format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

hep-th/0003160

Noncommutative Solitons

Rajesh Gopakumar, Shiraz Minwalla and Andrew Strominger

Jefferson Physical Laboratory, Harvard University

Cambridge, MA 02138, USA

Abstract

We find classically stable solitons (instantons) in odd (even) dimensional scalar noncommutative field theories whose scalar potential, $`V(\varphi )`$, has at least two minima. These solutions are bubbles of the false vacuum whose size is set by the scale of noncommutativity. Our construction uses the correspondence between non-commutative fields and operators on a single particle Hilbert space. In the case of noncommutative gauge theories we note that expanding around a simple solution shifts away the kinetic term and results in a purely quartic action with linearly realised gauge symmetries.

Mar. 2000

1. Introduction

Quantum field theory on a noncommutative space is of interest for a variety of reasons. It appears to be a self-consistent deformation of the highly constrained structure of local quantum field theory. Noncommutative field theories are nonlocal; unraveling the consequences of the breakdown of locality at short distances may help understanding non-locality in quantum gravity. The discovery of noncommutative quantum field theory in a limit of string theory  provides new inroads to the subject.

Perturbative aspects of noncommutative field theories have been analyzed in \[2--27\]. This study has thrown up some evidence for the renormalizability of a class of noncommutative field theories, and has revealed an intriguing mixing of the UV and IR  in these theories. In this paper we will construct localized classical solutions in some simple noncommutative field theories. We expect these objects to play a role in the quantum dynamics of the theory.

We first consider a scalar field with a polynomial potential. A scaling argument due to Derrick  shows that, in the commutative case, solitonic solutions do not exist in more than $`1+1`$ dimensions, as the energy of any field configuration can always be lowered by shrinking. Perhaps surprisingly, for sufficiently large noncommutativity parameter $`\theta `$, we will find classically stable solitons in any theory with a scalar potential with more than one $`\mathrm{𝚕𝚘𝚌𝚊𝚕}`$ minimum. These solitons are asymptotic to the true vacuum, and reach a second (possibly false) vacuum in their core. They cannot decay simply by shrinking to zero size because sharply peaked field configurations have high energies in noncommutative field theories. These solitons are metastable in the quantum theory, but by adjusting parameters in the scalar potential, their lifetime can be made arbitrarily long while their mass is kept fixed. Solutions are found corresponding to solitons in $`2l+1`$ dimensions or instantons in $`2l`$ dimensions for any $`l`$.

Our construction of these solutions exploits the connection between non-commutative fields and operators in single particle quantum mechanics. Under this correspondence, the $``$ product maps onto usual operator multiplication, and the equation of motion translates into algebraic operator equations. The noncommutative scalar action can be rewritten as the trace over operators (which can be regarded as $`\mathrm{}\times \mathrm{}`$ matrices). This leads to a connection between noncommutative field theories, and zero dimensional matrix models.

Next we consider noncommutative $`U(N)`$ Yang-Mills theory. When expanded around a simple solution of the equations of motion, the action takes the simple quartic form (up to constants and topological terms)

$$S_{YM}=\frac{1}{4g_{YM}^2}d^{2l}x\delta ^{\mu \lambda }\delta ^{\nu \rho }\mathrm{Tr}\left([\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu ,\mathrm{\Phi }_\nu ][\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda ,\mathrm{\Phi }_\rho ]\right),$$

where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu `$ are $`N\times N`$ hermitian matrices and all commutators are constructed from the $``$ product. Note that the kinetic term has been shifted away! The usual space-time gauge symmetries act linearly as unitary transformations on the fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu `$, and the $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu =0`$ vacuum leaves even local gauge symmetries unbroken. This construction is similar to that of , in which the kinetic term of Witten’s string field theory action  is shifted away. Indeed, our search for such a construction in noncommutative field theory was motivated by the tantalizing analogy, noted in , between noncommutative field theories and string field theories. The existence of the formulation (1.1) of noncommutative gauge theories strengthens the analogy. We also reproduce, as an illustration, the $`U(1)`$ instanton solutions of  .

Rewriting noncommutative fields as the large $`N`$ limit of matrices, (1.1) is closely related to the IKKT matrix theory \[32\]. Indeed, our construction is essentially equivalent to that presented by Aoki et. al.  in this context. Related observations are also made in \[37,,1,,33--36\].

This paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we describe the action for noncommutative scalar field theory. In section 3 we consider the limit, $`\theta \mathrm{}`$, in which the equations simplify considerably. The general solution can be found exactly and is given in terms of quantum mechanical projection operators. In Section 4 we show that there are stable solitons in this limit, as long as the potential has at least two local minima. In section 5 we argue that there are stable solitons at large but finite $`\theta `$ which can be constructed perturbatively in $`\theta ^1`$. In section 6 we turn to the noncommutative gauge theory where the purely quartic action is constructed. The $`U(1)`$ instanton solution of  is also reproduced. In an Appendix we give an explicit construction, of the leading $`\frac{1}{\theta }`$ correction to the simplest stable soliton of the scalar field theory.

2. The Noncommutative Scalar Action

Consider first a noncommutative field theory of a single scalar $`\varphi `$ in $`(2+1)`$ dimensions with non-commutativity purely in the spatial directions. The spatial $`R^2`$ is parametrized by complex coordinates $`z,\overline{z}`$. The energy functional

$$E=\frac{1}{g^2}d^2z\left(_z\varphi _{\overline{z}}\varphi +V(\varphi )\right),$$

where $`d^2z=dxdy`$. (We will comment on the generalization to arbitrary dimensions in the appropriate places.) Fields in this non-local action are multiplied using the Moyal star product,

$$\left(AB\right)(z,\overline{z})=e^{\frac{\theta }{2}\left(_z_{\overline{z}^{}}_z^{}_{\overline{z}}\right)}A(z,\overline{z})B(z^{},\overline{z}^{})|_{z_=z^{}}.$$

Note that in the quadratic part of the action, the star product reduces to the usual product.

We seek finite energy (localized) solitons of (2.1). These can also be interpreted as finite action instantons in the two-dimensional euclidean theory. We will, however, refer to the solutions as solitons in the following.

Since no solutions exist in the commutative limit $`\theta =0`$  , we begin our search in the limit of large noncommutativity, $`\theta \mathrm{}`$. It is useful to non-dimensionalize the coordinates $`zz\sqrt{\theta }`$, $`\overline{z}\overline{z}\sqrt{\theta }`$. As a result, the $``$ product will henceforth have no $`\theta `$; i.e. it will be given by (2.1) with $`\theta =1`$. Written in rescaled coordinates, the dependence on $`\theta `$ in the energy is entirely in front of the potential term:

$$E=\frac{1}{g^2}d^2z\left(\frac{1}{2}(\varphi )^2+\theta V(\varphi )\right)$$

In the limit $`\theta \mathrm{}`$, with $`V`$ held fixed, the kinetic term in (2.1) is negligible in comparison to $`V(\varphi )`$, at least for field configurations varying over sizes of order one in our new coordinates.

Our considerations apply to generic potentials $`V(\varphi )`$, but we will, for definiteness, mostly discuss those of polynomial form

$$V(\varphi )=\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi ^2+\underset{j=3}{\overset{r}{}}\frac{b_j}{j}\varphi ^j.$$

We have, of course, abbreviated

$$\varphi ^j=\varphi \varphi \mathrm{}\varphi .$$

3. Scalar Solitons in the $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$ Limit

After neglecting the kinetic term, the energy

$$E=\frac{\theta }{g^2}d^2zV(\varphi ),$$

is extremised by solving the equation

$$\frac{V}{\varphi }=0.$$

For instance, (3.1) is

$$m^2\varphi +b_3\varphi \varphi =0$$

for a cubic potential and

$$m^2\varphi +b_3\varphi \varphi +b_4\varphi \varphi \varphi =0$$

for a quartic potential.

If $`V(\varphi )`$ were the potential in a commutative scalar field theory, the only solutions to (3.1) would be the constant configurations

$$\varphi =\lambda _i,$$

where $`\lambda _i\{\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\mathrm{},\lambda _k\}`$ are the various real extrema of the function $`V(x)`$1 For $`V(\varphi )`$ as in (2.1), $`\lambda _i`$ are the real roots of the equation $`m^2x+_{j=3}^rb_jx^{j1}=0.`$. As we shall see below, the derivatives in the definition of the star product allow for more interesting solutions of (3.1).

3.1. A Simple Nontrivial Solution

A non-trivial solution to (3.1) can easily be constructed. Given a function $`\varphi _0(x)`$ that obeys

$$\left(\varphi _0\varphi _0\right)(x)=\varphi _0(x),$$

it follows by iteration that $`\varphi _0^n(x)=\varphi _0(x)`$,2 This equation and its solution has also appeared in earlier work involving the Moyal Product. See \[38,,39\]. and that $`f\left(a\varphi _0(x)\right)=f(a)\varphi _0(x)`$ (fields in $`f`$ are multiplied using the star product). In particular, $`\lambda _i\varphi _0(x)`$ solves (3.1) when $`\lambda _i`$ is an extremum of $`V(x)`$. Thus, in order to find a solution of (3.1), it is sufficient to find a function that squares to itself under the star product. We proceed to construct such a function below.

If we take the ordinary product of a smooth function of width $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with itself, the spatial size of the function shrinks to a fraction of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which is why non-constant functions never square to themselves! The non-locality of the star product, however, introduces an additional effect, adding roughly3 The added width is actually $`K`$, the typical momentum in the Fourier transform of the function. For a function of size $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with no oscillations, $`K\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. For a function of size $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with $`n`$ oscillations, $`K\frac{n}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. $`\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ to the width of the product. This makes it possible for a lump of approximately unit size to square to itself under the star product.

Consider a gaussian packet of the form

$$\psi _\mathrm{\Delta }(r)=\frac{1}{\pi \mathrm{\Delta }^2}e^{\frac{r^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2}},$$

with radial width $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (here $`r^2=x^2+y^2`$). The star product of $`\psi _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with itself is easily computed by passing to momentum space,

$$\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\mathrm{\Delta }(k)=e^{ikx}\psi _\mathrm{\Delta }(x)d^2x=e^{\frac{k^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2}{4}},$$

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \left(\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\mathrm{\Delta }\right)(p)& =\frac{1}{(2\pi )^2}d^2k\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\mathrm{\Delta }(k)\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\mathrm{\Delta }(pk)e^{\frac{i}{2}ϵ_{\mu \nu }k^\mu (pk)^\nu }\hfill \\ & =\frac{1}{2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }^2}e^{\frac{p^2}{8}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }^2+\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2}\right)}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Therefore

$$\left(\psi _\mathrm{\Delta }\psi _\mathrm{\Delta }\right)(x)=\frac{1}{\pi ^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2(\mathrm{\Delta }^2+\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2})}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{2r^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2+\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}\right].$$

In particular4 We note in passing that in the limit $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$, (3.1) reduces to $`\delta ^2(x)\delta ^2(x)=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^2}`$., when $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2=1`$, the gaussian squares to itself (up to a factor of $`2\pi `$). That is,

$$\varphi _0(x)=2\pi \psi _1(x)=2e^{r^2}$$

solves (3.1) and $`\lambda _i\varphi _0(x)`$ solves (3.1).

3.2. The General Solution

In order to find all solutions of (3.1) we will exploit the connection between Moyal products and quantization. Given a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ function $`f(q,p)`$ on $`R^2`$ (thought of as the phase space of a one-dimensional particle), there is a prescription which uniquely assigns to it an operator $`O_f(\widehat{q},\widehat{p})`$, acting on the corresponding single particle quantum mechanical Hilbert space, $``$. It is convenient for our purposes to choose the Weyl or symmetric ordering prescription

$$O_f(\widehat{q},\widehat{p})=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^2}d^2k\stackrel{~}{f}(k)e^{i\left(k_q\widehat{q}+k_p\widehat{p}\right)},$$

where

$$\stackrel{~}{f}(k)=d^2xe^{i(k_qq+k_pp)}f(q,p),$$

and

$$[\widehat{q},\widehat{p}]=i.$$

With this prescription, it may be verified that

$$\frac{1}{2\pi }𝑑p𝑑qf(q,p)=\mathrm{Tr}_{}O_f,$$

and that the Moyal product of functions is isomorphic to ordinary operator multiplication

$$O_fO_g=O_{fg}.$$

In order to solve any algebraic equation involving the star product, it is thus sufficient to determine all operator solutions to the equation in $``$. The functions on phase space corresponding to each of these operators may then be read off from (3.1). We will now employ this procedure to find all solutions of (3.1).

As noted above, any solution to (3.1) may be rescaled into a solution of (3.1). Particular solutions of (3.1) may thus be obtained by constructing operators in $``$ that obey (3.1), i.e. $`O_\varphi ^2=O_\varphi `$. This equation is solved by any projection operator in $``$. $``$ possesses an infinite number of projection operators, which can be classified by the dimension of the subspace they project onto. Each class contains a large continuous infinity of operators, each of which, upon rescaling, yields a solution to (3.1).

The most general solution to (3.1) hence takes the form

$$O=\underset{j}{}a_jP_j$$

where $`\{P_j\}`$ are mutually orthogonal projection operators onto one dimensional subspaces, with $`a_j`$ taking values in the set $`\{\lambda _i\}`$ of real extrema of $`V(x)`$.

In order to obtain the functions in space corresponding to the solutions (3.1), it is convenient to choose a particular basis in $``$. Let $`|n`$ represent the energy eigenstates of the one dimensional harmonic oscillator whose creation and annihilation operators are defined by

$$a=\frac{\widehat{q}+i\widehat{p}}{\sqrt{2}};a^{}=\frac{\widehat{q}i\widehat{p}}{\sqrt{2}}.$$

Note that $`a|n=\sqrt{n}|n1`$ and $`a^{}|n=\sqrt{n+1}|n+1`$. Any operator may be written as a linear combination of the basis operators $`|mn|`$’s, which, in turn, may be expressed in terms of $`a`$ and $`a^{}`$ as

$$|mn|=:\frac{a^m}{\sqrt{m}!}e^{a^{}a}\frac{a^n}{\sqrt{n!}}:$$

where double dots denote normal ordering.

We will first describe operators of the form (3.1) that correspond to radially symmetric functions in space. As $`a^{}a\frac{r^2}{2}`$, operators corresponding to radially symmetric wavefunctions are functions of $`a^{}a`$. From (3.1), the only such operators are linear combinations of the diagonal projection operators $`|nn|=\frac{1}{n!}:a^ne^{a^{}a}a^n:`$. Hence all radially symmetric solutions of (3.1) correspond to operators of the form $`O=_na_n|nn|`$, where the numbers $`a_n`$ can take any values in the set $`\{\lambda _i\}`$.

We now translate these operator solutions back to field space. From the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula

$$e^{i\left(k_q\widehat{q}+k_p\widehat{p}\right)}=e^{i\left(k_{\overline{z}}a+k_za^{}\right)}=e^{\frac{k^2}{4}}:e^{i\left(k_{\overline{z}}a+k_za^{}\right)}:,$$

where

$$k_z=\frac{k_x+ik_y}{\sqrt{2}},k_{\overline{z}}=\frac{k_xik_y}{\sqrt{2}},k^2=2k_zk_{\overline{z}}.$$

Any operator $`O`$ expressed as a normal ordered function of $`a`$ and $`a^{}`$, $`f_N(a,a^{})`$, can be rewritten in Weyl ordered form as follows. By definition,

$$O=:f_N(a,a^{}):=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^2}d^2k\stackrel{~}{f}_N(k):e^{i\left(k_{\overline{z}}a+k_za^{}\right)}:.$$

Using (3.1), (3.1) may be rewritten as

$$O=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^2}d^2k\stackrel{~}{f}_N(k)e^{\frac{k^2}{4}}e^{i\left(k_{\overline{z}}a+k_za^{}\right)}.$$

Thus, the momentum space function $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ associated with the operator $`O`$, according to the rule (3.1) is

$$\stackrel{~}{f}(k)=e^{\frac{k^2}{4}}\stackrel{~}{f}_N(k).$$

For the operator $`O_n=|nn|`$ we find, using (3.1) and (3.1), that the corresponding normal ordered function $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_N^{(n)}(k)=2\pi e^{\frac{k^2}{2}}L_n(\frac{k^2}{2})`$. (3.1) then becomes

$$|nn|=\frac{1}{(2\pi )}d^2ke^{\frac{k^2}{4}}L_n(\frac{k^2}{2})e^{i\left(k_{\overline{z}}a+k_za^{}\right)}$$

where $`L_n(x)`$ is the $`n^{th}`$ Laguerre polynomial. The field $`\varphi _n(x,y)`$ that corresponds to the operator $`O_n=|nn|`$ is, therefore,

$$\varphi _n(r^2=x^2+y^2)=\frac{1}{(2\pi )}d^2ke^{\frac{k^2}{4}}L_n(\frac{k^2}{2})e^{ik.x}=2(1)^ne^{r^2}L_n(2r^2).$$

Note that $`\varphi _0(r^2)`$ is precisely the gaussian solution found in Sec. 3.1.

In summary, (3.1) has an infinite number of real radial solutions, given by

$$\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}a_n\varphi _n(r^2)$$

where $`\varphi _n(r^2)`$ is given by (3.1) and each $`a_n`$ takes values in $`\{\lambda _i\}`$.

In order to generate all non radially symmetric solutions to (3.1), we rewrite (3.1) in operator language, using (3.1) as

$$E=\frac{2\pi \theta }{g^2}\mathrm{Tr}V(O_\varphi ).$$

(3.1) is manifestly invariant under unitary transformations of $`O_\varphi `$ and so has a $`U(\mathrm{})`$ global symmetry. In other words, if $`O`$ is a solution to the equation of motion, so is $`UOU^{}`$, where $`U`$ is any unitary operator acting on $``$. A general Hermitian operator (one that corresponds to a real field $`\varphi `$) may be obtained by acting on a diagonal operator (i.e. an operator that corresponds to a radially symmetric field configuration) by an element of the $`U(\mathrm{})`$ symmetry group (since any hermitian operator is unitarily diagonalizable). Thus every solution to (3.1) may be obtained from a radially symmetric solution by means of $`U(\mathrm{})`$ symmetry transformations.

Therefore solutions to (3.1) consist of disjoint infinite dimensional manifolds labelled by the set of eigenvalues of the corresponding operator. Points on the same manifold can be mapped into each other by $`U(\mathrm{})`$ transformations. Each manifold includes several5 Distinct diagonal operators having the same eigenvalues lie on the same manifold, being related by the “Weyl” subgroup of $`U(\mathrm{})`$ that permutes eigenvalues. diagonal operators (radially symmetric solutions). We will have more to say about the moduli space of these solutions in the next section.

As all solutions are related to radially symmetric solutions by a symmetry transformation, we will mostly discuss only radially symmetric solutions.

3.3. UV/IR Mixing

$`\varphi _0(r^2)`$, the Gaussian solution worked out in subsec 3.1, is a lump of unit size centred at the origin, as shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1:  A plot of $`\varphi _0(r)`$ versus $`r`$. The solution is a blob centred at the origin.

$`\varphi _n(r)`$, at large $`n`$, looks quite different (see Fig. 2.). It is a solution of size $`\sqrt{n}`$ that undergoes $`n`$ oscillations6 Using asymptotic formulae for Laguerre polynomials we find
$$\varphi _n(r)=\{\begin{array}{cc}2(1)^n\hfill & r\sqrt{\frac{1}{8n}}\hfill \\ \frac{2(1)^n}{(2\pi ^2r^2)^{\frac{1}{4}}}\mathrm{cos}(\sqrt{2n}2r\frac{\pi }{4})\hfill & \sqrt{\frac{1}{8n}}r\sqrt{2n})\hfill \\ \frac{2(2r^2)^n}{n!}e^{r^2}\hfill & r\sqrt{2n}\hfill \\ .\hfill & \end{array}$$
in that interval, with oscillation period $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}`$. $`\varphi _n(r^2)`$ thus receives significant contributions from momenta up to $`\sqrt{n}`$ in momentum space. These solutions exemplify the UV-IR mixing pointed out in ; oscillations with frequency $`\sqrt{n}`$ produce an object of size $`\sqrt{n}`$ (instead of $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}`$) in a noncommutative theory.

Fig. 2:  A plot of $`\varphi _{30}(r)`$ versus $`r`$.

3.4. Generalization to Higher Dimensions

All considerations of the preceding subsections may easily be generalized to higher dimensions. Consider a scalar field theory in $`2l+1`$ dimensions with non-commutativity only in the spatial directions. By a choice of axes, the $`2l\times 2l`$ dimensional noncommutativity matrix $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ may always be brought into block diagonal form. In other words, it is possible to choose spatial coordinates $`z_i,\overline{z}_{\overline{j}}`$ $`(i,\overline{j}=1\mathrm{}l)`$, in terms of which the non-commutativity matrix $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{i\overline{j}}=\theta _i\delta _{i\overline{j}}`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{ij}=\mathrm{\Theta }_{\overline{i},\overline{j}}=0`$., As before we consider the limit where $`\theta _i`$ are uniformly taken to $`\mathrm{}`$ and non-dimensionalize $`z_iz_i\sqrt{\theta _i}`$. As in the previous subsections, the kinetic term in the action may be dropped in this limit. Solutions to the equations of motion (3.1) are once again in correspondence with operator solutions to the same equations; the operators in question now acting on $`\times \times \mathrm{}\times `$, $`l`$ copies of the Hilbert space of the previous subsection. The general solution to (3.1) once again takes the form (3.1) in terms of projection operators on this space. As in the previous subsection, the general solution may be obtained from diagonal solutions via $`U(\mathrm{})`$ rotations. Diagonal solutions to (3.1) are given by

$$O=\underset{\stackrel{}{n}}{}a_\stackrel{}{n}|\stackrel{}{n}\stackrel{}{n}|\underset{\stackrel{}{n}}{}a_\stackrel{}{n}\underset{i}{}\varphi _{n_i}(|z_i|^2),$$

where $`\stackrel{}{n}`$ is shorthand for the set of quantum numbers $`\{n_i\}`$ for the $`l`$ dimensional oscillator and $`\varphi _{n_i}`$ are defined in (3.1). As in (3.1), the coefficients $`a_\stackrel{}{n}`$ take values in $`\{\lambda _i\}`$. A subset of the solutions (3.1) are actually invariant under $`SO(2l)`$ rotations and can be written in terms of associated Laguerre polynomials. These are displayed in Sec.A.3 of the Appendix.

In summary, in the limit of maximal noncommutativity, the construction of solitons in two spatial dimensions generalizes almost trivially to every even spatial dimension.

4. Stability and Moduli Space at $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$

In this section we study the stability of the solitons constructed in the previous section. We will also describe the moduli space of stable solitons.

4.1. Stability at $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$

We wish to examine the stability of the radial solution

$$\varphi (r^2)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\lambda _{a_n}\varphi _n(r^2)$$

to small fluctuations. Since any $`U(\mathrm{})`$ rotation does not change the energy of our solution (4.1), it is sufficient to study the stability of (4.1) to radially symmetric fluctuations. These are most conveniently parameterized as deformations of the eigenvalues. The energy for an arbitrary radially symmetric state $`\varphi (r^2)=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}c_n\varphi _n(r^2)`$ is

$$E=\frac{2\pi \theta }{g^2}\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}V(c_n).$$

The solution $`c_n=\lambda _{a_n}`$ is manifestly an extremum of $`S`$, as, by definition, $`\lambda _{a_i}`$ are extrema of the function $`V(x)`$. Clearly (4.1) is a local minimum of the energy (and so a stable solution) if, and only if, $`\lambda _{a_n}`$ is a local minimum of $`V(x)`$ for all $`0n\mathrm{}`$.

As an example consider the cubic potential of Fig. 3. with a maximum at $`\lambda =1`$. In this case, all $`\lambda _{a_n}`$ in (4.1) are either zero or -1. The only stable solution is that for which all $`\lambda _{a_n}=0`$, i.e. the vacuum. The solution $`\varphi _0(r^2)`$, for instance, is unstable, as the energy of this field configuration is decreased by scaling this solution by a constant near unity. This instability shows up as a negative eigenvalue of the quadratic form for fluctuations about $`\varphi _0(x)`$; the corresponding eigenmode $`\delta \varphi _0`$ is $`\varphi _0`$.

Fig. 3:  The $`\varphi ^3`$ theory with an unstable extremum

On the other hand the field theory with $`V(\varphi )`$ (say, for a quartic potential) graphed in Fig. 4 has stable solitons; these are solutions of the form $`\varphi (r^2)=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}\lambda _{c_n}\varphi _n(r^2)`$ with $`\lambda _{c_n}`$ taking the values of the minima – $`0`$ or $`\lambda 1.4`$ for all $`n`$. In particular $`\lambda \varphi _0(r^2)`$ is a stable solution, manifestly stable to rescalings. Again, one may check that the quadratic form for fluctuations about $`\lambda \varphi _0(r^2)`$ is positive. In particular, $`\delta \varphi \varphi _0`$ is an eigenmode of this quadratic form with positive eigenvalue.

Fig. 4:  A $`\varphi ^4`$ potential with two minima.

The stability of $`\varphi (r^2)=\lambda \varphi _0(r^2)`$ in the previous example may qualitatively be understood as follows. $`\varphi _0`$ is a Gaussian of height $`2\lambda `$. Far away from the origin, $`\varphi _0(x)=0`$, but near $`x=0`$, $`\varphi _0(x)`$ is in the vicinity of the second vacuum. In other words, the static solution corresponds to a bubble of the “false” vacuum. The area of the bubble is of order one (or $`\theta `$ in our original coordinates), the non-commutativity scale. In a commutative theory such a bubble would decay by shrinking to zero size. Noncommutativity prevents the bubble from shrinking to a spatial size smaller than $`\sqrt{\theta }`$. In order to decay, $`\varphi _0`$ actually has to scale to zero - but that process involves going over the hump in the potential and so is classically forbidden.

Fig. 5:  Profile of the Gaussian soliton with a false vacuum region (above the horizontal bar) of radius 1.

The energy of this soliton is proportional to the vacuum energy density $`\frac{V(\lambda )}{g^2}`$ at the ‘false’ vacuum times the volume of the soliton $`\theta `$. It is remarkable that the energy of the soliton is completely insensitive to the value of the scalar potential at any point except $`\varphi =\lambda `$. Thus the mass of the soliton is unchanged if the height of the barrier in $`V(\varphi )`$ (between $`\varphi =\lambda `$ and $`\varphi =0`$, see Fig. 4.) is taken to infinity while $`V(\lambda )`$ is kept fixed. This is true even though $`\varphi _0(r)`$, the solitonic field configuration corresponding to $`\lambda |00|`$, decreases continuously from $`\varphi =2\lambda `$ at $`r=0`$ to $`\varphi =0`$ at $`r=\mathrm{}`$!

Consider a 2+1 dimensional scalar theory, noncommutative only in space, at infinite $`\theta `$. Using the correspondence between functions and operators (matrices) described in the previous section, the noncommutative scalar field theory is equivalent to the matrix quantum mechanics of an $`N\times N`$ hermitian matrix $`H`$, at infinite $`N`$, with the usual relativistic kinetic term $`\mathrm{Tr}\left(_tH\right)^2`$, and a potential $`\mathrm{Tr}\left(V(H)\right)`$. The amplitude for an eigenvalue of $`H`$ to tunnel from $`\lambda `$ to $`0`$ is exponentially suppressed by the area under the potential barrier in Fig. 4., and goes to zero as this area is taken to infinity. Thus the finite mass soliton $`\lambda |00|`$ is stable, even quantum mechanically, in this limit.

The $`U(\mathrm{})`$ symmetry of (3.1) is spontaneously broken by every nonzero solution, $`\varphi (x)`$, of (3.1). As a consequence, every solution has a number of exact zero modes (Goldstone modes) corresponding to small displacements about $`\varphi (x)`$ on the manifold of solutions. As $`R_{nm}=|nm|+|mn|`$ and $`S_{nm}=i(|nm||mn|)`$ are the generators of $`U(\mathrm{})`$, these zero modes are given by the nonzero elements of $`\delta \varphi [R_{nm},\varphi ],[S_{nm},\varphi ]`$.

The $`U(\mathrm{})`$ group of symmetry transformations that generates these zero modes is certainly not manifest (at least to the untrained eye) in the energy written in coordinate space in the form (3.1). In addition to the two translations, (3.1) possesses three manifest local symmetries, corresponding to a linear change of the coordinates $`x,y`$ by an SL(2,R) matrix. The remaining $`U(\mathrm{})`$ transformations act non-locally on $`\varphi (x,y)`$, according to $`\varphi ^{}(x,y)=\left(U\varphi U^{}\right)(x,y)`$ where $`U(x,y)`$ is any function that obeys $`UU^{}=1`$ (such functions correspond to $`U(\mathrm{})`$ operators under the map (3.1)).

All arguments in this subsection may be applied (after straightforward generalizations) to higher dimensional solitons.

4.2. Multi Solitons

In this subsection we will qualitatively describe a part of the moduli space of stable solitons (at $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$) in the simple case of the potential graphed in Fig. 4 with a single non-zero minimum at $`\varphi =\lambda `$.

The stable solitons can be characterized by their ‘level’ (number of $`\lambda `$ eigenvalues). All stable level one solitons correspond to operators of the form

$$\lambda U|00|U^{}$$

where $`U`$ is a unitary operator. As mentioned above, the set of level one solitons span an infinite dimensional manifold parameterized by $`U(N)/U(N1)`$ (for $`N=\mathrm{}`$).

The soliton looks very different at different points on the manifold. $`U=I`$ in (4.1) corresponds to the gaussian blob of Fig. 1. If $`U`$ happens to be a unitary transformation that maps $`|0`$ to $`|m`$, for large $`m`$, the corresponding wave function is qualitatively similar to that in Fig. 2. When $`U=e^{a^{}za\overline{z}}`$ is the generator of translations, the operator in (4.1), $`\lambda |zz|`$, is proportional to the projection operator onto a gaussian centred around $`z=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x+iy)`$. (Here $`|z=e^{\frac{|z|^2}{2}}e^{a^{}z}|0`$ is the usual coherent state.) Again, if $`U`$ corresponds to one of the $`SL(2,R)`$ operators, we obtain squeezed states; gaussians elongated in the $`y`$ direction and shrunk in the $`x`$ direction. And so on.

Turn now to solitons at arbitrary level $`n`$. All such solitons may be obtained by acting on

$$\lambda (\varphi _0+\varphi _1+\mathrm{}+\varphi _{n1})$$

by arbitrary unitary transformations. The manifold of solutions thus generated is parameterized by $`\frac{U(N)}{U(Nn)}`$ (and has dimension $`d_n2nN`$) where $`N\mathrm{}`$.

Notice that $`d_nnd_1`$. This fact has a nice explanation; in a particular limit the manifold of level $`n`$ solutions reduces to $`n`$ copies of level $`1`$ solitons very far from each other. This conclusion follows from the observation that the operator that represents $`n`$ widely separated level one solitons (with centres $`z_j`$), for instance

$$M=\lambda \underset{j}{}|z_jz_j|$$

is approximately a level $`n`$ soliton (and exponentially close to a true level $`n`$ soliton) when $`|z_iz_j|\mathrm{}`$ for all $`i,j`$. We demonstrate this explicitly below for the case $`n=2`$.

Using $`z|z=e^{2|z|^2}`$, it is easy to check that the kets

$$|z_\pm =\frac{|z\pm |z}{\sqrt{2(1\pm e^{2|z|^2})}}$$

are orthogonal. From (3.1) we conclude that the projector

$$O_z=\lambda \left(|z_+z_+|+|z_{}z_{}|\right)=\lambda \frac{|zz|+|zz|+e^{2|z|^2}\left(|zz|+|zz|\right)}{(1e^{4|z|^2})}$$

corresponds to a level 2 solution. Up to corrections of order $`e^{2|z|^2}`$, $`O_z`$ is equal to $`|zz|+|zz|`$, the superposition of field configurations corresponding to two widely separated level one solitons 7 It is curious that the kinetic energy of this field configuration is independent of $`z`$ indicating that there is no force between the two solitons even to next leading order in $`\frac{1}{\theta }`$. . We conclude that a part of the level $`n`$ moduli space describes $`n`$ widely separated level one solitons.

We have, so far, worked in the strict limit $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$. The picture developed in this limit is qualitatively modified at large but finite $`\theta `$, as we will describe in the next section.

5. Scalar Solitons at Large but Finite $`\theta `$.

We have argued that, under certain conditions on $`V(\varphi )`$, (3.1) has an infinite number of stable solutions. Each solution has an infinite number of exact zero modes, the Goldstone modes of the spontaneously broken $`U(\mathrm{})`$ symmetry of (3.1).

At finite $`\theta `$, the kinetic term in (2.1) explicitly breaks this $`U(\mathrm{})`$ symmetry down to the Euclidean group in 2 dimensions. Finite $`\theta `$ effects may thus be expected to

1. Lift the $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$ manifold of solutions to a discrete set of solutions.

2. Give (positive or negative) masses to the $`U(\mathrm{})`$ Goldstone bosons about these discrete solutions.

In Appendix A we will argue that, at large enough $`\theta `$, corresponding to every radially symmetric solution $`s`$ of (3.1), there is a radially symmetric saddle point of (2.1), that reduces to $`s`$ as $`\theta \mathrm{}`$. It is likely that these are the only saddle points of (2.1).

Not all these radially symmetric solutions are stable, however. In fact, it might seem likely that some of the infinite number of zero modes, at $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$, about each solution $`s`$, might become tachyonic at finite $`\theta `$. If this were true, (2.1) would have no classically stable extremum at any finite $`\theta `$, no matter how large.

We will find that is not the case. In subsection 5.1 below we will argue that any small perturbation of (3.1) must preserve the existence of at least one classically stable level one soliton. In subsection 5.2 we will identify this soliton to be the one near the gaussian $`\lambda \varphi _0(r^2)`$.

5.1. Existence of A Stable Soliton

For definiteness, through the rest of this section we assume that the potential $`V(\varphi )`$ has the shape shown in Fig. 4. In particular, it is positive definite. Let the stable extremum of $`V`$ occur at $`\varphi =\lambda `$ and the unstable extremum at $`\varphi =\beta `$, ($`\lambda <\beta <0`$).

Consider, first, (3.1) i.e. the energy functional in the limit where we neglect the kinetic term. We will show that any path in field space leading from the soliton $`\lambda \varphi _0(r^2)`$ to the the vacuum passes through a point whose energy is larger than $`\frac{2\pi \theta }{g^2}V(\beta )`$. Since the energy of the stable soliton is $`\frac{2\pi \theta }{g^2}V(\lambda )<\frac{2\pi \theta }{g^2}V(\beta )`$, every path from the soliton to the vacuum must pass over a barrier of height $`𝒪(\frac{\theta }{g^2})`$.

The energy evaluated on an operator $`A`$ is

$$E=\frac{2\pi \theta }{g^2}\mathrm{Tr}(V(A))=\frac{2\pi \theta }{g^2}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}V(c_n)$$

where $`c_n`$ are the eigenvalues of $`A`$. Since $`V`$ is positive definite,

$$E\frac{2\pi \theta }{g^2}V(b),$$

where $`b`$ is the smallest eigenvalue of $`A`$.

Consider a path in field, or operator space, leading from $`\lambda \varphi _0`$ to the vacuum. At the beginning of this path $`b=\lambda `$. At its end $`b=0`$. Since $`\lambda <\beta <0`$, any smooth path with these endpoints must have a point at which $`b=\beta `$. At that point $`E>\frac{2\pi \theta }{g^2}V(\beta )`$, as was to be shown.

Now include the the kinetic term in (3.1). Barring singular behaviour, this changes the energies of all field configurations by terms of $`𝒪(\frac{1}{g^2})`$. For large enough $`\theta `$, the arguments of the previous paragraph imply that the field configuration that describe the level one soliton at $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$ cannot decay to the vacuum. Hence there must exist at least one stable soliton near one of the unperturbed level one solutions. In fact, as we will show in the next subsection, there is a stable soliton near the gaussian $`\lambda \varphi _0(r^2)`$. In the Appendix we will present an approximate construction of this solution at large but finite $`\theta `$. A similar argument demonstrates the existence of at least one stable solution at level $`n`$.

5.2. Approximate Description of the Stable Soliton

All level one solutions to (3.1) take the form $`\lambda U|00|U^{}`$ where $`U`$ is a unitary operator. We wish to determine the contribution of the kinetic term to the energy of such an operator.

The kinetic term in (2.1) for an operator $`A`$ is

$$K=\frac{2\pi }{g^2}\mathrm{Tr}[a,A][A,a^{}].$$

Setting $`A=\lambda U|00|U^{}`$ we find

$$\frac{g^2K(U)}{2\pi \lambda ^2}=1+\underset{k}{}2k|U_{k,0}|^22|\underset{k}{}\sqrt{k+1}U_{k,0}U_{k+1,0}^{}|^2.$$

We expand (5.1) to quadratic order in deviations from $`U=I`$. Choose $`U_i=U_{i,0}`$ for $`i1`$ as the coordinates for this expansion ($`|U_{00}|`$ is determined in terms of $`U_i`$ as $`U`$ is unitary). To quadratic order in $`U_i`$

$$\frac{g^2K(U)}{2\pi \lambda ^2}=1+2\underset{k=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}k|U_k|^2.$$

As $`U_1`$ and $`\overline{U}_1`$ do not appear in (5.1), they parameterize flat directions of $`K(U)`$ (to quadratic order). This was to be expected. Any localized extremum of (2.1) has two exact translational zero modes. Infinitesimally, $`U_{01}`$ and its complex conjugates act as derivatives on $`\varphi _0(r^2)`$, generating these zero modes. Modulo these zero modes, the fluctuation matrix about $`U=1`$ is positive definite.

While $`K(U)`$ has several critical points other than $`U=I`$, it has no further local minima. For example, $`U=U^{(m)}`$, the unitary transformation that rotates $`|00|`$ to $`|mm|`$, is an unstable critical point of $`K(U)`$ for all $`m`$. In fact $`U=U^{(m)}`$ is unstable to decay into $`U=I`$. This may be demonstrated by considering the path in field space $`|\alpha \alpha |`$ where $`|\alpha =\mathrm{cos}\alpha |0+\mathrm{sin}\alpha |m`$. (5.1) evaluated on such a path is equal to $`1+2m\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha `$ (for $`m>1`$; $`1+2\mathrm{sin}^4\alpha `$ for $`m=1`$) indicating that the state $`|mm|`$ can decay to $`|00|`$.

We will now argue that, at large enough $`\theta `$, the finite $`\theta `$ saddle point $`\varphi (x,y)`$ of (2.1) that reduces to $`\lambda |00|`$ as $`\theta \mathrm{}`$ is classically stable.

Consider the mass matrix for fluctuations about $`\varphi (x,y)`$. Since any operator may be written as $`UDU^{}`$ where $`D`$ is diagonal and $`U`$ unitary, small fluctuations may be decomposed into radial (fluctuations of $`D`$) and angular ones (fluctuations of $`U`$). The mass matrix for purely radial fluctuations is $`𝒪(\theta )`$ to leading order, and has been shown to be positive definite in sec 3.4. The mass matrix for purely angular fluctuations is $`𝒪(1)`$ to leading order, and has been shown to be positive definite, modulo the two zero modes. Since angular modes completely disappear from the potential, mixing between radial and angular fluctuations occurs only through the kinetic term, and are also $`𝒪(1)`$. These cross terms result in corrections to the eigenvalues of the mass matrix only at $`𝒪(\frac{1}{\theta })`$. Hence, to leading order in $`\frac{1}{\theta }`$, the mass matrix is positive. The two zero modes of the angular mass matrix cannot be driven negative by $`\frac{1}{\theta }`$ corrections as they are exact.

A similar argument demonstrates the instability of all other radially symmetric level one solitons (those that reduce to $`\lambda |nn|`$ at $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$) at large enough $`\theta `$.

The considerations of this subsection may easily be generalized to solitons in $`2l`$ spatial dimensions, using the higher dimensional analogue of (5.1):

$$\frac{g^2K(U)}{(2\pi )^l\lambda ^2}=1+2\underset{j,\stackrel{}{k}}{}k_j|U_{\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{0}}|^22\underset{j}{}|\underset{\stackrel{}{k}}{}\sqrt{k_j+1}U_{\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{0}}U_{\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{i},\stackrel{}{0}}^{}|^2$$

and (5.1)

$$\frac{g^2K(U)}{(2\pi )^l\lambda ^2}=1+2\underset{\stackrel{}{k}}{}\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{l}{}}k_j\underset{j=1}{\overset{l}{}}\delta _{\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{i}}\right)|U_{\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{0}}|^2.$$

We use the notation of (3.1); $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ is an $`l`$ dimensional vector, $`j`$ runs from $`1`$ to $`l`$ and $`\stackrel{}{i}`$ is the basis unit vector in the $`i^{th}`$ direction; in components $`i_n=\delta _{i,n}`$. Notice that $`K(U)`$ in (5.1) is independent of $`U_{\stackrel{}{i},0}`$ for all $`i`$, a consequence of the exact translational invariance in all $`2l`$ spatial directions.

6. Noncommutative Yang-Mills

6.1. Quartic Action for the $`U(1)`$ Theory in Two Dimensions

Consider the action

$$S=\frac{1}{4g_{YM}^2}d^2z[\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }},\mathrm{\Phi }][\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }},\mathrm{\Phi }],$$

where $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a complex field and

$$[\mathrm{\Phi },\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\mathrm{\Phi }\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}\mathrm{\Phi }.$$

The equation of motion following from (6.1) is

$$[\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }},[\mathrm{\Phi },\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}]]=0.$$

$`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can also be viewed as a quantum mechanical operator and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ as it’s hermitian conjugate. The commutators in (6.1)-(6.1) are then ordinary operator commutators, and the integral is the trace over the Hilbert space. In the operator representation a simple solution of the equation of motion (6.1) is

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=a,\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}=a^{}.$$

Let us expand around this solution by defining

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=a+iA_{\overline{z}},\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}=a^{}iA_z.$$

One then finds, translating back to functions (with $`\sqrt{2}z=q+ip`$, $`[a,]=_{\overline{z}}`$ and $`[a^{},]=_z`$, that

$$[\mathrm{\Phi },\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}]=1+i_zA_{\overline{z}}i_{\overline{z}}A_z[A_z,A_{\overline{z}}]=1+iF_{z\overline{z}}.$$

The operator representation of (6.1) has the manifest $`U(N=\mathrm{})`$ symmetry under which $`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }^{}=U^{}\mathrm{\Phi }U`$ just as in the scalar field theory. Infinitesimally,

$$\delta \mathrm{\Phi }=i[\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Lambda }],$$

where $`U=\mathrm{exp}i\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. When gauged, this is just the usual $`U(1)`$ gauge symmetry of the non-commutative theory,

$$\delta A=d\mathrm{\Lambda }+i[A,\mathrm{\Lambda }].$$

The equation of motion (6.1) is

$$D_{\overline{z}}F_{z\overline{z}}=0.$$

The action (6.1) is then

$$S=\frac{1}{4g_{YM}^2}d^2z\left(F_{z\overline{z}}i\right)^2,$$

the standard two dimensional non-commutative $`U(1)`$ Yang-Mills action up to constants and topological terms.

6.2. The U(N) Theory in $`2l`$ Dimensions

(6.1) can be generalized to

$$S=\frac{1}{4g_{YM}^2}d^{2l}x\delta ^{\mu \lambda }\delta ^{\nu \rho }\mathrm{Tr}\left([\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu ,\mathrm{\Phi }_\nu ][\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda ,\mathrm{\Phi }_\rho ]\right),$$

where $`\mu ,\nu =1,,,2l`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu `$ are real $`N\times N`$ matrices. Though we have restricted ourselves to a flat euclidean metric, one can generalise the argument below to the Minkowski metric as well.

The equation of motion is

$$\delta ^{\mu \nu }[\mathrm{\Phi }_\mu ,[\mathrm{\Phi }_\nu ,\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda ]]=0.$$

We choose complex coordinates such that $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{a\overline{b}}=i\delta _{a\overline{b}},`$ with $`a,b=1\mathrm{}l`$. (6.1) has the solution

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_b=a_b,\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{b}}=a_{\overline{b}}^{},$$

where $`[a_b,a_{\overline{c}}^{}]=\delta _{b\overline{c}}.`$ Expanding around this solution with

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_b=a_b+iA_{\overline{b}}$$

one finds

$$S=\frac{1}{4g_{YM}^2}d^{2l}z\left(F_{a\overline{b}}\mathrm{\Theta }_{a\overline{b}}^1\right)^2.$$

As before the manifest $`U(\mathrm{})U(N)`$ symmetry corresponds to the non-commutative $`U(N)`$ gauge symmetry.

6.3. The U(1) Instanton

The four dimensional non-commutative gauge theory has instanton solutions which are deformed versions of the usual non-abelian instantons. In particular, the $`U(1)`$ non-commutative theory also has non-singular finite action saddle points . We exhibit the operators $`\mathrm{\Phi }_a`$ corresponding to the simplest such $`U(1)`$ instanton.

The operators $`\mathrm{\Phi }_a`$ corresponding to an anti self dual field strength $`\delta ^{a\overline{b}}F_{a\overline{b}}=0`$ $`(a,\overline{b}=1,2)`$, obey

$$[\mathrm{\Phi }_b,\mathrm{\Phi }_c]=0,\delta ^{a\overline{b}}[\mathrm{\Phi }_a,\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{b}}]=2.$$

In four dimensions, the operators $`\mathrm{\Phi }_a(a=1,2)`$ live in a Hilbert space generated by the creation and annihilation operators of a two-dimensional harmonic oscillator (See Sec. 3.3). Rather than work in the conventional number basis $`|n_1,n_2`$, it is convenient to work in Schwinger’s angular momentum basis,

$$|j,m\frac{(a_1^{})^{j+m}}{\sqrt{(j+m)!}}\frac{(a_2^{})^{jm}}{\sqrt{(jm)!}}|0,0,$$

with $`0j<\mathrm{},|m|j`$. The operators

$$J_+=a_1^{}a_2,J_{}=a_2^{}a_1,J_z=\frac{1}{2}(a_1^{}a_1a_2^{}a_2)$$

obey the usual angular momentum algebra.

We will find a solution to (6.1) of the form

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Phi }_b& =a_b\underset{j,m}{}(1+c_j)|j,mj,m|=a_b+a_b\underset{j,m}{}c_j|j,mj,m|,\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{b}}& =a_{\overline{b}}^{},\hfill \end{array}$$

and put it into Hermitian form via a complexified gauge transformation $`W`$.

The ansatz (6.1) satisfies the holomorphic part of (6.1) for any $`c_j`$. For a real $`c_j`$, the only condition comes from the equation $`F_{1\overline{1}}=F_{2\overline{2}}`$. Using

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill a_{1,2}^{}|j,m& =\sqrt{j\pm m+1}|j+\frac{1}{2},m\pm \frac{1}{2};\hfill \\ \hfill a_{1,2}|j,m& =\sqrt{j\pm m}|j\frac{1}{2},m\frac{1}{2},\hfill \end{array}$$

yields the equation $`jc_j=(j+1)c_{j+\frac{1}{2}}`$. Which has the solution

$$c_j=\frac{c}{j(2j+1)},(j>0).$$

The complexified gauge transformation

$$W=W^{}=\underset{j,m}{}\sqrt{\frac{j}{j+1}}|j,m$$

puts the solution (6.1) into Hermitian form for $`c=1`$. The field strength then takes the compact form

$$[\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{b}},\mathrm{\Phi }_c]=\delta _{\overline{b}c}iF_{\overline{b}c}=\delta _{\overline{b}c}(\stackrel{}{J}\stackrel{}{\sigma })_{\overline{b}c}\underset{j,m}{}\frac{1}{j(j+1)(2j+1)}|j,mj,m|.$$

Here $`\stackrel{}{J}`$ are the angular momentum generators defined in (6.1) and $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }`$, the usual Pauli matrices. This solution is exactly the same as the simplest charge one $`U(1)`$ instanton in . It may be checked that $`\frac{1}{2}TrF_{a\overline{b}}^2=1`$.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to S. Coleman, J. Harvey, T. Kinoshita, J. Maldacena, B. Pioline, N. Seiberg, I. Singer, C. Vafa, M. Van Raamsdonk, S. Sinha, A. Vishwanath and S.-T. Yau for useful discussions. This work was supported in part by DOE grant DE-FG02-91ER40654.

Appendix A. Solutions at Finite $`\theta `$

In this appendix we will examine radially symmetric saddle points of (2.1) at finite $`\theta `$. In subsection A.1 we study the equation of motion resulting from (2.1) at finite $`\theta `$, and examine the existence of radially symmetric solutions to these equations. In A.2 we concentrate on a particular solution; the one that reduces to the stable soliton $`\lambda |00|`$ as $`\theta `$ is taken to infinity. We present an approximate construction of this soliton at large $`\theta `$. In A.3 we briefly comment on the generalization of these results to solitons in higher dimensions.

A.1. The Perturbation Expansion and a Recursion Relation

The full equation of motion derived from (2.1) may be written in momentum space as

$$\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(k^2)+\underset{j=3}{\overset{r}{}}\frac{b_j}{m^2}\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^{j1}(k^2)=\frac{k^2}{m^2\theta }\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(k^2)$$

While the LHS of (A.1) is independent of $`\theta `$, the RHS is of order $`\frac{1}{\theta }`$, and so is a small parameter at large $`\theta `$. For notational convenience, we set $`\frac{b_j}{m^2}=d_j`$ and $`\frac{1}{m^2\theta }=ϵ`$.

Let

$$\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_n\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_n(k^2)$$

be a solution to (A.1). Substituting (A.1) into (A.1), using the recurrence relation for Laguerre polynomials, and equating coefficients of $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_n(k^2)`$, we arrive at the difference equations

$$c_n+\underset{j=3}{\overset{r}{}}d_jc_n^{j1}=2ϵ[nc_{n1}(2n+1)c_n+(n+1)c_{n+1}].$$

We are interested in finite energy solutions to (3.1), i.e. solutions to (A.1) for which

$$\underset{n}{}V(c_n)<\mathrm{}.$$

Since $`V(0)=0`$, (A.1) will be satisfied if the $`c_n`$s approach zero sufficiently fast as $`n`$ approaches infinity. For such a solution, all nonlinear terms in (A.1) may be neglected at large enough $`n`$. At sufficiently large $`n`$, $`n`$ may also be replaced by a continuous variable $`u`$, and (A.1) turns into the second order differential equation

$$c(u)=2ϵu\frac{d^2c(u)}{du^2}.$$

(A.1) is the Schroedinger equation for a zero energy state of a particle in a $`\frac{1}{u}`$ potential. $`\sqrt{ϵ}`$ plays the role of Planck’s constant, and at small $`ϵ`$ (A.1) is easily solved in the WKB approximation, yielding

$$c(u)=A_{}u^{\frac{1}{4}}e^{\sqrt{\frac{2u}{ϵ}}}+A_+u^{\frac{1}{4}}e^{+\sqrt{\frac{2u}{ϵ}}}$$

where $`A_\pm `$ are arbitrary constants. In order that $`c_n`$ tend to zero at large $`n`$, $`A_+=0`$. Thus, for large8 (A.1) is a good approximation when $`|c_n|1`$ (so that dropping nonlinear terms in (A.1) is justified) and $`\frac{c_nc_{n1}}{c_n}1`$, i.e. $`nϵ1`$ (so that the transition from (A.1) to (A.1) is justified). $`n`$,

$$c_nAn^{\frac{1}{4}}e^{\sqrt{\frac{2n}{ϵ}}}.$$

(A.1) has an undetermined parameter $`A`$, the scale of the solution at large $`n`$. As (A.1) is a nonlinear equation, $`A`$ is not an arbitrary parameter, but is determined to be one of a discrete set of values. Given $`c_p`$ and $`c_{p+1}`$, the $`(p+1)`$ equations (A.1) with $`n=0\mathrm{}p`$ overdetermine the $`p`$ unknowns $`c_n`$ for $`n<p`$. The extra equation constrains the scale $`A`$, as we’ll see in the next subsection.

A.2. The Gaussian Soliton Corrected

In this section we present an approximate construction of the stable soliton that reduces to the gaussian at infinite $`\theta `$. Our construction approximates the true solution to arbitrary accuracy at small enough $`ϵ`$.

We wish to find a solution of (A.1) such that

$$\underset{ϵ0}{lim}c_0=\lambda $$

and

$$\underset{ϵ0}{lim}c_m=0$$

uniformly in $`m`$, for $`m1`$. (A.1) ensures that, on such a solution, (A.1) for $`n1`$ reduces to

$$c_n=2ϵ[nc_{n1}(2n+1)c_n+(n+1)c_{n+1}]$$

for small enough $`ϵ`$. It is easy to find an explicit solution to (A.1) that obeys (A.1), (A.1). Consider a function $`\varphi (x,y)`$ that obeys the differential equation

$$(ϵ^2+1)\varphi =b\varphi _0.$$

Expanding $`\varphi `$ in the form

$$\varphi =\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_n\varphi _n$$

and imitating the manipulations of section 4.3, we find that $`c_ns`$ obey (A.1) for $`n1`$, but obey

$$c_0=2ϵ\left[c_1c_0\right]+b$$

instead of (A.1) (with $`n=0`$). This relation will fix the free parameter $`b`$.

(A.1) is easily solved in momentum space

$$\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(k)=b\frac{\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_0(k)}{1+2ϵk^2}.$$

Using the explicit forms for $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_n(k)`$ and orthogonality of the Laguerre polynomials we find

$$c_n=b_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x\frac{e^xL_n(x)}{1+2ϵx}.$$

In particular

$$c_0=b𝑑x\frac{e^x}{1+2ϵx}=bF(ϵ)\mathrm{where}F(ϵ)=1ϵ+𝒪(ϵ^2).$$

Using (A.1) we conclude that (A.1) and (A.1) (at $`n=0`$) are identical on $`\{c_n\}`$ if $`b`$ is chosen such that

$$bF(ϵ)+\underset{j=3}{\overset{r}{}}d_j\left(bF(ϵ)\right)^{j1}=b\left(F(ϵ)1\right).$$

We wish to find a solution to (A.1) that obeys (A.1), i.e. (from (A.1)) one for which $`lim_{ϵ0}b=\lambda `$. As $`\lambda +_{j=3}^rd_j\lambda ^{j1}=0`$, such a solution exists, and takes the form

$$b(ϵ)=\lambda (1+Kϵ+𝒪(ϵ^2))$$

at small $`ϵ`$ where $`K`$ is a number that may easily be determined.

In summary, $`\{c_n\}`$ given by (A.1) with $`b`$ given by (A.1), (A.1), solve (A.1) for $`n1`$ and (A.1) (with $`n=0`$). $`\{c_n\}`$ therefore also approximately satisfy the true difference equations (A.1) for all $`n`$ as long as $`|c_n|1`$ for all $`n1`$. But it is easy to verify that all $`|c_n|`$ for all $`n1`$ are arbitrarily small at small enough $`ϵ`$. Using the completeness of the Laguerre polynomials,

$$\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_n^2=b^2_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{e^x}{(1+2ϵx)^2}b_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xe^x(12ϵx)=b(12ϵ).$$

Combining (A.1) and (A.1)

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_n^2<4ϵb^2$$

establishing (A.1) uniformly in $`n`$ on our solution. Thus $`\{c_n\}`$ provides an approximate solution to the full nonlinear difference equations (A.1) for all $`n`$ at small enough $`ϵ`$. Furthermore, from (A.1), this solution has finite energy.

As $`\{c_n\}`$ obey the linearized recursion relation (A.1) and are small at small $`ϵ`$, we can conclude, from the previous subsection, that $`d_n`$ takes the form (A.1) for $`nϵ1`$. In order to estimate the behaviour of $`c_n(ϵ)`$ for $`n\frac{1}{ϵ}`$ we formally expand the denominator in (A.1) in a power series in $`ϵx`$ and integrate term by term, arriving at the asymptotic expansion

$$c_n=\underset{m=n}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{m+n}(2ϵ)^m\frac{m!^2}{n!(mn)!}.$$

This expansion is useful only when the first few terms in the series in (A.1) are successfully smaller, i.e. for $`nϵ1`$.

A.3. Generalization to Higher Dimensions

In this subsection we will outline the generalization of the arguments of A.1 and the construction of A.2, for the case of the maximally isotropic noncommutativity in $`2l`$ dimensions, i.e. a theory with noncommutativity matrix $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, all of whose eigenvalues are $`\pm i\theta `$. It is likely that these arguments can be further extended to generic $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

We first note that a subset of the diagonal $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$ solutions (3.1) are (in non-dimensionalized coordinates) invariant under $`SO(2l)`$ rotations. These solutions take the form

$$\underset{\stackrel{}{n}}{}c_J\frac{1}{\sqrt{D_J}}\delta _{(J,_in_i)}|\stackrel{}{n}\stackrel{}{n}|\frac{1}{\sqrt{D_J}}\underset{J}{}c_J\varphi _J^{(l)}(r^2).$$

Here

$$\varphi _J^{(l)}(r^2=\underset{i}{}|z_i|^2)=2^l(1)^JL_J^{(l1)}(r^2).$$

where $`L_J^{(l1)}(r^2)`$ is an associated Laguerre polynomial. (A.1) is obtained from (3.1) by repeated use of the identity

$$\underset{m=0}{\overset{n}{}}L_{nm}^\alpha (x)L_m^\beta (y)=L_n^{\alpha +\beta +1}(x+y).$$

$`D_J=\left(\begin{array}{c}J+l1\\ J\end{array}\right)`$ is a convenient normalization factor.

When the noncommutativity matrix is maximally isotropic, the kinetic term in (2.1) is invariant under $`SO(2l)`$ rotations of rescaled coordinates. Thus the corrections to an $`SO(2l)`$ invariant $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$ solution, of the form (A.1), are also $`SO(2l)`$ invariant.

Restricting to $`SO(2l)`$ invariant functions, the arguments of section A.1 are easily generalized. Any $`SO(2l)`$ invariant function takes the form

$$\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(k^2)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_J\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_J(k^2);\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_J(k^2)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{D_J}}(2\pi )^lL_J^{(l1)}(\frac{k^2}{2})e^{\frac{k^2}{4}}.$$

The equation of motion implies that $`c_J`$ obey the following generalization of (A.1)

$$c_J+\underset{j=3}{\overset{r}{}}d_jc_J^{j1}=2ϵ[(J+l1)c_{J1}(2J+l)c_J+(J+1)c_{J+1}].$$

For large $`J`$ (A.1) and (A.1) are identical, hence all conclusions of section A.1 carry over to this case.

The perturbative construction of the solution that reduces to the $`SO(2l)`$ invariant Gaussian proceeds as in section A.2 yielding the approximate result (good for small $`ϵ`$)

$$d_J=\frac{b}{\sqrt{D_J}\mathrm{\Gamma }(l)}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x\frac{x^{l1}e^xL_J^{(l1)}(x)}{1+2ϵx}.$$

References

relax A. Connes, M. Douglas and A. Schwarz, “Noncommutative Geometry and Matrix Theory: Compactification on Tori,” hep-th/9711162, JHEP 02 (1998) 003. relax T. Filk, “Divergences in a Field Theory on Quantum Space,” Phys. Lett. B376 (1996) 53. relax J.C. Varilly and J.M. Gracia-Bondia, “On the ultraviolet behavior of quantum fields over noncommutative manifolds,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A14 (1999) 1305, hep-th/9804001. relax M. Chaichian, A. Demichev and P. Presnajder, “Quantum Field Theory on Noncommutative Space-times and the Persistence of Ultraviolet Divergences,” hep-th/9812180; “Quantum Field Theory on the Noncommutative Plane with E(q)(2) Symmetry,” hep-th/9904132. relax M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “One Loop Renormalizability of Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theories on Noncommutative Torus,” hep-th/9903107, JHEP 06 (1999) 015. relax C.P.Martin, D. Sanchez-Ruiz, “The One-loop UV Divergent Structure of U(1) Yang-Mills Theory on Noncommutative $`R^4`$,”hep-th/9903077, Phys.Rev.Lett. 83 (1999) 476-479. relax T. Krajewski, R. Wulkenhaar, “Perturbative quantum gauge fields on the noncommutative torus,” hep-th/9903187. relax S. Cho, R. Hinterding, J. Madore and H. Steinacker, “Finite Field Theory on Noncommutative Geometries,” hep-th/9903239. relax E. Hawkins, “Noncommutative Regularization for the Practical Man,” hep-th/9908052. relax D. Bigatti and L. Susskind, “Magnetic fields, branes and noncommutative geometry,” hep-th/9908056. relax H. Aoki, N. Ishibashi, S. Iso, H. Kawai, Y. Kitizawa and T. Tada, hep-th/9908141. relax N. Ishibashi, S. Iso, H. Kawai and Y. Kitazawa, “Wilson Loops in Noncommutative Yang-Mills,” hep-th/9910004. relax I. Chepelev and R. Roiban, “Renormalization of Quantum Field Theories on Noncommutative $`R^d`$, I. Scalars,” hep-th/9911098. relax H. Benaoum, “Perturbative BF-Yang-Mills theory on noncommutative $`R^4`$,” hep-th/9912036. relax S. Minwalla, M. Van Raamsdonk, N. Seiberg “Noncommutative Perturbative Dynamics,” JHEP 02 (2000) 020, hep-th/9912072. relax G. Arcioni and M. A. Vazquez-Mozo, “Thermal effects in perturbative noncommutative gauge theories,” JHEP 0001 (2000) 028, hep-th/9912140. relax M. Hayakawa, “Perturbative analysis on infrared aspects of noncommutative QED on R\**4,” hep-th/9912094; “Perturbative analysis on infrared and ultraviolet aspects of noncommutative QED on R\**4,” hep-th/9912167. relax S. Iso, H. Kawai and Y. Kitazawa, “Bi-local fields in noncommutative field theory,” hep-th/0001027. relax H. Grosse, T. Krajewski and R. Wulkenhaar, “Renormalization of noncommutative Yang-Mills theories: A simple example,” hep-th/0001182. relax I. Y. Aref’eva, D. M. Belov and A. S. Koshelev, “A note on UV/IR for noncommutative complex scalar field,” hep-th/0001215. relax W. Fischler, E. Gorbatov, A. Kashani-Poor, S. Paban, P. Pouliot and J. Gomis, “Evidence for winding states in noncommutative quantum field theory,” hep-th/0002067. relax A. Matusis, L. Susskind and N. Toumbas, “The IR/UV connection in the non-commutative gauge theories,” hep-th/0002075. relax M. Van Raamsdonk and N. Seiberg, “Comments on Noncommutative Perturbative Dynamics, ” hep-th/0002186. relax F. Ardalan and N. Sadooghi, “Axial Anomaly in Noncommutative QED on $`R^4`$,”hep-th/0002143. relax C. Chu, “Induced Chern Simons and WZW Action in Noncommutative Spacetime,” hep-th/0003007. relax O. Andreev and H. Dorn, “Diagrams of Noncommutative Phi-Three Theory from String Theory,”hep-th/0003113. relax Y. Kiem and S. Lee, “UV/IR Mixing in Noncommutative Field Theory via Open String Loops,”hep-th/0003145. relax G. Derrick, “Comments on Nonlinear wave equations as models for Elementary Particles,” J. Math. Phys 5 1252 (1964). S. Coleman, “Aspects of Symmetry”, Chapters 6 and 7 relax G. Horowitz, J. Lykken R. Rohm and A . Strominger, “A purely cubic action for String Field Theory, ” Phys.Rev.Lett. 57 (1986) 283-286. relax E. Witten, “Noncommutative Geometry and String Field Theory,” Nucl. Phys. B268 (1986) 253. relax N. Nekrasov and A. Schwarz, “Instantons on noncommutative $`R^4`$, and (2,0) superconformal six dimensional theory,” hep-th/9802068, Commun. Math. Phys. 198 (1998) 689-703. relax N. Ishibashi, H. Kawai, Y. Kitazawa and A. Tsuchiya, “A Large-N Reduced Model as Superstring,’ hep-th/9612115, Nucl.Phys. B498 (1997) 467-491. relax N.Ishibashi, S. Iso, H. Kawai, Y. Kitazawa, “Wilson Loops in Noncommutative Yang Mills,” hep-th/9910004. relax I. Bars and D. Minic, “ Noncommutative geometry on a discrete periodic lattice and gauge theory, ”hep-th/9910091. relax J. Ambjorn , Y.Makeenko, J. Nishimura, R.Szabo, “Finite $`N`$ matrix models of noncommutative gauge theory, ” hep-th/9911041, JHEP 11 029 (1999). relax J. Ambjorn, Y. Makeenko, J. Nishimura, R. Szabo, “Nonperturbative dynamics of noncommutative gauge theory,” hep-th/0002158. relax M. Li, “Strings from IIB Matrices, ” hep-th/9612222, Nucl.Phys. B499, (1997), 149. relax A. Dhar, G. Mandal, and S. R. Wadia, “Nonrelativistic Fermions, Coadjoint Orbits of $`W_{\mathrm{}}`$, and String Field Theory At $`c=1`$,” hep-th/9207011, “$`W_{\mathrm{}}`$ Coherent States And Path-Integral Derivation Of Bosonization Of Non-Relativistic Fermions In One Dimension,” hep-th/9309028, “String Field Theory Of Two Dimensional QCD: A Realization Of $`W_{\mathrm{}}`$ Algebra,” hep-th/9403050. relax D. B. Fairlie, T. Curtright, and C. K. Zachos, “Integrable Symplectic Trilinear Interactions For Matrix Membranes,” Phys. Lett. B405 (1997) 37, hep-th/9704037; D. Fairlie, “Moyal Brackets In $`M`$-Theory,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A13 (1998) 263, hep-th/9707190; “Matrix Membranes And Integrability,” hep-th/9709042.


text:
# 𝜇⁺-Knight Shift Measurements in U0.965Th0.035Be13 Single Crystals

## Abstract

Muon spin rotation ($`\mu `$SR) measurements of the temperature dependence of the $`\mu ^+`$-Knight shift in single crystals of U0.965Th0.035Be13 have been used to study the static spin susceptibility $`\chi _s`$ below the transition temperatures $`T_{c1}`$ and $`T_{c2}`$. While an abrupt reduction of $`\chi _s`$ with decreasing temperature is observed below $`T_{c1}`$, $`\chi _s`$ does not change below $`T_{c2}`$ and remains at a value below the normal-state susceptibility $`\chi _n`$. In the normal state we find an anomalous anisotropic temperature dependence of the transferred hyperfine coupling between the $`\mu ^+`$-spin and the U $`5f`$-electrons.

An intriguing feature of the heavy-fermion compound U1-xThxBe13 is that for $`0.019x0.045`$ a second phase transition $`T_{c2}(x)`$ appears at a temperature below the superconducting (SC) transition $`T_{c1}(x)`$ . The nature of the lower transition $`T_{c2}`$ is still a matter of considerable debate. Initially $`T_{c2}`$ was identified as a second distinct SC transition from measurements of a specfic heat peak , the pressure dependence of $`T_c(x)`$  and the increased slope of $`H_{c1}`$ vs. $`T`$ . The observation of a $`T^3`$ dependence of the 9Be NMR spin-lattice relaxation rate below $`T_{c2}`$ suggested a SC state characterized by line nodes in the energy gap . Later zero-field $`\mu `$SR measurements  clearly revealed the onset of small moment magnetism ($`10^3`$ $`\mu _B`$/U) below $`T_{c2}`$. The appearance of a small internal field could arise from a SC state that breaks time-reversal symmetry . On the other hand, it could originate from a spin-density wave instability  or the formation of long-range AFM correlations  within a single SC phase. However, these latter interpretations fail to explain  the large specific heat jump at $`T_{c2}`$.

Early $`\mu `$SR measurements on polycrystalline samples of U0.967Th0.033Be13 showed a constant or perhaps weakly increasing $`\mu ^+`$-Knight shift upon cooling below $`T_{c1}`$ . In the SC state the temperature dependence of the Knight shift $`K`$ reflects the change in the static spin susceptibility $`\chi _s`$ due to the formation of Cooper pairs. For the case of orbital $`s`$-wave ($`L=0`$) spin singlet ($`S=0`$) pairing, Yosida  calculated from the BCS theory that $`\chi _s(T)`$ vanishes as $`T0`$ K. Modifications to this temperature dependence are expected for spin-orbit scattering by impurities and unconventional pairing states.

In this Letter we report on the temperature dependence of the $`\mu ^+`$-Knight shift in single crystals of U0.965Th0.035Be13. These measurements differ from earlier studies on polycrystalline samples in that there are two magnetically inequivalent $`\mu ^+`$-sites which facilitate a determination of $`\chi _s`$ in the SC state. We find that upon cooling through $`T_{c1}`$, $`\chi _s`$ rapidly decreases, but remains independent of temperature below $`T_{c2}`$. Our study also reveals a temperature dependence in the normal state of the transferred hyperfine coupling at one of the two $`\mu ^+`$-sites, roughly coinciding with features observed in resistivity and specific heat data for pure UBe13.

The single crystals of U0.965Th0.035Be13 were grown from an Al flux as described in Ref. . From zero-field specific heat measurements the upper and lower transitions occur at $`T_{c1}=0.47(5)`$ K and $`T_{c2}=0.35(2)`$ K, respectively. The $`\mu `$SR measurements were carried out using a top loading dilution refrigerator on the M15 beam line at the TRI-University Meson Facility (TRIUMF), Canada and using a 4He gas-flow cryostat on the $`\pi `$M3 beam line at the Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI), Switzerland. The crystals were mounted on a Ag plate attached to a cold finger. The magnetic field $`𝐇`$ was applied parallel to the crystallographic $`\widehat{𝐜}`$-axis and transverse to the initial $`\mu ^+`$-spin polarization direction. As a local spin-$`1/2`$ probe, the muon is sensitive only to magnetic interactions and precesses about the local magnetic field $`B_\mu `$ with a Larmor frequency $`\omega =\gamma _\mu B_\mu `$, where $`\gamma _\mu /2\pi =13.55342`$ MHz/kOe. The applied field results in a uniform polarization of the localized U $`5f`$-moments, which reside at the corners of a cubic lattice. The Fourier transform of the $`\mu ^+`$-spin precession signal in U0.965Th0.035Be13 shows two distinct symmetric lines with an amplitude ratio of 1:2. In the time domain, each signal was best fit by a Gaussian relaxation function $`G(t)=\mathrm{exp}(\sigma ^2t^2/2)`$, where $`\sigma `$ is the $`\mu ^+`$-spin depolarization rate. From the amplitude ratio and the frequencies of these two signals, we have determined that the $`\mu ^+`$ stops at the (0, 0, 1/4) site, half way between nearest-neighbor U atoms. Muons stopping between U atoms adjoined along the $`\widehat{𝐜}`$-axis direction experience a net dipolar field from the $`5f`$-moments which is parallel to $`𝐇`$, and thus precess at a frequency $`\omega _{}`$ that is greater than those stopping in Ag (which provide a zero-shift reference frequency). On the other hand, twice as many $`\mu ^+`$ stop between U atoms adjoined along the $`\widehat{𝐚}`$\- and $`\widehat{𝐛}`$-axis directions, where the net dipolar field is antiparallel to $`𝐇`$. These muons precess at a frequency $`\omega _{}`$ that is lower than those stopping in Ag.

The Knight shift at the two magnetically inequivalent $`\mu ^+`$-sites is given by

$$K_,=\left(\omega _,\omega _{\mathrm{Ag}}\right)/\omega _{\mathrm{Ag}}.$$
(1)
Figure 1 shows measurements of the temperature dependence of $`K_{}`$ and $`K_{}`$ below 30 K at $`H=10`$ kOe and above 2 K at 6 kOe (insets). The reduction of $`K_{}`$ above $`T50`$ K is attributed to crystal electric field (CEF) excitations, which have been inferred from specific heat  and NMR spin-lattice relaxation  studies in pure UBe13. The effect on the hyperfine coupling is observable for both $`\mu ^+`$-sites from plots of $`K`$ vs. $`\chi _{\mathrm{mol}}`$ in the normal state (see Fig. 2), where $`\chi _{\mathrm{mol}}`$ is the isotropic bulk molar susceptibility. The plots are essentially linear between 5 and 50 K (where $`K`$ follows a Curie-Weiss behavior) and at temperatures above 63 K, with a change of slope between the two regions. The temperature dependence of $`\chi _{\mathrm{mol}}^1`$ is shown in the inset of Fig. 2 compared with that for proposed CEF spittings of U4+ $`J=4`$  and U3+ $`J=9/2`$  manifolds in cubic symmetry. The CEF models have been corrected by adding a molecular-field constant of 57 emu/mol, compared to 52 emu/mol in CeCu2Si2 . Although the data are consistent with $`J=9/2`$, the $`J=4`$ energy scheme results in similar behavior when the hybridization proposed in the quadrupolar Kondo model  is included in the calculation of $`\chi _{\mathrm{mol}}^1(T)`$ — as was shown for the case of pure UBe13 . A linear fit to $`\chi _{\mathrm{mol}}^1(T)`$ above 100 K yields an effective moment of 3.62(1) $`\mu _B`$/U.

Equation (1) can be expressed in terms of the individual contributions to $`K`$, so that for the axial symmetry of the $`\mu ^+`$-site

$$K_{}=(A_\mathrm{c}^{}+A_{\mathrm{dip}}^{zz})\chi _{5f}+K_{\mathrm{dem},\mathrm{L}}+K_0+K_{\mathrm{dia}}$$
(2)
and

$$K_{}=(A_\mathrm{c}^{}\frac{1}{2}A_{\mathrm{dip}}^{zz})\chi _{5f}+K_{\mathrm{dem},\mathrm{L}}+K_0+K_{\mathrm{dia}},$$
(3)
where $`A_\mathrm{c}`$ and $`A_{\mathrm{dip}}^{zz}`$ are the contact hyperfine and dipolar coupling constants pertaining to the interaction of the $`\mu ^+`$ with the $`5f`$-electrons (i.e. $`AH_{hf}/N_A\mu _B`$, where $`H_{hf}`$ is the hyperfine field, $`N_\mathrm{A}`$ is Avogadro’s number and $`\mu _B`$ is the Bohr magneton), $`\chi _{5f}`$ is the isotropic molar $`5f`$-electron susceptibility, $`K_{\mathrm{dem},\mathrm{L}}=4\pi (1/3N)\rho _{\mathrm{mol}}\chi _{\mathrm{mol}}`$ is the correction for the demagnetization and Lorentz fields (where $`N1`$ is the demagnetization factor and $`\rho _{\mathrm{mol}}=0.01227`$ mol/cm3 is the molar density), $`K_0`$ is the isotropic $`T`$-independent contribution from the non-$`5f`$ conduction electrons, and $`K_{\mathrm{dia}}`$ is due to flux expulsion in the SC state.

The total normal-state susceptibility is given by $`\chi _{\mathrm{mol}}=\chi _{5f}+\chi _0`$, where $`\chi _0`$ is the $`T`$-independent non-$`5f`$ contribution. From the normal-state plot of $`K_{}K_{}`$ vs. $`\chi _{\mathrm{mol}}`$ at 10 kOe (see Fig. 3), $`\chi _0=0.0039(2)`$ emu/mol was obtained from the intercept of the extrapolated linear line, where $`\chi _{5f}1/T0`$ and $`K_{}=K_{}K_0=1846(90)`$ ppm. In general, $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}=A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$, in which case the slope of the solid line (3/2)$`A_{\mathrm{dip}}^{zz}`$ gives $`A_{\mathrm{dip}}^{zz}=2066(22)`$ Oe/$`\mu _B`$. This value agrees with the result $`A_{\mathrm{dip}}^{zz}=2062`$ Oe/$`\mu _B`$ obtained from a simple dipolar-field calculation for U moments sitting on the corners of a cubic lattice of edge-length 5.134 Å. We note that the value of $`A_{\mathrm{dip}}^{zz}`$ obtained from the 6 kOe data is only 1693(28) Oe/$`\mu _B`$. Although this may imply that $`A_\mathrm{c}`$ is anisotropic, the time spectra recorded at 6 kOe had a larger time resolution and far fewer muon-decay events than the spectra taken at 10 kOe. Thus, it is likely that there is a systematic uncertainty in the temperature dependence of the $`\mu ^+`$-Knight shift at 6 kOe.

$`A_\mathrm{c}`$ represents the transferred hyperfine coupling between the $`\mu ^+`$-spin and the U $`5f`$-electrons via the conduction $`s`$-electrons. Substituting the value of $`A_{\mathrm{dip}}^{zz}`$ into Eqs. (2) and (3) gives the temperature dependence of $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ and $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ shown in Fig. 4. The offset of the 6 kOe data stems from the discussion in the previous paragraph. The decrease above 50 K is likely due to the mixing of the wave functions associated with the different CEF levels. The strong reduction of $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ and lack of change of $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ for $`T_{c1}T4`$ K is the source of the nonlinearity above $`\chi _{\mathrm{mol}}0.014`$ emu/mol in Fig. 3. This is not a muon induced effect, since similar departures from linearity have been observed in $`K`$-$`\chi _{\mathrm{mol}}`$ plots for the 9Be NMR Knight shift in UBe13  and the 63Cu and 29Si NMR Knight shifts in CeCu2Si2 . A decrease of $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ over nearly the same temperature range is also observed in pure UBe13 . This anomaly roughly coincides with the peak in the resistivity and specific heat at $`2.5`$ K in UBe13 , which is completely suppressed when 3.55 % Th is added. The decrease of $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ in both the pure and doped systems is not necessarily inconsistent with this latter behavior, because most of the $`\mu ^+`$ stopping in U0.965Th0.035Be13 do not reside near a Th impurity.

In the SC state the flux expulsion term $`K_{\mathrm{dia}}`$ in Eqs. (2) and (3) is related to the value of the magnetic penetration depth $`\lambda `$ and the coherence length $`\xi _0`$. To our knowledge there have been no measurements of the absolute value of $`\lambda `$ in U0.965Th0.035Be13. However, the lack of any increase in the $`\mu ^+`$-spin depolarization rate $`\sigma `$ below $`T_{c1}`$ is consistent with a value $`\lambda (0)12100`$ Å, as reported in pure UBe13 . Using the simple theoretical model developed by Hao et al. for the reversible magnetization of a type-II superconductor  and the value $`H_{c2}(0)55`$ kOe , we calculate that $`|K_{\mathrm{dia}}|72`$ ppm. Since we observed no field dependence for $`K_,`$ below $`T_{c1}`$ in the range 5 kOe $`H15`$ kOe, we conclude that the internal field is essentially uniform and the diamagnetic shift $`K_{\mathrm{dia}}`$ is negligible.

Because $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ is temperature independent in the normal state, we make the reasonable assumption that it remains so below $`T_{c1}`$, allowing $`\chi _s`$ (i.e., $`\chi _{5f}`$ in the SC state) to be determined from Eq. (2). As shown in Fig. 5, $`\chi _s(T)`$ exhibits two different behaviors (in agreement with the raw Knight shift data in Fig. 1) which coincide with the two phase transitions in the specific heat. The decrease of $`\chi _s(T)`$ between $`T_{c1}`$ and $`T_{c2}`$ is consistent with a phase in which the Cooper pairs have a substate of opposite spin projection (i.e., $`S_z=0`$). However, the data cannot distinguish between even and odd parity spin states possessing this substate, because Fermi-liquid corrections and spin-orbit (SO) scattering by impurities may be significant. For the case of an even parity SC phase we can estimate the importance of SO scattering from the relation $`\chi _s(T_{c2})/\chi _n=12l_{\mathrm{SO}}/\pi \xi _0`$ , where $`\chi _n`$ is the normal-state spin susceptibility at $`T_{c1}`$, $`\chi _s(T_{c2})/\chi _n=0.61`$ and $`\xi _077`$ Å from $`H_{c2}(0)`$ . This gives a SO scattering mean free path of $`l_{\mathrm{SO}}47`$ Å. The average distance between Th atoms $`15`$ Å, represents a lower limit for the mean free path $`l`$ between collisions of the electrons with the Th impurities. Since $`l_{\mathrm{SO}}`$ is of the same order of $`l`$, modification of $`\chi _s(T)`$ due to SO scattering cannot be ruled out.

The lack of a temperature dependence for $`\chi _s`$ below $`T_{c2}`$ is characteristic of a spin-triplet ($`S=1`$) odd-parity ($`L=1`$) superconductor with parallel spin pairing, except that $`\chi _s<\chi _n`$. This unusual behavior suggests that the component of the order parameter corresponding to the phase $`T_{c2}<T<T_{c1}`$ stops or slows down its growth at $`T_{c2}`$, where a second component develops. In terms of the $`𝐝`$-vector  of the triplet order parameter $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}(𝐤)=i(𝐝\sigma )\sigma _y`$, a possibile scenario is that (i) one component corresponds to $`𝐝𝐇`$, so that $`\chi _s`$ decreases below $`T_{c1}`$ and (ii) the second component corresponds to $`𝐝𝐇`$, in which case $`\chi _s`$ is unchanged below $`T_{c2}`$. The idea of a two-component $`𝐝`$-vector is similar to the weak spin-orbit coupling model recently developed for UPt3  from detailed 195Pt NMR Knight shift measurements . Finally, substituting $`\chi _s(T)`$ for $`\chi _{5f}`$ in Eq. (3) we find that the magnitude of $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ rapidly increases to a constant value below $`T_{c2}`$ (see Fig 4).

In conclusion, our study of U0.965Th0.035Be13 has identified different behavior for the temperature dependence of the spin susceptibility $`\chi _s`$ below the two transitions observed in the specific heat. A possible explanation for the absence of a change below $`T_{c2}`$ is that U0.965Th0.035Be13 is an odd parity spin-triplet superconductor. However, we stress that this may not be the only interpretation of our measurements. A definitive identification of the pairing state will require further measurements as a function of magnetic-field direction to unambiguously determine the relative orientation of the $`𝐝`$-vector and $`𝐇`$.

We are extremely grateful to K. Machida, D.L. Cox, M.J. Graf, A.V. Balatsky and A. Schenck for informative discussions. Work at Los Alamos was performed under the auspices of the U.S. DOE. Other support was provided by U.S. NSF, Grant DMR-9731361 (U.C. Riverside), DMR-9820631 (California State) and the Dutch Foundations FOM and NWO (Leiden).

FIGURE CAPTIONS

Figure 1. Temperature dependence of $`K_{}`$ and $`K_{}`$ measured at TRIUMF in an applied field $`H=10`$ kOe. Inset: Data taken above $`T_{c1}`$ at PSI, where the maximum available field was $`H=6`$ kOe.

Figure 2. Plot of the normal-state $`\mu ^+`$-Knight shift at $`H=6`$ kOe vs. the bulk molar susceptibility. Inset: Temperature dependence of the inverse susceptibility. Dashed and solid lines are calculations using Eq. (3) of Ref.  for the CEF schemes described in the text.

Figure 3. Plot of $`K_{}K_{}`$ vs. the bulk molar susceptibility at $`T>T_{c1}`$ and $`H=10`$ kOe. The solid line is a linear fit to the data above 5 K.

Figure 4. Temperature dependence of $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ (open symbols) and $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ (solid symbols) at $`H=6`$ kOe and 10 kOe. Note: We have assumed that $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ is unchanged below $`T_{c1}`$. The data for $`A_\mathrm{c}^{}`$ below $`T_{c1}`$ was obtained under this assumption.

Figure 5. Temperature dependence of the specific heat (open circles) and magnetic susceptibility (solid circles).