text:
# Thermodynamics, strange quark matter, and strange stars

## I Introduction

During the 10-plus years which have elapsed since Witten’s conjecture  that strange quark matter (SQM), rather than the normal nuclear matter, might be the true ground state of quantum chromodynamics (QCD), many theoretical and observational efforts have been made on the investigation of its properties and potential astrophysical significance . Because of the well-known difficulty of QCD in the nonperturbative domain, phenomenological models reflecting the characteristic of strong interactions are widely used in the study of hadron, and many of them have been successfully applied to investigating the stability and properties of SQM. One of the most famous models is the MIT bag model with which Jaffe et. al  find that SQM is absolutely stable around the normal nuclear density for a wide range of parameters. A vast number of further investigations  are performed with fruitful results. A recent important result is that young millisecond pulsars are most likely to be strange stars rather than neutron stars . Another alternative model is the mass-density-dependent model with which Chakrabarty et al. obtained significantly different results . However, Benvenuto and Lugones  pointed out that it is caused by the wrong thermodynamic treatment. They added an extra term to the expression of both pressure and energy, and got similar results as that in the bag model. A recent investigation indicates a link of SQM to the study of quark condensates  while a more recent work has carefully studied the relation between the charge and critical density of SQM .

Latterly, we have demonstrated that the previous treatments have unreasonable vacuum limits . In addition to this problem, there exist another serious problem, i.e., the zero pressure does not appear in the lowest energy state. In fact, there are two important problems in the quark mass-density-dependent model. One is how to determine the quark mass scaling. The other is how to deal with the thermodynamics with density-dependent particle masses self consistently. We have mainly concentrated on the first problem in Ref. . The present paper will concentrate more on the second problem. We find that the extra term provided in Ref.  should indeed be appended to the expression of pressure. However, it should not appear in that of energy according to both the general ensemble theory and basic thermodynamic principle. After our modification, the zero pressure point appears exactly at the lowest energy state, and thus the thermodynamics with density-dependent particle masses becomes self-consistent, which leads to completely different density behaviour of the sound velocity in SQM and different structure of strange stars.

We organize this paper as such. In the subsequent section, we give detail arguments on why the additional term in the pressure should not appear in the energy. The thermodynamic expression needed later are all derived carefully in this section. Then in Sec. III, we apply the new thermodynamic formulas to investigating strange quark matter, and find that the density behaviour of the sound velocity is opposite to the previous treatment but consistent with our recent publication. On application of our obtained equation of state, we integrate the equations of steller structure for strange stars in Sec. IV, and find that strange stars are dimensionally smaller and less massive than the previous calculation if SQM is absolutely stable. Sec. V is a short summary.

## II Thermodynamics with density-dependent particle masses

Let us explore directly from the general ensemble theory what the expression of pressure and energy should look like if the particle masses are dependent on density.

We express the density matrix as

$$\rho =\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Xi }}e^{\beta \left(E_{N_i,\alpha }_i\mu _iN_i\right)},$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ is the partition function, $`\beta `$ is the reverse temperature, $`N_i`$ are the particle numbers, and $`\mu _i`$ are the corresponding chemical potentials. The microscopic energy $`E_{N_i,\alpha }`$ is a function of the system volume $`V`$, the particle masses $`m_i`$, the particle numbers $`N_i`$, and the other quantum numbers $`\alpha `$. The pressure of the system is

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Xi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{\{N_i\},\alpha }{}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{E_{N_i,\alpha }}{V}}\right)e^{\beta \left(E_{N_i,\alpha }_i\mu _iN_i\right)}`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Xi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{\{N_i\},\alpha }{}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{V}}e^{\beta \left(E_{N_i,\alpha }_i\mu _iN_i\right)}\right]`$ (3)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Xi }}{V}}|_{T,\{\mu _i\}}={\displaystyle \frac{(V\mathrm{\Omega })}{V}}|_{T,\{\mu _i\}},`$ (4)
where

$$\mathrm{\Omega }\frac{1}{V\beta }\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Xi }$$
(5)
is the thermodynamic potential density which is generally a function of the temperature $`T`$, the chemical potentials $`\mu _i`$, and the particle masses $`m_i`$. If the particle masses have nothing to do with the baryon number density $`n_b=N/(3V)`$ (N is the total particle number), we simply get

$$P=\mathrm{\Omega }.$$
(6)
If the masses depend on density or volume, one should have

$$P=\mathrm{\Omega }+n_b\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{n_b}.$$
(7)
This is just the right thing the authors have done in Ref. . The authors derive it as such:

$$P=\frac{(\mathrm{\Omega }/n_b)}{(1/n_b)}|_{T,\mu _i}=n_b\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{n_b}\mathrm{\Omega }.$$
(8)
For canonical ensemble, the particle numbers $`N_i`$ keep fixed. This derivation is thus obvious. However, it is not so obvious for grand canonical ensemble because the particle number is not necessarily constant when the temperature T and chemical potentials $`\mu _i`$ unchanged. We will give a more convincing derivation a little later.

The additional term is of crucial importance for pressure balance. Not as done in Ref. , however, the extra term does not appear in the expression of energy. Now, let’s calculate the statistic average for the energy:

$`\overline{E}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Xi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{\{N_i\},\alpha }{}}E_{N_i,\alpha }e^{\beta \left(E_{N_i,\alpha }_i\mu _iN_i\right)}`$ (9)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Xi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{\{N_i\},\alpha }{}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\mu _iN_i\right)e^{\beta \left(E_{N_i,\alpha }_i\mu _iN_i\right)}`$ (10)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{\beta }}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Xi }+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\mu _i\overline{N_i},`$ (11)
where

$`\overline{N_i}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Xi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{\{N_i\},\alpha }{}}N_ie^{\beta \left(E_{N_i,\alpha }_i\mu _iN_i\right)}`$ (12)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Xi }}}{\displaystyle \underset{\{N_i\},\alpha }{}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\mu _i}}e^{\beta \left(E_{N_i,\alpha }_i\mu _iN_i\right)}\right]_{V,T,\{m_k\}}`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\mu _i}}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Xi }=V{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mu _i}}|_{T,\{m_k\}}`$ (14)
is the average number for particle type $`i`$. Therefore, the energy density of the system is

$`E`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{E}}{V}}={\displaystyle \frac{(\beta \mathrm{\Omega })}{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\mu _in_i`$ (15)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }+\beta {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\mu _in_i`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\mu _in_iT{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{T}},`$ (17)
where $`n_i`$ is the number density of particle type $`i`$:

$$n_i\frac{\overline{N_i}}{V}=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mu _i}|_{T,\{m_k\}}.$$
(18)
It is clear from Eq. (17) that only when Eq. (6) holds can one get the Eq. (8) in Ref. . Therefore, we should not, as done in Ref. , use that expression to calculate the energy density. Instead, we will calculate $`E`$ directly from Eq. (17) in this paper.

For more evident arguments, let’s see the following derivation starting from the basic derivative relation for an open system:

$$d(VE)=Td(VS)PdV+\underset{i}{}\mu _id\overline{N_i},$$
(19)
where S is the entropy density of the system.

Choosing T, V, and {$`\overline{N_i}`$} as the independent macroscopic state variables, the combined statement of the first and second laws of thermodynamics, Eq. (19), can be expressed as

$$d(VA)=VSdTPdV+\underset{i}{}\mu _id\overline{N_i},$$
(20)
where $`AETS`$ is the Helmholtz free energy density by which we have

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d(VA)}{dV}}|_{T,\{\overline{N_i}\}}`$ (21)
$`=`$ $`AV{\displaystyle \frac{dA}{dV}}|_{T,\{\overline{N_i}\}}`$ (22)
$`=`$ $`A+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}n_j{\displaystyle \frac{dA(T,\{n_i\})}{dn_j}}|_T.`$ (23)
This is a general expression for pressure. In obtaining the third equality, we have used the chain relation

$$V\frac{d}{dV}f\left(\{n_i=\frac{\overline{N_i}}{V}\}\right)|_{\{\overline{N_i}\}}=\underset{j}{}n_j\frac{d}{dn_j}f(\{n_i\}),$$
(24)
where $`f`$ is an arbitrary function.

According to the basic relation between thermodynamics and statistics, we have

$$A=\mathrm{\Omega }+\underset{i}{}\mu _in_i$$
(25)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the thermodynamic potential density. For a free Fermi system, it is

$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_iT}{2\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{ln}\left[1+e^{\beta \left(\sqrt{p^2+m_i^2}\mu _i\right)}\right]p^2𝑑p`$ (26)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\mathrm{\Omega }_i(T,\mu _i,m_i),`$ (27)
where $`g_i`$ is the degeneracy factor which is 6 for quarks and 2 for electrons. In order to include the interaction between particles, we regard the particle masses as density-dependent, namely

$$m_i=m_i\left(n_b\underset{j}{}n_j/3\right).$$
(28)
Because we have chosen $`T`$, $`V`$, and $`\{\overline{N_i}\}`$ as independent state variables, the chemical potential $`\mu _i`$ should also be regarded as a function of T and $`\{n_k\}`$, namely

$$\mu _i=\mu _i(T,\{n_k\}).$$
(29)
So, the total derivative of $`\mathrm{\Omega }(T,\{\mu _k\},\{m_k\})`$ with respect to $`n_j`$ should be taken like this:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Omega }}{dn_j}}|_T`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mu _i}}|_{T,\{m_k\}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\mu _i}{dn_j}}|_T+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{n_b}}|_{T,\{\mu _k\}}{\displaystyle \frac{n_b}{n_j}}`$ (30)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}n_i{\displaystyle \frac{d\mu _i}{dn_j}}|_T+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{n_b}}|_{T,\{\mu _k\}}.`$ (31)
Here we have used the Eq. (18) and the fact that $`n_b/n_j=1/3`$.

Substituting Eq. (25) into Eq. (23) gives

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`A+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}n_j{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dn_j}}\left[\mathrm{\Omega }+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\mu _in_i\right]_T`$ (32)
$`=`$ $`A+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}n_j\left[{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Omega }}{dn_j}}|_T+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\left(n_i{\displaystyle \frac{d\mu _i}{dn_j}}|_T+\mu _i{\displaystyle \frac{dn_i}{dn_j}}\right)\right]`$ (33)
$`=`$ $`A+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\mu _in_i+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{n_j}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{n_b}}|_{T,\{\mu _k\}}`$ (34)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }+n_b{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{n_b}}|_{T,\{\mu _k\}}`$ (35)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_i+n_b{\displaystyle \frac{m_i}{n_b}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_i}{m_i}}\right).`$ (36)
At zero temperature, the corresponding thermodynamic potential density can be obtained from Eq. (26) by first taking the limit $`T0`$ and then carrying out the resulting integration:

$`\mathrm{\Omega }={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_i}{48\pi ^2}}[\mu _i(\mu _i^2m_i^2)^{1/2}(2\mu _i^25m_i^2)`$ (37)
$`+3m_i^4\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _i+\sqrt{\mu _i^2m_i^2}}{m_i}}].`$ (38)
We thus have from Eqs. (18), (17), and (36):

$`n_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g_i}{6\pi ^2}}(\mu _i^2m_i^2)^{3/2},`$ (39)
$`E`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}m_in_iF(x_i),`$ (40)
$`P`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}m_in_ix_i^2G(x_i){\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}m_in_if(x_i)`$ (41)
where

$$x_i\frac{p_{f,i}}{m_i}=\frac{\left(\frac{6\pi ^2}{g_i}n_i\right)^{1/3}}{m_i}=\frac{\sqrt{\mu _i^2m_i^2}}{m_i}$$
(42)
is the ratio of the Fermi momentum to the mass that related to particle type $`i`$. With the hyperbolic sine function sh$`{}_{}{}^{1}(x)\mathrm{ln}(x+\sqrt{x^2+1})`$, the functions $`F(x_i)`$, $`G(x_i)`$, and $`f(x_i)`$ are defined as

$`F(x_i){\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}\left[x_i\sqrt{x_i^2+1}(2x_i^2+1)\text{sh}^1(x_i)\right]/x_i^3,`$ (43)
$`G(x_i){\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\left[x_i\sqrt{x_i^2+1}(2x_i^23)+3\text{sh}^1(x_i)\right]/x_i^5,`$ (44)
$`f(x_i){\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{n_b}{m_i}}{\displaystyle \frac{dm_i}{dn_b}}\left[x_i\sqrt{x_i^2+1}\text{sh}^1(x_i)\right]/x_i^3.`$ (45)
One can see, from Eqs. (40) and (41), that an additional term appears in the pressure expression, but not in the energy expression. We can specially confirm this result further as such.

From Eq. (19), one has an alternative general expression for pressure:

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d(VE)}{dV}}|_{S,\{\overline{N_k}\}}`$ (46)
$`=`$ $`E+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}n_j{\displaystyle \frac{dE}{dn_j}}|_S.`$ (47)
According to the Pauli principle and the relativistic energy-momentum relation $`\epsilon _i=\sqrt{p^2+m_i^2}`$, the energy density of the system at zero temperature should be

$$E(\{n_i\},\{m_j(n_b)\})=\underset{i}{}\frac{g_i}{2\pi ^2}_0^{p_{f,i}}\epsilon _ip^2𝑑p,$$
(48)
which, when the integration is carried out, is just the same as Eq. (40).

Because the entropy is also zero (or constant) at zero temperature, we can substitute Eq. (48) into Eq. (47), and accordingly get

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`E+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}n_j\left({\displaystyle \frac{E}{n_j}}+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{E}{m_i}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_i}{n_b}}{\displaystyle \frac{n_b}{n_j}}\right)`$ (49)
$`=`$ $`E+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}n_j{\displaystyle \frac{E}{n_j}}+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{n_j}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{E}{m_i}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_i}{n_b}}`$ (50)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}n_b{\displaystyle \frac{m_i}{n_b}}{\displaystyle \frac{E}{m_i}},`$ (51)
which leads to Eq. (41) exactly.

## III Properties of strange quark matter in the new thermodynamic treatment

Having derived in detail the thermodynamics with variable particle masses in the previous section, we now apply it to the investigation of strange quark matter.

As usually done in the previous literature , We assume the SQM to be a Fermi gas mixture of $`u`$, $`d`$, $`s`$ quarks and electrons with chemical equilibrium maintained by the weak interactions:

$$d,su+e+\overline{\nu }_e,s+uu+d,\mathrm{}$$

Because of these reactions, the chemical potentials $`\mu _i(i=u,d,s,e)`$ should satisfy

$`\mu _d=\mu _s\mu ,`$ (52)
$`\mu _u+\mu _e=\mu .`$ (53)
For the bulk SQM in weak equilibrium, the previous investigations got a slightly positive charge . Our recent study  demonstrates that negative charges could lower the critical density. However, too much negative charge can make it impossible to maintain flavor equilibrium. Therefore, the charge of SQM is not allowed to shift too far away from zero at both positive and negative directions. Therefore, one also has another two equations for a given baryon number density $`n_b`$:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}(n_u+n_d+n_s)=n_b,`$ (54)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}n_u{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}n_d{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}n_sn_e=0.`$ (55)
The first is the definition of baryon number density; the second is from the charge neutrality requirement. $`n_i(i=u,d,s,e)`$ is related to $`\mu _i`$ and $`m_i`$ by Eq. (39).

Because the results from lattice calculations show that quark matter does not become asymptotically free soon after the phase transition (instead, it approaches the free gas equation of state very slowly), one should consider the strong interaction between quarks in a proper way. We do this by including the interaction effect within the variable quark masses. Because of the characteristic of the quark confinement and asymptotic freedom of the strong interaction, one can write down the simplest and most symmetric parametrization for the quark masses $`m_q(q=u,d,s)`$ :

$$m_q=m_{q0}+\frac{D}{n_b^z},$$
(56)
where $`m_{q0}`$ is the corresponding quark current mass, $`z`$ is a fixed exponential. Previously, $`z`$ is regarded as 1. Our recent study  indicates that it is more reasonable to take $`z=1/3`$. The parameter $`D`$ is usually determined by stability arguments, i.e., at zero pressure $`(P=0)`$, the energy per baryon, $`E/n_b`$, is great than 930 MeV for two flavor quark matter in order not to contradict standard nuclear physics, but less than 930 MeV for three flavor symmetric quark matter so that SQM can have the possibility of absolute stability. Obviously, the rang of $`D`$ determined by this method depends on different thermodynamic treatments. Within the thermodynamics derived in the preceding section, $`D`$ is in the range (155—171 MeV)2 when taking $`z=1/3`$.

Because the light quark current masses are very small, their value uncertainties are not important. So we take the fixed central values $`m_{u0}=5`$ MeV and $`m_{d0}=10`$ MeV in our calculation. The electron mass is very small (0.511 MeV). As for $`s`$ quarks, we take 80 and 90 MeV, corresponding respectively to $`D^{1/2}`$ = 156 and 160 MeV.

For a given $`n_b`$, we solve for $`\mu _i(i=u,d,s,e)`$ from Eqs. (52)—(55), and calculate the energy density and pressure of SQM respectively from Eqs. (40) and (41) with the quark messes replace by Eq. (56).

Firstly, we draw the configuration of the SQM for the parameter set $`m_{s0}=80`$ MeV and $`D^{1/2}=156`$ MeV in Fig. 1. At high densities, all of the $`u,d`$, and $`s`$ quarks tend to become a triplicate. When the density becomes lower, $`d`$ fraction will increases while $`s`$ fraction decreases, and will become zero at a definite density which is called critical density in Ref.  because SQM does not exist below that density. The $`u`$ fraction is nearly unchanged. It in fact increases very slowly. To keep charge neutrality, the electron fraction will also increase. However, because of its very small mass, the electron fraction is so little that we multiply by one thousand to draw it in the figure.

In Fig. 2, we show the density dependence of the energy per baryon, $`VE/N=E/n_b`$, vs baryon number density $`n_b`$ for the parameter set I: $`m_{s0}=80`$ MeV, $`D^{1/2}=156`$ MeV, and II: $`m_{s0}=90`$ MeV, $`D^{1/2}=160`$ MeV. For the first parameter set, SQM is absolutely stable while for the second set it is nearly meta-stable. The point marked with a circle ‘$``$’ is the zero pressure point where the system pressure becomes zero. It can be clearly seen that the zero pressure points are exactly located at the lowest energy state. In fact, this is a basic requirement of thermodynamics because one can obtain from Eq. (46)

$$P=\frac{d(VE)}{dn_b}\frac{dn_b}{dV}|_{\{\overline{N_k}\}}=n_b^2\frac{d(E/n_b)}{dn_b}.$$
(57)
However, this is not the case for most of the previous thermodynamic treatments of strange quark matter in the mass-density-dependent model , which is their another serious flaw in addition to the unreasonable vacuum limits mentioned before.

In Fig. 3, we give the relation between the pressure $`P`$ and energy density $`E`$, i.e., the equation of state. It approaches the free gas equation of state at high densities. However, its shape is a little sunken at lower densities, contrary to previous calculation which is protuberant. This will leads to completely different lower density behaviour of the sound velocity in strange quark matter.

The velocity of sound is plotted in the lower part of Fig. 4. The upper part is calculated by the same method in Ref.  with parameter set B there. Simultaneously given with a full horizontal line is the ultra-relativistic case ($`1/\sqrt{3}`$) for purpose of comparison. Obviously, they become nearly identical at high densities while the lower density behaviour is opposite. The sound velocity in the previous treatment is higher than the ultra-relativistic case and will eventually exceed the speed of light at lower densities, which is unreasonable from the point of view of the theory of relativity.

## IV  Strange stars

It has long been proposed that the currently called neutron stars might be composed of strange quark matter and thus be in fact strange stars. A recent investigation shows that young millisecond pulsars are most likely to be strange stars rather than neutron stars . Previous authors have investigated the properties of strange stars by applying their obtained equation of state with interesting results . We have now modified the thermodynamic treatment and updated the quark mass scaling. Therefore, it is meaningful to study the structure of strange stars in the new context from the astrophysical view point.

As generally done, we assume the strange star to be a spherically symmetric object. Its stability is determined by the general relativistic equation of hydrostatic equilibrium known as Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkov equation

$$\frac{dP}{dr}=\frac{GmE}{r^2}\frac{(1+4\pi r^3P/m)(1+P/E)}{12Gm/r},$$
(58)
with the subsidiary condition

$$dm/dr=4\pi r^2E,$$
(59)
where $`G=6.70710^{45}`$ MeV-2 is the gravitational constant, $`r`$ is the distance from the core of the star, $`E=E(r)`$ is the energy density or mass density, $`P=P(r)`$ is the pressure, and $`m=m(r)`$ is the mass within the radius $`r`$.

For an initial baryon number density $`n_0`$ (accordingly $`P_0`$ and $`E_0`$), we can numerically solve Eqs. (58) and (59) with the aid of the equation of state, and obtain the corresponding $`P=P(r,n_0)`$ and $`m=m(r,n_0)`$, and consequently $`n=n(r,n_0)`$, the baryon number density at the radius $`r`$ for the central density $`n_0`$. The radius $`R`$ of the strange star is determined by the condition

$$P(R,n_0)=0,$$
(60)
namely,

$$R=R(n_0).$$
(61)
Accordingly, the mass of the strange star is

$$M=m(R(n_0),n_0)M(n_0).$$
(62)
To make strange stars stable, we must require $`dM/dn_0>0`$. For the above obtained equation of state, M firstly increases with $`n_0`$ up to a definite value $`M_{max}`$ corresponding to the highest acceptable central density $`n_{0max}`$. After that, $`M`$ decreases with $`n_0`$, and the star becomes unstable.

For the parameter set I, i.e. $`m_{s0}=80`$ MeV and $`D=(156`$ MeV$`)^2`$, we give the density profiles $`n(r,n_0)`$ in Fig. 5 as an example. The upmost line is for the largest acceptable central density $`n_{0max}`$ $`(1.35`$ fm-3). The lowest horizontal line corresponds to the surface density $`n_s`$ $`(0.25`$ fm -3) of strange stars which is independent of the central density, but a functional of the equation of state. Each line will intersect with it. The cross points correspond to the radius $`R`$ of the star. The maximum radius of the star appears in $`n_0`$ $`0.65`$ fm-3.

In Fig. 6, we show the mass-radius relation of strange stars with a solid line. The point marked with a full dot ‘$``$’ represents the largest acceptable mass $`M_{max}`$ ($`1.58`$ times the solar mass). For comparison, we have also plotted the result from the bag model calculation with the bag constant $`B^{1/4}=144`$ MeV, and that in Re.  with the parameter set B there. We can see that the strange stars in our case is dimensionally smaller and less massive than the previous calculation if SQM is absolutely stable. Naturally, this observation depends on the parameters employed. If we choose a bigger $`m_{s0}`$ and larger $`D`$, the case would be different. However, SQM would have no possibility of absolute stability in that case.

## V  Summary

We have derived the thermodynamics with density-dependent particle masses self-consistently, which overcome the serious flaws of the previous treatment of SQM in the quark mass-density-dependent model. We find that an additional term should be appended to the expression of pressure, but it should not appear in that of energy. When applying the new formulas to the investigation of SQM, we find that the density behaviour of the sound velocity is opposite to the previous calculation, but consistent with our recent publication, which leads to different structure of strange stars.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank the National Natural Science Foundation of China for financial support under Grant No. 19905011.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The objective of the present lecture is to illustrate the property of the Schrödinger equation which is called here the dyon–oscillator duality. The property is in the following. The Schödinger equation for an oscillator possesses two parameters – the energy $`E`$ and the cyclic frequency $`\omega `$. The quantization leads to the constraint $`E=\mathrm{}\omega (N+D/2)`$ where $`N=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$, and $`D`$ is the dimension of the configuration space of the oscillator. If $`\omega `$ is fixed, then $`E`$ is quantized and that is the standard situation. Imagine for a moment that now $`E`$ is fixed. Whence, necessarily $`\omega `$ is quantized, and we are in a nonstandard situation. The question is whether the nonstandard situation corresponds to any physics, i.e., whether it is possible to find such a transformation that converts the oscillator into a physical system with a coupling constant $`\alpha `$, being a function of $`E`$, and energy $`\epsilon `$, depending on $`\omega `$. If there exists such a transformation, we can confirm that the ”nonstandard oscillator” is identical to that physical system. Below will be shown the validity of the described picture for dimensions $`D=1,2,4,8`$ and that the final system is a bound system of charge–dyon (remind, that dyon is the hypothetical particle introduced by Schwinger which is unlike the Dirac monopole, endowed with not just magnetic but electric charge as well). As the ”standard” and ”nonstandard” regimes are mutually exclusive, the initial oscillator and the final ”charge–dyon” system are dual to each other, and that explains the relevancy of the term ”dyon–oscillator duality”. Note also that in the initial system the spectrum is discrete only, i.e. the particle has just a finite motion (for such cases it is usually said that we have a model with confinement). Generally speaking, the spectrum of the final system includes the discrete spectrum as well as the continuous one, i.e. in that model there is no confinement. However, unlike the first model, in the second model we have monopoles. There is some analogy between the dyon–oscillator and the Seiberg–Witten duality, according to which the gauge theories with strong interactions are equivalent to the theories having weak interaction on the one hand and topological nontrivial objects, such as monopoles and dyons are, on the other hand.

## 2 Radial Equations

Let consider the equation

$$\frac{d^2R}{du^2}+\frac{D1}{u}\frac{dR}{du}\frac{L(L+D2)}{u^2}R+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(E\frac{\mu \omega ^2u^2}{2}\right)R=0.$$
(1)
Here $`R`$ is the radial part of the wave function for the $`D`$-dimensional oscillator ($`D>2`$) and $`L=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ are the eigenvalues of the global angular momentum.

Introduce $`r=u^2`$ and take into account that

$$\frac{1}{u}\frac{d}{du}=2\frac{d}{dr},\frac{d^2}{du^2}=2\frac{d}{dr}+4r\frac{d^2}{dr^2}.$$

Then, equation (1) transforms into

$$\frac{d^2R}{dr^2}+\frac{d1}{r}\frac{dR}{dr}\frac{l(l+d2)}{r^2}R+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(\epsilon +\frac{\alpha }{r}\right)R=0,$$
(2)
where

$$d=D/2+1,l=L/2,$$
(3)
$$\epsilon =\mu \omega ^2/8,\alpha =E/4.$$
(4)
This is quite an unexpected result. If $`D=4,6,8,10,\mathrm{}`$, then $`d=3,4,5,6,\mathrm{}`$, and equation (2) is formally identical to the radial equation for a $`d`$-dimensional hydrogen atom (for odd $`D>2`$ the value of $`d`$ is half-integer and so cannot have the meaning of the dimension of the space in a usual sense). Then, $`l`$ takes not just integer but half-integer values as well, and a question arises about the origin of the fermion degree of freedom. The answer to the question will be given later. Finally, as has been mentioned in the first section, equations (1) and (2) are dual to each other and the duality transformation is $`r=u^2`$.

Earlier, just the radial part of the wave function of the oscillator was considered. For the Schrödinger equation we must take into account the angular part as well. Thus, the duality transformation must also include the transformation of angular variables. If we interpret the change of variables $`r=u^2`$ as a mechanism of generation of electric charge, then (as will be shown later) the transformation of some angular variables is responsible for the generation of magnetic charges.

In the next sections, we study dimensions $`D=1`$ and $`D=2`$ not considered in equation (1). Then, we analyze the dimensions $`D=4`$ and $`D=8`$. The dyon–oscillator duality is limited to these four dimensions. We postpone for a while the discussion of the problem of selection of the dimensions $`D=1,2,4,8`$.

## 3 1D Coulomb Anyon

Consider the one-dimensional Schrödinger equation

$$\frac{d^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{du^2}+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(E\frac{\mu \omega ^2u^2}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=0,$$
(5)
where $`\mathrm{}<u<\mathrm{}`$. We define a new variable

$$x=u^2,$$

and using the identity

$$\frac{d^2}{du^2}=4|x|\left(\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+\frac{1}{2x}\frac{d}{dx}\right)$$

and setting

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=Cx^{1/4}\mathrm{\Phi },$$
(6)
arrive at the equation

$$\frac{d^2\mathrm{\Phi }}{dx^2}+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(\epsilon _+\frac{\alpha }{|x|}+\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2\mu }\frac{3}{16x^2}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }=0,$$
(7)
where $`\epsilon `$ and $`\alpha `$ are the same as in (4).

Let us introduce the quantity $`\nu `$ which takes two values: $`\nu =1/4`$ and $`\nu =3/4`$, and rewrite the last equation in the form

$$\frac{d^2\mathrm{\Phi }^{(\nu )}}{dx^2}+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(\epsilon V_cV_{cs}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }^{(\nu )}=0,$$
(8)
where $`V_c=\alpha /|x|`$ and $`V_{cs}`$ is the Calogero–Sutherland potential $`V_{cs}=\mathrm{}^2\nu (1\nu )/2\mu x^2`$.

