\section{Introduction}

As is well known, the {\it{Euler polynomials}} are defined by the generating function to be

\begin{equation}\label{1}
\frac{2}{e^t+1}e^{xt}=\sum_{n=0} ^{\infty} E_n(x)\frac{t^n}{n!},{\text{ (see [1-7])}}
\end{equation}
When $x=0$, $E_n=E_n(0)$ are called {\it{Euler numbers}}.

For $s\in{\mathbb{C}}$, Kim considered Euler-zeta function which is defined by
\begin{equation}\label{2}
\zeta_E(s,x)=2\sum_{n=0} ^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^n}{(n+x)^s},~(x\neq0,-1,-2,\cdot\cdot\cdot).
\end{equation}
Thus, he obtained the following equation:
\begin{equation}\label{3}
\zeta_E(-n,x)=E_n(x),~(n\in{\mathbb{N}}\cup\left\{0\right\}), \ {\text{ (see \cite{03})}}.
\end{equation}

L. Carlitz introduced {\it{degenerate Euler polynomials}} which are defined by the generating function to be
\begin{equation}\label{4}
\frac{2}{\il^{\iol}+1}\il^{\frac{x}{\lambda}}=\sum_{n=0} ^{\infty} {\mathcal{E}}_n(x|\lambda)\frac{t^n}{n!},{\text{ (see \cite{01})}}.
\end{equation}
When $x=0$, ${\mathcal{E}}_n(\lambda)={\mathcal{E}}_n(0|\lambda)$ are called {\it{degenerate Euler numbers}}.

From \eqref{4}, we note that $\lim_{\lambda\rightarrow0}{\mathcal{E}}_n(x|\lambda)=E_n(x)$, $(n\geq0)$. By \eqref{4}, we easily get
\begin{equation}\label{5}
{\mathcal{E}}_m(\lambda)+{\mathcal{E}}_m(n+1|\lambda)=2\sum_{l=0} ^n(-1)^l(l|\lambda)_m,
\end{equation}
where $(l|\lambda)_m=l(l-\lambda)\cdots(l-\lambda(m-1))$ and $(l|\lambda)_0=1$.

In this paper, we construct degenerate Euler zeta function which interpolates degenerate Euler polynomials at negative integers.
\bigskip
\bigskip

\section{Degenerate Euler zeta function}

For $s\in{\mathbb{C}} \smallsetminus\left\{0,-1,-2,\cdot\cdot\cdot\right\}$, we recall that {\it{gamma function}} is given by
\begin{equation}\label{6}
\Gamma(s)=\ino e^{-t}t^{s-1}dt.
\end{equation}
Let
\begin{equation*}
F(t,x)=\frac{2}{e^t+1}e^{xt}=\sum_{n=0} ^{\infty} E_n(x)\frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{equation*}
Then, by \eqref{6}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{7}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{\Gamma(s)}\ino F(-t,x)t^{s-1}dt&=\frac{2}{\Gamma(s)}\ino\frac{1}{1+e^{-t}}e^{-xt}t^{s-1}dt\\
=&\frac{2}{\Gamma(s)}\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}(-1)^m\ino e^{-(m+x)t}t^{s-1}dt\\
=&\frac{2}{\Gamma(s)}\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^m}{(m+x)^s}\ino e^{-y}y^{s-1}dy=2\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^m}{(m+x)^s}\\
=&\zeta_E(s,x).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
From \eqref{7}, we note that
\begin{equation*}
\zeta_E(-n,x)=E_n(x),~(n\in{\mathbb{N}}\cup\left\{0\right\}).
\end{equation*}
Let
\begin{equation}\label{8}
F(t,x|\lambda)=\frac{2}{\il^{\iol}+1}\il^{\frac{x}{\lambda}}=\sum_{n=0} ^{\infty}{\mathcal{E}}_n(x|\lambda)\frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{equation}
For $\lambda\in(0,1)$ and $s\in{\mathbb{C}}$ with $R(s)>0$, we define degenerate $\Gamma$-function as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{9}
\Gamma(s|\lambda)=\ino \il^{-\iol}t^{s-1}dt.
\end{equation}
Note that $\lim_{\lambda\rightarrow0}\Gamma(s|\lambda)=\Gamma(s)$. From \eqref{2}, we can derive
\begin{equation}\label{10}
\begin{split}
\Gamma(s+1|\lambda)=&\ino\il^{-\iol}t^sdt\\
=&-\frac{s}{\lambda-1}\ino\il^{-\frac{1-\lambda}{\lambda}}t^{s-1}dt\\
=&\frac{s}{1-\lambda}\ino\left(1+\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}(1-\lambda)t\right)^{-\frac{1-\lambda}{\lambda}}t^{s-1}dt\\
=&\frac{s}{(1-\lambda)^{s+1}}\ino\left(1+\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}y\right)^{-\frac{1-\lambda}{\lambda}}y^{s-1}dy\\
=&\frac{s}{(1-\lambda)^{s+1}}\Gamma\left(s\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}\right.\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{10}, we obtain the following theorem.\\

\bigskip
\begin{theorem}\label{thm1}
For $s\in{\mathbb{C}}$ with $R(s)>0$ and $\lambda\in(0,1)$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma(s+1|\lambda)=\frac{s}{(1-\lambda)^{s+1}}\Gamma\left(s\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}\right.\right).
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}

\medskip

By Theorem \ref{thm1}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{11}
\begin{split}
\Gamma\left(s\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}\right.\right)=&\frac{s-1}{\left(1-\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}\right)^s}\Gamma\left(s-1\left|\frac{\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}}{1-\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}}\right.\right)\\
=&\frac{(s-1)(1-\lambda)^s}{(1-2\lambda)^s}\Gamma\left(s-1\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-2\lambda}\right.\right),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{12}
\Gamma\left(s-1\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}\right.\right)=\frac{(s-2)(1-2\lambda)^{s-1}}{(1-3\lambda)^{s-1}}\Gamma\left(s-2\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-3\lambda}\right.\right).
\end{equation}
Continuing this process, we have
\begin{equation}\label{13}
\Gamma\left(s-n\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}\right.\right)=\frac{(s-(n+1))(1-(n+1)\lambda)^{s-n}}{(1-(n+2)\lambda)^{s-n}}\Gamma\left(s-(n+1)\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-(n+2)\lambda}\right.\right).
\end{equation}
Thus, by Theorem \ref{thm1}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{14}
\begin{split}
\Gamma(s+1|\lambda)
=&\frac{s}{(1-\lambda)^{s+1}}\Gamma\left(s\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}\right.\right)=\frac{s(s-1)}{(1-\lambda)(1-2\lambda)^s}\Gamma\left(s-1\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-2\lambda}\right.\right)\\
=&\frac{s(s-1)(s-2)}{(1-\lambda)(1-2\lambda)(1-3\lambda)^{s-1}}\Gamma\left(s-2\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-3\lambda}\right.\right)=\cdots\\
=&\frac{s(s-1)(s-2)\cdots(s-(n+1))}{(1-\lambda)(1-2\lambda)\cdots(1-(n+1)\lambda)}\left(\frac{1}{1-(n+2)\lambda}\right)^{s-n}\\
&\times\Gamma\left(s-(n+1)\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-(n+2)\lambda}\right.\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{14}, we obtain the following theorem.

