1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{fullpage}
3: \usepackage{graphicx}
4: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
5: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
6: \newcommand{\bphi}{\mbox{\boldmath $\phi$}}
7: \newcommand{\pauli}{\mbox{\boldmath $\tau$}}
8: \newcommand{\bpi}{\mbox{\boldmath $\pi$}}
9: \newcommand{\I}{{\cal I}}
10: %%%%%%%If you do not have the msbm fonts, delete the following 10 lines
11: \font\mybb=msbm10 at 11pt
12: \font\mybbb=msbm10 at 17pt
13: \def\bb#1{\hbox{\mybb#1}}
14: \def\bbb#1{\hbox{\mybbb#1}}
15: \def\bZ {\bb{Z}}
16: \def\bR {\bb{R}}
17: \def\bE {\bb{E}}
18: \def\bT {\bb{T}}
19: \def\bM {\bb{M}}
20: \def\bC {\bb{C}}
21: \def\bA {\bb{A}}
22: \def\bP {\bb{P}}
23: \def\e {\epsilon}
24: \def\bbC {\bbb{C}}
25: \def\Z {\bb{Z}}
26: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
27: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\arabic{section}.\arabic{equation}}
28: \newcommand{\news}{\setcounter{equation}{0}}
29: %\newcommand{\newss}{\setcounter{equation}{0}}
30: \def\ben{\begin{equation}}
31: \def\een{\end{equation}}
32: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}
33: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
34: %\input amstex
35: %\input amssym.def
36: %\input amssym.tex
37: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.67}
38: \begin{document}
39: \title{
40: \begin{flushright}\ \vskip -2cm {\normalsize{\em DCPT-08/59}}\end{flushright}
41: \vskip 2cm Multi-Skyrmions with Vector Mesons}
42: \author{Paul Sutcliffe\\[10pt]
43: {\em \normalsize Department of Mathematical Sciences,
44: Durham University, Durham DH1 3LE, U.K.}\\
45: {\normalsize Email: p.m.sutcliffe@durham.ac.uk}
46: }
47: \date{March 2009}
48: \maketitle
49: \begin{abstract}
50: It is known that including vector mesons stabilizes the size of a
51: Skyrmion without the need for a Skyrme term. This paper provides
52: the first results for static multi-Skyrmions in such a theory.
53: The rational map ansatz is used to investigate multi-Skyrmions
54: in a theory which includes the $\omega$ vector meson and
55: has no Skyrme term. Bound states with baryon numbers two, three and four
56: are found, which have axial, tetrahedral and cubic symmetries, respectively.
57: The results reveal a qualitative similarity with the standard Skyrme
58: model with a Skyrme term and no vector mesons, suggesting that
59: some features are universal and do not depend on the details of the theory.
60: Setting the pion decay constant and meson masses to their experimental values
61: leaves only a single free parameter in the model. Fixing this parameter,
62: by equating the energy of the baryon number four Skyrmion to the
63: $\rm{He}^4$ mass, yields reasonable results for other baryon numbers.
64: \end{abstract}
65:
66: \newpage
67: \section{Introduction}\news\ \
68: Skyrmions are topological solitons that model baryons within a
69: nonlinear theory of pions, arising as a low energy effective theory from QCD
70: in the limit of a large number of colours \cite{Wi}.
71: The standard Skyrme model \cite{Sk} includes only the pion degrees of freedom
72: and the Lagrangian requires the inclusion of a Skyrme term, which is quartic
73: in derivatives. The role of the Skyrme term is to balance the sigma
74: model contribution and provide a scale for the
75: soliton, as required by Derrick's theorem \cite{De}.
76: The Skyrme term
77: has some drawbacks, for example, it makes the theory non-renormalizable
78: and the classical dynamical field equations have potential instabilities
79: associated with the loss of hyperbolicity \cite{CB}.
80:
81: Over twenty years ago it was shown \cite{AN2} that by generalizing
82: the nonlinear pion theory to include vector mesons, the size of a Skyrmion
83: is stabilized without the need for a Skyrme term. The original work
84: included only the $\omega$ meson but later extensions added other
85: vector mesons, for example $\rho$ mesons
86: \cite{MZ,BKY,HY}. These investigations
87: produced promising results and revealed some improvements over the standard
88: Skyrme model, although all these studies were limited to the sector with
89: baryon number one.
90:
91: The single Skyrmion solution is spherically symmetric and therefore it can be
92: constructed by solving only ordinary differential equations; though even
93: these must be solved numerically. However, multi-Skyrmions are not spherically
94: symmetric and therefore highly nonlinear partial differential equations
95: in three-dimensional space must be solved to study baryon numbers greater
96: than one. The substantial difficulties that need to be overcome mean that
97: even today there are still no results available on static multi-Skyrmions in
98: theories including vector mesons; though it has been demonstrated that a
99: product ansatz allows well-separated Skyrmions to be placed in an
100: attractive channel \cite{PRV}, and recently a Skyrme crystal has been
101: investigated \cite{PRV2}.
102: The purpose of the present paper is to
103: provide the first results on static multi-Skyrmions in
104: theories including vector mesons.
105: Details are presented
106: for baryon numbers from one to four, but the methods described are also
107: applicable to larger baryon numbers.
108:
109: Substantial progress in both numerical and analytic approaches
110: to standard Skyrmions means that multi-Skyrmions are now
111: fairly well understood in the Skyrme model (for a review see \cite{book}).
112: The approach taken in this paper
113: is to apply some of these techniques, in particular the rational map
114: ansatz \cite{HMS}, to study multi-Skyrmions in a theory without the
115: Skyrme term but including the $\omega$ vector meson.
116: Briefly, the rational map ansatz will be applied to provide an
117: approximation to the Skyrme field and the $\omega$ field will be computed
118: using an expansion in terms of symmetry adapted spherical harmonics.
