On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd

Lorentz-violating background
F. M. Andrade
E-mail: [email protected]
Departamento de Matemática e Estatı́stica, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa,
84030-900 Ponta Grossa-PR, Brazil
arXiv:1303.1660v2 [hep-th] 6 Jun 2013

E. O. Silva
E-mail: [email protected]
Departamento de Fı́sica, Universidade Federal do Maranhão, Campus Universitário
do Bacanga, 65085-580 São Luı́s-MA, Brazil

T. Prudêncio
E-mail: [email protected]
Instituto de Fı́sica, Universidade de Brası́lia, Caixa Postal 04455, 70919-970,
Brası́lia-DF, Brazil.

C. Filgueiras
E-mail: [email protected]
Departamento de Fı́sica, Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Caixa Postal
10071, 58109-970 Campina Grande-PB, Brazil

Abstract. The effects of a Lorentz symmetry violating background vector on the

Aharonov-Casher scattering in the nonrelativistic limit is considered. By using the
self-adjoint extension method we found that there is an additional scattering for any
value of the self-adjoint extension parameter and non-zero energy bound states for
negative values of this parameter. Expressions for the energy bound states, phase-
shift and the scattering matrix are explicitly determined in terms of the self-adjoint
extension parameter. The expression obtained for the scattering amplitude reveals
that the helicity is not conserved in this scenario.

PACS numbers: 11.30.Cp, 03.65.Ge, 03.65.Db, 11.55.-m

Submitted to: J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.

On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 2

1. Introduction

The standard model extension (SME) proposed by Colladay and Kostelecký [1, 2, 3]
(cf. also Refs. [4, 5, 6]) has been an usual framework for investigating signals of Lorentz
violation in physical systems and has inspired a great deal of investigations in this
theme in recent years. The interest in this issue appears in the different contexts, such
as field theory [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] aspects
on the gauge sector of the SME [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31], quantum electrodynamics
[32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38], and astrophysics [39, 40, 41]. These many contributions have
elucidated effects induced by Lorentz violation and served to set up stringent upper
bounds on the Lorentz-violating (LV) coefficients [42]. The physical properties of the
physical systems can be accessed by including in all sectors of the minimal standard
model LV terms. In the fermion sector, for example, this violation is implemented
by introducing two CPT-odd terms, Vµ ψ̄γ µ ψ, Wµ ψ̄γ5 γ µ ψ, where Vµ , Wµ are the LV
backgrounds. The LV terms are generated as vacuum expectation values of tensors
defined in a high energy scale. The SME has also been used as a framework to propose
Lorentz violation [43, 44] and CPT [45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50] probing experiments, which
have amounted to the imposition of stringent bounds on the LV coefficients. By carefully
analyzing the sectors of the SME some authors have specialized in introducing news
nonminimal couplings between fermionic and gauge fields in the context of the Dirac
equation. In Ref. [51], for example, a LV and CPT-odd nonminimal coupling between
fermions and the gauge field was proposed in the form
g
Dµ = ∂µ + ieAµ + i ǫµλαβ υ λ F αβ , (1)
2
in the context of the Dirac equation,

(iγ µ Dµ − M)Ψ = 0, (2)

were Ψ is the fermion spinor, υ µ = (υ0 , υ) is the Carroll-Field-Jackiw four-vector,

g is a constant that measures the nonminimal coupling magnitude, and F µν is the
electromagnetic field tensor, with

F 0i = −F i0 = E i , F ij = −F ji = ǫijk Bk . (3)

This suggests that the LV background, intervening in spacetime, may correct or generate
some new properties to the particles. The analysis of the nonrelativistic limit of Eq. (2)
reveals that the nonminimal coupling of the background with the electromagnetic fields
generates a magnetic dipole moment gυ even for non-charged particles [51], yielding an
Aharonov-Casher (AC) phase [52] for its wave function. The nonminimal coupling in
Eq. (1) has been applied to several physical systems in relativistic and nonrelativistic
quantum mechanics [53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63]. Recently, a new CPT-
even and LV dimension-five nonminimal coupling between fermionic and gauge fields,
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 3

involving the CPT-even and Lorentz-violating gauge tensor of the SME was proposed
in Ref. [64] (cf. also Ref. [65]). This new nonminimal coupling was identified by
λ
Dµ = ∂µ + ieAµ + (KF )µναβ γ ν F αβ , (4)
2
with (KF )µναβ being the tensor ruling the Lorentz violation in the CPT-even
electrodynamics of the SME. This nonminimal coupling modifies the Dirac equation,
whose nonrelativistic regime is governed by a Hamiltonian which induces new effects,
such as an electric-Zeeman-like spectrum splitting and an anomalous-like contribution
to the electron magnetic moment, among others.
In this paper, we specialize to the nonminimal coupling in Eq. (1). The aim is to
study the effects of this LV background in the scattering process of a spin-1/2 neutral
particle with magnetic dipole moment gυ in the presence of a electric field of an infinitely
long, infinitesimally thin line of charge, in the nonrelativistic limit.
The work is outlined in the following way: In Section 2 we derive the Schrödinger-
Pauli equation in order to study the physical implications of the LV background on
the spin-1/2 AC scattering problem. The Section 3 is devoted to the study of the LV
Hamiltonian via the self-adjoint extension technique and are presented some important
properties of the LV wave function. In Section 4 are addressed the scattering and bound-
state problems within the framework of the LV Schrödinger-Pauli equation. Expressions
for the energy bound-states, phase-shift and the scattering matrix are computed and all
them are explicitly described in terms of the physical condition of the problem and,
as it was expected, the self-adjoint extension parameter is also expressed in terms
of the physical parameters. At the end, we make a detailed analysis of the helicity
conservation’s problem in the present framework. In Section 5 we give our conclusions
and remarks.

2. The equation of motion

In this section, we derive the equation of motion that governs the dynamics of a spin-1/2
neutral particle in a radial electric field and a LV background. We start with the (2+1)-
dimensional Dirac equation, which follows from the decoupling of (3+1)-dimensional
Dirac equation for the specialized case where ∂3 = 0, into two uncoupled two-component
equations, such as implemented in Refs. [66, 67, 68]. Since we are interested only in the
effects of the LV background, we can consider only the sector generating the AC effect
in Eq. (1). In this case, the planar Dirac equation (~ = c = 1) is

(βγ · Π + βM) Ψ = ĒΨ, (5)

where Ψ is a two-component spinor, Π = p − gs (υ × E) is the generalized momentum,

and s is twice the spin value, with s = +1 for spin “up” and s = −1 for spin “down”.
The γ-matrices in (2 + 1) dimensions are given in terms of the Pauli matrices

β = γ0 = σ3 , γ1 = iσ2 , γ2 = −isσ1 . (6)

On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 4

The field configuration (in cylindrical coordinates) is chosen to be

r̂ δ(r)
E = 2λ , ∇ · E = 2λ , υ µ = (0, 0, 0, υ), (7)
r r
where E is the electric field generated by an infinite charge filament and λ is the linear
charge density along the z-axis. The second order equation implied by Eq. (5) is
 
obtained by applying the matrix operator M + β Ē − γ · Π β. After this application,
one finds

Ē 2 − M 2 Ψ = − (γ · Π) (γ · Π) Ψ

= Π2 + gσ · [∇ × (υ × E)] Ψ.

(8)

By accessing the nonrelativistic limit, Ē = M + E, M ≫ E, we obtain the Schrödinger-

Pauli equation
ĤΨ = EΨ, (9)
with
1 1
Ĥ = [p − gs (υ × E)]2 + gσ · [∇ × (υ × E)] , (10)
2M 2M
the Hamiltonian operator. Using (7), the Hamiltonian (10) becomes
 
1 δ(r)
Ĥ = Ĥ0 + ασz , (11)
2M r

with  2
1 ϕ̂
Ĥ0 = ∇ − αs , (12)
i r
and
α = 2gυλ, (13)
is the coupling constant of the δ(r)/r potential.
The Hamiltonian in Eq. (11) governs the quantum dynamics of a spin-1/2 neutral
particle with a radial electric field, i.e., a spin-1/2 AC problem, with gυ playing the
role of a nontrivial magnetic dipole moment, in contrast with the usual AC problem
where the magnetic dipole moment is µ = µσz ẑ [69]. Also, in Eq. (11) we observe
the presence of a δ function which is singular at the origin. This makes the problem
more complicated to be solved. Such kind of point interaction potential can then be
addressed by the self-adjoint extension approach [70, 71], which will be used for studying
the scattering and bound state scenarios.

3. Self-adjoint extension analysis

An operator O, with domain D(O), is said to be self-adjoint if and only if D(O† ) = D(O)
and O† = O. In order to determine all self-adjoint extensions of (12), making use
of the underlying rotational symmetry expressed by the fact that [Ĥ, Jˆz ] = 0, where
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 5

Jˆz = −i∂/∂ϕ + σz /2 is the total angular momentum operator in the z-direction, we

decompose the Hilbert space H = L2 (R2 ) with respect to the total angular momentum
H = Hr ⊗ Hϕ , where Hr = L2 (R+ , rdr) and Hϕ = L2 (S 1 , dϕ), with S 1 denoting the unit
sphere in R2 . So, it is possible to express the eigenfunctions of the two dimensional
Hamiltonian in terms of the eigenfunctions of Jˆz
!
ψm (r)ei(mj −1/2)ϕ
Ψ(r, ϕ) = , (14)
χm (r)ei(mj +1/2)ϕ

with mj = m + 1/2 = ±1/2, ±3/2, . . ., and m ∈ Z. By inserting Eq. (14) into Eq. (9)
the Schrödinger-Pauli equation for ψm (r) is found to be (k 2 = 2ME)

Hψm (r) = k 2 ψm (r), (15)

where
δ(r)
H = H0 + α , (16)
r
and
d2 1 d (m − αs)2
H0 = − − + . (17)
dr 2 r dr r2
The self-adjoint extension approach consists, essentially, in extending the domain
D(H0 ) to match D(H0†) and therefore turning H0 into a self-adjoint operator. To do
so, we must find the deficiency subspaces, N± , with dimensions n± , which are called
deficiency indices of H0 [72]. A necessary and sufficient condition for H0 being essentially
self-adjoint is that n+ = n− = 0. On the other hand, if n+ = n− ≥ 1, then H0
has an infinite number of self-adjoint extensions parametrized by unitary operators
U : N+ → N− . In order to find the deficiency subspaces of H0 in Hr , we must solve the
eigenvalue equation
H0† ψ± = ±ik02 ψ± , (18)
where k02 ∈ R was introduced for dimensional reasons. Since H0† = H0 , the solutions of
Eq. (18) which vanishes at the infinite are the Hankel functions (up to a constant)
(1) √
ψ± = H|m−αs| ( ∓ik0 r), (19)
√
with Im ±i > 0. The dimension of such deficiency subspace is thus (n+ , n− ) = (1, 1).
According to the von Neumann-Krein theory, all self-adjoint extensions Hθ,0 of H0 are
given by the one-parameter family

D(Hθ,0) = D(H0† ) = D(H0 ) ⊕ N+ ⊕ N− . (20)

Thus, D(Hθ,0 ) in Hr is given by the set of functions [72]

h
(1) √ (1)
√ i
ψθ (r) = ψm (r) + c H|m−αs| ( −ik0 r) + eiθ H|m−αs| ( ik0 r) , (21)

where ψm (r), with ψm (0) = ψ̇m (0) = 0 (ψ̇ ≡ dψ/dr), is the regular wave function,
c ∈ C and the number θ ∈ [0, 2π) represents a choice for the boundary condition. Using
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 6

the unitary operator U : L2 (R+ , rdr) → L2 (R+ , dr), given by (Uξ)(r) = r 1/2 ξ(r), the
operator H0 becomes
d2 (m − αs)2 − 1/4
H̃0 = UH0 U −1 = − + . (22)
dr 2 r2
By standard results the radial operator H̃0 , is essentially self-adjoint for |m − αs| ≥ 1,
while for |m − αs| < 1 it admits an one-parameter family of self-adjoint extensions [72].
This statement can be understood based in Eq. (19), because for |m − αs| ≥ 1 the right
hand side is not in Hr at 0, while it is in Hr for |m − αs| < 1.
All the self-adjoint extensions H0,λm of H̃0 are parametrized by the boundary
condition at the origin [70, 71]
ψ (0) = λm ψ (1) , (23)
with

ψ (0) = lim+ r |m−αs| ψm (r),

r→0
 
(1) 1 (0) 1
ψ = lim+ |m−αs| ψm (r) − ψ ,
r→0 r r |m−αs|
where λm is the self-adjoint extension parameter. In [71] is shown that there is a
relation between the self-adjoint extension parameter λm and the number θ in Eq. (21).
The number θ is associated with the mapping of deficiency subspaces and extend the
domain of operator to make it self-adjoint. The self-adjoint extension parameter λm
have a physical interpretation: it represents the scattering length [73] of H0,λm [71].
For λm = 0 we have the free Hamiltonian (without the δ function) with regular wave
functions at origin and for λm 6= 0 the boundary condition in Eq. (23) allows a r −|m−αs|
singularity in the wave functions at origin.

4. Scattering and bound state analysis

The general solution for Eq. (15) in the r 6= 0 region can be written as

ψm (r) = am J|m−αs| (kr) + bm Y|m−αs| (kr), (24)

with am and bm being constants and Jν (z) and Yν (z) are the Bessel functions of first
and second kind, respectively. Upon replacing ψm (r) in the boundary condition (23),
one obtain
  
|m−αs| −|m−αs| |m−αs| −|m−αs| 2−2|m−αs|
λm am Ak = bm Bk − λm Ck + BDk lim+ r , (25)
r→0

with
1 2|m−αs| Γ(|m − αs|)
A= |m−αs|
, B=− ,
2 Γ(1 + |m − αs|) π
cos(π|m − αs|)Γ(−|m − αs|) k2
C=− , D= . (26)
π2|m−αs| 4(1 − |m − αs|)
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 7

In Eq. (25), limr→0+ r 2−2|m−αs| is divergent if |m − αs| ≥ 1, hence bm must be zero.

On the other hand, limr→0+ r 2−2|m−αs| is finite for |m − αs| < 1. This means that there
arises the contribution of the irregular solution Y|m−αs| (kr). Here, the presence of an
irregular solution contributing to the wave function stems from the fact the Hamiltonian
H0 is not a self-adjoint operator when |m − αs| < 1 (cf. Section 3), hence such irregular
solution must be associated with a self-adjoint extension of the operator H0 [74, 75].
Thus, for |m − αs| < 1, we have

