text:
# Finite automorphisms of negatively curved Poincaré Duality groups

## 1 Introduction.

The study of finite group actions on topological spaces has a long and distinguished history. A frequent theme is to try and understand the topology of the fixed point set, both in it’s intrinsic form, and as a subspace of the original space. The classic work of Smith shows that for finite $`p`$-groups acting on spheres, the fixed point set has the $`_p`$ cohomology of a sphere. However, there are examples of ‘exotic’ actions on spheres, where the fixed point set is not homeomorphic to a sphere (indeed, does not even have the $``$ cohomology of a sphere). In this short paper, we are interested in relating actions on a hyperbolic group with the induced action on its boundary at infinity.

We will start by relating the fixed subgroup of an automorphism with the fixed subset of the induced action on the boundary at infinity. In particular, this will allow us to use the classic theorem of Smith to prove that if one starts with a $`\delta `$-hyperbolic Poincaré Duality group over $``$, and the group that is acting is a finite $`p`$-group ($`p`$ a prime), then the fixed subgroup is a Poincaré Duality group over $`_p`$. We will then use the strict hyperbolization technique due to Charney and Davis  to construct examples of involutions of a Poincaré Duality group over $``$ whose fixed subgroup fails to be a Poincaré Duality group over $``$ (and in fact, aren’t even duality groups over $``$). These examples also provide examples of ‘exotic’ involution on a sphere (the boundary at infinity) which can be realized geometrically (i.e. by an isometry of a $`CAT(1)`$ space). They also show that, in general, one could have involutions of $`CAT(1)`$ spaces having a sphere as the boundary at infinity, where the induced involution on the boundary has a fixed point set which is not an ANR.

Remark: This paper was motivated by the following more specific questions (each of which is still open). Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\pi _1(M)`$ where $`M`$ is a closed negatively curved Riemannian manifold, and let $`\alpha :\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be an automorphism with $`\alpha ^2=Id_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Question 1: Is the fixed subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^\alpha `$ a Poincaré Duality group over $``$?

Question 2: Is $`\alpha `$ induced by an involution of $`M`$? That is to say, does there exist a self-homeomorphism $`f:MM`$ with $`f^2=Id_M`$, and $`f_{\mathrm{}}=\alpha `$?

Question 3: Let $`\widehat{\alpha }:^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{M}^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{M}`$ be the induced involution of the sphere at infinity of the universal cover of $`M`$. Is the fixed point set of $`\widehat{\alpha }`$ (when non-empty) an ANR?

Acknowledgements.

The authors would like to thank the referee for several helpful comments, in particular for pointing out the existence of  and , and for suggesting the extension of Theorem 2.2 that is included at the end of Section 2. We would also like to thank the members of the Geometric and Function Theory seminar at the University of Michigan for pointing out a substantial simplification in our original proof of Proposition 2.1.

## 2 Main results.

### 2.1 A positive result.

###### Proposition 2.1.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a $`\delta `$-hyperbolic group, $`\overline{\sigma }`$ an automorphism of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of finite order $`m`$, and $`\overline{\sigma }_{\mathrm{}}`$ the induced action of $`\overline{\sigma }`$ on $`^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then $`(^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma })^{\overline{\sigma }_{\mathrm{}}}`$ is homeomorphic to $`^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }})`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be a symmetric generating set for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and consider the action of $`\overline{\sigma }`$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Observe that if we define a new generating set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}:=_{i=1}^m\overline{\sigma }^i(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$, then $`\overline{\sigma }`$ acts by isometries on the Cayley graph $`Cay(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Sigma }^{})`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with respect to these generators. Indeed, we note that given any pair of elements $`g,h`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we have that:

$$d_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(g,h)=inf\{i|g^1h=\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _i,\alpha _j\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}\}$$

Taking a minimal such expression, and applying $`\overline{\sigma }`$ to it, we see that:

$$\overline{\sigma }(g)^1\overline{\sigma }(h)=\overline{\sigma }(g^1h)=\overline{\sigma }(\alpha _1)\mathrm{}\overline{\sigma }(\alpha _i)$$

But by invariance of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ under $`\overline{\sigma }`$, we immediately get an expression for $`\overline{\sigma }(g)^1\overline{\sigma }(h)`$ as a product of $`i`$ elements of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$. This forces $`d_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(\overline{\sigma }(g),\overline{\sigma }(h))d_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(g,h)`$. But now $`\overline{\sigma }`$, by hypothesis, has finite order $`m`$. So by iterating our inequality we get that:

$$d_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(g,h)d_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(\overline{\sigma }(g),\overline{\sigma }(h))\mathrm{}d_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(\overline{\sigma }^m(g),\overline{\sigma }^m(h))=d_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(g,h)$$

which implies that all the inequalities are in fact equalities, and hence that $`\overline{\sigma }`$ does indeed act by isometries on $`Cay(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Sigma }^{})`$. From now on, we will omit the subscript $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ from our distance function in order to simplify notation.

Our next step is to define certain subsets of the Cayley graph $`Cay(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Sigma }^{})`$ in terms of their behavior under $`\overline{\sigma }`$, and to control the distance between these subsets. We let $`F_k:=\{g|d(g,\overline{\sigma }g)k\}`$, and observe that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}=F_0F_1F_2\mathrm{}`$. Neumann  has shown that, for each i, there exists a $`K_i`$ such that $`d(F_i,F_0)<K_i`$.

Next we observe that, by Neumann , the subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}=F_0`$ is quasi-convex in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. In particular, $`^{\mathrm{}}F_0`$ embeds in $`^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Now note that, trivially, we have that $`^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }})`$ is in fact a subset of $`(^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma })^{\overline{\sigma }_{\mathrm{}}}`$. To prove equality, we need to show the reverse inclusion. So let us take a point $`p(^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma })^{\overline{\sigma }_{\mathrm{}}}`$, and let $`\gamma Cay(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Sigma }^{})`$ be a geodesic ray based at the identity and with $`\gamma (\mathrm{})=p`$. Now by our choice of generators, we know that $`\eta :=\overline{\sigma }(\gamma )`$ will also be a geodesic ray (since $`\overline{\sigma }`$ acts isometrically on the Cayley graph), and since the point $`p=\gamma (\mathrm{})`$ is fixed by $`\overline{\sigma }_{\mathrm{}}`$, we must have $`d(\gamma ,\eta )C`$ for some constant $`C`$.

Our next claim is that, for each $`n`$, the inequality $`d(\gamma (n),\eta (n))2C`$ holds (and hence, as $`\eta =\overline{\sigma }(\gamma )`$, forces $`\gamma F_{2C}`$). In order to see this, we consider the following construction: given an integer $`n`$, we define $`f(n)`$ to be an integer satisfying $`d(\gamma (n),\eta (f(n)))C`$ (note that both $`\gamma (n)`$ and $`\eta (f(n))`$ correspond to elements in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$). We claim that $`|f(n)n|C`$ for all $`n`$. By way of contradiction, assume that $`f(n)n>C`$. The triangle inequality gives us:

$$f(n)=d(\eta (0),\eta (f(n)))d(\eta (0),\gamma (n))+d(\gamma (n),\eta (f(n)))n+C<f(n)$$

a contradiction (recall that $`\eta (0),\gamma (0)`$ are both the identity element in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$). The case $`nf(n)>C`$ can be dealt with in an analogous manner.

We now know that, if $`\gamma `$ is an arbitrary geodesic ray originating at the identity, and having $`\gamma (\mathrm{})=p`$, then $`\gamma F_{2C}`$. However, we also have that $`d(F_0,F_{2C})K`$ for some constant $`K`$. In particular, we can find a geodesic ray in $`F_0`$ which has uniformly bounded distance from $`\gamma `$, which forces $`p^{\mathrm{}}F_0=^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }})`$, completing the proof of the proposition.

###### Definition 2.1.

We say that a topological space $`X`$ is an $`n`$-dimensional Cech cohomology sphere with $`R`$ coefficients (where $`R`$ is a PID) provided that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\overline{H}}^k(X;R)=0`$ for all $`kn`$, and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\overline{H}}^n(X;R)=R`$ ($`\stackrel{ˇ}{\overline{H}}^{}`$ refers to reduced Cech cohomology).

###### Definition 2.2.

We say that a torsion-free group $`G`$ is a duality group of dimension $`n`$ over $`R`$ (where again, $`R`$ is a PID), provided that there is a right $`RG`$-module $`C`$ such that one has natural isomorphisms $`H^k(G;A)H_{nk}(G;C_RA)`$ for all $`k`$ and all $`RG`$-modules $`A`$ (naturality is taken with respect to $`A`$, and $`G`$ acts diagonally on the tensor product $`C_RA`$). If in addition we have that $`CR`$, then we say that $`G`$ is a Poincaré Duality group of dimension $`n`$ over $`R`$. Finally, if $`G`$ is a Poincaré Duality group of dimension $`n`$ over $`R`$, and the $`G`$ action on $`CR`$ is trivial, we say that $`G`$ is an orientable Poincaré Duality group of dimension $`n`$ over $`R`$.

For background material on duality groups and Poincaré Duality groups, we refer to the lecture notes by Bieri . Next, we quote the following result from Bestvina and Mess (Corollary 1.3 in their paper ):

###### Theorem 2.1 (Bestvina & Mess).

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a torsion-free $`\delta `$-hyperbolic group. Then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a Poincaré Duality group of dimension $`n`$ over $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ if and only if $`^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is an $`(n1)`$-dimensional Cech cohomology sphere with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ coefficients.

Using their result, we obtain an immediate corollary to our previous proposition:

###### Corollary 2.1.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a torsion-free $`\delta `$-hyperbolic Poincaré Duality group of dimension $`n`$ over $`_p`$. Let $`G`$ be a finite $`p`$-group ($`p`$ prime) acting by automorphisms on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then there is a $`0kn`$ such that the subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^G`$ is a Poincaré Duality group of dimension $`k`$ over $`_p`$.

###### Proof.

Let us first consider the case where $`G`$ is $`_p`$. Then consider the induced action of $`G`$ on the boundary at infinity $`^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Notice that, by Bestvina and Mess’ result, $`^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a compact $`(n1)`$-dimensional Cech cohomology sphere with $`_p`$ coefficients. So we can use a version of Smith theory (see theorem III.7.11 in Bredon ), to get that the fixed point set of the action on the boundary at infinity must be a $`(k1)`$-dimensional Cech cohomology sphere with $`Z_p`$ coefficients (for some $`1k1n1`$). Now our Proposition 2.1 along with Bestvina and Mess’ result immediately implies that the group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^G`$ is a Poincaré Duality group of dimension $`k`$ over $`_p`$ (where $`0kn`$).