119:
120: Bound states with baryon numbers two, three and four
121: are found, which have axial, tetrahedral and cubic symmetries, respectively.
122: The results reveal a qualitative similarity with the standard Skyrme
123: model, suggesting that some features are universal and do not depend on the
124: details of the theory.
125: Setting the pion decay constant and meson masses to their experimental values
126: leaves only a single free parameter in the model. Fixing this parameter,
127: by equating the energy of the baryon number four Skyrmion to the
128: $\rm{He}^4$ mass, yields reasonable results for other baryon numbers.
129:
130: Finally, recent developments in AdS/QCD have
131: led to renewed interest in baryons as Skyrmions \cite{SS}.
132: In particular, these studies point to the importance of the inclusion of
133: vector mesons and provide a string theory motivation for old ideas of
134: vector meson dominance.
135:
136:
137: \section{Skyrmions and the $\omega$ meson}\news\ \
138: The Skyrme field $U$ takes values in $SU(2)$ and satisfies the boundary
139: condition that $U\rightarrow 1$ as $|{\bf x}|\rightarrow \infty.$
140: It is related to the triplet of pion fields $\bpi$ through the formula
141: \be
142: U=\sigma +i\bpi\cdot\pauli,
143: \ee
144: where $\pauli$ denotes the triplet of Pauli matrices and
145: $\sigma^2+\bpi\cdot\bpi=1.$
146:
147: Topological solitons arise because there is a conserved topological current
148: \be
149: B^\mu=\frac{1}{24\pi^2}\epsilon^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}
150: Tr(\partial_\nu U\,U^\dagger\,\partial_\alpha U\,U^\dagger\,
151: \partial_\beta U\,U^\dagger),
152: \label{current}
153: \ee
154: and the associated integer topological charge $B=\int B^0\, d^3x$
155: is the soliton number and is identified with baryon number.
156:
157: The theory for the Skyrme field coupled to the $\omega$ vector meson
158: is given by the Lagrangian density \cite{AN2}
159: \be
160: {\cal L}=\frac{F_\pi^2}{16}\mbox{Tr}(\partial_\mu U\partial^\mu U^\dagger)
161: +\frac{F_\pi^2 m_\pi^2}{8}\mbox{Tr}(U-1)
162: -\frac{1}{4}(\partial_\mu\omega_\nu-\partial_\nu\omega_\mu)
163: (\partial^\mu\omega^\nu-\partial^\nu\omega^\mu)
164: +\frac{m_\omega^2}{2}\omega_\mu\omega^\mu+\beta\omega_\mu B^\mu,
165: \label{lagparam}
166: \ee
167: where $F_\pi=186\,\rm{MeV}$ is the pion decay constant, $m_\pi=138\,\rm{MeV}$
168: is the pion mass and $m_\omega=782\,\rm{MeV}$ is the $\omega$ mass.
169: The constant $\beta$ can be related to the $\omega\rightarrow 3\pi$
170: decay rate, however, this is enhanced by the resonance
171: $\omega\rightarrow \rho +\pi$ which is not included in the current theory.
172: Therefore the experimental data only provides an upper bound on $\beta,$
173: which is found to be $\beta\le 25.4 $ \cite{AN2}.
174:
175: It is convenient to remove various constants in the above Lagrangian density
176: by rescaling the $\omega$ field as $\omega\mapsto \omega F_\pi$
177: and using energy and length units of $F_\pi^2/m_\omega$ and $1/m_\omega$
178: respectively. The Lagrangian density then becomes
179: \be
180: {\cal L}=\frac{1}{16}\mbox{Tr}(\partial_\mu U\partial^\mu U^\dagger)
181: +\frac{M^2}{8}\mbox{Tr}(U-1)
182: -\frac{1}{4}(\partial_\mu\omega_\nu-\partial_\nu\omega_\mu)
183: (\partial^\mu\omega^\nu-\partial^\nu\omega^\mu)
184: +\frac{1}{2}\omega_\mu\omega^\mu+g\omega_\mu B^\mu,
185: \label{lag}
186: \ee
187: where $M=m_\pi/m_\omega=0.176$ and $g=\beta m_\omega /F_\pi.$
188:
189: Note that the theory (\ref{lag}) does not contain a Skyrme term
190: and has only one free parameter, $g,$ once the meson masses are
191: fixed to their experimental values.
192:
193: Several values for $g$ have been studied and the results are qualitatively
194: similar in all cases. Results will be presented for the two values
195: $g=96.7$ and $g=34.7,$ which are both consistent with the
196: above upper bound for $\beta.$ The first value, which is adopted from
197: now on until further notice, is taken from \cite{AN2}, and is obtained by
198: allowing both $g$ and $F_\pi$ to be free parameters whose values are
199: obtained by fitting the masses of the nucleon and delta resonance to the
200: energies of a spinning $B=1$ Skyrmion. This approach results in a value
201: of $F_\pi$ that is $124\,\rm{MeV}$ and therefore a little less than the
202: experimental result.
203: The second value of $g$ is calculated in a later section
204: by setting $F_\pi$ to the experimental value and fitting the energy of
205: the $B=4$ Skyrmion to the $\rm{He}^4$ mass.
206:
207: Only static fields are considered in this paper, therefore the spatial
208: components of the topological current vanish $B^i=0.$
209: As the topological current provides the source term for the field $\omega_\mu$
210: then its spatial components can be set to zero, $\omega_i=0.$
211: For ease of notation, in the following we drop the subscript on the
212: temporal component and write $\omega\equiv \omega_0.$
213:
214: Taking into account the above comments, the static energy associated with
215: the Lagrangian density (\ref{lag}) is given by
216: \be
217: E=\int\left(
218: \frac{1}{16}\mbox{Tr}(\partial_i U\partial_i U^\dagger)
219: +\frac{M^2}{8}\mbox{Tr}(1-U)
220: -\frac{1}{2}\partial_i\omega\partial_i\omega
221: -\frac{1}{2}\omega^2-g\omega B^0\right)
222: d^3x.
