Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Collapse of Coulomb bound states of vector bosons

V. V. Flambaum1,* and H. B. Tran Tan2

  • *Contact author: v.flambaum@unsw.edu.au

Phys. Rev. D 113, 113012 – Published 22 June, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/mmlk-cnpw

Abstract

Charged spin-1 (vector) particles behave very differently from electrons or scalars in a Coulomb field. For an infinitely heavy “pointlike” nucleus, their bound-state wave functions “fall to the center,” and embedding the system in a renormalizable electroweak-type theory does not remedy this short-distance pathology. We therefore solve the pure Coulomb problem for a finite nuclear radius R and recover the point-nucleus limit by letting R→0. This approach allows us to include the crucial ϒ-term in the wave equations, which for the pointlike nucleus is proportional to δ(r) and was ignored in the previous calculations of the energy spectrum. Several unusual effects emerge: (i) The ϒ-term supports a tower of states located mainly inside the nucleus. As R→0 their number diverges, most lying in the negative-energy continuum (energy ε<−mc2). They trigger vacuum breakdown—particle-antiparticle pair creation that ultimately screens the nuclear charge. (ii) Ordinary Sommerfeld-like states (with binding energy smaller mc2) persist, but a finite fraction of each wave function leaks into the nucleus, even as R→0. (iii) Charge density of a negatively charged vector particle changes sign in a vicinity of the nucleus and becomes positive charge density, whereas the ϒ-term ensures its density inside the nucleus remains negative. (iv) For weak coupling, Zα≪1, yet with mR<Zα, the “nonrelativistic” solution differs qualitatively from Schrödinger theory despite binding energies that are well below mc2; agreement is recovered only when Zα≪mR. These phenomena highlight the distinctive and subtle behavior of spin-1 particles in the Coulomb field.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (36)

  1. A. Proca, Comptes Rendu 202, 1490 (1936).
  2. H. S. W. Massey and H. C. Corben, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 35, 463 (1939).
  3. J. R. Oppenheimer, H. Snyder, and R. Serber, Phys. Rev. 57, 75 (1940).
  4. I. Tamm, Phys. Rev. 58, 952 (1940).
  5. H. C. Corben and J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 58, 953 (1940).
  6. A. Pomeranskii and I. Khriplovich, J. Exp. Theor. Phys. 86, 839 (1998).
  7. A. Pomeransky and R. Sen’kov, Phys. Lett. B 468, 251 (1999).
  8. A. A. Pomeranskii, R. A. Senkov, and I. B. Khriplovich, Usp. Fiz. Nauk 43, 1055 (2000).
  9. W. Fushchich, A. Nikitin, and W. Susloparow, Il Nuovo Cimento A (1965-1970) 87, 415 (1985).
  10. V. I. Fushchich and A. G. Nikitin, Symmetries of Equations of Quantum Mechanics (Allerton Press, New York, 1994).
  11. N. Kemmer, Proc. R. Soc. A 166, 127 (1938).
  12. R. J. Duffin, Phys. Rev. 54, 1114 (1938).
  13. N. Kemmer, Proc. R. Soc. A 173, 91 (1939).
  14. K. M. Case, Phys. Rev. 80, 797 (1950).
  15. K. M. Case, Phys. Rev. 100, 1513 (1955).
  16. S. Gonen, A. Havare, and N. Unal, arXiv:hep-th/0207087.
  17. H. Hassanabadi, B. H. Yazarloo, S. Zarrinkamar, and A. A. Rajabi, Phys. Rev. C 84, 064003 (2011).
  18. A. G. Jirón, L. B. Castro, A. S. de Castro, and A. E. Obispo, Europhys. Lett. 146, 40001 (2024).
  19. V. V. Flambaum and M. Y. Kuchiev, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 181805 (2007).
  20. V. V. Flambaum and M. Y. Kuchiev, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 22, 2971 (2007).
  21. M. Y. Kuchiev and V. V. Flambaum, Phys. Rev. D 73, 093009 (2006).
  22. V. V. Flambaum, A. J. Geddes, and A. V. Viatkina, Phys. Rev. A 97, 032510 (2018).
  23. F. G. Werner and J. A. Wheeler, Phys. Rev. 109, 126 (1958).
  24. W. Pieper and W. Greiner, Z. Phys. 218, 327 (1969).
  25. V. V. Flambaum and M. Y. Kuchiev, arXiv:0804.4529.
  26. Y. B. Zel’dovich and V. S. Popov, Sov. Phys. Usp. 14, 673 (1972).
  27. B. Müller, J. Rafelski, and W. Greiner, Z. Phys. 257, 62 (1972).
  28. J. Rafelski, B. Müller, and W. Greiner, Nucl. Phys. B68, 585 (1974).
  29. J. Rafelski, L. P. Fulcher, and A. Klein, Phys. Rep. 38, 227 (1978).
  30. A. Klein and J. Rafelski, Phys. Rev. D 11, 300 (1975).
  31. A. Klein and J. Rafelski, Z. Phys. 284, 71 (1978).
  32. J. a. G. Rosa and S. R. Dolan, Phys. Rev. D 85, 044043 (2012).
  33. V. V. Flambaum, G. H. Gossel, and G. F. Gribakin, Phys. Rev. D 85, 084027 (2012).
  34. V. V. Flambaum, G. H. Gossel, and G. F. Gribakin, Phys. Rev. D 86, 044042 (2012).
  35. G. Spencer-Smith, G. H. Gossel, J. C. Berengut, and V. V. Flambaum, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 45, 613 (2013).
  36. Y. V. Stadnik, G. H. Gossel, V. V. Flambaum, and J. C. Berengut, Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2605 (2013).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation