text:
# Functions of several quaternion variables and quaternion manifolds.

## 1 Introduction

Superanalysis and its enormous applications in mathematical and theoretical physics are developing fastly in recent times, but mainly for supercommutative superalgebras . For nonsupercommutative superalgebras superanalysis is rather new  and less known, even (super)analysis over Clifford algebras and, in particular, quaternions is very little known.

Quaternion manifolds appear to be very useful, since the spin structure for them naturally arise due to the embedding of the unitary group $`U(2)`$ of all complex $`2\times 2`$ unitary matrices into the quaternion skew field $`𝐇`$: $`U(2)𝐇`$. Moreover, due to Theorem $`4.9`$ for each complex manifold $`N`$ there exists a quaternion manifold $`M`$ and a complex holomorphic embedding $`\theta :NM`$. In view of the isomorphism of the spin group $`Spin(4)`$ with the direct product of the special unitary groups $`SU(2)SU(2)`$ and the embedding $`SU(2)SU(2)𝐇^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ each spin manifold $`N`$ has the embedding into the corresponding quaternion manifold $`M`$ of the quaternion dimension $`dim_𝐇M=2n`$, where $`dim_𝐂N=2n𝐍`$ (about complex spin manifolds see ).

This is possible for manifolds with connecting mappings of charts being in the class of quaternion holomorphic functions considered in , but in general this is impossible in the class of quaternion (right-)superlinearly superdifferentiable functions, since the latter leads to the additional restrictions in a complex manifold $`N`$ associated with the graded $`𝐇`$ structure in the tangent space $`T_xN`$ for each $`xN`$. The latter manifolds are called in the literature quaternion manifolds (see, for example,  and references therein), but practically they are complex manifolds with the additional quaternion structure in $`TN`$, since they are modelled on $`𝐂^𝐧`$ and their connecting functions of charts are complex holomorphic, but $`𝐇`$ is not the algebra over $`𝐂`$, though there is the embedding of $`𝐂`$ into $`𝐇`$ as the $`𝐑`$-linear space. On the other hand, a quaternion manifold $`M`$ modelled on $`𝐇^𝐧`$ with quaternion holomorphic connecting functions is not a complex manifold. Even if $`M`$ is foliated by the corresponding complex local coordinates it is like the product of four manifolds $`\text{ }_{l,m}M`$, $`l,m\{1,2\}`$, with the complex holomorphic structure in $`\text{ }_{1,1}M`$ and $`\text{ }_{1,2}M`$ and the complex antiholomorphic structure in $`\text{ }_{2,1}M`$ and $`\text{ }_{2,2}M`$ factorized by the equivalence relation $`𝒴`$ such that $`z\text{ }_{1,1}M`$ is $`𝒴`$-equivalent to $`z^{}\text{ }_{2,2}M`$ and $`\xi \text{ }_{1,2}M`$ is $`𝒴`$-equivalent to $`\xi ^{}\text{ }_{2,1}M`$, where $`\text{ }_{1,1}\varphi _a(z)=\overline{\text{ }_{2,2}\varphi _a(z^{})}`$ and $`\text{ }_{1,2}\varphi _a(\xi )=\overline{\text{ }_{2,1}\varphi _a(\xi ^{})}`$, where $`At(M)=\{(U_a,\varphi _a):a\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$, $`At(\text{ }_{l,m}M)=\{(\text{ }_{l,m}U_a,\text{ }_{l,m}\varphi _a):a\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$, $`\varphi _a:U_a\varphi _a(U_a)𝐇^𝐧`$ is a homeomorphism for each $`a`$, $`\varphi _b\varphi _a^1`$ is quaternion holomorphic on $`\varphi _a(U_aU_b)`$, $`U_a`$ is open in $`M`$, $`\varphi _a(U_a)`$ is open in $`𝐇^𝐧`$, $`_aU_a=M`$. It is known from the theory of complex manifolds, that the product $`S^{2n+1}\times S^{2m+1}`$ of two odd-dimensional unit real spheres can be supplied with the complex manifold structure . In view of the discussion above and Theorem $`4.9`$ the product $`S^{2n+1}\times S^{2m+1}\times S^{2p+1}\times S^{2q+1}`$ with $`n+m=p+q`$ can be supplied with the quaternion manifold structure, where $`n,m,p,q`$ are nonnegative integers. In some sense quaternion manifolds may be related with hyperbolic manifolds.

Therefore, in the class of quaternion holomorphic functions the quantum mechanics on complex manifolds is embeddable into the quantum mechanics on quaternion manifolds. Moreover, this is natural, since the Dirac operator can be expressed through the differentiation by quaternion variables . Some attempts to spread quantum mechanics from the complex case into the quaternion case were made in , but he had not any mathematical tool of functions of quaternion variables and quaternion manifolds.

In  the quaternion line integral $`_\gamma f(z,\stackrel{~}{z})𝑑z`$ on the space $`C_b^0(U,𝐇)`$ of all bounded continuous functions $`f:U𝐇`$ was investigated, where $`U`$ is an open subset in $`𝐇`$, $`\gamma `$ is a rectifiable path in $`U`$, such that it has some properties like the complex Cauchy integral: $`_\gamma f(z,\stackrel{~}{z})𝑑z=_{\gamma _1}f(z,\stackrel{~}{z})𝑑z+_{\gamma _2}f(z,\stackrel{~}{z})𝑑z`$ for each $`\gamma =\gamma _1\gamma _2`$ with $`\gamma _1(1)=\gamma _2(0)`$, $`\gamma _1,\gamma _2:[0,1]U`$, $`_\gamma (af(z,\stackrel{~}{z})+bg(z,\stackrel{~}{z})dz=a_\gamma f(z,\stackrel{~}{z})dz+b_\gamma g(z,\stackrel{~}{z})dz`$ for each $`a,b𝐇`$, $`f,gC_b^0(U,𝐇)`$, $`((_{\gamma ,\eta =\gamma (1)}f(z,\stackrel{~}{z})𝑑z)/\eta ).I=f(\eta ,\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$, though the quaternion line integral is not $`𝐇`$-linear. Then there quaternion holomorphic functions were introduced and investigated with the specific definition of the superdifferentiability (in general $`𝐇`$-nonlinear). There were found many quaternionic features in comparison with the complex case and the theory of quaternion holomorphic functions can not be reduced to the theory of complex holomorphic functions.

In this paper functions of several quaternion variables are investigated (see §§2 and 3) and their theory is applied to the definition and the studies of quaternion analogs of complex Stein manifolds (see §4). In this article theorems about integral representations of quaternion functions are proved. Among them there are the quaternion analogs of the Cauchy-Green, Martinelli-Bochner and Leray formulas, but they are quite different from the complex case, since quaternion integrals are noncommutative and quaternion differential forms does not satisfy the same properties as complex differential forms. They are applied to solve the $`\stackrel{~}{}`$-equations. This is important not only for the theory of quaternion functions, but also for investigations of quaternion manifolds. Then this can be used for developments of sheaves, quantum sheaves and quantum field theory on quaternion manifolds. Naturally free loop spaces and transformation groups of quaternion manifolds such as groups of diffeomorphisms, groups of geometric loops, groups of hoops can be further investigated continuing previous works of the author on these spaces and groups , which is interesting for theory of groups and their representations and also for their usages in quantum field theory, quantum gravity, superstrings, etc.

## 2 Differentiable functions of several quaternion variables

2.1. Theorem. Let $`U`$ be an open subset in $`𝐇`$ with a $`C^1`$-boundary $`U`$ $`U`$-homotopic with a product $`\gamma _1\times \gamma _2\times \gamma _3`$, where $`\gamma _j(s)=a_j+r_j\mathrm{exp}(2\pi M_js)`$, $`M_j𝐇_𝐢`$, $`|M_j|=1`$, $`s[0,1]`$, $`\gamma _j([0,1])U`$, $`0<r_j<\mathrm{}`$, $`j=1,2,3`$, where $`M_j`$ are linearly independent over $`𝐑`$. Let also $`f:cl(U)𝐇`$ be a continuous function on $`cl(U)`$ such that $`(f(z)/\stackrel{~}{z})`$ is defined in the sense of distributions in $`U`$ is continuous in $`U`$ and has a continuous extension on $`cl(U)`$, where $`U`$ and $`\gamma _j`$ for each $`j`$ satisfy conditions of Theorem 3.9 . Then

$$(2.1)f(z)=$$

$$(2\pi )^3_{\gamma _3}_{\gamma _2}_{\gamma _1}f(\zeta _1)(_{\zeta _1}Ln(\zeta _1\zeta _2))M_1^1(_{\zeta _2}Ln(\zeta _2\zeta _3))M_2^1(_{\zeta _3}Ln(\zeta _3z))M_3^1$$

$$(2\pi )^3_U\{(\widehat{f}(\zeta _1)/\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_1).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_1_{\zeta _1}Ln(\zeta _1\zeta _2))M_1^1(_{\zeta _2}Ln(\zeta _2\zeta _3))M_2^1(_{\zeta _3}Ln(\zeta _3z))M_3^1\}.$$

Proof. We have the identities $`d_\zeta [\widehat{f}(\zeta )._\zeta Ln(\zeta z)]=`$ $`\{(\widehat{f}(\zeta )/\stackrel{~}{\zeta }).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }\}_\zeta Ln(\zeta z)`$ $`+\{(\widehat{f}(\zeta )/\zeta ).d\zeta \}_\zeta Ln(\zeta z)`$ and $`d_\zeta d_\zeta Ln(\zeta z)|_{\zeta \gamma }=0`$ for $`\zeta `$ varying along a path $`\gamma `$, where for short $`f(z)=f(z,\stackrel{~}{z})`$, since there is the bijection of $`z`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{z}`$ on $`𝐇`$, there exist quaternion-valued functions $`g(\zeta ,z)`$ and $`h(\zeta ,z)`$ such that $`_\zeta Ln(\zeta z)=g(\zeta ,z)d\zeta =(d\zeta )h(\zeta ,z)`$ (see also §§2.1 and 2.6 ). As in  $`\widehat{f}(z,\stackrel{~}{z}):=g(z,\stackrel{~}{z})/z`$, where $`g(z,\stackrel{~}{z})`$ is a quaternion-valued function such that $`(g(z,\stackrel{~}{z})/z).I=f(z,\stackrel{~}{z})`$. Since $`\zeta _1`$ varies along the path $`\gamma _1`$, then $`d\zeta _1d\zeta _1|_{\zeta _1\gamma _1}=0`$. Consider $`zU`$ and $`ϵ>0`$ such that the torus $`𝐓(z,ϵ,𝐇)`$ is contained in $`U`$, where $`𝐓(z,ϵ,𝐇)=\psi _3\times \psi _2\times \psi _1`$, $`\psi _j`$ are of the same form as $`\gamma _j`$ but with $`z`$ instead of $`a_j`$ and with $`r_j=ϵ`$. Applying Stokes formula for regions in $`𝐑^\mathrm{𝟒}`$ and componentwise to $`𝐇`$-valued differential forms we get

$$_U\omega _{𝐓(z,ϵ,𝐇)}\omega =_{U𝐓(z,ϵ,𝐇)}𝑑w,\text{ where}$$

$$w=\widehat{f}(\zeta _1).(_{\zeta _1}Ln(\zeta _1\zeta _2))M_1^1(_{\zeta _2}Ln(\zeta _2\zeta _3))M_2^1(_{\zeta _3}Ln(\zeta _3z))M_3^1.$$

In view of Theorem 3.9  we have that $`lim_{ϵ0,ϵ>0}(2\pi )^3_{\gamma _3}_{\gamma _2}_{\gamma _1}w=f(z)`$ and $`lim_{ϵ0,ϵ>0}_{U𝐓(z,ϵ,𝐇)}𝑑\omega =_U𝑑\omega .`$ From this formula $`(2.1)`$ follows.

2.1.1. Remark. Formula $`(2.1)`$ is the quaternion analog of the (complex) Cauchy-Green formula. Since in the sence of distributions $`\widehat{f}/\stackrel{~}{z}=(g/\stackrel{~}{z})/z`$, then from $`\widehat{f}/\stackrel{~}{z}=0`$ it follows, that $`\widehat{f}.I/\stackrel{~}{z}=f/\stackrel{~}{z}=0`$. If $`f/\stackrel{~}{z}=0`$, then $`g`$ can be chosen such that $`g/\stackrel{~}{z}=0`$ . Therefore, from Formula $`(2.1)`$ it follows, that $`f`$ is quaternion holomorphic in $`U`$ if and only if $`f/\stackrel{~}{z}=0`$ in $`U`$.

2.2. Remark. Instead of curves $`\gamma `$ of Theorem $`2.1`$ above or Theorems $`3.9,3.24`$  it is possible to consider their natural generalization $`\gamma (\theta )+z_0=z_0+r(\theta )\mathrm{exp}(2\pi S(\theta ))`$, where $`r(\theta )`$ and $`S(\theta )`$ are continuous functions of finite total variations, $`\theta [0,1]𝐑`$, $`r(\theta )0`$, $`S(\theta )𝐇`$. Therefore, $`\gamma `$ is a rectifiable path. If $`S(0)=S(1)mod(𝐒_𝐢)`$ and $`r(0)=r(1)`$, then $`\gamma `$ is a closed path (loop): $`\gamma (0)=\gamma (1)`$, where $`𝐒_𝐢:=\{z𝐇_𝐢:|z|=1\}`$, $`𝐇_𝐢:=\{z𝐇:z+\stackrel{~}{z}=0\}`$. Consider $`S`$ absolutely continuous such that there exists $`TL^1([0,1],𝐇)`$ for which $`S(\theta )=S(0)+_0^\theta T(\tau )𝑑\tau `$ (see Satz 2 and 3 (Lebesgue) in §6.4 ) and let $`r(\theta )>0`$ for each $`\theta [0,1]`$. Evidently, $`Mn:=S(1)S(0)=_0^1T(\tau )𝑑\tau `$ is invariant relative to reparatmetrizations $`\varphi Diff_+^1([0,1])`$ of diffeomorphisms of $`[0,1]`$ preserving the orientation, $`n`$ is a real number, $`M𝐒_𝐢`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Delta }Arg(\gamma ):=Arg(\gamma )|_0^1=2\pi _0^1T(\tau )𝑑\tau `$ (see also Formula $`(3.7)`$ and §3.8 ). In view of Theorem $`3.8`$  for each loop $`\gamma :`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }Arg(\gamma )\mathrm{𝐙𝐒}_𝐢`$. For each $`ϵ>0`$ for the total variation there is the equality $`V(\gamma ϵ)=V(\gamma )ϵ`$. Since $`\gamma ([0,1])`$ is a compact subset in $`𝐇`$, then there exists $`r_m:=sup_{\theta [0,1]}r(\theta )<\mathrm{}`$. Hence $`z_0+(\gamma ϵ)([0,1])B(𝐇,z_0,r_mϵ)`$.

Therefore, Theorems $`3.9,3.24,3.30`$ and Formulas $`(3.9,3.9^{})`$  and Theorem $`2.1`$ above are true for such paths $`\gamma `$ also and Formula $`(3.9)`$  takes the form

$$(2.2)f(z)=(2\pi n)^1(_\psi f(\zeta )(\zeta z)^1𝑑\zeta )\stackrel{~}{M},$$

where $`0n𝐙`$ for a closed path $`\gamma `$, $`M𝐒_𝐢`$, Formula $`(2.2)`$ generalizes Formula $`(3.9)`$, when $`|n|>1`$. When $`\widehat{I}n(0,\gamma )=0`$, then $`(_\psi f(\zeta )(\zeta z)^1𝑑\zeta )=0`$ (see also §3.23 ).

