Effects of spin on the dynamics of the 2D Dirac oscillator in the magnetic cosmic

string background
Fabiano M. Andrade1, ∗ and Edilberto O. Silva2, †
1
Departamento de Matemática e Estatı́stica, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, 84030-900 Ponta Grossa-PR, Brazil
2
Departamento de Fı́sica, Universidade Federal do Maranhão,
Campus Universitário do Bacanga, 65085-580 São Luı́s-MA, Brazil
In this work the dynamics of a 2D Dirac oscillator in the spacetime of a magnetic cosmic string is
considered. It is shown that earlier approaches to this problem have neglected a δ function contribu-
tion to the full Hamiltonian, which comes from the Zeeman interaction. The inclusion of spin effects
leads to results which confirm a modified dynamics. Based on the self-adjoint extension method, we
determined the most relevant physical quantities, such as energy spectrum, wave functions and the
arXiv:1403.4113v1 [hep-th] 17 Mar 2014

self-adjoint extension parameter by applying boundary conditions allowed by the system.

PACS numbers: 03.65.Ge, 03.65.Db, 03.65.Pm

I. INTRODUCTION II. THE 2D DIRAC OSCILLATOR IN THE

The Dirac oscillator is a natural model for studying
properties of physical systems. This model is based on
the dynamics of a harmonic oscillator for spin-1/2 par-
ticles by introducing a nominimal prescription into free
Dirac equation [1]. Because it is a exactly solvable model,
several investigations have been developed in the context
of this theoretical framework in the latest years. The in-
terest in this issue appears in different contexts, such as
quantum optics [2–4], supersymmetry [5–7], nuclear re-
actions [8], Clifford algebra [9, 10] and noncommutative
space [11, 12]. Recently, the Dirac oscillator has been
verified experimentally by J. A. Franco-Villafañe et al.,
based on a tight-binding system [13]. A detailed descrip-
tion for the Dirac oscillator is given in Ref. [14] and for
other contributions see Refs. [15–22].
Among the various contexts in which the Dirac oscil-
lator can be addressed, we refer to the cosmic string, a
linear defect that change the topology of the the medium
when viewed globally. This framework has inspired a
great deal of investigation in recent years. Such works en-
compass several distinct aspects to investigate the effects
produced by topological defects of this nature [23–29].
In this Brief Report, we show rigorously how the dy-
namics of a 2D Dirac oscillator is modified when ad-
dressed in the presence of this topological defect, giving
a special attention to the effects of spin. Our approach is
based on the self-adjoint extension method which is ap-
propriate to address any system endowed with a singular
Hamiltonian (due to localized fields sources or quantum
confinement). We determine the most relevant physi-
cal quantities from the present model, such as energy
spectrum, wave functions and self-adjoint extension pa-
rameter by applying boundary conditions allowed by the
system.
MAGNETIC COSMIC STRING BACKGROUND
In this section, we study the motion of the particle in
the cosmic string background. The cosmic string space-
time with an internal magnetic field is an object de-
scribed by the following line element in cylindrical co-
ordinates (t, r, ϕ, z):
ds2 = −dt2 + dr2 + α2 r2 dϕ2 + dz 2 , (1)
with −∞ < (t, z) < ∞, r ≥ 0 and 0 ≤ ϕ ≤ 2π. The pa-
rameter α is related to the linear mass density m̃ of the
string by α = 1 − 4m̃ runs in the interval (0, 1] and cor-
responds to a deficit angle γ = 2π(1 − α). Geometrically,
the metric (1) corresponds to a Minkowiski space-time
with a conical singularity [30]. We start with the Dirac
equation in the curved spacetime (with ~ = c = 1):
[iγ µ (∂µ + Γµ ) − eγ µ Aµ − M ] ψ = 0, (2)
where e is the charge, M is mass of the particle, ψ is
a four-component spinorial wave function and Γµ is the
spin connection. The calculation of Γµ can be found in
some works in the literature. Here, we chose the same
tetrad as in Ref. [30] (see also Ref. [28]). The recipe for
determining Γµ is purely algebraic and the result is found
to be Γµ = (0, 0, Γϕ, 0), with the non-vanishing element
given as Γϕ = i(1−α)Σz /2, where Σz is the z-component
of the spin vector Σ [29, 30].
By exploiting the symmetry under z-translations, the
(2+1)-dimensional Dirac equation is obtained from the
decoupling of (3+1)-dimensional Dirac equation (2) for
the specialized case where ∂z = 0 and Az = 0, into two
uncoupled two-component equations [27, 31, 32]. The
relevant equation is the Dirac equation in (2 + 1) dimen-
sions

[βγ · π + βM ] ψ = Eψ, (3)

where π = −i(∇α + Γ) − eA is the generalized momen-

∗ fmandrade@uepg.br tum, with ∇α = ∂/∂rr̂+(1/αr)∂/∂ϕϕ̂, the Nabla opera-
† edilbertoo@gmail.com tor in cylindrical coordinates in the conical space and ψ is
 2

a two-component spinor. In (2 + 1) dimensions the γ ma- with m ∈ Z. By replacing Eq. (10) into Eq. (8), we
trices are given in terms of the Pauli matrices in cylindri- obtain
cal coordinates: βγ r = σ r , βγ ϕ = sσ ϕ and β = γ 0 = σ z ,    
where s is twice the spin value, with s = +1 for spin “up” (±) fm (r) (±) 2 fm (r)
H =k , (11)
and s = −1 for spin “down”. gm (r) gm (r)
The magnetic flux tube in the background space de-
scribed by the metric (1) is related to the magnetic field 2
where k (±) = E 2 − M 2 + 2M ω[1(±)sj (±)],
as
 
φ δ(r) (±) 1 1(∓)1 (1 − α)
eB = e∇α × A = − ẑ, (4) j = m+ + φ(±) , (12)
α r α 2 2
where φ = Φ/Φ0 is the flux parameter with Φ0 = 2π/e,
and the vector potential in the Coulomb gauge is
φs δ(r)
H (±) = H0 (±) , (13)
φ α r
eA = − ϕ̂. (5)
αr
and
Note that in the limit as α → 1, we obtain the vector
2
potential in Euclidean space. d2 1 d j (±)
The 2D Dirac oscillator is introduced by the non- H0 = − 2 − + 2 + M 2 ω 2 r2 . (14)
dr r dr r
minimal substitution −i∇α → −i∇α −iM ωβr [1], where
r is the position vector and ω the frequency of the oscilla- The superscript (+) ((−)) is associated with the up
tor (for a comprehensive discussion of the Dirac oscillator (down) spinor components. The Hamiltonian in Eq. (13)
see Ref. [14]). In this case, Eq. (3) reads governs the dynamics of a Dirac oscillator in a magnetic
cosmic string background, i.e., a Dirac oscillator problem
[α · (π − iM ωβr) + βM ] ψ = Eψ. (6) in the presence of the Aharonov-Bohm effect in a conical
spacetime. The presence of a two-dimension δ interac-
The second order equation implied by Eq.
tion in the radial Hamiltonian H (±) , which is singular at
(6) is obtained by applying the matrix operator
the origin, makes the problem more complicated to solve.
[βM + E + α · (π − iM ωβr)]:
The most adequate manner to address this kind of point
(E 2 − M 2 )ψ = [α·(π − iM ωβr)][α·(π − iM ωβr)]ψ. (7) interaction potential is by making use of the self-adjoint
extension approach [33, 34]. This is the method adopted
Equation (7), with the help of Eqs. (4), (5) and the in this work and discussed in the next section.
expression for Γϕ above reads

(E 2 − M 2 )ψ = Hψ, (8)
III. SELF-ADJOINT EXTENSION ANALYSIS
where
   2 In this section, we review some concepts on the self-
φ 1−α z 1 adjoint extension approach. An operator O, with domain
H = −i∇α + + σ ϕ̂
α 2α r D(O), is said to be self-adjoint if and only if O = O†
and D(O) = D(O† ), O† being the adjoint of operator
 
1 ∂ φ (1 − α) z
− 2M ωsσ z + + σ O. For smooth functions, ξ ∈ C0∞ (R2 ) with ξ(0) = 0,
iα ∂ϕ α 2α
we should have H (±) ξ = H0 ξ, and it is possible to in-
φs δ(r)
− 2M ω + M 2 ω 2 r2 + σz . (9) terpret the Hamiltonian (13) as a self-adjoint extension
α r of H0 |C0∞ (R2 /{0}) [35–37]. The self-adoint extension ap-
In Eq. (9), the quantity φ/α + (1 − α)/2ασ z contributes proach consists, essentially, in extending the domain of
to the term which depends explicitly of the spin of the D(O) in order to match D(O† ). From the theory of
particle. The first term is the contribution due to the symmetric operators, it is a well-known fact that the
magnetic flux while the second is due to the spin connec- symmetric radial operator H0 is essentially self-adjoint
tion. Note that, by making α = 1 (flat space-time) and for |j (±) | ≥ 1, while for |j (±) | < 1 it admits an one-
φ = 0 (absence of magnetic field) in Eq. (8), we obtain, parameter family of self-adjoint extensions [38], H0,λm ,
for the planar case, the Dirac oscillator as proposed by where λm is the self-adjoint extension parameter. To
Moshinsky and Szczepaniak [1]. characterize this family, we will use the approach in
Making use of the underlying rotational symmetry we [33, 34], which is based in a boundary conditions at the
can express the two component spinor as origin. All the self-adjoint extensions H0,λm of H0 are
parametrized by the boundary condition at the origin
fm (r) eimϕ
 
ψ(r, ϕ) = , (10)
gm (r) ei(m+1)ϕ Ω0 = λm Ω1 , (15)
 3

with the coefficients am and bm

 
fm (r) 2
(±)
!
Ω0 = lim r|j |
, (16) (±) bm λm k (±) (±)
r→0+ gm (r) λm γ |j |
= 1+ lim r2−2|j | .
   am 4(1 − |j (±) |) r→0+
1 fm (r) 1 (22)
Ω1 = lim+ − Ω0 |j (±) | , (17)
r→0 r|j (±) | gm (r) r (±)
We note that limr→0+ r2−2|j | diverges if |j (±) | ≥ 1.
where λm ∈ R is the self-adjoint extension parameter. This condition implies that bm must be zero if |j (±) | ≥
For λm = 0, we have the free Hamiltonian (without the δ 1 and only the regular solution contributes to fm (r)
function) with regular wave functions at the origin, and (gm (r)). For |j (±) | < 1, when the operator H0 is not
for λm 6= 0 the boundary condition in Eq. (15) permit self-adjoint, there arises a contribution of the irregular
(±) solution to fm (r) (gm (r)) [29, 40–45]. In this manner,
an r−|j | singularity in the wave functions at the origin. the contribution of the irregular solution for system wave
function steams from the fact that the operator H0 is not
self-adjoint.
IV. THE BOUND STATE ENERGY AND WAVE
FUNCTIONS
For fm (r) (gm (r)) be a bound state wave function, it
must vanish at large values of r, i.e., it must be normaliz-
able. So, from the asymptotic representation of the con-
In this section, we determine the energy spectrum for fluent hypergeometric function, the normalizability con-
the Dirac oscillator in the cosmic string background by dition is translated in
solving Eq. (11). For r 6= 0, the equation for the com-
ponent fm (r) can be transformed by the variable change bm Γ(1 + |j (±) |) Γ(d− )
(±)
ρ = M ωr2 resulting in =− . (23)
am Γ(1 − |j (±) |) Γ(d(±) ) +
2 2
!
′′ ′ j (+) ρ k (+) (±)
ρfm (ρ)+fm (ρ)− + − fm (ρ) = 0, (18) From Eq. (22), for |j (±) | < 1 we have bm /am = λm γ |j |
.
4ρ 4 4γ
Using this result into Eq. (23), one finds
with γ = M ω. Due to the boundary condition in Eq. (±)
(15), we seek for regular and irregular solutions for Eq. Γ(d+ ) 1 Γ(1 + |j (±) |)
(±)
=− . (24)
(18). Studying the asymptotic limits of Eq. (18) leads Γ(d− ) λm γ |j (±) |
Γ(1 − |j (±) |)
us to the following regular (subscript +) (irregular (sub-
script −)) solution Equation (24) determines implicitly the bound state en-
ergy for the Dirac oscillator in the cosmic string back-
(+)
fm,± (ρ) = ρ±|j |/2 −ρ/2
e M (ρ). (19) ground for different values of the self-adjoint extension
parameter. Two limiting values for the self-adjoint ex-
With this, Eq. (18) is rewritten as tension parameter deserves some attention. For λm = 0,
when the δ interaction is absent, only the regular solu-
tion contributes for the bound state wave function. In
 
ρM ′′ (ρ) + 1 ± |j (+) | − ρ M ′ (ρ)
the other side, for λm = ∞ only the irregular solution
2
!
1 ± |j (+) | k (+) contributes for the bound state wave function. For all
− − M (ρ) = 0. (20) other values of the self-adjoint extension parameter, both
2 4γ
regular and irregular solutions contributes for the bound
state wave function. The energy for the limiting values
Equation (18) is of the confluent hypergeometric equa- are obtained from the poles of gamma function, namely,
tion type zM ′′ (z) + (b − z)M ′ (z) − aM (z) = 0. In this
manner, the general solution for Eq. (18) is (
(±)
d+ = −n for λm = 0, (regular solution),
(±) (25)
d− = −n for λm = ∞, (irregular solution),
 
fm (r) (±)
 
(±)
= am ρ|j |/2 e−ρ/2 M d+ , 1 + |j (±) |, ρ
gm (r)
(±)

(±)
 with n a nonnegative integer, n = 0, 1, 2, . . .. By manip-
+ bm ρ−|j |/2 e−ρ/2 M d− , 1 − |j (±) |, ρ , ulation of Eq. (25), we obtain
(21) 
(±) 2 2 1  1(∓)1 1 − α 
2
E± = M + 2M ω 2n ± m + + φ(±)
(±) α 2 2

d± = (1 ± |j (±) |)/2 − k (±) /4γ. In Eq. (21) M (a, b, z)  
is the confluent hypergometric function of the first kind s 1(∓)1 1−α
+ m+ + φ(±) , (26)
[39] and am and bm are, respectively, the coefficients of α 2 2
the regular and irregular solutions.
In this point, we apply the boundary condition in Eq. The first + (−) sign inside brackets refers to regular (ir-
(15). Doing this, one finds the following relation between regular) solution at the origin. In particular, it should be
 4

noted that for the case when |j (±) | ≥ 1 or when the δ in- presence of the Aharonov-Bohm potential. This system
teraction is absent, only the regular solution contributes has been studied in Ref. [17]. However, the authors not
for the bound state wave function (bm = 0), and the en- take into account the effects of spin. In other words, the
ergy is given by Eq. (26) using the plus sign. Note that, term proportional to the δ interaction was discarded, by
for α = 1 (flat space), Eq. (26) coincides with the energy considering only the regular solution of the problem. The
found in Eq. (37) of Ref. [22]. Moreover, for noninteger presence of this term has direct implications in the en-
values of α, the infinite degeneracy of the Dirac oscillator ergy spectrum and wave functions of the oscillator. The
is absent, while for integer values of α, it is present. correct approach to this problem must include spin ef-
The unnormalized bound state wave functions for our fects, which are explicitly manifested by the spin-orbit
problem are coupling term, and so, we have a complete description
  for the dynamics of the Dirac oscillator. We consider the
fm,± (r) self-adjoint extension method and show that the spin-
(±)
 
= ρ±|j |/2 e−ρ/2 M −n, 1 ± |j (±) |, ρ .
gm,± (r) orbit coupling term, which results in a δ interaction, can
(27) not be dropped from the Hamiltonian. Although being
singular at the origin, this term reveals that both regular
The self-adjoint extension is related with the presence and irregular solutions contributes for the bound state
of the δ interaction. In this manner, the self-adjoint ex- wave function and, consequently, for the energy spec-
tension parameter must be related with the δ interaction trum. Expressions for the bound states energy for differ-
coupling constant (±)φs/α. In fact, as shown in Refs. ent values of the self-adjoint extension parameter were
[28, 29] (see also Refs. [40, 46]), from the regularization obtained. For two specific values for the self-adjoint ex-
of the δ interaction, it is possible to find such relation. tension parameter, i.e., λm = 0 and λm = ∞, the bound
Using the regularization method, one obtains the follow- state energies are given explicitly in Eq. (26). We also
ing equation for the bound state energy verified that, for the flat space (α = 1), the results of
Ref. [22] are recovered. Finally, we have presented a
(±)
Γ(d+ ) (±)φs + α|j (±) |
 
1 correct and adequate approach to describe the dynamics
= −
(±)
Γ(d− ) 2|j (±) |
r0 (±)φs − α|j (±) | of a Dirac oscillator in the magnetic cosmic string back-
ground.
1 Γ 1 + |j (±) |


× |j (±) |
. (28)
γ Γ 1 − |j (±) |

By comparing Eqs. (24) and (28), this relation is found

to be
(±)φs + α|j (±) |
 
1 1
= 2|j (±) | (29)
λm r0 (±)φs − α|j (±) |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
where r0 is a very smalls radius which comes from the δ
regularization [28, 29].
E. O. Silva acknowledges research grants by CNPq-
(Universal) project No. 482015/2013-6, CNPq-(PQ)
V. CONCLUSIONS project No. 306068/2013-3 and FAPEMA-(Universal)
project No. 00845/13. F. M. Andrade acknowledges
In this Brief Report, we have addressed the Dirac os- research grants by Fundação Araucária project No.
cillator interacting with a topological defect and in the 205/2013.

[1] M. Moshinsky and A. Szczepaniak, J. Phys. A 22, L817
(1989).
[2] D. Dutta, O. Panella, and P. Roy, Ann. Phys. 331, 120
(2013).
[3] A. Bermudez, M. A. Martin-Delgado, and A. Luis, Phys.
Rev. A 77, 063815 (2008).
[4] A. Bermudez, M. A. Martin-Delgado, and E. Solano,
Phys. Rev. A 76, 041801 (2007).
[5] R. P. Martinez-y Romero and A. L. Salas-Brito, J. Math.
Phys. 33, 1831 (1992).
[6] J. Bentez, R. P. Martnez y Romero, H. N. Núez-Yépez,
and A. L. Salas-Brito, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 1643 (1990).
[7] O. Castaños, A. Frank, R. López, and L. F. Urrutia,
Phys. Rev. D 43, 544 (1991).
[8] J. Grineviciute and D. Halderson, Phys. Rev. C 80,
044607 (2009).
[9] R. de Lima Rodrigues, Phys. Lett. A 372, 2587 (2008).
[10] J. P. Crawford, J. Math. Phys. 34, 4428 (1993).
[11] F. Vega, J Math. Phys. 55, 032105 (2014).
[12] S. Cai, T. Jing, G. Guo, and R. Zhang, Int. J. Theor.
Phys. 49, 1699 (2010).

[13] J. A. Franco-Villafañe, E. Sadurnı́, S. Barkhofen,
U. Kuhl, F. Mortessagne, and T. H. Seligman, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 111, 170405 (2013).
[14] P. Strange, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics: With Ap-
plications in Condensed Matter and Atomic Physics
(Cambridge University Press, 1998).
[15] F. M. Andrade, E. O. Silva, M. M. Ferreira Jr., and
E. C. Rodrigues, Physics Letters B , (2014).
[16] K. Bakke and C. Furtado, Ann. Phys. 336, 489 (2013).
[17] J. Carvalho, C. Furtado, and F. Moraes, Phys. Rev. A
84, 032109 (2011).
[18] A. Boumali and L. Chetouani, Phys. Lett. A 346, 261
(2005).
[19] M. Betrouche, M. Maamache, and J. R. Choi, Adv. High
Energy Phys. 2013, 383957(1–10) (2013).
[20] C. Quesne and V. M. Tkachuk, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.
38, 1747 (2005).
[21] K. Nouicer, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 39, 5125 (2006).
[22] N. Ferkous and A. Bounames, Phys. Lett. A 325, 21
(2004).
[23] H. Belich, E. O. Silva, M. M. Ferreira Jr., and M. T. D.
Orlando, Phys. Rev. D 83, 125025 (2011).
[24] H. F. Mota and K. Bakke, Phys. Rev. D 89, 027702
(2014).
[25] C. Filgueiras and F. Moraes, Phys. Lett. A 361, 13
(2007).
[26] M. Alford, J. March-Russell, and F. Wilczek, Nucl. Phys.
B 328, 140 (1989).
[27] M. G. Alford and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 1071
(1989).
[28] F. M. Andrade, E. O. Silva, and M. Pereira, Phys. Rev.
D 85, 041701(R) (2012).
[29] F. M. Andrade, E. O. Silva, and M. Pereira, Ann. Phys.
(N.Y.) 339, 510 (2013).
[30] E. R. Bezerra de Mello, J. High Energy Phys. 2004, 016
(2004).
5
[31] H. J. de Vega, Phys. Rev. D 18, 2932 (1978).
[32] R. H. Brandenberger, A.-C. Davis, and A. M. Matheson,
Nucl. Phys. B 307, 909 (1988).
[33] S. Albeverio, F. Gesztesy, R. Hoegh-Krohn, and
H. Holden, Solvable Models in Quantum Mechanics, 2nd
ed. (AMS Chelsea Publishing, Providence, RI, 2004).
[34] W. Bulla and F. Gesztesy, J. Math. Phys. 26, 2520
(1985).
[35] F. Gesztesy, S. Albeverio, R. Hoegh-Krohn, and
H. Holden, Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathe-
matik (Crelles Journal), J. Reine Angew. Math. 380, 87
(1987).
[36] L. Dabrowski and P. Stovicek, J. Math. Phys. 39, 47
(1998).
[37] R. Adami and A. Teta, Lett. Math. Phys. 43, 43 (1998).
[38] M. Reed and B. Simon, Methods of Modern Mathemati-
cal Physics. II. Fourier Analysis, Self-Adjointness. (Aca-
demic Press, New York - London, 1975).
[39] M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, eds., Handbook of
Mathematical Functions (New York: Dover Publications,
1972).
[40] F. M. Andrade, E. O. Silva, T. Prudêncio, and
C. Filgueiras, J. Phys. G 40, 075007 (2013).
[41] V. R. Khalilov, Theor. Math. Phys. 175, 637 (2013).
[42] V. R. Khalilov, Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2548 (2013).
[43] V. R. Khalilov and C.-L. Ho, Ann. Phys. (NY) 323, 1280
(2008).
[44] V. R. Khalilov and I. Mamsurov, Theor. Math. Phys.
161, 1503 (2009).
[45] V. R. Khalilov, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2708 (2014).
[46] F. M. Andrade and E. O. Silva, Phys. Lett. B 719, 467
(2013).