1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

2: \usepackage{amsmath,amsthm,amscd,amssymb}

3: \usepackage{latexsym}

4: %\usepackage{showkeys}

5: \theoremstyle{plain}

6: \usepackage{epsf}

7: \usepackage{epsfig}

8: \arraycolsep3.0pt

9: %definition for column separation in some matrices

10: \newlength{\mycolspace}

11: \setlength{\mycolspace}{.075in}

12: \newcommand{\mcs}{\hspace{\mycolspace}}

13: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}

14: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}

15: \newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}

16: \newtheorem{proposition}{Proposition}

17: \newtheorem{conjecture}{Conjecture}

18: 

19: \theoremstyle{definition}

20: \newtheorem{definition}{Definition}

21: \newtheorem{condition}{Condition}

22: \newtheorem{problem}{Problem}

23: \newtheorem{example}{Example}

24: 

25: \theoremstyle{remark}

26: \newtheorem{remark}{Remark}

27: \newtheorem{note}{Note}

28: \newtheorem{notation}{Notation}

29: \newtheorem{claim}{Claim}

30: \newtheorem{summary}{Summary}

31: \newtheorem{acknowledgment}{Acknowledgment}

32: \newtheorem{case}{Case}

33: \newtheorem{conclusion}{Conclusion}

34: \newcommand{\abs}[1]{|#1|}

35: \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\|#1\|}

36: \newcommand{\calA}{{\cal{A}}}

37: \newcommand{\calB}{{\cal{B}}}

38: \newcommand{\calC}{{\cal{C}}}

39: \newcommand{\calD}{{\cal{D}}}

40: \newcommand{\calE}{{\cal{E}}}

41: \newcommand{\calF}{{\cal{F}}}

42: \newcommand{\calG}{{\cal{G}}}

43: \newcommand{\calH}{{\cal{H}}}

44: \newcommand{\calI}{{\cal{I}}}

45: \newcommand{\calK}{{\cal{K}}}

46: \newcommand{\calL}{{\cal{L}}}

47: \newcommand{\calM}{{\cal{M}}}

48: \newcommand{\calN}{{\cal{N}}}

49: \newcommand{\calO}{{\cal{O}}}

50: \newcommand{\calP}{{\cal{P}}}

51: \newcommand{\calQ}{{\cal{Q}}}

52: \newcommand{\calR}{{\cal{R}}}

53: \newcommand{\calS}{{\cal{S}}}

54: \newcommand{\calT}{{\cal{T}}}

55: \newcommand{\calU}{{\cal{U}}}

56: \newcommand{\calV}{{\cal{V}}}

57: \newcommand{\calZ}{{\cal{Z}}}

58: \newcommand{\vp}{{\varphi_0}}

59: \newcommand{\bbR}{{\mathbb{R}}}

60: \newcommand{\bbC}{{\mathbb{C}}}

61: \def\re{\mathop{\rm Re}}

62: 

63: 

64: 

65: \begin{document}

66: \title{Acceleration-induced nonlocality: kinetic memory versus dynamic memory}

67: \author{C. Chicone\\Department of Mathematics\\University of 

68: Missouri-Columbia\\Columbia, Missouri 65211, USA 

69: \and B. Mashhoon\thanks{Corresponding author. E-mail:

70: mashhoonb@missouri.edu (B. Mashhoon).\newline Phone: (573) 882-6526;\;

71: FAX: (573) 882-4195.} \\Department of Physics and

72: Astronomy\\University of Missouri-Columbia\\Columbia, Missouri 65211, USA}

73: \maketitle

74: \begin{abstract} 

75: The characteristics of the memory of accelerated motion in Min\-kow\-ski 

76: spacetime are discussed within the framework of 

77: the nonlocal theory of accelerated observers. 

78: Two types of memory are distinguished: kinetic 

79: and dynamic. We show that only kinetic memory is acceptable, since 

80: dynamic memory leads to divergences for nonuniform accelerated motion.

81: \end{abstract}

82: \noindent PACS numbers: 03.30.+p, 11.10.Lm; Keywords: relativity, nonlocality

83: \section{Introduction}

84: 

85: The special theory of relativity is based on two basic postulates: 

86: Lorentz invariance and the hypothesis of locality. Lorentz invariance 

87: refers to a fundamental

88: symmetry principle, namely, the invariance of basic physical laws 

89: under inhomogeneous Lorentz transformations. In practice these laws 

90: of nature involve physical

91: quantities measured by inertial observers in Minkowski spacetime.

92: An inertial observer always moves uniformly and refers

93: its observations to the fixed spatial axes

94: of an inertial frame; it can be depicted by a straight line in the Minkowski 

95: diagram and represents an

96: ideal; in fact, physical observers are all effectively accelerated. 

97: For instance, one can imagine the influence of radiation pressure on 

98: the path of a cosmic particle.

99: In general, the acceleration of an observer consists of the translational 

100: acceleration of its path as well as the rotation of its spatial frame.

101: Observers with translational acceleration 

102: are therefore 

103: represented by curved lines in the Minkowski diagram.

104: As an example of a rotating observer, consider a uniformly moving

105: observer that refers its observations to spatial axes that rotate with 

106: respect to the spatial frame of the underlying inertial coordinate system. 

107: The hypothesis of locality refers to the

108: measurements of realistic (i.e. accelerated) observers: such an 

109: observer is postulated to be equivalent, at each event along its 

110: worldline, to a momentarily comoving

111: inertial observer. The origin of this assumption can be traced back 

112: to the work of Lorentz in the context of his classical electron 

113: theory~\cite{1}; later, it was

114: simply adopted as a general rule in relativity theory~\cite{2}.

115: 

116: Along its worldline, the accelerated observer passes through a 

117: continuous infinity of hypothetical momentarily comoving inertial 

118: observers. Stated mathematically, the translationally accelerated 

119: observer's curved worldline

120: is the \emph{envelope} of the straight worldlines of this class 

121: of hypothetical inertial observers. Therefore, the

122: hypothesis of locality has two components: (i) the assumption that 

123: the measurements of the accelerated observer must be somehow 

124: connected to the measurements of

125: the hypothetical class of momentarily comoving inertial observers 

126: along its worldline and (ii) that this connection is 

127: postulated to be the pointwise

128: equivalence of the accelerated observer and the momentarily comoving 

129: inertial observer. The latter means that the acceleration of the 

130: observer does not {\it

131: directly} affect the result of its measurement; devices that obey 

132: this rule are called ``standard". Thus the hypothesis of locality is 

133: a simple generalization of

134: the assumption that the rods and clocks of special relativity theory 

135: are not directly affected by acceleration

136: \cite{2}.

137: 

138: What is the physical basis for the hypothesis of locality? It is 

139: difficult to argue with part (i) of this hypothesis, since the 

140: fundamental laws of

141: (nongravitational) physics have been formulated with respect to 

142: inertial observers and hence the measurements of accelerated 

143: observers should be in some way

144: related to those of inertial observers. 

145: On the other hand, part (ii) can only 

146: be valid if the measurement process occurs instantaneously and

147: in a pointwise manner. 

148: That is, (ii) is appropriate

149: for phenomena involving coincidences of classical point particles

150: and null rays. 

151: Classical waves, 

152: on the other hand, are extended in time and space with a 

153: characteristic wave period $T$ and a

154: corresponding wavelength $\lambda$, respectively. Imagine, for 

155: example, the measurement of the frequency of an incident 

156: electromagnetic wave by an accelerated

157: observer; at least a few periods of the wave must be received by the 

158: observer before an adequate determination of the frequency would 

159: become possible. Thus this measurement

160: process  is nonlocal and extends over the worldline of the observer. 

161: The observer's acceleration can be characterized by certain 

162: {\it acceleration lengths} $L$ given by

163: $c^2/g$ and $c/\Omega$ for translational acceleration $g$ and 

164: rotational frequency $\Omega$, respectively.

165: The nonlocality of the external radiation is thus expected to couple

166: with the intrinsic scales associated with the acceleration of the observer.

167: 

168: Classical wave phenomena are expected to violate the hypothesis of 

169: locality. The scale of such violation would be given by $\lambda 

170: /L=T/(L/c)$, where $L/c$ is the

171: {\it acceleration time}. The hypothesis of locality will hold if 

172: $\lambda$ is so small that the incident radiation behaves like a ray, 

173: i.e. in the eikonal (or JWKB)

174: limit such that

175: $\lambda /L\to 0$; alternatively, $L$ can be so large that 

176: deviations of the form $\lambda /L$ would be below the sensitivity 

177: threshold of the detectors available

178: at present. Consider, e.g., laboratory experiments on the Earth; 

179: typical acceleration lengths would be $c^2/g_\oplus \simeq 1\,{\rm lyr}$ and 

180: $c/\Omega _\oplus \simeq 28\, {\rm AU}$, 

181: so that for essentially all practical purposes one can ignore 

182: any possible deviations from locality at the present time. In this 

183: way, we can account for the

184: fact that the standard theory of relativity is in agreement with all 

185: observational data available at present. As a matter of principle, 

186: however, it is necessary to

187: contemplate generalizations of the hypothesis of locality in order to 

188: take due account of intrinsic wave phenomena for realistic 

189: (accelerated) observers.

190: 

191: All of our considerations in this paper are within the framework of 

192: classical field theory; nevertheless, it is necessary to remark that 

193: quantum theory is based on

194: the notion of wave-particle duality, and so an adequate treatment of 

195: classical wave phenomena is a necessary prelude to a satisfactory 

196: quantum theory.

197: 

198: To proceed, we consider the most general extension of the hypothesis 

199: of locality that is consistent with causality and the superposition 

200: principle. A nonlocal Lorentz-invariant

201: theory of accelerated observers has been developed along these

202: lines~\cite{3,3a, 3b,3c}

203: and is presented in Section~2. The theory involves a kernel 

204: that depends primarily on the

205: acceleration of the observer; that is, the measurements of the 

206: observer depend on its past history of acceleration. 

207: The main physical principle that is employed in the nonlocal theory

208: for the determination of the kernel is the assumption that 

209: an intrinsic radiation field can never stand completely still with

210: respect to an accelerated observer;

211: this statement involves a simple generalization of a property of inertial

212: observers to all observers.

213: Thus the 

214: accelerated observer is endowed with

215: {\it memory}, and the past affects the present through an averaging 

216: process, where the weight function is proportional to the kernel 

217: $K(\tau ,\tau')$. It turns out

218: that the kernel $K$ cannot be completely determined by the theory 

219: presented in Section~2. An additional simplifying assumption is 

220: therefore introduced in Section~3: 

221: $K(\tau ,\tau ')$ must be a function of a single variable. Two 

222: cases are then considered:

223: (1)  $K(\tau ,\tau ')=k_0(\tau ')$ 

224: and

225: (2) $K(\tau ,\tau ')=k(\tau-\tau').$ 

226: We show that case~(1)---i.e. the 

227: \emph{kinetic} memory case---has acceptable

228: properties that are described in Section 3. Case~(2), i.e. 

229: the \emph{dynamic} memory case, is treated in detail in Sections 3 

230: and 4, where it is shown that the kernel function $k$ can be unbounded

231: even if the observer's past history has constant velocity except

232: for one episode of smooth translational acceleration  with finite duration. 

233: Specifically, we study the measurement of electromagnetic 

234: radiation fields by an 

235: observer that undergoes translational or rotational acceleration 

236: that lasts for only a finite interval of its proper time.

237: After the acceleration is turned off,

238: the observer  measures in addition to the regular field 

239: a residual field that contains the

240: memory of its past acceleration. This leftover piece is a finite 

241: \emph{constant} field (\emph{kinetic} memory) in case (1); however,

242: it is time dependent (\emph{dynamic} memory) in case (2). 

243: We rule out the latter case, since we prove that the measured field could

244: diverge under certain reasonable circumstances. We are thus left

245: with a unique theory that involves kinetic memory. 

246: An important aspect of our nonlocal ansatz is that the kernel

247: induced by the acceleration of the observer

248: depends on the spin of the radiation field under consideration. 

249: In particular, the kernel vanishes for an intrinsic scalar field,

250: i.e. such a field is always \emph{local}.

251: As discussed in Section~5,

252: our theory therefore rules out the possibility that a pure

253: scalar (or pseudoscalar) field  exists in nature. 

254: This conclusion is in agreement with available

255: experimental data.

256: The nonlocal theory therefore predicts that any scalar particle would

257: have to be a composite.

258: Section 5 contains a  brief discussion and our 

259: conclusions. 

260: A detailed discussion of the observational consequences of the nonlocal 

261: theory is beyond the scope of this work.