2.3. Theorem. Let $`U`$ be a bounded open subset in $`𝐇`$ and $`f:U𝐇`$ be a bounded continuous function. Then there exists a continuous function $`u(z)`$ which is a solution of the equation

$$(1)(u(z)/\stackrel{~}{z})=\widehat{f}$$

in $`U`$, in particular, $`(u(z)/\stackrel{~}{z}).I=f(z)`$.

Proof. Take quaternion one-forms $`d\zeta _l`$ expressible through $`d\zeta `$ as $`_{j=1}^{k(l)}P_{j,1,l}d\zeta P_{j,2,l}`$ with fixed nonzero quaternions $`P_{j,q,l}`$, where $`l=1,2,3,4`$, $`k(l)𝐍`$, $`\zeta U`$. Choose them satisfying conditions $`d\zeta _4\nu =\xi (v,w,x,y)dvdwdxdy`$, $`d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4\nu =0`$, where $`\nu =(_{\zeta _1}Ln(\zeta _1\zeta _2))M_1^1(_{\zeta _2}Ln(\zeta _2\zeta _3))M_2^1(_{\zeta _3}Ln(\zeta _3z))M_3^1`$ as in §2.1, $`z=vI+wJ+xK+yL`$, $`I`$, $`J`$, $`K`$ and $`L`$ are Pauli-matrices, $`v`$, $`w`$, $`x`$ and $`y𝐑`$, $`\xi :U\widehat{𝐇}`$ is a function nonzero and finite almost everywhere on $`U`$ relative to the Lebesgue measure. Then there exist $`d\zeta _4`$ and $`\nu `$ such that the continuous function

$$(2)u(z):=(2\pi )^3_U(\widehat{f}(\zeta _1).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4)\nu $$

is a solution of equation $`(1)`$. To demonstrate this take closed curves $`\gamma _j`$ in $`U`$ as in §2.1 and §2.2, for example, such that $`\zeta _j\gamma _j`$ satisfy conditions: $`(\zeta _1\zeta _2)=\eta _1`$, $`(\zeta _2\zeta _3)=\eta _3`$, $`\zeta _3=r\eta _3^T`$ with $`0<r<1`$, where $`\eta _1=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{t0}{0\overline{t}}\right)`$, $`\eta _2=\stackrel{~}{\eta }_3`$, $`\eta _3=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0u}{\overline{u}0}\right)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }_1=\eta _4`$, $`\eta _4=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\overline{t}0}{0t}\right)`$, where $`t`$ and $`u𝐂`$, $`\zeta =\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{tu}{\overline{u}\overline{t}}\right)U`$, $`a^T`$ denotes the transposed matrix of a matrix $`a`$. Hence $`d\eta _1d\eta _1=0`$, $`d\eta _2d\eta _2^T=0`$, $`d\eta _3d\eta _3^T=0`$, $`d\eta _4d\eta _4=0`$,

$`(i)`$ $`\eta _1^kd\eta _1=(d\eta _1)\eta _1^k`$ and $`\eta _3^kd\eta _3=[(d\eta _3)\eta _3^k]^{\stackrel{~}{.}}`$
for $`k=1`$ and $`k=1`$. These variables are expressible as $`\zeta _l=_{j=1}^{k(l)}P_{j,1,l}\zeta P_{j,2,l}`$ (see §§3.7 and 3.28 ). Therefore, there exists a quaternion variable $`\zeta _4`$ expressible through $`\zeta `$ as above such that

$`(ii)`$ $`d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4\nu =\xi (v,w,x,y)dvdwdxdy`$, $`d\zeta _4\nu =0`$. Therefore, there exists a subgroup of the group of all quaternion holomorphic diffeomorphisms of $`U`$ preserving Conditions $`(ii)`$ and the construction given above has natural generalizations.

On the other hand, $`\zeta `$ is expressible through $`\zeta _1`$,…,$`\zeta _4`$ as $`\zeta =_lP_{1,l}\zeta P_{2,l}`$, where $`P_{1,l},\mathrm{},P_{2,l}`$ are quaternion constants. Let at first $`f`$ be continuously differentiable in $`U`$. Each $`\zeta _j`$ is expressible in the form $`\zeta _j=_l\text{ }^lb_jS_l`$, where $`\text{ }^lb_j𝐑`$ are real variables, $`S_l\{I,J,K,L\}`$, hence differentials $`(f/\zeta _j).d\zeta _j=_l\{(f/z).S_ld\text{ }^lb_j`$ $`+(f/\stackrel{~}{z}).\stackrel{~}{S}_ld\text{ }^lb_j\}`$ are defined. Consider a fixed $`z_0U`$. We take a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-function $`\chi `$ on $`𝐇`$ such that $`\chi =1`$ in a neighbourhood $`V`$ of $`z_0`$, $`VU`$, $`\chi =0`$ in a neighbourhood of $`𝐇U`$. Then $`u=u_1+u_2,`$ where

$$u_1(z):=(2\pi )^3_U\chi (\zeta _1)(\widehat{f}(\zeta _1).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4)\nu ,$$

$$u_2(z):=(2\pi )^3_U(1\chi (\zeta _1))(\widehat{f}(\zeta _1).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4)\nu .$$

Then

$$u(z):=(2\pi )^3_𝐇\chi (\zeta _1+z)(\widehat{f}(\zeta _1+z).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4)\psi ,\text{ where}$$

$$\psi :=(_{\zeta _1}Ln(\zeta _1\zeta _2))M_1^1(_{\zeta _2}Ln(\zeta _2\zeta _3))M_2^1(_{\zeta _3}Ln(\zeta _3)M_3^1.$$

Since $`_{\zeta _4}\{[\chi (\zeta _1+z)\widehat{f}(\zeta _1+z).]\psi \}=0`$ and $`(/\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4)\{[\chi (\zeta _1+z)\widehat{f}(\zeta _1+z).]\psi \}.d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4`$ $`=_{\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4}\{[\chi (\zeta _1+z)\widehat{f}(\zeta _1+z).]\psi \},`$ then due to Equations $`(i,ii)`$
$`(u(z)/\stackrel{~}{z})=(2\pi )^3_𝐇_{\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4}\{[\chi (\zeta _1+z)\widehat{f}(\zeta _1+z)]\psi \}`$.
In view of Theorem 2.1 applied to $`\widehat{f}.S`$ for each $`S\{I,J,K,L\}`$ we have $`(u_1/\stackrel{~}{z})=\widehat{f}`$ in $`V`$, consequently, $`(u/\stackrel{~}{z})=\widehat{f}`$ in a neighbourhood of $`z_0`$. Taking a sequence $`f^n`$ of continuously differentiable functions uniformly converging to $`f`$ on $`U`$ we get the corresponding $`u^n`$ such that in the sence of distributions $`(u/\stackrel{~}{z})=lim_n\mathrm{}(u^n/\stackrel{~}{z})=lim_n\widehat{f}^n=\widehat{f}`$.

2.4. Theorem. Let $`U`$ be an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$. Then for every compact subset $`K`$ in $`U`$ and every multi-order $`k=(k_1,\mathrm{},k_n)`$, there exists a constant $`C>0`$ such that

$$\underset{zK}{\mathrm{max}}|^kf(z)|C_U|f(z)|𝑑\sigma _{4n}$$

for each quaternion holomorphic function $`f`$, where $`d\sigma _{4n}`$ is the Lebesgue measure in $`𝐇^𝐧`$.

2.5. Corollary. Let $`U`$ be an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and let $`f_l`$ be a sequence of quaternion holomorphic functions in $`U`$ which is uniformly bounded on every compact subset of $`U`$. Then there is a subsequence $`f_{k_j}`$ converging uniformly on every compact subset of $`U`$ to a limit in $`C_z^\omega (U,𝐇)`$.

Proofs of Theorem 2.4 and Corollary 2.5 follow from Theorem 2.1 above and Theorem 3.9  analogously to Theorem 1.1.13 and Corollary 1.1.14 .

2.6. Definitions. Let $`U`$ be an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and $`f:U𝐇^𝐦`$ be a quaternion holomorphic function, then the matrix: $`J_f(z):=(f_j(z)/z_k)`$ is called the quaternion Jacobi matrix, where $`j=1,\mathrm{},m`$, $`k=1,\mathrm{},n`$. To this quaternion operator matrix there corresponds a real $`(4m)\times (4n)`$-matrix. Denote by $`rank_𝐑(J_f(z))`$ a rank of a real matrix corresponding to $`J_f(z)`$. Then $`f`$ is called regular at $`zU`$, if $`rank_𝐑(J_f(z))=4\mathrm{min}(n,m)`$. If $`U`$ and $`V`$ are two open subsets in $`𝐇^𝐧`$, then a bijective surjective mapping $`f:UV`$ is called quaternion biholomorphic if $`f`$ and $`f^1:VU`$ are quaternion holomorphic.

2.7. Proposition. Let $`U`$ and $`V`$ be open subsets in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and $`𝐇^𝐦`$ respectively. If $`f:U𝐇^𝐦`$ and $`g:V𝐇^𝐤`$ are quaternion holomorphic functions such that $`f(U)V`$, then $`gf:U𝐇^𝐤`$ is quaternion holomorphic and $`J_{gf}(z)=J_g(f(z)).(J_f(z).h)`$ for each $`h𝐇^𝐧`$.

Proof. In view of Definition 2.1 and Theorem 3.10  $`(g_j(f(z))/z_l).\zeta =_{s=1}^m_{l=1}^k(g_j(\xi )/\xi _s)|_{\xi =f(z)}.(f_s(z)/z_l).h_l`$, where $`h=(h_1,\mathrm{},h_n)`$, $`h_l𝐇`$ for each $`l=1,\mathrm{},n`$, since $`f(U)V`$ and this is evident for quaternion polynomial functions and hence for locally converging series of quaternion holomorphic functions.

2.8. Proposition. Let $`U`$ be a neighbourhood of $`z𝐇^𝐧`$ and let $`f:U𝐇^𝐧`$ be a quaternion holomorphic function. Then $`f`$ is quaternion biholomorphic in some neighbourhood of $`z`$ if and only if $`rank_𝐑J_f(z)=4n`$.

Proof. From Proposition 2.7 it follows, that the condition $`rank_𝐑J_f(z)=4n`$ is necessary. In view of Definition 2.1, Theorem 3.10 and Note 3.11  an incerement of $`f`$ can be written in the form $`f(z+\zeta )=f(z)+J_f(z).\zeta +O(|\zeta |^2)`$ for each $`\zeta 𝐇^𝐧`$ such that $`z+\zeta U`$. As in the proof of Theorem 1.1.18  we get, that there exists a quaternion holomorphic function $`h`$ on an open neighbourhood $`W`$ of $`z`$ in $`U`$ satisfying the condition $`|g(z+\zeta )|C|\zeta |^2`$, $`WB(z,2ϵ,𝐇^𝐧)`$, $`0<ϵ<(2C)^1`$, where $`C`$ is a positive constant and $`h`$ is given by the series $`h=_{k=1}^{\mathrm{}}g_k`$, where $`g_{k+1}=gg_k`$ for each $`k𝐍`$ and $`g_1:=g`$, $`g:=idf`$, since for each $`\eta W`$ there exists $`r>0`$ such that $`B(\eta ,r,𝐇)U`$ and the series for $`h`$ is convergent on $`B(\eta ,r,𝐇)`$ with $`h(B(z,ϵ,𝐇^𝐧))B(z,2ϵ,𝐇^𝐧)`$. The operator $`J_f(\eta )`$ is continuous by $`\eta `$ on $`U`$, hence there exists a neighbourhood $`V`$ of $`z`$ such that $`rank_𝐑J_f(z)`$ is equal to $`4n`$ on it, hence $`f(V)`$ is open in $`𝐇^𝐧`$. From $`(id+h)f=f(id+h)=id`$ on $`B(z,ϵ,𝐇^𝐧)`$ it follows, that $`f`$ is quaternion holomorphic on a neighbourhood of $`z`$.

2.9. Corollary. Let $`X`$ be a subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and $`k\{1,2,\mathrm{},n1\}`$, then the following conditions are equivalent:

$`(i)`$ for each $`\zeta X`$ there exists a quaternion biholomorphic map $`f=(f_1,\mathrm{},f_n)`$ in some neighbourhood $`U`$ of $`\zeta `$ such that $`rank_𝐑f=4n`$ on $`U`$ and $`XU=\{zU:f_{k+1}(z)=0,\mathrm{},f_n(z)=0\}`$;

$`(ii)`$ for each $`\zeta X`$ there exists a neighbourhood $`V`$ of $`\zeta `$ and a regular quaternion holomorphic map $`g:V𝐇^{𝐧𝐤}`$ such that $`XV=\{zV:g(z)=0\}`$.

Proof is analogous to the proof of Corollary 1.1.19  and with a consideration of the determinant function of the real $`4n\times 4n`$ matrix $`J_{f,𝐑}(z)`$ corresponding to the quaternion operator $`J_f(z)`$, since $`detJ_{f,𝐑}(z)0`$ if and only if $`rank_𝐑f(z)=4n`$.

2.10. Definitions. Let $`U`$ be an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$. A subset $`X`$ in $`U`$ is called a quaternion submanifold of $`𝐇^𝐧`$ if the equivalent conditions of Corollary 2.9 are satisfied. If in addition $`X`$ is a closed subset in $`U`$, then $`X`$ is called a closed quaternion submanifold of $`U`$. This definition is the particular case of the following general definition.

A quaternion holomorphic manifold of quaternion dimension $`n`$ is a real $`4n`$-dimensional $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-manifold $`X`$ together with a family $`\{(U_j,\varphi _j):j\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$ of charts such that

$`(i)`$ each $`U_j`$ is an open subset in $`X`$ and $`_{j\mathrm{\Lambda }}U_j=X`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a set;

$`(ii)`$ for each $`j\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ a mapping $`\varphi _j:U_jV_j`$ is a homeomorphism on an open subset $`V_j`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$;

$`(iii)`$ for each $`j,l\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ a connection mapping $`\varphi _j\varphi _l^1`$ is a quaternion biholomorphic map (see §2.6) from $`\varphi _l(U_jU_l)`$ onto $`\varphi _j(U_jU_l)`$. Such system is called a quaternion holomorphic atlas $`At(X):=\{(U_j,\varphi _j):j\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$. Each chart $`(U_j,\varphi _j)`$ provides a system of quaternion holomorphic coordinates induced from $`𝐇^𝐧`$. For short we shall write quaternion manifold instead of quaternion holomorphic manifold and quaternion atlas instead of quaternion holomorphic atlas if other will not be specified.

For two quaternion manifolds $`X`$ and $`Y`$ with atlases $`At(X):=\{(U_j,\varphi _j):j\mathrm{\Lambda }_X\}`$ and $`At(Y):=\{(W_l,\psi _l):l\mathrm{\Lambda }_Y\}`$ a function $`f:XY`$ is called quaternion holomorphic if $`\psi _lf\varphi _j^1`$ is quaternion holomorphic on $`\varphi _j(U_jf^1(W_l))`$. If $`f:XY`$ is a quternion biholomorphic epimorphism, then $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are called quaternion biholomorphically equivalent.

A subset $`Z`$ of a quaternion manifold $`X`$ is called a quaternion submanifold, if $`\varphi _j(U_jZ)`$ is a quaternion submanifold in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ for each chart $`(U_j,\varphi _j)`$. If additionally $`Z`$ is closed in $`X`$, then $`Z`$ is called a closed quaternion submanifold.

2.11. Theorem. Let $`n2`$, $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_nC_{0,(z,\stackrel{~}{z})}^1(𝐇^𝐧,𝐇)`$ be a family of continuously quaternion $`(z,\stackrel{~}{z})`$-differentiable functions satisfying compatibility conditions:

$$(i)f_j/\stackrel{~}{z}_k=f_k/\stackrel{~}{z}_j\text{ for each }j,k=1,\mathrm{},n,$$

where in $`C_{0,(z,\stackrel{~}{z})}^1(𝐇^𝐧,𝐇)`$ is the subspace of $`C_{(z,\stackrel{~}{z})}^1(𝐇^𝐧,𝐇)`$ of functions with compact support. Then there exists $`uC_{0,(z,\stackrel{~}{z})}^1(𝐇^𝐧,𝐇)`$ satisfying the following $`\stackrel{~}{}`$-equation:

$$(ii)u/\stackrel{~}{z}_j=\widehat{f}_j,j=1,\mathrm{},n;$$

in particular, $`(u/\stackrel{~}{z}_j).I=f_j.`$

Proof. We put

$$(iii)u(z):=(2\pi )^3_𝐇[(\widehat{f}_1(\zeta _1,z_2,\mathrm{},z_n).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4)\eta ],\text{ where}$$

$$\eta :=(_{\zeta _1}Ln(\zeta _1\zeta _2))M_1^1(_{\zeta _2}Ln(\zeta _2\zeta _3))M_2^1(_{\zeta _3}Ln(\zeta _3z)M_3^1$$

(see §2.3). By changing of variables we get

$$u(z):=(2\pi )^3_𝐇[(\widehat{f}_1(z_1+\zeta _1,z_2,\mathrm{},z_n).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4)\psi ],\text{ where}$$

$$\psi :=(_{\zeta _1}Ln(\zeta _1\zeta _2))M_1^1(_{\zeta _2}Ln(\zeta _2\zeta _3))M_2^1(_{\zeta _3}Ln(\zeta _3)M_3^1.$$

Therefore, $`uC_{(z,\stackrel{~}{z})}^1(𝐇^𝐧,𝐇)`$. Due to Theorem 2.3 $`u/\stackrel{~}{z}_1=\widehat{f}_1`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$. In view of Theorem 2.1 and the condition $`f_1/\stackrel{~}{z}_k=f_k/\stackrel{~}{z}_1`$ the following equality is satisfied

$$\widehat{f}_k(z)=(2\pi )^3_𝐇\{[f_k(\zeta _1,z_2,\mathrm{},z_n)/\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_1].d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4\}\psi ,$$

hence $`u/\stackrel{~}{z}_k=\widehat{f}_k`$ for $`k=2,\mathrm{},n`$, that is, $`u`$ satisfies equations $`(ii)`$. From this it follows, that $`u`$ is quaternion holomorphic in $`𝐇^𝐧supp(f_1)\mathrm{}supp(f_n)`$. In view of formula $`(iii)`$ it follows, that there exists $`0<r<\mathrm{}`$ such that

$`(iv)u(z)=0`$ for each $`z𝐇^𝐧`$ with $`|z_2|+\mathrm{}+|z_n|>r`$. From $`u/\stackrel{~}{z}_1=\widehat{f}_1`$ it follows, that $`u/\stackrel{~}{z}_1=0`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧supp(f_1)`$. Consequently, there exists $`0<R<\mathrm{}`$ such that $`u`$ may differ from $`0`$ on $`𝐇^𝐧B(𝐇^𝐧,0,R)`$ only on a quaternion constant (see Theorem 3.28 and Note 3.11 in ). Together with $`(iv)`$ this gives, that $`u(z)=0`$ on $`𝐇^𝐧B(𝐇^𝐧,0,\mathrm{max}(R,r)).`$

2.12. Theorem. Let $`U`$ be an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$, where $`n2`$. Suppose $`K`$ is a compact subset in $`U`$ such that $`UK`$ is connected. Then for every quaternion holomorphic function $`h`$ on $`UK`$ there exists a function $`H`$ quaternion holomorphic in $`U`$ such that $`H=h`$ in $`UK`$.

Proof. Take any infinite $`(z,\stackrel{~}{z})`$-differentiable function $`\chi `$ on $`U`$ with compact support such that $`\chi |_V=1`$ on some (open) neighbourhood $`V`$ of $`K`$. Then consider a family of functions $`f_j`$ such that $`\widehat{f}_j(z,\stackrel{~}{z}).S=\{(\chi /\stackrel{~}{z}).S\}h`$ in $`UK`$ and $`f_j=0`$ outside $`UK`$ for each $`S\{I,J,K,L\}`$, where $`j=1,\mathrm{},n`$, $`f_j(z)=\widehat{f}_j(z).I`$. Therefore, conditions of Theorem 2.11 are satisfied and it gives a function $`uC_{0,(z,\stackrel{~}{z})}^1(𝐇^𝐧,𝐇)`$ such that $`u/\stackrel{~}{z}_j=\widehat{f}_j`$ for each $`j=1,\mathrm{},n`$. A desired function $`H`$ can be defined by the formula $`H:=(1\chi )hu`$ such that $`H`$ is quaternion holomorphic in $`U`$. Since $`\chi `$ has a compact support, then there exists an unbounded connected subset $`W`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧supp(\chi )`$. Therefore, $`u|_W=0`$, consequently, $`H|_{UW}=h|_{UW}`$. From $`(UK)W\mathrm{}`$ and connectedness of $`UK`$ it follows, that $`H|_{UK}=h|_{UK}`$.

2.13. Remark. In the particular case of a singleton $`K=\{z\}`$ Theorem 2.12 gives nonexistence of isolated singularities, that is, each quaternion holomorphic function in $`U\{z\}`$ for $`U`$ open in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ with $`n2`$ can be quaternion holomorphically extended to $`z`$. Theorem 2.12 is the quaternion analog of the Hartog’s theorem for $`𝐂^𝐧`$.

2.14. Corollary. Let $`U`$ be an open connected subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and $`n2`$. Suppose that $`f`$ is a right superlinearly superdifferentiable function $`f:U𝐇`$ and $`N(f):=\{zU:f(z)=0\}`$, then

$`(i)`$ $`UN(f)`$ is connected,

$`(ii)`$ $`N(f)`$ is not compact.

Proof. $`(i)`$. We have $`f=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{f_{1,1}f_{1,2}}{\overline{f}_{1,2}\overline{f}_{1,1}}\right)`$, where $`f_{1,1}(t,u)`$ is holomorphic by $`t`$ and antiholomorphic by $`u`$, $`f_{1,2}(t,u)`$ is holomorphic by $`u`$ and antiholomorphic by $`t`$, where $`\text{ }^jz=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\text{ }^jt\text{ }^ju}{\text{ }^j\overline{u}\text{ }^j\overline{t}}\right)`$, $`\text{ }^jz𝐇`$, $`z=(\text{ }^1z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nz)U`$. Therefore, $`N(f)=N(f_{1,1})N(f_{1,2})`$, consequently, $`UN(f)=(UN(f_{1,1}))(UN(f_{1,2})).`$ Then from Corollary 1.2.4  for complex holomorphic functions $`(i)`$ follows.

$`(ii)`$. Suppose that $`N(f)`$ is compact. In view of $`(i)`$ and Theorem 2.12 the function $`1/f`$ can be quaternion holomorphically extended on $`N(f)`$. This is a contardiction, since $`f=0`$ on $`N(f)`$.

2.14.1. Note. Corollary $`2.14`$ is not true for arbitrary quaternion holomorphic functions, for example, $`f(\text{ }^1z,\text{ }^2z)=f_1(\text{ }^1z)f_2(\text{ }^2z)`$ on $`B(𝐇^\mathrm{𝟐},0,2)`$, where $`f_1(\text{ }^1z):=\text{ }^1z\text{ }^1\stackrel{~}{z}r_1`$, $`f_2(\text{ }^2z):=\text{ }^2z\text{ }^2\stackrel{~}{z}r_2`$, $`0<r_1`$, $`0<r_2`$, $`r_1^2+r_2^2<4`$.

2.15. Theorem. Let $`U`$ be an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$, $`f_1`$,…,$`f_n`$ be infinite differentiable (by real variables) functions on $`U`$ and Conditions $`2.11.(i)`$ are satisfied in $`U`$. Then for each open bounded polytor $`P=P_1\times \mathrm{}\times P_n`$ such that $`cl(P)`$ is a subset in $`U`$, there exists a function $`u`$ infinite differentiable (by real variables) on $`P`$ and satisfying Conditions $`2.11.(ii)`$ on $`P`$.

Proof. Suppose that the theorem is true for $`f_{m+1}=\mathrm{}=f_n=0`$ on $`U`$. The case $`m=0`$ is trivial. Assume that the theorem is proved for $`m1`$. Consider $`U^{}=U_{}^{}{}_{1}{}^{}\times \mathrm{}\times U_{}^{}{}_{n}{}^{}`$ and $`U\mathrm{"}=U\mathrm{"}_1\times \mathrm{}\times U\mathrm{"}_n`$ open polytors in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ such that $`Pcl(P)U\mathrm{"}cl(U\mathrm{"})U^{}cl(U^{})U`$. Take an infinite differentiable (by real variables) function $`\chi `$ on $`U_{}^{}{}_{m}{}^{}`$ with compact support such that $`\chi |_{U\mathrm{"}_m}=1`$, $`\chi =0`$ in a neighbourhood of $`𝐇U_{}^{}{}_{m}{}^{}`$. There exists a function

$$\eta (z):=(2\pi )^3_{U_{}^{}{}_{m}{}^{}}\{[\chi (\zeta )(\widehat{f}_m(\text{ }^1z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^{m1}z,\zeta _1,\text{ }^{m+1}z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nz).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4)\nu ,$$

where a differential form $`\nu `$ is given in §2.3 with $`\zeta _1,\zeta _2,\zeta _3U_{}^{}{}_{m}{}^{}`$ and $`\text{ }^mz`$ here for $`\nu `$ instead of $`z`$ in §2.3. By changing of variables as in §2.3 we get

$$\eta (z):=(2\pi )^3_𝐇\chi (\zeta _1+z)(\widehat{f}_m(\text{ }^1z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^{m1}z,\zeta _1+\text{ }^mz,\text{ }^{m+1}z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nz).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_4)\psi ,\text{ where}$$

$$\psi :=(_{\zeta _1}Ln(\zeta _1\zeta _2))M_1^1(_{\zeta _2}Ln(\zeta _2\zeta _3))M_2^1(_{\zeta _3}Ln(\zeta _3)M_3^1.$$

Consequently, $`\eta /\stackrel{~}{z}_m=\widehat{f}_m`$ in $`U\mathrm{"}`$. The final part of the proof is analogous to that of Theorem 1.2.5 .

2.16. Definition. Let $`W`$ be an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and for each open subsets $`U`$ and $`V`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ such that

$`(i)`$ $`\mathrm{}UVWV`$ and

$`(ii)`$ $`V`$ is connected
there exists a quaternion holomorphic (right superlinear superdifferentiable, in short RSS, correspondingly) function $`f`$ in $`W`$ such that there does not exist any quaternion holomorphic (RSS) function $`g`$ in $`V`$ such that $`g=f`$ in $`U`$. Then $`W`$ is called a domain of quaternion (RSS, respectively) holomorphy. Sets of quaternion holomorphic (RSS) functions in $`W`$ are denoted by $`(W)`$ ($`_{RSL}(W)`$ respectively).

2.17. Definition. Suppose that $`W`$ is an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and $`K`$ is a compact subset of $`W`$, then

$`(i)`$ $`\widehat{K}_W^{}:=\{zW:|f(z)|sup_{\zeta K}\widehat{f}(\zeta )`$ for each $`f(W)\}`$;

$`(ii)`$ $`\widehat{K}_W^{_{RSL}}:=\{zW:|f(z)|sup_{\zeta K}|f(\zeta )|`$ for each $`f_{RSL}(W)\}`$;
these sets are called the $`(W)`$-convex hull of $`K`$ and the $`_{RSL}(W)`$-convex hull of $`K`$ respectively, where $`\widehat{f}(\zeta ):=sup_{h𝐇^𝐧,|h|1}|\widehat{f}(\zeta ).h|`$. If $`K=\widehat{K}_W^{}`$ or $`K=\widehat{K}_W^{_{RSL}}`$, then $`K`$ is called $`(W)`$-convex or $`_{RSL}(W)`$-convex correspondingly.

2.18. Proposition. For each compact set $`K`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$, the $`(𝐇^𝐧)`$-hull and $`_{RSL}(𝐇^𝐧)`$-hull of $`K`$ are contained in the $`𝐑`$-convex hull of $`K`$.

Proof. $`I.`$ Consider at first the $`(𝐇^𝐧)`$-hull of $`K`$. Each $`z𝐇^𝐧`$ can be written in the form $`z=(\text{ }^1z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nz)`$, $`\text{ }^jz𝐇`$, $`\text{ }^jz=_{l=1}^4x_{l,j}S_l`$, where $`x_{l,j}=x_{l,j}(z)𝐑`$, $`S_l\{I,J,K,L\}`$. If $`w𝐇^𝐧`$, $`wco_𝐑(K)`$, then there are $`y_1,\mathrm{},y_{4n}𝐑`$ such that $`_{j=1}^n_{l=1}^4x_{l,j}(w)y_{4(j1)+l}=0`$, but
$`_{j=1}^n_{l=1}^4x_{l,j}(w)y_{4(j1)+l}<0`$ if $`zK`$, where
$`co_𝐑(K):=\{z𝐇^𝐧:`$ there are $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_s𝐑`$ and $`v_1,\mathrm{},v_sK`$ such that $`z=a_1v_1+\mathrm{}+a_kv_k\}`$ denotes a $`𝐑`$-convex hull of $`K`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$. Put $`\zeta _j=_{l,j}y_{4(j1)+l}S_l`$, then $`f(z):=\mathrm{exp}(_{j=1}^nz_j\stackrel{~}{\zeta }_j)`$ is the quaternion holomorphic function in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ such that $`|f(z)|<1`$ for each $`zK`$ and $`|f(w)|=1`$ for the marked point $`w`$ above (see Corollary 3.3 ), since $`J^2=K^2=L^2=I`$. From $`\widehat{f}(\zeta )|f(\zeta )|`$ the first statement follows.

$`II.`$ Consider now the $`_{RSL}(𝐇^𝐧)`$-hull of $`K`$. Each $`f_{RSL}(W)`$ has the form $`f=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{f_{1,1}f_{1,2}}{\overline{f}_{1,2}\overline{f}_{2,2}}\right)`$ such that $`f_{1,1}`$ and $`f_{1,2}`$ are complex holomorphic by complex variables $`\text{ }^jt`$ and $`\text{ }^ju`$ respectively and antiholomorphic by complex variables $`\text{ }^ju`$ and $`\text{ }^jt`$ correspondingly (see Proposition 2.2 ). The set $`K`$ has projection $`K_{1,1}`$ and $`K_{1,2}`$ on the complex subspaces $`𝐂^𝐧`$ corresponding to variables $`\text{ }^1t,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nt`$ and $`\text{ }^1u,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nu`$ respectively. Therefore, $`(\widehat{K}_{𝐇^𝐧}^{_{RSL}})_{1,l}\widehat{K}_{1,l,𝐂^𝐧}^{}{}_{}{}^{𝒪}`$ for $`l=1`$ and $`l=2`$, where $`\widehat{K}_{1,l𝐂^𝐧}^{}{}_{}{}^{𝒪}`$ denotes the complex holomorphic hull of $`K_{1,l}`$ in $`𝐂^𝐧`$. In view of Proposition 1.3.3 $`\widehat{K}_{1,l,𝐂^𝐧}^{}{}_{}{}^{𝒪}co_𝐑(K_{1,l})`$, hence $`\widehat{K}_{𝐇^𝐧}^{_{RSL}}co_𝐑(K)`$.

2.18.1. Note. Due to Proposition $`2.18`$ above Corollary $`\mathrm{1.3.4}`$  can be transferred on $``$ and $`_{RSL}`$ for $`𝐇^𝐧`$ instead of $`𝐂^𝐧`$. Quaternion versions of Theorems $`\mathrm{1.3.5},7,11`$, Corollaries $`\mathrm{1.3.6},8,9,10,13`$ and Definition $`\mathrm{1.3.12}`$ are true in the $`_{RSL}`$-class of functions instead of complex holomorphic functions.

## 3 Integral representations of functions of quaternion variables

3.1. Definitions and Notations. Consider an $`𝐇`$-valued function on $`𝐇^𝐧`$ such that
$`(i)(\zeta ,\zeta )=ae`$ with $`a0`$ and $`(\zeta ,\zeta )=0`$ if and only if $`\zeta =0`$,
$`(ii)(\zeta ,z+\xi )=(\zeta ,z)+(\zeta ,\xi )`$,
$`(iii)(\zeta +\xi ,z)=(\zeta ,z)+(\xi ,z)`$,
$`(iv)(\alpha \zeta ,z\beta )=\stackrel{~}{\alpha }(\zeta ,z)\beta `$,
$`(v)(\zeta ,z)^{\stackrel{~}{.}}=(z,\zeta )`$ for each $`\zeta ,\xi `$ and $`z𝐇^𝐧`$, $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta 𝐇`$, $`n𝐍`$. Then this function is called the scalar product in $`𝐇^𝐧`$. The corresponding norm is:
$`(vi)|\zeta |=\{(\zeta ,\zeta )\}^{1/2}`$. In particular, it is possible to take the canonical scalar product:
$`(vii)<\zeta ;z>:=(\zeta ,z)=_{l=1}^n\text{ }^l\stackrel{~}{\zeta }\text{ }^lz`$, where $`z=(\text{ }^1z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nz)`$, $`\text{ }^lz𝐇`$.

Consider differential forms on $`𝐇`$:
$`(1)\omega _1(\zeta )=\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\stackrel{~}{\zeta },`$ $`\omega _1(\zeta z)=(\stackrel{~}{\zeta }\stackrel{~}{z})d\stackrel{~}{\zeta },`$ $`\omega _1(\zeta ,z)=(\stackrel{~}{\zeta }\stackrel{~}{z})(d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\stackrel{~}{z}),`$
$`(2)\nu _1(\zeta )=(d\stackrel{~}{\zeta })(\stackrel{~}{\zeta }),`$ $`\nu _1(\zeta z)=(d\stackrel{~}{\zeta })(\stackrel{~}{\zeta }\stackrel{~}{z}),`$ $`\nu _1(\zeta ,z)=(d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\stackrel{~}{z})(\stackrel{~}{\zeta }\stackrel{~}{z}),`$
$`(3)\omega _2(\zeta )=(jd\stackrel{~}{\zeta }j)(jd\zeta j),`$ $`\omega _2(\zeta ,z)=j(d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\stackrel{~}{z})jj(d\zeta dz)j,`$
$`(4)\nu _2(\zeta )=d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\stackrel{~}{\zeta },`$ $`\nu _2(\zeta ,z)=(d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\stackrel{~}{z})(d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\stackrel{~}{z}),`$
$`(5)\omega _4(\zeta )=\nu _2(\zeta )\omega _2(\zeta ),`$
$`(6)\omega _4(\zeta ,z)=\nu _2(\zeta ,z)\omega _2(\zeta ),`$
$`(7)\overline{\omega }_4(\zeta ,z)=\nu _2(\zeta ,z)\omega _2(\zeta ,z).`$
With the help of them construct differential forms on $`𝐇^𝐧`$:

$$(8)\theta _z(\zeta ):=(2n1)!(2\pi )^{2n}|\zeta z|^{4n}\underset{s=1}{\overset{n}{}}\{\omega _4(\text{ }^1\zeta )\mathrm{}$$

$$\omega _4(\text{ }^{s1}\zeta )\omega _1(\text{ }^s\zeta \text{ }^sz)\omega _2(\text{ }^s\zeta )\omega _4(\text{ }^{s+1}\zeta )\mathrm{}\omega _4(\text{ }^n\zeta )$$

$$+\omega _4(\text{ }^1\zeta )\mathrm{}\omega _4(\text{ }^{s1}\zeta )\nu _1(\text{ }^s\zeta \text{ }^sz)\omega _2(\text{ }^s\zeta )\omega _4(\text{ }^{s+1}\zeta )\mathrm{}\omega _4(\text{ }^n\zeta )\};$$

$$(9)\theta (\zeta ,z):=(2n1)!(2\pi )^{2n}|\zeta z|^{4n}\underset{s=1}{\overset{n}{}}\{\omega _4(\text{ }^1\zeta ,\text{ }^1z)\mathrm{}$$

$$\omega _4(\text{ }^{s1}\zeta ,\text{ }^{s1}z)\omega _1(\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz)\omega _2(\text{ }^s\zeta )\omega _4(\text{ }^{s+1}\zeta ,\text{ }^{s+1}z)\mathrm{}\omega _4(\text{ }^n\zeta ,\text{ }^nz)+\omega _4(\text{ }^1\zeta ,\text{ }^1z)$$

$$\mathrm{}\omega _4(\text{ }^{s1}\zeta ,\text{ }^{s1}z)\nu _1(\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz)\omega _2(\text{ }^s\zeta )\omega _4(\text{ }^{s+1}\zeta ,\text{ }^{s+1}z)\mathrm{}\omega _4(\text{ }^n\zeta ,\text{ }^nz)\};$$

$$(10)\overline{\theta }(\zeta ,z):=(2n1)!(2\pi )^{2n}|\zeta z|^{4n}\underset{s=1}{\overset{n}{}}\{\overline{\omega }_4(\text{ }^1\zeta ,\text{ }^1z)\mathrm{}$$

$$\overline{\omega }_4(\text{ }^{s1}\zeta ,\text{ }^{s1}z)\omega _1(\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz)\omega _2(\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz)\overline{\omega }_4(\text{ }^{s+1}\zeta ,\text{ }^{s+1}z)\mathrm{}\overline{\omega }_4(\text{ }^n\zeta ,\text{ }^nz)+$$

$$\overline{\omega }_4(\text{ }^1\zeta ,\text{ }^1z)\mathrm{}\overline{\omega }_4(\text{ }^{s1}\zeta ,\text{ }^{s1}z)\nu _1(\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz)\omega _2(\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz)\overline{\omega }_4(\text{ }^{s+1}\zeta ,\text{ }^{s+1}z)\mathrm{}\overline{\omega }_4(\text{ }^n\zeta ,\text{ }^nz)\},$$

where $`\zeta `$ and $`z𝐇^𝐧`$. If $`U`$ is an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and $`f`$ is a bounded quaternion differential form on $`U`$, then by the definition:

$$(11)(_Uf)(z):=_{\zeta U}f(\zeta )\theta (\zeta ,z)$$

for each $`z𝐇^𝐧`$. If in addition $`U`$ is with a piecewise $`C^1`$-boundary (by the corresponding real variables) and $`f`$ is a bounded differential form on $`U`$, then by the definition:

$$(12)(_Uf)(z):=_{\zeta U}f(\zeta )\theta (\zeta ,z)$$

for each $`z𝐇^𝐧`$.

3.2. Theorem. Let $`U`$ be an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ with piecewise $`C^1`$-boundary $`U`$. Suppose that $`f`$ is a continuous function on $`cl(U)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{}f`$ is continuous on $`U`$ in the sense of distributions and has a continuous extension on $`cl(U)`$. Then

$$(1)f=_Uf_U\stackrel{~}{}f\text{ on }U,$$

where $`_U`$ and $`_U`$ are the quaternion integral operators given by Equations $`3.1.(11,12)`$.

Proof. The differential form $`\theta (\zeta ,z)`$ has the decomposition

$$(2)\theta (\zeta ,z)=\underset{q=0}{\overset{2n1}{}}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q(\zeta ,z),$$

where $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q(\zeta ,z)`$ is the quaternion differential form with all terms of degree $`4nq1`$ by $`\zeta `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\zeta }`$ and their multiples on quaternion constants and of degree $`q`$ by $`z`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{z}`$ and their multiples on quaternion constants. The differential form $`f(\zeta )`$ has the decomposition

$$(3)f(\zeta )=\underset{r=0}{\overset{m}{}}f_r(\zeta ),$$

where $`m=deg(f)`$, $`f_r(\zeta )`$ is with all terms of degree $`r`$ by $`\zeta `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\zeta }`$ and their multiples on quaternion constants. Then $`f_r\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q=0`$, when $`r>q+1.`$ By the definition of integration $`_{\zeta U}f_r(\zeta )\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q(\zeta ,z)=0`$ for $`r<q+1.`$ If $`f`$ is a function, then $`_{\zeta U}f(\zeta )\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q(\zeta ,z)=0`$ for each $`q>0`$, since $`U`$ has the dimension $`4n1`$, hence

$$(4)(_Uf)(z)=_{\zeta U}f(\zeta )\theta _z(\zeta ),$$

since $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_0(\zeta ,z)=\theta _z(\zeta )`$. If $`f`$ is a $`1`$-form, then $`_{\zeta U}f(\zeta )\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q(\zeta ,z)=0`$ for each $`q>0`$, since $`U`$ has the dimension $`4n`$, consequently,

$$(5)(_Uf)(z)=_{\zeta U}f(\zeta )\theta _z(\zeta ).$$

Write $`\xi 𝐇`$ in the form $`\xi =\alpha e+\beta j`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }=\overline{\alpha }\beta j`$, where $`\alpha =\alpha _0+\alpha _i𝐢`$ and $`\beta =\beta _0+\beta _i𝐢𝐂`$, $`\alpha _0,\alpha _i,\beta _0`$ and $`\beta _i𝐑`$, $`𝐢:=(1)^{1/2}`$. There is the identity $`\beta j=j\overline{\beta }`$, since $`ij=ji=k`$, where $`\overline{\beta }=\beta _0\beta _i𝐢`$, $`𝐇=𝐑e𝐑i𝐑j𝐑k`$, $`i^2=j^2=k^2=e`$, $`i=𝐢e`$. Then
$`(6)d\beta jd\overline{\beta }j=0,`$ $`\nu _2(\xi )=d\overline{\alpha }d\beta jd\beta jd\overline{\alpha }d\beta d\overline{\beta }e`$,
$`(7)\omega _2(\xi )=d\alpha d\overline{\alpha }e+2d\alpha d\overline{\beta }jd\beta d\overline{\beta }e,`$
$`(8)d\xi d\stackrel{~}{\xi }\omega _2(\xi )=0`$, since $`d\xi d\stackrel{~}{\xi }=d\alpha d\overline{\alpha }e2d\alpha d\beta j+d\beta d\overline{\beta }e`$,
$`(9)\nu _2(\xi )\omega _2(\xi )=d\alpha d\overline{\alpha }d\beta d\overline{\beta }e=4d\alpha _0d\alpha _id\beta _0d\beta _ie`$. Therefore, $`\nu _2(\xi )\omega _2(\xi )/4`$ plays the role of the volume element in $`𝐇`$. Hence
$`(10)d_\zeta (|\zeta z|^{4n}\theta _z(\zeta ))=[(2n1)!(2\pi )^{2n}](2n)4^nd\text{ }^1\alpha _0d\text{ }^1\alpha _id\text{ }^1\beta _0d\text{ }^1\beta _i\mathrm{}d\text{ }^n\alpha _0d\text{ }^n\alpha _id\text{ }^n\beta _0d\text{ }^n\beta _i,`$ since $`d_\zeta =_\zeta +_{\stackrel{~}{z}}`$ (see Formula $`(2.15)`$ ). In view of Proposition $`\mathrm{1.7.1}`$  and Formulas $`(69)`$, $`3.1.(vi,vii)`$ above the differential form $`\theta _z(\zeta )`$ is closed in $`U\{z\}`$.

There exists $`ϵ_0>0`$ such that for each $`0<ϵ<ϵ_0`$ the ball $`B(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ):=\{\zeta 𝐇^𝐧:|\zeta z|ϵ\}`$ and hence the sphere $`S(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ):=\{\zeta 𝐇^𝐧:|\zeta z|=ϵ\}=B(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ)`$ are contained in $`U`$. Apply the Stoke’s formula for matrix-valued functions and differential forms componentwise, then
$`(11)_{S(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ)}f(\zeta )\theta _z(\zeta )=_Uf(\zeta )\theta _z(\zeta )_{U_ϵ}[df(\zeta )]\theta _z(\zeta )`$, where $`U_ϵ:=UB(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ)`$, $`0<ϵ<ϵ_0`$.

There are identities: $`d\xi jd\zeta =d\xi jd\zeta `$ and $`(\xi d\zeta )^{\stackrel{~}{.}}=[d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }]\stackrel{~}{\xi }`$ for each $`\xi ,\zeta 𝐇`$. Then from Identity $`(8)`$ it follows, that
$`(i)d\zeta jd\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\zeta =0,`$
$`(ii)d\zeta d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }jd\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\zeta =0,`$
$`(iii)d\zeta d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }jd\zeta =0,`$ since $`j^2=e`$ and $`𝐑e`$ is the centre of the quaternion algebra $`𝐇`$, $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta 𝐂`$ commute with $`d\alpha `$, $`d\overline{\alpha },`$ $`d\beta `$ and $`d\overline{\beta }`$, where $`\zeta =\alpha e+\beta j`$. From $`(iiii)`$ with the help of automorphisms $`\zeta j\zeta `$ and $`\zeta \zeta j`$ it follows, that
$`(iv)d\zeta d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\zeta =0,`$
$`(v)d\zeta jd\stackrel{~}{\zeta }jd\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\zeta =0,`$
$`(vi)d\zeta jd\stackrel{~}{\zeta }jd\stackrel{~}{\zeta }jjd\zeta j=0.`$ Therefore, from $`(8)`$ and $`(vi)`$ it follows, that

$`(12)_Udf=_U\stackrel{~}{}f`$, since $`df=f+\stackrel{~}{}f`$, where $`f(\zeta )=(f(\zeta )/\zeta ).d\zeta `$, $`\stackrel{~}{}f(\zeta )=(f(\zeta )/\stackrel{~}{\zeta }).d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }`$, $`f(\zeta )=f(\zeta ,\stackrel{~}{\zeta })`$ is the abbreviated notation.

In view of Formula $`(10)`$ and the Stoke’s formula:
$`(13)_{S(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ)}\theta _z(\zeta )=(2n1)!(2\pi )^{2n}[4^nϵ^{4n}2n]_{B(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ)}(dV)e=e`$, where $`dV`$ is the standard volume element of the Euclidean space $`𝐑^{\mathrm{𝟒}𝐧}`$. From Formula $`(13)`$ it follows, that
$`lim_{ϵ0}_{S(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ)}f(\zeta )\theta _z(\zeta )=f(z)`$, since
$`_{S(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ)}(f(\zeta )f(z))\theta _z(\zeta )=(2n1)!(2\pi )^{2n}ϵ^{4n+1}_{S(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ)}(f(\zeta )f(z))[|\zeta z|^{4n1}\theta _z(\zeta )]`$. The form $`[|\zeta z|^{4n1}\theta _z(\zeta )]`$ is bounded on $`U`$, consequently, $`|_{S(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ)}(f(\zeta )f(z))\theta _z(\zeta )|C_1\mathrm{max}\{|f(\zeta )f(z)|:\zeta B(𝐇^𝐧,z,ϵ)\}`$, where $`C_1`$ is a positive constant independent of $`f`$ and $`ϵ`$ for each $`0<ϵ<ϵ_0`$. Therefore, Formula $`(1)`$ follows from Formula $`(11)`$ by taking the limit when $`ϵ>0`$ tends to zero and using Identity $`(12)`$.

3.3. Corollary. Let $`U`$ be an open set in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and $`f`$ be a continuous function on $`cl(U)`$ and quaternion holomorphic on $`U`$. Then
$`(1)f=_Uf`$ on $`U`$,
where $`_U`$ and $`_U`$ are the integral operators given by Equations $`3.1.(11,12)`$.

Proof. From $`\stackrel{~}{}f=0`$, since $`f(\zeta )/\stackrel{~}{\zeta }=0`$, and Formula $`3.2.(1)`$ it follows Formula $`3.3.(1)`$.

3.4. Definitions and Notations. Suppose that $`U`$ is a bounded open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and $`\psi (\zeta ,z)`$ be a quaternion-valued $`C^1`$-function (by the corresponding real variables) defined on $`V\times U`$, where $`V`$ is a neighbourhood of $`U`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$, such that
$`(1)<\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta z>0`$ for each $`(\zeta ,z)U\times U`$. Then $`\psi `$ is called a quaternion boundary distinguishing map. Consider the function:
$`(2)\eta ^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda ):=\lambda (\zeta z)<\zeta z;\zeta z>^1`$
$`+(1\lambda )\psi (\zeta ,z)<\zeta z;\psi (\zeta ,z)>^1`$,
(see Formula $`3.1.(vii)`$) and the differential forms:
$`(3)\omega _1(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )):=\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )(\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz}+d\lambda )\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )`$,
$`\omega _1(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,0)):=\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,0)\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz}\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,0)`$,
$`(4)\nu _1(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )):=[(\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz}+d\lambda )\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )]\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )`$,
$`\nu _1(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,0)):=[\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz}\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,0)]\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,0)`$,
$`(5)\nu _2(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )):=[(\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz}+d\lambda )\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )][(\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz}+d\lambda )\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )]`$, $`\nu _2(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,0)):=[\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz}\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,0)][\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz}\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,0)]`$,
analogously to $`(35)`$ are defined $`\omega _1(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\psi }(\zeta ,z)),`$ $`\nu _1(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\psi }(\zeta ,z)),`$ $`\nu _2(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\psi }(\zeta ,z))`$ with $`\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\psi }(\zeta ,z)`$ instead of $`\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,0);`$

$$(6)\varphi _{\zeta ,z}:=\varphi _{\zeta ,z}(\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta ):=(2n1)!(2\pi )^{2n}<\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta z>^{2n}$$

$$\underset{s=1}{\overset{n}{}}\{\nu _2(\text{ }^1\stackrel{~}{\psi }(\zeta ,z))\omega _2(\text{ }^1\zeta )\mathrm{}\nu _2(\text{ }^{s1}\stackrel{~}{\psi }(\zeta ,z))\omega _2(\text{ }^{s1}\zeta )$$

$$[\omega _1(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\psi }(\zeta ,z))\omega _2(\text{ }^s\zeta )+\nu _1(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\psi }(\zeta ,z))\omega _2(\text{ }^s\zeta )]$$

$$\nu _2(\text{ }^{s+1}\stackrel{~}{\psi }(\zeta ,z))\omega _2(\text{ }^{s+1}\zeta )\mathrm{}\nu _2(\text{ }^n\stackrel{~}{\psi }(\zeta ,z))\omega _2(\text{ }^n\zeta )\};$$

$$(7)\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,z,\lambda }:=\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,z,\lambda }(\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta ):=(2n1)!(2\pi )^{2n}$$

$$\underset{s=1}{\overset{n}{}}\{\nu _2(\text{ }^1\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda ))\omega _2(\text{ }^1\zeta )\mathrm{}\nu _2(\text{ }^{s1}\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda ))\omega _2(\text{ }^{s1}\zeta )$$

$$[\omega _1(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda ))\omega _2(\text{ }^s\zeta )+\nu _1(\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda ))\omega _2(\text{ }^s\zeta )]$$

$$\nu _2(\text{ }^{s+1}\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda ))\omega _2(\text{ }^{s+1}\zeta )\mathrm{}\nu _2(\text{ }^n\stackrel{~}{\eta }^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda ))\omega _2(\text{ }^n\zeta )\}.$$

If $`f`$ is a bounded differential form on $`U`$, then define:

$$(8)(L_U^\psi f)(z):=_{\zeta U}f(\zeta )\varphi _{\zeta ,z}(\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta ),$$

$$(9)(R_U^\psi f)(z):=_{\zeta U,0\lambda 1}f(\zeta )\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,z,\lambda }(\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta ).$$

3.5. Theorem. Let $`U`$ be an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ with a piecewise $`C^1`$-boundary and let $`\psi `$ be a quaternion boundary distinguishing map for $`U`$. Suppose that $`f`$ is a continuous mapping $`f:cl(U)𝐇`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{}f`$ is also continuous on $`U`$ in the sence of distributions and has a continuous extension on $`cl(U)`$. Then

$$(1)f=(L_U^\psi f)(R_U^\psi \stackrel{~}{}f)(B_U\stackrel{~}{}f)\text{ on }U,$$

where the quaternion integral operators $`B_U`$, $`L_U^\psi `$ and $`R_U^\psi `$ are given by Equations $`3.1.(11)`$, $`3.4.(8),(9)`$.

Proof. There is the decomposition:

$`(2)\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,z,\lambda }=_{q=0}^{2n1}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda ),`$
where $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )`$ is a differential form with all terms of degree $`q`$ by $`z`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{z}`$ and their multiples on quaternion constants and of degree $`(4nq1)`$ by $`(\zeta ,\lambda )`$ (including $`\stackrel{~}{\zeta }`$ and multiples of $`\zeta `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\zeta }`$ on quaternion constants). A differential form $`f`$ has Decomposition $`3.2.(3)`$. If $`\psi (z)`$ is a quaternion $`z`$-superdifferentiable nonzero function on an open set $`V`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$, then differentiating the equality $`(\psi (z))(\psi (z))^1=e`$ gives $`[d_z(\psi (z))^1].h=(\psi (z))^1(d_z\psi (z).h)(\psi (z))^1`$ for each $`zV`$ and each $`h𝐇^𝐧`$. Then
$`_{\zeta U,0\lambda 1}f_r(\zeta )\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )=0`$ for each $`rq+1`$,
since $`dim(U)=4n1`$, $`d\lambda d\lambda =0`$ and $`d\lambda `$ commutes with each $`b𝐇`$. Therefore,
$`(3)R_U^\psi f_r=_{\zeta U,0\lambda 1}f_r(\zeta )\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{r1}^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda )\text{ for each }1r2n`$ and $`R_U^\psi f_r=0`$ for $`r=0`$ or $`r>2n`$. In particular, if $`f=f_1`$, then
$`(4)R_U^\psi f_1=_{\zeta U,0\lambda 1}f_1(\zeta )\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,\lambda }(\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta ),`$
where $`\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,\lambda }(\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta ),`$ is obtained from $`\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,z,\lambda }(\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta )`$ by substituting all $`\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta ,\text{ }^sz}`$ in Formulas $`3.4.(35,7,9)`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta }`$. On the other hand, with the help of Formulas $`3.2.(8),(vi)`$ each quaternion external derivative $`\stackrel{~}{}_{\text{ }^s\zeta }`$ can be replaced on $`d_{\text{ }^s\zeta }`$ in $`\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,\lambda }(\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta )`$ in Formula $`(4)`$. For $`\varphi _{\zeta ,z}`$ there is the dezcomposition:
$`(5)\varphi _{\zeta ,z}=_{q=0}^{2n1}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q^\psi (\zeta ,z),`$ where $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_q^\psi (\zeta ,z)`$ is a differential form with all terms of degree $`q`$ by $`z`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{z}`$ and their multiples on quaternion constants and of degree $`4nq1`$ by $`\zeta `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{z}`$ and their multiples on quaternion constants. Therefore,
$`(6)L_U^\psi f_r=_{\zeta U}f_r\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_r^\psi (\zeta ,z)`$ for each $`0r2n1`$
and $`L_U^\psi f_r=0`$ for $`r2n`$. In particular, for $`f=f_0`$:
$`(7)L_U^\psi f_0=_{\zeta U}f_0(\zeta )\varphi _\zeta (\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta ),`$
where $`\varphi _\zeta (\psi (\zeta ,z)),`$ is obtained from $`\varphi _{\zeta ,z}(\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta )`$ by substituting all $`\stackrel{~}{}_{\zeta ,z}`$ in Formulas $`3.4.(35,6,8)`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{}_\zeta `$.

In view of Formula $`3.2.(1)`$ it remains to prove, that $`R_U^\psi \stackrel{~}{}f=L_U^\psi fB_Uf`$ on $`U`$. For each $`\zeta `$ in a neighbourhood of $`U`$ there is the identity:

$`(8)<\eta ^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda );\zeta z>=1`$ for each $`0\lambda 1`$, hence $`d_{\zeta ,z,\lambda }<\eta ^\psi (\zeta ,z,\lambda );\zeta z>=0`$. By Proposition $`\mathrm{1.7.1}`$  and Formulas $`3.2.(8),(9),(ivi):`$

$`(9)d_{\zeta ,\lambda }\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,z,\lambda }=0.`$ From Identities $`3.2.(8),(vi)`$ it follows, that

$`(10)_\zeta f\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,\lambda }=0.`$ Therefore, from $`(4),(9),(10)`$ it follows, that

$`(11)d_{\zeta ,\lambda }[f(\zeta )\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,\lambda }]=[\stackrel{~}{}_\zeta f(\zeta )]\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,\lambda },`$ since $`\stackrel{~}{}_\zeta f(\zeta )=_{s=1}^n(f(\zeta ,\stackrel{~}{\zeta })/\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\zeta }).d\text{ }^s\stackrel{~}{\zeta }.`$ In view of Proposition $`\mathrm{1.7.3}`$  and Formulas $`3.2.(8),(9),(ivi);`$ $`3.4.(17)`$:

$`(12)\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,\lambda }|_{\lambda =0}=\varphi _\zeta `$, $`\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,\lambda }|_{\lambda =1}=\theta _z(\zeta )`$.
From the Stoke’s formula for matrix-valued differential forms, in particular, for $`[f(\zeta )\overline{\varphi }_{\zeta ,z,\lambda }(\psi (\zeta ,z);\zeta )]`$ on $`U\times [0,1]`$ and Formulas $`(4),(7),(11),(12)`$ above it follows the statement of this theorem.

3.6. Corollary. Let conditions of Theorem 3.5 be satisfied and let $`f`$ be a quaternion holomorphic function on $`U`$, then $`f=L_U^\psi f`$ on $`U`$.

3.7. Remark. For $`n=1`$ Formula $`3.2.(1)`$ produces another analog of the Cauchy-Green formula (see Theorem $`2.1`$ and Remark $`\mathrm{2.1.1}`$) without using the quaternion line integrals. This is caused by the fact that the dimension of $`𝐇`$ over $`𝐑`$ is greater, than $`2`$: $`dim_𝐑𝐇=4`$, that produces new integral relations. Theorem $`3.2`$ can be used instead of Theorem $`2.1`$ to prove theorems $`2.3`$ and $`2.11`$ (with differential forms of Theorem $`3.2`$ instead of differential forms of Theorem $`2.1`$). If $`\psi (\zeta ,z)=\zeta z`$, then $`L_U^\psi =B_U`$ and $`R_U^\psi =0`$, hence Formula $`3.5.(1)`$ reduces to Formula $`3.2.(1)`$. For a function $`f`$ or a $`1`$-form $`f`$ Formulas $`3.2.(4),(5)`$ respectively are valid as well for $`\overline{\theta }(\zeta ,z)`$ instead of $`\theta _z(\zeta )`$, where $`d_{\zeta ,z}\overline{\theta }(\zeta ,z)=0`$ for each $`\zeta z`$. A choise of $`\omega _4`$ (see $`3.1.(5)`$) and the corresponding to it $`\omega _1`$, $`\nu _1`$, $`\nu _2`$, $`\omega _2`$ is not unique, for example, $`d\stackrel{~}{\zeta }d\zeta d\zeta d\zeta `$ may be taken, since it gives up to a multiplier $`Ce`$, where $`C`$ is a real constant, the canonical volume element in $`𝐇`$ and $`d\zeta d\zeta d\zeta d\zeta =0.`$ Formulas $`3.2.(1)`$ and $`3.5.(1)`$ for functions of quaternion variables are the quaternion analogs of the Martinelli-Bochner and the Leray formulas for functions of complex variables respectively, where $`\psi (\zeta ,z)`$ is the quaternion analog of the Leray complex map (see §3.4). In the quaternion case the algebra of differential forms bears the additional gradation structure and have another properties, than in the complex case (see also §§2.8 and 3.7 ). Lemma $`3.9`$ below shows, that quaternion boundary distinguishing maps exist.

3.8. Definitions and Notations. Let a subset $`U`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ be given by:

$`(1)`$ $`U:=\{z𝐇^𝐧:`$ $`\rho (z)<0\}`$, where $`\rho `$ is a real-valued function such that there exists a constant $`ϵ_0>0`$ for which:

$`(2)`$ $`_{l,m=1}^{4n}(^2\rho (z)/x_lx_m)t_lt_mϵ_0|t|^2`$ for each $`t𝐑^{\mathrm{𝟒}𝐧}`$, where $`z=(\text{ }^1z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nz)`$, $`\text{ }^lz𝐇`$, $`\text{ }^lz=_{m=1}^4x_{4(l1)+m}S_m`$, $`S_1:=e`$, $`S_2:=i`$, $`S_3:=j`$, $`S_4:=k`$, $`x_l𝐑`$. Then $`U`$ is called a strictly convex open set (with $`C^2`$-boundary). Let

$`(3)`$ $`w_\rho (z):=(\rho (z)/\text{ }^1z,\mathrm{},\rho (z)/\text{ }^nz)`$ and $`v_\rho (z):=_{m=1}^4(w_\rho .S_m)S_m,`$ where as usually $`w_\rho .S_m=(d_z\rho (z)).S_m`$ is the differential of $`\rho `$.

3.9. Lemma. Let the function $`v_\rho `$ be as in §3.8. Then $`v_\rho `$ is the quaternion boundary distinguishing map for $`U`$.

Proof. Since $`S_mS_l=(1)^{\kappa (S_m)+\kappa (S_l)}S_lS_m`$, where $`\kappa (S_1)=0`$, $`\kappa (S_2)=\kappa (S_3)=\kappa (S_4)=1`$, then
$`<v_\rho (\zeta );\zeta z>+<\zeta z;v_\rho (\zeta )>=2_{l=1}^{4n}(\rho (\zeta )/x_l)x_l(\zeta z)`$,
where $`x_l=x_l(\zeta )`$ and $`x_l(\zeta z)`$ are real coordinates corresponding to $`\zeta `$ and $`\zeta z`$. By the Taylor’s theorem: $`\rho (z)e=\rho (\zeta )e<v_\rho (\zeta );\zeta z>/2<\zeta z;v_\rho (\zeta )>/2+_{l,m=1}^{4n}(^2\rho (\zeta )/x_lx_m)x_l(\zeta z)x_m(\zeta z)e/2+o(|\zeta z|^2)e`$. Therefore, there exists a neighbourhood $`V`$ of $`U`$ and $`ϵ_1>0`$ such that
$`(1)(<v_\rho (\zeta );\zeta z>+<\zeta z;v_\rho (\zeta )>)_e/2\rho (\zeta )\rho (z)+ϵ_0|\zeta z|^2/4`$ for each $`\zeta V`$ and $`|\zeta z|ϵ_1`$, where $`a=a_ee+a_ii+a_jj+a_kk`$ for each $`a𝐇`$, $`a_e`$, $`a_i`$, $`a_j`$ and $`a_k`$ are reals. If $`zU`$, $`\zeta U`$, $`|z\zeta |ϵ_1`$, then by $`(1)`$: $`(<v_\rho (\zeta );\zeta z>+<\zeta z;v_\rho (\zeta )>)_e\rho (z)>0`$. If $`|\zeta z|>ϵ_1`$, put $`z_1:=(1ϵ_1|\zeta z|^1)\zeta +ϵ_1|\zeta z|^1z`$, then $`\zeta z_1=ϵ_1|\zeta z|^1(\zeta z)`$, consequently, $`(<v_\rho (\zeta );\zeta z>+<\zeta z;v_\rho (\zeta )>)_e/2\rho (z_1)`$. Evidently, $`U`$ is convex and $`z_1U`$.

3.10. Theorem. Let $`U`$ be a strictly convex open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ (see $`3.8.(1)`$) and let $`f`$ be a continuous function on $`U`$ with continuous $`\stackrel{~}{}f`$ on $`U`$ in the sence of distributions having a continuous extension on $`cl(U)`$ such that $`2.11.(i)`$ is satisfied. Then there exists a function $`u`$ on $`U`$ which is a solution of the $`\stackrel{~}{}`$-equation $`2.11.(ii)`$.

Proof. In proofs of Theorems $`2.3`$ and $`2.11`$ take in Formula $`3.5.(1)`$ $`\chi f`$ instead of $`f`$, which is possible due to Lemma $`3.9`$, choosing $`\psi =v_\rho `$ and $`supp(\chi )`$ as a proper subset of $`U`$. Then $`L_U^\psi \chi f=0`$ and $`R_U^\psi \chi f=0`$, hence $`\chi f=B_U\stackrel{~}{}\chi f`$. For each fixed $`zU`$ a subset $`\text{ }^lU_\eta :=\{\xi 𝐇:\rho (\text{ }^1z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^{l1}z,\xi ,\text{ }^{l+1}z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nz)<0\}`$ is strictly convex in $`𝐇`$ due to $`3.8.(1,2)`$, where $`\eta :=(\text{ }^1z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^{l1}z,\text{ }^{l+1}z,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nz).`$ Apply $`3.5.(1)`$ by a variable $`\xi `$ in $`\text{ }^lU_\eta `$, in particular, for $`l=1`$, for which $`v_\rho `$ by the variable $`\xi `$ is the quaternion boundary distinguishing map for $`\text{ }^1U_\eta `$. Therefore, $`u(z):=B_{\text{ }^1U_\eta }\text{ }^1\widehat{f}(\xi ,\eta ).d\stackrel{~}{\xi }`$ with $`z=(\xi ,\eta )`$, $`\xi \text{ }^1U_\eta `$ solves the problem.

## 4 Quaternion manifolds

4.1. Definitions and Notations. Suppose that $`M`$ is a quaternion manifold and let $`GL(N,𝐇)`$ be the group of all invertible quaternion $`N\times N`$ matrices. Then a quaternion holomorphic vector bundle $`Q`$ of quaternion dimension $`N`$ over $`M`$ is a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-vector bundle $`Q`$ over $`M`$ with the characteristic fibre $`𝐇^𝐧`$ together with a quaternion holomorphic atlas of local trivializations: $`g_{a,b}:U_aU_bGL(N,𝐇)`$, where $`U_aU_b\mathrm{}`$, $`\{(U_a,h_a):a\mathrm{{\rm Y}}\}=At(Q)`$, $`_aU_a=M`$, $`U_a`$ is open in $`M`$, $`h_a:Q|_{U_a}U_a\times 𝐇^𝐧`$ is the bundle isomorphism, $`(z,g_{a,b}(z)v)=h_ah_b^1(z,v)`$, $`zU_aU_b`$, $`v𝐇^𝐧`$. Since $`M`$ is also the real manifold there exists the tangent bundle $`TM`$ such that $`T_xM`$ is isomorphic with $`𝐇^𝐧`$ for each $`xM`$, since $`TU_a=U_a\times 𝐇^𝐧`$ for each $`a`$, where $`dim_𝐇M=n`$ is the quaternion dimension of $`M`$. If $`X`$ is a Banach space over $`𝐇`$ (with left and right distributivity laws relative to multiplications of vectors in $`X`$ on scalars from $`𝐇`$), then denote by $`X_q^{}`$ the space of all additive $`𝐑`$-homogeneous functionals on $`X`$ with values in $`𝐇`$. Clearly $`X_q^{}`$ is the Banach space over $`𝐇`$. Then $`T^{}M`$ with fibres $`(H_q^n)^{}`$ denotes the quaternion cotangent bundle of $`M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^rT^{}M`$ denotes the vector bundle whose sections are quaternion $`r`$-forms on $`M`$, where $`S_bdx_bS_adx_a=(1)^{\kappa (S_a)+\kappa (S_b)}S_adx_aS_bdx_b`$ for each $`S_a,S_b\{e,i,j,k\}`$, $`dz=edx_e+idx_i+jdx_j+kdx_k`$, $`z𝐇`$, $`x_b𝐑`$.

Quaternion holomorphic Cousin data in $`Q`$ is a family $`\{f_{a,b}:a,b\mathrm{{\rm Y}}\}`$ of quaternion holomorphic sections $`f_{a,b}:U_aU_bQ`$ such that $`f_{a,b}+f_{b,l}=f_{a,l}`$ in $`U_aU_bU_l`$ for each $`a,b,l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$. A finding of a family $`\{f_a:a\mathrm{{\rm Y}}\}`$ of quaternion holomorphic sections $`f_a:U_aQ`$ such that $`f_{a,b}=f_af_b`$ in $`U_aU_b`$ for each $`a,b\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ will be called the quaternion Cousin problem.

4.2. Theorem. Let $`M`$ be a quaternion manifold and $`Q`$ be a quaternion holomorphic vector bundle on $`M`$. Then Conditions $`(i,ii)`$ are equivalent:

$`(i)`$ each quaternion holomorphic Cousin problem in $`M`$ has a solution;

$`(ii)`$ for each quaternion holomorphic section $`f`$ of $`Q`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{}f=0`$ on $`M`$, there exists a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-section $`U`$ of $`Q`$ such that $`(u/\stackrel{~}{z})=\widehat{f}`$ on $`M`$.

Proof. $`(i)(ii)`$. In view of Theorems $`2.11`$ and $`3.10`$ there exists an (open) covering $`\{U_a:a\}`$ of $`M`$ and $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-sections $`u_b:U_bQ`$ such that $`(u_b/\stackrel{~}{z})=\widehat{f}`$ in $`U_b`$. Then $`(u_bu_l)`$ is quaternion holomorphic in $`U_bU_l`$ and their family forms quaternion holomorphic Cousin data in $`Q`$. Put $`u:=u_bh_b`$ on $`U_b`$, where $`u_bu_l=h_bh_l`$, $`h_b:U_bQ`$ is a quaternion holomorphic section given by $`(i)`$.

$`(ii)(i)`$. Take a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-partition of unity $`\{\chi _b:b\}`$ subordinated to $`\{U_b:b\}`$ and $`c_b:=_a\chi _af_{a,b}`$ on $`U_b`$, then $`f_{l,b}=_a\chi _a(f_{l,a}+f_{a,b})=c_lc_b`$ in $`U_lU_b`$, hence $`(c_l/\stackrel{~}{z})=(c_b/\stackrel{~}{z})`$ in $`U_lU_b`$. By $`(ii)`$ there exists a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-section $`u:MQ`$ with $`(u/\stackrel{~}{z})=(c_b/\stackrel{~}{z})`$ on $`U_b`$ and $`h_b:=c_bu`$ on $`U_b`$ gives the solution.

4.3. Definitions. Suppose $`U`$ is an open subset in $`𝐇`$, then a $`C^2`$-function $`\rho :U𝐑`$ is called subharmonic (strictly subharmonic) in $`U`$ if $`_{m=1}^4^2\rho /x_m^20`$ ($`_{m=1}^4^2\rho /x_m^2>0`$ correspondingly) for each $`z=x_1e+x_2i+x_3j+x_4kU`$, where $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_4𝐑`$. If $`U`$ is an open subset in $`𝐇^𝐧`$, then a $`C^2`$-function $`\rho :U𝐑`$ such that the function $`\zeta \rho (v+\zeta w)`$ is subharmonic (strictly subharmonic) on its domain for each $`v,w𝐇^𝐧`$ is called plurisubharmonic (strictly plurisubharmonic correspondingly) function, where $`\zeta 𝐇`$.

A $`C^p`$-function $`\rho `$ on a quaternion manifold $`M`$ is called a strictly plurisubharmonic exhausting $`C^p`$-function for $`M`$, $`2p𝐍`$, if $`\rho `$ is a strictly plurisubharmonic $`C^p`$-function on $`M`$ and for each $`\alpha 𝐑`$ the set $`\{zM:\rho (z)<\alpha \}`$ is relatively compact in $`M`$.

4.4. Theorem. Let $`M`$ be a quaternion manifold with strictly plurisubharmonic exhausting function $`\rho `$ such that $`\rho e`$ is a $`C_{z,\stackrel{~}{z}}^\omega `$-function and let $`Q`$ be a quaternion holomorphic vector bundle on $`M`$, $`U_\alpha :=\{zM:\rho (z)<\alpha \}`$ for $`\alpha 𝐑`$.

$`(i).`$ Suppose that $`d\rho (z)0`$ for each $`zU_\alpha `$ for a marked $`\alpha 𝐑`$. Then every continuous section $`f:cl(U_\alpha )Q`$ quaternion holomorphic on $`U_\alpha `$ can be approximated uniformly on $`cl(U_\alpha )`$ by quaternion holomorphic sections of $`Q`$ on $`M`$.

$`(ii).`$ For each continuous mapping $`f:MQ`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{}f=0`$ on $`M`$ there exists a continuous mapping $`u:MQ`$ such that $`u/\stackrel{~}{z}=\widehat{f}`$ on $`M`$.

Proof. For a $`C_{z,\stackrel{~}{z}}^\omega `$-function $`\rho :U𝐑`$ (that is, $`\rho `$ is locally analytic in variables $`(z,\stackrel{~}{z})`$, $`𝐑=𝐑e𝐇`$) there is the identity:
$`_{l,m,a,b}(^2\rho /\text{ }^lx_a\text{ }^mx_b)t_{4(l1)+a}t_{4(l1)+b}=`$
$`_{m,l}(^2\rho (z)/\text{ }^lz\text{ }^mz).((\text{ }^lz/\text{ }^lx_a)t_{4(l1)+a},(\text{ }^mz/\text{ }^lx_b)t_{4(l1)+b})`$
$`=_{m,l=1}^n(^2\rho (z)/\text{ }^lz\text{ }^mz).(\text{ }^l\xi ,\text{ }^m\stackrel{~}{\xi })`$, since $`\text{ }^lz/\text{ }^lx_a=S_a`$, $`\text{ }^l\stackrel{~}{z}/\text{ }^lx_a=(1)^{\kappa (S_a)}S_a`$, where $`\text{ }^l\xi =_{a=1}^4t_{4(l1)+a}S_a`$, $`S_1=e`$, $`S_2=i`$, $`S_3=j`$, $`S_4=k`$, $`\text{ }^lz=_{a=1}^4\text{ }^lx_aS_a`$, $`t_b𝐑`$, $`\text{ }^lx_a𝐑`$. Therefore, a $`C_{z,\stackrel{~}{z}}^\omega `$-function $`\rho `$ is strictly plurisubharmonic on $`U`$ if and only if

$`(1)_{m,l=1}^n(^2\rho (z)/\text{ }^lz\text{ }^m\stackrel{~}{z}).(\text{ }^l\xi ,\text{ }^m\stackrel{~}{\xi })>0`$ for each $`zU`$ and each $`0\xi 𝐇^𝐧`$, where $`\xi =(\text{ }^1\xi ,\mathrm{},\text{ }^n\xi )`$ (see also §2 ). Consider a proper compact subset $`A`$ in $`M`$ such that $`d\rho (z)0`$ for each $`zA`$. Then for each $`ϵ>0`$ there exists a strictly plurisubharmonic function $`\rho _ϵ:M𝐑`$ such that $`\rho e`$ is a $`C_{z,\stackrel{~}{z}}^\omega `$-function on $`M`$ and $`(iiii)`$ are fulfilled:

$`(i)`$ $`\rho \rho _ϵ`$ together with its first and second derivatives is not greater than $`ϵ`$ on $`M`$;

$`(ii)`$ the set $`Crit(\rho _ϵ):=\{zM:d\rho _ϵ(z)=0\}`$ is discrete in $`M`$;

$`(iii)`$ $`\rho _ϵ=\rho `$ on $`A`$ (see also Lemma $`\mathrm{2.1.2.2}`$  in the complex case).

The space $`C_z^\omega (U,𝐇)`$ is dense in $`C^0(U,𝐇)`$ for each open $`U`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ (see §2.7 and Theorem $`3.28`$ in ). Suppose $`\beta 𝐑`$ and $`d\rho (z)0`$ for $`zU_\beta `$ and $`f:cl(U_\beta )Q`$ is a continuous section quaternion holomorphic on $`U_\beta `$. Therefore, for each $`\beta \alpha <\mathrm{}`$ if $`d\rho (z)0`$ for each $`zU_\alpha `$, then $`f`$ can be uniformly approximated on $`cl(U_\beta )`$ by continuous sections on $`cl(U_\alpha )`$ that are holomorphic on $`U_\alpha `$. There exists a sequence $`\beta <\alpha _1<\alpha _2<\mathrm{}`$ such that $`lim_l\alpha _l=\mathrm{}`$ and $`d\rho (z)0`$ for each $`zU_{\alpha _l}`$, since $`Crit(\rho )`$ is discrete. For each $`ϵ>0`$ there exists a continuous section $`f_l:cl(U_{\alpha _l})Q`$ such that $`f_l`$ is quaternion holomorphic on $`U_{\alpha _l}`$ and $`f_{l+1}f_l_{C^0(U_{\alpha _l})}<ϵ2^{l1}`$ for each $`l𝐍`$, where $`f_0:=f`$. Therefore, the sequence $`\{f_l:l𝐍\}`$ converges to the quaternion holomorphic section $`g:MQ`$ uniformly on each compact subset $`P`$ in $`M`$ and $`fg_{C^0(U_\beta )}<ϵ`$.

The second statement $`(ii)`$ follows from $`(i)`$ and Theorems $`2.11,3.10`$, since $`Crit(\rho )`$ is discrete in $`M`$ and there exists a sequence of continuous $`Q`$-valued functions on $`cl(U_{\alpha _l})`$ such that $`u_l/\stackrel{~}{z}=\widehat{f}`$ on $`U_{\alpha _l}`$, $`_lU_{\alpha _l}=M`$ (see also the complex case in §2.12.3  mentioning, that Lemma $`\mathrm{2.12.4}`$ there can be reformulated and proved for a quaternion manifold $`M`$ on $`𝐇^𝐧`$ instead of a complex manifold on $`𝐂^𝐧`$).

4.5. Definitions. Let $`M`$ be a quaternion manifold (see §2.10). For a compact subset $`G`$ in $`M`$ put: $`\widehat{G}_M^{}:=\{zM:|f(z)|sup_{\zeta G}|\widehat{f}(\zeta )|f(M)\}`$. Such $`\widehat{G}_M^{}`$ is called the $`(M)`$-hull of $`G`$. If $`G=\widehat{G}_M^{}`$, then $`G`$ is called $`(M)`$-convex. A quaternion manifold $`M`$ is called quaternion holomorphically convex if for each compact subset $`G`$ in $`M`$ the set $`\widehat{G}_M^{}`$ is compact.

A quaternion manifold $`M`$ with a countable atlas $`At(M)`$ having dimension $`n`$ over $`𝐇`$ and satisfying $`(i,ii)`$:

$`(i)`$ $`M`$ is quaternion holomorphically convex;

$`(ii)`$ for each $`zM`$ there are $`\text{ }^1f,\mathrm{},\text{ }^nf(M)`$ and there exists a neighbourhood $`U`$ of $`z`$ such that the map $`U\zeta (\text{ }^1f(\zeta ),\mathrm{},\text{ }^nf(\zeta ))`$ is quaternion biholomorphic (see §2.6), then $`M`$ is called a quaternion Stein manifold.

4.6. Remark. If $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$ are two quaternion Stein manifolds, then $`M_1\times M_2`$ is a quaternion Stein manifold. If $`N`$ is a closed quaternion submanifold of a quaternion Stein manifold $`M`$, then $`N`$ is also a quaternion Stein manifold.

4.7. Theorem. Let $`M`$ be a quaternion Stein manifold. Then for each $`(M)`$-convex compact subset $`P`$ in $`M`$, $`PM`$ and each neighbourhood $`V_P`$ of $`P`$ there exists a strictly plurisubharmonic exhausting $`C_{z,\stackrel{~}{z}}^\omega `$-function $`\rho `$ on $`M`$ such that $`\rho <0`$ on $`P`$ and $`\rho >0`$ on $`MV_P`$.

The proof of this theorem is analogous to that of Theorem $`\mathrm{2.3.14}`$  in the complex case taking $`\rho (z):=1+_{l=1}^{\mathrm{}}_{k=1}^{N(l)}f_l^k(z)(f_l^k(z))^{\stackrel{~}{.}}`$ for each $`zM`$, where $`f_l^kC_{z,\stackrel{~}{z}}^\omega `$, $`M=_lP_l`$, $`P_lInt(P_{l+1})`$ for each $`l𝐍`$, each $`P_l`$ is $`(M)`$-convex, $`_{k=1}^{N(l)}|f_l^k(z)|^2<2^l`$ for each $`zP_l`$, $`_{k=1}^{N(l)}|f_l^k(z)|^2>l`$ for each $`zP_{l+2}U_l`$, $`U_l:=Int(P_{l+1})`$, $`rank[(f_l^k/\text{ }^mz)_{m=1,\mathrm{},n}^{k=1,\mathrm{},N(l)}]=n`$ for each $`zP_l`$.

4.8. Theorem. A quaternion manifold $`M`$ is a quaternion Stein manifold if and only if there exists a strictly plurisubharmonic exhausting $`C_{z,\stackrel{~}{z}}^\omega `$-function $`\rho `$ on $`M`$, then $`\{zM:\rho (z)\alpha \}`$ is $`(M)`$-convex for each $`\alpha 𝐑`$.

Proof. The necessity follows from Theorem $`4.7`$. To prove sufficiency suppose $`\eta =(\text{ }^1\eta ,\mathrm{},\text{ }^n\eta )`$ are quaternion holomorphic coordinates in a neighbourhood $`V_\xi `$ of $`\xi M`$. Consider

$`(1)u(z):=2_{l,m=1}^n<v_\rho (\xi );\eta (z)\eta (\xi )>`$
$`+_{l,m=1}^n(^2\rho (\xi )/\text{ }^l\eta \text{ }^m\eta ).[(\text{ }^l\eta (z)\text{ }^l\eta (\xi )),(\text{ }^m\eta (z)\text{ }^m\eta (\xi ))]e`$,
where $`v_\rho (\xi )`$ is given by $`3.8.(3)`$. Then $`u`$ is holomorphic in $`V_\xi `$ and $`u(\xi )=0`$. By Lemma $`3.9`$:

$`(2)(u(z)+\stackrel{~}{u}(z))/2=\rho (z)e\rho (\xi )e_{l,m=1}^n(^2\rho (\xi )/\text{ }^l\eta \text{ }^m\eta ).[(\text{ }^l\eta (z)\text{ }^l\eta (\xi )),(\text{ }^m\eta (z)\text{ }^m\eta (\xi ))^{\stackrel{~}{.}}]+o(|\eta (\xi )\eta (z)|^2)`$. From the strict plurisubharmonicity of $`\rho `$ it follows, that there exists $`\beta >0`$ and $`V_\xi `$ such that

$`(3)(u(z)+\stackrel{~}{u}(z))/2<\rho (z)\rho (\xi )\beta |\eta (z)\eta (\xi )|^2`$ for each $`zV_\xi `$. Then $`\mathrm{exp}(u(\xi ))=1`$ and $`|\mathrm{exp}(u(z))|<1`$ for each $`\xi zcl(U_\alpha )V_\xi `$ (see Corollary $`3.3`$ ).

If $`g:𝐑𝐇`$ is a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-function with compact support, then $`g(z\stackrel{~}{z})=:\chi (z)`$ is a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-function on $`𝐇^𝐧`$ with compact support such that $`\chi `$ is quaternion $`(z,\stackrel{~}{z})`$-superdifferentiable. Therefore, there exists a neighbourhood $`W_\xi V_\xi `$ of $`\xi `$ and an infinitely $`(z,\stackrel{~}{z})`$-superdifferentiable function $`\chi `$ such that $`\chi |_{W_\xi }=1`$, $`supp(\chi )`$ is a proper subset of $`V_\xi `$, consequently, $`lim_m\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}(mu(z))(\chi (z)/\stackrel{~}{z})_{C^0(U_\alpha )}=0`$, where $`(\chi (z)/\stackrel{~}{z})=(\chi (z)/\text{ }^1\stackrel{~}{z},\mathrm{},\chi (z)/\text{ }^n\stackrel{~}{z}).`$ In view of Theorem $`3.10`$ there exist continuous functions $`v_m`$ on $`cl(U_\alpha )`$ such that $`(v_m/\stackrel{~}{z})=\mathrm{exp}(mu(z))(\chi /\stackrel{~}{z})`$ in $`U_\alpha `$ and $`lim_m\mathrm{}v_m_{C^0(U_\alpha )}=0`$.

Put $`g_m(z):=\mathrm{exp}(mu(z))\chi (z)v_m(z)+v_m(\xi )`$, hence $`g_m`$ is continuous on $`cl(U_\alpha )`$ and quaternion holomorphic on $`U_\alpha `$. Since $`supp(\chi )`$ is the proper subset in $`V_\xi `$, then $`g_m(\xi )=1`$ for each $`m𝐍`$, $`sup_mg_m_{C^0(U_\alpha )}<\mathrm{}`$ and for each compact subset $`P`$ in $`cl(U_\alpha )\{\xi \}`$ there exists $`lim_mg_m_{C^0(P)}=0`$. In view of Theorem $`4.4.(ii)`$ there exists a sequence of functions $`f_m(M)`$ and $`C=const<\mathrm{}`$ such that $`(a)`$ $`f_m(\xi )=1`$ for each $`m𝐍`$; $`(b)`$ $`f_m_{C^0(U_\alpha )}C`$ for each $`m𝐍`$; $`(c)`$ $`lim_m\mathrm{}g_m_{C^0(P)}=0`$ for each compact subset $`Pcl(U_\alpha )\{\xi \}`$.

Consider a quaternion holomorphic function $`f`$ on a neighbourhood of $`\xi `$ such that $`f(\xi )=0`$. Put $`\varphi _m:=f\mathrm{exp}(mu)\chi /\stackrel{~}{z}`$, then $`supp(\varphi _m)`$ is the proper subset in $`V_\xi W_\xi `$. In view of Inequality $`(3)`$ there exists $`\delta >0`$ such that $`lim_m\varphi _m_{C^0(U_{\alpha +\delta })}=0`$. As in §4.4 it is possible to assume, that $`Crit(\rho )`$ is discrete in $`M`$. Take $`0<ϵ<\delta `$ such that $`d\rho 0`$ on $`U_{\alpha +ϵ}`$. In view of Theorem $`4.4.(ii)`$ there exists a continuous function $`v_m`$ on $`cl(U_{\alpha +ϵ})`$ such that $`v_m/\stackrel{~}{z}=\widehat{\varphi }_m`$ on $`U_{\alpha +ϵ}`$ and $`lim_mv_m_{C^0(U_{\alpha +ϵ})}=0`$. Each $`v_m`$ is quaternion holomorphic on $`W_\xi `$, since $`\varphi _m=0`$ on $`W_\xi `$, hence $`lim_mv_m(\xi )=0`$. Since $`f(\xi )=u(\xi )=0`$ and $`\chi =1`$ on $`W_\xi `$, then $`g_m(\xi )/\xi =f(\xi )/\xi v_m(\xi )/\xi `$. In view of Theorem $`4.4.(i)`$ there exists $`f_m(M)`$ such that $`f_mg_m_{C^0(U_{\alpha +ϵ})}<m^1`$ and inevitably $`lim_mf_m(\xi )/\xi g_m(\xi )/\xi =0`$.

Let $`V_\xi `$ and $`W_\xi `$ be as above, then there exists $`\delta >0`$ such that $`(u(z)+\stackrel{~}{u}(z))/2<\delta `$ for each $`zU_{\alpha +\delta }(V_\xi )W_\xi )`$. Therefore, there exists a branch of the quaternion logarithm $`Ln(u)(U_{\alpha +\delta }(V_\xi cl(W_\xi ))`$ (see §§3.7, 3.8 ). From Theorems $`4.2,4.4`$ it follows that each quaternion holomorphic Cousin problem over $`U_{\alpha +\delta }`$ has a solution. Hence $`Ln(u)=w_1w_2`$ for suitable $`w_1(V_\xi U_{\alpha +\delta })`$ and $`w_2(U_{\alpha +\delta }cl(W_\xi )).`$ Put $`f:=u\mathrm{exp}(w_1)`$ in $`U_{\alpha +\delta }V_\xi `$ and $`f:=\mathrm{exp}(w_2)`$ in $`U_{\alpha +\delta }cl(W_\xi )`$. Then $`f(U_{\alpha +\delta })`$ and $`f(\xi )=0`$. In view of Inequality $`(3)`$ $`f(z)0`$ for each $`\xi zcl(U_\alpha )`$. Verify now that $`cl(U_\alpha )`$ is $`(M)`$-convex. Consider $`\xi Mcl(U_\alpha )`$. Due to §4.4 there exists a strictly plurisubharmonic exhausting $`C_{z,\stackrel{~}{z}}^\omega `$-function $`\psi `$ for $`M`$ such that $`Crit(\psi )`$ is discrete and $`U_\alpha G_{\psi (\xi )}`$, where $`G_\beta :=\{zM:`$ $`\psi (z)<\beta \}`$ for $`\beta 𝐑`$. Considering shifts $`\psi \psi +const`$ assume $`d\psi (z)0`$ for each $`zG_{\psi (\xi )}`$. From the proof above it follows, that there exists $`f(M)`$ such that $`f(\xi )=1`$ and $`|f(z)|<1`$ for each $`zcl(U_\alpha )`$.

4.8.1. Remark. With the help of Theorem $`4.8`$ it is possible to spread certain modifications of Theorems $`3.2`$ and $`3.5`$ on quaternion Stein manifolds.

4.9. Theorem. Let $`N`$ be a complex manifold, then there exists a quaternion manifold $`M`$ and a complex holomorphic embedding $`\theta :NM`$.

Proof. Suppose $`At(N)=\{(V_a,\psi _a):a\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$ is any holomorphic atlas of $`N`$, where $`V_a`$ is open in $`N`$, $`_aV_a=N`$, $`\psi _a:V_a\psi _a(V_a)𝐂^𝐧`$ is a homeomorphism for each $`a`$, $`n=dim_𝐂M𝐍`$, $`\{V_a:a\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$ is a locally finite covering of $`N`$, $`\psi _b\psi _a^1`$ is a holomorphic function on $`\psi _a(V_aV_b)`$ for each $`a,b\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ such that $`V_aV_b\mathrm{}`$. For each complex holomorphic function $`f`$ on an open subset $`V`$ in $`𝐂^𝐧`$ there exists a quaternion holomorphic function $`F`$ on an open subset $`U`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ such that $`\pi _{1,1}(U)=V`$ and $`F_{1,1}|_{Ve}=f|_V`$, where $`\pi _{1,1}:𝐑^𝐧e𝐑^𝐧i𝐑^𝐧j𝐑^𝐧k𝐑^𝐧e𝐑^𝐧i=𝐂^𝐧`$ is the projection, $`F_{1,1}:=\pi _{1,1}F`$ (see Proposition $`3.13`$  and use a locally finite covering of $`V`$ by balls). Therefore, for each two charts $`(V_a,\psi _a)`$ and $`(V_b,\psi _b)`$ with $`V_{a,b}:=V_aV_b\mathrm{}`$ there exists $`U_{a,b}`$ open in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ and a quaternion holomorphic function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{b,a}`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{b,a}|_{\psi _a(V_{a,b})e}=\psi _{b,a}|_{\psi _a(V_{a,b})}`$, where $`\psi _{b,a}:=\psi _b\psi _a^1`$, $`\pi _{1,1}(U_{a,b})=\psi _a(V_{a,b})`$. Consider $`Q:=_aQ_a`$, where $`Q_a`$ is open in $`𝐇^𝐧`$, $`\pi _{1,1}(Q_a)=\psi _a(V_a)`$ for each $`a\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The equivalence relation $`𝒞`$ in the topological space $`_a\psi _a(V_a)`$ generated by functions $`\psi _{b,a}`$ has an extension to the equivalence relation $``$ in $`Q`$. Then $`M:=Q/`$ is the desired quaternion manifold with $`At(M)=\{(\mathrm{\Psi }_a,U_a):a\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_b\mathrm{\Psi }_a^1=\mathrm{\Psi }_{b,a}`$ for each $`U_aU_b\mathrm{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_a^1|_{\psi _a(V_a)e}=\psi _a^1|_{\psi _a(V_a)}`$ for each $`a`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_a^1:Q_aU_a`$ is the quaternion homeomorphism. Moreover, each homeomorphism $`\psi _a:V_a\psi _a(V_a)𝐂^𝐧`$ has the quaternion extension up to the homeomorphism $`\mathrm{\Psi }_a:U_a\mathrm{\Psi }_a(U_a)𝐇^𝐧`$. The family of embeddings $`\eta _a:\psi _a(V_a)Q_a`$ such that $`\pi _{1,1}\eta _a=id`$ together with $`At(M)`$ induces the complex holomorphic embedding $`\theta :NM`$.

4.10. Definition. Let $`M`$ be a quaternion manifold. Suppose that for each chart $`(U_a,\varphi _a)`$ of $`At(M)`$ there exists a quaternion superdifferentiable mapping $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:u\varphi _a(U_a)\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)L_q(X,X,X_q^{};𝐇)=L_q(X,X;X)`$, where $`L_q(X^n,(X_q^{})^m;Y)`$ denotes the space of all quasi-linear mappings from $`X^n\times (X_q^{})^m`$ into $`Y`$ (that is, additive and $`𝐑`$-homogeneous by each argument $`x`$ in $`X`$ or in $`X_q^{}`$), where $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are Banach spaces over $`𝐇`$, $`X_q^{}`$ denotes the space of all quasi-linear functionals on $`X`$ with values in $`𝐇`$ (see §4.1), $`X_q^{}=L_q(X;𝐇)`$. If $`U_aU_b\mathrm{}`$, let

$`(1)D(\varphi _b\varphi _a^1).\mathrm{\Gamma }(\varphi _a)=D^2(\varphi _b\varphi _a^1)+\mathrm{\Gamma }(\varphi _b)(D(\varphi _b\varphi _a^1)\times D(\varphi _b\varphi _a^1)).`$ These $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\varphi _a)`$ are called the Christoffel symbols. Let $`=(M)`$ be a family of all quaternion holomorphic vector fields on $`M`$. For $`M`$ supplied with $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\varphi _a):a\}`$ define a covariant derivation $`(X,Y)^2_XY`$:

$`(2)_XY(u)=DY(u).X(u)+\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)(X(u),Y(u))`$, where $`X(u)`$ and $`Y(u)`$ are the principal parts of $`X`$ and $`Y`$ on $`(U_a,\varphi _a)`$, $`u=\varphi _a(z)`$, $`zU_a`$. In this case it is said that $`M`$ possesses a covariant derivation.

4.11. Remark. Certainly for a quaternion manifold there exists a neighbourhood $`V`$ of $`M`$ in $`TM`$ such that $`\mathrm{exp}:VM`$ is quaternion holomorphic (see the real case in ).

4.12. Theorem. Let $`f`$ be a quaternion holomorphic function such that $`\widehat{f}`$ is quaternion (right) superlinear on a compact quaternion manifold $`M`$, then $`f`$ is constant on $`M`$.

Proof. By the supposition of this theorem $`(f\varphi _b^1)\widehat{.}`$ is quaternion (right) superlinear for each chart $`(U_b,\varphi _b)`$ of $`M`$. Since $`M`$ is compact and $`|f(z)|`$ is continuous, then there exists a point $`qM`$ at which $`|f(z)|`$ attains its maximum. Let $`qU_b`$, then $`f\varphi _b^1`$ is the quaternion holomorphic function on $`V_b:=\varphi _b(U_b)𝐇^𝐧`$, where $`dim_𝐇M=n`$. Consider a polydisk $`V`$ in $`𝐇^𝐧`$ with the centre $`y=\varphi _b(q)`$ such that $`VV_b`$. Put $`g(w)=f\varphi _b^1(y+(zy)w)`$, where $`w`$ is the quaternion variable. Then for each $`zV`$ there exists $`ϵ_z>0`$ such that the function $`g(w)`$ is quaternion holomorphic on the set $`W_z:=\{w:w𝐇,|w|<1+ϵ_z\}`$ and $`|g(w)|`$ attains its maximum at $`w=0`$. In view of Theorem $`3.15`$ and Remark $`3.16`$  $`g`$ is constant on $`W_z`$, hence $`f`$ is constant on $`U_b`$. By the quaternion holomorphic continuation $`f`$ is constant on $`M`$.

Address: Theoretical Department,
Institute of General Physics,
Russian Academy of Sciences,
Str. Vavilov 38, Moscow 119 991 GSP-1, Russia
e-mail: ludkovsk@fpl.gpi.ru


format: text

text:
# References

Numerical Modelling of Transport Processes in Semiconductors
E.P. Yukalova1 and V.I. Yukalov2

1Laboratory of Informational Technologies
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna 141980, Russia

2Bogolubov Laboratory of Theoretical Physics
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna 141980, Russia

## Abstract

The peculiarities of electric current in semiconductors with nonuniform distribution of charge carriers are studied. The semiclassical drift-diffusion equations consisting of the continuity equations and the Poisson equation are solved numerically using Rusanov finite-difference scheme of third order. The different types of boundary conditions are numerically investigated. It is shown that the stability of the Rusanov scheme for the problem considered is achieved with the Neumann type boundary conditions. These conditions correspond to the absence of diffusion through semiconductor surface. Special set of parameters is found under which a very interesting and unusual transient effect of negative current in nonuniform semiconductors appears. Different regimes of negative current are considered for realistic semiconductor materials.

PACS: 02.60.Cb

Keywords: Numerical simulation, semiconductors

The study of electric current in semiconductors is important for describing and modelling semiconductor devices. The action of external radiation can result in the formation of a nonuniform distribution of charge carriers in a semiconductor sample. The transport processes in semiconductors with essentially nonuniform distribution of carriers can be quite specific. For instance, in a semiconductor sample biased with an external constant voltage the electric current may turn against the applied voltage . Of course, it can happen only as a short time fluctuation after which the current turns back becoming positive. So we can talk about this only as about a transient effect. This unusual transient effect of negative current is interesting by itself although there might be some useful applications suggested. For example, it can be used for measuring physical characteristics of semiconductor materials or for constructing electronic controlling devices .

Transport properties of semiconductors are usually described by the semiclassical drift-diffusion equations . In dimensionless units we have the continuity equation

$$\frac{\rho _i}{t}+\mu _i\frac{}{x}(\rho _iE)D_i\frac{^2\rho _i}{x^2}+\gamma _i\rho _i=0,$$
(1)
where $`0x1`$, $`t>0`$, $`i=1,2`$, and the Poisson equation

$$\frac{E}{x}=4\pi (\rho _1+\rho _2).$$
(2)
Here, $`\rho _1=\rho _1(x,t)`$ and $`\rho _2=\rho _2(x,t)`$ are charge densities; $`E=E(x,t)`$, electric field. The functions $`\rho _1,\rho _2,E`$ are unknown functions to be found from equations (1) and (2).

The considered semiconductor sample of length $`L`$ is characterized by the following parameters: $`\mu _i`$, mobilities; $`D_i`$, diffusion coefficients; $`\gamma _i`$, relaxation widths. Two types, ($`i=1,2`$), of charge carriers are assumed: positive and negative, so that $`\rho _1>0,\mu _1>0`$, and $`\rho _2<0,\mu _2<0`$. We consider the semiconductor sample of the length $`L=1`$.

Initial distribution of charge carriers is modelled by the Gaussian form, which e.g. corresponds to the distribution of charges in a semiconductor irradiated by an ion beam. For $`t=0`$,

$$\rho _i(x,0)\frac{Q_i}{Z_i}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{(xa_i)^2}{2b_i}\right\},(0<a_i<1),$$
(3)
where $`Q_i=_0^1\rho _i(x,0)𝑑x`$ and $`Z_i=_0^1\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{(xa_i)^2}{2b_i}\right\}𝑑x`$. Note that the initial distribution for the electric field $`E(x,0)`$ is to be found from equations (1) and (2), using (3) and given boundary conditions.

There are two possibilities of posing boundary conditions for functions $`\rho _i(x,t)`$. The Dirichlet type,

$$\rho _i(0,t)=\rho _i(1,t)=0,(i=1,2),$$

which corresponds to the absence of the drift current $`(j_i\mu _i\rho _iE=0`$) at the semiconductor surface, and the Neumann type,

$$\frac{\rho _i}{t}|_{x=0}=\frac{\rho _i}{t}|_{x=1}=0,(i=1,2),$$

which corresponds to the absence of diffusion through the semiconductor surface.

We considered both types of boundary conditions for $`\rho _i`$. It turned out that calculational procedure is less stable in the case of the Dirichlet boundary conditions because of the accumulation of charges at the semiconductor surfaces. As a result, discontinuities appear in the vicinity of the boundaries $`x=0`$ and $`x=1`$, which leads to numerical instability. In practice, it is also more difficult to arrange that the drift current through a semiconductor surface be absent. In what follows, we use the Neumann type of boundary conditions for the system (1) and (2).

The role of boundary conditions for the electric field $`E(x,t)`$ is played by the voltage integral

$$_0^1E(x,t)𝑑x=1.$$

Our aim is to study the peculiarity in the behaviour of the electric current through the semiconductor sample

$$J(t)=_0^1j_{tot}(x,t)𝑑x,$$
(4)
where

$$j_{tot}(x,t)=\left(\mu _1ED_1\frac{}{x}\right)\rho _1+\left(\mu _2ED_2\frac{}{x}\right)\rho _2+\frac{1}{4\pi }\frac{E}{t}.$$
(5)
We also are interested in the electric currents at the left ($`x=0`$) and right ($`x=1`$) surfaces of the semiconductor, $`J_0(t)j_{tot}(0,t)`$ and $`J_1(t)j_{tot}(1,t)`$. Let us note that $`J(t)`$ can be presented in the integral form

$$J(t)=_0^1\left[\mu _1\rho _1(x,t)+\mu _2\rho _2(x,t)\right]E(x,t)𝑑x+$$

$$+D_1[\rho _1(0,t)\rho _1(1,t)]+D_2[\rho _2(0,t)\rho _2(1,t)],$$

which is more convenient for numerical computation.

Numerical investigation showed that the known explicit finite difference schemes of the second order are strongly unstable for the system (1) and (2). Because of this, we resorted to the third-order accuracy finite-difference scheme suggested by Rusanov  which proved to be very efficient for discontinuous solutions. The calculational procedure for the Rusanov scheme is constructed as follows. We consider the vector-function $`u_m^{(n)}=\{\rho _1(x_m,t_n),\rho _2(x_m,t_n),E_m(x_m,t_n)\}`$, where $`x_m=mh`$ and $`t_n=n\tau `$, $`m=0,1,\mathrm{},M`$; $`n=0,1,\mathrm{}`$. The grid space step is $`h=1/M`$. The time step $`\tau `$ is chosen so that the calculational procedure be stable. The parameter $`\sigma `$ in the Rusanov scheme, responsible for the stability of calculations, is $`\sigma =0.45`$ for $`\tau /h=0.125`$. We will not present the computational scheme explicitly since it is quite cumbersome. Let us better dwell upon the approximation of boundary conditions for $`\rho _i(x,t)`$ ($`i=1,2`$) and for $`E(x,t)`$. Numerical modelling showed that the Neumann type of boundary conditions for the charge carriers are to be approximated with the third order accuracy for the time layers $`t=t_n=n\tau `$ and auxiliary time layers $`t=t_n^{(2)}=t_n+2\tau /3`$ at the integer boundary nodes:

$$\rho _i(x_M,t)=\frac{1}{3}\left[4\rho _i(x_{M1},t)\rho _i(x_{M2},t)\right],\rho _i(x_0,t)=\frac{1}{3}\left[4\rho _i(x_1,t)\rho _i(x_2,t)\right],$$

and with the second order accuracy for the half-integer boundary nodes at the auxiliary time layer $`t=t_n^{(1)}=n\tau +\tau /3`$:

$$\rho _i(x_{M+1/2},t)=\rho _i(x_{M1/2},t),\rho _i(x_{1/2},t)=\rho _i(x_{1/2},t),$$

where $`x_{m+1/2}=mh+1/2`$, $`m=0,1,\mathrm{},M`$, $`n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$.

To approximate the boundary conditions for the electric field $`E(x,t)`$, given in the integral form, it was necessary to rewrite it in the form convenient for calculations:

$$E(x,t)=1+4\pi \left[Q(x,t)_0^1Q(x,t)𝑑x\right],Q(x,t)=_0^x[\rho _1(y,t)+\rho _2(y,t)]𝑑y.$$

Then $`E(0,t)`$ and $`E(1,t)`$ are given by the above formulas for $`x=0`$ and $`x=1`$. At each time layer $`t_n=n\tau `$, we checked whether the equality $`_0^1E(x,t)𝑑x=1`$ holds true.

We have accomplished numerical calculations for different sets of parameters $`a_i`$, $`b_i`$, $`\mu _i`$, $`D_i`$, $`\gamma _i`$, and $`Q_i`$. It turned out that for some values of parameters there exists an unusual transient effect when the electric current turns against the applied voltage. This effect of negative current occurs on the whole manifold of parameters. Here we illustrate it for the case of a unipolar semiconductor, when $`Q_1Q>0`$ and $`Q_2=0`$. Other parameters are set as $`\mu _1=1,\mu _2=0,D_i1,\gamma _i1`$, and the notation $`a_1a`$, $`b_1b`$ is used.

Fig. 1 shows the total electric current (4) through the semiconductor sample, as a function of time, for the injected electric charge $`Q=0.5`$, the initial Gaussian distribution width $`b=0.1`$, and for different locations of the peak of this charge distribution, $`a`$. As is seen, the negative electric current happens at the initial stage of the process for $`a<0.5`$, such as $`a=0.1`$ and $`a=0.25`$, but does not exist for $`a0.5`$.

Fig. 2 presents the total electric current versus time for $`Q=3`$ and $`b=0.5`$, with varying locations $`a`$. Again, the negative current appears for $`a<0.5`$ but does not occur for $`a>0.5`$. More accurately, the conditions on $`a`$ and $`Q`$, sufficient for the occurrence of the negative current, are

$$a<\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{4\pi Q},Q>\frac{1}{2\pi }.$$

The existence of the transient effect of negative electric current is the most interesting result of the numerical modelling we have accomplished for semiconductors.

Figure captions

Fig. 1. Total electric current as a function of time for $`Q=0.5`$, $`b=0.1`$ and different locations for the peak of the initial charge-carriers distribution: $`a=0.1`$ (1 curve, solid line); $`a=0.25`$ (2 curve, long-dashed line); $`a=0.5`$ (3 curve, short-dashed line); and $`a=0.75`$ (4 curve, dotted line).

Fig. 2. Electric current through the semiconductor sample versus time for $`Q=3`$, $`b=0.5`$, and varying initial charge locations $`a`$, which take the same sequence of values as in Fig. 1.