λm am Ak |m−αs| = bm (Bk −|m−αs| − λm Ck |m−αs| ), (27)

and by substituting the values of A, B and C into above expression we find

bm = −µλmm (k, α)am , (28)

where
λm k 2|m−αs| Γ(1 − |m − αs|) sin(π|m − αs|)
µλmm (k, α) = .
λm k 2|m−αs| Γ(1 − |m − αs|) cos(π|m − αs|) + 4|m−αs| Γ(1 + |m − αs|)
(29)
Since a δ function is a very short range potential, it follows that the asymptotic behavior
of ψm (r) for r → ∞ is given by [76]
r  
2 |m|π π λm
ψm (r) ∼ cos kr − − + δm (k, α) , (30)
πkr 2 4
λm
where δm (k, α) is a scattering phase shift. The phase shift is a measure of the argument
difference to the asymptotic behavior of the solution J|m| (kr) of the radial free equation
which is regular at the origin. By using the asymptotic behavior of the Bessel functions
[77] into Eq. (24) one obtain
r   
2 π|m − αs| π
ψm (r) ∼ am cos kr − −
πkr 2 4
 
λm π|m − αs| π
−µm (k, α) sin kr − − . (31)
2 4
By comparing the above expression with Eq. (30), we have
   
π|m − αs| π λm π|m| π λm
cos kr − − + θm (k, α) = cos kr − − + δm (k, α) . (32)
2 4 2 4
λm
with θm (k, α) given by
 λm  λm
(k, α) = am µλmm (k, α).
 
cos θm (k, α) = am , sin θm (33)

Thus, the asymptotic behavior in Eq. (30) is satisfied if

1
am = q . (34)
1+ [µλmm (k, α)]2
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 8

Now, comparing the arguments of the cosines above, the sought phase shift is obtained
λm λm
δm (k, α) = ∆m (α) + θm (k, α), (35)

with
π
∆m (α) = (|m| − |m − αs|), (36)
2
the phase shift of the AC scattering and
λm
θm (k, α) = arctan [µλmm (k, α)]. (37)
λm
Therefore, by using Eq. (33), the scattering operator Sm (k, α) (S-matrix) for the
self-adjoint extension is
1 + iµλmm (k, α) 2i∆m (α)
 
λm
λm 2iδm (k,α)
Sm (k, α) = e = e , (38)
1 − iµλmm (k, α)
or by using Eq. (29), we have
λm k 2|m−αs| Γ(1 − |m − αs|)eiπ|m−αs| + 4|m−αs| Γ(1 + |m − αs|)
 
λm
Sm (k, α) = 2|m−αs| −iπ|m−αs| |m−αs|
e2i∆m (α) .
λm k Γ(1 − |m − αs|)e +4 Γ(1 + |m − αs|)
(39)
Hence, for any value of the self-adjoint extension parameter λm , there is an additional
scattering. If λm = 0, we achieve the corresponding result for the AC problem
0
with Dirichlet boundary condition [78], Sm (k, α) = e2i∆m (α) . For λm = ∞, we get
∞
Sm (k, α) = e2i∆m (α)+2iπ|m−αs| .
In accordance with the general theory of scattering, the poles of the S-matrix in the
upper half of the complex plane [79] determine the positions of the bound states in the
energy scale. These poles occur in the denominator of Eq. (39) with the replacement
k → iκ, with κ2 = −2ME, E < 0. Thus,

λm (iκ)2|m−αs| Γ(1 − |m − αs|)e−iπ|m−αs| + 4|m−αs| Γ(1 + |m − αs|) = 0. (40)

Solving the above equation for E, we found the bound state energy
 1/|m−αs|
2 1 Γ(1 + |m − αs|)
E=− − , (41)
M λm Γ(1 − |m − αs|)
for λm < 0. Hence, the poles of the scattering matrix only occur for negative values of
the self-adjoint extension parameter, when we have scattering and bound states. In this
latter case, the scattering operator can be expressed in terms of the bound state energy
 2iπ|m−αs|
− (κ/k)2|m−αs|

λm 2i∆m (α) e
Sm (k, α) = e . (42)
1 − (κ/k)2|m−αs|
In a previous work [80] (cf. also [81, 82, 83] for analogous systems), using another
self-adjoint extension approach, the energy bound state for the present system was
determined in terms of the physics of the problem, and it read
  1/|m−αs|
2 α + |m − αs| Γ(1 + |m − αs|)
E=− , (43)
Ma2 α − |m − αs| Γ(1 − |m − αs|)
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 9

where a is a very small radius smaller than the Compton wavelength λC of the electron
[84], which comes from the regularization of the δ function. By comparing Eq. (41)
with Eq. (43) we have
 
1 1 α + |m − αs|
= − 2|m−αs| . (44)
λm a α − |m − αs|
The above relation is only valid for λm < 0, consequently we have |α| ≥ |m − αs| and
due to |m − αs| < 1 it is sufficient to consider |α| ≥ 1 to guarantee λm to be negative.
A necessary condition for a δ function generates an attractive potential, which is able
to support bound states, is that the coupling constant must be negative. Thus, the
existence of bound states requires
α ≤ −1. (45)
Also, it seems from the above equation and from Eq. (13) that we must have gυλ < 0
and there is a minimum value for this product to ensure the presence of a bound state.
The scattering amplitude f (k, α) can be now obtained using the standard methods
of scattering theory, namely
∞
1 X
λm
(k, α) − 1 eimϕ


f (k, α) = √ Sm
2πik m=−∞

1  X
=√ (e2i∆m (α) − 1)eimϕ
2πik |m−αs|≥1


iµλmm (k, α)
 
X 1+ 
+ (e2i∆m (α) − 1)eimϕ . (46)
1− iµλmm (k, α) 
|m−αs|<1

The first sum is the AC amplitude (i.e., when the δ function is absent), while the
second sum is the contribution that come from the singular solutions. In the above
equation we can see that the scattering amplitude is energy dependent (cf. Eq. (29)).
This is a clearly manifestation of the known non-conservation of the helicity in the AC
scattering [85], because the only length scale in the nonrelativistic problem is set by
1/k, so it follows that the scattering amplitude would be a function of the angle alone,
multiplied by 1/k [86]. In fact, the failure of helicity conservation expressed in Eq. (46),
it stems from the fact that the δ function singularity make the Hamiltonian and the
helicity nonself-adjoint operators [87, 88, 89, 90]. By expressing the helicity operator,
ĥ = Σ · Π, in terms of the variables used in Eq. (14), we attain
   
|m − αs| + 1
0 −i ∂r +
 r 
ĥ = 
   . (47)
|m − αs| 
−i ∂r − 0
r

Notice under a parity π transformation ĥ → π † ĥπ = −ĥ, that comes immediately from
the parity transformation π † rπ = −r. This is in fact the helicity odd-parity property.
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 10

The helicity operator share the same issue as the Hamiltonian operator in the interval
|m + αs| < 1, i.e., it is not self-adjoint [91, 92]. Despite that on a finite interval [0, L],
ĥ is a self-adjoint operator with domain in the functions satisfying ξ(L) = eiθ ξ(0), it
does not admit a self-adjoint extension on the interval [0, ∞) [93], and consequently it
cannot be conserved, thus the helicity conservation is broken due to the presence of the
singularity at the origin [86, 88].

5. Conclusion

We have studied the spin-1/2 AC scattering problem with a Lorentz-violating and CPT-
odd nonminimal coupling between fermions and the gauge field in the context of the
nonrelativistic limit of the Dirac equation. It has been shown that there is an additional
scattering for any value of the self-adjoint extension parameter and for negative values
of this parameter there are non-zero energy bound states. The scattering amplitude
show a energy dependency, so the helicity in not conserved. This stem from the fact
that the helicity operator is not a self-adjoint extension operator.

Acknowledgments

F. M. Andrade acknowleges reasearcher grants by Fundação Araucária project No.

205/2013 and E. O. Silva acknowledges researcher grants by CNPq-(Universal) project
No. 484959/2011-5.

References

[1] D. Colladay and V. A. Kostelecký. CPT violation and the standard model. Phys. Rev. D, 55:6760,
Jun 1997.
[2] D. Colladay and V. A. Kostelecký. Lorentz-violating extension of the standard model. Phys. Rev.
D, 58:116002, Oct 1998.
[3] V. A. Kostelecký. Gravity, lorentz violation, and the standard model. Phys. Rev. D, 69:105009,
May 2004.
[4] S. Coleman and S. L. Glashow. High-energy tests of lorentz invariance. Phys. Rev. D, 59:116008,
Apr 1999.
[5] V. A. Kostelecký and S. Samuel. Phenomenological gravitational constraints on strings and higher-
dimensional theories. Phys. Rev. Lett., 63:224, Jul 1989.
[6] V. A. Kostelecký and S. Samuel. Photon and graviton masses in string theories. Phys. Rev. Lett.,
66:1811, Apr 1991.
[7] R. Jackiw and V. A. Kostelecký. Radiatively induced lorentz and CPT violation in
electrodynamics. Phys. Rev. Lett., 82:3572, May 1999.
[8] M. Pérez-Victoria. Exact calculation of the radiatively induced lorentz and CPT violation in qed.
Phys. Rev. Lett., 83:2518, Sep 1999.
[9] J. M. Chung. Lorentz- and CPT -violating chern-simons term in the functional integral formalism.
Phys. Rev. D, 60:127901, Oct 1999.
[10] J. M. Chung and B. K. Chung. Induced lorentz- and CPT-violating chern-simons term in qed:
Fock-schwinger proper time method. Phys. Rev. D, 63:105015, Apr 2001.
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 11

