the last four years more understanding has been gained of the interplay between instantons and monopoles in non - abelian gauge theories , based on the ability to construct exact caloron solutions , i.e. instantons at finite temperature for which @xmath3 approaches a constant at spatial infinity  @xcite . this last condition is best expressed by specifying the polyakov loop to approach a constant value at infinity , also called the holonomy .
it is the finite action that demands the field strength to go to zero at infinity , and guarantees the polyakov loop to be independent of the direction in which we approach infinity .
one can parametrize this polyakov loop in terms of its eigenvalues @xmath4 and a gauge rotation @xmath5 , such that = _
x(_0^a_0(x , t)dt)=g^(2i(_1,_2,
,_n))g , which can be arranged such that @xmath6 , and @xmath7 , with @xmath8 .
this is in the gauge where the gauge fields , assumed to be anti - hermitian matrices taking values in the algebra of @xmath1 , are periodic in the time direction @xmath9 . in our conventions the field strength is given by @xmath10 $ ] .
we will find it convenient to construct the multi - caloron solutions from the adhm - nahm fourier construction  @xcite based on taking instantons in @xmath11 , which periodically repeat in the time direction ( see also ref .
@xcite which uses directly the nahm transformation  @xcite as the starting point for the charge 1 construction ) . to allow for non - trivial holonomy ,
the periodicity is only up to a constant gauge rotation ( which is the holonomy ) . in this so - called algebraic gauge ,
all gauge field components vanish at spatial infinity , and we may approximately superpose these calorons by simply adding the gauge fields .
when each gauge field is periodic up to the same constant gauge transformation , the sum satisfies the same property .
it should be noted that we are not allowed to add gauge fields with different holonomy ; in an _ infinite _ volume the holonomy is fixed by the boundary condition .
as to the topological charge , we recall that in the atiyah - drinfeld - hitchin - manin ( adhm ) construction  @xcite it is supported by gauge singularities ( the algebraic gauge is for this reason also called the singular gauge ) , as opposed to at infinity being a pure gauge with the gauge function having the appropriate winding number . to deal with the gauge singularity of one instanton , when adding the field of the others , one has to smoothly deform the gauge field of the latter to vanish near the gauge singularity .
as long as the singularities are not too close , this can be done without a significant increase in the action . on the lattice
this problem does not occur , when hiding singularities between the meshes of the lattice .
4.1 cm    calorons , however , have an additional feature . when squeezed in the imaginary time direction ( the size @xmath12 becoming bigger than the period @xmath13 ) , they split in constituent monopoles with masses @xmath14 ( @xmath15 ) . outside the cores of these monopoles
the gauge field becomes abelian . ignoring the charged components ,
which decay exponentially outside the cores of the constituent monopoles , the field is described in terms of self - dual dirac monopoles .
the singularity of a dirac string can only be avoided by _ not _ neglecting the contributions coming from the charged components , even when far away from the constituents . for a single caloron we would not care , since the dirac string is not seen in gauge invariant quantities .
it does , however , involve a rather subtle interplay between the charged and neutral components of the gauge field in the vicinity of the would - be dirac string  @xcite .
it is this subtle interplay that is disturbed when we add gauge fields of various calorons together .
unlike for the gauge singularity , the combined field will not diverge , but it shows a narrow and steep enhancement at the location of the would - be dirac string as illustrated in fig .  [ fig : string ] , where we added two @xmath16 calorons .
also here one may shield the dirac strings from these tails .
but one always pays the price that the dirac string no longer can be hidden , and carries energy .
let us stress again that these are genuine gauge invariant non - singular features in the configuration , even though they are of course a consequence of our particular way of constructing a superposition .
a visible would - be dirac string presents a formidable obstacle to considering the constituents as independent objects ; they remember to which caloron they belong .
insisting the abelian field far from the constituents to be exactly additive under the approximate superposition leaves us little room for considering other possible superpositions , apart from carefully fine - tuning the charged components of the configuration . solving for the exact self - dual caloron solutions of higher charge we wish to show that a visible dirac string is an artifact of the particular procedure to construct approximate caloron solutions . for the exact charge @xmath0 caloron solutions we expect @xmath17 constituents and from the point of view of the parameter space
these can be expected to be independent ( as long the constituents do not get too close together ) .    3.0 cm    in this paper we develop the formalism and give exact solutions for a class of axially symmetric solutions .
for @xmath16 an example of such an exact solution with charge 2 is presented in fig .
[ fig : wellsep ] .
we compare the exact solution ( left ) , with the one obtained by adding two charge 1 calorons , showing the would - be dirac strings ( middle ) and with the exact abelian solution determined from ( self - dual ) dirac monopoles placed at the location of the constituents ( right ) .
indeed , the would - be dirac strings are no longer visible for the exact non - abelian solution .
this gives us good reasons to expect that moving away from the requirement of axial symmetry , the exact solutions will exhibit the constituent monopoles as independent objects .
this is an important prerequisite for attempting to formulate the long distance features of qcd in terms of these monopoles .
non - linearities will remain important when constituents overlap , like for instantons at zero - temperature , as will be illustrated through suitable examples .
our results can also be used to extract information on multi - monopole solutions . in the charge 1 case
it has been shown  @xcite that sending one of the constituents to infinity one is left with exact monopole solutions . perhaps somewhat surprisingly
, it has been notoriously difficult to construct approximate superpositions of magnetic monopoles in such a way the interaction energy decreases with their separation . within our approach
this is due to the difficulty ( particularly when sending some constituents to infinity ) in keeping dirac strings hidden .
it would therefore still be important to find approximate superpositions that achieve this .
nevertheless , it shows how subtle it is to consider abelian fields as embedded in non - abelian ones .
there is much more to t hooft s abelian projection  @xcite than meets the eye at first glance .
the rest of the paper will be organized as follows . in sect .
2 we formulate the fourier analysis of the adhm data for calorons of higher charge .
this allows us in sect .
2.1 to relate to the nahm equations , providing the connection between the adhm and nahm data .
the nahm equation for charge @xmath0 calorons  @xcite expresses self - duality of dual @xmath18 gauge fields on a circle , but with singularities . in sect .
2.2 we introduce the `` master '' green s function in terms of which the gauge field ( sect .  2.3 ) and the action density ( sect .  2.4 ) can be explicitly computed , relying heavily on some beautiful results  @xcite derived in the context of the adhm construction .
this can all be achieved without explicitly solving the nahm equation . in sect .  3 we will
, however , solve it for some special cases with axial symmetry .
there we also illustrate some interesting features that appear when constituents overlap , similar to what was observed at zero temperature  @xcite .    sect .  4
is devoted to the far - field limit ( related to the high - temperature limit ) , where up to exponential corrections only the abelian component of the field survives .
again , expressions can be derived without explicitly solving the nahm equation .
we apply the formalism to the exact axially symmetric solutions in sect .  4.3.1 , where we prove that in the far - field region they are in a precise sense described by ( self - dual )
dirac monopoles , which is conjectured to be the case for any exact solution .
we end in sect .  5 with a discussion of lattice results that have been obtained by various groups , some open questions and suggestions for future studies .
in constructing the higher charge caloron solutions similar steps are followed as for charge 1 .
we distinguish two constructions , @xmath19 based on quaternions , and @xmath1 based on complex spinors . with @xmath20 , this implies that for @xmath16 two constructions are possible .
for @xmath21 it was easily shown these are identical , but for @xmath22 this is more complicated due to the quadratic adhm constraint  @xcite which can not be solved in all generality . since the essential part of the construction that employs the impurity scattering technique is identical in both approaches , we will give a unified presentation .    the @xmath1 adhm formalism for charge @xmath0 instantons  @xcite
employs a @xmath0 dimensional vector @xmath23 , where @xmath24 is a two - component spinor in the @xmath25 representation of @xmath1 .
alternatively , @xmath26 can be seen as a @xmath27 complex matrix .
in addition one has four complex hermitian @xmath28 matrices @xmath29 , combined into a @xmath30 complex matrix @xmath31 , using the unit quaternions @xmath32 and @xmath33 , where @xmath34 are the pauli matrices . with some abuse of notation , we often write @xmath35 . together
@xmath26 and @xmath36 constitute the @xmath37 dimensional matrix @xmath38 , to which is associated a complex @xmath39 dimensional normalized zero mode vector @xmath40 , ( x)= ( + b(x)),b(x)=b - x,^(x)v(x)=0,v^(x)v(x)=_n . here
the quaternion @xmath41 denotes the position ( a @xmath28 unit matrix is implicit ) and @xmath40 can be solved explicitly in terms of the adhm data by v(x)=(-_n + u(x))^-,u(x)= ( b^-x^)^-1^,(x)=_n+u^(x)u(x ) , as @xmath42 is an @xmath43 positive hermitian matrix , its square root @xmath44 is well - defined .
the gauge field is given by a_(x)=v^(x)_v(x)=^-(x)(u^(x ) _
u(x))^-(x)+^(x)_^-(x ) .
[ eq : aadhm ] the @xmath45 adhm formalism for charge @xmath0 instantons  @xcite employs also a @xmath0 dimensional vector @xmath23 , where now @xmath46 is a quaternion ( 4 real parameters ) .
again , @xmath26 can be seen as an @xmath47 complex matrix ( but with @xmath48 real , as opposed to complex , parameters ) .
now the four @xmath28 matrices @xmath29 are required to be real and symmetric , still to be combined into a @xmath30 complex matrix @xmath35 .
the @xmath49 dimensional matrix @xmath38 is constructed as before .
it is immediately obvious that now @xmath42 is proportional to @xmath50 , simplifying the expression for the gauge field to a_(x)=v^(x)_v(x)=(u^(x)_u(x))/(x ) .
for @xmath51 to be a self - dual connection , @xmath38 has to satisfy the quadratic adhm constraint , which states that @xmath52 ( considered as a @xmath28 complex quaternionic matrix ) has to commute with the quaternions , or equivalently ^(x)(x)=_0f^-1_x,[eq : adhmconstr ] defining @xmath53 as a hermitian ( resp .
symmetric ) @xmath28 green s function .
the ity follows by computing the curvature f_=2 ^ -(x)u^(x)_f_x u(x)^-(x ) , making essential use of the fact that @xmath53 commutes with the quaternions , and @xmath54}$ ] being  ( @xmath55}$ ] is ) .
the quadratic constraint can be formulated as @xmath56 , where @xmath57 , and one obtains |_b_b_+_a _
2(_a^)= 0,[eq : radhmcon ] where @xmath58 is the spinorial trace . note that this implies that @xmath59 is traceless for @xmath60 .    to count the number of instanton parameters we observe that the transformation @xmath61 , @xmath62 , with @xmath63 ( resp .
@xmath64 ) leaves the gauge field and the adhm constraint untouched . taking this symmetry into account ,
one checks the dimension of the instanton moduli space to be @xmath65 dimensional .
we have @xmath65 and @xmath66 real parameters from @xmath26 and @xmath29 .
the @xmath67 symmetry removes @xmath68 real parameters and finally the quadratic adhm constraint gives @xmath69 real equations . on the other hand , for the quaternionic construction
there are @xmath48 and @xmath70 parameters from @xmath26 and @xmath29 , of which @xmath71 are removed by the @xmath72 symmetry , and the quadratic adhm constraint gives @xmath73 equations .
global gauge transformations are realized by @xmath74 , with @xmath75 and are here included in the parameter count . for calorons with non - trivial holonomy the dimension of the gauge invariant parameter space
is minimally reduced by @xmath76 ( maximal symmetry breaking ) and maximally by @xmath77 ( trivial holonomy ) .
we note that for @xmath16 the quadratic adhm constraint and symmetry of the adhm data for high charge differ considerably . for the caloron we have to deal in a sense with infinite topological charge , but finite within each ( imaginary ) time interval of length @xmath13 .
this infinity is resolved by fourier transformation , relating it to the nahm formalism  @xcite , but the difference between the @xmath67 and @xmath72 symmetries ( the infinity is moved to making these gauge symmetries local ) remains , as well as of course the nature of the nahm data ( the fourier transformation of the adhm data ) .
henceforth we put @xmath78 , which can always be achieved by a rescaling .    like for charge one  @xcite the caloron with polyakov loop @xmath79 at infinity
is built out of a periodic array of instantons , twisted by @xmath79 .
this is implemented in the adhm formalism by requiring ( suppressing color and spinor indices , respectively quaternion indices ) u_pk+k+a(x+1)=u_pk+a(x)_^-1 [ eq : ucocyc ] with @xmath80 ( the fourier index ) , and @xmath81 ( associated to the non - abelian nature of the nahm data ) . using that @xmath82 ,
leads to the required periodicity . demanding _
pk+k+a=_pk+a , b_pk+a , qk+b = b_pk - k+a , qk - k+b+ _ 0_pq_ab , suitably implements and is partially solved by imposing _
pk+a=^p__a , b_pk+a , qk+b = p_0_pq _ ab+a^ab_p - q , with @xmath83 still to be determined to account for .
it is useful to introduce the @xmath84 projectors @xmath85 on the @xmath86th eigenvalue of @xmath79 , such that @xmath87 and @xmath88 .
we now perform the fourier transformation to the nahm setting  @xcite , which casts @xmath36 into a weyl operator and @xmath89 into a singularity structure on @xmath90 , & & _ p , q b_pk+a , qk+b(x ) e^2i(pz - qz)= d^ab(z),2i_p e^2ipza^ab_p = a^ab(z ) , + & & _ p , q^_pk+a e^2i(pz - qz)^ _ qk+b=(z - z)_ab(z),_p e^-2 ipz_pk+a=_a(z ) , with @xmath91 , we can write @xmath92 and @xmath93 , where & & d^ab_x(z)d^ab(z)-2ix^ab= ^ab(_0 - 2ix)+a^ab(z ) , + & & _ ab(z)=_m(z-_m)_a^p_m_b , _
a(z)=_m(z-_m)p_m_a.it should be noted that @xmath29 hermitian , implies that @xmath94 is hermitian ( as a @xmath28 matrix ) , whereas a real symmetric @xmath29 in addition implies @xmath95 .
the @xmath96 matrix @xmath97 can always be decomposed as _
s^ab_m-^ab_m).[eq : lam ] on the diagonal one can show , as for @xmath21 , that @xmath98 , but in general the relation between @xmath99 and @xmath100 is more complicated , s_m^abs_m^cd+s_m^ads_m^cb=_m^ab _ m^cd+_m^ad_m^cb .
furthermore , @xmath101 is traceless implies that @xmath102 . both these conditions are equally valid for the @xmath45 construction .
but in the latter case , since through the nahm equation @xmath103 determines the discontinuities in @xmath104 , compatibility with @xmath105 requires @xmath106 , which will be verified below .
the nahm equation is obtained by fourier transforming the quadratic adhm constraint [ d_(z),d_(z)]|_=4 ^ 2(z ) , or in more familiar form ( as a @xmath28 matrix equation ) a_j(z)+[a_0(z),a_j(z)]+_jk[a_k(z ) , a_(z)]=2i_m(z-_m)_m^j,[eq : nahm ]    ( 10,1.5)(-1.6,-1.0 ) ( 0.,0)@xmath107 ( 1.2,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 1.6,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 1.25,-0.5)@xmath108 ( 2,0)(1,0)3 ( 2,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 2,0 ) ( 2,-0.5)@xmath109 ( 1.7,0.5)@xmath110 ( 3.75,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 3.75,0 ) ( 3.45,-0.5)@xmath111 ( 3.45,0.5)@xmath112 ( 5,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 5,0 ) ( 4.7,-0.5)@xmath113 ( 4.7,0.5)@xmath114 ( 5.2,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 5.6,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 6.0,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 6.4,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 6.8,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 7.25,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 7.7,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 8.1,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 8.5,0)(1,0)2.5 ( 8.5,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 8.5,0 ) ( 7.8,-.5)@xmath115 ( 7.8,.5)@xmath116 ( 9.5,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 9.5,0 ) ( 9.2,-.5)@xmath117 ( 9.2,.5)@xmath118 ( 11.0,0 ) ( 11.,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 10.7,-.5)@xmath119 ( 10.7,.5)@xmath120 ( 11.0 , 0)(1,0)1.0 ( 12.0,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 12.0,0 ) ( 11.6,-.5)@xmath121 ( 11.7,.5)@xmath122 ( 12.2 , 0.)(1,0)0.2 ( 12.6 , 0.)(1,0)0.2 ( 14.3,0 . ) .     + where the figure illustrates the jumps of @xmath123 at each of the singularities ( an overall factor of @xmath124 is not shown ) . the @xmath125 symmetry in the adhm construction translates into a @xmath67 gauge symmetry on @xmath90 , which allows one to set @xmath126 to be constant , where @xmath127 is a hermitian matrix which can be made diagonal by a constant gauge transformation . its trace part can be absorbed in @xmath128 .
central to the adhm construction is the green s function @xmath53 , which when fourier transformed to @xmath129 is a solution to the differential equation \{()^2 + _ m(z-_m)s_m}f_x(z , z)= _ k(z - z),[eq : df ]    ( 10,2.0)(-1.5,-1.1 ) ( 0.,0.)@xmath130 ( 1.2,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 1.6,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 1.25,-0.5)@xmath108 ( 2,0)(1,0)3 ( 2,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 2,0 ) ( 2,-0.5)@xmath109 ( 1.7,0.5)@xmath131 ( 3.75,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 3.75,0 ) ( 3.45,-0.5)@xmath111 ( 3.45,0.5)@xmath132 ( 5,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 5,0 ) ( 4.7,-0.5)@xmath113 ( 4.7,0.5)@xmath133 ( 5.2,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 5.6,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 6.0,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 6.4,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 6.5,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 6.5,0 ) ( 6.1,.5)@xmath134 ( 6.5,-0.5)@xmath135 ( 6.8,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 7.25,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 7.7,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 8.1,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 8.5,0)(1,0)2.5 ( 8.5,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 8.5,0 ) ( 7.8,-.5)@xmath115 ( 7.8,.5)@xmath136 ( 9.5,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 9.5,0 ) ( 9.2,-.5)@xmath117 ( 9.2,.5)@xmath137 ( 11.0,0 ) ( 11.,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 10.7,-.5)@xmath119 ( 10.7,.5)@xmath138 ( 11.0 , 0)(1,0)1.0 ( 12.0,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 12.0,0 ) ( 11.6,-.5)@xmath121 ( 11.7,.5)@xmath139 ( 12.2 , 0.)(1,0)0.2 ( 12.6 , 0.)(1,0)0.2 ( 14.3,0 . ) .     + where the figure illustrates the jumps for the _ derivative _ of @xmath140 ( itself being continuous ) at each of the singularities , which now includes @xmath141 ( an overall factor of @xmath142 is omitted ) . with help of the impurity scattering formalism
we will be able to express the solution in a simple form , without assuming explicit knowledge of @xmath104 . as a bonus
this also gives a more transparent derivation for @xmath21 .
the equation for the green s function is valid for the @xmath1 and @xmath45 formulations alike . in general
the matrix @xmath53 is complex hermitian , but for @xmath45 it is real symmetric , which implies that f_x^ab(z , z)=f_x^ba(z,z)^*,f_x^ab(z , z)=f_x^ba(-z,-z ) .
[ eq : fsymm ] for @xmath45 consistency requires , @xmath143 , which is to be compared with the condition we found in the previous section , @xmath144 . to demonstrate the validity of these relations we make use of the fact that @xmath145 , with @xmath146 real ( such that @xmath147 ) .
furthermore , we note that with @xmath148 , @xmath149 , whereas @xmath150 and @xmath151 . introducing @xmath152 , which is an imaginary unit quaternion ( i.e. @xmath153 , @xmath154 )
, we find with the help of _ 0s^ab_m-^ab_m&=&_a^|_(_0-i(-1)^m)^_b_[eq : rhos ] + & = & _ a^_b^(+ ) + & = & _ 0+,for which we used that @xmath155}$ ] is a real quaternion , therefore given by @xmath156})={{\scriptstyle{{1\over 2}}}}\sigma_0\tr_2(\omega\eta_{\nu\mu})=\sigma_0\hat\omega \cdot\vec\eta_{\mu\nu}$ ] .
we directly read off @xmath100 and @xmath103 and verify that indeed @xmath157 and @xmath158 .
we wrote the result so as to easily make contact with the @xmath21 results  @xcite ( for which the 2nd term in @xmath100 and the 1st term in @xmath103 do not contribute ) .    in formulating the impurity scattering
we note that the @xmath67 gauge transformation g(z)=(2i(_0-x_0_k)z ) turns @xmath159 into the ordinary derivative and conjugates all other objects in , such that \{-+v(z;x ) } f_x(z , z)=4 ^ 2 _
k(z - z),[eq : dftrans ] with @xmath160 and @xmath161 given by f_x(z , z)g(z)f_x(z , z)g^(z),v(z;x ) 4 ^ 2r^2(z;x)+2_m(z-_m)s_m,[eq : ftofh ] where @xmath162 and @xmath163 are defined by r_j(z;x)x_j_k - g(z)a_j(z)g^(z),s_mg(_m)s_mg^(_m).[eq : rdef ] periodicity is now only up to a gauge transformation .
note that @xmath164 is a hermitian @xmath28 matrix , and that @xmath161 does _ not _ depend on @xmath128 . by combining @xmath53 and its derivative into a vector , f_x(z , z )
, we can turn the second order equation in to a first order equation \{-}f_x ( z , z)=c(z - z),c-4 ^ 2 its solution is f_x(z , z)=w(z ) , w(z)=w(z ) where @xmath165 is a @xmath96 matrix , whereas @xmath166 is a two - component vector ( like @xmath167 ) , all components being hermitian @xmath28 matrices .
the theta function takes care of the inhomogeneous part of the equation .
however , we have to restrict to @xmath168 $ ] since the delta function is periodic .
the solution can be extended beyond this range using the periodicity , which when imposed , as we will see , also determines @xmath169 .
the solution for @xmath170 can be ( formally ) written as a path ordered exponential integral in the usual way . to show that this indeed makes sense
, we should specify how to deal with the delta functions in @xmath171 . from the definition of the path
ordered exponential integral we find @xmath172 with t_m== , which correctly reflects the matching conditions due to the  impurity " at @xmath173 , since @xmath160 is continuous across @xmath173 , whereas the derivative jumps with @xmath174 and both conditions can be summarized by @xmath175 . note that @xmath176 evolves with @xmath177 as @xmath178 , with w(z_2)w^-1(z_1)=w(z_2,z_1).[eq : wdef ] in particular , when @xmath179 and @xmath180 this gives the  propagation " between two neighboring impurities and we can write h_mw(_m+1 - 0,_m+0)=.[eq : hm ]    neither @xmath181 nor @xmath182 require us to specify a boundary condition for @xmath170 . a change in boundary condition
, however , affects @xmath169 .
to avoid such ambiguities , we define @xmath183 such that f_x(z , z)=w(z , z_0).[eq : fxz0 ] we determine @xmath184 by scattering  around " the circle determined from the boundary conditions of @xmath176 . using , the fact that @xmath185 is strictly periodic and that @xmath186 , one finds @xmath187 and @xmath188 ( where the order of the _ matrix _ multiplication , defined componentwise , is important ) . the latter condition can be used to fix @xmath184 over the range of one period , @xmath189 $ ] ( the use of @xmath185 requires @xmath168 $ ] , that of @xmath190 further restricts the range for @xmath135 to @xmath191 ) . with the help of the periodicity properties of @xmath165 it gives @xmath192 .
we thus find for _ arbitrary _
@xmath193 f_x(z , z)=w(z , z_0)\{(_2k-_z_0)^-1-(z-z)_2k } w^-1(z,z_0)c,[eq : vecf ] where we introduced the  holonomy " @xmath194 _ z_0g^(1)w(z_0 + 1,z_0)=g^(1 ) .
the equation for @xmath176 is valid for @xmath195 $ ] , but can be extended with the appropriate periodicity specified above .
we note that @xmath196 plays the role of a cocycle , in the gauge where @xmath197 is transformed to 0 , with @xmath194 the full circle  scattering " matrix .
the @xmath193-independence of @xmath176 follows from _ z_0&=&g^(1)w(z_0 + 1,z_0^+1)w(z^_0 + 1,z_0)= w(z_0,z^_0)g^(1)w(z^_0 + 1,z_0 ) + & = & w(z_0,z^_0)_z_0^w^-1(z_0,z^_0).[eq : frel ] putting things together we therefore find f_x(z , z)&=&g^(z)(_k,0)f_x(z , z ) g(z ) , + d_x^0(z)f_x(z , z)&=&g^(z ) ( 0,_k)f_x(z , z)g(z),[eq : finf ] satisfying all required conditions as can be checked explicitly .
