format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recently the existence of the cosmological constant becomes quite probable from the observation of the deep galaxy survey . While the dark matter is necessary in various observations such as the rotational curve of the spiral galaxy or the missing of the ordinary matter in the cosmological scale.

Then we start from the theory of general relativity with the dark matter and the cosmological constant in order to study the standard scenario of the astrophysics, that is, the physics of the cosmological, the galactic or solar scale. Though the neutrino is the promising candidate of the dark matter, there is no established direct observation of the dark matter as the ordinary matter. There is another attempt to explain the rotation curves in the theory of the Brans-Dicke theory , where the Newtonian force is modified by the effect of the scalar field. In this paper, we consider the scalar field as a candidate of the dark matter  together with the cosmological constant and study their effects on time development of the scale factor of the universe in the cosmological scale and the gravitational potential in the galactic or solar scale.

The famous scalar-tensor theory is the Brans-Dicke theory, but we adopt the Einstein theory with minimally coupled scalar field instead of the Brans-Dicke theory. Our principle of the choice of the theory is the following. For the scalar-tensor gravity theory, we can transform one from the Jordan frame to the Einstein frame by the conformal transformation . We prefer to adopt the Einstein frame because the post-Newtonian test of the general relativity such as the radar echo delay is quite stringent . Also we prefer the Einstein theory with minimally coupled scalar field because the scalar field as the dark matter means that the scalar field has no direct interaction of the gravitational field with the ordinary matter.

## 2 Classical Solution with Minimally Coupled Scalar and Cosmological Constant

### 2.1 Einstein Theory vs. Brans-Dicke Theory

The Brans-Dicke theory  is the typical scalar-tensor theory of the gravity. The action of the Brans-Dicke theory with the cosmological term is given by

$`I_{\mathrm{BD}}={\displaystyle d^4x\sqrt{g}\left[\frac{1}{16\pi G}\left(\xi \varphi ^2R2\mathrm{\Lambda }\varphi ^n\right)\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi +_{\mathrm{ordinary}\mathrm{matter}}\right]}.`$
Uehara-Kim  found the general solution for $`n=2`$ and matter dominant case, and Fujii  has found the special solution for general $`n`$.

Putting $`g_{\mu \nu }(x)=\mathrm{\Omega }^2(x)g_{\mu \nu }(x)`$ with $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x)=\sqrt{\xi }\varphi (x)`$, we obtain the following action

$`I_{\mathrm{BD}}={\displaystyle d^4x\sqrt{g}\left[\frac{1}{16\pi G}\left(R_{}2\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{(n4)\zeta \varphi _{}}\right)\frac{1}{2}g_{}^{\mu \nu }_\mu \varphi _{}_\nu \varphi _{}+\xi ^2e^{4\zeta \varphi _{}}_{\mathrm{ordinary}\mathrm{matter}}\right]},`$
where $`\varphi =\mathrm{exp}(\zeta \varphi _{})`$ with $`\zeta ^1=\sqrt{1/\xi +3/4\pi G}`$ and $`_{\mathrm{ordinary}\mathrm{matter}}`$ is obtained from $`_{\mathrm{ordinary}\mathrm{matter}}`$ by replacing the metric part in the form $`g_{\mu \nu }g_{\mu \nu }\xi ^1\mathrm{exp}(\zeta \varphi _{})`$.

Our philosophy to fix the theory comes from the following two principles: i) the kinetic part of the gravity is of the standard Einstein form, because of the stringent constraint of the post-Newtonian test such as the delay of the radar echo experiment, ii) the scalar field has no direct coupling to the ordinary matter nor gives the effect on the geodesic equation of the particle. From these principles, we do not adopt the Brans-Dicke theory. In the following, we adopt the Einstein theory with standard cosmological term and the minimally coupled scalar field.

### 2.2 Einstein Theory with Minimally Coupled Scalar Field

By considering the minimally coupled scalar field as some kind of dark matter, we study the prototype of the time development of the scale factor of the universe in the cosmological scale and the gravitational potential in the galactic or solar scale.

We use Misner-Thorne-Wheeler notation  and consider Einstein action with the cosmological constant, the minimally coupled scalar field and the ordinary matter

$`I={\displaystyle d^4x\sqrt{g}\left[\frac{1}{16\pi G}\left(R2\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi +_{\mathrm{ordinary}\mathrm{matter}}\right]},`$ (2.1)
where $`G`$ is the gravitational constant, $`R`$ is the scalar curvature and $`\varphi `$ is the minimally coupled scalar field. The equations of motion in this system are given by

$`R_{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_{\mu \nu }R+\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`8\pi G(T_{\mu \nu }^\varphi +T_{\mu \nu }),`$ (2.2)
$`_\mu (\sqrt{g}g^{\mu \nu }_\nu \varphi )`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (2.3)
where $`T_{\mu \nu }^\varphi =_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi \frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu }g^{\rho \sigma }_\rho \varphi _\sigma \varphi `$ and $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ is the energy-momentum tensor of the ordinary matter.

## 3 Cosmological Exact Solution

In order to study classical solutions in cosmology, we substitute the homogeneous, isotropic and flat metric

$$ds^2=dt^2+a(t)^2\left[dr^2+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}\theta ^2d\phi ^2)\right],$$
(3.1)
and the perfect fluid expression of the ordinary matter $`T_{\mu \nu }=(\rho +p)u_\mu u_\nu +pg_{\mu \nu }`$ into equations of motion. We denote $`\rho `$ and $`p`$ as the density and the pressure of the perfect fluid respectively and we can take $`u_\mu =(1,0,0,0)`$ in the co-moving system. Then equations of motion to be solved become

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}={\displaystyle \frac{8\pi G}{3}}\left(\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{2}}\right),`$ (3.2)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\right)^2+2{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}}\mathrm{\Lambda }=8\pi G\left(p+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{2}}\right),`$ (3.3)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{\varphi }}{\dot{\varphi }}}+3{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}=0.`$ (3.4)
We consider the perfect fluid characterized by $`p=\gamma \rho `$, and we obtain the conservation law of the ordinary matter density by taking the linear combination of Eqs.(3.2), (3.3) and (3.4). From Eq.(3.4), we have another conservation law. Then we have the following two conservation laws

$`\rho =\rho _0a^{3(1+\gamma )},`$ (3.5)
$`\dot{\varphi }={\displaystyle \frac{k}{a^3}},`$ (3.6)
where $`\rho _0`$ and $`k`$ are integration constants. The equation to be solved becomes Eq.(3.2) with the conditions Eqs.(3.5) and (3.6). Substituting Eqs.(3.5) and (3.6) into Eq.(3.2), we have the equation of the form

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}={\displaystyle \frac{8\pi G}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{a^{3(1+\gamma )}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{2a^6}}\right).`$ (3.7)
As the mathematical problem, we can solve exactly in the $`\gamma =1`$ and $`\gamma =0`$ case, but $`\gamma =1`$ case is unphysical. Then we consider only the $`\gamma =0`$ case, that is, the matter dominant case. In this case, we obtain

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G}{3}}\left(\dot{\varphi }+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{k}}\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{3k^2}}`$ (3.8)
by using Eqs.(3.2), (3.5) and (3.6).

### 3.1 $`k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }>4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$ case

In this case the cosmological and/or the scalar term are dominant, and we parametrize

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{3k^2}}}\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta },`$ (3.9)
$`\dot{\varphi }={\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{k}}+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{4\pi G}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{k^2}}}\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }.`$ (3.10)
Substituting this parametrization into Eq.(3.4), we have

$`\dot{\mathrm{\Theta }}+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}{1+A^2}}}(\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }A)=0,`$ (3.11)
where $`A^1=\sqrt{k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }/4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}1}`$. Then we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+A^2}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{A\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)1+\sqrt{1+A^2}}{A\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)1\sqrt{1+A^2}}}\right|=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}{1+A^2}}}(tt_0)`$ (3.12)
by using the formula

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Theta }}{\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }A}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+A^2}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{A\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)1+\sqrt{1+A^2}}{A\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)1\sqrt{1+A^2}}}\right|.`$ (3.13)
And then we have the relation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{A\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)1+\sqrt{1+A^2}}{A\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)1\sqrt{1+A^2}}}=\mathrm{exp}\left(\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left(tt_0\right)\right),`$ (3.14)
which gives the relation

$`\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{A}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1+A^2}}{A\mathrm{tanh}\left(\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left(tt_0\right)/2\right)}}.`$ (3.15)
Using this relation, we can write $`\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }`$ and $`\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }`$ in the form

$`\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }={\displaystyle \frac{1+\mathrm{tanh}^2(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}{1\mathrm{tanh}^2(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}}={\displaystyle \frac{(1+A^2)\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\right)\sqrt{1+A^2}\mathrm{sinh}\left(TT_0\right)}{A^2\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\right)+\sqrt{1+A^2}\mathrm{sinh}\left(TT_0\right)}},`$ (3.16)
$`\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }={\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}{1\mathrm{tanh}^2(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}}={\displaystyle \frac{A\left(1\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\right)+\sqrt{1+A^2}\mathrm{sinh}\left(TT_0\right)\right)}{A^2\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\right)+\sqrt{1+A^2}\mathrm{sinh}\left(TT_0\right)}},`$ (3.17)
where $`T=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}t`$ and $`T_0=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}t_0`$. Introducing $`\mathrm{\Theta }_0`$ through the relation $`\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }_0=\sqrt{1+A^2}/A`$, $`\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }_0=1/A`$, we can simplify the above expression in the form

$`\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1+A^2}\mathrm{cosh}(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)}{\mathrm{sinh}(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)A}},`$ (3.18)
$`\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }=A\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{(A+1/A)}{\mathrm{sinh}(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)A}}\right).`$ (3.19)
Using Eqs.(3.9) and (3.18), we have

$`\mathrm{log}a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{da}{a}}=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{3k^2}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑t\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }}`$ (3.20)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}}}\sqrt{1+A^2}{\displaystyle 𝑑T\frac{\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0\right)}{\mathrm{sinh}\left(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0\right)A}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mathrm{log}\left|\mathrm{sinh}(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)A\right|+\mathrm{const}.,`$
where we use the relation $`4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}/k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }=A^2/(1+A^2)`$. Therefore we have

$`a(t)=a_0\left(\mathrm{sinh}(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)A\right)^{1/3},`$ (3.21)
where $`a_0`$ is the constant.

Similarly, from Eqs.(3.10) and (3.19), we have

$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑t\left(\frac{\rho _0}{k}+\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{4\pi G}\frac{\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{k^2}}\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }\right)}={\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{k\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑T\left(1\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }}{A}\right)}`$ (3.22)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0(1+A^2)}{kA\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dT}{\mathrm{sinh}(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)A}}`$
$`=`$ $`\varphi _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{A\mathrm{tanh}\left((TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)/2\right)+1\sqrt{1+A^2}}{A\mathrm{tanh}\left((TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)/2\right)+1+\sqrt{1+A^2}}}\right|`$
$`=`$ $`\varphi _1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)A\sqrt{1+A^2}}{\mathrm{exp}(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)A+\sqrt{1+A^2}}}\right|,`$
where $`\varphi _0`$ is the constant and $`\varphi _1`$ is given by $`\varphi _1=\varphi _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1+A\sqrt{1+A^2}}{1+A+\sqrt{1+A^2}}}\right|`$.

The integration constant $`a_0`$ is not the independent integration constant but it can be expressed by $`k`$ and $`\rho _0`$. From Eqs.(3.6), (3.21) and (3.22), we have

$`\dot{\varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0(1+A^2)}{kA\left(\mathrm{sinh}(TT_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0)A\right)}}`$ (3.23)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0(1+A^2)a_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}}{kAa^3}}={\displaystyle \frac{k}{a^3}}.`$
which gives the relation $`a_0^3=k^2A/\rho _0(1+A^2)`$. This can be written in the form

$`k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2a_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{6}}{4\pi G}}.`$ (3.24)
Then we can obtain

$`a_0=\left(4\pi G({\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _0^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}})\right)^{1/6}.`$ (3.25)
Therefore we have the exact solution in the form

$`a(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(4\pi G({\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _0^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}})\right)^{1/6}\left(\mathrm{sinh}(TT_1)A\right)^{1/3},`$ (3.26)
$`\varphi (t)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}(TT_1)A\sqrt{1+A^2}}{\mathrm{exp}(TT_1)A+\sqrt{1+A^2}}}\right|,`$ (3.27)
where

$`T=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}t,T_1=T_0\mathrm{\Theta }_0=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}t_1=\mathrm{const}.,`$
$`A^1=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{4\pi G\rho _0^2}}1},\varphi _1=\mathrm{const}..`$
### 3.2  $`4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}>k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ case

In this case the ordinary matter is dominant, and we parametrize

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{3k^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}}\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta },`$ (3.28)
$`\dot{\varphi }={\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{k}}+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{k^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{4\pi G}}}\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }.`$ (3.29)
Substituting this parametrization into Eq.(3.4), we have

$`\dot{\mathrm{\Theta }}+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}{B^21}}}(\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }B)=0,`$ (3.30)
where $`B^1=\sqrt{1k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }/4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}`$. Then we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{B^21}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1B+\sqrt{B^21}\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}{1B\sqrt{B^21}\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}}\right|=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}{B^21}}}(tt_0),`$ (3.31)
by using the formula

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Theta }}{\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }B}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{B^21}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1B+\sqrt{B^21}\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}{1B\sqrt{B^21}\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}}\right|.`$
Then we have the relation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1B+\sqrt{B^21}\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}{1B\sqrt{B^21}\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}}=\mathrm{exp}\left(\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(tt_0)\right),`$ (3.32)
where we take the branch of the logarithm in such a way as the scale factor of the universe behaves as the power law in time at the very early age of the universe. Then we have the relation

$`\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{B1}{B+1}}}\mathrm{tanh}\left(\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(tt_0)/2\right).`$ (3.33)
Using this relation, we can write $`\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }`$ and $`\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }`$ in the form

$`\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}{1\mathrm{tanh}^2(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}}={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{B^21}\mathrm{sinh}\left(TT_0\right)}{\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\right)B}},`$ (3.34)
$`\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1+\mathrm{tanh}^2(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}{1\mathrm{tanh}^2(\mathrm{\Theta }/2)}}={\displaystyle \frac{B\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\right)1}{\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\right)B}},`$ (3.35)
where $`T=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}t`$ and $`T_0=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}t_0`$.

Using Eqs.(3.28) and (3.34), we have

$`\mathrm{log}a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{da}{a}}=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{3k^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑t\mathrm{sinh}\mathrm{\Theta }}`$ (3.36)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}}1}{\displaystyle 𝑑T\frac{\sqrt{B^21}\mathrm{sinh}\left(TT_0\right)}{\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\right)B}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mathrm{log}\left|\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\right)B\right|+\mathrm{const}.,`$
where we use the relation $`4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}/k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }=B^2/(B^21)`$. Therefore we have

$`a(t)=a_0\left(\mathrm{cosh}(TT_0)B\right)^{1/3},`$ (3.37)
where $`a_0`$ is the constant and $`(TT_0)=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(tt_0)`$.

Similarly, from Eqs.(3.29) and (3.35), we have

$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑t\left(\sqrt{1\frac{k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }1\right)}={\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{k\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑T\left(\frac{\mathrm{cosh}\mathrm{\Theta }}{B}1\right)}`$ (3.38)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0(B^21)}{kB\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dT}{\mathrm{cosh}\left(TT_0\right)B}}`$
$`=`$ $`\varphi _0+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0\sqrt{B^21}}{kB\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1B+\sqrt{B^21}\mathrm{tanh}\left((TT_0)/2\right)}{1B\sqrt{B^21}\mathrm{tanh}\left((TT_0)/2\right)}}\right|`$
$`=`$ $`\varphi _1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}\left(TT_0\right)B\sqrt{B^21}}{\mathrm{exp}\left(TT_0\right)B+\sqrt{B^21}}}\right|,`$
where $`\varphi _0`$ is the constant and $`\varphi _1`$ is given by $`\varphi _1=\varphi _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1+B\sqrt{B^21}}{1+B+\sqrt{B^21}}}\right|`$.

The integration constant $`a_0`$ is not the independent integration constant but it can be expressed by $`k`$ and $`\rho _0`$. From Eqs.(3.6), (3.37) and (3.38), we have

$`\dot{\varphi }={\displaystyle \frac{(B^21)\rho _0}{kB\left(\mathrm{cosh}(TT_0)B\right)}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(B^21)\rho _0a_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}}{kBa^3}}={\displaystyle \frac{k}{a^3}},`$ (3.39)
which gives the relation $`k^2=(B^21)\rho _0a_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}/B`$. This can be written in the form

$`4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2a_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{6}}{4\pi G}}.`$ (3.40)
Then we can obtain

$`a_0=\left(4\pi G({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}})\right)^{1/6}.`$ (3.41)
Therefore we have the exact solution in the form

$`a(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(4\pi G({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}})\right)^{1/6}\left(\mathrm{cosh}(TT_0)B\right)^{1/3},`$ (3.42)
$`\varphi (t)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}\left(TT_0\right)B\sqrt{B^21}}{\mathrm{exp}\left(TT_0\right)B+\sqrt{B^21}}}\right|,`$ (3.43)
where

$`T=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}t,T_0=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}t_0=\mathrm{const}.,`$
$`B^1=\sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}},\varphi _0=\mathrm{const}..`$
### 3.3  $`4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ case

For the completeness of the solution, we give the exact solution in this case. As the method to solve the equation is similar, we give only the result. The solution is given by

$`a(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\right)^{1/3}\left(\mathrm{exp}(TT_0)1\right)^{1/3},`$ (3.44)
$`\varphi (t)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|1\mathrm{exp}\left((TT_0)\right)\right|,`$ (3.45)
where

$`T=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}t,T_0=\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}t_0=\mathrm{const}.,\varphi _0=\mathrm{const}..`$
### 3.4  Special Limiting Case

i) $`\rho _0=0`$ case (no ordinary matter)

In case there is no ordinary matter $`\rho _00`$, which corresponds to $`A\sqrt{4\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}/k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, we have the expression

$`a(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi Gk^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\right)^{1/6}\left(\mathrm{sinh}(TT_1)\right)^{1/3},`$ (3.46)
$`\varphi (t)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|\mathrm{tanh}\left((TT_1)/2\right)\right|.`$ (3.47)
ii) $`k=0`$ case (no scalar matter): Lemaître universe

In case there is no scalar matter $`k0`$, which corresponds to $`B1`$, we have the expression

$`a(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\right)^{1/3}\left(\mathrm{cosh}(TT_1)1\right)^{1/3},`$ (3.48)
$`\varphi (t)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _1.`$ (3.49)
iii) $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ case (no cosmological constant)

In case there is no cosmological term $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$, which corresponds to $`B1+k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }/8\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$, we have the expression

$`a(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{\mathrm{\Lambda }0}{lim}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\rho _0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\right)^{1/3}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(tt_0\right)^2}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{8\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}\right)^{1/3}`$ (3.50)
$`=`$ $`\left(6\pi G\rho _0\right)^{1/3}\left(\left(tt_0\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{12\pi G\rho _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}\right)^{1/3}`$
$`\varphi (t)`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{\mathrm{\Lambda }0}{lim}\left\{\varphi _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(tt_0)k\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}/\sqrt{4\pi G\rho _0^2}}{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(tt_0)+k\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}/\sqrt{4\pi G\rho _0^2}}}\right|\right\}`$ (3.51)
$`=`$ $`\varphi _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12\pi G}}}\mathrm{log}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{(tt_0)k/\sqrt{12\pi G\rho _0^2}}{(tt_0)+k/\sqrt{12\pi G\rho _0^2}}}\right|.`$
## 4 Effect on the Gravitational Potential

In this section, we calculate the effect of the cosmological constant and the scalar matter to the gravitational potential. For the special case of i) no scalar matter or ii) no cosmological term, the exact solutions are well-known.

### 4.1 Exact solution for special cases

i) No scalar matter case

In this case, we take the standard metric in the form

$$ds^2=h(r)^2dt^2+f(r)^2dr^2+\left[r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}\theta ^2d\phi ^2)\right],$$
(4.1)
and the exact solution is given by

$`h(r)^2=1r_0/r\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2/3,`$ (4.2)
$`f(r)^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{1r_0/r\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2/3}}.`$ (4.3)
ii) No cosmological term case

In this case, we take the isotropic metric in the form

$$ds^2=h_1(r)^2dt^2+f_1(r)^2\left[dr^2+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}\theta ^2d\phi ^2)\right],$$
(4.4)
and the exact solution is given by

$`\varphi (r)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _0\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{rr_0}{r+r_0}}\right),`$ (4.5)
$`h_1(r)^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{rr_0}{r+r_0}}\right)^{2C},`$ (4.6)
$`f_1(r)^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{r_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{r^2}}\right)^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{r+r_0}{rr_0}}\right)^{2C},`$ (4.7)
where

$`\varphi _0`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2(1C^2)}{8\pi G}}},C=\mathrm{const}..`$
### 4.2 Cosmological term and scalar matter co-existing case

When the cosmological term and scalar matter co-exist, we cannot solve analytically, and we calculate the effect on the gravitational potential approximately. For this purpose, we take the standard metric Eq.(4.1) and the equations of motion Eqs.(2.2) and (2.3) are given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{4rf^{^{}}}{f^2}}+2f{\displaystyle \frac{2}{f}}2\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi r^2G\varphi _{}^{^{}}{}_{}{}^{2}}{f}},`$ (4.8)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{4rh^{^{}}}{f^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{2h}{f^2}}+2h2\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2h`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi r^2Gh\varphi _{}^{^{}}{}_{}{}^{2}}{f^2}},`$ (4.9)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2h\varphi ^{^{}}}{f}}\right)^{^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (4.10)
These can be rewritten into the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{f^{^{}}}{f}}{\displaystyle \frac{h^{^{}}}{h}}+{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Lambda }rf^2,`$ (4.11)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{f^{^{}}}{f}}+{\displaystyle \frac{h^{^{}}}{h}}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi Gr\varphi _{}^{^{}}{}_{}{}^{2},`$ (4.12)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2h\varphi ^{^{}}}{f}}\right)^{^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (4.13)
From Eq.(4.13), we have $`\varphi ^{^{}}=\alpha f/r^2h`$ with constant $`\alpha `$. Then we have

$`\left(\mathrm{log}f/h\right)^{^{}}={\displaystyle \frac{f^{^{}}}{f}}{\displaystyle \frac{h^{^{}}}{h}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{r}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}+\mathrm{\Lambda }rf^2,`$ (4.14)
$`\left(\mathrm{log}fh\right)^{^{}}={\displaystyle \frac{f^{^{}}}{f}}+{\displaystyle \frac{h^{^{}}}{h}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\alpha ^2f^2}{r^3h^2}}.`$ (4.15)
We introduce the new variables $`X`$, $`Y`$ in the form $`\mathrm{exp}(X)=fh`$, $`\mathrm{exp}(Y)=f/h`$, then the above equation becomes in the form

$`Y^{^{}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}(X+Y)}{r}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}+\mathrm{\Lambda }r\mathrm{exp}(X+Y),`$ (4.16)
$`X^{^{}}={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\alpha ^2\mathrm{exp}(2Y)}{r^3}}.`$ (4.17)
For $`\alpha =0`$ case (no scalar matter case), we have the solution

$`X=0,\mathrm{exp}(Y)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{1r_0/r\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2/3}},`$ (4.18)
which is the exact solution to Eqs.(4.2) and (4.3). Then we calculate the gravitational potential by considering the region of $`r`$ where $`r_0/r,\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2,4\pi G\alpha ^2/r^21`$. In this approximation, we have

$`Y`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{r}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2}{3}},`$ (4.19)
$`X`$ $``$ $`2\pi G\alpha ^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}\right)`$ (4.20)
from Eqs.(4.17) and (4.18) where $`r_1`$ is constant.

In order to find the solution for $`\alpha 0`$, we put $`r_0(=\mathrm{const}.)r_0(r)(\mathrm{function}\mathrm{of}r)`$. Then Eq.(4.16) becomes

$`Y^{^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_0(r)}{r}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2}{3}}\right)^{^{}}={\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{r_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{^{}}}{r}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Lambda }r}{3}}`$ (4.21)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{r_0}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Lambda }r}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{X}{r}}`$
which gives $`r_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{^{}}=X`$. Using Eq.(4.20), we have

$`r_0(r)=r_22\pi G\alpha ^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}\right),`$ (4.22)
where $`r_2`$ is constant.

The gravitational potential $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is given by

$`g_{00}`$ $`=`$ $`(1+2\mathrm{\Phi })=\mathrm{exp}(XY)`$ (4.23)
$``$ $`(1{\displaystyle \frac{r_0(r)}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2}{3}}+X)`$
$``$ $`(1+{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi G\alpha ^2}{r_1^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_2}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2}{3}}),`$
which gives $`\mathrm{\Phi }=2\pi G\alpha ^2/r_1^2r_2/2r\mathrm{\Lambda }r^2/6`$. Therefore the scalar matter does not contribute to the gravitational force $`F_r=\mathrm{\Phi }/r=r_2/2r^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }r/3`$ within our approximation. The cosmological term contribute to the repulsive force within the approximation.

## 5 Summary and Discussion

We consider the scalar field as the candidate of the dark matter. Then, in order to give the standard scenario of the astrophysics, we study the Einstein theory with minimally coupled scalar field and the cosmological constant. We have studied various classical solutions with minimally coupled scalar and the cosmological term in the cosmological, the galactic or solar scale. We obtained the exact solution in the cosmology scale, where the scale factor expand in the power law in the first beginning and then expand exponentially. In the galactic or solar scale, we cannot find the exact solution, and examine the contribution from the scalar field to the gravitational potential and find that the scalar field does not contribute to the gravitational force within our approximation. In this way, in the cosmological scale, the scalar field play the role of the dark matter in some sense. While, in the galactic or solar scale, the scalar field does not pay the role of the dark matter.

For the ordinary matter, we first start from the classical Lagrangian and quantize the field and treat it as the classical smeared matter and make the perfect fluid approximation. While, in our approach, we treat the scalar field as the classical field in the same level as the classical gravitational field. If the metric is homogeneous, it may give the same effect whether we treat the scalar field as the classical field or the quantized and classically smeared matter. But if the metric is not homogeneous and is space-dependent, there is the quite big gap in the step of the quantization and the treatment of the classically smeared matter. In this sense, the scalar field may give the contribution to the gravitational force if we treat the scalar field as the quantized matter field.

Acknowledgement:
Two of us (K.S. and K.U.) are grateful to the academic research funds of Tezukayama University.


text:
# Phase Dynamics of Nearly Stationary Patterns in Activator-Inhibitor Systems

## I Introduction

Studies of stationary patterns in activator-inhibitor systems have focused primarily on localized structures such as pulses and spots in excitable and bistable media TyKe:88 ; KeOs:89 ; meron:92 ; KM:94 ; LeSw:95 ; MuOs:96 ; WSBOP:96 ; SOBP:97 , and periodic patterns near a Turing bifurcation CDBD:90 ; OuSw:91n ; AAP:97 . Localized structures have instabilities to traveling patterns, breathing motion, and transverse deformations KeOs:89 ; OMK:89 ; HaMe:94a ; GMP:96 . Periodic patterns have been analyzed near the onset of a Turing instability and also near the codimension-two point of a Turing instability and a Hopf bifurcation RoMe:92 ; HBP:93 ; PDDK:93 ; DLDB:96 ; OB:98 . But very few studies have explored instabilities of periodic (nonlocal) stationary patterns in excitable and bistable media, or of periodic stationary patterns far beyond the Turing instability DK:89 ; Osipov:96 . The latter case includes pattern formation studies on the CIMA chemical reaction PDDK:93 ; OuSw:91 ; DP:94 .

In this paper we study instabilities of stationary periodic patterns by deriving a Cross-Newell phase equation KBBC:82 ; CN:84 ; NPBEI:96 . The derivation is not restricted to the immediate neighborhood of a Turing instability and applies to periodic patterns with space-scale separation that arise far from onset or in excitable and bistable media. The Cross-Newell equation was originally derived in the context of fluid dynamics and has recently been applied in a laser system LMN:96 .

We choose to study the FitzHugh-Nagumo (FHN) equations, a canonical model for activator-inhibitor systems,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{u}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`uu^3v+^2u,`$ (1)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{v}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ(ua_1va_0)+\delta ^2v.`$
Here, $`u`$ is the activator and $`v`$ the inhibitor. The parameters $`a_0`$ and $`a_1`$ can be chosen so that the FHN model (1) represents an excitable medium, a bistable medium, or a system with a Turing instability HaMe:94a . All three cases support stationary periodic solutions for $`\delta `$ sufficiently large.

In Section II we derive a phase equation describing weak modulations of periodic stripe pattern in the FHN model. In Section III we evaluate stability thresholds for Eckhaus and zig-zag instabilities and for a transition from stationary to traveling patterns. These thresholds suggest a number of spatial or spatio-temporal behaviors which we test in Section IV with numerical solutions of Eqs. (1).

## II The Phase Equation

Let $`u_0(\theta ;k)=u_0(\theta +2\pi ;k)`$, $`v_0(\theta ;k)=v_0(\theta +2\pi ;k)`$ be a stationary periodic solution of Eqs. (1) with phase $`\theta `$ and wavenumber $`k`$. We consider weak spatial modulations of this periodic pattern and assume that those modulations have a length scale $`L`$ that is much larger than the wavelength $`1/k`$. The ratio of the length scales $`\lambda =1/(kL)`$ can then be used as a small parameter to write modulated solutions as an asymptotic expansion about the periodic solution

$`u(\theta ,𝐑,T)=u_0(\theta ;k)+\lambda u_1(\theta ,𝐑,T)+\lambda ^2u_2(\theta ,𝐑,T)+\mathrm{}`$
$`v(\theta ,𝐑,T)=v_0(\theta ;k)+\lambda v_1(\theta ,𝐑,T)+\lambda ^2v_2(\theta ,𝐑,T)+\mathrm{}`$ (2)
where $`𝐑=\lambda 𝐫`$ and $`T=\lambda ^2t`$ are slow space and time variables. The phase $`\theta `$ in Eq. (2) is an undetermined function of space and time and $`k=|𝐤|=|\theta |`$ is the local wavenumber. Our objective is to derive an equation for the slow phase

$$\mathrm{\Theta }(𝐑,T):=\lambda \theta (𝐫,𝐑,T).$$

In terms of this phase the local wavevector is

$$𝐤(𝐑,T)=_R\mathrm{\Theta }.$$

Inserting the expansions (2) in Eqs. (1) we find at order unity

$`u_0u_0^3v_0+k^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2u_0}{\theta ^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (3a)
$`ϵ(u_0a_1v_0a_0)+\delta k^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2v_0}{\theta ^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (3b)
where $`k^2=𝐤𝐤`$. At order $`\lambda `$

$`\left(k^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\theta ^2}}+13u_0^2\right)u_1v_1`$ $`=`$ $`𝒟{\displaystyle \frac{u_0}{\theta }},`$ (4a)
$`ϵu_1+\left(\delta k^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\theta ^2}}ϵa_1\right)v_1`$ $`=`$ $`𝒟{\displaystyle \frac{v_0}{\theta }},`$ (4b)
where

$`𝒟={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Theta }}{T}}_R𝐤2𝐤_R.`$ (5)
Projecting the right hand side of (4) onto $`(_\theta u_0,ϵ^1_\theta v_0)`$, the solution of the adjoint problem, produces the phase equation

$$\tau \frac{\mathrm{\Theta }}{T}=_R(𝐤B),$$

where

$`\tau `$ $`=`$ $`<(_\theta u_0)^2>ϵ^1<(_\theta v_0)^2>,`$ (6)
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`<(_\theta u_0)^2>+\delta ϵ^1<(_\theta v_0)^2>.`$ (7)
In these equations $`<(.)>:=\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }(.)d\theta `$.

The quantities $`B`$ and $`\tau `$ contain information about various instabilities of the periodic stripe pattern. The condition $`\frac{d}{dk}[kB(k)]=0`$ implies the onset of an Eckhaus instability and the condition $`B=0`$ the onset of a zigzag instability CN:84 . In Appendix A we show that the condition $`\tau =0`$ indicates a transition to traveling waves.

To implement these conditions we need to solve Eqs. (3) for the periodic solution $`(u_0,v_0)`$. For parameter values that satisfy $`ϵ/\delta :=\mu 1`$ an approximate solution can be computed as shown in Appendix B. Using this solution to calculate $`\tau `$ and $`B`$, as shown in Appendix C, gives the following expressions:

$`\tau `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3\pi k}}{\displaystyle \frac{v_{}}{q\pi k\eta }}\beta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_{})\gamma (\mathrm{\Lambda }_{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_+),`$
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3\pi k}}{\displaystyle \frac{v_{}}{q\pi k\sqrt{\mu }}}\beta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_{})\gamma (\mathrm{\Lambda }_{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_+),`$ (8)
$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_+=\frac{2\pi \sqrt{\mu }}{k},$$
(9)
$$v_+\beta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_+)+v_{}\beta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_{})=0,$$
(10)
where $`\mu =ϵ/\delta `$, $`\eta =\sqrt{ϵ\delta }`$, $`v_\pm =(\pm 1a_0)/q^2`$, $`q^2=a_1+1/2`$,

$$\beta (x)=\mathrm{coth}qx\mathrm{csch}qx,$$
(11)
and

$`\gamma (\mathrm{\Lambda }_{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_+)`$ $`=`$ $`1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1+a_0)q\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}\mathrm{csch}q\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}`$ (12)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1a_0)q\mathrm{\Lambda }_+\mathrm{csch}q\mathrm{\Lambda }_+.`$
The quantities $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}`$ denote the widths of domains with high and low values of $`u`$ and $`v`$, respectively. The width is measured with respect to the spatial coordinate $`z=\frac{\sqrt{\mu }}{k}\theta `$ (see Appendix B). Given $`k`$, Eqs. (9) and (10) can be solved for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_+(k)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}(k)`$. Using these solutions in Eq. (8) graphs of $`\tau `$ and $`kB`$ as functions of $`k`$ can be produced.

## III Stability Thresholds

Explicit forms for $`\tau (k)`$ and $`B(k)`$ are available in the symmetric case, $`a_0=0`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_+=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}=\frac{\pi \sqrt{\mu }}{k}`$:

$`\tau (k)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi k\eta _cq^3}}\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{\eta _c}{\eta }}f(\pi q\sqrt{\mu }/k)\right],`$
$`B(k)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi k\eta _cq^3}}\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{\eta _c}{\sqrt{\mu }}}f(\pi q\sqrt{\mu }/k)\right],`$ (13)
where $`\eta _c=\frac{3}{2\sqrt{2}q^3}`$ and

$$f(x)=(1x\mathrm{csch}x)(\mathrm{coth}x\mathrm{csch}x).$$
(14)
Figure 1 shows graphs of $`\tau (k)`$ and $`kB(k)`$ for a bistable medium obtained with Eqs. (III) (thick lines) and with Eqs. (6) and (7) using numerically calculated solutions $`u_0,v_0`$ (circles). A very good agreement is obtained within the validity range of the analysis, $`k𝒪(\sqrt{\mu })1`$. For $`k𝒪(1)`$ the deviations become large. In particular the minimum of $`kB(k)`$ which designates the Eckhaus instability threshold, is not reproduced by the analytical form (13).

The instability to traveling waves occurs at $`\tau =0`$ or at

$$ϵ=\eta _c^2f^2(\pi q\sqrt{\mu }/k)\delta ^1.$$
(15)
The zigzag instability occurs at $`B=0`$ or at

$$ϵ=\eta _c^2f^2(\pi q\sqrt{\mu }/k)\delta .$$
(16)
The condition $`\frac{d}{dk}(kB)=0`$ for the Eckhaus instability becomes

$$\frac{df}{dx}|_{x=\pi q\sqrt{\mu }/k}=0.$$

Consider first the limit $`k0`$ in which the periodic pattern approaches an array of isolated front structures. In this limit $`f(\pi q\sqrt{\mu }/k)1`$ and the condition for the onset of traveling waves becomes $`ϵ=\eta _c^2\delta ^1`$. This is precisely the nonequilibrium Ising-Bloch (NIB) bifurcation point, where a stationary front loses stability to a pair of counter-propagating fronts. The condition for the zigzag instability becomes $`ϵ=\eta _c^2\delta `$. This is the threshold for the transverse front instability HaMe:94c .

The neutral stability curves for a bistable medium corresponding to Eqs. (15) and (16) are shown in Figs. 2a and 2b for fixed $`\delta `$ and $`ϵ`$, respectively. They imply that high wavenumber stationary planar patterns are stabilized against zigzag and traveling wave instabilities. Notice that for $`\delta =1`$ the neutral stability curves $`\tau =0`$ and $`B=0`$ coincide (see Eqs. (15) and (16) or Fig. 2b). For $`\delta >1`$, upon decreasing the wavenumber at constant $`ϵ`$, a high wavenumber pattern is destabilized to a zigzag pattern, whereas for $`\delta <1`$ the destabilization is to traveling waves. Similar neutral stability curves are found for the nonsymmetric case, $`a_00`$, for excitable media and for systems (far) beyond the Turing instability.

## IV Comparisons with Numerical Solutions

We have computed numerical solutions of Eqs. (1) to test the stabilization of zigzag and traveling-wave instabilities at high wavenumbers. Figure 3 shows a low wavenumber zigzag pattern and a high wavenumber planar pattern computed for the same parameter values. This behavior is well known in other contexts CrHo:93 . The zigzag instability is a mechanism by which the system locally increases the wavenumber. Figure 4 shows coexistence of a low wavenumber traveling wave and a high wavenumber stationary pattern. These numerical results are for a bistable system but similar results are found for excitable and Turing unstable systems. Coexistence of stationary and traveling waves has been found in experiments on the CIMA reaction PDDK:93 ; DP:94 . and analyzed using different theoretical approaches DK:89 ; IO:92 ; KO:95 ; Osipov:96 .

We have also tested the condition for the Eckhaus instability in a bistable system using numerical computations of $`\tau `$ and $`B`$. Choosing wavenumbers $`k>k_c`$ where $`k_c`$ corresponds to the minimum of $`kB`$, we found initial periodic patterns either collapse to uniform states or to a lower wavenumber pattern through phase slips. Fig. 5 demonstrates these two cases. Similar conclusions hold for excitable systems. An unstable Turing pattern, on the other hand, always converges to a lower wavenumber pattern since the single uniform state is unstable.

## V Conclusion

We have shown that the Cross-Newell phase equation provides a powerful tool for studying instabilities of stationary periodic patterns in activator-inhibitor systems. The equation contains information not only on the Eckhaus and zigzag instabilities, but also on the destabilization of stationary periodic patterns to traveling waves. The same equation applies to bistable, excitable, and Turing unstable systems. Equations of that kind should prove useful in identifying parameters and initial conditions where zigzag and Eckhaus instabilities couple to traveling wave modes. Such coupling may lead to complex spatiotemporal behavior analogous to the coupling of the NIB front bifurcation to a transverse front instability HaMe:94c ; HaMe:94b

###### Acknowledgements.

This study was supported in part by grant No 95-00112 from the US-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF) and by the Department of Energy, under contract W-7405-ENG-36.

## Appendix A The Meaning of $`\tau =0`$

We show here that the condition $`\tau =0`$ defines the critical value of $`ϵ`$ at which traveling solutions bifurcate from the stationary solution. We look for traveling solutions $`u(\theta ),v(\theta )`$ of Eqs. (1), where $`\theta =kx\omega t`$, that bifurcate from the stationary solution branch $`\omega =0`$ at some $`ϵ=ϵ_c`$. Near the bifurcation where $`\omega 1`$ we can expand the traveling solutions as power series in $`\omega `$ around the stationary solution $`u_0,v_0`$:

$`u(\theta )=u_0(\theta )+\omega u_1(\theta )+\mathrm{},`$
$`v(\theta )=v_0(\theta )+\omega v_1(\theta )+\mathrm{},`$ (17)
Expanding $`ϵ`$ as

$$ϵ=ϵ_c+ϵ_1\omega +\mathrm{},$$
(18)
and using these expansions in Eqs. (1) we find at order $`\omega `$

$`\left(k^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\theta ^2}}+13u_0^2\right)u_1v_1`$ $`=`$ $`u_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{},`$
$`ϵ_cu_1+\left(\delta k^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\theta ^2}}ϵa_1\right)v_1`$ $`=`$ $`v_0^{}ϵ_1(u_0a_1v_0a_0).`$
Projecting the right hand side onto $`(u_0^{},ϵ_c^1v_0^{})`$ gives

$$ϵ_c=\frac{<v_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}>}{<u_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}>},$$
(19)
where we used Eq. (3b) and switched to the notation of a prime for the derivative with respect to the single argument $`\theta `$. Using the definition (6) of $`\tau `$ and (19) we find

$$\tau =\left(1\frac{ϵ_c}{ϵ}\right)<u_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}>.$$
(20)
Thus, $`\tau =0`$ implies $`ϵ=ϵ_c`$ or the onset of traveling solutions.

## Appendix B Approximate Stationary Solution

For $`\mu =ϵ/\delta 1`$ a singular perturbation approach can be used to approximate the stationary solution $`u_0(\theta ),v_0(\theta )`$. Rescaling the space coordinate as $`z=\frac{\sqrt{\mu }}{k}\theta `$, Eqs. (3) become

$`u_0u_0^3v_0+\mu u_0^{\prime \prime }`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`u_0a_1v_0a_0+v_0^{\prime \prime }`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
where the prime denotes now the derivative with respect to $`z`$. Since the small parameter $`\mu `$ multiplies the second derivative term $`u_0^{\prime \prime }`$, two types of spatial regions can be distinguished. Outer regions where $`u_0(z)`$ varies on a scale of order unity and the term $`\mu u_0^{\prime \prime }`$ is negligible, and inner regions where $`u_0(z)`$ varies on a very short scale of order $`\sqrt{\mu }`$ and the term $`\mu u_0^{\prime \prime }`$ cannot be neglected. In these regions, however, $`v_0`$ hardly changes.

The analysis of the inner regions leads to the solutions

$$u_0=\pm \mathrm{tanh}\frac{\theta }{\sqrt{2}k},v_0=0.$$
(21)
These solution represent front structures separating two types of outer regions: domains of high activator values, $`u=u_+(v_0)`$ (”up state”), and domains of low activator values $`u=u_{}(v_0)`$ (”down state”), where $`u_\pm (v_0)`$ are the extreme roots of $`u_0u_0^3v_0=0`$. We look for periodic stationary solutions with wavelength $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_+`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}`$ are the widths of up and down states respectively. Consider now a down state spanning the spatial range $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}<z<0`$ followed by an up state spanning the range $`0<z<\mathrm{\Lambda }_+`$. The equations for $`v`$ at these outer regions are

$$v_0^{\prime \prime }q^2(v_0v_{})=0,\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}<z<0,$$
(22)
with the boundary conditions $`v_0(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{})=v_0(0)=0`$, and

$$v_0^{\prime \prime }q^2(v_0v_+)=0,0<z<\mathrm{\Lambda }_+,$$
(23)
with the boundary conditions $`v_0(0)=v_0(\mathrm{\Lambda }_+)=0`$. In obtaining these equations we approximated $`u_\pm (v_0)=\pm 1v_0/2`$. This approximation is particularly good for bistable media with $`a_0`$ small and $`a_1`$ relatively large. These values restrict $`v_0`$ to a small range around $`v_0=0`$. For excitable media and systems undergoing Turing instability, a large value of $`\delta `$ might be needed to keep $`v_0`$ small.

The solutions to Eqs. (22) and (23) are

$$v_0=\frac{v_{}}{\mathrm{sinh}q\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}}\left[\mathrm{sinh}qz\mathrm{sinh}q(z+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{})\right]+v_{},$$
(24)
for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}<z<0`$, and

$$v_0=\frac{v_+}{\mathrm{sinh}q\mathrm{\Lambda }_+}\left[\mathrm{sinh}q(z\mathrm{\Lambda }_+)\mathrm{sinh}qz\right]+v_+,$$
(25)
for $`0<z<\mathrm{\Lambda }_+`$. To determine $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pm `$ for a given $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ we match the derivatives of $`v_0`$ at the front positions

$$v_0^{}(0^+)=v_0^{}(0^{}),v_0^{}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_+)=v_0^{}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}).$$

This leads to the relation

$$v_+\beta (q\mathrm{\Lambda }_+)+v_{}\beta (q\mathrm{\Lambda }_{})=0,$$

where $`\beta (x)`$ is given by Eq. (11).

## Appendix C Calculation of $`\tau `$ and $`B`$

The quantities $`\tau `$ and $`B`$ are given by Eqs. (6) and (7). Consider first the integral

$$<u_0^{}(\theta )^2>=\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }u_0^{}(\theta )^2𝑑\theta .$$

It has a contribution from two inner regions at $`z=0`$ and $`z=\mathrm{\Lambda }_+`$ where $`u_0`$ is given by Eq. (21), and a contribution from two outer regions, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}<z<0`$ and $`0<z<\mathrm{\Lambda }_+`$ where $`u_0=1v_0/2`$ and $`u_0=1v_0/2`$ with $`v_0`$ given by Eq. (24) and Eq. (25), respectively. (Recall that $`z=\frac{\sqrt{\mu }}{k}\theta `$).

The contribution from the two inner regions is

$`<u_0^{}(\theta )^2>_{inner}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi k^2}}{\displaystyle _{inner}}\mathrm{sech}^4\left({\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{\sqrt{2}k}}\right)𝑑\theta ,`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\pi k}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{sech}^4x𝑑x={\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3\pi k}}.`$
We have used here the fact that $`k𝒪(\sqrt{\mu })1`$. The integral over a narrow inner region is transformed into an integral over a wide region after stretching the $`\theta `$ variable to the $`x=\frac{\theta }{\sqrt{2}k}`$ variable. The contribution from the two outer regions is

$`<u_0^{}(\theta )^2>_{outer}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\mu }}{8\pi k}}`$
$`\times `$ $`\left[{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}^0}v_0(z)_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}𝑑z+{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_+}}v_0(z)_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}𝑑z\right],`$
where we used in the two outer regions $`u_0(z)^{}=\frac{1}{2}v_0(z)^{}`$. Altogether,

$`<u_0^{}(\theta )^2>`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3\pi k}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\mu }}{8\pi k}}`$
$`\times `$ $`\left[{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}^0}v_0(z)_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}𝑑z+{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_+}}v_0(z)_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}𝑑z\right].`$
The second term on the right hand side of Eq. (C) is small (since $`\sqrt{\mu }1`$) and will not contribute to the leading order forms of $`\tau `$ and $`B`$.

Consider now the integral

$$<v_0^{}(\theta )^2>=\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }v_0^{}(\theta )^2𝑑\theta .$$

The contribution from the inner regions to this integral is negligible for $`\mu 1`$. Thus

$`<v_0^{}(\theta )^2>`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\mu }}{2\pi k}}`$ (27)
$`\times `$ $`\left[{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}^0}v_0(z)_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}𝑑z+{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_+}}v_0(z)_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}𝑑z\right].`$
Using the solutions (24) and (25) in the integrals (C) and (27) and using the expressions for $`\tau `$ and $`B`$ we obtain the expressions (8).


text:
# SPbU-IP-00-06 Nucleus-nucleus scattering in perturbative QCD with 𝑁_𝑐→∞

## 1 Introduction

In the framework of the colour dipole model of A.H.Mueller  it follows that in the high-colour limit $`N_c\mathrm{}`$ the scattering on a heavy nucleus is exactly described by the sum of fan diagrams constructed of BFKL pomerons, each of them splitting into two . The equation for the sum of BFKL fan diagrams was first written by I.Balitsky  in his original operator expansion formalism. Then it was rederived by Yu.Kovchegov  in the colour dipole framework and by the author by directly summing the BFKL fan diagrams . The perturbative solution of this equation in the region of small non-linearity (outside the saturation region) was studied in . Asymptotic estimates of the solution were presented in . Finally in  the exact solution of the equation was obtained by direct numerical methods. The main physical results following from these studies are that, first, at high rapidities $`Y`$ the hA total cross-section saturates to its geometrical limit $`2\pi R_A^2`$ and, second, the gluon density in the nucleus aquires a form of a soliton in $`Y\mathrm{ln}k`$ space moving towards higher momenta with nearly a constant velocity as $`Y`$ increases. This last property supports the applicability of the perturbative treatment, since the well-know diffusion of the BFFKL pomeron towards small momenta results to be stopped.

In the present paper we attempt to generalize these results to nucleus-nucleus (AB) scattering. In this case, in the $`N_c\mathrm{}`$ limit the total amplitude is given by the sum of all tree diagrams constructed of BFKL pomerons and the triple pomeron vertex. In contrast to the hA case, the vertex now describes not only splitting of a pomeron into two but also fusion of two pomerons into one. The diagrams for the amplitude accordingly result much more complicated than the fan diagrams relevant for the hA case. However, using the effective field theory methods developed for summing such diagrams long ago , one can construct an equation which describes the AB amplitude. Naturally this equation (in fact a pair of equations) results much more complicated than for the case of hA scattering. Its exact (numerical) solution does not seem realistic. However simple asymptotic estimates, analogous to the ones made in \[7,8 \], show that the total AB cross-section tends to its geometrical limit at high rapidities similar to the hA case.

Unfortunately the gluon density in the overlapping area cannot be found from these estimates, but rather requires knowledge of the solution in more detail. We leave this problem for future studies.

## 2 Effective field theory for AB scattering

At fixed overall impact parameter $`b`$ the AB amplitude $`𝒜(Y,b)`$ can be presented as an exponential of its connected part:

$$𝒜(Y,b)=2is\left(1e^{T(Y,b)}\right)$$
(1)
The dimensionless $`T`$ is an integral over two impact parameters $`b_A`$ and $`b_B`$ of the collision point relative to the centers of the nuclei A and B:

$$T(Y,b)=d^2b_Ad^2b_B\delta ^2(bb_A+b_B)T(Y,b_A,b_B)$$
(2)
As mentioned in the Introduction, in the perturbative QCD with $`N_c\mathrm{}`$ the amplitude $`T(Y,b_A,b_B)`$ is given by a sum of all connected tree diagrams constructed of BFKL pomerons and the triple pomeron vertex. More concretely, in these diagrams a line (”propagator”) connecting two points $`y_1,r_1`$ and $`y_2,r_2`$ corresponds to one half of the forward BFKL Green function :

$$G(y_1y_2,r_1,r_2)=\frac{r_1r_2}{32\pi ^2}\theta (y_1y_2)\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}e^{in(\varphi _1\varphi _2)}\frac{d\nu e^{(y_1y_2)\omega (\nu )}(r_1/r_2)^{2i\nu }}{\left(\nu ^2+\frac{(n1)^2}{4}\right)\left(\nu ^2+\frac{(n+1)^2}{4}\right)},$$
(3)
where $`\varphi _{1,2}`$ and are the azimuthal angles and

$$\omega (\nu )=\frac{\alpha _sN_c}{\pi }(\psi (1)\mathrm{Re}\psi (1/2+i\nu ))$$
(4)
are the BFKL levels. Due to the azimuthal symmetry of the projectile and target colour densities one may retain only the term with zero orbital momenta $`n=0`$ in (3).

The interaction between the pomerons is realized via the triple pomeron vertex. It is non-local and not symmetric in the incoming and outgoing pomerons. Its form for the splitting of a pomeron into two was established in . At $`N_c\mathrm{}`$ for the transition $`12+3`$ the three BFKL Green functions are connected by it as follows (see Fig. 1a)

$$\frac{4\alpha _s^2N_c}{\pi }\frac{d^2r_1d^2r_2d^2r_3}{r_1^2r_2^2r_3^2}\delta ^2(r_1+r_2+r_3)G(y_1^{}y,r_1^{},r_1)_1^4r_1^4G(yy_2^{},r_2,r_2^{})G(yy_3^{},r_3,r_3^{})$$
(5)
Here it is assumed that the operator $`_1`$ acts on the left. The form of the vertex for the fusion of two pomerons into one is actually not known. However, the symmetry between target and projectile prompts us to assume that for the inverse process $`2+31`$ the BFKL functions are to be joined as (Fig. 1b)

$$\frac{4\alpha _s^2N_c}{\pi }\frac{d^2r_1d^2r_2d^2r_3}{r_1^2r_2^2r_3^2}\delta ^2(r_1+r_2+r_3)G(y_2^{}y,r_2^{},r_2)G(y_3^{}y,r_3^{},r_3)_1^4r_1^4G(yy_1,r_1,r_1^{})$$
(6)
Finally we have to describe the interaction of the pomerons with the two nuclei. The BFKL Green functions corresponding to the external legs of the diagrams are to be integrated with the colour density of each nucleus. We take the target nucleus at rest, that is, at rapidity zero. Then each outgoing external BFKL Green function is to be transformed into

$$g^2AT_A(b_A)d^2r^{}G(y,r,r^{})\rho _N(r^{})𝑑y^{}d^2r^{}G(yy^{},r,r^{})\tau _A(y^{},r^{})$$
(7)
where $`\rho _N`$ is the colour density of the nucleon, $`T_A`$ is the profile function of the nucleus A and we define

$$\tau _A(y,r)=g^2AT_A(b_A)\rho _N(r)\delta (y)$$
(8)
(with dependence on $`b_A`$ implicit). Similarly each ingoing BFKL external Green function is transformed into

$$𝑑y^{}d^2r^{}G(y^{}y,r^{},r)\tau _B(y^{},r^{})$$
(9)
where

$$\tau _B(y,r)=g^2BT_B(b_B)\rho _N(r)\delta (yY)$$
(10)
To find the amplitude one has to sum over all connected diagrams with $`M`$ ingoing and $`N`$ outgoing lines, corresponding to $`M`$ interactions with the projectile and $`N`$ interactions with the target, divided by $`M!N!`$.

It is trivial to see that this sum exactly corresponds to the sum of tree diagrams generated by an effective quantum theory of two pomeronic fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }(y,r)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(y,r)`$ with action

$$S=S_0+S_I+S_E$$
(11)
consisting of three terms, which correspond to free pomerons, their mutual interaction and their interaction with external sourses (nuclei) respectively.

To give the correct propagators $`S_0`$ has to be chosen as

$$S_0=2𝑑y_1d^2r_1𝑑y_2d^2r_2\mathrm{\Phi }(y_1,r_1)G^1(y_1y_2,r_1,r_2)\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(y_2,r_2)2\mathrm{\Phi }|G^1|\mathrm{\Phi }^{}$$
(12)
where $`|`$ means the integration over $`y,r`$. Note that the sign of $`S_0`$ corresponds to the substitution of the conventionally defined field variables $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}`$:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }i\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Phi }^{}i\mathrm{\Phi }^{}$$
(13)
which allows to make all terms of the action real.

According to (5), (6) the interaction term $`S_I`$ is local in rapidity

$$S_I=\frac{4\alpha _s^2N_c}{\pi }dy\frac{d^2r_1d^2r_2d^2r_3}{r_1^2r_2^2r_3^2}\delta ^2(r_1+r_2+r_3)[_1^4r_1^4\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(y,r_1)\mathrm{\Phi }(y,r_2)\mathrm{\Phi }(y,r_3)+c.c.]$$
(14)
The overall sign combines the initial factor $`i`$ and $`i^3`$ from the substitution (13).

Finally the interaction with the nuclei is local both in rapidity and coordinates:

$$S_E=𝑑yd^2r\left[\mathrm{\Phi }(y,r)\tau _A(y,r)+\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(y,r)\tau _B(y,r)\right]$$
(15)
The minus sign comes from the initial $`i`$ and the substitution (13).

The amplitude $`T(Y,b_A,b_B)`$ is then expressed through a functional integral

$$Z=D\mathrm{\Phi }D\mathrm{\Phi }^{}e^{S/\mu ^2}$$
(16)
where $`\mu `$ is an arbitrary mass scale necessary to adjust the dimensions of various parts of the action. Keeping only the connected diagrams one finds

$$T(Y,b_A,b_b)=\mu ^2\mathrm{ln}\frac{Z}{Z_0}$$
(17)
where $`Z_0`$ is the value of $`Z`$ for $`S_E=0`$. Functional integral $`Z`$ is to be calculated in the classical approximation to retain only the tree diagrams. This gives

$$T(Y,b_A,b_B)=S_E\{\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\}=d^2r\left[\mathrm{\Phi }(0,r)\widehat{\tau }_A(r)+\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(Y,r)\widehat{\tau }_B(r)\right]$$
(18)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}`$ are the solutions of the classical equation of motion and $`\widehat{\tau }`$’s are (8) and (10) with the $`\delta `$ functions of rapidity dropped. We see that the result is independent of the scale $`\mu `$, as it should be.

## 3 Equations of motion

Before writing out the classical equation of motion, we transform the functional integral (16) to new variables in which the non-locality of the Lagrangian becomes substantially reduced. We put

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(y,r)=r^2\varphi (y,r),\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(y,r)=r^2\varphi ^{}(r,y)$$
(19)
In these variables the interaction term becomes

$$S_I=\frac{4\alpha _s^2N_c}{\pi }dyd^2r_1d^2r_2d^2r_3\delta ^2(r_1+r_2+r_3)[K_1\varphi ^{}(y,r_1)\varphi (y,r_2)\varphi (y,r_3)+c.c.]$$
(20)
where (dimensionles) operator $`K`$ has the form

$$K=r^2_r^4r^2$$
(21)
Now we transform (20) to the momentum space to obtain

$$S_I=\frac{4\alpha _s^2N_c}{\pi }dy\frac{d^2q}{(2\pi )^2}[K\varphi ^{}(y,q)\varphi (y,q)\varphi (y,q)+c.c.]$$
(22)
with operator $`K`$ local in the momentum space

$$K=_q^2q^4_q^2$$
(23)
As we observe, the interaction has become local in the momentum space.

Now we turn to the free part $`S_0`$. In new variables it takes the form

$$S_0=2\varphi |r^2G^1r^2|\varphi ^{}$$
(24)
It was shown in  that

$$r_1^2_1^4G(y,r_1,r_2)=g(y,r_1,r_2)r_2^2$$
(25)
where $`g`$ is the Green function of the BFKL equation for the so-called semi-amputated wave function:

$$\left(\frac{}{y}+H_1\right)g(y,r_1,r_2)=\delta (y)\delta ^2(r_1r_2)$$
(26)
Here $`H_1`$ is the BFKL Hamiltonian  acting on $`r_1`$. We rewrite (26) in the operatorial form

$$Kr^2Gr^2=\left(\frac{}{y}+H\right)^1$$
(27)
wherefrom

$$r^2G^1r^2K^1=\frac{}{y}+H$$
(28)
and finally

$$r^2G^1r^2=\left(\frac{}{y}+H\right)K$$
(29)
Since both $`G(y,r_1,r_2)`$ and $`g(y,r_1,r_2)`$ are symmetric in $`r_1,r_2`$ we also find in the same manner

$$r^2G^1r^2=K\left(\frac{}{y}+H\right)$$
(30)
so that $`K`$ commutes with $`H`$. Using (29) and (30) in (24) we see that the free part has become local in rapidity and can be expressed via the BFKL Hamiltonian $`H`$:

$$S_0=2\varphi |K\left(\frac{}{y}+H\right)|\varphi ^{}$$
(31)
This part remains non-local both in the coordinate and momentum spaces due to the non-locality of $`H`$.

The interaction with the nucleus part in the new variables takes the form

$$S_E=w_A|\varphi \varphi ^{}|w_B$$
(32)
where, in the coordinate space,

$$w_{A,B}(y,r)=r^2\tau _{A,B}(y,r)$$
(33)
Now, with the action nearly completely local (except for the Hamiltonian term) we can write out the equation of motion. We find

$$\frac{\delta S}{\delta \varphi (y,q)}=2K(\frac{}{y}+H)\varphi ^{}(y,q)+\frac{4\alpha _s^2N_c}{\pi }(K\varphi _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}(y,q)+2\varphi (y,q)K\varphi ^{}(y.q))w_A(y,q)=0$$
(34)
and

$$\frac{\delta S}{\delta \varphi ^{}(y,q)}=2K(\frac{}{y}+H)\varphi (y,q)+\frac{4\alpha _s^2N_c}{\pi }(K\varphi ^2(y,q)+2\varphi ^{}(y,q)K\varphi (y.q))w_B(y,q)=0$$
(35)
Applying operator $`(1/2)K^1`$ from the left we find our final equations of motion

$$(\frac{}{y}+H)\varphi ^{}(y,q)+\frac{2\alpha _s^2N_c}{\pi }(\varphi _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}(y,q)+2K^1[\varphi (y,q)K\varphi ^{}(y.q)])\frac{1}{2}K^1w_A(y,q)=0$$
(36)
and

$$(\frac{}{y}+H)\varphi (y,q)+\frac{2\alpha _s^2N_c}{\pi }(\varphi ^2(y,q)+2K^1[\varphi ^{}(y,q)K\varphi (y.q)])\frac{1}{2}K^1w_B(y,q)=0$$
(37)
As we see the resulting equations are rather complicated, since they involve nonlocal terms, bilinear in $`\varphi `$ and $`\varphi ^{}`$, which interconnect the two equations. Summing fan diagrams in the hA case in fact leads to the the same equations, in which however $`w_B=0`$. Then one immediately finds that $`\varphi =0`$ identically, which converts the first equation into

$$\left(\frac{}{y}+H\right)\varphi ^{}(y,q)+\frac{2\alpha _s^2N_c}{\pi }\varphi _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}(y,q)\frac{1}{2}K^1w_A(y,q)=0$$
(38)
This local equation is just the one studied in \[4-6\].

To conclude this section we present the non-local terms in Eqs. (36) and (37) in a more explicit way. To this end we calculate the kernel of the operator $`K^1`$ in the momentum space. We have in the coordinate space

$$K^1=r^2_r^4r^2$$
(39)
Using the identity

$$_1^4G(0,r_1,r_2)=\delta ^2(r_1r_2)$$
(40)
we can write the kernel of $`K^1`$ in the coordinate space as

$$K^1(r_1,r_2)=r_1^2G(0,r_1,r_2)r_2^2$$
(41)
Fourier transforming (41) and using (3) we find the kernel in the momentum space:

$$K^1(q_1,q_2)=\frac{d^2r_1d^2r_2}{r_1^2r_2^2}e^{iq_2r_2iq_1r_1}G(0,r_1,r_2)=\frac{1}{8}\frac{d\nu }{(\nu ^2+1/4)^2}I(\nu ,q_1)I^{}(\nu ,q_2)$$
(42)
where

$$I(\nu ,q)=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑rr^{2i\nu }J_0(qr)=2^{2i\nu }q^{1+2i\nu }\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2i\nu )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2+i\nu )}$$
(43)
Doing the integral over $`\nu `$ we finally find

$$K^1(q_1,q_2)=\frac{\pi }{2}\frac{1}{q_>^2}\left(\mathrm{ln}\frac{q_>}{q_<}+1\right)$$
(44)
where $`q_{>(<)}=\mathrm{max}(\mathrm{min})\{q_1,q_2\}`$.

Using (44) we can rewrite the nonlocal term in Eq. (36) as

$$4\alpha _s^2N_c\frac{d^2q_1}{(2\pi )^2q_>^2}\left(\mathrm{ln}\frac{q_>}{q_<}+1\right)\varphi (y,q_1)_1^2q_1^4_1^2\varphi ^{}(y,q_1)$$
(45)
where $`q_{>(<)}=\mathrm{max}(\mathrm{min})\{q,q_1\}`$. The nonlocal term in Eq. (37) is obtained by complex conjugation.

## 4 The total cross-section

The obtained equations which determine the classical fields $`\varphi `$ and $`\varphi ^{}`$ are very difficult to solve even numerically. The trouble lies not so in the their explicit non-locality, but in the appearence of two different sources at two different rapidities. Due to conditions $`\varphi =0`$ for $`y>Y`$ and $`\varphi ^{}=0`$ for $`y<0`$ and the $`\delta `$-like dependence of the sources on rapidities, one can drop the sources in Eq. (36) and (37) substituting them by conditions

$$\varphi ^{}(y,q)_{y=0}=K^1\widehat{w}_A(q),\varphi (y,q)_{y=Y}=K^1\widehat{w}_B(q)$$
(46)
In the hA case one has only the first of these conditions, which converts Eq. (36) into an evolution equation in rapidity, relatively easily solved by conventional methods. As mentioned the non-local term is zero in this case, but its presence would only slightly complicate the solution. After all the BFKL Hamiltonian is also non-local (although linear).

For the nucleus-nucleus scattering we have to solve homogeneous Eqs (36) and (37) with both conditions (46) imposed upon the solution. The Cauchy problem is thus transformed into an essentially more difficult boundary problem. A possible method of the solution is to transform Eqs. (36) and (37) into a system of two non-linear integral equations in combined rapidity-momentum space, which one may try to solve by iterations. Our experience in the hA problem shows that for the solution to have a reasonable precision one requires at least 800 points in the momentum and 400 points for 5 units of rapidity. Thus to find the amplitude for say $`Y=15`$ one has to perform $`1200\times 800^310^{10}`$ operations per iteration. On top of that the convergence properties of the iteration procedure is unknown.

Here we shall not attempt at solving Eqs. (36) and (37) with any reasonable degree of precision at all values of rapidity and momentum. Instead we shall again use our experience with the case of hA scattering (fan diagrams), where at any fixed momentum and $`y\mathrm{}`$ the solution $`\varphi ^{}(y,q)`$ aquires a simple form, independent of the target properties

$$\varphi ^{}(y,q)_y\mathrm{}=\frac{2\pi }{g^2}\mathrm{ln}\frac{Q(y)}{q}$$
(47)
with $`\mathrm{ln}Q(y)2.34(\alpha _sN_c/\pi )y`$. Note that (47) is not the solution at all $`y`$ and $`q`$. In particular (47) is not valid at $`qQ`$, which is just the region which determines the gluon density. However (47) is sufficient to establish that the hA scattering cross-section tends to its geometric limit at high $`y`$ .

Our guess is that also in the nucleus-nucleus case function $`\varphi ^{}(y,q)`$ aquires the form (47) at large rapidities $`yY`$ and $`\varphi (y,q)`$ aquires the same form with $`yYy`$. To support this behaviour we are going to demonstrate that in these limits the non-local terms in Eqs. (36) and (37) can be neglected, so that the equations decouple and become similar to the hA case.

Actually the demonstration is quite simple. Take Eq. (36) at large $`y`$ and put the conjectured asymptotics (47) into it. According to (45) the mixing non-local term will then be given by

$$\alpha _sN_c\frac{d^2q_1}{(2\pi )^2q_>^2}\left(\mathrm{ln}\frac{q_>}{q_<}+1\right)\varphi (y,q_1)_1^2q_1^4_1^2\mathrm{ln}\frac{Q(y)}{q_1}$$
(48)
Note that $`\varphi (y,q_1)`$ enters at large $`y`$ and small $`Yy`$. Its exact form is unknown but we can safely assume that it rapidly falls with $`q_1`$ similar to the inhomogeneous term $`K^1w_B`$ from which it is separated by a relatively small distance in rapidity. Action of the operator $`K=^2q^4^2`$ on the asymptotic form of $`\varphi ^{}`$ however gives zero. In fact

$$_1^2\mathrm{ln}\frac{Q(y)}{q_1}=2\pi \delta ^2(q_1)$$

Subsequent integration over $`q_1`$ gives zero at any finite $`q`$ due to factor $`q_1^4`$. Thus the non-local term is zero in Eq. (36) at $`yY\mathrm{}`$. Therefore the equation aquires the same form as for hA scattering (which implies that fan diagrams going from top to bottom dominate). This means that the asymptotical behaviour (47) is indeed true. The same result is found for the non-local term in Eq. (37) at small $`y`$ and $`Yy\mathrm{}`$ assuming the asymptotic form (47) for $`\varphi (Yy,q)`$. Its meaning is that fan diagrams going from bottom to top dominate in this limit.

Functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }(y,r)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(y,r)`$ which actually determine the amplitude according to (18) are related to $`\varphi (y,q)`$ and $`\varphi ^{}(y,q)`$ by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(y,r)=\frac{d^2q}{(2\pi )^2}e^{iqr}_q^2\varphi (y,q)$$
(49)
and similarly for the conjugated function. Using the asymptotical expression (47) we then get at high $`Y`$

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(0,r)=\frac{1}{g^2}\theta (R_Bb_B),\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(Y,r)=\frac{1}{g^2}\theta (R_Ab_A)$$
(50)
The two $`\theta `$ functions appear because according to Eqs. (36) and (37) $`\varphi =0`$ ($`\varphi ^{}=0`$) when $`w_B=0`$ ($`w_B=0`$), that is for $`b_B>R_B`$ ($`b_A>R_A`$).

Putting (50) in (18) we obtain the connected part of the amplitude at $`Y>>1`$ as

$$T(Y,b_A,b_B)=AT_A(b_A)\theta (R_Bb_B)+T_B(b_B)\theta (R_Ab_A)$$
(51)
It results independent of $`Y`$. After the integration over $`b_B`$ and $`b_B`$ we find

$$T(Y,b)=d^2b_Ad^2b_B\delta ^2(bb_A+b_B)\theta (R_Ab_A)\theta (R_Bb_B)[AT_A(b_A)+BT_B(b_B)]$$
(52)
According to (1) the total AB cross-section is given by

$$\sigma ^{tot}(Y)=2d^2b\left(1e^{T(Y,b)}\right)$$
(53)
¿From (52) and (53) one concludes that at large $`Y`$ the cross-section does not depend on $`Y`$. It saturates at a value which is purely geometrical and for $`A>>1`$ or/and $`B>>1`$. approaches the black disk limit in the overlap area.

## 5 Conclusions

We have derived a pair of equations which describe the nucleus-nucleus scattering in the perturbative QCD with a large number of colours (or, alternatively in the quasi-classical limit, or, in the limit $`A,B\mathrm{}`$). The equations contain mixing terms which are both non-linear and non-local. In contrast to the hA case the equations are to be solved with given boundary conditions at rapidities both of the projectile and target, which complicates the solution enormously.

However the asymptotical form of the solution at fixed momentum and large rapidities is shown to be the same as for the hA case. This allows to demonstrate that at large rapidities the total AB cross-section becomes independent of energy and given by purely geometric considerations. At large $`A`$ or/and $`B`$ it corresponds to the scattering on the black disc in the overlap area.

Going to particle production in AB collisions, the situation at central rapidities seems to be rather simple. The inclusive cross-section will be described by diagrams like shown in Fig. 2, with the target and projectile parts joined by a single pomeron, from which the observed particle is emitted. Evidently this contribution is just a convolution of the production vertex with two gluon densities of the projectile and target, each one corresponding to fan diagrams and found in . At rapiditiy distances from the target or projectile $`\delta y1/\mathrm{\Delta }`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the pomeron intercept the problem does not look so simple, since the AGK rules are rather complicated in this region (see e. g. ) and the usual cancellation of all diagrams except of the structure shown in Fig. 2 is not at all obvious. We leave this problem for future studies.

## 6 References

1. A.Mueller, Nucl. Phys.,B415 (1994) 373.
2. A.Mueller and B.Patel, Nucl. Phys.,B425 (1994) 471.
3. M.A.Braun and G.P.Vacca, Eur. Phys. J C6 (1999) 147.
4. I.Balitsky, hep-ph/9706411; Nucl. Phys. B463 (1996) 99.
5. Yu. Kovchegov, Phys. Rev D60 (1999) 034008.
6. M.Braun, preprint LU TP 00-06 (hep-ph/0001268)
7. Yu. Kovchegov, preprint CERN-TH/99-166 (hep-ph/9905214).
8 .E.Levin and K.Tuchin, preprint DESY 99-108, TAUP 2592-99 (hep-ph/9908317).
9. A.Schwimmer, Nucl. Phys. B94 (1975)445.
10. D.Amati, L.Caneshi and R.Jengo, Nucl. Phys. B101 (1975) 397.
11. L.N.Lipatov in: ”Perturbative QCD”, Ed. A.H.Mueller, World Sci., Singapore (1989) 411.
12. J.Bartels and M.Wuesthoff, Z.Phys., C66 (1995) 157.
13. M.A.Braun, Eur. Phys. J C6 (1999) 321.
14. M.Ciafaloni et al., Nucl. Phys. B98 (1975) 493.

## 7 Figure captions

Fig. 1. The triple pomeron vertex for the splitting of a pomeron into two (a) and fusion of two pomerons into one (b).
Fig. 2. The generic diagram for the inclusive particle production in the central region in AB collisions


text:
# Photoemission and the Origin of High Temperature Superconductivity

## Abstract

The condensation energy can be shown to be a moment of the change in the occupied part of the spectral function when going from the normal to the superconducting state. As a consequence, there is a one to one correspondence between the energy gain associated with forming the superconducting ground state, and the dramatic changes seen in angle resolved photoemission spectra. Some implications this observation has are offered.

In 1956, Chester published an interesting paper  which dealt with the the difference in energy between the normal and superconducting states (the condensation energy). For an isotope coefficient of one-half, he demonstrated that the condensation energy could be equated to the change in ion kinetic energy. Historically, the paper did not play a major role, since in the same year, the BCS theory of superconductivity was being developed, solving the problem of classical superconductors.

In this millenial year, though, we are faced with the unsolved problem of high $`T_c`$ superconductivity. Because of this, several of us have invoked the name of Chester. The hope is that by directly focusing on the condensation energy, some light might be shed on the solution to the high $`T_c`$ problem. This is particularly relevant if, as most of us suspect, the origin of high $`T_c`$ is associated directly with electron-electron interactions. In such a case, treating the pair glue as an external object, as in the electron-phonon problem, could be misleading. In essence, the electrons are gluing themselves together. This indicates that new ways of thinking may be important.

This has led a number of authors to concentrate on the change in various response functions when going into the superconducting state. This is illustrated as follows:

$`\mathrm{\Delta }G,FRF_NF_S\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (1)
The idea is to assume a non-zero superconducting order parameter, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. This leads to changes in the normal Greens function, $`G`$, and to the creation of an anomalous Greens function, the Gor’kov $`F`$ function. This in turn causes changes in various two-particle response functions, $`R`$: the dynamic spin susceptibility, the dielectric function, the optical conductivity, etc. This in turn leads to a change in the free energy between the normal ($`F_N`$) and superconducting ($`F_S`$) states. If the free energy is lowered, then a non-zero superconducting order parameter is self-consistently stabilized. Note that nowhere in this argument does the question of the pair glue arise. That is, superconductivity is generated simply if the response function change is such as to lower the free energy.

A number of theories with this philosophy have been advocated, each focusing on a different response function. One due to Anderson and co-workers suggests that the c-axis kinetic energy is lowered in the superconducting state . This leads to a change in the c-axis optical conductivity, which has received some experimental support . A different suggestion has been made in regards to the planar conductivity .

Turning to “potential energy” explanations, Leggett  has advocated that the energy savings comes from the density-density response function. Perhaps better known is the work of Scalapino and White , where a lowering of the exchange energy is suggested based on a change in the spin-spin response function. This idea was then connected to the appearance below $`T_c`$ of the neutron resonance mode by Demler and Zhang , which has also received experimental support . In all of these cases, a particular part of the free energy is being singled out, with the connection being made via a two particle correlation function.

Here, a different approach is advocated . This is illustrated as follows:

$`\mathrm{\Delta }GF_NF_S\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (2)
Note the simplified nature of this diagram relative to the first one. This argumentation is based on the following relation:

$`U_NU_S=`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\omega (\omega +ϵ_k)f(\omega )\left[A_N(𝐤,\omega )A_S(𝐤,\omega )\right]}`$ (3)
where $`U_N`$ ($`U_S`$) is the internal energy of the normal (superconducting) state, $`A(𝐤,\omega )`$ the single-particle spectral function, $`f(\omega )`$ the Fermi function, and $`ϵ_k`$ the bare energy dispersion. Eq. 3 is based on a reduced (single-band) Hamiltonian with two particle interactions, and in principle can be generalized to the multi-band case by replacing the scalar quantities in this equation by matrices in reciprocal lattice space. It is easily demonstrated that this equation using the BCS reduced Hamiltonian generates the BCS condensation energy, $`\frac{1}{2}N(0)\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$.

Note that the right hand side of Eq. 3 is a moment of the occupied part of the single-particle spectral function $`A`$ ($`A^{}`$). There are strong arguments that $`A^{}`$ is being measured by angle-resolved photoemission (ARPES) measurements in quasi-2D systems . As a consequence, we see that the high $`T_c`$ phenomenon is intimally connected with the dramatic change in the photoemission lineshape when going below $`T_c`$.

A useful decomposition, especially in regards to the various theories mentioned above, is to break the right hand side of Eq. 3 up into separate kinetic and potential energy pieces. This is easily implemented by rewriting $`(\omega +ϵ_k)`$ as $`(2ϵ_k)+(\omega ϵ_k)`$, the first term being the kinetic energy, the second the potential energy. Therefore, changes in the kinetic energy are associated with changes in the momentum distribution function (which is related to the integrated ARPES spectral weight ), whereas on the Fermi surface, the potential energy contribution reduces to the first moment of $`A^{}`$.

This is easily illustrated for the case of BCS theory . In this case, the potential energy is lowered by $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2/V`$, where $`V`$ is the pair potential, and the kinetic energy increased by $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2/V\frac{1}{2}N(0)\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$, the sum being the BCS condensation energy. The kinetic energy change is a consequence of the broadening of the momentum distribution function by the BCS coherence factors. The potential energy change is easily explained as well. It is due to the difference in $`ϵ`$ and $`E=\sqrt{ϵ^2+\mathrm{\Delta }^2}`$. On the Fermi surface, this difference is maximal, leading to a potential energy lowering of $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2`$ (the factor of $`\frac{1}{2}`$ coming from the coherence factors). When integrated over $`ϵ`$, one then obtains $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2/V`$.

There are two interesting points about the BCS example. First, the transition is potential energy driven (physically, this occurs because the ion terms which actually drive the transition are absorbed into the effective potential of the reduced Hamiltonian). Second, the condensation energy is confined to the vicinity of the Fermi surface by the coherence factors. Note that although the ultraviolet cut-off (the Debye energy) enters the individual kinetic and potential energy terms, it drops out of the net term.

There are several reasons to believe that this BCS analogy may be misleading in the high $`T_c`$ problem. First, it assumes the existence of quasiparticles. This can be contrasted with the high $`T_c`$ case, where although quasiparticle peaks exist below $`T_c`$, they do not exist above . That is, even though the superconducting state is almost certainly a (superfluid) Fermi liquid, the normal state appears to be a non Fermi liquid . As a Fermi liquid does a better job of diagonalizing the kinetic energy than a non Fermi liquid, then one might conjecture that the kinetic energy is indeed lowered in the superconducting state despite the coherence factors. Note that this does not violate the considerations of Chester . That is, although Chester  demonstrated that the potential energy of the electrons must be lowered and the kinetic energy raised in the superconducting state, these refer to the potential and kinetic energy terms of the total Hamiltonian, not those of the reduced one. Therefore, there is nothing that prevents the kinetic energy of the reduced Hamiltonian from being lowered.

Second, the BCS condensation energy is confined to a narrow shell around the Fermi surface. For the electron-electron case, though, we can anticipate that the whole Brillouin zone could be affected. This is corroborated by ARPES spectra, which do show changes in the spectra even well away from the Fermi surface. Moreover, ARPES data are characterized by regions of the zone where the dispersion is weak. These same regions of the zone are associated with the anomalous pseudogap seen in underdoped cuprates. Thinking about these regions of the zone, even in the superconducting state, in terms of standard Fermi surface based concepts may be misleading.

Eq. 3 suggests that the best way to get a handle on these issues is by a detailed study of the change in the ARPES lineshape throughout the zone. One objection is that the number being sought is small. For instance, Loram, based on specific heat data, estimates the condensation energy to be only 3K per plane for optimal doped YBCO . On the other hand, the relative contribution from a given $`𝐤`$ point is a different matter. As noted above, in BCS theory, k points on the Fermi surface yield a contribution to the condensation energy of $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2`$, which is a substantial number.

A quick look at the data is sufficient to indicate potential pitfalls, along with suggestions about what may be going on. The $`(\pi ,0)`$ point is singled out since it exhibits the most dramatic lineshape change. In the normal state, one has an extremely broad spectral peak, with a width of order the entire bandwidth. In the superconducting state, this gets dramatically rearranged into a sharp spectral peak, followed at higher binding energy by a dip and hump. By comparing these two spectra, we get some idea about contributions of each spectral feature to the condensation energy.

We begin by looking at the first moment ($`\omega `$) part of Eq. 3. There will be a positive contribution from the sharp spectral peak, which will be followed by a negative contribution from the spectral dip. Although the latter is smaller in weight than the former, it is enhanced because of the $`\omega `$ weighting. This is then followed by the hump and subsequent tail region, and therein lies the rub. Since this region is weighted by $`\omega `$, it is sensitive to how the data are normalized. Typically, ARPES data are normalized in such a way that the high energy tails match, and thus to first approximation there is no tail contribution. But, if one assumes (on the Fermi surface) that the data are normalized by having equal integrated weight, then typically the tails do not quite match. The resulting tail contribution to Eq. 3 can be quite large. Similar considerations enter for the kinetic ($`ϵ_k`$) part of Eq. 3, where one deals with the change in integrated area. The message here is that since there are varying positive and negative contributions to the condensation energy from any given spectrum, then the normalization issue will have to be resolved before we can gain insight from Eq. 3 based on ARPES data.

Still, a qualitative statement can be made concerning the doping dependence of the condensation energy. It is now well known that the weight in the quasiparticle peak is dramatically suppressed as the doping is reduced . In the context of Eq. 3, this implies a decrease in the condensation energy with underdoping. Moreover, since the normal state in the underdoped case is gapped, one expects a further reduction. These two observations go a long way in explaining the dramatic reduction in the condensation energy inferred from specific heat data .

To gain further insight, we have studied  the so-called mode model , developed to explain the lineshape change noted above. The idea is that the superconducting lineshape is very similar to that expected for electrons interacting with a collective mode. Detailed analysis of the data vs. doping  has verified that the mode is almost certainly the resonance mode observed by neutron scattering . The model consists of a constant scattering rate ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$) in the normal state, which becomes gapped in the superconducting state (this gap, which defines the spectral dip, is equal to $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$+$`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ is the mode energy). Of particular note, the quasiparticle peak is a consequence of a non-zero $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$.

The results for the condensation energy are surprising . Near the Fermi surface, the kinetic energy is lowered, and the potential energy raised. The former occurs because the formation of quasiparticle peaks has a larger effect on sharpening the momentum distribution than the coherence factors have on broadening it. The potential energy lowering is a more subtle matter. The gap in Im$`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ causes Re$`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ by the Kramers-Kronig relation to have a logarithmic behavior. Because of this, the normal and superconducting state spectra only asymptotically approach one another. This leads to a large negative tail contribution to the first moment in Eq. 3, much larger than the positive contribution from the quasiparticle peak. As a result, the potential energy is raised. The kinetic energy driven nature of the transition is surprising, given the expectation that the neutron resonance mode should lead to a lowering of the exchange energy . This behavior, though, is sensitive to the size of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. As $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is reduced (the doping is increased), the normal state becomes more Fermi-liquid like, and one crosses over to the BCS limit, where the transition becomes potential energy driven.

This behavior is reminiscent of a phase diagram for the cuprates recently suggested by Phil Anderson . The potential energy is lowered below a temperature $`T^{}`$ due to the formation of the pseudogap. This line merges with $`T_c`$ on the overdoped side, and so the superconducting transition is potential energy driven on this side. On the underdoped side, though, the transition is kinetic energy driven, since the potential energy savings already occurs at $`T^{}`$, and the additional kinetic energy savings is driven by quasiparticle formation. It is again important to note that despite the presence of a large spectral gap in the underdoped case, quasiparticle peak formation is still associated with $`T_c`$ . Also, this conjecture is consistent with Basov’s results , in that the sum rule violation he reports (indicating a lowering of the kinetic energy) only occurs on the underdoped side of the phase diagram.

In conclusion, we suggest that Eq. 3 will be very useful when thinking about the origin of high $`T_c`$, and that ARPES data will play a major role in this endeavor.

This work is supported by the U. S. Dept. of Energy, Basic Energy Sciences, under Contract W-31-109-ENG-38, the National Science Foundation DMR 9624048, and (M. R. ) the Indian DST through a Swarnajayanti fellowship.