Background
The (rational) Calogero-Moser system is the dynamical system which describes the evolution of nn particles on the line mathbbCmathbbC which repel each other with force proportional to the cube of their distance. If the particles have (distinct!) position qiqi and momentum pipi, then the Hamiltonian which describes this system is
H=sumip2i+sumineqkfrac1(xi−xk)2H=sumip2i+sumineqkfrac1(xi−xk)2
There are many interesting properties of this system, but one of the first interesting properties is that it is `completely integrable'. This means that solving it explicitly amounts to solving a series of straight-forward integrals.
The integrability can most easily be shown by showing that the phase space for this system includes into a symplectic reduction of a certain matrix space, and then noticing that the above Hamiltonian is a restriction of a integrable Hamiltonian on the whole space. This is done by assigning to any ensemble of points qiqi and momenta qiqi a pair of ntimesnntimesn matrices XX and YY, where XX is the diagonal matrix with qiqi on the diagonal entries, while YY is given by
Yii=pi,;Yik=(xi−xk)−1,;ineqkYii=pi,;Yik=(xi−xk)−1,;ineqk
This matrix assignment defines a map from the configuration space CMnCMn of the CM system to the space of pairs of matrices. The space of pairs of matrices (X,Y)(X,Y) is naturally a symplectic space from the bilinear form (X,Y)cdot(X′,Y′)=Tr(XY′)−Tr(X′Y)(X,Y)cdot(X′,Y′)=Tr(XY′)−Tr(X′Y), and the action of GLnGLn by simultaneous conjugation naturally has a moment map. Therefore, we sympletically reduce the space of pairs of matrices at a specific coadjoint orbit (not the origin) and get a new symplectic space overlineCMnoverlineCMn.
Composing the above matrix assignment with symplectic reduction, we get a map CMnrightarrowoverlineCMnCMnrightarrowoverlineCMn. This map turns out to be a symplectic inclusion which has dense image. We also notice that the functions Tr(Yi)Tr(Yi), as ii goes from 11 to nn, descend to a Poisson-commuting family of functions on overlineCMnoverlineCMn, and because overlineCMnoverlineCMn is 2n2n dimensional, each of the functions Tr(Yi)Tr(Yi) gives an integrable flow on overlineCMnoverlineCMn. Finally, we notice that Tr(Y2)Tr(Y2) restricts to HH on CMnCMn.
The Massive Version of the CM System
Now, make the following change to the system. To every particle, assign a number mimi (the mass), which can be in mathbbCmathbbC, but I am interested in the case where the mimi are positive integers. Define a the massive CM Hamiltonian as
Hm=sumifracp2imi+sumineqkfracmimk(xi−xk)2Hm=sumifracp2imi+sumineqkfracmimk(xi−xk)2
The physical meaning of this equation is that particles still have force proportional to the inverse of the cube of their distance, but the force is proportional to the mass of that particle; also, particles resist acceleration proportional to their mass. If the force were to drop off proportional to the inverse square of their distance, and attract instead of repel, this would model how massive particles move under the influence of gravity.
Questions
- Is this system integrable?
- Can it be realized in a similar matrix form?
- Does it have any interesting or new behavior than the usual CM system?
An Idea
It is almost possible to realize this Hamiltonian in a simple modification of the previous approach. Let MM denote the diagonal matrix with the mimis on the diagonal. Then
Tr(MYMY)=sumim2ip2i+sumineqkfracmimk(xi−xk)2Tr(MYMY)=sumim2ip2i+sumineqkfracmimk(xi−xk)2
The functions Tr((MY)i)Tr((MY)i) should again be a Poisson commutative family. Rescaling the pipi by m3/2im3/2i gives the massive Hamiltonian HmHm; however, this rescaling is not symplectic, and so it won't preserve the flows.
Another Idea
In the case of integer mimi, one possibility is to work with NtimesNNtimesN matrices rather than ntimesnntimesn matrices, where N=summiN=summi. Then it is possible to construct a matrix XX with eigenvalues qiqi, each occuring with multiplicity mimi, as well as a matrix YY such that (X,Y)(X,Y) defines a point in overlineCMNoverlineCMN. The Hamiltonian Tr(Y2)Tr(Y2) even restricts to the correct 'massive' Hamiltonian HmHm. However, the flow described by this Hamiltonian on overlineCMnoverlineCMn will in almost all cases immediately separate eigenvalues that started together, which we don't want. If we restrict the Hamiltonian to the closed subspace where the eigenvalues are required to stay together, then this gives the desired flow. Unfortunately, restricting to a closed subvariety doesn't preserve a Hamiltonian being integrable.
No comments:
Post a Comment