[11] A. P. B. Scarpelli, M. Sampaio, M. C. Nemes, and B. Hiller. Chiral anomaly and CPT invariance
in an implicit momentum space regularization framework. Phys. Rev. D, 64:046013, Jul 2001.
[12] D. Bazeia, T. Mariz, J. R. Nascimento, E. Passos, and R. F. Ribeiro. Lorentz and cpt symmetries
in commutative and noncommutative spacetimes. J. Phys. A, 36(17):4937, 2003.
[13] M. N. Barreto, D. Bazeia, and R. Menezes. Defect structures in lorentz and cpt violating scenarios.
Phys. Rev. D, 73(6):065015–, March 2006.
[14] P. P. Avelino, D. Bazeia, L. Losano, R. Menezes, and J. J. Rodrigues. Impact of lorentz violation
on the dynamics of inflation. Phys. Rev. D, 79(12):123503, June 2009.
[15] D. Bazeia, M. M Ferreira Jr, A R Gomes, and R Menezes. Lorentz-violating effects on topological
defects generated by two real scalarfields. Phys. D, 239(12):942, 2010.
[16] C. Miller, R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira Jr., and E. da Hora. Uncharged compactlike and fractional
lorentz-violating bps vortices in the cpt-even sector of the standard model extension. Phys. Rev.
D, 86:065011, Sep 2012.
[17] R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira Jr., and J. S. Rodrigues. Lorentz-violating contributions of the carroll-
field-jackiw model to the cmb anisotropy. Phys. Rev. D, 78:125013, Dec 2008.
[18] B. Altschul. Bounding lorentz violation at particle colliders by tracking the motion of charged
particles. Phys. Rev. D, 84:076006, Oct 2011.
[19] O. Ganguly, D. Gangopadhyay, and P Majumdar. Lorentz-preserving fields in lorentz-violating
theories. Eur. Phys. Lett., 96(6):61001, 2011.
[20] M. Cambiaso, R. Lehnert, and R. Potting. Massive photons and lorentz violation. Phys. Rev. D,
85:085023, Apr 2012.
[21] M. Pospelov and Y. Shang. Lorentz violation in hořava-lifshitz-type theories. Phys. Rev. D,
85:105001, May 2012.
[22] J. Leite and T. Mariz. Induced lorentz-violating terms at finite temperature. Eur. Phys. Lett.,
99(2):21003, 2012.
[23] R. Casana, E. S. Carvalho, and M. M. Ferreira Jr. Dimensional reduction of the cpt-even
electromagnetic sector of the standard model extension. Phys. Rev. D, 84:045008, Aug 2011.
[24] R. V. Maluf, V. Santos, W. T. Cruz, and C. A. S. Almeida. Matter-gravity scattering in the
presence of spontaneous lorentz violation. arXiv:1304.2090 [hep-th], 2013.
[25] C. Adam and F. R. Klinkhamer. Photon decay in a cpt-violating extension of quantum
electrodynamics. Nucl. Phys. B, 657(0):214, May 2003.
[26] C. Adam and F. R. Klinkhamer. Causality and cpt violation from an abelian chern-simons-like
term. Nucl. Phys. B, 607(1-2):247, July 2001.
[27] A. A. Andrianov and R. Soldati. Lorentz symmetry breaking in abelian vector-field models with
wess-zumino interaction. Phys. Rev. D, 51(10):5961, May 1995.
[28] A. A. Andrianov, R. Soldati, and L. Sorbo. Dynamical lorentz symmetry breaking from a (3+1)-
dimensional axion-wess-zumino model. Phys. Rev. D, 59(2):025002, December 1998.
[29] A. A. Andrianov and R. Soldati. Patterns of lorentz symmetry breaking in qed by cpt-odd
interaction. Phys. Lett. B, 435(3-4):449, September 1998.
[30] H. Belich, M. M. Ferreira Jr., J. A. Helayël-Neto, and M. T. D. Orlando. Dimensional reduction
of a lorentz- and CPT -violating maxwell-chern-simons model. Phys. Rev. D, 67:125011, Jun
2003.
[31] R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira Jr., A. R. Gomes, and P. R. D. Pinheiro. Gauge propagator and physical
consistency of the cpt-even part of the standard model extension. Phys. Rev. D, 80:125040, Dec
2009.
[32] A. P. Bata Scarpelli, Marcos Sampaio, M. C. Nemes, and B. Hiller. Gauge invariance and the
cpt and lorentz violating induced chernsimons-like term in extended qed. Eur. Phys. J. C,
56(4):571, 2008.
[33] R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira Jr., and M. R. O. Silva. Parity-odd and cpt-even electrodynamics of
the standard model extension at finite temperature. Phys. Rev. D, 81:105015, May 2010.
[34] T. Mariz. Radiatively induced lorentz-violating operator of mass dimension five in qed. Phys.
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 12

Rev. D, 83:045018, Feb 2011.

