format: text

text:
# Using HI to probe large scale structures at 𝑧∼3 .

## 1 Introduction

The problem of determining the distribution of matter on large scales in the universe and understanding the large scale structure (LSS) formation is of prime importance in modern cosmology. Observing the angular positions and redshifts of galaxies has been the most straightforward method of mapping the LSS in the present day universe (Peebles 1993, Peebles 1980), but the interpretation of these observations is complicated by the fact that the relation between the distribution of galaxies and the distribution of underlying matter is not fully understood (Bardeen et al. 1986). Other direct methods use galaxy clusters or super-clusters as tracers to map the large scale structures. A large variety of techniques have been developed and applied to quantify the distribution of galaxies, and amongst these the correlation functions (two-, three-point correlation functions, etc) and their Fourier counterparts (power spectrum, bi-spectrum, etc.) have been most popular (Peebles 1980). Much of the work comparing the observations with different theories has been based on these.

An alternative approach is to use observations of fluctuations in the diffuse extragalactic background radiation at different wavelengths to probe the large scale structure. Here, the observations of anisotropies in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) have been most important. These observations probe the clustering of matter at the last scattering surface (e.g. Bond 1996), and combined with the information from the galaxy surveys, they have been successful in narrowing down the allowed class of theoretical models of LSS formation (e.g., Peacock 1999 and reference therein). The study of diffuse background at other wavelengths has been used to infer the clustering properties of matter at more recent epochs. Shectman (1974) observed fluctuations in the optical background; the results of this observation are consistent with predictions from galaxy counts (Peebles 1980). This method has also been applied to far-infrared background (Kashlinsky et al.  1997) and recently the first detection of fluctuations in this background has been reported (Kashlinsky et al.  1999). Gorjian, Wright and Chary (1999) have recently reported a tentative detection of a near-infrared background. There are similar predictions for fluctuations in the X-ray background (Barcons et al. 2000, Barcons et al. 1998).

In this paper we investigate the possibility of using the extragalactic background radiation at low radio frequencies (meter wave) to probe the LSS. This is largely motivated by the fact that the Giant Meter-wave Radio Telescope (GMRT; Swarup et al. 1991) which is designed to observe in several frequency bands in the interval $`150\mathrm{MHz}`$ to $`1420\mathrm{MHz}`$ has recently started functioning. This frequency range corresponds to the $`1420\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}`$ emission from HI in the redshift range $`0z8.5`$. Absorption studies along sight lines to quasars indicate that most of the HI in the redshift range $`0z3`$ is in damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ (DLA) clouds and the density of HI in DLAs has been determined reasonably well from absorption studies (Lanzetta, Wolfe, & Turnshek 1995). Although the HI emission from individual DLAs at high $`z`$ is too faint to detect using presently available telescopes, the redshifted HI emission from unresolved DLAs will contribute to the background radiation at low frequencies. In this paper we investigate how the brightness temperature of this radiation is related to the density and peculiar velocity of the HI. We consider the possibility of detecting correlations in the fluctuations in this component of the background radiation and using this to probe LSS at high $`z`$.

The possibility of observing the redshifted 21 cm emission from HI at high $`z`$ has been discussed earlier by many authors in a large variety of contexts. One of the first papers (Sunyaev & Zel’dovich, 1975) considers the possibility of meter-wave observations to detect protogalaxies and protoclusters at $`z10`$. There have been several attempts to detect the HI in proto-clusters and proto-super clusters (see Subrahmanyan & Anantharamaiah 1990 and reference therein).

More recently Subramanian and Padmanabhan (1993) have calculated the abundance of protoclusters as a function of the redshifted HI flux density for various redshifts for both the CDM and HDM models. In a later paper Kumar, Padmanabhan and Subramanian (1995) have calculated the line profile of the HI emission from a spherically symmetric protocluster. Bagla, Nath and Padmanabhan (1997) and Bagla (1998) have used a combination of N-body simulations and a model for the behaviour of the baryons to calculate the abundance and the expected flux from the HI in structures like protoclusters at high redshifts. A major uncertainty in all of these works is in the assumptions about the HI content of the universe at high redshifts. The main focus of all of these works has been on individual peaks of the density fluctuations (protoclusters) which will manifest themselves as detectable features in low-frequency radio maps. Subramanian and Padmanabhan (1993) have also studied the possibility of detecting the excess variance in radio images due to the density fluctuations in the HI at high $`z`$.

Katz, Weinberg and Hernquist (1998) have used smoothed particle hydrodynamic simulations to study the distribution of HI gas at high $`z`$ and they consider the possibility of detecting HI emission from galaxies at $`z>2`$.

Tozzi et al. (1999) and Shaver et al. (1999) have studied the possibility of detecting the HI in the IGM at $`z>5`$. The state of the HI at these redshifts is unknown and these works are based on different scenarios for the reionization of the universe.

The work presented here differs significantly from the previous papers in that:

* It is restricted to $`z<3.5`$ where the HI content of the universe is well determined from DLA absorption studies. We use the results of these observations as inputs to our calculations.
* Instead of looking at the possibility of detecting individual features (as has been the focus of a large number of previous papers) we have studied the statistical properties of the fluctuations in the brightness temperature in low frequency radio maps. The statistical quantity we have studied is the cross-correlation between the temperature fluctuations along different lines of sight in radio map made at different frequencies. Individual features corresponding to protoclusters are rare events and protoclusters with flux in the range $`1.53\mathrm{m}\mathrm{Jy}`$ are predicted to occur with abundances in the range $`10^810^7\mathrm{Mpc}^3`$ in the CDM model (Subramanian and Padmanabhan, 1993). Even small density fluctuations will contribute to the cross-correlation signal and our proposal has the advantage of simultaneously using the signal in all the pixels in all the frequency channels across the bandwidth of observation.

The structure of the paper is as follows: in §2 we discuss the basic formalism of calculating the brightness temperature and fluctuations in the redshifted 21 cm radiation, in §3 we discuss the numerical results for two currently favoured cosmological models. In §4, the observational difficulties in the presence galactic and extragalactic foregrounds are presented, and we discuss a possible strategy for overcoming these. §5 gives a summary of our main results.

## 2 Formalism.

We treat the HI in damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ (DLA) systems as a continuous distribution with $`n_{\mathrm{HI}}(𝒙,t)`$ denoting the comoving number density of HI atoms in the excited state of the hyperfine transition. Such a treatment is justified in a situation where the resolution of the observations is not sufficient to detect individual DLAs. In addition, the fact that the HI actually does not have a continuous distribution but is distributed in discrete objects can, if required. be taken into account when calculating statistical measures of the fluctuation in the HI distribution.

The HI emission which is at a frequency $`\nu _e=1420\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}`$ in the rest frame of the gas it is emitted from is redshifted to a frequency $`\nu `$ for an observer located at the origin of the coordinate system. Taking into account the effects of both the expansion of the universe as well as the peculiar velocity $`𝒗(𝒙,t)`$ of the HI at the time of emission and $`𝒗(0,t_0)`$ of the observer at the present time, the comoving coordinate $`𝒙`$ of the HI and $`\nu `$ are related by

$$𝒙=𝒏c_{\frac{\nu }{\nu _e(1W)}}^1\frac{da}{a^2H(a)}$$
(1)
in a spatially flat universe. Here $`𝒏=𝒙/x`$ is a unit vector along the line of sight to the HI, $`W(𝒙)=𝒏[𝒗(𝒙,t)𝒗(0,t_0)]/c`$ accounts for the effects of the peculiar velocities and

$$H(a)=\frac{\dot{a}(t)}{a(t)}=H_0\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_{m0}a^3+\lambda _0}$$
(2)
is the Hubble parameter at the epoch when the scale factor has value $`a`$.

When discussing observations of the redshifted HI emission, it is convenient to use $`𝝂=𝒏\nu `$ to simultaneously denote the frequency and the direction of the observation. The vector $`𝝂`$ fixes both the comoving position $`𝒙`$ of the HI from where the radiation originates and the time $`t`$ at which the radiation originates, and we shall use $`𝝂`$ and $`(𝒙,t)`$ interchangeably. Here we calculate how $`T(𝝂)`$ the brightness temperature of the radiation is related to the density $`n_{\mathrm{HI}}(𝒙,t)`$ and the the peculiar velocity $`𝒗(𝒙,t)`$ of the HI.

The energy flux in the frequency interval $`d^3\nu `$ can be calculated if we know the number of excited HI atoms in the comoving volume $`d^3x`$ from where the radiation originates and it is given by

$$\mathrm{Flux}=\frac{h_P\nu _eA_{21}n_{\mathrm{HI}}(𝒙,t)d^3x}{4\pi r_L^2(𝒙)}$$
(3)
Here $`r_L`$ is the luminosity distance which is given by

$$r_L(𝒙)=x[1W]\frac{\nu _e}{\nu }$$
(4)
The flux is also related to the specific intensity as follows

$$\mathrm{Flux}=\frac{I(𝝂)}{\nu ^2}d^3\nu $$
(5)
which allows us to calculate the specific intensity to be

$$\frac{I(𝝂)}{\nu ^2}=\frac{h_P\nu _eA_{21}n_{\mathrm{HI}}(𝝂)}{4\pi \nu _e^2}\left\{\frac{1}{[1W(𝝂)]}\frac{\nu }{x}\right\}^2\left|\frac{𝒙}{𝝂}\right|.$$
(6)
where $`|\frac{𝒙}{𝝂}|`$ is the Jacobian of the transformation from $`𝝂`$ to $`𝒙`$ given in equation (1).

It should be noted here that the effect of the peculiar velocity $`(i.e.W)`$ can be neglected if we restrict the analysis to scales which are much smaller than the horizon. This is not true for the spatial derivatives of the peculiar velocities which appears in the Jacobian and we retain such terms in our analysis. Calculating the Jacobian gives us

$$\left|\frac{𝒙}{𝝂}\right|=\left(\frac{x}{\nu }\right)^2\frac{c}{H(\frac{\nu }{\nu _e})}\frac{\nu _e}{\nu ^2}\left[1\frac{\nu _e}{\nu }\frac{(𝒏\mathbf{})(𝒏𝒗)}{H(\frac{\nu }{\nu _e})}\right].$$
(7)
Equations (6) and (7) allows us to calculate the brightness temperature of the radiation

$$T(𝝂)=\left(\frac{c^2}{2k_B}\right)\frac{I(𝝂)}{\nu ^2}$$
(8)
which gives us

$$T(𝝂)=\frac{T_{21}N_{21}(𝝂)}{8\pi }\frac{A_{21}}{H(\frac{\nu }{\nu _e})}\left(\frac{\nu _e}{\nu }\right)^2\left[1\frac{\nu _e}{\nu }\frac{(𝒏\mathbf{})(𝒏𝒗)}{H(\frac{\nu }{\nu _e})}\right].$$
(9)
where $`T_{21}=h_p\nu _e/k_B`$ and $`N_{21}(𝝂)=(c/\nu _e)^3n_{HI}(𝝂)`$ is the number of HI atoms in the excited state in a comoving volume $`(21\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m})^3`$.

The number density $`n_{\mathrm{HI}}(𝝂)`$ can be written as a sum of two parts, namely the mean $`\overline{n}_{HI}(\nu )`$ and the fluctuation $`\mathrm{\Delta }n_{HI}(𝝂)`$. We assume that the fluctuation in the number density of HI can be related to the perturbations in the underlying dark matter distribution $`\delta (𝝂)`$ through a time dependent linear bias parameter $`b(\nu )`$ which gives us

$$N_{21}(𝝂)=\overline{N}_{21}(\nu )[1+b(\nu )\delta (𝝂)].$$
(10)
We use this to calculate the isotropic part of the temperature

$$\overline{T}(\nu )=\frac{2.38\mathrm{K}h^1\overline{N}_{21}(\nu )}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_{m0}(\frac{\nu _e}{\nu })^3+\lambda _0}}\left(\frac{\nu _e}{\nu }\right)^2$$
(11)
and the fluctuation

$$\mathrm{\Delta }T(𝝂)=\overline{T}(\nu )\left[b(\nu )\delta (𝝂)\frac{\nu _e}{\nu }\frac{(𝒏\mathbf{})(𝒏𝒗)}{H(\frac{\nu }{\nu _e})}\right]$$
(12)
Now, in the linear theory of density perturbations, both the perturbation and the peculiar velocity can be expressed in terms of a potential i.e.

$$\delta (𝒙,t)=D(t)^2\psi (𝒙)$$
(13)
and

$$𝒗(𝒙,t)=f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)H(t)a(t)D(t)\psi (𝐱).$$
(14)
where $`D(t)`$ is the growing mode of linear density perturbations (Peebles 1980). In a spatially flat universe the function $`f`$ can be well approximated by the form (Lahav et. al. 1991)

$$f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)=\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{0.6}+\frac{1}{70}[1\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_m(1+\mathrm{\Omega }_m)]$$
(15)
where the time dependence of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ can be expressed as

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_m(\nu )=\left(\frac{H_0}{H(\frac{\nu }{\nu _e})}\right)^2\left(\frac{\nu _e}{\nu }\right)^3\mathrm{\Omega }_{m0}.$$
(16)
Using this and defining a time dependent linear redshift space distortion parameter $`\beta (\nu )=f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)/b(\nu )`$ we can express the fluctuation in the temperature as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }T(𝝂)=\overline{T}_A(\nu )b(\nu )D(\nu )\left[^2+\beta (\nu )(𝒏)^\mathrm{𝟐}\right]\psi (𝒙)$$
(17)
We next calculate the cross-correlation between the temperature fluctuations along two different lines of sight $`𝒏_1`$ and $`𝒏_2`$ at two different frequencies $`\nu _1`$ and $`\nu _2`$. The quantity we consider is the correlation

$$w(𝝂_1,𝝂_2)=\mathrm{\Delta }T(𝝂_1)\mathrm{\Delta }T(𝝂_2)$$
(18)
which is a function of the two frequencies $`\nu _1`$, $`\nu _2`$ and $`\theta `$ the angle between the two lines of sight. Using equation (17) and defining $`\varphi (x_{12})=\psi (𝒙_1)\psi (𝒙_2)`$ to be the two point correlation of the potential $`\psi (𝒙)`$, we obtain

$$w(𝝂_1,𝝂_2)=\overline{T}_1\overline{T}_2D_1D_2b_1b_2\left[^2+\beta _1(𝒏_1\mathbf{})^2\right]\left[^2+\beta _2(𝒏_2\mathbf{})^2\right]\varphi (x_{12})$$
(19)
where $`x_{12}=𝒙_1𝒙_2`$ and we have used the notation $`\overline{T}_1=\overline{T}(\nu _1)`$, etc.

The function $`\varphi (x)`$ is related to the correlation of the perturbations in the underlying dark matter distribution, and $`\xi (𝒙_1,t_1,𝒙_2,t_2)=\delta (𝒙_1,t_1)\delta (𝒙_2,t_2)`$ the two point correlation of the perturbation in the dark matter density at the point $`𝒙_1`$ at the epoch $`t_1`$ and $`𝒙_2`$ at the epoch $`t_2`$ can be written in terms of the potential $`\varphi `$ as

$$\xi (𝒙_1,t_1,𝒙_2,t_2)=D(t_1)D(t_2)\stackrel{~}{\xi }(x_{12})=D(t_1)D(t_2)^4\varphi (x_{12}).$$
(20)
We have introduced the function $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }(x_{12})`$ so that we can write $`\xi (𝒙_1,t_1,𝒙_2,t_2)`$ as a product of two parts, one which has the temporal variation and another the spatial variation. Equation (20) can be inverted to express the different derivatives of $`\varphi (x_{12})`$ which appear in equation (19) in terms of moments of $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }(x_{12})`$ which are defined as

$$\stackrel{~}{\xi }_n(x_{12})=\frac{n+1}{x_{12}^{n+1}}_0^{x_{12}}\stackrel{~}{\xi }(y)y^n𝑑y.$$
(21)
The form of the angular correlation is further simplified if we restrict $`\theta `$ to be very small. Under this assumption $`𝒏_1𝒏_2`$, and we use $`𝒏`$ to denote the common line of sight. We also use $`\mu =𝒏(𝒙_1𝒙_2)/x_{12}`$ for the cosine of the angle between the line of sight $`𝒏`$ and the vector $`𝒙_1𝒙_2`$ joining the two points between which we are measuring the correlation. The relation between the different distances and angles is shown in figure 1, and we have $`x_{12}=\sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^22x_1x_2\mathrm{cos}(\theta )}`$ and $`\mu =(x_1x_2\mathrm{cos}(\theta ))/x_{12}`$. Using these we finally obtain the following expression for the two point correlation of the temperature

$`w(\nu _1,\nu _2,\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{T}_1\overline{T}_2D_1D_2b_2b_2\{\left[(1+\beta _1\mu ^2)(1+\beta _2\mu ^2)\right]\stackrel{~}{\xi }(x_{12})`$ (22)
$`+`$ $`\left[({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mu ^2)(\beta _1+\beta _2)+({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}3\mu ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{2}}\mu ^4)\beta _1\beta _2\right]\stackrel{~}{\xi _2}(x_{12})`$
$``$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{3}{10}}+3\mu ^2{\displaystyle \frac{7}{2}}\mu ^4]\stackrel{~}{\xi _4}(x_{12})\}`$
## 3 Predictions for different models.

The density of HI ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{HI}}`$) in DLAs has been determined reasonably well for $`0z3`$ from absorption studies (Lanzetta, Wolfe, & Turnshek 1995) and they find that the observed evolution of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{HI}}`$ is well approximated by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{HI}}(z)=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{HI0}}\mathrm{exp}(\alpha z)`$ with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{HI0}}=0.18\pm 0.04\times 10^3h^1`$ and $`\alpha =0.60\pm 0.15`$ for $`q_0=0`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{HI0}}=0.19\pm 0.04\times 10^3h^1`$ and $`\alpha =0.83\pm 0.15`$ for $`q_0=0.5`$, We have used this to calculate the isotropic part of the background brightness temperature due to the redshifted HI emission (equation 17). We have considered two spatially flat FRW cosmological models with parameters (I) $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{m0}=1.0`$ and $`\lambda _0=0`$, and (II) $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{m0}=0.3`$ and $`\lambda _0=0.7`$, with $`h=0.5`$ in both cases. It should be pointed out that the fits given Lanzetta et al.  (1995) are not valid for the model with a cosmological constant, and we use the $`q_0=0`$ fit in this case.

Figure 2 shows the brightness temperature as a function of frequency for both the cases.

We find that the temperature increases rapidly as we go to lower frequencies (higher $`z`$) and it is around $`1\mathrm{mK}`$ at $`\nu 330\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}`$ which corresponds to $`z3`$. The increase in the temperature is a direct consequence of the increase of HI density with increasing redshift. The HI density is not very well determined at $`z>3`$ and there is evidence that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{HI}}`$ falls off at higher redshifts (Storrie–Lombardi et al.  1996).

We next consider $`w(\nu _1,\nu _2,\theta )`$ the cross-correlation in the temperature fluctuation at different frequencies which we have calculated for the two cases discussed above. We have calculated the dark-matter two point correlation function (equation 20) using the analytic fitting form for the CDM power spectrum given by Efstathiou, Bond and White (1992). For case (I) we use a value of the shape parameter $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.25`$ and for (II) we use $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.14`$. The power spectra are normalized using the results of Bunn and White (1996) based on the 4-year COBE data. It should be noted that he redshift evolution of the matter correlation function and $`f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)`$ are quite different in the two cases that we have considered. The predictions for $`w(\nu _1,\nu _2,\theta )`$ are shown in figures 3 and 4. We have assumed that the HI faithfully traces the matter distribution and set $`b(\nu )=1`$ throughout.

In our analysis we have kept $`\nu _1`$ fixed at $`320\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}`$ and let $`\nu _2`$ vary over a band of $`16\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}`$ centered around $`\nu _1`$, while $`\theta `$ takes values upto $`2^{}`$. In order to measure $`w(\nu _1,\nu _2,\theta )`$ over this range we would need radio images of the background temperature fluctuation in a $`2^{}\times 2^{}`$ field at different frequencies in a $`16\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}`$ band centered around $`320\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}`$ and $`w(\nu _1,\nu _2,\theta )`$ could be estimated using

$$w(\nu _1,\nu _2,\theta )=\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\nu _1}(𝒏_1)\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\nu _2}(𝒏_2)$$
(23)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\nu _1}(𝒏_1)`$ refers to the temperature fluctuation along the direction $`𝒏_1`$ in the image made at frequency $`\nu _1`$, and the angular brackets denote average over all pairs of directions $`𝒏_1`$ and $`𝒏_2`$ which are separated by an angle $`\theta `$. The central frequency, bandwidth and angular range have been chosen keeping in mind the Giant Meter wave Radio Telescope (GMRT, Swarup et al. 1991) which has recently become operational. The frequency intervals and angular separation can be converted to a corresponding comoving length-scale and in case (I) $`1\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}=8.9\mathrm{Mpc}`$ and $`1^{^{}}=1.8\mathrm{Mpc}`$, while in case (II) $`1\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}=16.0\mathrm{Mpc}`$ and $`1^{^{}}=2.7\mathrm{Mpc}`$. The linear theory of density perturbations which we have used here can be applied at scales $`10\mathrm{M}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}`$, which covers most of the region shown in the figures.

We find that $`w(\nu _1,\nu _2,\theta )`$ is between $`10^7\mathrm{K}^2`$ to $`10^8\mathrm{K}^2`$ when the comoving-distance corresponding to the separation in frequencies and direction is less between $`10\mathrm{M}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}`$ and $`40\mathrm{M}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}`$ beyond which it falls off. The cross-correlation between the temperature fluctuations is expected to be larger at small scales where the linear theory of density perturbations will not be valid and we have not considered these scales here. The temperature fluctuations are anti-correlated when the separation in frequencies exceeds the angular separation. This occurs because of the effect of the peculiar velocity which produces a “distortion” very similar to the effect it has on the two-point correlation function in redshift surveys.

## 4 Observational prospects

In this section we discuss the prospects of actually observing the background radiation from the HI in damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ clouds. Our discussion is restricted to observations at around $`320\mathrm{MHz}`$ largely because we have reliable estimates of the HI content at $`z3`$ and there are indications that $`z3`$ might be the redshift where the HI content of the universe is maximum (Storrie–Lombardi et al.  1996). Another reason for our choice of this frequency range is that the GMRT (Swarup et al. 1991) which is already functioning at these frequencies is expected to have an angular resolution of $`10^{^{\prime \prime }}`$ and reach noise levels of $`100\mu \mathrm{K}`$ in around 10 hrs of integration. The angular resolution and sensitivity of the GMRT will be sufficient for detecting both the isotropic component as well as the correlations in the component of the background radiation arising from the HI at $`z3`$ (Figures 23 and 4) provided we can distinguish this component from the contribution due to other sources.

### 4.1 Galactic and extra-galactic foregrounds

Any observations at low frequencies will have a very large contribution from the synchrotron radiation from our own galaxy. Observations at $`408\mathrm{MHz}`$ (Haslam et al.  1982) with resolution $`1^{}\text{x}1^{}`$ indicate a minimum temperature of $`10\mathrm{K}`$ at $`408\mathrm{MH}z`$. Using $`T\nu ^{2.7}`$ as indicated by the spectral index of galactic synchrotron radiation, the temperature at $`\nu 320\mathrm{MHz}`$ is $`20\mathrm{K}`$. Comparing this number with the expected background from redshifted HI radiation (Figure 2) the galactic foreground is seen to be several orders above the expected signal. Another quantity of interest to us is the fluctuations in the galactic radiation at angles $`\stackrel{<}{}1^{}`$. However as the resolution of Haslam maps is $`1^{}`$ it cannot be used to make any predictions about the fluctuations at the angular scales of interest.

Another source of contamination is the continuum radiation from unresolved extragalactic sources (the resolved ones will be removed from the image before analysis) and we use results from the recent FIRST survey (for details see White et al. 1997 and references therein) to estimate this. Tegmark & Estathiou (1995) provide an analytic fit for the number of sources per unit flux $`\varphi [\mathrm{mJy}]`$ per steradian in this survey, and at flux levels $`\varphi 100\mathrm{m}\mathrm{J}\mathrm{y}`$ this can be approximated by

$$\frac{dn}{d\varphi }=\frac{5.24\times 10^5}{\mathrm{mJy}\mathrm{sr}}\left(\frac{\varphi }{0.75\mathrm{mJy}}\right)^{1.65}.$$
(24)
We use this to estimate the total contribution from sources fainter than $`100\mu \mathrm{Jy}`$, and converting this to brightness temperature we find that the continuum emission from unresolved radio sources is expected to produce a background radiation with brightness temperature $`.1\mathrm{K}`$ at $`1.5\mathrm{Ghz}`$. For the purposes of estimating an order-of-magnitude we assume this value to be representative of what we expect at $`320\mathrm{MHz}`$.

The two-point correlation function of the sources detected by FIRST has been estimated (Cress et al.  1996): $`w(\theta )0.18\theta ^{1.1}`$, with $`\theta `$ in $`\mathrm{arcminutes}`$. Little is known about the correlations expected in the fluctuations in the contribution to the background radiation from unresolved radio sources.

It is clear from the foregoing discussion that both galactic and extragalactic continuum signals are likely to be so high that they would totally swamp the signal which we want to detect and therefore it is not possible to directly detect the radiation from HI unless we find some method for removing the foregrounds.

At present the most promising strategy is to use the proposed observations themselves to determine the foreground and remove this from the data, and we next discuss a possible method for doing this.

### 4.2 Removing foregrounds

We consider the GMRT band centered at $`325\mathrm{MHz}`$ for our discussion in this section. The total bandwidth of $`16\mathrm{MHz}`$ is divided in 128 channels each with $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu =1.25\mathrm{kHz}`$, and the signal in any frequency channel is expected to be dominated by the foregrounds.

Here we briefly review the standard method of continuum subtraction which is generally used in spectral line detections and then discuss how this method can be used for the analysis proposed here. The reader is referred to Subrahmanyam and Anantharamaiah (1990) and references therein for examples of how this method is applied in searches for HI emission from protoclusters.

We represent the observed signal $`y_i(𝒏)`$ in the $`i`$ th frequency channel in the direction $`𝒏`$ as:

$$y_i(𝒏)=x_i(𝒏)+f_i(𝒏)+N_i$$
(25)
where $`x_i(𝒏)`$ and $`f_i(𝒏)`$ are the contribution to the output signal from the HI and the foregrounds respectively, and $`N_i`$ is the receiver noise.

We should at this stage remind ourselves that foregrounds are sources which are emitting continuum radiation—the primary such source being the synchrotron radiation from our own galaxy. We also have the contribution from unresolved extragalactic radio sources which, as we have seen above, is a smaller contribution. The sum total of these along any line of sight is expected to be a smooth function of the frequency. On the contrary the contribution from the HI will come from individual damped Lyman $`\alpha `$ clouds along the line of sight with a velocity width $`200\mathrm{km}\mathrm{sec}^1`$ (Prochaska & Wolfe 1998) and this will correspond to lines of width:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\nu \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }V}{c}\nu 0.2\mathrm{MHz}.$$
(26)
Although the total number of damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ clouds in a $`1^{}\times 1^{}\times \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}16}\mathrm{MHz}`$ field is expected to be quite large $`(3\times 10^4)`$ we expect to have only one damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ cloud along a single $`20^{^{\prime \prime }}\times 20^{^{\prime \prime }}\times 16\mathrm{MHz}`$ synthesized GMRT beam. The probability of two damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ clouds occurring right next to each other in the same synthesized beam and causing confusion is quite small, and hence the signal we are looking for will come in the form of lines of width $`0.2\mathrm{MHz}`$ which we will not be able to detect as the individual lines will be swamped by both the foreground as well as the noise. What we can do is to fit the smooth component of the signal $`y_i(𝒏)`$ by a function $`F_i(𝒏)`$ and subtract this from the output signal to remove the effect of the foregrounds

$$S_i(𝒏)=y_i(𝒏)F_i(𝒏)=x_i(𝒏)+N_i(𝒏)+E_i(𝒏)$$
(27)
where we call $`S_i(𝒏)`$ the reduced signal and $`E_i(𝒏)`$ is the possible error in the fitting procedure. If our foreground subtraction works correctly, the reduced signal should have contributions from only the HI signal and the noise.

We first determine the mean reduced signal

$$\overline{S}_i=S_i(𝒏)=x_i(𝒏)+N_i(𝒏)+E_i(𝒏)$$
(28)
where the angular brackets denote average over all lines of sight. If the errors in the foreground subtraction can be made smaller than the signal i.e. $`E_i(𝒏)<x_i(𝒏)`$ then this will give an estimate of the background brightness temperature due to the HI emission i.e. $`\overline{T}(\nu )=\overline{S}_i`$ where the index $`i`$ refers to the channel with central frequency $`\nu `$.

We next consider the quantity

$$\mathrm{\Delta }S_i(𝒏)=S_i(𝒏)\overline{S}_i$$
(29)
which gives the fluctuation in the brightness temperature. We can use this to estimate the cross-correlation in the fluctuations at different frequencies

$$w(\nu _1,\nu _2,\theta )=\mathrm{\Delta }S_i(𝒏)\mathrm{\Delta }S_j(𝐦)$$
(30)
where $`i`$ and $`j`$ are the channel with frequency $`\nu _1`$ and $`\nu _2`$ respectively, and $`𝒏`$ and $`𝐦`$ are two lines of sight separated by an angle $`\theta `$ and the angular brackets denote average over all such pairs of lines of sight.

## 5 Summary and Conclusions

We have investigated the contribution from the HI in unresolved damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ clouds at high redshifts to the background radiation at low frequency radio waves (meter waves). The isotropic part of this radiation depends on the density of HI and the background cosmological model, while the fluctuations in this component of the background radiation have an added dependence on the fluctuations in the distribution of the damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ clouds and their peculiar velocities.

We have used estimates of the HI density available from absorption studies to calculate the brightness temperature of this radiation. We find that this has a value $`1\mathrm{mK}`$ at $`320\mathrm{MHz}`$ which corresponds to $`z3`$. The distribution of damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ clouds is assumed to trace the underlying dark matter distribution which also determines the peculiar velocities. Using this and the linear theory of density perturbations, we have calculated the relation between the fluctuation in this component of the background radiation and the density perturbations at high $`z`$. Observations of the cross-correlations of the fluctuations at different sight lines across images produced at different frequencies holds the possibility of allowing us to probe the two point correlation function (or power spectrum) at high redshifts. We have calculated the expected cross-correlations for two currently acceptable CDM models and find it to be in the range $`10^7\mathrm{K}^2`$ to $`10^8\mathrm{K}^2`$ at $`\nu 320\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}`$ for separations in sight lines and frequencies such that the corresponding spatial separation is in the range $`10\mathrm{Mpc}`$ and $`40\mathrm{Mpc}`$. The cross-correlations are expected to be larger at smaller scales where the linear theory cannot be applied. Our results show that both the isotropic background (Figure 2) and its fluctuations (Figure 3 and 4) can be detected by GMRT which is the largest telescope operating at meter waves at present, provided this signal can be distinguished from other sources which contribute to the low frequency background radiation.

The biggest obstacles in detecting the HI contribution are the galactic and extra-galactic foregrounds, both of which are many orders larger than the signal we want to detect. The fact that both those sources of contamination emit continuum radiation while the HI contribution is from individual damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ clouds each of which emits a spectral line with a relatively small velocity width keeps alive the possibility of being able to distinguish this signal from the contamination. We have, in this paper, considered one possible approach which might allow us to model and subtract the foreground along any line of sight. More work is needed in this direction and work is currently underway in investigating other viable possibilities for foreground removal.

All the authors would like to thank Jayaram Chengalur for many useful discussions on issues related to the GMRT and foregrounds.


text:
# References

Napoli DSF-T-44/99

A Conformal Field Theory description of the Paired and parafermionic states in the Quantum Hall Effect 111Work supported in part by EC n. FMRX-CT96-0045.

Gerardo Cristofano Giuseppe Maiella
and
Vincenzo Marotta

Dipartimento di Scienze Fisiche
Universitá di Napoli “Federico II”
and
INFN, Sezione di Napoli
Mostra d’Oltremare Pad.19-I-80125 Napoli, Italy222E:mail: gerardo.cristofano(giuseppe.maiella;vincenzo.marotta)@na.infn.it

> Abstract
>
> We extend the construction of the effective conformal field theory for the Jain hierarchical fillings proposed in  to the description of a quantum Hall fluid at non standard fillings $`\nu =\frac{m}{pm+2}`$. The chiral primary fields are found by using a procedure which induces twisted boundary conditions on the $`m`$ scalar fields; they appear as composite operators of a charged and neutral component. The neutral modes describe parafermions and contribute to the ground state wave function with a generalized Pfaffian term. Correlators of $`N_e`$ electrons in the presence of quasi-hole excitations are explicitly given for $`m=2`$.
>
> Keyword: Vertex operator, Kac-Moody algebra, Quantum Hall Effect

The experimental evidence of a Hall plateau at filling $`\nu =\frac{5}{2}`$ has recently spurred a renewed interest in a deeper understanding of the underlying physics at plateaus which do not fall into the hierarchical scheme . To such an extent a pairing picture, in which pairs of spinless or spin-polarized fermions condense, has been presented  for the non-standard fillings $`\nu =\frac{1}{q}`$, $`q>0`$ and even. As a result the ground state gets described in terms of the Pfaffian (the so called Pfaffian state) and the non-Abelian statistics of the fractional charged excitations evidenced . More recently  it has been argued that the non-Abelian statistics might come out from constraining an Abelian theory, by employing the Meissner effect in the neutral sector; that would also account for the pairing phenomenon.

Lately a Conformal Field Theory (CFT) description in terms of composite fermions for the Jain filling fractions $`\nu =\frac{m}{2pm+1}`$ of a Quantum Hall Fluid (QHF) has been proposed has been proposed . The composite fermions are described by composite vertex operators, which are (the image of) primary fields of a CFT with central charge $`c=m`$ in the Lowest Landau Level (LLL), and factorize into a charged and a neutral component. The neutral component assures the locality properties of the composite electron field and the single-valuedness of the ground state wave function.

Further due to the $`Z_m`$ symmetry in the neutral sector the general $`N_e`$ electron correlation function shows clustering properties which have been proposed in the context of paired Hall states .

In this letter we present a natural extension of the $`m`$-reduction procedure (previously applied in ref. to the description of the Jain fillings) to the case of the non-standard fillings $`\nu =\frac{m}{pm+2}`$. In particular for $`m=2`$ the neutral degrees of freedom of the composite electrons describe Majorana fermions and contribute to the ground state wave function with a Pfaffian term, in agreement with an early proposal . Further, for generic $`m`$, the neutral degrees of freedom are parafermions and give rise to the clustering phenomenon of $`m`$ objects, which simply reproduces the picture presented in ref. by employing a hamiltonian formalism with $`m+1`$ body interactions.

The letter is organized as follows: after a brief review of the $`m`$-reduction procedure we construct the parafermion vertex operators which together with the charged $`U(1)`$ component give rise to the primary fields of the CFT. It should be noticed an interesting phenomenon related to the existence of two classes of primary fields: the $`Z_m`$ twist invariant and the $`Z_m`$ non-invariant ones. In fact on physical grounds one can argue that only the invariant fields are relevant to the description of the pairing phenomenon. As a result the central charge of neutral sector of our CFT is given by $`c=\frac{2(m1)}{m+2}`$. An interpretation of such a phenomenon has been proposed in ref. in terms of a strong coupling between the symmetric modes.

We then give the ground state wave function as a correlator of the primary fields with integer electric charge and the quasi-holes wave function for the elementary excitations, with fractional charge, up to the correlator of the twist fields.

Our approach is meant to describe all the plateaus with even denominator starting from the bosonic Laughlin filling $`\nu =1/2`$, which is described by a CFT with $`c=1`$, in terms of a scalar chiral field compactified on a circle with radius $`R^2=1/\nu =2`$ (or the dual $`R^2=1/2`$). Then the $`U(1)`$ current is given by $`J(z|1,2)=i_zQ(z)`$, where $`Q(z)`$ is the compactified Fubini field with the standard mode expansion:

$$Q(z)=qiplnz+\underset{n0}{}\frac{a_n}{n}z^n$$
(1)
with $`a_n`$, $`q`$ and $`p`$ satisfying the commutation relations $`[a_n,a_n^{}]=n\delta _{n,n^{}}`$ and $`[q,p]=i`$.

The representations are realized by the vertex operators $`U^\alpha (z)=:e^{i\alpha Q(z)}:`$ with $`\alpha ^2=2`$ and conformal dimension $`h=1`$, with a consequent extension of the $`U(1)`$ symmetry to the $`SU(2)_1`$ affine one. Furthermore the theory contains the Virasoro algebra generated by the stress-energy tensor $`T(z|1,2)=\frac{1}{2}:\left(_zQ(z)\right)^2:`$.

In order to construct the $`\nu =m/2`$ filling we start with the set of fields in the above CFT (mother). Using the $`m`$-reduction procedure, which consists in considering the subalgebra generated only by the modes which are divided by an integer $`m`$, we get the image of an orbifold of a $`c=m`$ CFT (see ref. and references therein).

Also for the $`SU(2)`$ case the fields in the mother CFT can be factorized into irreducible orbits of the discrete group $`Z_m`$ which is a symmetry of the daughter theory and can be organized into components which have well defined transformation properties under this group.

In order to compare the image so obtained to the $`c=m`$ CFT, we map $`zz^{1/m}`$ and we will indicate the components in the base $`\widehat{z}=z^m`$ with an hatted symbol (for instance, $`\varphi (z)\widehat{\varphi }(z)`$). In particular any component in the subalgebra is a function only of the variable $`z^m`$.

In ref. it was also defined an isomorphism between fields on the $`z`$ complex plane and fields on the $`z^m`$ plane by means of the following identifications:

$$a_{nm+l}\sqrt{m}a_{n+l/m}q\frac{1}{\sqrt{m}}q$$
(2)
Let us first introduce the invariant scalar field

$$X(z|m,2)=\frac{1}{m}\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}Q(\epsilon ^jz)$$
(3)
where $`\epsilon ^j=e^{i\frac{2\pi j}{m}}`$, corresponding to a compactified boson on a circle with radius now equal to $`R_X^2=2/m`$. This field depends only on powers of $`z^m`$ and satisfies trivial boundary conditions. It is the basic field of the $`U(1)`$ electrically charged sector of the theory where the charge is measured by the zero mode.

The non-invariant components, as a resulting image of $`m`$ constrained bosons, are expressed by

$$\varphi ^j(z|m,2)=Q(\epsilon ^jz)X(z|m,2)$$
(4)
with the condition $`_{j=1}^m\varphi ^j(z|m,2)=0`$.

These fields satisfy non-trivial twisted boundary conditions

$$\alpha \varphi ^j(\epsilon z|m,2)=\alpha \varphi ^{j+1}(z|m,2)+2\pi n\alpha pnZ$$
(5)
where the shift is due to the definition of index $`j`$ mod $`m`$.

The $`J(z|1,2)`$ current of the mother theory decomposes into a charged current given by $`J(z|m,2)=i_zX(z|m,2)`$ and $`m1`$ neutral ones $`_z\varphi ^j(z|m,2)`$.

In the same way every vertex operator in the mother theory can be factorized in a vertex that depends only on the invariant field:

$$𝒰^\alpha (z|m,2)=z^{\frac{\alpha ^2}{2}\frac{(m1)}{m}}:e^{i\alpha X(z|m,2)}:\alpha ^2=2$$
(6)
and in vertex operators depending on the $`\varphi ^j(z|m,2)`$ fields.

We also introduce the neutral components:

$$\psi _1^\alpha (z|m,2)=\frac{z^{\frac{\alpha ^2}{2}\frac{(1m)}{m}}}{m}\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}\epsilon ^{\frac{\alpha ^2j}{2}}:e^{i\alpha \varphi ^j(z|m,2)}:$$
(7)
which satisfy the fundamental product:

$$\psi _1^\alpha (z|m,2)\psi _1^\beta (\xi |m,2)=\frac{z^{\frac{\alpha ^2}{2}\frac{1m}{m}}\xi ^{\frac{\beta ^2}{2}\frac{1m}{m}}}{m^2}\underset{j,j^{}=1}{\overset{m}{}}\epsilon ^{\frac{\alpha ^2j+\beta ^2j^{}}{2}}:e^{i\alpha \varphi ^j^{}(z|m,2)}e^{i\beta \varphi ^j(\xi |m,2)}:\frac{(\epsilon ^j^{}z\epsilon ^j\xi )^{\alpha \beta }}{(z^m\xi ^m)^{\frac{\alpha \beta }{m}}}$$

The set of primary fields generated by this product can be expressed in terms of the fundamental representations $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^i`$ of $`SU(m)`$ Lie algebra. In fact, defining

$$\varphi ^{\mathrm{\Lambda }^i}(z|m,2)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{i}{}}\varphi ^j(z|m,2)$$
(8)
and $`\varphi ^\mathrm{\Lambda }(z|m,2)`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=_{i=1}^{m1}l_i\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$, and introducing the $`m`$-ality parameter $`a=_{i=1}^{m1}il_i`$ (mod $`m`$), which is invariant under the addition of any vector in the root lattice, the exact form of these fields can be deduced by the analysis of the OPE of eq.(S0.Ex1) for $`\alpha =\beta `$ to get the $`a=2`$ field. By repeated application of this analysis we can obtain the full set of fields:

$$\widehat{\psi }_a^\alpha (z|m,2)=\underset{j_1>j_2>\mathrm{}>j_a=1}{\overset{m}{}}f(\epsilon ^{j_1},\mathrm{},\epsilon ^{j_a},z^{1/m}):e^{i\alpha \widehat{\varphi }^{j_1}(z|m,2)}\mathrm{}e^{i\alpha \widehat{\varphi }^{j_k}(z|m,2)}:$$
(9)
where the functions $`f(\epsilon ^{j_1},\mathrm{},\epsilon ^{j_a},z)`$ can be extracted from the OPE relations.

The sum takes into account the fact that any field can be associated to the $`a`$-th fundamental representation of $`SU(m)`$ (namely, the antisymmetric tensor representation). In  it was shown that these are a realization of parafermions and satisfy the operator product algebra :

$$\widehat{\psi }_a^\alpha (z|m,2)\widehat{\psi }_a^{}^\alpha (\xi |m,2)=\frac{C_{a,a^{}}}{(z\xi )^{\frac{2aa^{}}{m}}}\left[\widehat{\psi }_{a+a^{}}^\alpha (z|m,2)+O(z\xi )\right]a+a^{}<m$$
(10)
and for $`a+a^{}=m`$ the OPE contains the Virasoro algebra generators:

$$\widehat{\psi }_a^\alpha (z|m,2)\widehat{\psi }_{ma}^\alpha (\xi |m,2)=\frac{C_{a,ma}}{(z\xi )^{\frac{2a(ma)}{m}}}\left[1+\frac{2h_a}{c_\psi }\widehat{T}_\psi (z|m,2)(z\xi )^2+O(z\xi )^3\right]$$
(11)
where $`C_{a,a^{}}`$ are the structure constants and $`h_a`$, $`c_\psi `$ are the conformal dimensions and central charge of parafermions .

Moreover the $`SU(m)`$ representations that can appear are the fundamental ones $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_a`$, because in the OPE algebra of $`\psi _1^\alpha (z|m,2)`$ (corresponding to the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$ representation) only the fields $`\psi _a^\alpha (z|m,2)`$ with $`a\{1,\mathrm{},m1\}`$ appear while $`\psi _m^\alpha (z|m,2)`$ is the identity operator. That is an effect of the $`Z_m`$ invariance of the parafermions algebra.

Notice that no neutral currents are present in the above OPE, as one would expect from symmetry considerations.

It is well known that the $`c_X=1`$ rationalCFT with $`R_X^2=2/m`$ has $`2m`$ primary fields which can be parametrized by $`\alpha =\sqrt{\frac{2}{m}}a`$ and $`\alpha =\sqrt{\frac{1}{2m}}a`$, $`a=1,\mathrm{},m`$. In our formalism these fields appear together with the neutral ones into the composite operators:

$$\widehat{V}^{\sqrt{\frac{2}{m}}a}(z|m,2)=\widehat{𝒰}^{\sqrt{\frac{2}{m}}a}(z|m,2)\widehat{\psi }_a(z|m,2)$$
(12)
for quasi-particles and

$$\widehat{V}_{qh}^{\frac{a}{\sqrt{2m}}}(z|m,2)=\widehat{𝒰}^{\frac{a}{\sqrt{2m}}}(z|m,2)\widehat{\sigma }_a(z|m,2)$$
(13)
for quasi-holes; $`\widehat{\sigma }_a(z|m,2)`$ are the parafermionic twist fields. The electric charges and magnetic flux contents of such fields is given after eqs.(20, 21).

In eq.(13) we have not included the contribution coming from the $`\overline{\sigma }`$ fields of the $`Z_m`$ non-invariant theory. In fact they give rise to a term which does not survive after the projection to the LLL333We notice that we do not have an explicit realization of the $`\overline{\sigma }`$ fields because we have projected the mother $`c=1`$ CFT onto the $`m`$-covering of the plane, so that those fields appear as branch cuts ..

The currents $`\widehat{V}^{\pm \sqrt{\frac{2}{m}}}(z|m,2)`$ and $`J(z|m,2)`$ generate the $`SU(2)_m`$ affine algebra while $`\widehat{V}_{qh}^{\frac{a}{\sqrt{2m}}}`$ are the primary fields of this algebra (see ref. for details).

The generator of the Virasoro algebra $`\widehat{T}(z|m,2)`$ was given in  as the sum of two independent operators, one depending on the charged sector:

$$\widehat{T}_X(z|m,2)=\frac{1}{2}:\left(\widehat{_zX}(z|m,2)\right)^2:$$
(14)
and the other given in terms of the $`Z_m`$ twisted bosons $`\widehat{\varphi }^j(z|m,2)`$:

$$\widehat{T}_\psi (z|m,2)=\frac{2}{m+2}\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{:(\widehat{_z\varphi }^j(z))^2:}{2m^2}+\underset{j^{}j=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{\epsilon ^{j^{}+j}:e^{i\alpha \widehat{\varphi }^j^{}(z)}e^{i\alpha \widehat{\varphi }^j(z)}:}{2m^2z^2(\epsilon ^j^{}\epsilon ^j)^2}+\frac{m^21}{24mz^2}\right)$$
(15)
while the higher integer spin operators generating the full parafermionic $`𝒲_m`$ algebra  was given in terms of the $`\widehat{\varphi }^j(z|m,2)`$ fields in . Notice that the vacuum expectation value of $`\widehat{T}_\psi `$ is zero due to the cancellation between the second and the third term in eq.(15).

It is not very hard to verify that the conformal dimensions of the fields of eq.(12) and eq.(13) are given by:

$$h_a=\frac{a^2}{m}+a\left(\frac{ma}{m}\right)=aa\{1,\mathrm{},m\}$$
(16)
for quasi-particles and

$$h_a^{qh}=\frac{a^2}{4m}+\frac{a(ma)}{2m(m+2)}=\frac{a(a+2)}{4(m+2)}a\{1,\mathrm{},m\}$$
(17)
for quasi-holes.

The contribution to the central charge $`c`$ is given by

$$c=1+\frac{2(m1)}{m+2}=\frac{3m}{m+2}$$
(18)
where 1 and $`{\displaystyle \frac{2(m1)}{m+2}}`$ come from the charged and neutral degrees of a freedom respectively.

We must notice that the contribution of the $`Z_m`$ invariant fields to the central charge is not equal to $`m`$. In fact the missing part is associated with the non-invariant fields defined as:

$$\psi ^{\alpha (i,j)}(z|m,2)=\frac{z^{\frac{\alpha ^2}{2}\frac{(1m)}{m}}}{m}(\epsilon ^{\frac{\alpha ^2i}{2}}:e^{i\alpha \varphi ^i(z|m,2)}:\epsilon ^{\frac{\alpha ^2j}{2}}:e^{i\alpha \varphi ^j(z|m,2)}:)$$
(19)
with $`ij=\{1,\mathrm{},m\}`$, which are primary fields of the complementary $`\overline{c}=\frac{m(m1)}{m+2}`$ theory. One can see also that these extra degrees of freedom can be gauged away by means of a coset reduction.

This appears to be a generalization of the Low-Barrier limit of a double-layer sample described in ref. where a strong tunnel effect was introduced. In our case the strong coupling between electrons of the different layers is simply a consequence of the induced $`Z_m`$ symmetry of the composite electrons states. This phenomenon was suggested to be relevant for CFT’s on algebraic curves in . It would be interesting to have a clear picture of the symmetries of the vacuum and excited states, so to understand the mechanism which decouples the $`Z_m`$ non-invariant theory from the invariant one.

We can now describe the generic filling $`\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{m}{pm+2}}`$ by flux attachment starting from $`\nu =m/2`$. In order to do so, we factorize the fields into two parts, the first describing the $`c_X=1`$ charged sector with radius $`R_X^2=\frac{pm+2}{m}`$, the second describing the neutral excitations, which are parafermions, with central charge $`c_\psi =\frac{2(m1)}{m+2}`$, for any $`pN`$.

The $`U(1)`$ sector is now described by the compactified boson $`X(z|m,pm+2)`$ and its related vertex operators $`𝒰^{\pm \alpha _l}(z|m,pm+2)`$, with $`\alpha _l=l/\sqrt{m(pm+2)}`$, $`l=1,\mathrm{},m(pm+2)`$, which produce excitations with anyonic statistics $`\theta =\pi \alpha _l^2`$. While the $`m1`$ neutral bosons $`\varphi ^j(z|m,2)`$ are independent from the flux number $`p`$.

To obtain a pure holomorphic function we will consider the correlator of the composite operators $`\widehat{V}^{\alpha _l}(z|m,pm+2)`$ with conformal dimensions:

$$h_l=\frac{l^2}{2m(pm+2)}+a\left(\frac{ma}{m}\right)l=(pm+2)aa=1,2,\mathrm{},m$$
(20)
They describe dressed $`a`$-electrons with electric charge $`q_a^e=a`$ and “magnetic charge” $`q_a^m=\frac{pm+2}{m}a`$ interacting through the neutral “cloud” associated with them (see eq.(12)).

Also we will consider correlators in which are present quasi-hole operators given by $`\widehat{V}_{qh}^{\alpha _l}(z|m,pm+2)`$ having conformal dimensions:

$$h_l^{qh}=\frac{l^2}{2m(pm+2)}+\frac{a(ma)}{2m(m+2)}$$
(21)
where $`(pm+2)(a1)<l<(pm+2)a`$ and $`a=1,2,\mathrm{},m`$.

Their electric and magnetic charges are $`q_l^e=\frac{l}{pm+2}`$ and $`q_l^m=\frac{l}{m}`$.

We should point out that $`m`$-ality in the neutral sector is coupled to the charged one in analogy to the case of Jain hierarchical fillings in order to assure the locality of electrons with respect to all the edge excitations . This follows from the fact that our projection when applied to a local field automatically couples the discrete $`Z_m`$ charge of $`U(1)`$ with the neutral sector, in order to give a totally single-valued composite field.

Also notice that the $`m`$-electron vertex operator does not contain any neutral field. Therefore, the $`m`$-electron wave function is realized only by means of the $`c_X=1`$ charged sector as proposed in ref..

We are now ready to give the holomorphic part of the ground state wave function for the generic filling $`\nu =\frac{m}{pm+2}`$. To such an extent we consider the $`N_e`$ single($`a=1`$)-electrons correlator which factorizes into a Laughlin-Jastrow type term coming from the charged sector:

$$<N_e\alpha |\underset{i=1}{\overset{N_e}{}}\widehat{𝒰}^\alpha (z_i|m,2pm+2)|0>=\underset{i<i^{}=1}{\overset{N_e}{}}(z_iz_i^{})^{p+\frac{2}{m}}$$
(22)
and a contribution coming from the neutral excitations:

$$<0|\underset{i=1}{\overset{N_e}{}}\widehat{\psi }_1^\alpha (z_i|m,2)|0>=\frac{_{\{j_i\}=1}^m\epsilon ^{\frac{\alpha ^2}{2}(2i1)j_i+j_i}_{\{j_i,j_i^{}\}=1}^m(\epsilon ^{j_i}z_i^{1/m}\epsilon ^{j_i^{}}z_i^{}^{1/m})^{\alpha ^2}}{_{i<i^{}=1}^{N_e}(z_iz_i^{})^{\frac{2}{m}}}$$
(23)
For $`N_e`$ multiple of $`m`$ we observe that the non analytic part of the neutral fields $`\widehat{\psi }^\alpha (z_i|m,2)`$ is necessary to eliminate the non integer part of the exponent in the correlator of the charged fields. We also point out that in our formalism the correlators are given, in principle, for any $`m`$ and $`N_e`$ and that follows from the projection procedure only.

By considering the case $`m=2`$, $`p`$ odd that is for $`\nu =1/q`$, $`q=p+1`$ we get for the correlator of $`N_e`$ single($`a=1`$)-electrons:

$$<N_e\alpha |\underset{i=1}{\overset{N_e}{}}\widehat{V}^{\sqrt{2q}}(z_i|2,2q)|0>=\underset{i<i^{}=1}{\overset{N_e}{}}(z_iz_i^{})^qPf\left(\frac{1}{z_iz_i^{}}\right)$$
(24)
(where $`Pf\left(\frac{1}{z_iz_i^{}}\right)=𝒜\left(\frac{1}{z_1z_2}\frac{1}{z_3z_4}\mathrm{}\right)`$ is the antisymmetrized product over pairs of electrons) which is in agreement with previous results . For the generic $`m`$ case, even though it is hard to work out explicitly the sum over the phases in eq.(23), for the $`N_e`$ point functions we found the clustering properties previously given in ref. in another framework by grouping particles into clusters of $`m`$.

In this last case the neutral modes describe parafermions and contribute to the ground state wave function with a generalized Pfaffian term. It would be very interesting to give an interpretation of the Pfaffian term (but also of its generalization presented in eq.(23)) in the context of a plasma description a la Laughlin in order to better understand the physics of the paired states .

In a similar way we also are able to evaluate correlators of $`N_e`$ single($`a=1`$)-electrons in the presence of quasi-hole excitations. In particular for $`m=2`$ and for two quasi-holes we get:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{<N_e\sqrt{2q}+2/\sqrt{2q}|_{i=1}^{N_e}\widehat{V}^{\sqrt{2q}}(z_i|2,2q)\widehat{V}^{1/\sqrt{2q}}(w_1|2,2q)\widehat{V}^{1/\sqrt{2q}}(w_2|2,2q)|0>}{<2/\sqrt{2q}|\widehat{V}^{1/\sqrt{2q}}(w_1|2,2q)\widehat{V}^{1/\sqrt{2q}}(w_2|2,2q)|0>}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{i<i^{}=1}{\overset{N_e}{}}}(z_iz_i^{})^qPf\left({\displaystyle \frac{(z_iw_1)(z_i^{}w_2)+(z_i^{}w_1)(z_iw_2)}{z_iz_i^{}}}\right)`$ (25)
in agreement with the wave functions proposed in Ref..

The explicit evaluation of correlation functions for the twist fields lies outside the scope of the present paper, but it does not affect the main results given in eq.(25). On the other hand, it is fundamental to understand the non-Abelian statistics of the quasi-holes. We will analyze this aspect in a forthcoming paper.

We also point out that we are not considering the full set of primary fields in the theory. Indeed, also for $`p=0`$ there are neutral fields which correspond to the “termal” fields of parafermionic theory .

Acknowledgments \- We thank M. Huerta, G. Zemba and A. Sciarrino for useful comments and for reading the manuscript.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1
Introduction

Recently, there has been renewed activities in the study of gauged supergravity in various dimensions as well as in their solutions. This, to a large extent, is motivated by the conjectured equivalence between string theory on anti-de Sitter (AdS) spaces (times some compact manifold) and certain superconformal gauge theories living on the boundary of AdS . The theories of extended supergravity in various dimensions possess rigid symmetries. A subgroup of these symmetries can be gauged by the vector fields present in the ungauged theory. Gauged supergravity theories exist in space-time dimensions where supersymmetry allows the existence of a cosmological constant. In $`D=11`$, $`D=10`$ and $`D=9,`$ a cosmological constant is not possible.

In five dimensions, $`N=2`$ supergravity theories can be obtained by gauging the $`U(1)`$ subgroup of the $`SU(2)`$ automorphism group of the $`N=2`$ supersymmetry algebra, thus breaking $`SU(2)`$ down to the $`U(1)`$ group. The $`U(1)`$ gauge field introduced to gauge the theory can be taken as a linear combination of the abelian vector fields of the ungauged theory with a coupling constant $`g`$. The additional couplings of the fermi-fields of the ungauged theory to the $`U(1)`$ gauge vector field breaks supersymmetry which necessitates the addition of $`g`$-dependent gauge invariant terms in order to restore $`N=2`$ supersymmetry. The purely bosonic terms added produce the scalar potential of the theory .

Gauged supergravity can be obtained by compactifying higher dimensional supergravity on a group manifold. It is usually difficult to find a consistent ansatz for the compactification111see  and references therein.. In particular it was shown recently  that the Freedman-Schwarz  gauged $`N=4`$ supergravity can be obtained by compactifying ten dimensional supergravity on the $`SU(2)\times SU(2)`$ group manifold. The difficulty arises because one has to identify the vector fields coming from the compactification of the metric with the vector fields coming from the antisymmetric tensor. The vector fields coming from compactifying the metric on a group manifold behave properly as $`SU(2)\times SU(2)`$ gauge fields. The components of the antisymmetric tensor do not usually behave like $`SU(2)\times SU(2)`$ gauge fields, and for this to happen a very precise form for the ansatz of the antisymmetric tensor must be taken. This prescription also works in obtaining $`D=7`$ gauged supergravity by compactifying ten dimensional supergravity on $`SU(2)`$ group manifold as was recently shown in . In a related matter, there are now many known black hole solutions for gauged $`D=5`$ supergravity . These solutions could be promoted to solutions of ten and eleven dimensional supergravity if one can embed the five dimensional supergravity in the higher dimensional ones.

It is our purpose in this paper to show that by compactifying and truncating $`D=10`$ supergravity to $`D=5`$ on an $`SU(2)\times `$ $`U(1)^2`$ group manifold one obtains a gauged $`D=5`$ supegravity theory with one vector multiplet. The solutions for this model can then be lifted to seven, ten and eleven dimensions. This work is organized as follow. In section two, it is shown how to reduce $`D=10`$ supergravity to a particular gauged N=2 five dimensional supergravity theory coupled to one vector multiplet. The gauged theory obtained is the $`U(1)`$ gauged version of the model introduced by Strominger and Vafa. The five dimensional model obtained is then reformulated in the framework of very special geometry in section three. Some particular solutions of the five dimensional theory, as examples, are lifted to seven, ten and eleven dimensions in section four. Finally our results are summarized and discussed.

## 2 A $`D=5`$ Gauged Supergravity From $`D=10`$ Supergravity

In this section we consider the dimensional reduction of $`D=10`$ supergravity down to $`N=2`$, $`U(1)`$ gauged $`D=5`$ supergravity coupled to one vector multiplet. First, the bosonic part of $`N=1`$ supergravity action in ten dimensions is

$`S_{10}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \widehat{e}\left(\frac{1}{4}\widehat{R}+\frac{1}{2}_M\widehat{\varphi }^M\widehat{\varphi }+\frac{1}{12}e^{2\widehat{\varphi }}\widehat{H}_{MNP}\widehat{H}^{MNP}\right)d^4xd^6z}`$ (1)
$``$ $`S_{\widehat{G}}+S_{\widehat{\varphi }}+S_{\widehat{H}}.`$
The notation used in this paper is as follows. We denote ten-dimensional quantities by hatted symbols. Base and tangent space indices are denoted by late and early capital Latin letters, respectively. For the four-dimensional space-time, we use late and early Greek letters, respectively, to denote base space and tangent space indices. Similarly, the internal base space and tangent space indices are denoted by late and early Latin letters, respectively.

$$\{M\}=\{\mu =0,\mathrm{},3;m=1,\mathrm{},6\},\{A\}=\{\alpha =0,\mathrm{},3;a=1,\mathrm{},6\}.$$
(2)
The general coordinates $`\widehat{x}^M`$ consist of spacetime coordinates $`x^\mu `$ and internal coordinates $`z^m`$. The flat Lorentz metric of the tangent space is chosen to be $`(+,,\mathrm{},)`$ with the internal dimensions all spacelike. Thus the metric is related to the vielbein by

$$\widehat{𝐠}_{MN}=\widehat{\eta }_{AB}\widehat{e}_M^A\widehat{e}_N^B=\eta _{\alpha \beta }\widehat{e}_M^\alpha \widehat{e}_N^\beta \delta _{ab}\widehat{e}_M^a\widehat{e}_N^b,$$
(3)
and the antisymmetric tensor field strength is

$$\widehat{H}_{MNP}=_M\widehat{B}_{NP}+_N\widehat{B}_{PM}+_P\widehat{B}_{MN}.$$
(4)
The coordinates $`z^m`$ span the internal compact group space. Thus we introduce the functions $`U_m^a(z)`$ which satisfy the condition

$$\left(U^1\right)_b^m\left(U^1\right)_c^n\left(_mU_n^a_nU_m^a\right)=\frac{f_{abc}}{\sqrt{2}},$$
(5)
Here $`f_{abc}`$ are the group structure constants and the internal space volume is $`\mathrm{\Omega }=|U_m^a|d^6𝐳`$. In the maximal case, i. e., $`SU(2)\times SU(2)`$, each $`S^3`$ factor admits invariant 1-form $`\theta ^a=\theta _i^adz^i`$, which satisfies

$$d\theta ^a+\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{abc}\theta ^b\theta ^c=0.$$
(6)
If one chooses

$$U_m^aU_i^a=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{g}\theta _i^a,$$
(7)
where $`g`$ is a coupling constant, then the structure constants will be given in terms of the coupling constant by $`f_{abc}=gϵ_{abc}`$. For the case where the coupling constant of one of the $`SU(2)`$ factors vanishes, the internal space becomes the group manifold $`SU(2)\times [U(1)]^3`$.

Our ansatz for the reduction to five dimensions is given by the following parameterization of the vielbein

$$\widehat{e}_M^A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{\frac{5}{6}\widehat{\varphi }}e_\mu ^\alpha & \sqrt{2}A_\mu ^ae^{\frac{1}{2}\widehat{\varphi }}\\ 0& e^{\frac{1}{2}\widehat{\varphi }}U_m^a\end{array}\right).$$
(8)
Here the function $`U`$ depends only on the internal coordinates $`(5,\mathrm{},9)`$. As an internal space we take the group manifold $`SU(2)\times [U(1)]^2`$, this means that the following choice for the structure constants is taken,

$`f_{mnp}`$ $`=`$ $`gϵ_{mnp},m,n,p=5,6,7,`$
$`f_{mnp}`$ $`=`$ $`0,m,n,p=8,9`$ (9)
The $`S_{\widehat{G}}`$ term of $`D=10`$ supergravity gives upon reduction, the following $`D=5`$ Lagrangian

$$_{5G}=e\left(\frac{1}{4}R\frac{1}{8}e^{\frac{8}{3}\widehat{\varphi }}F_{\mu \nu }^aF^{\mu \nu a}+\frac{5}{6}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \widehat{\varphi }_\nu \widehat{\varphi }+\frac{3g^2}{16}e^{\frac{8}{3}\widehat{\varphi }}\right)$$
(10)
$$F_{\mu \nu }^a=_\mu A_\nu ^a_\nu A_\mu ^a+f_{abc}A_\mu ^bA_\nu ^c$$
(11)
This is obtained by using the general formula of Scherk and Schwarz  for reducing gravity from higher dimensions. For the antisymmetric tensor, we take the ansatz

$$\widehat{B}_{\mu \nu }=B_{\mu \nu },\widehat{B}_{\mu m}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}A_\mu ^aU_m^a(z),\widehat{B}_{mn}=\stackrel{~}{B}_{mn}(z)$$
(12)
such that $`\widehat{H}_{mnp}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}}f_{mnp}.`$ To evaluate $`\widehat{H}_{MNP}\widehat{H}^{MNP}`$ we first define

$$\widehat{H}_{ABC}=\widehat{e}_A^M\widehat{e}_B^N\widehat{e}_C^P\widehat{H}_{MNP}.$$

A direct substitution of the ansatz $`\left(\text{8}\right)`$ and $`\left(\text{12}\right)`$ gives

$`\widehat{H}_{\alpha \beta \gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{5}{2}\widehat{\varphi }}e_\alpha ^\mu e_\beta ^\nu e_\gamma ^\rho H_{\mu \nu \rho }^{},`$
$`\widehat{H}_{\alpha \beta c}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}e^{\frac{7}{6}\widehat{\varphi }}e_\alpha ^\mu e_\beta ^\nu F_{\mu \nu }^a,`$
$`\widehat{H}_{\alpha bc}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\widehat{H}_{abc}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}}}f_{abc}`$
where

$`H_{\mu \nu \rho }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`H_{\mu \nu \rho }\omega _{\mu \nu \rho },`$
$`\omega _{\mu \nu \rho }`$ $`=`$ $`6(A_{[\mu }^a_\nu A_{\rho ]}^a+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}f_{abc}A_\mu ^aA_\nu ^bA_\rho ^c).`$ (13)
These results are a very strong consistency checks on the ansatz, especially in the form of $`H_{\mu \nu \rho }^{}`$ and $`\widehat{H}_{\alpha \beta c}.`$ We now have

$$_{5B}=e\left(\frac{1}{12}e^{\frac{16}{3}\widehat{\varphi }}H_{\mu \nu \rho }^{}H^{\mu \nu \rho }\frac{1}{8}e^{\frac{8\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}F_{\mu \nu }^aF^{\mu \nu a}\frac{g^2}{16}e^{\frac{8}{3}\widehat{\varphi }}\right).$$
(14)
The scalar part of $`D=10`$ supergravity, gives the following contribution to the five dimensional theory

$$_{5S}=\frac{e}{2}_\mu \widehat{\varphi }^\mu \widehat{\varphi }.$$
(15)
Therefore, combining all terms, the five dimensional theory is described by the Lagrangian

$$_5=e\left(\frac{1}{4}R\frac{1}{4}e^{\frac{8\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}F_{\mu \nu }^aF^{\mu \nu a}+\frac{4}{3}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \widehat{\varphi }_\nu \widehat{\varphi }+\frac{1}{12}e^{\frac{16\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}H_{\mu \nu \rho }^{}H^{\mu \nu \rho }+\frac{g^2}{8}e^{\frac{8\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}\right).$$
(16)
Since the potential of the resulting theory depends only on one scalar field, a consistent truncation can be achieved by setting all gauge fields but one to zero. Therefore the index $`a`$ in the above Lagrangian will take one value. In order to compare with the standard Lagrangian, we multiply our Lagrangian by a factor of $`2`$. Therefore the resulting $`N=2`$ five dimensional theory is described by the Lagrangian

$$_5=e\left(\frac{1}{2}R\frac{1}{2}e^{\frac{8\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}F_{\mu \nu }^1F^{\mu \nu 1}+\frac{8}{3}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \widehat{\varphi }_\nu \widehat{\varphi }+\frac{1}{6}e^{\frac{16\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}H_{\mu \nu \rho }^{}H^{\mu \nu \rho }+\frac{g^2}{4}e^{\frac{8\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}\right),$$
(17)
where $`\omega _{\mu \nu \rho }=6A_{[\mu }^1_\nu A_{\rho ]}^1`$ in $`H_{\mu \nu \rho }^{}.`$ We now apply a duality transformation by adding to the above Lagrangian the term

$$\frac{1}{3}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma \kappa }_\mu A_\nu ^0H_{\rho \sigma \kappa }.$$

Integrating $`A_\nu ^0`$ forces $`H_{\mu \nu \rho }`$ to be of the form $`3_{[\mu }B_{\nu \rho ]}`$ giving the five dimensional theory with the $`B_{\mu \nu }`$ field. On the other hand by integrating the independent field $`H_{\mu \nu \rho }`$ in the path integral as it appears linearly and quadratically is equivalent to the substitution

$$H_{\mu \nu \rho }=\omega _{\mu \nu \rho }+e^{\frac{16}{3}\widehat{\varphi }}ϵ_{\mu \nu \rho }^{\sigma \kappa }_\sigma A_\kappa ^0.$$

This gives the dual Lagrangian

$`_5`$ $`=`$ $`e({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}R{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{8\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}F_{\mu \nu }^1F^{\mu \nu 1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{16\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}F_{\mu \nu }^0F^{\mu \nu 0}+{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \widehat{\varphi }_\nu \widehat{\varphi }`$ (18)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{e^1}{2}}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma \lambda }F_{\mu \nu }^1F_{\rho \sigma }^1A_\lambda ^0+{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{4}}e^{\frac{8\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}).`$
where $`0`$ and $`1`$ are to label the graviphoton and the additional vector multiplet gauge fields respectively. This is the gauged $`U(1)`$ five dimensional $`N=2`$ supergravity with one vector multiplet. It is the gauged version of the five dimensional theory initially introduced by Strominger and Vafa .

We close this section by noting that it is possible to obtain $`D=5`$ gauged supergravity from $`D=7`$ gauged supergravity. In a recent work we have derived $`D=7`$ gauged supergravity by compactifying $`D=10`$ on an $`SU(2)`$ group manifold . The Lagrangian in seven dimensions is given by

$$_7=e\left(\frac{1}{4}R\frac{1}{4}e^{\frac{8}{5}\widehat{\varphi }}F_{MN}^aF^{MNa}+\frac{4}{5}g^{MN}_M\widehat{\varphi }_N\widehat{\varphi }+\frac{1}{12}e^{\frac{16}{5}\widehat{\varphi }}H_{MNP}^{}H^{{}_{}{}^{}MNP}+\frac{g^2}{8}e^{\frac{8}{5}\widehat{\varphi }}\right).$$

This is reduced and truncated to $`D=5`$ gauged supergravity by taking the following ansatz

$$e_M^A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{\frac{8}{15}\widehat{\varphi }}e_\mu ^\alpha & 0\\ 0& e^{\frac{4}{5}\widehat{\varphi }}\delta _m^i\end{array}\right),m=5,6.$$

as well as $`B_{\mu m}=0`$ and $`A_m^a=0`$. One can easily show that the reduced Lagrangian is given by $`\left(\text{16}\right)`$

## 3
Embedding Into Very Special Geometry

The solutions of five dimensional $`N=2`$ supergravity theory with vector multiplets theory have been discussed within the framework of very special geometry . Therefore, before we discuss solutions of the five dimensional theory and their embedding into ten dimensional supergravity and M-theory, it is essential to consider our compactified Lagrangian in this framework.

A class of five-dimensional $`N=2`$ supergravity coupled to abelian vector supermultiplets can be obtained by compactifying eleven-dimensional supergravity, the low-energy theory of M-theory, on a Calabi-Yau three-folds . The massless spectrum of the theory contains $`(h_{(1,1)}1)`$ vector multiplets with real scalar components, and thus $`h_{(1,1)}`$ vector bosons (the additional vector boson is the graviphoton). The theory also contains $`h_{(2,1)}+1`$ hypermultiplets, where $`h_{(1,1)}`$ and $`h_{(2,1)},`$ are the Calabi-Yau Hodge numbers.

The bosonic part of the effective gauged supersymmetric $`N=2`$ Lagrangian which describes the coupling of vector multiplets to supergravity is given by

$$=e\left(\frac{1}{2}R+g^2V\frac{1}{4}G_{IJ}F_{\mu \nu }{}_{}{}^{I}F_{}^{\mu \nu J}\frac{1}{2}𝒢_{ij}_\mu \varphi ^i^\mu \varphi ^j+\frac{e^1}{48}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma \lambda }C_{IJK}F_{\mu \nu }^IF_{\rho \sigma }^JA_\lambda ^K\right),$$
(19)
$`R`$ is the scalar curvature, $`F_{\mu \nu }^I`$ are the Abelian field-strength tensor, $`V`$ is the potential given by

$$V(X)=V_IV_J\left(6X^IX^J\frac{9}{2}𝒢^{ij}_iX^I_jX^J\right),$$
(20)
where $`X^I`$ represent the real scalar fields which have to satisfy the constraint

$$𝒱=\frac{1}{6}C_{IJK}X^IX^JX^K=1.$$
(21)
Also:

$$G_{IJ}=\frac{1}{2}_I_J\mathrm{log}𝒱|_{𝒱=1},𝒢_{ij}=_iX^I_jX^JG_{IJ}|_{𝒱=1},$$
(22)
where $`_i`$ refers to a partial derivative with respect to the scalar field $`\varphi ^i`$. The physical quantities in (19) can all be expressed in terms of the homogeneous cubic polynomial $`𝒱`$.

Further useful relations are

$$_iX_I=\frac{2}{3}G_{IJ}_iX^J,X_I=\frac{2}{3}G_{IJ}X^J.$$
(23)
It is worth pointing out that for Calabi-Yau compactification, $`𝒱`$ is the intersection form, $`X^I`$ and $`X_I=\frac{1}{6}C_{IJK}X^JX^K`$ correspond to the size of the two- and four-cycles and $`C_{IJK}`$ are the intersection numbers of the Calabi-Yau threefold.

A very useful relation of very special geometry is

$$𝒢^{ij}_jX^I_jX^J=G^{IJ}\frac{2}{3}X^IX^J.$$
(24)
The potential can also be written as

$$V(X)=9V_IV_J\left(X^IX^J\frac{1}{2}G^{IJ}\right).$$
(25)
The Lagrangian (18) correspond to the following identifications222note that the sign difference of the kinetic terms is due to using a different metric signature

$$G_{00}=2e^{\frac{16\widehat{\varphi }}{3}},G_{11}=2e^{8\frac{\widehat{\varphi }}{3}},𝒢_{11}=\frac{16}{3},C_{011}=8.$$

In order to determine the $`X^I,`$ we use the relations (23) together with $`X_IX^I=1,`$ this gives $`X^0=c_1e^{8\frac{\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}`$, $`X^1=c_2e^{4\frac{\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}.`$ Upon using (24) and the above identification we get $`c_1=\frac{1}{2},`$ $`c_2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}.`$ Finally, from the expression of the potential one obtains that $`V_0=0,`$ $`V_1=\frac{1}{3}.`$ Therefore we have

$$X^0=\frac{1}{2}e^{8\frac{\widehat{\varphi }}{3}},X^1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}e^{4\frac{\widehat{\varphi }}{3}},X_0=\frac{2}{3}e^{8\frac{\widehat{\varphi }}{3}},X_1=\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3}e^{4\frac{\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}.$$

## 4 Lifting Solutions to ten and eleven dimensions

Our previous results suggest that any solution of gauged supergravity in seven and five dimension given in terms of the metric, gauge field and scalar fields can be lifted to ten dimensions as a solution of $`N=1`$ ten dimensional supergravity. By also noting the relation between the ten and eleven dimensional theory, one can then lift all solutions to eleven dimensions.

To lift the solutions to ten dimensions we have to express the ten dimensional fields in terms of five dimensional ones. To start with we write the ten dimensional metric as

$`\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{5}{3}\widehat{\varphi }}g_{\mu \nu }2e^{\widehat{\varphi }}A_\mu ^aA_\nu ^a,`$
$`\widehat{g}_{\mu m}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2}e^{\widehat{\varphi }}A_\mu ^aU_m^a\left(z\right),`$
$`\widehat{g}_{mn}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\widehat{\varphi }}U_m^a\left(z\right)U_n^a\left(z\right).`$
The five dimensional model is given in terms of $`X^0,X^1,A_\mu ^0`$ and $`A_\mu ^1.`$ Since $`A_\mu ^0`$ is the dual of $`B_{\mu \nu }`$ we first evaluate

$$H_{\mu \nu \rho }^{}=H_{\mu \nu \rho }\omega _{\mu \nu \rho }=e^{\frac{16}{3}\widehat{\varphi }}ϵ_{\mu \nu \rho }^{\sigma \kappa }_\sigma A_\kappa ^0.$$

Or in terms of the ten dimensional fields

$`\widehat{H}_{\alpha \beta \gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{5}{2}\widehat{\varphi }}e_\alpha ^\mu e_\beta ^\nu e_\gamma ^\rho H_{\mu \nu \rho }^{}=e^{\frac{17}{6}\widehat{\varphi }}ϵ_{\alpha \beta \gamma }^{\delta \eta }e_\delta ^\sigma e_\eta ^\kappa _\sigma A_\kappa ^0,`$
$`\widehat{H}_{\alpha \beta c}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\delta _c^1e^{\frac{7}{6}\widehat{\varphi }}e_\alpha ^\mu e_\beta ^\nu F_{\mu \nu }^1.`$
The dilaton field is determined from the solution to $`X^0`$ and $`X^1.`$

### 4.1
Electrically charged solutions

The spherically symmetric BPS electric solutions as well as magnetic string solutions were obtained in  by solving for the vanishing of the gravitino and gaugino supersymmetry variation for a particular choice of the supersymmetry parameter. These are given by

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`𝒱^{4/3}(1+g^2r^2𝒱^2)dt^2+𝒱^{2/3}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{dr^2}{1+g^2r^2𝒱^2}}+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2+\mathrm{cos}^2\theta d\psi ^2)\right]`$
$`F_{tm}^I`$ $`=`$ $`_m(𝒱^1Y^I),`$
$`𝒱`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}C_{IJK}Y^IY^JY^K,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_{IJK}Y^JY^K=H_I=3V_I+{\displaystyle \frac{q_I}{r^2}}`$ (26)
where

$$Y^I=𝒱^{\frac{2}{3}}X^I,Y_I=𝒱^{\frac{1}{3}}X_I,𝒱=e^{3U}$$

Let us go back to the solutions of our five dimensional gauged theory with one vector multiplet. As for the electric solutions, we have the following equations

$`𝒱`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_{011}Y^0Y^1Y^1=4Y^0(Y^1)^2,`$ (27)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_{011}(Y^1)^2=4(Y^1)^2=H_0={\displaystyle \frac{q_0}{r^2}},`$
$`C_{110}Y^1Y^0=8(Y^1)Y^0=H_1=1+{\displaystyle \frac{q_1}{r^2}}.`$
This gives

$`Y^0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{r}{4q_0^{\frac{1}{2}}}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{q_1}{r^2}}\right),`$
$`Y^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{q_0^{\frac{1}{2}}}{2r}},`$
$`𝒱`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{q_0^{\frac{1}{2}}}{4r}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{q_1}{r^2}}\right).`$
The metric depends only on $`𝒱`$. The gauge field strengths are given by

$`F_{tr}^0`$ $`=`$ $`_r(𝒱^1Y^0)={\displaystyle \frac{2r}{q_0}},`$
$`F_{tr}^1`$ $`=`$ $`_r(𝒱^1Y^1)={\displaystyle \frac{4q_1}{r^3\left(1+\frac{q_1}{r^2}\right)^2}}.`$ (28)
To lift our solution to ten dimensions first we write

$$Y^0=𝒱^{\frac{1}{3}}X^0,Y^1=𝒱^{\frac{1}{3}}X^1,$$

from which we deduce that

$$\frac{X^0}{X^1}=\frac{Y^0}{Y^1}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}e^{4\widehat{\varphi }}=\frac{r^2}{2q^0}\left(1+\frac{q_1}{r^2}\right).$$

The gauge fields are

$$A_t^0=\frac{r^2}{q_0},A_t^1=\frac{2}{1+\frac{q_1}{r^2}}.$$

The ten dimensional metric is then

$`d\widehat{s}^2`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{5}{3}\widehat{\varphi }}\left(𝒱^{4/3}(1+g^2r^2𝒱^2)dt^2+𝒱^{2/3}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{dr^2}{1+g^2r^2𝒱^2}}+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2+\mathrm{cos}^2\theta d\psi ^2)\right]\right)`$
$`+e^{\widehat{\varphi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q_0}{2r^2𝒱^2}}dt^2\right)+e^{\widehat{\varphi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2q_0}}{r𝒱}}U_m^1\left(z\right)dtdz^m\right)+e^{\widehat{\varphi }}U_m^a\left(z\right)U_n^a\left(z\right)dz^mdz^n,`$
where $`𝒱=\frac{q_0^{\frac{1}{2}}}{4r}\left(1+\frac{q_1}{r^2}\right).`$ The non vanishing components of the field strength of the antisymmetric tensor $`B_{MN}`$ are

$`\widehat{H}_{234}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{17}{6}\widehat{\varphi }}e_0^te_1^r_rA_t^0={\displaystyle \frac{q_0^{\frac{7}{8}}}{2^{\frac{5}{16}}r^{\frac{7}{4}}\left(1+\frac{q_1}{r^2}\right)^{\frac{3}{8}}}},`$
$`\widehat{H}_{015}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}e^{\frac{7}{6}\widehat{\varphi }}e_0^te_1^r_rA_t^1={\displaystyle \frac{2^{\frac{11}{16}}q_1}{q_0^{\frac{1}{8}}r^{\frac{11}{4}}\left(1+\frac{q_1}{r^2}\right)^{\frac{11}{8}}}},`$
$`\widehat{H}_{567}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2\sqrt{2}}}.`$
### 4.2
Magnetic solutions

Here we will discuss the magnetic string solution found in . This is given by the metric

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`(gr)^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{3U}{2}}(dt^2+dz^2)+e^{2U}dr^2+r^2\left(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2\right)`$
$`e^U`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3gr}}+gr.`$ (29)
The gauge fields are given by $`A_\varphi ^I=q^I\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ and the scalar fields and the magnetic charges satisfy

$$X^IV_I=1,3gq^IV_I=1.$$
(30)
As for the magnetic solution of our model one finds that

$$X^0=\frac{1}{36},X_0=12,X^1=3,X_1=\frac{2}{9},e^{\frac{4\widehat{\varphi }}{3}}=3\sqrt{2}.$$
(31)
The above solution can be lifted to ten dimensions and we get

$`d\widehat{s}^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left(18\right)^{\frac{5}{8}}\left((gr)^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{3U}{2}}(dt^2+dz^2)+e^{2U}dr^2+r^2\left(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2\right)\right)`$
$`+2\left(18\right)^{\frac{1}{8}}q_1^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta d\varphi ^22^{\frac{3}{4}}\left(18\right)^{\frac{1}{8}}q_1\mathrm{cos}\theta U_m^1\left(z\right)d\varphi dz^m`$
$`+\left(18\right)^{\frac{1}{8}}U_m^a\left(z\right)U_n^a\left(z\right)dz^mdz^n.`$
$$\widehat{H}_{012}=e^{\frac{17}{6}\widehat{\varphi }}e_3^\theta e_4^\varphi _\theta A_\varphi ^0=18^{\frac{17}{48}}\frac{q_0}{r^2}.$$

We note that the numerical factors for the solution can be absorbed by rescaling the coordinates and the charge $`q_1.`$ More solutions found in  can also be lifted.

To lift these solutions further to eleven dimensions we have to first write the dimensional reduction of eleven dimensional supergravity to $`N=1`$ ten dimensional supergravity. These are

$$E_M^A=e^{\frac{1}{6}\widehat{\varphi }}\widehat{e}_M^A,E_{\stackrel{.}{11}}^{11}=e^{\frac{4}{3}\widehat{\varphi }},A_{MN\stackrel{.}{11}}=\widehat{B}_{MN}$$

and the eleven dimensional metric is related to the ten dimensional one by

$$ds^{2\left(eleven\right)}=e^{\frac{1}{3}\widehat{\varphi }}d\widehat{s}^2+e^{\frac{8}{3}\widehat{\varphi }}\left(dx^{11}\right)^2.$$

The non vanishing components of the antisymmetric tensor field-strengths are

$$F_{MNP\stackrel{.}{11}}=\widehat{H}_{MNP}.$$

The lifting of solutions from five to seven dimensions is very simple. We write

$$ds_7^2=e^{\frac{16}{15}\widehat{\varphi }}ds_5^2+e^{\frac{8}{5}\widehat{\varphi }}\left(\left(dx^5\right)^2+\left(dx^6\right)^2\right).$$

## 5 Conclusions

In this work we have shown that it is possible to obtain $`U(1)`$ gauged $`N=2`$ five dimensional supergravity interacting with one vector multiplet by compactifying and truncating ten dimensional supergravity on the group manifold $`SU(2)\times `$ $`U(1)^2`$. The model obtained is the gauged version of the supergravity model introduced by Strominger and Vafa. Using the relation between the higher dimensional fields and the lower ones, it becomes possible to lift known solutions such as black holes, string solutions and domain walls of the five dimensional theory to seven, ten and eleven dimensional supergravity theories to ten and eleven dimensions. Some known electric and magnetic solutions for our gauged $`D=5`$ supergravity compactified model, formulated in the framework of special geometry, were lifted to higher dimensions. Such solutions are not easy to find directly by studying the seven, ten and eleven dimensional supergravity theories. At this stage it would be useful to study some of the properties of these solutions and give their interpretation in terms of D-brane and M-theory dynamics.


text: # Gravitational waves from black hole collisions via an eclectic approach