB approximation” to get two approximate basis functions. Thus, if this approximation can be applied until the time $`t=t_1`$, we can follow the time-evolution of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(t,\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t)`$ by using the “WKB-approximated” solutions until $`t=t_1`$, and then letting the Airy functions take over the role of basis functions. We take this prescription to evaluate their time-evolution.

The “WKB-approximated” basis functions are

$`\varphi _1(t)=\omega _{0,k}^{1/2}\mathrm{cos}({\displaystyle _{t_1}^t}𝑑t^{}\omega _{0,k}(t^{})),`$
$`\varphi _2(t)=\omega _{0,k}^{1/2}\mathrm{sin}({\displaystyle _{t_1}^t}𝑑t^{}\omega _{0,k}(t^{})).`$ (3.11)
This approximation is valid as far as

$`v|\omega _{0,k}|^2\mathrm{and}|{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _{0,k}}{t}}||\omega _{0,k}|^2.`$ (3.12)
On the other hand, the condition for the Airy functions to be used is

$`|tt_{}|{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{8\beta ^{}}}{v}}.`$ (3.13)
So, if we choose $`t_1t_{}\sqrt{8\beta ^{}}/10v`$ to satisfy (3.13) (please note the sign), the condition to satisfy (3.12) is written as

$`v2\beta ^{}.`$ (3.14)
which is compatible with the condition to regard $`c_0`$ and $`w`$ as only massive fields. So, in this paper we consider such a system. One may worry that tachyonic modes with large $`k`$ do not satisfy (3.14) for any set of $`\beta `$ and $`v`$. In fact, in a set-up with $`v2\beta `$, $`v`$ is so slow that the tachyonic fluctuation $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ blows up enough much before the tachyon modes with large $`k`$ “wake up”. So, the above point is not practically a problem.

Using the Airy functions $`Ai(\tau )`$ and $`Bi(\tau )`$, we obtain the width $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t)^2`$ of $`|\mathrm{\Psi }(\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k},t)|^2`$ as

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t)^2`$ $`=`$ $`g_s[{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{\omega _1}}\{Bi^{}(\tau _1)Ai(\tau )Ai^{}(\tau _1)Bi(\tau )\}^2`$ (3.15)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _1\pi ^2}{(8v^2\beta ^{})^{1/3}}}\{Bi(\tau _1)Ai(\tau )Ai(\tau _1)Bi(\tau )\}^2],`$
where $`Ai^{}(\tau )=\frac{dAi(\tau )}{d\tau }`$, $`\tau \alpha _k^{1/3}(tt_{})`$, $`\omega _1\omega _{0,k}(t=t_1)(=\frac{\sqrt{11}}{10}\sqrt{8\beta ^{}})`$ and $`\tau _1\alpha _k^{1/3}(t_1t_{})`$. And we can obtain $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x^\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ for $`p2`$ for case (II) by substituting (3.15) for (3.6). For the case of D-strings, $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x^\mu )|=(\mathrm{\Delta }_{k=0}(t)f_0)^2/2`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{k=0}(t)`$ is given in (3.15).

As in the case (I), the blow-up of the tachyonic fluctuation is localized around $`x=0`$ with the width $`\delta =1/\sqrt{\beta }`$. A rough behavior of $`A(t)`$ is $`\mathrm{exp}[\frac{2}{3}\{(8v^2\beta )^{1/6}(tt_{})\}^{3/2}]`$, so we can see that a typical time scale of the decay is $`T^{(II)}1/(8v^2\beta )^{1/6}1/(4v^2\theta )`$. That is, the typical time scale depends more strongly on the relative velocity of the branes than on the angle $`\theta `$. The reason for this is that after reaching the critical distance, the larger the velocity is, the earlier potentially tachyonic modes “wake up” to become truly tachyonic and blow up. Time-dependent behavior of $`A(t)`$ in the specific case of D-4-branes with $`2\beta =10^2`$ and $`v=10^4`$ is plotted in Fig.4 where $`T^{(II)}36.84l_s`$.

In this way, we have obtained, for both cases, explicit functions of typical amplitudes of tachyonic fluctuations $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}=A(t)f_0`$.

For convenience, let us define the following quantity for a function of $`k`$, $`g(k)`$:

$`<<g(k)>>{\displaystyle \frac{d^{p1}𝐤}{(2\pi )^{p1}}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t)^2}{2}g(k)}`$ (3.16)
where it is normalized as $`<<1>>=A(t)^2`$. For a later use, we also define a “typical amplitude of tachyon’s wave vector” of tachyonic fluctuations as $`\sqrt{\overline{k^2}}(<<k^2>>/<<1>>)^{1/2}`$. By $`\sqrt{\overline{k^2}}`$ we can estimate which momentum-possessing tachyon modes contribute the most to the blow-up, since the weight for a tachyon mode with a momentum $`𝐤`$ in $`|\stackrel{~}{c}(x^\mu )|^2`$ is $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_k)^2/2`$, as in (3.1) with $`|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}|_{\mathrm{typical}}=\mathrm{\Delta }_k(t)^2/2`$.

## 4 Time-evolution of the D-p-branes’ shapes

In this section we discuss time-evolution of the D-p-branes’ shapes and show seemingly queer behavior of the brane’s shape occurs. Then, we give a physical interpretation of the behavior to conclude that it is not actually queer.

With (2.15) and (2.21), the typical value of $`d(x_\mu )`$ is

$`d(x_\mu )_{\mathrm{typical}}i{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )_{\mathrm{typical}}}{\sqrt{2}}}={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}}{\displaystyle _{k^22\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{d^{p1}𝐤}{(2\pi )^{p1}}}\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}(t)_{\mathrm{typical}}u_k(x_{\overline{\mu }})f_0(x)`$ (4.1)
since $`\stackrel{~}{d}_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ is negligible. We note that each $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}(t)_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ has its phase as $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}(t)_{\mathrm{typical}}=|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}(t)|_{\mathrm{typical}}e^{i\delta _k}`$, and so does $`d(x_\mu )_{\mathrm{typical}}`$. We regard this quality as the VEV of the field $`d(x_\mu )`$. Then, the transverse scalar U(2) field $`X_{p+1}`$ has the VEV of the form:

$`X_{p+1}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\beta x& d_{\mathrm{typical}}^{}\\ d_{\mathrm{typical}}& \beta x\end{array}\right).`$ (4.4)
Let us get geometrical information on the branes from (4.4), first for the case (I). In this case there is only one transverse scaler field which has non-trivial VEV elements, and, all the scalar fields are commutative with each other. Thus, as done in such conventional cases and in ref., it is a logical step to choose the gauge to diagonalize the VEV’s of the scalar field and interpret the diagonal parts as the positions of the two branes. $`X_{p+1}`$ is diagonalized as

$$\begin{array}{cc}X_{p+1}^{^{}}=U_0X_{p+1}U_0^1& =\left(\begin{array}{cc}y(x,t)& 0\\ 0& y(x,t)\end{array}\right)\end{array}$$
(4.5)
where $`y=\sqrt{(\beta x)^2+|d_{\mathrm{typical}}|^2}`$. $`U_0`$ is the transformation matrix to diagonalize $`X_{p+1}`$, whose explicit form we present here for a later use, as

$`\begin{array}{cc}U_0& =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2y}|d|_{\mathrm{typical}}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\sqrt{y+\beta x}|d|_{\mathrm{typical}}& \sqrt{y\beta x}d_{\mathrm{typical}}^{}\\ \sqrt{y\beta x}d_{\mathrm{typical}}& \sqrt{y+\beta x}|d|_{\mathrm{typical}}\end{array}\right).\end{array}`$ (4.9)
Since it holds $`|d_{\mathrm{typical}}|^2=|\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )_{\mathrm{typical}}|^2/2|\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )|_{\mathrm{typical}}^2/2`$*** In the last equality we use the approximation $`|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0k}^{}(t)_{\mathrm{typical}}\stackrel{~}{c}_{0k^{}}(t)_{\mathrm{typical}}u_k^{}u_k^{}|(2\pi )^{p1}\delta ^{(p1)}(kk^{})(\mathrm{\Delta }_k)^2/2`$ where $`u_k=e^{ik_{\overline{\mu }}x^{\overline{\mu }}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k`$ is given in (3.5). This holds good because only the contributions of $`c_k`$ and $`c_k^{}`$ with $`k=k^{}`$ has a coherent phase factor while the others do not. which we have obtained in the previous section, the formula for the shape of one of the recombined branes is

$`y(x,t)=\sqrt{(\beta x)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{A(t)^2}{2}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2\beta }{\pi }}}e^{2\beta x^2}}.`$ (4.10)
This is the same form as obtained for D-strings in ref.. However, we can make a precise analysis on the shape of the branes at arbitrary $`t`$ based on (4.10), since we have the explicit function of $`A(t)`$ for each case including the overall factor and fine coefficients; We can know explicitly when and which applicable condition of the approximations (SYM, WKB and some others) breaks. We will investigate the behavior of the system in detail using (4.10) with $`A(t)`$’s obtained in the previous section.

For the case (II), its essential difference from the case (I) is that there are two scalar fields which have non-trivial VEV’s of $`X_{p+1}`$ and $`X_9`$. Since the two do not commute each other after tachyon condensation, it is probable that one cannot determine definite positions of the branes in both of the dimensions $`x_{p+1}`$ and $`x_9`$ simultaneously (i.e. uncertainty relation). Here we assume that we can interpret each of $`X_{p+1}`$’s diagonal elements as the position of the two branes in the $`x_{p+1}`$ direction if we focus only on the positions in $`x_{p+1}`$ direction regardless of $`x_9^{(0)}`$ direction. We will return to this problem in the final section.

At the initial stage, the shape of each brane is approximately one part of hyperbola as in Fig. 5, which is consistent with our intuition; though $`|d|_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ is dependent on $`x`$ through the Gaussian $`f_0(x)`$, its width $`1/\sqrt{\beta }`$ is broad and its differential coefficient is so small.

The larger $`|d|_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ becomes, the further the distance of the two D-brane becomes. That is, $`|d|_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ corresponds directly to such a relative motion between the recombined branes as discussed in ref..

So far, the shape of the p-branes is within the reach of our intuition. After more time passes, however, a seemingly queer behavior occurs; the shape of each brane deviates from the approximate hyperbola and comes to have three extremes due to localization of tachyon condensation. This happens for the cases of D-p-brane for $`p2`$, and is also expected to happen for the case of D-strings, as we will show below. The appearance of such a shape was already discussed, but was denied in ref. in the case of D-strings.

The values of $`x`$ giving extremes of $`y(x,t)`$ are formally given by

$`x=0,\pm \sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\beta }}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{2A^4}{\pi \beta }}},`$ (4.11)
which means that each brane’s shape has three extremes if it holds

$`A>(\pi \beta /2)^{1/4}A_{\mathrm{critical}}.`$ (4.12)
Thus, all we have to do is to show that the condition (4.12) is compatible with applicable conditions of the approximations we have used. One of the important conditions is that of the WKB approximation that higher order terms of the fluctuations in the action do not disturb the behavior. Since only $`c`$ and $`d`$ include the tachyonic field, we estimate the orders of their second order terms $`S_2`$ and fourth order terms $`S_4`$ given respectively as

$`S_2`$ $``$ $`T_p{\displaystyle d^{p+1}x2i\beta (c^{}dcd^{})}`$
$`S_4`$ $``$ $`T_p{\displaystyle d^{p+1}x|c^{}dcd^{}|^2}`$ (4.13)
and show $`|S_4||S_2|`$ below.

For D-p-branes with $`p2`$, if we include the non-linear terms in the equation of motion, (2.21) (with $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}`$ replaced by its time-dependent typical value) are not the solutions to the equation of motion any more. However, since each of $`f_n`$ and $`u_k`$ forms a complete set, the expansion is still available as a type of decomposition of d.o.f.. So, we substitute (2.21) for $`S_2`$ and $`S_4`$ and discuss their amplitudes. Neglecting the contribution of non-tachyonic (i.e. non-blowing-up) modes, we have

$`S_2`$ $`=`$ $`T_p{\displaystyle 𝑑t(2\beta )A(t)^2}`$
$`S_4`$ $`=`$ $`T_p{\displaystyle 𝑑t\sqrt{\frac{\beta }{\pi }}\frac{d^{p1}𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}}{(2\pi )^{p1}}\frac{d^{p1}𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐}}{(2\pi )^{p1}}\frac{d^{p1}𝐤_\mathrm{𝟑}}{(2\pi )^{p1}}\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k_1}^{}\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k_2}\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k_3}^{}\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k_1k_2k_3}}.`$ (4.14)
since $`A(t)^2d^{p1}𝐤/(2\pi )^{p1}<|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k}|^2>`$. The factor $`\sqrt{\beta /\pi }`$ comes from extra normalization constants of $`f_0`$’s. To carry out the integrations with respect to momenta in (4.14) is difficult, so we make order estimation of $`S_4`$, which will later prove to suffice here; first we estimate a typical value of $`k=\sqrt{k_{\overline{\mu }}^2}`$ in condensation of $`\stackrel{~}{c}(x_\mu )`$ using $`k_{\mathrm{av}}=\sqrt{\overline{k^2}}`$ defined at the last part of section 2; it is about $`305`$ percent of $`\sqrt{k_{\mathrm{max}}^2}=\sqrt{2\beta }`$ and monotonically decreasing during $`t10T^{(I)}`$ in the case (I) or $`t10T^{(II)}`$ in the case (II). Next, we choose some appropriate value of $`k_{\mathrm{av}}`$ and approximate $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k_i}`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$ in (4.14) to $`|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k_{av}}|`$, defining $`A_{\mathrm{av}}(t)^2d^{p1}𝐤/(2\pi )^{p1}<|\stackrel{~}{c}_{0,k_{\mathrm{av}}}|^2>`$. Then, we can show that the behavior of $`A(t)_{\mathrm{av}}`$ is not so different from that of $`A(t)`$, and we estimate $`S_4`$ as

$`S_4T_p{\displaystyle 𝑑t\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_{p2}(2\beta )^{p/2}}{(2\pi )^{p1/2}}(A_{\mathrm{av}}(t))^4}.`$ (4.15)
Thus, the condition for $`|S_4||S_2|`$ is

$`A(t)\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^{p1/2}}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{p2}(2\beta )^{(p2)/2}}}}.`$ (4.16)
We can easily see that for a small angle $`\theta 2\beta `$ and $`p2`$, the inequality (4.16) is sufficiently compatible with (4.12). The other conditions, especially that of SYM that the displacement of branes should be smaller than $`l_s`$ ($`A(t)<l_s`$) and D-branes should have some low velocity ($`\dot{y}1(=c)`$ at all the value of $`x`$), are also shown easily to be satisfied. Therefore, the shape of the recombined D-p-brane for $`p2`$ surely come to have three extremes. An example is drown in Fig.6. This happens essentially due to the localization of tachyons around $`x`$, since the factor $`e^{2\beta x^2}`$ in (4.10) is directly responsible for the multiple extremes.

For the case of D-strings, the case is a bit more subtle, but we argue that the same phenomenon is expected to happen. In this case $`S_2`$ and $`S_4`$ are written as

$`S_2`$ $`=`$ $`T_{D1}{\displaystyle 𝑑t(2\beta )|\stackrel{~}{c}_0(t)|_{\mathrm{typical}}^2}`$
$`S_4`$ $`=`$ $`T_{D1}{\displaystyle 𝑑t\sqrt{\frac{\beta }{\pi }}|\stackrel{~}{c}_0(t)|_{\mathrm{typical}}^4}.`$ (4.17)
If we substitute $`\stackrel{~}{c}_0(t)=A(t)`$ for the condition $`|S_4|<|S_2|`$, we have

$`A(t)<(4\pi \beta )^{1/4}.`$ (4.18)
If one consider the equation of motion for $`\stackrel{~}{c}_0(t)`$,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\stackrel{~}{c}_0(t)}{dt^2}}=2\beta \stackrel{~}{c}_0(t)2|\stackrel{~}{c}_0(t)|^2\stackrel{~}{c}_0(t),`$ (4.19)
(4.18) is replaced by $`A(t)<(\pi \beta )^{1/4}`$. Anyway, there is, a little though , a range for $`A(t)`$ to be allowed to have three extremes within second order approximation: $`(\pi \beta /2)^{1/4}<A(t)<(\pi \beta )^{1/4}`$. This may seem subtle, but if we solve numerically the equation of motion for $`\stackrel{~}{c}_0(t)`$ we can see that $`|\stackrel{~}{c}_0(t)|`$ really develop to exceed $`A_{\mathrm{critical}}`$ in (4.12). The other conditions of the approximations are again shown to be satisfied. Thus, it is probable that the shape of the D-string also comes to have three extremes.

The physical interpretation of this seemingly queer behavior is as follows; the energy released via tachyon condensation pushes the recombined branes away from each other, but it is given only to the local part of the branes around $`x=0`$ due to localization of tachyon condensation, so, only the part is much accelerated. Though the D-branes have a large tension, they also have a large inertia, and when the given energy of the local part is large enough, the branes extend, surpassing the tension, to form three extremes. That is, localization of tachyon condensation or that of the released energy, and the (large) inertia causes the shapes of branes to have three extremes.

The recombined picture has been obtained, and that the seemingly queer behavior can also be explained from physical point of view. Thus, we can say that each diagonal element of $`X_{p+1}`$ describes the shape of each D-brane, and that in the gauge where $`X_{p+1}`$ is diagonalized (which we denote as “physical gauge”), the correspondence of degrees of freedom is direct between open strings and the matrices $`X_i`$ and $`A_\mu `$; for example, (1,1) component of $`A_\mu `$ corresponds to excitations of open strings whose both ends are on a first D-brane, etc..

## 5 Creation of open string pairs

Let us next discuss creation of open string pairs. We mainly concentrate on case (I) in this section: We first discuss the case of D-strings, and then that of D-p-branes with $`p2`$.

The blow-up of the gauge field appears in the off-diagonal elements of $`A_p`$ (in this case of course $`p=1`$) and a typical value of its electric flux is

$`\begin{array}{ccc}F_{0p}(x_\mu )_{\mathrm{typical}}& =\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& _0c_{\mathrm{typical}}^{}\\ _0c_{\mathrm{typical}}& 0\end{array}\right)& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \dot{A}(t)f_0(x)e^{i\delta }\\ \dot{A}(t)f_0(x)e^{i\delta }& 0\end{array}\right)\end{array}`$ (5.6)
where a dot represents a time-derivative and $`\delta `$ is a constant phase of $`c_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ (and $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{\mathrm{typical}}`$). This flux has a non-vanishing contribution to the energy density $`_{\mathrm{ele}}(x)`$ as

$`_{\mathrm{ele}}(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g_s}}(\dot{A})^2(f_0)^2,`$ (5.7)
so this excitation should have some physical meaning. What is the physical meaning of the blow-up? We argue that it means that open string pairs (each composed of two strings with opposite orientations) connecting the two recombined D-branes are created. We will explain the reason in the following some paragraphs.

First, we show that this blow-up correspond to excitations of open strings connecting the two branes. Here we would like to confirm some basic facts about SYM as low energy effective theory (LEET) of D-branes: As discussed in , each D-brane ($`\mathrm{Dp}_I`$ for I=1,2) has U(1) symmetry ($`\mathrm{U}(1)_I`$), and open strings starting at $`\mathrm{Dp}_1`$ and ending at $`\mathrm{Dp}_2`$ (which we denote as 1$``$2 strings) have $`\mathrm{U}(1)_1\times \mathrm{U}(1)_2`$ charges (-1,1), and 2$``$1 strings have charges (1,-1). In the U(2) SYM plus adjoint Higgs theory as LEET of branes, effective fields corresponding to the strings also have such charges, and if degrees of freedom (d.o.f.) of $`\mathrm{Dp}_I`$ correspond to (I,I)-components of the U(2) matrices for I=1,2 (as in the case of the physical gauge), one can represent $`\mathrm{U}(1)_1`$ and $`\mathrm{U}(1)_2`$ transformation as $`U_1=\mathrm{diag}(e^{i\alpha _1},1)`$ and $`U_2=\mathrm{diag}.(1,e^{i\alpha _2})`$ for parameters $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$. Suppose we use a unified symbol of the U(2) field $`\widehat{A}_M`$, which is equal to $`A_\mu `$ for $`M=\mu `$ (=$`0,1,\mathrm{},p`$) and is equal to $`X_i`$ for $`M=i`$ (=$`p+1,\mathrm{},9`$). Then, $`\widehat{A}_M`$ transforms under the $`\mathrm{U}(1)_1`$ and $`\mathrm{U}(1)_2`$ with constant $`\alpha _I`$’s as

$`\begin{array}{cc}\widehat{A}_M=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\widehat{a}_M& \widehat{b}_M\\ \widehat{c}_M& \widehat{d}_M\end{array}\right)& \widehat{A}_M^{^{}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\widehat{a}_M& \widehat{b}_Me^{i(\alpha _1\alpha _2)}\\ \widehat{c}_Me^{i(\alpha _1\alpha _2)}& \widehat{d}_M\end{array}\right),\end{array}`$ (5.13)
so, d.o.f. of $`\widehat{c}_M`$ correspond to those of $`12`$ strings and d.o.f. of $`\widehat{b}_M`$ to those of $`21`$ strings.

In our case it is when $`X_{p+1}`$ is diagonalized (i.e. in the physical gauge) that d.o.f. of $`\mathrm{Dp}_I`$ correspond to (I,I)-components of the U(2), so we have to see the gauge field in the physical gauge. Using $`U_0`$ in (4.9) (and abbreviating $`c_{\mathrm{typical}}`$ to $`c`$ here), we have the field in the gauge $`\widehat{A}_M^{^{}}=U_0\widehat{A}_MU_0^1+iU_0_MU_0^1`$ as

$`\begin{array}{ccc}A_0^{^{}}& =& \frac{\beta x}{4y^2}\frac{_0c^{}c+c^{}_0c}{|c|^2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& c^{}\\ c& 0\end{array}\right)\\ A_p^{^{}}& =& \{1\frac{\beta +2(\beta x)^2}{2y^2}\}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& c^{}\\ c& 0\end{array}\right)\\ X_{p+1}^{^{}}& =& \left(\begin{array}{cc}y& 0\\ 0& y\end{array}\right),\end{array}`$ (5.23)
and the electric flux as

$`\begin{array}{ccc}F_{0p}^{^{}}(x_\mu )& =U_0F_{0p}(x_\mu )U_0^1=& \left(\begin{array}{cc}0& _0c^{}\\ _0c& 0\end{array}\right).\end{array}`$ (5.27)
That is, the flux is invariant under the transformation via $`U_0`$; the blow-up arises only in its off-diagonal parts and hence, according to the above basic facts, the blow-up of the electric flux is due to excitations of 1$``$2 and 2$``$1 strings.

Then, how is the ratio of 1$``$2 and 2$``$1 strings? We can see that via charge densities $`j_0^{(I)}`$ (for I=1,2) of $`\mathrm{U}(1)_I`$ current $`j_\mu ^{(I)}`$; the above basic facts means that $`j_0^{(1)}`$ measures the number density of endpoints of open strings incoming to $`\mathrm{Dp}_1`$ minus that of strings outgoing from $`\mathrm{Dp}_1`$ (if it is appropriately normalized), and $`j_0^{(2)}`$ is equal to $`j_0^{(1)}`$ in this setting. In the notation of $`\widehat{A}_M`$ in (5.13), $`j_0^{(1)}`$ is written via Noether’s theorem as

$`j_0^{(1)}(=j_0^{(2)})=`$ $`i\{(\widehat{b}_M_0\widehat{c}_M\widehat{c}_M_0\widehat{b}_M)(\widehat{b}_M_M\widehat{c}_0\widehat{c}_M_M\widehat{b}_0)\}`$ (5.28)
$`2(\widehat{a}_0\widehat{d}_0)\widehat{b}_M\widehat{c}_M+(\widehat{a}_M\widehat{d}_M)(\widehat{b}_0\widehat{c}_M+\widehat{b}_M\widehat{c}_0).`$
Substituting the solution (5.23) for (5.28), $`j_0^{(1)}`$ is shown to vanish, which means that the number density of endpoints of open strings incoming to $`\mathrm{Dp}_1`$ at the point $`x`$ is equal to that of strings outgoing from $`\mathrm{Dp}_1`$ at $`x`$. This is also the case with $`j_0^{(2)}`$ and $`\mathrm{Dp}_2`$. That is, open string pairs connecting the two decaying D-p-branes are created, each pair of which is composed of 1$``$2 and 2$``$1 strings! ***We can also look into the configuration of fundamental strings in our solution (5.23) via electric source current $`J_{0M}(x_N)`$ of spacetime NSNS field $`B_{MN}`$ by using the results of ref., as done in ref.. Then, we can show that $`J_{0M}`$ vanishes in this case, which is consistent with $`j_0^{(1)}=j_0^{(2)}=0`$ and our interpretation of it.

Furthermore, excitations of the scalar and gauge fields in (5.23) also includes other components which correspond to such open string pairs. I thank K.Hashimoto for letting me notice these extra contributions. We can extract the components by writing all the excitations in terms of U(2) covariant forms in the physical gauge, as

$`D_0^{}X_{p+1}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`U_0D_0X_{p+1}U_0^1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}_0y& \beta x_0d^{}/y\\ \beta x_0d/y& _0y\end{array}\right),`$ (5.31)
$`D_p^{}X_{p+1}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`U_0D_pX_{p+1}U_0^1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}_xy& (\beta 2|d|^2)d^{}/y\\ (\beta 2|d|^2)d/y& _xy\end{array}\right).`$ (5.34)
By T-dualizing with respect to $`x_{p+1}`$ direction, $`D_0^{}X_{p+1}^{}`$ and $`D_p^{}X_{p+1}^{}`$ correspond respectively to the electric and magnetic fluxes $`F_{0,p+1}^{}`$ and $`F_{p,p+1}^{}`$. Thus, based on the same reason as the case of the electric flux $`F_{0p}^{}`$, we argue that only diagonal elements in (5.34) correspond to d.o.f. of D-1-branes and the remaining off-diagonal components in (5.34) correspond to d.o.f. of open strings connecting the branes. Consistency check of this argument is given in the following way: Non-vanishing part of the total energy density of th system is

$`_{\mathrm{total}}(x)={\displaystyle \frac{T_{D1}}{2}}Tr\{1_{2\times 2}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(D_p^{}X_{p+1}^{})^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(D_0^{}X_{p+1}^{})^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(F_{0p}^{})^2\},`$ (5.35)
and contribution of the diagonal elements of (5.34) to $`_{\mathrm{total}}(x)`$ is

$`_{\mathrm{diag}}(x)=T_{\mathrm{D1}}\{2+2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(_xy)^2+2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(_0y)^2+0\}.`$ (5.36)
while that of the off-diagonal elements of (5.34) and $`F_{0p}^{}`$ is

$`_{\mathrm{off}\mathrm{diag}}=T_{\mathrm{D1}}\{(\beta 2|d|^2)^2|d|^2/y^2+(\beta x)^2|_0d|^2/y^2+|_0c|^2\}.`$ (5.37)
The first and second term in (5.36) are rewritten within second order approximation as $`2\sqrt{1+(_xy)^2}`$, the energy density due to the D-strings’ existence (tension), and the third term is of course the density of the D-strings’ kinetic energy. That is, only $`_{\mathrm{diag}}(x)`$ just gives the energy density that the D-strings themselves have. Thus, it is plausible that the remaining energy $`_{\mathrm{off}\mathrm{diag}}`$ is the energy due to interaction of D-branes, which is consistent with our argument that open string pairs connecting the D-branes have the rest of the energy.Further confirmation of our argument that open string pair creation are created between the D-branes will be given in ref..

We can also estimate roughly the number density of the created open strings; since SYM describes the behavior of low energy modes or almost zero modes of open strings, the strings connecting the two D-branes should be nearly straight. Since the tension, or the energy density of fundamental strings is constant (=1 in our notation), the number density of the open strings (per unit length) $`n(x,t)`$ is equivalent to the energy density divided by the displacement of the two D-p-branes in $`x_{p+1}`$ direction.§§§In fact, open strings have momenta since the off-diagonal elements to momentum density is non-vanishing. Here, we ignore the contribution of momenta as an approximation and and estimate the number density. Thus, it is obtained as

$`n(x,t)={\displaystyle \frac{_{\mathrm{off}\mathrm{diag}}(x,t)}{2y(x,t)}}={\displaystyle \frac{|d|^2}{2y^3}}\{(\beta 2|d|^2)^2+22\beta (\beta x)^2+2\beta |d|^2\}`$ (5.38)
where we have used $`_0d=\sqrt{2\beta }d`$ and $`_0c=\sqrt{2\beta }c`$. A distribution of $`n(x,t)`$ for $`g_s=10^4`$ and $`A(t)=0.1`$ is given in Fig.7, and the situation is roughly depicted in Fig.8.

In fact, a total number of the fundamental string in Fig.7 is $`N𝑑xn50.14`$, i.e. not an even integer. This is due to our partially incomplete analysis, in which we do not consider the effect of quantization of charges or fluxes. Actually, $`n(x,t)`$ is an expectation value or a probability of distribution of number density for open string to be created, and the real process should happen in a quantum theoretic way; each pair will be created rather “suddenly” with the above probability.

Before moving on to the case of D-p-branes with $`p2`$, we discuss distribution of the released energy. The energy released by the shortening of D-branes is

$`E_{\mathrm{released}}`$ $`=`$ $`T_{D1}{\displaystyle 𝑑x2\sqrt{1+(_xy)^2}}|_{t=0}T_{D1}{\displaystyle 𝑑x2\sqrt{1+(_xy)^2}}|_t`$ (5.39)
$``$ $`T_{D1}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\{\beta ^2(\beta 2|d|^2)^2(\beta x)^2/y^2\}},`$
and it is used partly to accelerate D-branes and partly to create the open string pairs. Then, how much is the ratio of the energy distribution? D-branes’ kinetic energy $`E_{D1\mathrm{kinetic}}`$ and the energy used to create open string pairs $`E_{\mathrm{open}}`$ are given respectively as

$`E_{D1\mathrm{kinetic}}=T_{D1}{\displaystyle 𝑑x(_0y)^2},E_{\mathrm{open}}=T_{D1}{\displaystyle 𝑑x_{\mathrm{off}\mathrm{diag}}}`$ (5.40)
(Of course it holds $`E_{\mathrm{released}}=E_{D1\mathrm{kinetic}}+E_{\mathrm{open}}`$.) Since we know all the quantities in the formulas of the energies, we can calculate the ratios $`E_{D1\mathrm{kinetic}}/E_{\mathrm{released}}`$ and $`E_{\mathrm{open}}/E_{\mathrm{released}}`$ at the time $`t`$ numerically. The result is

$`\{\begin{array}{ccc}E_{D1\mathrm{kinetic}}/E_{\mathrm{released}}& <10\%& \\ E_{\mathrm{open}}/E_{\mathrm{released}}& >90\%& \mathrm{for}A(t)<0.1\end{array}`$ (5.42)
as in Fig.9. and Fig.10.

That is, most part of the released energy is used to create the open string pairs connecting the branes; only a little part of it is used to accelerate the D-branes. Thus, from the viewpoint of D-branes’ motion, dissipation of the energy of the branes is very large at least at the initial stage of decay. We note that the order of $`E_{\mathrm{open}}`$ in terms of $`g_s`$ is $`𝒪((g_s)^0)`$, and asymptotic behavior of $`E_{\mathrm{open}}`$ is $`E_{\mathrm{open}}e^{2\sqrt{2\beta }t}`$ or $`e^{\sqrt{2\beta }t}`$ (its exponent is decreasing along with time) for $`A(t)<0.1`$.

Next we study the case of D-p-branes with $`p2`$. The main difference is that they have extra world-volume coordinates $`x_{\overline{\mu }}`$, and hence the condensing tachyon field $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ (and $`U_0`$) can have dependence of $`x_{\overline{\mu }}`$. Then, in addition to $`A_0^{^{}}`$, $`A_p^{^{}}`$ and $`X_{p+1}^{}`$ in (5.23), $`A_{\overline{\mu }}`$ ($`\overline{\mu }=1,\mathrm{},p1`$) arises through the transformation via $`U_0`$, and both U(2) electric and magnetic flux have non-vanishing contribution to the energy. A naive form of $`A_{\overline{\mu }}`$ is a bit complicated, but using the approximation in the footnote under (4.9), we have

$`A_{\overline{\mu }}^{^{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2y}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& _{\overline{\mu }}c^{}\\ _{\overline{\mu }}c& 0\end{array}\right).`$ (5.45)
Non-vanishing fluxes and covariant derivatives of $`X`$’s are

$`F_{\overline{\mu }p}^{^{}}(x_\mu )`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& _{\overline{\mu }}c^{}\\ _{\overline{\mu }}c& 0\end{array}\right)`$ (5.48)
$`D_{\overline{\mu }}^{}X_{p+1}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}_{\overline{\mu }}y& \beta x_{\overline{\mu }}d^{}/y\\ \beta x_{\overline{\mu }}d/y& _{\overline{\mu }}y\end{array}\right),`$ (5.51)
in addition to (5.27) and (5.34). It should be stressed that the above is U(2) magnetic flux but not U(1)’s one on each of the branes. Thus, even if we consider the case of D-3-branes, its existence does not mean that D-strings are created. Instead, according to the basic facts stated above, these d.o.f. again correspond to the d.o.f. of fundamental strings, and $`j_0`$ is again shown to vanish by substituting (5.23) and (5.45) (with $`x_{\overline{\mu }}`$ dependence taken into account). Therefore, we conclude that in the case of recombination of D-p-branes with $`p2`$, open string pairs connecting the two D-branes are created while they are decaying.

Let us consider the number density of the string. In the case with $`p2`$, $`|_0d|^2`$ and $`|_0c|^2`$ in $`_{\mathrm{off}\mathrm{diag}}`$ (in (5.37)) in the case of D-strings are replaced by $`|_{\widehat{\mu }}d|`$ and $`|_{\widehat{\mu }}c|`$ where $`\widehat{\mu }=0,\mathrm{},p1`$. But then, if we use $`<<g(k)>>`$ defined in (3.16), it holds $`|_0d|^2<<2\beta k^2>>(f_0)^2/2`$ and $`|_{\overline{\mu }}d|^2<<k^2>>(f_0)^2/2`$, so $`|_{\widehat{\mu }}d|`$ gives $`2\beta |d|^2`$ and the number density formula (5.38) holds again, though in this case it is a density in a p-dimensional space.

The released energy $`E_r(t)`$ is

$`E_r(t)=T_{Dp}{\displaystyle d^px[2\sqrt{1+(_xy)^2+(_{\overline{\mu }}y)^2}]_{t=0}^t}.`$ (5.52)
Since an extra minus term $`(_{\overline{\mu }}y)^2|_t=<<k^2>>(f_0)^2|d|^2/y^2`$ is added to $`E_r(t)`$, the density part of the released energy is a bit reduced from that in the formula (5.39), but the density of energy used to create open string pairs has the same form as that in (5.38). (The density of D-p-branes’ kinetic energy is reduced in terms of $`A(t)`$.) Thus, in the case of D-p-branes with $`p2`$, the ratio of the energy used to create open string pairs to the released energy is more than that in the case of D-strings, and we can say again that most part of the released energy is used to create the open string pairs.

## 6 Creation of closed strings

Let us assume $`g_s1`$. Then, the branes can be regarded as heavy objects, and after recombination, they start to move away from each other, though very slowly, but with some acceleration in opposite directions. Thus, one can easily expect that the system has non-trivial time-evolution behavior of mass quadrupole moments, which causes gravitational radiation. Below, going out of the framework of SYM, we show that the above expectation is true, and evaluate its energy flux, based on the time-evolution of the D-branes’ shapes. In addition, we discuss creation of closed strings for configurations of D-branes beyond the reach of SYM. In this section we mainly discuss the case (I) again, but we expect that essential part of the discussion also holds in the case of the case (II).

Since the coupling of a D-brane to the spacetime metric is $`G_{10}M𝒪(g_s)`$ (where $`G_{10}=g_s^2/(M_{10})^8`$ is the gravitational constant, $`M_{10}`$ is a 10-dimensional mass parameter and $`M`$ is the brane’s mass), the background spacetime can be regarded as a flat one and the wave we will consider is a deviation around the flat spacetime. Since we are dealing with a motion of D-branes with a relatively slow velocity in order to apply SYM, a non-relativistic approximation is applicable. In addition, the motion of the D-branes are localized around $`x=0`$ at least at the initial stage, so the following formulae can be applied to this case (see e.g. ); the lowest order radiation of gravitational wave is electric quadrupole radiation, and the mass quadrupole moment of a collection of particles with masses $`\{m_I\}`$ in 10 spacetime dimensions is

$`I_{ij}={\displaystyle \underset{I}{}}m_A[x_i^Ix_j^I{\displaystyle \frac{1}{9}}\delta _{ij}(x^I)^2]`$ (6.1)
where $`x_i^I`$’s ($`i=1,\mathrm{},9`$) represent (space) positions of a particle labeled by I. The angular distribution of the energy flux due to the radiation is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2E_{\mathrm{gravi}}}{dtd\mathrm{\Omega }_8}}={\displaystyle \frac{G_{10}}{8\pi }}<({\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_{ij}}{dt^3}})^22(n_i{\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_{ij}}{dt^3}})^2+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{8}}(n_in_j{\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_{ij}}{dt^3}})^2>`$ (6.2)
where $`n_i(\overline{x}_ix_i)/|\overline{x}_ix_i|`$ where $`\overline{x}`$ is the position of the observer and $`<\mathrm{}>`$ denotes an average over several wavelength here. We note that in (6.2) $`x_i`$ in $`I_{ij}`$ is to be evaluated at the retarded time. To apply the above formulae, we regard the branes as an assembly of infinitesimal hyper-planes. Then, $`I_{ij}`$ in the case of branes is translated into

$`I_{ij}=T_p{\displaystyle \underset{I=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle d^px\sqrt{1+(_xx_i^I)^2}[x_i^Ix_j^I\frac{1}{9}\delta _{ij}(x_k^I)^2]}`$ (6.3)
where the index $`I(=1,2)`$ denotes each of the branes.

Let us first discuss the case of D-strings in the case (I), the simplest case, where D-strings moves (decays) toward positive and negative directions of $`x_2`$. The $`I_{ij}`$ which have non-trivial components are

$`I_{11}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{9g_s}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\sqrt{1+(_xy)^2}(8x^2y^2)}`$
$`I_{22}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{9g_s}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\sqrt{1+(_xy)^2}(8y^2x^2)}`$ (6.4)
$`I_{33}`$ $`=`$ $`I_{44}=\mathrm{}=I_{99}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{9g_s}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\sqrt{1+(_xy)^2}(y^2+x^2)}`$
Here we also assume that the branes has no velocity in $`x`$ direction. If we use 9-dimensional polar coordinate system as $`x_2=\mathrm{cos}\theta _1,x_1=\mathrm{sin}\theta _1\mathrm{cos}\theta _2,x_3=\mathrm{sin}\theta _1\mathrm{sin}\theta _2\mathrm{cos}\theta _3,\mathrm{},x_8=\mathrm{sin}\theta _1\mathrm{}\mathrm{sin}\theta _7\mathrm{cos}\theta _8,x_9=\mathrm{sin}\theta _1\mathrm{}\mathrm{sin}\theta _8`$, we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2E_{\mathrm{gravi}}}{dtd\mathrm{\Omega }_8}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_{10}}{8\pi }}\{{\displaystyle \frac{7}{2}}\mathrm{sin}^4\theta _1({\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_1}{dt^3}})^2+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{2}}(1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _1\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _1)({\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_2}{dt^3}})^2`$ (6.5)
$`+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _1(\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _1\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _2){\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_1}{dt^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_2}{dt^3}}\}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dE_{\mathrm{gravi}}}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{10\pi G_{10}}{99}}(({\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_1}{dt^3}})^2+({\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_2}{dt^3}})^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_1}{dt^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3I_2}{dt^3}})`$ (6.6)
where $`I_1𝑑x\sqrt{1+(_xy)^2}y^2/g_s`$ and $`I_2𝑑x\sqrt{1+(_xy)^2}x^2/g_s`$. Since $`|\frac{d^3I_1}{dt^3}||\frac{d^3I_2}{dt^3}|`$ (because accelerated most are the part around $`x=0`$ of the D-branes but $`_xy(x,t)`$ vanishes at $`x=0`$.), the first terms in (6.5) and (6.6) are dominant. Using the concrete formula for $`y(x,t)`$ in (4.10), we have the energy flux as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dE_{\mathrm{gravi}}}{dt}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{10\pi G_{10}}{99g_s^2}}16(2\beta )^3A(t)^4`$ (6.7)
where $`A(t)e^{\sqrt{2\beta }t}`$ is used. It is of course non-vanishing. Thus, the decaying D-strings certainly radiate closed strings as gravitational wave.

In the cases of D-p-branes with $`p2`$ in the case (I), only the diagonal elements of $`I_{ii}`$ have non-trivial values again due to the integration with respect to $`x_\mu `$. To carry out the computation of the energy flux of the radiation, it is necessary to regularize the world volume of the D-branes, and if we do it, we can easily show that the energy flux is shown to be non-vanishing, though the final result depends on the regularization volume. Thus, the decaying D-p-branes with $`p2`$ also radiate gravitational wave.

In addition, radiation of RR gauge field should also occur after recombination of D-branes; each of the D-branes in the initial settings is a BPS brane, so each part of the branes should be a source of the flux of RR (p+1)-form gauge field. Thus, RR gauge wave should also be radiated if the branes are accelerated and have non-vanishing multi-derivatives of their quadrupole moment with respect to time,*** We note that the lowest order RR gauge radiation is also their electric quadrupole one; the two D-branes are regarded to have RR charges of the same signature because if one set $`\theta =0`$, the force due to RR gauge field is repulsive. which is the case we are considering. We expect that the energy flux of the RR gauge wave has about the same order as that of the gravitational wave.

Let us discuss the order of the energy given to the fundamental strings in the case of D-strings. In this paper we do not discuss the scale of $`M_{10}`$, and set $`M_{10}=M_s(=1/l_s)`$ for simplicity. Then, since $`G_{10}=g_s^2`$ and $`A(t)^2𝒪(g_s)`$, the flux $`dE_{\mathrm{gravi}}/dt𝒪(g_s^2)`$. The energy flux of the RR gauge radiation is expected to be the same order as $`dE_{\mathrm{gravi}}/dt`$. Taking into account that $`E_{\mathrm{gravi}}(t)A(t)^4`$ and the asymptotic behavior of $`E_{\mathrm{open}}`$, we have the ratio of the energy given to the massless closed strings to that of open strings is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dE_{\mathrm{massless}\mathrm{closed}}/dt}{dE_{\mathrm{open}}/dt}}g_s^2e^{2\sqrt{2\beta }t}\mathrm{or}g_s^2e^{3\sqrt{2\beta }t}.`$ (6.8)
Thus, the energy given to the massless closed string is very small at the initial stage compared with that of open strings, but the ratio increases exponentially with a typical time-scale $`T^{(I)}=1/\sqrt{2\beta }`$

As for the case (II), the shape of the D-branes in all direction may not be defined due to the non-commutativity of the scalar fields, but it is not plausible that cancellation of the radiation would happen. So, gravitational radiation and that of RR gauge field are strongly expected to occur as creation of closed strings.

Next, we want to discuss the behavior of the system beyond SYM. If the distance between the D-branes becomes larger than $`l_s`$, it is difficult to imagine that the created open strings extend unlimitedly, because the string has its tension. It also seems unnatural if one take into account increase of entropy. Then, what will happen? Since open strings are created in pairs it is expected that each pair of open strings connecting the branes are cut to pieces to form some closed strings and two open strings, each of the latter of which has its both ends on each of the two D-branes, as Fig.11.

That is, such a picture seems to arise that the decaying (annihilating) D-branes leave many closed strings behind (and radiate some of them) while producing many open strings which start from and end on each brane. If this is true, the further the two branes go from each other, the more possibility there arises to create closed strings. This expectation is consistent with tendency of the ratio of $`dE_{\mathrm{closed}}/dt`$ to $`dE_{\mathrm{open}}/dt`$. The dominant mechanism to create closed strings in this setting might be the above way. (Please note that if there was a single open string connecting the decaying D-branes, the energy of the system was not saved by creating a closed string.)

It is also to be noted that the above picture may be regarded as a generalization of Sen’s conjecture for $`D\overline{D}`$ annihilation; in the case of $`D\overline{D}`$ with no topological defects, the sum of the tensions of a D-brane and an anti-D-brane are precisely the height of the potential of the unstable vacuum and they vanish to be nothing. On the other hand, the setting we are considering is a “middle” configuration of $`D\overline{D}`$ and parallel two BPS branes, the latter of which has definitely positive energy. Thus, our setting also has positive energy and hence there should remain something after the decay. According to our speculation, it may be the closed and open strings stated above.

## 7 Implications for an inflation model

In this section we consider implications of the above results of the system for the inflation model of the setting of two D-4-branes at one angle in ref..

First, we would like to speculate about the efficiency of the reheating of the model. According to the analysis in section 5, most part of the released energy via tachyon condensation is used to create open string pairs connecting the branes and only a little part is used to accelerate the branes, at least at the initial stage of decay. Thus, from the viewpoint of motion of the branes, dissipation of the energy is rather large initially, and might be large afterward, so the oscillation of the branes around some stable configuration might occur only a few times. That is, if this setting is applied to the inflation scenario, it is possible that the reheating might be efficient.

Second, we would like to discuss the mechanism to create “reheated” gauge fields and fermions; from the viewpoint of cosmology they should be produced at the end of the inflation, but the mechanism how are they produced in this setting of the inflation model has not been clarified. We speculate about a scenario of the mechanism based on our analysis: Although we are considering a simpler setting model, if a more complete model of brane-world is considered, the models should be the one in which at the end of inflation, the configuration of branes are put so oriented that they reproduce excitations of Standard Model as given in e.g. ref. or some others. (A prototype of such models are discussed e.g. in ref..) In the model, fields like fermions and gauge fields arise as open strings connecting the branes or on each of the branes. Our suggestion is that the open string pairs connecting the branes like those in Fig.8 and the open strings on each of the branes like those in Fig.11 might directly correspond to the “reheated” fermions or gauge fields created at the end of the inflation. It would be interesting to find a framework describing the process in the region of distance other than SYM or beyond SYM, and discuss the above possibilities.

## 8 Summary and discussion

We have investigated what happens in the process after the recombination of two D-p-branes at one angle for the two types of concrete initial conditions; case (I):two D-p-branes have been parallel until $`t=0`$ but are put intersected at one angle $`\theta `$ at the instant $`t=0`$, and case (II):one of parallel two D-p-branes were rotated by a small angle $`\theta `$ and are approaching each other very slowly. In summary, the results are the following:

* Explicit functions of typical amplitudes of condensing tachyonic fields (dependent on time and location) have been obtained.
* Time-evolution of the D-branes’ shape after recombination has been obtained, and seemingly queer behavior of the D-branes’ shape that each brane comes to have three extremes has been observed. Physical interpretation of it has also been given.
* Pair-creation of (many) open strings with opposite orientations connecting the two decaying branes has been shown to occur. Expectation value of number density of the created open strings has been estimated, and energy distribution into the open strings has also been evaluated; it has been shown that most part of the energy released via tachyon condensation is used to create the open string pairs, and dissipation of the D-branes’ energy is large at the initial stage.
* Creation of closed strings as gravitational radiation from the branes has also been shown to occur; its energy flux has been evaluated quantitatively, In addition, a strong suggestion has been obtained that closed strings are created out of open string pairs after the two branes get further from each other.
* Speculations on implications of the above results for the inflation model of the D-4-branes at one angle have been given: dissipation of the branes’ energy (due to the creation of the strings) might be large and reheating might be efficient. In addition, “reheated” gauge fields and fermion which should appear at the end of the inflation, might correspond as the open strings created accompanying the decay of the D-branes.

Among the above, the most important result is the pair-creation of open strings connecting the decaying D-branes, which strongly suggests that closed strings are created afterward. These creations in the case of decay of D-p-branes at one angle are in some senses like the case of decay of an unstable D-brane (or s-branes) where rolling tachyons  are used to discuss production of open string pairs and closed strings  (see also  and other references therein). Compared with the latter cases, the analysis used in this paper is only perturbative and can follow the behavior of the system for only a rather short time-scale. For further study of recombination of D-branes, the approaches analogous to the case of an unstable D-brane may be useful and is to be explored.

Finally, we discuss the problem of non-commutativity, uncertainty and diagonalization procedure (gauge choice) of VEV’s of adjoint scalar fields $`X_{p+1}`$ and $`X_9`$, which appear in the solution of case (II). The commutation relation of the two is

$`[X_{p+1},X_9]=z(t)\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& d^{}\\ d& 0\end{array}\right).`$ (8.3)
It is plausible for the relation to give an uncertainty relation

$`\mathrm{\Delta }x_{p+1}\mathrm{\Delta }x_9|z(t)||dx,t||z_0vt|A(t)e^{\beta x^2}.`$ (8.4)
That is, this is a solution in which the scale of uncertainty changes depending on location and time.

