text:
# Non-Linear Stochastic Equations with Calculable Steady States

## I Introduction

Non-linear stochastic partial differential equations appear extensively in problems of equilibrium and non-equilibrium statistical physics. For systems in thermal equilibrium, the form of these equations is constrained by fluctuation–dissipation conditions Deker  that ensure convergence of the steady state probability distribution to the appropriate Boltzmann weight HH . Non-equilibrium systems are not similarly constrained, and there is no simple way of finding their behavior in steady state (if any). However, there are examples in which steady states can be found exactly as solutions of the associated Fokker–Planck equations. In this paper we review some such examples, and introduce several new ones, along the way seeking general principles for finding steady states associated to non-linear stochastic equations exactly.

The simplest equation, which serves as the prototype for our investigations, is the Kardar–Parisi–Zhang (KPZ) equation KPZ

$$_th=\nu ^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda \left(h\right)^2+\eta ,$$
(1)
describing the non-equilibrium fluctuations of a (height) field $`h(𝐱,t)`$. The equation is equivalent to the Burgers equation (for a field $`𝐮=h`$) for vorticity-free turbulence Forster , and appears in various guises in the study of domain walls HHF  and directed polymers KZ ; FH  in a random potential, surface growth Reviews , and even the gene (or protein) sequence alignment problem HL ; Hwa . Still more problems can be formulated as generalizations of the KPZ equation that accommodate spatial anisotropy or the interplay of several fields. Examples in the literature include the dynamics of a vicinal surface Villain ; Wolf , the growth of two coupled surfaces Barabasi  or of a magnetic surface Drossel ; DK ; Kardar99 , and the transport of a flux line or polymer Ertas .

The stochastic aspect of Eq. (1) is due to the noise $`\eta (𝐱,t)`$, which has zero mean and short-range correlations in space and time. In the absence of the non-linear term proportional to $`\lambda `$, it reduces to a standard Langevin equation, with a Gaussian steady state. In one dimension, the non-linear term does not modify this steady state as the associated probability current in the Fokker–Planck equation is zero. This observation motivates our search for other equations with this property, namely an easily guessed (equilibrium) steady state which is not affected by the additional (non-equilibrium) non-linearities.

In Sec. II, we start by constructing the Fokker–Planck equation for the one dimensional KPZ equation and explicitly showing that the probability current due to the non-linear term does not modify the steady state, as it appears in an integral of a complete derivative. This observation is then used as a basis for constructing other one dimensional non-linear equations that share this property. Indeed, we find that the class of such equations is quite large, including some equations already considered in the literature.

Higher dimensional versions of the KPZ equation may also obtain a Gaussian steady state in spite of their non-linear character. We discuss such a case in Sec. III, namely an anisotropic variant of the KPZ equation in two dimensions with non-linear terms of opposite signs in the two directions. Using renormalization group methods, Wolf Wolf  showed that this model indeed flows under renormalization to a linear fixed point. Generalizations of this equation with calculable steady states are also constructed; they all share a hidden symmetry under reflection, absent in the isotropic KPZ equation.

The examples from one and two dimensions motivate the search for more general principles governing the existence of simple steady states, taken up in Sec. IV. Specifically, we consider stochastic dynamics of multiple fields coupled by non-linear (possibly anisotropic) generalizations of the KPZ term, and ask whether they admit Gaussian steady states. A direct solution of the Fokker–Planck equation becomes considerably more difficult and, instead, we derive two sets of general prescriptions on the coefficients for this to occur. These prescriptions may be viewed as generalized fluctuation–dissipation relations glasses , and are quite restrictive. In particular, they cannot be satisfied in three and higher dimensions as we show in Sec. V.

Having obtained general prescriptions, in Sec. VI we apply them to equations for coupled fields in one and two dimensions. Some of the examples we discuss correspond to equations that have already appeared in the literature, in particular pertaining to the dynamics of a flux–line or polymer (Sec. VI.1) and to the growth of a magnetic film (Sec. VI.2). However, in Sec. VI.3 we propose a novel set of equations to describe the coupling of the strain field of a growing crystal to its height fluctuations. We find that Gaussian steady states are indeed permitted for these equations in special cases.

The Appendix treats a simple example aimed at illustrating how the systematic approach may be extended to exactly calculable non-Gaussian steady states.

## II Generalized Growth Equations in One Dimensions

Consider the probability distribution $`𝒫[h]`$ for configurations of the field $`h(𝐱)`$. As the surface changes in time according to Eq. (1), the corresponding probability evolves according to the Fokker–Planck equation

$$_t𝒫=d^dx\left\{\left[\nu ^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda \left(h\right)^2\right]\frac{\delta 𝒫}{\delta h}+D\frac{\delta ^2𝒫}{\delta h^2}\right\}.$$
(2)
The term in the square brackets is due to the deterministic probability current and the remainder comes from the stochastic noise, assumed Gaussian with $`\eta (𝐱,t)=0`$ and

$$\eta (𝐱,t)\eta (𝐱^{},t^{})=2D\delta ^d(𝐱𝐱^{})\delta (tt^{}).$$
(3)
In equilibrium, $`D=k_BT`$; more generally, $`D`$ is a measure of the magnitude of the noise.

A steady-state solution is one for which $`_t𝒫=0`$. In the absence of the non-linear term, the steady-state solution of Eq. (2) is a simple Gaussian,

$$𝒫=N\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\nu }{2D}d^d𝐱(h)^2\right],$$
(4)
where $`N`$ is a normalization constant. In general, this is not a steady state for $`\lambda 0`$. In one dimension, however, the contribution of the non-linear term to the probability current can be simplified to

$`_t𝒫`$ $`=`$ $`𝒫{\displaystyle 𝑑x\frac{\nu \lambda }{2D}(_xh)^2_{xx}h}`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`𝒫{\displaystyle 𝑑x_x\left[\frac{\nu \lambda }{6D}(_xh)^3\right]},`$
a surface integral safely set to zero in the limit of an infinite system. Thus, the steady-state spatial correlations are not influenced by the presence of the KPZ non-linearity and coincide with the Gaussian (Edwards–Wilkinson EW ) ones. We make no statements about the stability of the steady state of Eq. (4); however, here, and in every other example for which simulations are available, numerical results indicate that the simple Gaussian steady states we discuss are indeed the ones achieved at long time.

The one-dimensional KPZ equation is a particular instance of a more general class of equations,

$$_th=f\left(_xh\right)_x_xh+g\left(_xh\right)+\eta ,$$
(6)
with $`f`$ and $`g`$ arbitrary functions. These equations obtain a steady state

$$𝒫=N\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{D}𝑑xF(_xh)\right],$$
(7)
where $`f`$ is the second derivative of $`F`$ (*i.e.*, $`d^2F(u)/du^2=f(u)`$). For $`g(_xh)=0`$, Eq. (6) is again a standard Langevin equation, while the contribution of this function to the probability current is

$`_t𝒫`$ $`=`$ $`𝒫{\displaystyle 𝑑x\frac{1}{D}g(_xh)f(_xh)_x_xh}`$ (8)
$`=`$ $`𝒫{\displaystyle 𝑑x_x\left[\frac{\nu }{D}G(_xh)\right]}`$
$`=`$ $`0,`$
where G is the primitive of $`gf`$ (*i.e.*, $`dG(u)/du=g(u)f(u)`$).

The special case of a cubic non-linearity $`g(_xh)=\frac{1}{2}\lambda (_xh)^2+\frac{1}{6}\lambda ^{}(_xh)^3`$ (with $`f=1`$) was introduced to describe an interface separating stationary phases of the Toom model DLSS . The Gaussian steady state corroborates the marginal irrelevance PBMH  of the cubic term, and implies spatial correlations of the form

$$(h(x)h(x^{}))^2^{1/2}|xx^{}|^{1/2}.$$
(9)
## III Anisotropic Equations in Two Dimensions

To describe the growth of a vicinal (slightly miscut from a low index facet) surface, Villain introduced Villain  an anisotropic version of the KPZ equation, which was subsequently studied with a renormalization group calculation by Wolf Wolf . This generalized equation has the form

$$_th=\nu _x_x^2h+\nu _y_y^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _x(_xh)^2+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _y(_yh)^2+\eta .$$
(10)
Under renormalization, the subspace with $`\nu _x/\nu _y=\lambda _x/\lambda _y`$ is fixed and equivalent to the isotropic KPZ equation modulo a rescaling of $`x`$ or $`y`$. This subspace is locally attractive, so that the equation flows to a strong-coupling limit if $`\lambda _x`$ and $`\lambda _y`$ have the same sign (stability requires $`\nu _x,\nu _y0`$). The more surprising behavior arises when the product $`\lambda _x\lambda _y`$ is negative, in which case the flows converge to a fixed point with vanishing non-linearities.

This vanishing of non-linearities at long length and time scales suggests a Gaussian steady-state probability density, as corroborated by an exact solution of a discrete model belonging to the same universality class Prahofer  and by a direct solution of the Fokker–Planck equation Kardar98 . Indeed, the Ansatz

$$𝒫=N\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{2D}𝑑x𝑑y\left[\nu _x\left(_xh\right)^2+\nu _y\left(_yh\right)^2\right]\right\},$$
(11)
with the generalized fluctuation–dissipation condition $`\nu _x/\nu _y=\lambda _x/\lambda _y`$, solves for the steady state. To verify this, we note that the contributions from the non-linearities take the form

$`_t𝒫`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒫}{2D}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x𝑑y\left[\lambda _x\left(_xh\right)^2+\lambda _y\left(_yh\right)^2\right]}`$ (12)
$`\times \left[\nu _x_x^2h+\nu _y_y^2h\right]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒫}{2D}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x𝑑y}`$
$`\{_x[{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _x\nu _x}{3}}\left(_xh\right)^3+\lambda _y\nu _x\left(_xh\right)\left(_yh\right)^2]`$
$`+_y\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _y\nu _y}{3}}\left(_yh\right)^3+\lambda _x\nu _y\left(_xh\right)^2\left(_yh\right)\right]`$
$`+2_xh_yh_x_yh(\lambda _y\nu _x+\lambda _x\nu _y)\}.`$
If $`\lambda _y\nu _x+\lambda _x\nu _y=0`$, the above contribution is the divergence of a vector field, and hence vanishes subject to the usual boundary conditions. This non-perturbative derivation complements the renormalization group analysis Wolf  which captures perturbatively the character of this state at large scales and the dynamics that lead to it. In particular, it demonstrates that a Gaussian steady state (and the logarithmic roughness it implies) obtains at *any* length scale, and not only in the long wavelength limit.

By suitable rescalings of $`x`$ and $`y`$, we can make $`\nu _x=\nu _y=\nu `$, so that the steady state reduces to Eq. (4) with $`d=2`$. Trivially, this steady state also holds for any equation related to

$$_th=\nu ^2h+\frac{\lambda }{2}\left[\left(_xh\right)^2\left(_yh\right)^2\right]+\eta ,$$
(13)
by a rotation of the plane. This class comprises all the equations of the form

$$_th=\nu ^2h+\frac{\lambda _1}{2}\left[\left(_xh\right)^2\left(_yh\right)^2\right]+\lambda _2_xh_yh+\eta ,$$
(14)
where $`\mathrm{arctan}(\lambda _2/\lambda _1)/2`$ is the plane rotation angle; in particular, the equation

$$_th=\nu ^2h+\lambda _xh_yh+\eta $$
(15)
is obtained from Eq. (13) by a 45 rotation.

The surprisingly simple steady state of Eq. (13) results from a “hidden” symmetry under the transformation

$$\{\begin{array}{c}hh\hfill \\ xy\hfill \\ yx\hfill \end{array}.$$
(16)
The symmetry $`hh`$ is precisely the one broken by the isotropic KPZ non-linearity. It is restored here, provided the plane is also inverted about an appropriate axis: the bisector in the case of Eq. (13), the $`x`$\- or $`y`$-axis in the case of Eq. (15), and a properly rotated axis in the general case of Eq. (14). This hidden symmetry sheds light on the renormalization group analysis Wolf , as any two dimensional anisotropic KPZ term may be written, upon rotation of the plane, as the sum of an isotropic part and the antisymmetric part of Eq. (13) whose subspace is invariant under renormalization.

By analogy to Eq. (6), we can generalize Eq. (15) to include a more complicated Laplacian term, as

$$_th=f_x(_xh)_{x}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}h+f_y(_yh)_{y}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}h+\lambda _xh_yh+\eta .$$
(17)
Indeed, it is easy to check that the probability density

$$𝒫=N\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{D}𝑑x𝑑y\left[F_x(_xh)+F_y(_yh)\right]\right\},$$
(18)
where $`f_x(u)=dF_x(u)/du`$ and $`f_y(u)=dF_y(u)/du`$, is stationary.

## IV General Prescriptions for Gaussian Steady States

The solution of Fokker–Planck equations by direct check of Ansätze soon becomes laborious beyond simple one and two dimensional examples. Instead, we derive general prescriptions on the structure of the equations of evolution, for the realization of Gaussian steady states. We consider equations of the form

$$_th_i(𝐱,t)=_𝐱^{(i)}[h]+𝒩_𝐱^{(i)}[h]+\eta _i(𝐱,t),$$
(19)
for $`n`$ coupled fields ($`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$), $`𝐱𝐑^d`$, and Gaussian (thermal) noise with correlator

$$\eta _i(𝐱,t)\eta _j(𝐱^{},t^{})=2D_i\delta _{ij}\delta ^d(𝐱𝐱^{})\delta (tt^{}).$$
(20)
$`_𝐱`$ and $`𝒩_𝐱`$ denote linear and non-linear functionals of the fields, respectively, evaluated at point $`𝐱`$. If $`\eta _i`$ and $`\eta _{ji}`$ are uncorrelated diagonalize , the Fokker–Planck equation reads

$$_t𝒫=d^dx\underset{i}{}\frac{\delta }{\delta h_i}\left[(_𝐱^{(i)}+𝒩_𝐱^{(i)})𝒫+\frac{\delta 𝒫}{\delta h_i}\right],$$
(21)
where we have absorbed $`D_i`$ in a rescaling of $`h_i`$ (by $`\sqrt{D_i}`$), and reduces to

$$_t𝒫=d^dx\underset{i}{}\left[(_𝐱^{(i)}+𝒩_𝐱^{(i)})\frac{\delta 𝒫}{\delta h_i}+\frac{\delta ^2𝒫}{\delta h_i^2}\right]$$
(22)
if $``$ and $`𝒩`$ depend upon the derivatives of $`h`$ only. We are looking for a Gaussian probability density

$$𝒫=Ne^{Q[h]},$$
(23)
with $`Q[h]`$ a quadratic form and $`N`$ a normalizing factor, that solves the steady state $`_t𝒫=0`$, i.e.

$$d^dx\underset{i}{}\left[(_𝐱^{(i)}+𝒩_𝐱^{(i)})\left(\frac{\delta Q}{\delta h_i}\right)+\left(\frac{\delta Q}{\delta h_i}\right)^2\right]=0.$$
(24)
The quadratic terms cancel if $``$ and $`Q`$ are related through

$$_𝐱^{(i)}=\frac{\delta Q}{\delta h_i},$$
(25)
and it remains to find the form of $``$ and $`𝒩`$ for which the integral

$`𝒥[h]`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle d^dx\underset{i}{}𝒩_𝐱^{(i)}\frac{\delta Q}{\delta h_i}}`$ (26)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^dx\underset{i}{}𝒩_𝐱^{(i)}_𝐱^{(i)}}`$
vanishes. This is the case if the integrand either vanishes identically or is the divergence of a vector field. In either case, the integrand is unchanged by a variation $`\delta h(𝐱)`$ that vanishes at infinity. If $`\delta h`$ is localized at $`𝐱`$, the condition $`𝒥[h+\delta h]=J[h]`$ translates, to first order in $`\delta h`$, into

$$\frac{\delta }{\delta h_j(𝐱)}d^dy𝒩_𝐲^{(i)}_𝐲^{(i)}=0,$$
(27)
where the summation over $`i`$ is understood.

For coupled KPZ-like equations drift  of the form

$$_th_i=\nu _{ij\alpha \beta }_\alpha _\beta h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{ijk\alpha \beta }_\alpha h_j_\beta h_k+\eta _i,$$
(28)
where Latin indices $`i,j,k=1,\mathrm{},n`$ refer to field components and Greek indices $`\alpha ,\beta =1,\mathrm{},d`$ refer to spatial components, Eq. (27) reduces to

$$\begin{array}{c}\nu _{ij\alpha \beta }\lambda _{ikl\gamma \delta }(_\alpha _\beta _\gamma h_k_\delta h_l+_\alpha _\gamma h_k_\beta _\delta h_l)\hfill \\ \nu _{ik\alpha \beta }\lambda _{ijl\gamma \delta }(_\alpha _\beta _\gamma h_k_\delta h_l+_\alpha _\beta h_k_\gamma _\delta h_l)=0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(29)
after some renaming of the indices and using the fact that $`\nu `$ and $`\lambda `$ can always be chosen to satisfy the equalities

$$\nu _{ij\alpha \beta }=\nu _{ij\beta \alpha }\mathrm{and}\lambda _{ijk\alpha \beta }=\lambda _{ikj\beta \alpha }.$$
(30)
Furthermore, Eq. (25) requires the symmetry

$$\nu _{ij\alpha \beta }=\nu _{ji\alpha \beta },$$
(31)
and the stationary probability density reads

$$𝒫=N\mathrm{exp}\left(d^dx\frac{\nu _{ij\alpha \beta }}{2}_\alpha h_i_\beta h_j\right).$$
(32)
Since repeated indices are summed over, Eq. (29) represents $`n`$ conditions—one for each possible value of the index $`j`$. Each of these in fact encapsulates more than one constraint: Eq. (29) is composed of terms that come in one of two derivative structures and, as the equation must be true for arbitrary $`h`$, terms of a given derivative structure must cancel independently. This is ensured by the following two sets of  generalized fluctuation–dissipation conditions on the tensors $`\nu `$ and $`\lambda `$: The first condition comes from grouping terms in Eq. (29) which are products of first and third derivatives, (such as $`_\alpha _\beta _\gamma h_k_\delta h_l`$), and reads

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\text{(I) }_P(\hfill & \nu _{ijP(\alpha )P(\beta )}\lambda _{iklP(\gamma )\delta }\hfill & \\ & \nu _{ikP(\alpha )P(\beta )}\lambda _{ijlP(\gamma )\delta }\hfill & )=0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(33)
where the summation runs over the six permutations of the indices $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma `$. A second condition comes from grouping terms of the form $`_\alpha _\gamma h_k_\beta _\delta h_l`$, and gives

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\text{(II) }_{R,R^{}}(\hfill & 2\nu _{ijR(\alpha )R^{}(\gamma )}\lambda _{iklR(\beta )R^{}(\delta )}\hfill & \\ & \nu _{ikR(\alpha )R(\beta )}\lambda _{ijlR^{}(\gamma )R^{}(\delta )}\hfill & \\ & \nu _{ilR^{}(\gamma )R^{}(\delta )}\lambda _{ijkR(\alpha )R(\beta )}\hfill & )=0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(34)
where the summation runs over the two permutations of the indices $`\alpha ,\beta `$ and the two permutations of the indices $`\gamma ,\delta `$. Each pair of conditions corresponds to a given choice of numerical values for $`j`$, $`k`$, $`l`$, $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\gamma `$, and $`\delta `$.

Conditions (I) and (II) are necessary for a Gaussian solution of the steady-state Fokker–Planck equation. They are also sufficient conditions, since $`𝒥[h+\delta h]=𝒥[h]`$ to first order for any $`\delta h`$ implies $`𝒥[h+\delta h]=𝒥[h]`$ to all orders, and $`𝒥[h]`$ = constant $`c`$. But normalization of $`𝒫`$ allows only $`c=0`$ (otherwise $`𝒫`$ either increases or decreases uniformly), and consequently $`_t𝒫=0`$.

## V Absence of Gaussian Steady States in Three and Higher Dimensions

If the matrix of Laplacian coefficients $`\nu _{ij\alpha \beta }`$ is positive definite, as required by infra-red stability, it can be diagonalized into

$$\nu _{ij\alpha \beta }=\nu _{ij}\delta _{\alpha \beta },$$
(35)
by successive rotations and rescalings, and the prescriptions (I) and (II) simplify correspondingly. In three and higher dimensions we may choose the space indices, in applying the prescriptions, such that $`\alpha =\gamma `$ while $`\alpha \beta \delta \alpha `$. With this choice, it is straightforward to check that prescription (II) forbids a non-vanishing contraction of tensors with different space indices, hence enforces the partially diagonal form

$$\nu _{ij}\lambda _{ikl\alpha \beta }\nu _{ij}\lambda _{ikl\alpha \alpha }\delta _{\alpha \beta },$$
(36)
(where $`i`$ is summed over but $`\alpha `$ is not). With this constraint, prescription (II) takes the form

$$\begin{array}{ccc}_{R,R^{}}[\hfill & \nu _{ij}\lambda _{jklR(\beta )R(\beta )}\delta _{R(\alpha )R^{}(\gamma )}\delta _{R(\beta )R^{}(\delta )}\hfill & \\ & \frac{1}{2}(\nu _{ik}\lambda _{ijlR^{}(\gamma )R^{}(\gamma )}+\nu _{il}\lambda _{ijkR(\alpha )R(\alpha )})\hfill & \\ & \times \delta _{R(\alpha )R(\beta )}\delta _{R^{}(\gamma )R^{}(\delta )}\hfill & ]=0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(37)
This equation expresses a set of different conditions, one for each choice of values of the indices that are not summed over. Specifically, for a particular choice in which $`\alpha =\gamma \beta =\delta `$, Eq. (37) translates into

$$\nu _{ij}\lambda _{ikl\alpha \alpha }=\nu _{ij}\lambda _{ikl\beta \beta }.$$
(38)
For the sake of visual ease, let us define the object $`\phi _\alpha \nu _{ij}\lambda _{ikl\alpha \alpha }`$ (the dependence of $`\phi _\alpha `$ on $`j,k,l`$ is tacit), in terms of which this identity reads

$$\phi _\alpha =\phi _\beta ;$$
(39)
clearly, if it is possible to choose three or more distinct values of the indices $`\alpha ,\beta `$, this condition is frustrated and admits only the trivial solution

$$\phi _\alpha =\nu _{ij}\lambda _{ikl\alpha \alpha }=0$$
(40)
for all $`j,k,l,\alpha `$. Viewed as a vector identity, this requires that any vector $`\nu _j`$ be orthogonal to any vector $`\lambda _{kl\alpha \alpha }`$ (with components labeled by $`i=1,\mathrm{}n`$). As long as the matrix $`\nu _{ij}`$ is non-degenerate, there are $`n`$ non-vanishing independent vectors $`\nu _j`$ (for $`j=1,\mathrm{}n`$) and Eq. (40) is satisfied only if the vectors $`\lambda _{kl\alpha \alpha }`$ vanish for all $`k,l,\alpha `$. Hence, no Gaussian steady state is achievable in three and higher dimensions if non-linearities are present in the equations of evolution Tauber .

## VI Coupled Fields in One and Two Dimensions

In the case of a single field fluctuating in two dimensions, prescriptions (I) and (II) immediately enforce the form of Eq. (14) for which a Gaussian steady state may be reached, as we checked explicitely in Sec. III. In what follows, we discuss examples in which the coupling among several fluctuating fields broadens the class of non-linear equations with Gaussian steady states beyond this specific anisotropic form (with coefficients of opposite signs).

### VI.1 Coupled Lines and Drifting Polymers

An array of fluctuating directed lines HHF ; KZ ; FH  is parametrized by a single variable, consequently the Greek indices in Eq. (28) all take the same value and may be omitted. Equation (28) then reduces to

$$_th_i=\nu _{ij}_x_xh_j+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{ijk}_xh_j_xh_k+\eta _i,$$
(41)
a generalization of the one dimensional KPZ equation for several coupled fields. In this simple case, prescriptions (I) and (II) are fulfilled by any tensors $`\nu `$, $`\lambda `$ such that

$$\nu _{ij}\lambda _{ikl}=\nu _{ik}\lambda _{ijl}=\nu _{il}\lambda _{ikj},$$
(42)
where $`\lambda _{ijk}`$ can always be chosen symmetric in $`j,k`$, and the sum over $`i`$ is understood. It is easy to check that these relations ensure a stationary probability density

$$𝒫=N\mathrm{exp}\left(𝑑x\frac{\nu _{ij}}{2}_xh_i_xh_j\right).$$
(43)
Indeed, with this Ansatz

$`_t𝒫`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑x\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{ikl}_xh_k_xh_l\nu _{ij}_x_xh_j𝒫}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }dx{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}(\nu _{ij}\lambda _{ikl}_x_xh_j_xh_k_xh_l`$
$`+\nu _{ik}\lambda _{ijl}_xh_j_x_xh_k_xh_l`$
$`+\nu _{il}\lambda _{ikj}_xh_j_xh_k_x_xh_l)𝒫,`$
where we have renamed the mute indices to obtain the last equality. But Eq. (42) implies that all three coefficients are identical, and

$$_t𝒫=𝑑x\frac{1}{6}\nu _{ij}\lambda _{ikl}_x(_xh_j_xh_k_xh_l)=0.$$
(45)
A special case of Eq. (41),

$$\{\begin{array}{c}_th_{}=\nu _{}_x_xh_{}+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{}(_xh_{})^2+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{}(_xh_{})^2+\eta _{}\hfill \\ _th_{}=\nu _{}_x_xh_{}+\lambda _\times _xh_{}_xh_{}+\eta _{}\hfill \end{array},$$
(46)
was introduced in Refs. Ertas  to describe a directed polymer drifting perpendicularly to itself. Here $`h_{}`$ and $`h_{}`$ are interpreted not as height fields associated with two different lines embedded in two dimensions, but rather as dynamically coupled longitudinal and transverse (to the average velocity of the polymer) fluctuations of a single line embedded in three dimensions. The conditions of Eq. (42) for a Gaussian steady state simplify to

$$\nu _{}\lambda _{}=\nu _{}\lambda _\times ,$$
(47)
in agreement with a direct check Ertas ; temperature .

In the simplest case with identical longitudinal and transverse coefficients, a stationary Gaussian distribution follows trivially from the steady-state properties of the one-dimensional KPZ equation (discussed in Sec. II), since the equations

$$\{\begin{array}{c}_th_{}=\nu _x_xh_{}+\frac{1}{2}\lambda [(_xh_{})^2+(_xh_{})^2]+\eta _{}\hfill \\ _th_{}=\nu _x_xh_{}+\lambda _xh_{}_xh_{}+\eta _{}\hfill \end{array}$$
(48)
are equivalent to

$$\{\begin{array}{c}_th_+=\nu _x_xh_++\frac{1}{2}\lambda (_xh_+)^2+\eta _+\\ _th_{}=\nu _x_xh_{}+\frac{1}{2}\lambda (_xh_{})^2+\eta _{}\end{array},$$
(49)
with $`h_\pm =h_{}\pm h_{}`$ and $`\eta _\pm =\eta _{}\pm \eta _{}`$. Clearly, the remark extends to higher spatial dimensions, where

$$\{\begin{array}{c}_th_{}=\nu ^2h_{}+\frac{1}{2}\lambda [(h_{})^2+(h_{})^2]+\eta _{}\hfill \\ _th_{}=\nu ^2h_{}+\lambda h_{}h_{}+\eta _{}\hfill \end{array},$$
(50)
transform into

$$\{\begin{array}{c}_th_+=\nu ^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda (h_+)^2+\eta _+\hfill \\ _th_+=\nu ^2h_{}+\frac{1}{2}\lambda (h_{})^2+\eta _{}\hfill \end{array}.$$
(51)
Therefore, the “roughness” exponent $`\zeta _{}`$ of a passive scalar $`h_{}`$ advected Kraichman ; Turbulence  by a Burgers flow $`𝐮=h_{}`$, defined through

$$\left(h_{}(𝐱)h_{}(𝐲)\right)^2^{1/2}|𝐱𝐲|^\zeta _{},$$
(52)
is none other than the KPZ roughness exponent KPZ .

### VI.2 Magnetic Growth

In a growing magnetic material, the spins may be assumed frozen in the bulk while still fluctuating on the surface, which itself fluctuates in height Drossel ; DK . For the case of XY spins, described by a single angular field $`\theta (x,y,t)`$, Ref. Kardar99  notes that a two-dimensional version of Eqs. (46) governs these non-equilibrium coupled fluctuations. In the modified notation, these equations of evolution read

$$\{\begin{array}{c}_th=\nu _h^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{hh}(h)^2+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{\theta \theta }(\theta )^2+\eta _h\hfill \\ _t\theta =\nu _\theta ^2\theta +\lambda _{h\theta }h\theta +\eta _\theta \hfill \end{array}.$$
(53)
(Obviously, Eqs. (53) fail to capture the periodic nature of $`\theta `$, and with it the potentially relevant presence of topological defects.)

Using prescriptions (I) and (II), it is easy to show that no Gaussian steady state exists for such isotropic equations as long as $`h`$ and $`\theta `$ are decoupled at the linear level. However, the stationary Gaussian distribution

$$𝒫=N\mathrm{exp}\left(𝑑x𝑑y\left[\frac{\nu _h}{2}(h)^2+\frac{\nu _\theta }{2}(\theta )^2\right]\right),$$
(54)
is achieved by a natural extension of the anisotropic Eq. (13),

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}_th\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _h^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{hh}[(_xh)^2(_yh)^2]\hfill \\ & & +\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{\theta \theta }[(_x\theta )^2(_y\theta )^2]+\eta _h\hfill \\ _t\theta \hfill & =\hfill & \nu _\theta ^2\theta +\lambda _{h\theta }(_xh_x\theta _yh_y\theta )+\eta _\theta \hfill \end{array},$$
(55)
provided $`\nu _h\lambda _{\theta \theta }=\nu _\theta \lambda _{h\theta }`$ (in direct analogy to Eq. (47)). We note also that these equations again satisfy the symmetry of Eq. (16).

### VI.3 Crystalline Growth

The height fluctuations of a material characterized by internal order parameters, as in the above case of a growing XY magnet, are subjected to the fluctuations of these order parameters. Conversely, the evolution of the internal order parameters depends on the height fluctuations. In contrast to amorphous growth, we may say that the fluctuations of an ordered material results from a textural growth, as the the additional fields invest the interface with a texture that constrains its fluctuations. The prime example is that of the growth of a crystal in which surface phonons interact with height fluctuations. In analogy with Eqs. (53), we propose the following equations for isotropic crystalline growth,

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}_th\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _h^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{hh}(h)^2+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{uu}^{(1)}(𝐮)^2\hfill \\ & & +\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{uu}^{(2)}u_iu_i+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{uu}^{(3)}_i𝐮u_i+\eta _h\hfill \\ _tu_i\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _u^{(1)}^2u_i+\nu _u^{(2)}_i𝐮+\lambda _{hu}^{(1)}_ih𝐮\hfill \\ & & +\lambda _{hu}^{(2)}hu_i+\lambda _{hu}^{(3)}h_i𝐮+\eta _i\hfill \end{array},$$
(56)
where $`𝐮(x,y,t)`$ is the surface displacement vector field, and $`\nu _u^{(1)}`$, $`\nu _u^{(2)}`$ are related to the usual Lamé coefficients through

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\nu _u^{(1)}=\mu _{\mathrm{Lam}\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{e}}}\hfill \\ \nu _u^{(2)}=\mu _{\mathrm{Lam}\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{e}}}+\lambda _{\mathrm{Lam}\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{e}}}\hfill \end{array}.$$

One would like to know, given the richness of Eqs. (56), what phases they describe beyond the usual KPZ (amorphous) phase. As a first step towards a complete answer, we discuss crystalline growth equations that admit an exact Gaussian steady state.

Equations (56) tacitly assume a triangular lattice at the microscopic level, since other lattices would be reflected in an anisotropic continuum limit that reproduces the appropriate crystal symmetries. In the context of anistropic equations, trivial extensions of Eqs. (55) support a Gaussian steady state.

Rather than dwelling on these examples, we turn to a new possibility, namely isotropic equations of the form of Eqs. (56) that admit a stationary Gaussian probability density, as allowed by the presence of linear couplings between $`u_x`$ and $`u_y`$. A somewhat tedious but straightforward application of prescriptions (I) and (II) to Eqs. (56) yields two (and only two) non-trivial solutions, characterized by a vanishing shear modulus $`\nu _u^{(1)}=0`$ and a vanishing bulk modulus $`\nu _u^{(1)}+\nu _u^{(2)}=0`$.

With a vanishing shear modulus $`\nu _u^{(1)}=0`$, (I) and (II) imply

$$\lambda _{hh}=\lambda _{uu}^{(2)}=\lambda _{uu}^{(3)}=\lambda _{hu}^{(2)}=\lambda _{hu}^{(3)}=0$$
(57)
and

$$\nu _h\lambda _{uu}^{(1)}=\nu _u^{(2)}\lambda _{hu}^{(1)},$$
(58)
resulting in the equations of motion

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}_th\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _h^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{uu}(𝐮)^2+\eta _h\hfill \\ _t𝐮\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _u(𝐮)+\lambda _{hu}h(𝐮)+\eta \hfill \end{array},$$
(59)
where the coefficients have been renamed ($`\nu _u\nu _u^{(2)}`$, $`\lambda _{uu}\lambda _{uu}^{(1)}`$, $`\lambda _{hu}\lambda _{hu}^{(1)}`$). The probability density

$$𝒫=N\mathrm{exp}\left(𝑑x𝑑y\left[\frac{\nu _u}{2}(h)^2+\frac{\nu _u}{2}(𝐮)^2\right]\right)$$
(60)
is stationary, as the direct check

$`_t𝒫`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }dxdy[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\lambda _{uu}(𝐮)\nu _h^2h`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\nu _h}{\nu _u}}\lambda _{uu}h(𝐮)\nu _u(𝐮)]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑x𝑑y\frac{\nu _h\lambda _{uu}}{2}[h(𝐮)^2]}`$ (62)
$`=`$ $`0,`$ (63)
confirms. In terms of the density fluctuations

$$\rho u$$
(64)
and the vorticity

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_xu_y_yu_x,$$
(65)
we may interpret Eqs. (59) as describing a liquid that is flowing on a fluctuating surface $`h(x,y,t)`$ via the partially decoupled set of equations

$$\{\begin{array}{c}_th=\nu _h^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{uu}\rho ^2+\eta _h\hfill \\ _t\rho =\nu _u^2\rho +\lambda _{hu}(\rho h)+\eta \hfill \\ _t\mathrm{\Omega }=_x\eta _y_y\eta _x\hfill \end{array}$$

This is again reminiscent of the advection of a scalar Kraichman ; Turbulence  (density fluctuations are advected along height gradients) which is not quite passive, as $`\rho `$ influences the evolution of $`h`$. Equations (VI.3) describe also a special case of the coupled growth of a binary film or, equivalently, of a scalar (Ising) magnet DK .

With a vanishing bulk modulus $`\nu _u^{(1)}+\nu _u^{(2)}=0`$, (I) and (II) imply

$$\lambda _{hh}=\lambda _{uu}^{(1)}=\lambda _{hu}^{(1)}=\lambda _{uu}^{(2)}+\lambda _{uu}^{(3)}=\lambda _{hu}^{(2)}+\lambda _{hu}^{(3)}=0$$
(66)
and

$$\nu _h\lambda _{uu}^{(2)}=\nu _u^{(1)}\lambda _{hu}^{(2)},$$
(67)
resulting in the equations of motion

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}_th\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _h^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{uu}_iu_j\left(_iu_j_ju_i\right)+\eta _h\hfill \\ _tu_i\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _u_j\left(_ju_i_iu_j\right)\hfill \\ & & +\lambda _{hu}_jh\left(_ju_i_iu_j\right)+\eta \hfill \end{array},$$
(68)
where $`\nu _u\nu _u^{(1)}`$, $`\lambda _{uu}\lambda _{uu}^{(2)},`$ and $`\lambda _{hu}\lambda _{hu}^{(2)}`$. Introducing a fictitious direction $`z`$ according to the natural definition $`\times 𝐮=(_xu_y_yu_x)\widehat{z}`$ with $`=(_x,_y,0)`$ and $`𝐮=(u_x,u_y,0)`$, we can rewrite Eqs. (68) in the more compact form

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}_th\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _h^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{uu}(\times 𝐮)^2+\eta _h\hfill \\ _t𝐮\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _u\times (\times 𝐮)\hfill \\ & & \lambda _{hu}h\times (\times 𝐮)+\eta \hfill \end{array}.$$
(69)
With this form at hand, the stationarity of the probability density

$$𝒫=N\mathrm{exp}\left(𝑑x𝑑y\left[\frac{\nu _h}{2}(h)^2+\frac{\nu _u}{2}(\times 𝐮)^2\right]\right)$$
(70)
is obtained in direct analogy with the case of vanishing shear modulus. In terms of $`\rho `$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, Eqs. (69) become

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}_th\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _h^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{uu}\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\eta _h\hfill \\ _t\mathrm{\Omega }\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _u^2\mathrm{\Omega }+\lambda _{hu}(\mathrm{\Omega }h)+\eta _{}\hfill \\ _t\rho \hfill & =\hfill & \eta _{}\hfill \end{array},$$
(71)
none other than Eqs. (VI.3) with $`\rho `$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ interchanged, but still a transverse noise $`\eta _{}=_x\eta _y_y\eta _x`$ driving the fluctuations of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and a longitudinal noise $`\eta _{}=_x\eta _x+_y\eta _y`$ driving $`\rho `$. Here we can interpret $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ as the density of dislocations whose presence locally affects growth.

Experiments on surface growth do not point to a unique characterization Krim  and, in particular, most measured roughness exponents differ from those expected on the basis of the KPZ equation Reviews ; Family ; Meakin . This may result from conservation laws, incorporated in some molecular beam epitaxy models Sun ; Lai ; Siegert ; Krug , but it also may be the consequence of the dynamic coupling of the height fluctuations with the fluctuations of the intrinsic order parameter of the material, as in magnetic or crystalline growth. Thus, having established that the special Eqs. (59) and (69) admit Gaussian steady states, one would like to know whether the full Eqs. (56) may flow to them under renormalization. If Eqs. (59) or (69) indeed have a basin of attraction, we are left with the surprising conclusion that the coupling to crystal vibration tethers the fluctuating surface, in an appropriately prepared sample, to logarithmic roughness, in marked contrast to the KPZ roughness associated with amorphous growth.

Rather than renormalizing the full set of Eqs. (56), one may, as a first attempt, consider the renormalization of Eqs. (VI.3) or (71) with an added KPZ term $`(\lambda _{hh}0)`$,

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}_th\hfill & =\hfill & \nu _h^2h+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{hh}(h)^2+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{uu}\rho ^2+\eta _h\hfill \\ _t\rho \hfill & =\hfill & \nu _u^2\rho +\lambda _{hu}(\rho h)+\eta _{}\hfill \\ _t\mathrm{\Omega }\hfill & =\hfill & \eta _{}\hfill \end{array}.$$
(72)
The sub-space of Eqs. (72) is closed under renormalization since they are invariant under the transformation

$$𝐮𝐮+\times 𝐀,$$
(73)
with $`𝐀(x,y)`$ an arbitrary smooth function. (Similarly, Eqs. (71) are invariant under

$$𝐮𝐮+\varphi ,$$
(74)
with $`\varphi `$ arbitrary.) Also, Eqs. (72) are interesting in their own right: the field $`\rho `$ may be interpreted as density fluctuations, e.g. of surfactants, sliding on the surface. Similarly, if $`h`$ describes the height of a material surface (such as a liquid film), $`\rho `$ may play the role of material surface density fluctuations (proportional to the thickness of the film in the case of an incompressible liquid). These density fluctuations are conserved as the particles, or liquid elements, slide along gradients in the surface height, according to Eqs. (72). However, the implicit $`\rho \rho `$ symmetry of Eqs. (72) is difficult to justify physically for surfactants or liquid films.

As a final non-perturbative observation on Eq. (72), we note that they are invariant under the infinitesimal tilt

$$\{\begin{array}{c}𝐱𝐱+\lambda ϵt\hfill \\ hh+ϵ𝐱\hfill \end{array}$$

in the sub-space $`\lambda _{hh}=\lambda _{hu}\lambda `$, so that $`\lambda _{hh}`$ and $`\lambda _{hu}`$ are not modified by coarse-graining. Their renormalization flows are then given by

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{\lambda _{hh}}{l}=(z_h+\zeta _h2)\lambda _{hh}\hfill \\ \frac{\lambda _{hu}}{l}=(z_\rho +\zeta _h2)\lambda _{hu}\hfill \end{array},$$

where $`z_h`$ and $`z_\rho `$ are the dynamical exponents associated to the fields $`h`$ and $`\rho `$, respectively, and $`\zeta _h`$ is the height roughness exponent. If a fixed point occurs at $`\lambda _{hh}=\lambda _{hu}0`$, the relation

$$z_h+\zeta _h=z_\rho +\zeta _h=2$$
(75)
holds exactly, while stability of a fixed point with $`\lambda _{hh}=\lambda _{hu}=0`$ requires

$$z_h+\zeta _h2\mathrm{and}z_\rho +\zeta _h2.$$
(76)
###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation through a Young Researcher Grant and the Harvard University Society of Fellows (RS), and the NSF through Grant No. DMR-01-18213 (MK).

## Appendix A Non-Gaussian Steady States

In this Appendix, we show through a simple example how the method used in the bulk of the paper may be extended to search for non-Gaussian steady states. We focus on equations of the form of Eq. (17) in Sec. III, where the usual Laplacian smoothing term is promoted to a more general object.

In parallel, we promote $`𝒬`$ (see Eq. (23)) to include higher order terms, as

$`𝒬`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^dx(\nu _{ij\alpha \beta }_\alpha h_i_\beta h_j`$ (77)
$`+\pi _{ijk\alpha \beta \gamma }_\alpha h_i_\beta h_j_\gamma h_k`$
$`+\rho _{ijkl\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }_\alpha h_i_\beta h_j_\gamma h_k_\delta h_l+\mathrm{}),`$
while still imposing the relation of Eq. (25) between $``$ and $`𝒬`$. Following the procedure of Sec. IV in the special case of a single field and in two dimensions (for the sake of simplicity), we obtain the additional prescriptions

$$\pi _{xx\alpha }\lambda _{yy}2\pi _{xy\alpha }\lambda _{xy}+\pi _{yy\alpha }\lambda _{xx}=0,$$
(78)
for any $`\alpha `$, and

$$\rho _{xx\alpha \beta }\lambda _{yy}2\rho _{xy\alpha \beta }\lambda _{xy}+\rho _{yy\alpha \beta }\lambda _{xx}=0,$$
(79)
for any $`\alpha ,\beta `$. Here $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$ have been symmetrized, and $`\alpha ,\beta `$ denote $`x`$ or $`y`$.

Let us focus on the quartic term with coefficient $`\rho `$. For rotationally symmetric tensors

$$\lambda _{\alpha \beta }=\lambda \delta _{\alpha \beta },$$
(80)
and

$$\rho _{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }=\rho (\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta _{\gamma \delta }+\delta _{\alpha \gamma }\delta _{\beta \delta }+\delta _{\alpha \delta }\delta _{\beta \gamma }),$$
(81)
Eq. (79) has only the trivial solution $`\lambda =0`$. By contrast, an antisymmetric non-linear term with

$$\lambda _{xx}=\lambda _{yy}\lambda ,\text{and}\lambda _{xy}=0,$$
(82)
allows the non-trivial solution

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\rho _{xxxx}=\rho _{xxyy}=\rho _{yyyy}\rho _1\hfill \\ \rho _{xxxy}=\rho _{yyyx}\rho _2/2\hfill \end{array},$$
(83)
with arbitrary $`\rho _1`$ and $`\rho _2`$. Thus, the equation of evolution

$`_th`$ $`=`$ $`\nu ^2h+\rho _1[(h)^2^2h+_xh_yh_x_yh]`$ (84)
$`+\rho _2[_xh_yh^2h+(h)^2_x_yh]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\lambda [(_xh)^2(_yh)^2]+\eta `$
obtains the non-Gaussian steady-state distribution

$`𝒫_{\text{quartic}}`$ $`=`$ $`N\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle }dxdy\{{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{2}}(h)^2`$ (85)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1}{12}}[(_xh)^4+6(_xh)^2(_yh)^2+(_yh)^4]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _2}{6}}[(_xh)^3_yh+(_yh)^3_xh]\}).`$
We note that this equation of evolution, too, satisfies the “hidden” symmetry of Eq. (16).


format: text

text:
# Penguin induced 𝐵→𝜂 transition form factor in light cone QCD

## 1 Introduction

Rare B meson decays, induced by flavor changing neutral current (FCNC) $`bs(d)`$ transition, provide potentially the stringiest testing ground for the Standard Model (SM) at loop level. These decays are also very suitable looking for new physics beyond the SM. Among all decays of B mesons, the semileptonic decays receive special attention, since their study offer one of the most efficient ways in determination of the Cabibbo–Kobayashi–Maskawa (CKM) matrix elements. From experimental side, there scheduled an impressive program for study of both inclusive and exclusive B–decays in B factories, BaBar and Belle, as well as LHC–b machines. CLEO Collaboration  has measured the branching ratios of $`B^0\pi ^{}\mathrm{}^+\nu `$ and $`B\rho ^{}\mathrm{}^+\nu `$ decays, from which it is obtained that $`\left|V_{ub}\right|=(3.25\pm 0.14_{0.29}^{+0.21}\pm 0.55)\times 10^3`$. In extraction of $`\left|V_{ub}\right|`$ from $`B\pi (\rho )\mathrm{}\nu `$ decay, main theoretical uncertainties come from $`B\pi (\rho )`$ transition form factors. For an accurate calculation of the CKM matrix elements, hadronic form factors need to be determined more reliably.

It should be noted that the decay modes of $`BK\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}(\mathrm{}=e,\mu )`$ has recently been observed with $`(BK\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{})=(0.75_{0.21}^{+0.25}\pm 0.09)\times 10^6`$  and $`(0.78_{0.200.18}^{+0.24+0.11})\times 10^6`$ . At BaBar, an excess of events over background with $`2.8\sigma `$ has been observed for the $`BK^{}\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ decay with $`(BK^{}\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{})=(1.68_{0.58}^{0.68}\pm 0.28)\times 10^6`$ .

In this work we calculate the penguin form factor of the $`B\eta \mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ decay in light cone QCD sum rules. The form factors induced by the vector current in $`B\eta \mathrm{}\nu `$ decay has already been calculated in light cone QCD sum rules in . It should be mentioned here that $`B\eta `$ form factors are related to the $`B\pi `$ form factors through SU(3) symmetry, which are calculated in light cone QCD sum rules in . A detailed description of the light cone QCD sum rule and its applications can be found in .

Interest to $`B\eta \mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ and $`B\eta ^{}\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ has its grounds in the fact that they can give information about $`\eta `$$`\eta ^{}`$ mixing angle . Soon B factories will provide much more data and therefore a more reliable determination of the transition form factors and as a result a more precise determination of $`\left|V_{ub}\right|`$ will be possible. The extraction of $`\left|V_{ub}\right|`$ from the $`B\eta (\eta ^{})\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ decay would present an efficient and complementary alternative to its determination from $`B\pi (\rho )\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ decay.

The present work is organized as follows. In section 2, we calculate the sum rule for the penguin form factor of the $`B\eta \mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ decay. Section 3 is devoted to the numerical analysis and the conclusion.

## 2 Light cone QCD sum rules for the penguin form factors in $`B\eta `$ transition

The penguin form factor of the $`B_d\eta `$ transition is defined as

$`\eta (p)\left|\overline{d}\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\nu (1+\gamma _5)b\right|B(p_B)=2i\left[p_\mu q^2q_\mu (pq)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{f_T}{m_B+m_\eta }}.`$ (1)
The starting point for the calculation of the form factor $`f_T`$ in Eq. (1) is the following correlator function:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu (p,q)`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle d^4xe^{iqx}\eta (p)\left|𝒯\left\{\overline{q}\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\nu (1+\gamma _5)b(x)\overline{b}(0)i(1\gamma _5)q\right\}\right|0}`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`i\mathrm{\Pi }^T[p_\mu q^2(pq)q_\mu ],`$
which is calculated in an expansion around the light cone $`x^2=0`$. The main reason for choosing the chiral $`\overline{b}i(1\gamma _5)q`$ current instead of the $`\overline{b}i\gamma _5q`$ current which has been used in the calculation of the $`B\pi `$ form factor , is because twist–3 wave functions do not contribute for this choice, which are the main inputs of the light cone QCD sum rules and which bring about the main uncertainty to the results .

Following the general idea QCD sum rules to obtain the penguin form factor is by matching the representation of the correlator function in hadronic and quark–gluon languages. Let us first consider the hadronic representation of the correlator function. By inserting a complete set of states with the same quantum numbers of the B meson between the currents in the correlator, and singling out the pole term of the lowest pseudoscalar B meson, we get

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu (p,q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\eta \left|\overline{q}\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\nu (1+\gamma _5)\right|BB\left|\overline{b}i(1\gamma _5)q\right|0}{m_B^2(p+q)^2}}`$ (3)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{h}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\eta \left|\overline{q}\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\nu (1+\gamma _5)\right|hh\left|\overline{b}i(1\gamma _5)q\right|0}{m_h^2(p+q)^2}},`$
$`=`$ $`i\mathrm{\Pi }^T[p_\mu q^2(pq)q_\mu ],`$
where the sum in Eq. (3) describes the contributions of the higher states and continuum. For the invariant amplitude $`\mathrm{\Pi }^T`$ one can write a general dispersion relation in the B meson momentum squared $`(p+q)^2`$ as

$`\mathrm{\Pi }^T(q^2,(p+q)^2)={\displaystyle 𝑑s\frac{\rho (s)}{s(p+q)^2}}.`$ (4)
The spectral density corresponding to (3), is

$`\rho (s)=2{\displaystyle \frac{f_T^\eta (q^2)}{m_B+m_\eta }}{\displaystyle \frac{m_B^2f_B}{m_b}}\delta (sm_B^2)+\rho ^h(s),`$ (5)
where we have used the definition

$`B\left|\overline{b}i\gamma _5q\right|0={\displaystyle \frac{m_B^2f_B}{m_b}}.`$
The first term in Eq. (5) represents the ground state B meson contribution and $`\rho ^h(s)`$ corresponds to the spectral density of the higher resonances and the continuum. The spectral density $`\rho ^h(s)`$ can be approximated by invoking the quark–hadron duality ansatz

$`\rho ^h(s)=\rho ^{QCD}(ss_0),`$ (6)
where $`s_0`$ is the continuum threshold. As a result, the hadronic representation of the invariant amplitude $`\mathrm{\Pi }^T`$ takes the following form

$`\mathrm{\Pi }^T=2{\displaystyle \frac{f_T^\eta (q^2)m_B^2f_B}{(m_B+m_\eta )m_b[m_B^2(p+q)^2]}}+{\displaystyle _{s_0}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑s{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^{QCD}(s)}{s(p+q)^2}}+\text{subtractions}.`$ (7)
In order to obtain the sum rule for $`f_T^\eta (q^2)`$, we proceed to calculate of the correlator function from QCD side. This can be done by using the light cone OPE method. For this purpose, we work in the large space–like momentum regions $`(p+q)^2m_b^20`$ for the $`b\overline{q}`$ channel and $`q^2m_b^2𝒪\text{(few }GeV^2\text{)}`$ for the momentum transfer, which correspond to the small light cone distance $`x0`$ and are required by the validity of the OPE. After contracting $`b`$ quark field, we get

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu (p,q)=i{\displaystyle d^4xe^{iqx}\eta (p)\left|\overline{q}(x)\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\nu (1+\gamma _5)𝒮^b(x,0)i(1\gamma _5)q\right|0},`$ (8)
where $`𝒮^b(x,0)`$ is the full quark propagator. In presence of the background gluon field, its explicit expression can be written as

$`0\left|𝒯\{b(x)\overline{b}(x)\}\right|0=i{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}e^{ikx}\frac{\overline{)}k+m_b}{k^2m_b^2}}`$ (9)
$``$ $`ig_s{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}e^{ikx}_0^1𝑑u\left[\frac{1}{2}\frac{\overline{)}k+m_b}{(k^2m_b^2)^2}G^{\alpha \beta }(ux)\sigma _{\alpha \beta }\frac{1}{k^2m_b^2}ux_\alpha G^{\alpha \beta }(ux)\gamma _\beta \right]},`$
where the first term on the right hand side corresponds to the free quark propagator, $`G^{\alpha \beta }`$ is the gluonic field strength and $`g_s`$ id the strong coupling constant. We see from Eqs. (8) and (9) that, in order to calculate the theoretical part of the correlator, the matrix elements of the nonlocal operators between $`\eta `$ meson and vacuum states are needed.

Here we would like to remark that in the following calculation $`\eta `$$`\eta ^{}`$ mixing will be neglected, since in octet–singlet basis this angle is about $`\theta 10^0`$ . Hence, in the above–mentioned basis, the interpolating current for $`\eta `$ meson is chosen as the SU(3) octet axial–vector current

$`J_\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}}\left(\overline{u}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5u+\overline{d}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5d\overline{s}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5s\right).`$ (10)
In order to simplify the notation we will use $`\overline{q}\mathrm{\Gamma }q`$ to denote

$`J_\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}}\left(\overline{u}\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu u+\overline{d}\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu d\overline{s}\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu s\right),`$
and introduce $`F_\eta =f_\eta /\sqrt{6}`$. Here, $`f_\eta `$ is the leptonic decay constant of $`\eta `$ meson and is to be determined from the relation

$`0\left|\overline{q}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5q\right|\eta ^{(\rho )}=if_\eta p_\mu .`$ (11)
It is easy to see from Eqs. (8) and (9) that the terms containing even number of Dirac matrices do not give any contribution. Remaining matrix elements can be parametrized in terms of $`\eta `$ meson functions up to twist–4 defined as

$`\eta (p)\left|\overline{q}(x)\gamma _\mu \gamma _5q(0)\right|0=if_\eta p_\mu {\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑ue^{iupx}\left[\phi _\eta (u)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16}}m_\eta ^2x^2A(u)\right]`$ (12)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}f_\eta m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{x_\mu }{px}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑ue^{iupx}B(u),`$
$`\eta (p)\left|\overline{q}(x)\gamma _\mu \gamma _5g_sG_{\alpha \beta }(ux)q(0)\right|0=f_\eta m_\eta ^2\left[p_\beta \left(g_{\alpha \mu }{\displaystyle \frac{x_\alpha p_\mu }{px}}\right)p_\alpha \left(g_{\beta \mu }{\displaystyle \frac{x_\beta p_\mu }{px}}\right)\right]`$ (13)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle 𝒟\alpha _i\phi _{}(\alpha _i)e^{ipx(\alpha _1+u\alpha _3)}}+f_\eta m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{p_\mu }{px}}(p_\alpha x_\beta p_\beta x_\alpha ){\displaystyle 𝒟\alpha _i\phi _{}(\alpha _i)e^{ipx(\alpha _1+u\alpha _3)}}`$
$`\eta (p)\left|\overline{q}(x)g_s\stackrel{~}{G}_{\alpha \beta }(ux)\gamma _\mu q(0)\right|0=if_\eta m_\eta ^2\left[p_\beta \left(g_{\alpha \mu }{\displaystyle \frac{x_\alpha p_\mu }{px}}\right)p_\alpha \left(g_{\beta \mu }{\displaystyle \frac{x_\beta p_\mu }{px}}\right)\right]`$ (14)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle 𝒟\alpha _i\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)e^{ipx(\alpha _1+u\alpha _3)}}+if_\eta m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{p_\mu }{px}}(p_\alpha x_\beta p_\beta x_\alpha ){\displaystyle 𝒟\alpha _i\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)e^{ipx(\alpha _1+u\alpha _3)}},`$
where

$`\stackrel{~}{G}_{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}ϵ_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }G^{\alpha \beta },\text{and}𝒟\alpha _i=d\alpha _1d\alpha _2d\alpha _3\delta (1\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3).`$
In Eqs. (12)–(14), the function $`\phi _\eta (u)`$ is the leading twist–2, $`A(u)`$, $`\phi _{}(\alpha _i)`$, $`\phi _{}(\alpha _i)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)`$ are all twist–4 wave functions. Inserting Eqs. (12)–(14) and Eq. (9) into Eq. (8) and completing integration over the variables $`x`$ and $`k`$, we get for the invariant structure

$`\mathrm{\Pi }^T`$ $`=`$ $`2F_\eta {\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle \frac{du}{m_b^2(q+pu)^2}}\left\{\phi _\eta (u){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_b^2m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{A(u)}{[m_b^2(q+pu)^2]^2}}\right\}`$ (15)
$``$ $`4F_\eta m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑uu{\displaystyle 𝒟\alpha _i\frac{\phi _{}(\alpha _i)2\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)}{\{m_b^2[q+p(\alpha _1+u\alpha _3)]^2\}^2}}`$
$`+`$ $`2F_\eta m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle 𝑑u𝒟\alpha _i\frac{2\phi _{}(\alpha _i)\phi _{}(\alpha _i)+2\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)}{\{m_b^2[q+p(\alpha _1+u\alpha _3)]^2\}^2}}.`$
The next and the last step in obtaining the sum rule for penguin form factor is to carry out the Borel transformation with respect to the variable $`(p+q)^2`$ which enhances the ground state contribution and suppresses contributions of the higher states and the continuum. Finally, matching this result with the corresponding invariant amplitude that is calculated in hadronic and quark languages, we get the sum rule. Subtraction of the continuum contribution is performed by using quark–hadron duality (more about subtraction of continuum and higher state contributions in light cone QCD can be found in ). Performing Borel transformation in Eq. (15), we get for the theoretical part

$`\left(\mathrm{\Pi }^T\right)^B=F_\eta \{2{\displaystyle _\delta ^1}{\displaystyle \frac{du}{u}}\phi _\eta (u)e^{s(u)/M^2}{\displaystyle \frac{m_b^2m_\eta ^2}{2}}{\displaystyle _\delta ^1}{\displaystyle \frac{du}{u^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{A(u)}{M^4}}e^{s(u)/M^2}`$ (16)
$``$ $`4m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle 𝑑uu𝒟\alpha _i\frac{\phi _{}(\alpha _i)2\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)}{M^2k^2}\theta (k\delta )e^{s(k)/M^2}}`$
$`+`$ $`2m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle }du{\displaystyle }𝒟\alpha _i{\displaystyle \frac{2\phi _{}(\alpha _i)\phi _{}(\alpha _i)+2\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)}{M^2k^2}}\theta (k\delta )e^{s(k)/M^2}\},`$
where

$`s(u)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_b^2q^2\overline{u}+m_\eta ^2u\overline{u}}{u}},s(k)=s(uk),`$
$`k`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha _1+u\alpha _3,\overline{u}=1u,\overline{k}=1k,`$
$`\delta `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_\eta ^2+q^2s_0+\sqrt{(m_\eta ^2+q^2s_0)^2+4m_\eta ^2(m_b^2q^2)}}{2m_\eta ^2}}.`$
In the same manner, performing Borel transformation in Eq. (7) and equating it to Eq. (16), we finally get the following sum rule for the penguin form factor

$`f_T^\eta (q^2)={\displaystyle \frac{(m_B+m_\eta )m_b}{2m_B^2f_B}}e^{m_B^2/M^2}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }^T\right)^B.`$ (17)
## 3 Numerical analysis

In this section we present the result of our numerical calculations on penguin form factor $`f_T^\eta (q^2)`$. It follows from Eqs. (16) and (17) that the main input parameters of the sum rule (17) are the $`\eta `$ meson wave functions. The explicit expressions of the wave functions $`\phi _\eta (u)`$, $`A(u)`$, $`\phi _{}(\alpha _i)`$, $`\phi _{}(\alpha _i)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)`$ are all given in . The other necessary input parameter of the sum rule is the leptonic decay constant $`F_\eta `$. As has already been noted, we will $`\eta `$$`\eta ^{}`$ mixing. Furthermore, since $`\eta `$ meson is an isoscalar, we have

$`F_\eta ^d=F_\eta ^uF_\eta ={\displaystyle \frac{f_\eta }{\sqrt{6}}},`$
where for the leptonic decay constant $`\eta `$ meson, we quote the result of a recent analysis which predicts $`f_\eta =159MeV`$ . Moreover, the leptonic decay constant B meson is chosen to have the value $`f_B=160MeV`$ .

Having all these input parameters at hand, we proceed carrying out numerical calculations. First of all, since $`M^2`$ is an auxiliary Borel parameter, we must find a region of $`M^2`$ where a physically measurable quantity be practically independent of it. The lower bound of $`M^2`$ is determined by the fact that nonperturbative terms must be subdominant. The upper limit of $`M^2`$ is determined by the condition that the higher states and continuum contributions are less than, for example, $`30\%`$ of the total result. Our numerical analysis shows that both conditions are satisfied in the region $`8GeV^2M^216GeV^2`$. Moreover, it should be emphasized that light cone QCD sum rule predictions are reliable in the region of momentum transfer square, i.e., $`q^2m_b^22m_b\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a typical hadronic scale having the value $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0.5GeV`$, which yields $`q^2\stackrel{<}{_{}}18GeV^2`$.

In Fig. (1) we present the dependence of the form factor $`f_T^\eta (q^2)`$ on the Borel parameter $`M^2`$ at different values of momentum transfer square, $`q^2=0GeV^2`$, $`q^2=5GeV^2`$ and $`q^2=10GeV^2`$, at two different choices of the continuum threshold $`s_0=35GeV^2`$ and $`s_0=40GeV^2`$. We observe from this figure that, $`f_T^\eta `$ seems to be practically independent of the Borel parameter $`M^2`$, as $`M^2`$ varies in the region $`8GeV^2M^216GeV^2`$.

Having this window for $`M^2`$, we next study the dependence $`f_T^\eta (q^2)`$ on $`q^2`$, at three fixed values of the Borel parameter $`M^2=8GeV^2`$, $`M^2=12GeV^2`$ and $`M^2=16GeV^2`$, picked obviously from the above–mentioned working region of $`M^2`$, again at two fixed values of the continuum threshold, $`s_0=35GeV^2`$ and $`s_0=40GeV^2`$, as before. Depicted in Fig. (2) is the dependence of the form factor on the momentum transfer $`q^2`$, which clearly demonstrates that $`f_\eta ^T(0)=0.16\pm 0.03`$. As we have noted earlier, the prediction by the light cone QCD sum rule is not reliable in the region $`q^218GeV^2`$. In order to extend the present result to whole physical region, we look for some convenient parametrization of the form factor in such a way that in the region $`4m_{\mathrm{}}^2q^218GeV^2`$ this parametrization coincides with the light cone QCD sum rule prediction. The best parametrization of $`f_T^\eta `$ with respect to $`q^2`$ can be written in terms of three parameters in the following way

$`f_T^\eta (q^2)={\displaystyle \frac{f_T^\eta (0)}{1a_F{\displaystyle \frac{q^2}{m_B^2}}+b_F\left({\displaystyle \frac{q^2}{m_B^2}}\right)^2}}.`$ (18)
For the values of these parameters for the penguin form factor we obtain $`a_F=1.08`$ and $`b_F=0.09`$, where the quoted errors can be attributed to the variation in $`s_0`$ and $`M^2`$. As has already mentioned earlier, the form factor for the $`B\eta `$ transition can be related to the corresponding $`B\pi `$ transition form factor through SU(3) symmetry. For example, the value $`f_T^\eta (q^2=0)=0.17`$ is obtained using SU(3) symmetry seems to be in quite a good agreement with our prediction of $`f_T^\eta (q^2=0)`$. In conclusion, we have calculated the penguin form factor for the $`B\eta \mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ decay in light cone QCD sum rule method, including contributions of wave functions up to twist–4 and mass correction of the $`\eta `$ meson.

## Figure captions

Fig. (1) The dependence of the form factor $`f_T^\eta `$ on the Borel parameter $`M^2`$ at $`q^2=0GeV^2`$, $`5GeV^2`$, and $`10GeV^2`$, at fixed values of the momentum threshold $`s_0=35GeV^2`$ and $`s_0=40GeV^2`$.
Fig. (2) The dependence of the form factor $`f_T^\eta `$ on the momentum transfer $`q^2`$ at $`M^2=8GeV^2`$, $`12GeV^2`$, and $`16GeV^2`$, at fixed values of the momentum threshold $`s_0=35GeV^2`$ and $`s_0=40GeV^2`$.


text:
# Zero-Energy Flows and Vortex Patterns in Quantum Mechanics

## Abstract

We show that zero-energy flows appear in many particle systems as same as in single particle cases in 2-dimensions. Vortex patterns constructed from the zero-energy flows can be investigated in terms of the eigenstates in conjugate spaces of Gel’fand triplets. Stable patterns are written by the superposition of zero-energy eigenstates. On the other hand vortex creations and annihilations are described by the insertions of unstable eigenstates with complex-energy eigenvalues into the stable patterns. Some concrete examples are presented in the 2-dimensional parabolic potential barrier case. We point out three interesting properties of the zero-energy flows; (i) the absolute economy as for the energy consumption, (ii) the infinite variety of the vortex patterns, and (iii) the absolute stability of the vortex patterns .

Keywords: Zero-energy solutions, vortex creations and annihilations, quantum mechanics, Gel’fand triplets,

1. Introduction

Vortices play interesting roles in various aspects of present-day physics such as vortex matters (vortex lattices) in condensed matters , quantum Hall effects \[3-5\], various vortex patterns of non-neutral plasma \[6-9\] and Bose-Einstein gases \[10-14\]. Some fundamental properties and applications of vortices in quantum mechanics were examined by many authors \[15-23\].

Recently we have proposed a way to investigate vortex patterns in terms of zero-energy solutions of Schrödinger equations in 2-dimensions, which are infinitely degenerate and eigenfunctions in conjugate spaces of Gel’fand triplets (CSGT) . It should be noted that the eigenfunctions in CSGT represent scattering states, and thus they are generally not normalizable . Therefore, the probability density ($`|\psi |^2`$) and the probability current ($`𝒋=\mathrm{Re}[\psi ^{}(i\mathrm{})\psi ]/m`$) for the eigenfunction ($`\psi `$), which are defined in usual Hilbert spaces, cannot be introduced to the eigenfunctions in CSGT. Instead of the probability current, however, the velocity which is defined by $`𝒗=𝒋/|\psi |^2`$ can have a well-defined meaning, because the ambiguity due to the normalization of the eigenfunctions disappears in the definition of the velocity. Actually we have shown that many interesting objects used in hydrodynamics such as the complex velocity potential can be introduced in the 2-dimensions of CSGT . We can expect that the hydrodynamical approach is a quite hopeful framework in the investigation of phenomena described in CSGT. One should pay attention to two important facts obtained in the early works . One is the fact that the zero-energy solutions are common over the two-dimensional central potentials such that $`V_a(\rho )=a^2g_a\rho ^{2(a1)}`$ with $`\rho =\sqrt{x^2+y^2}`$ except $`a=0`$ and then similar vortex patters described by the zero-energy solutions appear in all such potentials. Actually zero-energy solutions for a definite number of $`a`$ can be transformed to solutions for arbitrary number of $`a`$ by conformal transformations . The other is that the zero-energy solutions are infinitely degenerate, and thus all energy eigenvalues in CSGT with the potentials $`V_a(\rho )`$ are infinitely degenerate because the addition of the infinitely degenerate zero-energy solutions to arbitrary eigenfunctions does not change the energy eigenvalues at all.

We, however, have to know that these results are obtained in equations for the single particle. We can, of course, apply the results in scattering processes where injected particles can be treated as individual particles. In the above-mentioned processes where vortices are observed \[1-14\], however, correlations among constituent particles cannot be ignored. We have to study whether such zero-energy flows appear in many particle systems. Furthermore we also have to study time evolutions of vortex patterns that have already been observed in experiments \[6-14\]. As for the time evolutions we have to take account of non-zero energy solutions in CSGT. It is known that the non-zero energy solutions generally have complex energy eigenvalues like $`=Ei\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with $`E`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and then they have the time developments described by the factors $`e^{(iE/\mathrm{}\pm \mathrm{\Gamma }/\mathrm{})t}`$ . Considering that stationary flows and time-dependent flows are, respectively, represented by the zero-energy solutions and the non-zero energy solutions in CSGT, we can expect that in CSGT general time-dependent flows are described by linear combinations of the stationary flows written by the zero-energy solutions and non-stationary flows (time-dependent flows) described by non-zero (complex) energy solutions. In hydrodynamics it is well-known that the vortex patterns are important objects to identify the situations of the flows. In the present model we can image two different types of the vortex patterns. One is the stationary vortex patterns, and the other is the vortex patterns varying in the time evolutions. As presented in our early works , the stationary vortex patterns can be described by the superposition of the zero-energy solutions, while the time-dependent ones will be done by putting the non-zero energy solutions into the superposition.

In this paper we shall study two problems; one is the zero-energy flows in many particle systems in section 2, and the other is time-developments of vortex patterns in section 3. In order to obtain concrete examples of time-dependent vortex patterns, we shall use the eigenfunctions of the 2-dimensional parabolic potential barrier (2D-PPB)  in section 3, because the eigenfunctions with non-zero energy (complex energy) solutions in CSGT are known only in the case of the PPB. It is, however, noticed that the stable vortex patterns obtained in the 2D-PPB can easily be transformed those of the potentials $`V_a(\rho )`$ by the conformal transformations . From these concrete analyses we shall point out three interesting properties of zero-energy flows in section 4. In section 5 some remarks will be done. Throughout these investigations we shall see that this approach can be one interesting possibility to analyze various time-dependent vortex patterns in a rigorous framework of quantum mechanics in CSGT.

2. Zero-energy flows and vortices

2.1 Cases of single particle motions

Let us briefly see the arguments for the zero-energy flows in the single particle motions. (For details, see refs. 24 and 25.) (1) Zero-energy flows in single particle motions

In 2-dimensions the eigenvalue problems with the energy eigenvalue $``$ are explicitly written by

$$[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\mathbf{}+V_a(\rho )]\psi (x,y)=\psi (x,y),$$
(1)
where $`\mathbf{}=^2/x^2+^2/y^2,`$ the central potentials are generally given by $`V_a(\rho )=a^2g_a\rho ^{2(a1)},`$ with $`\rho =\sqrt{x^2+y^2}`$, $`a`$ ($`a0`$), and $`m`$ and $`g_a`$ are, respectively, the mass of the particle and the coupling constant. Note here that the eigenvalues $``$ should generally be complex numbers in CSGT.

Let us consider the conformal mappings $`\zeta _a=z^a,\mathrm{with}z=x+iy.`$ We use the notations $`u_a`$ and $`v_a`$ defined by $`\zeta _a=u_a+iv_a`$ that are written as $`u_a=\rho ^a\mathrm{cos}a\phi ,v_a=\rho ^a\mathrm{sin}a\phi ,`$ where $`\phi =\mathrm{arctan}(y/x)`$. In the $`(u_a,v_a)`$ plane the equations (1) are written down as

$$a^2\rho _a^{2(a1)/a}[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\mathbf{}_ag_a]\psi (u_a,v_a)=\psi (u_a,v_a),$$
(2)
where $`\mathbf{}_a=^2/u_a^2+^2/v_a^2.`$ We see that the equations become same for all values of $`a`$ (except $`a=0`$) for the energy eigenvalue $`=0`$. In fact, for $`=0`$ the equations have the same form as that for the free particle with the constant potentials $`g_a`$ as

$$[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\mathbf{}_ag_a]\psi (u_a,v_a)=0.$$
(3)
It should be noticed that in the case of $`a=1`$ where the original potential is a constant $`g_1`$ the energy does not need to be zero but can take arbitrary real numbers, because the right-hand side of (1) has no $`\rho `$ dependence. In the $`a=1`$ case, therefore, we should take $`g_1+`$ instead of $`g_a`$. This means that all plane wave solutions have the same infinite degeneracy discussed below.

It is trivial that the equations for all $`a`$ have the particular solutions $`\psi _0^\pm (u_a)=N_ae^{\pm ik_au_a}`$ and $`\psi _0^\pm (v_a)=N_ae^{\pm ik_av_a}`$ with $`k_a=\sqrt{2mg_a}/\mathrm{}`$ for $`g_a>0.`$ We notice here the degeneracy of the solutions that have already been known in the 2D-PPB . By putting the wave function $`f^\pm (u_a;v_a)\psi _0^\pm (u_a)`$ into (3) where $`f^\pm (u_a;v_a)`$ is a polynomial function of $`u_a`$ and $`v_a`$, we obtain the equation

$$[\mathbf{}_a\pm 2ik_a\frac{}{u_a}]f^\pm (u_a;v_a)=0.$$
(4)
A few examples of the functions $`f`$ are given by

$`f_0^\pm (u_a;v_a)`$ $`=1,`$
$`f_1^\pm (u_a;v_a)`$ $`=4k_av_a,`$
$`f_2^\pm (u_a;v_a)`$ $`=4(4k_a^2v_a^2+1\pm 4ik_au_a).`$ (5)
We can obtain the general forms of the polynomials in the 2D PPB, which are generally written by the multiple of the polynomials of degree $`n`$, $`H_n^\pm (\sqrt{2k_2}x)`$, such that $`f_n^\pm (u_2;v_2)=H_n^\pm (\sqrt{2k_2}x)H_n^{}(\sqrt{2k_2}y),`$ where $`x`$ and $`y`$ in the right-hand side should be considered as the functions of $`u_2`$ and $`v_2`$ . Since the form of the equations (4) is common for all $`a`$, the solutions can be written by the same polynomial functions that are obtained in the PPB. The states expressed by these wave functions belong to the conjugate spaces of Gel’fand triplets of which nuclear space is given by Schwarz space. Actually we easily see that the wave functions cannot be normalized in terms of Dirac’s delta functions except the lowest polynomial solutions.

Here it should be stressed that the existence of the infinitely degenerate zero-energy solutions brings the infinite degeneracy to all the eigenstates. This fact means that the energy and the other quantum numbers like angular momentums, which are related to the determination of the energy eigenvalues, are not enough to discriminate the eigenstates. What are good quantum numbers to characterize the infinite degeneracy? An interesting candidate to characterize the states is vortex patterns that tell us topological properties of the staes. Note that the voertex patterns have been observed in experiments \[8-14\]. Time developments of the patterns can also be good observables in those processes. (2) Velocity and vortices in quantum mechanics

Let us here briefly note how vortices are interpreted in quantum mechanics. The probability density $`\rho (t,x,y)`$ and the probability current $`𝒋(t,x,y)`$ of a wavefunction $`\psi (t,x,y)`$ in non-relativistic quantum mechanics are, respectively, defined by $`\rho (t,x,y)\left|\psi (t,x,y)\right|^2`$ and $`𝒋(t,x,y)\mathrm{Re}\left[\psi (t,x,y)^{}\left(i\mathrm{}\right)\psi (t,x,y)\right]/m.`$ They satisfy the equation of continuity $`\rho /t+𝒋=0.`$ Following the analogue of the hydrodynamical approach, the fluid can be represented by the density $`\rho `$ and the fluid velocity $`𝒗`$. They satisfy Euler’s equation of continuity $`\rho /t+(\rho 𝒗)=0.`$ Comparing this equation with the continuity equation, the following definition for the quantum velocity of the state $`\psi (t,x,y)`$ is led in the hydrodynamical approach;

$$𝒗\frac{𝒋(t,x,y)}{\left|\psi (t,x,y)\right|^2}.$$
(6)
Now it is obvious that vortices appear at the zero points of the density, that is, the nodal points of the wavefunction. At the vortices, of course, the current $`𝒋`$ must not vanish. When we write the wavefunction $`\psi (t,x,y)=\sqrt{\rho (x,y)}e^{iS(x,y)/\mathrm{}}`$, the velocity is given by $`𝒗=S/m`$. We should here remember that the solutions degenerate infinitely. This fact indicates that we can construct wavefunctions having the nodal points at arbitrary positions in terms of linear combinations of the infinitely degenerate solutions .

The strength of vortex is characterized by the circulation $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ that is represented by the integral round a closed contour $`C`$ encircling the vortex such that

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=_C𝒗𝑑𝒔$$
(7)
and it is quantized as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=2\pi l\mathrm{}/m,$$
(8)
where the circulation number $`l`$ is an integer .

2.2 Cases of many particle motions

Let us consider a simple system composed of $`N`$ number of the same particles with the mass $`m`$. (1) Zero-energy flows in many particle cases

The interactions between two constituent particles are supposed to be written by the same potential $`V(\rho _{ij})`$, where $`\rho _{ij}=|\stackrel{}{\rho _i}\stackrel{}{\rho _j}|`$ stands for the relative distance between two particles. The Schr$`\ddot{o}`$dinger equation for the $`N`$ particle system is written as

$$[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\mathbf{}_i+\underset{i>j}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N1}{}}V(\rho _{ij})]\mathrm{\Psi }(t,\stackrel{}{\rho }_1,\mathrm{},\stackrel{}{\rho }_N)=\mathrm{\Psi }(t,\stackrel{}{\rho }_1,\mathrm{},\stackrel{}{\rho }_N).$$
(9)
Introducing a centre of mass coordinate $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_C`$ and $`N1`$ relative coordinates $`\stackrel{}{\rho }_{r_i}`$ with $`i=1,\mathrm{},N1`$, the equation is rewritten as

$$[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2M}\mathbf{}_CH_r(\rho _{r_1},\mathrm{},\rho _{r_{N1}})]\mathrm{\Phi }_C(t,\stackrel{}{\rho _C})\varphi _r(t,\stackrel{}{\rho }_{r_1},\mathrm{},\stackrel{}{\rho }_{r_{N1}})=\mathrm{\Phi }_C(t,\stackrel{}{\rho }_C)\varphi _r(t,\stackrel{}{\rho }_{r_1},\mathrm{},\stackrel{}{\rho }_{r_{N1}}),$$
(10)
where $`M=Nm`$ and $`H_r(\rho _{r_1},\mathrm{},\rho _{r_{N1}})`$ stands for the Hamiltonian for the relative coordinates. It should be noted that the centre of mass coordinate can always be separable from the relative ones, and then the energy eigenvalue $``$ are written by the sum of the eigenvalue of centre of mass system $`E_C`$ and that of the relative ones $`E_r`$ as $`=E_C+E_r`$. We can consider that the zero-energy solutions can appear in the relative motions, e.g., when the relative interactions are written by the same PPB, $`H_r`$ are separable for all the relative coordinates, for which interatcions are written by the PPB. Here we shall, however, discuss the case where the flows discussed in the section 2.1 appear in the centre of mass motions, that is, the total flows. Now let us consider the zero-energy solutions of the total system represented by $`=0`$. Considering the equation $`=E_C+E_r`$, the flows discussed in the section 2.1 appear for $`E_r<0`$, because $`E_C>0`$ is required. This means that the relative interactions have to be totally described by a kind of attractive potential. In this case the centre of mass motions $`\mathrm{\Phi }_C(t,\stackrel{}{\rho _C})`$ are described by the plane waves with the infinite degeneracy, which are obtained from the solutions in the section 2.1 by putting $`a=1`$. If the Hamiltonian $`H_r`$ has levels with different negative-energy eigenvalues, we have different zero-energy flows characterized by different wave numbers $`k=\sqrt{2M|E_r|}/\mathrm{}`$ corresponding to the negative-energy eigenvalues $`E_r<0`$.

Provided that some external forces like electro-magnetic forces are put in the systems, the central motions possibly have potentials ($`V_C(\rho _C)`$). In this case the zero-energy solutions appear when $`V_C(\rho _C)`$ is written by one of the central potentials $`V_a(\rho _C)`$.

Here we note that in cases where the potentials of all the constituents have a negative constant potential $`V_0<0`$ in a common area such as in the region surrounded by repulsive potentials like short distance attractive potentials as shown in fig. 1, the zero-energy solutions can appear in the area. In these cases we have to solve the zero-energy problems under some special boundary conditions. We will be able to find out the solutions fulfilling the boundary conditions in terms of the infinitely degenerate zero-energy solutions. (2) Velocity of the centre of mass system

It is obvious that we can introduce the velocity for the centre of mass system as same as that for the single particle given in section 2.1 such that

$$𝒗_C=𝒋_C(t,\stackrel{}{\rho _C})/|\mathrm{\Phi }_C(t,\stackrel{}{\rho _C})|^2,$$
(11)
where the current for the centre of mass system is defined by $`𝒋_C(t,\stackrel{}{\rho }_C)=\mathrm{Re}\left[\mathrm{\Phi }_C^{}\left(i\mathrm{}_{\rho _C}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }_C\right]/m.`$ Since the derivative with respect to the centre of mass coordinate is just written by the sum of the derivatives of all the constituents, the velocity $`𝒗_C`$ is understood as the mean velocity of the constituents. We may consider that $`𝒗_C`$ represents the velocity that is used in hydrodynamics. Now it is trivial that in the case of the centre of mass motions we can follow the discussion on the vortices for the single particle motions presented in section 2.1.

We note that the velocity for a relative coordinate $`\rho _i`$ can also be defined as same as that for the centre of mass coordinate such that

$$𝒗_i=𝒋_{\rho _i}/|\varphi _r|^2,$$
(12)
where $`𝒋_{\rho _i}=\mathrm{Re}\left[\varphi _r^{}\left(i\mathrm{}_{\rho _i}\right)\varphi _r\right]/m.`$ We easily see that in independent particle models the above velocity coincides with that of the single particle given in section 2.1. If the central potentials of the type $`V_a(\rho )`$ appear for some relative coordinates, the zero-energy flows appear, and then the zero-energy vortices are produced in the relative motions.

3. Vortex patterns in 2D-PPB

In order to see some concrete examples of stable and time-dependent vortex patterns we shall make some vortex patterns in terms of the eigenfunctions of the 2D-PPB . As already noted, the stable patterns can be transformed to those of arbitrary potentials of the type $`V_a(\rho )`$ by the conformal transformations .

3.1 Eigenfunctions of 2D-PPB

Let us start from the short review on the eigenfunctions of the 2D-PPB $`V=m\gamma ^2(x^2+y^2)/2`$ that will be used in the following analyses. The infinitely degenerate eigenfunctions with the zero-energy for the potentials $`V_a(\rho )`$ have explicitly been given in (5), whereas the eigenfunctions with non-zero energies are known only in the case of PPB \[27-33\]. It is trivial that the eigenfunctions in the 2D-PPB are represented by the multiples of those of the 1D-PPB. The eigenfunctions of the 1D-PPB for $`x`$, which have pure imaginary energy eigenvalues $`i(n_x+\frac{1}{2})\mathrm{}\gamma `$, are given by

$$u_{n_x}^\pm (x)=e^{\pm i\beta ^2x^2/2}H_{n_x}^\pm (\beta x)(\beta \sqrt{m\gamma /\mathrm{}}),$$
(13)
where $`H_{n_x}^\pm (\beta x)`$ are the polynomials of degree $`n_x`$ written in terms of Hermite polynomials $`H_n(\xi )`$ with $`\xi =\beta x`$ as

$$H_n^\pm (\xi )=e^{\pm in\pi /4}H_n(e^{i\pi /4}\xi ).$$
(14)
We have four different types of the eigenfunctions in the 2D-PPB . Two of them

$$U_{n_xn_y}^{\pm \pm }(x,y)u_{n_x}^\pm (x)u_{n_y}^\pm (y)$$

with the energy eigenvalues $`_{n_xn_y}^{\pm \pm }=i(n_x+n_y+1)`$, respectively, represent flows diverging from the origin and flows converging towards the origin. Some examples for the low degrees are obtained as follows;

$`U_{00}^{\pm \pm }(x,y)`$ $`=e^{\pm i\beta ^2(x^2+y^2)/2},`$
$`U_{10}^{\pm \pm }(x,y)`$ $`=2\beta xe^{\pm i\beta ^2(x^2+y^2)/2},`$
$`U_{20}^{\pm \pm }(x,y)`$ $`=(4\beta ^2x^22i)e^{\pm i\beta ^2(x^2+y^2)/2},`$
$`U_{11}^{\pm \pm }(x,y)`$ $`=4\beta ^2xye^{\pm i\beta ^2(x^2+y^2)/2}.`$ (15)
Note that $`U_{01}^{\pm \pm }(x,y)`$ and $`U_{02}^{\pm \pm }(x,y)`$ are ,respectively, obtained by exchanging $`x`$ and $`y`$ in $`U_{10}^{\pm \pm }(x,y)`$ and $`U_{20}^{\pm \pm }(x,y)`$. It is transparent that the eigenfunctions of angular momentums are constructed in terms of the linear combinations of these diverging and converging flows . The other two

$$U_{n_xn_y}^\pm (x,y)u_{n_x}^\pm (x)u_{n_y}^{}(y)\mathrm{with}_{n_xn_y}^\pm (x,y)=i(n_xn_y)$$

are corner flows round the center. (See figs. 2 and 3.) The zero-energy solutions that are common in the potentials $`V_a(\rho )`$ appear when $`n_x=n_y`$ is satisfied. A few examples of the zero-energy eigenfunctions are explicitly obtained as follows;

$`U_{00}^\pm (x,y)`$ $`=e^{\pm i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2},`$
$`U_{11}^\pm (x,y)`$ $`=4\beta ^2xye^{\pm i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2},`$
$`U_{22}^\pm (x,y)`$ $`=4[4\beta ^4x^2y^2+1\pm 2i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)]e^{\pm i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2}.`$ (16)
It is obvious that the eigenfunctions of (15) and (16) are not normalizable. The proof that they are the eigenfunctions of CSGT are presented in refs. .

3.2 Stable vortex-patterns

Let us investigate vortex patterns in terms of the 2D-PPB eigenfunctions. Since the zero-energy solution given in the section 3.1 have no nodal point with non-vanishing currents, they have no vortex. However, it has been shown that some vortex patterns having infinite numbers of vortices, like vortex lines and vortex lattices, can be made in terms of simple linear combinations of those low lying stationary states in the early works . We shall here study linear combinations having a few or some vortices observed in experiments \[6-14\]. Let us start from compositions of stable vortex patterns. For the convenience in the following discussions we take the flow without any vortices described by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_B`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}U_{22}^+(x,y)U_{00}^+(x,y)`$
$`=(4\beta ^4x^2y^2+2i\beta ^2(x^2y^2))e^{i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2},`$ (17)
which will be called the basic flow hereafter. Note that the nodal point of the basic flow at the origin does not produce vortices, because the current vanishes there.

Here we shall show three stable patterns, which will be used in the discussions on vortex creations and annihilations. (S-1) Three-vortices pattern

The linear combination of the basic flow and $`U_{11}^+`$ such that

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{012}^+(x,y)`$ $`=\mathrm{\Phi }_Bc^2U_{11}^+(x,y)`$
$`=[4\beta ^2xy(\beta ^2xyc^2)+2i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)]e^{i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2},`$ (18)
with $`c`$ has three vortices at the origin and the two points $`(\pm c/\beta ,\pm c/\beta )`$ as shown in fig. 4. If we take $`c^2`$ instead of $`c^2`$, three vortices appear at the origin and the points $`(\pm c/\beta ,c/\beta )`$. (S-2) One-vortex pattern

Let us consider the linear combinations of two flows that are represented by the above eigenfunction $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{012}^+(x,y)`$ and coming from two different directions such that

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{012}^+(x,y)+\mathrm{\Phi }_{012}^+(\xi ,\eta ),`$ (19)
where $`\xi =\mathrm{cos}\alpha x+\mathrm{sin}\alpha y`$ and $`\eta =\mathrm{sin}\alpha x+\mathrm{cos}\alpha y`$ with $`0<\alpha <2\pi `$. It is apparent that the two functions have only one common zero-point at the origin for $`0<\alpha <2\pi `$. We see that the vortex at the origin has the circulation number $`l=2`$. (S-3) Four-vortices pattern

The linear combinations given by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{02}^+(x,y)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{\Phi }_Bc^4U_{00}^+(x,y)`$
$`=[(\beta ^2xyc^2)(\beta ^2xy+c^2)+i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2]e^{i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2},`$ (20)
has four vortices at the points $`(\pm c/\beta ,\pm c/\beta )`$ and $`(\pm c/\beta ,1c/\beta )`$ as shown in fig. 5.

3.3 Moving vortex-patterns

Let us go to the study of time-dependent vortex patterns, where vortices can move, and sometimes be created and annihilated. Such patterns are obtained by linear combinations of stable flows and time-dependent ones. In the following considerations the time dependent flows are put in the stable flows at $`t=0`$. (M-1) A pattern accompanied by a pair creation and annihilation

Let us consider the following linear combination;

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{02,1}^+(x,y,t)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Phi }_B\theta (t)c^3U_{10}^+(x,y)e^{\gamma t}`$
$`=[2\beta x(\beta ^3xy^2\theta (t)c^3e^{\gamma t})+i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)]e^{i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2},`$ (21)
where the theta function is taken as $`\theta (t)=0`$ for $`t<0`$ and $`=1`$ for $`t0`$. It has two nodal points at $`(ce^{\gamma t/3}/\beta ,\pm ce^{\gamma t/3}/\beta )`$ for $`t0`$, where two vortices with opposite circulation numbers exist. The nodal points go to the origin as the time $`t`$ goes to infinity as shown in fig. 6. Since the contribution of the unstable flow decreases as $`t\mathrm{}`$ because of the time factor $`e^{\gamma t}`$, the wavefunction $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{02,1}^+(x,y,t)`$ goes to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_B/2`$ as $`t\mathrm{}`$. Thus the flow has no nodal point in the limit. This means that the pair of vortices which are created at $`t=0`$ disappears at origin in the limit $`t\mathrm{}`$. We can say that this wavefunction describes the pair annihilation of two vortices. The time development of this process can be described as follows: (i) Before the time-dependent flow is put in the basic flow, i.e., $`t<0`$, there is no vortex. (ii) At $`t=0`$ when the time-dependent flow is put in the basic flow, a pair of vortices are suddenly created. (iii) The pair moves toward the origin, and then they annihilate at the origin, that is, the flow turns back to the basic flow $`\mathrm{\Phi }_B`$ having no vortex. (M-2) A pattern accompanied by creations and annihilations of two pairs

The linear combination given by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{02,2}^+(x,y,t)`$ $`=\mathrm{\Phi }_B\theta (t)c^2[2iU_{00}^+(x,y)U_{20}^+(x,y)e^{2\gamma t}]`$
$`=[4\beta ^2x^2(\beta ^2y^2\theta (t)c^2e^{2\gamma t})2i(\theta (t)c^2(1e^{2\gamma t})\beta ^2(x^2y^2))]e^{i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2}`$ (22)
has four nodal points at $`(\pm c/\beta ,ce^{\gamma t}/\beta )`$ and $`(\pm c/\beta ,ce^{\gamma t}/\beta )`$ for $`t0`$. In this case we easily see that the pair of vortices at $`(\pm c/\beta ,ce^{\gamma t}/\beta )`$ and that at $`(\pm c/\beta ,ce^{\gamma t}/\beta )`$ annihilate as $`t\mathrm{}`$ as shown in fig. 7. The stable flow $`\mathrm{\Phi }_B2ic^2U_{00}^+(x,y)`$ that appears in the limit has two nodal points at $`(\pm c/\beta ,0)`$, but it has no vortex but two vortex dipoles, because the current also vanish at the points. The time development of this process is interpreted similarly as the case (M-1).

In these two cases all vortices move on straight lines in the pair annihilation processes. (M-3) A pattern accompanied by creation and annihilation of four vortices

The linear combinations of stationary flows and diverging or converging ones make different types of annihilation processes. For an example, let us consider the linear combination of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_B`$ and the lowest order diverging flow described by

$$U_{00}^{++}(x,y,t)=e^{i\beta ^2(x^2+y^2)/2}e^{\gamma t}$$
(23)
having the energy eigenvalue $`i\gamma \mathrm{}`$. Let us consider the linear combination described by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{02,0}^{++}(x,y,t)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{\Phi }_B\theta (t)c^2U_{00}^{++}(x,y,t)`$
$`=[\beta ^4x^2y^2\theta (t)c^2e^{\gamma t}e^{i\beta ^2y^2}+i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2]e^{i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2}.`$ (24)
For $`t0`$ it has two nodal points at the points where the following relations are fulfilled;

$$XY=c(t)\mathrm{cos}Y,\frac{1}{2}(XY)c(t)\mathrm{sin}Y=0,$$
(25)
where $`X=\beta ^2x^2`$, $`Y=\beta ^2y^2`$ and $`c(t)=c^2e^{\gamma t}`$. From these relations we have an equation for $`Y`$

$$Y^2c(t)\mathrm{cos}Y+2c(t)Y\mathrm{sin}Y=0.$$
(26)
The solutions are obtained from the cross points of two functions $`f(Y)=Y^2`$ and $`g(Y)=c(t)(\mathrm{cos}Y2Y\mathrm{sin}Y)`$. We easily see that a solution for $`Y0`$ exists in the region $`0<Y<\pi /2`$ for arbitrary positive numbers of $`c(t)`$. Four vortices appear at the four points expressed by the combinations of $`x=\pm \sqrt{X}/\beta `$ and $`y=\pm \sqrt{Y}/\beta `$, where $`X`$ is obtained by using the first relation of (25). Since $`c(t)`$ goes to $`0`$ as $`t\mathrm{}`$, we see that $`X`$ and $`Y`$ simultaneously go to $`0`$ in the limit such that

$$XY|c|e^{\gamma t/2}0,\mathrm{for}t\mathrm{}.$$

Since the flow turns back to the basic flow, the four vortices annihilate at the origin in the limit. From the second relation of (25), we have

$$X=Y+2c(t)\mathrm{sin}Y.$$

This equation show us that the vortex points do not move along straight lines.

Here we consider a somewhat complicated processe. (M-4) A pattern accompanied by annihilation of four vortex-pairs

Here we take $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{02}^+(x,y)`$ of (20) as the stable flow, which has four vortices. For the simplicity $`c=1/2`$ is taken in the following discussions. Here the lowest order diverging flow $`U_{00}^{++}(x,y,t)`$ are put into the stationary flow at $`t=0`$. The wavefunction are given by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{02,0}^{++}(x,y;t)=`$ $`16\mathrm{\Phi }_{02}^+(x,y)+\theta (t)b^2U_{00}^{++}(x,y,t)`$
$`=`$ $`[16\beta ^4x^2y^21+\theta (t)b^2e^{\gamma t}e^{i\beta ^2y^2}+8i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)]e^{i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2}`$
$`=`$ $`[16\beta ^4x^2y^21+\theta (t)b(t)e^{\gamma t}\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^2y^2)+i(8\beta ^2(x^2y^2)`$
$`+\theta (t)b(t)e^{\gamma t}\mathrm{sin}(\beta ^2y^2))]e^{i\beta ^2(x^2y^2)/2},`$ (27)
where $`b`$ and $`b(t)=b^2e^{\gamma t}`$. Using $`X=\beta ^2x^2`$ and $`Y=\beta ^2y^2`$, we have two relations for nodal points of the wavefunction for $`t>0`$ as follows;

$$16XY+b(t)\mathrm{cos}Y1=0,8(XY)+b(t)\mathrm{sin}Y=0.$$
(28)
From these relations we obtain an equation for the nodal points

$$1b(t)\mathrm{cos}Y16Y^2+2b(t)Y\mathrm{sin}Y=0.$$
(29)
Examining the cross point of the two functions $`F(Y)=16Y^21`$ and $`G(Y)=b(t)(\mathrm{cos}Y2Y\mathrm{sin}Y)`$, we obtain the following results: (1) In the case of $`b(t)<1`$ the two functions always have a cross-point in the region satisfying $`Y0`$ (note that $`Y=\beta ^2y^2`$). The wavefunction, therefore, has four nodal points. This means that the flow always has four vortices that move toward the stationary points fulfilling $`|x|=|y|=(2\beta )^1`$ as $`t`$ increases. (2) In the case of $`b(t)>1`$, eq.(29) has an even number of solutions like $`n=0,2,4,\mathrm{}`$. Since one solution brings four vortices on a circle with the centre at the origin, the vortex number is given by $`4n`$. Note that the number $`n`$ increases as $`b(t)`$ increases. This fact means that, since $`b(t)`$ decreases as $`t`$ increases, the vortex number decreases as $`t`$ increases, until $`b(t)`$ gets to 1. Considering that the change of $`n`$ is always 2, we see that the reduction of the vortex number caused by the change of $`n`$ is always 8. That is to say, we observe that four vortex-pairs simultaneously annihilate at four different points on a circle. As a simple example, let us consider the case of $`n=2`$ at $`t=0`$. We observe the following time development of the flow: (i) For $`t<0`$ the stationary flow has the four vortices as shown in fig.5. (ii) At $`t=0`$ the original four vortices are disappear and eight vortices are newly created. Then we observe the flow having eight vortices. (See fig. 8.) (iii) In the time-evolution the eight vortices disappear simultaneously. We observe the process as the annihilations of four vortex-pairs. Thus the flow having no vortex appears. (iv) At the critical time $`t_c=\mathrm{ln}b^2/\gamma `$ when $`b(t_c)=1`$ is fulfilled four vortices are created at the origin, and then they move toward the stationary points. The vortex state at $`t=t_c`$ can be understood as a vortex quadrupole .

If, instead of the diverging flow $`U_{00}^{++}(x,y,t)`$, the converging flow $`U_{00}^{}(x,y,t)`$ is put in the stationary flow, we observe a flow continuously creating 8 vortices for any choices of $`b`$. Of course, the time dependent flow blows up the magnitude in the limit of $`t\mathrm{}`$, and thus the original stable flow can not be observed in the limit.

4. Interesting properties of zero-energy flows

Let us here consider interesting properties of the zero-energy flows. The first interesting property is due to the fact that the use of the zero-energy flows is very useful and economical from the viewpoint of energy consumption. For example it can be a very economical step for the transmission of information. Considering the huge variety arising from the infinite degeneracy, the transmission by the use of the zero-energy flows enable us to transmit an enormous amount of information without any energy loss. The flows are stable and then they can also be a very useful step for making mechanisms to preserve such information, e.g., for memories in living beings. The huge variety of vortex patterns can possibly discriminate the enormous amount of information. The addition of new memories and also the change of preserved memories can easily be carried out by pouring some zero-energy (stable) flows in the preserved ones. Furthermore, as shown in section 3.3, in all the time-dependent processes induced by pouring the unstable flows with complex energy eigenvalues the time-dependent flows always turn back to the stable flows in the long time scales, and then the initial flow patterns are recovered. That is to say, the initial patterns are kept in all such time-dependent processes. This stability of the flow patterns seems to be a very interesting property for the interpretation of the stability of memories not only in their preservations but in their applications as well. The applications, of course, mean thinking processes. These flows will possibly be workable in the steps for thinking in living beings. The use of the zero-energy and complex-energy solutions enables living beings to make up many functions in their bodies very economically on the basis of energy consumption. Anyway the zero-energy and complex-energy solutions are interesting objects to describe mechanisms working very economically as for the energy consumption. Especially, in the 2D-PPB case we can do it without any energy loss, because all the solutions of PPB have no real energy eigenvalue, i.e., the energy eigenvalues are zero or pure imaginary.

Here we would like to summarize the property of flows in CSGT. As for the zero-energy flows we can stress the following three properties; they can be (i) the absolutely energy-saving mechanism, (ii) the mechanism including an enormous topological variety in terms of vortex patterns, and also (iii) the perfect mechanism to recover the initial flow patterns in any disturbance by pouring arbitrary decaying flows with complex-energy eigenvalues. The role of the flows with complex energies will be understood as short excitement mechanisms of the vortex patterns. We still have a lot of problems to overcome the present situation, but we may expect that the study of the zero- and complex-energy solutions in CSGT will open a new site in physics.

5. Remarks

We have shown concrete examples of different types of vortex patterns accompanied by creations and annihilations of vortices by using only some low degree solutions of the 2D-PPB. We can, of course, present more complicated patterns by introducing the higher degree solutions, but the examples presented in the sections 3 will be enough to show the fact that various vortex patterns can be reproducible in terms of the eigenfunctions of the 2D-PPB. As already noted that the zero-energy solutions in the 2D-PPB can be transformed to those in the potentials $`V_a(\rho )`$ by the conformal transformations , the stable patterns given in section 3.2 can be transformed into the stable patterns of arbitrary potentials. This fact means that, as far as the stable patterns are concerned, there is an exact one-to-one correspondence between the patterns of the PPB and those of the other potentials. As for the time-dependent patterns we cannot present any concrete examples except the case of the 2D-PPB at this moment, but we may expect that similar vortex patterns as those given in section 3.3 for the PPB will appear in other potentials, since all energy eigenstates with complex eigenvalues degenerate infinitely in all the potentials $`V_a(\rho )`$ as same as in the 2D-PPB. Anyhow we cannot exactly say about the problem before we find any solutions with complex eigenvalues in the other cases.

Here we would like to note 2D-PPB. We do not know any physical phenomena that are described by 2D-PPB. We can, however, expect that most of weak repulsive forces in matters composed of many constituents will be approximated by PPBs as most of weak attractive forces are well approximated by harmonic oscillators. In general flows that go round a smooth hill of potential feel a weak repulsive force represented by a PPB \[34-36\]. Actually we see that when a charged particle is put in an infinitely long tube where same charged particles are uniformly distributed, the charged particle feels 2D-PPB. In non-neutral plasma electrons being near the center will possibly be in a similar situation. In the plasma electro-magnetic interactions must be introduced. It should be noted that in the case of a charged particle in a magnetic field the vortex quantization given by (6) can be read as

$`m\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $`={\displaystyle _c}(Sq𝐀)𝑑𝐬`$
$`={\displaystyle _c}𝐩𝑑𝐬q\mathrm{\Phi },`$ (30)
where $`q`$ is the charge of the particle and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the magnetic flux passing through the enclosed surface. Analyzing vortex phenomena of non-neutral plasma in terms of the eigenfunctions of the 2D-PPB will be an interesting application.

The infinite freedom arising from the infinite degeneracy of the zero-energy solutions should be noticed. Such a freedom has never appeared in the statistical mechanics describing thermal equilibrium. The freedom is different from that generating the usual entropy and then temperatures, because the freedom does not change real energy observed in experiments at all. A model of statistical mechanics for the new freedom has been proposed and some simple applications have been performed in the case of 1D-PBB \[37-39\]. The model is applicable to slowly changing phenomena in the time evolutions, because the PPB has only pure imaginary energy eigenvalues in the 1-dimension. In the present model of the 2-dimensions, however, we have the infinite degree of freedom arising from the zero-energy solutions that have no time evolution. The huge degeneracy of the zero-energy solutions can provide the huge variety in every energy eigenstate, which will be identified by the vortex patterns. In such a consideration the vortex patterns will be understood as the topological properties of flows. How this freedom should be counted in statistical mechanics is an important problem in future considerations.

Finally we would like to comment on the meaning of the eigenstates in CSGT. As already noted, the eigenfunctions in CSGT are generally not normalizable, and then the probability and the probability current cannot have a definite meaning. This fact means that the probabilistic interpretation for the eigenfunctions cannot be introduced in CSGT. How should we interpret the eigenfunctions in CSGT? From the discussions presented in this paper we find out a possible idea that the quantization in terms of Gel’fand triplets describes the quantization of flows. Flows are, of course, composed of many particles, and then the probability used in the description of one particle motions cannot be introduced. The magnitudes of the eigenfunctions should be considered to be proportional to the densities of the flows like the intensity of beams in scattering processes. Thus the normalizations of wavefunctions expessed by the linear combinations of the eigenfunctions lose the meaning in CSGT. We can, however, fond out that the energies are quantized as discrete or continuous numbers including complex numbers, and also the flows expressed by the eigenfunctions interfere. Though quantities in CSGT are in general not directly observed except eigenvalues such as energies, we see that velocities have a special role that they are observables being definable only on CSGT. Vortex patterns that are determined only from nodal points of wavefunctions are also good observables to investigate solutions in CSGT. As shown in section 3, we can actually see the interferences among flows through the investigation of the vortex patterns. We may say that hydrodynamical approach will be an interesting trial to investigate physics in CSGT.