Knauf’s degree and monodromy in planar potential scattering
- 32 Downloads
Abstract
We consider Hamiltonian systems on (T*ℝ2, dq ∧ dp) defined by a Hamiltonian function H of the “classical” form H = p 2/2 + V(q). A reasonable decay assumption V(q) → 0, ‖q‖ → ∞, allows one to compare a given distribution of initial conditions at t = −∞ with their final distribution at t = +∞. To describe this Knauf introduced a topological invariant deg(E), which, for a nontrapping energy E > 0, is given by the degree of the scattering map. For rotationally symmetric potentials V(q) = W(‖q‖), scattering monodromy has been introduced independently as another topological invariant. In the present paper we demonstrate that, in the rotationally symmetric case, Knauf’s degree deg(E) and scattering monodromy are related to one another. Specifically, we show that scattering monodromy is given by the jump of the degree deg(E), which appears when the nontrapping energy E goes from low to high values.
Keywords
Hamiltonian system Liouville integrability nontrapping degree of scattering scattering monodromyMSC2010 numbers
37J35 70F99 70H05Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Bates, L. and Cushman, R., Scattering Monodromy and the A 1 Singularity, Cent. Eur. J. Math., 2007, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 429–451.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 2.Born, M., Zur Quantenmechanik der Stoßvorgänge, Z. Physik, 1926, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 863–867.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 3.Cook, J.M., Banach Algebras and Asymptotic Mechanics, in Cargèse Lectures in Theoretical Physics: Application of Mathematics to Problems in Theoretical Physics (Cargèse, 1965): Vol. 6, New York: Gordon and Breach, 1967, pp. 209–245.Google Scholar
- 4.Dereziński, J. and Gérard, Ch., Scattering Theory of Classical and Quantum n-Particle Systems, Berlin: Springer, 1997.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 5.Duistermaat, J. J., On Global Action–Angle Coordinates, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 1980, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 687–706.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 6.Dullin, H. and Waalkens, H., Nonuniqueness of the Phase Shift in Central Scattering due to Monodromy, Phys. Rev. Lett., 2008, vol. 101, no. 7, 070405, 4 pp.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 7.Efstathiou, K., Giacobbe, A., Mardešić, P. and Sugny, D., Rotation Forms and Local Hamiltonian Monodromy, arXiv:1608.01579 (2016).Google Scholar
- 8.Efstathiou, K. and Martynchuk, N., Monodromy of Hamiltonian Systems with Complexity 1 Torus Actions, J. Geom. Phys., 2016 (in press).Google Scholar
- 9.Herbst, I.W., Classical Scattering with Long Range Forces, Comm. Math. Phys., 1974, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 193–214.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 10.Hunziker, W., The S-Matrix in Classical Mechanics, Comm. Math. Phys., 1968, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 282–299.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 11.Knauf, A., Qualitative Aspects of Classical Potential Scattering, Regul. Chaotic Dyn., 1999, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 3–22.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 12.Knauf, A., Mathematische Physik: Klassische Mechanik, Springer-Lehrbuch Masterclass, Berlin: Springer, 2011.Google Scholar
- 13.Knauf, A. and Krapf, M., The Non-Trapping Degree of Scattering, Nonlinearity, 2008, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 2023–2041.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 14.Simon, B., Wave Operators for Classical Particle Scattering, Comm. Math. Phys., 1971, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 37–48.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 15.Turaev, D. and Rom-Kedar, V., Elliptic islands appearing in near-ergodic flows, Nonlinearity, 1998, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 575–600.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar