1: \documentclass{elsart}

2:     \textwidth 6.2in

3:         \textheight 9in

4: 

5: \usepackage{amssymb,epsfig,graphicx,amsmath}

6: 

7: 

8: \journal{Phys. Lett. A}

9: \begin{document}

10: \begin{frontmatter}

11: 

12: \title{Resonances in the one-dimensional

13: Dirac equation in the presence of a point interaction and a constant

14: electric field}

15: \author[IVIC]{Luis Gonz\'alez-D\'{\i}az},

16: \ead{lugonzal@pion.ivic.ve}

17: \author[IVIC]{V\'{\i}ctor M. Villalba\corauthref{cor}}

18: \corauth[cor]{Corresponding author.} \ead{villalba@ivic.ve}

19: 

20: \address[IVIC]{Centro de F\'{\i}sica

21: Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Cient\'{\i}ficas, IVIC \\

22: Apdo 21827, Caracas 1020-A, Venezuela}

23: 

24: 

25: \begin{abstract}

26: We show that the energy spectrum of the one-dimensional Dirac

27: equation in the presence of a spatial confining point interaction

28: exhibits a resonant behavior when one includes a weak electric

29: field. After solving the Dirac equation in terms of parabolic

30: cylinder functions and showing explicitly how the resonant behavior

31: depends on the sign and strength of the electric field, we derive an

32: approximate expression for the value of the resonance energy in

33: terms of the electric field and delta interaction strength.

34: \end{abstract}

35: 

36: \begin{keyword}

37: Relativistic electron, Strong Fields, Dirac equation, Resonances

38: \PACS 03.65.Pm, 03.65.Nk, 03.65.Ge

39: \end{keyword}

40: \end{frontmatter}

41: 

42: 

43: \section{Introduction}

44: 

45: Supercritical effects are perhaps one of the most interesting

46: phenomena associated with the charged vacuum in the presence of

47: strong electric fields \cite{Greiner,Rafelski} The study of

48: supercritical effects induced by strong vector potentials goes back

49: to the pioneering works of Pieper and Greiner \cite{Pieper},

50: Zeldovich and Popov \cite{Zeldovich}

51:  among others. The idea behind

52: supercriticality is to have positron emission induced by the

53: presence of very strong attractive vector potentials. The phenomenon

54: can be described as follows: the energy level of an unoccupied bound

55: state dives into the negative energy continuum. i.e., an electron of

56: the Dirac sea is trapped by the potential, leaving  a positron that

57: escapes to infinity. \ The

58: electric field responsible for supercriticality should be stronger than $%

59: 2m_{e}c^{2}$, which is the value of the gap between the negative and

60: positive energy continua. \ Such strong electric fields could be

61: produced in heavy-ion collisions \cite{Greiner,Greiner2}. A rigorous

62: mathematical study of the behavior of the Dirac energy levels near

63: the continuum spectrum and the problem of spontaneous pair creation

64: has been carried out by \u{S}{e}ba \cite{PS:86}, Klaus \cite{Klaus}

65: and Nenciu \cite{Nenciu} among others.

66: 

67: In order to get a deeper understanding of the mechanism responsible

68: for supercriticality and for the resonant peaks appearing in the

69: energy spectrum when supercritical fields are present, we proceed to

70: work with a vector point interaction in the presence of a constant

71: electric field. Point interactions potentials may be used to

72: approximate, in a simple way, more complex short-ranged potentials.

73: Among the advantages of working with confining delta interactions we

74: should mention that, they only possess a single bound state and the

75: treatment of the interacting potential reduces to a boundary

76: condition. The study of bound states of the relativistic wave

77: equation in the presence of point interactions is a problem that has

78: been carefully discussed in the literature

79: \cite{Sutherland,McKellar,McKellar2,FD:89,Albeverio}. The

80: one-dimensional Dirac equation in the presence of a vector point

81: delta interaction has also been a subject of study in the search of

82: supercritical effects induced by attractive potentials

83: \cite{Greiner,Loewe}. Soon after the publication of the paper by

84: Loewe and Sanhueza \cite{Loewe}, Nogami et al \cite {Nogami} pointed

85: out that supercritical effects are also absent in a class of

86: non-local separable potentials in one dimension.