interestingly , implies @xmath198 as should of course be the case . in the light of this
we also note that ( choosing @xmath199 ) _ _ m&=&g^(1)t_m+nh_m+n-1t_m+n-1h_m+n-2 t_m+1h_m + & = & t_mh_m-1t_2h_1t_1g^(1)h_n t_nh_n-1t_m+1h_m,[eq : ths ]    ( 10,2.0)(-2.8,-1.1 ) ( -0.2,0.)@xmath200 ( 0.8,-0.5)@xmath201 ( 2,0)(1,0)2 ( 2,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 2,0 ) ( 1.7,0.5)@xmath181 ( 2.5,0.2)@xmath202 ( 4,0 ) ( 4,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 3.4,-0.5)@xmath203 ( 3.7,0.5)@xmath204 ( 4.0,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 4.4,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 4.8,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 5.2,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 5.6,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 6.0,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 6.4,0 ) ( 6.4,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 5.7,.5)@xmath205 ( 5.8,-0.5)@xmath206 ( 6.4,0)(1,0)2 ( 7.2,0.2)@xmath207 ( 8.4,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 8.4,0 ) ( 8.1,.5)@xmath208 ( 8.1,-0.5)@xmath119 ( 8.4,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 8.8,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 9.2,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 9.6,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 10,0)(1,0)2 ( 10,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 10,0 ) ( 9.7,-.5)@xmath209 ( 9.7,.5)@xmath210 ( 10.0,0 ) ( 10.9,0.2)@xmath182 ( 12.0,0 ) ( 12.,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 11.7,-.5)@xmath211 ( 12.2,0 . ) ,     + using for the second identity that @xmath212 and @xmath213 .
we will use these ingredients further on to relate to the earlier results for @xmath21 , where the positioning of @xmath214 is of course irrelevant .
the central role of the green s function @xmath185 becomes clear when one appeals to the fact that it can be used to find the gauge field ( working out ) , whereas its determinant gives a simple expression for the action density .
this follows from the general adhm construction  @xcite , and can be directly taken over for the caloron  @xcite .
for the gauge field one finds a_(x)&=&^(x)|__f_x ^^(x)+[^-(x),_^(x ) ] + & = & ^(x)|_^j__j(x ) ^(x)+[^-(x),_^(x ) ] , [ eq : adef ] where @xmath42 and @xmath215 are @xmath43 matrices defined by ( x)(_n - f_x^)^-1 , _
j_j f_x^. to apply this to the caloron all we have to do is perform the fourier transformation , ( x)^-1=_n-_m , mp_m_a f_x^ab(_m,_m ) ^_bp_m,_j=_m , mp_m_a _ j f_x^ab(_m,_m)^_bp_m.[eq : phidef ]    for the @xmath45 construction @xmath42 is a real quaternion , and hence a multiple of @xmath50 , after which the gauge field simplifies to a_(x)=(x)|_^j__j(x).[eq : asp1 ] to simplify @xmath42 and @xmath215 we use , together with @xmath216 , such that @xmath217 and @xmath218 .
we note that @xmath42 and @xmath215 involve the combinations @xmath219 , which can be split in symmetric and anti - symmetric combinations ( cf . ) _ a_0|_b&=&_0_a^_b^+ _ _ a^_b^ , + _ a_j|_b&=&_0|^j__a^_b^+_\{a_j|_b}. no contributions from @xmath220 and @xmath221 can appear in @xmath42 since these are symmetric in @xmath222 and @xmath223 , selecting from @xmath224 the term proportional to @xmath50 , but @xmath225 and @xmath226 vanish .
therefore ( cf . ) & -2cm(x)^-1=_0-f_x^ab(_2,_2)_m=1 ^ 2 ( p_m_a^_b^p_m+(-1)^mp_m__a^_b^p_m ) = [ eq : phis ] + & _ 0)=_0.similarly we can simplify the expression for @xmath215 , which we split in a charged component and abelian , or neutral , component @xmath227 with _
j^ch = f_x^ab(_1,_2)p_1_\{a_j|_b } p_2- and & -3cm_j^abel(x)=f_x^ab(_2,_2)_m=1 ^ 2 ( p_m_\{a_j|_b}p_m+(-1)^mp_m|_^j _ a^_b^p_m)[eq : vphis ] + & = if_x^ab(_2,_2)=-i^-1_k(f_x(_2,_2)_2^j ) , where we used that @xmath228 to correctly identify @xmath229 , see .
we may of course express @xmath42 and @xmath230 also in terms of the first impurity , @xmath231 $ ] and @xmath232 , as is easily verified .    like for @xmath21 we will show further on that @xmath233 decays exponentially , away from the cores of the constituent monopoles , where only the abelian component survives , a_^abel(x)=-^-1|^j__. note that for @xmath21 we are able to write @xmath234 , with @xmath235 , making use of the fact that @xmath236 .
this seems to allow for the dipoles of @xmath0 well - separated calorons to point in different directions .
we will discuss this issue further when studying the limiting behavior far from the cores of the constituents , where the field becomes algebraic and constituent locations are readily identified .      within the adhm formalism the action density is given by  @xcite ,
-_n f_^2(x)=-_^2_^2 ( x),[eq : osborn ] where @xmath237 equals @xmath238 after regularization to extract an irrelevant overall and for calorons divergent constant
. we will be able to find a simple expression for @xmath237 at any @xmath0 , generalizing the result for charge 1 calorons .
we use that @xmath239 , where in the last step we performed the fourier transformation , and @xmath240 includes an integration with respect to @xmath177 . the case @xmath241 is treated separately , due to the discontinuity in the @xmath177 derivative of @xmath185 at @xmath141 , which we regularize using point - splitting : ( d_x^0f_x)&=&_0_0 ^ 1dz  _ k(f_x(z+,z)+f_x(z-,z ) ) _ z=z + & = & 4i_0 ^ 1dz  ( w^-1(z , z_0 ) w(z , z_0 ) ) + & = & 2i_0 ^ 1dz  .
the tr without an index or hat indicates the full trace over the @xmath242 matrix involved . to see how the total derivative term appears ( not contributing to the integral due to the periodicity of @xmath243 $ ] ) we use that _
k(f_x(z , z))=-4 ^ 2(w^-1(z , z_0)w(z , z_0 ) ) + = -4 ^ 2(w^-1(z , z_0)w(z , z_0 ) ) + = -4 ^ 2 ( w^-1(z , z_0)w(z , z_0 ) ) , with @xmath244 ( as for point - spitting , although one checks that the @xmath245 dependent term actually vanishes ) .
we note that @xmath194 depends on @xmath128 only through @xmath246 , and that @xmath247 , such that @xmath248 . with this
we find _ 0(f_x)=-_0,(ie^-ix_0(_2k-_z_0)/),[eq : defpsi ] which is _ independent _ of @xmath193 .
the factor @xmath249 in the argument of the determinant was inserted just so @xmath250 agrees with the definition introduced earlier for @xmath21 .
next we compute @xmath251 , _ 0 ^ 1 dz  _ k(d_x^jf_x(z , z))=-2_0 ^ 1 dz  _ k(r_j(z;x)f_x(z , z))= + 8 ^ 2_0 ^ 1 dz  ( w^-1(z , z_0)w(z , z_0))=-4 mm + ( ( _ 2k-_z_0)^-1_z_0_z_0 ^ 1+z_0dz   w^-1(z , z_0)_jw(z , z_0 ) ) , where again @xmath245 can take any value , but for convenience is best set to 1 here . finally noting that @xmath194 only depends on @xmath252 through @xmath253 and using that w^-1(z , z_0)_j w(z , z_0)=_z_0 ^ 1+z_0 dz  w^-1(z , z_0 ) _
jw(z , z_0 ) , we verify that @xmath254 for all @xmath255 and @xmath0 .
it is amusing to note that this implies the remarkable formula -_n f_^2(x)=-_^2_^2 ( _ 2k - g^(1 ) ) , even though explicit evaluation can be quite cumbersome .
not so for some special cases , including the single caloron @xmath21 , where @xmath162 is _ piecewise constant _ as we will discuss next .
consider @xmath162 to be piecewise constant , for @xmath256 $ ] defined to be @xmath257 ( cf . ) , with @xmath258 constant hermitian @xmath28 matrices related to the nahm potential by @xmath259 . in this case
we can easily deal with the path ordered exponential integrals . to be specific
, the  propagation " from @xmath211 to @xmath209 defined through @xmath182 in , is given by h_m=,[eq : conhm ] where @xmath260 ( with @xmath261 such that @xmath262 ) and @xmath263 ( a hermitian @xmath28 matrix ) . since @xmath264 and @xmath265 are both quadratic in @xmath266 , actually no square root is involved in this expression for @xmath182 .
for charge 1 the nahm equation ( ) has no commutator terms and @xmath162 is always piecewise constant .
it reduces to the @xmath267 constituent radius for @xmath268 $ ] , @xmath269 , whereas the prefactor at the impurity becomes @xmath270 . with _ mr_m^-1 , a link to the earlier charge 1 results  @xcite is established by noting that _ m = t_m+1h_m ^-1 . with the placing of @xmath214 irrelevant , and the possibility of absorbing @xmath127 in @xmath128 , we therefore find _ _ m^k=1=e^2ix_0_m-1_m-2 _ 1_n_m+1_m^-1 , cf . .
in particular this shows that @xmath271 agrees with the result found earlier , @xmath272 .
the green s functions can be shown to agree as well , using @xmath273 .      arranging @xmath162 to be piecewise constant when @xmath22 requires one to fulfill some constraints . to solve the nahm equation , , in terms of the @xmath274
, the commutator term should vanish .
one way to achieve this , is by choosing @xmath275 .
the nahm equation relates the discontinuities of @xmath276 to @xmath103 , g^(_m)(y_m - y_m-1)g(_m)e=_m , [ eq : jumps ] which imposes constraints on @xmath277 , see . to seek a solution we choose all @xmath278 to be parallel in group space , @xmath279 ( @xmath280 a positive real number )
this reduces the problem to @xmath21 , since @xmath281 is proportional to @xmath282 . for @xmath16
this already solves the constraint , since for @xmath21 one has @xmath283 .
for @xmath284 it has been shown  @xcite that @xmath99 can take any value , provided @xmath285 , in particular we may choose all @xmath103 to be proportional to @xmath286 ( by properly choosing @xmath287 ) . for @xmath21
it is convenient to parametrize @xmath288 in terms of constituent locations , @xmath289 . as in sect .
[ sec : gaugefield ] we will take @xmath235 .
we obtain a larger class of @xmath278 for which the @xmath103 are parallel , by taking @xmath278 to be parallel up to a gauge rotation with an element of the unbroken subgroup @xmath290 which leaves the holonomy unchanged , _
a^m p_m,_n_a=0 .
this leads to _ m^ab=^a^b(2i(_b^m-_a^m ) ) y_m , s_m^ab=_m^aby_m/|y_m|.[eq : srho ] note that for @xmath45 we verify that @xmath291 and @xmath292 ( using @xmath293 ) . with @xmath294 for all @xmath86 ( by definition @xmath295 ) we may solve , y_m^ab=(_a+_a^2 y_m)_ab+i(1-_ab)_a_b _
j= 1^ny_j,[eq : ymfull ] where the @xmath296 are arbitrary , @xmath297 and @xmath298 for @xmath299 and @xmath300 for @xmath301 .
the eigenvalues of these hermitian matrices determine the constituent locations , all lined - up along @xmath286 .
it should be noted that there is no reason to expect that all the @xmath302 can be diagonalized simultaneously .
we will come back to this in the following section .
returning to the simplest case of parallel gauge orientations , i.e. putting @xmath303 , we may take the limit @xmath304 ( related to vanishing time separations ) to find y_m^ab=(_a+y_c_a^2)_ab+(y_m - y_c)_a_b y_c_m=1^n_my_m.[eq : ym ] the ( @xmath21 )  center of mass " coordinate @xmath305 can be freely chosen and the @xmath306 play the role of  center of mass " of each constituent caloron .
how exactly this is realized becomes clear when we diagonalize @xmath302 .
let us first consider for @xmath16 and charge 2 , @xmath307 , with @xmath308 . without loss of generality
we choose @xmath309 , such that the two eigenvalues of @xmath302 are given by @xmath310 , where @xmath311 and @xmath312 .
for large and positive @xmath313 we find @xmath314 , representing two charge 1 calorons centered at @xmath313 and @xmath315 , with separations between their constituents monopoles given in terms of @xmath316 .
we plot the constituent locations as a function of @xmath313 in fig .  [
fig : ydiag ] for @xmath317 and @xmath318 .
7.4 cm @xmath266 1.3 cm 10.5 cm @xmath313 1.7 cm    action density profiles are shown in fig .  [
fig : wellsep ] ( left ) for @xmath319 and in fig .
[ fig : overlap - xz ] for @xmath320 . from the dotted lines in fig .
[ fig : ydiag ] one reads off the associated constituent locations .
note that the magnetic moments of the two calorons are pointing in the same direction and that we can not freely interchange constituent monopole locations within our axially symmetric ansatz .
however , when @xmath313 is small it is more natural to interpret the configuration as a narrow caloron ( i.e. instanton ) with inverted magnetic moment in the background of a large caloron .
this is the proper setting to understand the non - trivial time dependence for @xmath321 illustrated in fig .
[ fig : overlap - zt ] ( left ) .
for @xmath322 a singular caloron arises due to the fusion of two constituents ( with opposite magnetic charge ) .
this singularity is avoided when @xmath323 , which can be understood by observing that the eigenvalues of @xmath324 parametrize time - locations .
if @xmath325 , with @xmath127 and @xmath313 made small , one will find two calorons ( and their constituents ) to be pushed far from each other .
this can be understood as well , in terms of a short - to - long distance duality in the adhm data for an instanton pair with non - parallel group orientation  @xcite , but can also be read off from the eigenvalues of @xmath302 defined in . as an example we take again @xmath16 and charge 2 , but now with @xmath326 and @xmath327 in general non - zero .    for the case
@xmath328 ( perpendicular relative color orientations ) , @xmath329 and @xmath330 ( equal mass constituents ) , the eigenvalues are @xmath331 , whereas for @xmath332 one finds @xmath333 . in the light of this
it is interesting to observe , as shown in fig .
[ fig : overlap - zt ] , that with @xmath332 and _ increasing _ @xmath127 the constituents are pushed out in the @xmath177 direction as well .
when @xmath334 the constituents would otherwise come close together through the periodicity in the time direction .
effectively these constituents thus have perpendicular color orientations ( due to our choice of holonomy with @xmath335 ) .
the transition from constituents separating in the time direction for @xmath127 near 0 to constituents separating in the @xmath177 direction for @xmath127 near @xmath336 occurs for @xmath337 at approximately @xmath338 .    with a little imagination one detects the ring - shaped structure also observed  @xcite in the case of instantons at zero temperature , see fig .
[ fig : overlap - zt ] ( middle ) .
a more direct analogy of course occurs when two calorons ( with @xmath12 small , i.e. instantons with unresolved constituent monopoles ) approach each other .
we checked that for @xmath339 and @xmath340 a singular caloron forms due to the overlap of two calorons with parallel gauge orientations , whereas for @xmath341 the two calorons are pushed away ( to infinity ) in the @xmath177 direction as is appropriate for the non - parallel group orientation due to the non - trivial holonomy . at an intermediate value ( @xmath342 for @xmath343 )
one observes a small ring in the @xmath344-@xmath177 plane .
choosing @xmath313 large one may check that @xmath345 indeed gives the time location for each caloron .
when , however , @xmath127 approaches @xmath336 they can no longer keep parallel gauge orientations due to the non - trivial holonomy . as noted before , this may be described by a solution with @xmath346 and @xmath340 .
computing the eigenvalues of @xmath302 therefore allows one to easily predict the behavior of the exact solution .    for charge 1
it had been shown  @xcite that as soon as one of the constituents is far removed from the others the solution becomes static . for the  dimensional reduction " to take place at higher charge this is no longer sufficient .
we have seen ( generalization to @xmath1 is straightforward ) that any magnetically neutral cluster of constituents , when small with respect to @xmath13 , will behave like an instanton that is localized in time .
for the special case with parallel group orientations , putting all @xmath347 in one would even be left with @xmath348 singular instantons on top of one regular caloron , whose scale parameter is set by @xmath349 , which can be understood from the fact that the matrix @xmath350 has rank 1 .
it does , however , give us one opportunity to go beyond the axial symmetry considered so far .
when @xmath351 we could solve the nahm equation for parallel gauge orientations by @xmath352 _ without _ insisting all the @xmath353 line - up .
this still describes @xmath348 singular instantons on top of one regular caloron , except that now the singular instantons can have _ arbitrary _ locations .    even though our ansatz to obtain exact solutions
has been restrictive ( as is clear from the axial symmetry ) , we stress that the solutions for the nahm equation we found provide genuine multi - caloron solutions , which reveal @xmath17 isolated lumps for each of its constituent monopoles ( with suitably chosen @xmath306 so the constituents do not overlap ) .
this is not only illustrated in fig .