\bigskip

\begin{theorem}\label{thm2}
For $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\Gamma(s+1|\lambda)}{\Gamma\left(s-(n+1)\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-(n+2)\lambda}\right.\right)}=\frac{s(s-1)(s-2)\cdots(s-(n+1))}{(1-\lambda)(1-2\lambda)\cdots(1-(n+1)\lambda)}\left(\frac{1}{1-(n+2)\lambda}\right)^{s-n}.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}

\medskip

Let us take $s=n+2$ $(n\in{\mathbb{N}})$ and $\lambda\in\left(0,\frac{1}{n+3}\right)$. Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{15}
\begin{split}
\Gamma(n+3|\lambda)
=&\frac{(n+2)!}{(1-\lambda)(1-2\lambda)\cdots(1-(n+1)\lambda)}\left(\frac{1}{1-(n+2)\lambda}\right)^2\\
&\times\Gamma\left(1\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-(n+2)\lambda}\right.\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
For $\lambda\in\left(0,\frac{1}{n+3}\right)$, we observe that
\begin{equation}\label{16}
\begin{split}
&\Gamma\left(1\left|\frac{\lambda}{1-(n+2)\lambda}\right.\right)=\ino\left(1+\left(\frac{\lambda}{1-(n+2)\lambda}\right)t\right)^{-\frac{1-(n+2)\lambda}{\lambda}}dt\\
=&\left.\left(\frac{1-(n+2)\lambda}{\lambda}\right)\left(\frac{\lambda}{(n+3)\lambda-1}\right)\left(1+\left(\frac{\lambda}{1-(n+2)\lambda}\right)t\right)^{\frac{(n+3)\lambda-1}{\lambda}}\right|_0 ^{\infty}\\
=&\left(\frac{1-(n+2)\lambda}{\lambda}\right)\left(\frac{\lambda}{(n+3)\lambda-1}\right)(-1)=\frac{1-(n+2)\lambda}{1-(n+3)\lambda}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Thus, by \eqref{15} and \eqref{16}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{17}
\Gamma(n+3|\lambda)=\frac{(n+2)!}{(1-\lambda)(1-2\lambda)\cdots(1-(n+2)\lambda)(1-(n+3)\lambda)}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{17}, we obtain the following theorem.\\

\bigskip

\begin{theorem}\label{thm3}
For $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $\lambda\in\left(0,\frac{1}{n}\right)$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma(n|\lambda)=\frac{(n-1)!}{(1-\lambda)(1-2\lambda)\cdots(1-n\lambda)}.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}

\bigskip

In the viewpoint of \eqref{7}, we define {\it{degenerate Euler zeta function}} as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{18}
\zeta_E(s,x|\lambda)=\frac{1}{\Gamma(s|\lambda)}\ino F(-t,x|-\lambda)t^{s-1}dt,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda\in(0,1)$ and $s\in{\mathbb{C}}$ with $R(s)>0$.

From \eqref{18}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{19}
\begin{split}
&\frac{1}{\Gamma(s|\lambda)}\ino F(-t,x|-\lambda)t^{s-1}dt=2\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}(-1)^m\ino\il^{-\frac{m+x}{\lambda}}t^{s-1}dt\\
\ \ \ \ =&\frac{2}{\Gamma(s|\lambda)}\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}(-1)^m\ino\left(1+\frac{\lambda}{m+x}(m+x)t\right)^{-\frac{m+x}\lambda}t^{s-1}dt\\
\ \ \ \ =&\frac{2}{\Gamma(s|\lambda)}\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^m}{(m+x)^s}\ino\left(1+\frac{\lambda}{m+x}y\right)^{-\frac{m+x}{\lambda}}y^{s-1}dy\\
\ \ \ \ =&2\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^m}{(m+x)^s}\frac{\Gamma\left(s\left|\frac{\lambda}{m+x}\right.\right)}{\Gamma(s|\lambda)},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $x\neq0,-1,-2,\cdot\cdot\cdot$.

Therefore, by \eqref{18} and \eqref{19}, we obtain the following theorem.

\bigskip

\begin{theorem}\label{thm4}
For $s\in{\mathbb{C}}$ with $R(s)>0$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\zeta_E(s,x|\lambda)=2\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^m}{(m+x)^s}\frac{\Gamma\left(s\left|\frac{\lambda}{m+x}\right.\right)}{\Gamma(s|\lambda)},
\end{equation*}
where $x\neq0,-1,-2,\cdot\cdot\cdot.$
\end{theorem}

\bigskip

Let $s=n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and $\lambda\in\left(0,\frac{1}{n}\right)$. Then, we have
\begin{equation}\label{20}
\zeta_E(n,x|\lambda)=2\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^m}{(m+x)^n}\frac{\Gamma\left(n\left|\frac{\lambda}{m+x}\right.\right)}{\Gamma(n|\lambda)}.
\end{equation}
From Theorem \ref{thm3}, we note that
\begin{equation}\label{21}
\begin{split}
&\frac{\Gamma\left(n\left|\frac{\lambda}{m+x}\right.\right)}{\Gamma(n|\lambda)}\\
=&\frac{(1-\lambda)(1-2\lambda)\cdots(1-n\lambda)}{(n-1)!}\frac{(n-1)!}{\left(1-\frac{\lambda}{m+x}\right)\left(1-\frac{2\lambda}{m+x}\right)\cdots\left(1-\frac{n\lambda}{m+x}\right)}\\
=&\frac{(1-\lambda)(1-2\lambda)\cdots(1-n\lambda)}{\left(1-\frac{\lambda}{m+x}\right)\left(1-\frac{2\lambda}{m+x}\right)\cdots\left(1-\frac{n\lambda}{m+x}\right)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{20} and \eqref{21}, we obtain the following theorem.\\

\bigskip

\begin{theorem}\label{thm5}
For $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and $\lambda\in\left(0,\frac{1}{n}\right)$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\zeta_E(n,x|\lambda)=2\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^m}{(m+x)^n}\frac{(1-\lambda)(1-2\lambda)\cdots(1-n\lambda)}{\left(1-\frac{\lambda}{m+x}\right)\left(1-\frac{2\lambda}{m+x}\right)\cdots\left(1-\frac{n\lambda}{m+x}\right)}.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}

\bigskip

From \eqref{8}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{22}
\begin{split}
&\frac{1}{\Gamma(s|\lambda)}\ino F(-t,x|-\lambda)t^{s-1}dt\\
=&\frac{1}{\Gamma(s|\lambda)}\ino\frac{2}{\il^{-\iol}+1}\il^{-\frac{x}{\lambda}}t^{s-1}dt\\
=&\frac{1}{\Gamma(s|\lambda)}\sum_{m=0} ^{\infty}{\mathcal{E}}_m(x|-\lambda)\frac{(-1)^m}{m!}\ino t^{s+m-1}dt.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Thus, by \eqref{22}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{23}
\zeta_E(-n,x|\lambda)=\frac{2\pi i}{n!}{\mathcal{E}}_n(x|-\lambda)(-1)^n\frac{1}{\Gamma(-n|\lambda)}.
\end{equation}
Now, we observe that
\begin{equation}\label{24}
\begin{split}
\Gamma(-n|\lambda)=&\ino\il^{-\iol}t^{-n-1}dt\\
=&\frac{2\pi i}{n!}\frac{1}{\lambda}\left(1+\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)\left(2+\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)\cdots\left((n-1)+\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)(-1)^n\lambda^n\\
=&\frac{2\pi i}{n!}(\lambda +1)(2\lambda+1)\cdots((n-1)\lambda+1)(-1)^n.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
From \eqref{23} and \eqref{24}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{25}
\zeta_E(-n,x|\lambda)=\frac{{\mathcal{E}}_n(x|-\lambda)}{(\lambda+1)(2\lambda+1)\cdots((n-1)\lambda+1)}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{25}, we obtain the following theorem.

\bigskip

\begin{theorem}\label{thm6}
For $n\in{\mathbb{N}}\cup\left\{0\right\}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\zeta_E(-n,x|\lambda)={\mathcal{E}}_n(x|-\lambda).
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}

\bigskip

\noindent{\bf{Remark.}} We note that $\zeta_E(s,x|\lambda)$ is analytic function in whole complex $s$-plane.

\vskip .1in

\noindent{\bf{Remark.}}
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\lambda\rightarrow0}\zeta_E(-n,x|\lambda)=E_n(x)=\zeta_E(-n,x).
\end{equation*}

\bigskip
\bigskip
\bigskip
\bigskip


\section{introduction}

In the past few years systems with extreme magnetic fields ($B>10^{15}G$)
have been proposed to exist. In the magnetar analysis, for example, magnetic
fields of the order of $10^{15}G$ at the surface \cite{mag1}, \cite{mag2}
and $10^{17}G$ at the center are expected to exist. In ultra-relativistic
heavy ion collisions, at $\sqrt{s}$= 200 GeV (at RHIC), the magnetic field
is expected to reach values as high as $10^{19}G$ \cite{hyion1}-\cite{hyion3}
and at LHC, at $\sqrt{s}$= 7 TeV, $10^{20}G$.

When studying particles inside this systems (eletrons inside stars, and so
on), the usual way is to solve the Dirac equation \cite{apl1}, \cite{apl2},
for example, and find the energy levels, and in general, the Minkowski
space-time is considered. A question that is quite intriguing, is if when
the magnetic field reach these values, some effect of the structure of the
space-time may be observed. This is the purpose of this work.

Including the magnetic field in the metric is not a trivial question but
some solutions exist, as the Melvin metric \cite{melv1}- \cite{melv4}, where
a magnetic universe, with a magnetic field in the $z$ direction, is
considered, or the Gutsunaev solution \cite{mank1}, \cite{mank2}, for a
magnetic dipole. Of course it is always possible to study an arbitrary shape
of the magnetic field and solve (at least numerically) the resulting
Einstein equations, but with the objective of finding analytical results,
and with this procedure, exploring this effect in a first approximation, we
will consider the Melvin metric and find the wave equations for Dirac
particles subjected to a magnetic field inside this metric.

So, this paper will show the following contents: In section II, a brief
review of the formulation of the Dirac equation in curved spaces will be
made. In section III the wave equation in the Melvin metric will be worked
out.  The results and conclusons of this work will be shown in section IV.

\section{Dirac equation in curved spaces}

In this section a brief review about the wave equation for spin 1/2
particles in curved spaces will be made. The basic formulation and the
equations that will be needed in the next sections will be shown.

A fundamental characteristic of the Dirac equation is its invariance under
Lorentz transformations, so, when studying Dirac particles in curved spaces,
it is interesting to preserve this aspect. One way to do that is by using
the tetrads $e_{\text{ \ }\mu}^{\left( a\right) }$ that may be defined in
order to satisfy the equation
\begin{equation}
g_{\mu\nu}=e_{\text{ \ \ }\mu}^{\left( a\right) }e_{\text{ \ \ }\nu
}^{\left( b\right) }\eta_{\left( a\right) \left( b\right) },   \label{eq1}
\end{equation}

\noindent where $\eta_{\left( a\right) \left( b\right) }$ is the Minkowski
tensor, that represents a flat space-time, and $g_{\mu\nu}$ the metric
tensor related to a space-time that possesses an arbitrary geometry \cite%
{tet1}-\cite{tet3}.

Observing eq. $\left( \ref{eq1}\right) $, we may note that the tetrads may
be used in order to project vectors from the curved space-time in the flat
space-time with the expression
\begin{equation}
V_{\mu}=e_{\text{ \ }\mu}^{\left( a\right) }V_{\left( a\right) } ,
\label{eq1b}
\end{equation}

\noindent that relates the form of a vector in different space-time
geometries.

As it was said before, the Dirac equation when written in the Minkowski
geometry posseses Lorentz symmetry, and we want that the equivalent
equation, written in a curved space-time possesses the same characteristic.
In fact, if we study the behavior of the elements of the Dirac equation
under transformations that preserve the desired symmetries,  we may
understand which are the quantities that need to be added or modified in the
equation.

We must note that a spinor transforms according to
\begin{equation}
\psi\rightarrow\rho\left( \Lambda\right) \psi,   \label{eq2}
\end{equation}

\noindent where $\rho\left( \Lambda\right) =1+\frac{1}{2}i\varepsilon^{%
\left( a\right) \left( b\right) }\Sigma_{\left( a\right) \left( b\right) }$,
and $\Sigma_{\left( a\right) \left( b\right) }$ is the spinorial
representation of the generators of the Lorentz transformation, written in
terms of the $\gamma^{\left( c\right) }$ matrices, $\Sigma_{\left( a\right)
\left( b\right) }\equiv\frac{1}{4}i\left[ \gamma_{\left( a\right)
},\gamma_{\left( b\right) }\right] $ \cite{nakahara}. The idea is to
construct a covariant derivative $\nabla_{\left( a\right) }\psi$ that is
locally Lorentz invariant, that means that we need to impose the
transformation condition
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\left( a\right) }\psi\rightarrow\rho\Lambda_{\left( a\right) }^{%
\text{ }\left( b\right) }\nabla_{\left( b\right) }\psi.   \label{eq3}
\end{equation}

\noindent The usual way to obtain the form of the covariant derivative
operator of the spinor is by supposing the combination
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\left( a\right) }\psi=e_{\left( a\right) }^{\text{ }\mu}\left(
\partial_{\mu}+\Omega_{\mu}\right) \psi,\text{ }   \label{eq4}
\end{equation}

\noindent and considering the form of the operator $\Omega_{\mu}$
transformation
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{\mu}\rightarrow\rho\Omega_{\mu}\rho^{-1}+\partial_{\mu}\rho%
\rho^{-1}.   \label{eq5}
\end{equation}

\noindent If we choose the combination of terms
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{\mu}\equiv\frac{1}{2}i\Gamma_{\text{ }\mu}^{\left( a\right) \text{ }%
\left( b\right) }\Sigma_{\left( a\right) \left( b\right) }=\frac{1}{2}ie_{%
\text{ \ }\nu}^{\left( a\right) }\nabla_{\mu}e_{\text{ \ }}^{\left( b\right)
\nu}\Sigma_{\left( a\right) \left( b\right) },   \label{eq6}
\end{equation}

\noindent or in an equivalent form
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{\mu}\equiv\frac{1}{2}i\Gamma_{\text{ }(a)\mu(b)}\Sigma^{(a)(b)},
\end{equation}

\noindent with the term $\Gamma_{\text{ }(a)\mu(b)}$ defined as
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{\text{ }(a)\mu(b)}=e_{(a)\nu}\left( \partial_{\mu}e_{(b)}^{\text{ \
\ }\nu}+\Gamma_{\text{ \ }\mu\lambda}^{\nu}e_{(b)}^{\text{ \ \ }\lambda
}\right) ,
\end{equation}

\noindent where $\Gamma_{\text{ \ }\mu\lambda}^{\nu}$ are the Christoffel
symbols, eq. $\left( \ref{eq5}\right) $ is satisfied. Consequentlly eq.  $%
\left(\ref{eq4}\right) $ satisfies the transformation condition demanded in $%
\left( \ref{eq3}\right) $ and then we get the final form of the covariant
derivative operator
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\left( c\right) }\psi=e_{\left( c\right) }^{\text{ }\mu}\left(
\partial_{\mu}+\frac{1}{2}ie_{\text{ \ }\nu}^{\left( a\right) }\nabla_{\mu
}e_{\text{ \ }}^{\left( b\right) \nu}\Sigma_{\left( a\right) \left( b\right)
}\right) \psi.   \label{eq7}
\end{equation}

\noindent We must remark that there are different definitions of covariant
derivatives of tensors in the literature when studying the covariant Dirac
equation, as for example in \cite{he1}-\cite{he3}.

Considering the Dirac equation in a flat space-time
\begin{equation}
i\gamma^{\left( a\right) }\partial_{\left( a\right) }\psi-m\psi=0,
\label{eq7b}
\end{equation}

\noindent and replacing the conventional derivative operator by the one
obtained in $\left( \ref{eq7}\right) $ we obtain the desired wave equation
for spin 1/2 particles in a curved space-time
\begin{equation}
ie_{\left( a\right) }^{\text{ }\mu}\gamma^{\left( a\right) }\left(
\partial_{\mu}+\Omega_{\mu}\right) \psi-m\psi=0.   \label{eq8}
\end{equation}

\noindent If the particle is submited to an external electromagnetic field,
we may introduce this effect by a minimal coupling
\begin{equation}
ie_{\left( a\right) }^{\text{ }\mu}\gamma^{\left( a\right) }\left(
\partial_{\mu}+\Omega_{\mu}+ieA_{\mu}\right) \psi-m\psi=0,   \label{eq8b}
\end{equation}

\noindent and the scalar action that leads to this equation is given by
\begin{equation}
S=\int d^{4}x\sqrt{-g}\bar{\psi}\left[ i\gamma^{\left( c\right) }e_{\text{ \
}\left( c\right) }^{\mu}\left( \partial_{\mu}+\frac{1}{2}ie_{\text{ \ }%
\nu}^{\left( a\right) }\nabla_{\mu}e_{\text{ \ }}^{\left( b\right) \nu
}\Sigma_{\left( a\right) \left( b\right) }+ieA_{\mu}\right) -m\right] \psi.
\label{eq9}
\end{equation}

It is usual to define the term $\gamma^{\mu}=e_{\left( a\right) }^{\text{ }%
\mu }\gamma^{\left( a\right) }$ as a Dirac matrix in a given curved
space-time and it is easy to verify that it satisfies the Clifford algebra
\begin{equation}
\gamma^{\mu}\gamma^{\nu}+\gamma^{\nu}\gamma^{\mu}=\mathbf{1}g^{\mu\nu}.
\label{eq10}
\end{equation}

\section{Wave equation in the Melvin Metric}

If now we want to obtain the wave equations shown in the last section, in a
space-time that has its structure determined by a magnetic field, an useful
idea wolud be to consider the Melvin metric \cite{melv1}-\cite{melv4}. The
Melvin metric is a solution of the Einstein-Maxwell equations of the general
relativity that represents a cylindrical magnetic universe. In his work \cite%
{melv1}, \cite{melv2}, Melvin considered a static magnetic field where its
lines lie in cylindrical surfaces perpendicular to the radial direction,
with intensity $\sim B_0$ in the vicinity of the symmetry axis and falls as
fast as $B_0/r^4$ far away from the axis. This solution has wide-ranging
applications in the literature, as, for example in the study of Kerr black
holes \cite{mbh}, or in cosmology, where the possibility of the interaction
of the magnetic field with the expansion of the universe may be considered,
as for example in \cite{melv5}, \cite{kast}.

The line element may be written in a cylindrically symmetric form (taking $c$%
=$G$=$\hbar$=1)
\begin{equation}
ds^{2}=\Lambda\left( r\right) ^{2}dt^{2}-\Lambda\left( r\right)
^{2}dr^{2}-\Lambda\left( r\right) ^{-2}r^{2}d\phi^{2}-\Lambda\left( r\right)
^{2}dz^{2},  \label{eq11}
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda\left( r\right) =1+\frac{1}{4}B_{0}^{2}r^{2}$ and $B_{0\text{ }%
}$ is the magnetic field. This metric reflects the curvature of the
space-time, determined by the existence of a magnetic field in the $z$
direction. For this reason, a metric with axial symmetry is taken into
account.

In the limit of vanishing the magnetic field we have $\Lambda(r)=1$ and the
equation (\ref{eq11}) becomes
\begin{equation}
ds^{2}=dt^{2}-dr^{2}-r^{2}d\phi^{2}-dz^{2},  \label{eq12}
\end{equation}

\noindent that is the flat Minkowski space-time written in cylindrical
coordinates. So, we may define
\begin{equation}
\eta_{\left( a\right) \left( b\right) }=\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1%
\end{array}
\right)   \label{eq13}
\end{equation}

\noindent and choose a diagonal tetrad basis  $e_{\text{ }\mu}^{(a)}$
\begin{equation}
e_{\text{ }\mu}^{\left( a\right) } =\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
\Lambda\left( r\right) & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & \Lambda\left( r\right) & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & r\Lambda\left( r\right) ^{-1} & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \Lambda\left( r\right)%
\end{array}
\right) ,  \label{eq14a}
\end{equation}

\noindent for which the equation $\left( \ref{eq1}\right)$ is satisfied, and
then it is easy to determine its inverse form $e_{\left( a\right) }^{\text{
\ }\mu}$,

\begin{equation}
e_{\left( a\right) }^{\text{ \ }\mu} =\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
\Lambda\left( r\right) ^{-1} & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & \Lambda\left( r\right) ^{-1} & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & \Lambda\left( r\right) /r & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \Lambda\left( r\right) ^{-1}%
\end{array}
\right) .   \label{eq14b}
\end{equation}

We are interested in studying the effect of a magnetic field $B_{0}$, that
modifies the space-time geometry, as it is shown in the Melvin metric. If we
consider a Dirac particle inside this field, we may also investigate the
effect of the minimal coupling in the wave equation for this particle
considering the 4-potential $A_{\mu}$. In a flat space-time, a constant
magnetic field in the $z$ direction, $B_{0}$, that may be related to an
equivalent magnetic field in the Melvin metric by the equation (\ref{eq1b})
appears if the 4-potential has the only non-vanishing component given by
\begin{equation}
A_{\phi}=-\frac{2}{B_0\Lambda(r)}.   \label{eq16}
\end{equation}

\noindent Observing that the term $\gamma^{\mu}\Omega_{\mu}$, in the curved
space wave equation, relative to the tetrad (\ref{eq14a}) is given by
\begin{equation}
\gamma^{\mu}\Omega_{\mu}=\frac{\gamma^{\left( 1\right) }}{2\Lambda^{2}}\frac{%
\partial\Lambda}{\partial r}+\frac{\gamma^{\left( 1\right) }}{2r\Lambda},
\label{eq17}
\end{equation}

\noindent equation (\ref{eq8b}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\left[ \frac{\gamma^{\left( 0\right) }}{\Lambda}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}+%
\frac{\gamma^{\left( 1\right) }}{\Lambda}\left( \frac{\partial}{\partial r}+%
\frac{1}{2\Lambda}\frac{\partial\Lambda}{\partial r}+\frac{1}{2r}\right) +%
\frac{\gamma^{\left( 2\right) }\Lambda}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial\phi }+%
\frac{\gamma^{\left( 3\right) }}{\Lambda}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}+iM+iq%
\frac{\gamma^{(2)}\Lambda A_{\phi}}{r}\right] \psi=0.  \label{eq18}
\end{equation}

\noindent In the limit $\Lambda\rightarrow 1$, this equation reduces to the
usual Dirac equation for a free particle in a flat space-time  in a
cylindrical coordinate system. So, we may interpret equation $\left( \ref%
{eq18}\right) $ as a generalization of a Dirac equation for a particle
inside a magnetic field, an equation that has been extensively studied in
the literature, in many contexts, as for example \cite{magnetico1}-\cite%
{magnetico5}. We are interested in observing the corrections in the energy
spectrum, due to the alteration of the geometry of the space-time,
determined in eq. $\left( \ref{eq18}\right) .$

Making a transformation in equation (\ref{eq18})
\begin{equation}
\psi=\frac{1}{\sqrt{r\Lambda\left( r\right) }}\Phi,   \label{eq20}
\end{equation}

\noindent we obtain a simplified form
\begin{equation}
\left[ \frac{\gamma^{\left( 0\right) }}{\Lambda}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}+%
\frac{\gamma^{\left( 1\right) }}{\Lambda}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}+\frac{%
\gamma^{\left( 2\right) }\Lambda}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial\phi }+\frac{%
\gamma^{\left( 3\right) }}{\Lambda}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}+iM+iq\frac{%
\gamma^{(2)}\Lambda A_{\phi}}{r}\right] \psi=0,   \label{eq20b}
\end{equation}

\noindent where the usual representation for the gamma matrices is
considered
\begin{align}
\gamma^{\left( 0\right) } & =\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1%
\end{array}
\right) ,\text{ }\gamma^{\left( 1\right) }=\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & 0 & 0%
\end{array}
\right) ,  \notag \\
\gamma^{\left( 2\right) } & =\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & -i \\
0 & 0 & i & 0 \\
0 & i & 0 & 0 \\
-i & 0 & 0 & 0%
\end{array}
\right) ,\text{ \ }\gamma^{\left( 3\right) }=\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1 \\
-1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0%
\end{array}
\right) ,   \label{eq21}
\end{align}

\noindent that has no dependence in the $z$, $t$ and $\phi$ variables. We
will suppose a solution of the form
\begin{equation}
\Phi=R\left( r\right) \exp[-i\sigma t+ip_{z}z+im\phi],   \label{eq22}
\end{equation}

\noindent where $\sigma$ is the energy of the system, that assumes positive
values for particles and negative values for antiparticles, $p_{z}$ is the
momentum, $m=\pm1,\pm2,\pm3,...,$ a quantum number, and $M$, the electron
mass. So, equation (\ref{eq18}) may be written in a explicit form
\begin{align}
& i\left( +\frac{d}{dr}+\frac{m}{r}\Lambda^{2}-\frac{q}{r}%
A_{\phi}\Lambda^{2}\right) R_{4}+\left( +\sigma-M\Lambda\right)
R_{1}-p_{z}R_{3}=0, \\
& i\left( +\frac{d}{dr}-\frac{m}{r}\Lambda^{2}+\frac{q}{r}%
A_{\phi}\Lambda^{2}\right) R_{3}+\left( +\sigma-M\Lambda\right)
R_{2}+p_{z}R_{4}=0, \\
& i\left( -\frac{d}{dr}-\frac{m}{r}\Lambda^{2}+\frac{q}{r}%
A_{\phi}\Lambda^{2}\right) R_{2}+\left( -\sigma-M\Lambda\right)
R_{3}+p_{z}R_{1}=0, \\
& i\left( -\frac{d}{dr}+\frac{m}{r}\Lambda^{2}-\frac{q}{r}%
A_{\phi}\Lambda^{2}\right) R_{1}+\left( -\sigma-M\Lambda\right)
R_{4}-p_{z}R_{2}=0.
\end{align}

\noindent In a first approximation we will solve the equation neglecting
terms in higher orders of $r,$ and then, the system of equations may be
written as
\begin{align}
- & i\left( +\frac{d}{dr}+\frac{m}{r}+\frac{mB_{0}^{2}}{2}r-\frac{2q}{B_{0}r}%
-\frac{qB_{0}}{2}r\right) R_{4}+\left( -\sigma+M\right) R_{1}+p_{z}R_{3}=0,
\\
- & i\left( +\frac{d}{dr}-\frac{m}{r}-\frac{mB_{0}^{2}}{2}r+\frac{2q}{B_{0}r}%
+\frac{qB_{0}}{2}r\right) R_{3}+\left( -\sigma+M\right) R_{2}-p_{z}R_{4}=0,
\\
- & i\left( +\frac{d}{dr}+\frac{m}{r}+\frac{mB_{0}^{2}}{2}r-\frac{2q}{B_{0}r}%
-\frac{qB_{0}}{2}r\right) R_{2}+\left( -\sigma-M\right) R_{3}+p_{z}R_{1}=0,
\\
- & i\left( +\frac{d}{dr}-\frac{m}{r}-\frac{mB_{0}^{2}}{2}r+\frac{2q}{B_{0}r}%
+\frac{qB_{0}}{2}r\right) R_{1}+\left( -\sigma-M\right) R_{4}-p_{z}R_{2}=0,
\label{eq26}
\end{align}

\noindent This set of equations may be decoupled by multiplying the first
equation  by the expression
\begin{equation}
-i\left( +\frac{d}{dr}-\frac{m}{r}-\frac{mB_{0}^{2}}{2}r+\frac{2q}{B_{0}r}+%
\frac{qB_{0}}{2}r\right)
\end{equation}

\noindent and then, using the second and the fourth to eliminate the terms
containing the spinors $R_{1}$, $R_{2}$ and $R_{3}$. The result is
\begin{equation}
\left[ \frac{d^{2}}{dr^{2}}-\frac{m^{\prime }\left( m^{\prime }+1\right) }{%
r^{2}}+b\left( -m^{\prime }+\frac{1}{2}\right) -\frac{b^{2}r^{2}}{4}+\left(
\sigma ^{2}-M^{2}-p_{z}^{2}\right) \right] R_{4}\left( r\right) =0,
\end{equation}

\noindent where $b=mB_{0}^{2}-qB_{0}$ and $m^{\prime }=m-2q/B_{0}$. In a
similar way we derive equations for $R_{1},$ $R_{2},R_{3}$ that may be
resumed in the form
\begin{equation}
\left[ \frac{d^{2}}{dr^{2}}-\frac{m^{\prime }\left( m^{\prime }\pm 1\right)
}{r^{2}}+b\left( -m^{\prime }\pm \frac{1}{2}\right) -\frac{b^{2}r^{2}}{4}%
+\left( \sigma ^{2}-M^{2}-p_{z}^{2}\right) \right] R\left( r\right) =0,
\label{eq28}
\end{equation}

\noindent where the positive sign refers to $R_{2}\left( r\right) $ and $%
R_{4}\left( r\right) $, and the negative one to $R_{1}\left( r\right) $ and $%
R_{3}\left( r\right) .$

As we may observe, equation (\ref{eq28}) is similar to the Schr\"{o}dinger
equation, and it may be written as
\begin{equation}
\frac{d^{2}R\left( r\right) }{dr^{2}}+\left( E-V_{ef}\right) R\left(
r\right) =0,   \label{eq29}
\end{equation}

\noindent where $E=\sigma^{2}-M^{2}-p_{z}^{2}$. The term $V_{ef}=\frac{%
m^\prime\left( m^\prime\pm1\right) }{r^{2}}-b\left( -m^\prime\pm\frac{1}{2}%
\right) +\frac{b^{2}r^{2}}{4}$  may be identified as an effective potential
and as we can see, the system has the form of an isotropic harmonic
oscillator.

In fact, the solution of the equation (\ref{eq29}) may be mapped into a
3-dimensional harmonic oscillator-like one in spherical coordinates. These
solutions are given in terms of the associate Laguerre polynomials
\begin{equation*}
R\left( S\right) =\left(
\begin{array}{c}
N_{1}S^{\left( 1/2-m^\prime/2\right) }e^{-\frac{S}{2}}L_{n}^{1/2-m^{\prime}}
\\
N_{2}S^{-m^{\prime}/2}e^{-\frac{S}{2}}L_{n}^{-1/2-m^{\prime}} \\
N_{3}S^{\left( 1/2-m^{\prime}/2\right) }e^{-\frac{S}{2}}L_{n}^{1/2-m^{\prime
}} \\
N_{4}S^{^{-m^{\prime}/2}}e^{-\frac{S}{2}}L_{n}^{-1/2-m^{\prime}}%
\end{array}
\right) ,
\end{equation*}

\noindent where $S=\frac{br^{2}}{2}$ and $N_i$ are normalization constants.
The energy spectrum, relative to this solution is
\begin{equation}
E=\left( n+\frac{3}{2}\right) \frac{b}{2},\text{ }n=0,1,2,3,...,
\label{eq30}
\end{equation}

\noindent and using the definition of $E$ given in eq. (\ref{eq29}), we
obtain the energy spectrum
\begin{equation}
\sigma=\sqrt{M^{2}+p_{z}^{2}+2B_{0}q\left( n+s+\frac{1}{2}\right)
+2B_{0}^{2}m\left( n+s+\frac{1}{2}\right) },   \label{eq31}
\end{equation}

\noindent where $s=\pm$1/2 is the spin quantum number of the particle and $m$
= 1, 2, 3..., in order to keep the conservation of the parity. As it was
pointed before, equation (\ref{eq31}) is written with $c=G=\hbar=1$. By
making the conversion to the international system of units we have
\begin{equation}
\sigma=\sqrt{M^{2}c^{4}+p_{z}^{2}c^{2}+2\hbar c^{2}B_{0}q\left( n+s+\frac {1%
}{2}\right) +4\pi\varepsilon_{0}\hbar^{2}GB_{0}^{2}m\left( n+s+\frac{1}{2}%
\right) }.   \label{eq32}
\end{equation}

\noindent where $\varepsilon_{0}$ is the vacuum permissivity constant. In a
system of units with $\hbar=c=1$ we have
\begin{equation}
\sigma=\sqrt{M^{2}+p_{z}^{2}+2B_{0}q\left( n+s+\frac {1}{2}\right)
+GB_{0}^{2}m\left( n+s+\frac{1}{2}\right) },   \label{eq33}
\end{equation}

\noindent were, in the last term inside the square root, the Planck mass $m_p
$ appears scaling the magnetic field as $(B_0/m_p)^2$.

\section{Results}

Studying equation (\ref{eq31}) we may recover some literature results. When
the magnetic field and $p_{z}$ goes to zero, we obtain the expression for
the rest energy of the particle
\begin{equation}
\sigma=Mc^{2}.   \label{eq33}
\end{equation}

Now, if the gravitational energy is neglected, the last term inside the
square root vanishes and we have
\begin{equation}
\sigma=\sqrt{M^{2}c^{4}+p_{z}^{2}c^{2}+2\hbar c^{2}B_{0}q\left( n+s+\frac {1%
}{2}\right) },   \label{eq34}
\end{equation}

\noindent that corresponds to the usual spectrum obtained from a Dirac
equation in a flat space with a vector potential. This fact confirms our
initial considerations about eq. (\ref{eq18}), interpreting it as a
generalization of this equation. It is also possible to analyse the
situation where only the gravitational term is considered,
\begin{equation*}
\sigma=\sqrt{M^{2}c^{4}+p_{z}^{2}c^{2}+4\pi\varepsilon_{0}%
\hbar^{2}GB_{0}^{2}m\left( n+s+\frac{1}{2}\right) },
\end{equation*}

\noindent and observing this equation it is easy to see that this term (when
the magnetic field appears) is a negligible correction for usual magnetic
fields (not so strong) for all energy levels.

But we are interested in studying the effect of extreme magnetic fields, as
intense as the ones found in magnetars, of the order of $B\sim
10^{15}-10^{16}G$ \cite{mag1}, \cite{mag2} or the fields expected to be
produced in heavy-ion collisions $B\sim 10^{19}G$ \cite{hyion1}-\cite{hyion3}%
. The results for some energy levels, obtained with the exact numerical
solution of  eq. (\ref{eq18}) (Melvin metric), considering some systems of
interest, are shown in Table 1. Observing the Table, we can see that the
effect of the magnetic field appears when $B$ increases and becomes
important when these fields are intense.

The same calculations have been performed in a flat space-time with a
minimal coupling. The results are shown in Table 2. As we can see, the
results are essentially the same, and, when comparing then with the ones
found in Table 1, we can only find deviations when considering fields of the
order of $B\sim 10^{19}G$ and quantum numbers as large as $n\sim 10^{30}$.
These results are shown in Fig. 1. Observing these results, the conclusion
that we may obtain, with a very good precision, is that the effect of the
magnetic field in the metric is very small and may be neglected.

As it was explained before, eq. (\ref{eq31}) is an approximation for small
values of $r$, but when comparing the results with the exact numeric
calculations that have been performed, up to the precision shown in Tables 1
and 2 the conclusions that we obtain are essentially the same, and then we
may use this equation as a very good approximation. The corrections from
terms with higher powers of $r$ appear beyond the precision shown in these
tables. This fact may be seen if one observes the approximations that have
been made when eq.(32)-(\ref{eq26}) have been obtained. Terms of the order $%
(B_0r)^{2n}$, where $n$ is an integer, appears. These terms increase with $%
r^2$, and reaches the maximum values with some $r_M$, that determines the
size of the considered system. For heavy-ion collisions, for example, $%
(B_0r_M)^{2}\sim 10^{-33}$, for pulsars, $10^{-11}$. The greater value
obtained was for magnetars, $10^{-7}$, and the effect of these corrections,
as it was said before, are always beyond the precision shown in the tables,
so, we may conclude that the accuracy of the approximation is good, even for
extremely large magnetic fields and levels.