[35] R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira Jr., and R. P. M. Moreira. Consistency analysis of a nonbirefringent
lorentz-violating planar model. Eur. Phys. J. C, 72:2070, 2012.
[36] B. Charneski, M. Gomes, R. V. Maluf, and A. J. da Silva. Lorentz violation bounds on bhabha
scattering. Phys. Rev. D, 86:045003, Aug 2012.
[37] A. P. B. Scarpelli. Qed with chiral nonminimal coupling: aspects of the lorentz-violating quantum
corrections. J. Phys. G, 39(12):125001, 2012.
[38] G. Gazzola, H. G. Fargnoli, A. P. Baêta Scarpelli, M. Sampaio, and M. C. Nemes. Qed with
minimal and nonminimal couplings: on the quantum generation of lorentz-violating terms in
the pure photon sector. J. Phys. G, 39(3):035002, 2012.
[39] T. Jacobson, S. Liberati, and D. Mattingly. Tev astrophysics constraints on planck scale lorentz
violation. Phys. Rev. D, 66:081302, Oct 2002.
[40] S. Liberati and L. Maccione. Lorentz violation: Motivation and new constraints. Ann. Rev.
Nuclear Particle Science, 59:245, 2009.
[41] L. Shao and B. Ma. Lorentz-violation-induced vacuum birefringence and its astrophysical
consequences. Phys. Rev. D, 83:127702, Jun 2011.
[42] V. A. Kostelecký and N. Russell. Data tables for lorentz and cpt violation. Rev. Mod. Phys.,
83(1):11, March 2011.
[43] V. A. Kostelecký and M. Mewes. Cosmological constraints on lorentz violation in electrodynamics.
Phys. Rev. Lett., 87:251304, Nov 2001.
[44] V. A. Kostelecký and M. Mewes. Signals for lorentz violation in electrodynamics. Phys. Rev. D,
66:056005, Sep 2002.
[45] R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecký, and N. Russell. Testing CPT with anomalous magnetic moments.
Phys. Rev. Lett., 79:1432, Aug 1997.
[46] R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecký, and N. Russell. CPT and lorentz tests in penning traps. Phys. Rev.
D, 57:3932, Apr 1998.
[47] R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecký, C. D. Lane, and N. Russell. Clock-comparison tests of lorentz and
CPT symmetry in space. Phys. Rev. Lett., 88:090801, Feb 2002.
[48] R. Bluhm and V. A. Kostelecký. Lorentz and CPT tests with spin-polarized solids. Phys. Rev.
Lett., 84:1381, Feb 2000.
[49] R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecký, and C. D. Lane. CPT and lorentz tests with muons. Phys. Rev.
Lett., 84:1098, Feb 2000.
[50] R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecký, and N. Russell. CPT and lorentz tests in hydrogen and antihydrogen.
Phys. Rev. Lett., 82:2254, Mar 1999.
[51] H. Belich, T. Costa-Soares, M. M. Ferreira Jr, and J. A. Helayl-Neto. Non-minimal coupling to a
lorentz-violating background and topological implications. Eur. Phys. J. C, 41:421, 2005.
[52] Y. Aharonov and A. Casher. Topological quantum effects for neutral particles. Phys. Rev. Lett.,
53(4):319, July 1984.
[53] A. G. Grushin. Consequences of a condensed matter realization of lorentz-violating qed in weyl
semi-metals. Phys. Rev. D, 86:045001, Aug 2012.
[54] K. Bakke, H. Belich, and E. O. Silva. Relativistic anandan quantum phase in the lorentz violation
background. Ann. Phys. (Berlin), 523(11):910, 2011.
[55] K. Bakke, H. Belich, and E. O. Silva. Relativistic landau-aharonov-casher quantization based on
the lorentz symmetry violation background. J. Math. Phys., 52:063505, 2011.
[56] H. Belich, E. O. Silva, M. M. Ferreira Jr, and M. T. D. Orlando. Aharonov-bohm-casher problem
with a nonminimal lorentz-violating coupling. Phys. Rev. D, 83(12):125025, June 2011.
[57] H. Belich, T. Costa-Soares, M. M. Ferreira Jr, J. A. Helayël-Neto, and M. T. D Orlando. A
comment on the topological phase for anti-particles in a lorentz-violating environment. Phys.
Lett. B, 639(6):675, 2006.
[58] H. Belich, L. P. Colatto, T. Costa-Soares, J. A. Helayël-Neto, and M. T. D. Orlando. Magnetic
moment generation from non-minimal couplings inascenario with lorentz-symmetry violation.
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 13

Eur. Phys. J. C, 62:425, 2009.