223: \label{energy}
224: \ee
225: Note the negative signs associated with the energy in the $\omega$ field,
226: as it is a temporal component.
227:
228: Variation of the above energy with respect to $\omega$ yields the
229: field equation
230: \be
231: \partial_i\partial_i\omega-\omega =gB^0,
232: \label{oeom}
233: \ee
234: which is a linear equation for $\omega$ with a source term proportional
235: to the topological charge density. The boundary condition is that
236: $\omega$ vanishes at spatial infinity.
237:
238: The problem at hand is therefore one of constrained energy minimization.
239: The Skyrme field $U$ is obtained as the field configuration, with a given
240: topological charge $B,$ that minimizes the energy (\ref{energy}),
241: with $\omega$ determined uniquely by $U$ as the solution of equation
242: (\ref{oeom}). In the following section an approximation technique is described
243: and implemented to solve this problem.
244:
245: Using equation (\ref{oeom}), together with an integration by parts, the energy
246: (\ref{energy}) can also be written as
247: \be
248: E=\int\left(
249: \frac{1}{16}\mbox{Tr}(\partial_i U\partial_i U^\dagger)
250: +\frac{M^2}{8}\mbox{Tr}(1-U)-\frac{1}{2}g\omega B^0\right)
251: d^3x,
252: \label{energy2}
253: \ee
254: which will be useful later. Alternatively, the same procedure can be
255: used to remove the last term in expression (\ref{energy}) in exchange
256: for changing the two minus signs to plus signs in front of the
257: $\omega$ dependent contributions.
258: This form makes it transparent that the additional contribution
259: to the energy from the inclusion of the $\omega$ field is non-negative.
260:
261: \section{Constructing multi-Skyrmions}\news\ \
262: Extensive numerical computations of the full nonlinear field equations
263: of the standard Skyrme model, with massless pions, have determined the minimal
264: energy Skyrmions with baryon numbers up to $B=22$ \cite{BS3}.
265: These numerical results can be reproduced with a surprising accuracy
266: using an approximation employing rational maps between Riemann spheres,
267: known as the rational map ansatz \cite{HMS}. This ansatz is briefly reviewed
268: below.
269:
270: In terms of the standard spherical polar coordinates $r,\theta,\phi,$
271: introduce the Riemann sphere coordinate $z=e^{i\phi}\tan(\theta/2),$ given by
272: stereographic projection of the two-sphere.
273: Let $R(z)$ be a degree $B$ rational map between Riemann spheres,
274: that is, $R=p/q$ where $p$ and $q$ are polynomials in $z$ such that
275: $\max[\mbox{deg}(p),\mbox{deg}(q)]=B$, and $p$ and $q$ have no common
276: factors. Given a rational map $R(z)$ the ansatz for the Skyrme field is
277: \be U(r,z)=\exp\bigg[\frac{if(r)}{1+\vert R\vert^2} \pmatrix{1-\vert
278: R\vert^2& 2\bar R\cr 2R & \vert R\vert^2-1\cr}\bigg]\,,
279: \label{rma}
280: \ee where $f(r)$ is a real profile function which satisfies the boundary
281: conditions $f(0)=\pi$ and $f(\infty)=0.$
282:
283: Applying the ansatz (\ref{rma}) to the baryon density (\ref{current})
284: produces the expression
285: \be
286: B^0=-\frac{f'}{2\pi^2}\left(\frac{\sin f}{r}
287: \frac{1+|z|^2}{1+|R|^2}\left|\frac{dR}{dz}\right|\right)^2,
288: \label{bden}
289: \ee
290: from which it is simple to verify that the topological charge is indeed
291: $B,$ as a consequence of the boundary conditions on $f(r)$ and the
292: fact that $R(z)$ has degree $B.$
293:
294: For the particular choice $R=z,$ the ansatz (\ref{rma}) reduces to
295: the standard hedgehog ansatz for a spherically symmetric $B=1$ Skyrmion.
296: For $B>1$ this ansatz does not provide any exact solutions,
297: but for suitable choices of rational maps and
298: profile functions, it provides excellent approximations to the true
299: multi-Skyrmion solutions of the standard Skyrme model.
300: In particular, the ansatz reproduces the correct symmetries of the
301: true solutions, and the energy of the ansatz typically only overestimates the
302: true energy of a multi-Skyrmion by the order of a percent.
303:
304: Substituting the ansatz (\ref{rma}) into the energy of the
305: standard Skyrme model leads to only one contribution which is sensitive to
306: the properties of the rational map beyond its degree. This contribution
307: originates entirely from the Skyrme term and involves the coefficient
308: \be \I=\frac{1}{4\pi}\int \bigg(
309: \frac{1+\vert z\vert^2}{1+\vert R\vert^2}
310: \bigg\vert\frac{dR}{dz}\bigg\vert\bigg)^4 \frac{2i \ dz d\bar z
311: }{(1+\vert z\vert^2)^2}\,.
312: \label{i}
313: \ee
314: Thus, within the rational map ansatz, the problem of finding
315: the minimal energy Skyrmion in the standard Skyrme model
316: reduces to the simpler problem of
317: calculating the rational map which minimizes the function
318: $\I$. Given the minimizing rational map, or more precisely the
319: associated value of $\I,$ the profile function can then be determined
320: by minimizing an energy functional for $f(r).$
321:
322: The $\I$ minimizing rational map for $B=1$ is the spherically symmetric
323: map $R=z$ and for $B=2$ it is the axially symmetric map $R=z^2,$
324: in agreement with the fact that the minimal energy $B=2$ Skyrmion
325: is axially symmetric \cite{KS,Ma3,Ve}.
326:
327: For any $B>1$ the map $R=z^B$ is axially symmetric, but it is not the
328: $\I$ minimizing map for $B>2.$ For $B=3$ and $B=4$ the $\I$ minimizing
329: maps are the unique maps with tetrahedral and cubic symmetry,
330: respectively, and are given by
331: \cite{HMS}
332: \be
333: R=\frac{z^3-\sqrt{3}iz}{\sqrt{3}iz^2-1},
334: \quad\quad\quad
335: R=\frac{z^4+2\sqrt{3}iz^2+1}{z^4-2\sqrt{3}iz^2+1}.
336: \label{maps}
337: \ee
338: These symmetries again agree with those of the numerically computed
339: Skyrmions in the standard Skyrme model \cite{BTC}.
340:
341: In the vector meson model there is no Skyrme term and hence it
342: appears that the coefficient $\I$ is not relevant.
343: However, notice that if the Laplacian term is neglected
344: in the $\omega$ field equation (\ref{oeom}) then $\omega$
345: is simply equal to a negative constant times the baryon density.
346: Substituting this approximation into the energy (\ref{energy2})
347: gives that the interaction term is a positive constant times
348: the square of the baryon density. With the rational map expression
349: for the baryon density (\ref{bden}) the angular part of this energy
350: is precisely $\I,$ and therefore this term arises in the vector meson
351: model as a leading order contribution in a derivative expansion.
352: Alternatively, a formal solution for $\omega$ can be written in
353: terms of the Green's function for the massive Klein-Gordon equation.
354: If this representation is applied to the interaction term in the energy
355: then it becomes a non-local expression involving two factors of the
356: baryon density. The angular part of this is therefore a non-local
357: version of $\I,$ which reproduces $\I$ exactly in the limit in which the
358: Green's function is replaced by a delta function.
359:
360: The above arguments suggest that the $\I$-minimizing maps are also
361: the appropriate maps for the vector meson model, and indeed it
362: will be shown that the maps (\ref{maps}) yield low energy
363: bound states, in contrast to the maps $R=z^3$
364: and $R=z^4,$ for example. This is strong evidence that in the vector
365: meson model the minimal energy Skyrmions for $B=3$ and $B=4$ have the
366: same Platonic symmetries as in the standard Skyrme model.
367: Additional evidence is provided by studying a (2+1)-dimensional
368: analogue of this problem, where numerical solutions of the exact static
369: field equations reveal an amazing similarity between solitons
370: in the Baby Skyrme model and its vector meson version \cite{FS}.
371:
372: The approach applied below involves exploiting the symmetry of the Skyrme
373: field to solve the field equation for $\omega$ by using an expansion
374: in terms of symmetry adapted spherical harmonics. This aspect is
375: reviewed in the following.
376:
377:
378: Given a subgroup $G\subset SO(3)$ of spatial rotations, introduce
379: the symmetric harmonics $K_l(\theta,\phi),$ as a set of real
380: orthonormal functions,
381: each of which is a linear combination of spherical harmonics
382: $Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi),$ that is,
383: \be
384: K_l=\sum_{m=-l}^l \alpha_{lm}Y_{lm},
385: \label{defk}
386: \ee
387: where the coefficients $\alpha_{lm}$ are chosen so that
388: each function $K_l$ is invariant under the group $G.$
389: Strictly speaking, the functions $K_l$ should carry
390: an additional index, since there may be more than
391: one symmetric harmonic with a given value of $l.$
392: However, for the specific calculations and symmetries discussed below,
393: only the values $0\le l\le 10\,$
394: will be required, and there is a unique symmetric harmonic for each $l$
395: in this range; therefore for simplicity the additional index will be
396: suppressed.
397:
398: As an example, if $G=SO(2),$ then the axially symmetric harmonics are
399: simply $K_l=Y_{l0}.$
400:
401: The angular part of the rational map generated baryon density (\ref{bden})
402: is given by
403: \be
404: b(\theta,\phi)=\frac{1}{4\pi}\left(\frac{1+|z|^2}{1+|R|^2}\left|\frac{dR}{dz}
405: \right|\right)^2,
406: \label{b}
407: \ee
408: where the normalization is such that the integral of $b$ over the two-sphere
409: is equal to $B.$
410:
411: For a $G$-symmetric rational map the angular baryon density $b$
412: can be expanded in terms of symmetric harmonics as
413: \be
414: b=\sum_l b_l K_l,
415: \label{expandb}
416: \ee
417: where $b_0=B/(2\sqrt{\pi})$ from the chosen normalization.
418: Similarly, $\omega$ can also be expanded in terms of symmetric harmonics
419: as
420: \be
421: \omega=\sum_l h_l(r)K_l,
422: \label{expando}
423: \ee
424: where $h_l(r)$ are real profile functions which depend only on the radial
425: coordinate $r.$ The boundary conditions are that $h_l(\infty)=0$ and
426: $h_l(0)=0$ for $l>0$ with $h_0'(0)=0.$
427:
428: The baryon density expression (\ref{bden}) together with the expansions
429: (\ref{expandb}) and (\ref{expando}) reduces the $\omega$ field equation
430: (\ref{oeom}) to a set of profile function equations
431: \be
432: h_l''+\frac{2}{r}h_l'-\left(1+\frac{l(l+1)}{r^2}\right)h_l'
433: =-\frac{2g}{\pi}\frac{f'\sin^2f}{r^2}b_l.
434: \label{profileh}
435: \ee
436: Substituting the rational map ansatz (\ref{rma}) and the expansions
437: (\ref{expandb}) and (\ref{expando}) into the energy (\ref{energy})
438: and performing the angular integration results in
439: \be
440: E=E_\omega+\frac{\pi}{2}\int_0^\infty\{
441: r^2f'^2+2B\sin^2f+2M^2r^2(1-\cos f)
442: +\frac{4g}{\pi^2} f'\sin^2f \sum_l b_lh_l\}dr,
443: \label{energy3}
444: \ee
445: where $E_\omega$ denotes a contribution to the energy
446: which has no explicit $f$ dependence.
447:
448: The equation for $f$ obtained from the variation of the energy
449: (\ref{energy3}) is
450: \be
451: f''+\frac{2}{r}f'-\frac{B}{r^2}\sin 2f-M^2\sin f
452: +\frac{2g}{\pi^2} \frac{\sin^2f}{r^2} \sum_l b_lh_l'=0.
453: \label{profilef}
454: \ee
455:
456: For functions $h_l$ and $f$ which satisfy equations
457: (\ref{profileh}) and (\ref{profilef}) the energy expression
458: (\ref{energy2}) can be used to rewrite the energy as
459: \be
460: E=\frac{\pi}{2}\int_0^\infty\{
461: r^2f'^2+2B\sin^2f+2M^2r^2(1-\cos f)
462: +\frac{2g}{\pi^2} f'\sin^2f \sum_l b_lh_l\}dr,
463: \label{energy4}
464: \ee
465: which is similar to (\ref{energy3}) except that
466: there is no longer a term which is independent of $f$ and
467: the coefficient in the final term has been halved.
468:
469: Given a $G$-symmetric rational map $R(z)$ the angular baryon density
470: (\ref{b}) can be calculated and the coefficients $b_l$ in the expansion
471: (\ref{expandb}) computed. The profile functions $h_l$ and $f$ can then
472: be found by numerically solving the equations (\ref{profileh}) and
473: (\ref{profilef}), using a heat flow algorithm.
474: Finally, these profile functions are used to determine the
475: energy from the expression (\ref{energy4}). As mentioned earlier, it is
476: found that truncating the expansions at $l=10$ is sufficient to produce
477: results of the required accuracy.
478:
479: \begin{figure}
480: \begin{center}
481: \includegraphics[width=11cm]{f.ps}
482: \caption{Profile functions $f(r)$ for $B=1,2,3,4.$ The
483: curves shift to the right with increasing $B$.
484: }
485: \label{fig-f}
486: \end{center}
487: \end{figure}
488:
489: The simplest example is the spherical $B=1$ Skyrmion with rational
490: map $R=z.$ There is only one spherically symmetric harmonic
491: $K_0=Y_{00}=1/(2\sqrt{\pi})$ and hence only the profile functions $f$ and
492: $h_0$ need to be calculated. In this case the rational map ansatz is
493: exact and the above procedure reproduces the earlier result \cite{AN2}.
494: For $g=96.7$ the energy is found to be $E_1=44.04$ and the
495: associated profile function
496: $f$ is plotted as the solid curve in Figure~\ref{fig-f}.
497: The spherically symmetric field $\omega=h_0K_0$ is presented as the
498: solid curve in Figure~\ref{fig-o}.
499:
500: \begin{figure}
501: \begin{center}
502: \includegraphics[width=11cm]{o.ps}
503: \caption{The spherical average $<\omega>$ as a function of the radius $r$,
504: for $B=1,2,3,4.$ The curves shift up and to the right with increasing $B$.
505: }
506: \label{fig-o}
507: \end{center}
508: \end{figure}
509:
510: Next consider the axially symmetric $B=2$ map $R=z^2.$
511: As mentioned earlier, the axially symmetric harmonics are
512: $K_l=Y_{l0}.$ However, the baryon density has an additional symmetry
513: under rotations by $180^\circ$ around an axis orthogonal to
514: the $SO(2)$ symmetry axis, which implies
515: that only symmetric harmonics with even $l$ are needed.
516: A computation of the angular baryon density produces the expansion
517: coefficients
518: \be
519: b=0.564K_0-0.363K_2+0.107K_4-0.026K_6+0.006K_8-0.001K_{10}+\ldots
520: \ee
521:
522: A numerical solution of the profile function equations (for $l\le 10$)
523: results in the energy
524: $E_2=87.44<88.08=2E_1,$ and hence this is a state which is bound
525: against the break-up
526: into two single Skyrmions. Note that the binding energy is quite small,
527: being less than 1\%. However, the rational map ansatz is exact
528: for a single Skyrmion and is only an approximation for multi-Skyrmions,
529: therefore any computation of binding energies which compares to single
530: Skyrmions will be a slight underestimate.
531:
532: The profile function $f(r)$ is displayed in Figure~\ref{fig-f}
533: (the curves shift to the right with increasing $B$).
534: Although the $\omega$ field now has a non-trivial angular dependence,
535: it is useful to plot the spherically averaged value
536: \be
537: <\omega>=\frac{1}{4\pi}\int\omega \sin\theta\,d\theta\,d\phi,
538: \ee
539: which is displayed in Figure~\ref{fig-o}
540: (the curves shift up and to the right with increasing $B$).
541: This reveals that although the $\omega$ field is again large and
542: negative at the origin it takes its most negative value at a positive
543: radius. This is to be expected because the source term for $\omega$ is
544: the baryon density and this has a toroidal distribution.
545: An isosurface plot of $\omega$ is displayed as the top right image
546: in Figure~\ref{fig-all4}, and the toroidal distribution is evident.
547: Although isosurface plots of $\omega$ resemble the associated baryon density
548: surfaces there are some differences, for example, the baryon density
549: vanishes at the origin for $B>1$ whereas, as seen above, the $\omega$
550: field at the origin is substantial.
551:
552: Axially symmetric fields for larger baryon numbers can be studied
553: by applying the same procedure as above to the rational map $R=z^B.$
554: However, it is found that all axially symmetric fields of this type
555: are unbound against the break-up into $B$ single Skyrmions. For example,
556: for $B=3$ the energy is calculated to be
557: $E_3^{{\rm axial}}=138.24>132.12=3E_1.$
558: Of course, since the rational map approximation has been used to
559: compute this energy it is expected
560: that the true energy of the axial $B=3$ field is slightly less than the
561: above value, but the correction is unlikely to be large enough to
562: yield a bound state. This is strong evidence that the $B=3$ Skyrmion
563: is not axially symmetric, in agreement with the usual Skyrme model.
564: As mentioned earlier, with a Skyrme term and no vector mesons
565: the minimal energy Skyrmion with $B=3$ has tetrahedral symmetry
566: and is described by the first rational map in (\ref{maps}).
567: In the following it is shown that
568: in the $\omega$ meson theory a tetrahedral bound state also exists
569: with baryon number three, which suggests that it is the
570: minimal energy $B=3$ Skyrmion.
571:
572: \begin{figure}
573: \begin{center}
574: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{all4.eps}
575: \caption{Isosurfaces of $\omega$ for $B=1,2,3,4$ (to scale).
576: The isosurface values are given by $B=1$, $\omega=-0.44$;\
577: $B=2$, $\omega=-0.40$;\ $B=3$, $\omega=-0.30$;\ $B=4$, $\omega=-0.28.$
578: }
579: \label{fig-all4}
580: \end{center}
581: \end{figure}
582:
583: To study Platonic Skyrmions the symmetric harmonics $K_l$ are
584: required, where $G$ is one of the Platonic symmetry groups.
585: The construction of Platonic harmonics using invariant generating polynomials
586: was introduced by Bethe and collaborators \cite{Be,VB}, and this is
587: briefly reviewed below for the tetrahedral case.
588:
589: The ring of tetrahedrally invariant homogeneous polynomials is generated by
590: three polynomials of degrees two, three and four,
591: \be
592: p_2=x_1^2+x_2^2+x_3^2, \quad\quad
593: p_3=x_1x_2x_3, \quad\quad
594: p_4=x_1^4+x_2^4+x_3^4.
595: \label{genpoly}
596: \ee
597: To obtain a tetrahedral harmonic $K_l,$ the first step is to determine
598: the most general degree $l$ homogeneous polynomial, $k_l$,
599: that can be constructed as a linear combination of products of the
600: polynomials (\ref{genpoly}). The coefficients in the polynomial $k_l$
601: are then fixed (up to an irrelevant overall factor) by requiring that
602: $k_l$ solves Laplace's equation.
603:
604: Note that for $l=2,3,5$ there is only one possible contribution to
605: $k_l,$ namely $p_2,\, p_3$ and $p_2p_3$ respectively. Of these three
606: polynomials only $p_3$ satisfies Laplace's equation, hence there are
607: no tetrahedral harmonics with $l=2$ or $l=5,$ and obviously none with $l=1.$
608:
609: Given the tetrahedrally invariant polynomial $k_l$ then $k_l/r^l$ is
610: a function of only the angular coordinates $\theta,\phi$ and, with
611: a suitable normalization, is the required tetrahedral harmonic $K_l,$
612: which can be decomposed into spherical harmonics $Y_{lm}.$
613: In addition to the above construction, Platonic harmonics may also be
614: determined using a projector technique \cite{Wo}, but in either case the
615: results are
616: \bea
617: & &
618: K_0=Y_{00},\quad
619: K_3=\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}(\bar Y_{32}-Y_{3-2}),\quad
620: K_4=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{5}{6}}\left(
621: Y_{44}+Y_{4-4}+\sqrt{\frac{14}{5}}Y_{40}
622: \right),\quad \nonumber \\
623: & &
624: K_6=\frac{\sqrt{7}}{4}\left(
625: Y_{64}+Y_{6-4}-\sqrt{\frac{2}{7}}Y_{60}
626: \right),\quad
627: K_7=i\frac{\sqrt{33}}{12}\left(
628: \bar Y_{76}-Y_{7-6}+\sqrt{\frac{13}{11}}(\bar Y_{72}-Y_{7-2})
629: \right),\quad \nonumber \\
630: & &
631: K_8=\frac{1}{24}\sqrt{\frac{195}{2}}\left(
632: Y_{88}+Y_{8-8}+2\sqrt{\frac{7}{65}}(Y_{84}+Y_{8-4})
633: +3\sqrt{\frac{22}{65}}Y_{80}
634: \right),\quad \label{tetharm}\\
635: & &
636: K_9=\frac{i}{4}\sqrt{\frac{13}{2}}
637: \left(
638: \bar Y_{96}-Y_{9-6}-\sqrt{\frac{3}{13}}(\bar Y_{92}-Y_{9-2})
639: \right),\quad \nonumber \\
640: & &
641: K_{10}=\frac{\sqrt{561}}{48}\left(
642: Y_{10,8}+Y_{10,-8}+\frac{6}{\sqrt{51}}(Y_{10,4}+Y_{10,-4})
643: -\sqrt{\frac{130}{187}}Y_{10,0}
644: \right).\nonumber
645: \eea
646:
647: Substituting the first rational map in (\ref{maps}) into the
648: angular baryon density (\ref{b}) and expanding in terms of
649: tetrahedral harmonics produces
650: \be
651: b=0.846K_0-0.585K_3-0.070K_4-0.127K_6+0.026K_7
652: +0.002K_8+0.022K_9
653: +0.006K_{10}+\ldots
654: \ee
655: Using the above coefficients
656: the associated profile functions can be computed
657: ($f$ is presented in Figure~\ref{fig-f} and the spherical
658: average $<\omega>$ is plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-o}) and the energy
659: found to be $E_3=126.63<131.48=E_2+E_1,$ and therefore a bound state.
660: A tetrahedrally symmetric $\omega$ isosurface is displayed as the
661: lower left image in Figure~\ref{fig-all4}.
662:
663: Turning attention to $B=4,$ the required rational map is the second map
664: in (\ref{maps}) and has cubic symmetry.
