text:
# An Interaction of An Oscillator with An One-Dimensional Scalar Field. Simple Exactly Solvable Models based on Finite Rank Perturbations Methods. II: Resolvents formulae

## Introduction.

### A Harmonic Oscillator Coupled to an One-Dimensional Scalar Field.

In a previous paper I had discussed several models of an one-dimensional harmonic oscillator coupled to an one-dimensional scalar field. Primarily I was interested in the models which one can describe by the equation array

$`\ddot{q}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2(qQ)+f_0(t)`$
$`\ddot{u}`$ $`=`$ $`Bu4\gamma _c\left(\delta _{\alpha ,t,x_0}\right)\left(Qq\right)+f_1(t)`$
$`Q`$ $`=`$ $`Q(t)=<l|u(t)>`$
as well as the models which one can describe by the equation array

$`\ddot{q}_0`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2q_0+\gamma _1Q_\varphi +f_0(t)`$
$`\ddot{\varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`B\varphi +4\gamma _{2,c}\left(\delta _{\alpha ,t,x_0}\right)q_0+f_1(t)`$
$`Q_\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`Q_\varphi (t)=<l|\varphi (t)>`$
Hereafter I use a P.A.M. Dirac’s “bra-ket” syntax and suppose that $`q`$ and $`Q`$, $`q_0`$ and $`Q_\varphi `$ are usual (one-dimensional) functions of $`t`$ :

$$q=q(t),Q=Q(t),q_0=q_0(t),Q_\varphi =Q_\varphi (t),$$

$`B`$ is an abstract linear operator, $`l`$ is a linear functional, $`\{u(t)\}_t`$, $`\{\varphi (t)\}_t`$ and $`\{\delta _{\alpha ,t,x_0}\}_t`$ are families of abstract elements; of course the type of $`\delta _{\alpha ,t,x_0}`$ must be the same as one of $`u(t)`$ or resp. $`\{\varphi (t)\}_t`$.

Normally I supposed that $`\delta _{\alpha ,t,x_0}`$ did not depend on $`t`$, i.e. was constant in $`t`$. In that case I wrote $`\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}`$ instead of $`\delta _{\alpha ,t,x_0}`$.

In this second paper I will suppose that $`\delta _{\alpha ,t,x_0}`$ is constant in $`t`$ as well, and rewrite the above equations as follows:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\ddot{q}& \\ \ddot{u}& \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& B4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<l|_2\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}q\\ u\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}f_0(t)& \\ f_1(t)& \end{array}\right)$$

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\ddot{q}_0& \\ \ddot{\varphi }& \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \gamma _1<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _{2,c}\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& B\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}q_0\\ \varphi \end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}f_0(t)& \\ f_1(t)& \end{array}\right)$$

where the subscribts $`1`$ and $`2`$ in $`<\mathrm{}|_1`$ and $`<\mathrm{}|_2`$ mean that arguments of $`<\mathrm{}|_1`$ are elements of the first component of the vector $`\left(\begin{array}{c}q\\ u\end{array}\right)`$ resp. $`\left(\begin{array}{c}q_0\\ \varphi \end{array}\right)`$ and arguments of $`<\mathrm{}|_2`$ are elements of the second component of the suitable vector. 111 often we omite these subscripts, using them primarily for emphasis.  Of course,

$$<1|q>=<1|_1q>=q,<1|q_0>=<1|_1q_0>=q_0$$

The subject will primarily be resolvents formulae i.e. the formulae that resolve the equation array:

$$z\left(\begin{array}{cc}q& \\ u& \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& B4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<l|_2\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}q\\ u\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}w_1& \\ w_2& \end{array}\right)$$

resp.

$$z\left(\begin{array}{cc}q_0& \\ \varphi & \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \gamma _1<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _{2,c}\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& B\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}q_0\\ \varphi \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}w_1& \\ w_2& \end{array}\right)$$

Of course, here all quantities, $`q,u,w_1,w_2,\delta _{\alpha ,x_0},l`$, etc. are supposed to be constant in $`t`$.

In the previous paper I had discussed d’Alembert-like solutions to the systems and resp. phenomena of Radiation Reaction, Braking Radiation and Resonance.

In this paper I will discuss Donoghue-Friedrichs-like solutions to the systems 222 i.e., I will discuss resolvents formulae of the system  and resp. the phenomenon of Resonance and notion of the Second Sheet.

## 1  Finite Rank Perturbations. Abstract Formulae.

### 1.1  Simple Cases. Rank-One Perturbations and Rank-Two Perturbations

#### 1.1.1  Rank-One Perturbations.

The simplest case of the problem looks like this: Suppose, we can find $`v_0`$ to an equation

$$Av_0=w_0$$

for any given $`w_0`$, where $`A`$ is an invertible linear operator, and suppose, we need to find any $`v`$ to

$$Avf_a<l_a|v>=w$$

where $`<l_a|`$ is a given linear functional, and the elements $`f_a,w`$ are given, as well.

One is used to saying concisely: we need

$$(Af_a<l_a|)^1w$$

Then we do as follows:

First, write

$$Av=w+f_a<l_a|v>$$

and notice,

in order to obtain $`v`$ we need to obtain ONLY $`<l_a|v>`$

Actually,

$$v=A^1(w+f_a<l_a|v>)$$

$$v=A^1w+<l_a|v>A^1f_a$$

So,

$`v=A^1w+c_aA^1f_a,\text{ where }c_a:=<l_a|v>.`$
Apply now this form to itself and to the recent relationship, consequently:

$$v=A^1w+<l_a|v>A^1f_a$$

then

$$<l_a|v>=<l_a|\left(A^1w+<l_a|v>A^1f_a\right)>$$

i.e.,

$$c_a=<l_a|A^1w+c_aA^1f_a>$$

On the other hand, to find a $`c_a`$, it is sufficient to fulfil

$$A^1w+c_aA^1f_a=A^1w+<l_a|A^1w+c_aA^1f_a>A^1f_a$$

i.e.,

$$c_aA^1f_a=<l_a|A^1w+c_aA^1f_a>A^1f_a$$

This relation is fulfilled, if

$$c_a=<l_a|A^1w+c_aA^1f_a>$$

It is the same equation to $`c_a`$ as above. Therefore, we need to solve this only scalar equation and set $`v=A^1w+c_aA^1f_a`$ . To do it, recall, $`f`$ is linear. Hence

$$c_a=<l_a|A^1w>+c_a<l_a|A^1f_a>$$

Thus we have seen,

$$\overline{)(1<l_a|A^1f_a>)c_a=<l_a|A^1w>}$$

and hence

$$\overline{)c_a=\frac{<l_a|A^1w>}{1<l_a|A^1f_a>},\text{ when }1<l_a|A^1f_a>0.}$$

Finally

$`(Af_a<l_a|)^1w=A^1w+A^1f_a{\displaystyle \frac{<l_a|A^1w>}{1<l_a|A^1f_a>}},\text{ when }1<l_a|A^1f_a>0.`$
#### 1.1.2  Rank-Two Perturbations.

A problem connected with Rank-Two Perturbations looks quite similarly: We know $`A^1`$ and need

$$(Af_a<l_a|f_b<l_b|)^1$$

More precisely, we need to solve the associated equation.

We can do it in two ways: we can iterate the final formulae of the previous subsubsection, and we can iterate the argumentations of one. In the former way, we first calculate

$$(Af_a<l_a|)^1$$

and then

$$(Bf_b<l_b|)^1\text{ where }B:=Af_a<l_a|.$$

Describe the latter way.

The equation to be solved is this:

$$Avf_a<l_a|v>f_b<l_b|v>=w$$

We rewrite it firstly as

$$Av=w+f_a<l_a|v>+f_b<l_b|v>$$

and this relation, we rewrite it as

$$v=A^1(w+f_a<l_a|v>+f_b<l_b|v>)=A^1w+A^1f_a<l_a|v>+A^1f_b<l_b|v>$$

where we have used the fact that $`A^1`$ is linear. Thus,

$`\begin{array}{c}v=A^1(w+c_af_a+c_bf_b)=A^1w+c_aA^1f_a+c_bA^1f_b,\\ \text{ where }c_a:=<l_a|v>,c_b:=<l_b|v>\end{array}`$
Apply now this form to itself and to the previous relationship. Then obtain,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}c_aA^1f_a+c_bA^1f_b& & \\ & =& A^1f_a<l_a|A^1w+c_aA^1f_a+c_bA^1f_b>\\ & & +A^1f_b<l_b|A^1w+c_aA^1f_a+c_bA^1f_b>\end{array}$$

To fulfil these relations, it is sufficient to satisfy the relations 333 if $`A^1f_a,A^1f_b`$ are linearly independent, then it is also necessary, to do ones

$$\begin{array}{ccc}c_a& =& <l_a|A^1w+c_aA^1f_a+c_bA^1f_b>\\ c_b& =& <l_b|A^1w+c_aA^1f_a+c_bA^1f_b>\end{array}$$

i.e., 444 recall, $`<l_a|`$ and $`<l_b|`$ are linear

$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}1<l_a|A^1f_a>& <l_a|A^1f_b>\\ <l_b|A^1f_a>& 1<l_b|A^1f_b>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}c_a\\ c_b\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}<l_a|A^1w>\\ <l_b|A^1w>\end{array}\right)`$
Therefore, if $`detrminant0`$,

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}c_a\\ c_b\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1<l_a|A^1f_a>& <l_a|A^1f_b>\\ <l_b|A^1f_a>& 1<l_b|A^1f_b>\end{array}\right)^1\left(\begin{array}{c}<l_a|A^1w>\\ <l_b|A^1w>\end{array}\right)$$

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}c_a\\ c_b\end{array}\right)=\frac{1}{determinant}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1<l_b|A^1f_b>& <l_a|A^1f_b>\\ <l_b|A^1f_a>& 1<l_a|A^1f_a>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}<l_a|A^1w>\\ <l_b|A^1w>\end{array}\right)$$

Finally,

$$(Af_a<l_a|f_b<l_b|)^1w=A^1w+c_aA^1f_a+c_bA^1f_b$$

$$v=A^1w+(\begin{array}{ccc}A^1f_aA^1f_b& & \end{array})\left(\begin{array}{cc}1<l_a|A^1f_a>& <l_a|A^1f_b>\\ <l_b|A^1f_a>& 1<l_b|A^1f_b>\end{array}\right)^1\left(\begin{array}{c}<l_a|A^1w>\\ <l_b|A^1w>\end{array}\right)$$

### 1.2  Finite Rank Perturbations of Matrix-operator.

The variant of the previous problems, we will deal, looks like this: Suppose, we can solve an equation array

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}& 0\\ 0& A_{22}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}v_{01}\\ v_{02}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}w_{01}\\ w_{02}\end{array}\right)$$

and suppose, we need to solve an equation array

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}f_{11}<l_1|_1& f_{12}<l_2|_2\\ f_{21}<l_1|_1& A_{22}f_{22}<l_2|_2\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}v_1\\ v_2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}w_1\\ w_2\end{array}\right)$$

i.e.

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}v_1f_{11}<l_1|v_1>f_{12}<l_2|v_2>& \\ f_{21}<l_1|v_1>+A_{22}v_2f_{22}<l_2|v_2>& \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}w_1\\ w_2\end{array}\right),$$

where, of course, $`A_{11},A_{22}`$ are two given invertible linear operators, and $`<l_1|,<l_2|`$ are two given linear functionals; the elements $`f_{11},f_{12},f_{21},f_{22},w_1,w_2`$ are given, as well.

One can show, it is exactly a rank-two case, an we can use the final formalae of the previous subsection, but we prefer direct reasoning and we imitate the arguing of the previous subsection and do as follows:

Firstly, write

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}A_{11}v_1\\ A_{22}v_2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}w_1+f_{11}<l_1|v_1>+f_{12}<l_2|v_2>& \\ w_2+f_{21}<l_1|v_1>+f_{22}<l_2|v_2>& \end{array}\right)$$

and define

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}c_1\\ c_2\end{array}\right):=\left(\begin{array}{c}<l_1|v_1>\\ <l_2|v_2>\end{array}\right)$$

Then write

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}A_{11}v_1\\ A_{22}v_2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}w_1+f_{11}c_1+f_{12}c_2& \\ w_2+f_{21}c_1+f_{22}c_2& \end{array}\right)$$

Then

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}v_1\\ v_2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}^1w_1+A_{11}^1f_{11}c_1+A_{11}^1f_{12}c_2& \\ A_{22}^1w_2+A_{22}^1f_{21}c_1+A_{22}^1f_{22}c_2& \end{array}\right)$$

Then

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}c_1\\ c_2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}<l_1|v_1>\\ <l_2|v_2>\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}<l_1|A_{11}^1w_1+A_{11}^1f_{11}c_1+A_{11}^1f_{12}c_2>& \\ <l_2|A_{22}^1w_2+A_{22}^1f_{21}c_1+A_{22}^1f_{22}c_2>& \end{array}\right)$$

Recall, $`l_1,l_2`$ are linear. Therefore

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}c_1\\ c_2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}<l_1|A_{11}^1w_1>+<l_1|A_{11}^1f_{11}>c_1+<l_1|A_{11}^1f_{12}>c_2& \\ <l_2|A_{22}^1w_2>+<l_2|A_{22}^1f_{21}>c_1+<l_2|A_{22}^1f_{22}>c_2& \end{array}\right)$$

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1<l_1|A_{11}^1f_{11}>c_1<l_1|A_{11}^1f_{12}>c_2& \\ <l_2|A_{22}^1f_{21}>c_1+c_2<l_2|A_{22}^1f_{22}>c_2& \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}<l_1|A_{11}^1w_1>& \\ <l_2|A_{22}^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)$$

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}1<l_1|A_{11}^1f_{11}>& <l_1|A_{11}^1f_{12}>\\ <l_2|A_{22}^1f_{21}>& 1<l_2|A_{22}^1f_{22}>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}<l_1|A_{11}^1w_1>& \\ <l_2|A_{22}^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)$$

Thus we conclude

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}v_1\\ v_2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}A_{11}^1w_1\\ A_{22}^1w_2\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}^1f_{11}& A_{11}^1f_{12}\\ A_{22}^1f_{21}& A_{22}^1f_{22}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}c_1\\ c_2\end{array}\right)$$

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)=\frac{1}{det}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1<l_2|A_{22}^1f_{22}>& <l_1|A_{11}^1f_{12}>\\ <l_2|A_{22}^1f_{21}>& 1<l_1|A_{11}^1f_{11}>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}<l_1|A_{11}^1w_1>& \\ <l_2|A_{22}^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)$$

where

$$det:=(1<l_1|A_{11}^1f_{11}>)(1<l_2|A_{22}^1f_{22}>)<l_1|A_{11}^1f_{12}><l_2|A_{22}^1f_{21}>$$

Of course, we need here $`det0`$. Note, we have obtained, that the values of $`c_1,c_2`$ must be such, as they are written. But do they exist at all? Are the found $`c_1,c_2`$ a solution of the problem? The answer is: yes. The way to verify it is plain: imitate the corresponding part of the rank-one case,– we omit details.

Finally we remark. If $`A_{11}`$ or $`A_{22}`$ are not invertible, but if $`A_{11}f_{11}<l_1|_1`$ or $`A_{22}f_{22}<l_2|_2`$, if at least one of these operators is invertible, in this case we can use one of the following Frobenius formulae for the inverse of a block matrix:

$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)^1`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}A^1+A^1B(DCA^1B)^1CA^1& A^1B(DCA^1B)^1\\ (DCA^1B)^1CA^1& (DCA^1B)^1\end{array}\right)`$
or

$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)^1`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}(ABD^1C)^1& (ABD^1C)^1BD^1\\ D^1C(ABD^1C)^1& D^1+D^1C(ABD^1C)^1BD^1\end{array}\right),`$
respectively.

We will not now concentrate ourselves upon details.

## 2  Resolvents Formulae for the Models of Interaction

Return to

$$z\left(\begin{array}{cc}q& \\ u& \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& B4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<l|_2\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}q\\ u\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}w_1& \\ w_2& \end{array}\right)$$

which we write also as

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& zB+4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<l|_2\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}q\\ u\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}w_1& \\ w_2& \end{array}\right)$$

and confer this latter expression with formulae of rank two perturbations. We let

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}f_{11}<l_1|_1& f_{12}<l_2|_2\\ f_{21}<l_1|_1& A_{22}f_{22}<l_2|_2\end{array}\right):=\left(\begin{array}{cc}z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& zB+4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<l|_2\end{array}\right)$$

and next take

$$\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}:=z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2,<l_1|_1:=<1|_1,& A_{22}:=zB,<l_2|_2:=<l|_2\\ f_{11}:=0& f_{12}:=\mathrm{\Omega }^2\\ f_{21}:=4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}& f_{22}:=4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}\end{array}$$

After substituting these values of $`A_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`f_{\mathrm{}}`$ in

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}1<l_1|A_{11}^1f_{11}>& <l_1|A_{11}^1f_{12}>\\ <l_2|A_{22}^1f_{21}>& 1<l_2|A_{22}^1f_{22}>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}<l_1|A_{11}^1w_1>& \\ <l_2|A_{22}^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)$$

we obtain

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \left(\begin{array}{cc}1<1|_1(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^10>& <1|_1(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^1(\mathrm{\Omega }^2)>\\ <l|_2(zB)^1(4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0})>& 1<l|_2(zB)^1(4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0})>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)& & \\ & & \\ & =& \left(\begin{array}{cc}<1|_1(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^1w_1>& \\ <l|_2(zB)^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

Then

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}\\ & \\ 4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>& 1+4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)& & \\ & & \\ & =& \left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}& \\ & \\ <l|(zB)^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

Now let us choose

$$B:=c^2\mathrm{\Delta }$$

In this case one can show that for any complex $`z`$ such that $`z(\mathrm{},0]`$

$$(zB)^1(zc^2\mathrm{\Delta }))^1$$

exists and is an integral operator which can be described as following (see e.g. Appendix A) :

$$((zc^2\mathrm{\Delta }))^1F)(x)=_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}\frac{i}{2kc^2}e^{ik|xx^{}|}F(x^{})dx\text{ where }k^2=z/c^2,Imk>0$$

If we choose in addition

$$\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}(x):=\delta (xx_0),<l|F>:=F(x_0)$$

then we obtain:

$$<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>=\frac{i}{2kc^2}$$

and equation

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}\\ & \\ 4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>& 1+4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)& & \\ & & \\ & =& \left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}& \\ & \\ <l|(zB)^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

becomes as following:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}\\ & \\ 4\gamma _c\frac{i}{2kc^2}& 1+4\gamma _c\frac{i}{2kc^2}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)& =& \left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}& \\ & \\ _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}\frac{i}{2kc^2}e^{ik|x_0x^{}|}w_2(x^{})𝑑x& \end{array}\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{determinant}}\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \left(\begin{array}{cc}1+4\gamma _c{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}& {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}\\ & \\ 4\gamma _c{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}{\displaystyle \frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}& \\ & \\ {\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}e^{ik|x_0x^{}|}w_2(x^{})𝑑x& \end{array}\right)& & \end{array}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{determinant}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}(1+4\gamma _c{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}){\displaystyle \frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}e^{ik|x_0x^{}|}w_2(x^{})𝑑x& \\ & \\ 4\gamma _c{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}+{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}e^{ik|x_0x^{}|}w_2(x^{})𝑑x& \end{array}\right)`$
where

$$k^2=z/c^2,Imk>0$$

and

$`determinant`$ $`:=`$ $`1+4\gamma _c{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}4\gamma _c{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}`$
$`=1+2\gamma _c{\displaystyle \frac{i}{kc^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}2\gamma _c{\displaystyle \frac{i}{kc^2}}`$
i.e.,

$`determinant`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{kc^2(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)+2\gamma _ci(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)2\gamma _ci\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{kc^2(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}}={\displaystyle \frac{kc^2(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)+2\gamma _ciz}{kc^2(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{kc^2(k^2c^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)2\gamma _cik^2c^2}{kc^2(k^2c^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}}={\displaystyle \frac{k^2c^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^22i\gamma _ck}{k^2c^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2i\gamma _c}{c^2}}k{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}}}{k^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}}}}={\displaystyle \frac{(k+{\displaystyle \frac{i\gamma _c}{c^2}})^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}}+({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _c}{c^2}})^2}{k^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}}}}`$
We observe that $`determinant`$ vanishes at two values of $`k`$:

$$k_{1,2}=\frac{i\gamma _c}{c^2}\pm \sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}(\frac{\gamma _c}{c^2})^2}\frac{i\gamma _c}{c^2}i\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}+(\frac{\gamma _c}{c^2})^2}.$$

But these values are forbidden to $`k`$ because of the condition $`Imk>0`$ and of course because of the condition $`\gamma _c>0`$ !!!

We temporarily defer discussing ‘what does it mean’. In the next section, we will specially return to this question, for the time being, we turn to calculating the resolvent associated with the Friedrichs model, i.e., with the equation array

$$z\left(\begin{array}{cc}q_0& \\ \varphi & \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \gamma _1<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _{2,c}\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& B\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}q_0\\ \varphi \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}w_1& \\ w_2& \end{array}\right)$$

We take

$$\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}:=z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2,<l_1|_1:=<1|_1,& A_{22}:=zB,<l_2|_2:=<l|_2\\ f_{11}:=0& f_{12}:=\gamma _1\\ f_{21}:=4\gamma _{2,c}\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}& f_{22}:=0\end{array}$$

and after substituting these values of $`A_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`f_{\mathrm{}}`$ in

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}1<l_1|A_{11}^1f_{11}>& <l_1|A_{11}^1f_{12}>\\ <l_2|A_{22}^1f_{21}>& 1<l_2|A_{22}^1f_{22}>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}<l_1|A_{11}^1w_1>& \\ <l_2|A_{22}^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)$$

we obtain

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \left(\begin{array}{cc}1<1|_1(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^10>& <1|_1(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^1(\gamma _1)>\\ <l|_2(zB)^1(4\gamma _{2,c}\delta _{\alpha ,x_0})>& 1<l|_2(zB)^10>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)& & \\ & & \\ & =& \left(\begin{array}{cc}<1|_1(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^1w_1>& \\ <l|_2(zB)^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

i.e.,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \frac{\gamma _1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}\\ & \\ 4\gamma _{2,c}<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)& & \\ & & \\ & =& \left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}& \\ & \\ <l|(zB)^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

Now let us take again

$$B:=c^2\mathrm{\Delta }$$

$$\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}(x):=\delta (xx_0),<l|F>:=F(x_0)$$

Since in this case for any complex $`z`$ such that $`z(\mathrm{},0]`$ the operator

$$(zB)^1(zc^2\mathrm{\Delta }))^1$$

exists and since

$$<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>=\frac{i}{2kc^2}\text{ where }k^2=z/c^2,Imk>0$$

the recent equation to $`c_1,c_2`$ becomes as following:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \frac{\gamma _1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}\\ & \\ 4\gamma _{2,c}\frac{i}{2kc^2}& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)& =& \left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}& \\ & \\ <l|_2(zB)^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{determinant_F}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& {\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}\\ & \\ 4\gamma _{2,c}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}{\displaystyle \frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}& \\ & \\ {\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}e^{ik|x_0x^{}|}w_2(x^{})𝑑x& \end{array}\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{determinant_F}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}{\displaystyle \frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}e^{ik|x_0x^{}|}w_2(x^{})𝑑x& \\ & \\ 4\gamma _{2,c}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}+{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}e^{ik|x_0x^{}|}w_2(x^{})𝑑x& \end{array}\right)`$
where

$$k^2=z/c^2,Imk>0$$

and

$`determinant_F`$ $`:=`$ $`1+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}4\gamma _{2,c}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}`$
$`=1+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1}{k^2c^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}\gamma _{2,c}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{kc^2}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(k^2c^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)kc^2+i\gamma _1\gamma _{2,c}}{(k^2c^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)kc^2}}`$
i.e.,

$`determinant_F`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2/c^2)k+i\gamma _1\gamma _{2,c}/c^4}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2/c^2)k}}`$
We conclude this section with two remarks.

Remark 1.  We have considered the operator

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& zB+4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<l|_2\end{array}\right)$$

as a perturbation of the operator

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2& 0\\ 0& zB\end{array}\right).$$

The perturbation, i.e. the operator

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<l|_2\end{array}\right)$$

is a rank-two operator, we have already mentioned it. If we initially take

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}z& 0\\ 0& zB\end{array}\right)$$

as an unperturbated operator, then the perturbation becomes

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<l|_2\end{array}\right),$$

and this operator is a rank-one one.

Actually,

$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<l|_2\end{array}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`|\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}& \end{array}><1l|`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}& \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}<1|_1& & <l|_2\end{array}\right).`$
We have used here the fact that, as an operator $`𝐂𝐂`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2<1|_1`$ coincides with the operator of multiplication by $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$ :

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^2<1|_1q>=\mathrm{\Omega }^2q,q𝐂$$

—in other words,

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^2<1|_1=\mathrm{\Omega }^2=\mathrm{\Omega }^2I_𝐂=\mathrm{\Omega }^2.$$

Of course, we have identified the operator multiplication by a number with this number itself:

the operator multiplication by a number $``$ this number itself.

Remark 2.  As for an explicit and detailed expression of

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2& \mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|_2\\ 4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<1|_1& zB+4\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}<l|_2\end{array}\right)^1,$$

we have

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}q\\ u\end{array}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{c}A_{11}^1w_1\\ A_{22}^1w_2\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}^1f_{11}& A_{11}^1f_{12}\\ A_{22}^1f_{21}& A_{22}^1f_{22}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}c_1\\ c_2\end{array}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{c}(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^1w_1\\ (zB)^1w_2\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^10& (z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^1\mathrm{\Omega }^2\\ (zB)^14\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}& (zB)^14\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}c_1\\ c_2\end{array}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{c}(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^1w_1\\ (zB)^1w_2\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& (z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^1\mathrm{\Omega }^2\\ (zB)^14\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}& (zB)^14\gamma _c\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}c_1\\ c_2\end{array}\right),`$
$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)det`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\left(1+4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>\right)& {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}\\ & \\ 4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}{\displaystyle \frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}& \\ & \\ <l|(zB)^1w_2>& \end{array}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\left(1+4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>\right){\displaystyle \frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}<l|(zB)^1w_2>& \\ & \\ 4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>{\displaystyle \frac{w_1}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}+<l|(zB)^1w_2>& \end{array}\right),`$
where

$$det=1+4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>.$$

Notice, by the way,

$`det(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)`$ $`=`$ $`(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)+4\gamma _cz<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>`$
$`=\left(1+4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>\right)z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2,`$
$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& \\ c_2& \end{array}\right)det(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\left(1+4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>\right)w_1+\mathrm{\Omega }^2<l|(zB)^1w_2>& \\ & \\ 4\gamma _c<l|(zB)^1\delta _{\alpha ,x_0}>w_1+(z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)<l|(zB)^1w_2>& \end{array}\right).`$
## 3  Resonances, Resolvents, and the Second Sheet

In the previous section we have observed that the $`determinant`$ vanishes at two values of $`k`$:

$`k_{1,2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i\gamma _c}{c^2}}\pm \sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}}({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _c}{c^2}})^2}.`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i\gamma _c}{c^2}}i\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}}+({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _c}{c^2}})^2}.`$
The circumstance having excited an interest is that these values are forbidden (!!!) to $`k`$ because of the condition $`Imk>0`$ 555 and of course because of the condition $`\gamma _c>0`$ . In this section, we return specially to this fact, and we are now discussing ‘what does it mean’.

Firstly, we fix on

$$det_{1,+}(k):=((z+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)determinant)^1((k^2c^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)determinant)^1$$

as a function of $`k`$, —we need rather this latter quantity than the $`determinant`$ . We have:

$`det_1(k,+)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1/c^2}{k^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2i\gamma _c}{c^2}}k{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}}}}={\displaystyle \frac{1/c^2}{(k+{\displaystyle \frac{i\gamma _c}{c^2}})^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}}+({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _c}{c^2}})^2}},`$
$`(\text{ where }k^2=z/c^2,Imk>0).`$
The first factor which calls attention to itself is that the written form of $`det_1(k)`$ in itself need not the relation $`k^2=z/c^2,Imk>0`$ being fulfilled, and provokes to introduce the formal extension of $`det_1(k,+)`$ , $`Det_1(k)`$ say, defined by

$`Det_1(k)`$ $`:=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1/c^2}{k^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2i\gamma _c}{c^2}}k{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}}}},k^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2i\gamma _c}{c^2}}k{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}}0.`$
This extension $`Det_1(k)`$ is an analytic function of $`k`$, and at real $`k`$

$`|Det_1(k)|^2=|det_{1,+}(k+i0))|^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1/c^4}{(k^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{c^2}})^2+({\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma _c}{c^2}}k)^2}},(k𝐑).`$
For a moment, let us renormalise $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`\gamma _c`$ so that

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{c}\mathrm{\Omega },\frac{\gamma _c}{c^2}\gamma ,$$

or choose the measure units so that $`c=1`$. Then we have:

$`det_{1,+}(k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k+i\gamma )^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\gamma ^2}},`$
$`(\text{ where }k^2=z,Imk>0),`$
$`|det_1(k+i0))|^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}},(k𝐑).`$
We had already seen a similar expression. We had seen it in the previous paper.

In the previous paper 666we mean \[Ch03-1\], in subsection 1.4, where just $`c=1`$, we had seen: given an incident wave of the kind

$$A_{mp}\mathrm{sin}(k(x+t))\text{ where }k𝐑,A_{mp}𝐑,$$

then

$`q(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2A_{mp}}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}\left((k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)\mathrm{sin}(kt)2\gamma k\mathrm{cos}(kt)\right)+const_1`$
$`+const_1+{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma }{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{q(t)}{t}}|_{t=0}+e^{\gamma t}\left(const_1\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma t)+const_2\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma t)\right);`$
we can write this relation as follows:

$`q(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2A_{mp}}{\sqrt{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}}\mathrm{sin}(kt+\varphi _k)`$
$`+const_1+{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma }{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{q(t)}{t}}|_{t=0}+e^{\gamma t}\left(const_1\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma t)+const_2\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma t)\right)`$
where $`\varphi _k`$ is such that

$$\mathrm{cos}\varphi _k=\frac{k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{\sqrt{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}},\mathrm{sin}\varphi _k=\frac{2\gamma k}{\sqrt{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}.$$

We had also seen that the field $`u(t,x)`$ is given by

$`u(t,x)`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}Q(t|x|)A_{mp}\mathrm{sin}(k(t|x|))& ,& \text{ if }0t|x|\hfill \\ 0& ,& \text{ if }t|x|<0t\hfill \end{array}\right\}+A_{mp}\mathrm{sin}(k(x+t)),`$
where

$`Q(t)A_{mp}\mathrm{sin}(kt)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma A_{mp}k}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}\left(2\gamma k\mathrm{sin}(kt)+(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)\mathrm{cos}(kt)\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma }{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{q(t)}{t}}|_{t=0}+e^{\gamma t}\left(const_3\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma t)+const_4\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma t)\right)`$
and, thus, at points of the left real half-line the field is given by the relationships:

$`u(t,x)`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}Q(t+x)& ,& \text{ if }x<0,0t+x\hfill \\ 0& ,& \text{ if }x<0,t+x<0t\hfill \end{array}\right\}`$
$`Q(t){\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma }{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{q(t)}{t}}|_{t=0}e^{\gamma t}\left(const_3\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma t)+const_4\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma t)\right)`$
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{(2\gamma k)^2A_{mp}}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}+A\right)\mathrm{sin}(kt)+{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma A_{mp}k(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}\mathrm{cos}(kt)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2A_{mp}}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}\mathrm{sin}(kt)+{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma A_{mp}k(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}\mathrm{cos}(kt)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)A_{mp}}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}\left((k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)\mathrm{sin}(k(t))2\gamma k\mathrm{cos}(kt)\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)A_{mp}}{\sqrt{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}}\mathrm{sin}(kt+\varphi _k).`$
In addition,

$`q(t)Q(t)e^{\gamma t}\left((const_1const_3)\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma t)+(const_2const_4)\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma t)\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^2A_{mp}}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}\left((k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)\mathrm{sin}(k(t))2\gamma k\mathrm{cos}(kt)\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{k^2A_{mp}}{\sqrt{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}}\mathrm{sin}(kt+\varphi _k).`$
Now, let us concentrate ourselves upon the expressions of the amplitudes of the harmonic parts of $`q(t)`$ , $`Q(t)`$ and $`q(t)Q(t)`$ , —expressions as functions of $`k`$ ,— i.e., let us concentrate upon oscillator amplitude, transmitted wave one, and a ‘deformation’ amplitude. These amplitudes are exactly

$`amplitude_q(k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2A_{mp}}{\sqrt{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}},`$
$`amplitude_Q(k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)A_{mp}}{\sqrt{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}},`$
$`amplitude_{qQ}(k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^2A_{mp}}{\sqrt{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}};`$
we will also need $`amplitude_q(k)^2`$ , $`amplitude_Q(k)^2`$ , and $`amplitude_{qQ}(k)^2`$ :

$$amplitude_q(k)^2=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2},$$

$$amplitude_Q(k)^2=\frac{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2},$$

$$amplitude_{qQ}(k)^2=\frac{(k^2)^2A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}.$$

After standard transformations—

$$(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2=k^42(\mathrm{\Omega }^22\gamma ^2)k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^4=(k^2(\mathrm{\Omega }^22\gamma ^2))^2+4\gamma ^2(\mathrm{\Omega }^2\gamma ^2)$$

—we also write $`amplitude_q(k)^2`$ and $`amplitude_{qQ}(k)^2`$ as follows:

$$amplitude_q(k)^2=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2}{(k^2(\mathrm{\Omega }^22\gamma ^2))^2+4\gamma ^2(\mathrm{\Omega }^2\gamma ^2)},$$

$$amplitude_{qQ}(k)^2=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2}{12(\mathrm{\Omega }^22\gamma ^2)k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^4k^4}.$$

777 In addition, we have
$$amplitude_Q(k)^2=\frac{A_{mp}^2}{1(2\gamma )^2/(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)+(2\gamma )^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2/(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2}.$$

We emphasise: in transforming no special assumption has been made. But now recall, we have been discussing incident wave where $`k`$ is a wave-number, so, we presume that $`k𝐑`$ .

Thus, since $`k𝐑`$ , we had seen: there is a value of a system parameter, —this parameter is $`k`$, the wave-number of the incident wave, —such that the oscillator amplitude becomes maximal. This phenomenon is called a resonance, in the proper, usual sense of the word. Temporarily, we call this phenomenon resonance of the first kind.

We had also seen: there is a value of a system parameter, —this parameter is $`k`$ again, the wave-number of the incident wave, —such that the incident harmonic wave is completely reflected. This phenomenon is a kind of resonance, we will temporarily call it resonance of the second kind.

We have finally seen: there is a value of $`k`$ such that amplitude of $`q(t)Q(t)`$ becomes maximal. This phenomenon is also a kind of resonance, we will temporarily call it resonance of the third kind.

Currently, the first kind resonant values of $`k`$ are exactly

$$k_{1st.res}=\pm \sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }^22\gamma ^2}$$

the second kind ones are

$$k_{2nd.res}=\pm \mathrm{\Omega }$$

and the third kind resonant values of $`k`$ are

$$k_{3rd.res}=\pm \sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^4}{\mathrm{\Omega }^22\gamma ^2}}.$$

Another standard of transforming the denominator in the expressions of $`amplitude_q(k)^2`$ and $`amplitude_Q(k)^2`$ is this:

$$(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2=(k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)(k^22i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2).$$

Thus, we observe that

$$amplitude_q(k)^2=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)(k^22i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}$$

$$amplitude_Q(k)^2=\frac{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}=\frac{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)(k^22i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}$$

$$amplitude_{qQ}(k)^2=\frac{(k^2)^2A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}=\frac{(k^2)^2A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)(k^22i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}$$

and recall that

$`det_{1,+}(k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k+i\gamma )^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\gamma ^2}},`$
$`(\text{ where }k^2=z,Imk>0),`$
$`|det_1(k+i0))|^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)(k^22i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}}(k𝐑).`$
First we focus on expressions of $`amplitude_q(k)^2`$ and $`det_1(k)`$ . In the first moment we tend to write

$$amplitude_q(k)^2=\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2det_{1,+}(k)det_{1,+}(k).$$

We may not do it. There are at least two reasons, both of them are connected with the domains.

If $`Imk>0`$ then $`Im(k)<0`$. Hence, if $`det_{1,+}(k)`$ is defined, then $`det_{1,+}(k)`$ is not.

Secondly, if we deal with $`det_{1,+}(k)`$ , then $`Imk>0`$ ; if we deal with $`amplitude_q(k)^2`$ then $`k𝐑`$ , i.e., $`Imk=0`$; so, we must deal here with two ‘different’ $`k`$-s.

It is no surprise: $`k`$ as a parameter of $`amplitude_q(k)^2`$ means wave-number of incident wave, whereas $`k`$ as a parameter of $`det_1(k,+)`$ is a term in describing of a resolvent of an operator.

In other words, $`k`$ in $`amplitude_q(k)^2`$ and $`k`$ in $`det_1(k,+)`$ are of different natures.

Nevertheless, the relation

$$amplitude_q(k)^2=\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2|det_{1,+}(k+i0))|^2$$

is mathematically correct, and we see: in order to find resonant values of the amplitude we have to find positions of extremal values of a function, which is absolute values function of boundery values function of an analytic function, analytic in the open upper half-plane ($`Imk>0`$) .

Let us discuss the recent idea in terms of analytic functions. We see, the written form of $`amplitude_q(k)^2`$, $`amplitude_Q(k)^2`$ and $`amplitude_{qQ}(k)^2`$ in itself need not the relation $`k^2=z/c^2,Imk>0`$ being fulfilled, and provokes to introduce the formal extensions of these quantities, $`Amplitude_q(k)^2`$, $`Amplitude_Q(k)^2`$ and $`Amplitude_{qQ}(k)^2`$ say, defined by

$$Amplitude_q(k)^2:=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)(k^22i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}$$

$$Amplitude_Q(k)^2:=\frac{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}=\frac{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)(k^22i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}$$

$$Amplitude_{qQ}(k)^2:=\frac{(k^2)^2A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^2}=\frac{(k^2)^2A_{mp}^2}{(k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)(k^22i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2)}$$

wherever

$$(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2+(2\gamma k)^20.$$

These extensions are analytic functions of $`k`$, with poles at

$`k_{1,2}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`i\gamma \pm \sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }^2\gamma ^2}k_{1,2},`$
$`k_{1,2}^+`$ $`=`$ $`+i\gamma \sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }^2\gamma ^2}k_{1,2}^{},`$
and $`Amplitude_q(k)^2`$ is decreasing as $`|k|\mathrm{}`$ . Thus we expect, the maximal value of $`amplitude_q(k)^2`$ is somewhere near the poles of $`Amplitude_q(k)^2`$, at least at small $`\gamma `$ .

…We have yet one analytic extension defined on $`𝐂`$ except for some poles. It is $`Det_1(k)`$, introduced in the beginning of this section:

$`Det_1(k)`$ $`:=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2}},k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^20.`$
The expressions of $`Amplitude`$-s and $`Det_1(k)`$ suggest writing

$$Amplitude_q(k)^2=\mathrm{\Omega }^4A_{mp}^2Det_1(k)Det_1(k),$$

$$Amplitude_Q(k)^2=(k^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2A_{mp}^2Det_1(k)Det_1(k),$$

$$Amplitude_{qQ}(k)^2=(k^2)^2A_{mp}^2Det_1(k)Det_1(k).$$

These relations are mathamatically correct. Therefore, let us discuss $`amplitude`$-s connecting them with $`Det_1(k)`$.

We notice that $`Det_1(k)`$ is analytic extension of $`det_{1,+}(k)`$ , thus $`Det_1(k)`$ as well as $`det_{1,+}(k)`$ , is related rather to the resolvent, $`R(z)`$, resolvent as a function 888 operator-valued function  of parameter $`z,z𝐂`$ 999 we mean usual notations in usual writing $`R(z)=(zA)^1`$ . But the ‘natural’ parameter of resolvent is $`z`$ , not $`k`$ . Thus we would like to reformulate $`Det_1(k)`$ as a function of $`z`$ .

Let us resume what we have. The situation with resolvent and resonances discussed in this section looks generally like this:

Observation 1.

(1) The resolvent is related to the function

$`det_{1,+}(k)`$ $`:=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k+i\gamma )^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\gamma ^2}},`$
$`(\text{ where }Imk>0);`$
(1a) the domain of $`det_{1,+}(k)`$ is

$$\{k|Imk>0\}$$

and is one-to-one to the set

$$\{z|z=k^2;Imk>0\}𝐂(\mathrm{},0];$$

(2) The $`amplitude`$-s are related to the function

$`det_{1,0}(k)`$ $`:=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k+i\gamma )^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\gamma ^2}},`$
$`(\text{ where }Imk=0);`$
(2a) the domain of $`det_{1,0}(k)`$ is

$$\{k|Imk=0\}\{k|Imk=0,Rek>0\}\{k|k=0\}\{k|Imk=0,Rek<0\},$$

with the possible exception of the poles 101010 they exist, iff $`\gamma =0`$ .

Note,

$$\{z|z=k^2;Imk=0,Rek>0\}(\mathrm{},0)\{z|z=k^2;Imk=0,Rek<0\}$$

(3) The resonances are related to the poles of the function

$`det_{1,,0}(k)`$ $`:=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k+i\gamma )^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\gamma ^2}},`$
$`(\text{ where }Imk0,k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^20);`$
(3a) the poles, $`k_{pol}`$, of $`det_{1,,0}(k)`$, and resonant values are connected by:

$$k_{pol}=i\gamma \pm i\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\gamma ^2},$$

$$k_{1st.res}=\pm \sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }^22\gamma ^2},$$

$$k_{2nd.res}=\pm \mathrm{\Omega },$$

$$k_{3rd.res}=\pm \sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^4}{\mathrm{\Omega }^22\gamma ^2}}.$$

(3b) The domain of $`det_{1,,0}(k)`$ is

$$\{k|Imk0\}=\{k|Imk<0\}\{k|Imk=0\},$$

with the exception of the poles;

the set

$$\{k|Imk<0\}$$

is one-to-one to the set

$$\{z|z=k^2;Imk<0\}𝐂(\mathrm{},0];$$

(4) All these functions are consistent: there is an analytic function,—

$`Det_1(k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^2}},k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^20,`$
— such that:

(4a) every $`det_{1,\mathrm{\#}}`$ is a restricton of $`Det_1(k)`$ ;

(4b) the union of the domains of $`det_{1,\mathrm{\#}}`$ is the domain of $`Det_1(k)`$ .

Now then, we have no problem with reformulating $`det_{1,+}(k)`$ as a function of $`z`$: we do it by defining

$`d_{1,+}(z)`$ $`:=`$ $`det_1(k(z))={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k(z)^2+2i\gamma k(z)\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k(z)+i\gamma )^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\gamma ^2}},`$
$`\text{if }z(\mathrm{},0],`$
where $`k(z)`$ is defined as the unique solution to

$$k^2=z,Imk>0.$$

We need now reformulate $`Det_1(k)`$ which is an extension of $`det_1(k)`$. In other words, we have to extend $`d_{1,+}(z)`$ , but ‘into WHAT?’

Of course, we can extend $`d_1(z)`$ onto

$$z𝐂,z=k^2,k^2+2i\gamma k\mathrm{\Omega }^20.$$

We can do it, by defining, e.g.,

$`d_{1(1)}(z)`$ $`:=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k_+(z)^2+2i\gamma k_+(z)\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k_+(z)+i\gamma )^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\gamma ^2}},`$
$`(k_+(z)^2+2i\gamma k_+(z)\mathrm{\Omega }^20)`$
where $`k_+(z)`$ is defined as the unique solution to

$$k_+^2=z,Imk_+>0,$$

if

$$z(\mathrm{},0],$$

and to

$$k_+^2=z,Rek_+0,$$

if

$$z(\mathrm{},0],$$

but further, there is ‘no place’ for the ‘rest of $`Det_1`$’, i.e., for $`det_{1,,0}`$ .

With $`det_{1,,0}`$ , we connect another function of $`z`$ :

$`d_{1(2)}(z)`$ $`:=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k_{}(z)^2+2i\gamma k_{}(z)\mathrm{\Omega }^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k_{}(z)+i\gamma )^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\gamma ^2}},`$
$`(k_{}(z)^2+2i\gamma k_{}(z)\mathrm{\Omega }^20)`$
where $`k_{}(z)`$ is defined as the unique solution to

$$k_{}^2=z,Imk_{}<0,$$

if

$$z(\mathrm{},0],$$

and to

$$k_{}^2=z,Rek_{}0,$$

if

$$z(\mathrm{},0].$$

Thus we are not able to reformulate $`Det_1(k)`$ in terms of ONE function of $`z`$ . We can only reformulate $`Det_1(k)`$ in terms of TWO functions of ONE variable: $`d_{1(1)}(z)`$ and $`d_{1(2)}(z)`$ .

Nevertheless, physicists prefer to say, there is ONE analytic function $`D_1(z)`$ defined on ‘TWO exemplars’ of $`𝐂`$ , so that

(1) on the first ‘exemplar’ of $`𝐂`$, $`D_1(z)=d_{1(1)}(z)`$ ; this first ‘exemplar’ of $`𝐂`$ is called first or physical sheet of $`F(z)`$ ;

(2) on the second ‘exemplar’ of $`𝐂`$, $`D_1(z)=d_{1(2)}(z)`$ ; this second ‘exemplar’ of $`𝐂`$ is called second or unphysical sheet of $`F(z)`$ .

One can say also:

$`d_{1(2)}(z)`$ is a part of an extended $`d_{1(1)}(z)`$, the part which is defined on the second ‘exemplar’ of $`𝐂`$, and this second ‘exemplar’ of $`𝐂`$ is named the second sheet associated with $`R(z)`$.

—In these words, $`z_{res}`$ is a resonant pole, if $`z_{res}`$ is a pole placed on the second sheet of the resolvent.

From the formal mathematical standpoint, the notion we have just introduced can be explained as following: ‘two exemplars’ of $`𝐂`$ can be defined as

$$(𝐂\times \{1\})(𝐂\times \{2\});$$

the ‘first’ sheet is identified with $`𝐂\times \{1\}`$ , and the second one is identified with $`𝐂\times \{2\}`$; finally put

$$D_1(z\times \{1\}):=d_{1(1)}(z),$$

$$D_1(z\times \{2\}):=d_{1(2)}(z).$$

The constructions of such kind are basic objects of the theory of Riemann surfaces, but we will not go into details.

There are reasons for it, and one of them is that the concept of Riemann surface has been elaborated so as to avoid introducing principal distinctions between the sheets, whereas we would like to contradistinguish them,—we need two or even three objects,—one object connected immediately with resolvent and the other(s) one(s) done with amplitudes and resonant poles. In other words, we prefer constructions like that we have displayed as Observation 1 .

Another reason is that we need rather $`R(z)`$ and $`R(k^2)`$ than $`det_\mathrm{\#}`$ , but the formers are not usual scalar functions. They are operator-valued function, thus, we must give exact definitions suited to the case. First we must define what we mean by ‘element of $`R(k^2)`$ is an analytic function’, what we mean by ‘analytic extension’, and then many other things. Otherwise confusion and false conclusions will occur!!

How to find proper mathematical definitions, does not form the subject of this paper.

## Appendix A.

## Free Green’s Function.

Here we reproduce a well-known proof that

$`(zc^2\mathrm{\Delta })^1(x,x^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}e^{ik|xx^{}|},\text{ where }k^2=z/c^2,Imk>0`$
It can be deduced from p-representation of $`(zc^2\mathrm{\Delta })^1`$:

$$(zc^2\mathrm{\Delta })^1(x,x^{})=\frac{1}{2\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}\frac{e^{ip(xx^{})}}{z+c^2p^2}𝑑p.$$

We have:

$`(zc^2\mathrm{\Delta })^1(x,x^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{ip(xx^{})}}{z+c^2p^2}}𝑑p`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{ip(xx^{})}}{p^2+z/c^2}}𝑑p`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{ip(xx^{})}}{p^2k^2}}𝑑p`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{ip(xx^{})}}{p+k}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{pk}}𝑑p`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{ik|xx^{}|}}{2k}},`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2kc^2}}e^{ik|xx^{}|},\text{ where }k^2=z/c^2,Imk>0`$


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The dynamics of open tachyon condensation  and the K-theoretical classification of D-brane charges , strongly suggest the interpretation of D-branes as solitons of some ten dimensional underlying gauge-Higgs theory naturaly associated with configurations of D9-filling-branes with the open tachyon playing the role of the Higgs field.

A fascinating issue, that is still open, is to unravel the precise physical meaning of the gauge theory used in the K-theoretical description of D-brane charges. In this approach, for instance, the D6-brane of type IIA string theory can be naturally interpreted as a ’t Hooft-Polyakov monopole . The pattern of symmetry breaking can be characterized by the vacuum manifold $`\frac{U(2)}{U(1)U(1)}`$ and the topological stability of the D6-brane is related to the non-vanishing second homotopy group of this vacuum manifold.

On the other hand, it is well known that ’t Hooft-Polyakov monopoles in the standard Yang-Mill-Higgs model in four dimensions have electric charge, i.e are dyons. This is manifest in the topology of the corresponding moduli space that is, for just one monopole, $`R^3S^1`$ . Of course, it is tempting, but probably too naive, to try to see in the $`S^1`$ of the monopole moduli space a manifestation of the extra eleven dimension of M-Theory. However what we can certainly expect, if the open tachyon condensation approach to D-branes as solitons is correct, is to find some dyon charge for the D6-brane.

The interesting thing about D6-branes is that they have a purely gravitational description as KK-monopoles in eleven dimensional supergravity . It is well known that KK-monopoles in ten dimensions have an electric dyon charge . Moreover, the moduli of these ten dimensional KK-monopoles is in fact $`R^3S^1`$ as it is the case for the dyon. The extra $`S^1`$ part of the moduli in this case is related with large gauge transformations of the $`B`$-field and the electric charge of the KK-monopole can be interpreted as a consequence of unwinding the string modes on a Hopf fibration of $`S^3`$ . In this sense what we need to do in order to prove that D6-branes are dyons, as it is predicted by the open tachyon condensation description of them, is to extend the previous argument on ten dimensional KK-monopoles to the case of eleven dimensional KK-monopoles. This is the modest target of this note.

## 2 Eleven Dimensional Description of D6-branes

Let us start recalling some well known facts about D6-branes as eleven dimensional KK-monopoles

At the level of solutions, the D6-brane has a singularity at the origin which makes necessary the eleven dimensional description  as a KK-monopole, in order to have a completely regular solution. We can check this explicitely by means of the usual KK reduction for the eleven dimensional metric

$$\frac{ds_{11}^2}{l_p^2}=e^{4\varphi /3}\left(dx^s+𝒜_\mu dx^\mu \right)^2+\frac{e^{2\varphi /3}}{l_s^2}ds_{10}^2.$$
(1)
The relations between the M-theory parameters $`(l_p,R_s)`$ and the string theory parameters $`(l_s,g_s)`$ are

$`g_s=e^{2\varphi },{\displaystyle \frac{R_s}{l_p}}=g_s^{2/3},l_p^3=g_sl_s^3.`$ (2)
When considering extended objects, we can decompose the metric as $`𝔼^{1+p}+𝔼^{10p}`$. The solution is then determined by an harmonic function, $`H`$, in the transverse space

$$H=1+\frac{k}{r^{8p}}.$$
(3)
As we are dealing with the D6-brane of type IIA string theory, we can associate it to a 6-form in ten dimensions. However, when this form is lift to eleven dimensions, we find that it is only non-trivial in the presence of an isometric direction, i.e. in the presence of a KK-monopole of the eleven dimensional theory .

The metric for the KK-monopole can be written as

$$ds_{11}^2=Hdx^\mu dx_\mu +H^1\left(d\psi _{TN}+𝒜_\mu dx^\mu \right)^2+ds^2\left(𝔼^{1,6}\right),$$
(4)
where $`\psi _{TN}`$ is taken as a periodic coordinate of period $`2\pi `$ (the Taub-NUT coordinate) in order to eliminate the Dirac string singularity and which will represent the compact eleventh dimension. For $`G=0`$ (with $`G`$ the field strenght of the 3-form of M-theory), $`𝒜=H`$, which implies $`^2𝒜=0`$.

It is worth to mention that this solution is a gravitational instanton of the eleven dimensional supergravity, of the nut type, which interpolates between the KK-vaccum $`𝔼^{1,9}\times S^1`$ at $`r\mathrm{}`$ and the M-theory vacuum at $`r0`$.

Performing a direct dimensional reduction we find the solution for the D6-brane

$$ds_{10}^2=H^{1/2}ds^2(𝔼^{1,6})+H^{1/2}ds^2(𝔼^3),$$
(5)
with

$`e^{2\varphi }=H^{3/2},F_m={}_{}{}^{}dH\text{and }H=1+{\displaystyle \frac{k}{r}},`$ (6)
where $`F_m`$ is the magnetic field strenght and the Hodge dual is taken in the transverse space.

This process of desingularization has also the advantage of making evident the origin of the field content of the D6-brane, which is clear from the point of view of the action principles . As usually stated, the field content of the KK-monopole is a seven dimensional vector multiplet of $`N=1`$ supersymmetry consisting on the vector field $`A_i`$ and three scalars corresponding to transaltional zero modes in the transverse space.

Apart from the purely gravitational part, this field constent arises from the dimensional reduction of the M2-brane. More especifically, we can consider the decomposition of the $`C^{(3)}`$ form, to which the eleven dimensional membrane couples, in the presence of the KK-monopole as

$$C_{MNP}^{(3)}\stackrel{KKM}{}\{\begin{array}{ccc}C_{\mu \nu \rho }& & \\ C_{\mu \nu i}& =& C_{\mu \nu }A_i\\ C_{\mu ij}& =& V_\mu B_{ij}\\ C_{ijk}\end{array},$$
(7)
where $`x^\mu =(r,\theta ,\varphi ,\psi )`$ are the Taub-NUT coordinates (with $`\psi x^\mathrm{\#}`$ the eleventh dimensional coordinate) and $`y^i`$, $`i=0,\mathrm{},6`$ the coordinates on the world-volume of the KK-monopole. The fields $`A`$ and $`B`$ are respectively the gauge field and the antisymmetric 2-form on the D6-brane world volume.

As is clear from the field content of the KK-monopole, this decomposition implies that the system we are considering is an M2-brane wrapped on the isometric direction of the space with an end on the world-volume of the KK-monopole, which can be schematically represented as

$$(0|M2,KKM)=\{\begin{array}{cccccccccccc}\times & |& & & \times & \times & & & & & & \\ \times & |& & & & z& \times & \times & \times & \times & \times & \times \end{array}.$$
(8)
The zero modes in the decomposition of the 3-form of M-theory which live in the transverse space will be determined by the geometry of the space, in the sense that they will be requiered to be harmonic functions

$`^\alpha _{[\alpha }V_{\mu ]}=0,`$ (9)
$`^\alpha _{[\alpha }C_{\mu \nu ]}=0,`$ (10)
which, after a proper parametrization to be explained below, implies

$$_{[\mu }V_{\nu ]}=\frac{1}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}C_{\mu \nu },$$
(11)
which can be seen as the gauge transformation for $`C_{\mu \nu }`$ and establishes the standard relation between the B-field and the gauge field on the D6-brane, as can be seen building the corresponding part of the 4-form field strenght as

$`G_{\mu \nu ij}`$ $`=`$ $`C_{\mu \nu }_{[i}A_{j]}+_{[\mu }A_{\nu ]}B_{ij}`$ (12)
$`=`$ $`C_{\mu \nu }\left(_{[i}A_{j]}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}}B_{ij}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`C_{\mu \nu }_{ij}.`$
When the $`C_{\mu \nu }`$ is integrated, gives rise to the $`F+B`$ term of the Born-Infeld theory of the D6-brane.

Moreover, due to the holonomy group of the Taub-NUT manifold, in order to obtain a normalizable $`C_{\mu \nu }`$, we must require for it to be an anti-self-dual tensor.

Let us stop for a second and look at the implications of (11). We have obtained a description of the KK-monopole from a purely gravitational point of view, including the degrees of freedom corresponding to the gauge fields of the N=1 vector multiplet of its world-volume theory, as seen from (12).

There is, however, an extra condition which we have not used, namely, that the field strenght of the 3-form of M-theory, $`G`$, has to be zero. From (12) one obtains the following relation between the fields on the world-volume

$$\frac{1}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}B+dA=0$$
(13)
Which trivially implies that the B-field is flat, i.e. its topological classification lies in $`[H]Tors\left(H^3(X,)\right)`$.

## 3 D6-brane Charges

Now we can compute the charges of the system. The metric on the transverse space can be written as

$$ds_{TN}^2=\frac{r+m}{rm}dr^2+(r^2m^2)d\mathrm{\Omega }_{(2)}^2+(4m)^2\frac{rm}{r+m}\left(d\psi +\frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{2}d\varphi \right)^2,$$
(14)
so the vector potential and its field strenght are

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`2m\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi ,`$ (15)
$`F`$ $`=`$ $`dA=2m\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta d\varphi .`$ (16)
From here one can compute the NUT charge as

$$N=\frac{1}{8\pi }F=m.$$
(17)
It is interesting to mention that the parameter $`m`$ is set, from boundary conditions to be

$$4m=l_se^{\varphi _0}$$
(18)
where $`\varphi _0`$ is the boundary value of the dilaton of the type IIA string theory.

The magnetic charge of the monopole can be computed from the integral of the totally antisymmetric part of the spin connection minus the background $`\omega =Fk`$, where $`k=\frac{rm}{r+m}\left(4md\psi +2m\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi \right)`$ is the Killing vector representing the isometry, which is, up to a normalization factor

$$\omega =(4m)^2\frac{rm}{r+m}\frac{\mathrm{sin}\theta }{2}d\theta d\varphi d\psi .$$
(19)
This form is proportional to the volume form of the $`S^3`$ which means that it can be interpreted as a winding number. The corresponding charge is

$$K=\frac{1}{16\pi ^2}\omega =4m^2.$$
(20)
The metric (14) is self-dual, i.e. $`R_{\alpha \beta \gamma \sigma }=\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{\alpha \beta \eta \pi }R^{\eta \pi }_{\gamma \sigma }`$, which, in turn, implies that the mass of the solution is equal to its NUT charge, and has a positive orientation defined by an orthonormal frame  which can be chosen in such a way that

$`e^\psi `$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{rm}{r+m}}\right)^{1/2}\left(4md\psi +2m\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi \right),`$ (21)
$`e^r`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{r+m}{rm}}\right)^{1/2}dr,`$ (22)
where we have just written the two components that will be interesting for us.

At this moment we have computed three of the charges of the system, and this would be all if we do not consider the vector potentials associated with the 3-form of M-theory.

In order to define now the electric charge we will use the following strategy. Since we are considering an eleven dimensional supergravity solution, we will use the M-theory 3-form $`C_{MNP}`$. The pieces of $`C_{MNP}`$ that will be relevant for our discussion are the 2-form $`C_{\mu \nu }`$ and the 1-form $`V_\mu `$ defined in (7). Notice that these forms are associated, respectively, with the gauge field $`A_i`$ and the 2-form $`B_{ij}`$ on the D6-brane world-volume.

Using (11), we observe that the 2-form $`C_{\mu \nu }`$ is a pure gauge. It is this pure gauge 2-form the one that is playing for the eleven dimensional KK-monopole case the same role that a pure gauge 2-form $`B`$ in the case of the ten dimensional KK-monopole. In this sense we will define the electric charge as associated with $`C_{\mu 4}`$ where the coordinate $`4`$ is the one of the $`S^1`$ fiber of the Hopf fibration.

Let us stress that the main difference with the dyon effect for the ten dimensional KK-monopole is that we need to proyect the M-theory 3-form $`C`$ on the world-volume coordinates. Moreover, the fact that the so defined 2-form is a pure gauge is reflecting the gauge invariance of the world-volume BI lagrangian.

Thus in order to compute the electric charge, we parametrize the $`V_\mu `$ as in

$$V_\mu =(f_1(r),0,\frac{1}{2}f_2(r)\mathrm{cos}\theta ,f_2(r)),$$
(23)
which can be seen to correspond, up to normalization constants, to the vector $`k`$ plus a deformation coming from the $`e^r`$. This allows us to write

$$C_{\mu 4}=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^3l_s^{3/2}}\frac{2m}{(r+m)^2}dr.$$
(24)
Dualising this form we find

$$C_{(3)}={}_{}{}^{}C_{\mu 4}^{}=\frac{3(4m)^2}{2(2\pi )^3l_s^{3/2}}\left(\frac{rm}{r+m}\right)^2\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta d\varphi d\psi ,$$
(25)
which is again proportional to the volume of the $`S^3`$. This is the electric charge of the KK-monopole, and is well defined at infinity.

Notice that the $`S^1`$ part of the dyon moduli space is related to large gauge transformations of the 2-form $`C_{\mu \nu }`$.

This concludes the proof that the D6-brane interpreted as an eleven dimensional KK-monopole is -as predicted from the ten dimensional open tachyon condensation description- a dyon. This points out to a deep connection between the gauge-Higgs ten dimensional description of a D6-brane as a ’t Hooft-Polyakov monopole and the eleven dimensional gravitational description. The dyon charge is the most natural bridge between the two descriptions .

## Acknowledgements

This research was possible thanks to the grant AEN2000-1584.