\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\centerline{
\epsfxsize=120.mm
\epsffile{figura14.eps}}
\caption{Energy levels as functions of the quantum number $n$ considering
eq. (\ref{eq18}), (\ref{eq19}) and eq. (\ref{eq18}) without a
minimal coupling (solid line).}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\centerline{
\epsfxsize=120.mm
\epsffile{tabela2.eps}}

{\small Table 1: Energy levels in the Melvin metric with a minimal coupling,
from the value of the magnetic field found in the Earth, up to the one
expected to be produced in ultra-relativistic heavy-ion collisions.}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\centerline{
\epsfxsize=120.mm
\epsffile{tabela3.eps}}

{\small Table 2: Energy levels in a flat space-time.}
\end{figure}

One remark that must be made is that when considering a covariant Dirac
equation, a particle with gyromagnetic ratio $g=2$ is taken into account.
This is a good approximation for electrons inside stars, for example. But
when considering higher energy processes, as high-energy collisions,
deviations from this value are proposed to exist, and then, a way to study
this question is to consider extensions of the covariant Dirac equation, as
for example as it has been made in \cite{he3}. This kind of approach is left
for future works.

Another aspect that may be taken into account is the Melvin metric. It is
clear that many of the systems that have been studied does not have the
magnetic field in the form of the one that determines this metric, but in
some regions, with intense magnetic fields, at least as a first qualitative
approximation, these results must be correct, and we expect that more
careful calculations, with the metric determined by different shapes of the
magnetic  fields, confirm our results.

\vfill\eject


\section{Inroduction}
Since their discovery over 100 years ago, cosmic rays have been the subject of intense research, yet their origin remains a mystery.
Key evidence to help solve this problem will come from the energy spectrum of cosmic rays and the relative proportions of the different cosmic ray types, in particular the ratio of antimatter to matter.
In this work we are looking at two important measures: the positron fraction ($e^{+} / (e^{+} + e^{-})$) in the range \ensuremath{\sim}~0.5 to \ensuremath{\sim}~{1}{TeV} and the antiproton ratio ($\overline{p}/p$) in the \ensuremath{\sim}~1.5 to \ensuremath{\sim}~{3}{TeV} range.
This is done using the Earth-Moon ion spectrometer (EMIS), pioneered for use with IACTs by the ARTEMIS collaboration \cite{Pomar2001} and also being used by the MAGIC collaboration to measure the positron fraction \cite{Colin2009, Colin2011b}.
Observations are subject to constraints on Moon elevation and illumination, thus observing time is limited to a few hours per year, this time includes observations during a Lunar eclipse on 2014-04-15.

\section{Positron Fraction \& Antiproton Ratio}
Since the first conclusive result of an increase in the positron fraction from the PAMELA collaboration \cite{Adriani2009} and especially with the improved statistics and energy range provided by AMS-02 \cite{Aguilar2013} ,the positron fraction has been of particular interest.
This rise was largely unexpected and deviates markedly from ``traditional'' models as shown in Figure \ref{Fig:PosFrac} where a typical GALPROP \cite{GALPROP} result is overlaid.
The key question has been what will happen at higher energies where a measure of the fraction can greatly constrain the existing models.

\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{posFracPython}
\caption{Current measurements of the positron fraction from AMS-02 \cite{Aguilar2013}, PAMELA \cite{Adriani2009} and the \Fermis \cite{Ackermann2012}.  Overlaid is a typical GALPROP prediction \cite{GALPROP} of the positron fraction showing the divergence above \ensuremath{\sim}\SI{10}{GeV}.  Data is from \cite{Maurin2014}.}
\label{Fig:PosFrac}
\end{figure}

The antiproton ratio is well measured up to a few hundred GeV (with data from AMS-02 recently reducing the statistical uncertainty and increasing the energy range).
However, above \SI{1}{TeV} there are only upper limits, as can be seen in Figure \ref{Fig:APRatFull}.
At present, none of  these limits are constraining on typical models that fit the existing antiproton ratio measurements at lower energies.

\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{ARGOMSplot.png}
\caption[Antiproton Ratio]{The antiproton ratio (from \cite{Bartoli2012}) showing the upper limits from a variety of experiments above \SI{1}{TeV}, the solid lines are predictions based upon pure secondary production \cite{Donato2009} and the dot-dash line includes contributions from additional sources of $\bar{p}$ at cosmic ray accelerators \cite{Blasi2009a}.}
\label{Fig:APRatFull}
\end{figure}

\section{The Earth-Moon Ion Spectrometer}
The Earth-Moon ion spectrometer (EMIS) is a technique to determine the relative fluxes of cosmic rays of different rigidities ($R = p/q$ where $p$ is the particle momentum, $q$ is the charge).
The basis of the technique is that the cosmic ray flux is uniform across the sky.
The only exception is if there is an object obstructing this flux, creating a deficit or shadow, such as the Moon.
Since cosmic rays are deflected by the Earth's magnetic field, with the amount of deflection depending upon the rigidity of the cosmic ray, this deficit will also be deflected.
When viewing this shadow from the ground (Figure~\ref{Fig:MSDiagram}) it creates a band that passes across the Moon, with one charge deflected one way, one the other and with lower rigidity particles deflected further than higher rigidity particles.
The ratio between the strength of the positive and negative shadows can be used to determine the ratio between positive and negative species.
By applying analysis cuts, hadronic and leptonic showers can be differentiated, allowing for separate ratios to be determined for the two.

\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{MSDiag}
\caption{A diagram showing the cosmic ray shadow the amount of deflection (shown for various rigidities as dotted circles) depends on the position in the sky.  For a falling Moon in the west, the positive shadow is at a lower elevation.}
\label{Fig:MSDiagram}
\end{figure}

\section{Feasibility of Observing with VERITAS}
\subsection{Bright Moonlight Observations}
In order to conduct these observations the telescopes must be pointed close to a partially illuminated Moon.
The Moon is a significant light source that will increase the background light, reducing the signal-to-noise ratio, increasing the trigger rate (and thus the deadtime) and potentially  damaging the PMTs.
To reduce its impact two techniques were employed, the high voltage supplied to the PMTs was reduced (RHV) and Schott glass UG-11 filters (UVF) were employed that only pass UV light, reducing the amount of light entering the PMTs.
These methods and their impact on the performance of the array are discussed in detail elsewhere in this conference \cite{Griffin2015}.
For the normal Moon shadow observations, a combined approach with both RHV and UVF is used.
During the 2014 lunar eclipse, due to the reduced lunar brightness we were able to observe using only UVF.

\subsection{Shadow Position}
In order to conduct the observations we need to know where the shadow is.
The deflection of a particle is a function of the magnetic field, with the amount of deflection depending upon the rigidity of the particle.
In order to find this position we used the code TJ2010 \cite{TJ2010}.
The shadow axis is defined using the Moon and the position of the $\pm\SI{750}{GV}$ shadow.
Observations are conducted with the centre of the camera pointed $\pm\ang{0.5}$ perpendicular to this line.
Since the shadow is the width of the Moon (\ang{0.5}) and with an angular resolution of \ang{0.1} for leptonic showers, this pointing means the shadow is fully contained in one half of the camera leaving the other half for background estimation.