87: 

88: Since we are interested in studying the mechanism of positron

89: production by supercritical fields, we proceed to analyze the

90: resonant behavior of the energy when a bound state dives into the

91: negative continuum. This resonant behavior is associated with the

92: appearance of simple poles of the resolvent  on the second sheet at

93: a position very near the real axis \cite{Reed}.

94: 

95: 

96: The method of complex eigenvalues (Gamow vectors) was introduced in

97: quantum mechanics by Gamow \cite{GG:28} in connection with the

98: theory of Alpha decay. Titchmarsch \cite{ET:58} and Barut

99: \cite{WB:62} demonstrated an application,  in the framework of

100: non-relativistic quantum mechanics, for the Gamow vector method to

101: the problem of an attractive delta interaction $\delta (r)$ of strength $%

102: -\cot \alpha $ with a weak electric  field term associated with the

103: potential $V(r)=-\lambda r.$   They found that the Schr\"{o}dinger

104: equation with a weak electric field exhibits a continuous spectrum

105: from $-\infty $ to $+\infty ,$ and  a resonance at $E^{'}$ in the

106: vicinity

107: of $E_{{0}}-\frac{1}{2}\lambda \tan \alpha ,$ where $%

108: E_{0}=-\cot ^{2}\alpha $ is the energy of the unperturbed state. The

109: eigenvalue $E^{'}$

110: is a complex number in the lower half plane. \ According to Barut, the Schr%

111: \"{o}dinger equation with the potential $-\lambda r$ describes a

112: system that tries to form a bound state that ``dissolves itself" in

113: the presence of the continuous spectrum. In this Letter, using \ the

114: idea developed by Titchmarsch \cite{ET:58}, we find the energy

115: spectrum of the one-dimensional Dirac equation with boundary

116: conditions associated with a vector Dirac delta interaction and a

117: constant electric field whose strength is weak, and therefore it

118: produces a perturbative effect on the delta energy spectrum. We find

119: that in this case the energy spectrum exhibits a resonance due to

120: supercriticality.

121: 

122: The Letter is structured as follows: In Section 2, we solve the

123: one-dimensional Dirac equation in the presence of an attractive

124: $\delta$ potential and a constant electric field. In Section 3, we

125: compute the energy resonances and show how they depend on the

126: electric field strength. We also derive an approximate analytic

127: expression for the energy resonances. Finally, in Section 4 we

128: summarize our conclusions.

129: 

130: \section{The one-dimensional Dirac equation}

131: 

132: In this section we will consider the 1+1 Dirac equation in the presence of

133: the attractive vector point interaction potential represented by $%

134: eV(x)=-g_{v}\delta (x),$ and a constant electric field associated

135: with the potential $eV(x)=\lambda x$. \ The Dirac equation,

136: expressed in natural units\ ($\hslash =c=1$) can be written in the

137: form \cite{Greiner1}

138: \begin{equation}

139: \left( i\gamma ^{\mu }(\frac{\partial }{\partial x^{\mu }}-ieA_{\mu

140: })-m\right) \Psi =0,  \label{1}

141: \end{equation}

142: where $A_{\mu}$ is the vector potential, $e$ is the charge and $m$

143: is the mass of the electron. The Dirac matrices $\gamma^{\mu}$

144: satisfy the commutation relation $\left\{ \gamma

145: ^{\mu },\gamma ^{\nu }\right\} =2\eta ^{\mu \nu }$ with $\eta ^{\mu \nu }=%

146: \mathrm{diag}(1,-1).$ Since we are working in 1+1 dimensions, we choose to

147: work in a two-dimensional representation of the \ Dirac matrices

148: \begin{equation}

149: \gamma ^{0}=\sigma _{3},\gamma ^{1}=-i\sigma _{2}  \label{2}.

150: \end{equation}

151: Substituting the representation matrix representation (\ref{2}) into

152: Eq. (\ref{1}), and taking into account that the potential

153: interaction does not depend on time, we obtain

154: 

155: \begin{equation}

156: \{-i\sigma _{{1}}\frac{d}{dx}+\left( \lambda x-E\right) +m\sigma _{{3}}\}%

157: \mathsf{X}(x)=0,  \label{dirac}

158: \end{equation}

159: with $\Psi =\sigma _{3}\mathsf{X.}$, and

160: \begin{equation}

161: \mathsf{X}(x)=

162: \begin{pmatrix}

163: X_{{1}} \\

164: X_{{2}}

165: \end{pmatrix}

166: ,

167: \end{equation}

168: with the boundary conditions at $x=0$

169: \begin{equation}

170: \begin{split}

171: X_{{1}}(0^{{+}})& =X_{{1}}(0^{{-}})\cos {g_{{v}}}-iX_{{2}}(0^{{-}})\hspace{%

172: 0.1cm}\mathrm{\sin }{g_{{v}}}, \\

173: X_{{2}}(0^{{+}})& =-iX_{{1}}(0^{{-}})\hspace{0.1cm}\mathrm{\sin }{g_{{v}}}+X_{%

174: {2}}(0^{{-}})\cos {g_{{v}}}.

175: \end{split}

176: \label{dominio}

177: \end{equation}

178: The above conditions (\ref{dominio}) describe a the point vector

179: potential interaction of strength $g_{{v}}$ \cite{FD:89}.

180: 

181: Equation (\ref{dirac}) is equivalent to the system of equations

182: \begin{equation}

183: \left( m+\lambda x-E\right) X_{{1}}-i\frac{dX_{2}}{dx}=0,

184: \label{pdirac}

185: \end{equation}

186: \begin{equation}

187: i\frac{dX_{1}}{dx}+\left( m-\lambda x+E\right) X_{{2}}=0,

188: \label{sdirac}

189: \end{equation}

190: Introducing the new functions $\Omega _{{1}}$ and $\Omega _{{2}}$

191: \begin{equation}

192: X_{{1}}=\Omega _{{1}}+i\Omega _{{2}},\quad X_{{2}}=\Omega _{{1}}-i\Omega _{{2%

193: }},  \label{rela}

194: \end{equation}

195: we obtain that the system of equations (\ref{pdirac}) -(\ref{sdirac})

196: reduces to the form

197: \begin{align}

198: \frac{d\Omega _{1}}{dx}+i\left( \lambda x-E\right) \Omega _{{1}}-m\Omega _{{2%

199: }}& =0,  \label{podirac} \\

200: \frac{d\Omega _{{2}}}{dx}-i\left( \lambda x-E\right) \Omega _{{2}}-m\Omega _{%

201: {1}}& =0,  \label{sodirac}

202: \end{align}

203: which is more tractable in the search of exact solutions. Substituting (\ref

204: {podirac}) into (\ref{sodirac}) we obtain the second-order differential

205: equation

206: \begin{equation}

207: \frac{d^{2}\Omega _{{1}}}{dx^{2}}\,+\{i\lambda +\left( \lambda

208: x-E\right) ^{2}-m^{2}\}\,\Omega _{{1}}=0.  \label{ecua}

209: \end{equation}

210: 

211: Looking at the asymptotic behavior of the parabolic cylinder

212: functions $D_{\nu}(z)$ \cite{HB:53} we obtain that the regular

213: solutions, for $\lambda>0$, of Eq. (\ref{ecua}) belonging to

214: $\mathcal{L}^{2}(-\infty ,0)$ and $\mathcal{L}^{2}(0,\infty )$

215: ($Im\,E>0$), respectively are

216: \begin{equation}

217: \begin{split}

218: \Omega _{{1}}^{-}(x)& =AD_{{-\rho -1}}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{-i%

219: \frac{\pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda \,x-E\right) \right)  \\

220: \Omega _{1}^{+}(x)& =BD_{\rho }\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{i\frac{%

221: \pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda \,x-E\right) \right) ,

222: \end{split}

223: \label{sol1}

224: \end{equation}

225: where $D_{{\rho }}$ y $D_{{-\rho -1}}$ are parabolic cylinder

226: functions \cite{HB:53}, $\rho =\frac{im^{{2}}}{2\lambda }$, \ and

227: $A$ and $B$ are constants.

228: 

229: Inserting (\ref{sol1}) into (\ref{podirac}) and using the recurrence

230: relations for the parabolic cylinder functions \cite{HB:53}, we

231: obtain

232: \begin{equation}

233: \begin{split}

234: \Omega _{2}^{-}(x)& =i\frac{\sqrt{2\lambda }}{m}e^{{i\frac{\pi }{4}}}AD_{{%

235: -\rho }}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{-i\frac{\pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda

236: \,x-E\right) \right),  \\

237: \Omega _{2}^{+}(x)& =i\frac{m}{\sqrt{2\lambda }}e^{{i\frac{\pi }{4}}}BD_{{%

238: \rho -1}}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{i\frac{\pi }{4}}}\left(

239: \lambda \,x-E\right) \right).