[ fig : wellsep ] , but can also be understood analytically for any charge @xmath0 and @xmath1 as follows .
we diagonalize each @xmath302 with ( in general _ different _ ) similarity transformations @xmath354 , or @xmath355 .
these bring @xmath356 to the diagonal form @xmath357 , with @xmath358 the constituent radii , such that @xmath359 ( @xmath354 acting componentwise ) simplifies to ( cf . )
the action density can now be explicitly expressed in terms of the constituent radii & -_n f_^2(x)=-_^2_^2 ( x),=(ie^-ix_0(_2k-)/ ) , + & ( 2i(x_0_k-_0))u_nh_nt_nh_n-1 t_n-1h_1 u_1^t_1 .
( [ eq : ths],[eq : osborn],[eq : defpsi],[eq : conhm ] ) , where @xmath360 ( @xmath354 again acting componentwise ) .
the size of the constituent monopoles is read off to be @xmath361 ( or @xmath362 when @xmath363 ) , and one concludes that the action density will contain @xmath17 lumps for sufficiently well separated constituents .
the figures were produced by computing the action density using precisely this method .
the non - trivial value of the polyakov loop at spatial infinity ( holonomy ) leads to a spontaneous breaking of the gauge symmetry , but without the need of introducing a higgs field .
one may view @xmath3 as the higgs field in the adjoint representation .
this is one way to understand why constituent monopoles emerge .
the best way to describe the caloron solutions , in case of well separated constituents , is by analyzing the field outside the cores of these constituents , where only the abelian field survives . since in our case
the asymptotic polyakov loop value defines a global direction in color space the abelian generator in terms of which we can describe the so - called far - field configuration is fixed , giving rise to a global embedding in the full gauge group .
extrapolating the abelian fields back to inside the core of the constituents leads to dirac monopoles .
such an extrapolation is well defined in terms of the _ high temperature limit _ , which makes the core of the constituents
shrink to zero size and the field to become a smooth abelian gauge field everywhere except for the singularities of the dirac monopoles .
thus we anticipate that in this limit the self - dual abelian field is still described by point like constituents , despite the fact that @xmath364 is no longer piecewise constant .
any  fuzziness " of the constituent location that may result from this , would be confined to the non - abelian core , and not visible from afar .      despite the somewhat formal expression for the green s function @xmath185
, one can extract information about the long - range fields from it . in the following
we will show how to neglect the exponentially decaying fields in the cores of the monopole constituents , being left with the abelian components of fields which decay algebraically .
we only need to consider the
bulk " contributions @xmath182 , , which contain all the dependence on @xmath252 .
our starting point is restricted to the @xmath86th interval , @xmath365 \{-+4 ^ 2r^2(z;x)}f_m(z)=0 .
[ eq : dfm ] to distinguish between exponentially growing and decreasing contributions for this homogeneous equation we take as a basis for @xmath366 functions @xmath367 with the following asymptotic behavior    @xmath368 .
this prompts us to introduce on each interval the matrix valued functions @xmath369 ( we suppress the dependence on @xmath252 ) such that f_m^(z)=p . from which it follows that @xmath369 is a solution of the riccati equation r_m^(z)^2r_m^(z)=r^2(z;x).[eq : riccati ] we note that for @xmath370 , @xmath371 and that for piecewise constant @xmath162 both @xmath372 and @xmath373 are constant and equal to @xmath356 , introduced in .
we can write for @xmath374 the  propagator " @xmath375 defined in in terms of @xmath367 as @xmath376 with w_m(z ) . using that @xmath377 and @xmath378 , we find by neglecting the exponentially decreasing factors @xmath379 the required limiting behavior for @xmath182 . paying special attention to the ordering of the @xmath28 matrices @xmath380 , observing that w_m^-1(_m)=(4r_m(_m))^-1,r_m(r_m^+(_m)+r_m^-(_m ) )
, we find well outside the cores of the constituents h_mf_m^+(_m+1 ) ( 4r_m)^-1 .
the sparse nature of the matrices involved will be of considerable help to simplify the limiting behavior of the green s function .
a crucial ingredient is the combination & & = + & & _ mr_m-1^+(_m)+r_m^-(_m)+s_m,[eq : defsigma ] for clarity summarizing the various ingredients in the following picture +    ( 10,3.6)(-0.5,-1.2 ) ( 1.2,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 1.6,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 0.95,-0.5)@xmath108 ( 2,0)(1,0)11 ( 2,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 2,0 ) ( 1.7,-0.5)@xmath381 ( 1.7,1.3)@xmath382 ( 1.7,0.7)@xmath383 ( 3.2,-0.6)@xmath384 ( 7.75,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 7.75,0 ) ( 7.45,-0.5)@xmath211 ( 7.45,1.7)@xmath385 ( 5.7,1.3)@xmath386 ( 7.45,0.8)@xmath387 ( 7.75,0.5)@xmath388 ( 9.1,-0.6)@xmath389 ( 13,-0.25)(0,1)0.5 ( 13,0 ) ( 12.7,-0.5)@xmath209 ( 12.7,1.3)@xmath390 ( 12.7,0.7)@xmath391 ( 13.2,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 13.6,0)(1,0)0.2 ( 14.4,0 . ) .     + this leads to the following far - field approximation for @xmath392 ( cf . ) , _ _ mg^(1)_m [ eq : approxf ] where @xmath393 and _
m,m&&f_m-1^+(_m)(2r_m-1)^-1_m-1 f_m-2^+(_m-1)(2r_m-2)^-1_m-2 + & & f_m+1^+(_m+2)(2r_m+1)^-1_m+1 f_m^+(_m+1)(4r_m)^-1.[eq : defgm ] one might have expected a factor @xmath394 on the right , but this is contained in the remaining terms of . for example @xmath395 .    as we have seen in eqs .
( [ eq : adef ] ) and ( [ eq : phidef ] ) , the gauge field only requires us to know the green s function at the impurities . without loss of generality
we may assume @xmath396 and take @xmath199 , such that ( see eqs .
( [ eq : ftofh],[eq : vecf],[eq : finf ] ) ) f_x(_m,_m)=-4 ^ 2(_k,0)w(_m,_m+0 ) ( _ 2k-__m)^-1 .
the matrix @xmath397 has a @xmath96 block structure , and one can verify that in general ^-1=.[eq : blockinv ] identifying the blocks , in the high temperature limit we find a(_2k-__m)_11&&_k-2g^(1)_m r_m^-(_m ) , + b(_2k-__m)_12&&-g^(1)_m , + c(_2k-__m)_21&&-4 ^ 2(r_m-1^+(_m)+ s_m)g^(1)_m r_m^-(_m),[eq : hight ] + d(_2k-__m)_22&&_k-2(r_m-1^+(_m)+s_m ) g^(1)_m , where we used that @xmath398 , cf .
( [ eq : frel],[eq : ths ] ) . evaluating the green s function at
the _ same _ impurities , @xmath399 , is simplified by the fact that @xmath400 .
this gives the following remarkably simple result in the far - field limit , f_x(_m,_m)=-4 ^ 2(_2k-__m)_12 ^ -14 ^ 2 ( 2_m-_m^-1g(1))^-1 2(_m)^-1.[eq : fdiag ]    for the green s function evaluated at _ different _ impurities , @xmath401 , we need to determine @xmath402 , for which we can follow the same method as for @xmath392 w(_m-0,_m+0)=_m,m , with @xmath403 as defined in .
this leads to f_x(_m,_m)&&-4 ^ 2_m,m((_2k-__m ) ^-1_22 + 2r_m^-(_m)(_2k-__m)^-1_12 ) + & & _
m,m_m^-1g(1)f_x(_m,_m ) , which is exponentially suppressed since @xmath403 grows as @xmath404 .
this can not compensate for the decay of @xmath405 , provided all @xmath211 are unequal , i.e. all constituents have a non - zero mass .
massless constituents have a so - called non - abelian cloud  @xcite , which has no abelian far - field limit .      to determine @xmath250 in the expression for the action density , eqs .
( [ eq : osborn],[eq : defpsi ] ) , we need to compute @xmath406 . using we find & ( _ 2k - f__n)===(b)(ab^-1d - c ) + & ( g^(1)_m)(_m^-1g(1)-2_m ) ( -2g^(1)_m_m ) , such that ( _
m_m)=2 ^ -k_m=1^n\{(f^+_m ( _ m+1))(_m)/(2r_m)}. for @xmath407 , @xmath408 ( see ) and @xmath409 , which implies that @xmath410 = 2^{-k}\exp(2\pi k|\vec x|)$ ] ( recall that @xmath411 ) .
therefore , the action is given by @xmath412 , as should be the case for a self - dual charge @xmath0 solution .      without the off - diagonal components of the green s function contributing to the far - field region , the functions @xmath413 and @xmath414 in eqs  ( [ eq : adef],[eq : phidef ] ) can be further simplified to ( x)^-11-_mf^ab(_m,_m)p_m_a^_b p_m , _ j_mf^ab(_m,_m)p_m_a _
j ^_bp_m , and only the abelian components of the gauge field survive . particularly the case of @xmath45 discussed in sect .
[ sec : gaugefield ] is easy to deal with . using eqs .
( [ eq : ftofh],[eq : asp1],[eq : phis],[eq : vphis],[eq : fdiag ] ) we find ^-1(x)&&_0(1-_k[2_2 ^ -1s_2])_0 _
ff^-1(x),(x ) _ k[2_2 ^ -1g(_2)_2g^(_2 ) ] ) , + a_(x)&&(1-_k[2 _ 2 ^ -1s_2])^-1|_^j__k[2_2 ^ -1 g(_2)_2^jg^(_2)]),[eq : approxphi ] where we recall ( see ) that @xmath415 .
this is in perfect agreement with the earlier @xmath21 results  @xcite .
note that the gauge rotation which relates @xmath416 to @xmath160 also relates @xmath100 to @xmath163 ( see eqs .
( [ eq : ftofh],[eq : rdef ] ) ) and therefore does not appear in the final expression for @xmath42 .
it is interesting to note that the dipole moment of the abelian gauge field is particularly simple and does not require us to solve for @xmath417 , since @xmath418 such that _
|x|a_(x)= |_^j_.[eq : dip ] hence the dipole moment @xmath419 only involves @xmath277 , and we do except it allows for configurations with a vanishing dipole moment . for higher multipole moments , through @xmath417
, we need to deal with the full quadratic adhm constraint , or equivalently with the riccati and nahm equations .
nevertheless , it is remarkable that in the high temperature limit the @xmath252 dependence is restricted to @xmath420 and @xmath421 _
only_. we would like to prove that each of its eigenvalues vanish at an isolated point , as one way to identify the @xmath422 constituent locations .
we will defer the study of this interesting issue , and its generalization to @xmath1 , to a future publication .
the far - field approximation further simplifies when considering the axially symmetric solutions discussed in sect .
[ sec : axial ] .
we restrict ourselves here to @xmath45 . since @xmath162 is piecewise constant , the riccati equation is trivial to solve , r^_m(z)=r_m=. the square root involves a positive @xmath28 matrix , and is well - defined . due to the fact that @xmath423 ( see eqs .
( [ eq : rdef],[eq : srho ] ) ) , the abelian component of the gauge field is of the simple form ( @xmath235 , see sect .
[ sec : gaugefield ] ) a^abel_(x)=-e_j|^j _ _ ( x ) . in the far field limit @xmath424
( see ) . since @xmath425 has rank 1 , the matrix @xmath426 has only one non - vanishing column with respect to a suitably chosen basis , which implies that @xmath427 .
this allows us to write in the far - field region _ ff(x)= , from which we immediately read off the result  @xcite for @xmath21 , in which case it is easy to show that @xmath428 , revealing @xmath51 to be a linear superposition of two oppositely charged self - dual dirac monopoles .
we would like @xmath429 to similarly factorize for @xmath22 in @xmath422 dirac monopoles , but since @xmath430 , @xmath431 and @xmath425 in general do not commute , some care is required in demonstrating the factorization .
we will rely on the fact that @xmath432 and hence independent of @xmath86 . since by definition @xmath295 ( see sect .  [
sec : axial ] ) , one finds that _ ff(x)=.
this can now be reorganized according to _ ff(x)&= & + & = & , after which we can separately diagonalize @xmath433 and @xmath434 to find _
ff(x)=_i=_i , where @xmath435 give the locations of the constituent monopoles , with @xmath436 the eigenvalues of @xmath302 and @xmath437 ( the index @xmath86 distinguishing their charge ) .
the second expression for the factorized version of @xmath438 uses the fact that the constituent locations can be ordered according to y_1^(1)<y_2^(1)<y_1^(2)<y_2^(2)<
<y_1^(k)<y_2^(k ) .
it should be noted that this prevents the constituents to pass each other while varying the parameters for the axially symmetric configuration , see also fig .
[ fig : ydiag ] and the discussion in sect .
[ sec : axial ] . we need to go beyond this simple axially symmetric configuration to allow for the constituents to rearrange themselves more freely .
we have presented the general formalism for finding exact instanton solutions at finite temperature ( calorons ) with any non - trivial holonomy and topological charge . in an infinite volume holonomy and charge
are fixed .
the solution is described by @xmath65 parameters of which @xmath439 give the spatial locations of the @xmath17 constituent monopoles .
the remaining parameters are given by @xmath0 time locations and @xmath440 phases associated to gauge rotations in the subgroup that leaves the holonomy unchanged .
of these , @xmath76 can be considered as global gauge rotations .
the dimension of the moduli space , i.e. the number of gauge invariant parameters , is therefore equal to @xmath441 .
our subset of axially symmetric solutions has @xmath442 paramters of which there are @xmath76 global gauge rotations , or @xmath443 gauge invariant paramters .
explicit solutions were found for the case of axial symmetry , an important limitation being the difficulty of solving the nahm equation , or equivalently the quadratic adhm constraint .
we certainly expect more progress can be made on this in the near future .
nevertheless , we already found a rich structure that bodes well for being able to consider the constituent monopoles as independent objects .
this is surprisingly subtle , as we have illustrated by the fact that an approximate superposition of charge 1 calorons tends to give rise to a _ visible _ dirac string .
this is also related to the difficulty of finding approximate multi - monopole solutions , which can be obtained from the caloron solutions by sending a subset of the constituent monopoles to infinity , as has been well studied in the charge 1 case  @xcite .
an important tool has been our study of the far - field limit , describing the abelian gauge field far removed from any of the constituent monopoles .
this allows for a description of the long distance properties in terms of ( self - dual ) dirac monopoles .
much could be extracted concerning its properties without the need to explicitly solve the nahm equation .
we conjecture in general to be able to identify the dirac monopole location , but some work remains to be done here .
4.6 cm    it may seem that all these results are somewhat academic since until recently none of these constituent monopoles were found in dynamical lattice configurations .
first of all one would be tempted to search for them at high temperature , but it should be noted that above the deconfining phase transition the average polyakov loop takes on trivial values , associated to the center of the gauge group , which is not the environment in which a caloron will reveal its constituents .
this would give the well - known harrington - shepard solution constructed long ago  @xcite . with our present understanding
this solution can be seen as having @xmath76 massless constituents which can not be localized .
only when sending all these to infinity one is left with a monopole  @xcite .
furthermore , at high temperature classical configurations will be heavily suppressed due to their boltzmann weight .
rather , the hope is that the constituent monopoles play an important role _ below _
the deconfining temperature , where the average of the polyakov loop is non - trivial , and tends to favor _ equal _ mass constituents .
this is why in this paper our examples were for that case , see figs .
[ fig : wellsep],[fig : overlap - xz],[fig : overlap - zt ] and the discussion in sect .
[ sec : axial ] .
nevertheless , the formalism developed here gives results for any choice of the holonomy , and a sample of unequal mass constituents is given in fig .
[ fig : uneq ] .
in general the constituent monopoles can be characterized by their magnetic ( = electric ) charge . for
@xmath1 there are @xmath84 different types of abelian charges involved  @xcite , and all @xmath0 constituents of a given type have the same mass .
we will discuss briefly the lattice evidence for the presence of constituent monopoles that has accumulated the last few years . a first numerical study using cooling
was performed with twisted boundary conditions , which implies non - trivial holonomy  @xcite .
good agreement was found with the infinite volume charge 1 analytic results , in particular so for the fermion zero - modes  @xcite which are more localized than the action density .
a charge 2 solution was also found , shown in fig .
8 of ref .
fermion zero - modes played an intricate role in an extensive numerical study of nahm dualities on the torus  @xcite .
as suggested in ref .