262: In the following, we use units such that

263: $c=1$, i.e. the speed of light in vacuum is unity.

264: 

265: \section{Accelerated observers and nonlocality}

266: 

267: 

268: The measurement of length by accelerated observers involves subtle 

269: issues in relativity theory that have been investigated in detail 

270: \cite{4,4a,4b}; for our present

271: purpose, the main result of such studies is that an accelerated frame 

272: of reference, i.e. an extended coordinate system set up in the 

273: neighborhood of an accelerated

274: observer, is of rather limited theoretical significance. We shall 

275: therefore refer all measurements to an inertial reference frame in 

276: Minkowski spacetime.

277: 

278: Imagine a global inertial frame with coordinates $x=(t,\mathbf{ x})$ 

279: and the standard class of static inertial observers with their 

280: orthonormal tetrad frame

281: $\lambda^\mu_{(\alpha)}=\delta ^\mu _\alpha$, where $\lambda^\mu 

282: _{(0)}$ is the temporal direction at each event and $\lambda^\mu 

283: _{(i)}$, $i=1,2,3$, are the spatial

284: directions. The hypothesis of locality implies that an accelerated 

285: observer is also endowed with a tetrad frame 

286: $\hat{\lambda}^\mu_{(\alpha)}(\tau )$, where $\tau

287: $ is the proper time along its worldline. For each $\tau$, 

288: $\hat{\lambda}^\mu_{(\alpha)}(\tau)$ coincides with the constant 

289: tetrad frame (related to $\lambda^\mu

290: _{(\alpha)}$ by a Lorentz transformation) of the momentarily comoving 

291: inertial observer. We note that 

292: $

293: d\hat{\lambda}^\mu_{(\alpha)}/d\tau 

294: =\phi_\alpha ^{\hspace{0.075in}\beta}\hat{\lambda}^\mu _{(\beta)}

295: $, 

296: where $\phi_{\alpha 

297: \beta}=-\phi_{\beta \alpha}$ is a tensor such that 

298: $\phi_{0 i}=(\mathbf{g})_i$ and

299: $\phi_{ij}=\epsilon_{ijk}($\boldmath$\Omega$\unboldmath$)_k$. Here 

300: $\mathbf{g}(\tau )$ is the translational acceleration of the observer 

301: and

302: \boldmath$\Omega$\unboldmath$(\tau )$ is the rotational frequency of 

303: its spatial frame. 

304: Each element of the acceleration tensor $\phi_{\alpha\beta}$

305: is a scalar under the inhomogeneous Lorentz transformations

306: of the background spacetime.

307: We assume throughout that the acceleration is 

308: turned on at $\tau =\tau_0$

309: and will in general be turned off at $\tau_1>\tau_0$.

310: 

311: Let $f_{\mu \nu}$ represent an electromagnetic radiation field as 

312: measured by the standard set of static inertial observers. According 

313: to the hypothesis of

314: locality $\hat{f}_{\alpha \beta}=f_{\mu \nu}\hat{\lambda 

315: }^\mu_{(\alpha)}\hat{\lambda}^\nu _{(\beta)}$, i.e. the projection of 

316: the field on the instantaneous

317: tetrad frame, would be the field  measured by the 

318: accelerated observer. On the other hand, let $F_{\alpha \beta }(\tau 

319: )$ be the true result of such a

320: measurement. Taking causality into account, the most general linear 

321: relationship between $F_{\alpha \beta}(\tau )$ and $\hat{f}_{\alpha 

322: \beta}(\tau )$ is

323: \begin{equation}\label{eq1} 

324: F_{\alpha \beta}(\tau )

325: =\hat{f}_{\alpha \beta}(\tau )

326: +\int^\tau_{\tau_0}K_{\alpha \beta \gamma\delta }(\tau ,\tau ')

327: \hat{f}^{\gamma\delta}(\tau')\, d\tau '.

328: \end{equation}

329: This relation refers to quantities that are all scalars under

330: the Poincar\'e group of spacetime transformations of the underlying

331: inertial coordinate system.

332: We note that the magnitude of the nonlocal part of equation 

333: \eqref{eq1} is of the form $\lambda /L$ if the kernel is proportional 

334: to the acceleration of the

335: observer. It follows from Volterra's theorem that in the space of 

336: continuous functions the relationship between $F$ and $f$ is 

337: unique~\cite{5,5a}; 

338: this theorem has been

339: extended to the Hilbert space of square-integrable functions 

340: by Tricomi~\cite{5b}.

341: 

342: The basic ansatz~\eqref{eq1} is consistent with an observation originally

343: put forward by Bohr and Rosenfeld that the electromagnetic field cannot

344: be measured at a spacetime \emph{point}; in fact, an averaging process

345: is necessary over a spacetime neighborhood~\cite{br,bra}. In the case of

346: measurements by \emph{inertial} observers envisaged by 

347: Bohr and Rosenfeld~\cite{br,bra}, there is no intrinsic temporal or 

348: spatial scale

349: associated with the inertial observers; 

350: therefore, one can effectively pass to the

351: limiting case of a point with no difficulty as

352: the dimensions of the spacetime neighborhood can be shrunk to zero

353: without any obstruction. For an accelerated observer, however, the

354: intrinsic acceleration time and length need to be properly taken into

355: account. Hence the nonlocal ansatz~\eqref{eq1} may be interpreted in

356: terms of a certain averaging process over the past worldline of the 

357: accelerated observer.

358: 

359: To determine the kernel $K$, let us first mention a basic consequence 

360: of the hypothesis of locality for a radiation field. Imagine plane 

361: monochromatic

362: electromagnetic waves of frequency $\omega$ propagating along the 

363: $z$-axis and an observer rotating uniformly about this axis with 

364: frequency $\Omega_0$ in the

365: $(x,y)$-plane on a circle of radius $\rho$ in the underlying

366: inertial reference frame. We find from 

367: $\hat{f}_{\alpha \beta}=f_{\mu \nu}\hat{\lambda}^\mu_{(\alpha 

368: )}\hat{\lambda}^\nu _{(\beta)}$ that

369: according to the rotating observer the frequency of the wave is 

370: $\hat{\omega}=\gamma (\omega \mp \Omega_0)$, where $\gamma$ is the 

371: Lorentz factor corresponding to

372: the speed $\rho \Omega_0$ of the observer and the upper (lower) sign 

373: refers to incident positive (negative) helicity radiation. This result 

374: has a simple intuitive

375: interpretation: In an incident positive (negative) helicity wave the 

376: electric and magnetic field vectors rotate with frequency $\omega 

377: (-\omega)$ about the

378: direction of propagation of the wave. As seen by the rotating 

379: observer, the field vectors rotate with frequency 

380: $\omega-\Omega_0\,(-\omega-\Omega_0)$ with respect to 

381: the inertial temporal coordinate $t$; moreover, the Lorentz

382: factor simply accounts for time dilation $dt=\gamma d\tau$. It 

383: follows that a positive helicity incident wave can stand completely 

384: still with respect to all observers rotating uniformly

385: with frequency $\Omega_0=\omega$. In terms of energy, we 

386: have 

387: $\hat{E}=\gamma(E-$\boldmath$\sigma$\unboldmath$\cdot$

388: \boldmath$\Omega$\unboldmath$_0)$, 

389: where

390: \boldmath$\sigma$\unboldmath\;  is the spin of the incident photon. More 

391: generally, for oblique incidence $\hat{E}=\gamma (E- \hbar 

392: M\Omega_0)$, where $M$ is the

393: multipole parameter such that $\hbar M$ is the component of the total 

394: (orbital plus spin) angular momentum along the $z$-axis. 

395: This is an example of the 

396: general phenomenon of

397: spin-rotation coupling; various aspects of this effect and the 

398: available observational evidence are discussed in~\cite{6,6a,6b,6c,6d,6e}. 

399: Again, 

400: the incident wave can

401: theoretically stand completely still for all observers rotating with 

402: frequency $\Omega_0$ such that $\omega =M\Omega_0$. Let us recall 

403: here a fundamental

404: consequence of Lorentz invariance, namely that a radiation field can 

405: never stand completely still with respect to an inertial observer. 

406: That is, an inertial observer can

407: move along the direction of propagation of a wave so fast that the 

408: frequency $\hat{\omega}=\gamma \omega (1-\beta)$ can approach zero 

409: but the mathematical limit of

410: $\hat{\omega}=0$ is never physically achieved, since the observer's 

411: speed cannot reach the speed of light in vacuum $(\beta <1)$. 

412: Therefore, for an inertial observer $\hat{\omega}=0$

413: implies that $\omega=0$. On the other hand, while we find that the 

414: hypothesis of locality predicts that a circularly polarized wave can 

415: stand completely still with

416: respect to a uniformly rotating observer, this possibility 

417: can be avoided in the nonlocal theory by an appropriate choice of the 

418: kernel.

419: 

420: To implement the requirement that a radiation field can never stand 

421: completely still with respect to any observer, we assume that if 

422: $F_{\alpha \beta}(\tau )$

423: turns out to be constant in equation~\eqref{eq1}, then $f_{\mu \nu}$ 

424: must have been  originally constant just as in the case of

425: inertial observers in the standard theory of relativity. 

426: It is convenient to replace the tensor 

427: $f_{\mu \nu}$ by a six-vector

428: $f$, with electric and magnetic fields as components, and introduce 

429: the ``Lorentz'' matrix $\Lambda $ such that $\hat{f}=\Lambda f$. Then for 

430: constant fields $f$ and $F$,

431: equation~\eqref{eq1} takes the form

432: \begin{equation}\label{eq2} F=\Lambda(\tau) f+\int^\tau_{\tau_0}K(\tau 

433: ,\tau ')\Lambda (\tau')f\,d\tau',\end{equation}

434: where for $\tau=\tau_0$, the matrix 

435: $\Lambda_0:=\Lambda(\tau_0)$ is constant and

436: $F=\Lambda_0 f$. Thus in the nonlocal 

437: theory the kernel $K$ should be determined from the Volterra integral 

438: equation

439: \begin{equation}\label{eq3} \Lambda_0=\Lambda (\tau 

440: )+\int^\tau _{\tau_0}K(\tau ,\tau')\Lambda (\tau ')\,d\tau'.

441: \end{equation}

442: It follows from Volterra's theory (see Appendix A) that to every 

443: kernel $K$ corresponds a unique {\it resolvent} kernel $R(\tau 

444: ,\tau')$ such that

445: \begin{equation}\label{eq4} \Lambda (\tau )=\Lambda_0

446: +\int^\tau_{\tau_0}R(\tau ,\tau')\Lambda_0\,d\tau 

447: '.\end{equation}

448: Therefore, only the integral of the resolvent kernel is 

449: completely determined by our physical requirement

450: \begin{equation}\label{eq5} 

451: \int^\tau_{\tau_0} R(\tau ,\tau')\,d\tau '

452: =\Lambda (\tau )\Lambda_0^{-1}-I,\end{equation}

453: where $I$ is the unit matrix. It is clear at this point that given 

454: $\Lambda (\tau )$, relations \eqref{eq3}--\eqref{eq5} are not 

455: sufficient to determine the kernel

456: $K$ uniquely. To proceed further, other simplifying 

457: restrictions are necessary on $K$ or $R$,

458: \begin{equation}\label{eq6} \hat{f}(\tau )

459: =F(\tau)+\int^\tau_{\tau_0}R(\tau ,\tau')F(\tau ')\,d\tau '.

460: \end{equation}

461: This must be done in such a way as to preserve time translation 

462: invariance in the underlying inertial coordinate system.

463: 

464: Let us finally remark that for a scalar field, $\Lambda (\tau )=1$ and 

465: equations \eqref{eq3}--\eqref{eq5} simply reduce to the requirement 

466: that $K(\tau ,\tau')$ must

467: have a vanishing integral over $\tau':\tau_0\to \tau$. That is, the 

468: connection between the kernel and the acceleration of the observer 

469: disappears. This

470: circumstance is further discussed in Section 5.

471: 

472: \section{Memory}

473: 

474: It is necessary to introduce  simplifying assumptions in order to 

475: find a unique kernel $K$. We therefore tentatively postulate that $K$ 

476: is a function of a single

477: variable. There are two reasonable possibilities:

478: \begin{align*} \tag{case 1} K(\tau ,\tau')=k_0(\tau ')\\

479: \intertext{and}

480: \tag{case 2} K(\tau ,\tau')=k(\tau -\tau');

481: \end{align*}

482: in either case, the basic requirement of time translation invariance 

483: in the background global inertial frame is satisfied.

484: \subsection{Kinetic memory}

485: In case~(1), the kernel $k_0$ corresponds to a simple weight 

486: function that can be determined by differentiating 

487: equation~\eqref{eq3},

488: \begin{equation}\label{eq7} k_0(\tau 

489: )=-\frac{d\Lambda}{d\tau}\Lambda^{-1}(\tau )=\Lambda (\tau 

490: )\frac{d\Lambda^{-1}}{d\tau }.\end{equation}

491: The kernel $k_0$ is thus directly proportional to the acceleration of 

492: the observer. A significant feature of this kernel is that once the 

493: acceleration is turned

494: off at $\tau =\tau_1$, then for $\tau >\tau_1$,

495: \begin{equation}\label{eq8} F(\tau )=\hat{f}(\tau 

496: )+\int^{\tau_1}_{\tau _0}k_0(\tau ')\hat{f}(\tau ')\,d\tau'.

497: \end{equation}

498: There is therefore a {\it constant} memory of past acceleration and 

499: the field $F$ satisfies the standard field equations in the inertial 

500: frame. That is, the field

501: equations are linear differential equations and the addition of a 

502: constant solution is always permissible but subject to boundary 

503: conditions. In terms of actual

504: laboratory devices that have experienced accelerations in the past, 

505: such constant fields as in equation~\eqref{eq8} would be canceled 

506: once the devices are reset.

507: Thus case~(1) involves simple ``nonpersistent'' memory of past 

508: acceleration; therefore, we call $k_0$ the {\it kinetic memory} 

509: kernel. 

510: 

511: It is interesting to note that our basic integral 

512: equation~\eqref{eq2} together with the kinetic memory kernel~\eqref{eq7}

513: and an integration by parts takes the form 

514: \[

515: F(\tau)=F(\tau_0)+\int_{[\tau_0,\tau]} \Lambda df,

516: \]

517: so that $dF=\Lambda df$ along the worldline of the accelerated observer.

518: \subsection{Dynamic memory}

519: The second case involves a convolution type kernel 

520: $K=k(\tau -\tau ')$. It follows 

521: (see Appendix A) that in this case the resolvent 

522: kernel is of convolution type

523: as well, $R=r(\tau -\tau')$. Thus equation~\eqref{eq5} can be 

524: written, after expressing the left side as the area under the 

525: graph of the function $r$ from the origin to

526: $\tau-\tau_0=t$, as

527: \begin{equation}

528: \label{eq9}r(t)=\frac{d\Lambda 

529: (t+\tau_0)}{dt}\Lambda_0^{-1}.

530: \end{equation}

531: The kernel $k$ is then given by (cf. Appendix A)

532: \begin{equation}\label{eq10} k(t)=-r (t)+r\ast r(t)-r\ast r\ast 

533: r(t)+\cdots ,\end{equation}

534: where a star denotes the convolution operation. We note that in this 

535: case the {\it resolvent} kernel is directly proportional to 

536: acceleration, so that $r=0$ and,

537: by equation~\eqref{eq10}, $k=0$ for $t<0$ or $\tau <\tau_0$, i.e. 

538: before the acceleration is turned on. However, the character of 

539: memory that is indicated by $k$,

540: \begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq11} F(\tau )&=\hat{f}(\tau 

541: )+\int^\tau_{\tau_0}k(\tau -\tau ')\hat{f}(\tau ')\,d\tau '\\

542: &=\hat{f}(\tau)+\int^{\tau-\tau_0}_0k(t)\hat{f}(\tau 

543: -t)\,dt,\end{split}\end{equation}

544: is more complicated than in case~(1) 

545: due to the intricate relationship between $r(t)$ 

546: and $k(t)$ in equation~\eqref{eq10}. Even if the acceleration is 

547: turned off at $\tau =\tau_1$,

548: it turns out that $k$ does not vanish in general for $\tau>\tau_1$

549: and could even be divergent; in fact, proving the latter point is the 

550: main purpose of this paper.

551: 

552: Imagine, for instance, that $k(t)$ is finite everywhere and decays 

553: exponentially to zero for $t\to \infty$. Then in 

554: equation~\eqref{eq11}, as $\tau \to \infty$

555: long after the acceleration has been turned off at $\tau =\tau_1$, 

556: the contribution of the nonlocal term in \eqref{eq11} rapidly 

557: approaches a constant and we essentially

558: recover the ``nonpersistent'' kinetic memory familiar from 

559: case~(1). It turns out, however, that in general 

560: case~(2) involves situations with persistent

561: or {\it dynamic} memory such that under certain conditions $k(t)$ 

562: could diverge resulting in an asymptotically divergent $F(\tau )$.

563: 

564: The convolution (Faltung) type kernel is generally employed in many 

565: branches of physics and mathematics. As in equation~\eqref{eq11}, to 

566: produce the nonlocal part

567: of the output $F(\tau )$, an input signal $\hat{f}(\tau-t)$ is 

568: linearly folded, starting from $\tau$ and going backwards in proper 

569: time until $\tau_0$, with a

570: weight function $k(t)$ that is the impulse response of the system. 

571: The use of convolution type kernels is standard practice in 

572: phenomenological treatments of the

573: electrodynamics of media~\cite{7,7a,7b}, feedback control systems~\cite{8}, 

574: etc. We find, however, that for the pure vacuum case the convolution 

575: kernel due to \emph{nonuniform acceleration} 

576: in general leads to instability and is 

577: therefore unacceptable. This proposition is proved in the following 

578: section for the translational and rotational 

579: accelerations of the observer. 

580: 

581: The simplicity of the kinetic memory versus dynamic memory has been

582: particularly stressed by Hehl and Obukhov in their investigations of

583: nonlocal electrodynamics~\cite{ho,hoa}; moreover, their work has led

584: to the question of the ultimate physical significance of the convolution type

585: kernel in the nonlocal theory of accelerated systems~\cite{ho,hoa}. 

586: This question is settled in the present paper in favor of the

587: kinetic memory kernel.

588: \section{Dynamic memory of accelerated motion}

589: \subsection{Linear acceleration}

590: 

591: Imagine an observer at rest on the $z$-axis for $-\infty <\tau 

592: <\tau_0$. At $\tau =\tau _0$, the observer accelerates along the 

593: positive $z$-direction with

594: acceleration $g(\tau )>0$. For $\tau\ge \tau_0$, we set

595: \begin{equation}\label{eq12}

596: \theta (\tau )=\int^\tau_{\tau_0}g(\tau ')\,d\tau ',\end{equation}

597: $C=\cosh \theta$ and $S=\sinh \theta$. The natural nonrotating 

598: orthonormal tetrad frame of the observer along its worldline is given 

599: by

600: \begin{equation}\begin{array}{ll} \hat{\lambda}^\mu_{(0)} = (C,0,0,S), & 

601: \hat{\lambda}^\mu_{(1)}=(0,1,0,0),\\

602: \hat{\lambda}^\mu_{(2)}=(0,0,1,0), & 

603: \hat{\lambda}^\mu_{(3)}=(S,0,0,C).\end{array}\end{equation}

604: In this case $\Lambda (\tau )$ is given by

605: \begin{equation}\label{eq14} \Lambda =\begin{bmatrix} U & V\\-V 

606: &U\end{bmatrix},\quad U=\begin{bmatrix} C & 0 & 0\\ 0 & C & 0\\0 & 0 

607: & 1\end{bmatrix},\quad

608: V=SI_3,\end{equation}

609: where $I_i$, $(I_i)_{jk}=-\epsilon_{ijk}$, is a $3\times 3$ matrix 

610: proportional to the operator of infinitesimal rotations about the 

611: $x^i$-axis. 

612: 

613: Let us first consider case~(1), for which the kernel can be 

614: easily computed using equation~\eqref{eq7},

615: \begin{equation}\label{eq15} k_0(\tau )=-g(\tau )\begin{bmatrix}0 & 

616: I_3\\ -I_3 & 0\end{bmatrix},\end{equation}

617: so that when the acceleration is turned off at $\tau =\tau_1$ the 

618: kernel $k_0$ vanishes with the acceleration for $\tau \geq \tau_1$. 

619: On the other hand, $k_0$ is

620: simply constant for uniform acceleration (i.e. hyperbolic motion) 

621: with $g(\tau )=g_0$ for $\tau \geq \tau_0$. In the rest of this 

622: section, we focus attention on

623: case~(2) involving the convolution kernel.

624: 

625: For the convolution kernel, the resolvent kernel is given, via 

626: equation~\eqref{eq9}, by

627: \begin{equation}\label{eq16} r(\tau -\tau_0)=g(\tau )\begin{bmatrix} 

628: SJ_3 & CI_3\\-CI_3 & SJ_3\end{bmatrix},\end{equation}

629: where $(J_k)_{ij}=\delta_{ij}-\delta_{ik}\delta_{jk}$. In principle, 

630: the convolution kernel can be computed via the substitution of 

631: equation~\eqref{eq16} in

632: equation~\eqref{eq10}; however, this turns out to be  a daunting task in 

633: practice. Imagine, for instance, that the acceleration is turned off 

634: at $\tau=\tau_1$, so

635: that the resolvent kernel \eqref{eq16} has compact support over a 

636: time interval of length $\alpha=\tau_1-\tau_0$ and vanishes 

637: otherwise. It then follows that the

638: $r^{\ast\, n}$ term in the expansion \eqref{eq10} has compact support over 

639: a time interval of length $n\alpha$. The summation of series 

640: \eqref{eq10} turns out to be

641: rather complicated, except for the case of {\it uniform} 

642: acceleration, i.e. $g(\tau )=g_0$ for $\tau \geq \tau_0$, and the 

643: result is

644: \begin{equation}\label{eq17} k=-g_0\begin{bmatrix} 0 & I_3\\ -I_3 & 

645: 0\end{bmatrix}.\end{equation}

646: It is interesting to note that equation \eqref{eq17} is the \emph{same} as 

647: the result of case~(1), equation~\eqref{eq15}, for \emph{uniform}

648: acceleration.

649: 

650: In view of the difficulty of summing the series \eqref{eq10} 

651: directly, we find it advantageous to use Laplace transforms, which we 

652: denote by an overbar, i.e.

653: $\mathcal{L} \{ k(t)\}=\bar{k}(s)$, where

654: \begin{equation}\label{eq18} \bar{k} (s)=\int^\infty_0 

655: e^{-st}k(t)\,dt;\end{equation}

656: then, taking the Laplace transform of equation~\eqref{eq10} and using 

657: the convolution (Faltung) theorem repeatedly, we arrive at

658: \begin{equation}\label{eq19} \bar{k} (s)=[I+\bar{r} (s)]^{-1}-I,\end{equation}

659: which is consistent with the reciprocity between $k$ and $r$.

660: 

661: \subsection{Stepwise acceleration}\label{sec:sa}

662: \begin{figure}[tb]  

663: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig1.eps, width=25pc}}

664: \caption{\label{fig1}

665: The linear acceleration of an observer that undergoes uniform

666: acceleration $g_0$ during a period $\alpha=\tau_1-\tau_2$ of its

667: proper time. If the area under the graph exceeds a critical value given

668: by $\beta_0\approx 1.2931$,

669: then the convolution kernel leads to divergences.}

670: \end{figure}

671: Let us specialize to a simple case of stepwise 

672: uniform acceleration, namely, we let $g(\tau)=g_0$ for $\tau_0\leq 

673: \tau \leq \tau_1$ and zero

674: otherwise (see Figure~\ref{fig1}). In this case,

675: \begin{equation} \label{eq20} \bar{r} (s)=\begin{bmatrix} \bar{r}_1 & 

676: \bar{r}_2\\ -\bar{r}_2 & \bar{r}_1\end{bmatrix},\end{equation}

677: where $\bar{r}_1(s)=q(s)J_3$ and $\bar{r}_2(s)=p(s)I_3$. Here 

678: $p(s)=\mathcal{L}\{gC\}$ and $q(s)=\mathcal{L}\{ gS\}$. All $6\times 

679: 6$ matrices that we consider in

680: this paper have the general form \eqref{eq20}, i.e. each is 

681: completely determined by two $3\times 3$ matrices just as $\bar{r}_1$ 

682: and $\bar{r}_2$ characterize

683: $\bar{r}$ in equation~\eqref{eq20}; we therefore write $\bar{r}\to 

684: [\bar{r}_1;\bar{r}_2]$ to express this decomposition as

685: in equation~\eqref{eq20}. To find the Laplace 

686: transforms of $gC$ and $gS$, we

687: note that in equation~\eqref{eq12}, $\theta=g_0(\tau-\tau_0)$ for 

688: $\tau \leq \tau_1$ and $\theta=\beta_0=g_0(\tau _1-\tau_0)$ for

689: $\tau \geq \tau_1$; therefore,

690: \begin{equation}\label{eq21} p(s)\pm q(s)=\frac{g_0}{s\mp 

691: g_0}[1-e^{-(s\mp g_0)\alpha}],\end{equation}

692: where $\alpha = \tau_1-\tau_0=\beta_0/g_0$ is the acceleration time 

693: interval. Using the results of Appendix B, we find from

694: equation~\eqref{eq19} that $\bar{k}(s)$ 

695: can be expressed as

696: \[\bar{k}(s)\to [\beta_0Q(s)J_3;\beta_0P(s)I_3],\] where

697: \begin{align}\label{eq22} 

698: P(s)&=\frac{e^w}{D}[w(-e^w+\cosh \beta_0)+\beta_0\sinh \beta_0],\\

699: \label{eq23} Q(s) &= \frac{1}{D} [e^w(w\sinh \beta_0-\beta_0\cosh 

700: \beta_0)+\beta_0].

701: \end{align}

702: Here $w:=s\alpha$ and the denominator $D$ can be factorized as

703: \begin{equation}\label{eq24} 

704: D=(we^w-\beta_0e^{\beta_0})(we^w+\beta_0e^{-\beta_0}).

705: \end{equation}

706: 

707: It is useful to recall that the kernel $k\to [k_1;k_2]$ 

708: refers to a system at rest 

709: on the $z$-axis for $\tau \leq \tau_0$ that is uniformly accelerated

710: at $\tau=\tau_0$ 

711: with acceleration $g_0$

712: until $\tau_0+\alpha =\tau_1$, and then continues with uniform speed 

713: $\tanh \beta_0$ along the positive $z$-direction for $\tau \geq 

714: \tau_1$. Under certain

715: conditions, it is possible to obtain series representations for $k_1$ 

716: and $k_2$ (see Appendix C); however, to gain insight into the 

717: asymptotic behavior of $k_1$

718: and $k_2$ it proves more fruitful to proceed with an investigation of 

719: the singularities of $\bar{k}_1(s)=\beta_0 Q(s) J_3$ and 

720: $\bar{k}_2(s)=\beta_0 P(s)I_3$ in the complex 

721: $s$-plane. 

722: This is due to a simple property of the Laplace transformation in 

723: equation~\eqref{eq18} extended to the complex $s$-plane: let us

724: suppose that the convolution kernel $k(t)$ is a bounded function

725: for all $t=\tau-\tau_0>0$ as one naturally expects of a function

726: that represents memory; then, for any $s$ in the complex plane with

727: positive real part, i.e. $\re(s)>0$, equation~\eqref{eq18} implies

728: that the absolute magnitude of $\bar k(s)$ should be finite,

729: i.e. $\bar k(s)$ cannot be singular. Therefore, if we could show that

730: $\bar k(s)$ has in fact pole singularities at complex values of $s$ 

731: with $\re(s)>0$, then it would simply follow that 

732: $k(t)$ cannot be bounded for all $t>0$ and would thus be unsuitable

733: to represent the memory of finite accelerated motion. 

734: 

735: We will prove the following result: If $\beta_0 \exp(\beta_0)> 3\pi/2$,

736: then the corresponding function $k$ is unbounded for $t\ge 0$.

737: It suffices to show that $\bar k$ has a pole in the right half of

738: the complex $s$-plane. In fact, let us suppose that $\bar k$ has a pole

739: at $s=s_0$, where $\re (s_0)>0$,

740: but  $\norm{k}:=\sup_{t\ge 0} \abs{k(t)}<\infty$.  

741: In this case, $\bar k$ has a pole in the half-plane

742: $\calH$ consisting of all complex numbers $s$ such that 

743: $\re(s)\ge \frac{1}{2} \re(s_0)$, and therefore $\abs {\bar k}$ is not

744: bounded on $\calH$. On the other hand, for $s\in \calH$,

745: we have that

746: \[

747: \abs{\bar k(s)}\le \int_0^\infty e^{-\re(s) t}\abs{k(t)}\,dt

748: \le \norm{k}\int_0^\infty e^{-\re(s_0) t/2}\,dt<\infty,

749: \]

750: in contradiction. Thus the rest of this subsection is devoted

751: to the

752: determination of the poles of $\bar k(s)$ in the right half-plane.

753:  

754: 

755: The poles of $\bar k$ are elements of the zero set of $D$ with

756: $w=s \alpha$ and $\alpha>0$. Note, however,

757: that the (real) zeros $w=\pm\beta_0$ are removable singularities. 

758: Poles in the right half-plane are the zeros of $D$ with nonzero

759: imaginary parts. In view of the definition of $D$, let us consider

760: the complex roots in the right half-plane of the 

761: equation $w\exp(w)=b$, 

762: where $b$ is one of the real numbers $\pm\beta_0\exp(\pm \beta_0)$.

763: Because the zero set of this relation is symmetric with respect

764: to the real axis, it suffices to consider only roots in the

765: first quadrant of the complex $w$-plane.

766: 

767: We set $w=\xi+i\eta$, where $\xi\ge 0$  and $\eta\ge 0$ are real variables,

768: and note that $w\exp(w)=b$ if and only if

769: \[

770: \xi e^\xi=b\cos\eta,\qquad \eta e^\xi=-b \sin\eta.

771: \] 

772: If this system of equations has a solution,

773: then,  by squaring, adding and rearranging,

774: we have that  

775: $

776: \eta^2=b^2 \exp(-2\xi)-\xi^2

777: $

778: or, since $\eta\ge 0$, $\eta=\sqrt{b^2 \exp(-2\xi)-\xi^2}$.

779: 

780: 

781: There are several cases. For example, 

782: for $b>0$, there is a pole in the right half-plane

783: if the system of equations

784: \[

785: \eta=\sqrt{b^2 e^{-2\xi}-\xi^2},\qquad \xi e^\xi=b\cos\eta

786: \]

787: has a solution with $\xi>0$ and $\eta\bmod 2\pi\in (3\pi/2,2\pi)$.

788: Similarly, for $b<0$, there is a pole in the right half-plane

789: if the system of equations

790: \[

791: \eta=\sqrt{b^2 e^{-2\xi}-\xi^2},\qquad \xi e^\xi=b\cos\eta

792: \]

793: has a solution with $\xi>0$ and $\eta\bmod 2\pi\in (\pi/2,\pi)$.

794: 

795: A necessary condition for  the relation

796: $\eta=\sqrt{b^2 \exp(-2\xi)-\xi^2}$ to have a solution $(\xi,\eta)$

797: is  that $\xi \exp(\xi)<\abs{b}$. 

798: For  $b<0$, we must have $\xi \exp(\xi)<\beta_0\exp(-\beta_0)$; hence,

799: there is a unique real number $\xi_0$ such that the necessary condition

800: is met whenever $\xi\le \xi_0$. 

801: On the other hand, for $b>0$, the necessary condition,

802: $\xi \exp(\xi)<\beta_0\exp(\beta_0)$, is met if and only if $\xi<\xi_0=\beta_0$. 

803: 

804: Let us view $\eta$ as a function of $\xi$ and note that 

805: $\eta(0)=\abs{b}$, $\eta(\xi_0)=0$, and 

806: \[

807: \eta\frac{d\eta}{d\xi}=-e^{-2\xi}b^2-\xi<0

808: \]

809: for $\xi\ge 0$. In particular, $\eta$ decreases monotonically for

810: $0\le \xi\le \xi_0$.

811: 

812: Consider the relation $\xi \exp(\xi)=b\cos\eta$.

813: At $\xi=0$,  we have $\cos\eta=0$; therefore, the implicitly

814: defined function $\eta$ is such that 

815: $\eta(0)$ is an odd integer multiple of $\pi/2$. 

816: At $\xi_0$, we have $\cos\eta=\pm 1$ according to the sign

817: of $b$. In fact, $\eta(\xi_0)$ is an even multiple of

818: $\pi$ for $b>0$ and an odd multiple of $\pi$ for $b<0$.

819: Also, let us note that

820: \[

821: (\xi+1)e^\xi=-b\frac{d\eta}{d\xi}\sin\eta .

822: \]

823: 

824: \begin{figure}[tb]  

825: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig2.eps, width=25pc}}

826: \caption{\label{fig2}The real branches of $\xi \exp(\xi)=b\cos\eta$

827: for $b>0$.}

828: \end{figure}

829: Suppose that $b>0$. We will determine the positions of the

830: real branches of the curve defined

831: by $\xi \exp(\xi)=b\cos\eta$. For $0\le \eta\le \pi/2$, we have

832: $\sin\eta>0$ and $d\eta/d\xi<0$, so there is a real branch

833: connecting the points $(0,\pi/2)$ and $(\xi_0,0)$ in the 

834: $(\xi,\eta)$-plane. For $\pi/2<\eta< 3\pi/2$, we have

835: $\cos\eta<0$; thus, there is no real branch in this region.

836: There is a real branch connecting $(0,3\pi/2)$ and $(\xi_0,2\pi)$

837: with $d\eta/d\xi>0$. 

838: This pattern continues as depicted in Figure~\ref{fig2}.

839: Note, however, that only the ``increasing'' branches correspond to

840: poles in the right half-plane. Indeed, for $b>0$, it is necessary that 

841: $\eta\bmod 2\pi$ be in the interval $(3\pi/2,2\pi)$. In particular,

842: the ``lowest'' branch corresponding to a pole connects

843: the points $(0,3\pi/2)$ and $(\xi_0,2\pi)$. It is now clear that

844: the curve defined by $\eta=\sqrt{b^2 \exp(-2\xi)-\xi^2}$ intersects

845: an increasing branch with $\xi>0$ if and only if $b>3\pi/2$.

846: The number of poles in the right half-plane increases by one  

847: as $b$ increases past an odd multiple of $\pi/2$.

848: 

849: \begin{figure}[tb]  

850: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig3.eps, width=25pc}}

851: \caption{\label{fig3}The real branches of $\xi \exp(\xi)=b\cos\eta$

852: for $b<0$.}

853: \end{figure}

854: Suppose that $b<0$. In this case, the real branches of 

855: $\xi \exp(\xi)=b\cos\eta$

856: exist only if $\cos\eta<0$ as in Figure~\ref{fig3} and  

857: a corresponding

858: pole in the open right half-plane does not exist unless $\abs{b}>\pi/2$. 

859: Using the definition of $b$, 

860: this condition is equivalent to the requirement

861: that $\beta_0\exp(-\beta_0)>\pi/2$. But, the maximum value

862: of  $\beta_0\exp(-\beta_0)$ is $1/e<\pi/2$. Hence, negative values of

863: $b$ do not correspond to poles in the right half-plane.

864: 

865: We conclude that the dynamic memory kernel $k$ for

866: stepwise uniform linear acceleration is unbounded for 

867: $\beta_0=g_0\alpha>1.3$.

868: 

869: 

870: \subsection{Rotation}

871: \begin{figure}[tb]  

872: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig4.eps, width=25pc}}

873: \caption{\label{fig4} Schematic plot of the motion of the observer

874: that undergoes stepwise uniform rotation of frequency $\Omega_0$ during

875: a period $\alpha=\tau_1-\tau_2$ of its proper time such that 

876: $\vp=\gamma \Omega_0\alpha$. If $\vp$ exceeds $\pi/2$,

877: then the convolution kernel leads to divergences.}

878: \end{figure}

879: Imagine next an observer that is initially moving uniformly with speed $v$ 

880: in the $(x,y)$-plane along a line parallel to the $y$-axis at 

881: $x=\rho_0$. At $t=0$,

882: $x=\rho_0$ and $y=0$, the observer starts rotating on a circle of 

883: radius $\rho_0$ with uniform frequency $\Omega_0=v/\rho_0$ in the 

884: positive sense around the

885: $z$-axis. Though the motion is continuous, there is no acceleration 

886: for $t<0$ and uniform circular acceleration for $t>0$. The natural 

887: orthonormal tetrad frame of

888: the uniformly rotating observer is given by

889: \begin{equation}\begin{split} \hat{\lambda}^\mu_{(0)}&=\gamma 

890: (1,-v\sin \varphi ,v\cos \varphi ,0),\\

891: \hat{\lambda}^\mu _{(1)}&= (0,\cos \varphi ,\sin \varphi ,0),\\

892: \hat{\lambda}^\mu_{(2)}&= \gamma (v,-\sin \varphi ,\cos \varphi ,0),\\

893: \hat{\lambda}^\mu _{(3)}&= (0,0,0,1),\label{eq25}\end{split}\end{equation}

894: where $\gamma =(1-v^2)^{-\frac{1}{2}}$ is the Lorentz factor and 

895: $\varphi =\Omega_0t=\gamma \Omega_0\tau$, so that we have set 

896: $\tau_0=0$ in this case. Computing

897: $\phi_{\alpha \beta}$ for the tetrad frame \eqref{eq25}, we find as 

898: expected that the translational acceleration has only a radial 

899: component

900: $g_1=-v\gamma^2\Omega_0$ and the rotational frequency is along the 

901: $z$-direction with magnitude $\Omega_3=\gamma^2\Omega_0$. Thus 

902: $\hat{f}=\Lambda f$, where

903: $\Lambda \to [\Lambda_1;\Lambda_2]$ is given by

904: \begin{equation}\label{eq26} \Lambda_1 =\begin{bmatrix} \gamma \cos 

905: \varphi & \gamma \sin \varphi & 0\\ -\sin \varphi & \cos \varphi &0\\ 

906: 0 & 0 &\gamma

907: \end{bmatrix},\quad \Lambda_2=v\gamma \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 &1\\ 0 & 

908: 0 & 0\\ -\cos \varphi & -\sin \varphi & 0\end{bmatrix} .\end{equation}

909: 

910: Let us first consider case~(1); the kinetic memory kernel 

911: $k_0$ can be easily computed using the fact that for $\Lambda$

912: given by equation~\eqref{eq26} we have $\Lambda^{-1}\to 

913: [\Lambda^T_1;\Lambda_2^T]$. Then

914: we find that $k_0\to 

915: [$\boldmath$\Omega$\unboldmath$\cdot$\boldmath$I$\unboldmath$;-\mathbf{g}\cdot 

916: \mathbf{I}]$, where

917: \boldmath$\Omega$\unboldmath$=(0,0,\gamma^2\Omega_0)$ and $\mathbf{g} 

918: =(-v\gamma^2\Omega_0,0,0)$ with respect to the orthonormal tetrad 

919: frame \eqref{eq25}. Thus

920: $k_0$ is a constant kernel so long as the observer rotates uniformly; 

921: for instance, if the acceleration is turned off at $\tau_1=\alpha$ 

922: corresponding to

923: $\vp=\gamma \Omega _0\alpha$, then the observer will have 

924: uniform linear motion again with speed $v$ for $\tau >\tau_1$ and the 

925: kernel $k_0$ will vanish (see Figure~\ref{fig4}).

926: 

927: Let us now consider case~(2); the dynamic memory kernel is 

928: given by the series \eqref{eq10} in terms of the resolvent kernel. 

929: This is given by

930: equation~\eqref{eq9}, $r\to [r_1;r_2]$, where

931: \begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq27} r_1&=\gamma 

932: \Omega_0\begin{bmatrix} -\gamma^2 \sin \varphi & \gamma \cos \varphi 

933: &0\\ -\gamma \cos \varphi & -\sin \varphi

934: & 0\\ 0& 0 & v^2\gamma^2\sin \varphi \end{bmatrix},\\ r_2&= 

935: v\gamma^2\Omega_0\begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & \gamma \sin \varphi\\ 0 & 0 

936: & \cos \varphi \\ \gamma \sin

937: \varphi & -\cos

938: \varphi & 0\end{bmatrix}.\end{split}\end{equation}

939: The explicit calculation of $k$ using the series \eqref{eq10} for the 

940: general case of stepwise uniform rotation from $\tau =0$ to 

941: $\tau_1=\alpha$ is rather

942: complicated; however, for $\tau_1\to \infty$ the calculation can be 

943: carried through and the result is a constant kernel given by $k\to

944: [$\boldmath$\Omega$\unboldmath$\cdot \mathbf{I};-\mathbf{g}\cdot 

945: \mathbf{I}]$. Just as in the case of uniform translational 

946: acceleration (cf. Section 4), we have

947: $k_0=k$ for uniform rotation as well.

948: 

949: To calculate $k$ for the stepwise uniform rotation of duration 

950: $\tau_1-\tau_0=\alpha >0$, we use Laplace transforms as in the 

951: previous section (see Figure~\ref{fig4}). Let

952: $C'=\alpha^{-1}\mathcal{L}\{\cos \varphi\}$ and $S'=\alpha 

953: ^{-1}\mathcal{L} \{ \sin \varphi \}$; then, with $w=s\alpha$ we find

954: \begin{equation}\label{eq28}

955:  C'\pm i S'= 

956: \frac{1-e^{-(w\mp i\vp)}}{w\mp i\vp},

957: \end{equation}

958: and hence the Laplace transform of the resolvent kernel is given by 

959: $\bar{r}\to [\bar{r}_1;\bar{r}_2]$, where

960: \begin{equation}\label{eq30} \bar{r}_1=\vp\begin{bmatrix} 

961: -\gamma^2S' & \gamma C' & 0\\ -\gamma C' & -S' & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 

962: v^2\gamma^2S'\end{bmatrix},\quad

963: \bar{r}_2=v\gamma \vp\begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & \gamma S'\\ 0 & 0 

964: & C'\\ \gamma S' & -C' & 0\end{bmatrix}.\end{equation}

965: Using methods given in Appendix B, equation~\eqref{eq19} leads to 

966: \[\bar{k}(s)\to [\bar{k}_1(s);\bar{k}_2(s)],\]

967: where

968: \begin{eqnarray}

969: \label{eq31} 

970:  \bar{k}_1(s)&=&\vp

971: \begin{bmatrix} 

972: \gamma^2 \mathcal{Q} & \gamma \mathcal{P} & 0\\ 

973: -\gamma \mathcal{P} & \mathcal{Q} & 0\\

974:  0 & 0 & -v^2\gamma^2\mathcal{Q}

975: \end{bmatrix},\\ 

976: \label{eq31b}\bar{k}_2(s)&=&v\gamma \vp

977: \begin{bmatrix} 

978: 0 & 0 & -\gamma \mathcal{Q}\\

979:  0 & 0 & \mathcal{P}\\

980: -\gamma \mathcal{Q} & -\mathcal{P} & 0

981: \end{bmatrix}.

982: \end{eqnarray}

983: Here $\mathcal{P}$ and $\mathcal{Q}$ are given by

984: \begin{align}\label{eq32} \mathcal{P} &= 

985: \frac{e^w}{\mathcal{D}}[w(-e^w+\cos \vp)-\vp\sin 

986: \vp],\\

987: \label{eq33} \mathcal{Q} &= \frac{1}{\mathcal{D}} [e^w(-w\sin 

988: \vp+\vp\cos \vp)-\vp],\end{align}

989: and the denominator $\mathcal{D}$ is given by

990: \begin{equation}\label{eq34} 

991: \mathcal{D}=(we^w-i\vp e^{i\vp})

992:                    (we^w+i\vp e^{-i \vp}).

993: \end{equation}

994: It is interesting to note that if we formally substitute $\beta_0$ 

995: for $i\vp$ in equations~\eqref{eq32}--\eqref{eq34}, we obtain 

996: results familiar from the previous subsection;

997: specifically, under $i\vp\to \beta_0$, $\mathcal{P}\to P$, 

998: $\mathcal{Q}\to iQ$ and $\mathcal{D}\to D$, where $P,Q$ and $D$ are 

999: given in

1000: equations~\eqref{eq22}--\eqref{eq24}. Therefore, the main results of 

1001: the previous subsection

1002: can also be used in the analysis of stepwise uniform rotation; 

1003: for instance, with appropriate 

1004: modifications the explicit

1005: expressions given in Appendix C for the convolution kernel in a 

1006: special case can be employed here as well. However, since 

1007: $\vp>0$, the singularities of

1008: $\mathcal{P}$ and $\mathcal{Q}$ are in general different from those 

1009: in the previous subsection.

1010: 

1011: To determine the pole singularities of $\bar k(s)$ in

1012: the right half-plane in the case of stepwise rotation 

1013: it suffices to consider the equation 

1014: \begin{equation}\label{eq:our}

1015: we^w= i\vp e^{i \vp}

1016: \end{equation}

1017: with $\vp>0$.

1018: Indeed, note that if $w$ is a solution of this equation,

1019: then the complex conjugate of $w$ is a solution of 

1020: $w\exp(w)= -i\vp \exp(-i \vp)$.

1021: 

1022: 

1023: As before, let us set 

1024: $w=\xi+i\eta$ and note that equation~\eqref{eq:our} 

1025: is equivalent to the system

1026: of real equations given by

1027: \begin{equation}\label{eq:psign}

1028: \xi e^\xi=\vp\sin(\eta-\vp),\qquad \eta e^\xi=\vp\cos(\eta-\vp),

1029: \end{equation}

1030: where $\xi\ge 0$ and $\vp>0$.

1031: We recall here that the solution $w=i\vp$, i.e. $\xi=0$

1032: and $\eta=\vp$, of equations~\eqref{eq:our} and~\eqref{eq:psign} 

1033: corresponds to a removable singularity.

1034: A necessary condition for system~\eqref{eq:psign}

1035: to have a solution with $\xi>0$ is that $\sin(\eta-\vp)>0$ and

1036: $\eta\cos(\eta-\vp)>0$; the latter condition means that

1037:  $\cos(\eta-\vp)$ and $\eta$ must have the

1038: same sign. 

1039: 

1040: Consider the system

1041: \begin{equation}\label{eq:nsys}

1042: (\xi^2+\eta^2) e^{2 \xi}=\vp^2,\qquad \xi e^\xi=\vp\sin(\eta-\vp).

1043: \end{equation}

1044: If it has a solution $(\xi,\eta)$, 

1045: then it follows from display~\eqref{eq:nsys} that

1046: \[

1047: \eta^2 e^{2\xi}=\vp^2\cos^2(\eta-\vp),

1048: \]

1049: and therefore $\eta \exp(\xi)=\pm \vp\cos(\eta-\vp)$.

1050: Comparing this result with system~\eqref{eq:psign}, we conclude

1051: that we can use system~\eqref{eq:nsys} for finding the poles if we keep

1052: in mind that  $\eta$ and

1053: $\cos(\eta-\vp)$ must have the same sign. 

1054: 

1055: \begin{figure}[tb]  

1056: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig5.eps, width=25pc}}

1057: \caption{\label{fig5} The graph of $\eta^2=\vp^2\exp(-2\xi)-\xi^2$.}

1058: \end{figure}

1059: The first equation in display~\eqref{eq:nsys} is equivalent to

1060: $\eta^2=\vp^2\exp(-2\xi)-\xi^2$. Its graph 

1061: in the right half-plane has the form depicted in Figure~\ref{fig5},

1062: where $\xi_0$ is the unique real solution of the equation 

1063: $\xi \exp(\xi)=\vp$.

1064: 

1065: The poles we seek correspond to the intersections of the graph in 

1066: Figure~\ref{fig5}

1067: with the real branches of the second curve in display~\eqref{eq:nsys}.

1068: The intercepts of these branches with the $\eta$-axis are given

1069: by the solutions of the equation $\sin(\eta-\vp)=0$; that is,

1070: $\eta$ is equal to $\vp$ plus an integer multiple of $\pi$. Along the

1071: line given by $\xi=\xi_0$, the intercepts are given by 

1072: $\xi_0 \exp(\xi_0)=\vp \sin(\eta-\vp)$. Because $\xi_0 \exp(\xi_0)=\vp$, 

1073: these intercepts

1074: are the solutions of $\sin(\eta-\vp)=1$; that is,

1075: $\eta$ is $\vp+\pi/2$ plus an integer multiple of $2\pi$.

1076: The shape of the branches connecting points on the two vertical lines

1077: (at $\xi=0$ and $\xi=\xi_0$) is determined by the sign of $\cos(\eta-\vp)$ along the branch.

1078: Indeed, we have already established that poles occur only

1079: at points where $\eta$ and $\cos(\eta-\vp)$ have the same sign. 

1080: Note that

1081: \[

1082: (\xi+1)e^\xi=\vp\frac{d\eta}{d\xi}\cos(\eta-\vp),

1083: \]

1084: and therefore the slope of the branch has the same sign as $\cos(\eta-\vp)$. 

1085: Moreover, only the branches with $\sin(\eta-\vp)>0$ correspond

1086: to poles in the right half-plane.

1087: 

1088: \begin{figure}[tb]  

1089: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig6.eps, width=25pc}}

1090: \caption{\label{fig6} The graph of $\xi \exp(\xi)=\vp \sin(\eta-\vp)$

1091: for $0<\vp<\pi/2$.}

1092: \end{figure}

1093: There are several cases depending on the size of $\vp$.

1094: For $0<\vp<\pi/2$, it is easy to see that the important branches

1095: are as depicted in Figure~\ref{fig6}. These would not 

1096: intersect the graph in Figure~\ref{fig5}; hence, there are no poles in

1097: the right half-plane.

1098: 

1099: 

1100: We will next show that if $\vp>\pi/2$, then there is at least one pole in

1101: the right half-plane. For $\vp$ in this range, there is 

1102: an integer  $j\ge 1$ such that $j\pi/2\le \vp< (j+1)\pi/2$. In particular,

1103: we have that 

1104: $\vp-j\pi/2\ge 0$ and $\vp-(j+1)\pi/2<0$. 

1105: There are four cases.

1106: (1) Suppose that $j$ is even and $\cos (j\pi/2)=1$. The branch of the

1107: curve $\xi \exp(\xi)=\vp \sin(\eta-\vp)$ with $\eta$-intercept

1108: $\vp-j\pi/2\ge 0$ has positive slope (like the upper

1109: branch in Figure~\ref{fig6}). Because $\vp-j\pi/2<\vp$,

1110: this branch intersects the curve depicted in Figure~\ref{fig5} 

1111: in the upper half-plane. This point corresponds to a pole. Indeed,

1112: at the point of intersection $\sin(\eta-\vp)>0$ and

1113: $\eta\cos(\eta-\vp)>0$.

1114: (2) Suppose that $j$ is even and $\cos (j\pi/2)=-1$. 

1115: The branch with  $\eta$-intercept $\vp-j\pi/2\ge 0$ has negative

1116: slope and meets the line $\xi=\xi_0$ with ordinate $\vp-(j+1)\pi/2<0$.

1117: Hence, this branch intersects the curve depicted in 

1118: Figure~\ref{fig5} 

1119: in the lower half-plane. This point corresponds to a pole.

1120: (3) Suppose that $j$ is odd and $\cos ((j+1)\pi/2)=1$. The

1121: branch of the curve with $\eta$-intercept  $\vp-(j+1)\pi/2$ has

1122: positive slope and it meets the curve depicted in Figure~\ref{fig5}

1123: in the upper half-plane where the intersection point corresponds to a pole.

1124: For the subcase where $j=3$ and $\vp=3\pi/2$, 

1125: it is interesting to note that

1126: $\eta=0$ and $\xi_0$, such that 

1127: $\xi_0 \exp(\xi_0)=3\pi/2$, is the pole.

1128: (4) Suppose that $j$ is odd and $\cos ((j+1)\pi/2)=-1$. 

1129: The curve with $\eta$-intercept $\vp-(j+1)\pi/2$ has

1130: negative slope and $-\vp\le \vp-(j+1)\pi/2$. Hence, this branch meets

1131: the curve depicted in Figure~\ref{fig5} in the lower half-plane where

1132: the intersection corresponds to a pole.

1133: 

1134: We conclude that the dynamic memory kernel $k$ for stepwise uniform

1135: rotation is unbounded for $\vp=\gamma\Omega_0\alpha>\pi/2$.

1136: \subsection{Smooth acceleration} 

1137: We have demonstrated

1138: that the convolution kernel $k$ is unbounded for certain

1139: stepwise translational and rotational accelerations. 

1140: Could this result be due to the discontinuities of these accelerations 

1141: at $\tau_0$ and $\tau_1$? To prove that this is \emph{not} the case,

1142: we are interested here instead in smooth accelerations that

1143: closely approximate the stepwise ones already studied. The

1144: translational and rotational cases are in fact closely related as

1145: we have demonstrated; therefore

1146: in this subsection we show the same result for the simpler case of

1147: \emph{smooth} translational acceleration.

1148: 

1149: Let us consider an acceleration $g$ with compact

1150: support in the interval $[\tau_0,\tau_1]$.

1151: By the definition of $\Lambda$ and the choice of $g$,

1152: the matrix $\Lambda(\tau_0)=\Lambda_0$ is the $6\times 6$ identity

1153: matrix. Using this fact and  

1154: equations~\eqref{eq9} and~\eqref{eq14}, we find that 

1155: $ r(t)=[g(\tau)S(\tau) J_3;g(\tau)C(\tau) I_3]$, 

1156: where $t=\tau-\tau_0$, $S(\tau)=\sinh\theta$, $C(\tau)=\cosh\theta$

1157: and $\theta(\tau)$ is given by equation~\eqref{eq12}.  

1158: It follows from equation~\eqref{eq18} that 

1159: $ \bar r(s)=[\calS(s) J_3;\calC(s) I_3]$,

1160: where

1161: \[

1162: \calC(s)\pm\calS(s)

1163:  =\int_0^\infty e^{-st}g(t+\tau_0)e^{\pm\theta(t+\tau_0)}\,dt.

1164: \]

1165: Using equation~\eqref{eq19} and the results of Appendix B, we find that

1166: the Laplace

1167: transform of the convolution kernel $k$ is given by

1168: $\bar k(s)=[\calH_1(s)J_3;\calH_2(s)I_3]$, where

1169: \[

1170: \calH_1(s)=\frac{1+\calS}{(1+\calS)^2-\calC^2}-1,\qquad

1171: \calH_2(s)=- \frac{\calC}{(1+\calS)^2-\calC^2}.

1172: \]

1173: 

1174: We are interested in the zeros of the denominator

1175: \[(1+\calS)^2-\calC^2=(1+\calS+\calC)(1+\calS-\calC).\]

1176: It suffices to demonstrate that $1+\calS+\calC$ has a zero in

1177: the right half of the complex $s$-plane.

1178: Because $g$ has compact support in the interval $[\tau_0,\tau_1]$,

1179: the function $1+\calS+\calC$ is given by

1180: \[

1181: s\mapsto 1+\int_0^\alpha  

1182: e^{-s t} e^{\int_0^t g(\sigma+\tau_0)\,d\sigma} g(t+\tau_0)\,dt,

1183: \]

1184: where $\alpha=\tau_1-\tau_0$.

1185: If $g$ is the stepwise uniform acceleration

1186: considered previously, then this function reduces to

1187: \[ s\mapsto \frac{e^{-\alpha s}}{s-g_0}

1188: ( se^{\alpha s}- g_0 e^{\alpha g_0});

1189: \] 

1190: and, by the results in Subsection~\ref{sec:sa} for equation~\eqref{eq24},

1191: if $\beta_0 \exp(\beta_0)>3\pi/2$, it

1192: has a zero in the right half of the complex $s$-plane corresponding

1193: to a pole of $\bar k$. 

1194: We will show that such a pole persists for a smooth acceleration

1195: that is sufficiently close to the stepwise acceleration.

1196: 

1197: For an arbitrary acceleration $g$ with support in

1198: the interval $[\tau_0,\tau_1]$, we define

1199: the associated real-valued function $\zeta$ on

1200: the interval $[0,\alpha]$ given  by $\zeta(t)=g(t+\tau_0)$.

1201: Also, recall that the  $L^1$-norm of a real-valued function $\upsilon$ 

1202: defined on the interval

1203: $[0,\alpha]$ is given by

1204: \[\norm{\upsilon}_1:=\int_0^\alpha\abs{\upsilon(t)}\,dt.\] 

1205: 

1206: Suppose that $\zeta$ and $\upsilon$ are real-valued functions

1207: defined on the interval $[0,\alpha]$ such that $\norm{\zeta}<\infty$ and

1208: $\norm{\upsilon}_1<\infty$, and consider the  

1209: complex-valued analytic functions $Z$ and $\Upsilon$ 

1210: of the complex variable $s$ given by  

1211: \begin{eqnarray*}

1212: Z(s)&=& 

1213: 1+\int_0^\alpha  

1214: e^{-s t} e^{\int_0^t \zeta(\sigma)\,d\sigma} \zeta(t)\,dt,\\

1215: \Upsilon(s)&=& 

1216: 1+\int_0^\alpha  

1217: e^{-s t} e^{\int_0^t \upsilon(\sigma)\,d\sigma} \upsilon(t)\,dt.

1218: \end{eqnarray*}

1219: We will prove the following proposition.

1220: \emph{If $Z$ has a zero in the open right-half of the complex 

1221: $s$-plane

1222: and $\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1$ is sufficiently small,

1223: then $\Upsilon$ has a zero in the open right-half of 

1224: the complex $s$-plane.}

1225: By a standard result from mathematical analysis (see~\cite{ll}), 

1226: if $\zeta$

1227: is an $L^1$ function

1228: (for example, if $\zeta(t)=g(t+\tau_0)$ for

1229: the stepwise acceleration $g$), then $\norm{\zeta-\upsilon}_1$

1230: can be made as small as desired for

1231: a $C^\infty$ function $\upsilon$. Hence, by the proposition,

1232: there is a smooth acceleration with compact support such that 

1233: its associated

1234: convolution kernel is unbounded.

1235: 

1236: Our proof begins with two estimates.

1237: For notational convenience, let us define

1238: \[

1239: \hat{\zeta}(t)=e^{\int_0^t \zeta(\sigma)\,d\sigma} \zeta(t),\qquad

1240: \hat{\upsilon}(t)=e^{\int_0^t \upsilon(\sigma)\,d\sigma} \upsilon(t).

1241: \]

1242: The first estimate is 

1243: \begin{equation}\label{est:1}

1244: \abs{\Upsilon(s)-Z(s)}\le \norm{\hat\upsilon-\hat\zeta}_1

1245: \end{equation}

1246: for all $s$ such that $\re (s)\ge 0$. 

1247: To prove it, note that

1248: \[

1249: \abs{\Upsilon(s)-Z(s)}\le 

1250: \int_0^\alpha \abs{e^{-s t}}\abs{\hat\upsilon(t)-\hat\zeta(t)}\,dt.

1251: \]

1252: Because $\abs{\exp(-s t)}\le 1$ for $\re(s)\ge 0$, we have the

1253: inequality

1254: \[\abs{\Upsilon(s)-Z(s)}\le \norm{\hat\upsilon-\hat\zeta}_1\]

1255: for all $s$ in the closed right half-plane. 

1256: The second estimate is 

1257: \begin{equation}\label{est:2}

1258: \norm{\hat\upsilon-\hat\zeta}_1\le 

1259: e^{\norm{\zeta}_1}(1+\alpha\norm{\zeta}) e^{\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1}

1260: \norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1.

1261: \end{equation}

1262: To prove it, we have the triangle law estimate

1263: \begin{eqnarray}\label{est:tl}

1264: \nonumber\abs{\hat\upsilon(t)-\hat\zeta(t)}&\le&

1265: \abs {e^{\int_0^t \upsilon(\sigma)\,d\sigma}\upsilon(t)

1266: -e^{\int_0^t \upsilon(\sigma)\,d\sigma}\zeta(t)}\\

1267: \nonumber &&{}+\abs {e^{\int_0^t \upsilon(\sigma)\,d\sigma}\zeta(t)

1268: -e^{\int_0^t \zeta(\sigma)\,d\sigma}\zeta(t)}\\

1269: &\le & e^{\int_0^t \abs{\upsilon(\sigma)}\,d\sigma}\abs{\upsilon-\zeta}

1270: +\abs{\zeta}

1271: \abs{e^{\int_0^t \upsilon(\sigma)\,d\sigma}-e^{\int_0^t \zeta(\sigma)\,d\sigma}}

1272: \end{eqnarray}

1273: and, by the mean value theorem (applied to the exponential function),

1274: the inequality

1275: \[

1276: \abs{e^{\int_0^t \upsilon(\sigma)\,d\sigma}-e^{\int_0^t \zeta(\sigma)\,d\sigma}}

1277: \le e^\varsigma

1278: \big|\int_0^t \upsilon(\sigma)\,d\sigma-\int_0^t \zeta(\sigma)\,d\sigma\big|,

1279: \]

1280: where $\varsigma$ is some number between 

1281: $\int_0^t \upsilon(\sigma)\,d\sigma$ and $\int_0^t \zeta(\sigma)\,d\sigma$.

1282: If $\varsigma\le 0$, then $\exp(\varsigma)<1$; and if

1283: $\varsigma>0$, then $\varsigma<\max\{\norm{\upsilon}_1,\norm{\zeta}_1\}$.

1284: Hence, 

1285: \[e^\varsigma\le e^{\max\{\norm{\upsilon}_1,\norm{\zeta}_1\}}\]

1286: and, because 

1287: $\norm{\upsilon}_1\le \norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1+ \norm{\zeta}_1$,

1288: we have that

1289: \[e^\varsigma\le e^{\norm{\zeta}_1}e^{\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1}.\]

1290: Using this result and the estimate~\eqref{est:tl}, it follows that

1291: \begin{eqnarray*}

1292: \abs{\hat\upsilon(t)-\hat\zeta(t)}

1293: &\le&

1294: e^{\norm{\upsilon}_1}\abs{\upsilon(t)-\zeta(t)}

1295: +\norm{\zeta}

1296: e^{\norm{\zeta}_1}e^{\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1}

1297: \int_0^\alpha\abs{\upsilon(\sigma)-\zeta(\sigma)}\,d\sigma\\

1298:  &\le& e^{\norm{\zeta}_1}e^{\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1}

1299: (\abs{\upsilon(t)-\zeta(t)}+\norm{\zeta}\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1).

1300: \end{eqnarray*}

1301: Therefore,

1302: \begin{eqnarray*}

1303: \norm{\hat\upsilon-\hat\zeta}_1

1304: &=&\int_0^\alpha\abs{\hat\upsilon-\hat\zeta}\,dt\\

1305: &\le& e^{\norm{\zeta}_1}e^{\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1}

1306: (\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1+\alpha\norm{\zeta}\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1)

1307: \end{eqnarray*}

1308: and 

1309: a rearrangement of the right-hand side of the last inequality

1310: gives the desired result.

1311: 

1312: In the rest of this section, we let $\zeta$ represent the

1313: stepwise uniform linear acceleration and $\upsilon$ the

1314: smooth linear acceleration that approximates it sufficiently closely. 

1315: We then

1316: choose a circle centered at a zero of $Z$ in the open right half 

1317: of the complex $s$-plane such that the circle does not pass through

1318: a zero of $Z$ and such that the circle is contained in

1319: the open right half-plane. Let $\kappa$, a complex-valued function 

1320: defined on the interval $[0,2\pi]$, be a continuous

1321: parametrization of this circle and define two new functions

1322: $\kappa_Z$ and $\kappa_\Upsilon$ on this interval by

1323: \[\kappa_Z(\vartheta)=Z(\kappa(\vartheta)),\qquad 

1324: \kappa_\Upsilon(\vartheta)=\Upsilon(\kappa(\vartheta)).

1325: \]

1326: The images of these functions are closed curves in the complex

1327: $s$-plane. 

1328: In complex analysis, the principle of the argument theorem~\cite{hen}

1329: for an analytic function $\Delta$ relates the winding number of the

1330: image of $\kappa_\Delta$ with respect to the origin to

1331: the number of zeros of the function $\Delta$ inside the circle,

1332: provided that the circle does not pass through any zero of $\Delta$.

1333: If we show that $\kappa_Z$ and $\kappa_\Upsilon$ are homotopic and therefore

1334: have the same winding number with respect to the origin and that the circle

1335: does not pass through a zero of $\Upsilon$, then $Z$ and $\Upsilon$ must

1336: have the same number of zeros inside the circle.

1337: 

1338: We claim that if $\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1$ is 

1339: sufficiently small, then the image of $\kappa$ does not pass through a zero

1340: of $\Upsilon$. To prove the claim, note that 

1341: \[ m:= \min\{\abs{\kappa_Z(\vartheta)}:0\le \vartheta\le 2\pi\}>0\]

1342: (because $\kappa$ does not pass through a zero of $Z$) 

1343: and using the triangle inequality

1344: \[

1345: 0<m\le \abs{\kappa_\Upsilon(\vartheta)}+\norm{\kappa_\Upsilon-\kappa_Z},

1346: \]

1347: where $\norm{\kappa_\Upsilon-\kappa_Z}$ is the supremum

1348: of $\abs{\kappa_\Upsilon(\vartheta)-\kappa_Z(\vartheta)}$ for

1349: $0\le \vartheta\le 2 \pi$.

1350: Using the estimates~\eqref{est:1} and~\eqref{est:2},

1351: we have that

1352: \begin{equation}\label{est:kk}

1353: \abs{\kappa_\Upsilon(\vartheta)-\kappa_Z(\vartheta)}

1354: \le e^{\norm{\zeta}_1}e^{\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1}

1355: (1+\alpha\norm{\zeta})\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1.

1356: \end{equation}

1357: By the estimate~\eqref{est:kk}, $\norm{\kappa_\Upsilon-\kappa_Z}$

1358: can be made small, say less than  

1359: $m/2$,

1360: by taking $\norm{\upsilon-\zeta}_1$ sufficiently small. 

1361: For all 

1362: $\upsilon$ satisfying this requirement, which we impose for

1363: the remainder of the proof,  we have that 

1364: $\abs{\kappa_\Upsilon(\vartheta)}>0$; that is, $\kappa$ does not pass through a zero

1365: of $\Upsilon$.

1366: 

1367: It remains to show that 

1368: $\kappa_\Upsilon$ is homotopic to $\kappa_Z$. Assuming this

1369: homotopy relation, the  image

1370: curves  of $\kappa_\Upsilon$ and $\kappa_Z$ would 

1371: have the same winding number with respect to the origin.

1372: By the choice of $\kappa$ and the argument principle (see~\cite{hen}), 

1373: the curve

1374: $\kappa_Z$ has a nonzero winding number. Hence, 

1375: $\kappa_\Upsilon$ would have the same nonzero winding number. Again,

1376: by the argument principle,  $\Upsilon$ must then have a zero in

1377: the disk bounded by the circle parametrized by $\kappa$, which

1378: is the desired result.

1379: 

1380: To complete the proof we need to show that  

1381: $\kappa_\Upsilon$ and $\kappa_Z$

1382: are indeed homotopic. Let $\bbC$ denote the complex numbers. 

1383: We will show that 

1384: $H:[0,1]\times[0,2\pi]\to \bbC\setminus\{0\}$  given by

1385: \[

1386: H(\sigma, \vartheta)=\kappa_Z(\vartheta)-

1387: \sigma (\kappa_Z(\vartheta)-\kappa_\Upsilon(\vartheta))

1388: \]

1389: is the required homotopy. By inspection, $H$ is continuous,

1390: $H(0,\vartheta)=\kappa_Z(\vartheta)$ and 

1391: $H(1,\vartheta)=\kappa_\Upsilon(\vartheta)$. Hence, it suffices

1392: to show that $H(\sigma,\vartheta)\ne 0$ for all 

1393: $(\sigma,\vartheta)\in [0,1]\times[0,2\pi]$.

1394: By our choice of $\upsilon$, we have that 

1395: $\norm{\kappa_\Upsilon-\kappa_Z}<m/2$; therefore

1396: \[

1397: \abs{H(\sigma, \vartheta)}

1398: \ge \abs{\kappa_Z(\vartheta)}-

1399: \abs{\sigma}\abs{\kappa_\Upsilon(\vartheta)-\kappa_Z(\vartheta)}

1400: \ge m-\norm{\kappa_\Upsilon-\kappa_Z}> m/2,

1401: \]

1402: as required.

1403: 

1404: We conclude that the dynamic memory kernel $k$ for the smooth

1405: linear acceleration that closely approximates the stepwise

1406: acceleration is unbounded if the area under the graph of $g(\tau)$

1407: exceeds a critical value $\sim 1$.

1408: 

1409: 

1410: \section{Discussion}

1411: 

1412: We have investigated the properties of the nonlocal kernel that is 

1413: induced by accelerated motion in Minkowski spacetime. The physical 

1414: principles outlined in this

1415: paper do not completely determine the kernel; therefore, simplifying 

1416: mathematical assumptions need to be introduced in order to identify a 

1417: unique kernel. Two

1418: possibilities have been explored in this work corresponding to 

1419: kinetic memory $(k_0)$ and dynamic memory $(k)$. We show that for 

1420: accelerated motion that is uniform

1421: (linear or circular), the two kernels give the same constant result 

1422: $k_0=k$. They differ, however, if the acceleration is turned off at a 

1423: certain moment. We have

1424: therefore studied piecewise uniform acceleration (linear and circular)

1425: and have demonstrated that the dynamic memory (convolution) kernel 

1426: could be divergent and is

1427: therefore ruled out. Furthermore, 

1428: this conclusion is shown to be 

1429: independent of the stepwise character of the linear acceleration considered.

1430: 

1431: The use of convolution kernels is standard practice in the nonlocal

1432: electrodynamics of continuous media, where it is assumed phenomenologically

1433: that memory always fades. In our treatment of acceleration-induced

1434: nonlocality in vacuum, however, the behavior of memory must be determined

1435: from first principles. In this connection, the possible advantage of kinetic

1436: memory in terms of its simplicity was first emphasized by Hehl and 

1437: Obukhov~\cite{ho,hoa}.

1438: 

1439: The theory developed here is applicable to any basic field; however, 

1440: for the sake of concreteness and in view of possible observational 

1441: consequences, we employ

1442: electromagnetic radiation fields throughout. A basic consequence of 

1443: the nonlocal theory of accelerated systems is that it is incompatible 

1444: with the existence of a

1445: basic scalar field; that is, in this case $\Lambda (\tau )=1$, $k_0=0$ 

1446: and the nonlocality disappears so that a basic scalar radiation field

1447: can stay completely at rest with respect to a rotating observer 

1448: in contradiction with our fundamental 

1449: physical assumption. This prediction of the nonlocal theory is in 

1450: agreement with present

1451: experimental data. Further confrontation of the nonlocal theory with 

1452: observation is urgently needed.

1453: 

1454: \appendix

1455: 

1456: \section*{Appendix A}

1457: 

1458: Consider an integral equation of the form

1459: \begin{equation}\label{A1} \phi (x)=\psi (x)+\epsilon 

1460: \int^x_a K(x,y)\phi (y)\,dy,\tag{A1}\end{equation}

1461: where $\psi$ is a continuous function, the kernel

1462: $K$ is continuous and $\epsilon$ is a constant parameter. 

1463: There is a unique continuous resolvent

1464: kernel $R$ such that

1465: \begin{equation}\label{A2}\tag{A2} \psi (x)=\phi (x)+\epsilon 

1466: \int^x_aR(x,y)\psi (y)\,dy.\end{equation}

1467: In turn, $K$ can be 

1468: thought of as the resolvent kernel for $R$; this follows from the 

1469: complete reciprocity between $K$

1470: and $R$.

1471: 

1472: The proof of the existence and uniqueness of the resolvent

1473: kernel is by successive approximation. In fact, the solution $\phi$ 

1474: can be obtained as the uniform limit of the sequence of 

1475: continuous functions

1476: $\{\phi_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$  defined as follows:

1477: $\phi_0 (x)=\psi(x)$ and 

1478: \begin{equation}\label{A3}\tag{A3} \phi_{n+1}(x)=\psi (x)+\epsilon 

1479: \int^x_a K(x,y)\phi_n(y)\,dy.\end{equation}

1480: Thus

1481: \begin{align}\label{A4}\tag{A4} 

1482: \phi_1(x)=&\; \psi (x)+\epsilon \int^x_aK(x,y)\psi (y)\, dy,\\

1483:  \nonumber \phi_2 (x)=&\;\psi (x)+\epsilon 

1484: \int^x_aK(x,y)[\psi (y)+\epsilon \int^y_a K(y,z)\psi (z)\,dz]\,dy\\

1485: \label{A5}

1486: \tag{A5}

1487: =&\;\phi_1(x)+\epsilon^2\int^x_aK(x,y)\int^y_a K(y,z)\psi (z)\, dz dy.

1488: \end{align}

1489: The integration in \eqref{A5} is over a triangular domain in the 

1490: $(y,z)$-plane defined by the vertices $(a,a)$, $(x,a)$ and $(x,x)$. 

1491: Changing the order of the

1492: integration in \eqref{A5} results in the equality

1493: \begin{equation*}\label{A6}\tag{A6}\begin{split} 

1494: &\int^x_aK(x,y)\left[ \int^y_aK(y,z)\psi (z) dz\right]\, dy\\

1495: &\quad =\int^x_a\left[ \int^x_z K (x,y) K(y,z)\,dy\right] \psi

1496: (z)\,dz.\end{split}\end{equation*} Let us define the successive 

1497: iterated kernels of $K$ by $K_1(x,z)=K(x,z)$ and

1498: \begin{equation}\label{A7}\tag{A7} K_{n+1} (x,z) =\int^x_z K(x,y) K_n 

1499: (y,z)\, dy.\end{equation}

1500: Then we can write \eqref{A5} as

1501: \begin{equation}\label{A8}\tag{A8} \phi_2 

1502: (x)=\phi_1(x)+\epsilon^2\int^x_a K_2 (x,z) \psi (z)\,dz,\end{equation}

1503: and similarly

1504: \begin{equation}\label{A9}\tag{A9} \phi_3 (x)=\phi_2 (x) +\epsilon^3 

1505: \int^x_a K_3 (x,z)\psi (z)\,dz,\end{equation}

1506: etc., such that in general

1507: \begin{equation}\label{A10}\tag{A10} \phi_m (x)=\phi_{m-1} 

1508: (x)+\epsilon^m\int^x_a K_m(x,z)\psi (z)\,dz.\end{equation}

1509: 

1510: Iterating \eqref{A10} for $m=1,2,3,\ldots ,n$ and summing the 

1511: equations results in

1512: \begin{equation}\label{A11}\tag{A11} \phi_n(x)=\psi (x)+\int^x_a 

1513: \left[ \sum^n_{m=1}\epsilon^mK_m(x,z)\right] \psi (z)\,dz,\end{equation}

1514: which can be rewritten as

1515: \begin{equation}\label{A12}\tag{A12} \psi (x)=\phi_n(x)+\epsilon 

1516: \int^x_a\left[ -\sum^n_{m=1}\epsilon^{m-1}K_m(x,y)\right] \psi 

1517: (y)\,dy.\end{equation}

1518: It can be shown that the uniform limit as $n\to \infty$ exists 

1519: (see~\cite{5,5a,5b}). 

1520: Thus,

1521: we obtain  equation~\eqref{A2} with

1522: \begin{equation}\label{A13}\tag{A13} 

1523: R(x,y)=-\sum^\infty_{n=1}\epsilon^{n-1} K_n(x,y).

1524: \end{equation}

1525: 

1526: In case (1), $K(x,y)=k_0(y)$, the iterated kernels $K_n$ 

1527: for $n>1$ and the resolvent kernel $R$ are in general functions of 

1528: both $x$ and $y$.

1529: 

1530: In case (2),

1531: $K(x,y)=k(x-y)$, i.e.\ the kernel is of the convolution (Faltung) 

1532: type, it follows from \eqref{A7} that

1533: \begin{equation}\label{A14}\tag{A14} 

1534: k_{n+1}(t)=\int^t_0k(u)k_n(t-u)\,du,\end{equation}

1535: where $x-z=t$ and $x-y=u$; therefore, all of the iterated kernels are 

1536: of the convolution type and can be obtained by successive 

1537: convolutions of $k$ with itself. More precisely, 

1538: let a star denote the Faltung operation,

1539: \begin{equation}\label{A15}\tag{A15} \phi \ast \chi (t) 

1540: =\int^t_0\phi (t)\chi (t-u)\,du=\chi \ast \phi (t),\end{equation}

1541: and write $\phi^{\ast\, 2} = \phi \ast \phi$, etc. Then, the resolvent 

1542: kernel \eqref{A13} can be expressed as $R(x,y)=r(x-y)$, where

1543: \begin{equation}\label{A16}\tag{A16} 

1544: r(t)=-\sum^\infty_{n=1} \epsilon^{n-1}k^{\ast\, n}(t).\end{equation}

1545: 

1546: \section*{Appendix B}

1547: 

1548: In this paper, we deal with $6\times 6$ matrices of the form

1549: \begin{equation}\label{B1}\tag{B1} \mathcal{M}=\begin{bmatrix} A & 

1550: B\\ -B & A\end{bmatrix},\end{equation}

1551: where $\det A\neq 0$ and $\det B=0$. The inverse of the matrix 

1552: $\mathcal{M}$ is given by

1553: \begin{equation}\label{B2}\tag{B2} \mathcal{M}^{-1}=\begin{bmatrix} G 

1554: & H\\ -H & G\end{bmatrix},\end{equation}

1555: where

1556: \begin{equation}\label{B3}\tag{B3} G=(A+BA^{-1}B)^{-1},\quad 

1557: H=-GBA^{-1}=-A^{-1}BG.\end{equation}

1558: 

1559: \section*{Appendix C}

1560: 

1561: Let us rewrite $P(s)$ and $Q(s)$ given by equations~\eqref{eq22} and 

1562: \eqref{eq23} in the form

1563: \begin{align*}\label{C1}\tag{C1} 

1564: 2\beta_0\, P(s) & = 

1565: \frac{1-\frac{\beta_0}{w}}{1-\zeta_+}-\frac{1+\frac{\beta_0}{w}}{1+\zeta_-},\\

1566: \label{C2}\tag{C2} 2\beta_0\, Q(s) 

1567: &=-2+\frac{1-\frac{\beta_0}{w}}{1-\zeta_+} 

1568: +\frac{1+\frac{\beta_0}{w}}{1+\zeta_-},\end{align*}

1569: where $w=s\alpha$, $\beta_0=g_0\alpha$ and $\zeta_\pm$ are given by

1570: \begin{equation}\label{C3}\tag{C3} \zeta_\pm =\frac{\beta_0}{w}\exp 

1571: (-w\pm \beta_0).\end{equation}

1572: If we assume that $\re (s)>g_0$, then $|\zeta_\pm |<1$. We can 

1573: therefore expand $(1\mp \zeta_\pm)^{-1}$ in powers of $\zeta_\pm$ and 

1574: use the relation

1575: \begin{equation}\label{C4}\tag{C4} \mathcal{L} \left\{ 

1576: u_{n\alpha}(t)\frac{(t-n\alpha)^{\ell-1}}{(\ell-1)!}\right\} 

1577: =\frac{e^{-n\alpha s}}{s^\ell}\end{equation}

1578: for integers $n\ge 0$ and $\ell >1$ to find $k(t)\to [k_1(t);k_2(t)]$. 

1579: Here 

1580: we use unit step functions such that $u_{n\alpha}(t)=u_0(t-n\alpha )$ 

1581: and $u_0(t)$ is the

1582: standard unit step function, i.e. $u_0(t)=1$ for $t\geq 0$ and 

1583: $u_0(t)=0$ for $t<0$.

1584: 

1585: We find that $k_1=\tilde k_1J_3$,  $k_2=\tilde k_2I_3$ and

1586: \begin{align*}\label{C5}\tag{C5} 

1587: g^{-1}_0\tilde k_1(t)&=\mathcal{S}_1u_\alpha (t)+\mathcal{C}_2 

1588: u_{2\alpha}(t)+\mathcal{S}_3 u_{3\alpha}

1589: (t)+\mathcal{C}_4u_{4\alpha}(t)+\cdots ,\\

1590: \label{C6}\tag{C6} g^{-1}_0\tilde k_2(t)+u_0(t)&=\mathcal{C}_1u_\alpha 

1591: (t)+\mathcal{S}_2 u_{2\alpha}(t) +\mathcal{C}_3 u_{3\alpha} 

1592: (t)+\mathcal{S}_4 u_{4\alpha}(t)+\cdots

1593: ,\end{align*}

1594: where

1595: \begin{equation}\label{C7}\tag{C7} \mathcal{C}_n\pm 

1596: \mathcal{S}_n=e^{\pm n\beta_0}\left[ 

1597: \frac{(g_0t-n\beta_0)^{n-1}}{(n-1)!}\mp 

1598: \frac{(g_0t-n\beta_0)^n}{n!}\right]

1599: .\end{equation}

1600: Note that for any fixed value of $t$, only a finite number of terms 

1601: contribute to the kernel $k(t)$.

1602: 

1603: \subsection*{Acknowledgements}

1604: 

1605: One of us (B.M.) is very grateful to Friedrich Hehl and Yuri Obukhov 

1606: for many stimulating discussions regarding the nature of memory in

1607: nonlocal electrodynamics.

1608: 

1609: \begin{thebibliography}{xxxx}

1610: \bibitem{1} H.A. Lorentz, The Theory of Electrons (Dover, New York, 

1611: 1952), ch. V, \S 183, pp. 215--217.

1612: 

1613: \bibitem{2} A. Einstein, The Meaning of Relativity (Princeton 

1614: University Press, Princeton, 1950), p. 60.

1615: 

1616: \bibitem{3} B. Mashhoon, Phys. Rev. A 47 (1993) 4498.

1617: \bibitem{3a} B. Mashhoon, ``Nonlocal 

1618: Electrodynamics", in: Cosmology and Gravitation, edited by M. Novello 

1619: (Editions Fronti\`eres,

1620: Gif-sur-Yvette, 1994), pp. 245--295. 

1621: \bibitem{3b} U. Muench, F.W. Hehl and B. 

1622: Mashhoon, Phys. Lett. A 271 (2000) 8.

1623: \bibitem{3c} B. Mashhoon, ``Relativity and 

1624: Nonlocality", in: Reference

1625: Frames and Gravitomagnetism, edited by J.-F. Pascual-Sanchez, L. 

1626: Floria, A. San Miguel and F. Vicente (World Scientific, Singapore, 

1627: 2001), pp. 133--144.

1628: 

1629: \bibitem{4} B. Mashhoon, Phys. Lett. A 143 (1990) 176.

1630: \bibitem{4a} B. Mashhoon, Phys. Lett. A  145 (1990) 147.

1631: \bibitem{4b} B. Mashhoon,

1632: ``Measurement Theory and General Relativity", in: Black Holes: 

1633: Theory and Observation,

1634: edited by F.W. Hehl, C. Kiefer and R. Metzler (Springer, Berlin, 

1635: 1998), pp. 269--284.

1636: 

1637: \bibitem{5} V. Volterra, Theory of Functionals and of Integral and 

1638: Integro-Differential Equations (Dover, New York, 1959).

1639: \bibitem{5a} H.T. Davis, 

1640: The Theory of the Volterra

1641: Integral Equation of Second Kind (Indiana University Studies, 17, 

1642: 1930).

1643: \bibitem{5b} F.G. Tricomi, Integral Equations (Interscience, New York, 

1644: 1957).

1645: 

1646: \bibitem{br} N. Bohr and L. Rosenfeld, 

1647: Det. Kgl. dansk. Vid. Selskab. 12 (1933) no. 8, translated in:

1648: Quantum Theory and Measurement, edited by J. A. Wheeler and W. H. Zurek

1649: (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1983).

1650: \bibitem{bra} N. Bohr and L. Rosenfeld, Phys. Rev. 78 (1950) 794.

1651: 

1652: \bibitem{6}  B. Mashhoon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 (1988) 2639.

1653: \bibitem{6a} B. Mashhoon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68 (1992) 3812.

1654: \bibitem{6b} B. Mashhoon, Phys. Lett. A 198 (1995) 9.

1655: \bibitem{6c} B. Mashhoon, Gen. Rel. Grav. 31 (1999) 681.

1656: \bibitem{6d} B. Mashhoon, Class. Quantum Grav. 17 (2000) 2399. 

1657: \bibitem{6e} B. Mashhoon, R. Neutze, M. Hannam and G.E. Stedman, Phys. Lett. 

1658: A 249 (1998) 161.

1659: 

1660: \bibitem{7} L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, Electrodynamics of 

1661: Continuous Media (Pergamon, Oxford, 1960), p. 249.

1662: \bibitem{7a} A.C. Eringen, J. Math. Phys. 25 (1984) 3235.

1663: \bibitem{7b}

1664: G. Bertotti, Hysteresis in Magnetism (Academic Press, San Diego, 1998).

1665: 

1666: \bibitem{8} J.K. Roberge, in: Methods of Experimental Physics: 

1667: Electronic Methods, vol. 2, 2nd ed., edited by E. Bleuler and R.O. 

1668: Haxby (Academic Press, New York,

1669: 1975), ch. 12.

1670: 

1671: \bibitem{ho} F.W. Hehl and Y.N. Obukhov, in:

1672: Gyros, Clocks, Interferometers $\cdots:$  Testing Relativistic Gravity in

1673: Space, edited by C. L\"ammerzahl, C.W.F. Everitt and F.W. Hehl,

1674: Lecture Notes in Physics 562 (Springer, Berlin, 2001), pp. 479--504.

1675: \bibitem{hoa} F.W. Hehl and Y.N. Obukhov,

1676: Foundations of Classical Electrodynamics, in press  (Birkh\"auser, Boston,

1677: 2002).

1678: 

1679: \bibitem{ll} E.H. Lieb and M. Loss, Analysis, 2nd ed.

1680: (Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, 2001),  p. 64.

1681: 

1682: \bibitem{hen} P. Henrici, Applied and Computational Complex Analysis 

1683: (Wiley, New York, 1986).

1684: \end{thebibliography}

1685: 

1686: \end{document}

1687: