text:
# Axially symmetric multi-baryon solutions and their quantization in the chiral quark soliton model

## I Introduction <br>

The chiral quark soliton model(CQSM) was developed in 1980’s as a low-energy effective theory of QCD. Since it includes the Dirac sea quark contribution and explicit valence quark degrees of freedom, the model interpolates between the constituent quark model and the Skyrme model diakonov88 ; reinhardt88 ; meissner89 ; report ; wakamatsu91 . The CQSM is derived from the instanton liquid model of QCD vacuum and incorporates the non-perturbative feature of the low-energy QCD, spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking. It has been shown that the $`B=1`$ solution provides correct observables as a nucleon including mass, electromagnetic value, spin carried by quarks, parton distributions and octet SU(3) baryon spectra.

For $`B=2`$, the stable axially symmetric soliton solution was found in sawado98 . The solution exhibits doubly degenerate bound spectrum of the quark orbits in the background of the axially symmetric chiral field with winding number two. Upon quantization, various dibaryon spectra were obtained, showing that the quantum number of the ground state exactly coincide with that of physical deuteron sawado00 ; sawado02 . For $`B>2`$, the Skyrme model predicts that the solutions have only discrete, crystal-like symmetries braaten90 ; sutcliffe97 ; manton98 . According to the prediction, we studied the CQSM with $`B=3`$ tetrahedrally symmetric chiral fields and obtained triply degenerate spectrum of the quark orbits sawado02t . Its large degeneracy indicates that the terahedrally symmetric solution may be the lowest-lying configuration. For $`B>3`$, one can also expect that the lowest-lying solutions in the CQSM inherits the discrete symmetries predicted in the Skyrme model. Studying solutions with those symmetries in CQSM is, however, formidable especially for quantization. Thus, before embarking those discrete symmetries, it will be instructive to study axially symmetric solutions which are much simpler. Besides, considering the fact that for some higher baryon numbers, the ground states of the skyrmions do not agree with the experimental observation irwin  , the possibility that axially symmetric solutions provide correct ground states can not be excluded. Recently, it was found in Ref. grigoriev  that in the BPS monopoles all axially symmetric solutions up to chrage five have lower energy than that of discrete symmetries. A cylindrical shape isomer in $`{}_{}{}^{12}C`$ was also found in the Skyrme model framework nikolaev . Research of axially symmetric solitons is thus in progress.

In Sec.II, we shall obtain axially symmetric classical soliton solutions with $`B=25`$. The solutions exhibit doubly degenerate spectra due to their axial symmetry. Such degeneracy generates large shell gaps and confirms that the solutions are stable local minima. In Sec.III, we shall quantize the obtained classical solitons semiclassically. Imposing the Finkelstein-Rubinstein constraints on the states, the ground states of the axially symmetric solitons are constructed and examined if they agree with the experimental observation. In Sec.IV is the detail of the numerical analysis used to obtain the classical and quantum solutions. Conclusions and discussions are in Sec.V.

## II Axially Symmetric Classical Solutions

The CQSM is derived from the instanton liquid model of the QCD vacuum and incorporates the nonperturbative feature of the low-energy QCD, spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking. The vacuum functional is defined by diakonov88

$`𝒵={\displaystyle 𝒟\pi 𝒟\psi 𝒟\psi ^{}\mathrm{exp}\left[id^4x\overline{\psi }\left(i\overline{)}MU^{\gamma _5}\right)\psi \right]}`$ (1)
where the SU(2) matrix

$`U^{\gamma _5}={\displaystyle \frac{1+\gamma _5}{2}}U+{\displaystyle \frac{1\gamma _5}{2}}U^{}\mathrm{with}U=\mathrm{exp}\left(i𝝉𝝅/f_\pi \right)`$
describes chiral fields, $`\psi `$ is quark fields and $`M`$ is the constituent quark mass. $`f_\pi `$ is the pion decay constant and experimentally $`f_\pi 93\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$.

The $`B=1`$ soliton solution has been studied in detail at classical and quantum level in diakonov88 ; reinhardt88 ; meissner89 ; report ; wakamatsu91 . To obtain solutions with $`B>1`$, we shall employ the chiral fields with winding number $`B`$ in the Skyrme Model as the background of quarks, which can be justified as follows.

In Eq.(1), performing the functional integral over $`\psi `$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ fields, one obtains the effective action

$$S_{\mathrm{eff}}(U)=iN_cSp\mathrm{ln}iD=iN_c\mathrm{log}detiD,$$
(2)
where $`iD=i\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ \hfill \end{array}MU^{\gamma _5}`$ is the Dirac operator. The classical solutions can be obtained by the extremum condition of (2) with respect to $`U`$. For this purpose, let us consider the derivative expansion of the action dhar85 ; ebert86 ; wakamatsu91 . Up to quartic terms, we have,

$`S_{\mathrm{eff}}={\displaystyle }d^4x[C\mathrm{tr}(L_\mu L^\mu )`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{N_c}{32\pi ^2}}\mathrm{tr}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}[L_\mu ,L_\nu ]^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}(_\mu L^\mu )+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}(L_\mu L^\mu )^2\}],`$
(3)
where $`L_\mu =_\mu UU^{}`$. Suitably adjusting the coefficients, one can identify (3) with the Skyrme model action. Therefore, it will be justified to adopt the configurations of the solutions in the Skyrme model to chiral fields in the CQSM.

In the Skyrme model the minimal energy pion configuration with $`B=2`$ has an axial symmetry manton87  and can be written by

$$U(𝒙)=\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)+i𝝉\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z),$$
(4)
where

$$\widehat{𝒏}=(\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)\mathrm{cos}m_\mathrm{w}\phi ,\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)\mathrm{sin}m_\mathrm{w}\phi ,\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z))$$
(5)
and $`m_\mathrm{w}`$ is the winding number of the pion fields. We shall use this configuration in the backgound to obtain axially symmetric chiral quark solitons.

In the CQSM, the number of valence quark is associated with the baryon number such that the baryon number $`B`$ soliton consist of $`N_c\times B`$ valence quarks. If the correlation between quarks is sufficiently strong, their binding energy become large and the valence quarks can not be observed as positive energy particles kahana84 ; balachandran98 . Thus, one gets the picture of the topological soliton model in the sense that the baryon number coincide with the winding number of the background chiral field when the valence quarks occupy all the levels diving into negative energy region.

Let us rewrite the effective action in (2) as

$`S_{\mathrm{eff}}=iN_c\mathrm{log}det(i\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ \hfill \end{array}MU^{\gamma _5})`$ (8)
$`=iN_c\mathrm{log}det\left(i_tH(U^{\gamma _5})\right)`$ (9)
where

$`H(U^{\gamma _5})=i\alpha +\beta MU^{\gamma _5}.`$ (10)
The classical energy of the soliton can be estimated from the quark determinant in Eq.(9) rajaraman ; reinhardt89 . We introduce the eigenstates of operatos, $`i_tH(U^{\gamma _5})`$ and $`H(U^{\gamma _5})`$, such that

$`H(U^{\gamma _5})\varphi _\mu (𝒙)=E_\mu \varphi _\mu (𝒙)`$ (11)
$`\left(i_tH(U^{\gamma _5})\right)\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mu ,n}=\lambda _{\mu ,n}\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mu ,n}.`$ (12)
where $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mu ,n}=e^{i\omega _nt}\varphi _\mu `$ and $`\lambda _{\mu ,n}=E_\mu +\omega _n`$. Imposing on $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mu ,n}`$ the anti-periodicity condition, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mu ,n}(𝒙,T)=\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mu ,n}(𝒙,0)`$, reads

$`\omega _nT=(2n+1)\pi .`$ (13)
The determinant in Eq.(9) then becomes

$`det(i_tH)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mu ,n}{}}\lambda _{\mu ,n}`$ (14)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mu ,n}{}}\left(E_\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{(2n+1)\pi }{T}}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`C{\displaystyle \underset{\mu ,n0}{}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{|E_\mu |^2T^2}{(2n+1)^2\pi ^2}}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`C{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}\mathrm{cos}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|E_\mu |T\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{C}{2}}\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}|E_\mu |T\right)`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}(1+\mathrm{exp}(i|E_\mu |T))`$
where

$$C=\underset{n0}{}\left(\frac{(2n+1)^2\pi ^2}{T^2}\right)$$

and the product formula for the cosine function $`\mathrm{cos}(z)=_{n1}^{\mathrm{}}(14z^2/(2n1)^2\pi ^2)`$ has been used. Inserting (14) into (9), one obtains

$`S_{\mathrm{eff}}=N_cT{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}n_\mu |E_\mu |+N_cT{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}|E_\mu |`$ (15)
where $`n_\mu `$ is the valence quark occupation number which takes values only 0 or 1. Correspondingly, the classical energy is given by

$`E=E_{\mathrm{val}}+E_{\mathrm{field}}`$ (16)
where

$`E_{\mathrm{val}}=N_c{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}n_\mu |E_\mu |,`$
$`E_{\mathrm{field}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}N_c{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}|E_\mu |.`$
representing the valence quark and sea quark contribution to the total energy respectively.

The effective action $`S_{\mathrm{eff}}(U)`$ is ultraviolet divergent and hence must be regularized. Using the proper-time regularization scheme schwinger51 , we can write

$`S_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{reg}}[U]={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}N_c{\displaystyle _{1/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\tau }{\tau }}\mathrm{Sp}\left(\mathrm{e}^{D^{}D\tau }\mathrm{e}^{D_0^{}D_0\tau }\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}N_cT{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\omega }{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{1/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\tau }{\tau }}`$
$`\times \mathrm{Sp}\left[\mathrm{e}^{\tau (H^2+\omega ^2)}\mathrm{e}^{\tau (H_0^2+\omega ^2)}\right]`$ (17)
where $`D_0`$ and $`H_0`$ are operators with $`U=1`$. The total energy is then given by

$$E_{\mathrm{static}}[U]=E_{\mathrm{val}}[U]+E_{\mathrm{field}}[U]E_{\mathrm{field}}[U=1]$$
(18)
where

$`E_{\mathrm{val}}=N_c{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}E_{\mathrm{val}}^{(i)}`$
$`E_{\mathrm{field}}=N_c{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}\left\{𝒩(E_\mu )\right|E_\mu |+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\sqrt{4\pi }}}\mathrm{exp}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{E_\mu }{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\right)^2\right]\}`$
with

$$𝒩(E_\mu )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{2},\left(\frac{E_\mu }{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\right)^2)$$

and $`E_{\mathrm{val}}^{(i)}`$ is the valence energy of the $`i`$ th valence quark. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a cutoff parameter evaluated by the condition that the derivative expansion of (17) reproduces the pion kinetic term with the correct coefficient, i.e.,

$`f_\pi ^2={\displaystyle \frac{N_cM^2}{4\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _{1/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\tau }{\tau }}\mathrm{e}^{\tau M^2}.`$ (19)
The extremum conditions for the total energy

$$\frac{\delta }{\delta F(\rho ,z)}E_{\mathrm{static}}[U]=0,\frac{\delta }{\delta \mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)}E_{\mathrm{static}}[U]=0$$
(20)
yield the following equations of motion for the profile functions,

$`R^T(\rho ,z)\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)=R^L(\rho ,z)\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)`$ (21)
$`S(\rho ,z)\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)=P(\rho ,z)\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)`$ (22)
where

$$P(\rho ,z)=R^T(\rho ,z)\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)+R^L(\rho ,z)\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z).$$
(23)
In terms of eigenfunction $`\varphi `$ in Eq.(11), $`R^T`$,$`R^L`$ and $`S`$ are given by

$`R^T(\rho ,z)=R_{\mathrm{val}}^T(\rho ,z)+R_0^T(\rho ,z)`$ (24)
$`R^L(\rho ,z)=R_{\mathrm{val}}^L(\rho ,z)+R_0^L(\rho ,z)`$ (25)
$`S(\rho ,z)=S_{\mathrm{val}}(\rho ,z)+S_0(\rho ,z)`$ (26)
where

$`R_{\mathrm{val}}^T(\rho ,z)={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\phi \overline{\varphi }_i(\rho ,\phi ,z)i\gamma _5}`$
$`\times (\tau _1\mathrm{cos}m_\mathrm{w}\phi +\tau _2\mathrm{sin}m_\mathrm{w}\phi )\varphi _i(\rho ,\phi ,z),`$
$`R_0^T(\rho ,z)={\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}𝒩(E_\mu )sgn(E_\mu ){\displaystyle 𝑑\phi \overline{\varphi }_\mu (\rho ,\phi ,z)i\gamma _5}`$
$`\times (\tau _1\mathrm{cos}m_\mathrm{w}\phi +\tau _2\mathrm{sin}m_\mathrm{w}\phi )\varphi _\mu (\rho ,\phi ,z),`$
$`R_{\mathrm{val}}^L(\rho ,z)={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\phi \overline{\varphi }_i(\rho ,\phi ,z)i\gamma _5\tau _3\varphi _i(\rho ,\phi ,z)},`$
$`R_0^L(\rho ,z)={\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}𝒩(E_\mu )sgn(E_\mu ){\displaystyle 𝑑\phi \overline{\varphi }_\mu (\rho ,\phi ,z)i\gamma _5}`$
$`\times \tau _3\varphi _\mu (\rho ,\phi ,z),`$
$`S_{\mathrm{val}}(\rho ,z)={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\phi \overline{\varphi }_i(\rho ,\phi ,z)\varphi _i(\rho ,\phi ,z)},`$
$`S_0(\rho ,z)={\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}𝒩(E_\mu )sgn(E_\mu ){\displaystyle 𝑑\phi \overline{\varphi }_\mu (\rho ,\phi ,z)\varphi _\mu (\rho ,\phi ,z)}.`$
and subscripts, $`0`$ and val, represent the vacuum and valence quark contributions respectively. The boundary conditions for the profile functions were constructed by Braaten and Carson braaten88 ;

$`F(\rho ,z)0as\rho ^2+z^2\mathrm{},`$
$`F(0,0)=\pi ,\mathrm{\Theta }(0,z)=\{\begin{array}{c}0,z>0\\ \pi ,z<0\end{array}.`$ (29)
The procedure to obtain the self-consistent solutions of Eq.(21) and (22) is $`1)`$ solve the eigenequation in Eq.(12) under assumed initial profile functions $`F_0(\rho ,z),\mathrm{\Theta }_0(\rho ,z)`$ which satisfy the boundary conditions eqs.(29), $`2)`$ use the resultant eigenfunctions and eigenvalues to calculate $`R^T,R^L,S`$ and also $`P`$ in Eq.(23), $`3)`$ solve Eq. (21) and (22) to obtain new profile functions, and $`4)`$ repeat $`1)3)`$ until the self-consistency is attained.

In Figs. 1-4, we show the spectrum of the quark orbits in the background of chiral fields with winding number $`m_\mathrm{w}=25`$, as a function of the size parameter $`X`$. The profile functions are parameterized by $`X`$ as

$`F(\rho ,z)`$ $`=`$ $`\pi +\pi \sqrt{\rho ^2+z^2}/X\mathrm{for}X\sqrt{\rho ^2+z^2}`$ (30)
$`=`$ $`0\mathrm{otherwise},`$
$`\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{tan}^1(\rho /z).`$ (31)
To examine the spectrum in detail, let us consider the Hamiltonian defined in (10). For the axially symmetric chiral field in Eq.(4), this Hamiltonian commutes with the third component of the grand spin operator $`K_3`$ and the time-reversal operator $`T`$. These are specifically,

$`K_3=L_3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sigma _3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\mathrm{w}\tau _3`$ (32)
$`T=i\gamma _1\gamma _3i\tau _1\tau _3C`$ (33)
where $`L_3`$, $`\sigma _3`$, and $`\tau _3`$ are respectively the third component of orbital angular momentum, spin, and isospin operator, and $`C`$ is a charge conjugation operator. The parity operator is defined by $`P=\gamma _0`$ for odd $`B`$, and $`P=\gamma _0\tau _3`$ for even $`B`$. Thus, the eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian can be specified by the magnitude of $`K_3`$ and the parity $`\pi =\pm `$. We have $`K_3=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\pm 3,\mathrm{}`$ for odd $`B`$, and $`K_3=\pm \frac{1}{2},\pm \frac{3}{2},\pm \frac{5}{2},\pm \frac{7}{2},\mathrm{}`$ for even $`B`$. Since the Hamiltonian is invariant under time reverse, the states of $`+K_3`$ and $`K_3`$ are degenerate in energy.

Fig.1 shows the quark spectrum with $`m_\mathrm{w}=2`$. The bound states diving into negative region are doubly degenerate with $`K_3=\pm \frac{1}{2}`$. Thus putting $`N_c=3`$ valence quarks on each of the bound levels, we have the $`B=2`$ soliton solution. For $`m_\mathrm{w}=3`$, the spectrum of $`K_3=\pm 1^{}`$(double degeneracy) and $`K_3=0^+`$ states dive into negative-energy region. Thus, we have the $`B=3`$ soliton solution. For $`m_\mathrm{w}=4`$, the spectrum of $`K_3=\pm \frac{1}{2}^+`$ and $`K_3=\pm \frac{3}{2}^{}`$(both doubly degenerate) states dive into negative region. Thus, we have the $`B=4`$ soliton solution. For $`m_\mathrm{w}=5`$, the spectrum of $`K_3=\pm 2^+`$(double), $`K_3=\pm 1^{}`$(double) and $`K_3=0^+`$ states dive into negative-energy region. Thus we have the $`B=5`$ soliton solution. These results confirm that the baryon number of the soliton is identified with the number of diving levels occupied by $`N_c`$ valence quarks. It can be seen that the degeneracy which occurs due to symmetry of the chiral field reduces the number of states and hence makes large shell gaps. This observation indicates that degeneracy in spectrum contribute to make classical energies of the soliton solutions lower. In fact, our $`B=2`$ solution which is considered to be the minimum energy soliton from the study of the $`B=2`$ skyrmions provides the maximum degeneracy in spectrum. It will be interesting to study minimum solutions from this point of view.

The baryon number density is defined by the zeroth component of the baryon current reinhardt88 ,

$$B=\frac{1}{N_c}\overline{\psi }\gamma _0\psi =B_{\mathrm{val}}+B_0$$
(34)
where

$`B_{\mathrm{val}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_c}}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\phi \varphi _i^{}(\rho ,\phi ,z)\varphi _i(\rho ,\phi ,z)}`$
$`B_0={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_c}}[{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}𝒩(E_\mu )sgn(E_\mu )`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }d\phi \varphi _\mu ^{}(\rho ,\phi ,z)\varphi _\mu (\rho ,\phi ,z)`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}𝒩(E_\mu ^{(0)})sgn(E_\mu ^{(0)})`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }d\phi \varphi _\mu ^{(0)}(\rho ,\phi ,z)\varphi _\mu ^{(0)}(\rho ,\phi ,z)].`$
The contour plot of the baryon number density for each baryon number is shown in Fig. 9. It can be seen that they have toroidal in shape.

The mean radius $`\rho `$ is given by

$$\rho =\rho _{\mathrm{val}}+\rho _0.$$
(35)
where

$`\rho _{\mathrm{val}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_\mathrm{w}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑z𝑑\phi \rho \varphi _i^{}(\rho ,\phi ,z)\varphi _i(\rho ,\phi ,z)}`$
$`\rho _0={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_\mathrm{w}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}𝒩(E_\mu )sgn(E_\mu )`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }\rho d\rho dzd\phi \rho \varphi _\mu ^{}(\rho ,\phi ,z)\varphi _\mu (\rho ,\phi ,z).`$
The root mean square radius is given by

$$\sqrt{r^2}=\sqrt{r^2_{\mathrm{val}}}+\sqrt{r^2_0}$$
(36)
where

$`r^2_{\mathrm{val}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_\mathrm{w}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑z𝑑\phi (\rho ^2+z^2)\varphi _i^{}(\rho ,\phi ,z)\varphi _i(\rho ,\phi ,z)}`$
$`r^2_0={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_\mathrm{w}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}𝒩(E_\mu )sgn(E_\mu )`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }\rho d\rho dzd\phi (\rho ^2+z^2)\varphi _\mu ^{}(\rho ,\phi ,z)\varphi _\mu (\rho ,\phi ,z).`$
These values for each baryon number are shown in Table 2.

## III Quantization

### III.1 Rotational Zero Mode Quantization

The solitons that we obtained in the previous section are classical objects and therefore must be quantized to assign definite spin and isospin to them. Quantization of the solitons can be performed semiclassically for their rotational zero modes. For the hedgehog soliton, because of its topological structure, a rotation in isospin space is followed by a simultaneous spatial rotation. For the axially symmetric soliton, there are six rotational zero modes by rotations of iso-degrees of freedom and spatial rotations.

Let us introduce the “dynamically rotated” chiral fields braaten88

$$U(𝒙,t)=A(t)U(𝒙^{})A(t)^{},x_{}^{i}{}_{}{}^{}=\mathrm{\Xi }_j^i[B(t)]x^j$$
(37)
where

$$\mathrm{\Xi }_j^i[B(t)]=\frac{1}{2}Tr[\sigma ^iB(t)\sigma _jB(t)^{}],$$
(38)
and $`A(t)`$ and $`B(t)`$ are time-dependent $`SU(2)`$ matrices generating an iso-rotation and a spatial rotation respectively. By transforming the rotating frame of reference, the Dirac operator with Eq. (37) can be written as

$`\stackrel{~}{iD}`$ $`=`$ $`i\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ \hfill \end{array}MU^{\gamma _5}(𝒙,t)`$ (42)
$`=`$ $`A(t)S(t)^{}\gamma ^0[i_t+i\stackrel{~}{\gamma ^0}\stackrel{~}{\gamma ^k}_{k}^{}{}_{}{}^{}U^{\gamma _5}(𝒙^{})+iA^{}\dot{A}`$
$`+iS^{}\dot{S}]S(t)A(t)^{}`$
where

$$\stackrel{~}{\gamma ^\mu }=\mathrm{\Lambda }_\nu ^\mu S\gamma ^\nu S^{}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\gamma ^0\\ \gamma ^k+(𝒓^{}\times \dot{𝜽})^k\gamma ^0\end{array}\right),$$
(43)
and $`S(t)`$ is the rotation operator for the Dirac field and $`𝜽`$ is an angle of the spatial rotation. Note that the gamma matrices $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma ^\mu }`$ explicitly depend on the coordinates and do not transform as a contravariant vector koepf89 . Substituting Eq. (43) into Eq. (42), one obtains

$`\stackrel{~}{iD}=A(t)S(t)^{}\gamma ^0[i_tH(U^{\gamma _5})+\mathrm{\Omega }_A+\mathrm{\Omega }_B]S(t)A(t)^{}`$
where

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_A=iA^{}\dot{A}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Omega }_A^a\tau _a`$ (45)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_B=iS^{}\dot{S}+(𝒓\times 𝒑)\dot{𝜽}=\mathrm{\Omega }_B^aJ_b`$ (46)
with $`J_a=1/2ϵ_{abc}\gamma ^b\gamma ^ci(𝒓\times )_a`$. $`\mathrm{\Omega }_A`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_B`$ are the angular velocity operators for an isorotation and for a spatial rotation respectively. Assuming that the rotation of the soliton is adiabatic, we shall expand the effective action $`S_{eff}`$ around the classical solution $`U_S`$ with respect to the angular momentum velocity $`\mathrm{\Omega }_A`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_B`$ up to second order biedenharn85

$`S_{\mathrm{eff}}(U)`$
$`=S_{\mathrm{eff}}(U_S)iN_cSp\left[\mathrm{log}\left(i_tH(U_S^{\gamma _5})+\mathrm{\Omega }_A+\mathrm{\Omega }_B\right)\right]`$
$`Sp[\mathrm{log}(i_tH(U_S^{\gamma _5})]`$ (47)
With the proper-time regularization, we have

$`S_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{reg}}(U)=S_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{reg}}(U_S)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle }dt[I_{0,ab}^{AA}\mathrm{\Omega }_A^a(t)\mathrm{\Omega }_A^b(t)+I_{0,ab}^{AB}\mathrm{\Omega }_A^a(t)\mathrm{\Omega }_B^b(t)`$
$`+I_{0,ab}^{BA}\mathrm{\Omega }_B^a(t)\mathrm{\Omega }_A^b(t)+I_{0,ab}^{BB}\mathrm{\Omega }_B^a(t)\mathrm{\Omega }_B^b(t)]`$ (48)
where $`I_0`$s are the vacuum sea contributions to the moments of inertia defined by

$`I_{0,ab}^{AA}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}N_c{\displaystyle \underset{n,m}{}}f(E_m,E_n,\mathrm{\Lambda })n|\tau _a|mm|\tau _b|n`$
$`I_{0,ab}^{AB}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}N_c{\displaystyle \underset{n,m}{}}f(E_m,E_n,\mathrm{\Lambda })n|\tau _a|mm|J_b|n`$
$`I_{0,ab}^{BA}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}N_c{\displaystyle \underset{n,m}{}}f(E_m,E_n,\mathrm{\Lambda })n|J_a|mm|\tau _b|n`$
$`I_{0,ab}^{BB}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}N_c{\displaystyle \underset{n,m}{}}f(E_m,E_n,\mathrm{\Lambda })n|J_a|mm|J_b|n`$
with the cutoff function $`f(E_m,E_n,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$

$`f(E_m,E_n,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\sqrt{\pi }}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{E_m^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}e^{E_n^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}{E_m^2E_n^2}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sgn}(E_m)\mathrm{erfc}(|E_m|/\mathrm{\Lambda })\mathrm{sgn}(E_n)\mathrm{erfc}(|E_n|/\mathrm{\Lambda })}{E_mE_n}}.`$
Similarly, for the valence quark contribution to the moments of inertia, we have

$`I_{\mathrm{val},ab}^{AA}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}N_c{\displaystyle \underset{mval}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{val|\tau _a|mm|\tau _b|val}{E_mE_{\mathrm{val}}}}`$
$`I_{\mathrm{val},ab}^{AB}=N_c{\displaystyle \underset{mval}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{val|\tau _a|mm|J_b|val}{E_mE_{\mathrm{val}}}}`$
$`I_{\mathrm{val},ab}^{BA}=N_c{\displaystyle \underset{mval}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{val|J_a|mm|\tau _b|val}{E_mE_{\mathrm{val}}}}`$
$`I_{\mathrm{val},ab}^{BB}=2N_c{\displaystyle \underset{mval}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{val|J_a|mm|J_b|val}{E_mE_{\mathrm{val}}}}.`$ (50)
The total moments of inertia are then given by the sum of the vacuum and valence as

$`I_{ab}^{AA}=I_{\mathrm{val},ab}^{AA}+I_{0,ab}^{AA}`$
$`I_{ab}^{AB}=I_{\mathrm{val},ab}^{AB}+I_{0,ab}^{AB}`$
$`I_{ab}^{BA}=I_{\mathrm{val},ab}^{BA}+I_{0,ab}^{BA}`$
$`I_{ab}^{BB}=I_{\mathrm{val},ab}^{BB}+I_{0,ab}^{BB}.`$
From axial symmetry of the system, following relations are derived

$`I_{ij}=0,ij,`$
$`I_{11}^{AA}=I_{22}^{AA},I_{11}^{BB}=I_{22}^{BB},`$
$`I_{11}^{AB}=I_{22}^{AB}=I_{11}^{BA}=I_{22}^{BA}=0,`$
$`I_{33}^{BB}=m^2I_{33}^{AA},I_{33}^{AB}=I_{33}^{BA}=m_\mathrm{w}I_{33}^{AA}.`$ (51)
Theoretically, these moments of inertia can be computed using the eigenstates of Eq.(12). However, due to the difference of the boundary conditions between the initial and final states of the matrix element, the moments of inertia acquire nonzero values with vanishing pion fields. To overcome this problem, we make the following replacement goeke91

$`n|J_a|m`$ $``$ $`n|[H(U_S^{\gamma _5}),J_a]|m/(E_nE_m)`$ (52)
$`=`$ $`n|[MU_S^{\gamma _5},l_a]|m/(E_nE_m)`$
where $`l_a=i(𝒓\times )_a`$. Unless the Hamiltonian explicitly depend on the coordinates, the numerator vanishes with vanishing pion fields. The spurious contributions to the moment of inertia can be removed in this way.

The quantization conditions for the collective coordinates, $`A(t)`$ and $`B(t)`$, define a body-fixed isospin operator $`𝐊`$ and a body-fixed angular momentum operator $`𝐋`$ as

$`I_{ab}^{AA}\mathrm{\Omega }_A^b+I_{ab}^{AB}\mathrm{\Omega }_B^btr\left(A{\displaystyle \frac{\tau _a}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{A}}\right)K_a`$ (53)
$`I_{ab}^{BA}\mathrm{\Omega }_A^b+I_{ab}^{BB}\mathrm{\Omega }_B^btr\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _a}{2}}B{\displaystyle \frac{}{B}}\right)L_a.`$ (54)
These are related to the usual coordinate-fixed isospin operator $`I_a`$ and coordinate-fixed angular momentum $`J_a`$ operator by transformations,

$$I_a=\mathrm{\Xi }_a^b[A(t)]K_b,J_a=\mathrm{\Xi }_a^b[B(t)]^TL_b.$$
(55)
To estimate the quantum energy corrections, let us introduce the basis functions of the spin and isospin operators which were inspired from the cranking method for nuclei bohr ; weigel86 ,

$`A,B|ii_3k_3,jj_3l_3`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{(2i+1)(2j+1)}}{8\pi ^2}}D_{i_3k_3}^i(A)D_{j_3,m_\mathrm{w}k_3}^j(B)`$
where $`D`$ is the Wigner rotation matrix. Then, we find the quantized energies of the soliton as

$`E`$ $`=`$ $`E_{static}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2I_{11}^{AA}}}i(i+1)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2I_{11}^{BB}}}j(j+1)`$ (56)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{I_{33}^{AA}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{I_{11}^{AA}}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{w}^2}{I_{11}^{BB}}}\right)k_3^2`$
where $`i(i+1),j(j+1)`$ and $`k_3`$ are eigenvalues of the Casimir operators $`𝑰^2`$ and $`𝑱^2`$, and the operator $`𝑲_3`$, respectively.

On Table 3 are the results of our calculation of moments of inertia, $`I_{11}^{AA},I_{11}^{BB}`$ and $`I_{33}^{AA}`$, with $`B=25`$. It is instructive to compare our results with the Skyrme model braaten88  where $`U_{11}=0.104,V_{11}=0.163`$ and $`U_{33}=0.0709`$ which are correspondingly our $`I_{11}^{AA},I_{11}^{BB}`$ and $`I_{33}^{AA}`$. They are qualitatively in good agreement.

### III.2 Finkelstein-Rubinstein constraints

If a multi-skyrmion describes atomic nuclei upon quantization,

it has to be quantized as a boson or as a fermion whether $`B`$ is even or odd. This requirement is implemented in the form of Finkelstein-Rubinstein (FR) constraints fr . The FR constraints for the rational map ansatz was constructed in irwin  and krusch  and applied to predict the ground states of skyrmions up to $`B=22`$. In this section, we shall apply the FR constraints for the rational map ansatz directly to our axially symmetric multi-skyrmions and obtain their ground states.

Following the notation in krusch , let $`g`$ be a rotation by $`\alpha `$ around $`𝐧`$ followed by an isorotation by $`\beta `$ around $`𝐍`$. Then the FR constraints can be defined as

$`\mathrm{exp}(i\alpha 𝐧𝐉)\mathrm{exp}(i\beta 𝐍𝐈)\psi =\chi _{FR}(g)\psi `$ (57)
where

$$\chi _{FR}(g)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \text{if contractible}\hfill \\ 1\hfill & \text{otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$

and, $`𝐉`$ and $`𝐈`$ are space-fixed spin and isospin operators respectively. $`\psi `$ is the wave function which transforms under a tensor product of rotations and isorotations. In particular, a closed loop is noncontractible for odd $`B`$ and contractible for even $`B`$, which is consistent with spin statistics. Consequently, quantum numbers $`I`$ and $`J`$ are half-integers for odd $`B`$ and integers for even $`B`$.

In order to construct the ground states for a given baryon number $`B`$, let us define $`N(L(\alpha ,\beta ))`$ as a homotopy invariant for a loop $`L`$ generated by rotations by $`\alpha `$ and isorotations by $`\beta `$. Then, for the axially symmetric rational map of degree $`B`$, it is given by krusch

$`N(L(\alpha ,\beta ))={\displaystyle \frac{B}{2\pi }}(B\alpha \beta ).`$ (58)
It can be shown that $`N`$ (mod $`2`$) determines if the loop is contractible or not in the same sense as $`B`$ (mod $`2`$). Therefore, $`N`$ (mod $`2`$) gives the FR constraints for each generator of the symmetry group of the rational map.

The axially symmetric rational map with degree $`B`$ is given by

$`R(z)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{z^B}}.`$ (59)
There are two symmetric generators for this rational map. One is a rotation by $`\alpha `$ followed by an isorotation by $`\beta =B\alpha `$. Substituting it into (58), one obtains $`N(L(\alpha ,B\alpha ))=0`$. The FR constraints for this loop is thus given by

$`e^{i\pi (L_3BK_3)}\psi =\psi .`$ (60)
where we introduced the body-fixed spin $`(𝐋)`$ and isospin $`(𝐊)`$ operators related to the space-fixed operators by orthogonal transformations. The other symmetry is $`C_2`$ with transformation

$`z{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z}},R(z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{R(z)}}.`$ (61)
This corresponds to $`\alpha =\beta =\pi `$ and hence $`N(L(\pi ,\pi ))=B(B1)/2`$. The FR constraints for this loop is

$`e^{i\pi (L_1+K_1)}\psi =(1)^{B(B1)/2}\psi .`$ (62)
In the following we construct the ground states consistent with the derived FR constraints (60) and (62) for $`B=25`$ with axial symmetry.

* $`B=2`$
We find the FR constraints

$`e^{i\pi (L_32K_3)}\psi =\psi `$ (63)
$`e^{i\pi (L_1+K_1)}\psi =\psi .`$ (64)
This gives the ground state as $`|J,L_3|I,K_3=|1,0|0,0`$.
* $`B=3`$
We find the FR constraints

$`e^{i\pi (L_33K_3)}\psi =\psi `$ (65)
$`e^{i\pi (L_1+K_1)}\psi =\psi .`$ (66)
This gives the ground state as $`|\frac{5}{2},\frac{3}{2}|\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}`$.
* $`B=4`$
We find the FR constraints

$`e^{i\pi (L_34K_3)}\psi =\psi `$ (67)
$`e^{i\pi (L_1+K_1)}\psi =\psi .`$ (68)
This gives the ground state as $`|0,0|0,0`$.
* $`B=5`$
We find the FR constraints

$`e^{i\pi (L_35K_3)}\psi =\psi `$ (69)
$`e^{i\pi (L_1+K_1)}\psi =\psi .`$ (70)
This gives the ground state as $`|J|I=|\frac{7}{2},\frac{5}{2}|\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}`$.

Thus, for even $`B`$, the axially symmetric solitons are possible candidates of the ground states of $`B`$ atomic nuclei as is the case of the deuteron and $`{}_{}{}^{4}He`$ while for odd $`B`$ they emerge only as excited states.

## IV NUMERICAL ANALYSIS

### IV.1 Eigen Equations

In this subsection, we show the numerical analysis of the eigen equations in detail. To solve the eigenequation of the form,

$`[i𝜶\mathbf{}+\beta M(\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)+i\gamma _5𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)]\varphi _\mu (𝒙)`$
$`=E_\mu \varphi _\mu (𝒙),`$ (71)
we introduce the deformed harmonic oscillator spinor basis which was originally constructed by Gambhir et al. in the relativistic mean field theory for deformed nuclei gambhir . The upper and lower components of the Dirac spinors are expanded separately by the basis as

$$\varphi _\mu (𝒙)=\left(\begin{array}{c}f_\mu (𝒙)\\ ig_\mu (𝒙)\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}_af_{\mu a}𝚽_a(𝒙,s)\\ i_{\stackrel{~}{a}}g_{\mu \stackrel{~}{a}}𝚽_{\stackrel{~}{a}}(𝒙,s)\end{array}\right)\chi _{m_\tau }^I$$
(72)
where $`𝚽_a(𝒙,s,\tau )`$ are the eigefunctions of a deformed harmonic oscillator potential

$`V_{osc}(\rho ,z)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\omega _\rho ^2\rho ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\omega _z^2z^2,`$ (73)
and defined by

$$𝚽_a(𝒙,m_s)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega |}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega \phi }\chi _{m_s}^S$$
(74)
with

$`\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega |}(\rho )=N_{n_r}^{|\omega |}(\sqrt{\alpha _\rho \rho })^{|\omega |}e^{\frac{1}{2}\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}L_{n_r}^{|\omega |}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`n_r=0,1,2,\mathrm{},N_{rmax}`$
$`\varphi _{n_z}(z)=N_{n_z}e^{\frac{1}{2}\alpha _zz^2}H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)`$
$`n_z=1,3,\mathrm{},2N_{zmax}+1\mathrm{or}0,2,\mathrm{},2N_{zmax},`$
and

$$\chi _+=\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right),\chi _{}=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right)$$
(75)
depending on if the eigenvalues of the third components of the spin $`m_s`$ (isospin $`m_\tau `$) takes $`+1`$ or $`1`$. The functions, $`L_{n_r}^{|m|}`$ and $`H_{n_z}`$, are the associated Laguerre polynomials and the Hermite polynomials with the normalization constants

$`N_{n_r}^{|\omega |}=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _\rho n_r!}{(n_r+|\omega |)!}}},N_{n_z}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2^{n_z}n_z!\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{\alpha _z}}}}}.`$ (76)
These polynomials can be calculated by following recursion relations

$`x{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}L_n^\alpha (x)=nL_n^m(x)(n+m)L_{n1}^\alpha (x)`$ (77)
$`L_n^{m1}(x)=L_n^m(x)L_{n1}^m(x)`$ (78)
and

$`H_{n+1}(x)2xH_n(x)+2n_zH_{n1}(x)=0`$ (79)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}H_n(x)=2nH_{n1}(x)`$ (80)
where constants $`\alpha _\rho `$ and $`\alpha _z`$ can be expressed by the oscillator frequencies as

$`\alpha _\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{\omega _\rho }{\mathrm{}}},\alpha _z={\displaystyle \frac{\omega _z}{\mathrm{}}}`$ (81)
which are free parameters chosen optimally. The $`N_{rmax}`$ and $`N_{zmax}`$ are increased until convergence is attained. The parity transformation rule of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha `$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha (\rho ,\phi +\pi ,z;s,t)=(1)^{\omega +n_z}\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha (\rho ,\phi ,z;s,t)$$
(82)
where

$$H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)=(1)^{n_z}H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z),$$
(83)
has been used. The parity is $`+`$ for $`\omega +n_z=`$ odd, and $``$ for $`\omega +n_z=`$ even.

There are two sets of the complete basis for each parity. One is the natural basis with $`K_3^P=0^+,1^{},2^+,\mathrm{}`$, for odd $`B`$ and $`K_3^P=\frac{1}{2}^+,\frac{3}{2}^{},\frac{5}{2}^+,\mathrm{}`$ for even $`B`$. Another is the unnatural basis with $`K_3^P=0^{},1^+,2^{},\mathrm{}`$, for odd $`B`$ and $`K_3^P=\frac{1}{2}^{},\frac{3}{2}^+,\frac{5}{2}^{},\mathrm{}`$ for even $`B`$ The natural basis is given by

$`\varphi _\mu ^{(n)}(𝒙)=`$
$`\left(\begin{array}{c}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha (0)}{}}f_{\alpha (0),\mu }𝚽_{\alpha (0)}(𝒙,_S)+{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha (1)}{}}f_{\alpha (1),\mu }𝚽_{\alpha (1)}(𝒙,_S)\\ i{\displaystyle \underset{\beta (0)}{}}g_{\beta (0),\mu }𝚽_{\beta (0)}(𝒙,_S)+i{\displaystyle \underset{\beta (1)}{}}g_{\beta (1),\mu }𝚽_{\beta (1)}(𝒙,_S)\end{array}\right)\chi _u^I+\left(\begin{array}{c}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha (2)}{}}f_{\alpha (2),\mu }𝚽_{\alpha (2)}(𝒙,_S)+{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha (3)}{}}f_{\alpha (3),\mu }𝚽_{\alpha (3)}(𝒙,_S)\\ i{\displaystyle \underset{\beta (2)}{}}g_{\beta (2),\mu }𝚽_{\beta (2)}(𝒙,_S)+i{\displaystyle \underset{\beta (3)}{}}g_{\beta (3),\mu }𝚽_{\beta (3)}(𝒙,_S)\end{array}\right)\chi _d^I`$ (88)
(89)
where

$`\alpha (0)=\{n_r,n_z:\mathrm{odd},\omega _0K_31/2m_\mathrm{w}/2\}`$
$`\alpha (1)=\{n_r,n_z:\mathrm{even},\omega _1K_3+1/2m_\mathrm{w}/2\}`$
$`\alpha (2)=\{n_r,n_z:\mathrm{even},\omega _2K_31/2+m_\mathrm{w}/2\}`$
$`\alpha (3)=\{n_r,n_z:\mathrm{odd},\omega _3K_3+1/2+m_\mathrm{w}/2\}`$
and

$`\beta (0)=\{n_r,n_z:\mathrm{even},\omega _0K_31/2m_\mathrm{w}/2\}`$
$`\beta (1)=\{n_r,n_z:\mathrm{odd},\omega _1K_3+1/2m_\mathrm{w}/2\}`$
$`\beta (2)=\{n_r,n_z:\mathrm{odd},\omega _2K_31/2+m_\mathrm{w}/2\}`$
$`\beta (3)=\{n_r,n_z:\mathrm{even},\omega _3K_3+1/2+m_\mathrm{w}/2\}.`$
The unnatural basis $`\varphi _\mu ^{(u)}`$ is given by replacing, $`\alpha \beta `$ in (89).

### IV.2 Matrix elements of the eigenequation

By using the natural and unnatural basis, the eigenvalue problem in Eq.(71) can be reduced to a symmetric matrix diagonalization problem.

Let us calculate the matrix elements of the Hamiltonian below. For the kinetic term

$`𝜶\mathbf{}𝒑=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑\\ 𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑& 0\end{array}\right),`$
we have

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(0)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _0\phi }}`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}\right)\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _0^{}\phi }`$
$`=\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}(N_{n_z}N_{n_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _z}n_z^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_{n_z}^2}}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}1}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}N_{n_z}N_{n_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _z}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_{n_z}^2}}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}+1})`$
$`=\{\begin{array}{c}\delta _{\omega _0\omega _0^{}}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\frac{N_{n_z}^{}}{N_{n_z}}\sqrt{\alpha _z}n_z^{}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}1}\\ \delta _{\omega _0\omega _0^{}}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}(\frac{1}{2})\frac{N_{n_z^{}}}{N_{n_z}}\sqrt{\alpha _z}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}+1}\end{array}`$ (93)
and

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i\mathit{\varphi }_{\beta ^{}(1)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _0\phi }}`$
$`\times e^{i\phi }\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right)\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _1^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _1^{}\phi }`$
$`=\{\begin{array}{c}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _r}(\sqrt{n_r+\omega _0+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}+\sqrt{n_r}\delta _{n_r1n_r^{}})\\ (\omega _00:\omega _1^{}=\omega _0+1>0)\\ \delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _r}(\sqrt{n_r\omega _0}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}+\sqrt{n_r+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}1}).\\ (\omega _0<0:\omega _1^{}=\omega _0+10)\end{array}`$ (97)
In the natural basis, quantum numbers $`(n_z,n_z^{})`$ takes values $`(1,2),(3,4),\mathrm{}`$ for the upper part and $`(1,0),(3,2),\mathrm{}`$ for the lower part. In the unnatural basis, $`(n_z,n_{}^{}{}_{z}{}^{})=(0,1),(2,3),\mathrm{}`$ for the upper part and $`(n_z,n_{}^{}{}_{z}{}^{})=(2,1),(3,2),\mathrm{}`$ for the lower part.

For the potential term

$`\beta M(\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)+i\gamma _5𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z))`$
$`=M\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)& i𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)\\ i𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)& \mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\end{array}\right),`$ (101)
we have

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}\chi _u^I|M\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(0)}\chi _u^I`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zM\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)}`$
$`\times \varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)\varphi _{n_{}^{}{}_{r}{}^{}}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_{}^{}{}_{z}{}^{}}(z)`$ (102)
$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}\chi _u^I|Mi𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(0)}\chi _u^I`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zM\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)}`$
$`\times \varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)\varphi _{n_{}^{}{}_{r}{}^{}}^{|\omega _o^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_{}^{}{}_{z}{}^{}}(z)`$ (103)
and

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}\chi _u^I|Mi𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(2)}\chi _d^I`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zM\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)}`$
$`\times \varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)\varphi _{n_{}^{}{}_{r}{}^{}}^{|\omega _2|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_{}^{}{}_{z}{}^{}}(z).`$ (104)
Other elements can be calculated in the same manner. In Appendix A, we shall present these calculations of the matrix elements in more detail.

### IV.3 Matrix Elements for the Moments of Inertia

To compute the matrix elements of the moments of inertia, we shall evaluate $`n|\tau _1|m,n|\tau _3|m`$ and $`n|J_1|m`$. For $`n|\tau _1|m`$, only following elements survive

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}^{(n)}\chi _u^I|\tau _1|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(2)}^{(u)}\chi _d^I=𝚽_{\beta (0)}^{(n)}\chi _u^I|\tau _1|𝚽_{\beta ^{}(2)}^{(u)}\chi _d^I`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _0\phi }\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _2^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _2^{}\phi }}`$
$`=\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\delta _{K_3\frac{m_\mathrm{w}}{2}K_3^{}+\frac{m_\mathrm{w}}{2}}`$
$`𝚽_{\alpha (1)}^{(n)}\chi _u^I|\tau _1|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(3)}^{(u)}\chi _d^I=𝚽_{\beta (1)}^{(n)}\chi _u^I|\tau _1|𝚽_{\beta ^{}(3)}^{(u)}\chi _d^I`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _1|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _1\phi }\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _3^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _3^{}\phi }}`$
$`=\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\delta _{K_3\frac{m_\mathrm{w}}{2}K_3^{}+\frac{m_\mathrm{w}}{2}}`$
$`𝚽_{\alpha (2)}^{(n)}\chi _d^I|\tau _1|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(0)}^{(u)}\chi _u^I=𝚽_{\beta (2)}^{(n)}\chi _d^I|\tau _1|𝚽_{\beta ^{}(0)}^{(u)}\chi _u^I`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _2|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _2\phi }\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _0^{}\phi }}`$
$`=\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\delta _{K_3+\frac{m_\mathrm{w}}{2}K_3^{}\frac{m_\mathrm{w}}{2}}`$
$`𝚽_{\alpha (3)}^{(n)}\chi _d^I|\tau _1|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(1)}^{(u)}\chi _u^I=𝚽_{\beta (3)}^{(n)}\chi _d^I|\tau _1|𝚽_{\beta ^{}(1)}^{(u)}\chi _u^I`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _3|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _3\phi }\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _1^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _1^{}\phi }}`$
$`=\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\delta _{K_3+\frac{m_\mathrm{w}}{2}K_3^{}\frac{m_\mathrm{w}}{2}}.`$ (105)
For $`n|\tau _3|m`$,

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}\chi _u^I|\tau _3|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(0)}\chi _u^I=𝚽_{\alpha (1)}\chi _u^I|\tau _3|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(1)}\chi _u^I`$
$`=𝚽_{\beta (0)}\chi _u^I|\tau _3|𝚽_{\beta ^{}(0)}\chi _u^I=𝚽_{\beta (1)}\chi _u^I|\tau _3|𝚽_{\beta ^{}(1)}\chi _u^I`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _0\phi }\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _0^{}\phi }}`$
$`=\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\delta _{K_3K_3^{}}`$
$`𝚽_{\alpha (2)}\chi _d^I|\tau _3|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(2)}\chi _d^I=𝚽_{\alpha (3)}\chi _d^I|\tau _3|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(3)}\chi _d^I`$
$`=𝚽_{\beta (2)}\chi _d^I|\tau _3|𝚽_{\beta ^{}(2)}\chi _d^I=𝚽_{\beta (3)}\chi _d^I|\tau _3|𝚽_{\beta ^{}(3)}\chi _d^I`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _0\phi }\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _0^{}\phi }}`$
$`=\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\delta _{K_3K_3^{}}.`$ (106)
For $`n|J_1|m`$, we shall eveluate $`n|[H(U_0^{\gamma _5}),J_1]|m`$ instead with the replacement of (52),

$`n|[H(U_0^{\gamma _5}),J_1]|m`$
$`=n|[\beta M(\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)+i\gamma _5𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)),l_1]|m`$
$`=n|l_1[\beta M(\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)+i\gamma _5𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z))]|m`$
where

$`l_1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[e^{i\phi }\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}z{\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}i{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right)e^{i\phi }\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}z{\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}+i{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right)\right]`$
$`l_2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}i\left[e^{i\phi }\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}z{\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}i{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right)+e^{i\phi }\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}z{\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}+i{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right)\right]`$
$`l_3=i{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}`$ (107)
are the components of the angular momentum operator $`𝒍`$ in cylindrical coordinates. Using eqs.(107), one obtains

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}^{(n)}|e^{\pm i\phi }\left[\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}z{\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}i{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right)\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\right]|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(0)}^{(u)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zN_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}N_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}N_{n_z}N_{n_z^{}}e^{\alpha _zz^2}}`$
$`\times \{\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|+1}L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`\times \sqrt{\alpha _z}[(n_zH_{n_z1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z))H_{n_z^{}}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)`$
$`+H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)(n_z^{}H_{n_z1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z))]`$
$`\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|1}[((2n_r+|\omega _0|\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r+|\omega _0|)L_{n_r1}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2))L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`+L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)((2n_r^{}+|\omega _0^{}|\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r^{}+|\omega _0^{}|)L_{n_r^{}1}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2))\pm L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)]`$
$`\times H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)zH_{n_z^{}}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)\}\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\delta _{K_3\frac{1}{2}K_3^{}\pm \frac{1}{2}}`$ (108)
$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}^{(n)}|ie^{\pm i\phi }\left[\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}z{\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}i{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right)\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)\right]|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(0)}^{(u)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zN_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}N_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}N_{n_z}N_{n_z^{}}e^{\alpha _zz^2}}`$
$`\times \{\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|+1}L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`\times \sqrt{\alpha _z}[(n_zH_{n_z1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z))H_{n_z^{}}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)`$
$`+H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)(n_z^{}H_{n_z1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z))]`$
$`\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|1}[((2n_r+|\omega _0|\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r+|\omega _0|)L_{n_r1}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2))L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`+L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)((2n_r^{}+|\omega _0^{}|\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r^{}+|\omega _0^{}|)L_{n_r^{}1}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2))\pm L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)]`$
$`\times H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)zH_{n_z^{}}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)\}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)\delta _{K_3\frac{1}{2}K_3^{}\pm \frac{1}{2}}`$ (109)
$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}^{(n)}|ie^{\pm i\phi }\left[\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}z{\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}i{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right)\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)e^{im\phi }\right]|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(2)}^{(u)}`$
$`={\displaystyle }\rho d\rho dzN_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}N_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _2^{}|}\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _2^{}|}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}N_{n_z}N_{n_z^{}}e^{\alpha _zz^2}`$
$`\times \{\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _2^{}|+1}L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _2^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`\times \sqrt{\alpha _z}[(n_zH_{n_z1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z))H_{n_z^{}}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)`$
$`+H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)(n_z^{}H_{n_z1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z))]`$
$`\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _2^{}|1}[((2n_r+|\omega _0|\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r+|\omega _0|)L_{n_r1}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2))L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _2^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`+L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)((2n_r^{}+|\omega _2^{}|m\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _2^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r^{}+|\omega _2^{}|)L_{n_r^{}1}^{|\omega _2^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2))\pm L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _2^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)]`$
$`\times H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)zH_{n_z^{}}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)\}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)\delta _{K_3\frac{1}{2}K_3^{}\pm \frac{1}{2}}.`$ (110)
Other elements can be obtained in the same manner. In Appendix B, we shall present these calculations in more detail.

### IV.4  Numerical Convergence

In this subsection, we show the convergence of the soliton energy $`E_{static}`$ with respect to T) $`K_3`$ with the basis number fixed, and U) the number of the basis (discretized momentum number) with $`K_3`$ fixed.

Fig.10 shows the case of T) with $`B=3`$. As can be seen, the energy is almost convergent at the $`(K_3)_{max}=10`$.

In the case of U), the energy is not perfectly convergent up to $`N_{rmax}=N_{zmax}=22`$ (see Fig.11). Therefore, all our results have $`12\%`$ uncertainty.

## V CONCLUSIONS

In this paper, we studied axially symmetric soliton solutions with $`B=25`$ in the chiral quark soliton model. The one-quark spectral flow analysis indicates that the number of diving states from positive continuum to negative coincide with the baryon number. As is shown in Table 1, the valence quark spectra contain double degeneracy, realisng lower energy than non-degenerate states. Therefore, our solitons are stable although they are not necessarily minimal energy one, which confirms that they are good saddle point solutions.

Upon quantization, we computed zero-mode rotational corrections to the classical energy. The study of the Finkelstein-Rubinstein constraints indicates that the axially symmetric solution with even $`B`$ has the same quantum number as the physically observed nuclei. These results are shown in Table 4 and 5. Some of the states may be observed in experiments. For odd $`B`$, the constraint of $`C_2`$ in Eq.(62) seems to assure the validity of the ansatz. Indeed, it provides the ground state as $`i=j=1/2`$ for $`B=3`$ and as $`i=1/2,j=3/2`$ for $`B=5`$, which exactly coincide with physical observations. This seems to make sense since in the minimal energy configurations with discrete symmetries, the solutions tend to have $`i=j=1/2`$ due to their shell-like structure. However, unfortunately the constraint in Eq.(60) forbit such states. Consequently, the axially symmetric solitons with odd $`B`$ emerge only as excited states. The resultant lowest state is $`E=3657`$ MeV with $`i=1/2,j=5/2`$ for $`B=3`$, and is $`E=6591`$ MeV with $`i=1/2,j=7/2`$ for $`B=5`$.

Recently, we also studied classical multi-baryonic systems with discrete symmetries in the CQSM and found larger degeneracy of the quark orbits than of the axially symmetric sawado02 ; sawado03 . For example, triply degenerate bound spectrum is obtained in the $`B=3`$ tetrahedral soliton background. The interesting point is that the corresponding energy of the soliton is $`E210`$ MeV which is higher than the axially symmetric, $`E=173`$ MeV (see Table 1). Likewise, for the $`B=4`$ minimal energy soliton with cubic symmetry, the valence quark spectrum shows four-fold degeneracy with $`E170`$ MeV while for the axially symmetric, $`E=106,232`$ MeV. Thus, although the degeneracy of the spectum indicates the stability of the solutions, other factors should be also taken into account in regard to minimization of their classical energies. More detailed discussions on this subject will be made elsewhere.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank S.Oryu for useful discussions. We are also grateful to N.S.Manton to inform the paper of S.Krusch (ref.krusch ). One of us (Sawado) also thanks M.Kawabata and K.Saito for their help of numerical computations.

## Appendix A Evaluation of the matrix elements

In this appendix, we shall present detailed calculations of the matrix elements, $`d^3x\varphi _\mu ^{}H\varphi _\nu `$.

For the kinetic term of the elements, one gets

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(0)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _0\phi }}`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}\right)\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _0\phi }`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑z\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0|}N_{n_z}e^{\alpha _zz^2}H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)}`$
$`\times N_{n_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _z}\left(n_z^{}H_{n_z^{}1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z^{}+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)\right)`$
$`=\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\delta _{\omega _0\omega _0^{}}N_{n_z}N_{n_z^{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_{n_z}^2}}`$
$`\times \sqrt{\alpha _z}\left(n_z^{}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _{n_zn_{z^{}+1}}\right).`$
(111)
For $`(n_z,n_z^{})=(1,2),(3,4),\mathrm{}`$ or $`(n_z,n_z^{})=(0,1),(2,3),\mathrm{}`$, the righthand side of Eq.(111) becomes

$`=\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\delta _{\omega _0\omega _0^{}}{\displaystyle \frac{N_{n_z^{}}}{N_{n_z}}}\sqrt{\alpha _z}n_z^{}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}1}.`$ (112)
For $`(n_z,n_z^{})=(1,0),(3,2),\mathrm{}`$ or $`(n_z,n_z^{})=(2,1),(4,3),\mathrm{}`$,

$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\delta _{\omega _0\omega _0^{}}{\displaystyle \frac{N_{n_z^{}}}{N_{n_z}}}\sqrt{\alpha _z}n_z^{}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}+1}.`$ (113)
Also,

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(1)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _0\phi }e^{i\phi }}`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right)\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _1^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _1\phi }`$
$`=\delta _{\omega _0\omega _1^{}}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}{\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho \varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}\left(\frac{}{\rho }+\frac{\omega _1^{}}{\rho }\right)\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _1^{}|}}`$
$`=\delta _{\omega _0\omega _1^{}}\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}{\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho (\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _1^{}|}\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _1^{}|1}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}}`$
$`\times N_{n_z}^{|\omega _0|}N_{n_z^{}}^{|\omega _1^{}|}L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)((2n_r^{}+|\omega _1^{}|+\omega _1^{}\alpha \rho ^2)`$
$`\times L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _1^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r^{}+|\omega _1^{}|)L_{n_r^{}1}^{|\omega _1^{}|}(\alpha \rho ^2)).`$ (114)
For $`\omega _00`$ $`(\omega _1^{}=\omega _0+1>0)`$, the righthand side of Eq.(114) becomes

$`=\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}{\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho (\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{2\omega _0+1}\rho ^{2\omega _0}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _0+1}}`$
$`\times L_{n_r}^{\omega _0}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)(2n_r^{}+2\omega _0+2)L_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _0}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}{\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho (\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{2\omega _0+3}\rho ^{2\omega _0+2}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}N_{n_z}^{\omega _0}N_{n_z^{}}^{\omega _0+1}}`$
$`\times \left(L_{n_r}^{\omega _0+1}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r1}^{\omega _0+1}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)\right)L_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _0+1}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`=\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _\rho }N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _0+1}(2n_r^{}+2\omega _0+2){\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_{n_r}^{\omega _02}}}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}`$
$`\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _\rho }N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _0+1}`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_{n_r}^{\omega _0+12}}}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_{n_r}^{\omega _0+12}}}\delta _{n_r1n_r^{}}\right)`$
$`=\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _\rho }(2\sqrt{n_r+\omega _0+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}`$
$`\sqrt{n_r+\omega _0+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}+\sqrt{n_r}\delta _{n_r1n_r^{}})`$
$`=\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _\rho }(\sqrt{n_r+\omega _0+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}+\sqrt{n_r}\delta _{n_r1n_r^{}})`$ (115)
where

$`N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _0+1}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}}{N_{n_r}^{\omega _02}}}={\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}}{\sqrt{n_r+\omega _0+1}}},`$ (116)
$`N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _0+1}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}}{N_{n_r}^{\omega _0+12}}}=\sqrt{n_r+\omega _0+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}},`$ (117)
$`N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _0+1}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{n_r1n_r^{}}}{N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _0+12}}}=\sqrt{n_r}\delta _{n_r1n_r^{}}.`$ (118)
have been used.

Likewise, for $`\omega _0<0`$ $`(\omega _1^{}=\omega _0+10)`$,

$`=\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}{\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho (\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{2\omega _01}\rho ^{2\omega _22}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}}`$
$`\times N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}L_{n_r}^{\omega _0}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)\rho {\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\rho }}L_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}{\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho (\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{2\omega _0+1}\rho ^{2\omega _0}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}}`$
$`\times N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}L_{n_r}^{\omega _0}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`=\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}{\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho (\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{2\omega _01}\rho ^{2\omega _22}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}}`$
$`\times N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}L_{n_r}^{\omega _0}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)(2\alpha \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}{\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho (\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{2\omega _0+1}\rho ^{2\omega _0}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}}`$
$`\times N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}L_{n_r}^{\omega _0}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`\times \left(L_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _0}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}1}^{\omega _0}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)\right)`$
$`=2\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _\rho }N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_{n_r}^{\omega _02}}}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}1}`$
$`\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _\rho }N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_{n_r}^{\omega _02}}}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_{n_r}^{\omega _02}}}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}1}\right)`$
$`=\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _\rho }(2\sqrt{n_r+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}1}`$
$`+\sqrt{n_r\omega _0}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}\sqrt{n_r+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}1})`$
$`=\delta _{n_zn_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _\rho }(\sqrt{n_r\omega _0}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}+\sqrt{n_r+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}1})`$
where

$`N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{n_rn_r^{}1}}{N_{n_r}^{\omega _02}}}=\sqrt{n_r+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}1},`$ (120)
$`N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{n_rn_r^{}}}{N_{n_r}^{\omega _02}}}=\sqrt{n_r\omega _0}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}},`$ (121)
$`N_{n_r}^{\omega _0}N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _01}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{n_rn_r^{}1}}{N_{n_r^{}}^{\omega _02}}}=\sqrt{n_r+1}\delta _{n_rn_r^{}1}`$ (122)
have been used. In the same manner, elements,

$`𝚽_{\alpha (1)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(0)}𝚽_{\alpha (1)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(1)}`$
$`𝚽_{\alpha (2)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(2)}𝚽_{\alpha (2)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(3)}`$
$`\mathrm{}`$ (123)
can be analytically calculated.

Since $`𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑`$ does not contain isospin operators, following elements vanish

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(2)}𝚽_{\alpha (0)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(3)}`$
$`𝚽_{\alpha (1)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(2)}𝚽_{\alpha (1)}|𝝈\mathbf{}𝒑|i𝚽_{\beta ^{}(3)}`$
$`\mathrm{}.`$ (124)
For the potential term in the Hamiltonian given by

$`M\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)& i𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)\\ i𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)& \mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\end{array}\right),`$
only following matrix elements survive

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}|M\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(0)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zM\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)}`$
$`\times \varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)\varphi _{n_{}^{}{}_{r}{}^{}}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_{}^{}{}_{z}{}^{}}(z)`$ (127)
$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}|iM𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)|𝚽_{\beta ^{}(0)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zM\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)}`$
$`\times \varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)`$ (128)
$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}|iM𝝉\mathbf{}\widehat{𝒏}\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)|𝚽_{\beta ^{}(2)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zM\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho ,z)\mathrm{sin}F(\rho ,z)}`$
$`\times \varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _2|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z).`$ (129)
Other elements of the potential term can be calculated in the same manner.

## Appendix B Evaluation of the moments of inertia

In this appendix, we shall give the detailed derivation to obtain matrix elements in Eq.(108).

For the first term in Eq.(108), one obtains

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}^{(n)}|e^{\pm i\phi }\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\right)|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(0)}^{(u)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _0\phi }e^{\pm i\phi }\left(\rho \frac{}{z}\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\right)\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _0^{}\phi }}`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑z\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)\left(\rho \frac{}{z}\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\right)\varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)\delta _{K_3\frac{1}{2}K_3^{}\pm \frac{1}{2}}}.`$ (130)
Performing partial integration with respect to $`z`$ in Eq.(130),

$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑z\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\rho \varphi _{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\frac{}{z}\left(\varphi _{n_z}(z)\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)\right)\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\delta _{K_3\frac{1}{2}K_3^{}\pm \frac{1}{2}}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zN_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}N_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|}\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|+1}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)}`$
$`\times N_{n_z}N_{n_z^{}}\sqrt{\alpha _z}e^{\alpha _zz^2}[(n_zH_{n_z1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z))H_{n_z^{}}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)`$
$`+H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)(n_z^{}H_{n_z1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z))]\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\delta _{K_3\frac{1}{2}K_3^{}\pm \frac{1}{2}}.`$ (131)
Similarly, performing partial integration with respect to $`\rho `$, one obtains

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}^{(n)}|e^{\pm i\phi }\left(z{\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\right)|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(0)}^{(u)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3x\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)e^{i\omega _0\varphi }e^{\pm i\phi }\left(z\frac{}{\rho }\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\right)\varphi _{n_\rho ^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)e^{i\omega _0^{}\phi }}`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑z\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z}(z)\left(z\frac{}{\rho }\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\right)\varphi _{n_\rho ^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)\delta _{K_3\frac{1}{2}k_3^{}\pm \frac{1}{2}}}`$
$`={\displaystyle 𝑑\rho 𝑑z\frac{}{\rho }\left(\rho \varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\rho )\varphi _{n_r}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\rho )\right)\varphi _{n_z}(z)z\varphi _{n_z^{}}(z)\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\delta _{K_3\frac{1}{2}K_3^{}\pm \frac{1}{2}}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zN_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}N_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|}\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|1}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}}`$
$`\times [((2n_r+|\omega _0|\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r+|\omega _0|)L_{n_r1}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2))L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`+L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)((2n_r^{}+|\omega _0^{}|\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r^{}+|\omega _0^{}|)L_{n_r^{}1}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2))]`$
$`\times N_{n_z}N_{n_z^{}}e^{\alpha _zz^2}H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)zH_{n_z^{}}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\delta _{K_3\frac{1}{2}K_3^{}\pm \frac{1}{2}}.`$ (132)
Finally, we reach the final answer

$`𝚽_{\alpha (0)}^{(n)}|e^{\pm i\phi }\left[\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}z{\displaystyle \frac{}{\rho }}i{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\right)\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\right]|𝚽_{\alpha ^{}(0)}^{(u)}`$
$`={\displaystyle \rho 𝑑\rho 𝑑zN_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}N_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\sqrt{\alpha _\rho })^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|}e^{\alpha _\rho \rho ^2}N_{n_z}N_{n_z^{}}e^{\alpha _zz^2}}`$
$`\times \{\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|+1}L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`\times \sqrt{\alpha _z}[(n_zH_{n_z1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z))H_{n_z^{}}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)`$
$`+H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)(n_z^{}H_{n_z1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_{n_z+1}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z))]`$
$`\rho ^{|\omega _0|+|\omega _0^{}|1}[((2n_r+|\omega _0|\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r+|\omega _0|)L_{n_r1}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2))L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)`$
$`+L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)((2n_r^{}+|\omega _0^{}|\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)2(n_r^{}+|\omega _0^{}|)L_{n_r^{}1}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2))\pm L_{n_r}^{|\omega _0|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)L_{n_r^{}}^{|\omega _0^{}|}(\alpha _\rho \rho ^2)]`$
$`\times H_{n_z}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)zH_{n_z^{}}(\sqrt{\alpha _z}z)\}\mathrm{cos}F(\rho ,z)\delta _{K_3\frac{1}{2}K_3^{}\pm \frac{1}{2}}.`$ (133)


format: text

text:
# Atomic gas far away from the Virgo cluster core galaxy NGC 4388

## 1 Introduction

The Virgo cluster spiral galaxy NGC 4388 is located at a projected distance of 1.3o from the Virgo cluster center (M87). Its high radial velocity of $``$1400 km s-1 with respect to the cluster mean and its estimated line-of-sight distance (Tully-Fisher method; Yasuda et al. 1997) to the cluster center place its three dimensional location very close to M87. In addition, NGC 4388 represents one of the nearest Seyfert 2 galaxies and the first AGN to be found in the Virgo cluster (Phillips & Malin 1982). Veilleux et al. (1999) made observations with a Fabry-Perot Interferometer in the H$`\alpha `$ and O\[iii\] $`\lambda `$5007 lines. They found a large, high-ionization plume extending northeastwards from the nucleus up to a projected distance of 4 kpc111We adopt a distance of 17 Mpc to the Virgo cluster. above the plane of the galaxy. The plume is blueshifted with respect to the galaxy’s systemic velocity. Yoshida et al. (2002) discovered a very large H$`\alpha `$ plume that extends up to $``$35 kpc northeastwards. This region contains $`10^5`$ M of ionized gas. They argued that the dominating source of ionization is the radiation coming from the nucleus. Veilleux et al. (1999) discussed 4 different origins for the 4 kpc plume: (i) a minor merger, (ii) a galactic wind, (iii) nuclear outflow, and (iv) ram pressure stripping. Based on their data they favoured a combination of (iii) and (iv). Yoshida et al. (2002) on the other hand favoured scenario (i) and (iv). A surprisingly new result is that Gerhard et al. (2002) found an isolated compact Hii region at a projected distance of 17 kpc north and 4.4 kpc west of the galaxy center. The age of the dozen O stars embedded in this region ($``$3 Myr) implies that they have formed far outside the main star-forming regions of the galaxy and perhaps even within the hot intracluster medium. Gerhard et al. (2002) argued that a radial velocity of 150 km s-1 excludes that the involved gas has been pushed to this large distance by ram pressure stripping. In addition to the studied isolated compact Hii region they found 17 Hii region candidates in the data of Yoshida et al. (2002). In this article we report the detection of atomic gas at a projected distance of more than 20 kpc northeastwards from the center of NGC 4388. The observations and their results are described in Sect. 2 and Sect. 3. The dynamical model is presented in Sect. 4. We compare a model snapshot with our observations and discuss possible implications in Sect. 5. The conclusions are given in Sect. 6.

## 2 Observations

On March, 14–21 2002 we performed 21-cm line observations at 5 different positions at a frequency corresponding to the systemic velocity of NGC 4388 with a bandwidth of 12.5 MHz. The two channel receiver had a system noise of $``$30 K. The 1024 channel autocorrelator was split into four parts with 256 channels, yielding a channel separation of $``$10 km s-1. We further binned the channels to obtain a final channel separation of $``$20 km s-1. One central position and four positions at a distance of one beamsize (9.3) to the NW, SW, SE, and NE from the galaxy center were observed in on–off mode (5 min on source, 5 min off source). The integration times are shown in Table 1.

Care was taken to avoid other Virgo galaxies with velocities within our bandwidth in all 5 on and off source positions. We used 3C286 for pointing and flux calibration. The observation times ranged between 80 min and 350 min per position. The resulting noise (Table 1) is partly determined by small amplitude interferences, but is close to the theoretical noise of 2 mJy per hour of integration.

## 3 Results

The Effelsberg 100-m spectrum of the central position can be seen in Fig. 1 (solid line). It shows a double-horn structure with a $``$25% higher peak emission at the receding side. The total flux is $`S_{\mathrm{HI}}`$=3.9 Jy km s-1, which corresponds to a total Hi mass of $`M_{\mathrm{HI}}=\mathrm{2.7\hspace{0.17em}10}^8`$ M.

In order to compare our off-center positions to interferometric data where the galaxy is spatially resolved, we use VLA 21 cm C array data (Cayatte et al. 1990). These data have a spatial resolution of $`23^{\prime \prime }\times 17^{\prime \prime }`$ and a channel separation of 20 km s-1. We clipped the data cube at a level of 4 mJy/beam and cut out the inner $`4^{}\times 3^{}`$ around the galaxy center. The resulting spectrum for the central position is represented by the dashed line in Fig. 1. The total flux and peak flux density of Cayatte et al. (1990) are $``$20% higher than our values, which is within the calibration accuracy. Both spectra agree reasonably well.

For the 4 off-center positions we have synthesized spectra from the VLA data using the position of the pointing and the beamsize of the Effelsberg 100-m telescope at 21 cm (9.3). We use the spatial information of the VLA data to construct the synthesized spectra. Fig. 2 shows the 100-m spectra of these positions (solid lines) together with the synthesized VLA spectra. The VLA spectra represent Hi gas located in the disk (see Cayatte et al. 1990). If there is an emission excess in the off-center 100-m spectra this must be due to gas located outside the disk.

The rms noise of the north-eastern (NE) position is certainly overestimated, because of a relatively strong standing wave that had to be subtracted. We made 3 independent observations of this position in 3 different nights. In all 3 sub-spectra the signal is detected. One of them shows a flat baseline without a standing wave. The peak emission of none of the synthesized VLA spectra exceeds the 100-m 3$`\sigma `$ noise level, except the NE position where we have overestimated the rms.

Only the 100-m spectrum of the NE position shows a detection. The main peak is around zero radial velocity with respect to the galaxy. It has a width of $``$80 km s-1. In addition, we detect a second smaller maximum at 160 km s-1, which has the same position and width as the corresponding emission of the eastern, receding side of NGC 4388. However, it contains $``$30% more flux than the corresponding maximum of the VLA data. The total flux of the emission is $`S_{\mathrm{HI}}`$=0.9 Jy km s-1, which corresponds to an atomic gas mass of $`M_{\mathrm{HI}}=\mathrm{6\hspace{0.17em}10}^7`$ M.

## 4 The model

Since the model is described in detail in Vollmer et al. (2001), we summarize only its main features. The N-body code consists of two components, a non-collisional component that simulates the stellar bulge/disk and the dark halo, and a collisional component that simulates the ISM.

The 20 000 particles of the collisional component represent gas cloud complexes which are evolving in the gravitational potential of the galaxy.

The total gas mass is $`M_{\mathrm{gas}}^{\mathrm{tot}}=\mathrm{3.8\hspace{0.17em}10}^9`$ M, which corresponds to the total neutral gas mass before stripping assuming an Hi deficiency of 1.1. To each particle a radius is attributed depending on its mass. During the disk evolution the particles can have inelastic collisions, the outcome of which (coalescence, mass exchange, or fragmentation) is simplified following Wiegel (1994). This results in an effective gas viscosity in the disk.

As the galaxy moves through the ICM, its clouds are accelerated by ram pressure. Within the galaxy’s inertial system its clouds are exposed to a wind coming from the opposite direction of the galaxy’s motion through the ICM. The temporal ram pressure profile has the form of a Lorentzian, which is realistic for galaxies on highly eccentric orbits within the Virgo cluster (Vollmer et al. 2001). The effect of ram pressure on the clouds is simulated by an additional force on the clouds in the wind direction. Only clouds which are not protected by other clouds against the wind are affected.

The non–collisional component consists of 49 125 particles, which simulate the galactic halo, bulge, and disk. The characteristics of the different galactic components are shown in Table 2.

The resulting rotation velocity is $``$200 km s-1 and the rotation curve is flat.

The particle trajectories are integrated using an adaptive timestep for each particle. This method is described in Springel et al. (2001). The following criterion for an individual timestep is applied:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t_\mathrm{i}=\frac{20\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1}{a_\mathrm{i}},$$
(1)
where $`a_i`$ is the acceleration of the particle i. The minimum of all $`t_\mathrm{i}`$ defines the global timestep used for the Burlisch–Stoer integrator that integrates the collisional component.

The galaxy is on an eccentric orbit within the cluster. The temporal ram pressure profile can be described by:

$$p_{\mathrm{ram}}=\frac{p_{\mathrm{max}}}{t^2+t_{\mathrm{HW}}^2},$$
(2)
where $`t_{\mathrm{HW}}`$ is the width of the profile (Vollmer et al. 2001). We set $`p_{\mathrm{max}}`$=5000 cm-3(km/s)2 and $`t_{\mathrm{HW}}`$=50 Myr. The efficiency of ram pressure also depends on the inclination angle $`i`$ between the galactic disk and the orbital plane (Vollmer et al. 2001). We set $`i`$=45o.

Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 show the evolution of the stellar and gas disk during the galaxy’s passage through the cluster core. The galaxy is seen face-on in Fig. 3. In Fig. 4 the position and inclination angle of NGC 4388 ($`PA=90^\mathrm{o}`$, $`i=85^\mathrm{o}`$) are used. The time of closest approach to the cluster center, i.e. maximum ram pressure, is $`t=0`$ Myr.

Since only the gas is affected by ram pressure, the stellar disk does not change during the whole simulation. At $`t80`$ Myr the external $``$5 kpc ring of neutral gas begins to be pushed to the north (Fig. 4). At maximum ram pressure ($`t=0`$ Myr) this northern extraplanar gas shows 2 distinct features: (i) an approximately uniform gas layer in the north of the disk and (ii) a horizontal gas ridge located to the north east. This is where the accelerated gas, which was initially rotating against the direction of the galaxy’s velocity (at (0 kpc, 20 kpc) in Fig. 3) and already rotated $``$180o, is now again compressed by ram pressure (at (-20 kpc, 0 kpc) in Fig. 3). These structures expand in the following evolution of the neutral gas. For $`t>40`$ Myr a counter-rotating arm is forming (see Vollmer et al. 2001), which is responsible for the diagonal gas feature in the south-west (Fig. 4).

In order to show the effect of ram pressure on the radial velocities, we show the latter as a function of the projected distance from the galaxy center for the last snapshot ($`t120`$ Myr) in Fig. 5.

From 0 to 30 kpc the radial velocities with respect to the galaxy center show an almost constant gradient from 100 km s-1 to -50 km s-1. At a distance of $``$30 kpc the velocities bifurcate. One part continues with the same gradient, the other part shows a much steeper gradient. The minimum velocities are -600 km s-1. The minimum absolute velocities are $`|v|`$800 km s-1. The main gas mass is found at a projected distances between 20 kpc and 30 kpc and radial velocities between -50 km s-1 and 0 km s-1. At this timestep, the galaxy has an absolute velocity of $``$2000 km s-1 with respect to the cluster mean velocity. From $`p_{\mathrm{max}}=5000`$ cm-3(km/s)2 we derive a maximum ICM density of $`n_{\mathrm{ICM}}^{\mathrm{max}}\mathrm{3\hspace{0.17em}10}^3`$ cm-3. Using the ICM density profile of Schindler et al. (1999), this corresponds to an impact parameter of $`b100`$ kpc, which is consistent with the dynamical model of Vollmer et al. (2001). We compare the final timestep ($`t120`$ Myr) with our observations.

## 5 Discussion

Despite the fact that the 100-m spectra do not give precise informations about the location of the detected Hi gas, we can conclude from our data that the component around zero radial velocity lies at a distance of at least half a beamsize (4.7 or 23 kpc) away from the galaxy center. It contains several 107 solar masses. If it was closer to the galaxy one should see it in the VLA synthesized spectrum if it is high column density gas or alternatively in the central 100-m spectrum if it was low column density, extended gas. We suggest that it is connected to the very extended H$`\alpha `$ plume discovered by Yoshida et al. (2002).

To our knowledge this is the first time that atomic gas is observed at these large distances from a galaxy in a cluster core region. What is the origin of this extraplanar gas?

Veilleux et al. (1999) discussed 4 different mechanisms (cf. Sect. 1) and favoured a mixture of nuclear outflow and ram pressure stripping. Yoshida et al. (2002) prefered a minor merger and/or ram pressure stripping. If the detected atomic gas is connected to the very extended H$`\alpha `$ plume, our data rule out a nuclear outflow as the origin of this plume, because of its large total gas mass. A superwind that has recently ceased could have provided enough energy (see e.g. Heckman et al. 1990), but there is no indication for a recent, strong starburst in the center of NGC 4388. If the atomic gas and the very extended H$`\alpha `$ plume represent the debris of a minor merger, its gas velocity around relative zero places its orbit in the plane of the sky. In our understanding this is inconsistent with the morphology of the H$`\alpha `$ plume. If the H$`\alpha `$ emission represents the debris of a tidally disrupted dwarf galaxy, it should trace its trajectory. In this picture the curvature of the north-eastern part of the very extended H$`\alpha `$ emission is dynamically difficult to explain. In addition, the H$`\alpha `$ plume is larger close to the disk, which is also in contradiction to the tidal debris scenario.

We suggest a model, where the atomic gas and the H$`\alpha `$ are connected and both represent ram pressure stripped gas in different phases. In Fig. 6 (left panel) we show a possible ram pressure stripping scenario. The galaxy moves to the south and away from the observer. It is on a radial orbit and its core passage is $``$120 Myr ago (Sect. 4). The galaxy has lost $``$90% of its atomic gas. We show only gas with a local density greater than $`n30`$ cm-3. For clarity the greyscales are inverted, i.e. dark regions correspond to low column density gas. Since the stars are not affected by ram pressure, the stellar disk is symmetric. The gas disk is strongly truncated at a radius of $``$5 kpc ($`1^{}`$). This is in agreement with the VLA observations of Cayatte et al. (1990). Only the high density eastern edge of the stripped, extraplanar gas distribution can be seen. In addition, the counter-rotating, backfalling arm in the south-west has high local densities and thus appears in Fig. 6 (left panel). The main off-plane gas mass is located at (-20 kpc, 20 kpc). For simulations with smaller maximum ram pressure, it is located closer to the galaxy.

The corresponding velocity field is shown in Fig. 6 (right panel). Within the disk plane, the velocity field is dominated by rotation. The western side of the disk is approaching the observer. The stripped gas at distances smaller than 10 kpc above the disk plane has positive velocities, whereas the gas at distances greater than 10 kpc has negative velocities. The counter-rotating, backfalling arm has a mean radial velocity of $`0`$ km s-1.

Fig. 7 shows the model 100-m spectrum at central position (left panel) and the northeastern (NE) position (right panel). We find a total Hi mass of $`\mathrm{5\hspace{0.17em}10}^8`$ M and $`\mathrm{7\hspace{0.17em}10}^7`$ M at the central and north-eastern position, respectively.

The central spectrum shows a double horn structure and the receding side has a higher peak flux as it is observed (Fig. 1). However, a part of the flux from the high velocity end of the approaching side is missing, mainly because it has a lower local density.

For the north-eastern position we observe a clear resemblance between the model and the observed spectrum (Fig. 2). The maximum at 160 km s-1 is due to the extended eastern, receding side, whereas the main maximum around $``$-50 km s-1 radial velocity is due to the material at distances of about 20 kpc from the galactic disk (Fig. 6). Thus the ram pressure scenario can account for the very extended tail. However, it is not possible to reproduce the velocity field of the NE H$`\alpha `$ plume (Veilleux et al. 1999), since it shows a blueshift with respect to the galaxy’s systemic velocity. In order to explain this feature an additional outflow mechanism is needed.

How can this gas survive within such a hostile environment like the intracluster medium (ICM)? Our model is not able to investigate this subject, because it considers only the neutral gas phase and does not include ISM/ICM shocks that might heat the gas. Evaporation and ionization physics are also not included. Thus we have to rely on analytical arguments.

Veilleux et al. (1999) argued that in the case classical thermal heat conduction a typical Hi cloud evaporates in the hot ICM within 107 yr. On the other hand, Vollmer et al. (2001) showed that within the ICM evaporation is saturated. If the stripped atomic gas clouds have column densities of 1021 cm-2, the evaporation time can reach $``$108 yr. They also discussed the possibility that the dense part of the stripped neutral gas contracts due to its selfgravity, because the internal heating (stellar radiation and supernova shocks) are absent. Since the dust is stripped together with the gas, molecules might form when the gas density becomes high enough. The only gas heating is then the X-ray radiation from the hot ICM. An equilibrium cloud has a mass of several thousand solar masses, a radius of $``$10 pc, and a column density of a few $`10^{21}`$ cm-2. Only 10% of this column density is in form of neutral hydrogen. Could this be the case for NGC 4388? These clouds can in principle survive long enough to be pushed to the observed large distances. It is then not excluded that these clouds collapse and form stars.

Interestingly, Gerhard et al. (2002) found a compact Hii region that has formed stars in situ, far away from the main star-forming disk. This Hii region is located at a projected distance of 17.5 Mpc from the galaxy center in the northwest of the galactic center and has a radial velocity of 150 km s-1. Within our model it is possible that this Hii region is falling back to the galaxy after having been pushed by ram pressure to a large galactocentric distance. When a stripped cloud collapses, its column density increases rapidly and it decouples from the wind (ram pressure). It then begins to fall back to the galaxy due to the galaxy’s gravitational potential. With the relatively low metallicity (Gerhard et al. 2002) this stripped gas was located approximately at the optical radius ($`R_{25}`$) of NGC 4388 before stripping has taken place (Duc et al. 2000). This scenario is in agreement with the positive radial velocity of the compact Hii region. In addition, Gerhard et al. (2002) found a number of Hii region candidates in the very extended H$`\alpha `$ plume. Within our picture this would mean that the stripped gas clouds have become molecular and are now forming stars. This mechanism would be analog to the formation of globular clusters in the tidal tails of gravitationally perturbed galaxies.

## 6 Conclusions

We have observed the Virgo cluster core galaxy NGC 4388 in the 21 cm Hi line with the Effelsberg 100-m telescope at 5 different positions: one in the center and 4 located one 100-m beamsize to the NE, NW, SW, and SE from the galaxy center. The results of these observations are compared to a realistic dynamical model including ram pressure stripping. The results are:

1. We detected extraplanar Hi gas of $``$6 107 M located at a distance of at least 20 kpc to the north-east of the galaxy center. This gas is most probably connected to the very extended H$`\alpha `$ plume detected by Yoshida et al. (2002).
2. The dynamical model is able to reproduce the Hi deficiency, the truncated Hi disk and the extraplanar emission. NGC 4388 passed the cluster core $``$120 Myr ago.
3. Within this scenario the maximum ram pressure is $`p_{\mathrm{max}}=5000`$ cm-3(km/s)-2, the maximum ICM density encountered during core passage is $`n_{\mathrm{ICM}}\mathrm{3\hspace{0.17em}10}^3`$ cm-3, the galaxy’s absolute velocity with respect to the cluster mean is $``$2000 km s-1, and the angle between the disk and the orbital plane is $`i=45^\mathrm{o}`$
4. The extraplanar compact Hii region recently found by Gerhard et al. (2002) can be explained as a stripped gas cloud that collapsed and decoupled from the ram pressure wind due to its increased surface density.

###### Acknowledgements.

Based on observations with the 100-m telescope of the MPIfR (Max-Planck-Institut für Radioastronomie) at Effelsberg. The authors would like to thank V. Cayatte and J. van Gorkom for providing us kindly their VLA data.