For the more general case, we note that, since every $`p`$-group is solvable, one can find a normal subgroup $`G^{}G`$. Finally one uses induction, since we have that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^G=(\mathrm{\Gamma }^G^{})^{G/G^{}}`$. This gives the general case.

As was pointed out to the authors by the referee, Corollary 2.1 also follows from the result announced by Chang and Skjelbred in , where they explain why the fixed set of a finite $`p`$-group action on a Poincaré Duality space over $`_p`$ is still a Poincaré Duality space over $`_p`$.

We conclude this section by mentioning that a Poincaré Duality group over $``$ is automatically a Poincaré Duality group over $`_p`$, but that the converse does not necessarily hold. In Theorem 2.2, the group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ will be an example of this with $`p=2`$.

### 2.2 A family of counterexamples.

One can now ask the question of whether the previous result can be strengthened to obtain that the fixed subgroup is a Poincaré Duality group over $``$. This turns out to be false, and in this section, we will construct counterexamples. As was pointed out by the referee, similar examples were constructed by Davis & Leary . Their construction used the reflection trick method (as opposed to our use of hyperbolization) and served a somewhat different purpose. We now proceed to state our main theorem.

###### Theorem 2.2.

Let $`\tau `$ be a PL involution of a sphere $`S^n`$ whose fixed point set is a submanifold $`N^m`$ which is not a homology sphere (with $``$ coefficients), and has dimension $`m2`$. Let $`X`$ be the strict hyperbolization of the suspension of $`S^n`$, and $`\sigma `$ the induced involution on $`X`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be the fundamental group of $`X`$, and $`\overline{\sigma }`$ the induced involution on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then $`\overline{\sigma }`$ is an involution of a ($`\delta `$-hyperbolic) orientable Poincaré Duality group over $``$ whose fixed subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ is not a duality group over $``$.

Before starting with the proof, let us note that examples of involutions of spheres whose fixed point sets are not homology spheres do exist. In fact, Jones  has proved that every closed PL manifold that has the $`_2`$ homology of a sphere can be realized as the fixed point set of a PL involution of some larger dimensional sphere.

For a more concrete example, we can consider Brieskorn spheres: for $`n2`$, define two complex functions $`f_n(z_0,\mathrm{},z_{2n+1}):=z_0^3+_{i=1}^{2n+1}z_i^2`$, and $`g_n(z_0,\mathrm{},z_{2n}):=z_0^3+_{i=1}^{2n}z_i^2`$. Using these two functions, define a pair of manifolds $`M_n`$ and $`N_n`$ by considering the intersection of $`f_n^1(0)`$ and $`g_n^1(0)`$ with a small enough ball centered at the origin in the appropriate complex vector space. It is known that $`M_n`$ is PL homeomorphic to the sphere $`S^{4n+1}`$, while $`N_n`$ is a $`(4n1)`$-dimensional manifold that does not have the $``$-homology of a sphere (combine Lemma 8.1 with the comments on pg. 72 in Milnor ). Furthermore, observe that the involution $`z_{2n+1}z_{2n+1}`$ on $`M_n`$ has fixed point set $`N_n`$, giving us an infinite family of examples.

###### Proof.

We start by recalling that the strict hyperbolization procedure given by Charney and Davis (section 7 in ) takes a simplicial complex and functorially assigns to it a topological space (in fact, a union of compact hyperbolic manifolds with corners) that supports a metric of strict negative curvature. Let us apply this procedure to the suspension of the sphere $`\mathrm{\Sigma }S^n`$ (respectively $`\mathrm{\Sigma }N^m`$), and call the resulting space $`X^{n+1}`$ (respectively $`Y^{m+1}`$). We will omit the dimension of the spaces unless we explicitly require them for computations.

We now list out some properties of the spaces $`X`$ and $`Y`$. Observe that, by a result of Illman , there exists a triangulation of the pair $`(S^n,N^m)`$ such that the involution $`\tau `$ is a simplicial map. In particular, the involution on the suspension will still be simplicial, and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }N^m`$ is a subcomplex of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }S^n`$. Functoriality of the strict hyperbolization procedure now implies that $`Y`$ is a totally geodesic subspace of $`X`$, invariant under the induced involution $`\sigma `$ on $`X`$ . Since hyperbolization preserves the local structure, $`X`$ will be an orientable manifold, while $`Y`$ will have a pair of non-manifold points (corresponding to the two vertices of the suspension).

Now take a basepoint $`YX`$, and let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\pi _1(Y,)`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\pi _1(X,)`$. The involution $`\sigma `$ will give an order two automorphism $`\overline{\sigma }`$ of the group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We note that, since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the fundamental group of a closed orientable aspherical manifold, it is automatically an orientable Poincaré Duality group over $``$. Now consider the fixed subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$. In order to get information about this group, we consider a lift of the action to the universal cover $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ of $`X`$.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{}\stackrel{~}{X}`$ be a preimage of the point $``$, and let us lift the involution $`\sigma `$ to the universal cover. Note that the fixed point set of the lifted involution is precisely the path connected lift $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ of $`Y`$ that contains the point $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. Furthermore, the action $`\overline{\sigma }`$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is compatible with the lift $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$ of $`\sigma `$, in the sense that $`(\overline{\sigma }(g))(\stackrel{~}{})=\stackrel{~}{\sigma }(g(\stackrel{~}{}))`$.

Next we note that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Indeed $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is automatically fixed by $`\overline{\sigma }`$, hence we have a containment $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$. On the other hand, for an arbitrary $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$, we have that $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }(g(\stackrel{~}{}))=(\overline{\sigma }(g))(\stackrel{~}{})=g(\stackrel{~}{})`$. In particular, $`g(\stackrel{~}{})`$ must be fixed under $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$, which implies $`g(\stackrel{~}{})\stackrel{~}{Y}`$. Since $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ is a path connected, totally geodesic subset, we can connect $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ to $`g(\stackrel{~}{})`$ by a path which lies entirely within $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$. Looking at the projection of this path in $`X`$, we observe that it is a closed loop based at $``$, representing the element $`g`$, and lying entirely in $`Y`$. Hence $`g\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, giving us the reverse containment. We conclude that the two groups are equal.

So in particular, $`Y`$ is a topological space which happens to be a $`K(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }},1)`$. In particular, the group cohomology of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ is related to the compactly supported cohomology of $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$. So we have now reduced our claim to analyzing the properties of $`H^{}(\stackrel{~}{Y},)`$. In order to do this, we consider the Zeeman spectral sequence; let us first introduce some terminology. We will denote by $`h_p`$ the $`p^{th}`$ local homology sheaf for $`Y`$, and by $`\stackrel{~}{h}_p`$ the corresponding sheaf for $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$. For $`xY`$ (respectively, in $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$), we will denote by $`h_p(x)`$ (respectively $`\stackrel{~}{h}_p(x)`$) the stalk at the point $`x`$. Recall that $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ is the hyperbolization of an $`(m+1)`$-dimensional complex $`\mathrm{\Sigma }N^m`$; we will use $`Y^i`$ to denote the subspace of $`Y`$ obtained from the hyperbolization of the $`i`$-skeleton of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }N^m`$. Observe the following facts about the local homology sheaf:

* if $`im+1`$ and $`xY^0`$, then $`h_i(x)=0`$.
* if $`xY^0`$, then $`h_{m+1}(x)=`$.
* there exists a point $`pY^0`$ and an integer $`s`$ such that $`2s<m+1`$ and $`h_s(p)0.`$

All of the previous remarks are clear, with the possible exception of the third: let $`p`$ be one of the two vertices of the suspension. Since the original link of $`p`$ was not a homology sphere, and as hyperbolization does not change the link, there must exist an $`s<m+1`$ which yields the desired fact. Note that the sheafs we are considering are given by local data, so that we have that $`\stackrel{~}{h}_p(\stackrel{~}{x})=h_p(x)`$, whenever $`\stackrel{~}{x}`$ is a lift of the point $`x`$. Hence we have that the three facts mentioned above for the stalks of the local homology sheaf $`h_p`$ on $`Y`$ also hold for the stalks of the local homology sheaf $`\stackrel{~}{h}_p`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$.

Now the Zeeman spectral sequence (see section 2 of McCrory , based on previous work of Zeeman ) states that:

$$E_{i,j}^2:=\stackrel{ˇ}{H}_c^j(\stackrel{~}{Y};\stackrel{~}{h}_i)\stackrel{j}{}H_{ij}(\stackrel{~}{Y})$$

with differentials $`d_{i,j}^t:E_{i,j}^tE_{i+(t1),j+t}^t`$. Observe that, by the properties listed above for the $`i^{th}`$ local homology sheaf, $`E_{i,j}^2=0`$ if $`im+1`$ and $`j0`$. So in particular, all the terms vanish except those in the $`0^{th}`$ row and those in the $`(m+1)^{st}`$ column (see figure on previous page).

We now plan on working with this spectral sequence. Observe from the shape of the spectral sequence that one has isomorphisms:

$$E_{s,0}^2E_{s,0}^3\mathrm{}E_{s,0}^{ms+2}$$

$$E_{m+1,ms+2}^2E_{m+1,ms+2}^3\mathrm{}E_{m+1,ms+2}^{ms+2}$$

and that the differential $`d^{ms+2}`$ maps $`E_{s,0}^{ms+2}`$ to $`E_{m+1,ms+2}^{ms+2}`$. However, we know that $`H_s(\stackrel{~}{Y})=0`$, so the differential must be an isomorphism. This yields:

$$H_c^0(\stackrel{~}{Y};\stackrel{~}{h}_s)=E_{0,s}^2E_{m+1,ms+2}^2=H_c^{ms+2}(\stackrel{~}{Y};\stackrel{~}{h}_{m+1})$$

(since we are dealing with complexes, Cech cohomology coincides with standard cohomology). Furthermore, $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ is simply-connected and has dimension $`m+13`$, hence $`\stackrel{~}{h}_{m+1}`$ is the trivial $``$ sheaf over $`\stackrel{~}{Y}^{m+1}\stackrel{~}{Y}^0`$. This implies:

$$H_c^0(\stackrel{~}{Y};\stackrel{~}{h}_s)H_c^{ms+2}(\stackrel{~}{Y};\stackrel{~}{h}_{m+1})=H_c^{ms+2}(\stackrel{~}{Y};)$$

Now focusing on the left hand term, we note that $`\stackrel{~}{h}_s(q)=0`$ for all $`q\stackrel{~}{Y}^0`$, which gives us:

$$H_c^{ms+2}(\stackrel{~}{Y};)H_c^0(\stackrel{~}{Y};\stackrel{~}{h}_s)=\underset{q\stackrel{~}{Y}^0}{}\stackrel{~}{h}_s(q)$$

But now observe that if $`\stackrel{~}{p}`$ is a vertex in $`\stackrel{~}{Y}^0`$ which is a lift of $`p`$ (one of the vertex points of the suspension), then $`\stackrel{~}{h}_s(g\stackrel{~}{p})=h_s(p)0`$ for every element $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$. Since all the points $`g\stackrel{~}{p}`$ lie in $`\stackrel{~}{Y}^0`$, and since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ is an infinite group, this implies that $`_{q\stackrel{~}{Y}^0}\stackrel{~}{h}_s(q)`$ is not finitely generated. So in particular, $`H_c^{ms+2}(\stackrel{~}{Y};)`$ is not finitely generated. Since $`Y`$ is a finite complex which happens to be a $`K(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }},1)`$, we conclude that $`H^{ms+2}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }},\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }})H_c^{ms+2}(\stackrel{~}{Y};)`$ is not finitely generated. By Bieri and Eckmann’s criterion (see Bieri , section 9.10), this implies that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ cannot be a Poincaré Duality group over $``$.

In order to see that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ is not even a duality group over $``$, it is sufficient to show that the cohomological dimension of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ is greater than $`ms+2`$. We first note that, since $`s2`$, we have that $`ms+2m`$, so it is sufficient to show that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ has non-trivial cohomology in some dimension that is strictly greater than $`m`$. Observe that, by construction, we have that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ is the fundamental group of the finite aspherical $`(m+1)`$-dimensional space $`Y`$, which implies that the cohomological dimension of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ is at most $`m+1`$. We would be done provided we can show that the cohomological dimension of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ is exactly $`m+1`$. Looking back at the construction of $`Y`$, we observe that the submanifold $`N^m`$ we started with is a $`_2`$ homology sphere. Suspending the manifold, we obtain an $`(m+1)`$-dimensional space which is a $`_2`$ homology manifold. Now $`Y`$ is the hyperbolization of this space, and since the hyperbolization procedure preserves the local structure, $`Y`$ is also an $`(m+1)`$-dimensional $`_2`$ homology manifold. This implies that $`H^{m+1}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }};_2)_20`$, which forces the cohomological dimension of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ to be at least $`m+1`$. This completes our proof.

###### Remark.

As was pointed out to the authors by the referee, the argument in Theorem 2.2 can also be used to show that the condition that $`G`$ be a p-group in Corollary 2.1 really is necessary. Namely, there are examples of a $`_6`$ action on an orientable Poincaré Duality $`\delta `$-hyperbolic group over $``$ whose fixed subgroup is not a Duality group over any PID (in which $`01`$). Indeed, note that the unit tangent bundle $`S(S^{n1})`$ of an $`(n1)`$-dimensional sphere can be identified with the Stiefel manifold $`V_{2,n}`$ of orthonormal $`2`$-frames in $`^n`$. The latter can be embedded in $`^n`$ via the map $`f(u,v)=u+iv`$ (where $`u,v^n`$ are orthonormal vectors).

Note that since $`u,v`$ are orthonormal, we have that $`|f(u,v)|^2=|u|^2+|v|^2=2`$, and also that:

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}(u_j+iv_j)^2=\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}u_j^2\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}v_j^2+2i(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}u_jv_v)=0$$

This implies that $`S(S^{n1})`$ is diffeomorphic to the Brieskorn variety for the polynomial $`z_1^2+\mathrm{}z_n^2=0`$. In particular, we see that $`S(S^{n1})`$ is the fixed point set of the $`_6`$ action on the Brieskorn variety for the polynomial $`z_0^3+z_1^2+\mathrm{}z_n^2+z_{n+1}^2=0`$, where the action is given by $`g(z_0,z_1,\mathrm{},z_n,z_{n+1})=(\theta z_0,z_1,\mathrm{},z_n,z_{n+1})`$, where $`\theta =e^{2\pi i/3}`$. Furthermore, since odd dimensional spheres have a non-zero vector field, we have that $`H_{}(S(S^{2n1});)H_{}(S^{2n1}\times S^{2n2};)`$.

Now let $`N_n`$ be the fixed point set of the above mentioned action of $`_6`$ on the Brieskorn variety $`M_n`$ for the polynomial $`z_0^3+z_1^2+\mathrm{}z_{2n}^2+z_{2n+1}^2=0`$. As we mentioned earlier, the Brieskorn variety $`M_n`$ is PL-homeomorphic to $`S^{4n+1}`$, while by the previous paragraph, $`N_n`$ is diffeomorphic to $`S(S^{2n1})`$. Suspending the spaces and hyperbolizing gives us a $`_6`$ action on a $`CAT(1)`$ space $`X`$, where now the fixed subset $`Y`$ is the hyperbolization of the suspension of $`S(S^{2n1})`$.

The proof that $`\pi _1(Y)`$ is not Poincaré Duality over any PID $`R`$ is almost a verbatim repetition of that given for Theorem 2.2. In particular, the local homology sheaf for the space $`Y`$ will have three distinct indices (namely $`s=2n1,2n,4n2`$) for which $`h_s(p)0`$ (where again, $`p`$ is one of the suspension points). Working through the Zeeman spectral sequence, we again find indices ($`<4n2`$) where the cohomology of $`\pi _1(Y)`$ is not finitely generated. The only substantial change is in the argument showing that the cohomological dimension of $`\pi _1(Y)`$ over $`R`$ is $`4n2`$. To do this, we merely note that the hyperbolization map $`Y\mathrm{\Sigma }S(S^{2n1})`$ induces a surjection on integral homology, together with the fact that $`H_{4n2}(\mathrm{\Sigma }S(S^{2n1});R)R`$.

## 3 Concluding remarks.

We finish our paper with a few remarks. Firstly, we note that the results we obtain are, in some sense, dealing with exceptional automorphisms of $`\delta `$-hyperbolic groups. Indeed, Levitt & Lustig  have shown that, in a suitable sense, ‘most’ automorphisms of a $`\delta `$-hyperbolic group have very simple fixed point sets for their induced actions on the boundary at infinity (in fact, their fixed point sets consist of a pair of points). Also, if we start with a torsion free group, then the group of inner automorphisms will also be torsion free, hence any automorphism of finite order in some sense ‘lives’ in the outer automorphism group, which tends to be small.

Secondly, we should point out that, in the counterexamples we constructed, the groups $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ all have boundary at infinity which is in fact homeomorphic to a sphere. This follows from the fact that the link of every vertex in the space $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ is PL-homeomorphic to the standard sphere, so by a result of Davis & Januszkiewicz , the boundary at infinity of $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ is homeomorphic to a sphere.

Thirdly, we can ask related questions in a somewhat more general setting. More precisely, given an arbitrary topological space $`Y`$, we can consider the question of what type of actions can be realized algebraically or geometrically. By a geometric action, we mean one that is induced by an isometry of a $`\delta `$-hyperbolic space $`X`$ whose boundary is homeomorphic to $`Y`$. By an algebraic action, we mean one that is induced by an automorphism of a $`\delta `$-hyperbolic group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ whose boundary is homeomorphic to $`Y`$. Note that, at the cost of changing the set of generators for the group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (as in the proof of Proposition 2.1), we can always view an algebraic action as a geometric one (given by an isometry of the Cayley graph).

The fact that this question is non-trivial, even in the more general setting, can be seen by considering the situation of a Menger manifold. It is well known that there are numerous $`\delta `$-hyperbolic groups whose boundary at infinity are Menger manifolds. Now a result of Iwamoto  states that every closed subset of a Menger manifold can be realized as the fixed point set of an involution. On the other hand, if an involution can be realized algebraically via an involution $`\sigma `$ of a group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, then the fixed point set on the boundary at infinity must coincide with the boundary at infinity of the subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^\sigma `$. However, the latter set cannot have any cutpoints (see Bowditch  and Swarup ). This gives a necessary condition for a closed subset of a Menger manifold to be the fixed point set of an algebraically realizable involution. What are the sufficient conditions?

Finally, we mention that these examples give involutions of a $`\delta `$-hyperbolic group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ where the fixed point set of the induced involution on the boundary at infinity is not an ANR, although $`^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }S^n`$. One could ask whether the fixed point set could display other complicated behavior. For instance, does there exist an involution of a $`\delta `$-hyperbolic group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, with fixed subgroup $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, with the property that $`^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }S^n`$, $`^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Lambda }S^{n2}`$, and the embedding $`S^{n2}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }S^n`$ is a locally flat, non-trivial knot?

## 4 Bibliography.

 Bestvina, M. & Mess, G. The boundary of negatively curved groups. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 4 (1991), no. 3, pp. 469–481.

 Bieri, R. Homological dimension of discrete groups. Second edition. Queen Mary College Mathematical Notes. Queen Mary College, Department of Pure Mathematics, London, 1981. iv+198 pp.

 Bowditch, B. H. Connectedness properties of limit sets. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 351 (1999), no. 9, pp. 3673–3686.

 Bredon, G. E. Introduction to compact transformation groups. Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 46. Academic Press, New York-London, 1972. xiii+459 pp.

 Chang, T. & Skjelbred, T. Group actions on Poincaré Duality spaces. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 78 (1972), pp. 1024–1026.

 Charney, R. M. & Davis, M. W. Strict hyperbolization. Topology 34 (1995), no. 2, pp. 329–350.

 Davis, M. W. & Januszkiewicz, T. Hyperbolization of polyhedra. J. Differential Geom. 34 (1991), no. 2, pp. 347–388.

 Davis, M. W. & Leary, I. J. Some examples of discrete group actions on aspherical manifolds. To appear in The Proceedings of ICTP Conference on High-dimensional Manifold Topology.

 Illman, S. Smooth equivariant triangulations of $`G`$-manifolds for $`G`$ a finite group. Math. Ann. 233 (1978), no. 3, pp. 199–220.

 Iwamoto, Y. Fixed point sets of transformation groups of Menger manifolds, their pseudo-interiors and their pseudo-boundaries. Topology Appl. 68 (1996), no. 3, pp. 267–283.

 Jones, L. Construction of surgery problems. in Geometric topology (Proc. Georgia Topology Conf., Athens, Ga., 1977), pp. 367–391, Academic Press, New York-London, 1979.

 Levitt, G. & Lustig, M. Most automorphisms of a hyperbolic group have very simple dynamics. Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4) 33 (2000), no. 4, pp. 507–517.

 McCrory, C. Zeeman’s filtration of homology. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 250 (1979), pp. 147–166.

 Milnor, J. Singular points of complex hypersurfaces. Annals of Mathematics Studies, No. 61 Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.; University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo 1968 iii+122 pp.

 Neumann, W. D. The fixed group of an automorphism of a word hyperbolic group is rational. Invent. Math. 110 (1992), no. 1, pp. 147–150.

 Swarup, G. A. On the cut point conjecture. Electron. Res. Announc. Amer. Math. Soc. 2 (1996), no. 2, pp. 98–100 (electronic).

 Zeeman, E. C. Dihomology. III. A generalization of the Poincaré duality for manifolds. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 13 (1963), pp. 155–183.


format: text

text:
# Moon and Sun shadowing effect in the MACRO detector

## 1 Introduction

MACRO was a large area underground detector located in Hall B of the Gran Sasso National Laboratory (LNGS) in Italy at an average depth of 3700 m.w.e, 13 34´E longitude and 42 27´N latitude. A detailed description of the detector can be found in . The experiment was primarily designed to search for monopoles and rare particles in the cosmic rays, including high energy neutrinos and muons from cosmic point sources . These sources can be inferred from an excess of muons above a nearly isotropic background in a particular region of the sky . An important requirement for any kind of detector using this technique is the determination of the best signal/background ratio, which is related to the angular resolution.
It was originally suggested by Clark  that an observed narrow angle “shadow” in the cosmic ray flux due to the absorption by the Sun and the Moon can be useful to test the angular resolution and the pointing ability of cosmic ray detectors. Moreover, the positive determination of the Moon shadow in the expected position, validates the analyses of coincident data between different detectors as MACRO together EAS-TOP or other detectors.

However, since the angular diameter of these bodies is about 0.5 wide, only detectors having good angular resolution and sufficient statistics have the possibility to detect this signal. Several large air shower arrays  and shallow depth detectors  have observed these effects. Deep underground observations ($`>`$2000 m.w.e.) have greater difficulties in observing the shadows, due to the greatly reduced underground muon flux. However MACRO , SOUDAN2  and LVD  have all collected data continuously for about 10 years, thereby gaining the sufficient sensitivity to observe the effect.

Underground muons are the remnants of the air showers initiated by the collisions of primary cosmic rays with air nuclei. The secondary muons which reach the MACRO detector had to cross a minimum rock overburden of 3200 hg cm-2. This corresponds to a minimum energy of the muon at the surface of about 1.4 TeV and to a primary proton with median energy around 22 TeV. Since the Earth Magnetic field is approximately (to within 10%) a dipole field, and its strength is 0.5 G at the surface, a single charged particle crossing it will acquire a transverse momentum of about 25 GeV/c for a path integral over few Earth’ radii. The average displacement of muon trajectories due to this effect,as viewed in the detector, will be $`[0.15^{}Z/(E_p/10TeV)]`$, eastward for positive primaries, . Therefore the apparent position of the Moon shadow will appear moved to the west direction (with respect to the Earth-Moon direction) by the same amount.

The motion in time of the Earth’s magnetic pole around its average position, introduces a smearing of the shadow when the effect is observed over many years . Additional smearing can be produced by the fact that the observations are made at different angles and at different times of the year.

The Sun shadowing effect is more complicated to estimate. Particles shadowed by the Sun are traveling in the direction of the Sun-Earth axis and therefore are traveling through the solar magnetic field and the Interplanetary Magnetic Field (IMF). The IMF is due to the electric currents in the Sun that generate a complex magnetic field which extends out into the interplanetary space. As the Sun’s magnetic field is carried out through the solar system by the solar wind and the Sun is rotating, the rotation winds up the magnetic field into a large rotating spiral, known as the Parker spiral. The magnetic field is primarily directed outward from the Sun in one of its hemispheres, and inward in the other. This causes opposite magnetic field directions in the Parker spiral. The thin layer between the different field directions is described as the neutral current sheet. Since this dividing line between the outward and inward field directions is not exactly on the solar equator, the rotation of the Sun causes the current sheet to become ”wavy”, and this waviness is carried out into interplanetary space by the solar wind. For this reason the IMF shows a sector structure with field directions reversing across the sector boundaries ; therefore, in some sectors the magnetic field points inward, and outward in others. Moreover, this structure varies with the solar activity cycle; a complete simulation must thus take into account the solar activity phase and the sectors encountered by the particle traveling in our solar system.

The possibility to use the Moon and Sun shadows as mass spectrometers was first explored by Lloyd-Evans ; following this idea Urban et al.  proposed this method as a way to search for antimatter in primary cosmic rays. If there is a significant antimatter component in the primary CRs in the TeV energy region, then the magnetic fields should deflect them in opposite direction with respect to the matter component; therefore the proton component should be deflected by the geomagnetic field eastward and the antiproton component westward. As a consequence the shadow produced by the proton component should be to the west with respect to the Moon center, while the resulting shadow due to antiprotons should be to the east. However to resolve the images, the two disks must be far from each other, at least by the disk diameter itself.

The shadow of the Moon was previously observed by MACRO using a partial data sample. In this paper we present the measurement of the Moon and Sun shadows using the full data set of muons collected by the MACRO detector. Using the result obtained for the Sun we are able to set an upper limit to the antiproton flux of TeV energy at the Earth.

## 2 The muon data sample and the expected background

### 2.1 Muon data sample

The muon sample used for the present analysis includes all events collected from the start of MACRO data taking in February, 1989 through the end of 2000. The sample totals $`50.0\times 10^6`$ events collected over 74,073 hours of livetime. During the first part of this period, the apparatus was under construction. The three main detector configurations included one ($`A_{eff}\mathrm{\Omega }1,010`$ m2 sr) and six ($`A_{eff}\mathrm{\Omega }5,600`$ m2 sr) supermodules without the attico (the upper part of the detector described in), and finally the full six supermodules with attico ($`A_{eff}\mathrm{\Omega }6,600`$ m2 sr). Approximately 60% of the data sample was obtained during periods when MACRO had full acceptance.

The run and event was used to select good quality events were the same as in our first analysis of the Moon shadow  and for the muon-astronomy searches . Thus, only muon events contained in a half-angle cone of $`10^{}`$ and centered on the Moon and the Sun have been retained for further analysis. The number of events that passed all cuts in the Moon window was 404988, almost doubling the previous statistics, and 396662 events in the Sun window. The rate of accumulation of the events in the two windows is given in Fig. 1. As visible in Fig. 1 the effects of a reduced detector livetime, due to the installation of the final configurations in years 1992-1993, produced a different esposure for the Sun and The Moon.

We note that during the period when MACRO was operative the solar activity went from its maximum phase in 1991, through a minimum phase around 1996/97 to the beginning of the next maximum in 2001. However almost 62% of the total events were accumulated from 1994 onward, close to the period of minimum solar activity when the neutral sheet was probably lying close to the ecliptic plane with little warping . The period is contained within the so-called A$`>`$0 phase of the solar cycle during which the magnetic field of the Sun is directed outward at the north pole of the Sun and inward in the South.

As in our previous analysis, for each real event observed, we produced 25 simulated background events, by randomly coupling muon directions and times, as explained in . This technique was used to estimate the expected events from any direction of the sky, including the Sun and the Moon.

## 3 Shadow of the Moon

The Moon is a celestial body moving quickly in the sky. Thus, to perform the analysis it is necessary to make a very precise and accurate computation of its position. The topocentric position of the moon was computed at the arrival time of each event using the database of ephemerides available from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, JPLEPH . A correction for the parallax due to MACRO’s instantaneous position on the Earth was then applied to each ephemeris position .

### 3.1 Event deficit around the Moon

The distribution of events with arrival directions close to the Moon direction can be used to make visible the event deficit around the Moon disk. The average disk radius is computed for each event of the 404988 events in the sample giving a value of $`0.26\pm 0.01`$. Fig. 2 shows the distribution $`\frac{1}{\pi }\frac{dN}{d\theta ^2}\mathrm{vs}.\theta `$, where $`\theta `$ is the angular distance between the calculated Moon center position in celestial coordinates and the muon arrival direction. The significance of the deficit can be calculated by fitting this distribution with a function of the form :

$$\frac{dN_\mu }{d\theta ^2}=k(1\frac{\theta _M^2}{2\sigma ^2}e^{\frac{\theta ^2}{2\sigma ^2}})$$
(1)
where $`\theta _M=0.26^{}`$ is the average value of the angular radius of the Moon, previously computed, $`\sigma `$ is the detector angular resolution and k the event density.

This function represents the signal produced by the Moon absorption effect when the detector point spread function (PSF) can be assimilated to a bidimensional normal distribution. We know that in our case this is not really appropriate because muons observed in the apparatus undergo multiple Coulomb scattering in the overburden rock, which generates long tails in the measured angular distributions. Nonetheless, this simple analysis gives results consistent with the one presented in the next section where we take into account the real PSF of the apparatus by using a maximum likelihood method. The fit of the data to the above function has a $`\chi ^2=54.8`$ for 31 D.o.F. and a $`\chi ^2=95.9`$ for a flat distribution (32 D.o.F.). The difference between these values suggests that the chance probability of the observed deficit is $`10^9`$, equivalent to a statistical significance of about $`6\sigma `$. The fitted values of the parameters are $`\mathrm{k}=(1294\pm 5)\mathrm{events}/\mathrm{degree}^2`$ and $`\sigma =(0.55\pm 0.05)^{}`$. The value of k obtained by the fit can be used to have a rough estimate of the number of missing events (blocked by the Moon disk): $`\pi \mathrm{k}\theta _\mathrm{M}^2=275\pm 1`$. We also estimated the number of missing events by considering the number of expected background events in the 10 cone windows, Nbck = $`405100\pm 127`$, calculated as mentioned above. Thus, the number of blocked events is $`405100(\frac{0.26^{}}{10^{}})^2=274\pm 1`$, in agreement with the result of the fit. Since the livetime of the apparatus for the entire sample is about 74000 hr, the rate of the events obscured by the Moon is about 3 events/month.

The observed signal can then be used to optimize the bin size for astronomy searches . In fact we can choose the size of a circular window centered on the Moon that maximizes the statistics $`\frac{N_{exp}N_{obs}}{\sqrt{N_{exp}}}`$, being $`N_{obs}`$ integrated the number of events observed in the Moon direction and $`N_{exp}`$ the integrated number of expected events in the same direction. The behavior of this quantity versus the angular distance from the Moon center, is shown in Fig.3. This figure suggests the choice of bin 0.5 radius wide as the optimal one for maximizing the signal if there is a source at the center of the bin .

### 3.2 Maximum likelihood analysis

In the simple one dimensional analysis above, we have implicitly assumed that the position of the moon’s shadow is known and the significance calculated as the PSF of the apparatus is a perfect two dimensional normal distribution. However geomagnetic effects, displacement of the shadow and the distortions introduced by the true PSF, cannot be easily taken into account using this analysis. For all these reasons we have developed a binned likelihood method, based on a a priori knowledge of the MACRO PSF (MPSF), a technique originally developed by COS-B.

The MPSF was accurately determined by using double muon events in the detector. Muon pair events are produced in the decays of pions and kaons produced in the primary cosmic ray interactions; these muons therefore come from about 20 km above the apparatus and have small initial separation angles; thus they reach the apparatus with almost parallel paths. Therefore, the distribution of their separation angles is a good measurement of convolution of the scattering in the mountain overburden and the detector’s intrinsic angular resolution. This space angle should be divided by a factor $`\sqrt{2}`$ to take into account of the independent deviations of each muon in the pair. The reconstructed MPSF  is more peaked to small angular deviations, with respect to a normal distribution, but with long tails at large deviations.

In order to analyze both the Moon and the Sun shadowing effects, we have to take into account the finite size of these objects. Therefore we have modified the true MPSF by selecting random positions on a disk having the same angular dimensions of the Moon and then generating random deviations according the MPSF. This new distribution, a convolution of the original MPSF and an extended source of fixed angular radius, is then used as the PSF for the analysis. The sensitivity of the results to the angular radius of the object will be explored at the end of this section.

A two dimensional likelihood analysis was performed, composing the observed data with the expectation from a source of unknown strength and position. We filled a two-dimensional histogram, centered on the Moon position, and a similar histogram containing the simulated events, obtained by adding to the expected background , the events due to a source at $`(x_s,y_s)`$ having a chance strength $`S_M`$, spread according to the modified PSF. The source in this case should have negative strength, since we are looking for an attenuation. Both the observed and simulated events are plotted using horizontal coordinates (azimuth and altitude) and using equal solid angle bin ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Omega }=0.125^{}\times 0.125^{}=1.6\times 10^2`$ deg2). For each of the bin in the histogram used, we assume to have a source exactly at the bin center, then the unknown strength $`S_M`$ is evaluated by minimizing the quantity $`\chi ^2`$ for poissonian distributed data

$$\chi ^2(x_s,y_s,S_M)=2\underset{i=1}{\overset{n_{bin}}{}}[N_i^{sim}N_i+N_i\mathrm{ln}\frac{N_i}{N_i^{sim}}],$$
(2)
where the sum is over all bins in the window , $`N_i`$ is the observed number of muons in the i-th bin, and $`N_i^{sim}`$ the number of events in the same bin from the simulated distribution. The minimum value found in each bin, $`\chi ^2(x_s,y_s,S_M)`$ was then compared with $`\chi ^2(0)`$ for the null hypothesis that no shadowing source is present at the center of the bin ($`S_M=0`$). We then fill a new two-dimensional histogram filled with the quantity $`\lambda =\chi ^2(0)\chi ^2(x_s,y_s,S_M)`$. The most likely position of the Moon shadow is given by the bin having the maximum value $`\lambda ^{max}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Since there is only one free parameter, the strength of the source $`S_M`$, $`\lambda `$ behaves like $`\chi _1^2`$, a $`\chi ^2`$ distribution with one degree of freedom . The significance of the moon detection is given by P($`\chi _1^2\chi _1^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$).

In Figure 4 we show the results of this analysis in a window $`4.375^{}\times 4.375^{}`$ centered on the moon position. This window has been divided into $`35\times 35`$ cells, each having dimensions $`0.125^{}\times 0.125^{}`$. The $`\lambda `$ values of this figure are displayed in grey scale format for every bin in the moon window. Also shown is the fiducial position of the Moon and a circle centered at this position corresponding to the average lunar radius, $`0.26^{}`$. The largest deviation away from the expected background is found at (0. ,+0.125 ) with a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=39.1`$, corresponding to a significance of 6.5$`\sigma `$ and a negative strength of 316 events, as expected for a shadowing effect. The $`\chi ^2`$ value for the null hypothesis, i.e. when a source of null intensity is set in the bin with the largest deviation found, is 1240.71 for the $`35\times 35`$ bins. The entire sky region in the fiducial position of the disk has $`\lambda 36.`$ values. Moreover the negative strength observed is equal to $`316\pm 40`$ events, in agreement with the expected deficit. The $`1\sigma `$ error in the strength, treated as a parameter, is directly estimated by the likelihood method by considering the parameter interval delimited by the condition $`\lambda =\mathrm{\Lambda }1`$ (or $`\chi ^2=\chi _{min}^2+1`$).

We estimated other parameters used in the simulation, like the Moon average radius , in order to verify the correctness of the analysis or the MPSF shape itself . For this consideration we assume that the true shadow center position is that having the largest deviation, i.e. at (0. ,+0.125 ), and repeat the analysis using different PSFs each modified by different values of the trial angular radius for the source, starting with a null value corresponding to the true, unmodified MPSF. This technique let us to both verify the sensibility of the analysis to extended PSFs and also to quote an error on the radius of the measured object. Fig.5 shows the $`\chi ^2`$ values at the central shadow position, versus the trial angular disk radius. From this figure we can quote as the radius for the Moon a value of $`(0.25\pm 0.25)^{}`$, well in agreement with the correct averaged value. This result confirms that the Moon shadow signal is more likely due to an extended source instead of a point-like source.

The displacement of the shadow is in good agreement with the expected position, and this confirms the correct alignment of the apparatus. We can quote as the maximum error in the alignment of the apparatus a value of about 0.1, taking into account the observed shadow displacement northward.

## 4 Day-Night effects

To study possible differences in the geomagnetic field due to the solar wind, we divided the muon sample in two subsamples by requiring that the angular distance between the Moon and the Sun is smaller or larger than 90. This requirement is almost equivalent to a daytime-nighttime requirement on the data, similar to what was used in a previous analysis . The results of the analyses for the two subsamples are shown in Fig.6a-b: there is a sharper shadow for the “night” sample, with a large significance, and a broader shadow for the “day” sample (with a lower significance). Since the two subsamples are almost equivalent (198183 and 206805 events for “day” and “night” respectively) we conclude that night events encounter a reduced geomagnetic field with respect to the day events . The cause has probably to be ascribed to the different configuration of the geomagnetic field in the two sides. Also time varying effects can be different for the two subsamples.

## 5 Shadowing effect of the Sun

The same analysis was performed also for the Sun. In this case the total number of events collected with an angular distance from the Sun center of 10 is 396662, a sample almost equivalent to that of the Moon. Since the angular dimensions of the two bodies are essentially the same, we expect about the same number of missing events. However, besides the geomagnetic field effect, two other magnetic fields come into deflecting the cosmic ray particles: the Sun’s magnetic field and the IMF. As these fields are variable in time, it is more difficult to predict the shadow displacement. Using the ecliptic coordinates for the muons collected, and a window centered on the calculated Sun position, we obtain the results shown in Fig. 8. The deficit is clear and it is displaced by 0.6 northward with a $`\chi ^2=22.0`$ corresponding to a signal significance of $`4.6\sigma `$. The deficit observed for the Sun shadowing results to be $`247\pm 48`$ events, using the error estimated by the likelihood method as for the Moon shadowing effect. In trying to explain our result let us analyze the behavior of the magnetic fields in the years during which we collected our data. Fig. 7 shows the monthly average Ap values  in the years 1989-2000. These values indicate a global (planetary) magnetic activity and are sensitive to solar particle effects on the Earth’s magnetic field. It is evident that the Sun was in a relatively quiet activity during 1993-2000, where the bulk of our events have been collected. Moreover, as we have mentioned in section 2.1, during the whole period the solar cycle was in the so-called A$`>`$0 phase. In this situation the displacement due to the large regular IMF is expected to be northward of the ecliptic plane. Let us note that from 1991 till the end of 1997 the Heliospheric Current Sheet was estimated to have a tilt angle $`<`$25 and was almost symmetric between the north and south hemispheres of the solar cavity.

Since MACRO is located at a high latitude, it is possible that by averaging over a long period of observations the net result produces a displacement to the north as if the apparatus was mostly looking in the “away” hemisphere of the IMF. The amplitude and the direction of the shift is in agreement with other observations at the same energy range.

## 6 Antiproton flux limits

The displacement of the Sun shadow from the expected center position can be used to evaluate a limit on the antiproton abundance in the cosmic ray flux . In fact if a primary antiproton flux is present, it should produce a displacement on the opposite direction with respect to that of the proton flux . The $`\chi ^2`$ level in the symmetric position with respect to the sun center, i.e. at 0.6 southward, results to be $`\chi ^2=3.2`$. In this case we use again the likelihood analysis to estimate an upper limit at the desired confidence level. Taking into account that the $`\lambda `$ variable follows the $`\chi ^2`$ distribution with one degree of freedom, we can estimate the upper limit at 68$`\%`$ c.l. choosing $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=1`$ and the upper limit at 90$`\%`$ c.l. choosing to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=2.7`$. Using this method we obtain $`n_{68\%}=125`$ events and $`n_{90\%}=155`$ events of deficit. Therefore $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}=51\%`$ at 68$`\%`$ c.l. and $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}=62\%`$ at 90$`\%`$ c.l. for primaries at a mean energy of about 20 TeV . We can also evaluate the upper limit looking to the event density distributions centered in the position found for the sun shadow, i.e. 0.6 displaced northward respect to the Sun “nominal” position, and in the symmetric position. The two distributions are shown in Fig.9, and again is visible the deficit in the distribution northward position while the other is flat. Using the considerations derived from Fig.3 we found that the number of observed events within 0.5, from the distribution southward centered, gives 664 events observed and 710 expected. We can therefore quote the upper limit as 60 events (68$`\%`$c.l.) and 81 events (90$`\%`$c.l.).

Since as previously explained the choice of a 0.5 half-angle cone, collects about 50$`\%`$ of events from a source, the upper limit should be $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}=120/247=48.5\%`$ at 68$`\%`$c.l. and $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}=162/247=52.\%`$ at 90$`\%`$c.l. in agreement with the likelihood estimations.

Figure 10 shows our $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}`$/p limit compared to measurements from other experiments.

## 7 Conclusions

Using a sample of 50 million muons MACRO has detected the Moon and Sun shadows, with a significance of 6.5 and 4.6 $`\sigma `$, respectively. The strength of the signals is in agreement with those expected. The Moon shadow effect is centered as expected in the case of primary protons of 15 TeV energy (median), demonstrating the correctness and the stability of the detector pointing ability. The Sun shadow is shifted with respect to the “nominal” center position. The absence of a symmetric shadow leads to an upper limit of the $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}`$ ratio of 48.5$`\%`$ at 68$`\%`$ c.l. for high energy cosmic rays. MACRO is the deepest detector to observe the shadows of the Sun and of the Moon. This investigation confirms that the apparatus had the capability to detect signals from cosmic sources by observing secondary muons underground.

## 8 Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the support of the director and of the staff of the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso and the invaluable assistance of the technical staff of the Institutions participating in the experiment. We thank the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN), the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. National Science Foundation for their generous support of the MACRO experiment. We thank INFN, ICTP (Trieste), WorldLab and NATO for providing fellowships and grants (FAI) for non Italian citizens.


text:
# New theory of periodical systems by finite interval inverse problem.

## 1 Abstract

We show that the mechanism of gap formation has a resonance nature. The special real fundamental solutions were discovered which ‘paradoxically’ have knot distribution with a period coinciding with that of potential at all energies of the whole lacuna interval. In terms of these solutions resonance gap appearance gets the most direct explanation: ever repeating hits by the potential result in exponential increase (decrease) of the wave amplitudes in the forbidden zones. The analogous alternating hits from opposite sides are responsible for the wave beatings in allowed zones. The inversion technique gives rise to zone control algorithms – shifting chosen boundaries of spectral bands, changing degree of zone forbiddenness. All this cannot be achieved by the previous Bloch theory.

## 2 Introduction

It is well known that periodical potential perturbation splits the continuous spectrum creating bands of allowed zones separated by gaps of forbidden zones. The explanation of this statement by Bloch-Floquet formalism has seemed to be satisfactory since the appearance of this theory 70 years ago. However, the intrinsic mechanism of zone formation by a certain periodic potential remained incompletely understandable: Bloch theory as a black box gives out only the spectral zones without qualitative explanations. Additional insight into the theory became possible due to inverse problem and SUSY QM formalisms that opened new horizons in quantum mechanics by their exactly solvable models, see our new book : ”Submissive quantum mechanics” about the turnover from direct to inverse problem  (it can be found in internet http://thsun1.jinr.ru/$``$ zakharev/).

We have found the following fact: there is some kind of deep-hidden ’resonance’ which tears the spectrum. Namely, inside the gaps the period of the potential coincides with that of very special (we will call them ‘smart’, i.e. ‘intellectual’) solutions. Being periodically positioned, knots of these smart solutions are not the same, but interlaced with each other. Of these two linearly independent solutions, being a manifold of zero measure, the whole continuum of solutions with ’invisible resonance’ can be constructed. They will have quite irregular disposition of knots at each energy value in the forbidden zone. Despite this ’irregularity camouflage’ due to a resonant nature of constituents (coherent hits of perturbation in the successive periods), ‘smart’ solution oscillation amplitudes are forced to exponentially increase (or decrease)in opposite directions. This is characteristic to non-physical (forbidden) behaviour. Hence, arbitrary solutions tend asymptotically (as $`x\pm \mathrm{}`$) to pure smart solutions. On the one side, the discovered resonance mechanism seems to be very natural. On the other side, the property of smart solutions having the same period of knots (oscillations) on the finite energy interval contradicts the widely spread notion that the oscillation frequency increases with the energy, for instance, the initial free solution has a specified period at only one fixed energy point. In periodical potentials there are almost no periodical solutions except the zone boundaries. Bloch waves are products of functions with different periods. In forbidden zone nobody suspected of any periodicity. The unexpected periodical positioning of knots in rare smart solutions reveals almost evidently the resonance cause.

The above mentioned can be explained in the following way. Different solutions perceive the same potential as different effective potentials: more or less repulsive (attractive). It is due to different sensitivity of bumps and knots of (real) solution to the local values of the potential. So, for instance, if bumps of the smart solutions are at potential barrier positions there will prevail a repulsion, i.e., the effective kinetic energy will be weakened, which widens the distance between knots. This allows energy change complete compensation needed to keep knot period constant all over the energy interval of the entire forbidden zone. So the inter-knot distance of smart solutions remains unchanged when shifting simultaneously the energy over the $`E`$-axis and the wave knot lattice over the $`x`$-axis.

It is worth to mention that the choice of purely real solutions was one of the key moments simplifying the investigations of this paper.

Splitting the unperturbed continuous spectrum into the band one by creating forbidden zones is essentially quantum effect. So we shall return later once more to clarify this basic features of wave behavior in periodical structures which is not at all ’non-physical’ aspect of the theory. We shall also consider below somewhat less wonderful solutions in the allowed zones.

## 3 Inverse problem and SUSY QM spectral control

The complete sets of explicit inverse problem solutions on finite interval served us as a hint in constructing solutions to periodic potentials. Moreover, they give rise to a significantly broader class of exactly solvable models for periodic systems (infinite zone models).

The key point of the inverse problem is that spectral parameters (energy levels, normalizing constants, etc.) enter in the formalism as input data and corresponding exactly solvable models are generated by varying only a certain spectral parameter or a finite number of them (while living the others unaltered). Since spectral parameters form a complete set and completely determine properties of quantum systems, exact models corresponding to all possible variations of spectral parameters give rise embrace the whole manifold one- and multi-channel systems. Thus, there appears a possibility of changing at wish quantum objects by variation of these parameters (as if using control ’levers’) and examine quantum systems in different thinkable situations. By the way, instead of about ten direct problem exactly solvable models which currently serve as a basis of the contemporary education one should also be guided by an infinite (!) number, even complete sets of such models from the inverse problem.

The laws of structure transformations and wave motions revealed by computer visualization of these models were reformulated into unexpectedly simple universal rules. The elementary ”bricks and blocks” were discovered of which it is possible in principle to construct objects with any given properties .

Let us shortly formulate these rules  because they will serve as suggesting considerations in constructing remarkable solutions with periodically spaced knots. Each real wave consists of bumps and knots. We now discuss two algorithms of transformation of one wave bump . They are easily demonstrated by the example of eigenvalue problem on a finite interval with zero boundary conditions (namely, for the ground state of the infinite rectangular well). First rule: To shift one energy level up (down) over the energy scale we must introduce a potential barrier (well) near the extremum of the bump where the wave is most sensitive to the potential ($`V`$), see Fig.1. Pay attention to the important immobility of the ground state knots that promoted us in revealing resonance (’smart’) solutions. In addition, we need compensating wells (barriers) in the vicinity of knots if we want to keep all other energy levels at their previous places. So the different states see the same potential as different effective potentials. The second rule: for shifting the spatial localization of a wave bump over the finite interval to the right (left) we need potential perturbation as a barrier-well (well-barrier) block. These rules are applicable to wave bumps of each (bound or scattering) state and for any potential , see Fig.1., Fig.2.

As a result, we can transform any wave with arbitrary number of bumps. So we acquire the vision of the intrinsic logic of structure and behavior peculiarities of a great amount of thinkable systems, including real ones.

## 4 Waves in periodical potentials

Periodical perturbation ’stretches one spectral point’ of initial free motion into continuous energy interval of forbidden zone with zero spectral density; in allowed zones the density is compressed .

Switching on the perturbation violates generally the periodicity (equidistancy) of knots of the real solutions. There are continuum such solutions at any energy value and all solutions, unlike those for free motion, are quite different (they do not turn into one another by shifting $`x`$-variable).

Consider a free one-dimensional motion of waves over the x-axis. The Schrödinger equation has two linearly independent partial solutions. It suffice to fix the position of any knot to determine the solution up to an inessential norming factor. For zero potential there is a continuous spectrum $`E>0`$. A typical solution is $`\mathrm{sin}(kx+\alpha )`$ with the phase $`\alpha `$.

We shall choose, e.g., the periodic potential with the Kronig-Penney form, see Fig.3.

If the wave bumps (their extrema) are positioned above the middles of potential wells (see Fig.4C) and the knots inside the potential barriers, the wave ’must have’ higher average kinetic energy and, hence, frequency of oscillations. Thus, we attained the same frequency as was in free motion but at a lower energy value $`E_<`$. This corresponds to pushing downward to the energy $`E_<`$ the ground state of the auxiliary problem of the infinite rectangular potential of width equal to the period (see Fig.1) with the potential wall positions coinciding with the knots. Remind that such a shift of levels is performed without moving the knots at the ends of the interval . On the contrary, shifting the bump extrema of $`\mathrm{sin}(kx+\alpha )`$ to the middles of the barriers (see Fig.4A) would decrease in the average kinetic energy if we keep the energy $`E=k^2`$ unchanged. Consequently, one has to lift energy up to $`E_>`$ for the inter-knot distance to remain unaltered. The symmetry of potential between the knots according to the middle point between the knots in both the cases conserves the symmetry of the corresponding solutions on the periods. This allows their smooth periodic continuation. The solutions considered correspond to the upper and lower boundaries of the forbidden zone which is created by the potential perturbation.

This is confirmed by the consideration of other solutions with the energies between $`E_>,E_<`$. Take the solution with the knots at the boundaries of the potential wells and barriers (see Fig.4.B,D). In this case, under each bump is the block ”well-barrier” or ”barrier-well” which slightly change the energy of the state which follows from the requirement of keeping inter-knot distance unaltered. Besides this there is strong violation of the symmetry of the bump, in particular, its derivatives at the knots (see discussion below). This leads to exponential growth of the solution oscillation amplitude as $`x\pm \mathrm{}`$. It follows from smooth connection of solutions on the neighbor periods. All other dispositions of the knots with respect to wells and barriers of the potential will lead to combinations of shifts over the energy scale and violations of symmetry of the initial bumps. So the whole spectral lacuna can be continuously filled by these solutions with gradual change in the ’degree of forbiddeness’ of the zone from zero at one boundary to the maximum value somewhere near its middle and again to zero at the other boundary. This happens because of the increase-decrease of symmetry violation of the perturbing potential between the knots (pay special attention to the gradual shift of state over E and to the movement of bumps localization over x). Here the mathematically exact proof can be obtained without formulae (explanations ’on fingers’ based, however, on the previous rules of quantum intuition). Arbitrary solution in forbidden zone has different asymptotically periodical displacement of knots because only increasing component of the corresponding linear combination of smart solutions survives at asymptotic distances (solution tends to one or another smart solution as $`x\pm \mathrm{}`$).

Above $`E_>`$ inside the allowed zone the frequency of knots begins to increase with $`E`$ until the number of knots on one period increases by one. The solutions there have alternating increases and decreases of oscillation amplitudes. These beatings in allowed zones can be explained in the following way. There are no analogies of ’smart’ solutions with equidistant knots except the zone boundaries where there is one periodic solution among the continuous set with disordered knots. With increase of energy the (average) density of ’disordered’ knots also increases, as in free motion. There is difference in size of the potential period and the distances between solution knots. On the one side, it leads to oscillations of these knot positions with respect to potential periods along the $`x`$ axis. On the other side, there is alternation of regimes of increase-decrease of oscillation amplitudes. The asymmetry of potential perturbations between the neighbor knots and inequality of solution derivatives there result in increasing and then decreasing (and so on) of swinging of the solutions, i.e., lead to beatings. In other words, at some moment, there may be more effective attraction, say, to the left and repulsion from the right between the knots of the solution. This will make the solution oscillation amplitude increase to the left. Later, due to shifting oscillations of the solution relative the potential periods, the situation changes to the opposite one: there will be excess of repulsion from the left and attraction from the right. The wave length of these modulated oscillations (beatings) will decrease from infinite value on the lower boundary of the allowed zone to a finite value of about the potential period size at the upper boundary.

At the energy zone boundaries, in addition to periodic solution, there is a solution linearly increasing in both directions. This reminds the situation with the solutions in vicinity of eigenstate with an energy $`E_\nu `$ in a finite depth potential well. Above and below $`E_\nu `$ there are two independent solutions exponentially increasing (decreasing) to the right (left) sides and vice versa. Meanwhile at $`E_\nu `$ there are two solutions increasing and decreasing (bound state proper) in both directions.

Let us discuss once again the mechanism of zone formation by using somewhat different scheme. Let us at first consider an auxiliary problem of finding solutions and spectrum of the Hamiltonian with zero boundary conditions at the edges of the finite interval (period) $`[\epsilon ,a+\epsilon ]`$, for any $`0<\epsilon <a`$ and the potential $`V^\epsilon (x)=V_{per}(x)`$, e.g., Kronig-Penney one, for $`x`$ belonging to this interval. The corresponding spectrum is discrete set $`\{E_n^\epsilon \}_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}`$. If we continue periodically (with the period $`a`$) this interval we will, of course, restore the periodical potential and, moreover, find particular solutions for $`V_{per}(x)`$ at the energies $`E_n^\epsilon `$. In fact, the sought solutions may be obtained from the auxiliary problem eigenfunctions $`\mathrm{\Psi }^\epsilon (x,E_n^\epsilon )`$. The wave continuity is guaranteed by vanishing of the eigenfunctions at the matching points $`na+\epsilon `$ (points of contact of adjacent intervals). The smoothness of wave matching can be attained by multiplying neighbor eigenfunction by a factor being equal (modulo) to the ratio of the derivatives at the right and the left boundaries. If this factor is equal modulo to $`1`$ the energy $`E_n^\epsilon `$ will be at one of the zone boundaries. This case corresponds to such position of the interval $`[\epsilon ,a+\epsilon ]`$ that $`V^\epsilon (x)`$ is a symmetric (with respect to the interval center) potential with a rectangular barrier (or well) in the middle, see Fig 4 A,C. When once the potential symmetry is violated (by altering $`\epsilon `$), $`\mathrm{\Psi }^\epsilon (x,E_n^\epsilon )`$ loses its previous symmetry, which results in either increasing or decreasing solution on the whole axis. Hence, the energy $`E_n^\epsilon `$ turns out to be inside the forbidden zone. Simultaneously, the $`E_n^\epsilon `$ is shifted downward (upward) since the potential $`V^\epsilon (x)`$ becomes effectively less repulsive (attractive) as a result of shifting barrier (well) position on the interval. Thus, by varying the parameter $`\epsilon `$ (as if scanning the potential by the interval $`[\epsilon ,a+\epsilon ]`$), the energy $`E_n^\epsilon `$ runs the entire nth spectral gap.

## 5 Shifts of zone boundaries

It appears that our ability to shift isolated bound state energy levels (over the $`E`$-scale) in the infinite potential well on a finite interval allows us to move some chosen upper (lower) boundaries of the spectral zones (bands) of periodic structures keeping infinite number of other upper (lower) boundaries unperturbed.

For definiteness, we will consider shifting up and down the upper boundary of only the second allowed zone for the initial Dirac comb of periodic $`\delta `$-barriers. For this purpose, we will use the SUSY QM formulas for only chosen energy level shift on the finite interval $`[0,\pi ]`$ with potential $`V_0(x)`$ . Let $`\psi _0(x,E_n)`$ be corresponding eigenfunction at the energy $`E_n`$. We assume $`\overline{\psi }_0(x,E_n+t)`$ to be a non-physical auxiliary solution in the initial potential at shifted energy $`E_n+t`$ with the symmetry being opposite to that of the $`\psi _0(x,E_n)`$. With these solutions, we can construct the Wronskian

$`\theta (x)=\psi _0^{}(x,E_n)\overline{\psi }_0(x,E_n+t)`$
$`\psi _0(x,E_n)\overline{\psi }_0^{}(x,E_n+t).`$ (1)
Shifting energy level $`E_nE_n+t`$ is performed by special potential transformations. The corresponding final expressions for the transformed potential and solutions read

$`V(x)=`$
$`V_0(x)2t{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}\{\psi _0(x,E_n)\overline{\psi }_0(x,E_n+t)\theta (x)^1\};`$ (2)
$`\psi (x,E)=\psi _0(x,E)`$
$`t\overline{\psi }_0(x,E_n+t)\theta (x)^1{\displaystyle _0^x}\psi _0(y,E_n)\psi _0(y,E)𝑑y;`$ (3)
$`\psi (x,E_n+t)=\psi _0(x,E_n)\theta (x)^1.`$ (4)
The potential (2) can be periodically continued: $`V^{per}(x+l\pi )=V(x),l=0;\pm 1;\pm 2;\mathrm{}`$ for $`x`$ belonging to $`[0,\pi ]`$. Such a scheme allows a spectral zone control. Let us consider this potential with an incorporated Dirac comb (equally spaced $`\delta `$-potential barriers or wells $`_{m=\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}v\delta (xm\pi )`$), i.e., the following periodic potential: $`_{m=\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}v\delta (xm\pi )+V^{per}(x)`$. The corresponding results are shown in Fig.5.

In the special case of mergence of allowed zones there is local compensation of attraction and repulsion, at the energy value $`E_m`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=1`$ : as in the case of a free motion, any choice of boundary condition (position of some knot) gives solutions on periods with symmetric derivatives at the ends of the interval (their invariance under arbitrary translations), which provides wave behavior without exponential growth. Any small change of energy leads to violation of this situation. A like mergence of the first and the second allowed zones see Fig.6. (something above $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=2`$ and below $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=3`$).

Exactly solvable models allow one to demonstrate the control of ‘forbiddenness’ at any chosen energy point by changing the derivative of finite interval solution at the left boundary, the spectral weight vector $`c`$ . Below are given the formulas for the potential and wave functions transformations corresponding to variations of the spectral weight factor $`c_n`$ of a chosen bound state at the energy $`E_n`$. Let $`\underset{m}{\overset{}{\psi }}(x)`$ be the eigenfunction of the initial Hamiltonian corresponding to $`m`$th energy eigenvalue, $`\underset{m}{\overset{}{c}}`$’s are the initial spectral weight factors. Then changing $`\underset{m}{\overset{}{c}}c_m`$ gives

$`\psi _n(x)=\underset{n}{\overset{}{\psi }}(x)+{\displaystyle \frac{(1c_m^2/\underset{m}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{c}}})\underset{m}{\overset{}{\psi }}(x)}{1(1c_m^2/\underset{m}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{c}}})\underset{0}{\overset{x}{}}\underset{m}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{\psi }}}(y)dy}}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{x}{}}}\underset{m}{\overset{}{\psi }}(y)\underset{n}{\overset{}{\psi }}(y)dy,`$ (5)
$`V(x)=\stackrel{}{V}(x)`$
$`+2{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1c_m^2/\underset{m}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{c}}})\underset{m}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{\psi }}}(x)}{1(1c_m^2/\underset{m}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{c}}})\underset{0}{\overset{x}{}}\underset{m}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{\psi }}}(y)dy}}.`$ (6)
Again, we periodically continue these results. Changing $`c`$ leads to previous symmetry violation for the initial wave function $`\underset{n}{\overset{}{\psi }}(x)=\sqrt{(}2/\pi )\mathrm{sin}(nx)`$ (we put $`\stackrel{}{V}(x)=0`$ and the interval to be $`[0,\pi ]`$). As a result, the whole axis wave function, ‘sewed’ from $`\psi _n(x)`$, will asymptotically diverge. The factor $`c`$ just represents the index of divergence rate, ‘forbiddenness’. See results on the corresponding control in Fig.7,  (in particular, we can thus tear the continuous spectrum at energy point $`E_n`$).

Instructive are some simple examples of shifting only the upper or only lower boundaries of zones. They can be achieved by introducing $`\delta `$-peaks or $`\delta `$-wells at the middle of the periodical potential barriers or wells. Take into account that the $`\delta `$-potentials do not influence the solution if they are coincident with the knots, but push the energy of state maximally up or down, being disposed at the maximum modulo of the wave bumps.

Analogous reasoning is applicable to other forbidden zones. We only need to use the initial free sine-like solutions at higher energies corresponding to knot frequency twice (and more times) in comparison with the periodic oscillations of the potential.

We can generalize the theory for arbitrary periodic potential for which it is impossible to choose the period with symmetrical potential shape (with respect to the center of period). In spite of asymmetry in this case there are such positions of solution knots relative to potential at specific energies $`E_{<,>}`$ that the derivatives at knots become equal modulo. So we get the boundaries of zones. See Fig.8. as an example potential with peak of barriers and bottoms of wells at the same points. In this case $`\mathrm{\Psi };\mathrm{\Psi }_1;\mathrm{\Psi }_2;\mathrm{\Psi }_3`$ correspond to spatial shifts to the right, left and E-shifts up and down.

It is worth to mention the possibility to create localized bound states in periodic structures in analogy with transformation of free motion (soliton-like potentials which are transparent for Bloch waves .

Everything we have learned about the periodic structures (smart solutions in forbidden zones, beatings in allowed zones) is applicable to the finite interval potentials created from truncated periodic potentials (i.e., becoming periodic when continuing over the entire $`x`$-axis), in particular, to resonance tunneling through finite number of periodic potential barriers where multiplets of resonances correspond to allowed zones and gaps between them to forbidden zones.

It is worth to mention that we have found examples for complex periodic potentials ) which do not create lacunas.

## 6 Some multichannel models.

We hope to generalize our theory to systems of coupled Shrödinger equations. As the first steps in this direction can be considered the following models illustrating some important features of complex systems.

1. Let $`V_{11}(x)=V_{22}(x)`$ (with equal periods) and the thresholds of both the channels are equal $`\epsilon _1=\epsilon _2=0`$. For uncoupled (independent) channels the one-channel theory is obviously generalized. There are separate spectral bands in both the channel spectral branches. Now let us switch on some interchannel coupling $`V_{12}(x)=V_{21}(x)`$. So, the interaction matrix is symmetrical with respect to channels. If we choose boundary conditions for both the channels equal, the partial channel functions will be equal $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1(x)=\mathrm{\Psi }_2(x)`$. This allows one to make the substitution $`V_{12}(x)\mathrm{\Psi }_2(x)V_{12}(x)\mathrm{\Psi }_1(x)`$ in the equation for the first channel and analogous transformation in the second channel. This results in their effective separation (coupling disappearance : ’diagonalization’ of the interaction matrix) with new effective interaction matrix elements $`V_{11eff}=V_{11}(x)+V_{12}(x)`$; $`V_{22eff}=V_{22}(x)+V_{21}(x)`$. So, spectral bands of these separate channels will coincide with one another and for the whole system. If we choose different signs for partial waves (determining corresponding boundary conditions) then in the new effective diagonal interaction matrix elements there will be ”-” instead of ”+” $`V_{11eff}=V_{11}(x)V_{12}(x)`$; $`V_{22eff}=V_{22}(x)V_{12}(x)`$.

All this leads, e.g., to two branches of potential oscillations accompanied by natural effect for the band structure (widening or narrowing of forbidden zones).

2. Let the thresholds be unequal $`\epsilon _1<\epsilon _2`$, $`V_{11}(x)=V_{22}(x)=0`$ and the coupling of channels be some constant $`V_{12}(x)=V_{21}(x)=const`$. Let us choose the boundary conditions as follows: $`\mathrm{\Psi }_i(0)=\mathrm{\Psi }_i(\pi )=0;i=1,2`$. It means the requirement of equidistancy of knots in different channels with quite different partial channel energies $`E_i=E\epsilon _i`$. This ’paradoxical’ situation can exist despite the difference of the thresholds if the effective kinetic energies in both the channels, e.g., ground state are equal. This can be achieved by choosing different spectral weights of partial components which are proportional to one another: $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1(x)=c_1/c_2\mathrm{\Psi }_2(x)`$. Really, the partial channel equations can be rewritten as uncoupled ones using the substitution $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1(x)`$ by $`c_1/c_2\mathrm{\Psi }_2(x)`$ and vice versa:

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_1^{\prime \prime }(x)=(E\epsilon _1V_{12}c_2/c_1)\mathrm{\Psi }_1\mathrm{\Psi }_2^{\prime \prime }(x)=(E\epsilon _2V_{21}c_1/c_2)\mathrm{\Psi }_2.`$ (7)
The expressions in brackets in the right hand sides are effective kinetic energies and they become equal if

$$c_2/c_1=\mathrm{\Delta }\epsilon _{12}/2V_{12}\pm \sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }\epsilon _{12}^2/(4V_{12}^2)+1}.$$

3. Again let $`\epsilon _1<\epsilon _2`$, $`V_{11}(x)=V_{22}(x)=0`$, but with the modified boundary conditions $`\mathrm{\Psi }_i(\pi /i=\mathrm{\Psi }_i(\pi /i)=0;i=1,2`$ and interchannel coupling $`V_{12}(x)=V_{12}\delta (x)`$. In this model the effective kinetic energy in the second channel with smaller partial energy $`E\epsilon _2`$ must be even greater than in the first channel in order to provide the two times smaller distance between the knots ($`\pi `$ in comparison with $`2\pi `$ for the first channel).

Figure captions

Fig 1. The potential perturbation of the bottom of the infinite rectangular well which results in lowering (shown by arrow $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_1`$) only one level $`\underset{1}{\overset{}{E}}=1E_1=4`$ of the ground state. The bold black arrow directed downward points to the well (dashed-dotted line $`\mathrm{\Delta }V(x)`$) acting on the most sensitive, central, region of the wave function to shift the level downward. The same arrows directed upward near the walls of the initial well, where the function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ has knots and where it is the least sensitive to potential changes, point to the barriers needed to keep all other energy levels $`E_{i1}`$ from shifting. The transformations of the wave functions $`\underset{1,2}{\overset{}{\mathrm{\Psi }}}\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,2}`$ are shown by thin dashed lines. The instructive value of this picture consists in that it demonstrates qualitative features of universal, elementary  transformation for a single bump of a wave function. It allows one to understand the rule of the wave transformations of arbitrary states with many bumps and in arbitrary potentials, see also other pictures. b) Evolution of the $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ when $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=1`$, $`3`$. Note that the knots at the edges of the interval (equal to period, see text) do not move c) Evolution of the potential when $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=1`$, $`2`$, $`3`$. Do not confuse the cases b, c) with motions in the system: we mean changes of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$, $`V`$ under successive transitions from one system to another (”in the space of different models”).

Fig.2. The (a,b) transformation of the infinite rectangular potential well $`\stackrel{}{V}V`$ and eigenfunctions $`\underset{1}{\overset{}{\mathrm{\Psi }}}(x)`$ (a,d), $`\underset{2}{\overset{}{\mathrm{\Psi }}}(x)`$ (a,c) by increasing spectral weight factor (SWF) $`\underset{1}{\overset{}{c}}c_1`$, the derivative $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1^{}(x=0)`$ at the left wall. The scales of the functions $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1,\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ (a) are shifted up to the corresponding energy levels $`E_1,E_2`$. In (b,c,d) the evolution of the potential and functions with increasing $`c_1`$ 2, 5, 10, 20 times is demonstrated. Meanwhile all ! energy levels $`E_n`$ and all SWF, except one $`c_{n1}`$, remain unchanged, as is seen for $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ (a,c). The parameter SWF $`c_1`$ controls the localization of the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1(x)`$ (a,d,e) in space: by increasing $`c_1`$ the ground state is pressed to the left potential wall, as is shown by arrows in (a,d). This is performed by the potential barrier in (a,b) on the right which shifts the function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1(x)`$ to the left, and the potential well on the left which simultaneously compensates the influence of the barrier on the energy levels and keeps them all at the same places. All wave functions, except the ground state, undergo some recoil in the opposite direction which is demonstrated by $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2(x)`$ (a,c). So there is separation of the bound state from others.

Fig.3. The wave functions of a free motion $`\mathrm{sin}(kx+\alpha )`$ at energy $`E=k^2`$ corresponding to frequency of periodic potential $`V(x)`$ oscillations. These solutions of the Shrödinger equation are chosen with different values $`\alpha `$ so that the knots coincide with: the middle of the potential barriers, or wells, or left sides of the barriers (wells). All free waves have the equidistant distribution of knots, and switching on the perturbing periodic potential must violate this. However, we can find such values of $`E_>;E_<;`$ etc. (shifted from $`E_1`$, see vertical arrows) at which we can choose perturbed solutions with the same equidistant distributions of knots. Horizontal arrows correspond to the shifts of space localization of the wave bumps (see Fig.4.C,D) without shifting the knots.

Fig.4. The same as in Fig.3, but the cases with a different shift of knots are considered separately: A,B) the perturbed solution is shifted up without violation of the distance between knots; B) shift to the right (mainly) of localization of any wave bump; C) shifting down the solution with keeping equidistant distribution of its knots. D) shift to the left. Transformations of wave bumps are shown separately at the left sides of the figures (see also Fig.5).

Fig.5. Perturbations of the initial free wave functions with the different x-shifts ($`\alpha `$) by the periodic potential with the period equal to the distance between the wave knots. The perturbed solutions are considered at energy values (A: $`E_>;B:E_<;`$, etc.) where their knots do not change their positions. C) Exponential increase of swinging amplitude of solutions in forbidden zone is demonstrated by introducing big negative factors $`f,f^2,f^3\mathrm{}`$ which provide the smooth junction of solutions on neighbor periods (the corresponding potential perturbation is shown in Fig.5.D.).

Fig.6. Shifting the upper boundary of the second allowed spectral zone (shown with arrows). Pay attention to the merging of this zone with the upper one at $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=1`$. Find two another examples of merging of first and second zones.

Fig.7. (Upper part) Changes in zone structure corresponding to relative variations of a derivative at one end of a period (spectral weight factor) $`c/\stackrel{}{c}`$ at energy point $`E=2`$. The initial periodic potential $`\stackrel{}{V}\delta (xn\pi )`$ has Dirac comb peaks with the strength $`\stackrel{}{V}=4`$ and period $`\pi `$. The wave function at $`E=2`$ is on each period an eigenfunction of the eigenvalue problem with the boundary conditions on the edges of a period specified so that the auxiliary discrete energy level just coincides with the chosen point $`E=2`$. (Lower part) Changes of the imaginary part of quasi-momentum $`ImK(E)`$ which characterize the degree of forbiddeness, the index of exponential swinging of solutions.

Fig.9. Schematic illustration of the set of ’smart’ solutions with periodic knots (curved line) which are a zero measure manifold among all other solutions in the chosen forbidden zone (rectangular shadowed area corresponding to $`\pm \mathrm{\Delta }x`$ on the finite interval having a length of the period).

The continuum of free periodic solutions of the type shown in Fig.3 at ’resonance’ energy $`E_r`$ (shown here as a line with points) are transformed by periodic perturbation $`V`$ into exponentially increasing (decreasing) solutions of a forbidden zone which splits the initial continuous spectrum.