Let us assume this uncertainty relation. Then, the situation is as follows: If one focuses on the positions in $`x_{p+1}`$ direction and do not determine those in $`x_9`$ direction, it seems possible to discuss the shapes of branes projected on $`x_px_{p+1}`$-plane with some high accuracy. so, we have argued that the discussion in section 4 holds. As for the “shape” (or profile) in $`x_9`$ direction, suppose one diagonalizes $`X_{p+1}`$ and describes their positions in the direction with the accuracy of the order $`|d(x=0)|`$, i.e. the accuracy one can determine whether the branes are combined or not at $`x=0`$. Then, one is able to determine the positions in $`x_9`$ direction only with the accuracy of order $`|z|e^{\beta x^2}`$, which means that we cannot tell whether the branes are separated or not at $`x=0`$, and at the point a little away from $`x=0`$, one can tell the branes are separated but cannot determine the shape. And at the point more away from $`x=0`$, one can tell the shape of the branes projected on $`x_px_{p+1}`$-plane.

One may notice that there seems a bit problematic thing: When one takes the gauge which diagonalizes $`X_9`$ instead, no evidence of recombination process can be observed. It may be possible to attribute this problem to the gauge choice: On the one hand there is a gauge where geometric information of the branes is easy to extract (“physical gauge” where $`X_{p+1}`$ is diagonalized). On the other hand, there is a gauge where the behavior of fluctuations like tachyon condensation is easy to describe (the gauge $`X_9`$ is diagonalized).

In addition, we would like to speculate about the meaning of diagonal elements of the scalar field which is not diagonalized; it might have some geometric meaning. In the physical gauge, the VEV of $`X_9`$ is written as

$`X_9^{^{}}=U_0X_9U_0^1={\displaystyle \frac{z(t)}{2\sqrt{(\beta x)^2+|d|^2}}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\beta x& d^{}\\ d& \beta x\end{array}\right).`$ (8.7)
The diagonal elements represent two kink-like shapes (profiles) along x-direction with a width $`|d|/\beta `$ with both ends approaching $`\pm z(t)/2`$, which fits our expectation for the branes’ shapes projected on $`x_px_9`$-plane. It may be a merely coincidence, but there might be a possibility that it has some geometric meaning. Let us remember the solution of dielectric (spherical) D2/D0 bound states given by Myers in ref.. We concentrate the N=2 (two D0) case. The solution is

$`\begin{array}{ccc}X_1=\frac{R}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),& X_2=\frac{R}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& i\\ i& 0\end{array}\right),& X_3=\frac{R}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)\end{array}`$ (8.15)
where $`R`$ is the extent of the spherical D-2-brane to which two D-0-branes are bound. If one focuses on $`x_3`$ direction, the two D-0-branes are considered to locate in the north and south pole of the sphere in the $`x_3`$ direction. Then, one cannot determine the positions of two D0’s in $`x_1`$ and $`x_2`$ direction, but the zeros in diagonal elements of them may be interpreted as center of mass positions or expectation values of their positions. Analogous to this case, it might be possible that the diagonal elements of $`X_9^{^{}}`$ describe center-of mass positions of the branes in $`x_9`$ direction though the definite position is uncertain. The above point, related with non-commutativity, gauge choice and uncertainty, would be interesting and to be explored in the future.

Acknowledgement

I would especially like to thank Hidehiko Shimada for many fruitful discussions, encouragement and much adequate advice in proceeding this work. I also thank to Prof. K. Hashimoto and S. Nagaoka for useful communication and discussion. I also like to thank Dr. Taro Tani for many useful discussion and encouragement, Prof. M. Kato for useful comments (questions), directing my attention to some aspects I was not considering, and Y. Aisaka for teaching me how to use many computer tools. I would like to thank Prof. H. Tye for giving me helpful comments at the conference String Phenomenology 2003. Finally, I would like to thank members of Theoretical Physics Laboratory at RIKEN for useful discussion. This work is supported by Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science under Post-doctorial Research Program (No.13-05035).

Appendix

## Appendix A The width of a Gaussian wave function for a mode with a time-dependent (negative) frequency-squared

In this appendix we first review derivation of the propagator (kernel) $`K`$ of the harmonic oscillator with a time-dependent frequency, and then the fact that an initially Gaussian wave function keeps to be Gaussian within WKB approximation, and finally present the formula for the time-dependent width of the Gaussian in terms of basis functions. See for more detail ref..

If one find two independent solutions $`A(t)`$ and $`B(t)`$ (which we denote as basis functions) to the “WKB-approximated equation of motion

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2x(t)}{dt^2}}=\omega (t)^2x(t),`$ (A.1)
we can immediately write essential part of the propagator in terms of $`A(t)`$ and $`B(t)`$ up to WKB approximation. The solution representing the classical path of a motion from $`(x_0,t_0)`$ to $`(x_1,t_1)`$ is

$`x(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{B_1A_0A_1B_0}}[\{B_1A(t)A_1B(t)\}x_0+\{B_0A(t)+A_0B(t)\}x_1]`$ (A.2)
$``$ $`h_0(t)x_0+h_1(t)x_1`$ (A.3)
where we abbreviate $`A(t_1)`$ as $`A_1`$, etc. Substituting (A.3) for the action $`S=_{t_0}^{t_1}𝑑tm(\dot{x}^2\omega ^2x^2)/2`$, and exponentiating the one times $`i`$, we have the propagator $`K(x_1,t_1;x_0,t_0)=Fe^{iS_{\mathrm{cl}}}`$ where $`S_{\mathrm{cl}}`$ is quadratic in $`x`$ as

$`S_{\mathrm{cl}}={\displaystyle \frac{m}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=0,1}{}}x_ix_j\alpha _{ij}(t_1;t_0)`$ (A.4)
where

$`\alpha _{ij}(t_1;t_0){\displaystyle _{t_0}^{t_1}}𝑑t[{\displaystyle \frac{dh_i}{dt}}{\displaystyle \frac{dh_j}{dt}}\omega (t)^2h_ih_j].`$ (A.5)
$`F`$ is a time-dependent normalization but not dependent on $`x_i`$, which can be determined in several ways. (In this paper we determine the factor $`F`$ so that the propagator in each case $`K`$ satisfies the Schrodinger equation.) Since the wave function for $`t=t_1`$ is given by $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x_1,t_1)=𝑑x_0K(x_1,t_1;x_0,t_0)\mathrm{\Psi }(x_0,t_0)`$, the absolute value of an initially Gaussian wave function remains to be Gaussian, since the above is only a Gaussian integral. The behavior of the system is represented by the time-dependent width of the Gaussian obtained in terms of the basis functions as

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(t)^2=\mathrm{\Delta }(t_0)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _{00}(t;t_0)^2}{\alpha _{01}(t;t_0)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2(t_0)^2(\alpha _{01})^2}}.`$ (A.6)
Thus, finding the basis functions leads directly to the time-evolution behavior of the width and the system up to WKB approximation as far as the the initial wave function is Gaussian. We note that normalizations of $`A(t)`$ and $`B(t)`$ do not appear in (A.3) and hence also not in the final result.


format: text

text:
# ABOUT LEVI-MALCEV THEOREM FOR HOMOGENEOUS BOL ALGEBRAS

> Abstract The fundamental ideas of the applicability of Levi-Malcev Theorem for Bol algebras, which plays a basic role in structural theory are outlined

1. Introduction

It is well known that Levi–Malcev theorem is valid for Lie algebras and Malcev algebras. But it is not valid for binary-Lie algebras (in classical sense) as well as for Bol algebras. Since the Levi–Malcev theorem plays the basic role in structural theories, it is useful to get some generalized version of such a theorem for Bol algebras. In this report the problem for so-called homogeneous Bol algebras with some examples will be discussed.

Let us note that the problem is important in applications to Differential geometry and Smooth Quasigroups and Loops theory (because that Bol algebra is the proper infinitesimal object for a smooth Bol loop, and any symmetric space, for example, is a smooth Bol loop).

It is also noted that, Bol loops and Bol algebras are significant in Mathematical Physics (chiral anomalies etc.).

Remark: The smooth Bol loops-Bol algebras theory is due to L.V. Sabinin, P.O. Mikheev. See, for example .

2. General definitions

Let consider $`(𝐁,)`$ be an affinely connected space with $`𝐑=\mathrm{𝟎}`$, and let $`𝐗(𝐱)`$ be an infinitesimal affine transformation in $`(𝐁,)`$ that means for every vector field $`𝐘B`$ we have

$$L_XL_X=_{[X,Y]}$$

where $`L`$ is a Lie differential in the direction of the vector field $`𝐗`$. Let us introduce in $`𝐁`$ a basis of vectori field such that for every $`X_1,,X_n`$ then

$$X(x)=\alpha ^j(x)(X_j)_x$$

and we can have

$$[X_i,X_k]=T_{ik}^jX_j.$$

Definition 1. Any vector space $`V`$ of $`𝐁`$ with the operations

$$\xi ,\eta \xi \eta V,$$

$$\xi ,\eta ,\zeta (\xi ,\eta ,\zeta )V(\xi ,\eta ,\zeta V)$$

and identities

$$\xi \xi =0,(\xi ,\eta ,\zeta )+(\eta ,\zeta ,\xi )+(\zeta ,\xi ,\eta )=0,$$

$$(\xi ,\eta ,\zeta )\chi (\xi ,\eta ,\chi )\zeta +(\zeta ,\chi ,\xi \eta )(\xi ,\eta ,\zeta \chi )+\xi \eta \zeta \chi =0,$$

$$(\xi ,\eta ,(\zeta ,\chi ,\omega ))=((\xi ,\eta ,\zeta ),\chi ,\omega )+(\zeta ,(\xi ,\eta ,\chi ),\omega )+(\zeta ,\chi ,(\xi ,\eta ,\omega ))$$

is called a Bol algebra.

Let $`𝐈`$ be an ideal of a Bol algebra $`V`$ and denote $`𝐈^{(1)}=(V,𝐈,𝐈)`$ and $`𝐈^{(k)}=(V,𝐈^{(k1)},𝐈^{(k1)})`$

Definition 2. The ideal $`𝐈`$ of a Bol algebra $`V`$ is called weakly solvable if there exist k, such that $`𝐈^{(k)}=0`$.

Definition 3. The weak radical $`RV`$ of a Bol algebra is called a maximal weakly solvable ideal. The Bol algebra $`V`$ is called semisimple if $`RV=0`$.

Definition 4. Let $`𝒢`$ be a vector subspace of $`V`$, we say that $`𝒢`$ is a Bol subalgebra if, $`a,b,c𝒢ab,(a,b,c)𝒢.`$

Definition 5. \[Mikheev 1.\] A local analytic loops $`(B,,e)`$ verify the $`G`$-property if there exist such a neighbourhood $`𝒰`$ of the point $`eB`$ such that for any $`x𝒰`$ the loop $`(B,,e)`$ and $`(B,\frac{1}{x},e)`$ are isomorphic.

Theorem 1. \[Mikheev 1.\] A local analytic Bol loop $`(B,,e)`$ posses a $`G`$-property if and only, if the corresponding affine connected space $`(B,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is local homogeneous.

Definition 6. An arbitrary Bol algebra is said to be homogeneous if its an infinitesimal object for a local analytic Bol loop that posses a $`G`$-property.

Indeed we will have the following bilinears and trilinears operations:

$$\xi ,\eta \xi \eta T_e(B)$$

$$(\xi \eta )^i=T_{jk}^i(e)\xi ^j\eta ^k$$

$$(\xi ,\eta ,\tau )^i=(\mathrm{\Delta }_eT_{jk}^i+T_{jk}^sT_{sl}^i)\xi ^j\eta ^k\tau ^l$$

$$[X_i,X_k]=T_{ik}^jX_j$$

which will verify the identities of the definition of Bol algebras.

Let’s $`V`$ be a Bol algebra over the field of characteristic zero and let us assume that in $`V`$ there is a radical $`RV`$ and a semisimple subalgebra $`SMV`$ such that

$$V=SMV+RV.$$

This implies that

$$RVSMV=\{0\}.$$

Hence $`V=RVSMV`$ and $`SMVV/RV`$ and the Bol subalgebra $`SMV`$ is isomorphic to the factor algebra of the algebra $`V`$ by its radical.

Connversely, if $`V`$ contains the Bol subalgebra $`SMV`$ isomorphic to $`V/RV`$ then the algebra $`SMV`$ is semisimple. Indeed, $`SMVRV=0`$ and

$$dimV=dimRV+dim(V/RV)=dimRV+dimSMV.$$

Hence, $`V=SMV+RV.`$ This lead us to state the following theorem:

Theorem 2. For every homogenous Bol algebra $`V`$ over the field of caracteristic zero there exist semi simple sub algebra $`SMV`$ and a weak radical $`RV`$ such that $`V=SMV+RV.`$

Proof:

Let assume that $`[RV]^2=0`$ which means that if the radical is abelian, then $`RV`$ is a submodule of the module $`SMV`$ relatively to $`V`$ by the application $`exp(\mathrm{𝐚𝐝}x)`$, where $`\mathrm{𝐚𝐝}x`$ is an inner differential of Bol enveloping Lie algebra. Since $`[RV]^2=0`$ then, $`RV`$ belongs to the kernel of the representation of the Bol algebra $`V`$ of the defined module $`RV.`$ Hence we obtain the induced representation of the algebra $`\overline{V}=V/RV.`$ We have for the module the following operation: $`\overline{ab}=([a,b]_V))`$, $`aV`$, $`bRV,`$ and the commutator is taken from the minimal enveloping Lie algebra . If $`[RV]^20`$ then $`\overline{V}=(V)/[RV]^2),`$ and $`dim\overline{V}dimV.`$ By using the induction according to the dimension of the algebra, we can say that the statement is true for the algebra $`\overline{V}`$. Further, $`\overline{RV}=(RV/[RV]^2)`$ is a radical for the algebra $`\overline{V}`$ and $`\overline{V}/\overline{RV}V/RV.`$ Therefore, the algebra $`\overline{V}`$ contain the subalgebra $`\overline{SMV}V/RV`$ as a subalgebra. The algebra $`\overline{V}`$ and $`\overline{SMV}`$ has the form $`K/RV`$ where $`K`$ is the subalgebra of Bol algebra $`V,`$ containing $`[RV]^2.`$ But, $`[RV]^2`$ is the radical of the Bol algebra $`K`$ and $`(K)/[RV]^2)(V/RV)`$ such that $`dimKdimV,`$ using the induction we obtain that $`K`$ contain the subalgebra $`SMVV/RV,`$ hence the result.

Further an example is given with a counter example.

For the type I of the classification given in , the Bol algebra have trilinear operation equal to zero and:

$$e_1e_3=e_1+e_2$$

$$e_2e_3=e_2$$

$$VV=<e_1+e_2,e_2>$$

$$SMV=\frac{V}{<e_1+e_2,e_2>}=<e_3>.$$

We see in the case

$$V=<e_1+e_2,e_2><e_3>$$

Counter example, let consider the Bol algebras of Type IV in ,

$$e_1e_3=xe_1+pe_2+e_3,p,x0$$

$$(e_1,e_2,e_3)=e_1$$

$$(e_1,e_3,e_3)=e_1.$$

This Bol algebra is not homogeneous.

Hence

$$VV=<e_1,e_2,e_3>=RV$$

$$SMV=\frac{V}{<e_1,e_2,e_3>}=<e_2,e_3>.$$

We see that:

$$RVSMV=<e_1,e_2,e_3><e_2,e_3>0.$$

Hence the Levi-Malcev theorem can not be applied.

References

1-P.O. Mikheev On G-properties for analytic Bol loops,Webs and Quasigroups, Kalinin, 1986. p. 54-59.

2-L.V. Sabinin, P.O. Mikheev, Quasigroups and differential geometry, in: Quasigroups and loops theory and applications. Berlin: Helderman Verlas, 1990.-pp. 357-430.

3-K. Yamaguti On the Lie triple system and its generalization j.sci. Hiroshima Univ. ser. A. 21. N.3 1958. p. 155-160.

4-W.G. Lister A structure theory of Lie triple system Trans. AMS. -1952.-T. 72.-p. 217-245.

5-B. Harris Cohomology of Lie triple systems and Lie algebras with involution Trans. AMS.-1951.-T. 71.-p. 148-162.

6-M. Kikkawa Remarks on solvability of Lie triple algebras Mem. Fac. sci. shim. Univ. N.13 -1979, p.17-22.

7-T.B. Bouetou On the geometry of Bol algebras Ph.D Thesis, Moscow University 1995.
8- V.T. Filipov Homogeneous Bol Algebras Sibirian Math. journal Vol.35, N.4 1994, pp. 818-825.
9- A.S. Kleshchev Branching Rules for Modular Representation of Symmetric Groups I  Journal of algebra 178, pp 493-511 (1995).