240: \end{split}

241: \label{sol2}

242: \end{equation}

243: From (\ref{sol1}), (\ref{sol2}) and (\ref{rela}), we have that the

244: components of the spinor solution for $x<0$ are

245: 

246: \begin{equation}

247: \begin{split}

248: X_{1}^{-}(x)& =A\left[ D_{{-\rho -1}}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{-i%

249: \frac{\pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda \,x-E\right) \right) -\frac{\sqrt{2\lambda }}{%

250: m}e^{{i\frac{\pi }{4}}}D_{{-\rho }}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{-i%

251: \frac{\pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda \,x-E\right) \right) \right],  \\

252: X_{{2}}^{-}(x)& =A\left[ D_{{-\rho -1}}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{-i%

253: \frac{\pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda \,x-E\right) \right) +\frac{\sqrt{2\lambda }}{%

254: m}e^{{i\frac{\pi }{4}}}D_{{-\rho }}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{-i%

255: \frac{\pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda \,x-E\right) \right) \right],

256: \end{split}

257: \label{izq}

258: \end{equation}

259: analogously, we have that, for $x>0$, the spinor $\mathsf{X}$ has

260: the components:

261: 

262: \begin{equation}

263: \begin{split}

264: X_{{1}}^{+}(x)& =B\left[ D_{{\rho }}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{i%

265: \frac{\pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda \,x-E\right) \right) -\frac{m}{\sqrt{2\lambda

266: }}e^{{i\frac{\pi }{4}}}D_{{\rho -1}}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{i%

267: \frac{\pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda \,x-E\right) \right) \right],  \\

268: X_{{2}}^{+}(x)& =B\left[ D_{{\rho }}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{i%

269: \frac{\pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda \,x-E\right) \right) +\frac{m}{\sqrt{2\lambda

270: }}e^{{i\frac{\pi }{4}}}D_{{\rho -1}}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{i%

271: \frac{\pi }{4}}}\left( \lambda \,x-E\right) \right) \right].

272: \end{split}

273: \label{der}

274: \end{equation}

275: 

276: 

277: 

278: Inserting (\ref{izq}) and (\ref{der}) in (\ref{dominio}), we obtain that the

279: equation for the energy eigenvalues $E$ has the form:

280: \begin{equation}

281: \begin{split}

282: 2\lambda D_{{\rho }}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{i\frac{\pi }{4}}%

283: }E\right) & D_{{-\rho }}\left( {-\sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}}e^{{-i\frac{\pi }{%

284: 4}}}E\right)  \\

285: & -m^{{2}}D_{{\rho -1}}\left( \sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}e^{{i\frac{\pi }{4}}%

286: }E\right) D_{{-\rho -1}}\left( {-\sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda }}}e^{{-i\frac{\pi }{%

287: 4}}}E\right) e^{{-2ig_{{v}}}}=0.

288: \end{split}

289: \label{urav}

290: \end{equation}

291: 

292: The regular solutions of Eq. (\ref{ecua}), for $\lambda<0$, can be

293: obtained after interchanging the roles of $\Omega_{1}^{-}(x)$ and

294: $\Omega_{1}^{+}(x)$  and of $\Omega_{2}^{-}(x)$ and

295: $\Omega_{2}^{+}(x)$ in Eq. (\ref{sol1}) and Eq. (\ref{sol2})

296: respectively; therefore Eq. (\ref{urav}) permits us to compute the

297: energy resonances for positive as well as negative values of the

298: electric field strength $\lambda$

299: 

300: \section{Energy resonances}

301: 

302: It is not an easy task to solve Eq. (\ref{urav}), nevertheless it is

303: possible to derive an analytic approximation for the energy

304: eigenvalues. In order to do this approximation we consider the

305: effect of the electric field in the vicinity of zero, i.e., where

306: the delta interaction is located. We insert the spinor solutions

307: obtained using this approach into (\ref {dominio}), obtaining in

308: this way an eigenvalue equation, whose roots are a

309: good approximation to those of (\ref{urav}). The approximate equation for $%

310: \Omega _{{1}}$ has the form

311: \begin{equation}

312: \frac{d^{2}\Omega _{{1}}}{dx^{2}}\,+\{i\lambda

313: +E^{2}-m^{2}\}\,\Omega _{{1}}=0.  \label{a}

314: \end{equation}

315: The solution of Eq. (\ref{a}) that, for $x>0$, and $\lambda>0$

316: exhibit a regular asymptotic behavior is

317: \begin{equation}

318: \Omega _{1}^{+}=A\exp (-i\sqrt{i\lambda +E^{2}-m^{2}}x). \label{b}

319: \end{equation}

320: Substituting the solution (\ref{b}) into Eq. (\ref{podirac}) we obtain

321: \begin{equation}

322: \Omega _{2}^{+}=-iA\frac{\sqrt{i\lambda +E^{2}-m^{2}}+E}{m}\exp

323: (-i\sqrt{i\lambda +E^{2}-m^{2}}x),  \label{d}

324: \end{equation}

325: and, analogously, we have that for $x<0,$ the corresponding

326: solutions are

327: \begin{equation}

328: \Omega _{1}^{-}=B\exp (i\sqrt{i\lambda +E^{2}-m^{2}}x), \label{c}

329: \end{equation}

330: \begin{equation}

331: \Omega _{2}^{-}=-iB\frac{-\sqrt{i\lambda +E^{2}-m^{2}}+E}{m}\exp

332: (i\sqrt{i\lambda +E^{2}-m^{2}}x).  \label{e}

333: \end{equation}

334: Substituting the right $\Omega _{1,2}^{+}$ and left $\Omega

335: _{1,2}^{-}$\ spinor components into Eq. (\ref{dominio}), we find

336: that, for $g_{v}=-\pi $, the energy state sinks into the negative

337: energy continuum, exhibiting a resonant behavior that depends on the

338: electric field strength as:

339: 

340: \begin{equation}

341: E\left( \lambda \right) \approx -\left( m+\frac{\lambda ^{{2}}}{8m^{{3}}}%

342: \right) +i\frac{\lambda }{2m},  \label{spectrum}

343: \end{equation}

344: where we have assumed that $\lambda$ is positive and small compared

345: to $m$. It should be noticed that, when we turn off the electric

346: perturbation, we recover the

347: energy eigenvalue $E(0)=-m$  for a point vector interaction with strength $%

348: g_{{v}}=-\pi $ \cite{FD:89}.  It is worth mentioning the vanishing

349: of the first order perturbative correction to the supercritical

350: energy $E=-m$ as a result of the presence of the electric field

351: interaction $\lambda$. This behavior can also be observed looking at

352: the real part of the resonant energy given by Eq. (\ref{spectrum}).

353: An approximate expression for the energy resonances for negative

354: values of $\lambda$ can be obtained after substituting $\lambda$ by

355: $-\lambda$ in Eq. (\ref{spectrum}).

356: 

357: We can try to obtain an approximate solution to the full Eq.

358: (\ref{ecua}) after making a series expansion of the function $\

359: i\lambda +\left( \lambda x-E\right) ^{2}-m^{2}$ around zero. In this

360: way, we have that the approximate function  $\Omega _{{1}}$

361: satisfies the second order differential equation

362: \begin{equation}

363: \frac{d^{2}\Omega _{{1}}}{dx^{2}}\,+\{i\lambda +E^{2}-2\lambda

364: Ex-m^{2}\}\,\Omega _{{1}}=0.  \label{f}

365: \end{equation}

366: The regular solutions $\Omega _{{1}}^{-}$ and for $x<0,$ and  $\Omega _{{1}%

367: }^{+}$ for $x>0$ can be expressed, for $\lambda>0$, in terms of Hankel functions $%

368: H_{1/3}^{1}(z)$ and $H_{1/3}^{2}(z)$ \cite{Abramowitz} as follows

369: \begin{equation}

370: \Omega _{{1}}^{-}=Az^{1/3}H_{1/3}^{1}(z),  \label{g}

371: \end{equation}

372: \begin{equation}

373: \Omega _{{1}}^{+}=Bz^{1/3}H_{1/3}^{2}(z),  \label{h}

374: \end{equation}

375: where $A$ and $B$ are constants and $z$ is given by the expression

376: \begin{equation}

377: z=-\frac{\left( i\lambda +E^{2}-m^{2}-2E\lambda x\right) ^{3/2}}{3\lambda E}

378: \label{i}

379: \end{equation}

380: Substituting the solutions (\ref{g}) and (\ref{h}) for $\Omega

381: _{{1}}^{-}$ and $\Omega _{{1}}^{+}$ into Eq. (\ref{podirac}) we

382: obtain the corresponding expressions for $\Omega _{{2}}^{-}$ and

383: $\Omega _{{2}}^{+}.$ \ Taking into account the relation between

384: $X_{1}$, $X_{2}$ and $\Omega _{1},$ $\Omega _{2} $ (\ref{rela}), and

385: inserting the lower and upper components of $\mathsf{X}$ into the

386: boundary condition (\ref{dominio}), we find that an approximate

387: equation for the energy spectrum is:

388: 

389: \begin{equation}

390: \left( X_{{2}}(0^{{-}})X_{{1}}(0^{{+}})-X_{{2}}(0^{{+}})X_{{1}}(0^{{-}%

391: })\right) \cos g_{v}+i\left( X_{{2}}(0^{{+}})X_{{2}}(0^{{+}})-X_{{1}}(0^{{+}%

392: })X_{{1}}(0^{{-}})\right) \sin g_{v}=0  \label{energ}

393: \end{equation}

394: It is worth noting that the energy spectrum obtained from Eq. (\ref{energ}%

395: ) with $\Omega _{{1}}^{-}$ and $\Omega _{{1}}^{+}$ given by Eqs.

396: (\ref{g}) and (\ref{h}) gives a result comparable to the one

397: obtained using the relation Eq. (\ref{spectrum})

398: \begin{figure}[tbp]

399: \begin{center}

400: \includegraphics[width=10cm]{espectro.eps}

401: \end{center}

402: \caption{Dependence of the real and imaginary parts of the energy on

403: the electric field strength for $0<\lambda<0.1m^2$.}

404: \end{figure}

405: Fig. 1 shows how the real and imaginary part of the energy depend on

406: the  parameter $\lambda $ when a point vector interaction of

407: strength $g_{{v}}=-\pi $ is applied. The energy exhibits a resonant

408: behavior produced by the electric field.

409: 

410: The inverse of the imaginary part of Eq. (\ref{spectrum}) permits

411: one to determine the time \cite{Newton,Goldberger} that the state

412: stays in negative continuum.  The stronger the electric field

413: perturbation, the shorter the mean life of the resonance

414: \cite{Newton}. An interesting result that can be observed from Eq.

415: (\ref{spectrum}) and it is also depicted in Fig. 1 is that the

416: imaginary part of the resonant energy behaves as a square root with

417: respect to the real part of the energy.

418: 

419: \section{Concluding remarks}

420: 

421: 

422: In this article we have shown that the presence of a weak electric

423: field plays a crucial role in the appearance of a resonant energy

424: state in the one-dimensional Dirac equation in the field of an

425: attractive vector delta interaction. This phenomenon is analogous to

426: the Stark effect \cite{Galindo}, where a perturbative constant

427: electric field produces a shifting and broadening of the energy

428: levels of the hydrogen atom. It also parallels the autoionization

429: process, where the presence electron-electron interaction term

430: induces a self-ionization process and levels decay like in the Auger

431: effect \cite{Reed,Galindo}. Such analogies seem to indicate that,

432: for resonant effects, the shape of the perturbative potential is

433: sometimes more important than the strength of the potential field.

434: 

435: We have also shown that, the one-dimensional Dirac equation in the

436: field of an attractive vector delta interaction exhibits a resonant

437: supercritical  behavior when one introduces a  potential of the form

438: $\lambda x$. Since this effect is not present when one consider the

439: sole vector interaction $-g_{v}\delta (x)$ \cite{FD:89}, we conclude

440: that it is necessary the presence of the electric field  in order to

441: sink the delta bound state into the negative continuum.

442: 

443: \section{Acknowledgments}

444: We thank Dr. Ernesto Medina for reading and improving the

445: manuscript. We also wish to express our gratitude to the anonymous

446: referees for their critical remarks. This work was supported by

447: FONACIT under project G-2001000712.

448: 

449: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

450: \bibitem{Greiner}  W. Greiner, B. M\"{u}ller, and J. Rafelski, \textit{%

451: Quantum Electrodynamics of Strong fields} (Springer Verlag, Berlin,

452: 1985).

453: 

454: \bibitem{Rafelski}  J. Rafelski, P. Fulcher and A. Klein Phys. Rep. \textbf{%

455: 38}  (1978) 227.

456: 

457: \bibitem{Pieper}  W. Pieper, and W. Greiner, Z. Phys. \textbf{218,}

458: (1969) 327.

459: 

460: \bibitem{Zeldovich}  Y. B. Zeldovich, and V. S. Popov, Sov. Phys. Usp.

461: \textbf{14}  (1972) 673.

462: 

463: \bibitem{Greiner2} W. Greiner and J. Reinhardt, Physica Scripta \textbf{T56},

464:  (1995) 203.

465: 

466: \bibitem{PS:86}  P. \u{S}{e}ba, The Dirac eigenvalues near upper and

467: lower continuum, Preprint JINR E2-86-808, Dubna 1986.

468: 

469: \bibitem{Klaus} M. Klaus, J. f\"{u}r Mathematik, \textbf{362}, 197 (1985).

470: 

471: \bibitem{Nenciu} G. Nenciu, Commun. Math. Phys. \textbf{109} 303 (1987).

472: 

473: 

474: \bibitem{Sutherland}  B. Sutherland and D. C. Mattis, Phys. Rev. A \textbf{24%

475: },  (1981) 1194.

476: 

477: \bibitem{McKellar}  B. H. J. McKellar and G. J. Stephenson, Phys. Rev. A.

478: \textbf{36}  (1987) 2566.

479: 

480: \bibitem{McKellar2}  B. H. J. McKellar and G. J. Stephenson, Phys. Rev. C.

481: \textbf{35}  (1987) 2262.

482: 

483: \bibitem{FD:89}  F. Dom\'{i}nguez-Adame and E. Maci\'{a}, J. Phys. A: Math.

484: Gen. \textbf{22}  (1989) L419.

485: 

486: \bibitem{Albeverio} S. Albeverio, F. Gesztesy, R. H{\o}egh-Krohn and

487: H. Holden, \textit{Solvable Models in Quantum Mechanics}(AMS Chelsea

488: Publishing, Providence, Rhode Island 2005)

489: 

490: \bibitem{Loewe}  M. Loewe and M. Sanhueza, J. Phys. A: Math.

491: Gen. \textbf{23}, (1990) 553.

492: 

493: \bibitem{Nogami}  Y. Nogami, N. P.Parent and F. M. Tokoyama, J. Phys. A:

494: Math. Gen \textbf{23},  (1990) 5667.

495: 

496: \bibitem{Reed} M. Reed and B. Simon, \textit{Methods of Modern Mathematical

497: Physics: IV Analysis of Operators} (Academic Press, New York 1978).

498: 

499: 

500: \bibitem{GG:28}  G. Gamow, Z. Phys. \textbf{51}, (1928)  204. \newline

501: E.U. Condon, and R. W. Gurney, Phys. Rev. \textbf{33},  (1929) 127.

502: 

503: \bibitem{ET:58}  E. C. Titchmarsh, \textit{Eigenfunction Expansions

504: Associated with Second Order Differential Equations}, Part II.

505: (Oxford University Press, Oxford 1958).

506: 

507: \bibitem{WB:62}  W. E. Brittin, \textit{Lectures in Theoretical Physics},

508: Vol. IV. Interscience Publishers, 1962, Pag. 460.

509: 

510: \bibitem{Greiner1}  W. Greiner, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics, Wave

511: equations, (Springer, New York 1990).

512: 

513: \bibitem{HB:53}  \textit{Higher Transcendental Functions}, Vol. II. McGraw -

514: Hill Book Company, Inc., 1953.

515: 

516: 

517: \bibitem{Abramowitz}  M. Abramowitz and I. Stegun, \textit{Handbook of

518: Integrals, Series and Products} (Dover, New York 1965).

519: 

520: \bibitem{Newton}  R. G. Newton, \textit{Scattering Theory of Waves and

521: Particles}, (Dover, New York, 2002)

522: 

523: \bibitem{Goldberger}  M. Goldberger and K. Watson, \textit{Collision Theory}

524: (Dover, New York, 2004)

525: 

526: \bibitem{Galindo} A. Galindo, and P. Pascual, \textit{Quantum Mechanics

527: II} (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1991).

528: 

529: \end{thebibliography}

530: 

531: \end{document}

532: