format: text

text:
# Positively Curved Surfaces in the Three-sphere

## 1. Introduction

My aim in this talk is to demonstrate the use of fully nonlinear parabolic evolution equations as tools for proving results in differential geometry. I will emphasise the fact that there is a wide variety of flows which are geometrically defined and potentially applicable to geometric problems, and that there is great benefit to be had by choosing the flow carefully. I will focus on a particular application, relating to surfaces in the 3-sphere, but the method has much wider applicability.

There are some well-known examples of geometric evolution equations of the kind I want to consider: Eells and Sampson  used a heat flow to prove existence of harmonic maps into non-positively curved targets; Hamilton considered the flow of Riemannian metrics in the direction of their Ricci tensor, and proved that it deforms metrics of positive Ricci curvature on three-manifolds  and metrics of positive curvature operator on four-manifolds  to constant curvature metrics. The Ricci flow also gives results in higher dimensions, proved by Huisken , Nishikawa  and Margerin , if the curvature tensor is suitably pinched. The mean curvature flow of submanifolds of Euclidean space is also well-known as the gradient descent flow of the area functional, and because it arises in models of interfaces such as in annealing metals. The examples I will concentrate on are closest to the last example, as they are evolution equations describing submanifolds moving with curvature-dependent velocity. There are many parabolic flows of this kind, particularly for the codimension one (hypersurface) case: William Firey  introduced the motion by Gauss curvature as a model for pebbles wearing away as they tumble, and other flows which have been considered include motion by powers of Gauss curvature , , the square root of the scalar curvature , the harmonic mean of the principal curvatures , and the reciprocal of the mean curvature . More generally, one can take the velocity to be a function of the principal curvatures which is monotone increasing in each argument.

This gives a huge variety of flows to choose from, so it makes sense to choose the flow carefully to suit the problem. I will illustrate a strategy for choosing the flow by asking that some desired curvature inequality be preserved under the flow.

I will begin, in the next two sections, by discussing some old results concerning surfaces in the three-sphere. This motivates the results of the later sections.

## 2. Constant mean curvature surfaces

There is a well-known result of Simons  which says that a minimal hypersurface in a $`S^{n+1}`$ with the squared norm of the second fundamental form $`|A|^2`$ less than $`n`$ is in fact totally geodesic (hence a great $`n`$-sphere). This result comes from an application of Simons’ identity which relates the second derivatives of mean curvature to the Laplacian of the second fundamental form:

$$_i_jH=\mathrm{\Delta }h_{ij}+|A|^2h_{ij}Hh_i^ph_{pj}+Hg_{ij}nh_{ij}.$$

From this we can deduce if the hypersurface is minimal (so $`H=0`$)

$$0=\mathrm{\Delta }|A|^22|A|^2+2|A|^2(|A|^2n).$$

If $`|A|^2<n`$ at a maximum, then the maximum principle implies $`|A|^2`$ is identically zero, and the result follows. Also, if the maximum of $`|A|^2`$ is equal to $`n`$, then $`M`$ must be a product $`S^k(a)\times S^{nk}(b)`$ in $`R^{k+1}\times R^{n+1k}`$, with radii $`a`$ and $`b`$ determined by the fact that $`M`$ lies in $`S^{n+1}R^{n+2}`$ and is minimal.

Simons’ argument was taken up by other authors (, , ) in the slightly more general setting of constant mean curvature hypersurfaces. The results are similar: If the hypersurface has constant mean curvature $`H`$, and $`|A|`$ is bounded by a constant depending on $`n`$ and $`H`$, then the hypersurface is totally umbillic, hence a geodesic sphere in $`S^{n+1}`$; if the inequality is not strict then the only extra possibilities are products of spheres. The argument is similar to that above, but complicated by the non-vanishing of the mean curvature.

Let me look closer at the situation for surfaces in the three-sphere: The intrinsic curvature of the surface is given by $`1+\kappa _1\kappa _2=1+\frac{1}{2}H^2\frac{1}{2}|A|^2`$. If $`M`$ is minimal, then $`H=0`$, so $`|A|^2<2`$ is equivalent to positivity of the intrinsic curvature. This is also true for constant mean curvature surfaces: In two dimensions, the curvature condition from  and  is equivalent to positivity of the intrinsic curvature.

## 3. Flat tori

The condition of positive intrinsic curvature seems natural in view of the results on constant mean curvature surfaces. For surfaces in space, positive curvature is a rather restrictive condition — a compact surface satisfying this condition is the boundary of a convex region. In the 3-sphere it seems somewhat less restrictive, as we can see by considering the ‘boundary’ case of flat surfaces, where there are the beautiful results of Weiner  and Enomoto  which classify flat tori in the 3-sphere by their Gauss maps. It was known for some time that there are many examples of these (see ), since the inverse image of any smooth curve in $`S^2`$ under the Hopf projection is a flat torus in $`S^3`$. These examples are all invariant under the action of $`U(1)`$ on $`C^2R^4`$, but Weiner and Enomoto showed that there are many examples which are not symmetric.

The Gauss map of a surface in $`S^3`$ can be thought of in several ways: One can consider the tangent plane of the surface as a subspace of $`R^4`$, which gives a map from the surface to the Grassmannian $`G_{2,4}`$ of 2-planes in $`R^4`$. The latter is a metric product $`S^2\times S^2`$, and the projections onto each factor are called the self-dual and anti-self-dual Gauss maps. Alternatively, since $`S^3`$ is a group, one can map the unit normal of the surface by either left or right translations to the Lie algebra — this again gives two maps to $`S^2`$, and of course these are the same as before: The self-dual Gauss map is the same as the left-translation Gauss map, and the anti-self-dual Gauss map is the same as the right-translation Gauss map.

Enomoto  observed that if $`M^2`$ is intrinsically flat in $`S^3`$, then both Gauss maps are degenerate (their images are just curves in $`S^2`$). Weiner gave the complete classification result: The image curves $`\gamma _1`$ and $`\gamma _2`$ necessarily have zero total curvature, and if $`I_1`$ and $`I_2`$ are subintervals of $`\gamma _1`$ and $`\gamma _2`$ respectively, then $`|_{I_1}\kappa 𝑑s|+|_{I_2}\kappa 𝑑s|<\pi `$. Conversely, if $`\gamma _1`$ and $`\gamma _2`$ are any curves satisfying these conditions, then there is a flat torus with these curves as the images of the two Gauss maps, and the torus is unique up to motion by unit speed in the normal direction.

This gives a very large family of flat tori in the 3-sphere, and from these we see that surfaces with positive intrinsic curvature in $`S^3`$ can look quite complicated: The surface can look metrically like a long thin cylinder with caps on the ends, placed in $`S^3`$ by ‘winding around’ a flat torus many times before closing off the ends.

## 4. Curvature flow

Curvature flow can give powerful generalisations of results like those from ,  and : Huisken  extended techniques developed earlier for convex hypersurfaces in Euclidean space  to prove the following result:

Theorem: Let $`M_0^n=x_0(M)`$ be a hypersurface in $`S^{n+1}`$ which satisfies

$$|A|^2<\frac{1}{n1}H^2+2$$

if $`n>2`$, and

$$|A|^2<\frac{3}{4}H^2+\frac{4}{3}$$

if $`n=2`$. Then there exists a smooth family of hypersurfaces $`\{M_t=x_t(M)\}_{0t<T}`$ which satisfy the same curvature condition and move by mean curvature flow with initial data $`M_0`$. Either $`T<\mathrm{}`$ and $`M_t`$ is asymptotic to a family of geodesic spheres shrinking to their common centre, or $`T=\mathrm{}`$ and $`M_t`$ approaches a great sphere.

This includes the result that there are no minimal surfaces with $`|A|^2<n`$ except great spheres. It also implies the stronger statement that every hypersurface satisfying $`|A|^2<\frac{1}{n1}H^2+2`$ can be deformed, keeping this condition, to a great sphere (except in the case $`n=2`$). The condition $`|A|^2<\frac{1}{n1}H^2+2`$ is the same as that arrived at by Okumura  for constant mean curvature surfaces (Cheng and Nakagawa  improved this for higher dimensions, but in two dimensions it is sharp). The proof of the above result is significantly more difficult than that for the constant mean curvature case.

The result seems very satisfying, except when $`n=2`$ where the method does not seem to work for Okumura’s condition $`|A|^2<H^2+2`$. The latter is exactly the condition of positive intrinsic curvature. This raises several questions: Does mean curvature flow in fact preserve this condition? If not, is there any flow which does?

## 5. The optimal result

### 5.1. Choosing the evolution equation

Now we can illustrate the method: The previous questions can be answered in a rather systematic way. The idea is to write down the conditions required for an arbitrary flow by a function $`F`$ of curvature to preserve positive intrinsic curvature.

We can write down an evolution equation for an arbitrary function $`G`$ of the principal curvatures $`\kappa _1`$ and $`\kappa _2`$, and see what conditions are required for the flow to preserve the condition $`G0`$. For convenience we can write $`G`$ in the form

$$G(\kappa _1,\kappa _2)=(\kappa _1\kappa _2)^2\phi (\kappa _1+\kappa _2)^2$$
(5.1)
so that in the case we are interested in, $`\phi (x)=\sqrt{4+x^2}`$. We can also write

$$F=f(\kappa _1+\kappa _2,G).$$
(5.2)
Then the evolution equation for $`G`$ is as follows:

$$\frac{G}{t}=\dot{F}^{ij}_i_jG+Q(h)(h,h)+Z(h),$$
(5.3)
where $`\dot{F}`$ is the matrix of derivatives of $`F`$ with respect to the components of the second fundamental form, which is positive definite as long as $`F`$ is an increasing function of each of the principal curvatures. The second term is a quadratic function of the components of the derivative of the second fundamental form, with coefficients depending on curvature $`h`$, explicitly given by

$$Q=\left(\dot{G}^{ij}\ddot{F}^{kl,mn}\dot{F}^{ij}\ddot{G}^{kl,mn}\right)_ih_{kl}_jh_{mn},$$

where $`\ddot{F}`$ is the second derivative of $`F`$ with respect to the components of $`h`$. The last term $`Z`$ depends on the curvature alone, and has the form

$`Z`$ $`=\dot{G}^{ij}\left(F(h_{ij}^2+g_{ij})+\dot{F}^{kl}\left(h_{ij}h_{kl}^2h_{kl}h_{ij}^2+g_{ij}h_{kl}g_{kl}h_{ij}\right)\right)`$
$`=F\left(\dot{G}^1(1+\kappa _1^2)+\dot{G}^2(1+\kappa _2^2)\right)+(1+\kappa _1\kappa _2)(\kappa _2\kappa _1)(\dot{G}^1\dot{F}^2\dot{F}^1\dot{G}^2).`$
To show that $`G0`$ is preserved (with $`G=1+\kappa _1\kappa _2`$), we consider the situation at a point where $`G`$ first attains a zero minimum. Then the first term on the right-hand side of (5.3) is non-negative; we consider each of the other terms. The last term is simplest: Substituting the forms of $`F`$ and $`G`$ from (5.1) and (5.2), we find

$$Z=G\left(fH+\frac{f}{H}\phi ^2\right),$$

so $`Z`$ vanishes at a zero of $`G`$, no matter what speed $`F`$ we use. This is another indication of the fact that the condition of positive intrinsic curvature is optimal. The gradient terms are the most complicated, but we can simplify them significantly by observing two things: First, $`h`$ is a totally symmetric $`3`$-tensor, by the Codazzi equation. Second, at a minimum of $`G`$, the gradients of $`G`$ vanish. It follows that there are only two independent components of $`h`$, and one finds that these never mix in the expression for $`Q`$, so that

$$Q=\alpha (_1h_{22})^2+\beta (_2h_{11})^2.$$

Since we have no further information about $`h`$ (that is, no reason to expect that the magnitudes of these remaining components should vanish) we must impose the condition that $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are non-negative. This gives two conditions, which we can interpret as conditions on the first and second derivatives of $`F`$. A fact which is perhaps not obvious is that these conditions only involve the restriction of $`F`$ to the boundary of the set $`\{G=0\}`$ in the curvature plane, so we can consider $`F`$ as defined by (5.2) with $`G=0`$. Then the conditions can be written explicitly as follows:

$$\frac{\phi ^{\prime \prime }}{1\phi ^{}}\frac{1\phi ^{}}{\phi }\frac{f^{\prime \prime }}{f^{}}\frac{\phi ^{\prime \prime }}{1+\phi ^{}}+\frac{1+\phi ^{}}{\phi }.$$

In the case of interest, we have $`\phi =\sqrt{4+H^2}`$, and the first and last quantities are both equal to $`2H/(4+H^2)`$. The only possibilities for $`F`$ are the following:

$$F=C_1+C_2\mathrm{arctan}\left(\frac{H}{2}\right).$$

This applies only along the curve $`\{G=0\}`$, so we are reasonably free to choose $`F`$ in the region where $`G>0`$, as long as it is monotone in both principal curvatures.

### 5.2. The extreme case

The remarkably restricted form of the evolution equation is illuminated somewhat by considering the extreme case of flat surfaces: If the flow preserves positive intrinsic curvature, then it must also preserve zero curvature. As outlined above, the structure of surfaces with zero curvature is very well understood, and in particular the Gauss map $`G:M^2S^2\times S^2`$ has the remarkable property that the projection onto each factor is one-dimensional. This must be preserved under the flow.

The flow we have ended up with is characterised by the fact that the Gauss map evolves according to the mean curvature flow (now for codimension 2 surfaces in $`S^2\times S^2`$, which means that each of the two curves coming from the two projections of the Gauss map evolves according to the curve-shortening flow in $`S^2`$. Since each of the curves divides the area of the sphere into two equal parts, the image of the Gauss map never develops singularities (at least in the case where the two curves are homotopic to great circles traversed once), but in fact the flat tori will in general develop singularities — this is analogous to the motion of a curve in the plane with constant normal speed, which develops singularities even though the normal direction stays constant at each point. Incidentally, there has been some very impressive recent progress on mean curvature flow in higher codimension, due to Mu-Tao Wang , who has used it to prove several very interesting results regarding maps between manifolds.

The examples of flat tori can be used to prove that there is no other curvature-driven flow of surfaces which preserves the condition of positive curvature, by giving examples for any other flow of flat tori which do not stay flat.

### 5.3. Regularity

A technical issue which arises is the following: The speed we ended up with is not concave or convex as a function of the second fundamental form. The regularity estimates due to Krylov  and Evans  for fully nonlinear equations (needed to prove that we get classical solutions of the flow) require concavity, so we cannot use these. Instead it is possible to adapt the estimates for elliptic equations in two variables (due to Morrey  and Nirenberg ) to give good $`C^{2,\alpha }`$ estimates for solutions of fully nonlinear parabolic equations in two space variables.

### 5.4. Curvature pinching

Now we come to the problem of choosing a good way to extend the speed from the boundary $`\{G=0\}`$ to the interior of the region $`\{G>0\}`$. The idea is to do this in such a way that any compact surface with strictly positive curvature necessarily has very strongly controlled curvature in the future — that is, we want the region $`\{G>0\}`$ to be exhausted by a nested family of regions which stay away from the boundary, and only approach infinity near the ‘umbillic’ line $`\kappa _1=\kappa _2`$. This means that any singularity which occurs will have to be totally umbillic, so occurs only when the surface shrinks to a point while becoming spherical in shape.

This can be done in many ways. One which is relatively simple to describe, but results in solutions which are only $`C^{2,\alpha }`$, is as follows: Take

$$F=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{arctan}\kappa _1+\mathrm{arctan}\kappa _2,\hfill & \kappa _1\kappa _2<1;\hfill \\ \frac{\pi }{4}(\kappa _1\kappa _2+1),\hfill & \kappa _1\kappa _2>1.\hfill \end{array}$$

This is then a Lipschitz, monotone increasing function of the curvatures, and one can check that the following regions of the curvature plane are preserved:

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\epsilon =\left\{|\kappa _1\kappa _2|\frac{1+\kappa _1\kappa _2}{\epsilon }\right\}\left\{\kappa _1\kappa _21\right\}\left\{|\kappa _1\kappa _2|\frac{2}{\epsilon }\right\}\left\{\kappa _1\kappa _21\right\}.$$

This means that the difference between the principal curvatures stays bounded even if the curvature becomes large, which implies very strong control on singularities. This is similar to the estimate used in  to prove that worn stones (i.e. convex surfaces moving by their Gauss curvature) become round as they shrink to points.

With a little more work we can choose the speed to be a smooth function of the principal curvatures, and then solutions are also smooth.

In the choice above, we also have the nice feature that minimal surfaces do not move. We can with slight modifications arrive at a speed for which constant mean curvature surfaces do not move, for any particular choice of the mean curvature, as long as we are willing to work in the category of oriented surfaces. More generally, we can contrive that for a given monotone increasing function $`\varphi `$ of the principal curvatures, surfaces satisfying $`\varphi =0`$ do not move. Here $`F`$ (and $`\varphi `$) must be symmetric. We can also choose if desired a speed which is always positive, so that there are no stationary solutions.

### 5.5. The results

The main result for the above speed is the following:

Theorem 1. Let $`x_0`$ be an immersion of $`S^2`$ in $`S^3`$, with non-negative intrinsic curvature in the induced metric. Then the flow constructed above deforms $`M_0=x_0(S^2)`$ through a family $`M_t=x_t(S^2)`$, with intrinsic curvature strictly positive for each $`t>0`$, to either a great sphere (in infinite time) or to a point, with spherical limiting shape (in finite time). If $`M_0`$ is embedded, then so is $`M_t`$ for each $`t>0`$.

This includes in particular Simons’ result on mimimal surfaces. If we modify the speed somewhat, then we get the following result, which gives in particular a new result for Weingarten surfaces in the 3-sphere:

Theorem 2. Let $`\varphi `$ be any smooth, strictly monotone function of $`\kappa _1`$ and $`\kappa _2`$ defined on $`\{\kappa _1\kappa _2+10\}`$. Then there exists a function $`F`$ which is smoothly defined on $`\{\kappa _1\kappa _2+10\}`$, and strictly monotone increasing in each argument, with $`\text{sgn}F=\text{sgn}\varphi `$ everywhere, such that the following holds: If $`M_0=x_0(S^2)`$ is a smooth compact surface in $`S^3`$ with non-negative intrinsic curvature, then the motion with speed $`F`$ deforms $`M_0`$ through a smooth family $`\{M_t\}_{0t<T}`$, each strictly positively curved, which either converge to a point with spherical limiting shape with $`T<0`$, or converge to a totally umbillic surface (spherical cap) with $`\varphi =0`$ if $`T=\mathrm{}`$.

This includes two cases: Either there is some point where $`\varphi =0`$, in which case there is a spherical cap with $`\varphi =0`$ and the above result implies that this is the only surface with $`\varphi =0`$ with positive intrinsic curvature, or $`\varphi `$ is never zero, in which case all surfaces converge to points. In the latter case a very small geodesic sphere with one choice of orientation will shrink inwards to its centre, while the same sphere with the opposite orientation expands over the equator and eventually contracts to the antipodal point. In this way we have a unique way of associating an oriented surface with the point it eventually contracts to, and we deduce the following:

Theorem 3. The space of oriented surfaces with positive intrinsic curvature in $`S^3`$ retracts onto $`S^3`$.

Finally, if we introduce some non-local terms in the speed, we can devise a flow which fixes the enclosed volume, preserves positive intrinsic curvature, and gives convergence to spherical caps, without moving constant mean curvature surfaces.

## 6. Other results by related methods

The methods I outlined above also yield interesting results for a variety of other problems: One which works out similarly, and which has some interesting parallels, is that of surfaces in three-dimensional hyperbolic space. The surfaces of interest are those for which all of the principal curvatures are less than $`1`$ in magnitude. We can find a flow which deforms any such surface in a compact hyperbolic manifold to a minimal surface, while keeping the principal curvatures less than $`1`$ in magnitude. Rather surprisingly, this flow is in a way the hyperbolic analogue of the one we just described for the sphere: Instead of moving with speed equal to the sum of the arctangents of the principal curvatures, we move with speed equal to the sum of the hyperbolic arctangents of the principal curvatures. The resulting flow is very well-behaved, and has the interesting property that the Gauss map of the surface (the map which takes a point of the surface to its tangent plane, thought of as a point in the Grassmannian of spacelike 2-planes in Minkowksi space $`R^{3,1}`$), evolves according to mean curvature flow.

The methods also give good results for hypersurfaces in higher-dimensional spheres: Hypersurfaces with positive sectional curvatures can be deformed in such a way as to preserve that condition, and similar results can be deduced. The condition of positive sectional curvature can probably be relaxed: Positive sectional curvature is implied by the condition of Okumura  for constant mean curvature hypersurfaces, but not by the sharper condition of Cheng and Nakagawa  and Alencar and do Carmo .


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recently it has been claimed that the cosmological constant problem can be solved in brane worlds with $`N>2`$ infinitely large extra dimensions with an extra Einstein term localized on the brane . Then the graviton propagator is soft (massive) beyond some scale $`r>r_c`$, and consequently the gravitational field (the FRW scale factor $`a(t)`$) does not necessarily “react” to sources that are smooth at scales $`>r_c`$ such as a cosmological constant. The success of the cosmological standard model, on the other hand, requires $`r_c>H_0^1`$ where $`H_0`$ is the Hubble constant today.

The setup in  assumes a vanishing cosmological constant in the bulk, which can possibly be motivated by some unbroken supersymmetry (and $`R`$-parity) in the bulk. A 4-dimensional behaviour of gravity, hopefully over a large range of scales, is then due to an additional Einstein term on the brane \[3-5\]. The (classical) brane-to-brane graviton propagator actually suffers from a short distance singularity for $`N>2`$, which requires an UV regularization in the form of “blowing up” the transverse size of the 3-brane, higher derivative terms in the bulk or a momentum cutoff \[6-12\].

A solution of the cosmological constant problem is achieved only if one includes, in addition, an arbitrary (not fine-tuned) cosmological constant on the brane. This induces a non-trivial gravitational field in the bulk surrounding the brane, which generically exhibits a naked singularity . Again a regularization of this singularity requires a blowing-up of the brane  (or higher derivative terms ).

In  it has been argued that allowing the brane to inflate – with a phenomenologically acceptable small acceleration rate – removes the naked singularity. However, no explicit solution of the Einstein equations was given, and the proposed scenario supposedly requires at least fine-tuned initial conditions.

In the present paper we present a (singularity free) solution of Einstein’s equation, which corresponds to a blown-up 3-brane in $`N>2`$ extra dimensions. In contrast to smoothed-out branes considered elsewhere Einstein’s equations are satisfied everywhere: Not only in the bulk for $`r>r_b`$ (where $`r_b`$ is the radius of the blown-up brane) but also for $`r<r_b`$. This is made possible through a particular choice for the profile function $`f(r)`$, which describes the distribution of the brane tension as a function of $`r`$ (which was concentrated at $`r=0`$ originally): We assume that the complete brane tension (i.e. the brane cosmological constant) is concentrated at the surface $`r=r_b`$ of the blown-up brane, i.e. $`f(r)\delta (rr_b)`$. The shape of the brane in the $`N`$ extra dimensions is then the one of a sphere $`S^{(N1)}`$. Although the distribution of the brane tension is still $`\delta `$-function-like in the radial direction, this does not imply a singular gravitational field in the bulk (or on the brane) since one has just an effective co-dimension one problem.

A similar setup has already been considered in . In , however, the metric in the bulk “inside” the sphere (for $`r<r_b`$) was assumed to be constant, and no consistent solution to the junction conditions could be found.

Here we take instead, for $`r<r_b`$, a copy of the known metric “outside”  after an inversion $`rr_b^2/r`$. This configuration has a $`\mathrm{Z}\mathrm{}_2`$ symmetry: Changing the radial coordinate from $`r`$ to $`y`$ by $`r=r_b\mathrm{exp}(y/r_b)`$ our setup is invariant under a reflection at $`y=0`$; the surface of $`S^{(N1)}`$ is situated at $`y=0`$. Now the notions “inside” and “outside” have actually lost their meaning, since the space “inside” is just a copy of the space “outside” and shares with it its infinite volume.

Nevertheless this corresponds to a regularization (“blowing-up”) of an infinitely thin 3-brane: Fields living on the brane with its world volume $`R^{(3,1)}\times S^{(N1)}`$ (where $`R^{(3,1)}`$ is our 4-dimensional Minkowski space) just see the finite world volume of $`𝒪(r_b^{N1})`$ of $`S^{(N1)}`$ independently from the infinite volumes “inside” and “outside”, and their Kaluza-Klein modes on $`S^{(N1)}`$ become infinitely heavy for $`r_b0`$.

Since we have explicit singularity-free solutions of Einstein’s equations and junction conditions, we can ask whether the brane can support an arbitrary tension (cosmological constant) without inflation, i.e. without a naked singularity in the static case. It turns out, however, that the brane tension and the volume of the blown-up brane have to be relatively fine-tuned. This follows from the mere number of junction conditions to be satisfied, hence we have all reasons to believe that this result is generic and independent from the particular setup considered here (a profile function concentrated on the boundary). The Einstein term on the brane does not play a particular role for this result, it just modifies the required relation between the brane tension and its volume on $`S^{(N1)}`$.

Next we can ask whether the gravitational propagator on the brane behaves 4-dimensionally over a phenomenologically acceptable range of scales or momenta $`p^2`$. To this end we study the scalar propagator on the brane in the present gravitational background, with coefficients of the kinetic terms in the bulk and on the brane identical to the ones of the Einstein terms. This does not yet allow us to study the tensor structure of the graviton propagator, but a $`p^2`$ behaviour of the scalar propagator over a large range of $`p^2`$ is already a necessary condition for an acceptable behaviour of gravity.

The result is that, one the one hand, a $`p^2`$ behaviour of the scalar propagator over a phenomenologically acceptable range is possible, for a certain range of values of the gravitational constant $`M_D`$ in the $`D`$-dimensional bulk and the volume of $`S^{(N1)}`$. However, for the corresponding values of these parameters the warp factor $`A`$ on the brane is huge:

$$A>10^{15\sqrt{\frac{N1}{N+2}}}.$$
(1.1)
This behaviour of the warp factor is opposite to the one proposed in  as a solution to the Weak Scale – Planck Scale hierarchy problem. A scenario with many infinite extra dimensions, and 4-d gravity due to an (induced) Einstein term on the brane, is thus a priori difficult to realize.

On the other hand recall that, for a 4-dimensional behaviour of gravity over a phenomenologically acceptable range, the setup in  requires (for $`N>1`$)

$$\left(\frac{M_{Pl}}{M_D}\right)>10^{30}.$$
(1.2)
Here we find that the required hierarchy between the gravitational constants $`M_D`$ and $`M_{Pl}`$ is less dramatic, if one allows the proper volume of $`S^{(N1)}`$ to be as small as $`M_{Pl}^{1N}`$ (instead of $`M_D^{1N}`$): Then a $`p^2`$ behaviour of the propagator over a phenomenologically acceptable range requires only

$$\left(\frac{M_{Pl}}{M_D}\right)^{N+2}>10^{30}$$
(1.3)
which, for $`N`$ large, is easier to realize than eq. (1.2).

In the next section we present our setup more explicitly, and solve the combined Einstein equations in the bulk and junction conditions on the blown-up brane. The existence of static singularity-free (non-supersymmetric) $`(D2)`$-brane configurations in $`D`$-dimensions, with $`N1`$ dimensions of the brane compactified on $`S^{(N1)}`$, is quite remarkable in view of the naked singularities encountered generally  and the negative result in . As noted above, however, a relative fine-tuning of the input parameters is required, thus the cosmological constant problem is not solved.

In Section III we study the scalar propagator in this background. Although the full problem (the corresponding wave equation for all non-zero modes) cannot be solved explicitely , the partial results in  can be used here as well and allow to obtain the essential features of the $`p^2`$-dependence of the propagator. Then we derive the phenomenological constraints on the input parameters cited above and conclude.

## 2 Singularity Free Blown-up p-Branes

The original scenario consists in an infinitely thin 3-brane in a $`D=4+N`$ dimensional bulk, i.e. with $`N`$ extra dimensions. Our conventions for coordinates and indices are: $`x^\mu `$, $`\mu =0\mathrm{}3`$, are the coordinates of flat Minkowski space $`R^{(3,1)}`$ along the 3-brane, with the metric $`\eta _{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,1)`$. $`y^i`$, $`i=1\mathrm{}N`$, denote the coordinates of the extra dimensions. Indices $`A,B=0\mathrm{}D1`$ run over all $`D=4+N`$ coordinates.

The original action includes an Einstein term in the bulk, and an Einstein term plus a cosmological constant on the brane situated at $`y^i=0`$:

$$S=d^4xd^Ny\left\{\sqrt{g^{(D)}}\frac{1}{2\kappa _D}R^{(D)}+\sqrt{g^{(4)}}\delta ^N(y)\left[\frac{1}{2\kappa _4}R^{(4)}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_4\right]\right\}.$$
(2.1)
Our convention for the curvature scalar $`R^{(D)}`$ is such that, in a weak field expansion, $`R^{(D)}g_{A,B}^{AB}g_{,AB}^{AB}`$, i.e. the sign of the curvature is opposite to the sign of $`R`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4`$ in (2.1) corresponds to a positive cosmological constant for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4>0`$.

Smoothing out the 3-brane corresponds to a replacement of $`\delta ^N(y)`$ in (2.1) by a profile function $`f(y)`$. Let us introduce spherical coordinates in the extra dimensions: $`y^i=\{r,y^\alpha \}`$ where $`y^\alpha `$, $`\alpha =1\mathrm{}N1`$, are angles on $`S^{(N1)}`$ (an infinitely thin brane would be situated at $`r=0`$). The profile function now depends on $`r`$ only, $`f=f(r)`$. $`f(r)`$ is non-vanishing only for $`rr_b`$, where $`r_b`$ is the width of the brane.

An explicit solution of Einstein’s equation everywhere, i.e. also for $`rr_b`$, is not possible for general profile functions $`f(r)`$. Therefore, as stated in the introduction, we make the particularly simple choice $`f(r)\delta (rr_b)`$. The blown-up brane is then “hollow”, all tension is located at the surface $`r=r_b`$. It corresponds to an infinitely thin $`D2`$ brane with a geometry $`R^{(3,1)}\times S^{(N1)}`$, where $`S^{(N1)}`$ is a sphere with radius $`r_b`$. The fact that this $`D2`$ brane is again infinitely thin does not necessarily induce singularities in its surrounding gravitational field, since its co-dimension is just 1 (the dimension of its world volume is $`D1`$).

Correspondingly we should also replace the Einstein term $`\sqrt{g^{(4)}}R^{(4)}`$ on the brane by $`\sqrt{g^{(D1)}}R^{(D1)}`$, since this will be the structure induced by radiative corrections . The $`D1`$ coordinates along the brane are $`x^\mu `$ and the angles $`y^\alpha `$. Thus the action (2.1) is replaced by

$$S=d^4xd^Ny\left\{\sqrt{g^{(D)}}\frac{1}{2\kappa _D}R^{(D)}+\sqrt{g^{(D1)}}\delta (rr_b)\left[\frac{1}{2\kappa _{D1}}R^{(D1)}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}\right]\right\}.$$
(2.2)
Subsequently we will be interested in Poincaré invariant (on $`R^{(3,1)}`$) and spherically symmetric (on $`S^{(N1)}`$) background metrics with $`g_{r\mu }=g_{r\alpha }=0`$; then we have $`\sqrt{g^{(D)}}=\sqrt{g^{(D1)}g_{rr}}`$.

The Einstein equations derived from (2.2) read

$$\frac{1}{\kappa _D}G_{AB}^{(D)}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{g_{rr}}}\delta (rr_b)\left[\frac{1}{\kappa _{D1}}G_{AB}^{(D1)}+g_{AB}^{(D1)}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}\right]$$
(2.3)
where $`g_{AB}^{(D1)}`$ is the pull-back of $`g_{AB}^{(D)}`$ onto the brane, and the Einstein tensor $`G_{AB}^{(D1)}`$ is constructed from $`g_{AB}^{(D1)}`$. For $`A=r`$ (or $`B=r`$) we have $`G_{rB}^{(D1)}=g_{rB}^{(D1)}=0`$. Up to now this is the same setup as considered in .

A static metric with the desired symmetries has the form

$$ds^2=A^2(r)\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +B^2(r)dr^2+C^2(r)d\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}^2,$$
(2.4)
where $`d\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}^2`$ is the metric on $`S^{(N1)}`$. Note that our convention for $`C(r)`$ is such that flat space corresponds to $`C(r)=r`$. The parameters $`\kappa _{D1}`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}`$ in (2.2) are then related to the original 4-dimensional parameters $`\kappa _4`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4`$, as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa _{D1}}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}C^{N1}(r_b)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa _4}},`$ (2.5a)
$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}C^{N1}(r_b)}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_4`$ (2.5b)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}`$ is the volume of the unit sphere $`S^{(N1)}`$. An asymptotically (for $`r\mathrm{}`$) flat solution of the empty space Einstein equations (for $`r>r_b`$) for $`A(r)`$, $`B(r)`$ and $`C(r)`$ has been given in :

$`A(r)=f_o^{\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{\frac{N1}{N+2}}}`$ (2.6a)
$`B(r)=f_o^{\frac{1}{N2}\left(\sqrt{\frac{N1}{N+2}}\frac{N3}{2}\right)}`$ (2.6b)
$`C(r)=rf_o^{\frac{1}{N2}\left(\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{N1}{N+2}}\right)}`$ (2.6c)
with

$$f_o=1+\frac{\alpha }{r^{N2}}.$$
(2.7)
(The index $`o`$ attached to $`f_o`$ stands for “outside”.) The parameter $`\alpha `$ in (2.7) can also be written as $`\alpha =\pm r_0^{N2}`$, and will be determined in terms of the parameters in the action (2.2) below.

Next we seek for a solution of the empty space Einstein equations for $`r<r_b`$. In  the metric for $`r<r_b`$ has been chosen flat (constant), and no singularity free solution to the junction conditions (see below) has been found.

Instead, we chose for the metric for $`r<r_b`$ a copy of the metric for $`r>r_b`$ after a coordinate transformation

$$r^{}=\frac{r_b^2}{r}$$
(2.8)
and renaming $`r^{}r`$. The coefficient $`r_b^2`$ in (2.8) ensures that all components of the metric are continuous across $`r=r_b`$. Explicitely the metric for $`r<r_b`$ reads

$`A(r)=f_i^{\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{\frac{N1}{N+2}}}`$ (2.9a)
$`B(r)={\displaystyle \frac{r_b^2}{r^2}}f_i^{\frac{1}{N2}\left(\sqrt{\frac{N1}{N+2}}\frac{N3}{2}\right)}`$ (2.9b)
$`C(r)={\displaystyle \frac{r_b^2}{r}}f_i^{\frac{1}{N2}\left(\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{N1}{N+2}}\right)}`$ (2.9c)
with

$$f_i=1+\alpha \left(\frac{r}{r_b^2}\right)^{N2}$$
(2.10)
and hence $`f_i(r_b)=f_o(r_b)`$.

If one introduces an exponential radial coordinate $`y`$ through $`r=r_b\mathrm{exp}(y/r_b)`$ for $`r>r_b`$, one sees that eqs. (2) and (2) are related by a $`\mathrm{Z}\mathrm{}_2`$-symmetry (reflection) around $`y=0`$. For convenience (the junction conditions below) we stick to a single coordinate $`r`$ ranging from 0 to $`\mathrm{}`$; the price to pay are the coordinate singularities for $`r0`$ in (2): The divergence in $`B(r)`$ indicates that the point $`r=0`$ is at infinite proper distance from the “surface” at $`r_b`$ (since it is an image of $`+\mathrm{}`$), and the behaviour of $`C(r)`$ shows that the proper volume of spheres at radii $`r<r_b`$ blows up the same way as the one of spheres at radii $`r>r_b`$.

In spite of the fact that the volumes both “inside” and “outside” are infinite (mirrors of each other), the proper volume of the extra dimensional part of the brane on $`S^{(N1)}`$ at $`r=r_b`$ is finite and given by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}C^{N1}(r_b)`$.

Finally we have to show, however, that the metric (2) for $`r>r_b`$, and (2) for $`r<r_b`$, allows to satisfy the junction conditions at $`r=r_b`$, i.e. to match the coefficients of $`\delta (rr_b)`$ in the Einstein equations (2.3).

Let us first discuss the coefficients of $`\delta (rr_b)`$ on the right-hand side of eq. (2.3), which are non-vanishing only for $`\{A,B\}=\{\mu ,\nu \}`$ or $`\{\alpha ,\beta \}`$. To this end we need the $`\{\mu ,\nu \}`$, $`\{\alpha ,\beta \}`$-components of the Einstein tensor $`G_{AB}^{(D1)}`$ computed from the pull-back metric $`g_{AB}^{(D1)}`$  (Subsequently $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`C`$ denote $`A(r)`$, $`B(r)`$, and $`C(r)`$ evaluated at $`r=r_b`$):

$`G_{\mu \nu }^{(D1)}(r_b)={\displaystyle \frac{A^2(N1)(N2)}{2C^2}}\eta _{\mu \nu },`$ (2.11a)
$`G_{\alpha \beta }^{(D1)}(r_b)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(N2)(N3)g_{\alpha \beta }^{(N1)},`$ (2.11b)
where $`g_{\alpha \beta }^{(N1)}`$ is the metric on $`S^{(N1)}`$ with unit radius. Thus the non-vanishing right-hand sides of eq. (2.3) read

$`\delta (rr_b)\eta _{\mu \nu }\left({\displaystyle \frac{A^2(N1)(N2)}{2\kappa _{D1}BC^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{A^2}{B}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}\right),`$ (2.12a)
$`\delta (rr_b)g_{\alpha \beta }^{(N1)}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(N2)(N3)}{2\kappa _{D1}B}}+{\displaystyle \frac{C^2}{B}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}\right).`$ (2.12b)
Terms $`\delta (rr_b)`$ appear on the left-hand side of eq. (2.3) due to the discontinuous first derivatives of the metric across $`r=r_b`$. Generally one finds

$`G_{\mu \nu }^{(D)}=\delta (rr_b)\eta _{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{A^2}{B^2}}\left(3\left[{\displaystyle \frac{A^{\prime \prime }}{A}}\right](N1)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{C^{\prime \prime }}{C}}\right]\right)+\text{regular},`$ (2.13a)
$`G_{\alpha \beta }^{(D)}=\delta (rr_b)g_{\alpha \beta }^{(N1)}{\displaystyle \frac{C^2}{B^2}}\left(4\left[{\displaystyle \frac{A^{\prime \prime }}{A}}\right](N2)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{C^{\prime \prime }}{C}}\right]\right)+\text{regular}`$ (2.13b)
where

$$\left[\frac{A^{\prime \prime }}{A}\right]=\left(\frac{_rA}{A}|_{r_b+\epsilon }\frac{_rA}{A}|_{r_b\epsilon }\right)_{\epsilon 0}$$
(2.14)
and similarly for $`[C^{\prime \prime }/C]`$. No terms $`\delta (rr_b)`$ appear in $`G_{rA}^{(D)}`$ for any $`A`$, in agreement with the right-hand side of eq. (2.3). From $`A(r)`$, $`C(r)`$ in eqs. (2) and (2) one finds

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{A^{\prime \prime }}{A}}\right]={\displaystyle \frac{N2}{2r_b}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f}}\right)\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{N1}{N+2}}},`$ (2.15a)
$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{C^{\prime \prime }}{C}}\right]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{r_b}}\left(12\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{N1}{N+2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f}}\left(1+2\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{N1}{N+2}}}\right)\right).`$ (2.15b)
where $`f=f_o(r_b)=f_i(r_b)`$. Thus the terms $`\delta (rr_b)`$ in eq. (2.3) imply

$`{\displaystyle \frac{A^2}{\kappa _DB^2r_b}}\left(1N+w+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f}}(1Nw)\right)={\displaystyle \frac{A^2}{B}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(N1)(N2)}{2\kappa _{D1}C^2}}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}\right),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{C^2}{\kappa _DB^2r_b}}(N2)\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f}}\right)={\displaystyle \frac{C^2}{B}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(N2)(N3)}{2\kappa _{D1}C^2}}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}\right),`$
where we have defined $`w=\sqrt{(N+2)(N1)}/2`$. These equations can be considerably simplified. Using $`r_bB=C/\sqrt{f}`$ (cf. eqs. (2.6b) and (2.6c), or (2.9b) and (2.9c)) they can be brought into the form

$`\sqrt{f}(1w)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{f}}}(1+w)={\displaystyle \frac{(N2)\kappa _D}{\kappa _{D1}C}},`$ (2.17a)
$`\sqrt{f}(N1+(N3)w)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{f}}}(N1(N3)w)=2\kappa _D\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}C.`$
Let us recall the basic parameters in the action (2.2) describing the blown-up brane. These are

i) The $`D=4+N`$-dimensional gravitational constant $`\kappa _D`$, which can be written in terms of a $`D`$-dimensional gravitational scale $`M_D`$ as

$$\frac{1}{\kappa _D}=M_D^{2+N}.$$
(2.18)
ii) The radial position of the $`S^{(N1)}`$-part of the brane in the $`N`$ extra dimensions is given by $`r_b`$; however, only its proper volume $`V_{S^{(N1)}}`$ is of physical significance, which is given by

$$V_{S^{(N1)}}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}C^{N1}$$
(2.19)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}`$ is the volume of the unit sphere. Eq. (2.19) explains the physical meaning of $`CC(r_b)`$.

iii) The gravitational constant $`\kappa _{D1}`$ on the brane is related through (2.5a) to the effective 4-dimensional gravitational constant $`\kappa _4`$. Defining $`\kappa _4=M_{Pl}^2`$ we thus have

$$\frac{1}{\kappa _{D1}}=\frac{1}{V_{S^{(N1)}}\kappa _4}=\frac{M_{Pl}^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}C^{N1}}.$$
(2.20)
iv) The cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}`$ (or tension) on the brane is related through (2.5a) to the 4-dimensional cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4`$:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_4}{V_{S^{(N1)}}}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_4}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}C^{N1}}.$$
(2.21)
v) The width of the resulting gravitational field in the radial direction is given by a parameter $`\alpha `$ in $`f_i(r_b)=f_o(r_b)f`$, with

$$f=1+\frac{\alpha }{r_b^{N2}}.$$
(2.22)
Instead of $`\alpha `$, $`f`$ can be considered as a parameter to be solved for. Then $`r_b`$ is given in terms of $`C`$ and $`f`$ through eq. (2.6c) at $`r=r_b`$, and $`\alpha `$ in terms of $`f`$ and $`r_b`$ through (2.22).

Now we have 2 equations (2) (originating from the $`\{\mu ,\nu \}`$ and $`\{\alpha ,\beta \}`$ components of the junction conditions) to solve. This implies immediately that the 4 input parameters i) - iv) cannot be arbitrary; one “fine-tuning” relation has to be satisfied. Note that we count $`C`$ (or $`r_b`$) as an input parameter: Its origin is the profile function in the radial direction of the “blown-up” 3-brane (localized at its surface), introduced originally as an UV regulator.

Furthermore some consistency conditions have to be satisfied: $`C`$ and notably $`f`$ have to be positive. If $`f<0`$, the metric is generically complex, and there exists always a naked singularity in the bulk  which is precisely what we want to avoid.

Eqs. (2) can be solved most easily with $`\kappa _D`$, $`\kappa _{D1}`$ and $`C`$ (positive) as input: Then eq. (2.17a) determines $`f`$, for which luckily always a positive solution exists. Subsequently eq. (2) fixes $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}`$ (or $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4`$ with $`C`$ given). One sees immediately that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4`$ has to be fine-tuned.

Apart from this constraint on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4`$ (or $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}`$), the existence of consistent (singularity-free) solutions is quite remarkable, given the general presence of naked singularities in the case of flat $`p`$-branes in $`N`$ codimensions .

Let us first consider the case without an Einstein term on the brane, i.e. $`\kappa _{D1}^10`$. Then eq. (2.17a) fixes $`f=(w+1)/(w1)`$, and eq. (2) gives $`\kappa _D\mathrm{\Lambda }_{D1}C=2\sqrt{(N+2)(N1)(N2)/(N+3)}`$. Thus, with eqs. (2.18) and (2.21),

$$M_\mathrm{\Lambda }^4M_D^{2+N}C^{N2}.$$
(2.23)
With $`f𝒪(1)`$ we have $`r_0^{N2}(\alpha )r_b^{N2}C^{N2}`$, hence

$$r_0^{N2}M_\mathrm{\Lambda }^4M_D^{(N+2)}.$$
(2.24)
This order of magnitude of $`r_0`$ coincides with the one in .

Of phenomenological interest (cf. the next section) is, however, the opposite limit

$$\frac{\kappa _D}{\kappa _{D1}C}1.$$
(2.25)
Now eq. (2.17a) gives

$$\left(\sqrt{f}\right)^1\frac{\kappa _D}{\kappa _{D1}C}.$$
(2.26)
($`f<1`$ implies that the parameter $`\alpha `$, introduced below eq. (2.7), is negative.) Now eq. (2.26) implies, from eq. (2.6a) or (2.9a) for $`r=r_b`$,

$$A\left(\frac{\kappa _D}{\kappa _{D1}C}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{N1}{N+2}}}$$
(2.27)
As we will see in the next section, at the example of the scalar propagator, only in this limit the graviton propagator on the brane has the possibility to behave 4-dimensionally over a wide range of scales.

## 3 The Scalar Propagator

As a first step towards the momentum dependence of the brane-to-brane graviton propagator in the present gravitational background we will study the corresponding propagator of a (dimensionless) scalar field, whose kinetic terms in the bulk and on the brane have identical coefficients as the Einstein terms in the action (2.2). Although an exact expression for this propagator cannot be given, the essential features of its momentum dependence can be deduced using results from .

The differential equation for the general (bulk-to-bulk) scalar propagator has the form

$$\left(\frac{1}{\kappa _D}^{(D)}+\frac{1}{\kappa _{D1}B}\delta (rr_b)^{(D1)}\right)G(xx^{},y,y^{})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{g^{(D)}}}\delta ^4(xx^{})\delta ^N(yy^{}).$$
(3.1)
We recall that $`A(r)`$, $`B(r)`$ and $`C(r)`$ define the metric (2.4), and $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`C`$ denote these functions at $`r=r_b`$. The $`N`$ extra coordinates $`y^i`$ are split into $`y^i=\{r,y^\alpha \}`$ where $`y^\alpha `$ are the angles on $`S^{(N1)}`$, and subsequently $`g_{\alpha \beta }`$ will denote the (dimensionless) angular part of the metric on $`S^{(N1)}`$.

Then the Laplacians in (3.1) are

$$^{(D)}=A^2(r)_\mu \eta ^{\mu \nu }_\nu +\frac{1}{\sqrt{g^{(D)}}}_r\sqrt{g^{(D)}}B^2(r)_r+C^2(r)_\alpha g^{\alpha \beta }_\beta ,$$
(3.2)
and

$$^{(D1)}=A^2_\mu \eta ^{\mu \nu }_\nu +C^2_\alpha g^{\alpha \beta }_\beta .$$
(3.3)
The determinant of the $`D`$-dimensional metric is

$$\sqrt{g^{(D)}}=A^4(r)B(r)C^{N1}(r)\sqrt{det(g_{\alpha \beta })}.$$
(3.4)
We will Fourier transform $`G(xx^{},y,y^{})`$ with respect to the 4 Minkowski coordinates $`x^\mu x^\mu `$, whereupon $`_\mu \eta ^{\mu \nu }_\nu `$ is replaced by $`p^2`$. Furthermore, following , we will decompose the angular part of the propagator into spherical harmonics $`Y_{\mathrm{}}^{m_a}`$ ($`a=1\mathrm{}N2`$) on $`S^{(N1)}`$:

$$G(xx^{},r,y^\alpha ,r^{},y^\alpha )=\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}e^{ipx}\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}\underset{\mathrm{},m_a}{}Y_{\mathrm{}}^{m_a}(y^\alpha )Y_{\mathrm{}}^{m_a}(y^\alpha )G_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r^{})$$
(3.5)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}`$ is the volume of the unit sphere, and the spherical harmonics satisfy

$$\underset{\mathrm{},m_a}{}Y_{\mathrm{}}^{m_a}(y^\alpha )Y_{\mathrm{}}^{m_a}(y^\alpha )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{det(g_{\alpha \beta })}}\delta ^{N1}(y^\alpha y^\alpha ),$$
(3.6)
$$_\alpha g^{\alpha \beta }_\beta Y_{\mathrm{}}^{m_a}(y^\alpha )=\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+N2)Y_{\mathrm{}}^{m_a}(y^\alpha ).$$
(3.7)
Putting $`r^{}=r_b`$, the equation for the bulk-to-brane propagator $`G_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r_b)`$ becomes

$`\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa _D}}[A^2(r)p^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{g^{(D)}}}}_r\sqrt{g^{(D)}}B^2(r)_r+C^2(r)\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+N2)]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa _{D1}B}}\delta (rr_b)[A^2p^2+C^2\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+N2)]\}G_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r_b)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{A^4BC^{N1}\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}}}\delta (rr_b).`$ (3.8)
Following  the solution of eq. (3) can be written as

$$G_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r_b)=\frac{D_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r_b)}{1+\frac{A^4C^{N1}\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}}{\kappa _{D1}}\left(A^2p^2+C^2\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+N2)\right)D_{\mathrm{}}(p,r_b,r_b)}$$
(3.9)
where $`D_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r^{})`$ is the propagator in the absence of field dependent terms on the brane and satisfies

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa _D}}\left[A^2(r)p^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{g^{(D)}}}}_r\sqrt{g^{(D)}}B^2(r)_r+C^2(r)\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+N2)\right]D_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r^{})`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{A^4BC^{N1}\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}}}\delta (rr^{}).`$ (3.10)
Defining an operator $`𝒪_{\mathrm{}}(r)`$ as (using (3.4) for $`\sqrt{g^{(D)}}`$)

$$𝒪_{\mathrm{}}(r)=\frac{1}{A^2(r)B(r)C^{N1}(r)}_rA^4(r)B^1(r)C^{N1}(r)_r+\frac{A^2(r)}{C^2(r)}\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+N2)$$
(3.11)
eq. (3) can be rewritten as

$$\left(𝒪_{\mathrm{}}(r)+p^2\right)D_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r^{})=k\delta (rr^{})$$
(3.12)
with

$$k=\frac{\kappa _D}{A^2BC^{N1}\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}}.$$
(3.13)
The wave equation corresponding to eq. (3.12) (with a vanishing right-hand side, and in the notation $`p^2=m^2`$) has been studied in . There the setup is slightly different than the one considered here: In  the brane (for the purpose of solving the wave equation) is located at $`r=0`$, and the functions $`A(r)`$, $`B(r)`$ and $`C(r)`$ in $`𝒪_{\mathrm{}}`$ are of the form (2) for $`r>0`$. The remarkable result in  is that inspite of the singular behaviour of these functions for $`r0`$ the solutions of the wave equation, and hence the scalar propagator, are well defined.

In the present case the brane is located at $`r=r_b`$, and the functions $`A(r)`$, $`B(r)`$ and $`C(r)`$ in $`𝒪_{\mathrm{}}`$ are of the form (2) only for $`r_br<\mathrm{}`$, but of the form (2) for $`0<rr_b`$, hence $`\mathrm{Z}\mathrm{}_2`$-symmetric under $`rr_b^2/r`$. Asymptotically, both for $`r\mathrm{}`$ and $`r0`$, $`𝒪_{\mathrm{}}(r)`$ tends to the (radial) Laplacian in flat space. Hence its spectrum is continuous, with eigenfunctions $`\varphi (\mathrm{},q,r)`$ that behave as plane waves for $`r\mathrm{}`$ and $`r0`$. Here $`q`$ denotes a continuum variable conjugate to $`r`$. These eigenfunctions can be decomposed into even ones under $`\mathrm{Z}\mathrm{}_2`$ (with vanishing radial derivatives at $`r=r_b`$) and odd ones under $`\mathrm{Z}\mathrm{}_2`$ (which vanish at $`r=r_b`$).

It is possible to repeat the analysis in  of the operator $`𝒪_{\mathrm{}}(r)`$ in the present setup (without singularities for $`r0`$, except for coordinate singularities, but jumps in the first radial derivatives of $`A(r)`$, $`B(r)`$ and $`C(r)`$ at $`r=r_b`$), with the same result: $`𝒪_{\mathrm{}}(r)`$ is self-adjoint and thus semi-positive. Hence the eigenfunctions $`\varphi (\mathrm{},q,r)`$ satisfying

$$𝒪_{\mathrm{}}\varphi (\mathrm{},q,r)=e^2(q,\mathrm{})\varphi (\mathrm{},q,r)$$
(3.14)
with $`e^2(q,\mathrm{})0`$ represent a complete basis.

Although neither these functions nor their eigenvalues are not known explicitely (except for the zero modes ) they can be used to construct a formal solution for the bulk Green function $`D_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r^{})`$ satisfying eq. (3.12):

$$D_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r^{})=k𝑑q\frac{\varphi (\mathrm{},q,r)\varphi (\mathrm{},q,r^{})}{p^2+e^2(q,\mathrm{})}$$
(3.15)
The rough behaviour of $`D_{\mathrm{}}(p,r,r^{})`$ for $`p0`$ can be obtained from eq. (3.15) from the behaviour of the eigenvalues $`e^2(q,\mathrm{})`$ for $`q0`$: First, dimensional analysis dictates that we must have $`e^2(q,\mathrm{})q^2`$. No powers of $`r_b`$ can appear here, since the problem is non-singular for $`r_b0`$ . This shows already that $`D_{\mathrm{}}(p0,r,r^{})p^1`$.

Below we will be interested in the brane-to-brane propagator (and in the $`\mathrm{}=0`$ partial wave), and in this case we can be somewhat more precise on the corresponding coefficient. Expanding $`𝒪_{\mathrm{}=0}`$ around $`r=r_b`$ it becomes simply $`A^2B^2_r^2`$, in which case (3.12) can be solved by simple Fourier transformation and the argument of the $`dq`$-integral in (3.15) becomes $`1/(p^2+A^2B^2q^2)`$. Thus one finds

$$D_{\mathrm{}=0}(p0,r_b,r_b)\frac{kB}{Ap}.$$
(3.16)
Note that if one would compactify the extra dimensions inside a finite volume of size $`R^N`$, the spectrum of $`𝒪_{\mathrm{}}(r)`$ would be discrete. Then the integral $`dq`$ in (3.15) would be replaced by a sum over discrete modes $`q_i`$ with spacing $`R^1`$, and the $`p0`$ behaviour of $`D_{\mathrm{}}`$ would be entirely due to the zero mode: $`D_{\mathrm{}}(p0,r,r^{})k/(Rp^2)`$ in contrast to the $`p^1`$-behaviour obtained for infinite extra dimensions.

The result (3.16) can be plugged into (3.9), together with $`k`$ given in (3.13). Up to factors of $`𝒪(1)`$ one finds

$$G_{\mathrm{}}(p,r_b,r_b)\frac{\kappa _D}{A^3C^{N1}\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}}\frac{1}{p+\frac{A\kappa _D}{\kappa _{D1}}\left(A^2p^2+C^2\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+N2)\right)}.$$
(3.17)
Of particular importance is the denominator in the second factor in (3.17), and the question where and when it behaves $`p^2`$ such that a phenomenologically acceptable $`p^2`$ dependence of the propagator is obtained.

First, to this end the first term has to be small with respect to the second one, i.e.

$$p\frac{A\kappa _{D1}}{\kappa _D}$$
(3.18)
which is true at scales $`1/pr_c`$ with

$$r_c\frac{\kappa _D}{A\kappa _{D1}}.$$
(3.19)
Now recall that the second and third terms in the denominator originate from the kinetic term $`^{(D1)}`$ localized on the brane, whose extra dimensions ($`N1`$ of them) are compactified on $`S^{(N1)}`$. Once this term dominates, the propagator sees the corresponding Kaluza-Klein states (partial waves with $`\mathrm{}>0`$) with masses $`M_{kk}A/C`$ in agreement with the metric (2.4).

Contributions of these states to the full propagator $`G`$ in (3.5) (the sum over $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$) would not be acceptable, since they would again modify its $`p^2`$-dependence and turn it into a $`D=4+N`$ dimensional propagator. Thus one has to require

$$p<M_{kk}\frac{A}{C}$$
(3.20)
in which regime only the $`\mathrm{}=0`$ mode contributes.

Once the inequalities (3.18) and (3.20) are satisfied, the $`\mathrm{}=0`$ brane-to-brane propagator behaves as

$$G_0(p,r_b,r_b)\frac{\kappa _{D1}}{C^{N1}\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}A^2p^2}\frac{\kappa _4}{A^2p^2},$$
(3.21)
where we have used (2.5a) in the last step. The coefficient coincides with the one obtained from a 4-dimensional action

$$S=\frac{1}{2\kappa _4}d^4x\sqrt{g^{(4)}}_\mu \varphi g^{\mu \nu }_\nu \varphi $$
(3.22)
with $`g_{\mu \nu }^{(4)}=A^2\eta _{\mu \nu }`$, as it should.

The two inequalities (3.18) and (3.20) are compatible only if

$$\frac{\kappa _D}{\kappa _{D1}C}1.$$
(3.23)
Let us consider the required orders of magnitude in more detail. For the scale $`r_c`$, beyond which gravity would change, one can only tolerate $`r_c>H_0^1`$ , where $`H_0`$ is the Hubble constant today. Hence, rewriting eq. (3.19),

$$r_c\frac{\kappa _D}{C\kappa _{D1}}\frac{C}{A}>H_0^1.$$
(3.24)
On the other side, in order not to change gravity at distances down to $`10^4`$m through Kaluza-Klein states with masses $`M_{kk}`$ trapped on $`S^{(N1)}`$ we need

$$M_{kk}\frac{A}{C}>10^3\mathrm{eV}.$$
(3.25)
With $`H_010^{33}`$ eV eqs. (3.24) and (3.25) imply

$$\frac{\kappa _D}{C\kappa _{D1}}>10^{30}.$$
(3.26)
Now recall that, from the junction conditions derived in the previous chapter, the combination of parameters in (3.26) is related to the warp factor $`A`$ on the brane. From eqs. (2.26), (2.27) with (3.26) one finds

$$A>10^{15\sqrt{\frac{N1}{N+2}}}.$$
(3.27)
A huge warp factor on the brane aggravates the hierarchy problem (i.e. the smallness of the Weak Scale as compared to the Planck Scale) instead of solving it in the sense of  via a tiny warp factor on the brane.

If one is willing to swallow this complication, one can translate the constraint (3.26), via eqs. (2.18) and (2.20), into a constraint on the $`D`$-dimensional gravitational scale $`M_D`$ and $`C`$, which is related to the size of the blown-up brane in the extra dimensions via (2.19). Then (3.26) gives

$$\frac{M_{Pl}^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{N1}M_D^2(M_DC)^N}>10^{30}.$$
(3.28)
For $`CM_D^1`$ one obtains

$$M_D<10^{15}M_{Pl}$$
(3.29)
as in the co-dimension 1 case in . However, eq. (3.28) allows to generate a huge number more easily, if one allows for $`CM_D^1`$. In the extreme case $`CM_{Pl}^1`$ one obtains

$$\left(\frac{M_{Pl}}{M_D}\right)^{N+2}>10^{30}$$
(3.30)
which, for $`N`$ large, allows for much more modest ratios $`M_D/M_{Pl}`$.

What would be the required tension (cosmological constant) on the brane? From eqs. (2) one finds that, in the limit (2.25) and (2.26), its right hand sides are of comparable magnitude. Using eqs. (2.20) and (2.21) this gives

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_4\frac{M_{Pl}^2}{C^2}$$
(3.31)
or $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4M_{Pl}^2M_D^2`$ in the case (3.29), $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4M_{Pl}^4`$ in the case (3.30).

In order to see whether this scenario is phenomenologically viable, the complete spectrum of physical fluctuations would have to be studied.

The tensor structure of 4-dimensional gravity, in the presence of an additional Einstein term on the brane, has recently been the subject of numerous investigations \[3, 9, 16-21\]. Note that the problematic result (ghosts and tachyons for $`N2`$) obtained in  cannot be applied here, since we have a non-trivial gravitational background and, notably, replaced $`R^{(4)}`$ by $`R^{(D1)}`$ on the blown-up brane, hence we have an effective codimension one scenario. The recent results in the co-dimension 1 case, on the other hand, point towards a phenomenologically acceptable tensor structure of 4-dimensional gravity \[16-20\]. Nevertheless the details in the present case, as well as the spectrum of 4-dimesional scalars (moduli), remain to be studied.

Independently thereof we want to emphasize that the present brane configuration can also be studied in compact extra dimensions, in which case the correct structure of 4-dimensional gravity is guaranteed even without an additional Einstein term on the brane. Given the present negative result on the solution of the cosmological constant problem, and the required hierarchies of scales in the case of infinite-volume extra dimensions (notably the need for $`M_DM_{Pl}`$, although our eq. (3.30) reduces the required hierarchy), compact extra dimensions are perhaps somewhat more promising. Work in this direction is in progress.

Acknowledgement: We thank Ch. Charmousis for numerous stimulating discussions.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The idea of the brane-world given in  is strongly motivated by the recent development in the superstring/M theory . In string theory however, the dilaton is necessarily included as a scalar partner of the graviton and plays many important dynamical roles. For example, the bulk configuration of the dilaton would give an insight for the running coupling constant of the boundary 4d Yang-Mills theory in an appropriate 10d background manifold. It would therefore be interesting to see the role of the dilaton in the brane-world and to examine whether the dilaton could live also in our 4d world after the warped compactification and how it behaves. When it survives on the brane as a massless scalar partner of the graviton as in 10d, the equivalence principle, which will be observed in the free-fall experiments, would be remained as a problem to be resolved as in . While it could appear as a 4d massive scalar, its mass ($`m_\varphi `$) should be very small since it could not exceed the 4d cosmological constant $`\lambda `$ in order to be trapped . Then we can estimate its magnitude as $`m_\varphi \sqrt{\lambda }`$, and the coupling to the light particles like photons could be estimated as $`1/M_{\mathrm{pl}}`$. This implies a very long life time $`\tau M_{\mathrm{pl}}^2/m_\varphi ^3`$ of the massive dilaton, and this fact gives a serious difficulty known as the moduli problem . In this case, we could however consider this massive particle as a candidate of the dark matter .

It would be meaningful to study the problem of localization of the dilaton in order to approach to the above issues from the viewpoint of the brane-world. Although the localization of the graviton has been extensively studied , much attention has not been given to scalar field , especially for the dilaton. However, it would be important to see the situation of the dilaton as well as the graviton in the context of the warped compactification within the superstring theory.

In addition to the dilaton and graviton, we also examine the localization of gauge bosons which are the important force of our 4d world. Up to now, the localization of the graviton has been assured in a wide range of solutions except for AdS4 brane . As for the gauge bosons, its localization has been examined in some models . To trap gauge bosons, it was necessary to introduce positive $`\lambda `$ or the bulk-dilaton field. The latter case might be related to the massive vector model  by a special form of brane-vector coupling . This point is an another reason to examine the brane-world with bulk-dilaton.

We study these issues in terms of a simple class of solutions for brane-world with non-trivial dilaton, which are essentially equivalent to the one given in . However, the use and extension of these solutions are different. The dilaton ($`\varphi `$) is identified here with a scalar field which couples to the brane like $`e^{\gamma \varphi }`$ and has the bulk potential of the exponential form. We concentrate on the localization of the fields mentioned above. Since the solutions given here have the same form of warp factor with the one, which are given before  for the case without the dilaton, then many problems of the localization would be easily understood.

Several new aspects caused by dilaton are given here. The localization of both the graviton and gauge bosons is realized for any brane of positive, negative and zero $`\lambda `$, i.e., dS4, AdS4 and Minkowski brane. When dilaton is absent, the gauge bosons are localized only for $`\lambda >0`$, dS4 brane , but this is not a necessary condition when we consider dilaton. The essential point needed for the localization of gauge bosons would be in the deformation of the warp factor from its exact AdS form. And the necessary deformation can be obtained either by the positive $`\lambda `$ or by the dilaton. In any case, the conformal symmetry is broken, so we could say that this breaking of the conformal symmetry would be inevitable for the localization of gauge bosons.

As for the graviton, it can be localized even if $`\lambda <0`$ when dilaton is included. This point is important since the general coordinate invariance is not necessarily broken for AdS4 brane in the case when dilaton is considered.

As for the localization of dilaton, we must solve the mixed equations with the scalar components of the metric. For our solutions, the master equation for these system is obtained in a simple form, and we find that any mode of the bulk dilaton can not be trapped on the brane.

In Section 2, we set our model with dilaton, and brane solutions are shown. We comment on the relation between these new solutions and the one given before without dilaton. In Section 3, the localization of graviton, gauge bosons and dilaton are examined. In the final section, summary and discussions are given.

## 2 Dilaton coupled brane solution

We begin with the following action with dilaton ($`\varphi `$),

$`S_g={\displaystyle d^4x𝑑y\sqrt{g}\left\{\frac{1}{2\kappa ^2}(R2\mathrm{\Lambda })\frac{1}{2}(\varphi )^2V(\varphi )\right\}}\tau {\displaystyle d^4x\sqrt{detg_{\mu \nu }}e^{\gamma \varphi }},`$ (1)
where the parameters are the five-dimensional gravitational constant $`\kappa ^2`$, bulk cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, brane tension $`\tau `$ and dilaton-brane coupling $`\gamma `$. The brane is set at $`y=0`$ by imposing $`yy`$ symmetry on the above action. And the form of the potential $`V`$ is not specified at this stage. The equations of motion derived from the action (1) are given as

$`G_{MN}=\kappa ^2\left\{_M\varphi _N\varphi g_{MN}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\varphi )^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\kappa ^2}}+V\right)g_{\mu \nu }\delta _M^\mu \delta _N^\nu \tau e^{\gamma \varphi }\delta (y)\right\},`$ (2)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}}_M\left\{\sqrt{g}g^{MN}_N\varphi \right\}={\displaystyle \frac{V}{\varphi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{detg_{\mu \nu }}}{\sqrt{g}}}\tau \gamma e^{\gamma \varphi }\delta (y).`$ (3)
Here we solve these under the following ansatz for metric,

$`ds^2=g_{MN}dx^Mdx^N=A^2(y)(dt^2+a^2(t)\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j)+dy^2,`$ (4)
where $`\gamma _{ij}=(1+k\delta _{mn}x^mx^n/4)^2\delta _{ij}`$. As long as we do not mention, $`k=0`$. While $`a(t)`$ is solved for each $`k`$, for example $`a_0=e^{H_0t}`$, $`H_0=\sqrt{\lambda }`$ for $`k=0`$. If we take as $`\varphi =\varphi (y)`$, Einstein equations (2) and dilaton equation (3) are written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{A^{\prime \prime }}{A}}+\left({\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{A^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\varphi ^{})^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\kappa ^2}}+V(\varphi )\right){\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{3}}e^{\gamma \varphi }\delta (y),`$ (5)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{A^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{6}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\varphi ^{})^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\kappa ^2}}V(\varphi )\right),`$ (6)
$`\varphi ^{\prime \prime }+4\varphi ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}={\displaystyle \frac{V}{\varphi }}+\tau \gamma e^{\gamma \varphi }\delta (y),`$ (7)
where $`{}_{}{}^{}=d/dy`$. Let us assume the following form for $`\varphi `$,

$`\varphi ^{}=\alpha A^n\mathrm{sgn}(\mathrm{y}),`$ (8)
Eqs.(6) and (7) are solved as

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{A^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{6}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha ^2}{n}}A^{2n}+V_0\right){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{6}},`$ (9)
$`V={\displaystyle \frac{n+4}{2n}}(\alpha A^n)^2+V_0,2\alpha =\gamma \tau e^{\gamma \varphi _0},`$ (10)
where $`V_0`$ is a constant, and we take the boundary conditions $`A(0)=1`$ and $`\varphi (0)=\varphi _0`$. From eq.(9), we can see that the parameters $`V_0`$ and $`\alpha `$ can be absorbed into $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\lambda `$ when $`n=1`$. We can solve for other values of $`n`$, but we consider this simple solution in the following analysis since it is included in the previously obtained one for the case without dilaton by replacing the modified parameters. We should however notice here that this solution of $`n=1`$ corresponds to the one which has already been found by P. Kanti et al.. Another ansatz which could lead to the solutions similar to our previous ones are also possible, but they are a little bit complicated. So we concentrate here on the solution of $`n=1`$ with the above ansatz (8).

Then the potential is given as

$`V={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{A}}\right)^2+V_0,`$ (11)
and the equations (5) and (6) can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{A^{\prime \prime }}{A}}+\left({\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}{A^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{3}}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{3}}e^{\gamma \varphi _0}\delta (y).`$ (12)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}\right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{6}}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}{A^2}},`$ (13)
$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\mathrm{\Lambda }+\kappa ^2V_0,\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=\lambda +{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2\alpha ^2}{3}}.`$ (14)
As stated above, the equations (12) and (13) are the same form with the one obtained before  for the case where dilaton is suppressed. The dilaton modifies superficially the brane and bulk cosmological constants ($`\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) to $`(\stackrel{~}{\lambda },\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ as shown above. So the solutions are obtained by replacing the parameters ($`\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) in the previously given solutions by the new one, $`(\stackrel{~}{\lambda },\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. Then the various analyses can be performed in a parallel way. For example, the solutions $`A(y)`$ and $`\varphi (y)`$ and the potential $`V(\varphi )`$ are given as follows.

For $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=0`$,

$`A(y)=1\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}|y|1{\displaystyle \frac{|y|}{y_H}},`$ (15)
$`\varphi (y)={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}}}\mathrm{ln}(1\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}|y|)+\varphi _0,V(\varphi )={\displaystyle \frac{3\alpha ^2}{2}}e^{\frac{2\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}}{\alpha }(\varphi \varphi _0)}+V_0.`$ (16)
For $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}<0`$,

$$A(y)=\frac{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}}{\mu }\mathrm{sinh}\left[\mu (y_H|y|)\right],$$
(17)
$$\varphi (y)=\frac{\alpha }{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\mathrm{coth}\left[\mu (y_H|y|)/2\right]}{\mathrm{coth}(\mu y_H/2)}\right)+\varphi _0,$$
(18)
$$V(\varphi )=\frac{3\alpha ^2}{2}\frac{\mu ^2}{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}\mathrm{sinh}^2\left\{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}(\varphi \varphi _0)/\alpha +\chi \right\}+V_0,$$
(19)
$$\mu =\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}/6},\mathrm{sinh}(\mu y_H)=\mu /\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }},e^\chi =\mathrm{coth}(\mu y_H/2).$$
(20)
For $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}>0`$,

$$A(y)=\frac{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}}{\mu _d}\mathrm{sin}\left[\mu _d(y_H|y|)\right],\varphi (y)=\frac{\alpha }{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\mathrm{cot}\left[\mu _d(y_H|y|)/2\right]}{\mathrm{cot}(\mu _dy_H/2)}\right)+\varphi _0,$$
(21)
$$V(\varphi )=\frac{3\alpha ^2}{2}\frac{\mu _d^2}{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}\mathrm{cosh}^2\left\{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}(\varphi \varphi _0)/\alpha +\chi _d\right\}+V_0,$$
(22)
$$\mu _d=\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}/6},\mathrm{sin}(\mu _dy_H)=\mu _d/\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }},e^{\chi _d}=\mathrm{cot}(\mu _dy_H/2).$$
(23)
For any above solution, there exists horizon whose position is represented by $`y=y_H`$ and which has curvature singularity due to the non-trivial dilaton. So we interpret the extra dimension is in a finite region, $`0yy_H`$. Hereafter we set $`\varphi _0=0`$ for the sake of brevity, or we interpret $`\tau `$ as $`\tau e^{\gamma \varphi _0}`$ as long as we do not mention it especially. And we obtain from eq.(12) for the above solutions

$`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{6}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^4\tau ^2}{36}}.`$ (24)
This is the same form of the relation given before by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\lambda `$ in the case of the theory without dilaton.

## 3 Localization

Here we consider the localization of the bulk fields in terms of the linearized field equations for the graviton, dilaton and gauge bosons around the background configuration obtained above.

### 3.1 Graviton

Under the metric (4), it is convenient to take the gravitational fluctuation $`h_{ij}`$ as follows,

$$ds^2=A(y)^2(dt^2+a^2(t)[\gamma _{ij}(x^i)+h_{ij}(x^\mu ,y)]dx^idx^j)+dy^2.$$
(25)
We are interested in the localization of the traceless transverse component, which represents the graviton on the brane. It is projected out by the conditions, $`h_i^i=0`$ and $`_ih^{ij}=0`$, where $`_i`$ denotes the covariant derivative with respect to the three-metric $`\gamma _{ij}`$ which is used to raise and lower the three-indices $`i,j`$. The transverse and traceless part is denoted by $`h`$ hereafter for simplicity. The linearized field equation for $`h`$ is obtained in the same form with the one given previously for the case without dilaton,

$$_5^2h=0,$$
(26)
in terms of the five dimensional covariant derivative $`_5^2=_M^M`$. The above equation is given for $`k=0`$, and this is equivalent to the field equation of a five dimensional free massless scalar. For $`k=\pm 1`$, the term proportion to this appears, but it is not essential here and is abbreviated.

Then we arrive at the conclusion that the graviton can be localized on the brane if $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }0`$. The new point is that the graviton can be trapped even if $`\lambda <0`$ differently from the case without dilaton. When the dialton is not considered, massive spin-2 field is trapped on the brane of negative $`\lambda `$. Then the general coordinate invariance is broken for AdS4 brane from the viewpoint of the brane world scenario. But this is not always true as seen above.

For scalar fields, we can obtain similar results given for the case without dilaton by replacing the parameters $`(\mathrm{\Lambda },\lambda )`$ by $`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }},\stackrel{~}{\lambda })`$. The discussions are abbreviated here.

### 3.2 Dilaton

Here we discuss the dilaton according to its linearized equation around the background solution given here. The equation is obtained by denoting as $`\varphi =\overline{\varphi }+\delta \varphi `$, where $`\overline{\varphi }`$ represents the classical solution for $`\varphi `$. The bulk “mass” term of the dilaton is obtained from the potential, $`V(\overline{\varphi }+\delta \varphi )`$ given above. Expanding it around the classical solutions, we get

$$V=\overline{V}+\frac{1}{2}m_\varphi ^2(\delta \varphi )^2,$$
(27)
$$m_\varphi ^2=\frac{6\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}{A^2}+\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{2},$$
(28)
where $`\overline{V}=V(\overline{\varphi })`$. The explicit forms of $`m_\varphi ^2`$ for each solutions are written as

$`m_\varphi ^2=6\stackrel{~}{\lambda }e^{\frac{2\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}}{\alpha }\overline{\varphi }},\text{for }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=0,\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0,`$ (29)
$`m_\varphi ^2=3\mu ^2\mathrm{cosh}\left[2({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}}{\alpha }}\overline{\varphi }+\chi )\right],\text{for }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}<0,\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0,`$ (30)
$`m_\varphi ^2=3\mu _d^2\mathrm{cosh}\left[2({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}}{\alpha }}\overline{\varphi }+\chi _d)\right],\text{for }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}>0,\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0.`$ (31)
They are all not constant but the functions of $`y`$. In this sense, we can not see the mass of the dilaton in a normal form. On the other hand, we can see that they are all negative in all region of $`y`$. So the brane obtained here seems to be unstable for the dilaton fluctuation. However, we should notice the other mass term coming from the brane, and the total mass term is given as

$$m_\varphi ^2=\frac{6\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}{A^2}+\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{2}+\tau \gamma ^2\delta (y).$$
(32)
We can see a possibility to cure the instability by the third term. In order to make clear this point we must however solve the coupled equations with the scalar component of the metric and dilaton fluctuations.

In order to reduce the number of the scalar components of the metric, we move to the conformal coordinate by changing the fifth coordinate $`y`$ to $`z`$ in terms of the relation, $`dy/dz=A(y)`$. Then the metric is rewritten as

$`ds^2=g_{MN}dx^Mdx^N=A^2(z)(\gamma _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +dz^2),`$ (33)
where

$`\gamma _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu =(dt^2+a^2(t)\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j).`$ (34)
In this coordinate, the scalar fluctuations of the metric are reduced to the following form in an appropriate gauge ,

$$ds^2=A^2(z)\left[(1+2\sigma )dz^2+(1+2\psi )\gamma _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu \right].$$
(35)
After a calculation, we obtain the linearized equation for $`\psi `$,

$$_z^2\psi 3_z\psi \left(4_z+6\lambda \right)\psi =\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }_4\psi ,$$
(36)
where $`=_zA/A`$ and $`\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }_4`$ denotes the four dimensional laplacian as given below. In deriving this equation, the constraints

$$\sigma =2\psi ,\delta \varphi _z\overline{\varphi }=3(_z\psi +2\psi )$$
(37)
and classical equations are used. In this process, the dilaton-brane coupling $`\gamma `$ is disappeared in (36) due to a characteristic property of our classical solution for the dilaton, the case of $`n=1`$ in (8). Then, $`\psi `$ is decomposed as follows in terms of the four-dimensional continuous mass eigenstates:

$$\psi =𝑑m\phi _m(t,x^i)\mathrm{\Phi }(m,y),$$
(38)
where the 4d mass $`m`$ is defined by

$$\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }_4\phi =\ddot{\phi }_m+3\frac{\dot{a}_0}{a_0}\dot{\phi }_m+\frac{_i^2}{a_0^2}\phi _m=m^2\phi _m,$$
(39)
and $`\dot{}=d/dt`$. In order to see the localization, we do not need the solution of this equation, and we need only the explicit form of $`\mathrm{\Phi }(m,y)`$. Its equation is rewritten into the form of one-dimensional Schrödinger-like equation with the rescaled $`\mathrm{\Phi }(m,y)`$ as $`\mathrm{\Phi }(m,y)=A^{3/2}u(z)`$ and modified eigenvalue $`\stackrel{~}{m}^2`$,

$$[_z^2+V(z)]u(z)=\stackrel{~}{m}^2u(z),$$
(40)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{m}^2=m^2+6\lambda ,$$
(41)
$$V(z)=\frac{9}{4}(A^{})^2\frac{5}{2}AA^{\prime \prime }.$$
(42)
where we must notice $`{}_{}{}^{}=d/dy`$. Since $`A`$ is singular at $`y=0`$ ( at $`z=z_0`$), then $`u`$ must satisfy the following boundary condition at $`z=z_0`$,

$$u^{}(z_0)=\frac{5\kappa ^2\tau }{12}u(z_0).$$
(43)
And the eigenvalue $`\stackrel{~}{m}^2`$ of the bound state is given as the solution of this equation (43).

Without solving this equation, we can say that any state of $`u(z)`$ can not be trapped on the brane due to the positive $`\delta `$-function potential included in the second term of the above potential (42). We must notice that the potential becomes negative in some region for our background solutions, and this implies a tachyonic state could be trapped on the brane. But it is not a problem here since such a dangerous mode can not be trapped as stated above due to the property of the potential. So we can say that the brane considered here is stable for the dilaton fluctuation.

### 3.3 Gauge field

Here we consider a case where the dilaton couples to gauge fields with the following action

$`S=S_g+S_{\text{gauge}},`$ (44)
$`S_{\text{gauge}}={\displaystyle d^4x𝑑y\sqrt{g}\left(\frac{1}{4}e^{4\zeta \varphi }g^{MN}g^{PQ}F_{MP}F_{NQ}\right)},`$ (45)
where $`\zeta `$ denotes the dilaton-gauge field coupling. When the dilaton is decoupled from the gauge fields, then $`\zeta =0`$ and the gauge fields can be trapped for $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0`$ in this case. This is easily understood from the previous analysis  given for the case without dilaton. In fact, the warp factor and the equation of the gauge-boson fluctuation have the same form with the one given in  if ($`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$) were replaced by ($`\lambda `$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$).

For $`\zeta 0`$, we expand the fields in terms of the four-dimensional mass eigenstates, $`A_M=𝑑ma_M(t,x^i,m)\varphi _M(y,m)`$, and the equation of motion for the spatial transverse component $`A_i^T`$ is derived as

$`(_y^2+\{2{\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}+4\zeta \varphi ^{}\}_y+{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{A^2}})\varphi _i^T=0,`$ (46)
$`(_t^2{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}_0}{a_0}}_t+{\displaystyle \frac{_j^2}{a_0^2}})a_i^T=m^2a_i^T.`$ (47)
By introducing $`u(z)`$ and $`z`$ defined as $`\varphi _i^T=A^{1/2}u(z)`$ and $`z/y=\pm A^1`$, Eq.(46) can be written as

$$[_z^24\xi _z+V(z)]u(z)=m^2u(z),$$
(48)
where $`\xi =\zeta \alpha `$ and the potential $`V(z)`$ is given as

$$V(z)=\frac{1}{4}(A^{})^2+\frac{1}{2}AA^{\prime \prime }+2\xi A^{}.$$
(49)
It is difficult to get an analytic solution of the equation (48) for non-zero $`m`$ except for some special cases, which are given in two examples below. Before showing them, we show that the zero mode is trapped on the brane for all solutions given above. In other words, the gauge bosons can be trapped for those solutions when the dilaton couples to the gauge bosons. It is proved as follows.

For $`\zeta =0`$, the eigenvalue equation is written as

$$[_z^2+V_0(z)]u(z)=m^2u(z),$$
(50)
$$V_0(z)=\frac{1}{4}(A^{})^2+\frac{1}{2}AA^{\prime \prime },$$
(51)
For the zero-mode $`u_0(z)`$ ($`m=0`$), Eq.(50) is written as,

$$[_z^2+V_0(z)]u_0(z)=0,$$
(52)
and its normalizable solution is obtained as

$$u_0(z)=c_0X^{1/4}$$
(53)
where $`c_0`$ is a constant. And $`X=\mathrm{sinh}^2(\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}z)`$ ($`X=\mathrm{cosh}^2(\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}z)`$) for $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}<0`$ ($`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}>0`$).

It is easily seen that the above solution $`u_0(z)`$ also satisfies the zero-eigenvalue equation of $`\zeta 0`$,

$$[_z^24\xi _z+V(z)]u_0(z)=0,$$
(54)
where $`\xi =\zeta \alpha `$ and the potential $`V(z)`$ is given as

$$V(z)=V_0(z)+2\xi A^{}.$$
(55)
The proof of (54) is shown as follows. By substituting the solution (53) into (54), we find

$$[_z^24\xi _z+V(z)]u_0(z)=2\xi (2_z+A^{})u_0(z),$$
(56)
and the right hand side vanishes when the explicit forms of $`u_0(z)`$ and $`A^{}(z)`$ for each solution given above are used. Then the zero-mode solutions are not affected by the dilaton coupling.

On the other hand, the normalizability condition is modified by the dilaton coupling. When dilaton couples to the gauge bosons, the condition of normalizability of zero mode is given as

$$_{z_0}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑ze^{4\xi z}u_0(z)^2<\mathrm{},$$
(57)
From this and the explicit form of $`u_0(z)`$, we find for both solutions the following common condition,

$$4\xi <\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}.$$
(58)
As a result, we can say that the gauge bosons can be trapped for the case of $`\zeta 0`$ whenever the constraint (58) is satisfied. In the followings, we can see this relation through the explicit solutions for the soluble cases for general $`m`$.

As a first example, we consider the case of $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=0`$. This is given as a limit of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}0`$ from either solution of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}>0`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}<0`$. In this case, we can solve for $`u(z)`$ of non-zero $`m`$, but the setting of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=0`$ would not be realistic when we respect the Newton’s law to be observed in our world. Although the graviton is trapped on the brane, its KK modes would be overwhelming . So the analysis of this case is performed from the theoretical interest.

As above the same form of equation (48) and (49) are obtained. And the explicit form of the potential is given as

$$V(z)=\frac{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}}{4}(\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}8\xi )\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}\delta (zz_0).$$
(59)
Then $`u(z)`$ is solved as,

$`u(z)=c_1e^{k_+z}+c_2e^{k_{}z},k_\pm =2\xi \pm \sqrt{(2\xi \sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}/2)^2m^2}`$ (60)
where $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ are constants of integration. The normalizable solution is obtained by choosing $`k_{}`$ and the boundary condition, (67), can be written as

$$2\xi +\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}/2=\sqrt{(2\xi \sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}/2)^2m^2}.$$
(61)
Then we obtain $`m=0`$ and $`\xi <\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}/4`$, which is nothing but the one given above, (58). This indicates that the result given above for the zero-mode is satisfied also in the limit of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}0`$.

As a second soluble example, we consider another limit, $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=0`$. However, $`\lambda `$ is zero or negative in this limit as seen from the relation $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=\lambda +\frac{\kappa ^2\alpha ^2}{3}`$ (see (14)), so the brane is not a realistic also in this case when we respect the present observation of small but positive $`\lambda `$. However it is meaningful from a theoretical viewpoint to study this case.

In this case, the warp factor $`A(y)`$ takes the simple Randall-Sundrum form, and the potential is given as

$$V(z)=\frac{3}{4z^2}\frac{2\xi }{z}\mu \delta (|z|z_0).$$
(62)
Then $`u(z)`$ is solved as,

$`u(z)=e^{2z(\xi +d/2)}z^{3/2}\{c_1{}_{1}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(b_1,b_2;2zd)+c_2U(b_1,b_2;2zd)\},`$ (63)
where $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ are constants of integration and

$$d=\sqrt{4\xi ^2m^2},b_1=\frac{3}{2}\frac{\xi }{d},b_2=3$$
(64)
Here $`{}_{1}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(b_1,b_2;X)`$ denotes the Kummer’s hypergeometric function, and the confluent hypergeometric function denoted by $`U(b_1,b_2;X)`$ is another independent solution of the same differential equation. It follows from this solution that $`u(z)`$ oscillates with $`z`$ when $`m^2>4\xi ^2`$, where the continuum KK modes appear.

Here we concentrate on the bound state which is restricted to the region of $`m^2<4\xi ^2`$. From the normalization condition, which is obtained by replacing $`u_0(z)`$ in (57) by $`u(z)`$,

$$e^{4\xi z}u^2(z)𝑑z<\mathrm{},$$
(65)
the solution for the localized state is obtained by setting $`c_1=0`$ since

$$e^{2\xi z}e^{2z(\xi +d/2)}z^{3/2}{}_{1}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(b_1,b_2;2zd)e^{2|\xi |z}/\sqrt{z}$$

for $`z\mathrm{}`$. Then $`u(z)`$ is written as,

$$u(z)=c_2e^{2z(\xi +d/2)}z^{3/2}U(b_1,b_2;2zd).$$
(66)
At the next step, we consider the boundary condition at $`z=z_0`$ (or $`y=0`$), which is given as follows by taking into account of the $`\delta `$-function potential in (62),

$$\frac{du(z_0)}{dz}=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{6})u(z_0).$$
(67)
This condition can be written as

$$\frac{1}{2}+\frac{\mu \xi }{d}=\frac{U(b_1,b_2+1;2d/\mu )}{U(b_1,b_2;2d/\mu )},$$
(68)
where we used $`z_0=1/\mu `$. This equation provides the value of $`m`$ when $`\xi `$ and $`\mu `$ are given. Our interest is in the trapped gauge bosons, so we see this equation for $`m=0`$. For $`\xi >0`$, the above equation is written as

$$\frac{2}{x}=\frac{U(1,4;x)}{U(1,3;x)},$$
(69)
where $`x=4|\xi |/\mu `$. While the right hand side is obtained as 444 The relations (70) and (71) are easily obtained from the identities, $`U(a,a+1;x)=x^a`$ and $`U^{}(a,c;x)=U(a,c;x)U(a,c+1;x)`$

$$\frac{U(1,4;x)}{U(1,3;x)}=\frac{2}{x}+\frac{x}{1+x},$$
(70)
and we can see (69) is not satisfied for $`x>0`$. From this we can say that there is no solution of $`m=0`$ for $`\xi >0`$.

For $`\xi <0`$, equation (68) is written as

$$1+\frac{2}{x}=\frac{U(2,4;x)}{U(2,3;x)}.$$
(71)
This equation is the identity, so we find always the solution $`m=0`$ for $`\xi <0`$. As a result, we can say that the gauge bosons can be trapped in the region, $`\xi <0`$, for $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=0`$. This result is again consistent with the relation $`4\xi <\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}`$, (58). In order to see clearly the above result, the numerical estimation of the value of $`m`$ as the solutions of (67) is shown in the Fig.1 as a function of $`\xi `$ for fixed $`\mu `$, $`\mu =1`$.

For the case of $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }<0`$, the graviton can not be trapped as stated above, then this brane is also unrealistic. While it would be worthwhile from the theoretical viewpoint to study this case, but we like to discuss in the future.

Finally at this sub-section, we comment on another interesting point stated in the introduction for the case of nonzero $`\zeta `$. The dilaton-coupled action (44) could be related to the action described in terms of massive vector field. According to , where the case of zero effective cosmological constant $`\lambda `$ is considered, we define the massive vector field as $`\stackrel{~}{A}_MϵA_M`$ and $`ϵe^{2\zeta \varphi }`$. Then the mass-like term for the component $`\stackrel{~}{A}_\mu `$ is given by

$$\left(\frac{A^{}}{A}\frac{ϵ^{}}{ϵ}+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{ϵ^{}}{ϵ}\right)^{}+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{ϵ^{}}{ϵ}\right)^2\right)\sqrt{g}g^{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{A}_\mu \stackrel{~}{A}_\nu ,$$
(72)
where the delta function term is also included. For the brane solutions given above, the “mass” is dependent on $`y`$ in general, then it can not be identified as the standard mass. This would imply that we need special brane solution to rewrite the theory to the massive gauge theory with a special coupling to the brane. On this point, we will discuss in a separate paper.

## 4 Summary and Discussions

We have examined the solutions of brane-world including the dilaton and investigated the localization of the bulk fields. Due to a specific ansatz, the solutions are obtained in a way where only the brane and bulk cosmological constant $`(\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ are modified to $`(\stackrel{~}{\lambda },\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ without changing the equations of motion compared to the case without dilaton field. The new point is the appearance of a dynamical bulk scalar, the dilaton.

The solutions are classified by these new parameters $`(\stackrel{~}{\lambda },\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. For $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0`$, the graviton and the gauge bosons are trapped as shown previously. The new feature is seen from $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=\lambda +\kappa ^2\alpha ^2/3`$. When dilaton is decoupled ($`\alpha =0`$), the graviton is trapped only for $`\lambda 0`$, but it is trapped even if $`\lambda <0`$ when the dilaton couples and $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0`$ were satisfied. This is always possible since $`\kappa ^2\alpha ^2/3>0`$. This point is important in the sense that we can see the graviton also in AdS4 brane. The breaking of the general coordinate invariance is expected in AdS4 brane, but this is evaded by including the dilaton in such a way to satisfy $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }>0`$. We should however notice that this breaking would be seen in AdS4 brane when $`\lambda `$ is very small and we arrive at $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }<0`$.

As for the gauge bosons, the new analyses are given here by including the coupling ($`\zeta `$) of the dilaton to gauge bosons. We find that the gauge bosons are trapped for small enough coupling $`4\xi (=4\zeta \alpha )<\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }}`$ (see (58)). This condition is further assured by studying two concrete examples, where solutions for any 4d mass-state could be obtained.

When we consider the smallness of $`\lambda `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=\lambda +(\kappa \alpha )^2/3`$, the above condition is satisfied if $`\zeta `$ is the same order of the 5d gravitational coupling $`\kappa `$ or smaller than it. As a limit of this constraint, we can consider the case of $`\zeta =0`$, the decoupling limit. Our results given here are consistent with the one given in the previous analysis for $`\zeta =0`$ where the trapping of the gauge bosons is observed for small $`\lambda `$. One more point to be noticed is the relation between the dilaton coupled gauge theory and the massive vector theory. We will address on this point in near future.

Finally we comment on the localization of the dilaton which should be considered as an important dynamical field as well as graviton from the string theory viewpoint. At first glance, there seems a possible tachyonic bound state of the dilaton fluctuations since its bulk potential is negative. The trapping problem of this field however should be solved as a mixed system with scalar components of the metric fluctuations. We could then find a simple master equation for this system and that there is no trapping of any mode of dilaton fluctuations and also for the scalar components of the metric. As a result, we obtain a stable brane model with a dilaton. The massless dilaton is usually expected as in the 10d superstring theory, but our analysis implies that the dilaton is absent in our 4d universe after a compactification. From the viewpoint of superstring theory, this seems to be a difficulty at a glance, but it could give a possible resolution for the moduli problem and the equivalence principle when the dilaton is rejected to exist in our 4d world.

The bulk dilaton can be related to the problem of the AdS/CFT correspondence. When the dilaton is trivial or absent, the bulk is AdS5. And it has been observed that the propagator of the graviton on the brane seems to receive quantum corrections from CFT living on the same brane . This correction is seen through the Newton potential between two massive objects on the brane, and the same correction is obtained from the 5d propagator of the graviton in the AdS bulk. This is known as AdS/CFT correspondence which is consistent with the conformal invariance. For the case of the non-trivial dilaton, we expect a non-conformal field theory on the boundary. So it would be an interesting problem to study this problem in our model with non-trivial dilaton configurations. A report on these points would be given in a future paper.

## Acknowledgments

This work has been supported in part by the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (13135223) of the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture of Japan. M.T. was supported by Special Postdoctral Research Program in RIKEN.