\section{Introduction}

Recent observations of the new baryonic  $P_c$
states~\cite{Aaij:2015tga} and the mesonic $XYZ$
states~\cite{Olsen:2014qna,Liu:2013waa,Bodwin:2013nua,Brambilla:2010cs}
by various collaborations have challenged the conventional wisdom
that mesons are made of quark-antiquark pairs and baryons are
composed of three (anti)quarks in the naive quark model. These
findings have attracted a lot of attention from the theory side.
Various explanations of these states have been proposed, such as
molecules, mutiquark compact objects, kinematic effects, or mixtures
of components of different nature. Up to now none of them has been
accepted unanimously. This is not surprising, given limited
experimental constrains and  the fact the various components of a
hadron are not observables themselves. Furthermore, it is quite
likely that a specific reaction or decay process can only review
part of the nature of the hadrons under investigation. Clearly, the
only way to understand the nature of a hadron is to examine it from
all possible ways, both experimentally and theoretically.

Nevertheless, it seems clear that Nature is richer than it is preferred to be.
In this respect, it is not surprising to find out that many low-lying states, even those long believed to be
conventional $q\bar{q}$ (or $qqq$) states, may have large components of other nature. Indeed, it has been shown
that many of the low-lying mesonic states can be understood not only as $q\bar{q}$ states but also as meson-meson molecules,
 dynamically generated in the so-called unitary approaches. One of such examples are
the tensor states: $f_2(1270)$, $f_2'(1525)$, and $K_2^*(1430)$. They  are found dynamically generated
from the vector meson - vector meson interactions~\cite{Molina:2008jw,Geng:2008gx,Geng:2009gb},
obtained in the coupled-channel Bethe-Salpeter equations by unitarizing the tree-level hidden gauge diagrams ~\cite{hidden1,hidden2,hidden3,hidden4}.

The molecular nature of these tensor states has been extensively
tested in a large number of processes, for instance,  the two-photon
decay of the $f_2(1270)$~\cite{yamagata}; the two-photon and one
photon-one vector decays of the $f_2(1270)$, $f'_2(1525)$ and
$K^*_2(1430)$~\cite{Branz:2009cv};
 the $J/\psi \to \phi(\omega)
f_2(1270), ~f'_2(1525)$ and $J/\psi \to K^{*0}(892)
\bar{K}^{*0}_2(1430)$ decays~\cite{alberzou};  the radiative decay of $J/\psi$ into
$f_2(1270)$ and $f'_2(1525)$ ~\cite{Geng:2009iw};
the $\psi (2S)$ decays into $\omega(\phi) f_2(1270)$, $\omega(\phi)
f'_2(1525)$, $K^{*0}(892) \bar{K}^{*\,0}_2(1430)$ and the radiative
decays of $\Upsilon (1S),\Upsilon (2S), \psi (2S)$ into $\gamma
f_2(1270)$, $\gamma f'_2(1525)$, $\gamma f_0(1370)$, and $\gamma
f_0(1710)$ ~\cite{dai2s,Dai:2015cwa};
 the ratio of the decay widths of
$\bar B^0_s \to J/\psi f_2(1270)$ to $\bar B^0_s \to J/\psi
f'_2(1525)$ ~\cite{xiebdec}. The agreement with experimental data turns out to be quite good in general, providing
support to the  underlying assumption that these states contain large meson-meson components.

In a recent work~\cite{Xie:2014twa}, taking the molecular picture
for the $f_2(1270)$ resonance, the $\gamma p \to p f_2(1270)$
reaction has been studied. It was found that the theoretical results
of the differential cross sections are in agreement with the
experimental data of Ref.~\cite{Battaglieri:2009aa}, providing first
support for the molecular picture of the $f_2(1270)$ state in a
baryonic reaction. In this work, we extend the formalism proposed in
Ref.~\cite{Xie:2014twa} to study the $\gamma p \to f'_2(1525) p$ and
$\gamma p \to K^*_2(1430) \Lambda (\Sigma)$ reactions. One should
stress again that as the only way to unravel the nature of a hadron
is via different reactions and decay processes, we deem such studies
very timely and important.

The present article is organized as follows. In
Sec.~\ref{sec:formalism}, we introduce the formalism and the main
ingredients of the model. In Sec.~\ref{sec:results}, we present our
main results, and a short summary and conclusions are given
in Sec.~\ref{sec:summary}.

\section{Formalism and ingredients} \label{sec:formalism}

\subsection{Feynman amplitudes}

From the perspective that the $f'_2(1525)$ and $K^*_2(1430)$
resonances are dynamically generated from the vector-vector ($VV$)
interactions, the $f'_2(1525)$ and $K^*_2(1430)$ photoproductions
proceed via the creation of two vector mesons by the $\gamma p$
initial state in a primary step and the following interaction
(rescattering) of the two vector mesons, thus dynamically generating
the resonance. This corresponding Feynman diagrams are shown in
Fig.~\ref{Fig:gammaptof2p} for the $\gamma p \to f'_2(1525) p$
reaction and Fig.~\ref{Fig:gammaptok2star} for the $\gamma p \to
K^*_2(1430)\Lambda (\Sigma)$ reaction.

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{gammaptof2p.eps}
\caption{Diagrammatic representation of the $f'_2(1525)$
photoproduction, where $k,~p,~p',q,p_{f_2}$ are the four-momentum of
the involved particles and $q=p'-p$.} \label{Fig:gammaptof2p}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.]{gammaptok2star.eps}
\caption{Diagrammatic representation of the $\gamma p \to
K^*_2(1430)\Lambda (\Sigma)$ reaction.} \label{Fig:gammaptok2star}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

As can be seen from Figs.~\ref{Fig:gammaptof2p} and
\ref{Fig:gammaptok2star}, the photon first gets converted into one
vector meson, a characteristic of the local hidden gauge formalism,
which then interacts with the other vector emitted by the proton. To
evaluate the Feynman amplitudes, we need the coupling of the tensor
meson to the respective vector mesons, $g_{T}^{VV}$, the
$\gamma$-$V$ coupling, and the $V NN$ coupling. In the unitary
approach, the amplitude close to a pole that represents a resonance
can be written in the following way
\begin{eqnarray}
t_{\rm pole} &\simeq& \frac{\left(g^{VV}_T \right)^2 P^{(2)}_{\rm initial} P^{(2)}_{\rm
final}}{s - s_R},       \label{tpole} \\
P^{(2)}_{\rm initial} &=& \frac{1}{2}(\epsilon^{(1)}_i
\epsilon^{(2)}_j + \epsilon^{(1)}_j \epsilon^{(2)}_i)
-\frac{1}{3}\epsilon^{(1)}_l \epsilon^{(2)}_l \delta_{ij}, \\
P^{(2)}_{\rm final} &=& \frac{1}{2}(\epsilon^{(3)}_i
\epsilon^{(4)}_j + \epsilon^{(3)}_j \epsilon^{(4)}_i)
-\frac{1}{3}\epsilon^{(3)}_m \epsilon^{(4)}_m \delta_{ij},
\end{eqnarray}
where $s_R$ is the pole position and $g^{VV}_T$ the coupling of the
resonance to the $VV$ component in isospin $I=0(1/2)$ and spin
$S=2$. The Eq.~(\ref{tpole}) is the representation of a resonance
amplitude, for instance the $f'_2(1525)$ and $K^*_2(1430)$ in the
present case, as shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:rhorhotof2} (a). The
$P^{(2)}_\mathrm{initial/final}$  projects the initial and final
$VV$ pair into spin two.  Then the coupling of a tensor resonance to
$VV$ is given by the diagram of Fig.~\ref{Fig:rhorhotof2} (b), and
is expressed in terms of the following vertex~\cite{yamagata}
\begin{eqnarray}
t_{R \to VV} = g^{VV}_T P^{(2)}_{\rm initial} , \label{tRrhorho}
\end{eqnarray}
where the values for $g^{VV}_T$ are shown in Table~\ref{Tab:tvvcoupling}, taken from
Ref.~\cite{Geng:2008gx}.

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{vvtotensor.eps}
\caption{(a): The $VV \to VV$ amplitude dominated by the
$f'_2(1525)$ or $K^*_2(1430)$ pole; (b): Representation of the
$f'_2(1525)$ or $K^*_2(1430)$ coupling to $VV$.}
\label{Fig:rhorhotof2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\begin{table}[htbp]
\caption{The coupling constants of $f'_2(1525)$ and $K^*_2(1430)$ to
$VV$.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline\hline
Resonance & Channel & $g^{VV}_T$ (MeV)  \\
\hline
$f'_2(1525)$ & $\rho \rho$  & $(-2443,i649)$  \\
             & $\omega \omega$  & $(-2709,i8)$  \\
             & $ \phi\omega$  & $(5016,-i17)$  \\
$K^*_2(1430)$ & $\rho K^*$ & $(10901,-i71)$   \\
& $\omega K^*$ & $(2267,-i13)$   \\
& $\phi K^*$ & $(-2898,i17)$   \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center} \label{Tab:tvvcoupling}
\end{table}

The $\gamma$-$V$ conversion vertex can be obtained from the local
hidden gauge Lagrangians~\cite{hidden1,hidden2,hidden3,hidden4} (see
Ref.~\cite{Nagahiro:2008cv} for a practical set of rules) and one
has~\cite{angelsphotok}
\begin{eqnarray}
-i t_{\gamma V} = -i C_{\gamma V} \frac{eM^2_V}{g} \epsilon_{\mu}(V)
\epsilon^{\mu}(\gamma), \label{trhogamma}
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
g = \frac{M_{\rho}}{2f};~~~~f=93~~{\rm
MeV};~~~~\frac{e^2}{4\pi}=\frac{1}{137},
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{\gamma \rho} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}};~~~~C_{\gamma \omega} =
\frac{1}{3\sqrt{2}};~~~~C_{\gamma \phi} = -\frac{1}{3}.
\end{eqnarray}

The other ingredient that we need is the vector-baryon-baryon
vertex, which is given by the Lagrangian
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L}_{BBV} = g (<\bar{B}\gamma^{\mu}[V_{\mu},B]> +
<\bar{B}\gamma^{\mu}B><V_{\mu}>).\label{lbbv}
\end{eqnarray}
From this, one can easily obtain the $\rho^0 pp$, $\omega pp$, $K^{*+} p \Lambda$,
$K^{*+} p \Sigma^0$, and $K^{*0} p \Sigma^+$ vertices,
\begin{eqnarray}
-it_{\rho^0 pp} &=& i \frac{g}{\sqrt{2}} \bar{p}\gamma^{\mu} p
\epsilon_{\mu}(\rho^0), \label{rhopp} \\
-it_{\omega pp} &=& i \frac{3g}{\sqrt{2}} \bar{p}\gamma^{\mu} p
\epsilon_{\mu}(\omega),  \label{omepp} \\
-it_{K^{*+} p \Lambda} &=& -i \frac{3g}{\sqrt{6}}
\bar{\Lambda}\gamma^{\mu} p
\epsilon_{\mu}(K^*),  \label{kstarplambda} \\
-it_{K^{*+} p \Sigma^0} &=& -i \frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}
\bar{\Sigma}\gamma^{\mu} p
\epsilon_{\mu}(K^*), \label{kstarpsigmazero} \\
-it_{K^{*0} p \Sigma^+} &=& -i g \bar{\Sigma}\gamma^{\mu} p
\epsilon_{\mu}(K^*). \label{kstarpsigmaplus}
\end{eqnarray}

There is one more subtlety  to consider. The amplitude of
Eq.~(\ref{tpole}) is evaluated for a $VV$ state in the unitary
normalization, which for $I=0$ and $I = 1/2$ are given as follows (recall
$|\rho^+> = -|1,+1>$),
\begin{eqnarray}
&& |\rho\rho,I=0> = -\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}} (\rho^+ \rho^- + \rho^-
\rho^+ + \rho^0 \rho^0), \label{f2rhorho} \\
&& |\omega\omega,I=0> = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (\omega \omega), \label{f2omeome} \\
&& |\phi\omega,I=0> = (\phi \omega), \\
&& |\rho K^*,I=1/2,I_3 = 1/2> = \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}(\rho^+ K^{*0}) ,\nonumber \\
&& - \sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}(\rho^0 K^{*+}), \\
&& |\rho K^*,I=1/2,I_3 = -1/2> = \sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}(\rho^0 K^{*0}),
\nonumber \\
&& - \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}(\rho^- K^{*+}), \\
&& |\omega K^*,I=1/2> = (\omega K^*), \\
&& |\phi K^*,I=1/2> = (\phi K^*).
\end{eqnarray}

Considering the vertices described above, we obtain the weights $W^{VV}_T$ for
$\gamma p \to f'_2(1525) p$ and $\gamma p \to K^*_2(1430)\Lambda
(\Sigma)$ reactions (Table~\ref{Tab:weights}). They account for the
factor of Eq.~(\ref{trhogamma}),
Eqs.~(\ref{rhopp}-\ref{kstarpsigmaplus}), the components of the $VV$
state in the good normalization and the couplings of the resonances
to the $VV$ channel. In the case of two identical particles the
coupling is multiplied by an extra factor of $\sqrt{2}$ to restore the
good normalization from the couplings calculated in
Ref.~\cite{Geng:2008gx} in the unitary approach as shown in Eqs.~(14-20).

\begin{table}[htbp]
\caption{Weights for the $\gamma p \to f'_2(1525) p$ and $\gamma p
\to K^*_2(1430)\Lambda (\Sigma)$ reactions. The  $f'_2(1525)$ and $K^*_2(1430)$ are
abbreviated as $f'_2$ and $K^*_2$, respectively.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline\hline
Reaction &   & $W^{VV}_T$  \\
\hline
$\gamma p \to f'_2(1525) p$ & $\rho^0 \rho^0$  & $-\frac{e}{\sqrt{6}} g^{\rho \rho}_{f'_2}$  \\
             & $\omega \omega$  & $\frac{e}{\sqrt{2}} g^{\omega \omega}_{f'_2}$  \\
             & $ \phi\omega$  & $-\frac{e}{\sqrt{2}} g^{\phi \omega }_{f'_2}$  \\
$\gamma p \to K^{*+}_2(1430) \Lambda$ & $\rho^0 K^{*+}$ & $\frac{e}{2} g^{\rho K^*}_{K^*_2}$   \\
& $\omega K^{*+}$ &  $-\frac{e}{2\sqrt{3}} g^{\omega K^*}_{K^*_2}$   \\
& $\phi K^{*+}$ & $\frac{e}{\sqrt{6}}  g^{\phi K^*}_{K^*_2}$   \\
$\gamma p \to K^{*+}_2(1430) \Sigma^0$ & $\rho^0 K^{*+}$ & $\frac{e}{2\sqrt{3}} g^{\rho K^*}_{K^*_2}$   \\
& $\omega K^{*+}$ &  $-\frac{e}{6} g^{\omega K^*}_{K^*_2}$   \\
& $\phi K^{*+}$ & $\frac{e}{3\sqrt{2}}  g^{\phi K^*}_{K^*_2}$   \\
$\gamma p \to K^{*0}_2(1430) \Sigma^+$ & $\rho^0 K^{*0}$ & $-\frac{e}{\sqrt{6}} g^{\rho K^*}_{K^*_2}$   \\
& $\omega K^{*0}$ &  $-\frac{e}{3\sqrt{2}} g^{\omega K^*}_{K^*_2}$   \\
& $\phi K^{*0}$ & $\frac{e}{3} g^{\phi K^*}_{K^*_2}$   \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center} \label{Tab:weights}
\end{table}

Gauge invariance imposes a stringent constraint on photonuclear
processes, although sometimes not all of the terms needed to have
gauge invariance are numerically
relevant~\cite{Borasoy:2005zg,Doring:2005bx}. Nevertheless, in the
present case, a thorough study of gauge invariance was conducted in
Ref.~\cite{Nagahiro:2008cv} for the radiative decay of axial vector
mesons within the local hidden gauge approach, and in particular in
Ref.~\cite{yamagata} for the amplitude $\rho \rho \to \rho \gamma$,
which is similar to what we have here, with the two vector mesons
interacting to produce the tensor states. There it is concluded that
gauge invariance is encoded in the effective coupling of the tensor
states to the two vector mesons.

Considering the weights given above, the $T$ matrix for the diagram
of Fig.~\ref{Fig:gammaptof2p} is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
&& -i T_{\gamma p \to f'_2(1525)p} = -i e(-\frac{g^{\rho
\rho}_{f'_2}}{\sqrt{6}} + \frac{g^{\omega \omega}_{f'_2}}{\sqrt{2}}
- \frac{g^{ \phi \omega}_{f'_2}}{\sqrt{2}}) \nonumber \\
&& \{ \frac{1}{2} [ \epsilon_i(\gamma) \epsilon_j(V) +
\epsilon_j(\gamma) \epsilon_i(V) ] -\frac{1}{3}\epsilon_m(\gamma)
\epsilon_m(V) \delta_{ij} \} \nonumber \\
&& \frac{1}{q^2 - m^2_{V}}
<p(M')|\gamma^{\mu}\epsilon_{\mu}(V)|p(M)>, \label{tgammap1}
\end{eqnarray}
with $M$ and $M'$ the  third spin component of the initial and final
proton. The $V$ stands for the exchanged $\rho^0$ or $\omega$. We
take $m_V = m_{\rho} = m_{\omega} = 780$ MeV in the present
calculation. Next, we perform the sum over the polarizations of
the vector meson exchanged in Fig.~\ref{Fig:gammaptof2p} and then we
obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
&& T_{\gamma p \to f'_2(1525)p} = e(-\frac{g^{\rho
\rho}_{f'_2}}{\sqrt{6}} + \frac{g^{\omega \omega}_{f'_2}}{\sqrt{2}}
- \frac{g^{ \phi \omega}_{f'_2}}{\sqrt{2}}) \frac{1}{q^2 - m^2_V}
\nonumber \\
&& [\frac{1}{2}\epsilon_i(\gamma) (-g_{j\mu} +
\frac{q_jq_{\mu}}{m^2_V})  + \frac{1}{2} \epsilon_j(\gamma) (-g_{i \mu} + \frac{q_i q_{\mu}}{m^2_V}) \nonumber \\
&&  -\frac{1}{3}\epsilon_m(\gamma) \delta_{ij} (-g_{m \mu} +
\frac{q_m q_{\mu}}{m^2_V})] \nonumber \\
&&  <p(M')|\gamma^{\mu}|p(M)>. \label{tgammap2}
\end{eqnarray}

Following the same procedure, we obtain the transition amplitudes
for $\gamma p\to K^{*}_2(1430)\Lambda(\Sigma)$:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& T_{\gamma p \to K^{*+}_2(1430) \Lambda} = e(\frac{g^{\rho
K^*}_{K^*_2}}{2} - \frac{g^{\omega K^*}_{K^*_2}}{2\sqrt{3}} +
\frac{g^{ \phi K^*}_{K^*_2}}{\sqrt{6}}) \nonumber \\
&& \frac{1}{q^2 - m^2_{K^*}} [\frac{1}{2}\epsilon_i(\gamma)
(-g_{j\mu} +
\frac{q_jq_{\mu}}{m^2_{K^*}}) \nonumber \\
&& + \frac{1}{2} \epsilon_j(\gamma) (-g_{i \mu} + \frac{q_i
q_{\mu}}{m^2_{K^*}})  -\frac{1}{3}\epsilon_m(\gamma) \delta_{ij}
(-g_{m \mu} +
\frac{q_m q_{\mu}}{m^2_{K^*}})] \nonumber \\
&& \times  <\Lambda(M')|\gamma^{\mu}|p(M)>, \\
&& T_{\gamma p \to K^{*+}_2(1430) \Sigma^0} = e(\frac{g^{\rho
K^*}_{K^*_2}}{2\sqrt{3}} - \frac{g^{\omega K^*}_{K^*_2}}{6} +
\frac{g^{ \phi K^*}_{K^*_2}}{3\sqrt{2}}) \nonumber \\
&&  \frac{1}{q^2 - m^2_{K^*}} [\frac{1}{2}\epsilon_i(\gamma)
(-g_{j\mu} +
\frac{q_jq_{\mu}}{m^2_{K^*}}) \nonumber \\
&&  + \frac{1}{2} \epsilon_j(\gamma) (-g_{i \mu} + \frac{q_i
q_{\mu}}{m^2_{K^*}}) -\frac{1}{3}\epsilon_m(\gamma) \delta_{ij}
(-g_{m \mu} +
\frac{q_m q_{\mu}}{m^2_{K^*}})] \nonumber \\
&& \times  <\Sigma(M')|\gamma^{\mu}|p(M)>, \\
&& T_{\gamma p \to K^{*0}_2(1430) \Sigma^+} = e(-\frac{g^{\rho
K^*}_{K^*_2}}{\sqrt{6}} - \frac{g^{\omega K^*}_{K^*_2}}{3\sqrt{2}} +
\frac{g^{ \phi K^*}_{K^*_2}}{3}) \nonumber \\
&&  \frac{1}{q^2 - m^2_{K^*}} [\frac{1}{2}\epsilon_i(\gamma)
(-g_{j\mu} +
\frac{q_jq_{\mu}}{m^2_{K^*}}) \nonumber \\
&&  + \frac{1}{2} \epsilon_j(\gamma) (-g_{i \mu} + \frac{q_i
q_{\mu}}{m^2_{K^*}})  -\frac{1}{3}\epsilon_m(\gamma) \delta_{ij}
(-g_{m \mu} + \frac{q_m q_{\mu}}{m^2_{K^*}})] \nonumber \\
&& \times <\Sigma(M')|\gamma^{\mu}|p(M)>, \label{tgammaK2}
\end{eqnarray}
where we take $m_{K^*} = m_{K^{*+}} = m_{K^{*0}} = 893.1$ MeV.

In Eqs.~(\ref{tgammap2})-(\ref{tgammaK2}),  the latin
indices run over $1$, $2$, $3$ and the $\mu$ index from $0, 1, 2,
3$.

Then one can easily calculate $\bar{\sum}\sum|T|^2$. Here we give
explicitly the case of the $\gamma p \to f'_2(1525) p$ reaction, as an
example,
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \bar{\sum}\sum|T|^2 = \frac{e^2}{96 m^2_p (q^2 -
m^2_V)^2}|-\frac{g^{\rho \rho}_{f'_2}}{\sqrt{6}} + \frac{g^{\omega
\omega}_{f'_2}}{\sqrt{2}} - \frac{g^{ \phi
\omega}_{f'_2}}{\sqrt{2}}|^2 \nonumber \\
&& \sum_{\gamma~{\rm pol.}}
\sum_{i,j,m,l}\sum_{\mu,\mu'}[\frac{1}{2}\epsilon_i(\gamma)
(-g_{j\mu} + \frac{q_jq_{\mu}}{m^2_V}) \nonumber \\
&& + \frac{1}{2} \epsilon_j(\gamma) (-g_{i \mu} + \frac{q_i
q_{\mu}}{m^2_V})
 -\frac{1}{3}\epsilon_m(\gamma) \delta_{ij} (-g_{m \mu} +
\frac{q_m q_{\mu}}{m^2_V})] \nonumber \\
&& [\frac{1}{2}\epsilon_i(\gamma) (-g_{j\mu'} +
\frac{q_jq_{\mu'}}{m^2_V})   + \frac{1}{2} \epsilon_j(\gamma) (-g_{i
\mu'} + \frac{q_i q_{\mu'}}{m^2_V}) \nonumber \\
&&  -\frac{1}{3}\epsilon_l(\gamma) \delta_{ij}
(-g_{l \mu'} + \frac{q_l q_{\mu'}}{m^2_V})] \nonumber \\
&& Tr[(\Slash{p'} + m_p)\gamma^{\mu}(\Slash{p} + m_p)\gamma^{\mu'}],
\end{eqnarray}
where  all the indices and the two photon
polarizations should be summed over, with the following expressions of the latter,
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon^{(1)}(\gamma) = \left (
\begin{array}{c}
1   \\
0   \\
0
\end{array}
\right ); ~~~~\epsilon^{(2)}(\gamma) = \left ( \begin{array}{c}
0   \\
1   \\
0
\end{array} \right ),
\end{eqnarray}
where we have assumed that the photon travels in the $Z$ direction.

\subsection{Differential cross section}

The differential cross section for $\gamma p \to f'_2(1525) p$ and
$\gamma p \to K^*_2(1430) \Lambda (\Sigma)$ reactions are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d\sigma}{dt} = \frac{m_i^2}{16\pi s |\vec{k}|^2}
\bar{\sum}\sum |T|^2, \label{dsigmadt}
\end{eqnarray}
with $s$ the invariant mass squared of the $\gamma p$ system, and
$m^2_i = m^2_p$ for $\gamma p \to f'_2(1525) p$ reaction, $m^2_i =
m_p m_{\Lambda}$ for $\gamma p \to K^{*+}_2(1430) \Lambda$ reaction,
and $m^2_i = m_p m_{\Sigma}$ for $\gamma p \to K^*_2(1430) \Sigma$
reaction.~\footnote{We take $m_{\Sigma^0} = m_{\Sigma^+} = 1191$ MeV
and $m_{K_2^{*+}} = m_{K_2^{*0}} = 1429$ MeV in this work.} The
$\vec{k}$ is the three momenta of the initial photon in the center
of mass frame (c.m.), and $t= q^2 = (p-p')^2$.

The Eq.~(\ref{dsigmadt}) can be generalized for the case when the
$f'_2(1525)$ ($K^*_2(1430)$) is explicitly allowed to decay into
$K\bar{K}$ ($K\pi$) by working out the three body phase space and we
find
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d^2\sigma}{dM_{\rm inv} dt} &=& \frac{m^2_i}{8\pi^2 s
|\vec{k}|^2} \frac{M^2_{\rm inv} \Gamma_{i}}{|M^2_{\rm inv} -
M^2_{R} + i
M_{\rm inv} \Gamma_{R}|^2} \nonumber \\
&& \times \bar{\sum}\sum |T|^2, \label{dsigmadmdt}
\end{eqnarray}
where $M_{\rm inv}$ is the invariant mass distribution of the
$K\bar{K}$ or $K\pi$, $\Gamma_{R}$ is the total decay width of the
$f'_2(1525)$ or $K^*_2(1430)$ and $\Gamma_{i}$ is the partial decay
width of the $f'_2(1525) \to K \bar{K}$ or $K^*_2(1430) \to K \pi$.
In the present study, we choose the following decay modes: $f'_2(1525) \to K^+ K^-$,
$K^{*+}_2(1430) \to K^0 \pi^+$, and $K^{*0}_2(1430) \to K^+ \pi^-$.
The $f'_2(1525) \to K^+ K^-$ decay accounts for $1/2$ of the
$K\bar{K}$ decay of the $f'_2(1525)$ which is $89\%$ of the
$\Gamma_{f'_2(1525)}$, while the $K^{*+}_2(1430) \to K^0 \pi^+$ or
$K^{*0}_2(1430) \to K^+ \pi^-$ decay accounts for $2/3$ of the
$K\pi$ decay of the $K^*_2(1430)$ which is $50\%$ of
$\Gamma_{K^*_2(1430)}$. Since the $f'_2(1525) \to K \bar{K}$ and
$K^*_2(1430) \to K \pi$ decays are in $D$-wave, in order to have
$\Gamma_i$ and $\Gamma_R$ in the range of invariant masses that we
consider, we take
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \Gamma_{f'_2 \to K \bar{K}}(M_{\rm inv}) = \Gamma_{K
\bar{K}}^{\rm on} (\frac{\tilde{q}_{K\bar{K}}}{\bar{q}_{K\bar{K}}} )^5 \frac{M^2_{f'_2}}{M^2_{\rm inv}} , \\
&& \Gamma_{f'_2} (M_{\rm inv}) = 0.89 \Gamma_{f'_2}^{\rm on} (
\frac{\tilde{q}_{K\bar{K}}}{\bar{q}_{K\bar{K}}} )^5
\frac{M^2_{f'_2}}{M^2_{\rm inv}} + 0.11 \Gamma_{f'_2}^{\rm on},
\end{eqnarray}
with $\Gamma^{\rm on}_{f'_2} = 73$ MeV, $\Gamma^{\rm on}_{K\bar{K}}
= 32.5$ MeV, $M_{f'_2} = 1525$ MeV~\cite{Agashe:2014kda}, and
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{q}_{K\bar{K}} &=& \frac{\lambda^{1/2}(M^2_{\rm inv}, m^2_{K},
m^2_{\bar{K}})}{2M_{\rm inv}}, \\
\bar{q}_{K\bar{K}} &=& \frac{\lambda^{1/2}(M^2_{f'_2}, m^2_{K},
m^2_{\bar{K}})}{2M_{f'_2}},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda$ is the K\"allen function with $\lambda(x,y,z) =
(x-y-z)^2 - 4yz$.

Similarly, for the $K^*_2$ decay modes, we take
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \Gamma_{K^*_2 \to K \pi}(M_{\rm inv}) = \Gamma_{K
\pi}^{\rm on} (\frac{\tilde{q}_{K\pi}}{\bar{q}_{K\pi}} )^5 \frac{M^2_{K^*_2}}{M^2_{\rm inv}} , \\
&& \Gamma_{K^*_2} (M_{\rm inv}) = 0.5 \Gamma_{K^*_2}^{\rm on} (
\frac{\tilde{q}_{K\bar{K}}}{\bar{q}_{K\bar{K}}} )^5
\frac{M^2_{K^*_2}}{M^2_{\rm inv}} + 0.5 \Gamma_{K^*_2}^{\rm on},
\end{eqnarray}
with $\Gamma^{\rm on}_{K^*_2} = 104$ MeV, $\Gamma^{\rm on}_{K\pi} =
34.7$ MeV~\cite{Agashe:2014kda}, and
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{q}_{K\pi} &=& \frac{\lambda^{1/2}(M^2_{\rm inv}, m^2_{K},
m^2_{\pi})}{2M_{\rm inv}}, \\
\bar{q}_{K\pi} &=& \frac{\lambda^{1/2}(M^2_{K^*_2}, m^2_{K},
m^2_{\pi})}{2M_{K^*_2}}.
\end{eqnarray}

\section{Numerical results} \label{sec:results}

In Ref.~\cite{Xie:2014twa} three models were considered, one is the
one we exposed here, and the other two contained an additional tensor
$\rho NN$ coupling and Regge propagators. The results
obtained there were very similar and in this exploratory work we
perform calculations only with one of the models as specified above.

In Fig.~\ref{Fig:dsigdmdtf2p} we show $\frac{d^2\sigma}{dM_{\rm
inv}dt}$  for the $\gamma p \to p K^+K^-$ reaction for at
$E_{\gamma} = 3.4$ GeV and $t = -1.2$ GeV$^2$, where $M_{\rm inv}$
is the invariant mass of $K^+K^-$ system. The $f_2'(1525)$ resonance
is clearly seen, peaking around $M_{\rm inv} = 1525$ MeV with an
apparent width of about 60 MeV.

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{dsigdmdtf2p.eps}
\caption{Theoretical predictions for the $D$-wave $K \bar{K}$ mass
distribution of the $\gamma p \to p K^+ K^-$ reaction at $E_{\gamma} =
3.4$ GeV and $t = -1.2$ GeV$^2$} \label{Fig:dsigdmdtf2p}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

In Fig.~\ref{Fig:dsigdmdtk2star} we show  $\frac{d^2\sigma}{dM_{\rm
inv}dt}$  for the $\gamma p
\to \Lambda (\Sigma) K \pi$ reaction at  $E_{\gamma} = 3.4$ GeV and $t = -1.2$ GeV$^2$,
where $M_{\rm inv}$ is the invariant mass of the $K
\pi$ system.  The $K^*_2(1430)$ is clearly seen in all the three decay modes, but the magnitude of the decay modes
are quite different. Experimental confirmation of such a hierarchy constitutes a valid check of the molecular picture
of the $K_2^*(1430)$ and the reaction mechanism advocated here.

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{dsigdmdtk2star.eps}
\caption{Theoretical predictions for the $D$-wave $K \pi$ mass
distribution of the $\gamma p \to \Lambda (\Sigma) K \pi$ reaction at
$E_{\gamma} = 3.4$ GeV and $t = -1.2$ GeV$^2$}
\label{Fig:dsigdmdtk2star}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

Fig.~\ref{Fig:dsigdt} shows $d\sigma/dt$ at $E_{\gamma} = 3.4$
GeV for the four reaction modes studied. We see that
the slopes for the four reactions are quite similar.

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{dsigmadt.eps}
\caption{Differential cross sections $\frac{d\sigma}{dt}$ as
functions of $t$ at $E_{\gamma} = 3.4$ GeV.} \label{Fig:dsigdt}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

In addition to the differential cross section, we calculate also the
total cross section for the four reactions as a function of the
photon beam energy $E_{\gamma}$. The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:tcs}.
The cross sections increase rapidly away from threshold and soon becomes almost constant at
higher photon energies.

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{tcs.eps}
\caption{Total cross sections for the $\gamma p \to f'_2(1525)p$ and
$\gamma p \to K^*_2(1430)\Lambda(\Sigma)$ reactions as functions of
$E_{\gamma}$.} \label{Fig:tcs}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

We stress again that the reaction formalism advocated here involves no
free parameters, which allow us to make predictions for total cross sections.
The differential and total cross sections can be checked in future experiments,
such as those at CLAS. In this sense, the reaction mechanism can be easily tested.

\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:summary}

In recent years, it has been found that the $f'_2(1525)$ and
$K^*_2(1430)$ resonances, though long been accepted as ordinary
$q\bar{q}$ states, can be dynamically generated from the vector
meson-vector meson interaction, and therefore qualify as
vector-vector molecules. Many studies adopting such a scenario have
been performed in mesonic reactions and all yield positive results.
In the present work, we have proposed to test the molecular picture
in the photonuclear reaction. The elements needed for the test are
very simple, which makes particularly transparent the interpretation
of the results. On one side the $f'_2(1525)$ and $K^*_2(1430)$
couple to $VV$ in $I=0$ and $I=1/2$, respectively, and the couplings
have been fixed before in the unitary approach that generates the
$f'_2(1525)$ and $K^*_2(1430)$ as a $VV$ molecule based on the local
hidden gauge formalism for the interaction of vector mesons. On the
other side, with these couplings and the vector meson dominance
hypothesis, incorporated in the local hidden gauge approach, the
photon gets converted into one of the vector mesons, which interact
with the vector meson emitted by the incoming proton to generate the
$f'_2(1525)$ and $K^*_2(1430)$ resonances. With this simple picture
we predict both the differential and total cross sections, which
could be tested by future experiments, such as those at CLAS.

\section*{Acknowledgments}

One of us, E. O., wishes to acknowledge support from the Chinese
Academy of Science (CAS) in the Program of Visiting Professorship
for Senior International Scientists (Grant No. 2013T2J0012). L.S.G. thanks the Institute for Nuclear Theory at University of Washington
for its hospitality and the Department of Energy for partial support during the completion of this work.
This work is partly supported by the Spanish Ministerio de Economia y
Competitividad and European FEDER funds under the contract number
FIS2011-28853-C02-01 and FIS2011-28853-C02-02, and the Generalitat
Valenciana in the program Prometeo II-2014/068. We acknowledge the
support of the European Community-Research Infrastructure
Integrating Activity Study of Strongly Interacting Matter (acronym
HadronPhysics3, Grant Agreement n. 283286) under the Seventh
Framework Programme of EU. This work is also partly supported by the
National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos.
11475227,1375024, and 11522539. This work is also supported by the
Open Project Program of State Key Laboratory of Theoretical Physics,
Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China
(No.Y5KF151CJ1).

\bibliographystyle{plain}


\section{Introduction}
\hspace{0.5cm}
In the recent years, the quantum entanglement and mixedness are two
biggest challenges of quantum information theory.
Quantum entanglement is a very important quantum characteristic that
has no classical counterpart.
Also, quantum entanglement is necessary for the realization of
quantum communication and the most important computational tasks,
such as quantum teleportation \cite{b1}, superdense coding \cite{b2}
and so on.
In addition, it is crucial to understand the fundamental aspects of
quantum mechanics, including quantum measurement and quantum
decoherence \cite{b3}.
Consequently, no system can be completely isolated from its
environment.
Thus in real experimental situations due to the coupling
environment, the entangled state inevitably loses its purity and
becomes mixed.
\\ \indent
Decoherence phenomenon is the most dangerous obstacle for all
entanglement manipulations.
However, the recent studies of decoherence effect for different
systems are increased due to the variety of applications in areas as
quantum optics and quantum information \cite{ad1,ad11,ad2,ad3}.
In fact, the interactions between a quantum system with the
environment are caused two types of irreversible effects, e.g.,
quantum dissipation and quantum decoherence \cite{b4,b5}.
The former will cause energy dissipation, and the latter will make
the system degenerate from coherent state to classical state.
Entanglement evolution under decoherence has attracted much interest
and many researchers have studied it extensively based on various
models in the view of environment-induced decoherence \cite{b5d,b5d1}.
\\ \indent
In the previous years, some researchers have found that state
entanglement can be decreased to zero abruptly and remained zero for
a finite time.
This phenomenon is called entanglement sudden death
\cite{b6,b7,b8,bb8,bbb8}, where entanglement of two-qubit decays to
zero in a finite time under the influence of pure vacuum noise
\cite{b9}.
Precisely, entanglement sudden death has been experimentally
observed in an implementation using twin photons \cite{b10} and
atomic ensembles \cite{b11}.
In many efforts have been devoted to study various types of
superconducting (SC) qubit which is considered as good candidate to
solve this problem.
\\ \indent
Nowadays, superconductors are viable elements and feasible within
current experimental technology.
SC qubit is represented a unique and its interesting approach to
quantum information and quantum computation because it naturally
allow strong coupling.
Some aspects which are discussed through these systems: entanglement
between a flux qubit and a superconducting quantum interference
device (SQUID) \cite{b12} have been realized experimentally.
In addition, there are other aspects: the strong coupling of a
single photon to a SC qubit has been experimentally demonstrated
\cite{b13} by using a one-dimensional transmission line resonator
\cite{b14}.
Recently, some quantum logic gates have proposed \cite{b14d1}
by using a system consisting of a number of SC-charge qubits
coupled to a resonator to study different quantum operations.
Also, a new physical scheme for implementing a discrete quantum
Fourier transform is proposed via SC qubits coupled to a single-mode
SC-cavity \cite{b14d2}.
However, the effect of environment cannot be neglected in these
situations \cite{b15}, because, the qubits are never isolated, but
under some environmental influence.
\\ \indent
Our purpose of this article is to give an analysis of the
entanglement dynamics of a SC phase qubit coupled to a torsional
resonator.
Consequently, some phenomena, such as the qubit inversion, purity
and negativity are theoretically investigated, mainly because such
states are more physical and experimentally relevant.
Thus we take into account decoherence and analyze its effect on
these phenomena.
Despite the complexity of the problem, the analytical descriptions
of the exact solution of the master equation is presented.
\\ \indent
This article is arranged as follows: The physical system of qubit
with torsional resonator and its dynamics  is provided in section 2.
The influence of  phase-damping on a SC qubit inversion and measures
of entanglement is presented in section 3.
Finally,the conclusions is demonstrated in section 4.
\section{The physical system of qubit with
torsional resonator and its dynamics }
\hspace{0.5cm}
We introduce a theoretical description of the superconducting phase
qubit coupled to a torsional resonator.
A phase qubit with $\kappa$ excess Cooper-pair charges consists of
two superconducting islands connected to a superconducting electrode
through two identical Josephson tunnel junctions of a  small size
with the same capacitance $C_{J}$, see Fig.\ref{w1}.
If the phase qubit is working in a regime with $k_{B}T\ll E_{C}\ll
E_{J}$, where $E_{J}$, $E_{C}$, $k_{B}$ and $T$ are Josephson
energy, charging energy, Boltzmann constant and temperature,
respectively.
The Hamiltonian of the superconducting phase qubit can be described
by the form \cite{b16}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{a}
\hat{H}_{qu}&=& \frac{(2e)^{2}}{2C_{J}}\kappa^{2}-\frac{\hbar
I_{0}}{2e}\Big(\cos(\pi f_{c})+\frac{
I}{I_{0}}\Theta\Big)\cos(\Theta-\pi f_{c}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Theta$, $I$, $I_{0}$, and $f_{c}$ are the phase difference
across the junction, bias current, junction critical current, and
the external flux which is generated by a classical applied magnetic
field, respectively.
Moreover, $\kappa$ and $\Theta$ are quantum mechanical conjugate
variables and satisfy $[\kappa,\Theta]=-i$.
\\ \indent
In this study, the bias current $I$ is assumed to be zero.
The Josephson energy, and the charging
energy for each junction also are assumed to be $E_{J}=\hbar
I_{0}/2e\sim6.8\times10^{-21}\,\,J$  and
$E_{C}=\frac{(2e)^{2}}{2C_{J}}\sim8.3\times10^{-27}\,\,J$  as estimated in \cite{c1}.
Therefore, the effective Josephson coupling $E_{J_{e}}=E_{J}\cos(\pi
f_{c})$ of phase qubit is controlled by the external flux $f_{c}$.
If the phase different $\Theta$ is confined to the period $\pi
f_{c}$, the states of a single qubit are restricted to a two
lowest-energy states $|g\rangle$ and $|e\rangle$.
\begin{figure}
\centering\includegraphics[height=10cm,width=14cm]{ph.pdf}
\caption{Circuit diagram of the phase qubit; a single Josephson
junction with Josephson coupling energy $E_{J}$ and Josephson
capacitance $C_{J}$ is driven with a bias current $I$. The rectangle
in this diagram refer to dissipative  part of the admittance of the
bias current $I$.}\label{w1}
\end{figure}
Hence, the Hamiltonian (\ref{a}) can be converted to a spin
representation as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{b}
\hat{H}_{qu}&=& -\frac{\hbar\omega_{z}}{2}\hat{\sigma}_{z},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\omega_{z}\sim\frac{\sqrt{2E_{C}E_{J_{e}}}}{\hbar}$ is the
frequency of the phase qubit, and $\hat{\sigma}_{z}$ is the usual
Pauli spin operator.
\\ \indent
The torsional resonator mode is described by a harmonic
oscillator-like Hamiltonian as follows \cite{sss}
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{H}_{mode}
&=&\frac{P^{2}_{\top}}{2I_{m}}+\frac{1}{2}I_{m}\omega^{2}_{v}
\top^{2},
\end{eqnarray}
where $P_{\top}$ is the angular momentum conjugate to $\top$ and
$\top\in[0,2\pi]$.
The fluctuations of the angle $\top$ can be described by the
fluctuation $\top_{0}=\sqrt{\hbar/I_{m}\omega_{v}}$ in the ground
state, where $I_{m}$, and $\omega_{v} $ are the rotational moment of
inertia of the torsional resonator, and vibration frequency,
respectively.
\\ \indent
If we put the SC qubit in the torsional resonator, the effective
flux is $f_{c}=f^{'}\sin{\top}$.
Hence, $\top$ is measured relative to the direction of $f_{c}$,
$E_{J}$ is the largest energy scale and coupling between the qubit
and torsional vibrational mode can be a large quantity.
Thus, we consider the qubit is coupled to resonator mode.
Also, the external magnetic field is parallely applied to the phase
qubit plane.
Then the external field in this case is given by:
$f_{c}=f^{'}(\top-\top_{e})$, where $\top_{e}$ is the angle at
equilibrium measured from the direction of $f_{c}$.
In this work, $f^{'}$ is the maximum value of magnetic flux when the
field is perpendicular to the qubit plane.
If $\top_{e}$ is non-zero, the coupling strength is decreased by
factor $\sin \top_{e}$, so consider the angle $\top_{e}=0$.
However, one concludes that the total Hamiltonian restricted to the
two states is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{a1}
\hat{H}_{t}&=&
\hbar\omega\hat{a}^{\dag}\hat{a}-\frac{\hbar\omega_{z}}{2}\hat{\sigma}_{z}
+G(\hat{a}+\hat{a}^{\dag})\hat{\sigma}_{x},
\end{eqnarray}
where $(\hat{a}^{\dag})$ $\hat{a}$ and $(\hat{\sigma}^{\dag})$
$\hat{\sigma}$ are the (creation) annihilation operators for the
vibrational mode and phase qubit, respectively, $G=\pi
f^{'}\sqrt{\frac{E_{J}\omega_{z}}{2I_{m} \omega}}$ is the constant
coupling energy between the phase qubit and the torsional resonator,
and $\omega=\sqrt{\omega^{2}_{v} +2\pi^{2}f{^{'}}^{2}E_{J}/I_{m}}$
is the torsional oscillator frequency.
Because of the negative sign of the second term, the above
Hamiltonian (\ref{a1}) in the counter-rotating wave approximation
can be written as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{a2}
\hat{H}&=&
\hbar\omega\hat{a}^{\dag}\hat{a}-\frac{\hbar\omega_{z}}{2}\hat{\sigma}_{z}
+G(\hat{a}\hat{\sigma}_{-}+\hat{a}^{\dag}\hat{\sigma}_{+}).
\end{eqnarray}
\\ \indent
Under the previous  hypothesis, the non-unitary time evolution of
present interaction system with taking into account the dissipative
effect is given through the density operator.
The density operator is described by a master equation of the form:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{a3}
\hbar\hat{\dot{\rho}} &=& i[\hat{\rho},\hat{H}]+
\frac{\hbar\gamma}{2}\Big(\hat{\sigma}_{z}\hat{\rho}\hat{\sigma}_{z}-\hat{\rho}\Big),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\gamma$ is a positive parameter that represents a dispersive
reservoir (or phase damping of the qubit system).
It is one of the variables that does not interchange energy with the
qubit system.
Dispersive reservoir of the qubit may occur due to dephasing
interactions that might arise.
For instance, the dispersive reservoir may occur from the elastic
collisions in a qubit vapor.
The exact solution for Eq.\ref{a3} in the case of a high-$Q$
torsional resonator ($\gamma/G\ll1$) is obtained by analytic method.
The used analytic method is presented by the dressed-states
representation \cite{c3,c4,c5}.
This representation is consisting of the complete set of Hamiltonian
eigenfunctions.
Here, the states $|g\rangle$ and $|e\rangle$ are corresponding to
the higher energy and the lower energy, respectively.
In the invariant subspace spanned by $|e,n+1\rangle$ and
$|g,n\rangle$, the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of the Hamiltonian
(\ref{a2}) are given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{H}|\Psi^{\pm}_{n}\rangle&=&
E^{\pm}_{n}|\Psi^{\pm}_{n}\rangle,\qquad\qquad \hat{H}|e,0\rangle=
-\frac{\hbar\omega_{z}}{2}|e,0\rangle,
\end{eqnarray}
with the abbreviations
$ E_{n}^{{\pm}} =\hbar \omega(n+\frac{1}{2})\pm R_{n}$,
$|\Psi_{n}^{\pm}\rangle =
\beta_{n}^{\mp}|g,n\rangle\pm\beta_{n}^{\pm}|e,n+1\rangle$,
$\beta_{n}^{\pm}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{1\mp\frac{\delta}{R_{n}}}$,
$R_{n}=G\sqrt{(n+1)+(\frac{\delta}{G})^{2}}$,
and $\delta=\frac{\hbar(\omega_{z}-\omega)}{2}$ is the detuning
parameter which represents the difference between transition energy
of qubit  and torsional energy.
\\ \indent
To obtain the analytical solution for Eq.\ref{a3}, we suppose that
the qubit is initially in the general superposition of the excited
state and ground state while the torsional resonator is assumed to
be initially in a coherent state, that is
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{\rho}(0) &=&
\Big(\cos\theta|e\rangle+e^{i\varphi}\sin\theta|g\rangle\Big)
\Big(\cos\theta|e\rangle+e^{i\varphi}\sin\theta|g\rangle\Big)^{\dagger}
\otimes|\alpha\rangle\langle\alpha|.
\end{eqnarray}
Consequently, the time-dependent analytical solution for the density
matrix with the initial previous state is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{a4}
\hat{\rho}(t) &=&\rho^{00}_{ee}|e,0\rangle\langle
e,0|+\sum^{\infty}_{n,m=0}\Big\{\rho^{n,m}_{gg}(t)|g,n\rangle\langle
g,m|+\rho^{n,m+1}_{ge}(t)|g,n\rangle\langle e,m+1| \nonumber\\&&
+\rho^{n+1,m}_{eg}(t)|e,n+1\rangle\langle
g,m|+\rho^{n+1,m+1}_{ee}(t)|e,n+1\rangle\langle e,m+1|\Big\},
\end{eqnarray}
where all elements of the density matrix (\ref{a4}) are also
functions in $\theta,\varphi,\delta$.
The elements of the previous density matrix are given by the
following formulas:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\hspace{-0.63cm}\rho^{n+1,m+1}_{ee}(t)=\left\{%
\begin{array}{ll}
x_{n}x^{*}_{m}e^{-iA_{n,m}t}\{2\beta^{+}_{n}\beta^{-}_{n}
\beta^{+}_{m}\beta^{-}_{m}\sin^{2}\theta [\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}\cos
(R^{+-}_{n,m}t)-\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}\cos (R^{++}_{n,m}t)]\\
+\xi_{n,m}\cos^{2}\theta[({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{+-}_{n,m}t}
+{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{+-}_{n,m}t})\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}
\\+({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,m}t}
+{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}e^{iR^{++}_{n,m}t})
\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}]
\\+\frac{\tilde{\alpha}\beta^{+}_{m}\beta^{-}_{m}\sin2\theta}{2\sqrt{n+1}}
[({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{+-}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{+-}_{n,m}t})
\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}+({\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{++}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,m}t}) \mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}]
\\+\frac{\tilde{\alpha}^{*}\beta^{+}_{n}
\beta^{-}_{n}\sin2\theta}{2\sqrt{m+1}}
[({\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{+-}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{+-}_{n,m}t})
\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}+({\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}e^{iR^{++}_{n,m}t})\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}]
\},&\\
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad\quad
\hbox{$\forall$ n$\neq$ m;} \\
|x_{n}|^{2}\{\sin^{2}\theta[\Pi^{+,-}-v^{+,-}]
+\xi_{n,n}\cos^{2}\theta [\varpi^{+,-}+v^{+,-}]
+\Omega^{+,-}+\Gamma^{+,-}
\},&\\
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad\quad
\hbox{$\forall$ n=m.} \\
\end{array}%
\right.
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\hspace{-0.63cm}\rho^{n,m}_{gg}(t)=\left\{%
\begin{array}{ll}
x_{n}x^{*}_{m}e^{-iA_{n,m}t}\{
\sin^{2}\theta[({\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{-iR^{+-}_{n,m}t}
+{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2} e^{iR^{+-}_{n,m}t})
\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}\\+({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}
e^{iR^{++}_{n,m}t} +{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}
e^{-iR^{++}_{n,m}t})\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}]\\
+2\beta^{+}_{n}\beta^{-}_{n}\beta^{+}_{m} \beta^{-}_{m}\xi_{n,m}
\cos^{2}\theta [\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}\cos
(R^{+-}_{n,m}t)-\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m} \cos (R^{++}_{n,m}t)]
\\+\frac{\tilde{\alpha}\beta^{+}_{n}\beta^{-}_{n}\sin2\theta}{2\sqrt{n+1}}
[({\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{-iR^{+-}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}e^{iR^{+-}_{n,m}t})\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}
+({\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{++}_{n,m}t})\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}]
\\+\frac{\tilde{\alpha}^{*}\beta^{+}_{m}
\beta^{-}_{m}\sin2\theta}{2\sqrt{m+1}}
[({\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}e^{-iR^{+-}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}e^{iR^{+-}_{n,m}t})\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}
+({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}e^{iR^{++}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,m}t})
\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}]\},&\\
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad\quad
\hbox{$\forall$ n$\neq$ m;} \\
|x_{n}|^{2}\{\sin^{2}\theta[\varpi^{+,-}+v^{+,-}]
+\xi_{n,n}\cos^{2}\theta[\Pi^{+,-}-v^{+,-}]
-\Omega^{+,-}-\Gamma^{+,-}\},\\
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad\quad
\hbox{$\forall$ n=m.} \\
\end{array}%
\right.
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\hspace{-1.01cm}\rho^{n+1,m}_{eg}(t)=\left\{%
\begin{array}{ll}
x_{n}x^{*}_{m}e^{-iA_{n,m}t}\{
\beta^{+}_{n}\beta^{-}_{n}\sin^{2}\theta
[({\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{-iR^{+-}_{n,m}t}-{\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}
e^{iR^{+-}_{n,m}t})
\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}+({\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{++}_{n,m}t}) \mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}]\\
+\beta^{+}_{m}\beta^{-}_{m}\xi_{n,m} \cos^{2}\theta
[({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{+-}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{+-}_{n,m}t})\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}
+({\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{++}_{n,m}t}
-{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,m}t})\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}]
\\+\frac{\tilde{\alpha}\sin2\theta}{2\sqrt{n+1}}
[({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{-iR^{+-}_{n,m}t}
+{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}e^{iR^{+-}_{n,m}t})\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}
+({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,m}t}
+{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}{\beta_{m}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{++}_{n,m}t})\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}]
\\+\frac{\tilde{\alpha}^{*}\sin2\theta}{\sqrt{m+1}}
\beta^{+}_{n}\beta^{-}_{n}\beta^{+}_{m}\beta^{-}_{m}[\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}
\cos(R^{+-}_{n,m}t)-\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}\cos (R^{++}_{n,m}t)]\},&\\
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad\quad
\hbox{$\forall$ n$\neq$ m;} \\
|x_{n}|^{2}\{\beta_{n}^{+}\beta_{n}^{-}
\sin^{2}\theta[({\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}
-{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2})e^{\frac{-\gamma
b_{n}t}{2}}\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,n}+(
{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,n}t}-
{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{++}_{n,n}t})\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,n}]
\\+\beta_{n}^{+}\beta_{n}^{-}
\xi_{n,n}\cos^{2}\theta[({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2} -{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2})
e^{\frac{-\gamma b_{n}t}{2}}\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,n}+(
{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}e^{iR^{++}_{n,n}t}-
{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,n}t})\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,n}]
\\+\frac{{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}
\sin2\theta(\tilde{\alpha}+\tilde{\alpha}^{*})}{\sqrt{n+1}}
e^{\frac{-\gamma b_{n}t}{2}}\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,n}
\\+\frac{\sin2\theta}{\sqrt{n+1}}[\frac{\tilde{\alpha}}{2}(
{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{4}e^{-iR^{++}_{n,n}t}+
{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{4}e^{iR^{++}_{n,n}t})
-\tilde{\alpha}^{*}{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}
\cos(R^{++}_{n,n}t)]\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,n}\},&\\
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad\quad
\hbox{$\forall$ n=m.} \\
\end{array}%
\right.
\end{eqnarray*}
Where
\begin{eqnarray*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\rho^{n,m+1}_{ge}= (\rho^{n+1,m}_{eg})^{\dag},\:\:
\rho^{00}_{ee}=e^{-|\alpha|^{2}}\cos^{2}\theta,\:\:
\tilde{\alpha}=\alpha e^{-i\varphi},
\:\:\xi_{n,m}=\frac{|\alpha|^{2}}{\sqrt{(n+1)(m+1)}},\\
x_{n}=e^{(-\frac{|\alpha|^{2}}{2})}\frac{\alpha^{n}}{\sqrt{n!}},\:\:
R^{+-}_{n,m}=R_{n}-R_{m},\:\:R^{++}_{n,m}=R_{n}+R_{m},\\
\Delta^{+-}_{n,m}=\frac{1}{2}[1
-({\beta^{+}_{n}}^{2}{\beta^{+}_{m}}^{2}
+{\beta^{-}_{n}}^{2}{\beta^{-}_{m}}^{2}
-{\beta^{+}_{n}}^{2}{\beta^{-}_{m}}^{2}
-{\beta^{-}_{n}}^{2}{\beta^{+}_{m}}^{2})],\\
\Delta^{++}_{n,m}=\frac{1}{2}[1
+({\beta^{+}_{n}}^{2}{\beta^{+}_{m}}^{2}
+{\beta^{-}_{n}}^{2}{\beta^{-}_{m}}^{2}
-{\beta^{+}_{n}}^{2}{\beta^{-}_{m}}^{2}
-{\beta^{-}_{n}}^{2}{\beta^{+}_{m}}^{2})],\\
\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,m}=e^{-\gamma
t\Delta^{+-}_{n,m}},\:\:\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,m}=e^{-\gamma
t\Delta^{++}_{n,m}},\:\:
b_{n}=4{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta^{-}_{n}}^{2},\:\:A_{n,m}=\hbar\omega(n-m),\\
\Gamma^{+,-}=\frac{\beta_{n}^{+}\beta_{n}^{-}
\sin2\theta}{2\sqrt{n+1}}[{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2} (\tilde{\alpha}
e^{iR^{++}_{n,n}t}+\tilde{\alpha}^{*}
e^{-iR^{++}_{n,n}t})-{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2} (\tilde{\alpha}
e^{-iR^{++}_{n,n}t}+\tilde{\alpha}^{*}
e^{iR^{++}_{n,n}t})]\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,n},\\
\Omega^{+,-}=\frac{\beta_{n}^{+}\beta_{n}^{-}\sin2\theta(\tilde{\alpha}
+\tilde{\alpha}^{*})}{2\sqrt{n+1}}
({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}-{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2})e^{\frac{-\gamma
b_{n}t}{2}} \mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,n},\\
\Pi^{+,-}=[({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{4}
+{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{4})\sinh(\frac{\gamma
b_{n}t}{2})+2{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}\cosh(\frac{\gamma
b_{n}t}{2})] \mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,n},\\
\varpi^{+,-}=[({\beta_{n}^{+}}^{4} +{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{4})
\cosh(\frac{\gamma
b_{n}t}{2})+2{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}\sinh(\frac{\gamma
b_{n}t}{2})]\mathbb{E}^{+-}_{n,n}\:\: \textsf{and}\\
v^{+,-}=2{\beta_{n}^{+}}^{2}{\beta_{n}^{-}}^{2}
\cos(R^{++}_{n,n}t)\mathbb{K}^{++}_{n,n}.
\end{array}
\end{eqnarray*}
\indent
To calculate the asymptotic behavior of the density matrix, we set
$Gt\rightarrow\infty$, as follows:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\hat{\rho}(Gt\rightarrow\infty) &=&\rho^{00}_{ee}|e,0\rangle\langle
e,0|+\frac{1}{2} \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}
|x_{n}|^{2}\Big(\sin^{2}\theta+\xi_{n,n}\cos^{2}\theta\Big)
\nonumber\\&&\times \Big(|e,n+1\rangle\langle
e,n+1|+|g,n\rangle\langle g,n|\Big),
\end{eqnarray*}
which is a statistically mixed state.
\section{The influence of dispersive reservoir on some physical phenomena}
In the current section, we study the existence of some phenomena of
the previous system.
In an effort to present a numerical characterization, we have
performed some calculations for the properties quantity for a
particular set of parameters, some of which can be considered as
realistic, while some other parameters look perhaps too optimistic.
\subsection{SC qubit inversion phenomenon}
\hspace{0.5cm}
The qubit inversion is one of the important dynamic variables of the
properties of quantum mechanics.
It gives information about the behavior of the qubit during the
interaction period.
Therefore, by using the analytic solution of the master equation and
keeping in mind that the state $|g\rangle$ is the one with higher
energy, we discuss the effect of dispersive reservoir on qubit
inversion, which is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
W_{qu}(t)&=& \rho^{00}_{ee}+\sum_{i}\Big(\rho^{ii}_{ee}(t)
-\rho^{ii}_{gg}(t)\Big).
\end{eqnarray}
It is generally accepted that the revivals of inversion appears as a
consequence of quantum coherence which are built up during the
interaction between the resonator and the qubit.
\\ \indent
Numerical calculations which indicate the influence of dispersive
reservoir $\frac{\gamma}{G}$ on qubit inversion is exhibited in
Fig.\ref{w2}a, Fig.\ref{w2}b and Fig.\ref{w2}c.
The time evolution of $W_{qu}$ is plotted  as a function of the
scaled time $\frac{Gt}{\pi}$ and $\frac{\gamma}{G}$, in the
resonance case, for a different values of  $\theta$ and $\alpha$.
In the absence of detuning effect and $\frac{\gamma}{G}$, see
Fig.\ref{w2}a and Fig.\ref{w2}b, one finds that $W_{qu}$ fluctuates
around zero, and the collapse and revival phenomena start to appear.
It is seen from Fig.\ref{w2}a and Fig.\ref{w2}b a short period of
collapse after onset of the interaction followed immediately by a
reasonable revival period.
After this period of collapse, one can not see another collapse
period because of existence of interference in the fluctuation, so
in these cases of $\theta$ the revival period is not apparent.
The reason for this is due to the value of coherence parameter
$\alpha$.
If $\alpha=6$, the revival and collapse phenomena are more
pronounced than the other case for different values of $\theta$, say
$\frac{\pi}{2}$. This result is observed in Fig.\ref{w2}c.
Furthermore, for many different values of $\theta$, the revival and
collapse phenomena are more pronounced.
Also, it is observed from Fig.\ref{w2} that the periodic
oscillations of $W_{qu}$ between $1$ as a maximum value and $-1$ as
a minimum value around $0$.
\\ \indent
If the dispersive reservoir parameter is regarded
$\frac{\gamma}{G}\neq0$, the time evolution of $W_{qu}$ is shown in
Figs.\ref{w2}a, Fig.\ref{w2}b and Fig.\ref{w2}c.
At a weak dispersive reservoir, the collapses and revivals
phenomenon is still observed for a short time.
The increase of collapses region slowly due to the influence of the
damping.
But with large values of dispersive reservoir, the amplitude of
revivals is greatly decreased.
With $\frac{\gamma}{G}>0.1$, all revivals are completely washed out,
and the system is collapsed completely.
This means that the probability of existence for the qubit in the
state $|g\rangle $ and $|e\rangle$ are equal.
\begin{figure}
\hspace{-1cm}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{a.pdf}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{b.pdf}\\
\hspace{-1cm}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{d.pdf}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{c.pdf}
\caption{The evolution of SC qubit inversion plotted against the
scaled time $\frac{Gt}{\pi}$ and dispersive reservoir
$\frac{\gamma}{G}$ in the resonance case for $\theta=\frac{\pi}{10}$
in (a), $\theta=\frac{\pi}{3}$ in (b) and $\theta=\frac{\pi}{2}$ in
(c), and off-resonance case for $\theta=\frac{\pi}{3}$ and
$\frac{\delta}{G}=6$ in (d), with the coherence parameter $\alpha=3$
in (a, b, d) and $\alpha=6$ in (c).}\label{w2}
\end{figure}
\\ \indent
To investigate the influence of detuning parameter
$\frac{\delta}{G}$ and $\frac{\gamma}{G}$ parameter on the behavior
of qubit inversion, we display in Fig.\ref{w2}d the behavior of
inversion in off-resonance case with $\theta=\frac{\pi}{3}$,
$\frac{\delta}{G}=6$ and $\alpha=3$.
Firstly, for $\frac{\gamma}{G}=0$, one can observe from
Fig.\ref{w2}d, the revivals and collapses phenomena are more
pronounced than the case of $\frac{\delta}{G}=0$, and the curve of
qubit inversion is shifted down.
Also, one can note that from  Fig.\ref{w2}d the revival period is
increased, and it can distinguish other periods of revival in that
case, that is in the case of off-resonance for this case of $\theta$
the revival period is more apparent.
In fact the revival time is given by: \Big($\tau_{R}=2\pi
G\sqrt{\delta^{2}+|\alpha|^{2}}$\Big) which increases by increasing
$\delta$.
However, we can see from Fig.\ref{w2}d, that the detuning parameter
leads to the state of qubit to tend to $|g\rangle$ more than
$|e\rangle$.
Besides that, if $\frac{\gamma}{G}\neq0$, the collapses and revivals
phenomenon is still observed in a very short time.
This phenomenon disappears slowly by increasing time due to the
influence of $\frac{\gamma}{G}$.
One can observe rapid deterioration for the revivals of $W_{qu}$ at
the large values of $\frac{\gamma}{G}$.
From Fig.\ref{w2}d, we observe increasing in the behavior of
$W_{qu}$ curve, after that the value of $W_{qu}$ is almost to zero
at time $Gt\simeq50\pi$.
Moreover, the collapse region has becomes very large.
However, if we take large values of $\frac{\delta}{G}$ for the
different values of $\theta$, the amplitudes of the fluctuations are
diminished, the collapse periods are elongated, and a large decrease
is happened in the amplitudes of periodic oscillations of maximum
value and minimum value for the inversion.
\subsection{Dynamical properties of coherence and entanglement phenomena}
\hspace{0.5cm}
In order to understand the influence of dispersive reservoir of
qubit on some dynamical properties, such as coherence and
entanglement, we use in the following the solution in Eq.\ref{a4}.
Then we investigate the effect of dispersive reservoir on the
dynamical properties.
\subsubsection{Dynamical properties of coherence phenomenon}
\hspace{0.5cm}
In this part, we study the behavior of purity as a measure of the
amount of coherence loss caused by the dispersive reservoir of qubit
and the unitary qubit-vibrational mode interaction.
The purity of this state is measured by the von Neumann entropy
\cite{b19} as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{qu(r)}(t)&=& -\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\lambda^{i}_{qu(r)}(t)\ln
\lambda^{i}_{qu(r)}(t),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda^{i}_{qu(r)}$ are the instantaneous eigenvalues of the
two subsystems (qubit and torsional resonator).
In a bipartite quantum system, the system and subsystem entropies,
at any time $t$, are limited by the following Araki-Lieb
inequality
$ |S_{qu}-S_{r}|<S<|S_{qu}+S_{r}|. $
As a result, if the density operator $\rho$ describes a pure state,
the entropy $S$ becomes $0$ and remains constant.
This means that, if the system is initially prepared in a pure state
at any time $t>0$, the reduced entropies of the two subsystems are
identical, that is, $S_{qu}(t) = S_{r} (t)$.
Otherwise $S>0$, that is, $S_{qu}(t) \neq S_{r} (t)$.
\\ \indent
Here, we begin from pure state, therefore, we either use $S_{r}$ or
$S_{qu}$ in the absence of dispersive reservoir, to measure the
amount of entanglement between the two subsystems, whether in the
resonance or off-resonance cases.
Exactly, $S_{qu}(0)=S_{r}(0)=0$.
In this work, we devote our study to the von Neumann entropy for the
reduced density operator of the qubit that can be expressed as
follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{qu}(t)&=&-\sum_{i=\pm} \lambda^{i}_{qu}(t)\ln
\lambda^{i}_{qu}(t),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda^{\pm}_{qu}(t)
=\frac{1}{2}\Big(\rho^{00}_{ee}+\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}
[\rho^{n,n}_{ee}(t)+\rho^{n,n}_{gg}(t)]\Big)
\pm\sqrt{\Lambda^{2}_{n}(t) +\Upsilon^{2}_{n}(t)}$, with $
\Lambda_{n}(t)=\frac{1}{2}\Big(\rho^{00}_{ee}+\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}
[\rho^{n,n}_{ee}(t)-\rho^{n,n}_{gg}(t)]\Big)$\,\,\, and \,\,\,
$\Upsilon_{n}(t)=|\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\rho^{n,n+1}_{ge}(t)|$.
\begin{figure}
\hspace{-1cm}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{u.pdf}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{v.pdf}\\
\hspace{-1cm}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{w.pdf}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{r.pdf}
\caption{The evolution of purity plotted against the scaled time
$\frac{Gt}{\pi}$ and dispersive reservoir $\frac{\gamma}{G}$ in the
resonance case for $\theta=\frac{\pi}{3}$ in (a), and off-resonance
case for $\theta=\frac{\pi}{3}$ and $\frac{\delta}{G}=4$ in (b),
$\theta=\frac{\pi}{4}$ and $\frac{\delta}{G}=10$ in (c) and
$\theta=\frac{\pi}{8}$ and $\frac{\delta}{G}=25$ in (d), with
$\alpha=3$.}\label{w3}
\end{figure}
 \indent
In our discussion for the influence of dispersive reservoir of qubit
on the purity, the time evolution of the purity against
$\frac{Gt}{\pi}$ and $\frac{\gamma}{G}$, in the resonance case with
$\theta=\frac{\pi}{3}$, $\varphi=0$ and $\alpha=3$, is displayed in
Fig.\ref{w3}a.
From Fig.\ref{w3}a, if $\frac{\gamma}{G}=0$, one can observe that
the behavior of curve of $S_{qu}$ is not periodical.
In addition, we see that the time evolution curve of qubit entropy
has local extreme at the revival time
$\Big(t_{R}=\frac{2\pi|\alpha|}{G}=3\sqrt{8I_{m}
\omega/E_{J}\omega_{z}{f^{'}}^{2}}\Big)$, indicating that the qubit
state does not return most closely to its initial state at this
time.
Also, one can observe that the value of minima for $S_{qu}$ in
Fig.\ref{w3}a is increased when the time increases.
Finally, the $S_{qu}$ oscillate around its maxima as time becomes
very large.
Besides that, in the presence of the dispersive reservoir
$\frac{\gamma}{G}\neq0$, we cannot use the $S_{qu}$ as a measure for
entanglement but we use it as a measure to the amount of the
coherence loss of the qubit state.
At a weak dispersive reservoir, one can find the amplitudes of the
oscillations of entropy diminish rapidly, and the local extreme of
the purity at half-revival time for the mentioned measure are still
apparent, where at this time the qubit and vibration mode are
approximately disentangled.
If $\frac{\gamma}{G}=0.1$, the amplitudes of the local extreme of
the purity oscillations are more rapidly deteriorated.
Due to damping, the amplitude of the purity of qubit is suppressed.
Therefore, the qubit coherence loss may occur due to dephasing
interactions of qubit with the vibration mode.
However, the purity loses its coherence more than its gain due to
dispersive reservoir, and finally completely loses coherence and
fall into a statistically mixed state.
\vspace{0.2cm}\\  \indent
As well as, we investigate in Fig.\ref{w3}b and Fig.\ref{w3}c,
\ref{w3}d), the evolution of purity in off-resonance case with
$\varphi=0$ and $\alpha=3$ for a different values of $\theta$ and
$\frac{\delta}{G}$.
In the absence of $\frac{\gamma}{G}$, see Fig.\ref{w3}b,
Fig.\ref{w3}c and Fig.\ref{w3}d, one can note that the detuning
parameter affects the fluctuations in the temporal evolution for
$S_{qu}$, and results in deterioration of the oscillations.
One can also note from these figures, the local extreme for the
mentioned measure are pronounced and still apparent in all curves.
However, we see that the amplitudes of oscillations of purity are
decreasing due to the increase of the value for $\frac{\delta}{G}$
in these different figures, that is the detuning parameter improves
the influence of dispersive reservoir on this phenomenon.
In addition, when $\frac{\gamma}{G}\neq0$, one can find from
Fig.\ref{w3}b, Fig.\ref{w3}c and Fig.\ref{w3}d at a weak value of
$\frac{\gamma}{G}$, that the local extreme for the mentioned measure
is about to disappear.
Also, one can observe at the high values of $\frac{\gamma}{G}$, that
the amplitudes of oscillations for all curves are deteriorated
completely, and the purity is increased monotonically and no longer
equal zero due to the influence of the dispersive reservoir.
\\ \indent
However, from Fig.\ref{w3}c for $\theta=\frac{\pi}{4}$ (phenomenon
of coherent trapping) and $\frac{\delta}{G}=10$, and from
Fig.\ref{w3}d for $\theta=\frac{\pi}{8}$ and $\frac{\delta}{G}=25$.
We note that the behavior for two curves of the purity in these
cases of detuning is periodical, and note that the oscillations
periods for two curves are apparent after a large period of time on
the case in which $\frac{\delta}{G}=4$.
Then, we conclude that the behavior of curves of purity is also
periodical for the values more than $\frac{\delta}{G}=25$ for the
different values of $\theta$.
Finally, when $\frac{\gamma}{G}=1$, we get
$\lambda^{\pm}_{qu}(Gt\rightarrow\infty)=
\frac{1}{2}\pm\frac{1}{2}e^{-|\alpha|^{2}}\cos^{2}{\theta}$, then
$S_{qu}(Gt\rightarrow\infty)\sim\ln2=0.693$, which means that the
asymptotic qubit state is a statistically mixed state, that is the
mixedness of the phase qubit state is complete.
\subsubsection{Dynamical properties of  entanglement phenomenon}
\hspace{0.5cm}
Because of the existence of dispersive reservoir parameter in
Eq.\ref{a4}, the purity cannot be a measure for the entanglement.
Therefore, we use the negativity $N(\rho)$ to measure the amount of
the entanglement that can be expressed as \cite{b20}
\begin{eqnarray}
N(\rho) &=& \max\Bigg(0, -\sum_{s}\lambda_{s}\Bigg),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda_{s}$ is a negative eigenvalue of the partially
transposed density matrix of the vibrational mode-phase qubit.
Here, $\lambda_{s}$ is computed by using numerical calculations.
For an entangled mixed state, $N(\rho)$ is positive.
If $N(\rho)=0$, the states are separable.
Moreover, the negativity is used to estimate the amount of
entanglement of the final state if we start with a pure or mixed
state.
\\ \indent
The influence of dispersive reservoir of qubit on the negativity as
a function of $\frac{Gt}{\pi}$ and a parameter $\frac{\theta}{\pi}$
in the resonance case when  $\varphi=\frac{\pi}{4}$ and $\alpha=3$
is shown in Fig.\ref{w4}a and Fig.\ref{w4}b.
From Fig.\ref{w4}a, in the absence of $\frac{\gamma}{G}$, we note
that the local extremes of $N(\rho)$ approximately are regularly
distributed at small times $ Gt\simeq10\pi$ with the different
values of $\theta$.
After that, the values of minimum for $N(\rho)$ are increased when
the time increases.
Also, the time evolution curve of $N(\rho)$ has a local extreme at
the revival time $t_{R}$.
However, we note that, the value of $N(\rho)$ is oscillated around
its maxima for the different values of $\theta$ and $Gt$.
If we take into account the dispersive reservoir parameter, the
amplitudes of the fast oscillations of the negativity measure
diminish, and $N(\rho)$ arrives to its minima (maxima) value at
half-revival time.
The negativity has a very strong sensitivity to $\frac{\gamma}{G}$
parameter.
Therefore, when we take $\frac{\gamma}{G}=0.1$, see Fig.\ref{w4}b,
the $N(\rho)$ quite vanishes at particular times for the different
values of $\theta$.
In this case, the dispersive reservoir at these particular times,
the entanglement between the vibrational mode and qubit is
completely destroyed.
If $N(\rho)=0$, the final state shown in Eq.\ref{a4} disentangles
completely and abruptly in just a finite time and evolves to the
vacuum state, and its coherence is lost completely.
\begin{figure}
\hspace{-1cm}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{n1.pdf}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{n2.pdf}\\
\hspace{-1cm}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{n3.pdf}\includegraphics[height=9cm,width=10cm]{n4.pdf}
\caption{The time evolution of the entanglement $N(\rho)$ in the
resonance case for all $\theta$ and off-resonance case for
$\theta=\frac{\pi}{7}$, with $\varphi=\frac{\pi}{4}$ and $\alpha=3$,
for the different values of dispersive reservoir:
$\frac{\gamma}{G}=0$ in (a, c) and $\frac{\gamma}{G}=0.1$ in (b,
d).}\label{w4}
\end{figure}
\\ \indent
To visualize the influence of detuning parameter and
$\frac{\gamma}{G}$ parameter on the temporal evolution for
negativity, the behavior of the negativity in off-resonance case
with $\theta=\frac{\pi}{7}$, $\alpha=3$ and $\varphi=\frac{\pi}{4}$
is displayed in Fig.\ref{w4}c and Fig.\ref{w4}d.
One can find that, the detuning parameter $\frac{\delta}{G}\neq0$
affects the amplitudes of fluctuations in the evolution of $N(\rho)$
either by increasing or by decreasing on the case in which
$\frac{\delta}{G}=0$ for the different values of $\theta$.
Therefore, if $\theta=\frac{\pi}{7}$, see Fig.\ref{w4}c, the
amplitudes of oscillations of $N(\rho)$ are less than their
counterparts of the case $\frac{\delta}{G}=0$.
Because of the detuning parameter, some of oscillations are
deteriorated, the local extremes of the negativity are pronounced
and still apparent in this surface.
In addition, with $\frac{\gamma}{G}\neq0$, the oscillations of the
local extreme of the $N(\rho)$ are disappeared completely.
When the dispersive reservoir is increased, say $\frac{\gamma}{G} =
0.1$, see Fig.\ref{w4}d, the amplitude of most oscillations are
suppressed and $N(\rho)$ quite vanishes at particular times.
This means that, after a particular time, the dispersive reservoir
destroys the entanglement of the global total system state.
Therefore, one can determine a particular region in which there is
no entanglement between the qubit and the torsional resonator due to
the complete destruction of coherence in the presence of
$\frac{\gamma}{G}$.
\section{Conclusion}
In this article, the system of SC phase qubit coupled to a torsional
resonator is governed by a master equation.
An analytical solution for the master equation is obtained with the
general initial state.
Several physical phenomena have been studied, such as qubit
inversion, purity and negativity in the resonance and off-resonance
cases for many different initial states.
It is found that, the qubit inversion and purity, for the resonance
and off-resonance cases, are quite sensitive to any change
$\frac{\gamma}{G}$ parameter.
By using the negativity the amount of the entanglement is studied.
The dispersive reservoir destroys the entanglement of the global
vibrational mode-phase qubit state.
In addition, we found that in off-resonance case, the detuning
parameter improve the influence of the damping on qubit inversion,
purity and negativity.
Therefore, one can determine a particular region in which there is
no entanglement between the qubit and the torsional resonator due to
the presence of $\frac{\gamma}{G}$.


\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:Pse_Introduction}

The question posed by Davis ``When is the underlying space of a smooth orbifold a topological manifold?" \cite[p.~9]{MR2883685} amounts to the classification of finite subgroups of the orthogonal group $\Or_n$ for which the quotient space $\R^n/G$ is a topological manifold and has been completely answered in \cite{Lange_Mik}, \cite{Lange2} and \cite{Lange1}. The quotient space $\R^n/G$ not only inherits a topology from $\R^n$ but also other structures, i.e. a metric and a piecewise linear structure. One may as well ask when $\R^n/G$ is a manifold with respect to such an additional structure. In case of the quotient metric this task translates to the question of when a Riemannian orbifold is a Lipschitz manifold. Moreover, it makes sense to admit manifolds with boundary in the formulation of Davis's question.

We call a finite group generated by \emph{reflections} and \emph{rotations} in a finite-dimensional Euclidean space, i.e. by orthogonal transformations with codimension \emph{one} and \emph{two} fixed point subspaces, a \emph{reflection-rotation group}. We call it a rotation group if it is generated by rotations. A classification of reflection-rotation groups is contained in \cite{Lange_Mik}. Based on earlier results (cf. \cite{Mikhailova}, \cite{Lange2,Lange1}) we answer the question posed in the title in the following ways. Theorem A has already been obtained in \cite{Lange2}, we state it for completeness.

\begin{thmAB} \label{thm:mikhailovas_theorem} For a finite subgroup $G<\Or_n$ the quotient space $\R^n/G$ is a PL (Lipschitz) manifold with boundary if and only if $G$ is a reflection-rotation group. In this case $\R^n/G$ is either PL (bi-Lipschitz) homeomorphic to the half space $\R^{n-1}\times\R_{\geq 0}$ and $G$ contains a reflection or $\R^n/G$ is PL (bi-Lipschitz) homeomorphic to $\R^n$ and $G$ does not contain a reflection.
\end{thmAB}

In particular, the underlying space of a Riemannian orbifold is a Lipschitz manifold if and only if all its local groups are reflection-rotation groups. The quotient space $S^3/P$ of a $3$-sphere by the binary icosahedral group $P<\SOr_4$ is Poincar\'e's homology sphere and it follows from Cannon's double suspension theorem that its double suspension $\Sigma^2(S^3/P)$ is a topological $5$-sphere \cite{MR541330}. We refer to the realization of the binary icosahedral group in $\SOr_4$ as \emph{Poincar\'e group}. The answer in the topological category reads as follows.

\begin{thmC}\label{thm:theorem_C} For a finite subgroup $G < \Or_n$ the quotient space $\R^n/G$ is a topological manifold with boundary if and only if $G$ has the form
\begin{eqnarray*}
		G = G_{rr} \times P_1 \times \ldots \times P_k
\end{eqnarray*}
for a reflection-rotation group $G_{rr}$ and Poincar\'e groups $P_i<\SOr_4$, $i=1,\ldots,k$, such that the factors act in pairwise orthogonal spaces and such that $n>4$ if $k=1$ and $n>5$ if $G$ contains in addition a reflection. In this case $\R^n/G$ is either homeomorphic to the half space $\R^{n-1}\times\R_{\geq 0}$ and $G$ contains a reflection or $\R^n/G$ is homeomorphic to $\R^n$ and $G$ does not contain a reflection.
\end{thmC}

The if directions of Theorem B and C follow from the if direction of Theorem A which has been proven in \cite{Lange2} (cf. \cite{Mikhailova}) and the double suspension theorem. To show the only-if direction we first prove

\begin{thmD}\label{thm:theorem_CD} For a finite subgroup $G < \Or_n$ the quotient space $\R^n/G$ is a homology manifold with boundary if and only if $G$ has the form
\begin{eqnarray*}
		G = G_{rr} \times P_1 \times \ldots \times P_k
\end{eqnarray*}
for a reflection-rotation group $G_{rr}$ and Poincar\'e groups $P_i<\SOr_4$, $i=1,\ldots,k$, such that the factors act in pairwise orthogonal spaces. In this case the boundary of $\R^n/G$ is nonempty if and only if $G_{rr}$ contains a reflection.
\end{thmD}

The following related question was asked by Vinberg.

\begin{qst} Let $G<\Or_n$ be a rotation group. Is it always possible to find $n$ polynomials $f_1,\ldots,f_n \in \R[x_1,\ldots,x_n]^{G}$ in the invariant ring of $G$ for which the induced map
\[
		f= [f_1,\ldots,f_n] : \R^n/G \To \R^n
\]
defines a homeomorphism?
\end{qst}

\emph{Acknowledgements.} I thank Alexander Lytchak for introducing me to the problem and for helpful discussions.

\section{Preliminaries}

\subsection{Homology manifolds}
Homology manifolds are generalizations of topological manifolds (cf. \cite{MR0494113}). In order to simplify our proofs we make the following modified definition.

\begin{dfn}\label{dfn:hom_mfd} We say that a Hausdorff space $X$ is a \emph{homology $n$-manifold}, if all its local homology groups coincide with the local homology groups of $\R^n$, i.e. if for all $x \in X$
\[
	H_i(X, X-\{x\})=\begin{cases}
  0,  & \text{for }i\neq n\\
  \Z, & \text{for } i=n \\
\end{cases}
\]
holds.
\end{dfn}

\begin{rem}
All spaces occurring in this paper are finite-dimensional simplicial complexes. Every such space is a finite-dimensional absolute neighborhood retract \cite[Application 18.4, p.~61]{MR0007094}. Therefore, our modification of other stricter definitions of homology manifolds (cf. \cite{MR0494113}, \cite{MR1886687}) does not make any difference for the formulation of Theorem D.
\end{rem}

For a topological space $X$ and a subspace $Y \subset X$ we define the \emph{double of $X$ along $Y$} to be
\[
	 2_Y X = X \times \{0,1\} / \sim \text{ where } (y,0)\sim (y,1) \text{ for all }y\in Y
\]
endowed with the quotient topology and we simply denote it by $2X$ if the meaning of the subspace is clear. In order to deal with Davis's question for manifolds with boundary, we define homology manifolds with boundary in the following way.

\begin{dfn}\label{def:hom_man_boun} We say that a Hausdorff space $X$ is a \emph{homology $(n+1)$-manifold with boundary}, if it can be decomposed into a nonempty set of interior points $\mathring{X}$ and a set of boundary points $\partial X$ such that its double $2X$ along its boundary is a homology $(n+1)$-manifold, its boundary $\partial X$ is either empty or a homology $n$-manifold and the local homology groups at boundary points coincide with those of $0\in \partial (\R^n\times \R_{\leq 0})$, i.e. for all $x \in \partial X$ and all $i\geq0$ we have $H_i(X, X-\{x\})= 0$.
\end{dfn}

\begin{rem}	If the space $X$ in the definition of a homology manifold with boundary is sufficiently nice, then its boundary and its double are automatically homology manifolds. This is for example the case if $X$ is a PL space (cf. \cite[p.~510]{MR1402473}, \cite[Prop.~5.4.11, p.~188]{MR1019276}) and so it holds for all spaces we are working with in this paper (cf. \cite{Lange2}).
\end{rem}

The open cone of a topological space $X$ is defined to be $CX=(X \times [0,1)) / (X \times \{0\})$. Homology manifolds share the following properties. Proofs are standard computations (cf. \cite[Cor. VI.12.10, p.~181]{MR606196}, \cite[Thm.~16.11, p.~378]{MR1481706}, \cite[p.~117]{MR1867354}).
\begin{lem} \label{lem:characterization_of_homology_manifolds}
For Hausdorff spaces $X$ and $Y$ the following statements hold for integers $n\geq0$.
\begin{compactenum}
	\item $X$ and $Y$ are homology manifolds, if and only if $X\times Y$ is a homology manifold.
	\item If $X$ is a homology manifold, then $X\times Y$ is a homology manifold with boundary, if and only if $Y$ is a homology manifold with boundary. Moreover, we have $\partial (X\times Y) = X \times \partial Y$.
 	\item $CX$ is a homology $(n+1)$-manifold if and only if $X$ is a homology $n$-manifold and $H_*(X)=H_*(S^n)$.
	\item $CX$ is a homology $(n+2)$-manifold with nonempty boundary $C(\partial X)$ if and only if $X$ is a homology $(n+1)$-manifold with nonempty boundary and $H_*(X)=H_*(\{*\})$, $H_*(\partial X)=H_*(S^n)$.
\end{compactenum}
\end{lem}

\subsection{Piecewise linear manifolds} For a discussion of piecewise linear manifolds, we refer to the preliminary section of \cite{Lange2}.

\subsection{Lipschitz manifolds}\label{sec:Lipschitz-man}
We say that a metric space $X$ is a \emph{Lipschitz manifold} if it is a topological manifold and the coordinate maps can be chosen to be bi-Lipschitz. For a finite subgroup $G < \Or_n$ the quotient $\R^n/G$ inherits a metric from $\R^n$, the so-called \emph{quotient metric}, where the distance between two points in $\R^n/G$ is defined to be the distance of the corresponding orbits in $\R^n$. With respect to this metric $\R^n/G$ is a \emph{length space}, i.e. the distance between two points is the infimum of the lengths of all rectifiable paths connecting these points (cf. \cite{MR1835418}). We would like to know when it is a Lipschitz manifold. Since $\R^n/G$ can be triangulated by a simplicial complex $K/G$ (cf. \cite{Lange2}), the metric on $\R^n/G$ can be recovered from the flat metrics on the simplices of $K/G$. Therefore, $\R^n/G$ is a Lipschitz manifold with boundary if it is a PL manifold with boundary. In particular, $\R^n/G$ is a Lipschitz manifold with boundary if $G$ is a reflection-rotation group by Theorem A which has been proven in \cite{Lange2}.

Siebenmann and Sullivan established the following necessary and sufficient condition for a simplicial complex to be a Lipschitz manifold \cite[Thm.~1,  p.~504; Thm.~2, p.~506 in combination with Remark $(i)$, p.~507)]{MR537747}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:characterization_lip_manifolds}
A locally finite simplicial complex $K$ with a length metric induced by flat metrics on its simplices is a Lipschitz manifold, if and only if the link of every simplex of $K$ is a homotopy sphere and a Lipschitz manifold with respect to its induced length metric.
\end{thm}

According to this result, the same argument as in the PL category shows that $G$ is a rotation group, if $\R^n/G$ is a Lipschitz manifold (cf. \cite{Lange2}). First, the fact that the link of the origin in the triangulation $K$ of $\R^n$ is again a Lipschitz manifold, implies by induction that all proper isotropy groups in $G$ are rotation groups. Then the simply connectedness of this link implies that $G$ is generated by its isotropy groups and thus is a rotation group itself. Necessary conditions for the case that $\R^n/G$ is a Lipschitz manifold with nonempty boundary will be deduced in the next section.

\section{Proof of the main results}

For manifolds without boundary Theorem D has been proven in \cite{Lange1}. To prove it also in the general case for manifolds with boundary we first show a lemma based on the following concepts.

\begin{dfn}\label{dfn:orbifold} A metric space $\Orb$ is called a \emph{Riemannian orbifold} of dimension $n$, if for each point $x \in \Orb$ there exists an open neighborhood $U$ of $x$ in $\Orb$ and an $n$-dimensional Riemannian manifold $M$ together with a finite group $G$ acting isometrically on $M$ such that $U$ and $M/G$ are isometric.
\end{dfn}

For a set of data $(x,U,M,G)$ as in the definition denote by $\pi_x : M \To U$ the composition of the natural projection from $M$ to $M/G$ and an isometry from $M/G$ to $U$ and let $p\in \pi_x^{-1}(x)$. Every Riemannian orbifold in the above sense is a smooth orbifold in the sense of \cite{MR2883685, Thurston} with the $(B_r(0)\subset T_p M,G_p,B_r(x),\pi_x\circ \exp_p)$ for sufficiently small $r$ as orbifold charts.

\begin{dfn}\label{dfn:orbifold_covering} A map $\varphi : \Orb \To \Orb'$ between Riemannian orbifolds is called an orbifold covering if any point $x\in \Orb'$ has a neighborhood $U$ isometric to some $M/G$ (cf. Definition \ref{dfn:orbifold}) such that each component $U_i$ of $\varphi^{-1}(U)$ contains precisely one preimage of $x$ and is isometric to $M/G_i$ for some subgroup $G_i<G$.
\end{dfn}

Now we can show

\begin{lem}\label{lem:boundary-double-reflection}
Let $G<\Or_n$ be a finite subgroup with orientation preserving subgroup $\Gp$ and assume that $\R^n/G$ is a homology manifold with nonempty boundary. Then $G$ contains a reflection and there exists an isometry $\varphi$ from the double $2(\R^n/G)$ with its induced length metric to $\R^n/\Gp$ such that $p_0=p_1\circ \varphi$ where $p_0$ and $p_1$ are the natural projections from $2(\R^n/G)$ and $\R^n/\Gp$ to $\R^n/G$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} The proof is by induction on $n$. For $n=1,2$ the claim is clear. Assume it holds for some fixed $n>1$ and let $G<\Or_{n+1}$ be a finite subgroup such that $\R^{n+1}/G$ is a homology manifold with nonempty boundary. Then $S^n/G$ is also a homology manifold with nonempty boundary by Lemma \ref{lem:characterization_of_homology_manifolds}. For a point $x \in S^n$ whose coset lies in the boundary of $S^n/G$ the quotient space $T_x S^n /G_x$ is a homology manifold with nonempty boundary. Therefore, it follows by induction that $G_x\subset G$ contains a reflection and that there exists an isometry $\tilde{\theta}: 2(T_xS^n /G_x) \To T_xS^n /\Gp_x$ with the property stated in the lemma. Using the exponential map, we obtain an equivariant bijection $\theta: B_r(x_0) \To B_r(x_1)$ between small balls $B_r(x_0)$ and $B_r(x_1)$ about the cosets $x_0$ and $x_1$ of $x$ in $2(S^n /G_x)$ and $S^n /\Gp_x$, respectively. By construction the map $\theta$ descends to an isometry, in fact to the identity, between the quotients of $B_r(x_0)$ and $B_r(x_1)$ by the respective reflection. Since the metrics on $S^n /G_x$, $2(S^n /G_x)$ and $S^n /\Gp_x$ are length metrics this implies that the restriction $\theta: B_{r/4}(x_0) \To B_{r/4}(x_1)$ is an isometry. In particular, we see that $2(S^n /G)$ is a Riemannian orbifold and that the natural projection $p_0 : 2(S^n /G) \To S^n /G$ is a covering of Riemannian orbifolds. By the assumption $n>1$ the sphere $S^n$ is simply connected. Therefore there exists an index $2$ subgroup $\tilde{G}<G$ and a homeomorphism $\varphi: 2(S^n/G) \To S^n/\tilde{G}$ with $p_0=p_1\circ \varphi$ where $p_1:S^n/\tilde{G}\To S^n/G$ is the natural projection \cite[Chapt.~13, p.~305]{Thurston}. Similar as above we see that $\varphi$ is an isometry. Moreover, since $2(S^n/G) = S^n/\tilde{G}$ has the integral homology of a sphere (cf. Definition \ref{def:hom_man_boun} and Lemma \ref{lem:characterization_of_homology_manifolds}), the subgroup $\tilde{G}$ preserves the orientation \cite[Lem.~2.14]{Lange1}. The fact that both $\Gp$ and $\tilde{G}$ are orientation preserving subgroups of index 2 in $G$ implies $\Gp=\tilde{G}$. The linear extension $\varphi: 2(\R^{n+1}/G) \To \R^{n+1}/\Gp$ of $\varphi: 2(S^n/G) \To S^n/\Gp$ is an isometry that satisfies the desired property (note that $C(2(S^n/G))=2(C(S^n/G))=2((CS^n)/G)$ as metric spaces, cf. \cite[Sect. 3.6.2.]{MR1835418}).
\end{proof}

Now we are in the position to finish the proof of Theorem D. \renewcommand*{\proofname}{Proof of Theorem D}
\begin{proof} The if direction follows from Lemma \ref{lem:characterization_of_homology_manifolds}, $(ii)$, and the result in \cite{Lange2} (cf. \cite{Lange1}). Conversely, assume that $G<\Or_n$ is a finite subgroup such that $\R^n/G$ is a homology manifold with boundary. According to Lemma \ref{lem:boundary-double-reflection}, our Definition \ref{def:hom_man_boun} (cf. the subsequent remark) and the result in \cite{Lange1}, the orientation preserving subgroup $\Gp$ of $G$ is a product of a rotation group and a certain number of Poincar\'e groups. So we are done, if $G$ itself preserves the orientation. Otherwise $G$ contains a reflection $s$ by Lemma \ref{lem:boundary-double-reflection} which normalizes $\Gp$. This reflection can only act in one of the factors of $\Gp$. Therefore the claim follows, if we can show that $\R^4/\tilde{P}$ is not a homology manifold for $\tilde{P}=\left\langle P,s \right\rangle$ where $s$ is one of the existing reflections in the normalizer of $P$ in $\Or_4$. The coset of $s$ in $\tilde{P}/P$ acts as an orientation reversing isometry on $S^3/P$. Hence, its fixed point subspace is a disjoint union of points and totally geodesic embedded surfaces. If $\R^4/\tilde{P}$ were a homology manifold, then only a single embedded sphere could occur and $S^3/P$ would be the double of $S^3/\tilde{P}$ along this sphere by Lemma \ref{lem:boundary-double-reflection}. In this case $P$ would be a free product of isomorphic groups due to the theorem of Seifert and van Kampen on fundamental groups \cite[Thm.~1.20., p.~43]{MR1867354} (the boundary of $S^3/\tilde{P}$ admits a collar). This is a contradiction, since $P$ is neither trivial nor infinite and thus the claim follows.
\end{proof}
\renewcommand*{\proofname}{Proof}

Now Theorem C can be proven as well.
\renewcommand*{\proofname}{Proof of Theorem C}
\begin{proof} According to the results in \cite{Lange1} and \cite{Lange2} the quotient space $\R^n/G$ is a topological manifold with boundary for all groups described in Theorem C. Conversely, suppose $G<\Or_n$ is a finite subgroup for which $\R^n/G$ is a topological manifold with boundary. Then $G$ has the form $G = G_{rr} \times P_1 \times \ldots \times P_k$ as in Theorem $D$ by that theorem with $n>4$ for $k=1$ (cf. \cite{Lange1}). Moreover, the additional condition $n>5$ for $k=1$ in the case that $G$ contains a reflection also holds, since $\R^4/P$, which would have to be the boundary of $\R_{\geq 0} \times \R^4/P$ by homological reasons (cf. Lemma \ref{lem:characterization_of_homology_manifolds}), is not a topological manifold.
\end{proof}

We conclude with a proof of Theorem B.
\renewcommand*{\proofname}{Proof of Theorem B}
\begin{proof} The if direction is a direct consequence of Theorem A (cf. Section \ref{sec:Lipschitz-man}). The only-if direction in the case in which the boundary is empty has been proven in Section \ref{sec:Lipschitz-man}. So assume that $G<\Or_n$ is a finite subgroup for which $\R^n/G$ is a Lipschitz manifold with nonempty boundary. In view of Lemma \ref{lem:boundary-double-reflection} it suffices to observe that the double of a length space that is a Lipschitz manifold with boundary with its induced length metric is a Lipschitz manifold without boundary.
\end{proof}
\renewcommand*{\proofname}{Proof}