@xcite one may also enforce non - trivial holonomy on the lattice by putting at the spatial boundary of the box all links in the time direction to the same constant value @xmath444 , such that @xmath445 ( @xmath446 the number of lattice sites in the time direction ) .
this has been implemented in @xmath16 lattice monte carlo studies as well , where @xmath79 was set to the average value of the polyakov loop , appropriate for the temperature at which the simulations were performed  @xcite .
cooling was applied to find calorons , including those at higher charge .
apart from the configurations that in the continuum would be exactly self - dual , the lattice allows one to also consider configurations in which both self - dual and anti - selfdual lumps appear .
this revealed constituent monopoles that seem not directly associated to calorons , called @xmath447 ( as opposed to @xmath448 ) .
both objects in such a @xmath447 configuration have fractional topological charged , but opposite in sign .
perhaps these arise when two near constituent monopoles , one belonging to a caloron , the other to an anti - caloron ,  annihilate " .
our analytic methods can not directly address this situation due to the lack of self - duality .
the same holds for configurations that seem to only carry magnetic fields , which were already seen long ago  @xcite .
one point of criticism that applies to both methods is that the choice of boundary conditions may force the  dissociation " of instantons into constituent monopoles , particularly since volumes can not yet be chosen so large that many instantons are contained within a given configuration .
a recent study  @xcite has done away with the fixed boundary conditions that enforce the non - trivial holonomy .
nevertheless , still one finds in many cases that calorons  dissociate " into constituent monopoles below the deconfinement transition temperature .
a particularly useful tool has turned out to be the fermionic ( near ) zero - modes to detect the monopole constituents when they are too close together to reveal themselves from the action density  @xcite .
this relies on the observation that the zero - mode is localized on _ only _ one of the constituent monopoles , determined by the boundary conditions imposed on the fermions in the time direction  @xcite . for @xmath16
this is particularly simple , with periodic and anti - periodic boundary conditions of the fermions making the zero - mode switch from one constituent to the other , as is illustrated for a close pair of constituents in fig .
[ fig : zmflip ] . in addition one may use the polyakov loop for diagnostic purposes  @xcite , for @xmath16 taking the values @xmath449 and @xmath450 near the respective constituent locations ( at these points the gauge symmetry is restored , providing an alternative definition for the center of a constituent monopole ) .
3.7 cm    fermion eigenfunctions with eigenvalues near zero have also been used as an alternative to cooling , to filter out the high frequency modes and identify topological lumps . for a recent lattice study , including some discussion of calorons with non - trivial holonomy , see ref .
@xcite and references therein . using the near zero - modes as a filter
, constituent monopoles have even been identified recently for @xmath451 well below the deconfining temperature  @xcite , resembling fig .
[ fig : zmflip ] ( see also fig .  14 of ref
.  @xcite .    for the exact axially symmetric multi - caloron solutions constructed in this paper the @xmath0
associated fermion zero - modes ( for charge @xmath0 ) will be derived in the near future .
we anticipate that one can choose a basis where each is localized on one of the constituent monopoles , the type of which is determined by the choice of fermionic boundary conditions in the time direction . analyzing these zero - modes is particularly interesting in the light of some puzzles that were presented in a recent study  @xcite of the normalizable fermion zero - modes in the background of a collection of so - called bipoles , i.e. pairs of oppositely charged ( but self - dual ) dirac monopoles , which are of interest in a wider context as well . this will be one of the many topics we have access to with our analytic tools .
but ultimately our main aim is to develop a reliable method to describe the long distance features of non - abelian gauge theories in terms of monopole constituents to understand both confinement and chiral symmetry breaking .
the results of this paper , and in particular the recent lattice results , provide some encouragement in this direction .
we thank conor houghton for initial collaboration on the monopole aspects of this work and him as well as chris ford for extensive discussions .
pvb also thanks michael mller - preussker and christof gattringer for discussions concerning calorons with non - trivial holonomy on the lattice .
furthermore he is grateful to leo stodolsky and valya zakharov for hospitality at the mpi in munich and to poul damgaard , urs heller and jac verbaarschot for inviting him to the ect * workshop `` non - perturbative aspects of qcd '' in trento .
he thanks both institutions for their support , while some of the work presented in this paper was performed .
fb likes to thank the organizers of the  channel meeting on theoretical particle physics " for a well organized and stimulating meeting as well as dimitri diakonov , gerald dunne , alexander gorsky and peter orland for discussions .
the research of fb is supported by fom .
kraan and p. van baal , phys .
lett . b428 ( 1998 ) 268 [ hep - th/9802049 ] ; nucl .
phys . b533
( 1998 ) 627 [ hep - th/9805168 ] .
kraan and p. van baal , phys .
lett . b435
( 1998 ) 389 [ hep - th/9806034 ] .
atiyah , n.j .
hitchin , v.g .
drinfeld , yu . i. manin , phys .
65 a ( 1978 ) 185 ; m.f .
atiyah , _ geometry of yang - mills fields _ , fermi lectures , ( scuola normale superiore , pisa , 1979 ) .
w. nahm , _ self - dual monopoles and calorons _ , in : lect .
notes in physics .
201 , eds .
g. denardo , e.a .
( 1984 ) p. 189 .
k. lee and p.
yi , phys .
d56 ( 1997 ) 3711 ( hep - th/9702107 ) ; k. lee , phys . lett . b426
( 1998 ) 323 [ hep - th/9802012 ] ; k. lee and c. lu , phys .
d58 ( 1998 ) 025011 ( hep - th/9802108 ) .
w. nahm , phys .
lett . 90b ( 1980 ) 413 .
g. t hooft , nucl .
phys . b190 [ fs3 ] ( 1981 ) 455 ; physica scripta 25 ( 1982 ) 133 .
corrigan , d.b .
fairlie , s. templeton and p. goddard , nucl .
b140 ( 1978 ) 31 .
h. osborn , nucl .
b159 ( 1979 ) 497 .
m. garca prez , t.g .
kovcs and p. van baal , phys .
b472 ( 2000 ) 295 [ hep - ph/9911485 ] .
p. van baal , in : lattice fermions and structure of the vacuum , eds . v. mitrjushkin and g. schierholz ( kluwer , dordrecht , 2000 ) , p. 269
[ hep - th/9912035 ] .
k. lee , e.j . weinberg and p.
yi , phys .
b376 ( 1996 ) 97 ( hep - th/9601097 ) ; phys .
d54 ( 1996 ) 6351 ( hep - th/9605229 ) ; e.j .
weinberg , _ massive and massless monopoles and duality _ , hep - th/9908095 .
kraan , comm .
212 ( 2000 ) 503 [ hep - th/9811179 ] .
harrington and h.k .
shepard , phys .
d17 ( 1978 ) 2122 ; ibid .
d18 ( 1978 ) 2990 .
p. rossi , nucl .
b149 ( 1979 ) 170 . m. garca prez , a. gonzlez - arroyo , a. montero and p. van baal , jour . of high energy phys
06 ( 1999 ) 001 [ hep - lat/9903022 ) ]
. m. garca prez , a. gonzlez - arroyo , c. pena and p. van baal , phys . rev .
d60 ( 1999 ) 031901 [ hep - th/9905016 ] .
chernodub , t.c .
kraan and p. van baal , nucl .
phys . b(proc.suppl . )
83 - 84 ( 2000 ) 556 [ hep - lat/9907001 ] .
m. garca prez , a. gonzlez - arroyo , c. pena and p. van baal , nucl .
b564 ( 1999 ) 159 [ hep - th/9905138 ] .
ilgenfritz , m. mller - preussker , and a.i .
veselov , in : lattice fermions and structure of the vacuum , eds . v. mitrjushkin and g. schierholz ( kluwer , dordrecht , 2000 ) , 345 [ hep - lat/0003025 ] .
ilgenfritz , b.v .
martemyanov , m. mller - preussker and a.i .
veselov , nucl .
b(proc.suppl.)94 ( 2001 ) 407 [ hep - lat/0011051 ] ; nucl .
suppl.)106 ( 2002 ) 589 [ hep - lat/0110212 ] .
laursen and g. schierholz , z. phys .
c38 ( 1988 ) 501 .
ilgenfritz , b.v .
martemyanov , m. mller - preussker , s. shcherendin and a.i .
veselov , hep - lat/0206004 .
p. van baal , nucl .
b(proc.suppl.)106 ( 2002 ) 586 [ hep - lat/0108027 ] . c. gattringer , m. gckeler , p.e.l .
rakow , s. schaefer , a. schfer , nucl .
b618 ( 2001 ) 205 [ hep - lat/0105023 ] .
christof gattringer , private communications .
the zero - mode densities for the case of fig .
[ fig : zmflip ] were produced for the purpose of illustrating the behavior observed by c. gattringer and co - workers in @xmath451 lattice gauge theory .
kraan and p. van baal , nucl .
suppl.)73 ( 1999 ) 554 [ hep - lat/9808015 ] .
p. van baal , chiral zero - modes for abelian bps dipoles , to appear in  confinement , topology , and other non - perturbative aspects of qcd " , eds .
j. greensite and s. olejnik ( kluwer ) , hep - th/0202182 .