665: The cubically symmetric harmonics are, of course, a subset of those
666: with tetrahedral symmetry. The tetrahedral polynomials $p_2$ and $p_4$
667: in (\ref{genpoly}) are also invariant under the cubic group, but $p_3$
668: is not. However, $p_6\equiv p_3^2$ is invariant under the cubic group,
669: and indeed $p_2,p_4,p_6$ are the generating polynomials. This implies that
670: the required cubic harmonics are the tetrahedral harmonics
671: $K_l$ (\ref{tetharm}) with even $l.$
672:
673: The expansion coefficients of the $B=4$ angular baryon density are given by
674: \be
675: b=1.128K_0-0.601K_4-0.050K_6+0.076K_8+0.009K_{10}+\ldots
676: \ee
677: and the results of computing the profile functions are again displayed
678: in Figure~\ref{fig-f} and Figure~\ref{fig-o}.
679: The energy is calculated to be $E_4=159.67,$ and this confirms that
680: this configuration is bound against the break-up into all possible
681: lower charge clusters. A cubically symmetric $\omega$ isosurface is
682: displayed as the lower right image in Figure~\ref{fig-all4}.
683:
684: The energy results for this coupling, which recall is $g=96.7$,
685: are summarized in the second and third columns of Table~\ref{tab-energy},
686: where the energy is also presented as a ratio to that of a single Skyrmion
687: (this is convenient for the bound state comparison).
688:
689:
690: \begin{table}[ht]
691: \centering
692: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
693: \hline
694: & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$g=96.7$} & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$g=34.7$} \\
695: \hline
696: $B$ & $E_B$ & $E_B/E_1$ & $E_B$ & $E_B/E_1$ & $E_B$ in \rm{MeV}
697: & Experiment \\
698: \hline
699: 1 & 44.04 & 1.000 & 22.53 & 1.000 & 996 & 939\\
700: 2 & 87.44 & 1.985 & 45.20 & 2.006 & 1999 & 1876\\
701: 3 & 126.63 & 2.875 & 65.88 & 2.924 & 2913 & 2809\\
702: 4 & 159.67 & 3.626 & 84.28 & 3.741 & 3727 & 3727\\
703: \hline
704: \end{tabular}
705: \caption{The energy, $E_B,$ of the charge $B$ Skyrmion
706: and the ratio $E_B/E_1,$ of the energy to that of a single Skyrmion,
707: for two different values of the coupling $g.$
708: For the second value of the coupling the energy is also given in \rm{MeV}
709: and the corresponding experimental value is listed for comparison.}
710: \label{tab-energy}
711: \end{table}
712:
713: A range of values for the coupling $g$ have been investigated
714: and the results are qualitatively similar.
715: As discussed earlier, the value $g=96.7$ is
716: taken from \cite{AN2}, which involves fitting properties of the
717: single Skyrmion to the nucleon and delta, whilst treating $F_\pi$
718: as a free parameter. However, it is known that this method of
719: parameter fitting can be problematic, in any Skyrme model, because of
720: difficulties associated with the rigid rotor approximation \cite{BKS}.
721: Access to the properties of multi-Skyrmions allows the following
722: alternative procedure to be applied.
723:
724: All the physical
725: parameters, meson masses $m_\pi,$ $m_\omega,$ and the
726: pion decay constant $F_\pi,$ are set to the experimental values
727: listed earlier, leaving only the single parameter $g$ to be
728: determined. A sensible way to fit this parameter is to match
729: the energy of the $B=4$ Skyrmion to the $\rm{He}^4$ mass, which
730: is 3727\,\rm{MeV}. The reason this is a good approach is that the
731: ground state of $\rm{He}^4$ has zero spin and isospin, therefore there
732: are no issues to address regarding the inclusion of quantum energies
733: associated with spin and isospin. Adopting this approach yields the value
734: $g=34.7$ and the associated Skyrmion energies, plus the
735: experimental masses for comparison, are listed in columns
736: four to seven of Table~\ref{tab-energy}.
737:
738: One point to note is that reducing $g$ leads to a reduction
739: in the relative binding energies.
740: In particular, the data presented in Table~\ref{tab-energy}
741: reveals that for this new value of the coupling $E_2=2E_1\times1.003,$
742: and therefore it appears that the $B=2$ Skyrmion is not a bound state.
743: However, recall that the rational map ansatz is only an approximation
744: for $B>1$ and the true energy is expected to be anything up to
745: the order of a percent lower than the approximate value.
746: As the value of $E_2$ is so close
747: to that of $2E_1$ then this correction is expected to produce a $B=2$
748: bound state, with a small binding energy. In fact, experimentally
749: the deuteron binding energy is around 2\,\rm{MeV}, which is only about
750: 0.1\% of the deuteron mass. Therefore, if a reasonable comparison
751: with experimental data is to be achieved, then even a tiny overestimate
752: of the $B=2$ energy would indeed be expected to result in an apparently
753: unbound state.
754:
755: A comparison of the last two columns in Table~\ref{tab-energy} shows
756: that all the calculated energies are within 7\% of the experimental
757: values, which is very reasonable given that the theory
758: has only a single free parameter $g.$
759: This accuracy is comparable to that in the standard Skyrme model, when
760: the pion decay constant is treated as a free parameter whose value
761: emerges as considerably lower than the experimental one.
762:
763:
764: The Skyrmion energies presented are the classical energies and
765: do not include quantum contributions associated with spin and isospin.
766: These quantum energies are traditionally added via a zero mode
767: quantization involving the calculation of inertia tensors
768: from the classical solution \cite{ANW}. Expressions for the
769: required inertia tensors have been calculated in terms of rational
770: maps and profile functions \cite{Ko,MMW} and therefore the results
771: in this paper could be used to calculate these quantum corrections
772: to the presented classical energies.
773:
774: \section{Conclusion}\news\ \
775: Multi-Skyrmions have been investigated in a theory without a Skyrme term
776: but including the $\omega$ vector meson to provide a scale for the Skyrmion.
777: The approach employed here involved using
778: the rational map ansatz and therefore an obvious
779: avenue for future research is to perform full field simulations of this
780: theory, to test the accuracy of the approximations used.
781: In particular, in the standard Skyrme model it is known that
782: for baryon numbers above seven, there is an important qualitative
783: difference between multi-Skyrmions in a theory with massive or
784: massless pions \cite{BS10,BMS}. It would be of interest to know
785: if a similar result holds for the theory with vector mesons
786: and no Skyrme term.
787:
788: Extending the current analysis to a theory including other vector mesons,
789: starting with the $\rho$ meson along the lines of \cite{MZ}, is clearly
790: of importance. Furthermore, the emergence of a Skyrme model with
791: vector mesons from AdS/QCD \cite{SS} suggests that a Skyrme term
792: should also be included, even if it is not required to provide a
793: scale for the Skyrmion. The results presented in this paper suggest
794: that the vector meson and Skyrme term theories have very similar properties,
795: and therefore one might expect that a theory which includes both
796: contributions will also have similar universal features.
797:
798: \section*{Acknowledgements}
799: Many thanks to Wojtek Zakrzewski for useful discussions.
800: I thank the STFC for support under the rolling grant ST/G000433/1.
801:
802: \begin{thebibliography}{100}
803:
804: \bibitem{Wi} E. Witten,
805: \textit{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{B223}, 422 (1983);
806: {\it ibid} \textbf{B223}, 433 (1983).
807:
808: \bibitem{Sk} T.~H.~R. Skyrme,
809: \textit{Proc. R. Soc. Lond.} \textbf{A260}, 127 (1961).
810:
811: \bibitem{De} G.~H. Derrick,
812: \textit{J. Math. Phys.} \textbf{5}, 1252 (1964).
813:
814: \bibitem{CB} W.~Y. Crutchfield and J.~B. Bell,
815: \textit{J. Comp. Phys.} \textbf{110}, 234 (1994).
816:
817: \bibitem{AN2} G.~S. Adkins and C.~R. Nappi,
818: \textit{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{B137}, 251 (1984).
819:
820: \bibitem{MZ} U.~G. Meissner and I. Zahed,
821: \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{56}, 1035 (1986).
822:
823: \bibitem{BKY} M. Bando, T. Kugo and K. Yamawaki,
824: \textit{Phys. Reports} \textbf{164}, 217 (1988).
825:
826: \bibitem{HY} M. Harada and K. Yamawaki,
827: \textit{Phys. Reports} \textbf{381}, 1 (2003).
828:
829: \bibitem{PRV} B.-Y. Park, M. Rho and V. Vento,
830: \textit{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{A736}, 129 (2004).
831:
832: \bibitem{PRV2} B.-Y. Park, M. Rho and V. Vento,
833: \textit{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{A807}, 28 (2008).
834:
835: \bibitem{book} N.~S. Manton and P.~M. Sutcliffe,
836: {\em Topological Solitons}, Cambridge University Press (2004).
837:
838: \bibitem{HMS} C.~J. Houghton, N.~S. Manton and P.~M. Sutcliffe,
839: \textit{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{B510}, 507 (1998).
840:
841: \bibitem{SS} T. Sakai and S. Sugimoto,
842: \textit{Prog. Theor. Phys.} \textbf{113}, 843 (2005).
843:
844: \bibitem{BS3} R.~A. Battye and P.~M. Sutcliffe,
845: \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{79}, 363 (1997);
846: \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{86}, 3989 (2001);
847: \textit{Rev. Math. Phys.} \textbf{14}, 29 (2002).
848:
849: \bibitem{KS} V.~B. Kopeliovich and B.~E. Stern,
850: \textit{JETP Lett.} \textbf{45}, 203 (1987).
851:
852: \bibitem{Ma3} N.~S. Manton,
853: \textit{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{B192}, 177 (1987).
854:
855: \bibitem{Ve} J.~J.~M. Verbaarschot,
856: \textit{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{B195}, 235 (1987).
857:
858: \bibitem{BTC} E. Braaten, S. Townsend and L. Carson,
859: \textit{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{B235}, 147 (1990).
860:
861: \bibitem{FS} D. Foster and P.~M. Sutcliffe,
862: {\em Baby Skyrmions stabilized by vector mesons}, arXiv:0901.3622
863: (2009).
864:
865: \bibitem{Be} H. Bethe,
866: \textit{Ann. d. Physik.} \textbf{395}, 133 (1929).
867:
868: \bibitem{VB} F.~C. Von der Lage and H.~A. Bethe,
869: \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{71}, 612 (1947).
870:
871: \bibitem{Wo} P.~E.~S. Wormer,
872: \textit{Mol. Phys.} \textbf{99}, 1973 (2001).
873:
874: \bibitem{BKS} R.~A. Battye, S. Krusch and P.~M. Sutcliffe,
875: \textit{Phys. Lett. } \textbf{B626}, 120 (2005).
876:
877: \bibitem{ANW} G.~S. Adkins, C.~R. Nappi and E. Witten,
878: \textit{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{B228}, 552 (1983).
879:
880: \bibitem{Ko} V.~B. Kopeliovich,
881: \textit{J. Exp. Theor. Phys.} \textbf{93}, 435 (2001).
882:
883: \bibitem{MMW} O.~V. Manko, N.~S. Manton and S.~W. Wood,
884: \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{C76}, 055203 (2007).
885:
886: \bibitem{BS10} R.~A. Battye and P.~M. Sutcliffe,
887: \textit{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{B705}, 384 (2005);
888: \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{C73}, 055205 (2006).
889:
890: \bibitem{BMS} R.~A. Battye, N.~S. Manton and P.~M. Sutcliffe,
891: \textit{Proc. Roy. Soc.} \textbf{A463}, 261 (2007).
892:
893: \end{thebibliography}
894:
895: \end{document}
896:
897: \end{document}