\subsection{Crab Nebula Observations}
On 2013-03-19 the Crab Nebula was \ensuremath{\sim}\ang{3} from a 45\% illuminated Moon, this provided an opportunity to test the sensitivity of the array in the proposed observing conditions (UVF + RHV).
Observations were conducted for all of the time the Crab Nebula was above \ang{40} elevation, with a total live time of \SI{107.5}{minutes}.
These data show that even with both RHV and UVF the VERITAS array is still sensitive to $\gamma$-ray s, though at a much reduced level of 6.82 $\sigma / \sqrt{hours}$ using the standard analysis cuts.
For comparison, normal observations have a sensitivity of around 30 $\sigma / \sqrt{hours}$ at these elevations.

\subsection{Observation Simulation}
In order to test the observation's feasibility and to develop the analysis techniques, a Monte-Carlo model was generated assuming an energy threshold of \SI{500}{GeV} for leptons and \SI{1.5}{TeV} for hadrons.
This simulation (smoothed with a Gaussian kernel of \ang{0.1}) is shown in Figure \ref{Fig:HadSimSmooth}, the total number of counts falling within on field-of-view (FoV) is \ensuremath{\sim}$2.2\times10^6$.
This corresponds to 30 hours of observations at a reconstruction rate of \SI{10}{Hz}.
The proton shadow is clearly visible cutting off sharply due to the power law spectrum just before \SI{1}{TV} shadow position, along with the fainter helium shadow which extends through the \SI{1}{TV} shadow position to the \SI{500}{GV} position due to its factor or two lower rigidity.
The angular resolution (which is much larger at \ang{0.4} for hadronic showers) extends the shadow in all directions and will be a major constraint in this analysis since it will reduce the sensitivity by smearing out the signal and reducing the area available for estimating the background.

\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{PSF_hadrons_smooth}
\caption{Moon shadow simulation, the number of events within the FoV (large dashed circle) is approximately equivalent to 30~hours of observations. The shadow shape is influenced by the large angular resolution (\ang{0.4}), high energy threshold (\SI{1.5}{TeV}) and the source spectrum (a power law of index -2.7) which results in the shadow lying close to the Moon in a ``blob'' rather than an band.}
\label{Fig:HadSimSmooth}
\end{figure}

If selection cuts are applied, the survival fraction is 0.3 for leptons and 0.001 for hadrons, a simulation with the counts reduced to these fractions is shown in Figure \ref{Fig:LeptSimSmooth}.
The electron deficit just above the threshold energy is  visible at a rigidity of -500 to \SI{-700}{GV}, though a lot weaker than the proton deficit in the previous simulation.
With the lower statistics, statistical fluctuations produce comparable deficits elsewhere in the simulation, though the one associated with the electron shadow is present in all simulations, thus the 30 hours of observations can be considered a minimum.
The positron deficit is not visible and requires significantly more time to detect using this simple analysis.
However, neither simulation has made use of the reconstructed energy to aid in the analysis, the addition of this parameter will significantly improve the sensitivity.

\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{PSF_leptons_smooth}
\caption{A simulation of the expected skymap after gamma/hadron selection cuts are applied.  The number of events within the FoV is approximately equivalent to 30~hours of observations.}
\label{Fig:LeptSimSmooth}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Feasibility Study Conclusions}
This study shows that it may be feasible to detect the shadow with VERITAS.
Taking tens of hours to detect either shadow (potentially hundreds for the positron shadow) it will require a multiyear investment as a maximum of $15-20$ hours of observing time can be expected in any one year (less with bad weather).
However, since an upper limit on the positron fraction in the 0.5 to \SI{1}{TeV} range could potentially provide useful constraints, a detection of the positron shadow may not be required.
Observations and support work are ongoing.

\section{Normal EMIS Observations}
Observations taken during the 2013-14 observing season totalled 326~minutes (out of a maximum possible of \similar900~minutes).
These results do not show the presence of the cosmic ray shadows on their own (and would require significant more time to do so) but they have been used to verify that the tracking and the analysis method is working correctly.

\section{Lunar Eclipse Observations}
On 2014-4-15 a total lunar eclipse was visible from the VERITAS facility.
74 minutes of observations were taken pointing directly at the Moon  in the elevation range 45 to \ang{50}.
During the majority of the time the currents were low (less than background stars that do not normally cause an effect on the analysis).
The last 14 minutes had slightly higher currents, reaching levels comparable with bright stars towards the end of the data taking and thus this time has not been used in this analysis.
Quality cuts were also chosen to minimise the impact of any optical brightness (at the cost of statistics and a raised energy threshold) by using a large \textit{Size} (number of digital counts in the cleaned image) cut and requiring that a minimum of three telescopes are used in the image reconstruction.
Up to the event reconstruction stage the standard analysis packages are used, after that custom methods are employed (with an independent cross check) to plot the positions of the showers in a coordinate system centred on the Moon, but with the axes defined by the midline of the shadow (\textit{Parallel}) and its perpendicular (\textit{Perpendicular}).
The \textit{Parallel} distance is then normalised so that the distance between the \SI{1}{TV} shadow position and the Moon is constant.
The results are shown in Figure \ref{Fig:LunEclMap} where a deficit due to the shadowing of the Moon is clearly visible slightly offset from the Moon along the \textit{Parallel} axis.

\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{AllHardEDLunEclMap}
\caption{The 20725 showers that passed the quality cuts are plotted relative to the Moon in the coordinate system described in the text with a \ang{0.1} Gaussian smoothing applied.  The deficit due to the Moon is slightly offset from the center of the camera.}
\label{Fig:LunEclMap}
\end{figure}

To test for deflection, a fit was conducted using a 2D Gaussian over the central part of the FoV.
This fit gives a centroid location of (\textit{Parallel, Perpendicular}) = (\ang{0.09}, -\ang{0.06}), $\sigma$ = (\ang{0.19}, \ang{0.20}).
It should be noted that the energy threshold is estimated at above \SI{4}{TeV} at which energy the shift is expected to be \ang{0.2}.
Further work is ongoing to determine whether there is any evidence for deflection.
If selection cuts are applied to examine the electron shadow then only 32 counts remain and no conclusions can be drawn.

\section{Conclusion}
VERITAS is using the EMIS technique to measure the positron fraction in the energy range \SIrange{0.5}{1}{TeV}; a measurement which has been of great interest to the community over the last few years.
This measurement will require many tens of hours, (if not hundreds for the positron shadow) taking many years to accumulate the data.
Observations conducted during a lunar eclipse and pointed directly at the Moon show a clear deficit in the cosmic ray flux due to the shadowing of the Moon.
Work is ongoing to determine whether there is any evidence for a deflection in the shadow position from the Moon.

\acknowledgments
This research is supported by grants from the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Smithsonian Institution, and by NSERC in Canada.
We acknowledge the excellent work of the technical support staff at the Fred Lawrence Whipple Observatory and at the collaborating institutions in the construction and operation of the instrument.
R. Bird is funded by the DGPP which is funded under the Programme for Research in Third-Level Institutions and co-funded under the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).
The VERITAS Collaboration is grateful to Trevor Weekes for his seminal contributions and leadership in the field of VHE gamma-ray astrophysics, which made this study possible.