In one spatial dimension, a particle moving in the Calogero–Sutherland potential has a very unusual property. Unlike the potential $`V_{cs}`$, the wave function is not invariant under the replacement $`\nu (1\nu )`$. It describes a boson for even $`\nu `$ and a fermion for odd $`\nu `$. Statistics corresponding to the other values of $`\nu `$ is called the fractional statistics, and the system influenced along with $`V_{cs}`$ by a potential binding the particle to the center is called the 1D anyon. So, we have started from the 1D quantum oscillator and arrived at the 1D Coulomb anyon.

Comparing Eq. (5) with Eq. (8), we summarize that there are two alternative possibilities connected with Eq. (5) – explicit and hidden. In the first case, the parameter $`\omega `$ is fixed ($`\omega =fix.>0`$) and plays a role of the coupling constant, the parameter $`E`$ is quantized and has the meaning of energy, and the system is the 1D quantum oscillator. For a hidden possibility, the parameter $`E`$ is fixed ($`E=fix.>0`$), the coupling constant is equal to $`E/4`$, $`\omega `$ is quantized, the quantity $`\epsilon =\mu \omega ^2/8`$ takes the meaning of energy, and the system is the 1D Coulomb anyon. Since the 1D Coulomb anyon includes the $`1/x^2`$ interaction, it pretends to be a magnetic monopole in one spatial dimension. So, the anyon–oscillator duality is a prototype of the dyon–oscillator duality in 1D Quantum Mechanics.

Now we can calculate the energy levels $`\epsilon _n`$ and the wave functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{(\nu )}`$ in the following way. For energy levels we have

$$\epsilon =\frac{\mu \omega ^2}{8}=\frac{\mu }{8}\left[\frac{E}{\mathrm{}(2n+2\nu )}\right]^2=\frac{\mu }{8}\left[\frac{4\alpha }{\mathrm{}(2n+2\nu )}\right]^2=\frac{\mu \alpha ^2}{2\mathrm{}^2(n+\nu )^2},$$

where $`N=2n+2\nu 1/2`$ with $`N`$ numerating the energy levels $`E=\mathrm{}\omega (N+1/2)`$ and $`n`$ being integer and nonnegative.

Consider the wave functions. It follows from (6) that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{(\nu )}=\frac{1}{C}x^{1/4}\mathrm{\Psi }_n^{(\nu )},$$

where $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n^{(\nu )}\mathrm{\Psi }`$, and therefore

$$\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{(\nu )}|^2𝑑x=\frac{1}{|C|^2}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}x^{1/2}|\mathrm{\Psi }_n^{(\nu )}|^2𝑑x.$$

The integral in the left-hand side is equal to 1, from which it follows that

$$|C|^2=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}u^2|\mathrm{\Psi }_N(u)|^2𝑑u=\overline{u^2}=\frac{2(n+\nu )\mathrm{}}{\mu \omega }.$$

Thus,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{(\nu )}=\frac{(1)^n}{\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{\frac{\mu \omega }{\mathrm{}(n+\nu )}}x^{1/4}\mathrm{\Psi }_n^{(\nu )}$$

if we choose the phase factor as $`(1)^n`$.

Remind that according to the theory of quantum oscillator,

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_N^{(\nu )}=\left(\frac{\mu \omega }{\pi \mathrm{}}\right)^{1/4}\frac{1}{2^NN!}e^{\mu \omega u^2/2}H_N\left(u\sqrt{\frac{\mu \omega }{\mathrm{}}}\right),$$

where $`H_N(\xi )`$ is the Hermite polynomial

$$H_N(\xi )=(1)^Ne^{\xi ^2}\frac{d^N}{d\xi ^N}e^{\xi ^2}.$$

Further, it is known that Hermite polynomials could be expressed in terms of confluent hypergeometric functions. For our case ($`s=0,1/2`$)

$$H_{2n+2s}(z)=(1)^n\frac{(2n+2s)!}{n!}(2z)^{2s}F(n,2s+1/2,z^2).$$

Using the identification $`y=x\mu \omega /\mathrm{}`$ and the relations $`2s+1/2=2\nu `$ and $`\mu \omega /\mathrm{}=2\mu \alpha /\mathrm{}^2(n+\nu )`$, we get

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{(\nu )}=\sqrt{\frac{\mu \alpha }{\mathrm{}^2}}\frac{1}{2^{n\nu +1/4}}\frac{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2n+2\nu +1/2)}}{\pi ^{1/4}n!(n+\nu )}y^\nu e^{|y|/2}F(n,2\nu ,y),$$

and after taking into account the duplication formula for Euler’s gamma-function

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(2z)=2^{2z1}\pi ^{1/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)\mathrm{\Gamma }(z+1/2)$$

we arrive at the formula

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_n^{(\nu )}=\frac{\sqrt{\mu \alpha }}{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{n+\nu }\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2\nu )}\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+2\nu )}{n!}}y^\nu e^{|y|/2}F(n,2\nu ,y).$$

So, we have two types of 1D Coulomb anyons with $`\nu =1/4`$ and $`\nu =3/4`$, respectively.

## 4 Magnetic Vortex

Now turn to the cyclic oscillator. Here is the first example where along with the radial variable there appears an angular one. In the polar coordinates $`(u,\phi )`$, where $`0u<\mathrm{}`$, $`0\phi <2\pi `$, the Schrödinger equation takes the form

$$\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{u^2}+\frac{1}{u}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{u}+\frac{1}{u^2}\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{\phi ^2}+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(E\frac{\mu \omega ^2u^2}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=0.$$
(9)
Input new variables

$$r=u^2,\varphi =2\phi $$
(10)
and rewrite equation (9) as

$$\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{r^2}+\frac{1}{r}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{r}+\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{\varphi ^2}+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(\epsilon +\frac{\alpha }{r}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=0.$$
(11)
where $`\epsilon `$ and $`\alpha `$ are given by expressions (4). Equation (10) is identical to the Schrödinger equation for a two-dimensional hydrogen atom; however, $`\varphi [0,4\pi )`$. Thus, instead of a plane, we have two-sheeted Riemann surface. As a consequence, the single-valuedness condition $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r,\varphi +4\pi )=\mathrm{\Psi }(r,\varphi )`$ leads to the integer as well as half-integer eigenvalues for the angular momentum. The solution of the first type for $`\varphi (\varphi +2\pi )`$ does not change the sign, while the second type solutions under the same transformation change the sign. Whence, without loss of information we can think of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r,\varphi )`$ defined in the region $`0\varphi <2\pi `$ and having two modifications that differ from each other by the quantum number $`s=0`$ or $`1/2`$. In addition $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{(0)}(r,\varphi +2\pi )=\mathrm{\Psi }^{(0)}(r,\varphi )`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{(1/2)}(r,\varphi +2\pi )=\mathrm{\Psi }^{(1/2)}(r,\varphi )`$. We say that these wave functions describe the system with full inner momentum $`s=0`$ and $`s=1/2`$, respectively.

Introduce now the important substitution

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{(s)}(r,\varphi )=e^{is\varphi }\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}(r,\varphi ),$$
(12)
where $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}(r,\varphi +2\pi )=\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}(r,\varphi )`$ for $`s=0`$ as well as for $`s=1/2`$. From (11) and (12) it follows that the function $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}`$ satisfies the equation

$$\frac{^2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}}{r^2}+\frac{1}{r}\frac{\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}}{r}+\frac{1}{r^2}\left(\frac{}{\varphi }+is\right)^2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(\epsilon +\frac{\alpha }{r}\right)\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}=0.$$
(13)
Now let us clear up to what system there corresponds equation (13). Input the Cartesian coordinates

$$x_1=r\mathrm{cos}\varphi ,x_2=r\mathrm{sin}\varphi .$$

As $`/\varphi =x_1/x_2x_2/x_1`$, then instead of (13) we have

$$\left(\frac{}{x_1}\frac{isx_2}{r^2}\right)^2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}+\left(\frac{}{x_2}+\frac{isx_1}{r^2}\right)^2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(\epsilon +\frac{\alpha }{r}\right)\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}=0.$$
(14)
To this equation there corresponds the Hamiltonian

$$\widehat{H}=\frac{1}{2\mu }\left[\left(\widehat{p}_1\frac{\mathrm{}sx_2}{r^2}\right)^2+\left(\widehat{p}_2+\frac{\mathrm{}sx_1}{r^2}\right)^2\right]\frac{\alpha }{r}.$$
(15)
Input a vector

$$\stackrel{}{A}=\frac{g}{r^2}(x_2,x_1)$$

where $`g=\mathrm{}cs/e`$ and $`e=\sqrt{\alpha }`$. As

$$rot\stackrel{}{A}=\frac{A_2}{x_1}\frac{A_1}{x_2}=g\left[\frac{}{x_1}\left(\frac{}{x_1}\frac{1}{r}\right)+\frac{}{x_2}\left(\frac{}{x_2}\frac{1}{r}\right)\right]=g\left(\frac{^2}{x_1^2}+\frac{^2}{x_2^2}\right)\frac{1}{r}=2\pi g\delta (\stackrel{}{x}),$$

then $`\stackrel{}{A}`$ is the vector potential created by the magnetic vortex of the magnetic charge $`g`$ and placed in the origin of coordinates.

Now instead of (15) we get the Hamiltonian

$$\widehat{H}=\frac{1}{2\mu }\left(\widehat{p}_\mu \frac{e}{c}A_\mu \right)^2\frac{e^2}{r},$$

corresponding to the two-dimensional charge–dyon system. So it is proved that the cyclic oscillator is dual to the charge–dyon system, being a generalization of a usual two-dimensional hydrogen atom.

Let us discuss the correspondence between the cyclic oscillator and the charge–dyon system in detail. It is well-known that in the polar coordinates $`(u,\phi )`$ the energy and wave function of the cyclic oscillator are given by the formulas $`E=\mathrm{}\omega (2n+|M|+1)`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{n,M}(u,\phi )=A_{n,M}u^{|M|}e^{\mu \omega u^2/\mathrm{}}F(n,|M|+1,\frac{\mu \omega }{\mathrm{}}u^2)e^{iM\phi },$$

where $`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$, $`M=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$. To even and odd wave functions there correspond even and odd values of $`M`$. Formally, the allowance for parity can be realized by introducing the quantum numbers $`s=0,1/2`$ and $`m=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$, so that $`M=2(m+s)`$.

The energy $`\epsilon `$ is calculated similarly to the one in the previous section

$$\epsilon =\frac{\mu e^4}{2\mathrm{}^2(n+|m+s|+1/2)^2}.$$
(16)
Next, going over to $`r=u^2`$ and $`\varphi =2\phi `$ we have

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{n,m}^{(s)}=A_{n,m}^{(s)}r^{|m+s|}e^{\mu \omega r/\mathrm{}}F(n,2|m+s|+1,\mu \omega r/\mathrm{})e^{i(m+s)\varphi }.$$

It remains to pass from the two-sheeted Riemann surface $`(0\varphi <4\pi )`$ to the plane $`(0\varphi <2\pi )`$, then take into account (12) and the last formula with the expression $`\mu \omega /\mathrm{}=2\mu e^2/\mathrm{}^2(n+|m+s|+1/2)`$ and, introducing a new variable $`\rho =2\mu e^2r/\mathrm{}^2(n+|m+s|+1/2)`$, write

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_{n,m}^{(s)}(\rho ,\varphi )=C_{n,m}^{(s)}\rho ^{|n+m|}e^\rho F(n,2|n+m|+1,\rho )e^{im\varphi },$$
(17)
where the normalization constant $`C_{n,m}^{(s)}`$ is determined by the condition

$$2\pi \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left|\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_{n,m}^{(s)}(\rho ,\phi )\right|^2r𝑑r=1.$$

Go back to the transformation (10) and pass there from the polar coordinates $`(r,\varphi )`$ to the Cartesian ones $`(x_1,x_2)`$. Note that $`\varphi [0,4\pi )`$. We have

$`x_1`$ $`=`$ $`r\mathrm{cos}\varphi =u^2[\mathrm{cos}^2(\varphi /2)\mathrm{sin}^2(\varphi /2)]=u_1^2u_2^2,`$
$`x_2`$ $`=`$ $`r\mathrm{sin}\varphi =2u^2\mathrm{sin}^2(\varphi /2)\mathrm{cos}(\varphi /2)=2u_1u_2.`$ (18)
This transformation is known from celestial mechanics as the Levi–Civita transformation. In terms of the complex coordinates $`z=x_1+ix_2`$, $`v=u_1+iu_2`$ it takes the form $`z=v^2`$, i.e., corresponds to the square of the complex variable $`v`$. The Levi–Civita transformation together with the transformations (10) and the $`𝐙_\mathrm{𝟐}`$-reduction compose the duality transformation. Note that $`x=\sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^2}=u^2u_1^2+u_2^2`$. The last expression is known as the Euler’s identity. Thus, the Levi–Civita transformation is bilinear coordinate transformation obeying Euler’s identity. This fact is quite noteworthy from the mathematical point of view, and we will have an opportunity to discuss it.

## 5 Charge–Dyon System

Unlike the two-dimensional space, in four-dimensions there are several types of ”spherical coordinates”. We take the ones used in the theory of symmetrical top

$$u_1+iu_2=u\mathrm{cos}(\beta /2)e^{i(\alpha +\gamma )/2},u_3+iu_4=u\mathrm{sin}(\beta /2)e^{i(\alpha \gamma )/2}.$$
(19)
For $`u=const`$, the position on a sphere is parametrized by the coordinates $`(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )`$ that cover the sphere completely when

$$\alpha [0,2\pi ),\beta [0,\pi ),\gamma [0,4\pi ).$$

In the coordinates (19), the length-element and the Laplacian are given by

$`dl^2=du^2+{\displaystyle \frac{u^2}{4}}\left(d\alpha ^2+d\beta ^2+d\gamma ^2+2\mathrm{cos}\beta d\alpha d\gamma \right),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{u_\mu ^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{u^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{u}}\left(u^3{\displaystyle \frac{}{u}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{4}{u^2}}\widehat{J}^2,`$
where

$`\widehat{J}^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\beta }}\left(\mathrm{sin}\beta {\displaystyle \frac{}{\beta }}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\beta }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\alpha ^2}}2\mathrm{cos}\beta {\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\alpha \gamma }}+{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\gamma ^2}}\right).`$
Thus, in terms of the coordinates (19) the isotropic oscillator is described by the equation

$$\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{u^2}+\frac{3}{u}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{u}\frac{4}{u^2}\widehat{J}^2\mathrm{\Psi }+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(E\frac{\mu \omega ^2u^2}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=0.$$

The operators $`\widehat{J}^2,\widehat{J}_3=i/\gamma `$, $`\widehat{J}_3^{}=i/\alpha `$ are mutually commuting, and their eigenfunction is represented by the matrix of finite rotations

$$D_{ms}^j(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )=e^{im\alpha }d_{ms}^j(\beta )e^{is\gamma }.$$

The explicit form of the function $`d_{ms}^j(\beta )`$ is rather complicated, it can be found in manuals on Quantum Mechanics. It is important that the quantities $`j,m`$ and $`s`$ run the values $`j=0,1/2,1,\mathrm{}`$ and $`m,s=0,\pm 1/2,\pm 1,\mathrm{},\pm j`$.

Now it is clear that the function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ should be of the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=R(u)D_{ms}^j(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ).$$

As the eigenvalues of the operator $`\widehat{J}^2`$ are equal to $`j(j+1)`$, the radial function $`R(u)`$ satisfies the equation

$$\frac{d^2R}{du^2}+\frac{3}{u}\frac{dR}{du}\frac{4j(j+1)}{u^2}R+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(E\frac{\mu \omega ^2u^2}{2}\right)R=0.$$

This equation is solved as follows. First, use the dimensionless variable $`v=au`$ with $`a=(\mu \omega /\mathrm{})^{1/2}`$, and rewrite the last equation as

$$\frac{d^2R}{dv^2}+\frac{3}{v}\frac{dR}{dv}\frac{4j(j+1)}{v^2}R+\lambda Rv^2R=0,$$

where $`\lambda =2\mu E/\mathrm{}^2a^2=2E/\mathrm{}\omega `$. The next step is in the passage to the variable $`\rho =v^2`$ and the equation

$$\frac{d^2R}{d\rho ^2}+\frac{2}{\rho }\frac{dR}{dv}\frac{j(j+1)}{\rho ^2}R+\left(\frac{\lambda }{4\rho }\frac{1}{4}\right)R=0.$$

The analysis of this equation as $`\rho 0`$ and $`\rho \mathrm{}`$ verifies the appropriateness of the substitution

$$R(u)=\rho ^je^{\rho /2}W(\rho )$$

leading to the equation for a confluent hypergeometric function

$$\rho \frac{d^2W}{d\rho ^2}+(2j+2\rho )\frac{dW}{d\rho }(j+1\lambda /4)W=0.$$

A further scenario is usual to any student who masters the course of Quantum Mechanics. The result is

$$W=F(j+1\lambda /4,2j+2;\rho ),$$

$$j+1\lambda /4=n,n=0,1,2\mathrm{}.$$

Concluding, we receive

$`E_N=\mathrm{}\omega (N+2),N=2n+2j=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ (20)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }=Const(au)^{2j}e^{a^2u^2/2}F(n,2j+2,a^2u^2)d_{ms}^j(\beta )e^{im\alpha }e^{is\gamma }.`$ (21)
For fixed $`j`$ to the energy level $`E_N`$ there correspond $`(2j+1)^2`$ states (degeneracy by $`m`$ and $`s`$). As $`j=\frac{N}{2},\frac{N}{2}1,\mathrm{}`$, the total degeneracy for the $`N`$-th energy level is

$$g_N=\frac{1}{6}(N+1)(N+2)(N+3).$$

Observe now how the charge–dyon system could be obtained from the four-dimensional oscillator.

Using the variable $`r=u^2`$, we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{u_\mu ^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`4r\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}\left(r^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\beta }}\left(\mathrm{sin}\beta {\displaystyle \frac{}{\beta }}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\alpha ^2}}]`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\beta }}[{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\gamma ^2}}2\mathrm{cos}\beta {\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\alpha \gamma }}]\}.`$
Thus, the Schrödinger equation

$$\frac{d^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{du_\mu ^2}+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(E\frac{\mu \omega ^2u^2}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=0$$

gains (in terms of the coordinates (19)) the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}\left(r^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{r}}\right)`$ $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\beta }}\left(\mathrm{sin}\beta {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\beta }}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{\alpha ^2}}\right]`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\beta }}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{\gamma ^2}}2\mathrm{cos}\beta {\displaystyle \frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{\alpha \gamma }}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}}\left(\epsilon +{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{r}}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=0,`$
with $`e^2=E/4`$, $`\epsilon =\mu \omega ^2/8`$.

Perform a substitution

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(r,\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )=\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}(r,\alpha ,\beta )e^{is(\alpha +\gamma )},$$
(22)
where $`s`$ is any real parameter. It is easy to show that the function $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}`$ satisfies the equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}\left(r^2{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}}{r}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\beta }}\left(\mathrm{sin}\beta {\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}}{\beta }}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{^2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}}{\alpha ^2}}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2is}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}}{\alpha }}{\displaystyle \frac{2s^2}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}}\left(\epsilon +{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{r}}\right)\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}=0.`$ (23)
As in the previous sections, the expression for $`\epsilon `$ is easily found to be

$$\epsilon =\frac{\mu e^4}{2\mathrm{}^2(n+j+1)^2}.$$

The wave function $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}`$ is obtained by comparing formulae (22) and (21), i.e.,

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}(r,\alpha ,\beta )=C\rho ^je^{\rho /2}F(n,2j+2,\rho )d_{ms}^j(\beta )e^{i(ms)\alpha },$$

where $`\rho =a^2u^2=2\mu e^2r/\mathrm{}^2(n+j+1)`$.

The first line of this equation is nothing but $`^2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}/x_j^2`$ where

$$x_1+ix_2=r\mathrm{sin}\beta e^{i\alpha },x_3=r\mathrm{cos}\beta .$$

Then,

$$\frac{2is}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}\frac{}{\alpha }=\frac{is}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}\frac{}{\alpha }+\frac{}{\alpha }\frac{is}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}.$$

Substituting here the formula

$$\frac{}{\alpha }=x_1\frac{}{x_2}x_2\frac{}{x_1},$$

we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{2is}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{isx_1}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{x_2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{}{x_2}}{\displaystyle \frac{isx_1}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{isx_2}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{x_1}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{x_1}}{\displaystyle \frac{isx_2}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}}.`$
Also note that

$$\frac{s^2(x_1^2+x_2^2)}{r^4(1+\mathrm{cos}^2\beta )}\frac{2s^2}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}=\frac{s}{r^2}.$$

Then, equation (23) can be rewritten as

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{x_1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{isx_2}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}}\right)^2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}`$ $`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{x_2}}{\displaystyle \frac{isx_1}{r^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}}\right)^2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}+{\displaystyle \frac{^2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}}{x_3^2}}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}}\left(\epsilon +{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{s^2}{r^2}}\right)\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}=0.`$
This equation is identical to the Pauli equation

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{x_j}}i{\displaystyle \frac{e}{c}}A_j\right)^2\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}}\left(\epsilon +{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{s^2}{r^2}}\right)\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}=0,`$ (24)
where the vector potential $`A_j`$ is expressed as follows:

$$\stackrel{}{A}=\frac{g\mathrm{sin}\beta }{r(1+\mathrm{cos}\beta )}(\mathrm{sin}\alpha ,\mathrm{cos}\alpha ,0)$$
(25)
with $`g=\mathrm{}cs/e`$.

The vector potential (25) corresponds to the Dirac monopole with the magnetic charge $`g`$. So, equation (24) describes the motion for a charged particle $`e`$ in the field of a dyon with charges $`(e,g)`$. The presence of the charge $`(e)`$ is indicated by the term $`e^2/r`$. The part $`(\mathrm{}^2s^2/2\mu r^2)`$ presents a potential introduced by Goldhaber with the argument of conservation of the angular momentum in scattering of a charged particle from a magnetic monopole. As has been proved by Zwanziger, the addition of such a term makes a problem, corresponding to equation (24), superintegrable.

Thus, we are lucky to ”synthesize” from the isotropic oscillator the bound charge–dyon system. It remains to clear up one important detail. As was shown by Dirac, the introduction of magnetic monopole in Quantum Mechanics leads to the quantization of an electric charge

$$e=\frac{\mathrm{}c}{g}s,s=0,\pm 1/2,\pm 1,\pm 3/2,\mathrm{}.$$

In our approach, the Dirac quantization condition is deduced from formula (22). The transformation $`\gamma (\gamma +4\pi )`$ is identical, as it is seen from the coordinate definition (19). Requiring the single-valuedness for the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(r,\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )`$, we come to the condition $`s=0,\pm 1/2,\pm 1,\mathrm{}`$ which, together with the formula $`g=\mathrm{}cs/e`$, leads to the quantization of an electric charge.

So, we have shown that the dyon–oscillator duality is valid for the four-dimensional oscillator.

Now focus on the duality transformation. So we have

$`x_1+ix_2`$ $`=`$ $`r\mathrm{sin}\beta e^{i\alpha }=2r\mathrm{sin}(\beta /2)\mathrm{cos}(\beta /2)e^{i\alpha }=2r{\displaystyle \frac{u_1+iu_2}{u}}e^{i(\alpha +\gamma )/2}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{u_3+iu_4}{u}}e^{i(\alpha \gamma )/2}e^{i\alpha }=2(u_1+iu_2)(u_3+iu_4),`$
$`x_3`$ $`=`$ $`r\mathrm{cos}\beta =r[\mathrm{cos}^2(\beta /2)\mathrm{sin}^2(\beta /2)]=r{\displaystyle \frac{u_1^2+u_2^2}{u^2}}r{\displaystyle \frac{u_3^2+u_4^2}{u^2}}`$
$`=`$ $`u_1^2+u_2^2u_3^2u_4^2,`$
or, otherwise,

$`x_1`$ $`=`$ $`2(u_1u_3u_2u_4),`$
$`x_2`$ $`=`$ $`2(u_1u_4+u_2u_3),`$
$`x_3`$ $`=`$ $`u_1^2+u_2^2u_3^2u_4^2.`$
This bilinear transformation satisfies Euler’s condition $`r=u^2`$ and is called the Kustaanheimo–Stiefel transformation. It corresponds to the mapping $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^4(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{u}})\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^3(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{x}})`$ that, along with the formula

$$\gamma =\frac{i}{2}ln\left\{\frac{u_1+iu_2}{u_1iu_2}\frac{u_3iu_4}{u_3+iu_4}\right\}$$

and the ansatz $`\mathrm{\Psi }\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(s)}`$, composes the duality transformation.

## 6 Magic Numbers

Let us answer the question why the dyon–oscillator duality is valid just for the oscillators with the configuration spaces of dimensions $`D=1,2,4,8`$. We have already mentioned that the duality transformation must satisfy the Euler’s identity

$$(u_1^2+u_2^2+\mathrm{}+u_D^2)^2=x_1^2+x_2^2+\mathrm{}+x_d^2,$$
(26)
where $`d=1`$ for $`D=1`$ and $`d=D/2+1`$ for $`D>1`$. It was proved by Hurwitz that in the cases of $`x_i`$ being a bilinear combination of $`u_i`$, the identity

$$(u_1^2+u_2^2+\mathrm{}+u_D^2)^2=x_1^2+x_2^2+\mathrm{}+x_D^2$$
(27)
is true for $`D=1,2,4,8`$. These magic numbers are directly related to the existence of the four fundamental algebraic structures: real numbers, complex numbers, quaternions and octonions. Putting in (27) $`x_{d+1}=x_{d+2}=\mathrm{}=x_D=0`$, we come to (26).

## 7 Hurwitz Transformation

The question arises, of how to find a transformation converting $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^8(\mathrm{u})`$ into $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^5(\mathrm{x})`$, i.e. the transformation with the last of the magic numbers presented above. Begin to write down the transformation in the form

$$x=H(u;D)u.$$

Here $`D`$ is the dimension of the space, $`H`$ is the matrix $`D\times D`$ with the elements $`u_\mu `$, and $`x,u`$ are the $`D`$-dimensional columns composed from $`x_j,u_\mu `$ and, possibly, zeroes. So for the Levi–Civita and Kustaanheimo–Stiefel transformations, we have

$$\left|\begin{array}{c}x_1\\ x_2\end{array}\right|=\left|\begin{array}{cc}u_1& u_2\\ u_2& u_1\end{array}\right|\left|\begin{array}{c}u_1\\ u_2\end{array}\right|,$$

$$\left|\begin{array}{c}x_1\\ x_2\\ x_3\\ 0\end{array}\right|=\left|\begin{array}{cccc}u_3& u_4& u_1& u_2\\ u_4& u_3& u_2& u_1\\ u_1& u_2& u_3& u_4\\ u_2& u_1& u_4& u_3\end{array}\right|\left|\begin{array}{c}u_1\\ u_2\\ u_3\\ u_4\end{array}\right|.$$

The matrices $`H(u;2)`$ and $`H(u;4)`$ have the property

$$H(u;2)H^T(u;2)=u^2E(2),H(u;4)H^T(u;2)=u^2E(4),$$

where $`\mathrm{"}T\mathrm{"}`$ means the sign of transposition, $`E(2)`$ and $`E(4)`$ are the unit matrices. Due to these properties the Euler’s identities are fulfilled. Now, one can easily deduce that the transformation $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^8(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{u}})\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^5(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{x}})`$ must take the form

$$\left|\begin{array}{c}x_0\\ x_1\\ x_2\\ x_3\\ x_4\\ 0\\ 0\\ 0\end{array}\right|=\left|\begin{array}{cccccccc}u_0& u_1& u_2& u_3& u_4& u_5& u_6& u_7\\ u_4& u_5& u_6& u_7& u_0& u_1& u_2& u_3\\ u_5& u_4& u_7& u_6& u_1& u_0& u_3& u_2\\ u_6& u_7& u_4& u_5& u_2& u_3& u_0& u_1\\ u_7& u_6& u_5& u_4& u_3& u_2& u_1& u_0\\ u_1& u_0& u_3& u_2& u_5& u_4& u_7& u_6\\ u_2& u_3& u_0& u_1& u_6& u_7& u_4& u_5\\ u_3& u_2& u_1& u_0& u_7& u_6& u_5& u_4\end{array}\right|\left|\begin{array}{c}u_0\\ u_1\\ u_2\\ u_3\\ u_4\\ u_5\\ u_6\\ u_7\end{array}\right|.$$

Whence it follows that

$`x_0`$ $`=`$ $`u_0^2+u_1^2+u_2^2+u_3^2u_4^2u_5^2u_6^2u_7^2,`$
$`x_1`$ $`=`$ $`2(u_0u_4+u_1u_5u_2u_6u_3u_7),`$
$`x_2`$ $`=`$ $`2(u_0u_5u_1u_4+u_2u_7u_3u_6),`$ (28)
$`x_3`$ $`=`$ $`2(u_0u_6+u_1u_7+u_2u_4+u_3u_5),`$
$`x_4`$ $`=`$ $`2(u_0u_7u_1u_6u_2u_5+u_3u_4).`$
It is easy to prove that for the matrix $`H(u;8)`$ there is a condition

$$H(u;8)H^T(u;8)=u^2E(8)$$

that guarantees the validity of Euler’s identity.

Adding to (28) the transformations

$`\alpha _T`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{(u_0+iu_1)(u_2iu_3)}{(u_0iu_1)(u_2+iu_3)}},`$
$`\beta _T`$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{arctan}\left({\displaystyle \frac{u_0^2+u_1^2}{u_2^2+u_3^2}}\right)^{1/2},`$ (29)
$`\gamma _T`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{(u_0iu_1)(u_2iu_3)}{(u_0+iu_1)(u_2+iu_3)}},`$
we obtain a transformation converting $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^8`$ to the direct product $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^5𝐒^\mathrm{𝟑}`$ of the space $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^5(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{x}})`$ and a three-dimensional sphere $`𝐒^\mathrm{𝟑}(\alpha _T,\beta _T,\gamma _T)`$.

## 8 Yang–Coulomb Monopole

In the coordinates (28)-(29)the eight-dimensional isotropic oscillator is described by the equation

$$\frac{1}{2\mu }\left(i\mathrm{}\frac{}{x_j}\mathrm{}A_j^2\widehat{T}_a\right)^2\mathrm{\Psi }+\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2\mu r^2}\widehat{T}^2\mathrm{\Psi }\frac{e^2}{r}\mathrm{\Psi }=\epsilon \mathrm{\Psi }$$
(30)
where $`\epsilon `$ and $`e^2`$ are defined as usual. The operators $`\widehat{T}_a`$ are the generators of the $`SU(2)`$ group. In the coordinates $`(\alpha _T,\beta _T,\gamma _T)`$ they are parametrized as follows:

$`\widehat{T}^1`$ $`=`$ $`i\left(\mathrm{cos}\alpha _T\mathrm{cos}\beta _T{\displaystyle \frac{}{\alpha _T}}+\mathrm{sin}\alpha _T{\displaystyle \frac{}{\beta _T}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\alpha _T}{\mathrm{sin}\beta _T}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\gamma _T}}\right),`$
$`\widehat{T}^2`$ $`=`$ $`i\left(\mathrm{sin}\alpha _T\mathrm{cot}\beta _T{\displaystyle \frac{}{\alpha _T}}\mathrm{cos}\alpha _T{\displaystyle \frac{}{\beta _T}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\alpha _T}{\mathrm{sin}\beta _T}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\gamma _T}}\right),`$
$`\widehat{T}^3`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{}{\alpha _T}}.`$
The five-dimensional vectors $`\stackrel{}{A}^a`$ are given by the expressions

$`\stackrel{}{A}^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r(r+x_0)}}(0,x_4,x_3,x_2,x_1),`$
$`\stackrel{}{A}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r(r+x_0)}}(0,x_3,x_4,x_1,x_2),`$
$`\stackrel{}{A}^3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r(r+x_0)}}(0,x_2,x_1,x_4,x_3).`$
Each term of the triplet $`A_j^a`$ coincides with the vector potential of a $`5D`$ Dirac monopole with a unit topological charge and with the line of singularity along the nonpositive $`x_0`$ semiaxis. The vectors $`A_j^a`$ are orthogonal to each other

$$A_j^aA_j^b=\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{rx_0}{r+x_0}\delta _{ab}$$

and to the vector $`\stackrel{}{x}=(x_0,x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)`$ as well.

We see that equation (4) describes the charge–dyon system with $`SU(2)`$ monopoles which we call the Yang–Coulomb monopole (YCM). The YCM is defined as a five-dimensional system composed of the Yang monopole ($`A_j^a`$) of the topological charge $`+1`$ and the particle of the isospin $`(\widehat{T}_a)`$. Both the monopole and particle are also assumed to have electric charges of the opposite signs. Thus, the monopole–particle coupling is realized not only by the $`SU(2)`$ gauge field but also by the Coulomb interaction. At large distances the Coulomb structure becomes immaterial and YCM seems to be a pure Yang monopole. The YCM is a unique example of an integrable non-Abelian system. The $`SO(6)`$ group is a group of hidden symmetry of YCM which can be used for calculation of the energy spectrum of YCM by an algebraic method.

After quite complicated calculations, which are omitted here, we can reduce equation (30) to the form

$$\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_5\frac{4}{r(r+x_0)}\widehat{L}\widehat{T}\frac{2}{r(r+x_0)}\widehat{T}^2\right)\mathrm{\Psi }+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(\epsilon +\frac{e^2}{r}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=0,$$
(31)
where

$`\widehat{L}_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}[D_{41}(x)+D_{32}(x)],`$
$`\widehat{L}_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}[D_{13}(x)+D_{12}(x)],`$
$`\widehat{L}_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}[D_{12}(x)+D_{34}(x)]`$
with

$$D_{ij}=x_i\frac{}{x_j}+x_j\frac{}{x_i}.$$

We see that equation (31) contains the LT-coupling term demonstrating that we have no way to separate the wave function dependence on $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^5`$ and $`𝐒^\mathrm{𝟑}`$.

In $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^5`$ we introduce the hyperspherical coordinates $`r[o,\mathrm{})`$, $`\theta [0,2\pi ]`$, $`\alpha [0,2\pi )`$, $`\beta [0,\pi ]`$ and $`\gamma [0,4\pi )`$ according to the relations

$`x_0`$ $`=`$ $`r\mathrm{cos}\theta ,`$
$`x_1+ix_2`$ $`=`$ $`r\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}e^{i\frac{\alpha +\gamma }{2}},`$
$`x_3+ix_4`$ $`=`$ $`r\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}e^{i\frac{\alpha \gamma }{2}},`$
and rewrite equation (31) as

$$\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_{r\theta }\frac{\widehat{L}^2}{r^2\mathrm{sin}^2(\theta /2)}\frac{\widehat{J}^2}{r^2\mathrm{cos}^2(\theta /2)}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(\epsilon +\frac{e^2}{r}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=0,$$
(32)
where $`\widehat{J}_a=\widehat{L}_a+\widehat{T}_a`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{r\theta }=\frac{1}{r^4}\frac{}{r}\left(r^4\frac{}{r}\right)+\frac{1}{r^2\mathrm{sin}^3\theta }\frac{}{\theta }\left(\mathrm{sin}^3\theta \frac{}{\theta }\right).$$

We introduce the separation ansatz

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Phi }(r,\theta )G(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ;\alpha _T,\beta _T,\gamma _T),$$

where $`G`$ are the eigenfunctions of $`\widehat{L}^2,\widehat{T}^2`$ and $`\widehat{J}^2`$ with the eigenvalues $`L(L+1)`$, $`T(T+1)`$ and $`J(J+1)`$.

Because of the LT–interaction, we seek the function $`G`$ in the form

$$G=\underset{M=m+t}{}(JM|L,m;T,t)D_{mm^{}}^L(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )D_{tt^{}}^T(\alpha _T,\beta _T,\gamma _T),$$

where $`(JM|L,m;T,t)`$ are the Clebsch–Gordan coefficients.

Let us take the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(r,\theta )`$ in the form

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(r,\theta )=R(r)Z(\theta ).$$

Equation (32) is then separated into

$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^3\theta }\frac{d}{d\theta }\left(\mathrm{sin}^3\theta \frac{dZ}{d\theta }\right)\frac{2L(L+1)}{1\mathrm{cos}\theta }Z\frac{2J(J+1)}{1+\mathrm{cos}\theta }Z+\lambda (\lambda +3)Z=0$$
(33)
and a purely radial equation

$$\frac{1}{r^4}\frac{d}{dr}\left(r^4\frac{dR}{dr}\right)\frac{\lambda (\lambda +3)}{r^2}+\frac{2\mu }{\mathrm{}^2}\left(\epsilon +\frac{e^2}{r}\right)R=0$$
(34)
with the separation constant $`\lambda (\lambda +3)`$ being equal to the nonnegative eigenvalues of the global angular momentum.

In equation (33) it is convenient to change the variable as $`y=(1\mathrm{cos}\theta )/2`$ and set

$$Z(y)=y^L(1y)^JW(y).$$

Substituting this into equation (33) we obtain the hypergeometric equation

$$y(1y)\frac{d^2W}{dy^2}+[c(a+b+1)y]\frac{dW}{dy}abW=0,$$

where $`a=\lambda +L+J`$, $`b=\lambda +L+J+3`$, $`c=2L+2`$.

Thus, we find that

$$Z(\theta )=(1\mathrm{cos}\theta )^L(1+cos\theta )^LF(\lambda +J+L,\lambda +J+L+3,2L+2;\frac{1\mathrm{cos}\theta }{2}).$$

The solution behaves well at $`\theta =\pi `$ if the series $`F`$ terminates, that is

$$\lambda +J+L=n_\theta ,$$

with $`n_\theta =0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$.

Let us now consider the radial equation and introduce the function

$$f(r)=e^{kr}r^\lambda R(r).$$

It can easily be verified that the equation for $`f(r)`$ has the form of the confluent hypergeometric equation

$$z\frac{d^2f}{dz^2}+(cz)\frac{df}{dz}af=0,$$

where $`z=2kr,k=\sqrt{2\mu \epsilon /\mathrm{}^2}`$, $`c=2\lambda +4`$, $`a=\lambda +21/kr_0`$, $`r_0=\mathrm{}^2/me^2`$. For the bound state solutions ($`\epsilon <0`$), we have

$$\lambda +21/kr_0=n_r,n_r=0,1,2,\mathrm{};$$

therefore,

$$\epsilon _N^T=\frac{me^4}{2\mathrm{}^2(N/2+2)^2},$$

where $`N=2(n_r+\lambda )=2(n_r+n_\theta +J+L)`$.

For fixed $`T`$, the energy levels $`\epsilon _N^T`$ do not depend on $`L,J`$ and $`\lambda `$, i.e., they are degenerate. The total degeneracy is

$$g_N^T=(2T+1)\underset{\lambda }{}\underset{L}{}(2L+1)\underset{J}{}(2J+1).$$

After some tedious calculation we finally obtain

$$g_N^T=\frac{1}{12}(2T+1)^2\left(\frac{N}{2}T+1\right)\left(\frac{N}{2}T+2\right)\left\{\left(\frac{N}{2}T+2\right)\left(\frac{N}{2}T+3\right)+2T(N+5)\right\}.$$

For $`T=0`$ and $`N=2n`$ (even) the right-hand side of the last formula is equal to $`(n+1)(n+2)^2(n+3)/12`$ – that is, to the degeneracy of pure Coulomb levels. Further, we have $`T=0,1,\mathrm{},N/2`$ for even $`N`$ and $`T=1/2,3/2,\mathrm{},N/2`$ for odd $`N`$. Therefore,

$$g_N=\underset{T=0,\frac{1}{2}}{\overset{N/2}{}}g_N^T=\frac{(N+7)!}{7!N!}$$

i.e., we obtain the degeneracy of the energy levels for the 8D isotropic quantum oscillator.

Formulae (28) and (29) represent the duality transformation mapping the 8D quantum oscillator into charge–dyon system with the $`SU(2)`$ monopole.

## 9 Oscillator-like Systems

We have considered above the dyon–oscillator duality. This type of duality is valid not only for the $`1D,2D,4D`$ and $`8D`$ oscillators, but also for oscillator-like systems with the potentials

$$V(u^2)=C_0+C_2u^2+W(u^2),$$

where $`W(u^2)`$ has the form

$$W(u^2)=\underset{n=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}C_{2n}u^{2n}$$

For such modified potentials the ansatz (4) can be rewritten as

$$\epsilon =\frac{C_2}{4},e^2=\frac{EC_0}{4}$$

Thus, the value of the function $`V(u^2)`$ at $`u^2=0`$ contributes to the Coulomb coupling constant $`e^2`$. It is also easy to verify that the left-hand side of equation (34) develops the additional term $`(W(r)/4r)`$.

## 10 Exercises

$``$ Find the energy levels and normalized wave functions for states of the particle placed in the field $`V(x)=\alpha /|x|\mathrm{}^2\nu (\nu 1)/2\mu x^2`$, where $`x(\mathrm{},\mathrm{})`$ and $`\nu 0,1/2`$ (see Ref. ).

$``$ Prove that the 3D oscillator with coordinates confined by the 2D half-up cone for an angle of $`\pi /6`$ is dual to the 2D charge–dyon system obeying fractional statistics. Find the duality transformation (see Ref. ).

$``$ Calculate the length-element $`dl^2`$, metric tensor $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ and the Laplace operator $`^2/u_\mu ^2`$ in the coordinates (19).

$``$ Compute the integrals of motion for the 3-dimensional charge–dyon system, transforming for $`g=0`$ into the operator of orbital momentum and Runge–Lenz operator (see Ref. ).

$``$ Prove that the Goldhaber correction in the Hamiltonian of the 3-dimensional charge–dyon system is identical to the interaction $`\stackrel{}{\mu }\stackrel{}{B}`$ of the magnetic momentum $`\stackrel{}{\mu }`$ of a particle with the magnetic field $`\stackrel{}{B}`$ (see Ref. ).

$``$ Solve the Schrödinger equation for the 3-dimensional charge–dyon system in the parabolic coordinates $`x_1=\sqrt{\xi \eta }\mathrm{cos}\phi `$ $`x_2=\sqrt{\xi \eta }\mathrm{sin}\phi `$, $`x_3=(\xi \eta )/2`$ (see Ref. ).

$``$ Compute the expansion coefficients of the parabolic basis of the 3-dimensional charge–dyon system in terms of its spherical basis (see Ref. ).

$``$ Prove that the transformation (28) converts the Schrödinger equation for the $`8D`$ oscillator into equation (30).

$``$ Show that equation (30) can be transformed into (31).

$``$ Calculate the length-element $`dl^2`$, metric tensor $`g_{ij}`$ and Laplace operator $`^2/x_j^2`$ in the coordinates $`(r,\theta ,\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )`$.

Acknowledgment

I would like to thank the organizers of the school for the occasion to give a talk for so young and active audience.

Also I am grateful to Yeranuhi Hakobyan for her help in preparing this lecture.

References

Duality in QFT:

 N. Seiberg and E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 431, 484 (1994).

 Jeffrey A. Harvey, ”Magnetic Monopoles, Duality, and Supersymmetry”, EFI-96-06,hep-th/9603-86.

Dirac Monopoles and Dyons:

 P.A.M. Dirac, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 133, 69 (1931).

 J. Schwinger, Science, 165, 757 (1969).

 T.T.Wu and C.N. Yang, Phys.Rev. D 12, 3845 (1975).

Charge–Dyon and Dyon–Dyon Systems:

 A.S. Goldhaber, Phys. Rev. B 140, 1407 (1965).

 D. Zwanziger, Phys. Rev. 176, 1480 (1968).

One-Dimensional Anyons:

 A.P. Polychronakos, Nucl. Phys. B 324, 597 (1989).

 A.P. Balachandran, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 5, 2585 (1991).

 C.A. Anerisis and A.P. Balachandran, Int. J.Mod.Phys. A 6, 4721 (1991).

 S. Isakov, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 9, 2563 (1994).

Two-Dimensional Anyons:

 J.M. Leinaas and Myrheim, Nuovo Ciemento B 37, 1 (1977).

 F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44, 957 (1982).

 R. Jackiw, Ann. Phys. 201, 83 (1990).

 G.S. Canright and S.M. Girvin, Science 247, 1197 (1990).

 S. Forte, Rev. Mod. Phys. 64, 193 (1992).

 Alberto Lenda, ”Anyons: Quantum Mechanics of Particles with Fractional Statistics” (Springer-Vrelag, Berlin Heidelberg, 1992).

Group Theoretical Approach to 3D Anyons:

 M.S. Plyushchay, Phys. Lett. B 262, 71 (1991).

 M.S. Plyushchay, Phys. Lett. B 362, 54 (1991).

 M.S. Plyushchay, Nucl. Phys. B 491, 619 (1997).

 M.S. Plyushchay, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 12, 1153 (1997).

Yang Monopole:

 C.N. Yang, J. Math. Phys. 19, 320; 2622 (1978).

 M. Minami, Proc. Theor. Phys. 63, 303 (1980).

Hurwitz Transformation:

 A. P. Chen and M. Kibler, Phys. Rev. A 31, 3960 (1985).

 D. Lambert and M. Kibler, J. Phys. A 21, 307 (1988).

 M. Kibler, P. Winternitz, J. Phys. A 21, 1787 (1988).

 L. Davtyan, A. Sissakian, V. Ter-Antonyan, J. Math. Phys. 36, 1 (1995).

 A. Sissakian, V. Ter-Antonyan, ”The Structure of the Hurwitz Transformation”. In Proceedings of the International Workshop ”Finite Dimensional Integrable Systems”, 191, Dubna, 1995.

 L. Mardoyan, A. Sissakian, V. Ter-Antonyan, ”The Eulerian Parametrization of the Hurwitz Transformation”. In Proceedings of the International Workshop ”Finite Dimensional Integrable Systems”, 137, Dubna, 1995.

Oscillator and Kepler Problem:

 T. Iwayi, Y. Uwano, J. Math. Phys. 27, 1523 (1986).

 M. Kibler, A. Ronveaux, T. Negadi, J. Math. Phys. 27, 1541 (1986).

 T. Iwayi, Y. Uwano, J. Phys. A 21, 4083 (1988).

 A. Inomata, G. Junker, R. Wilson, Found. Phys. 23, 1075 (1993).

 T. Iwai, T. Sunako, J. Geom. Phys. 20, 250 (1996).

 Gao-Jian Zeng, Steng-Mei Ao, Xiang- Sheng Wu and Ka-Lin-Su, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 37, 2463 (1998).

 M.V. Pletyukhov and E. A. Tolkachev, Rep. Math. Phys. 43, 303 (1999).

 M.V. Pletyukhov and E. A. Tolkachev, J. Phys. A 32, L249 (1999).

 Toshiniro Iwai, J. Geom. Phys. 7, 507 (1990).

 I. Mladenov and V. Tsanov, J.Phys. A 20, 5865 (1987).

 L. Davtyan, L. Mardoyan, G. Pogosyan, A. Sissakian, V. Ter-Antonyan, J. Phys. A 20, 6121 (1987).

 M.V. Pletyukhov and E.A. Tolkachev, J. Math. Phys. 40, 93 (1999).

Singular D-Dimenional Oscillator:

 B. Sutherland, J. Math. Phys. 12, 246 (1971).

 F. Calogero, J. Math. Phys. 12, 419 (1971).

 Ye. Hakobyan, G. Pogosyan and A. Sissakian, Phys. Atom. Nucl. 61, 1762 (1998).

Dyon–Oscillator Duality (Abelian Monopole):

 A. Nersessian, V. Ter-Antonyan, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 9, 2431 (1994).

 A. Nersessian, V. Ter-Antonyan, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 10, 2633 (1995).

 A. Nersessian, V. Ter-Antonyan, M. Tsulaia, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 11, 1605 (1996).

 A. Maghakian, A. Sissakian, V. Ter-Antonyan, Phys. Lett. A 236. 5 (1997).

 L. Mardoyan, A. Sissakian, V. Ter-Antonyan, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 12, 237 (1997).

 Ye. Hakobyan, V. Ter-Antonyan, ”Quantum Oscillator as 1D Anyon”, quant-ph/0002069.

 A. Nersessian, V. Ter-Antonyan, Phys. Atom. Nucl. 61, 1756 (1998).

Dyon–Oscillator Duality (Non-Abelian Monopole):

 L. Mardoyan, A. Sissakian, V. Ter-Antonyan, Phys. Atom. Nucl. 61, 1746 (1998).

 L. Mardoyan, A. Sissakian, V. Ter-Antonyan, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 14, 1303 (1999).