[59] K. Bakke, E. O. Silva, and H. Belich. Hemckellarwilkens effect and scalar aharonovbohm effect
for a neutral particle based on the lorentz symmetry violation. J. Phys. G, 39(5):055004, 2012.
[60] L. R. Ribeiro, C. Furtado, and E. Passos. An analogy of the quantum hall conductivity in a
lorentz-symmetry violation setup. J. Phys. G, 39(10):105004, 2012.
[61] K. Bakke and H. Belich. Relativistic landau-he-mckellar-wilkens quantization and relativistic
bound states solutions for a coulomb-like potential induced by the lorentz symmetry breaking
effects. Ann. Phys. (N.Y.), 333(0):272, 2013.
[62] K Bakke and H Belich. Abelian geometric phase for a dirac neutral particle in a lorentz symmetry
violation environment. J. Phys. G, 39(8):085001, 2012.
[63] K Bakke and H Belich. Quantum holonomies based on the lorentz-violating tensor background.
J. Phys. G, 40(6):065002, 2013.
[64] R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira Jr., E. Passos, F. E. P. dos Santos, and E. O. Silva. New cpt-even
and lorentz-violating nonminimal coupling in the dirac equation. Phys. Rev. D, 87(4):047701–,
February 2013.
[65] R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira Jr., R. V. Maluf, and F. E. P. dos Santos. Effects of a cpt-even and
lorentz-violating nonminimal coupling on electron-positron scattering. Phys. Rev. D, 86:125033,
Dec 2012.
[66] H. J. de Vega. Fermions and vortex solutions in abelian and non-abelian gauge theories. Phys.
Rev. D, 18(8):2932–2944, October 1978.
[67] R. H. Brandenberger, A. Davis, and A. M. Matheson. Callan-rubakov effect for strings. Nucl.
Phys. B, 307(4):909–923, October 1988.
[68] M. G. Alford and F. Wilczek. Aharonov-bohm interaction of cosmic strings with matter. Phys.
Rev. Lett., 62(10):1071–1074, March 1989.
[69] E. O. Silva, F. M. Andrade, C. Filgueiras, and H. Belich. On aharonov-casher bound states. Eur.
Phys. J. C, 73(4):2402, 2013.
[70] W. Bulla and F. Gesztesy. Deficiency indices and singular boundary conditions in quantum
mechanics. J. Math. Phys., 26(10):2520, 1985.
[71] S. Albeverio, F. Gesztesy, R. Hoegh-Krohn, and H. Holden. Solvable Models in Quantum
Mechanics. AMS Chelsea Publishing, Providence, RI, second edition, 2004.
[72] M. Reed and B. Simon. Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics. II. Fourier Analysis, Self-
Adjointness. Academic Press, New York - London, 1975.
[73] J. J. Sakurai and J. Napolitano. Modern Quantum Mechanics. Addison-Wesley, 2nd ed. edition,
2011.
[74] J. Audretsch, U. Jasper, and V. D. Skarzhinsky. A pragmatic approach to the problem of the
self-adjoint extension of hamilton operators with the aharonov-bohm potential. J. Phys. A,
28(8):2359, 1995.
[75] F. A. B. Coutinho, Y. Nogami, and J. Fernando Perez. Self-adjoint extensions of the hamiltonian
for a charged particle in the presence of a thread of magnetic flux. Phys. Rev. A, 46(9):6052,
November 1992.
[76] C. R. de Oliveira and M. Pereira. Scattering and self-adjoint extensions of the aharonovbohm
hamiltonian. J. Phys. A, 43(35):354011, 2010.
[77] M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, editors. Handbook of Mathematical Functions. New York: Dover
Publications, 1972.
[78] S. N. M. Ruijsenaars. The aharonov-bohm effect and scattering theory. Ann. Phys. (NY), 146(1):1,
March 1983.
[79] K. Bennaceur, J. Dobaczewski, and M. Ploszajczak. Continuum effects for the mean-field and
pairing properties of weakly bound nuclei. Phys. Rev. C, 60(3):034308, August 1999.
[80] E. O. Silva and F. M. Andrade. Remarks on the aharonov-casher dynamics in a cpt-odd lorentz-
violating background. Europhys. Lett., 101(5):51005–, 2013.
[81] C. Filgueiras, E. O. Silva, W. Oliveira, and F. Moraes. The effect of singular potentials on the
On the Aharonov-Casher scattering in a CPT-odd Lorentz-violating background 14

harmonic oscillator. Ann. Phys. (NY), 325(11):2529, November 2010.

[82] F. M. Andrade and E. O. Silva. Effects of quantum deformation on the spin-1/2 aharonov-bohm
problem. Phys. Lett. B, 719(4-5):467, February 2013.
[83] C. Filgueiras, E. O. Silva, and F. M. Andrade. Nonrelativistic quantum dynamics on a cone with
and without a constraining potential. J. Math. Phys., 53(12):122106, December 2012.
[84] M. Bordag and S. Voropaev. Bound states of an electron in the field of the magnetic string. Phys.
Lett. B, 333(12):238, July 1994.
[85] C. R. Hagen. Exact equivalence of spin-1/2 aharonov-bohm and aharonov-casher effects. Phys.
Rev. Lett., 64(20):2347, May 1990.
[86] A. S. Goldhaber. Dirac particle in a magnetic field: Symmetries and their breaking by monopole
singularities. Phys. Rev. D, 16(6):1815, September 1977.
[87] Y. Kazama, C. N. Yang, and A. S. Goldhaber. Scattering of a dirac particle with charge z e by a
fixed magnetic monopole. Phys. Rev. D, 15(8):2287, April 1977.
[88] B. Grossman. Does a dyon leak? Phys. Rev. Lett., 50(7):464, February 1983.
[89] N. Ganoulis. Modified aharonov-bohm scattering from electroweak strings. Phys. Lett. B,
298(12):63, January 1993.
[90] A. C. Davis, A. P. Martin, and N. Ganoulis. Charged-particle scattering from electroweak and
semi-local strings. Nucl. Phys. B, 419(2):323, May 1994.
[91] F. A. B. Coutinho and J. F. Perez. Helicity conservation in the aharonov-bohm scattering of dirac
particles. Phys. Rev. D, 49(4):2092, February 1994.
[92] V. S. Araujo, F. A. B. Coutinho, and J. F. Perez. On the most general boundary conditions
for the aharonov-bohm scattering of a dirac particle: helicity and aharonov-bohm symmetry
conservation. J. Phys. A, 34(42):8859, 2001.
[93] G. Bonneau, J. Faraut, and G. Valent. Self-adjoint extensions of operators and the teaching of
quantum mechanics. Am. J. Phys., 69(3):322, March 2001.